# Nick Griffin's car trashed?



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

... well it might've been apparently:

Interesting story from
www.enrager.net/newswire/stories.php?story=05/03/29/3529211



> BNP Bricked!
> 
> A large BNP (British National Party) meeting was held in a village just outside Halifax on Easter Sunday (27/03/05). The BNP leader, Nick Griffin was present at the meeting, and on the agenda was party strategy for the May elections, and also the demonstration coinciding with Nick Griffin answering his bail at Halifax police station on April 6th.
> 
> ...


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

How could they?! 

they're as bad as the fascists....


....well done all involved.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

How good of them, helping the BNP with their vision of a UK under seige. I wonder if they were all BNP member's cars and not someone else casually parked there.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

So naturally you wouldn't object if BNP thugs expressed themselves in the same manner and, say, put through your front windows because they didn't like your politics?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

who is "you"? No one seems to have claimed responsibility for this action.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

editor- I beat you to it, see:




			
				kropotkin said:
			
		

> How could they?!
> 
> they're as bad as the fascists....


----------



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

Poi E said:
			
		

> How good of them, helping the BNP with their vision of a UK under seige. I wonder if they were all BNP member's cars and not someone else casually parked there.


If the BNP wants that image, why have they not advertised it on their website? 

Fact is, they don't want to be associated with fighting, and they certainly don't want to give the impression that if you get active with them, you will experience serious problems. 

They like presenting themselves as being victimised by the state, but not by the British people...


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> So naturally you wouldn't object if BNP thugs expressed themselves in the same manner and, say, put through your front windows because they didn't like your politics?


 Actually if that happened I'd attempt to use the media to expose their bully-boy tactics 
On this occasion I agree with the editor but it is important that antifa realise that they need to be doing more than disrupting meetings as the bnp are only going to get more media interest from this happening and it is through the media that they gain recognition.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

...which will will be why they publicised this attack by their countrymen on their website, and used their access to the media to exploit it for the victim status, right?

..oh no...wait...they didn't. Oh well.


----------



## knopf (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> How could they?!
> 
> they're as bad as the fascists....
> 
> ...


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> who is "you"? No one seems to have claimed responsibility for this action.


You appear to be applauding the action ("well done all involved.") so presumably you think smashing up cars is a legitimate way to show disapproval at people holding an opposing political opinion.

Do you?


----------



## Phototropic (Mar 30, 2005)

I think it is appaling what happened. We live in a liberal democracy and we should only operate within the confines of that. No opinion is to extreme that can't be debated by having a nice sit down and a cup of tea.



(Nice one. Should cost them a few bob)


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Phototropic said:
			
		

> (Nice one. Should cost them a few bob)


So long as the bricks are going in the opposite direction to you, eh?


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

Just checked their website- absolutely no mention of this, backing up kropotkins point 
Worrying story about Liz Dawn though


----------



## tobyjug (Mar 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> ... well it might've been apparently:



More votes for the BNP.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

I think _any means necessary_ is a legitimate way of opposing a group of people that want to ethnically cleanse Britain, following Hitler's lead, of all non-whites, trade-unionists, democracy - indeed any opposition.

Incidentally, Hitler himself thought it the only way "his movement" could've been stopped.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> If the BNP wants that image, why have they not advertised it on their website?
> 
> Fact is, they don't want to be associated with fighting, and they certainly don't want to give the impression that if you get active with them, you will experience serious problems.
> 
> They like presenting themselves as being victimised by the state, but not by the British people...



I would say a bunch of guys turning up from nowhere and vandalising unidentified cars makes a very big point for the BNP to people who attended the meetings (some of whom will not be decided voters.) Naturally they don't want to be seen as a party that gets involved with fighting vandals. That's a job for the police, isn't it?


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> So long as the bricks are going in the opposite direction to you, eh?


 Do you not think that if the bnp are allowed to continue unchallenged then one day it will be us facing the bricks?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> Do you not think that if the bnp are allowed to continue unchallenged then one day it will be us facing the guns, backs to the wall?



I've changed your post for you.

Incidentally, I'm sure that would include owners of website's expressing any dissent towards their state.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> You appear to be applauding the action ("well done all involved.") so presumably you think smashing up cars is a legitimate way to show disapproval at people holding an opposing political opinion.
> 
> Do you?


 You appear to think that all opinions are of equal validity. How terribly postmodern of you.

I believe in the destruction of fascism, by whatevr means are deemed necessary. The far-right must be tackled on many different levels, and physical-force antifascism is one of them. It is not the only strategy, but then no one claims it is. For an ideology that spreads by portraying its adherants as the muscled defenders of the Glorious white Race, it is galling to be attacked by precisely those people they try to appeal to.

Violence is nothing more than a tactic. Sometimes it is appropriate, sometimes not. You feel it is appropriate in apprehending those society deems "criminal", but not in preventing the spreading of fascism.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

> So naturally you wouldn't object if BNP thugs expressed themselves in the same manner and, say, put through your front windows because they didn't like your politics?



But that's the point. Given half the chance they would. Given power, as flimsier said, then we would be up against the war or in death camps.

Physically taking on the fascists is self-defence against their long term aims and medium term methods.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> Violence is nothing more than a tactic. Sometimes it is appropriate, sometimes not.



Surely it is about effectiveness of the violence, not delicate matters of appropriateness? The acts of vandalism achieved nothing IMO.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

> The acts of vandalism achieved nothing IMO.



How do you know that? How do you know that it didn't scare a couple off from becoming active in the BNP?


----------



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> it is important that antifa realise that they need to be doing more than disrupting meetings as the bnp are only going to get more media interest from this happening and it is through the media that they gain recognition.


Any evidence for this? 

Cos there is evidence for the counter claim - that in areas where the BNP found themselves unable to hold meetings or spread propaganda unsurprisingly they did really badly... er some northern town beginning with "R" in the 90s being one example... Rochdale perhaps?




			
				editor said:
			
		

> So long as the bricks are going in the opposite direction to you, eh?


Editor - as soon as fascists feel strong enough to do stuff like that they'll do it anyway. In the late 70s and 80s they were strong enough to launch entirely unprovoked attacks on progressive groups/meetings (because that is the very purpose of fascism) - like attacks on human rights meetings, South Africa house pickets, etc.. Do you think if they're left alone they will just play nice?

Tobyjug - how will this get more votes for them? They won't even advertise it, so people outside of political circles won't even know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

elsewhere on this site are photographs of an rts do where the motorway near shepherd's bush had holes dug in it, so i find it a bit strange that, given editor's apparent approval of _that_ action he should get so het up about a few smashed fash cars.


----------



## Squatticus (Mar 30, 2005)

Fascsism isn't just an 'opposing political opinion' - its a poison that needs stamping out - bricks, bottles, whatever.

Innit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

Poi E said:
			
		

> Surely it is about effectiveness of the violence, not delicate matters of appropriateness? The acts of vandalism achieved nothing IMO.


won't it have fucked their no-claims bonus?

it also appears to have effectually disrupted their meeting, which appears to have been the object of the exercise.


----------



## mk12 (Mar 30, 2005)

But will this action make some people sympathetic to the BNP, and fear antifa? Surely it should be the other way round?


----------



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> won't it have fucked their no-claims bonus?


Nah surely most won't even be covered for vandalism will they.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

"But, Grandad, didn't fighting the Germans make you as bad as them?"

1. Cliche: The violence of the oppressed is qualitatively different to the violence of the oppressor.
2. It is sensible to preemptively attack to defend yourself instead of waiting to be attacked first.
3. Fascist activity is strongly correlated to increases in attacks on ethnic minorities
4. Making it difficult for fascists to organise in a community is a Good Thing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Nah surely most won't even be covered for vandalism will they.


so they'll be quids out! even better!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> 4. Making it difficult for fascists to organise in a community is a Good Thing.


they'll find that harder to do, if they can't drive!


----------



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> so they'll be quids out! even better!


What say 3 smashed windows would cost a grand to fix on most cars - how many meetings could you afford to attend that cost you a grand a time?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Poi E said:
			
		

> Surely it is about effectiveness of the violence, not delicate matters of appropriateness? The acts of vandalism achieved nothing IMO.



There's an argument that they may have that it's of limited effectiveness.

It's a better argument though, to the liberal 'you're as bad as them' rubbish.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2005)

Personally I'm a bit ambivalent about this one.  Its one thing to boot the fash off the streets, but smashing cars up outside a public meeting (which might not have all belonged to the fash) strikes me as a bit counterproductive.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> But will this action make some people sympathetic to the BNP, and fear antifa? Surely it should be the other way round?



Don't be such a fuckwit.


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> But will this action make some people sympathetic to the BNP, and fear antifa? Surely it should be the other way round?


 If this action is widely publicised then people will start asking why antifa have done this whilst questioning why people buy into the bnp's lies..
Interestingly the antifa site also mentions a case of, "75 Turkish anarchists prevent 200 fascists from holding a demonstartion by throwing rocks at them. A week later the fascists mobilise to hold another demonstartion, but are prevented when 500 people come turn up to stop them".
Heres hoping that next time antifa have _way_ more protestors and that the bnp are forced back to meetings of three men and a dog in the back of a pub...
Lets hope fascism doesn't look so glamorous now.


----------



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

In Bloom - who said it was a public meeting?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> Do you not think that if the bnp are allowed to continue unchallenged then one day it will be us facing the bricks?


They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.

But remind me how people bravely lobbing bricks at empty cars and then legging it are somehow aiding the democratic process.


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Personally I'm a bit ambivalent about this one.  Its one thing to boot the fash off the streets, but smashing cars up outside a public meeting (which might not have all belonged to the fash) strikes me as a bit counterproductive.


 Mate, I ain't turning up to _any_ meeting where my shiney new motor might get it


----------



## neilh (Mar 30, 2005)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Personally I'm a bit ambivalent about this one.  Its one thing to boot the fash off the streets, but smashing cars up outside a public meeting (which might not have all belonged to the fash) strikes me as a bit counterproductive.


i hope/suppose they wouldn't have smashed car windows unless they were certain they were cars of bnp folk. i don't think they'd be stupid enough to just smash random car windows without being sure first.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> . Sometimes it is appropriate, sometimes not. You feel it is appropriate in apprehending those society deems "criminal", but not in preventing the spreading of fascism.


How does a group of unknown people lobbing bricks at random empty cars and then legging it prevent the spread of fascism?

How did they know who the cars belonged to anyway?
Or is having the misfortune of parking your car in the proximity of a BNP meeting just cause to get it smashed up?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.
> 
> But remind me how people bravely lobbing bricks at empty cars and then legging it are somehow aiding the democratic process.


 As it seems they were largely anarchist, I don't think they have much interest in aiding representative democracy at all. They did, however, have a direct effect on the organising capacity and levels of fear of BNP organisers.


----------



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.
> 
> But remind me how people bravely lobbing bricks at empty cars and then legging it are somehow aiding the democratic process.


Editor, a serious question:
Do you think that because the nazis "democratically" won the election in Germany that people shouldn't have fought to get rid of them?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> How does a group of unknown people lobbing bricks at random empty cars and then legging it prevent the spread of fascism?
> 
> How did they know who the cars belonged to anyway?
> Or is having the misfortune of parking your car in the proximity of a BNP meeting just cause to get it smashed up?


 nice use of the word "random" there. What in the article lead you to think it was "random"?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.


you weren't paying attention to the recent elections of bnp councillors, then, or the large number of votes they received in the mayoral and european elections last year?





> _But remind me how people bravely lobbing bricks at empty cars and then legging it are somehow aiding the democratic process._


i don't believe that you've thought this one through, as it's my understanding that the people involved in antifa don't believe in the so-called democratic process to which you allude.


----------



## neilh (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.
> 
> But remind me how people bravely lobbing bricks at empty cars and then legging it are somehow aiding the democratic process.


but surely how well they do at the ballot box will be related to how easily they can organise in areas, so this poor performance in elections could be because of stuff like this. and whereas i don't believe there's much of a democratic process in britain, if they have the opportunity to organise easily without hassle, and so manage to get any success, i'm sure we'd see even less.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> How does a group of unknown people lobbing bricks at random empty cars and then legging it prevent the spread of fascism?
> 
> How did they know who the cars belonged to anyway?


spotters?


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> How do you know that? How do you know that it didn't scare a couple off from becoming active in the BNP?



Couple goes to BNP meeting worried about the state of Britain. Have fears confirmed by actions outside. See that BNP are respectable compared to thugs outside. Sign up on the line. Just a thought.


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.
> 
> But remind me how people bravely lobbing bricks at empty cars and then legging it are somehow aiding the democratic process.


 It wasn't a public or democratic meeting and theirs isn't a democratic or public agenda.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Do you think that because the nazis "democratically" won the election in Germany that people shouldn't have fought to get rid of them?


Try as I might, I simply can't find any meaningful comparisons there.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> In Bloom - who said it was a public meeting?


I got the impression that a large meeting where the party leader was speaking would be public, sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick, like.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> But that's the point. Given half the chance they would. Given power, as flimsier said, then we would be up against the war or in death camps.
> 
> Physically taking on the fascists is self-defence against their long term aims and medium term methods.



Your ugly mug should be put up on redwatch and all your personal possesions smashed up. You should be stopped from going about your business, as it's become clear now that you want all white people gassed. You may deny this, but it's a long term plan I'm sure of. 
 

You fucking idiot. You're no different from David Copeland.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Try as I might, I simply can't find any meaningful comparisons there.



Why not. The BNP want to follow in Hitler's footsteps. They are fascists. There's a comparison.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Try as I might, I simply can't find any meaningful comparisons there.


you say they are challenged at the ballot box. what if they won? and with the pisspoor electoral system in this country, a party which receives a minority of the vote _can_ win, with a large majority - look at the labour party, for example. if they won, would you oppose them? or would you say the people had spoken?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i don't believe that you've thought this one through, as it's my understanding that the people involved in antifa don't believe in the so-called democratic process to which you allude.


Am I talking to the people involved in antifa here, picky pedant boiy?

No. I'm not.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Your ugly mug should be put up on redwatch and all your personal possesions smashed up. You should be stopped from going about your business, as it's become clear now that you want all white people gassed. You may deny this, but it's a long term plan I'm sure of.
> 
> 
> You fucking idiot. You're no different from David Copeland.


Considering the large numbers of BNP members who have links to the NF and the history of violent anti-semitism and holocaust denial among their leadership, do you really think that the comparison exists?  Or are you just talking out of your arse again?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Why not. The BNP want to follow in Hitler's footsteps. They are fascists. There's a comparison.



Flimsier. Can you get your head out of the ceiling or stop sniffing the felt tip pens. How on Earth do you come to the conclusion that the BNP want to follow the footsteps of the Nazis?

People like you are inflamming the growth of the BNP. You are not going to stop a single person from becoming a member or voting for the BNP by smashing up cars.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> you say they are challenged at the ballot box. what if they won?


Maybe I should follow the lead discussed here and just throw even more bricks at cars, eh?

I'd oppose them with argument and policy, not with random vandalism, often at the expense of innocent third parties.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Am I talking to the people involved in antifa here, picky pedant boiy?
> 
> No. I'm not.


----------



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> I got the impression that a large meeting where the party leader was speaking would be public, sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick, like.


Has he ever spoken in public at a Party meeting? I don't think he has, and hopefully in this country will never be able to.

editor: you say people (anti-fascists) shouldn't use violence (against fascists) cos it doesn't help the "democratic process"
I ask you if a certain group of people (anti-fascists) were justified in using violence (against fascists) which went against the "democratic process".

You can't see *any* comparison there at all?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Considering the large numbers of BNP members who have links to the NF and the history of violent anti-semitism and holocaust denial among their leadership, do you really think that the comparison exists?  Or are you just talking out of your arse again?



Large numbers? 

Care to give me a figure?

Should we not have put thousands of Labour supporters into camps during the 70's for their links to communism?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> People like you are inflamming the growth of the BNP.



You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. When there has been effective opposition to fascists, they have been stopped. When there hasn't been, they have grown.

People like you apologising for them do them more good than anyone.


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.


Dunno about that: I might be wrong but aren't they currently getting the biggest vote they've ever received? 

On June 10th last year they got over 800,000 votes and that's not including all the ones that were unintentionally spoiled. I find that rather worrying.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Should we not have put thousands of Labour supporters into camps during the 70's for their links to communism?


I think that was the plan that your ilk had going.


----------



## neilh (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I'd oppose them with argument and policy, not with random vandalism, often at the expense of innocent third parties.


is there any evidence to back up the claim that often innocent third parties are accidently targeted by antifa or similar organisations? i got the impreswsion folk carrying out this kind of thing were normally careful to avoid this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I'd oppose them with argument and policy, not with random vandalism, often at the expense of innocent third parties.


did you see nick griffin on newsnight some years ago?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Layabout: why haven't the BNP tried to publicise this happening on their website.

Or, for that matter, _any_ successful no platform action?

I mean, they would, wouldn't they, if 'people like me' were the best at recruiting for the BNP?

Or are you talking out of your arse? Again.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. When there has been effective opposition to fascists, they have been stopped. When there hasn't been, they have grown.
> 
> People like you apologising for them do them more good than anyone.



What are you talking about?

They'll have that meeting again. That action has just made up the minds of hundreds of people of are on the verge of voting for the BNP. 

The only damage it's done is fuck up a few people's no claims bonuses. Hardly a big step backwards for the BNP, is it?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> They'll have that meeting again. That action has just made up the minds of hundreds of people of are on the verge of voting for the BNP.



How do you know that?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Layabout: why haven't the BNP tried to publicise this happening on their website.
> 
> Or, for that matter, _any_ successful no platform action?
> 
> ...



Why would I know why they haven't published it on their website? 

I don't jump to random conclusions like you do. There could be loads of reasons why they haven't published it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> The only damage it's done is fuck up a few people's no claims bonuses.


apparently not - see above.


----------



## Fuchs66 (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> How do you know that? How do you know that it didn't scare a couple off from becoming active in the BNP?



If anything it probably encouraged them to stay, the BNP exists through having their black/white (no pun intended) view of the world and the activists who went apeshit on the cars helped keep that blinkered view going. It's very difficult directly fighting such idiots the best way is dont allow them to have the attention they crave this doesnt mean ignore the problem, just dont over inflate it, eventually they'll choke on their own shite.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Why would I know why they haven't published it on their website?
> 
> I don't jump to random conclusions like you do. There could be loads of reasons why they haven't published it.



Like?

And why no other successful no-platform action? I mean, you seem to think it helps them. Surely they'd use it!?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> did you see nick griffin on newsnight some years ago?


FFS: I can't be arsed with this.

If you're incapable of making a coherent point, I see no point in entertaining your tedious outpourings any further.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

> Your ugly mug should be put up on redwatch and all your personal possesions smashed up. You should be stopped from going about your business, as it's become clear now that you want all white people gassed. You may deny this, but it's a long term plan I'm sure of.
> 
> You fucking idiot. You're no different from David Copeland.



Editor as layabout is so fond of reporting posts, I want to report this one to you. Is it ok in the FAQ to compare someone to a homophobic, fascist bomber and imply that's what they want to do?

Layabout I've got quite a nice looking mug as it goes, and it was on red watch as far a I know   You really are a nut job, aren't you....



> Couple goes to BNP meeting worried about the state of Britain. Have fears confirmed by actions outside. See that BNP are respectable compared to thugs outside. Sign up on the line. Just a thought.



Couple goes to BNP meeting. Get bricks thrown at them. Thinks fuck that for a laugh, I'm not getting involved with this and never come back. And as icepick said earlier, when the BNP were physically intimidated in the past they couldn't operate at all....


----------



## neilh (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> The only damage it's done is fuck up a few people's no claims bonuses. Hardly a big step backwards for the BNP, is it?


well the common impression of most folk here seems to be it prob cost them in the area of a grand; if so that's a lot of leaflets, stickers, rooms booked for meetings etc that could have been done with that money, and the knowledge that theres no reason to think the same might happen at the next meeting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor

it is foolish to debate and reason with fascists for at least two reasons:

1) you give them a credibility they don't deserve;

2) there's the chance they'll smack you if you win the argument.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> How do you know that?



Flimsier. I'm not going to post up a 2 page fucking post about the mentality of people on the verge of voting for the BNP, when I'm paid back with a 1 sentance retort olong the lines of "Layabout still supports the BNP".


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

I agree with Pickman's model.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I agree with Pickman's model.


it could be worse! you could be agreeing with layabout!


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> 2) there's the chance they'll smack you if you win the argument.


Isn't there a chance of being smacked in the face if you lob bricks at their cars?

So when was the last time you mixed it up with a bit of direct action then?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Flimsier. I'm not going to post up a 2 page fucking post about the mentality of people on the verge of voting for the BNP, when I'm paid back with a 1 sentance retort olong the lines of "Layabout still supports the BNP".



So you don't know that, and can't give reasons why?

In addition, you can't give a reason why the BNP don't put up reports of events which you say are so useful to them? For example, when their general election press conference was stopped in 1997, the only people who reported it was the BBC and the left wing press - the BNP didn't bother? Why, if it was going to be so counter-productive to us and good for them?

This thread is already full of examples where action is productive in stopping fascists and the BNP. You just come out with unsubstantiated bullshit. Again.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

this meeting was attended by bnp top brass and election candidates - hardened fascists all

the cars did belong to them - this is known thanks to classic intelligence gathering techniques, one of the cars even had a personalised bnp plate 

according to scouts in the area an  hour and a half after the attack, the bnpers were still standing around staring at their cars and looking pissed off - so it obviously disrupted their meeting quite badly


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Isn't there a chance of being smacked in the face if you lob bricks at their cars?


it's a risk worth taking. having been on the receiving end of volleys of bottles thrown by c18 and the bnp in the past, i think it's only a pity one of the fash didn't try to head one of the rocks back.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

neilh said:
			
		

> well the common impression of most folk here seems to be it prob cost them in the area of a grand; if so that's a lot of leaflets, stickers, rooms booked for meetings etc that could have been done with that money, and the knowledge that theres no reason to think the same might happen at the next meeting.



You don't get it do you?

The cars are personal property. They haven't stopped thousands of pounds being spent on that party's activities with those actions.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

> It's very difficult directly fighting such idiots the best way is dont allow them to have the attention they crave this doesnt mean ignore the problem, just dont over inflate it, eventually they'll choke on their own shite.



If that was the case why have facist organisations come to power in various countries around the world and this tactic has always proved futile.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Edited: answer the other questions first.


----------



## neilh (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Isn't there a chance of being smacked in the face if you lob bricks at their cars?
> 
> So when was the last time you mixed it up with a bit of direct action then?


so it was their cars then and not just random ones? i thought this would be the case.
i don't see the relevance, i thought this was direct action, whether it's direct action you agree with or not, and i'm sure just like the rest of us, some of the folk disrupting that meeting do do other things, others don't; there's no reason fighting fascists and doing other political stuff needs to be exclusive.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> So when was the last time you mixed it up with a bit of direct action then?


.....


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> So you don't know that, and can't give reasons why?
> 
> In addition, you can't give a reason why the BNP don't put up reports of events which you say are so useful to them? For example, when their general election press conference was stopped in 1997, the only people who reported it was the BBC and the left wing press - the BNP didn't bother? Why, if it was going to be so counter-productive to us and good for them?
> 
> This thread is already full of examples where action is productive in stopping fascists and the BNP. You just come out with unsubstantiated bullshit. Again.



Are the BNP bigger or smaller now than in 1997?

Yes / No

?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

they're certainly fatter...


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> did you see nick griffin on newsnight some years ago?


 Transcript here- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/3901631.stm


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Are the BNP bigger or smaller now than in 1997?
> 
> Yes / No
> 
> ?



Errm, you thick twat. Yes/ No doesn't fit that question.

And if you think the reasons are one-dimensional, you're doubly a thick twat.

Now, answer my questions. And others.


----------



## neilh (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You don't get it do you?
> 
> The cars are personal property. They haven't stopped thousands of pounds being spent on that party's activities with those actions.


well i was under the impression the kind of folk going to the meetings would also be coming up with money for that kind of thing; mebbe your right then, but it's still gonna stop some folk being involved if they know it's gonna cost them personally in this way.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> they're certainly fatter...



Aren't we all?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Are the BNP bigger or smaller now than in 1997?
> 
> Yes / No
> 
> ?



Yes they are bigger or smaller, depending on which member you are talking about.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Aren't we all?


i've retained the trim figure i had then.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

neilh said:
			
		

> well i was under the impression the kind of folk going to the meetings would also be coming up with money for that kind of thing; mebbe your right then, but it's still gonna stop some folk being involved if they know it's gonna cost them personally in this way.



If you smashed up my car for my political beleifs I would treble my donations.

Psst. I would like to keep what democracy we have, rather than decend into mob violence.


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You don't get it do you?
> 
> The cars are personal property. They haven't stopped thousands of pounds being spent on that party's activities with those actions.


 Don't be so sure- members may now be too financially concerned fixing their cars to contribute to the party


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Yes they are bigger or smaller, depending on which member you are talking about.



old one eye is definately piling on the pounds, where's all the membership subs going?


----------



## hibee (Mar 30, 2005)

Morally I've no problem if a few BNP bods have to visit Quick Fit today. The question is: how effective was it?

I wasn't around at the time, but as I understand it the logic of physical force ant-fascism in the 70s and 80s was that the right were using these tactics themselves and it was legitimate to a) hit them back without running hypocritically to the state and b) made them look stupid in front of the people they hoped their hard man image would appeal to.

Today the BNP are projecting an altogether different image - that of a "respectable", suited, law-and-order party. They are accordingly cutting out the marches and the riots. In that context trashing their cars will actually help them win sympathy among the people they are hoping will support them - the opposite of the previous situation.

Without any effective left-wing alternative to whom BNP voters are supposed to turn anti-fascism becomes pretty meaningless - smash up those cars and, er, vote new labour!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> old one eye is definately piling on the pounds, where's all the membership subs going?


pukka pies or similar, via one n. griffin?


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> old one eye is definately piling on the pounds, where's all the membership subs going?


 Worryingly I reckon the moneys going on their website and increasingly on media manipulation like pamphlets which often make no mention of the bnp


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Errm, you thick twat. Yes/ No doesn't fit that question.
> 
> And if you think the reasons are one-dimensional, you're doubly a thick twat.
> 
> Now, answer my questions. And others.



You're dealing with someone who's an ex-member of the BNP. I can only tell you what motivates people to vote and become members for them. If people have a bee in their bonnet about various issues, which they have common ground with the BNP on and no other party is listening and they see that their only option is being violently opposed, they will go in the direction of the BNP with a lot of support. People won't be put off by a few threats of violence.

Are you on the BNP mailing list?

Do you see read all their propaganda?

They aren't trying to appeal to people like you. You have to look at the people they are targeting. Ignore the feelings of the people they are targeting and your actions will be counter-productive.

The best way to fight the BNP is to turn the membership against the leadership. That can't happen if people are forcing all involved in the BNP to stand together fighting acts of violence and dirty tricks.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

hibbee: do you think that there is now no place whatsoever for physical antifascism?

I- and all the anarchists and communists I know- think that the best solution is on-the-ground community organising. I also think that a multitude of different tactics is necessary, including this one.

If as you say, the BNP are trying to distance themselves from streetfighting, isn't there something to be said for denying them that attempt at "respectibility"? They will, after all, start requesting that the liberal state they hate so much starts protecting them, won't they? And what will that do to their supposedly oppositonal pretensions?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

Hibee I agree that a credible alternative is needed, however it is not the case that no platform can’t stop fascist activity, or at least disrupt it, without an immediate alternative. Look at the early 1990s.

I think it could well be the case that many people would be put off, as they wouldn’t think it would be worth the grief. If you might be beaten up or have your car smashed in if you become an activist many people will think fuck it, not worth the bother. Granted you might get zealots like layabout and it will make them more determined, but that kinda person is gonna get involved no matter what.

Editor it’s not the same as the Tories and Labour, they aren’t based around a fascist ideology that will, at some point, operate a street policy to smash the left and working class. As kropotikin says, why should we wait until that happens before we defend ourselves.

And I think icepicks comments are valid if you’re making a principle of what your saying . The Nazis were elected through a liberal democrat regime. In which case should people have not fought back? At what point can people fight back against fascism? Do we have to wait until they are in power and open about their aims?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Layabout: You are an ex-member of the BNP. You're not the only one. A large proportion of ex-members who _actively_ oppose the BNP actually get involved in no-platform, including violence. You've again offered no evidence. I know they're not appealing to me. They were once appealing to my dad.

So, can you give me a reason why the BNP never publicise successful no platform actions?

Oh, and no platform is not exclusive. It's one of many tactics.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout: no one I know is interested  in attacking BNP members, only organisers and leadership. I have no problem with that whatsoever, whereas I would have with attacks on membership.


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout- it might be nice this idea of yours of corrupting the bnp from the inside but tbh who the fuck wants to hang round a load of racists...
My heart goes out to those in Searchlight reporting back to their superiors*

*wherever they may be


----------



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> They will, after all, start requesting that the liberal state they hate so much starts protecting them, won't they? And what will that do to their supposedly oppositonal pretensions?


Yeah loads of them were doing that on fascist message boards after the last antifa action against the NF, and complaining that people weren't turning up to events, and that they needed better security + transport etc.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

Layabout just because you’re an “ex” BNP member and are now a right-wing Tory, why the fuck should people listen to your tactics on stopping fascism? Ever occurred to you that people might just think you’re talking shit?

As said, your views on how to stop fascism certainly wouldn’t have worked with any previous fascist organisation that has got to power.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel: on this we all agree.

I am very interested in the editor's response to one of your questions

*At what point does physical opposition to fascism become legitimate?*

I don't want people to wait until the BNP control aspects of the state (they have already provided an excuse for the mainstream liberal parties to shift scarily to the authoritarian right) to start resisting.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Yeah loads of them were doing that on fascist message boards after the last antifa action against the NF, and complaining that people weren't turning up to events, and that they needed better security + transport etc.



According to layabout though, they'd have been delighted because they'll have had 'hundreds' of new members as a result.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> cockneyrebel: on this we all agree.
> 
> I am very interested in the editor's response to one of your questions
> 
> ...



I think the editor stopped engaging in this debate because of something about Pickman's Model being picky or something.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

not because he has a shit argument then?


----------



## blamblam (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> According to layabout though, they'd have been delighted because they'll have had 'hundreds' of new members as a result.


Well yeah but to be fair he has not backed up any of his claims with any evidence whatsoever.

Does he have any?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout

if griffin's electoral strategy doesn't work, no anti-fascists will have to do anything to turn the membership against the leadership - it will happen anyway, and if reports i've heard are correct there are already rumblings amongst some sections of the rank'n'file.

i expect the bnp to return to their street politics in the next few years as they are outflanked politically by the tories and labour. you may say that a lot of the people the bnp appeal to are fucked off with both the main parties. but i bet they said precisely the same thing in the late '70s with the nf - and where are the nf now?


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> According to layabout though, they'd have been delighted because they'll have had 'hundreds' of new members as a result.



to layabout
if the bnp were delighted by the bricking why havent they gone to the media or mentioned anything on their site?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Well yeah but to be fair he has not backed up any of his claims with any evidence whatsoever.
> 
> Does he have any?



He never does. He usually makes a statement (like on this thread) and then says that he's won the argument.

Or he pisses off because he has no argument.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> if the bnp were delighted by the bricking why havent they gone to the media or mentioned anything on their site?



That's a question I keep asking. Layabout says there may be lots of reasons but he's declined to give one.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> layabout: no one I know is interested  in attacking BNP members, only organisers and leadership. I have no problem with that whatsoever, whereas I would have with attacks on membership.



Yes but the problem there is that it doesn't isolate the membership from the leadership. The enemy of the membership becomes those who are violent towards the leadership. What you want is the leadership to become the enemy of the leadership. The leadership needs to be exposed for lying to the membership, which ain't going to happen if violent direct action is taken against the leadership.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I think the editor stopped engaging in this debate because of something about Pickman's Model being picky or something.


that's never stopped him before.

and as for being picky, you can't get more fantastically pedantic than editor.


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> He never does. He usually makes a statement (like on this thread) and then says that he's won the argument.
> 
> Or he pisses off because he has no argument.



....not before calling you a "cunt" like some inmature schoolkid.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Yes but the problem there is that it doesn't isolate the membership from the leadership. The enemy of the membership becomes those who are violent towards the leadership. What you want is the leadership to become the enemy of the leadership. The leadership needs to be exposed for lying to the membership, which ain't going to happen if violent direct action is taken against the leadership.



Anyone?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> to layabout
> if the bnp were delighted by the bricking why havent they gone to the media or mentioned anything on their site?



They have mentioned acts of violence before on their website, including cars being smashed. 

I am not going to jump to conclusions as to why they have not done so yet for this one.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> They have mentioned acts of violence before on their website, including cars being smashed.
> 
> I am not going to jump to conclusions as to why they have not done so yet for this one.



They have never mentioned any successful 'no platform' even though it would benefit them so much - so claims you.

Why?


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Layabout just because you’re an “ex” BNP member and are now a right-wing Tory, why the fuck should people listen to your tactics on stopping fascism? Ever occurred to you that people might just think you’re talking shit?
> 
> As said, your views on how to stop fascism certainly wouldn’t have worked with any previous fascist organisation that has got to power.


Exactly. It's quite amazing that layabout insists on telling everyone how wrong they are about everything when his politics are so starkly different from the majority of people that post here anyway.  

And as someone already pointed out - there are other ex-bnp members who actively support no platform actions, so you can't claim to somehow know the mentality of everyone who has ever been in, or is in, the bnp.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

something to do with "the oxygen of publicity" in thatcher's famous phrase.


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> What you want is the leadership to become the enemy of the leadership.


I know I'm pretty close to 'stupidest poster 05' but could someone explain this sentence


----------



## hibee (Mar 30, 2005)

As I say, I don't have a problem with giving them a doing and physical resistance has its place. But in the context of the BNP pursuing an electoral strategy, trying to present themselves as the voice of ordinary, decent people, it could be counter-productive.

I think layabout's an arsehole, but he's got a point; he's the kind of person they're trying to appeal to at the moment and you should take in how he sees this.

Trashing cars will make you feel like an anti-fascist hero if, like me, you were too young for Waterloo Station, but, if you're not going to tackle them on their own terms, that's about as much use as it will be.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> I know I'm pretty close to 'stupidest poster 05' but could someone explain this sentence


at a guess - that you've got to get the leadership to shoot themselves in the foot?

but it's only a guess, mind.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Your ugly mug should be put up on redwatch and all your personal possesions smashed up. You should be stopped from going about your business, as it's become clear now that you want all white people gassed. You may deny this, but it's a long term plan I'm sure of.
> 
> You fucking idiot. You're no different from David Copeland.


This post is so far out of order and I'm at a loss where to begin.

Consider yourelf warned, layabout.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Layabout just because you’re an “ex” BNP member and are now a right-wing Tory, why the fuck should people listen to your tactics on stopping fascism? Ever occurred to you that people might just think you’re talking shit?
> 
> As said, your views on how to stop fascism certainly wouldn’t have worked with any previous fascist organisation that has got to power.



CR. Are the BNP going to get new support off left wingers or right wingers? If you're too lazy to get yourself into the mindset of a right winger on the verge of suporting the BNP, then you're going to fail.

The Tories & UK are the ones who are the biggest threat to the BNP, not violent activists from the far left who feel satisfying their hatred and anger is way more important than anything else.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

*edit:  at hibbee*

that doesn't answet the questions I asked, it just restates your previous post.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> and as for being picky, you can't get more fantastically pedantic than editor.


Bwahahaha!

Don't you read what people say about you then, or do you just pretend they're not saying it?



Sorry, but I've got better things to do than deal with another Pickman's Pedant-o-Thon in Tedium-o-Vision.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> This post is so far out of order and I'm at a loss where to begin.
> 
> Consider yourelf warned, layabout.



Why do you take me so fucking literally on everything I say?

What's so out of order?

I'm trying to give the twirp an idea of how counter-productive his mindset is.

His/her thinking is no different to David Copelands. Paranoid delusions that can only be satisfied by taking the law into his own hands.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> I think layabout's an arsehole, but he's got a point; he's the kind of person they're trying to appeal to at the moment and you should take in how he sees this.
> 
> Trashing cars will make you feel like an anti-fascist hero if, like me, you were too young for Waterloo Station, but, if you're not going to tackle them on their own terms, that's about as much use as it will be.



Agree with this.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> His/her thinking is no different to David Copelands.


Right. So you think it's reasonable to directly compare him with a murdering bomber, do you?

I give up.


----------



## Phototropic (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> So long as the bricks are going in the opposite direction to you, eh?



I would reply but since I would only do it half as well I as others who have posted after me I will keep it short.

I would like to keep the bricks one way yes. And that is why i support this kind of action. Why should we care what happens to them? Given half the chance they would remove the remove the rights they hide behind. They say they are legitmate politcal party, people like you say we should debate, well quite frankly fuck that. GIven half the chance they would scrap all that and then we would see how much they really value democracy. Choke them from the roots, that way they will never be able to grow. Stop their meetings, their activitys, allow them no voice and no platform. Why would any of us ever want to risk facsim gaining a foothold?

EDIT: Ooops  didn't see the gazzillion pages that have appeared. THough we were still on page 1


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout - i probably know more bnp/potential bnp supporters than you, i am someone who the bnp are trying to appeal to, (working class, white, no qualifications, respectable hardworking parents who never claimed benefits and have been fucked over and betrayed by labour) when i was 16 the bnp/nf did look interesting and exciting though i knew little about their politics, then i saw an undercover panorama documentary about AFA/RA and that helped to show me who would never be any use to me (the far right)
showing the bnp leadership as vulnerable to attack will drive a wedge between them and the white working class people who are looking to them for defence, especially the young lads who they currently appeal to

hibee is right though and pro working class left wingers and anarchists need urgently to provide a political alternative to the far right and labour - i would hope most people on this action are doing that as well - in fact it should be their priority


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

a lot of you seem to see this recent action as a Big Event. which in some ways it _is_...

however, rather than this being a one-off, it's part of an ongoing campaign of anti-fascist activity against the bnp. it isn't going to defeat the bnp because a few of the fuckers have to get their cars repaired. as part of a campaign of attrition, which will make holding their meetings increasingly difficult, it's just one of a number of actions. the next meeting they have, they'll have to have increased security at, and they'll have to watch out for months to come. don't matter if there's no opposition to them at some meetings, the fear of god's already been put into them.

the next time they have a meeting attacked, there may be more of them to guard it, but they won't have the advantage of knowing where or when anti-fascists will strike. as the campaign of attrition progresses, i suspect you'll find fewer ordinary people attending their meetings, as if the bnp can't protect their own leadership, who can they protect? not the ordinary punter, that's for sure.

like a certain organisation said, they've got to be lucky all the time, we only have to be lucky now and again. or words to that effect, anyway.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Now, layabout, you still have my posts. Do you want me to repeat all of those questions you are forgetting to answer, or do you want to stop wriggling and admit you have no clue.


----------



## hibee (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> hibbee: do you think that there is now no place whatsoever for physical antifascism?



As I said above, no. The left should look after itself and not go running to the state. However, that's a different matter from...



> If as you say, the BNP are trying to distance themselves from streetfighting, isn't there something to be said for denying them that attempt at "respectibility"? They will, after all, start requesting that the liberal state they hate so much starts protecting them, won't they? And what will that do to their supposedly oppositonal pretensions?



The BNP are appealing to the kind of people who want the police to be tougher, border controls to be strengthened etc - people who support the state in a toughened form. If you were provoking them back into violence you'd have a point, but that isn't happenening.

As I say, anti-fascism is a tactic and you adapt to each scenario. You could throw a few at me and I'd support them; but this one, at this point in time, icould be counter-productive.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Right. So you think it's reasonable to directly compare him with a murdering bomber, do you?
> 
> I give up.



OK all right, fair enough, the comparison was a bit extreme, but that's where the same logic ends up. If it's OK to go around smashing cars up with people we disagree with or deem a threat to society, surely you can see, when you play the numbers game, why it's so dangerous to let violence against members of society with disgaree with, become somehow socially acceptable.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> a lot of you seem to see this recent action as a Big Event. which in some ways it _is_...
> 
> however, rather than this being a one-off, it's part of an ongoing campaign of anti-fascist activity against the bnp. it isn't going to defeat the bnp because a few of the fuckers have to get their cars repaired. as part of a campaign of attrition, which will make holding their meetings increasingly difficult, it's just one of a number of actions. the next meeting they have, they'll have to have increased security at, and they'll have to watch out for months to come. don't matter if there's no opposition to them at some meetings, the fear of god's already been put into them.
> 
> ...




I don't think being an undeground gang of brick throwers offers much of a viable alternative to the BNP, though.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> I think layabout's an arsehole, but he's got a point; he's the kind of person they're trying to appeal to at the moment and you should take in how he sees this.



the thing is layabout has an anti working class, anti trade union tory agenda - so his point coming from say oldhammer (if he is being honest about himself would carry more weight)



> Trashing cars will make you feel like an anti-fascist hero if, like me, you were too young for Waterloo Station, but, if you're not going to tackle them on their own terms, that's about as much use as it will be.



i know what you mean  - but, physical force has it's place, as for that matter do anti racist gigs, it's who carries these actions out and what else they are doing that puts this in it's context iyswim


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

> If you're too lazy to get yourself into the mindset of a right winger on the verge of suporting the BNP, then you're going to fail.



But that’s the point layabout, you think UKIP and the Tories are the answer, most people on here think a left wing, pro-working class alternative is needed.

But what you can’t deny is that no platform, historically, has proved a very useful tactic in stopping fascism. Hence the reason people still think it has some usefulness against the BNP.

It smacks of the fucking obvious that people can be put off from being a BNP activist by being scarred off by physical threats. And that’s exactly why fascists use the tactic the other way around, and why the BNP leadership will operate that policy as soon as it becomes viable.

And I ask again to either layabout or the editor. At what point does it become legitimate to physically oppose fascism?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Bwahahaha!
> 
> Don't you read what people say about you then, or do you just pretend they're not saying it?
> 
> ...


just cos someone repeats a load of old shit a thousand times doesn't make it true. i wonder how long you spent yesterday to prove your point that i'd linked to a number of tabloids. it must have taken you a few minutes to find out the scotsman's no longer a broadsheet. and your defence of posting lyrics in the world politics forum (which you've banned lyrics from) was a sight to see. pity you deleted it. as i've observed before, you are leagues above me when it comes to pedanticism - chelsea compared to my doncaster rovers.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Now, layabout, you still have my posts. Do you want me to repeat all of those questions you are forgetting to answer, or do you want to stop wriggling and admit you have no clue.



Because I've answered them loads of times before and we end up with ciruclar arguments. I try to explain what pushes people in the direction of the BNP and then you try to frustrate me by saying that I agree with their politics or have different views on issues that I actually have.


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> The Tories & UK are the ones who are the biggest threat to the BNP, not violent activists from the far left who feel satisfying their hatred and anger is way more important than anything else.


In two minds on this- I reckon the ukippers need to seperate themselves from the bnp (see interview on Late Edition BBC3 where interviewer had clip of Griffin accusing ukippers of racism) though they could profit from this by pointing out that they don't have people smashing up their cars 



			
				rednblack said:
			
		

> showing the bnp leadership as vulnerable to attack will drive a wedge between them and the white working class people who are looking to them for defence, especially the young lads who they currently appeal to


Which makes it worthwhile- difficult to sell yourselves as the 'protectors' of white Britain when people see you running from white British people


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> And I ask again to either layabout or the editor. At what point does it become legitimate to physically oppose fascism?



Or, at what point does it become legitimate to coerce people's political behaviour by threats of violence?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

hibbee said:
			
		

> As I say, anti-fascism is a tactic and you adapt to each scenario. You could throw a few at me and I'd support them; but this one, at this point in time, icould be counter-productive.



sorry, the worst interpretation I can see is that it would be neutral. Do you honestly think that this sort of action could make it _easier_ for the BNP to grow?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Because I've answered them loads of times before and we end up with ciruclar arguments. I try to explain what pushes people in the direction of the BNP and then you try to frustrate me by saying that I agree with their politics or have different views on issues that I actually have.



For example, you said there might be lots of reasons why the BNP don't publicise successful incidents of no platform - even though (according to you) it encourages hundreds of people to join them. You have failed to give one potential reason. Ever.

You again have not answered the questions and are seriously wriggling.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

> Because I've answered them loads of times before and we end up with ciruclar arguments. I try to explain what pushes people in the direction of the BNP and then you try to frustrate me by saying that I agree with their politics or have different views on issues that I actually have.



You might try to explain to explain sometimes, but often don't. But when you do you come out with a load of old shit.

Who has stopped fascist movements/organisations in the past. The left, not the right. So unless the BNP are some unique historical quirk there is no reason that this won't be the case again.

Right-wingers just jump on board with the fascists once they get anywhere near power, or at best just take on their agenda.

And no layabout I hate violence, but I think the violence of fascism needs to be defended against by force, as history shows. David Copeland was a racist, homophobic murdering piece of shit. If you make comparisons like that again I should think the editor will ban you.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

Poi E said:
			
		

> Or, at what point does it become legitimate to coerce people's political behaviour by threats of violence?


 when they are organising as a fascist?

We all have our lines, that is mine. I feel I can defend it rationally. Where is yours?


----------



## hibee (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> sorry, the worst interpretation I can see is that it would be neutral. Do you honestly think that this sort of action could make it _easier_ for the BNP to grow?



Yes, because it fits into their poor-little-me-everyone's-picking-on-me rhetoric which has proved extremely profitable.


----------



## militant atheist (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> pedanticism



pedantry


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

so, as has been said before, why aren't they crowing about it from the rooftops?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

But hibee if that was the case why wouldn't they publicise it as much as they could, like on their web site?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> But that’s the point layabout, you think UKIP and the Tories are the answer, most people on here think a left wing, pro-working class alternative is needed.



Then peddle your cause rather than bring it into disrepute by associating yourself with violence.



> But what you can’t deny is that no platform, historically, has proved a very useful tactic in stopping fascism. Hence the reason people still think it has some usefulness against the BNP.



It's been useful for poor bastards like me who used to have to deal with the consquences of an NF march through Brixton, but the BNP isn't playing those old games, is it?




> It smacks of the fucking obvious that people can be put off from being a BNP activist by being scarred off by physical threats. And that’s exactly why fascists use the tactic the other way around, and why the BNP leadership will operate that policy as soon as it becomes viable.



They won't. They have too many supporters already who ain't up for the violence thing.



And I ask again to either layabout or the editor. At what point does it become legitimate to physically oppose fascism?[/QUOTE]


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

Poi E

why should i or antifa provide an alternative to the bnp? as an anti-fascist i just want to see the bnp dogs battered off the streets and their filthy candidates forced to withdraw injured. if not better.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Errm, layabout.... stop wriggling. I've asked five times. Maybe six. Others have asked a similar number of times.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Errm, layabout.... stop wriggling. I've asked five times. Maybe six. Others have asked a similar number of times.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Errm, layabout.... stop wriggling. I've asked five times. Maybe six. Others have asked a similar number of times.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier doing his paxman impression


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

The impossible triple post! Three times in a minute.... I didn't think you could do more than one every 30 seconds.... so the quickest you should be able to do three posts in is, errm.... 1 minute and a tiny bit. But the clock is the same for all three!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier

STOP REPEATING YOURSELF!


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Errm, layabout.... stop wriggling. I've asked five times. Maybe six. Others have asked a similar number of times.


 well, there's three at any rate.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

> This message is hidden because Pickman's model is on your ignore list.





And it was the boards anyway, not me.


----------



## hibee (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> But hibee if that was the case why wouldn't they publicise it as much as they could, like on their web site?



If in the main they don't then I'll stand corrected; I'm sure they'll be embarrassed but if it benefits them they'll talk about how the lawless reds are trying to undermine decent white folk. As I say I'm not against it; I'm just not conviced it will be particularly effective at this point in time when working class people have no alternatives.


----------



## hibee (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> Poi E
> 
> why should i or antifa provide an alternative to the bnp? as an anti-fascist i just want to see the bnp dogs battered off the streets and their filthy candidates forced to withdraw injured. if not better.



effectively, tell working class people "vote labour"? not good enough, I'm afraid.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

they aren't, so my interpretation is that they don't see it as a benefit: hence "well done all involved".


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> effectively, tell working class people "vote labour"? not good enough, I'm afraid.


 Why do the working class have to vote for anyone- as if any party that got into parliament would represent their interests. Council elections are a different matter, but that is not what you are implying.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 30, 2005)

Layabout don't you get the message that you should answer the Qs and not avoid them?

In terms of violence I don't think it will put people off the left and looking at history millions of working class people support violence if the left can convince people of why it is needed. And with fascism the case is there.

I think it does put people off from getting involved in the BNP. Neither of us can prove it at this moment as fuck all no platform is happening. But the Tories and UKIP, far from stopping the BNP, along with the media peddle the BNPs agenda. Even the BNP says that. As said all of history shows that the right-wing have always helped a fascist agenda, and it has only ever been the left who has stopped, or tried to stop them.

As said the fascist might be doing their respectable electoral turn now (even the Nazis did that onn a few occasions), but the violence will come if they ever get anywhere and I don't think self-defence can wait until that moment.


----------



## hibee (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> they aren't, so my interpretation is that they don't see it as a benefit: hence "well done all involved".



come on, they've only had 24 hours. just because they don't put it on their website today doesn't mean they won't capitalise on it in forthcoming campaigns.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> Do you honestly think that this sort of action could make it _easier_ for the BNP to grow?



You actually can't see that? I guess the election will tell.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

The action seems to have been on Sunday.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> come on, they've only had 24 hours. just because they don't put it on their website today doesn't mean they won't capitalise on it in forthcoming campaigns.



History indicates they won't.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> Why do the working class have to vote for anyone- as if any party that got into parliament would represent their interests. Council elections are a different matter, but that is not what you are implying.



to be fair to hibee he is saying "provide an alternative" nothing about voting

to be unfair to him i've already anwered his questions


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> Poi E
> 
> why should i or antifa provide an alternative to the bnp? as an anti-fascist i just want to see the bnp dogs battered off the streets and their filthy candidates forced to withdraw injured. if not better.



So you'll be pretty ineffective then.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

Poi E said:
			
		

> You actually can't see that? I guess the election will tell.


 What, so if the BNP increase their turnout it will be down to antifascist actions? Are you serious? 

the actions could be highly effective AND the BNP vote could go up: it shows fuck all as it is abstracted from everything else that is going on around it.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> to be fair to hibee he is saying "provide an alternative" nothing about voting
> 
> to be unfair to him i've already anwered his questions


 as did I, and several others.

The best thing to be doing is community organising, but physical force stuff is always useful.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> come on, they've only had 24 hours. just because they don't put it on their website today doesn't mean they won't capitalise on it in forthcoming campaigns.



they've had since sunday - and... nothing
i bet if there's any mention on st*rmfr*nt they'll deny it even happened


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

rnb

i've heard there is a brief mention on that site.


----------



## hibee (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> History indicates they won't.



If it forces them back on the streets it will be worthwhile because it will scupper what has been an extremely successful strategy for them. But come on, have you ever read BNP propaganda? It's all about how everyone is against them because only they speak for white workers; if they don't flag up individual humiliations at the time they'll turn them to their advantage when the bruises have healed.

The point is that the BNP are far more successfull than the left because they have chanced upon a winning formula which most of the left have yet to engage with.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

You haven't addressed this though:


> It's all about how everyone is against them because only they speak for white workers



what happens when the white workers seem a little ungrateful?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> What, so if the BNP increase their turnout it will be down to antifascist actions? Are you serious?
> 
> the actions could be highly effective AND the BNP vote could go up: it shows fuck all as it is abstracted from everything else that is going on around it.


if past experience is anything to go by, increased uaf activity where the bnp are standing will lead to a rise in the bnp vote. i doubt that any antifa actions, or actions by other anti-fascists, will improve the bnp's share of the vote.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> If it forces them back on the streets it will be worthwhile because it will scupper what has been an extremely successful strategy for them. But come on, have you ever read BNP propaganda? It's all about how everyone is against them because only they speak for white workers; if they don't flag up individual humiliations at the time they'll turn them to their advantage when the bruises have healed.



you are right about their propaganda - but if it's white working class people doing the attacking what does that say?

personally i'll stick to both tactics (physical force, and providing an alternative through working with hackney independent, harngey solidarity group and my resident's assoacition) cheers


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> effectively, tell working class people "vote labour"? not good enough, I'm afraid.


not really! in fact, not at all. i leave that sort of arsery (vote labour) to the swp and their mates.

if someone asked me (and they are!) i'd suggest the iwca, where they're standing. but i don't see it as my role to tell people who to vote for - unless hackney independent stand someone where i live i ain't voting.

outside of electoral politics, i would suggest people look at the various local groups, like rnb mentions, and the several national anarchist organisations. but imo best to work locally with your mates and such.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

*waves at keighly jugend*

interesting name


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> rnb
> 
> i've heard there is a brief mention on that site.



A brief mention that absolutely nobody has replied to.

Also, nothing on the party site either.

My guess is that either they are too embarassed to report a defeat, or are planning a more measured response later.

Good work by the lads with the bricks though, and for "revolutionary socialists" to back out of a protest against their natural and most committed enemies, in addition to kowtowing to the very party they purport to be trying to replaces is sickening.


----------



## belboid (Mar 30, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> *waves at keighly jugend*
> 
> interesting name


the last of west yorkshires country blues artists i do believe!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

Pilgrim said:
			
		

> A brief mention that absolutely nobody has replied to.
> 
> Also, nothing on the party site either.
> 
> ...


but typical.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 30, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> the last of west yorkshires country blues artists i do believe!


----------



## kea (Mar 30, 2005)

bloody hell.
eight pages in two and a half hours.


and "I'd oppose them with argument and policy, not with random vandalism" -  classic! oh ed, you are a card


----------



## treelover (Mar 30, 2005)

just wondering like, what was the average age of the AF erm, hitsquad?
because it seems like something many people grow out of.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

treelover said:
			
		

> just wondering like, what was the average age of the AF erm, hitsquad?
> because it seems like something many people grow out of.


i don't believe the af organise hitsquads. d'you mean antifa?


----------



## treelover (Mar 30, 2005)

yeah, just shorthand


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> History indicates they won't.



History indicates they do. They have put up such attacks on their site in the past.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

there was this little gem in the scotsman yesterday. but nothing a news google turned up about the disrupted meeting under discussion.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Morally I've no problem if a few BNP bods have to visit Quick Fit today. The question is: how effective was it?
> 
> I wasn't around at the time, but as I understand it the logic of physical force ant-fascism in the 70s and 80s was that the right were using these tactics themselves and it was legitimate to a) hit them back without running hypocritically to the state and b) made them look stupid in front of the people they hoped their hard man image would appeal to.


Another reason for getting physical with the fascists held true from the 1930s on IMHO, and that's that whenever anti-Fascist meetings/rallies/demos were held they were subject to attack by the Fascists, usually with either the collusion from the police or with the police at the least "turning a blind eye". In those cases it made sense to advance from a *reactive* use of force to a *pro-active* use.


> Today the BNP are projecting an altogether different image - that of a "respectable", suited, law-and-order party. They are accordingly cutting out the marches and the riots. In that context trashing their cars will actually help them win sympathy among the people they are hoping will support them - the opposite of the previous situation.


The BNP "ruling clique" may very well have decided to adopt electoral politics as their new aim, and wish to govern. However, given that their "grassroots" support is still heavily laced with bonehead racists and Adolfites, they'll either have to have a "night of the long knives" to divest themselves of the "undesirables" or they'll have to politically accomodate their grassroots at the expense of their "progessives". Either move will lose them support from one faction or the other.


> Without any effective left-wing alternative to whom BNP voters are supposed to turn anti-fascism becomes pretty meaningless - smash up those cars and, er, vote new labour!


Which still doesn't mean that resisting the resurgence of Fascism in it's "New Right" form isn't a goof thing.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 30, 2005)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> , they'll either have to have a "night of the long knives" to divest themselves of the "undesirables"



They'll just use the powers in the Terrorism Act 2000.


----------



## silentNate (Mar 30, 2005)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> The BNP "ruling clique" may very well have decided to adopt electoral politics as their new aim, and wish to govern. However, given that their "grassroots" support is still heavily laced with bonehead racists and Adolfites, they'll either have to have a "night of the long knives" to divest themselves of the "undesirables" or they'll have to politically accomodate their grassroots at the expense of their "progessives". Either move will lose them support from one faction or the other.


In Newsnights interview with Griffin he states an interest in eliminating this 'element' but evidence is that the bnp let these people back in under some guise. Fact is that this action will have also made it difficult for them to get meeting places 
They will attempt anything in gaining power so I find it difficult to condemn anifa's actions


----------



## tobyjug (Mar 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Tobyjug - how will this get more votes for them? They won't even advertise it, so people outside of political circles won't even know.



This is hardly a private forum. It has become very obvious recently that comments on U75 boards are often very public domain in no time at all.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

& broadcast to the entire english-speaking world!


----------



## Phototropic (Mar 30, 2005)

I can see the headlines tommorow.

BNP GAIN 500,000 NEW MEMBERS!

Reports of rapant vanadalism _EXPLODED_ all over the interent yesterday. Urban75 (not avaliable due to volumn of traffic and every journalist in the country trying to logon) revelead this EXCLUSIVE!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

Phototropic said:
			
		

> I can see the headlines tommorow.
> 
> BNP GAIN 500,000 NEW MEMBERS!
> 
> Reports of rapant vanadalism _EXPLODED_ all over the interent yesterday. Urban75 (not avaliable due to volumn of traffic and every journalist in the country trying to logon) revelead this EXCLUSIVE!


looks like it will be in the grauniad then.


----------



## hibee (Mar 30, 2005)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> The BNP "ruling clique" may very well have decided to adopt electoral politics as their new aim, and wish to govern. However, given that their "grassroots" support is still heavily laced with bonehead racists and Adolfites, they'll either have to have a "night of the long knives" to divest themselves of the "undesirables" or they'll have to politically accomodate their grassroots at the expense of their "progessives".



This may be right, and I'm quite happy to see them get a doing. It's just that given that's it's their electoral strategy which has brought them success I can think of better ways of dealing with them at the moment.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 30, 2005)

Ok, supposing it was the other was around, and the fash attacked your progressive/anarchist meeting. If you were someone who was just thinking about getting involved with the group being attacked, would it drive you away from that group because of the threat, or would it just make you more determined to get invloved as you know what you were up against.

In my case (without risking winding up in hospital and/or prison) it would be the latter opition.


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Flimsier. Can you get your head out of the ceiling or stop sniffing the felt tip pens. How on Earth do you come to the conclusion that the BNP want to follow the footsteps of the Nazis?


No they're fluffy little kittens really aren't they layabout?
*
THEY WANT ALL NON-WHITE PEOPLE KICKED OUT THE COUNTRY FFS!!*  

What do you think would happen if they ever got into power and the people they despise so much weren't prepared to be paid off and leave nice and quietly  like good little brown/black/Jewish people? I wish you'd stop playing dumb when it comes to what the BNP are all about


----------



## Stavrogin (Mar 30, 2005)

comedy.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Pilgrim said:
			
		

> A brief mention that absolutely nobody has replied to.
> 
> Also, nothing on the party site either.
> 
> ...



OK, though I think we'd agree that the planned protest really would have been useless.


----------



## LLETSA (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> you say they are challenged at the ballot box. what if they won? and with the pisspoor electoral system in this country, a party which receives a minority of the vote _can_ win, with a large majority - look at the labour party, for example. if they won, would you oppose them? or would you say the people had spoken?





The BNP do not, despite an impressive (or alarming) growth in their vote, stand the remotest chance of winning a general election. Even if they could win it would be on a minority vote and it is likely that they would be swept from office pretty quickly, either by mass revulsion against their attempts to repatriate non-white people - which would have to involve an element of force or pressure, no matter what they say (but without actually controlling the state machine they would not have access to most of the necessary means) - or, more likely, because of their position becoming increasingly untenable due to the obvious impracticability of most of what they stand for. In any case, short of some kind of major breakdown of the system, it is likely that the ruling class and its state machine would find an excuse to prevent them from taking office even if they should win, or else conspire to bring them down as soon as possible. Modern capitalism is pro-immigration and, especially since the demise of mass labour movements with the potential to fundamentally alter society, has no need of fascism. 

The real danger from the BNP lies in its potential to capitalise on the failure of the left and those mass labour movements and become the choice of all those who have been abandoned by political and economic developments since the 1980s, or else feel that they have. In other words to occupy the a large part of the space that should belong to a viable workers' movement, with their dead-end ideology and pushing policies that the more intelligent of their leaders know damn well are mostly unworkable. (But why should they worry? By then they will be building lucrative electoral careers.)


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> History indicates they do. They have put up such attacks on their site in the past.



No succesful ones though.

Can you now answer the question you've been asked about 15 times, mr wriggle?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Phototropic said:
			
		

> I can see the headlines tommorow.
> 
> BNP GAIN 500,000 NEW MEMBERS!
> 
> Reports of rapant vanadalism _EXPLODED_ all over the interent yesterday. Urban75 (not avaliable due to volumn of traffic and every journalist in the country trying to logon) revelead this EXCLUSIVE!


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Ok, supposing it was the other was around, and the fash attacked your progressive/anarchist meeting. If you were someone who was just thinking about getting involved with the group being attacked, would it drive you away from that group because of the threat, or would it just make you more determined to get invloved as you know what you were up against.
> 
> In my case (without risking winding up in hospital and/or prison) it would be the latter opition.



Nope, if I was a voter thinking I was getting involved in a respectable party, it'd make me wonder why people want to kick shit out of the leaders of said parties, and find out why.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> The BNP do not, despite an impressive (or alarming) growth in their vote, stand the remotest chance of winning a general election. Even if they could win it would be on a minority vote and it is likely that they would be swept from office pretty quickly, either by mass revulsion against their attempts to repatriate non-white people - which would have to involve an element of force or pressure, no matter what they say (but without actually controlling the state machine they would not have access to most of the necessary means) - or, more likely, because of their position becoming increasingly untenable due to the obvious impracticability of most of what they stand for. In any case, short of some kind of major breakdown of the system, it is likely that the ruling class and its state machine would find an excuse to prevent them from taking office even if they should win, or else conspire to bring them down as soon as possible. Modern capitalism is pro-immigration and, especially since the demise of mass labour movements with the potential to fundamentally alter society, has no need of fascism.
> 
> The real danger from the BNP lies in its potential to capitalise on the failure of the left and those mass labour movements and become the choice of all those who have been abandoned by political and economic developments since the 1980s, or else feel that they have. In other words to occupy the a large part of the space that should belong to a viable workers' movement, with their dead-end ideology and pushing policies that the more intelligent of their leaders know damn well are mostly unworkable. (But why should they worry? By then they will be building lucrative electoral careers.)



See, I utterly agree with the second paragraph, and have some time for what is behind the first post. However, history illustrates that the ruling class will use fascism if and when it becomes desirable or (more likely) necessary. There are also parallels (and yes differences) with Hitler and the nazis, and comparisons between the complacency of the left and your attitude to the fash now.

I just think it's a dangerous game to be speculating with. My opinion is that they will return to their 'to the streets' game after some disappointing election results (and they've had almost none of them for a while) and have fundamentally not changed their spots, whereas you think they have (please correct me if I'm wrong) as they claim.

I think there is an urgent need for an alternative. If I was convinced by any I'd get involved - and maybe I shouldn't just be waiting - but I also believe 100% in stopping them from organising wherever possible.


----------



## Squatticus (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> They'll have that meeting again. That action has just made up the minds of hundreds of people of are on the verge of voting for the BNP.



I bet its made up the minds of anyone who was thinking of parking outside their meeting   

BTW, Layabout, you are Joe Finnon, and I claim my £5.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Nope, if I was a voter thinking I was getting involved in a respectable party, it'd make me wonder why people want to kick shit out of the leaders of said parties, and find out why.



Flimsier, you really are totally hopeless when it comes to putting yourself in the shoes of a person who is considering giving the BNP a vote.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> No succesful ones though.
> 
> Can you now answer the question you've been asked about 15 times, mr wriggle?



I've answered it more than 15 times. And more than 15 times all you've done in reply was just present the views of the people I'm talking about as my own.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Squatticus said:
			
		

> I bet its made up the minds of anyone who was thinking of parking outside their meeting
> 
> BTW, Layabout, you are Joe Finnon, and I claim my £5.



He's not. I've got his home number.

I do think he's dishonest about himself in some way, but I think he's honest about being an ex-bnp member.

I'm very very disappointed though, that just as I was beginning to take him seriously, he chooses to run away from a thread rather than take the questions head on. Even a 'fuck, I'm not sure, let me think about it - I might change my view' would have got him a fuckload more respect.

Layabout: the reason you are seen as a racist, BNP apologist, is because you defend the BNP position or the BNP with exceptions proving the rule, and you run away from arguments about your position that you can't answer. You also seem to rarely offer evidence, which means that a large number of people find you a laughing stock (though at least you were being talked about in the pub, I suppose). Backing up your points and/ or admitting where you are struggling would be better.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I've answered it more than 15 times. And more than 15 times all you've done in reply was just present the views of the people I'm talking about as my own.



The BNP do not shout about any successful no-platform events. Why?

You said earlier that there were lots of possible reasons why they hadn't shouted about the one in this very thread. Can you name, say, 5?

That's the question.

Because you think it's the biggest recruitment for the BNP - the no-platform stuff - so if you're right there must be fantastic reasons for not doing so. I can't think of any.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 30, 2005)

Outrageous!

Vandalism!



What if everyone got it into their heads to deal with the fascists in this way?

They'd .. 

they'd.. 

they'd ...

they'd be fucked.


Well done to whoever was responsible.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Flimsier, you really are totally hopeless when it comes to putting yourself in the shoes of a person who is considering giving the BNP a vote.



My dad was a few years ago.

edited to add: and I like the way you have dishonestly used my answer to a completely different scenario to (completely fuckwittedly and with no evidence AGAIN) try and make a point about a different scenario.

Dishonest, not very clever, and showing more wriggling, I'm afraid.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Nope, if I was a voter thinking I was getting involved in a respectable party, it'd make me wonder why people want to kick shit out of the leaders of said parties, and find out why.


But don't you see, the BNP claim that they, the "voice of the silent majority" are being attacked from both the liberal govt and from far-left extremists (which this action would no doubt fall under). This action will just confirm those claims, as the "voice of the silent majority" has been attacked by a bunch of communist hooligans


----------



## Tom A (Mar 30, 2005)

Kaka Tim said:
			
		

> Outrageous!
> 
> Vandalism!
> 
> ...


As I said on enrager, too many people are law-abiding liberals, or just generally cowards who don't want to face a long stretch in prison (myself included) for the masses to rise up against the fascist scourge.
If that wasn't the case, we would be having a revolution to take us into a socialist utopia by now


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> But don't you see, the BNP claim that they, the "voice of the silent majority" are being attacked from both the liberal govt and from far-left extremists (which this action would no doubt fall under). This action will just confirm those claims, as the "voice of the silent majority" has been attacked by a bunch of communist hooligans



I'll tell you what Akeeleleveller, fuck off with the rolleyes. Please.

Put yourself in the scenario above, and do you really think people are that thick? Because your scenario seems to suggest people don't think for themselves at all.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

>



Do you not understand how this undermines your post?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> and "I'd oppose them with argument and policy, not with random vandalism" -  classic! oh ed, you are a card


Yeah, sorry appearing so, like, unK3wl and non-rad.

Next time I'll be sure to shout: YES! Smash it up! Smash anything up! Break it! Brick it! Punch them! Kick them! Kill! Hurt! Rip open their flesh! Drill holes in them! Murder them all!!!!!!!

...from the safety of my keyboard, natch.

I wonder how many people here have actually mixed it up in the real world, rather than egging on others from their bedrooms. Or are they too busy giving the BNP the oxygen of publicity with threads like this?


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Yeah, sorry appearing so, like, unK3wl and non-rad.
> 
> Next time I'll be sure to shout: YES! Smash it up! Smash anything up! Break it! Brick it! Punch them! Kick them! Kill! Hurt! Rip open their flesh! Drill holes in them! Murder them all!!!!!!!
> 
> ...from the safety of my keyboard, natch.



To be fair, this is not what some (or maybe a lot) of the posters (I know of 2 plus me) on this thread do. There is an argument. You raised a point of view. I'd like you to defend it - but if you don't want to, to be honest the above is a cheap shot and not conducive to the debate.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I'll tell you what Akeeleleveller, fuck off with the rolleyes. Please.


    



> Put yourself in the scenario above, and do you really think people are that thick? Because your scenario seems to suggest people don't think for themselves at all.


Well, give them several decades of seeing their mainstay industry go down the toilet, throw in 25 years of Thatcherism, a lifetime of right-wing Establisment Scum/HateMail propaganda, which includes about 15 years of demonising asylum seekers, Muslims, etc, plus the fear of terrorism after 9/11, and you can see how groups like the BNP appeal to them. It doesn't matter what motives antifa had for attacking them. All that matters was that _they were attacked by *someone* who didn't like them_. People tend not to like being attacked, so will rally against their attackers - i.e. become more involved in the BNP.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

what about the somewhat more real threat of 'terrorism' before sept 11?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> To be fair, this is not what some (or maybe a lot) of the posters (I know of 2 plus me) on this thread do. There is an argument. You raised a point of view. I'd like you to defend it - but if you don't want to, to be honest the above is a cheap shot and not conducive to the debate.


I've already given my opinion and don't see why I should have to "defend it" to anyone.

I don't believe throwing bricks at a bunch of (probably) random cars and then running away does anything more than foster more violence. There. That's my opinion.

And as a point of interest: I do get a little pissed off by keyboard warriors talking tough here because more often than not it's me that ends up taking the flak for them - as was the case recently.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> The BNP do not, despite an impressive (or alarming) growth in their vote, stand the remotest chance of winning a general election. Even if they could win it would be on a minority vote and it is likely that they would be swept from office pretty quickly, either by mass revulsion against their attempts to repatriate non-white people - which would have to involve an element of force or pressure, no matter what they say (but without actually controlling the state machine they would not have access to most of the necessary means) - or, more likely, because of their position becoming increasingly untenable due to the obvious impracticability of most of what they stand for. In any case, short of some kind of major breakdown of the system, it is likely that the ruling class and its state machine would find an excuse to prevent them from taking office even if they should win, or else conspire to bring them down as soon as possible. Modern capitalism is pro-immigration and, especially since the demise of mass labour movements with the potential to fundamentally alter society, has no need of fascism.
> 
> The real danger from the BNP lies in its potential to capitalise on the failure of the left and those mass labour movements and become the choice of all those who have been abandoned by political and economic developments since the 1980s, or else feel that they have. In other words to occupy the a large part of the space that should belong to a viable workers' movement, with their dead-end ideology and pushing policies that the more intelligent of their leaders know damn well are mostly unworkable. (But why should they worry? By then they will be building lucrative electoral careers.)




yes, yes, yes - it is highly unlikely, if not inconceivable, that the bnp would win a general election - but my post was in answer to editor, who was strongly implying that the ballot box is the only place to challenge the bnp. i wondered what he'd do in the hypothethical case they gained power.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what about the somewhat more real threat of 'terrorism' before sept 11?


 Well there was the Troubles in Northern Ireland that sometimes spilt over into the mainland, but since 9/11 all the western govts have been making such a major issue about the threat of terrorism. That was what I was trying to put across.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

ED: But isn't stating your opinion and not defending it against questions or counter-arguments pretty poor form on boards credited for the discussion that goes on.

I mean, have you read the posts after yours? Can you respond to them?

I posted the above because this afternoon I was looking forward to your argument. I didn't agree with it, but I've changed my opinion a number of times in the last 2 years _because_ of some of the posts on U75.

It would, would it not, wind you up if DrJazz just didn't answer your questions/ refusals?

I'm actually not trying to be narky here.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> yes, yes, yes - it is highly unlikely, if not inconceivable, that the bnp would win a general election - but my post was in answer to editor, who was strongly implying that the ballot box is the only place to challenge the bnp.


That's not actually what I said.



			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i wondered what he'd do in the hypothethical case they gained power.


Sorry. Can't be arsed with fairy tales.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> And as a point of interest: I do get a little pissed off by keyboard warriors talking tough here because more often than not it's me that ends up taking the flak for them - as was the case recently.



I do get that, and I do sympathise. I think there are a number of posters on this thread who are not just keyboard warriors, and I'd hope that a number of the same posters are the type who would report posts that might report posts that might result in you taking any flak.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> It would, would it not, wind you up if DrJazz just didn't answer your questions/ refusals?
> 
> I'm actually not trying to be narky here.


What do you want me to 'defend' about them?

I've given my honest opinion. I'm not debating dubious sources, non-existent planes and disappearing planes like DrJ so I fail to see any validity in your comparison.

If people want to wander off and bang on about Hitler and WW2 or fantasy tales about the BNP coming into power sometime soon that's up to them, but I fail to see what it's got to do with my opinion about people lobbing bricks at some cars somewhere.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I do get that, and I do sympathise. I think there are a number of posters on this thread who are not just keyboard warriors, and I'd hope that a number of the same posters are the type who would report posts that might report posts that might result in you taking any flak.


I've been getting a LOT of personal shit recently as a result of these boards.

And I mean a lot. People ringing up on my mobile and personal phone numbers and other kinds of stuff and - I'll be honest - it's wearing my down.

You probably know about the last time a keyboard warrior bigged things online here and I needed up having a bunch of cunts starting an email campaign to contact my personal work clients in an attempt to deprive me of my livelihood.

The irony was I hadn't even _seen_ the fucking offending post in question!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Maybe I should follow the lead discussed here and just throw even more bricks at cars, eh?
> 
> I'd oppose them with argument and policy, not with random vandalism, often at the expense of innocent third parties.


for someone who can't "be arsed with fairy tales" it's strange you could be arsed to respond to it.


----------



## neilh (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I don't believe throwing bricks at a bunch of (probably) random cars and then running away does anything more than foster more violence.


once again, where are you getting the impression that it was probably random cars? cos it always seemed a bit odd to me that they'd just attack any car that was outside the meeting and someone already stated somewhere on this thread something about how it had been researched.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> my opinion about people lobbing bricks at some cars somewhere.



But this was the kind of emphasis on what happened that sparked a flurry of posts you didn't respond to. 

It's not an accurate emphasis, is it? It does show your point of view, which is that people shouldn't attack BNP leaders (or their cars) - which you started by expousing. That's the view I'd like you to defend, from the questions and arguments you've had against you.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I've been getting a LOT of personal shit recently as a result of these boards.
> 
> And I mean a lot. People ringing up on my mobile and personal phone numbers and other kinds of stuff and - I'll be honest - it's wearing my down.
> 
> ...



I didn't know. I'm sorry, and that'd out of order. No buts.

That isn't related to this thread though, is it?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> for someone who can't "be arsed with fairy tales" it's strange you could be arsed to respond to it.


Cutting edge, vital and crucial point there, Pickmans! Another great contribution!

Shame you're talking shit. If I could be arsed with your fairy tales, I would have started a discussion on them. But I'm didn't so kindly put away your Pedant-o-Scope for the night.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> That's not actually what I said.






			
				editor said:
			
		

> They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.
> 
> But remind me how people bravely lobbing bricks at empty cars and then legging it are somehow aiding the democratic process.


sounds like you're saying that you should only go through the ballot box to me.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> That isn't related to this thread though, is it?


It has all the makings of the same thing all over again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Cutting edge, vital and crucial point there, Pickmans! Another great contribution!
> 
> Shame you're talking shit. If I could be arsed with your fairy tales, I would have started a discussion on them. But I'm didn't so kindly put away your Pedant-o-Scope for the night.


i'll make my point simple, so as not to tax you: 

you say one thing but you did the opposite previously on this thread.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

neilh said:
			
		

> once again, where are you getting the impression that it was probably random cars?


Bricks bounce when they hit solid objects and I imagine the throwers wouldn't be too concerned about what they hit after.

But if you're telling me every single brick was lobbed with total accuracy then I'll withdraw the random part.

But what if one of the BNP peeps had borrowed the car from, say, his non-BNP voting girlfriend?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i'll make my point simple, so as not to tax you:
> 
> you say one thing but you did the opposite previously on this thread.


Thanks for that. Fascinating, as ever!


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

editor: at what point does physical resistance to fascism become legitimate, in your opinion?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin

he's made it clear that iho it doesn't, as his response to my asking how he'd oppose them if they took power shows.






			
				editor said:
			
		

> I'd oppose them with argument and policy, not with random vandalism, often at the expense of innocent third parties.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Bricks bounce when they hit solid objects and I imagine the throwers wouldn't be too concerned about what they hit after.
> 
> But if you're telling me every single brick was lobbed with total accuracy then I'll withdraw the random part.
> 
> But what if one of the BNP peeps had borrowed the car from, say, his non-BNP voting girlfriend?



How strong would the BNP need to be before you thought it was ok to confront them physically?

Or I could rephrase 'How close to power...'

That's the main question people have asked you on this thread.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> editor: at what point does physical resistance to fascism become legitimate, in your opinion?



Apols. I didn't realise you'd posted it.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> kropotkin
> 
> he's made it clear that iho it doesn't, as his response to my asking how he'd oppose them if they took power shows.


 If he genuinely does think that, he's an irresponsible idiot.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

thats cool flim.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> kropotkin
> 
> he's made it clear that iho it doesn't, as his response to my asking how he'd oppose them if they took power shows.


Christ you're tiresome.  

An expression of an 'argument' can take many forms and can be quite forceful.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Christ you're tiresome.
> 
> An expression of an 'argument' can take many forms and can be quite forceful.


 That is very grand-sounding, could you be a little more specific?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> If he genuinely does think that, he's an irresponsible idiot.


Hey! What not mindlessly soak up what Pickman's _thinks_ I'm saying and then declare me an "irresponsible idiot" on the back of it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Christ you're tiresome.
> 
> An expression of an 'argument' can take many forms and can be quite forceful.


i suspect you'd have made that distinction earlier were it really what you thought.


----------



## neilh (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Bricks bounce when they hit solid objects and I imagine the throwers wouldn't be too concerned about what they hit after.
> 
> But if you're telling me every single brick was lobbed with total accuracy then I'll withdraw the random part.
> 
> But what if one of the BNP peeps had borrowed the car from, say, his non-BNP voting girlfriend?


firstly, you weren't tryng to say it was irresponsible because another car could be hit by a brick bouncing off a bnp member's car, but that it was random cars they bricked in the first place. i'm sure it ain't that hard to make sure you don't trash another car accidentaly by a rebounding brick, and never have i heard of an innocent third party's car being damaged in this way. fair enough you don't agree with them attacking the cars, and i can see both sides of that debate, but to imply that it was irresponsible of them cos they might have not taken enough care about where the bricks bounced to seems a bit far pushed and ridiculous; and it seems none of them seemed to be worried about the dangers of their bricks bouncing back and hitting themselves, which seems more likely, if improbably.
secondly, again it's a bit of a hypothetical situation, but that's a risk you take if you lend a bnp organiser a car for them to go about bnp business with.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> That is very grand-sounding, could you be a little more specific?


It means I can go right up to a fucker's face and shout him down if I feel strongly about it.

It means I can stand in his way and stop him doing what he wants to do by arguing about his moral right to do it.

But throwing rocks and running away like naughty schoolboys doesn't do it for me.

What do you do, big man?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

well, I would guess you've been asked the same question about 10 times or so. I understand that you are busy, and I respect you enough to think that that is *not* your opinion.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

I don't do anything.

But that is a needlessly personal and ad hominem route to start to take in this discussion, which has in every case been about our _opinions_.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> It means I can go right up to a fucker's face and shout him down if I feel strongly about it.
> 
> It means I can stand in his way and stop him doing what he wants to do by arguing about his moral right to do it.



I don't think that would work, if they were in power, or close to it, or even if they were confident, as the National Front proved in this very country.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i suspect you'd have made that distinction earlier were it really what you thought.


Ah, you're back to telling me what I think again.

How fucking tedious.


----------



## cemertyone (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I've been getting a LOT of personal shit recently as a result of these boards.
> 
> And I mean a lot. People ringing up on my mobile and personal phone numbers and other kinds of stuff and - I'll be honest - it's wearing my down.
> 
> ...



Are you referring to moi by any chance?????and if so.... i think you might remember that i posted up my full name and London address and phone number to any and all who might have caused you problems in relation to any of my posts on this board..to come straight to my door and deal with me directly...and i apoligised to you for the trouble....i am not and have never been a "keyboard warrior" hence my full address on the boards........


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I don't think that would work, if they were in power, or close to it, or even if they were confident, as the National Front proved in this very country.


Sorry: am I somehow supposed to be taking them all on _on my own now?
_
I'm giving you my opinion of how I choose to express myself politically _as of now_, not in some fantasy future that hasn't happened yet, or in some time before I was born.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Meanwhile, layabout has got away with his wriggle. He wasn't willing to admit their was a problem with his position.

The only thing that makes me suspicious is that after I said I took him seriously as an EX-member he called me 'gullable' - maybe I was.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

cemertyone said:
			
		

> ...i am not and have never been a "keyboard warrior" hence my full address on the boards........


You're lucky to be still posting here, chum

I nearly lost my career because of you and posting up your address would only have potentially led you into real trouble (and that's why I immediately deleted your details. I believe you thanked me for it at the time when you knew the full story).


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

.....


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Sorry: am I somehow supposed to be taking them all on _on my own now?
> _
> I'm giving you my opinion of how I choose to express myself politically _as of now_, not in some fantasy future that hasn't happened yet, or in some time before I was born.



It wasn't before you were born. It was the late 70s.

Nonetheless, the answer is no. The expression of how to oppose them on this thread is not as a group and is most effective, to stop such a situation coming about again.

You can express yourself to them like that. I'd doubt if they care about anyone's opinions - which is why denying them a platform is a vital part of defeating them. Hence the discussion.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> well, I would guess you've been asked the same question about 10 times or so. I understand that you are busy, and I respect you enough to think that that is *not* your opinion.


I don't really give a shit whether you 'respect' me or not.

I do what I do and get on with it. Every day.

Are you mindful of throwing me any more abuse because Pickman's told you what I think, or have you had enough for the day?

I know I have.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Ed: It's still 0-0.

Cheer up!


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 30, 2005)

I didn't suggest that should respect me, I said that i had enough respect for you to not think that that was your opinion- which is what yopu accused me of. I wrote that is someone (you, in this case) _did_ think that, then they would be irresponsible idiots.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Are you mindful of throwing me any more abuse because Pickman's told you what I think


eh? i posted a quote from you which answered kropotkin's question, and made it plain what the context was - it was your words, not my interpretation of them.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> It wasn't before you were born. It was the late 70s.


This is getting ridiculous. People here have also been discussing the rise of Nazism, and old as I may be, I'm not _that_ old.

And seeing as I was a schoolboy in the 70s, I don't really think I would have been up to much in a battle with the NF.

And if you're looking for a group conclusion on how to oppose the BNP, then you won't find me joining the car-trashing crew quite yet.


----------



## tobyjug (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Nope, if I was a voter thinking I was getting involved in a respectable party, it'd make me wonder why people want to kick shit out of the leaders of said parties, and find out why.




Depends on who is doing the kicking. If it is the "usual suspects" I would be more inclined to vote for the party being kicked.


----------



## tobyjug (Mar 30, 2005)

Squatticus said:
			
		

> Fascsism isn't just an 'opposing political opinion' - its a poison that needs stamping out - bricks, bottles, whatever.
> 
> Innit.



It rather depends of what one thinks fascism is. Some U75ers seem to have a mindset it is anyone with a differing opinion to them.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> I didn't suggest that should respect me, I said that i had enough respect for you to not think that that was your opinion- which is what yopu accused me of. I wrote that is someone (you, in this case) _did_ think that, then they would be irresponsible idiots.


Well, thanks for that. Any more insults you want to throw me _'if'_ someone tells you I _might_ think something?

What do you think you added to the discussion by declaring that I might be an "irresponsible idiot", by the way?

Seems pointlessly provocative, if you ask me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

tobyjug said:
			
		

> It rather depends of what one thinks fascism is. Some U75ers seem to have a mindset it is anyone with a differing opinion to them.


fascism is characterised by extreme nationalism, a belief in the need for a strong state, a belief in the family unit, and a chauvinistic view towards other nations and races. some fascisms have other characheristics, such as the irish blueshirts' corporatist beliefs, a characteristic shared by italian fascism under mussolini. fascisms as a rule are mass movements, though individual groups may be small. a mass movement is certainly their aim. usually they also have a core, demagogic leader around whom a cult of personality is organised. 

i don't think that animal rights types are fascists per se, though obviously there will be some strasserite or blood & soil types amongst them.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> It wasn't before you were born. It was the late 70s.
> 
> Nonetheless, the answer is no. The expression of how to oppose them on this thread is not as a group and is most effective, to stop such a situation coming about again.
> 
> You can express yourself to them like that. I'd doubt if they care about anyone's opinions - which is why denying them a platform is a vital part of defeating them. Hence the discussion.



Tony Blair doesn't care about my opinions.

Charles Kennedy doesn't care about my opinions.

You don't care about my opinions.

Violence is the answer!


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Ed: I've been suggesting we should learn from history (ie the rise of far right and fascist groups including the NF and the Nazis) in the argument. Ignoring it in favour of personal experience really is complacent.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> fascism is characterised by extreme nationalism, a belief in the need for a strong state, a belief in the family unit, and a chauvinistic view towards other nations and races. some fascisms have other characheristics, such as the irish blueshirts' corporatist beliefs, a characteristic shared by italian fascism under mussolini. fascisms as a rule are mass movements, though individual groups may be small. a mass movement is certainly their aim. usually they also have a core, demagogic leader around whom a cult of personality is organised.
> 
> i don't think that animal rights types are fascists per se, though obviously there will be some strasserite or blood & soil types amongst them.



I've never read such shite in all of my life. 

I am an ULTRA NATIONALIST. Queen, country and all that. However, unlike you I get my fucking priorities right and put democracy higher up than my own selfish poltical beliefs and asperations.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Tony Blair doesn't care about my opinions.
> 
> Charles Kennedy doesn't care about my opinions.
> 
> ...



When you've answered the questions posed at you, please come back and deal with the thread.

At the moment, you have the look of a dying man shooting pot-shots at anyone.

Poor form wriggler. YOu've become a laughing stock.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I've never read such shite in all of my life.
> 
> I am an ULTRA NATIONALIST. Queen, country and all that. However, unlike you I get my fucking priorities right and put democracy higher up than my own selfish poltical beliefs and asperations.



Surprise surprise.

I apologise to U75 for my previous mistake. This is layabout in his own words.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I've never read such shite in all of my life.


why not? you profess to despise the bnp, yet whilst a member you must have read some of their literature.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> When you've answered the questions posed at you, please come back and deal with the thread.
> 
> At the moment, you have the look of a dying man shooting pot-shots at anyone.
> 
> Poor form wriggler. YOu've become a laughing stock.



Who the fuck are you? The moderator or something?

I told you. I have given you insights to the mentaility of moderate BNP supporters many, many times and all you do in return for my troubles, rather than carry the debate forward, is twist my words to imply the views of other people that I'm dicussing are the same views of my own. I've got way too much to be getting on with, to be playing such childish fucking games with you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

if you're like the moderate bnpers...


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

No, you've given your views.

YOu have failed to answer any questions on this thread. Ever.

Care to try? We're still waiting. I'm off down the shops. I'll be back in 30 minutes....

I mean, one of them you've been asked close on 20 times in this thread.


----------



## catch (Mar 30, 2005)

neilh said:
			
		

> i'm sure it ain't that hard to make sure you don't trash another car accidentaly by a rebounding brick, and never have i heard of an innocent third party's car being damaged in this way. .



When I was 8 years old, we shot small stones at the road at high speed to produce sparks, one of which bounced off and hit a car (fortunately not causing significant damage) so ner.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Surprise surprise.
> 
> I apologise to U75 for my previous mistake. This is layabout in his own words.



Do you even know what nationalism is about? 

Do you think the BNP are the be all and end all of British Nationalism?

Flimsier = white male human

Nick Griffin = white male human

Flmiser = fascist!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I mean, one of them you've been asked close on 20 times in this thread.


me or layabout?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

catch said:
			
		

> When I was 8 years old, we shot small stones at the road at high speed to produce sparks, one of which bounced off and hit a car (fortunately not causing significant damage) so ner.


a stone is somewhat different from a brick. so


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> No, you've given your views.
> 
> YOu have failed to answer any questions on this thread. Ever.
> 
> ...



Flimsier, you don't get it do you?

I've discussed the mentality of BNP supporters before..........PLENTY OF TIMES.....and just about EVERY fucking time I try to discuss the way BNP members think...............YOU ACCUSE ME.......of thinking the exact same way.

I am not going to leave myself open to your childish fucking trolling.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> if you're like the moderate bnpers...



A subjective statement if there ever was one.

I'm a Tory.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> A subjective statement if there ever was one.
> 
> I'm a Tory.


not a one nation tory, from the sounds of it - slightly nearer to the barking side of the party.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> not a one nation tory, from the sounds of it - slightly nearer to the barking side of the party.



Define a one nation tory.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Do you even know what nationalism is about?
> 
> Do you think the BNP are the be all and end all of British Nationalism?
> 
> ...


No, that was you in your own words. I merely quoted you, word for word.

You're getting desperate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

one of the less objectionable tories, a 'wet', someone like ian gilmour.


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I am an ULTRA NATIONALIST. Queen, country and all that.


Ahh, that makes me feel quite sad for you


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Flimsier, you don't get it do you?
> 
> I've discussed the mentality of BNP supporters before..........PLENTY OF TIMES.....and just about EVERY fucking time I try to discuss the way BNP members think...............YOU ACCUSE ME.......of thinking the exact same way.
> 
> I am not going to leave myself open to your childish fucking trolling.



Nope. You discuss BNP supporters and say they all think the same way.

I say you can't generalise.

You make up some spurious reason to not reply to any points, as in the post I quote in this one.

So, 'just about every fucking time...' please show me some evidence for this statement. Since you've failed to support any other assertion of yours in this thread, I'm not holding my breath. Nonetheless, if you're willing to show me some evidence for your earlier asseritions, I'm happy to see them. You won't though. You never ever do.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> me or layabout



Come on, you're not that stupid. Layabout obviously.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

just checking...


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Nope. You discuss BNP supporters and say they all think the same way.
> 
> I say you can't generalise.
> 
> ...



Flimsier you do all the time. I give you hypothetical situations and questions and you always make wild assumptions of my motives for asking the questions.

What about that time when I asked about whether unions should have the rights to expel muslims? You immidiatly took that as a support for such a daft idea.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Flimsier you do all the time. I give you hypothetical situations and questions and you always make wild assumptions for motives for asking the questions.
> 
> What about that time when I asked about whether unions should have the rights to expel muslims? You immidiatly took that as a support for such a daft idea.


Sorry, 'all the time': evidence please?

You know, I'm sorry for having to pick you up on the fact that you have no evidence for many of your assertions today.

While we're at it, why don't we start with the 'hundreds more bnp voters' from Sundays actions, or you're loads of possible reasons why the BNP might not have put it on their website - despite it being one of the best possible recruiting tools.


----------



## kea (Mar 30, 2005)

why do icepick's threads always turn into rows?!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

kea said:
			
		

> why do icepick's threads always turn into rows?!


it is the way of the world.


----------



## kea (Mar 30, 2005)

it's almost as though he intended it.
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ... 
<raises eyebrow>


----------



## audiotech (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I've never read such shite in all of my life.
> 
> I am an ULTRA NATIONALIST. Queen, country and all that. However, unlike you I get my fucking priorities right and put democracy higher up than my own selfish poltical beliefs and asperations.



Democracy? Like the rest of us you didn't vote for the present head of state.

If you were a true democrat you'd be a Republican at least, rather than some loony toon, 'ultra nationalist' (sounds like some pseudo gang btw) you pretend to be.


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

I wonder what layabout would suggest _should_ be done to challenge the bnp..


----------



## belboid (Mar 30, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> I wonder what layabout would suggest _should_ be done to challenge the bnp..


Vote Tory!


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> Vote Tory!


Give it a few more years and he'll come to see the error of his ways about that too


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> Give it a few more years and he'll come to see the error of his ways about that too


satan, you'd have thought the period 1979 - 1997 would have shown him that by now.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Try as I might, I simply can't find any meaningful comparisons there.



You astonish me.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Flimsier. Can you get your head out of the ceiling or stop sniffing the felt tip pens. How on Earth do you come to the conclusion that the BNP want to follow the footsteps of the Nazis?



http://www.stopthebnp.com/


----------



## ecadre (Mar 30, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Layabout I've got quite a nice looking mug as it goes, and it was on red watch as far a I know



Join the club   

What a bunch of tossers.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> You astonish me.


So you think the BNP are about to invade Poland, take over Europe and plunge the world into a global war then?


----------



## LLETSA (Mar 30, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> See, I utterly agree with the second paragraph, and have some time for what is behind the first post. However, history illustrates that the ruling class will use fascism if and when it becomes desirable or (more likely) necessary. There are also parallels (and yes differences) with Hitler and the nazis, and comparisons between the complacency of the left and your attitude to the fash now.
> 
> I just think it's a dangerous game to be speculating with. My opinion is that they will return to their 'to the streets' game after some disappointing election results (and they've had almost none of them for a while) and have fundamentally not changed their spots, whereas you think they have (please correct me if I'm wrong) as they claim.
> 
> I think there is an urgent need for an alternative. If I was convinced by any I'd get involved - and maybe I shouldn't just be waiting - but I also believe 100% in stopping them from organising wherever possible.





Where did I say that I think they have 'fundamentally changed their spots'?
What they have done, primarily, is changed their tactics.

The reason why I don't compare what is happening regarding the BNP now and what happened with the mass fascist movements during the pre-WW2 period is because the situations are different in almost every imaginable way. That is not complacency.  The ruling class has no serious challenge coming its way in the forseeable future.  That is why it does not need to hold a fascist threat in reserve. All those sections of the ruling class that matter favour mass immigration. That is why establishment politicians and the media feel free to condemn the BNP as a Nazi freak show. And that is why they are able to portray themselves as 'the only real rebels.' The aim of the ruling class is to frighten off the very people that the likes of Griffin believe will enable them to grow into a more serious force: middle class professionals and the like. The ruling class is content to let the BNP become, to some extent, the party of that section of the working class which has been left behind by political and economic developments since the eighties, even if this means constant low-level racial tension in quite large areas of the country (although they would never admit this, of course.) 800,000-plus votes and the absence (in most areas) of a credible working class alternative - and the widespread lack of recognition on the left that this situation even exists - suggests that this strategy could succeed.  Better for the ruling class to have the dumb proles looking to a bunch of racist ranters, powerless to carry out their ultimate aims and evidently unenthusiastic about representing their constituents' day-to-day interests, than getting interested in a viable working class alternative.


----------



## koshmar (Mar 30, 2005)

> _Nick Griffin (Party Chairman) Received a two-year suspended sentence in April 1998 for inciting racial hatred. His magazine The Rune carried obscene anti-Semitic and Holocaust denial material as well as crude racism.
> 
> Tony Lecomber (Group Development Officer). In 1985 he was convicted on five counts for offences under the Explosives Act, including possession of homemade hand-grenades and electronic timing devices. Sentenced to three-years imprisonment.
> In 1991 he was sentenced to another three years imprisonment for unlawful wounding for his part in an attack on a Jewish schoolteacher whom he caught trying to peel off a BNP sticker at an underground station. He has a total of 12 convictions.
> ...



Yup, they sound like a decent bunch of blokes with whom you could hold a lucid and reasonable discussion on political issues...


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout...are you a pacifist?

Just wondering like...


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> http://www.stopthebnp.com/



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4155361.stm


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

koshmar said:
			
		

> Yup, they sound like a decent bunch of blokes with whom you could hold a lucid and reasonable discussion on political issues...



Look if they are breaking the law, it's a job for the police, not for Koshmar the incredible caped boy wonder.


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4155361.stm


Yer not very good at this game are you


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Look if they are breaking the law, it's a job for the police...


Yeah right


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Yeah


----------



## koshmar (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Look if they are breaking the law, it's a job for the police, not for Koshmar the incredible caped boy wonder.


What the fuck is that supposed to mean? I was pointing out that the policy of sitting down over a cuppa to discuss the pros and cons of immigration is hardly going to be acceptable to these inbreds...

You on mushrooms?


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout seems unable and unwilling to answer previous questions put to him so why should he be compelled to answer any future ones?

I asked you if you were a pacifist little man...

Yeah or nay!


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 30, 2005)

*...*

How can anyone be a pacifist and an "ultra nationalist"? It does'nt make sense to me. As a nationalist you'd be prejudicing your country against others, and as an "ultra", I'd imagine you'd do it with military force.

Is'nt ultra nationalism a strand of fascism anyway?


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

The point being that layabout believes in forced repatriation.


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

Or is it the nicer option of giving them a modicum of respectability by offering a one way ticket to wherever they came from in the first place? Compensation included?

Wanks


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

Get yer gold teeth, spectacles and hand made wigs here


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

"a job for the police" - yeah right, no coppers in the bnp at all, right...


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> How can anyone be a pacifist and an "ultra nationalist"?


Yeah I found that quite funny as well...

But it would seem that the only persons that the layabout character would defend from any type of direct action would be members and 'officials' of the BNP!

D'ya think that he's a pacifist?


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

Cops are sound...aint that right layabout


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> D'ya think that he's a pacifist?



Don't really know or care, to be honest. I suspect not.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> A subjective statement if there ever was one.
> 
> I'm a Tory.




"Conservative" surely?

How many Tories actually like that term?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> The point being that layabout believes in forced repatriation.



I have never expressed any such view, nor do I hold any such views. I'm not shocked that you of all people would resort to telling such lies.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> "Conservative" surely?
> 
> How many Tories actually like that term?



Who are you? A fucking Mori research assistant?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> "a job for the police" - yeah right, no coppers in the bnp at all, right...



Does that make any difference? 

I don't think so. Everyone has political views and as long as the police officer believes in the law, I really don't have a problem.


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> Don't really know or care, to be honest. I suspect not.


Well he most certainly is not a critic of the BNP

Every post I've read from layabout has either been race related or in defence of the BNP


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Does that make any difference?
> 
> I don't think so. Everyone has political views and as long as the police officer believes in the law, I really don't have a problem.


So no BNP fucks in the Police Force layabout ?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

koshmar said:
			
		

> What the fuck is that supposed to mean? I was pointing out that the policy of sitting down over a cuppa to discuss the pros and cons of immigration is hardly going to be acceptable to these inbreds...
> 
> You on mushrooms?



Look, can you stop making rascist statements you daft cunt?

Would you dare care to call a section of a non-white community "in-breds" ?

Go away you rascist fucker and leave the adults to discuss the issues you can't handle.

You can't persuade people into your way of thinking, so you want to pick up the football, scream wacist and get violent.

Would you like to bash me up if you feel that I'm not open to defend my politics against you?

Look, as much as you hate it, we live in a free country. You can fucking simmer. I don't HAVE TO sit down and discuss anything with you. I'm well within my rights to not listen to anyone and vote how I fucking please. The same goes for everyone else, including New Labour supporters, SWP supporters, BNP supporters etc etc etc.

So you can either fucking accept it (And deal with it), simmer or go out and break the law and get slung in prison.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> So you think the BNP are about to invade Poland, take over Europe and plunge the world into a global war then?



Now you're just being silly.









John Tyndall, founder of the BNP on the left (sic).

Try:
http://www.stopthebnp.com

for starters.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> So no BNP fucks in the Police Force layabout ?



I really don't know to be honest. Hard to really find out these days, isn't it?


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

In anycase...are you a pacifist layabout?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> Now you're just being silly.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



John Tyndall was expelled from the BNP.


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

Don't like violence do you


----------



## ecadre (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Who are you? A fucking Mori research assistant?



Flip, caught out again


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> In anycase...are you a pacifist layabout?



Do you take it up the shitter?


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> John Tyndall was expelled from the BNP.


Why was he expelled from the BNP layabout?


----------



## ecadre (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Look, can you stop making rascist statements you daft cunt?
> 
> Would you dare care to call a section of a non-white community "in-breds" ?
> 
> ...



Is this for real or just a comedy turn?


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> Now you're just being silly.
> 
> John Tyndall, founder of the BNP on the left (sic).


I don't need a lesson from you on what the BNP are about, thanks.

I was single handedly writing and flogging an anti-racist magazine on the terraces probably before you were out of school.

What have you ever done?


----------



## ecadre (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Why was he expelled from the BNP layabout?



Lust for power from the Griffinites.


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> In anycase...are you a pacifist layabout?


Still haven't addressed my point have you!


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Do you take it up the shitter?


Stop that now.


----------



## mk12 (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Do you take it up the shitter?



I haven't heard that since I was 15. Brilliant.


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> Lust for power from the Griffinites.


Same old shits with the same old agenda...treat them as such


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Still haven't addressed my point have you!



Are you a nationalist?


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Are you a nationalist?


Nope!

I'm an Internationalist

You?


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> So you can either fucking accept it (And deal with it), simmer or go out and break the law and get slung in prison.


So we should "fucking accept" the rise of the bnp - is that what you're saying layabout? There's plenty of non-violent ways to deal with the bnp; strange that you haven't suggested that people adopt one of these tactics isn't it? It's either 'fucking accept it, simmer or get slung in prison". 

Why am I not surprised that you don't think they need to be challenged at all?


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 30, 2005)

*...*




			
				X-77 said:
			
		

> So we should "fucking accept the rise of the bnp" - is that what you're saying layabout? There's plenty of non-violent ways to deal with the bnp; strange that you haven't suggested that people adopt one of these tactics isn't it? It's either 'fucking accept it, simmer or get slung in prison".
> 
> Why am I not surprised that you don't think they need to be challenged at all?



Maybe its because the thinking of the BNP and their nationalist ilk still make up his thinking?

He might have left the BNP, but the BNP have clearly not left him....


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> Maybe its because the thinking of the BNP and their nationalist ilk still make up his thinking?
> 
> He might have left the BNP, but the BNP have clearly not left him....


It's quite astounding that an ex-bnp member should come onto a mainly left-wing board and tell people to 'fucking accept' the bnp - like anyone is going to listen to him anyway!


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> "Conservative" surely?
> 
> How many Tories actually like that term?


you're right...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4395275.stm


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 30, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> It's quite astounding that an ex-bnp member should come onto a mainly left-wing board and tell people to 'fucking accept' the bnp - like anyone is going to listen to him anyway!



That's exactly what I think. I believe he is barking up the completely wrong tree. If people always point out that his threads on Islam and immigration are nothing less than racist and will not change their positions towards the issue (even polirising it further) or him (by rustling up odious stories from odious newspapers), why does he bother? He must have nothing better to do.


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

He's a twat in anycase.

So are you going to promote your case a little bit further layabout?

Lets talk about your pseudo pacifistic wannabee approach to those who would wish to be left alone by the anti-fascists that you see in your midst.

Are you a pacifist layabout?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Nope!
> 
> I'm an Internationalist
> 
> You?



Nationalist.

Of the rainbow variety...........


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> It's quite astounding that an ex-bnp member should come onto a mainly left-wing board and tell people to 'fucking accept' the bnp - like anyone is going to listen to him anyway!



It's not about accepting the BNP. The only party I "accept" is the one I'm going to vote for. 

Stop trying to be simplistic. I might suit you, but you're getting in the way of the adults.


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Nationalist.
> 
> Of the rainbow variety...........


Are you well?

What do you mean


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> That's exactly what I think. I believe he is barking up the completely wrong tree. If people always point out that his threads on Islam and immigration are nothing less than racist and will not change their positions towards the issue (even polirising it further) or him (by rustling up odious stories from odious newspapers), why does he bother? He must have nothing better to do.



Richard.

Are you deliberatly misrepresenting my views and lying about me, because I'm white, you racist cunt?

Go and find me ONE just ONE fucking post, where I have EVER critisized Islam.

Furthermore I think it rather hypocritical and sick that a racist like you, smears  me with the "racism" label, just because you don't agree with me about what is a fair immigration policy. 

Shame on you.


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Stop trying to be simplistic. I might suit you, but you're getting in the way of the adults.


I was directy responding to your quote. Once again - try to keep up. I even quoted it for your convenience. 

And it's strange how everyone who doesn't agree with your warped little mind is the one not being very 'adult', isn't it?


----------



## vimto (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> It's not about accepting the BNP. The only party I "accept" is the one I'm going to vote for.
> 
> Stop trying to be simplistic. I might suit you, but you're getting in the way of the adults.


So why do you consitantly support the BNP Nazi boy?


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Are you well?
> 
> What do you mean



Nationalism in it's purest form, without the homphobic and racist old bollocks.


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Richard.
> 
> Are you deliberatly misrepresenting my views and lying about me, because I'm white, you racist cunt?
> 
> ...


**YAWN** Just who do you think you're fooling on this board anyway?


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Richard.
> 
> Are you deliberatly misrepresenting my views and lying about me, because I'm white, you racist cunt?
> 
> ...



I'm racist against you because you are WHITE?

Grow up, sad little man.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 30, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I don't need a lesson from you on what the BNP are about, thanks.
> 
> I was single handedly writing and flogging an anti-racist magazine on the terraces probably before you were out of school.
> 
> What have you ever done?



Is this a formal invitation or just a meaningless personal attack?

I don't think it would be particularly difficult to get some idea who I am from a reasonably intelligent web search.

You say that you were flogging that sheet in 1992(I started writing an anti-racism football fanzine in 1992).  I've never been a teacher, so I was well out of school by then.

I was brought for the most part in Coventry. I think we know a bit about the fash up here.

Do you seriously want to know my personal history?  You're welcome to it as I've no fears about my personal anti-fascist and anti-racist credentials.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> So why do you consitantly support the BNP Nazi boy?



What are you on about?

By your standards, Richard White is a fucking radical muslim just because he doesn't want loads of them locked up!


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> I'm racist against you because you are WHITE?
> 
> Grow up, sad little man.



You hate whites, don't you? 

I knew it.

Racist cunt.


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 30, 2005)

*...*




			
				layabout said:
			
		

> Nationalism in it's purest form, without the homphobic and racist old bollocks.



Can one exist without the other? I doubt it.


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> **YAWN** Just who do you think you're fooling on this board anyway?



Not you. Why would I want to fool a fool?


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You hate whites, don't you?
> 
> I knew it.
> 
> Racist cunt.



Stupid Boy...


----------



## X-77 (Mar 30, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Not you. Why would I want to fool a fool?


Whatever. 

Goodnight


----------



## layabout (Mar 30, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> Can one exist without the other? I doubt it.



Really?

I think you're getting your nationalism mixed up with your fascism.


----------



## vimto (Mar 31, 2005)

Know what I really love about all this is that there are decent people who perhaps in the past have followed the BNP line and thinking that 'these are the guys with something to say...and are gonna make a big difference to the way we are gonna live in the future'

What's happening now?

Radicals coming from a Nationalist point of view are now moving over toward an Internationalist point of view.

It's called Dialectics or some such thing.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> You say that you were flogging that sheet


It wasn't a 'sheet' and the article makes that clear, so why call it that?

Cheap point-scoring anyone?


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Know what I really love about all this is that there are decent people who perhaps in the past have followed the BNP line and thinking that 'these are the guys with something to say...and are gonna make a big difference to the way we are gonna live in the future'
> 
> What's happening now?
> 
> ...



I used to have an Internationalist point of view. I had a deep rooted desire for capitalists to fuck over socialists the world over. But now I really couldn't give a fuck. It's a sick old world out there and if you want to help, you're more than welcome to bugger off somwhere to help solve it, because you ain't much use here.


----------



## vimto (Mar 31, 2005)

Are you a pacifist layabout?


----------



## silentNate (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I used to have an Internationalist point of view. I had a deep rooted desire for capitalists to fuck over socialists the world over. But now I really couldn't give a fuck. It's a sick old world out there and if you want to help, you're more than welcome to bugger off somwhere to help solve it, because you ain't much use here.


 You ain't much use here or anywhere-else so sling yer hook bnp lad


----------



## vimto (Mar 31, 2005)

Are you a pacifist layabout?

Huh?


----------



## vimto (Mar 31, 2005)

Twat


----------



## vimto (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I used to have an Internationalist point of view. I had a deep rooted desire for capitalists to fuck over socialists the world over. But now I really couldn't give a fuck. It's a sick old world out there and if you want to help, you're more than welcome to bugger off somwhere to help solve it, because you ain't much use here.


You against Internationalism layabout?


----------



## Dhimmi (Mar 31, 2005)

Unpopular as this will be I think it's rather healthy that Layabout posts here, I think it's a waste for us to resort to personal insults over it. 
I'd actually like to know why folk are attracted to bnp politics, membership or activity without having to pour judgements upon it. 
Aside from the site claiming the action are there any independent reports on the event?




			
				kropotkin said:
			
		

> layabout: no one I know is interested  in attacking BNP members, only organisers and leadership. I have no problem with that whatsoever, whereas I would have with attacks on membership.



Ah the most interesting distinction I've come across in the thread so far, any chance you might expand on the strategy behind this line of thought?


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> You ain't much use here or anywhere-else so sling yer hook bnp lad



I'm neither a lad nor have any kind of relationship with the BNP.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> It wasn't a 'sheet' and the article makes that clear, so why call it that?
> 
> Cheap point-scoring anyone?



Er, no actually.

That word may be a bit slangy or colloquial for you, but I've often heard newspapers/magazines/fanzines  being called "sheets". It was informal not cheap point-scoring.

Anyway, why are you reffering to that rather than the rest of the post?


----------



## vimto (Mar 31, 2005)

You against Internationalism layabout?


----------



## vimto (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I'm neither a lad nor have any kind of relationship with the BNP.


Why you keep on defending them then boy?


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> That word may be a bit slangy or colloquial for you, but I've often heard newspapers/magazines/fanzines  being called "sheets". It was informal not cheap point-scoring.


Really? I've never ever heard anyone refer to my football comic fanzine as a 'sheet'. Not once. Perhaps you could find such a reference to the comic somewhere for me?



			
				ecadre said:
			
		

> Anyway, why are you reffering to that rather than the rest of the post?


What's there to respond to in the rest of your previous post? You clearly think yourself as such an expert on the BNP that you're in a position to patronisingly lecture me on the subject.

I can't say I'm that impressed with your attitude, to be honest, but if it makes you feel good, feel free to willy wave around your 'credentials'.


----------



## vimto (Mar 31, 2005)

You not talking to me little boy?


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

Excuse me Mr Editor?

I'm getting a bit concerned that you are now having a go at me in a rather bizarre way.




			
				editor said:
			
		

> Really? I've never ever heard anyone refer to my football comic fanzine as a 'sheet'. Not once. Perhaps you could find such a reference to the comic somewhere for me?



Why have you fixed upon this?  I made no comment on your fanzine other than indicating that you started publishing it in 1992.

You had said _"I was single handedly writing and flogging an anti-racist magazine on the terraces probably before you were out of school."_ I simply indicated that by 1992 I had been out of school a long time.

If you want to have a discussion about English dialect etc. then fine. I often call filled bread rolls _"batches"._  Loads of people in Coventry call them batches and I haven't heard it in that context anywhere else. I don't have any particular reference for assertion, but it could be an interesting discussion.

The use of _"sheet"_ for a publication has obvious links to concatenations such as _"news sheet"_ or _"broadsheet"._

The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary gives a possible definition as _"a newspaper, periodical, or occasional publication <a gossip sheet>."_

http://www.etymonline.com notes a usage of  sheet _"Meaning "a newspaper" is first recorded 1749."_

Webster's 1828 Dictionary notes as definition number 3 _"A piece of paper printed, folede and bound, or formed in to a book in blank, and making four, eight, sixteen or twenty-four pages, &c."_

I don't know precisely where I picked up the particular usage of the word _"sheet"_ that I made in my post. I lived in Pudsey until I was eight, picking up a very strong West Yorkshire (mostly Bradford) accent that hasn't entirely gone. However, it is more likely that I picked it up in Coventry, later in life.

It's not something I have particularly thought about before, I'll run it by a few people and see what they think.




			
				editor said:
			
		

> What's there to respond to in the rest of your previous post?



Well, _"sheet"_ was a single word that for some reason you pounced upon. It wasn't related to any discussion other than being a noun that I used to indicate your fanzine. Hardly important.

The question that I had for you was whether you really wanted to know my political history? A reasonable question since you had asked, _"What have you ever done?"_ in relation to anti-fascist work.




			
				editor said:
			
		

> You clearly think yourself as such an expert on the BNP that you're in a position to patronisingly lecture me on the subject.



No, I gave an internet link where there are loads of articles and research about the BNP. The people who run that website are the experts.

Here it is:

http://www.stopthebnp.com

It is run by Searchlight, the anti-fascist magazine.




			
				editor said:
			
		

> I can't say I'm that impressed with your attitude, to be honest, but if it makes you feel good, feel free to willy wave around your 'credentials'.



Ahem.  You implied that I had not even left school whilst you were leading the good fight.

Quote:  _"I was single handedly writing and flogging an anti-racist magazine on the terraces probably before you were out of school."_

And then you asked, _"What have you ever done?."_ 

I am pretty certain you have never met me and have no idea who I am.  It's a bit rich to start talking about _"willy waving"_ in the circumstances.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Go away you rascist (sic) fucker and leave the adults to discuss the issues you can't handle.



Except you refuse to (discuss them) because you have no answers.

Wriggle on.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Racist cunt.



Earlier in the thread, someone predicted you'd use this exact phrase when you were wriggling for an argument.


----------



## X-77 (Mar 31, 2005)

With layabout it is a distinct case of "I'm alright Jack". If the BNP ever became powerful, are they really going to want rid of a white male who is a right-wing 'ultra nationalist' with serious gripes about immigration? 

Hell no, he's quite safe, therefore he can quite comfortably tell everyone here to "fucking accept it, and deal with it". At the end of the day, whether an "ex-member" or not (?) his politics are far closer to the bnp than anyone arguing with him here.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

arabonradar:

I am not really qualified to talk about the strategy, as I have yet to be involved in any physical force anti-fascism myself. This is largely to do with being a coward, although I hope to eventually grow to the balls to take part myself.

I do, however, applaud it when it is carried out by responsible and trusted comrades who know what they are doing, and more importantly why.

My interpretation of the strategy that this action was part of is that it must be made as difficult as possible for the BNP to grow. The people who join the BNP are on the whole not fascists or terrible people, but workers who justifiably feel abandoned by the mainstream liberal-democratic parties. Their areas are run down, their schools fucked, housing waiting-lists long. They are ripe territories for the BNP to enter and racialise these problems, prsenting themselves as the only defenders of these people, and the only people willing to stand up for "their own".

The strategy to deal with this is two-fold. Firstly, and most importantly, a genuine political alternative that deals with these issues on a class basis must be developed. This does not necessarily mean an electoral party, but must be a organisation based in and reflective of the communities affected.

Secondly there must be a concerted effort made to disrupt the organising of the BNP. Life for organisers, when acting in their role AS organisers, must be made as difficult possible. Meetings and stalls must be shut down, leadership cadres attacked.

Does that explain it better?


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> I am not really qualified to talk about the strategy, as I have yet to be involved in any physical force anti-fascism myself. This is largely to do with being a coward, although I hope to eventually grow to the balls to take part myself.


Do you really call each other 'comrades'?!
Why?


----------



## knopf (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Do you really call each other 'comrades'?!
> Why?



.... yes we do. I'm not in the same anarchist group as kropotkin, but I would still consider him to be a comrade.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

sometimes. Mostly because of the historical significance of the word, and it's meanings.

I had to stifle a laugh when I first heard it used.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Do you really call each other 'comrades'?!
> Why?



Yes, it's pretty common on the left.  A term of greeting, endearment, group identity and all that. Personally I use "comrade" pretty much unself-consciously, but then again I was brought up in a communist family.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> Yes, it's pretty common on the left.  A term of greeting, endearment, group identity and all that.


Don't you think it might have the effect of completely alienating ordinary folks who find such _nom de plumes_ archaic, embarrassing, dodgy or laughable in a 'Citizen Smith' kind of way?

Personally, I couldn't keep a straight face if someone tried to address me in that  manner. I think I'd find myself involuntarily adopting this pose:


----------



## belboid (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Don't you think it might have the effect of completely alienating ordinary folks who find such _nom de plumes_ archaic, embarrassing, dodgy or laughable in a 'Citizen Smith' kind of way?
> 
> Personally, I couldn't keep a straight face if someone tried to address me in that  manner. I think I'd find myself involuntarily adopting this pose:


mmm, do you still have the dreads?  don't you find people approach you in a similarly amused manner?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

editor, that was very funny indeed. Did it take you long to think of that one?

As I have already said, it is not a term that I hear often, and nor is it one that is used to members of the public. It is an historical term that is mainly used by those who have been in and around the revolutionary left for decades.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> mmm, do you still have the dreads?  don't you find people approach you in a similarly amused manner?


You've lost me here. Why would "approaching" people be 'amused' by dreads?


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> As I have already said, it is not a term that I hear often, and nor is it one that is used to members of the public. It is an historical term that is mainly used by those who have been in and around the revolutionary left for decades.


And what do you think about my point that it usage might alienate ordinary people from your cause and politics?


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Don't you think it might have the effect of completely alienating ordinary folks who find such _nom de plumes_ archaic, embarrassing, dodgy or laughable in a 'Citizen Smith' kind of way?
> 
> Personally, I couldn't keep a straight face if someone tried to address me in that  manner. I think I'd find myself involuntarily adopting this pose:



It's not a non de plume, it's a greeting. Think of "mate" or something like that.

I would only say comrade if it was someone who is an.......er.....comrade.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

because they are associated in the mind of the public with stupid tree-hugging hippies?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> And what do you think about my point that it usage might alienate ordinary people from your cause and politics?


 what do you think of my point, twice stated, that it is not a term I ever hear used towards the public?

Why do you constantly focus on irrelevancies? You clearly couldn't give a fuck about the answers to your questions, it is just another cheap dig- something you never have any problem getting indignant about others doing.


----------



## belboid (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> You've lost me here. Why would "approaching" people be 'amused' by dreads?


because they assume you are a stonehead/hippy/white rasta/something else they find amusing.

Your friends probably don't find dreads amusing, same as a lot of other people's dont give a shit about someone using the word 'comrade'


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> because they assume you are a stonehead/hippy/white rasta/something else they find amusing.
> 
> Your friends probably don't find dreads amusing, same as a lot of other people's dont give a shit about someone using the word 'comrade'



Well said, comrade   


Edited to add:
(yes, I know they're wrong......)


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> because they are associated in the mind of the public with stupid tree-hugging hippies?


Are they really?

I can't say that's the feedback I've received in real life.

And anyway, seeing as I'm not part of a gang espousing a political doctrine, it makes no odds to me what some clueless bigoted cunts might think.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> because they assume you are a stonehead/hippy/white rasta/something else they find amusing.


Can't say I've received much feedback like that.

Are you sure it's not your own prejudices shining through here?


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> Why do you constantly focus on irrelevancies? You clearly couldn't give a fuck about the answers to your questions, it is just another cheap dig- something you never have any problem getting indignant about others doing.


Wow. What hypocrisy. Need I remind you of your earlier mud-slinging in this thread?


----------



## belboid (Mar 31, 2005)

Quite sure thank you.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Wow. What hypocrisy. Need I remind you of your earlier mud-slinging in this thread?


 Not that anyone ever disagreeing with you has any effect on your opinion, but I might point out that I have not slung any mud or insults at you (although given that the word "sheet" is now an insult, I can uderstand why you'd think i had).


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> _nom de plumes_


what, like editor?


----------



## knopf (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Personally, I couldn't keep a straight face if someone tried to address me in that  manner.



Realising I'm a new kid & you're the ed & all, but doesn't that say more about you than it says about us?


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> And what do you think about my point that it usage might alienate ordinary people from your cause and politics?



Simple answer, no.  I can't think of a single occasion where anything like that has happened.

You're assuming that we all go around calling each other "Comrade!" in portentous tones. Hardly true, I usually get called "Andrew."

So,  its' used sometimes as a greeting, something to break the ice, not always taken seriously.

What else should we greet each other as?  Dudes, peeps, or something? Comrade doesn't get used anything like all the time, but it does give respect and identity to certain important human relationships.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

knopf said:
			
		

> Realising I'm a new kid & you're the ed & all, but doesn't that say more about you than it says about us?


Who's the "us" you're speaking on behalf of here?

And seeing as kropotkin said he had to "stifle a laug" when he first it used, why does that say about him in your point-scoring mind?


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what, like editor?


Err, except I don't expect people to call me that* in real life,* which is the whole point I raised.

Christ, you really are exceptionally tedious.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

...whereas this page-long diversion is not?


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> You're assuming that we all go around calling each other "Comrade!" in portentous tones.


No, I wasn't suggesting that. Really. I was just trying to make the point that I've known people be seriously put off when they go to a meeting and people start calling each other 'comrades'.

The fact that this honest observation led to people throwing around insults about my _personal appearance_ speaks volumes of the integrity of some of the people here.

Very disappointing.



			
				ecadre said:
			
		

> What else should we greet each other as?  Dudes, peeps, or something? .


What's wrong with using your names?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

a nom de plume is a pseudonym - d'you think people called samuel clemens 'mark twain' in real life? ffs, if you're going to introduce terms into the thread, please in future try to have some vague idea of what they mean.

i don't know of anyone who has ever used the nom de plume 'comrade'.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

Back on thread;




			
				kropotkin said:
			
		

> arabonradar:
> 
> I am not really qualified to talk about the strategy, as I have yet to be involved in any physical force anti-fascism myself. This is largely to do with being a coward, although I hope to eventually grow to the balls to take part myself.
> 
> ...



That pretty much covers it I think.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> ...whereas this page-long diversion is not?


Now that "Picky" Pickman's has arrived, you can guarantee that diversions will be the name'o'the'game from now on. After all, there's never a point too small or irrelevant to escape the attentions of his well-oiled Pedant-o-Meter.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> No, I wasn't suggesting that. Really. I was just trying to make the point that I've known people be seriously put off when they go to a meeting and people start calling each other 'comrades'.
> 
> The fact that this honest observation led to people throwing around insults about my _personal appearance_ speaks volumes of the integrity of some of the people here.
> 
> ...



Like I said, in the post you snipped from, they generally call me "Andrew." It's my name, not a nom de plume or summat.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

Again, you have misunderstood what someone said in your desire to play the victim.
Belboid said that something slightly out of the ordinary (your haircut, the word "comrade") can result in people's strange reactions. Not an insult in sight.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> a nom de plume is a pseudonym - d'you think people called samuel clemens 'mark twain' in real life? ffs, if you're going to introduce terms into the thread, please in future try to have some vague idea of what they mean.


And he's off! In widescreen Tedium-o-Vision!



			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i don't know of anyone who has ever used the nom de plume 'comrade'.


Apart from those on this thread who have already said that they use the word, of course.

I'm out of this thread for while. Nice work Pickman's!


----------



## belboid (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> No, I wasn't suggesting that. Really. I was just trying to make the point that I've known people be seriously put off when they go to a meeting and people start calling each other 'comrades'.
> 
> The fact that this honest observation led to people throwing around insults about my _personal appearance_ speaks volumes of the integrity of some of the people here.
> 
> ...


excuse me but I made no insult about your personal appearnace - I made a _comment_ about the well known fact that you had/have dreads. And that some people find them amusing/silly/off-putting - just as you think use of the word 'comrade' is silly/off-putting for some people. It was a point that seemed to be clear to everyone but you.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

no, a nom de plume is different from a greeting.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> excuse me but I made no insult about your personal appearnace - I made a _comment_ about the well known fact that you had/have dreads.


Why bring up my personal appearance here in the first place? What's it got to do with people calling themselves comrade?

Dredging up my personal details to score points gives you a rather unfair advantage over me, does it not?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Apart from those on this thread who have already said that they use the word, of course.


you just don't get it, do you? which part of "it is not a pen-name" do you have trouble with?

there still don't appear to be any news reports on the incident which sparked the thread. i wonder why there's the apparent continuing news blackout.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> no, a nom de plume is different from a greeting.


Look out! You've been Pickmanfied!

 

See you later!


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

OK, use me then.
I used to hair electric blue spiked hair. That sometimes caused reactions from people that suggested they were put off by it.


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> No, I wasn't suggesting that. Really. I was just trying to make the point that I've known people be seriously put off when they go to a meeting and people start calling each other 'comrades'.



Why?  In the case of something like a branch meeting or conference it's used as a collective noun. It's a word with meaning and respect.

Individuals generally get called by name, but comrade is good for when you've had a brainstorm and can't remember or don't know their name.


----------



## belboid (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Why bring up my personal appearance here in the first place? What's it got to do with people calling themselves comrade?


mmm, the bit I said in the next line from the post you quoted from.



> Dredging up my personal details to score points gives you a rather unfair advantage over me, does it not?


I don't honestly see why.  As you have yourself often posted up a picture of yourself with dreads then I didn't think you could take it as an invasion of your 'privacy' in any way.  If you do then I most humbly apologise.


----------



## knopf (Mar 31, 2005)

"Us" = people in the anarchist movement who call each other comrade.

As for point-scoring..... I don't think I was. Grovelling apologies if that's how it came across, obviously.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> there still don't appear to be any news reports on the incident which sparked the thread. i wonder why there's the apparent continuing news blackout.



because the bnp have no interest in reporting it, as it makes them look like prannies to potential supporters?

maybe...


----------



## ecadre (Mar 31, 2005)

Anyway, back to the thread.

Has this incident (the cars and all that) been reported anywhere else other than that page on enrager?


----------



## silentNate (Mar 31, 2005)

I followed the first eight pages of this argument but it appears to have become waylaid with other matters 
Can someone tell me- was Griffin's car trashed?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

if it was, he's not saying.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> As you have yourself often posted up a picture of yourself with dreads then I didn't think you could take it as an invasion of your 'privacy' in any way.


Is my photo in my profile on these boards?
Do I post under my real name on these boards?
Do I regularly post up pictures of myself on these boards?
Do I like people dredging up my personal details to score points on these boards?

No to all of the above.


----------



## exleper (Mar 31, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> Anyway, back to the thread.
> 
> Has this incident (the cars and all that) been reported anywhere else other than that page on enrager?


I implore everyone to *ignore all forms of pedantry and personal insult matches and keep to topic*.

A quick search on BBC and Google News reveals that enrager appears to be the only news source to pick this up.

Which is a little bit strange.  I know enrager are a newswire service and so the story wasn't collected by journalists, but surely that kind of attack is relatively newsworthy?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

exleper

this incident did occur, if that's what you're wondering.


----------



## blamblam (Mar 31, 2005)

exleper said:
			
		

> I implore everyone to *ignore all forms of pedantry and personal insult matches and keep to topic*.
> 
> A quick search on BBC and Google News reveals that enrager appears to be the only news source to pick this up.
> 
> Which is a little bit strange.  I know enrager are a newswire service and so the story wasn't collected by journalists, but surely that kind of attack is relatively newsworthy?


It has been mentioned by fascists themselves on stormfront.org and some other small fascist web board


----------



## belboid (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> Is my photo in my profile on these boards?
> Do I post under my real name on these boards?
> Do I regularly post up pictures of myself on these boards?
> Do I like people dredging up my personal details to score points on these boards?
> ...


as I said, if you took it as an infringement of your privacy, then I apologise.

But - I don't go trawling the net looking for pictures of you or any such thing - the only way I know what you look (or looked) like is through pictures you have posted up or linked to yourself.

And I had no intention of 'scoring' a point, but was _making_ one - a point that other people seemed to have got without problem, ie that some people find certain words or manners of attire to be 'archaic, embarrassing, dodgy or laughable'.

you do seem to be going out of your way here to find offense where none was ever intended.


----------



## exleper (Mar 31, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> exleper
> 
> this incident did occur, if that's what you're wondering.


Well, I was beginning to doubt.   I'm sure it did, its just when the only source is an anti-authoritarian newswire, you tend to think it could be biased.   

Is enrager really the only source to report the incident?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

pretty much, thus far.


----------



## exleper (Mar 31, 2005)

I had a look on stormfront...I've never been on that site before.  It was fucking scary.  It was like entering enemy lines or something....every post was just appaling racist shite.  eg. from here http :// w


> *Muslim Rape Epidemic in Sweden and Norway*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't understand how this kind of thing doesn't get shut down.  I just can't understand it at all.  

I'm so fucking angry now I could explode..


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

don't worry, you can just have a robust chat with them.

That ought to stop them.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

ecadre said:
			
		

> Anyway, back to the thread.
> 
> Has this incident (the cars and all that) been reported anywhere else other than that page on enrager?


It's also on Indymedia, although it seems just to be a copy and past of the original enrager article.


----------



## exleper (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> It's also on Indymedia, although it seems just to be a copy and past of the original enrager article.


Hmmmm...and in response to article on that site, a user has written the following:


> The first time you posted this bollocks we let it pass but if you are going to keep on I suppose one of us had better set the record straight.
> 
> The meeting was indeed held and yes we did find out at short notice however because we had such a small amount of notice no action was able to be pulled together in time. Later that evening in the pub a number of loud mouthed ANL wannabees were mouthing off about how they would have, "done them over" if they had known.
> 
> As ever when mouthing needs to be converted into action a lot of peole tend to drift away but I'm sure our friend here will be right up the front next time and we look forward to seeing his contribution.


Which I would imagine suggests that the incident did *not *take place.


----------



## The Black Hand (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> You appear to be applauding the action ("well done all involved.") so presumably you think smashing up cars is a legitimate way to show disapproval at people holding an opposing political opinion.
> 
> Do you?



Yup


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> Yup


So you've no problems with right wingers expressing themselves in the same manner with your property, then?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

exleper said:
			
		

> Hmmmm...and in response to article on that site, a user has written the following:
> 
> Which I would imagine suggests that the incident did *not *take place.



I can confirm that it did take place.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

exleper said:
			
		

> I had a look on st-rmfront...


It's one of the most depressing sites on the internet.

(I removed your link - even though it was correctly broken - because, well, I don't want it on the site. Hope you don't mind).


----------



## knopf (Mar 31, 2005)

exleper said:
			
		

> Hmmmm...and in response to article on that site, a user has written the following:
> 
> Which I would imagine suggests that the incident did *not *take place.



Although there is at least one other instance that I know of, where the fash have used Indymedia to spread disinformation about their activities (or lack thereof). I'm thinking about the NF's wreath-laying in Woolwich on the anniversary of the murder of a white teenager, despite the kid's family saying publicly that they wanted nothing to do with the NF.


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

Does anyone want a cup of tea?


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> So you've no problems with right wingers expressing themselves in the same manner with your property, then?


 I asked a very similar question 10 pages ago. As per usual, people wriggled their way round it.

Typical.


----------



## LLETSA (Mar 31, 2005)

exleper said:
			
		

> I implore everyone to *ignore all forms of pedantry and personal insult matches and keep to topic*.
> 
> A quick search on BBC and Google News reveals that enrager appears to be the only news source to pick this up.
> 
> Which is a little bit strange.  I know enrager are a newswire service and so the story wasn't collected by journalists, but surely that kind of attack is relatively newsworthy?





All too many threads on this board quickly degenerate into people writing about each other rather than about the subject of the thread.  Try making a point about something dear to the political hearts of certain people and you'll find that within the space of a few replies the subject will have been left behind and you are yourself suddenly the focus of the thread.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

Layabout: any chance of an answer?

Or are you still using the same excuse for not answering.


----------



## LLETSA (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> It's one of the most depressing sites on the internet.(I removed your link - even though it was correctly broken - because, well, I don't want it on the site. Hope you don't mind).






I don't find it depressing at all.  On the contrary, it can be hilarious.  I recommend the occasional visit to all those who talk about the BNP as some kind of Nazi machine with the potential to set up the Fourth Reich and all that.  When you consider the hard core that post there, it is difficult to be all that intimidated by such a bunch of witless, clueless and deluded tosspots.  

And spotting the spooks and provocateurs can be entertaining too.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

I was on there a while back. Admired the way they had the pluck to include an 'opposing views' section, although any attempt to debate with the hard-core white power massif were met with considerable hostility. However, yes, it's full of racist BS, as is to be expcted. I remember one poster going on at this Jewish guest poster with such venom, like as if was responsible for every crime ever carried out against the White people!


----------



## X-77 (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> I asked a very similar question 10 pages ago. As per usual, people wriggled their way round it.
> 
> Typical.


To be fair, the point about using violence was answered by a number of posters, e.g:



> *flimsier* I think any means necessary is a legitimate way of opposing a group of people that want to ethnically cleanse Britain, following Hitler's lead, of all non-whites, trade-unionists, democracy - indeed any opposition.
> 
> Incidentally, Hitler himself thought it the only way "his movement" could've been stopped.





> *cockneyrebel* But that's the point. Given half the chance they would. Given power, as flimsier said, then we would be up against the war or in death camps.
> 
> Physically taking on the fascists is self-defence against their long term aims and medium term methods.





> *kropotkin* You appear to think that all opinions are of equal validity. How terribly postmodern of you.
> 
> I believe in the destruction of fascism, by whatevr means are deemed necessary. The far-right must be tackled on many different levels, and physical-force antifascism is one of them. It is not the only strategy, but then no one claims it is. For an ideology that spreads by portraying its adherants as the muscled defenders of the Glorious white Race, it is galling to be attacked by precisely those people they try to appeal to.
> 
> Violence is nothing more than a tactic. Sometimes it is appropriate, sometimes not. You feel it is appropriate in apprehending those society deems "criminal", but not in preventing the spreading of fascism.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

exleper said:
			
		

> Which I would imagine suggests that the incident did *not *take place.


Indymedia has recently had a lot of problems with people spreading mis-information by falsely stating that articles are fabrications though.


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Layabout: any chance of an answer?
> 
> Or are you still using the same excuse for not answering.



Sure, I can do a huge copy'n'paste from an answer I've given you before, but I know already that you'll use the chance to tell everyone that I have views I patently don't. 

The thread will turn into an even bigger slanging match, with fairly new people calling me a right fucking cunt, for having views everyone else knows I don't. Naturally, no one will bother to open their gobs in my defence and I'll be forced to post about yet more stuff I have posted in the past to prove what my own fucking point of view is. 

After about 5 pages, YOU would still not have answered any of my questions and would still be babbling on about how I'm a racist cunt for posting up what I deem as legitimate concerns of the white working class.

So are you up for it?

Remember, I won't be in a mood to speed post so the whole process should take about 5 days.

The winner is the person who doesn't give up in sheer boredom or manages to get himself banned.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Sure, I can do a huge copy'n'paste from an answer I've given you before, but I know already that you'll use the chance to tell everyone that I have views I patently don't.
> 
> The thread will turn into an even bigger slanging match, with fairly new people calling me a right fucking cunt, for having views everyone else knows I don't. Naturally, no one will bother to open their gobs in my defence and I'll be forced to post about yet more stuff I have posted in the past to prove what my own fucking point of view is.
> 
> ...



No, you said that there were lots of reasons the BNP wouldn't shout about succesful no platform actions, despite (you saying) such actions meaning they'd get hundreds of new members.

I asked you for five. There's nothing in your posts to answer that, but you can keep lying if you like.

Wriggle wriggle. Why don't you try your trick of leaving the thread for a few hours and see if anyone remembers you're still wriggling?


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

Re: X-77

But the point I was trying to make was if, as an anarchist, you were NOT discouraged from staying involved in anarchism just because some fash thugs attacked your meeting, then it's hard to see why the fash would be discouraged because of some millitant anti-fascist direct action.

In both cases, it probably drives the targets of the attack deeper into the arms of whatever cause they are involved in.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Re: X-77
> 
> But the point I was trying to make was if, as an anarchist, you were NOT discouraged from staying involved in anarchism just because some fash thugs attacked your meeting, then it's hard to see why the fash would be discouraged because of some millitant anti-fascist direct action.
> 
> In both cases, it probably drives the targets of the attack deeper into the arms of whatever cause they are involved in.



I answered that directly, so why are you lying about not getting an answer?


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I answered that directly, so why are you lying about not getting an answer?


 You were just avoiding the point I was trying to make. Using your logic on the flip side scenario, it would seem that the newbies of the hypothetical anarchist meeting that had just been attacked by the fash would somehow think twice about staying involved in this ideology that they thought was the best solution for society. But we know that it wouldn't work out like that at all.

Anyway, I cannot be arsed continually bickering with you about this, I'll leave that to layabout, who in spite of being an obnoxious Tory  seems to be doing a pretty fine job.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> You were just avoiding the point I was trying to make. Using your logic on the flip side scenario, it would seem that the newbies of the hypothetical anarchist meeting that had just been attacked by the fash would somehow think twice about staying involved in this ideology that they thought was the best solution for society. But we know that it wouldn't work out like that at all.
> 
> Anyway, I cannot be aresd continually bickering with you about this, I'll leave that to layabout, who in spite of being an obnoxious Tory  seems to be doing a pretty fine job.



I think they would think twice, yes. I think they would question why they or their leaders were being attacked with bricks. The same as potential fash would.


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> No, you said that there were lots of reasons the BNP wouldn't shout about succesful no platform actions, despite (you saying) such actions meaning they'd get hundreds of new members.
> 
> I asked you for five. There's nothing in your posts to answer that, but you can keep lying if you like.
> 
> Wriggle wriggle. Why don't you try your trick of leaving the thread for a few hours and see if anyone remembers you're still wriggling?



You haven't even proved such actions were successful!


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I think they would think twice, yes. I think they would question why they or their leaders were being attacked with bricks.


I think they'd be more likely to say "kick the fuck out of the bastard brick lobbers" myself rather than enter a period of quiet contemplation about their policies.


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I think they would think twice, yes. I think they would question why they or their leaders were being attacked with bricks. The same as potential fash would.



Because there are morons out there who would take the law into their own hands and don't give a shit about democracy. 

Sure keep it all up, make the BNP membership stand shoulder to shoulder with it's leadership. And you wonder why month after month they are more organised and stronger than before.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You haven't even proved such actions were successful!



I've been on a group of six people who stopped the BNP press conference prior to the election in 1997. Why didn't the BNP crow about that?

Not the point though. You said 'lots of reasons'. Name some.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> I think they'd be more likely to say "kick the fuck out of the bastard brick lobbers" myself rather than enter a period of quiet contemplation about their policies.


 I couldn't have said that better myself.


----------



## cats hammers (Mar 31, 2005)

Yes, because that's exactly what happened in the 80's.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

jackwupton said:
			
		

> Yes, because that's exactly what happened in the 80's.


What century are we in, jack?


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I've been on a group of six people who stopped the BNP press conference prior to the election in 1997. Why didn't the BNP crow about that?
> 
> Not the point though. You said 'lots of reasons'. Name some.



Flimsier, I really can't tell you, that was 8 years ago.

However, if you look at the BNP website, you'll find there are plenty of articles on where they have been stopped from having meetings.

If you really insist, in about an hours time, I can go through their website and find such articles.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom the fact is that is exactly what fascist movements do. Rule the streets to indimate their political opponents. And if that isn't countered then the fascists will be successful. Hoping that fascist movements will be stopped by sitting down and having rational discussion is just not reality.

So in order to counter that fascism needs to be defended against. Just because the BNP are currently playing their respectable card (as the Nazis did at times) doesn't mean that they shouldn't be no platformed as self-defence against their long term aims.

Now there is a legitimate discussion around the tactical use of no platform at a given time and the burning need for a left-wing working class alternative which currently doesn't exist. But the fact is no platform can turn people off from fascism either through intimidation or making people think about why it's happened. And yes I think that people are turned off from the left when the fascists are successful in their intimidation, it certainly doesn't always make people more determined, far from it. But you can't just say that means the left and right are the same as firstly their goals are totally different and secondly, in the case of the left, it is the actions of self defence.

As said, at what point do you think it would be legitimate to use force against a fascist movement?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

> If you really insist, in about an hours time, I can go through their website and find such articles.



OK you do that. And remember we want articles talking about no platform, not state oppression.


----------



## blamblam (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Re: X-77
> 
> But the point I was trying to make was if, as an anarchist, you were NOT discouraged from staying involved in anarchism just because some fash thugs attacked your meeting, then it's hard to see why the fash would be discouraged because of some millitant anti-fascist direct action.
> 
> In both cases, it probably drives the targets of the attack deeper into the arms of whatever cause they are involved in.


But Tom that goes against all existing evidence about the success of no platform actions in the past, which have destroyed entire branches of fascist groups (the NF went from 20,000 members down to about 60 now ffs!). People cannot afford to keep spending thousands to fix cars or getting hospital treatment or whatever - particularly as fascists are generally petty bullies. And bullies give up when they people fight back and show they can't push people around.

sorry am in realy hurry!!


----------



## chegrimandi (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> You appear to be applauding the action ("well done all involved.") so presumably you think smashing up cars is a legitimate way to show disapproval at people holding an opposing political opinion.
> 
> Do you?



are you taking the piss ed? cunt face gets his car bricked and you're voicing your disapproval.....

   

anger is an energy.  

what if one finds someone else completely abhorrent and odious, not everyone can behave dispassionately and reasonably, thank fuck.


----------



## exleper (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> I can confirm that it did take place.


How?

Sorry, I really don't want to be pedantic, but the evidence that any event took place is relatively thin from the way I see it.  I know that IndyMedia can be full of bullshitters, but I havent seen any solid proof that it did take place.  How can you confirm - were you there?


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

MR LUSTBATHER on enrager said:
			
		

> In the telagraph and argus( bradfords local paper) this gets a mention,the jist was lots of masked up man throwing bricks at a easter party in shelf halifax.With a women saying that a brick just missed a new born baby.


 Now if it actually hit that baby, there would be uproar, and quite rightly so. Either way, isn't this proof of how such actions can be counter-productive? Hurting innocent babies, how very anti-fascist.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Flimsier, I really can't tell you, that was 8 years ago.
> 
> However, if you look at the BNP website, you'll find there are plenty of articles on where they have been stopped from having meetings.
> 
> If you really insist, in about an hours time, I can go through their website and find such articles.



Do those 'lots of reasons' not exist now then?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

*exleper*

err..no. And I now have marked you down as a particularly obvious informant.


----------



## chegrimandi (Mar 31, 2005)

I can't be arsed to read the whole thread......

anyone know who it was wot done it?


----------



## silentNate (Mar 31, 2005)

Wheres that article? Couldn't find it.

http://www.thisisbradford.co.uk/bradford__district/bradford/news/index.html


----------



## exleper (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> err..no. And I now have marked you down as a particularly obvious informant.


What?  You have me marked down as an _informant_??  Are you saying that I'm a BNP-er?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

searching that site for "baby brick" doesn't reveal anything. When was this report?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

exleper said:
			
		

> What?  You have me marked down as an _informant_??  Are you saying that I'm a BNP-er?


 Well, you seem to be trying very hard to get someone to admit on a public forum to having either taken part in the action, or to admit to knowing someone who has. Both of which lay the person open to legal challenge.

Are you unaware of this?

Anyone on here reading between the lines knows what went on.


----------



## chegrimandi (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.
> 
> But remind me how people bravely lobbing bricks at empty cars and then legging it are somehow aiding the democratic process.



what if one doesn't think democracy whatever the fuck that useless word means, what if people don't think thats all we've got to hope for? Do you think we live in a democracy? do you think we are consulted much about our foreign policy? About anything? Do you?

so many questions!


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2005)

chegrimandi said:
			
		

> so many questions!


And no time to answer them!
I've got a club to put on tonight!

You coming along?!


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

shit, i didn't realise that was on tonight. I might pop along.


----------



## knopf (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> searching that site for "baby brick" doesn't reveal anything. When was this report?



Quite. That's why I asked him on enrager to put up a link.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 31, 2005)

chegrimandi said:
			
		

> I can't be arsed to read the whole thread......
> 
> anyone know who it was wot done it?



Anti-fash dudes bricked BNP supporters/members cars. Debate on whether it is a legitimate way to oppose facism/people carrying out lawful activities (which one it is depends on your POV.) Personal insults and comments about hair styles etc.


----------



## exleper (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> Well, you seem to be trying very hard to get someone to admit on a public forum to having either taken part in the action, or to admit to knowing someone who has. Both of which lay the person open to legal challenge.
> 
> Are you unaware of this?


Yes, I'm unaware of this.  I'm not trying to get anyone to admit anything.  I'm trying to find reputable sources, which are not currently obvious, to prove the event took place, otherwise there's little point in discussing it.



			
				kropotkin said:
			
		

> Anyone on here reading between the lines knows what went on.


I don't know what that means.

Now answer my question: are you suggesting/accusing me of being a BNP member?


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

no. I was accusing you of being a police agent.

I take that back though, sorry. But you should realise the effects of what you ask.


----------



## chegrimandi (Mar 31, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> And no time to answer them!
> I've got a club to put on tonight!
> 
> You coming along?!




not tonight ed, but as I'm only a hop skip and a jump away now work wise I'll prolly be along at the next.....have fun....  

I have many questions after all


----------



## exleper (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> no. I was accusing you of being a police agent.
> 
> I take that back though, sorry. But you should realise the effects of what you ask.


Fair enough.


----------



## chegrimandi (Mar 31, 2005)

Poi E said:
			
		

> Anti-fash dudes bricked BNP supporters/members cars. Debate on whether it is a legitimate way to oppose facism/people carrying out lawful activities (which one it is depends on your POV.) Personal insults and comments about hair styles etc.



of course its legitimate. Wheres the debate....?   

shame they didn't kill the slimy cunt with a blunt hammer.


----------



## Emma Herself (Mar 31, 2005)

oh for fucks sake why do you all post so fast??


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

Wouldn't a sharp hammer be a pickaxe?


----------



## chegrimandi (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> Wouldn't a sharp hammer be a pickaxe?



blunt hammer for extra pain. oh yeh hammers are fairly blunt aren't they. skip the hammer errr a small piece of cutlery. yeh thats much better.


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Do those 'lots of reasons' not exist now then?



1. The said "events" may never have happened.
2. The police may have convinced the BNP that releasing a press statement about said "events" will hinder their investigation.
3. The BNP may be waiting for another story to release it with.
4. The BNP may be carefully considering what to put in their statement and therefore may not release the statement for another few days or weeks.
5. When a news "event" happens towards the end of a calender month, it's easy to get away with putting an article about it at the beginning of the next calender month, giving plenty of time to get the article right.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

That's not good enough. I didn't mean 'yet'. I meant _at all_.


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> That's not good enough. I didn't mean 'yet'. I meant _at all_.



What? I'm here to please you?

Flimsier, please stay out of politics. People like you will get the BNP elected for all the wrong fucking reasons.


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> What? I'm here to please you?
> 
> Flimsier, please stay out of politics. People like you will get the BNP elected for all the wrong fucking reasons.



As opposed to the _right_ reasons? What are they then?

Again, a statement with nothing to back it up. And are you finally admitting that when you said 'lots of reasons' you were talking shit. Again.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> Wheres that article? Couldn't find it.
> 
> http://www.thisisbradford.co.uk/bradford__district/bradford/news/index.html


 According to the enrager thread it's yet to be put online.

Edit to add:




			
				MR LUSTBATHER on enrager said:
			
		

> For you impaitent friggers ,ive got the paper in front of me and will fish out a few choice bits( cannot be arsed to type all of it)
> 
> Police are investigating after a masked gang attacked families attending an easter gathering of bnp supproters.
> 
> ...


Well if it's a BNPer stating that it missed a baby well god knows who it's been distorted. Not dismissing it, but definately summat to take with a handful of salt then.


----------



## blamblam (Mar 31, 2005)

the fascist on stormfront said that shit about the baby, they probably told the press that. Tom A if you believe there was a danger of anti-fascists bricking a baby on the say-so of some nazi fuckwits then you're a fucking moron


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

ooh...the ed'll have you for throwing mud if you're not careful! _If_ you thought this _then_ etc etc etc


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> the fascist on stormfront said that shit about the baby, they probably told the press that. Tom A if you believe there was a danger of anti-fascists bricking a baby on the say-so of some nazi fuckwits then you're a fucking moron


 I never said I believed them. I know damn well that this would be the sort of thing that the fash would use to try and discredit the work of the anti-fascists. All I was saying was not to rule out the possiblity.

However with hindsight, if the SWP can fabircate stories about racist attacks and stolen mobiles by anarchists at the ESF, I am sure that BNP are quite capable of doing a similar thing with bricks nearly missing babies.


----------



## blamblam (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> I never said I believed them. I know damn well that this would be the sort of thing that the fash would use to try and discredit the work of the anti-fascists. All I was saying was not to rule out the possiblity.
> 
> However with hindsight, if the SWP can fabircate stories about racist attacks and stolen mobiles by anarchists at the ESF, I am sure that BNP are quite capable of doing a similar thing with bricks nearly missing babies.


after the antifa attack on the NF they first claimed one huge bastard who got beaten up was 17, then 16, then 15


----------



## X-77 (Mar 31, 2005)

> Darren mandy bnp spekes man said a brick narrowly missed a 3 month old baby in a carry cot and a six yr old sufferd a asmtha attck.


Definite load of old bollocks! Surprise they don't mention some imaginary old dear who got caught in the cross-fire too


----------



## invisibleplanet (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> What? I'm here to please you?
> 
> Flimsier, please stay out of politics. People like you will get the BNP elected for all the wrong fucking reasons.



The BNP will be lucky to get near the elections this year due to their inability to live up to election promises, the revealed racial hatred incitements from it's 'mouthpieces' and 'members', it's lawbreaking electioneering (campaigning for the youth-wing in schools by leafleting at both schools and colleges, citing without permission of copyright holders in election campaign leaflets, failing to even turn up to vote at council meetings where manifesto pledges were involved (ie tax cuts), and through it's lineage be proven to be the political front and mouthpiece for national fascism. 

BNP Chairman Nick Griffin (who was part of the National Front in the 1980s and who worked with members of the Italian neo-Nazi terrorist group Armed Revolutionary Nuclear (NAR) who were in Britain on the run from Italian police, will be returning to Halifax for questioning in less than a week, after being arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred two months ago, along with Tom Linden, Harrogate Organiser and BNP Yorkshire Press Officer, the party's founding chairman John Tyndall, and the former leader of its youth wing Mark Collett, who will also answer bail.

I'd pretty much say that this will be an historically important day of judgement for the BNP.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

no it won't, and if you think any of the above will impede them when it comes to election time you are living in a dreamworld.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2005)

Straight from the fantasy pages of Searchlight or the UAF...


----------



## past caring (Mar 31, 2005)

Searchlight, I'd say - I'd even lay money it was c+p'ed from them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

yeh, it has their pisspoor style.


----------



## past caring (Mar 31, 2005)

Have you seen her "contribution" on the other thread? Equally laughable.....


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

The one that alleges that certain individuals have knifed people and the like, or a different contribution?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> The one that alleges that certain individuals have knifed people and the like, or a different contribution?


certain mps have apparently knifed people, according to invisible planet.


----------



## koshmar (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Look, can you stop making rascist statements you daft cunt?
> 
> Would you dare care to call a section of a non-white community "in-breds" ?
> 
> ...



Do you know you're going to have a thrombosis if you keep up this level of vitriol?

Have a nice cup of tea and a 







before you do yourself an injury. There's a good boy...


----------



## flimsier (Mar 31, 2005)

I think it was prospective MPs the allegation was about...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I think it was prospective MPs the allegation was about...


i read it as "proposed bnp councillors, and [already elected] mps".


----------



## past caring (Mar 31, 2005)

We're talking about the same post, yes.

But it wasn't the knife thing that made it bollocks, just that same old routine that "exposing" the BNP and Griffin as racists/thugs (this time, handily, via the courtcase) will be sufficient to see a reversal of their fortunes.

Fucking lunacy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

past caring

the entire fucking post _is_ barking - ip should stop taking the tablets, they're clearly not working.


----------



## past caring (Mar 31, 2005)

True - I was just doing a little bit of shorthand - it wasn't worth considering in detail.

But yeah, now I come to think of it, the notion that Griffin is likely to be convicted is utter nonsense - at least if, as we've been led to believe, the main evidence for the prosecution is the Searchlight/Panorama "exposè". Of course, it's _possible_ - in theory at least - that the most damning evidence wasn't screened. But I doubt it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

nah - investigative journalists these days aren't all that, and will chuck out all the evidence asap, not (imo) having a clue about legal things.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> no it won't, and if you think any of the above will impede them when it comes to election time you are living in a dreamworld.



So if that won't, how will bricking a few cars?


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> nah - investigative journalists these days aren't all that, and will chuck out all the evidence asap, not (imo) having a clue about legal things.



Did you see that "investigative" journalism on Dessie Noonan? It was utter shit! It almost painted the gangsters as an integral and positive part of the community. All "investigative" programmes about the BNP have been quite lazy - purely to give a shock effect, but don't really tell the audience what it does'nt already know, and the style always makes the Nazis appear stigmatised and hard-done by (!). That "young, Nazi and proud" programme about Mark Collett was exeptionally poor....


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> Did you see that "investigative" journalism on Dessie Noonan? It was utter shit! It almost painted the gangsters as an integral and positive part of the community. All "investigative" programmes about the BNP have been quite lazy - purely to give a shock effect, but don't really tell the audience what it does'nt already know, and the style always makes the Nazis appear stigmatised and hard-done by (!). That "young, Nazi and proud" programme about Mark Collett was exeptionally poor....


that's that fuckwit macintyre, the bloke who had to advertise he wanted to be mugged in brixton.


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> that's that fuckwit macintyre, the bloke who had to advertise he wanted to be mugged in brixton.



I remember! Thinking about that programme still makes me cringe!

*Donal McFuckwit to Hooded Black Youth*: "I_f I told you I had an expensive laptop on me, would you mug me?_"


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2005)

what a fucking arse! 

that macintyre's so fucking arsy it beggars belief.


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what a fucking arse!
> 
> that macintyre's so fucking arsy it beggars belief.



*Donal McFuckwit to Hooded Black Youths Who Stole His Laptop* (in typical patronising tone): "_You guys should'nt have to steal from someone like me, you know! I remember my father telling me about when he first came to London - all the pubs had "no dogs, no blacks, no Irish" on the doors. We are all in the same boat, don't you think?_"

On the "_young, Nazi and proud_" programme the interviewer (Louis Theroux's brother) got to know Mark Collett quite a lot and painted him as some sort of "poor misguided soul" - yet Collett knows perfectly what he's doing and has done. The guy deserves no sympathy...


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

I find it hard to believe some of the people who post on here think that this cowardly attack is actually something to crow about or that it is going to hinder the political progress of the BNP.Do they think that smashing cars and throwing things and then running away makes these tossers V.C. contenders. Does it fuck! If the only way you think that you can beat the BNP is by using violence rather that winning the political argument then you might as well stay at home.


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I find it hard to believe some of the people who post on here think that this cowardly attack is actually something to crow about or that it is going to hinder the political progress of the BNP.Do they think that smashing cars and throwing things and then running away makes these tossers V.C. contenders. Does it fuck! If the only way you think that you can beat the BNP is by using violence rather that winning the political argument then you might as well stay at home.


 I thought you weren't going to post here anymore?


----------



## red_hippy (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Do they think that smashing cars and throwing things and then running away makes these tossers V.C. contenders.



Well if they did get the V.C it'd be the first time it'd ever been given for anything worthwhile.




			
				Oldhamer said:
			
		

> If the only way you think that you can beat the BNP is by using violence rather that winning the political argument then you might as well stay at home.



...violence and winning the political argument aren't mutually exclusive y'know


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> ...violence and winning the political argument aren't mutually exclusive y'know


As any Iraqi, Afghan, or West Papuan will tell you.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> I thought you weren't going to post here anymore?




 I changed my mind you know free country and all that shit. Anyway tommy A do you think that these antifa tough guys did the left any favours with their actions?


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I changed my mind you know free country and all that shit. Anyway tommy A do you think that these antifa tough guys did the left any favours with their actions?


 TBH, not really.

Doesn't mean that I agree with you, or with the BNP though.


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

*....*



> To be honest with you I am going anyway this is one of the most pathetic sites I have ever had the misfortune to come on and you're attitude tom A is typical of the response of someone who cannot argue the point like a lot of people on here you immediatly want to shut them up well I have no wish to debate any longer with retarded anal such as you,you tosser.



Oldhamer sounds like a charming person. 

But then again, if you flounce and then return to a board to defend the BNP it shows more of a fact of boredom rather than anything else...


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Well if they did get the V.C it'd be the first time it'd ever been given for anything worthwhile.
> 
> Oh! right attacking women and babies is heroic in you're strange world is it?
> 
> ...violence and winning the political argument aren't mutually exclusive y'know



 Violence breeds violence. remember that when you and yours are on the reciving end.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> Oldhamer sounds like a charming person.
> 
> But then again, if you flounce and then return to a board to defend the BNP it shows more of a fact of boredom rather than anything else...



 No pal! shows that every so often I have to work away and don't sit playing at a keyboard all day. duh!


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Violence breeds violence. remember that when you and yours are on the reciving end.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> TBH, not really.
> 
> Doesn't mean that I agree with you, or with the BNP though.




 Don't expect agreement Tommy. Proof of common sense is fine sets you aside from the fuckwits


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> No pal! shows that every so often I have to work away and don't sit playing at a keyboard all day. duh!



You assume too much, knuckledragger. I work too you know. Difference between you and me is that I am not full of hate.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

>




 I didn't ask for a photo


----------



## red_hippy (Mar 31, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> You assume too much, knuckledragger. I work too you know. Difference between you and me is that I am not full of hate.



...and the fact your able to operate more than three braincells at once RW


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> You assume too much, knuckledragger. I work too you know. Difference between you and me is that I am not full of hate.



 No! you could have fooled me. you seem to emit nothing but hate. Did you get bullied at school?


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> ...and the fact your able to operate more than three braincells at once RW



 He's got three? who did he borrow the other two from?


----------



## red_hippy (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> He's got three? who did he borrow the other two from?



well it certainly couldn't have been you mate, doesn't seem like you've got enough to spare


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> No! you could have fooled me. you seem to emit nothing but hate. Did you get bullied at school?



See, there you go again....the troll assumes too much....

I was a right naughty little bastard at school....


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> well it certainly couldn't have been you mate, doesn't seem like you've got enough to spare



Excellent.

*Unsubscribes from thread, oldhamer is making me scared!!! Wooooo!!!!*


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

>


That post is insulting to chimps. This is more of a comparision:


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> Excellent.
> 
> *Unsubscribes from thread, oldhamer is making me scared!!! Wooooo!!!!*




 And of course going completly of the subject regarding the cowards of the left wing who creep up from behind attack and then run


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> well it certainly couldn't have been you mate, doesn't seem like you've got enough to spare




 And if he got them from you, you'd definatly be in the red so to speak


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> And of course going completly of the subject regarding the cowards of the left wing who creep up from behind attack and then run








Silly little Nazi.


----------



## kropotkin (Mar 31, 2005)

yeah, yeah, boo hoo.

This is going to keep happening. And it is going to happen more often and in more places.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> Silly little Nazi.




 Thank you game,set and match. has got no answers so start to shout Nazi and racist and fash


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> yeah, yeah, boo hoo.
> 
> This is going to keep happening. And it is going to happen more often and in more places.



What is?


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Thank you game,set and match. has got no answers so start to shout Nazi and racist and fash



I have the answers but they are not worth debating with you....I thought you left. Did'nt you leave? Were you that desperate to come back?


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

Well, they people behind the bricking are not even nearly as cowardly as such as the Nazi scum who murdered an antifascist over in Germany.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Richard White said:
			
		

> I have the answers but they are not worth debating with you....I thought you left. Did'nt you leave? Were you that desperate to come back?



 I chose to return  I missed the camarade.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Well, they people behind the bricking are not even nearly as cowardly as such as the Nazi scum who murdered an antifascist over in Germany.



 This is indeed a tragic needless death and I do not condon it in any way but think back Tom the report in to the attack in Halifax contains a tale of a mother and baby in one of the cars nearby who could so easily have been hit by the bricks thrown. they could have also been killed by people using thuggery to get their point across


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

> And of course going completly of the subject regarding the cowards of the left wing who creep up from behind attack and then run



What about the right-wingers who sit in cupboards wanking while strangling themselves to death with a kettle cord, now that's creepy!.....the master race eh!

Now there was a tragic death....ROFLMAO

 

So Oldhammer how are you doing in "voluntarily" making every non-white leave the country?


----------



## red_hippy (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> a tale of a mother and baby in one of the cars nearby who could so easily have been hit by the bricks thrown. they could have also been killed by people using thuggery to get their point across



...but they weren't, were they?  ...because the people involved were targetting Griffin's car, not the mother and child sat nearby.


----------



## red_hippy (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> What about the right-wingers who sit in cupboards wanking while strangling themselves to death with a kettle cord, now that's creepy!.....the master race eh!



hehe, if only all fascists followed his example...  then all those mothers and babies at risk from vicious leftie thugs would be so much safer


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> What about the right-wingers who sit in cupboards wanking while strangling themselves to death with a kettle cord, now that's creepy!.....the master race eh!
> 
> Now there was a tragic death....ROFLMAO
> 
> ...



 If anyone wants to leave the country it's up. to them but I think that you may see a lot of people regardless of skin colour going anyway because the way this government is screwing everything up there's gonna be a major recession.


----------



## layabout (Mar 31, 2005)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Well, they people behind the bricking are not even nearly as cowardly as such as the Nazi scum who murdered an antifascist over in Germany.



And? What does that have to do with anything? The skinhead is a murdering cunt. Is there a point in there somewhere?


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> ...but they weren't, were they?  ...because the people involved were targetting Griffin's car, not the mother and child sat nearby.



 But they haven't got the bottle to face him or the BNP up have they? Chickenshit wankers


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> hehe, if only all fascists followed his example...  then all those mothers and babies at risk from vicious leftie thugs would be so much safer



 Did you think that up all by yourself or did you have help


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

> If anyone wants to leave the country it's up. to them but I think that you may see a lot of people regardless of skin colour going anyway because the way this government is screwing everything up there's gonna be a major recession.



Come on Oldhamer surely you want to be a good BNP member and try and follow out the party line. So what are you doing to implement the no-whites strategy? What are you doing to try and persuade non-whites to leave the country?

I suspect the BNP have a very different idea of "voluntarily" than most other people.

So seeing as you're from Oldham did you know the far-right bloke who wanked himself to death? Wasn't he looking at pictures of women dressed as school girls as well?


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> And? What does that have to do with anything? The skinhead is a murdering cunt. Is there a point in there somewhere?



 Apparantly if an anti fash is killed it's more serious than if it is just a mere mortal. well it is in the land of the pranny.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

> But they haven't got the bottle to face him or the BNP up have they? Chickenshit wankers



But haven't the far-right got a whole history in the UK of being battered by the left?

So what do you think of your leaders view that there is a conspiracy to exterminate the white man? Or your other candidate "Odin's Eye", so is Thor worshipping still big in the BNP?


----------



## red_hippy (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Did you think that up all by yourself or did you have help



well strictly speaking, yes I did have some help....  i.e it was you who made the fucking stupid comment about the mother and child being sat nearby when Griffin got his car bricked




			
				Oldhamer said:
			
		

> But they haven't got the bottle to face him or the BNP up have they?



no bottle maybe, plenty of bricks tho!!


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

Been to any Red, White and Blue festivals lately Oldhamer? What do you think of the holocaust jokes?


----------



## Tom A (Mar 31, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> And? What does that have to do with anything? The skinhead is a murdering cunt. Is there a point in there somewhere?


 I was comparing the people who were involved in the attack on the BNP meeting to the skinhead who murdered (i.e. *deliberately killed* an anti-fascist).

Somehow I don't think even the anti-fa types would stoop to murder...


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

BNP security didn't look like they had much bottle at the Le Pen demo. They were shitting themselves....

So is one-eye Griffin a bit of a hard nut then? Maybe through his upper class, Oxbridge background gave him a good grounding in fencing....


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Come on Oldhamer surely you want to be a good BNP member and try and follow out the party line. So what are you doing to implement the no-whites strategy? What are you doing to try and persuade non-whites to leave the country?
> 
> I glare at every ethnic I see
> 
> ...



 We don't talk about him   And yeah I met him once at an election but he didn't stay long as he only got about 65 votes.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> well strictly speaking, yes I did have some help....  i.e it was you who made the fucking stupid comment about the mother and child being sat nearby when Griffin got his car bricked
> 
> Why was it stupid the only stupid bit was the twats throwing bricks
> 
> ...



 Brave lads eh!


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

A quote from your glorious leader:



> Make no mistake, this is the start of the Endgame, and the aim of the game is the extinction of the White Man.



Don't you worry that your leader is slightly unhinged?



> I glare at every ethnic I see



Is that all you can do to implement the glorious all-white Valhalla that the BNP wants? Seriously this is a major BNP policy, how do you go about implementing it? It's so quaint the way far-right bone heads refer to people as "ethnics".....



> Just the same as Labour and Tory (sorry conservative)



Sorry can you point to me where the Labour and Tories say they want to remove all non-whites from the country? And they don't have an all-white membership either.



> We don't talk about him  And yeah I met him once at an election but he didn't stay long as he only got about 65 votes



Is his behaviour typical of a far-right member? Did he only get 65 votes because he was too busy bashing one out while hanging from a kettle cord? Seriously this isn't a good advert for the master race....


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Been to any Red, White and Blue festivals lately Oldhamer? What do you think of the holocaust jokes?



 Didn't go to that one but herd it on the telly. shit joke anyway


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> BNP security didn't look like they had much bottle at the Le Pen demo. They were shitting themselves....
> 
> Really
> 
> So is one-eye Griffin a bit of a hard nut then? Maybe through his upper class, Oxbridge background gave him a good grounding in fencing....



 He was a boxer dickhead and I'd back him against most of the lefty wankers anyday.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

Do you feel good being associated with kettle cord bloke?

And maybe the holocaust joke was not funny enough for you, but surely the mental health of the Cyclops is a bit of a worry?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

Yeah they do a bit of boxing at Oxbridge I heard. How did he lose the eye by the way? Surely if you attacked from one side he'd be battered before he knew what was going on.....

And when does Griffin think the extermination of the white man is gonna happen, this is the end game for fucks sake, I think you should take this a bit more seriously.


----------



## red_hippy (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> He was a boxer dickhead and I'd back him against most of the lefty wankers anyday.



That explains the glass eye and mental instability then.

....he ever take it out as a party trick?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

Did he get a blood clot in the brain in one of his bouts or something, or did too much LSD bring him to his white man end game theory?

Maybe Griffin sits in cupboards strangling himself as well. Maybe the lack of oxygen is slowly killing of his brain.....


----------



## red_hippy (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Maybe Griffin sits in cupboards strangling himself as well. Maybe the lack of oxygen is slowly killing of his brain.....




...slowly?!


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> How did he lose the eye by the way?
> .



he threw a bullet in a bonfire at a fash festival in france, the daffy cunt


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

Maybe the BNP should get sponsorship of Russell Hobbs or something? I'm sure they do an all white range or something and could give a bulk discount on the cords.....


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> A quote from your glorious leader:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




 What would you know about far right members? If you saw a real BNP meeting you'd know that were not all boneheads


----------



## koshmar (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> What would you know about far right members? If you saw a real BNP meeting you'd know that were not all boneheads


No, but they're still sinister evil bastards


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

> he threw a bullet in a bonfire at a fash festival in france, the daffy cunt



Fucking hell I see the Oxbridge education didn't go to waste then!!

Another astounding example of the master race then. Not only do we have kettle cord bashers, Odin worshippers but the glorious leader of the white man end game theory throws bullets in fires.....

Maybe Russell Hobbs could make a special cyclops range. I'm sure there could be some slogan about having a cuppa done in the blink of an eye or something.....


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

> What would you know about far right members? If you saw a real BNP meeting you'd know that were not all boneheads



You're right. As said you also have the cupboard dwellers, Odin worshippers and white man end game theory cyclops.....


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

only poor depth perception could explain this waistcoat


*look at who's hand he's shaking*


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

Fucking hell Oldhamer, you don't seem worried enough that we're in the end game for the white man.

Any survival tips? What is it gonna be, a virus? Are people sniping us off one by one?


----------



## red_hippy (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Maybe Russell Hobbs could make a special cyclops range. I'm sure there could be some slogan about having a cuppa done in the blink of an eye or something.....



...could have a 'mad fascist pervert' range aswell, with a flex long enough for you to be able to bash off with it round your neck whilst making a cuppa (although the cuppa wouldn't have been much use in Etchell's case...  would have gone cold by the time the coroner got there)


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Fucking hell I see the Oxbridge education didn't go to waste then!!
> 
> Another astounding example of the master race then. Not only do we have kettle cord bashers, Odin worshippers but the glorious leader of the white man end game theory throws bullets in fires.....
> 
> Maybe Russell Hobbs could make a special cyclops range. I'm sure there could be some slogan about having a cuppa done in the blink of an eye or something.....



 You know Cockney reb I'm getting worried about you you seem to have an unhealthy fettish for kettle cords  If you like I could ask the deceased NF members family if they still have the cord and if so I will post it to you so as you can act out you'r fantasy with the real thing (obviously the piccys will need to be of ethnic girls so I'll leave that bit to you)


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

> ...could have a 'mad fascist pervert' range aswell, with a flex long enough for you to be able to bash off with it round your neck whilst making a cuppa (although the cuppa would most certainly have gone cold in Mr. Etchell's case)



ROFLMAO......

Heh maybe the end game theory is down to those women who are ethnics. Exotic temptresses who are out to corrupt our genes.....

So what is it? Virus? Snipers? Exotic women?

How do I survive the end game Oldhamer, I need to know....


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> ...could have a 'mad fascist pervert' range aswell, with a flex long enough for you to be able to bash off with it round your neck whilst making a cuppa (although the cuppa wouldn't have been much use in Etchell's case...  would have gone cold by the time the coroner got there)



 Fuckin Sickko


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

> You know Cockney reb I'm getting worried about you you seem to have an unhealthy fettish for kettle cords  If you like I could ask the deceased NF members family if they still have the cord and if so I will post it to you so as you can act out you'r fantasy with the real thing (obviously the piccys will need to be of ethnic girls so I'll leave that bit to you)



I think it's the far right who have an unhealthy fetish for kettle cords. Hence one of them hanging from one in a cupboard.

Did the bloke get an honour guard at his funeral?


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> (obviously the piccys will need to be of ethnic girls so I'll leave that bit to you)



surely even a wierd fucker like you thinks ethnic girls would be better than schoolgirls?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

That waist coat is truely tragic, are you sure Griffin's other eye wasn't affected as well?

Is it a magic waist coat? Does it help him survive the end game with Odin's special powers?


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> only poor depth perception could explain this waistcoat
> 
> 
> *look at who's hand he's shaking*



 He's shaking the hand of a walking corpse


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> surely even a wierd fucker like you thinks ethnic girls would be better than schoolgirls?




 They were adult girls dressed up as schoolys   for fucks sake rednblack keep up will you.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Is it a magic waist coat? Does it help him survive the end game with Odin's special powers?



it can repel bullets fired by ethnics


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer do you have no worries that you support a group whose leadership are clealry the cast of one flew over the cuckoos nest.....

Odin, end games, perverts, cyclops.....


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I think it's the far right who have an unhealthy fetish for kettle cords. Hence one of them hanging from one in a cupboard.
> 
> Did the bloke get an honour guard at his funeral?



 Right hands raised all round I heard


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

what's a hamer?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

Is Gary Glitter a member of the BNP? Maybe he shares his wardrobe with Nick Griffin?

Is the school disco club night a BNP front   

Actually probably not I think you get quite a few women there.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Oldhamer do you have no worries that you support a group whose leadership are clealry the cast of one flew over the cuckoos nest.....
> 
> Odin, end games, perverts, cyclops.....



 I try not to think to hard about it   It spoils the dream


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

is the bnp soft on pedos?


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

Actually probably not I think you get quite a few women there.[/QUOTE]

 Yeah Fuckin loads and every one an Aryan Princess


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> is the bnp soft on pedos?



 Why. Are you thinking of joining?


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Why. Are you thinking of joining?



not if you are soft on nonces that's for sure, are asian nonces worse than white ones, or are they both as bad as eachother?


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> ROFLMAO......
> 
> Heh maybe the end game theory is down to those women who are ethnics. Exotic temptresses who are out to corrupt our genes.....
> 
> ...


 YOU DON'T


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> YOU DON'T



but cockney is black, surely it's only whites who will die?


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> not if you are soft on nonces that's for sure, are asian nonces worse than white ones, or are they both as bad as eachother?



 Which catogary do you fit in to? I don't think they've gone that P.C. as to knowingly let in ponces so I don't think you could join R+B soz!


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> but cockney is black, surely it's only whites who will die?




 Fuckin hell!  I thought that sort of statment got you locked up these days.It's racist.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Which catogary do you fit in to? I don't think they've gone that P.C. as to knowingly let in ponces so I don't think you could join R+B soz!



a ponce is a pimp, i asked about nonces


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Fuckin hell!  I thought that sort of statment got you locked up these days.It's racist.



you lefty cunt


----------



## cockneyrebel (Mar 31, 2005)

So we've got the end game theory.

We've got Odin.

We've got a cyclops who throws bullets into a fire.

We've got perverts and holocaust worshippers.

One flew over the cuckoos nest is starting to look a bit tame.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> a ponce is a pimp, i asked about nonces



 Sorry I'm not as into it as you are   I,m pretty sure that whatever sexual perversion your into would not be very welcome within the British National Party. You may wish to try for the lib dems or respect I'm told they accept anyone. good luck in your quest to find your nich in life


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> You may wish to try for the lib dems or respect I'm told they accept anyone. good luck in your quest to find your nich in life



you're right there, i must admit...


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> you lefty cunt



 How dare you Sir  Take that back.


----------



## militant atheist (Mar 31, 2005)

*oldhammer*

All this is very amusing  .  But has anyone tried actually *debating* with this guy.  In my one interaction with him he seemed reasonable and open to factual information.http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2801229&postcount=76.  , as opposed to the supposed 'Tory' who instantly told me to fuck off in response to starting the thread.  Oldhammers views may be abhorrent to us, but I think some kind of serious logical argument may be more productive than endless 'kettle cord' references, which after all, is probably the kind of approach 'Stormfront' would take if you tried to argue on there. And no, I'm not a fucking liberal.


----------



## rednblack (Mar 31, 2005)

evans294 said:
			
		

> And no, I'm not a fucking liberal.



actually i agree with you, if oldhamer is telling the truth about himself then i welcome his contributions

doesnt mean i'm above taking the piss though


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> So we've got the end game theory.
> 
> We've got Odin.
> 
> ...



 Not exciting enough for you then Cockney reb? I'll get that cord to you in the post asap. Be sure to follow the neck fastening instructions to the letter


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> actually i agree with you, if oldhamer is telling the truth about himself then i welcome his contributions
> 
> doesnt mean i'm above taking the piss though



 It adds a little intrest to the debate dont ya think


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

evans294 said:
			
		

> All this is very amusing  .  But has anyone tried actually *debating* with this guy.  In my one interaction with him he seemed reasonable and open to factual information.http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2801229&postcount=76.  , as opposed to the supposed 'Tory' who instantly told me to fuck off in response to starting the thread.  Oldhammers views may be abhorrent to us, but I think some kind of serious logical argument may be more productive than endless 'kettle cord' references, which after all, is probably the kind of approach 'Stormfront' would take if you tried to argue on there. And no, I'm not a fucking liberal.



 Thank you Evens294 I will try to debate if given the chance but whenever I log on after a couple of semi sensible responses it normally desends in to a slanging piss take. I blame people like RednBlack,Cockneyrebel,Tom A and various others. I of course am totally innocent


----------



## militant atheist (Mar 31, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> if oldhamer is telling the truth about himself


Well, are you?


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

evans294 said:
			
		

> Well, are you?



 I try to be truthful if the question is fair. Yes I am a card carrying BNP member although I don't believe in all of there policy's. But I do think that there will be a problem in this country if immigration is not addressed.


----------



## militant atheist (Mar 31, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I try to be truthful if the question is fair. Yes I am a card carrying BNP member although I don't believe in all of there policy's. But I do think that there will be a problem in this country if immigration is not addressed.



Thanks, I'm genuinely interested to know how long you've been a member and what prompted you to join.  What policies seem attractive to you and which you don't agree with?  I think the response I quoted above shows you are 'truthful if the question is fair'.


----------



## Oldhamer (Mar 31, 2005)

evans294 said:
			
		

> Thanks, I'm genuinely interested to know how long you've been a member and what prompted you to join.  What policies seem attractive to you and which you don't agree with?  I think the response I quoted above shows you are 'truthful if the question is fair'.



 Although I have always probably been right wing (Tory voter in the eighty's) I had never looked on myself as political and it was not untill the early ninety,s (coinciding with the birth of my son) that I started looking at the way the country was going and what sort of world were my children going to have to live in. I got what I felt was an insight in 1998 as the area that I lived in became ethnicly enriched and my son who had been playing in the school yard across from our house came in shaking and crying and told me that a gang of Asian youths had approched him and his friend and held a Knife to his throat,told him that this was their area now and he was not to enter the school again. My son was five years old at the time and never went out of the house alone again untill we moved two years later. 

In 2001 as most people will know Oldham was the centre of the most horrific riots ever seen in Britain and the police at the time did nothing to stop the riots due to political correctness. the riots escalated and millions of poundsworth of damage was done. The riotors were manly members of the Asian community but when the dust had settled as it were the finger of blame was pointed directly at the white people of Oldham. one month after this I voted for the BNP in the general elections, probably at first as a protest vote but then the local paper ,M.P.s and the whole media condemed not only the BNP but anyone who had the nerve to vote for them. Angered by this I phoned the BNP information line to ask for a few more details about them and was sent an information pack which I must admit lay on the table for quite a few months.I applied for a membership card in the following year 2002 after my wife,son and daughter were attacked by Asians who threw bricks(ironicly considering the thread) at their car as they drove through Glodwick.My wife went to the police to report the incident and after a vauge unintrested officer had taken details informed my wife that they would look in to it but given the unstable situation would not push to hard(ffs) 

The first meeting I went to I was understandably wary due to all the bad press but was amazed to find that the BNP was not made up of shaven headed thugs but consisted of families, senior citizens and others who felt that it was time to stand up and be counted. Since that first meeting I have been quite active within the party and really do think that the BNP once they have a little more political savvy could be a serious force in British politics

As for you question regarding what policy's I don't rate 

1 National service-Anyone who is forced to serve in the Army will not be as good a soldier as some one who volunteers

2 I do not believe in corporal punishment in schools-violence as I have said before only breeds violence.

3 White only membership- To become respected the BNP needs to accept that Black people are part of Britain and open membership to them.

4 Forced repatration- is a no no but I do think that asylum and all immigration should be stopped for at least the next ten years.

Ok that about does the opening of the heart bit  I know that this will no doubt get a response and I'm not being ignorent but I've got an early start in the morning so in going to bed now but god willing I'll be back on tomorrow night and will be able to go through everything with you. Goodnight all.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> 3 White only membership- To become respected the BNP needs to accept that Black people are part of Britain and open membership to them.


I think you're being a little naive if you can't see _why_ the BNP only allow white only membership. If you are being honest and want to see them reverse this policy, then quite frankly, it doesn't make sense that you should be in the party in the first place. I think you need to look a little deeper and find out what they are all about - at their very core - because I do think you have been duped by them.

Serious question: Why do you think there is such a hysterical response to the BNP?


----------



## flimsier (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> And? What does that have to do with anything? The skinhead is a murdering cunt. Is there a point in there somewhere?



Edited: layabout is a troll from another board, but I'm sure I can put it better when sober. I've saved my post until tomorrow or the weekend.


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Edited: layabout is a troll from another board, but I'm sure I can put it better when sober. I've saved my post until tomorrow or the weekend.



? 

Yes I do post on other messageboards flimsier. As for the term troll, that's rather subjective.


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Apr 1, 2005)

*...*




			
				flimsier said:
			
		

> Edited: layabout is a troll from another board, but I'm sure I can put it better when sober. I've saved my post until tomorrow or the weekend.



Oh dear.


----------



## silentNate (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> ?
> 
> Yes I do post on other messageboards flimsier. As for the term troll, that's rather subjective.


 I post on other boards 
Where do you post layabout?


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> I post on other boards
> Where do you post layabout?



LOL, I don't think you post on the other 2 messageboards I post on.

1 is a very small UK based current affairs site and the other is Texan based site.

I used to post on TIL & The Guardian but not no more.


----------



## silentNate (Apr 1, 2005)

I post on about five sites, dunno- will have to check if any of those outside of Nederlands or England are in Texas


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> I post on about five sites, dunno- will have to check if any of those outside of Nederlands or England are in Texas



Nah I mean the site in Texas is a for Texans, if you know what I mean.


----------



## 888 (Apr 1, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Without any effective left-wing alternative to whom BNP voters are supposed to turn anti-fascism becomes pretty meaningless - smash up those cars and, er, vote new labour!



Yeah, because all that matters is voting isn't it? Tosser.

I've only bothered to read the first couple of pages of this enormous thread, but rednblack's post 84 put paid to most of the editor's emotional liberal objections (whereas people like layabout should just be ignored).


----------



## militant atheist (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Although I have always probably been right wing (Tory voter in the eighty's) I had never looked on myself as political and it was not untill the early ninety,s (coinciding with the birth of my son) that I started looking at the way the country was going and what sort of world were my children going to have to live in. I got what I felt was an insight in 1998 as the area that I lived in became ethnicly enriched and my son who had been playing in the school yard across from our house came in shaking and crying and told me that a gang of Asian youths had approched him and his friend and held a Knife to his throat,told him that this was their area now and he was not to enter the school again. My son was five years old at the time and never went out of the house alone again untill we moved two years later.
> 
> In 2001 as most people will know Oldham was the centre of the most horrific riots ever seen in Britain and the police at the time did nothing to stop the riots due to political correctness. the riots escalated and millions of poundsworth of damage was done. The riotors were manly members of the Asian community but when the dust had settled as it were the finger of blame was pointed directly at the white people of Oldham. one month after this I voted for the BNP in the general elections, probably at first as a protest vote but then the local paper ,M.P.s and the whole media condemed not only the BNP but anyone who had the nerve to vote for them. Angered by this I phoned the BNP information line to ask for a few more details about them and was sent an information pack which I must admit lay on the table for quite a few months.I applied for a membership card in the following year 2002 after my wife,son and daughter were attacked by Asians who threw bricks(ironicly considering the thread) at their car as they drove through Glodwick.My wife went to the police to report the incident and after a vauge unintrested officer had taken details informed my wife that they would look in to it but given the unstable situation would not push to hard(ffs)
> 
> ...




OK, can't sleep so I'll respond to this now.

Everything you have said seems to me like a perfect illustration of how a seemingly regular person can get drawn into the BNP, but if I may let me respond to your comments in detail:

1.  Clearly, most of us arrive at a political perspective as a result of of our background, experience and evnvironment which consequently shapes our world view.  You recount a deeply disturbing experience pertaining to your son as a young child with Asian youths.  However, as I'm sure you're aware stupid, childish territorial/tribul disputes occur among kids all the time.  Please ask yourself, would have responded in the same way had the kids been white and from another district?  Are you totally convinced that the sole reason this dispicable behaviour occured was because your son is white and the offending kids were Asian?  Again, do you not think the parents of the Asian kids would have been horrified and condemned their kids' beaviour?  *Are you quite certain this was a solely racial incident?* 

2.  Equally, with regard to the Oldham riots, are you sure this might not have been more tribal/territorial disputes, fuelled by social deprivation and accelerated by extremists?   Similar, but less extreme, disorder occurs in town centres and around football grounds every weekend without any racial element.  You correctly state in your post that 'violence breeds violence', wouldn't a more rational response be, say, to participate in a dialogue with some equally concerned members of the Asian community to help heal the wounds, rather than join a party that thrives on this kind of discord.  With regard to apparent police inaction to your complaints, you'll find people complain about this all the time in connection with all kinds of crimes. Again, I really don't believe it's a racial issue.

3.  Many people are concerned about immigration, but are you aware that according to the Home Office inward migrants contibuted a net gain to the economy of £2.5 billion last year and are essential to help fund the pensions of our aging population?  Take a look around you and it's not to hard to see how the health service, catering industry, transport and agriculture would collapse without the input of immigrant workers.  I accept that it may not be apparent in your part of Oldham, but the UK is still 92% white!

4.  Nobody pretends that the BNP is solely composed of shaven-headed thugs these days, there are no doubt many decent people who have fallen for their simplistic approach of providing seemingly easy solutions to complex problems.  But remember, millions of decent people were amongst those whovoted for the German Nazis in the 30's and we all know the outcome.

5.  Most critically, your objections to BNP policy are *fundamental* .  You oppose the measures that make them  fascist (not just a term of abuse - in the true sense of ultra-nationalist, social-authoritarian, xenephobic).  Being a member and disagreeing with fundamental policies like repatriation and white-only membership makes no sense!  It's like being a member of the Communist Party but disagreeing with the state control of factories and banks bit  

Oldhamer, you come across a decent and thoughtful person and, if nothing else do you really feel at home in a party that is led by convicted criminals? http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/stopthebnp/uncovered/pg07.htm  If you are a right-leaning person with concerns about the immigration issue there are a number of parties (UKIP, Veritas, the dominant strand of the Conservatives) who share these views but without the fascist/criminal element.  You're too good for the BNP mate!


----------



## past caring (Apr 1, 2005)

888 said:
			
		

> Yeah, because all that matters is voting isn't it? Tosser.



We reading the same post? Where was hibee suggesting that only voting matters? I suppose it's _possible_ to misread or misunderstand the meaning as those doing the car smashing _also_ calling for a vote for New Labour. 

But the real meaning was clear - what _political_ alternative is currently being offered to those currently voting or considering voting for the BNP? That alternative may - or may not - involve a preparedness to engage in some electoral politics. But it needs to be measurable, success wise. 

Maybe  it's a separate debate, but to what extent do you think the BNP are currently stoppable via a physical-force/no-platform strategy? Can it really hamper their growth or is something more needed? And what degree of _relative_ weight should be attached to that something more?

And bare in mind, when answering, that you're discussing the question with someone who sees the validity of the physical-force stuff as an entirely tactical, rather than "moral", issue.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

evans294 said:
			
		

> If you are a right-leaning person with concerns about the immigration issue there are a number of parties (UKIP, Veritas, the dominant strand of the Conservatives) who share these views but without the fascist/criminal element.  You're too good for the BNP mate!


   you're supposed to be persuading him that his feelings are misplaced anger, not telling him to vote UKIP/Veritas/Tory!! Remember that there are Tories that have jumped ship to join the BNP and as for UKIP/Veritas...come on!!


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

888 said:
			
		

> Yeah, because all that matters is voting isn't it? Tosser.


That's rather unfair - did hibee mention voting?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer, on a serious level then. Lets say that attacks on your son and family were racist. Obviously this is totally wrong. However ethnic minorities are far, far more likely to suffer racist attacks than white people. Look at the most serious of racist crimes, murder, and I think out of the last 15 or so, one person has been white. Now this is also in the context of white people being 92% of the population.

So are you saying that in response to this, black and Asian people should set up the equivalent of the BNP?

There are undoubtedly serious racial tensions in some parts of the country. However interestingly, by far the most mixed place, London, has seen a decrease in racist crimes and the BNP has got nowhere. Now if immigration was such a problem, as the BNP says, surely this wouldn’t be logical. London should be a hot bed of racial tension.

In terms of immigration why don’t you have a look through this leaflet:

http://www.workerspower.com/index.php?asylum_lies

And as evans says, you have to look at the real agenda of the BNP. Does it not worry you that you’re in an organisation whose leaders are riddled with pro-Nazis, have festivals who mock the holocaust and a leader who says that the white man is on the verge of extinction and we’re in the end game. Does this not strike you as, well insane, to say the least? And what about the frequent rants about “lefty trade unionists”. Doesn’t it strike you as odd that an organisation that says it is pro-working class is so anti trade-unionism.

There are massive problems in this country. Look at the lack of council housing. Yet the cause is not immigration. Council housing in 1980 stood at around 5.4 million. Now it is nearly down to the 2 million mark, with only about another 900,000 housing association properties on top of that. Social housing has been decimated by right to buy. Now the most severe shortages are in London. Should my response to that be that we need to build more council housing, as that is the root of the problem, or should I call for a ban of all northerners coming to London, as migration levels from north to south are high?

What about the NHS where 27% of doctors and over 40% of nurses are immigrants?

Taxes for the rich, both in terms of income tax and corporation tax are at an all-time low. Rupert Murdoch has paid almost zero tax for years. Don’t you think that is more of a pressing issue than immigration? Immigration is an easy cop out for any government to pass the buck of the problems they’ve created.

Seriously Oldhamer do you feel comfortable being in an organisation that wants to remove every non-white from the country and is so anti-working class? Do you believe in shit like “the end game”? If not don’t you think that you’re in the wrong organisation?


----------



## hibee (Apr 1, 2005)

888 said:
			
		

> Yeah, because all that matters is voting isn't it? Tosser.
> 
> I've only bothered to read the first couple of pages of this enormous thread, but rednblack's post 84 put paid to most of the editor's emotional liberal objections (whereas people like layabout should just be ignored).



Er, I didn't say that voting was all that mattered. Quite the reverse, in fact. Maybe you should try reading threads before you label anyone a "tosser". Tosser.


----------



## militant atheist (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> you're supposed to be persuading him that his feelings are misplaced anger, not telling him to vote UKIP/Veritas/Tory!! Remember that there are Tories that have jumped ship to join the BNP and as for UKIP/Veritas...come on!!



Umm, I'm not trying to persuade him of anything other than to see the true nature of the BNP  He identifies his own views as right-wing and expresses concern about immigration, as do about a third of the population!  All I'm saying is that there are other parties who share these concerns to vote for which are not avowedly fascist, however much you or I may disagree with them.  The concerns Oldhamer expresses about the BNP would indicate to me that he would be more at home with the Tories.


----------



## rednblack (Apr 1, 2005)

evans294 said:
			
		

> Well, are you?



i only wondered because some twat like tony wentworth is not above coming on here an pretending to be a normal rank and file bnp member


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Apr 1, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> i only wondered because some twat like tony wentworth is not above coming on here an pretending to be a normal rank and file bnp member



I have my suspicions.....funny that the first thread he contributed to was on this subject - and then gave a point of view of actually attending that meeting, even making up lies (mother and kids targeted by anti-fash) to defend the BNP.

Very suspicious. Wentworth and his RedWatch friends took a photo of me and other Salford Uni students once outside the Uni - I doubt it made it on there, though. They were after pictures of the organisers (Salford Uni SU) rather than the individual contributers.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Did he get a blood clot in the brain in one of his bouts or something, or did too much LSD bring him to his white man end game theory?
> 
> Maybe Griffin sits in cupboards strangling himself as well. Maybe the lack of oxygen is slowly killing of his brain.....





Do you all take every utterance of Griffin at face value?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

koshmar said:
			
		

> No, but they're still sinister evil bastards





No they're not.  A few of them might be, but most clearly aren't. To say this kind of thing is just building them up into something they're not.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

Yeah Fuckin loads and every one an Aryan Princess [/QUOTE]



Except in Oldham is that?


----------



## silentNate (Apr 1, 2005)

jeremy_hardy said:
			
		

> In some areas of the country the British National Party has been doing quite well electorally.
> And one of the really hard things about being on the left, is you always have to be positive about human kind, and it's just so tiresome.
> You always have to come up with a reason why someone's done something and it can't just be because they are stupid bastards..
> People vote for the BNP and we have to say: Yeah well though the BNP are Nazi's, the people who vote for them aren't necessarily Nazi's. The BNP play on people's fears, people who are alienated because of the expropriation of their labor, according to the theory of capital accumulation, leaving them feeling vulnerable, and looking for scapegoats and blaming the wrong people instead of the bosses they should blame. And I just think well that’s all well and good but if you just took everyone from the BNP, and everyone who votes for them, and shot them in the back of the head, there would be a brighter future for us all.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> i only wondered because some twat like tony wentworth is not above coming on here an pretending to be a normal rank and file bnp member





When it comes to the British far right, don't you think there's all kinds of people among them pretending to be something that they're not?


----------



## rednblack (Apr 1, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> When it comes to the British far right, don't you think there's all kinds of people among them pretending to be something that they're not?



eh?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> eh?





When trying to assess the fascist scene, does all of it really ring true for you?


----------



## silentNate (Apr 1, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> When trying to assess the fascist scene, does all of it really ring true for you?


 No, I tend to think they are all racist bigots. Your point is?


----------



## TremulousTetra (Apr 1, 2005)

I don't know whether this has been covered above, but the BNP are currently crowing over the fact that the UAF has abandoned their leafleting in the kieghley area on the second of April, whilsty still not merntioning the attack above.  This kind of undermines the arguments of the editor and layabout was putting about " own goals" for antifascists.

Fraternal greetings.  ResistanceMP3

PS.  I'm not actually an advocate of the kind of action that took place above.


----------



## rednblack (Apr 1, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> When trying to assess the fascist scene, does all of it really ring true for you?



well no

if you mean the state sponsered white nationalist party or certain "infiltrations" of the bnp etc - i just didnt understand your point


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> No, I tend to think they are all racist bigots. Your point is?





That this is exactly what you are meant to think.  

And then inflate them into a threat of Hitler proportions.  Cue 'eff off you pervert Nazi cunt' type responses when one of them (or so he says) comes on a site like this.  Not to forget big talk about 'opposing them violently'. (Funny how most of those who indulge in this are usually not the ones who were doing it at the time it was most necessary.)

This is not to say that they are not a threat of a kind, far from it.  But without an understanding of exactly what kind of threat, mistake after mistake will be made when it comes to countering them.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> well no
> 
> if you mean the state sponsered white nationalist party or certain "infiltrations" of the bnp etc - i just didnt understand your point





That is what I meant.  But I'd go further.  Do you think that the likes of Griffin and some of the other leaders really believe in much of what they say?


----------



## rednblack (Apr 1, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> That is what I meant.  But I'd go further.  Do you think that the likes of Griffin and some of the other leaders really believe in much of what they say?



i've no idea - many of them could just be opportunists


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> i've no idea - many of them could just be opportunists





Exactly.  And if they can make a real electoral breakthrough they'll be sitting pretty as well-paid bureaucrats, raking it in from their status as 'the most odious politicians in Britain,' in full knowledge they they'll never be able to carry out most of what they stand for. Not that some of them wouldn't if they could, nor that they won't try to gain some victories.  But the more intelligent of them surely know the score and are prepared to play the game.  Luckily for them, as displayed on here, there are plenty among the opposition prepared to play along with them.


----------



## silentNate (Apr 1, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Exactly.  And if they can make a real electoral breakthrough they'll be sitting pretty as well-paid bureaucrats, raking it in from their status as 'the most odious politicians in Britain,' in full knowledge they they'll never be able to carry out most of what they stand for. Not that some of them wouldn't if they could, nor that they won't try to gain some victories.  But the more intelligent of them surely know the score and are prepared to play the game.  Luckily for them, as displayed on here, there are plenty among the opposition prepared to play along with them.


So attacking a meeting of the bnp is 'playing along' is it? 
If you think I'm buying this, 'don't worry they'll be ineffective in Govt' garbage then you can sod off. I'm well aware that bnp council members have done fuck all whilst in office but then why risk a far-right revival by rolling over and allowing them to carry on...
Just as I'm aware that there are just as many opportunists on the left waiting for their moment (like the swp for instance)...


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> So attacking a meeting of the bnp is 'playing along' is it?
> If you think I'm buying this, 'don't worry they'll be ineffective in Govt' garbage then you can sod off. I'm well aware that bnp council members have done fuck all whilst in office but then why risk a far-right revival by rolling over and allowing them to carry on...
> Just as I'm aware that there are just as many opportunists on the left waiting for their moment (like the swp for instance)...





Point out that bit where I advocate 'rolling over.'


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> So attacking a meeting of the bnp is 'playing along' is it?





Under current circumstances yes.


----------



## silentNate (Apr 1, 2005)

And what you propose doing is what LLETSA??


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 1, 2005)

silentNate said:
			
		

> And what you propose doing is what LLETSA??





I am in favour of the approach taken by those who are going to the kind of people that the BNP are trying (and to a large degree succeeding) to gain an audience among with a political alternative - and doing this in an organised way. The BNP's arguments are not particularly strong and could be defeated hands down if this approach caught on. Unfortunately the rest of 'the left' seems too preoccupied with its own importance/irrelevance to recognise that, in the eyes of the majority of potential BNP voters, the BNP are opposed only by the mainstream parties who can barely hide their contempt for them.


----------



## artfuldodger (Apr 1, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> . (Funny how most of those who indulge in this are usually not the ones who were doing it at the time it was most necessary.)



How would you know? Do you know each individual member then, or is it that if you didn't run with afa/ra within a certain timeframe then you didn't count? Some were about then actually and some were still smoking fags behind the bikesheds. Unlike the now defunct R.A. i believe todays antifascists have some new blood amongs't their ranks....thank fuck. Wondered how long it would be before we'd see your lots imput.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

evans294 said:
			
		

> OK, can't sleep so I'll respond to this now.
> 
> Everything you have said seems to me like a perfect illustration of how a seemingly regular person can get drawn into the BNP, but if I may let me respond to your comments in detail:
> 
> ...



 I do sometimes have my moments of doubt regarding the party but as I once said to a girl who came racing out of her house to return a copy of the voice of freedom (and to abuse me) that I had just delivered and it turned out to be an old schoolfriend and as we chatted she said "I know things are bad but do you really think that the BNP is the answer" to which I replied "If you know a better one tell me about it,untill you can then they are the only ones who look like they even care about what is happening to our country" I'm still waiting for her to come up with a better idea.

Sorry Evans 294 but to believe what is written in searclight is to believe that the moon is made of green cheese. Even members of the extreme left think that it is full of state sponsered shite.

Thanks for the offer of alternative parties pal but I think I'll stick with the BNP for the time being. they may not be the odds on favourite to win an election anytime soon but when I joined Iknew I was in for the long haul and accepted it. Anyway the way things are shaping downing street might be closer than we all know for the BNP.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Apr 1, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Exactly.  And if they can make a real electoral breakthrough they'll be sitting pretty as well-paid bureaucrats, raking it in from their status as 'the most odious politicians in Britain,' in full knowledge they they'll never be able to carry out most of what they stand for. Not that some of them wouldn't if they could, nor that they won't try to gain some victories.  But the more intelligent of them surely know the score and are prepared to play the game.  Luckily for them, as displayed on here, there are plenty among the opposition prepared to play along with them.



Q. In Burnley, where the BNP exploited racial tensions enough to win 3 seats on the council in a 'BNP will cut taxes' pledge', how many BNP councillors turned up to the Annual Budget meeting where, in their absence, a 5% tax increase was narrowly voted in ?
A. ZERO

A vote for the BNP at local council level does seem like a wasted vote!


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2005)

yeh, searchlight works with the state - but i think you'd be hard-pushed to deny that the bnp leadership ain't full of failed bombers and the like.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> i only wondered because some twat like tony wentworth is not above coming on here an pretending to be a normal rank and file bnp member



 Gow blimly R+B wot makes you think im the little cockey boy?, strewth!

 No I'm not Tony but I do know him quite well. care for another stab? only 17,799 members left to go at.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Gow blimly R+B wot makes you think im the little cockey boy?, strewth!
> 
> No I'm not Tony but I do know him quite well. care for another stab? only 17,799 members left to go at.


what, the bnp has 17,800 members?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Q. In Burnley, where the BNP exploited racial tensions enough to win 3 seats on the council in a 'BNP will cut taxes' pledge', how many BNP councillors turned up to the Annual Budget meeting where, in their absence, a 5% tax increase was narrowly voted in ?
> A. ZERO
> 
> A vote for the BNP at local council level does seem like a wasted vote!



 Was this the meeting that they changed the times at the last minute so that the BNP councillors couldn't make the meeting?

 Think about it really even if the BNP councillors proposed building a mosque the opposing side would say no just purely down to the fact that it was the BNP forwarded the idea.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what, the bnp has 17,800 members?




 Could be more now thanks to the antics of the idiots with bricks at the weekend. Oh! sorry yeah one equals two hundred  no were not talking about UAF now or the SWP.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2005)

cos you couldn't be saying there's 17,800 bnp members, when the march _right now_ interview with one nick griffin says they have 8,000 members.


----------



## past caring (Apr 1, 2005)

artfuldodger said:
			
		

> How would you know? Do you know each individual member then, or is it that if you didn't run with afa/ra within a certain timeframe then you didn't count? Some were about then actually and some were still smoking fags behind the bikesheds. Unlike the now defunct R.A. i believe todays antifascists have some new blood amongs't their ranks....thank fuck. Wondered how long it would be before we'd see your lots imput.



He's not in RA - never has been.

New blood? Possibly.

Hope they're not all like you. Never were interested in any political work _beyond_ the physical side - and even that amounted to little more than scurfing some lone bonehead on a BR station concourse and then giving it large after.

I'd have more time for you lot if there were _any_ sign of a politics that went beyond the purely physical but there isn't, is there? Piss poor.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> cos you couldn't be saying there's 17,800 bnp members, when the march _right now_ interview with one nick griffin says they have 8,000 members.



 yeah but he's only got one eye so he can only see half of them


----------



## audiotech (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I do sometimes have my moments of doubt regarding the party but as I once said to a girl who came racing out of her house to return a copy of the voice of freedom (and to abuse me) that I had just delivered and it turned out to be an old schoolfriend and as we chatted she said "I know things are bad but do you really think that the BNP is the answer" to which I replied "If you know a better one tell me about it,untill you can then they are the only ones who look like they even care about what is happening to our country" I'm still waiting for her to come up with a better idea.
> 
> Sorry Evans 294 but to believe what is written in searclight is to believe that the moon is made of green cheese. Even members of the extreme left think that it is full of state sponsered shite.
> 
> Thanks for the offer of alternative parties pal but I think I'll stick with the BNP for the time being. they may not be the odds on favourite to win an election anytime soon but when I joined Iknew I was in for the long haul and accepted it. Anyway the way things are shaping downing street might be closer than we all know for the BNP.



I'm sorry to have to disappoint you Oldhamer, but there have been, since 1945, a number of fascist groups active in Britain whose aim has been to revive Hitler’s ideas and to create a national-socialist state. Some eventually realised, that since the last war and the discovery of the death-camps, that ideology has been rejected by the vast majority of the people.

At present the essential aim of the BNP, is to get the name of the organisation known throughout the land. With limited manpower available (it is still tiny and overwhelmingly male) the BNP have cleverly sought publicity - ‘the life-blood of any movement’ - which to the BNP is the key - and lots of it. They have achieved this by courting the media with a few stunts thrown in for good measure. This on the back of some electoral successes.

However, fundamentally they need to grow and keep up the momentum to affect a challenge to mainstream parties and thereby put forward a credible political alternative.

The BNP are attempting to redifine and re-package far-right politics - this redifinition is more likely to succeed than conventional fascism.

The BNP are following in the footsteps of the most successful European fascist organisations by concentrating on electoral tactics, which were btw also employed by the fascist organisations of the 1920s and 1930s. They play down, if in sometimes ambiguous terms, associations with pre, or world war two fascism.

They have also developed crude propaganda, utilising populist issues such as crime (which they usually associate with race), paedophilia and of course their ace card anti-immigration. The British National Party solution to this issue is an amalgam of forced and voluntary expulsion. Which is fast becoming the labour governments policy, which, of course, may undercut the BNP's position any time soon.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> yeh, searchlight works with the state - but i think you'd be hard-pushed to deny that the bnp leadership ain't full of failed bombers and the like.



 I thought searchlight worked for the state not with it.

 And we've only got one failed (now rehabilitated) bomber.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Anyway the way things are shaping downing street might be closer than we all know for the BNP.


Sorry pal, ain't happening anytime soon. The left might be full of infighting, fractured and splintered every which way but if it came down to it, they could still beat the fash hands down. The biggest demos in this country are on the left, so for now at least you're vastly outnumbered.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

....plus there's still plenty of people that have never even heard of the BNP.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I thought searchlight worked for the state not with it.
> 
> And we've only got one failed (now rehabilitated) bomber.


That's the problem, you think a lot of things that aren't so. Like the one about the BNP being some sort of answer to all the problems of this country.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> Sorry pal, ain't happening anytime soon. The left might be full of infighting, fractured and splintered every which way but if it came down to it, they could still beat the fash hands down. The biggest demos in this country are on the left, so for now at least you're vastly outnumbered.




 I thought that the biggest demos came from the Muslims with the stop the war marches with the left just jumping in on the act hoping to rekindle the heydays.

 When was the last real big left wing demo? just out of intrest.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> ....plus there's still plenty of people that have never even heard of the BNP.



 Every day more people are becoming aware of use. infact this week alone I have given out four membership forms to people and last month I got two new party members so If everyone else in the BNP has similar results then soon we will be a force to be reckoned with.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> That's the problem, you think a lot of things that aren't so. Like the one about the BNP being some sort of answer to all the problems of this country.



 And you have some kind of insider info do you? like a direct line to Griffin or something. So many people condem the BNP and say that they are no answer but then fail to come up with an alternative.


----------



## herman (Apr 1, 2005)

Are one eyed people now allowed to drive?

There is a major depth perception issue that seems critical to the question.

Whoever trashed the dudes car has probably done a favour to some kids on a crossing in Welshpool.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I thought that the biggest demos came from the Muslims with the stop the war marches with the left just jumping in on the act hoping to rekindle the heydays.
> 
> When was the last real big left wing demo? just out of intrest.


You think the muslims in this country are single-handedly responsible for the big anti-war marches? Did the 'voice of freedom' tell you that 

Biggest march in British history - Feb 15th. 1-2 million marched in London. Plenty of Muslims, but mostly white people for your info (as would be expected when Muslims are only a tiny percentage of the population and white people are in the vast majority  )

I'd like to see your little group mobilise that sort of number.


----------



## Belushi (Apr 1, 2005)

herman said:
			
		

> Are one eyed people now allowed to drive?
> 
> There is a major depth perception issue that seems critical to the question.



Definately, I once had a one eyed neighbour who drove, badly I must add.


----------



## Dubversion (Apr 1, 2005)

i've come to this thread very late, so i'm in danger of just repeating what others have said.

but for the record, i can appreciate the ways in which the smashing up of BNP members cars could be a political or philosophical own goal, and could just be illogical or ineffective.

but i really can't bring myself to give a shit. smash the cars up, then when they've bought new ones, smash those up too. fuck em and the scum that drive them.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> And you have some kind of insider info do you? like a direct line to Griffin or something. So many people condem the BNP and say that they are no answer but then fail to come up with an alternative.


An alternative to what? Scapegoating non-white people for all of society's ills? You had some run ins with a group of Asians and suddenly everything is their fault. How can anyone give someone with your point of view an 'alternative' when you've got it so wrong in the first place?


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Every day more people are becoming aware of use. infact this week alone I have given out four membership forms to people and last month I got two new party members so If everyone else in the BNP has similar results then soon we will be a force to be reckoned with.


Hardly means you're gonna take over the country anytime soon. There's vastly more people that are wise to/wising up to, the BNP than are in the BNP so you need to mobilise a heck of a lot more than 6 people a month I'm afraid...


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> i've come to this thread very late, so i'm in danger of just repeating what others have said.
> 
> but for the record, i can appreciate the ways in which the smashing up of BNP members cars could be a political or philosophical own goal, and could just be illogical or ineffective.
> 
> but i really can't bring myself to give a shit. smash the cars up, then when they've bought new ones, smash those up too. fuck em and the scum that drive them.



Sure no problem mate. I don't give a fuck, as it's your rights and your kind of point of view the government will affect more to counter political violence.

I can't lose. The far right and the far left both end up being heavily restricted or even better outlawed.

Why should I give a fuck? It's not my cars being smashed and it isn't my polticial rights that will get clipped. 

I've no desire to stick up for your political rights or freedoms. I'll worry about my own, thank you very much.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> You think the muslims in this country are single-handedly responsible for the big anti-war marches? Did the 'voice of freedom' tell you that
> 
> Biggest march in British history - Feb 15th. 1-2 million marched in London. Plenty of Muslims, but mostly white people for your info (as would be expected when Muslims are only a tiny percentage of the population and white people are in the vast majority  )
> 
> I'd like to see your little group mobilise that sort of number.



 Very true we probably couldn't, but would you class them as the left wing or normal everyday people who just wanted to protest about an unjust and unlawful war. I mean they wer'nt all card carrying members of ANTIFA or SWP were they?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> An alternative to what? Scapegoating non-white people for all of society's ills? You had some run ins with a group of Asians and suddenly everything is their fault. How can anyone give someone with your point of view an 'alternative' when you've got it so wrong in the first place?



 Funny though how so many people who I talk to agree with my point of veiw admittedly some of them point blank won't hear a good word about the BNP but theres quite a few who show a lot of intrest in the party.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Very true we probably couldn't, but would you class them as the left wing or normal everyday people who just wanted to protest about an unjust and unlawful war. I mean they wer'nt all card carrying members of ANTIFA or SWP were they?


No but they were people who gave a shit about an impending war and the subsequent deaths of Iraqis. You know, the FOREIGNERS that you're so scare of. 

That says to me that at least 99.99% of them would not have been nationalists or far-right ignorants.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> Hardly means you're gonna take over the country anytime soon. There's vastly more people that are wise to/wising up to, the BNP than are in the BNP so you need to mobilise a heck of a lot more than 6 people a month I'm afraid...




 How many people have you convinced to go on one of you're famous demos in the last month or do you just spend time fly posting stop the BNP posters around towns at the dead of night?


----------



## Zonk (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> but theres quite a few who show a lot of intrest in the party.



Thats coz you drink in pubs full of fash wankstains with union jack y-fronts on sale behind the bar, init.


----------



## herman (Apr 1, 2005)

We all here have to ask ourselves how deep does politics run in society.

What is political?
What is not?

Is shopping?

I would argue that shopping is political.

So are many aspects of our lives.

Violence is part of our lives.
Political violence is part of our lives.

Violent methods maybe a raw expression of politics but a genuine expression nevertheless.  Friends of mine in the Midlands have been on the receiving end of fascist violence- I apparently am on the Redwatch site that is a recipe for violence.

Those in power will never give up power without violence against people - violence is part of the political process.

Any BNP supporter who acts like a wounded child because of an act against a car needs to grow up.  

Its small potatoes.  In the last century there has been a war that was not by aim but by the law of unintended consequences turned out to be  a war against fascism- though Spain was more overtly so.  Cable Street was nothing if it was not a rejection of fascism.

Politics and violence goes hand in hand. It was true for the chartists it is true today. It was true for the hosts of Rebecca.

Who gives 2 fucks about griffins car.


----------



## tobyjug (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> Serious question: Why do you think there is such a hysterical response to the BNP?



I would like to know the answer to that as well please. The more people react the more votes the BNP will get.


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Very true we probably couldn't, but would you class them as the left wing or normal everyday people who just wanted to protest about an unjust and unlawful war. I mean they wer'nt all card carrying members of ANTIFA or SWP were they?


I'm not a card carrying member of ANTIFA or SWP but I still attended the march in Glasgow.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> No but they were people who gave a shit about an impending war and the subsequent deaths of Iraqis. You know, the FOREIGNERS that you're so scare of.
> 
> That says to me that at least 99.99% of them would not have been nationalists or far-right ignorants.



 It says to me that 99.9% of them didn't want British troops getting killed just to further the ambitions of  American global occupation and control of the oil fields.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Funny though how so many people who I talk to agree with my point of veiw admittedly some of them point blank won't hear a good word about the BNP but theres quite a few who show a lot of intrest in the party.


Really? I don't believe for one minute that you feel at ease with being an active member (leafleting etc) for the BNP or admitting to new people you are in the bnp, do you? Be honest.


----------



## herman (Apr 1, 2005)

tobyjug said:
			
		

> I would like to know the answer to that as well please. The more people react the more votes the BNP will get.



That would be true if people only act in proportion to the violence upon them. Historically that has been far from the case. It did not work that way for the BUF.

Resistance against the BUF probably was one of the defining factors in splitting the middle class right away from the BUF


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> It says to me that 99.9% of them didn't want British troops getting killed just to further the ambitions of  American global occupation and control of the oil fields.


Yeah because 99.99% of people on anti-war marches only care about soldiers and don't give a fuck about civilians in other countries do they? You've never been on an anti-war march clearly


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

Zonk said:
			
		

> Thats coz you drink in pubs full of fash wankstains with union jack y-fronts on sale behind the bar, init.



 Fuck me gonk where have you been? lifes been so dull without you. I've really missed you vared and colourful use of the english language. It's been so long since I was called fash I was starting to think I'd lost my touch>


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> I'm not a card carrying member of ANTIFA or SWP but I still attended the march in Glasgow.


Ditto with me (apart from the Glasgow bit, I was on the London march).


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

tobyjug said:
			
		

> I would like to know the answer to that as well please. The more people react the more votes the BNP will get.


so you don't understand why people think they're dodgy as fuck then? They should be ignored?


----------



## tobyjug (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> so you don't understand why people think they're dodgy as fuck then? They should be ignored?




I understand pefectly why people think they are dodgy, but whilst people attack the BNP and  totally ignore why people are voting BNP and call them racists for doing so the more votes the BNP will get.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> How many people have you convinced to go on one of you're famous demos in the last month or do you just spend time fly posting stop the BNP posters around towns at the dead of night?


At least if I did try and convince someone to come on a march I don't have to fear them thinking I'm a right-wing loony tune who wants anyone with the wrong skin colour booted out the country. And no, don't waste my time flyposting against your little party.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

tobyjug said:
			
		

> I understand pefectly why people think they are dodgy, but whilst people attack the BNP and  totally ignore why people are voting BNP and call them racists for doing so the more votes the BNP will get.


What's the proof of that? If people are voting for the bnp it's because of hysterical nonsense they see in the sun and the daily mail, you can hardly blame it on anti-racist activists.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

tobyjug said:
			
		

> I would like to know the answer to that as well please. The more people react the more votes the BNP will get.



 When you use the term hysterical I assume you mean like in the case of Mr Meacher the M.P. for Oldham who called the people who voted BNP idiots or some such thing.

 I think that the it could be well to do with the British sense of cheering on the underdog. the sense of well being one gets when the likes of lowley soccer teams beat the likes of United or Liverpool. so when the likes of blair or the now defunk blunkett pulls a stunt like having Griffin arrested this mentality of backing a David rather than a Golioth comes naturally and the intrest in the party grows as was proven when Griffin was arrested and the TV continued to report the procedings the BNP infomation line calls increased quite dramaticly.


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> What's the proof of that? If people are voting for the bnp it's because of hysterical nonsense they see in the sun and the daily mail, you can hardly blame it on anti-racist activists.



Or this kind of hysterical nonsense perhaps...

http://**********www.bnp.org.uk/bnptv/margaretbroadband.wmv

(Remove *'s to view)


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> Really? I don't believe for one minute that you feel at ease with being an active member (leafleting etc) for the BNP or admitting to new people you are in the bnp, do you? Be honest.




 I don't do the leafleting very much now due to some violent responses of certain people and the fact that if I was to retaliate then no doubt that the stormtroopers of GMP would lock me up and throw away the key. but If I am working in someones house who starts to steer the conversation in the direction of Immigration or politics then if they sound promising then I will start the opening something like "It's a shame that the BNP don't get more publicity because they seem to  have some god ideas" then if the response to this is promising then I take it further and it normally ends with me giving them a VOF just so they can get a true pictue of the real BNP and not the lies that are spread by the media. This Has in the past got us some new members


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Are you a taxi driver perhaps?


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Are you a taxi driver perhaps?



Fuck off, racist!


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Fuck off, racist!


Hehehe...

Dontcha just fucking love it


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

So why would you consider me to be a racist layabout?


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Have you got your hand up Oldhamer's arse and replying for him layabout?


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I thought that the biggest demos came from the Muslims with the stop the war marches with the left just jumping in on the act hoping to rekindle the heydays.
> 
> When was the last real big left wing demo? just out of intrest.



No, incorrect, the largest demo February 15, 2003 with an estimated two million people which made it possible to take a meal during the middle of the demo and come back out and join it again. 
The muslim contigitent and the Stop War coalition became the minority on the day, but as ever a welcome minority, as their work helped to build the previous demos. 
But as with other mass movements of which I believe the anti-war movement is there is a huge number of non-affliated individuals and groups that will com out on the streets when it is necessary. 
In addition these individuals and groups and the left/unions/muslims etc are the very people that will stem the right wing should it be necessary.


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Very true we probably couldn't, but would you class them as the left wing or normal everyday people who just wanted to protest about an unjust and unlawful war. I mean they wer'nt all card carrying members of ANTIFA or SWP were they?



And?


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Funny though how so many people who I talk to agree with my point of veiw admittedly some of them point blank won't hear a good word about the BNP but theres quite a few who show a lot of intrest in the party.



I am incredibly interested in the BNP


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Or this kind of hysterical nonsense perhaps...
> 
> http://**********www.bnp.org.uk/bnptv/margaretbroadband.wmv
> 
> (Remove *'s to view)


I'd rather not open any dodgy bnp link...would make me feel too dirty and probably infest my computer with viruses anyway..


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> When you use the term hysterical I assume you mean like in the case of Mr Meacher the M.P. for Oldham who called the people who voted BNP idiots or some such thing.
> 
> I think that the it could be well to do with the British sense of cheering on the underdog. the sense of well being one gets when the likes of lowley soccer teams beat the likes of United or Liverpool. so when the likes of blair or the now defunk blunkett pulls a stunt like having Griffin arrested this mentality of backing a David rather than a Golioth comes naturally and the intrest in the party grows as was proven when Griffin was arrested and the TV continued to report the procedings the BNP infomation line calls increased quite dramaticly.



For once I am glad to see Man United win the Cup


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> So why would you consider me to be a racist layabout?



Easy.

First off, why do you think Oldhamer is a taxicab driver?


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Easy.
> 
> First off, why do you think Oldhamer is a taxicab driver?



Don't answer this until Layabout responds to my almost week old questions


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I think that the it could be well to do with the British sense of cheering on the underdog. the sense of well being one gets when the likes of lowley soccer teams beat the likes of United or Liverpool. so when the likes of blair or the now defunk blunkett pulls a stunt like having Griffin arrested this mentality of backing a David rather than a Golioth comes naturally and the intrest in the party grows as was proven when Griffin was arrested and the TV continued to report the procedings the BNP infomation line calls increased quite dramaticly.


More like the british people saw our opportunistic govt arresting the leader of the UK's resident fascist party and thought 'a bunch of pricks all round really'. 

Either that or they thought 'who's that Griffin bloke when he's at home?' 

But David and Goliath? Hardly...


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

Main Street said:
			
		

> Don't answer this until Layabout responds to my almost week old questions



There one post of yours I have to answer. Let's face it, it's a big old post, but trust me it will get answered. 

Besides, not everyone answers all of my questions.


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Easy.
> 
> First off, why do you think Oldhamer is a taxicab driver?


Why shouldn't he be?


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> There one post of yours I have to answer. Let's face it, it's a big old post, but trust me it will get answered.
> 
> Besides, not everyone answers all of my questions.



Yeah but i aint everyone - i can only be me


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

So why are you accussing me of being a racist BNP boy?


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Huh...?!


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Main Street said:
			
		

> Don't answer this until Layabout responds to my almost week old questions


Ooops sorry


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Why shouldn't he be?



You haven't answered the question.

Why do you think Oldhamer is a taxicab driver?

It's a straightforward question that I imagine doesn't need an answer longer than 2 sentences.


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Ooops sorry



hey no problem, 

answer his question if you want, I don't mind if layabout can only focus on one thread at a time


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You haven't answered the question.
> 
> Why do you think Oldhamer is a taxicab driver?
> 
> It's a straightforward question that I imagine doesn't need an answer longer than 2 sentences.



Or one that requires five days to answer


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You haven't answered the question.
> 
> Why do you think Oldhamer is a taxicab driver?
> 
> It's a straightforward question that I imagine doesn't need an answer longer than 2 sentences.


Oooh lets get all politically correct shall we layabout

You know fucking well why that comment was made. Are you completely devoid of anything approaching satirical comment?

Now tell me where my comment could be construed as being racist.


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Oooh lets get all politically correct shall we layabout
> 
> You know fucking well why that comment was made. Are you completely devoid of anything approaching satirical comment?
> 
> Now tell me where my comment could be construed as being racist.



No. Answer the question please.


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Come on BNP boy


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Come on BNP boy



Please stop trying to drag Oldhamer into this one and answer the question. Ta.


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> No. Answer the question please.


Now tell me where my comment could be construed as being racist little one.

Are you capable?


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Please stop trying to drag Oldhamer into this one and answer the question. Ta.



No you answer the question


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Please stop trying to drag Oldhamer into this one and answer the question. Ta.


Your the twat that's standing up for him and replying to posts that he cant address.

Not that your doing any better mind you


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Now tell me where my comment could be construed as being racist little one.
> 
> Are you capable?



Yes thanks, but you have failed to answer why you have asked Oldhamer if he's a taxi driver. I say you are reluctant to answer my question, because your motives for asking Olhamer that question, were purely hateful and racist.

Shame on you, ya racist 2 bob cunt.


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Your the twat that's standing up for him and replying to posts that he cant address.
> 
> Not that your doing any better mind you



I'm not standing up for him, it's just that I can smell racism from your direction.


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Yes thanks, but you have failed to answer why you have asked Oldhamer if he's a taxi driver. I say you are reluctant to answer my question, because your motives for asking Olhamer that question, were purely hateful and racist.
> 
> Shame on you, ya racist 2 bob cunt.



language


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Yes thanks, but you have failed to answer why you have asked Oldhamer if he's a taxi driver. I say you are reluctant to answer my question, because your motives for asking Olhamer that question, were purely hateful and racist.
> 
> Shame on you, ya racist 2 bob cunt.


Asking someone if they are a cab driver constitutes racism in your books layabout?

Why?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You haven't answered the question.
> 
> Why do you think Oldhamer is a taxicab driver?
> 
> It's a straightforward question that I imagine doesn't need an answer longer than 2 sentences.



 Vimto in his infinate wisdom thinks that I am Mick Treacy But I'm not. Though I do wonder about the thinking behind this I mean why or what does it matter who anyone is on a forum. I mean for instance maybe Tony Blair posts on here or maybe Mr Howard. Who's to say that RednBlack or vimto isn't say Ken Livinstone why should it matter.


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Vimto in his infinate wisdom thinks that I am Mick Treacy But I'm not. Though I do wonder about the thinking behind this I mean why or what does it matter who anyone is on a forum. I mean for instance maybe Tony Blair posts on here or maybe Mr Howard. Who's to say that RednBlack or vimto isn't say Ken Livinstone why should it matter.


...and who the fuck is 'Mick Treacy' when he's at home?

Is he a taxi-driver?


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Asking someone if they are a cab driver constitutes racism in your books layabout?
> 
> Why?



You know why. It's not the question but the motives behind it, you smelly racist.


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> ...and who the fuck is 'Mick Treacy' when he's at home?
> 
> Is he a taxi-driver?



You're hanging yourself with your pathetic hateful bile.


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You know why. It's not the question but the motives behind it, you smelly racist.




You really are charming...and I think it is time I said goodbye


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> ...and who the fuck is 'Mick Treacy' when he's at home?
> 
> Is he a taxi-driver?


I hadn't a clue either but I looked him up and apparently..



> Name: Mick Treacy
> Position: Branch organiser for Oldham
> Has five convictions including handling stolen goods, deception, theft from an employer and public order.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/st...special/membership/organisers/mick_treacy.stm


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> ...and who the fuck is 'Mick Treacy' when he's at home?
> 
> Is he a taxi-driver?



 So Vimto you're so shit hot on the BNP that you've never heard of Mick Treacy then? Mr antifa anti fash man super lefty hero boy what planet do you frequent then cos it ant earth.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

Main Street said:
			
		

> You really are charming...and I think it is time I said goodbye



 typical I can't find an answer so I want you to go


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> So Vimto you're so shit hot on the BNP that you've never heard of Mick Treacy then? Mr antifa anti fash man super lefty hero boy what planet do you frequent then cos it ant earth.


So should I really know about the activities of Mick Treacy then Oldhamer? Is he a big shot in your organisation? Are you a wannabee Mick Treacy or are you the real thing?


----------



## Main Street (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> typical I can't find an answer so I want you to go




What is this? Tag?

or is you can not find the full stop?


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

I reckon yer just a low life meself but there ya go  

layabout removed his fist from your arse yet Oldhamer?


----------



## Zonk (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> So Vimto you're so shit hot on the BNP that you've never heard of Mick Treacy then? Mr antifa anti fash man super lefty hero boy what planet do you frequent then cos it ant earth.



Yes everyone should know that gimp Treacy shouldn't they Oldspanner. He's a fine example of your hardworking upstanding and law-abiding member of society isnt he....you arse!


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Zonk said:
			
		

> Yes everyone should know that gimp Treacy shouldn't they Oldspanner. He's a fine example of your hardworking upstanding and law-abiding member of society isnt he....you arse!


Who is he Zonk


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> I hadn't a clue either but I looked him up and apparently..
> 
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/st...special/membership/organisers/mick_treacy.stm




 Ha! Ha! you got you're info from the bbc well ok if you want to believe the Blair Bullshit company then thats fine. Me I know the guy and have done for years and I can tell you that most of what is claimed is crap. But fuckin hell lets not let the truth stand between us and a load of propaganda. Lets do a hatchet job on the man.


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

> Name: Mick Treacy
> 
> Position: Branch organiser for Oldham
> 
> Has five convictions including handling stolen goods, deception, theft from an employer and public order.


This your hero Oldhamer?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> So should I really know about the activities of Mick Treacy then Oldhamer? Is he a big shot in your organisation? Are you a wannabee Mick Treacy or are you the real thing?



 One thing I could never be is Mick Treacy I haven't got the bottle to put up with the shit he's took from the lying scum media and thr cowardly red scum that constantly intimidate him If it were me I'd now be doing time and there would be a few less lefty wankers in the world.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> This your hero Oldhamer?




 Fuckin hell Vimto I thought you'd know by now that I hero worship you and you're quick repartee


----------



## layabout (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Ha! Ha! you got you're info from the bbc well ok if you want to believe the Blair Bullshit company then thats fine. Me I know the guy and have done for years and I can tell you that most of what is claimed is crap. But fuckin hell lets not let the truth stand between us and a load of propaganda. Lets do a hatchet job on the man.



Fair enough, so he's going to sue the BBC then?


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> One thing I could never be is Mick Treacy I haven't got the bottle to put up with the shit he's took from the lying scum media and thr cowardly red scum that constantly intimidate him If it were me I'd now be doing time and there would be a few less lefty wankers in the world.


And there was me thinking that you were the party of Law and Order Oldhamer. Yet you still defend a known criminal who is 


> Name: Mick Treacy
> 
> Position: Branch organiser for Oldham
> 
> Has five convictions including handling stolen goods, deception, theft from an employer and public order.



Yeah?


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Fuckin hell Vimto I thought you'd know by now that I hero worship you and you're quick repartee


Hey I know this Oldhamer that's why I spend so much time on you


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

<flutters eyelashes>


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Fair enough, so he's going to sue the BBC then?



 What with? they did such a good job that the man lost his job nearly his home and they made sure that anyone who comes within a mile of the man is tainted with the same brush. So layabout if you were a solicitor would you take on his case against a multi million pound state controlled lie machine like the beeb?


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Ha! Ha! you got you're info from the bbc well ok if you want to believe the Blair Bullshit company then thats fine. Me I know the guy and have done for years and I can tell you that most of what is claimed is crap. But fuckin hell lets not let the truth stand between us and a load of propaganda. Lets do a hatchet job on the man.


It's the first result on google, I didn't go out my way to look on the bbc site, actually.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Hey I know this Oldhamer that's why I spend so much time on you



 Don't think that you can sweet talk me Vimto I'm not that easy you know


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> <flutters eyelashes>




 Aw! fuck it then, it's a date


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> It's the first result on google, I didn't go out my way to look on the bbc site, actually.



 Hey! my names there too   (Mad rush of left wing computers desends on google search engine)


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Hey! my names there too   (Mad rush of left wing computers desends on google search engine)


so what have you been convicted of then?


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

So why you in the BNP really Oldhamer?

I honestly cant see the point of it all


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> so what have you been convicted of then?


 
Nothing. I'm a respectable citizen so respectable I can stand for election


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Nothing. I'm a respectable citizen so respectable I can stand for election


so you're a candidate then....they're the worst kind, lots of skeletons in bnp candidates closets. What are your skeletons then?


----------



## X-77 (Apr 1, 2005)

too tired to wait for reply, I'm off to bed now, got to be up nice and early for this tomorrow:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=109230

Night all


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Night X-77


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Hey! my names there too


Really?

You must be one of the 'big shots' then Oldhamer


----------



## vimto (Apr 1, 2005)

Always remember that you've got a friend mate

PM me ok


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> So why you in the BNP really Oldhamer?
> 
> I honestly cant see the point of it all



 Knee jerk reaction to a world that I see going wrong mate. don't know how old you are but when I was a kid the country was different, you looked at life with a sense of hope now all I see is a country going down the pan and I want to know how to slow it down so that my kids don't have to much of a shit life. And before you start I'm not solely on about immigration it's just the country in general Shit government shit health service shit councils I mean for fucks sake last week in Delph which is a small village near Oldham the council even shut the library cos they said it's not cost effective. so what! it's part of the British tradition little old lady with her hearing aid shopping trolly and a book out of the crime section that tells her twenty different ways to get rid of the old man without getting caught. It's tradition for Christ sake.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Really?
> 
> You must be one of the 'big shots' then Oldhamer



 Naw! just playing at it


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> Always remember that you've got a friend mate
> 
> PM me ok



 Cheers pal


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 1, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> so you're a candidate then....they're the worst kind, lots of skeletons in bnp candidates closets. What are your skeletons then?



 Spray painted OAFC on a few walls when I was twelve


----------



## koshmar (Apr 2, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> That this is exactly what you are meant to think.
> 
> And then inflate them into a threat of Hitler proportions.  Cue 'eff off you pervert Nazi cunt' type responses when one of them (or so he says) comes on a site like this.  Not to forget big talk about 'opposing them violently'. (Funny how most of those who indulge in this are usually not the ones who were doing it at the time it was most necessary.)
> 
> This is not to say that they are not a threat of a kind, far from it.  But without an understanding of exactly what kind of threat, mistake after mistake will be made when it comes to countering them.


Hollow vacuous bollocks. You've been sniffing too much aerosol, mate.


----------



## vimto (Apr 2, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Knee jerk reaction to a world that I see going wrong mate. don't know how old you are but when I was a kid the country was different, you looked at life with a sense of hope now all I see is a country going down the pan and I want to know how to slow it down so that my kids don't have to much of a shit life. And before you start I'm not solely on about immigration it's just the country in general Shit government shit health service shit councils I mean for fucks sake last week in Delph which is a small village near Oldham the council even shut the library cos they said it's not cost effective. so what! it's part of the British tradition little old lady with her hearing aid shopping trolly and a book out of the crime section that tells her twenty different ways to get rid of the old man without getting caught. It's tradition for Christ sake.


 I don't really disagree with you on this one Oldhamer...but do you really think that the BNP and their general policies are ever going to address the problems you have identified.

The BNP agenda is far to narrow to take on board the problems you are concerned about.

The BNP agenda is a racist agenda which takes bugger all to do with the real problems facing working class people...working class people who generally struggle to attempt to keep their families and communities intact or at least solvent throughout the world.

The issues raised by the BNP are superficial and do not represent those who would wish to effect change on a global basis Oldhamer.

Would you disagree?


----------



## Dhimmi (Apr 2, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> arabonradar:
> I am not really qualified to talk about the strategy, as I have yet to be involved in any physical force anti-fascism myself. This is largely to do with being a coward, although I hope to eventually grow to the balls to take part myself.
> I do, however, applaud it when it is carried out by responsible and trusted comrades who know what they are doing, and more importantly why.



Thanks for the detailed explaination. I admire the underlying sentiment but I'm not too sure about the tactics, shutting the power off might have been more effective in the community (NIMBY factor ;-} }, for grass roots supporters I suggest the action might have created a "Blitz" or "Dunkirk Spirit" moment similar in it's invigoration to when anti-fascists imagine they're defeating the NASDP. This I think creates a dangerous mythology that might lead an increasingly accelerating down escalator, when we need to go up.


----------



## layabout (Apr 2, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> I don't really disagree with you on this one Oldhamer...but do you really think that the BNP and their general policies are ever going to address the problems you have identified.
> 
> The BNP agenda is far to narrow to take on board the problems you are concerned about.
> 
> ...




Who are you? What have you done with Vimto? You fucking cunt!!!!!!!!!


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You fucking cunt!!!!!!!!!


Not really grown up debate that, is it?


----------



## Main Street (Apr 2, 2005)

Stick around editor. It doesn't improve. Layabout hows about an answer before Monday?


----------



## vimto (Apr 2, 2005)

arabonradar said:
			
		

> Thanks for the detailed explaination. I admire the underlying sentiment but I'm not too sure about the tactics, shutting the power off might have been more effective in the community (NIMBY factor ;-} }, for grass roots supporters I suggest the action might have created a "Blitz" or "Dunkirk Spirit" moment similar in it's invigoration to when anti-fascists imagine they're defeating the NASDP. This I think creates a dangerous mythology that might lead an increasingly accelerating down escalator, when we need to go up.


 Anybody


----------



## vimto (Apr 2, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Who are you? What have you done with Vimto? You fucking cunt!!!!!!!!!


Oooh spooky...


----------



## vimto (Apr 2, 2005)

...all right mate


----------



## past caring (Apr 2, 2005)

koshmar said:
			
		

> Hollow vacuous bollocks. You've been sniffing too much aerosol, mate.



Well, we're all waiting with baited breath for the stunning insights of _your_ analysis.

Any chance?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 2, 2005)

artfuldodger said:
			
		

> How would you know? Do you know each individual member then, or is it that if you didn't run with afa/ra within a certain timeframe then you didn't count? Some were about then actually and some were still smoking fags behind the bikesheds. Unlike the now defunct R.A. i believe todays antifascists have some new blood amongs't their ranks....thank fuck. Wondered how long it would be before we'd see your lots imput.





Don't get your knickers in a twist.  I was thinking more of certain people who post on here rather than anybody else.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 2, 2005)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Q. In Burnley, where the BNP exploited racial tensions enough to win 3 seats on the council in a 'BNP will cut taxes' pledge', how many BNP councillors turned up to the Annual Budget meeting where, in their absence, a 5% tax increase was narrowly voted in ?
> A. ZERO
> 
> A vote for the BNP at local council level does seem like a wasted vote!





Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 2, 2005)

*On the internet nothing is spontaneous....*




			
				Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Ha! Ha! you got you're info from the bbc well ok if you want to believe the Blair Bullshit company then thats fine. Me I know the guy and have done for years and I can tell you that most of what is claimed is crap. But fuckin hell lets not let the truth stand between us and a load of propaganda. Lets do a hatchet job on the man.





Further back in the thread somewhere I think you claim that you came to the BNP sort of out of the blue after a bit of trouble with some Asians and even then continued to have doubts about them for a while.  And yet you now say you've been mates with one of their best-known local organisers for years. 

Ho hum.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 2, 2005)

*Punx not dead*




			
				past caring said:
			
		

> Well, we're all waiting with baited breath for the stunning insights of _your_ analysis.
> 
> Any chance?





Not really much chance.  It always seems that for the likes of Koshmar the important thing is not to provide any kind of political alternative or analysis but to strut around declaring how alternative they are in themselves.  So alternative that they don't have time for mixing with mundane man- or-woman-in-the-street types. Hence they don't have to offer them anything.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 2, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> He's not in RA - never has been.
> 
> New blood? Possibly.
> 
> ...



For someone who's looking like Arnies twin of late, i find the physical only argument a laugh. Imo attacking fascists is political work whatever way it manifests itself. If you think most ppl involved in A.F. work want to sit about debating with idiots then think on. It was good enough for you in the past (as a tactic of course) but now apparently worse than doing nothing at all. I remember the afa statement saying everyone had their role to play. I knew mine and still do. You're right,  some ppl dont want to do the 'political' work but then we cant all be politicians can we? I hate the way you think you are the only answer. That old ra line 'if not our way then fuck off' is still the mantra eh? Good luck with the revolution mate, you'll be waiting a long long time..... As for the realists among us it's buisness as usual.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 2, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Good luck with the revolution mate, you'll be waiting a long long time..... As for the realists among us it's buisness as usual.





What's that then?  Being shock troops for the ineffectual left and the establishment parties?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 2, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> What's that then?  Being shock troops for the ineffectual left and the establishment parties?


when, some years ago, afa went round turning over fash meetings and such, i don't recall people bandying such insults around, at least not genuine anti-fascists. now that the ra activists who were involved in afa have moved into a different sphere of political activity, it seems odd that there's a tendency for some of those in the ra circle to attck those who carry on physical militant anti-fascism.

if it was right then, i see no reason for militant anti-fascism not to carry on now. the antifa website makes it plain that they are not an apolitical group, nor are they a group working for the mainstream parties. though thus far they haven't had the numbers or resources to do all they might desire, i don't believe it fair or proper to libel them as useful idiots. 

it's probably unnecessary to remind you that ra was founded by people expelled by the swp for squaddism, for confronting the nf, then pursuing an electoral strategy as well as street politics. when afa and other militant anti-fascists succeeded in smashing the fash off the streets in the 1980s and 1990s it probably looked like job done to those involved. however, the changes in fash strategy seem to have wrong-footed a lot of the left, including ra. the fash haven't gone away, yet there doesn't appear to be a political party fighting elections on a directly anti-fascist/pro-working class political platform in the areas where the bnp are standing. 

so i believe that there is still a role for militant anti-fascist street tactics _and_ a place for people to organise iwca or other pro-w/c local groups in areas as yet unaffected by the bnp's rise. within the areas which the bnp has a foothold, urgent action is required. a continuing rise in bnp activity and success is by no means inevitable - but for people to carp from the sidelines does no one any good. the only solution to the fascist problem is first to recognise there is one, and one which requires action, and then to lay the basis not only for a physical and political/cultural attack on their personnel and arguments but in the longer term envisages w/c control of their areas, based on class politics. to achieve this, i believe that we need to see there's a role for people to play both within groups like antifa and in groups like the iwca. to forget or ignore either strand will lead to defeat.

if the bnp's electoral strategy founders, and i believe it will, then they will return to street politics. this, i feel, will happen at some point in the next parliament, and there is already anecdotal evidence of number of bnp members who don't feel comfortable with the respectability griffin's trying to gain wanting a return to street activity. should i be right, then when it occurs there will be an urgent need for anti-fascists to be prepared to physically confront the fash in large numbers. to prepare for that when that happens will be to prepare too late. 

of course it could turn out quite different, but i'd rather be prepared for the worst than have something unexpected and nasty creep up and find us unready.

but, to rewrite bobby sands, everyone, militant anti-fascist or otherwise, has a part to play.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 2, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Further back in the thread somewhere I think you claim that you came to the BNP sort of out of the blue after a bit of trouble with some Asians and even then continued to have doubts about them for a while.  And yet you now say you've been mates with one of their best-known local organisers for years.
> 
> Ho hum.



 Err I went to school with him as we are about the same age, lost touch and then met up again when I joined the party. Hope this clears up you're confusion


----------



## layabout (Apr 2, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> of course it could turn out quite different, but i'd rather be prepared for the worst than have something unexpected and nasty creep up and find us unready.
> 
> but, to rewrite bobby sands, everyone, militant anti-fascist or otherwise, has a part to play.



I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that you're really BNP.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 2, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that you're really BNP.


some weeks ago i came to the conclusion that you were an arse.

nothing you've posted since has done anything but reconfirm my view.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 2, 2005)

vimto said:
			
		

> I don't really disagree with you on this one Oldhamer...but do you really think that the BNP and their general policies are ever going to address the problems you have identified.
> 
> We've got to remember Vimto that the BNP has only been in existince since about 1982 and is still on a learning curve as far as politics is concerned you really don't think labour or cons came in to the game with all the answers do you I mean they still haven't got it right yet and they've been around for years.
> 
> ...


 Yes


----------



## past caring (Apr 2, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> For someone who's looking like Arnies twin of late



Is this directed at me? Do I know you? Want to do me the courtesy of letting on who's dishing out the insults? Maybe a PM?

Or maybe you're talking about yourself. If so, am I supposed to be impressed? You must be really proud.....

For reply to the the substantive points, see reply to Pickman's Model - to follow.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 2, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> For reply to the the substantive points, see reply to Pickman's Model - to follow.


uh oh...


----------



## layabout (Apr 2, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> some weeks ago i came to the conclusion that you were an arse.
> 
> nothing you've posted since has done anything but reconfirm my view.



Why are you getting so personal?

It's just that what your way of dealing with things is so short-sighted and is to the advantage of the BNP. It's real obvious.


----------



## X-77 (Apr 2, 2005)

so that's what we're all doing wrong - we're not taking the advice of a right-wing ultra nationalist ex-bnp member!


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 2, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Why are you getting so personal?
> 
> It's just that what your way of dealing with things is so short-sighted and is to the advantage of the BNP. It's real obvious.


  

yeh, and i'd really take the advice of someone who didn't realise the bnp were racist when he joined, or similar.


----------



## layabout (Apr 2, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> yeh, and i'd really take the advice of someone who didn't realise the bnp were racist when he joined, or similar.



Is the BNP gay?

Is the BNP left handed or right handed?

Does the BNP like fruit?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 2, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Is the BNP gay?
> 
> Is the BNP left handed or right handed?
> 
> Does the BNP like fruit?


if you don't know - and you've been a member - how is anyone else supposed to?


----------



## layabout (Apr 2, 2005)

X-77 said:
			
		

> so that's what we're all doing wrong - we're not taking the advice of a right-wing ultra nationalist ex-bnp member!



If I knew you would take my advice, I would ask you to............


----------



## layabout (Apr 2, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> if you don't know - and you've been a member - how is anyone else supposed to?



Why do you think I'm asking?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 3, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Err I went to school with him as we are about the same age, lost touch and then met up again when I joined the party. Hope this clears up you're confusion





Now why did I know you were going to say this?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 3, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Now why did I know you were going to say this?



 I really don't know? Maybe you went to the same school as well. ether that or you're a mind reader


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 3, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> when, some years ago, afa went round turning over fash meetings and such, i don't recall people bandying such insults around, at least not genuine anti-fascists. now that the ra activists who were involved in afa have moved into a different sphere of political activity, it seems odd that there's a tendency for some of those in the ra circle to attck those who carry on physical militant anti-fascism.
> 
> if it was right then, i see no reason for militant anti-fascism not to carry on now. the antifa website makes it plain that they are not an apolitical group, nor are they a group working for the mainstream parties. though thus far they haven't had the numbers or resources to do all they might desire, i don't believe it fair or proper to libel them as useful idiots.
> 
> ...



Don't follow the logic of what you say here at all Pickman. On one hand you are acknowledging that the fash tactics are different ie no longer march and grow but a serious attempt to engage politically within local communities, but then you insist that the tactic of physically stopping the BNP marching is still relevant when they no longer march.

You support the building of local pro working class political organisations  to not only challenge  BNP attempts to gain support over local issues but to advance working class interests and then support  activity which is a direct substitute for this political activity. 

And why do you think that the BNP electoral stratgey will fail and in what circumstances? My impression is that they are in a period of overall consolidation despite not matching the level of optimism they had two years ago but they are bigger and currently more succesful than the revo left and anarchists.

For all its bravado and apparant anti fash 'purity' ANTIFA aren't engaging with the BNP supporters or its potential supporters. First of all they haven't got the scale of troops to engage directly with BNP canvassing teams and secondly the BNP are actually building a political organsisation that they can pull people to, ANTIFA aren't.

The truth is engaging with the local working class over the issues that they want to do something about isn't glamourous or exciting enough for the 'new blood' of ANTIFA.It would be too complimentary to say that these 'anti fash' are inolved in a misguided shortcut , its a political deadend in a political ghetto.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 4, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> For all its bravado and apparant anti fash 'purity' ANTIFA aren't engaging with the BNP supporters or its potential supporters. First of all they haven't got the scale of troops to engage directly with BNP canvassing teams and secondly the BNP are actually building a political organsisation that they can pull people to, ANTIFA aren't.
> 
> The truth is engaging with the local working class over the issues that they want to do something about isn't glamourous or exciting enough for the 'new blood' of ANTIFA.It would be too complimentary to say that these 'anti fash' are inolved in a misguided shortcut , its a political deadend in a political ghetto.



i hope the people in antifa see themselves not as 'building' a party political alternative to another political party, however much a deadend or ghetto that is perceived to be by some.

I would also hope that antifa sees itself developing above & beyond a single mission statement, broading the scope to embrace fascism in all its forms (not simply embedded in one example of a political party) or appealing to one particular brand of politicism.


----------



## past caring (Apr 4, 2005)

*Part 1*

I said I'd come back to this - and although Chuck has had a go, there's a few things I want to add.

First, let's get one thing out of the way - I didn't contribute anything of substance earlier in the thread because I didn't want to be seen to be giving any support to the liberal, hand-wringing element. Physical force anti-fascism is a tactical issue, not a moral one - I'd always take your side over that of the moralists on here......




			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> when, some years ago, afa went round turning over fash meetings and such, i don't recall people bandying such insults around, at least not genuine anti-fascists. now that the ra activists who were involved in afa have moved into a different sphere of political activity, it seems odd that there's a tendency for some of those in the ra circle to attck those who carry on physical militant anti-fascism.



It's worth, perhaps, baring in mind where the initial insults - and the source of bad feeling - originated. At the point where AFA analysed that the BNP had moved away from street activity and were set to bypass the left and that this demanded a different approach from anti-fascists, there were three main responses from the nay-sayers withing AFA.....

1) To agree (at least in public) with the analysis - but to do nothing. 

2) To agree with the need for a more political focus - but to insist that the physical approach still had its part, simply because the NF and BNP "are still fascists". Some of us might have been more convinced of the "different views, honestly held" nature of the disagreement had those making this argument got on board with any of the subsequent political activity - whether that be under the banner of the IWCA or something else.

3) That _our_ analysis wasn't honestly held - that AFA, and more specifically RA were "past it" or had "lost their bottle". This wasn't, of course, an argument that was ever made face-to-face with the people they were accusing (artfuldodge/danbreen - I'm convinced now it's the same person - were among this latter group).




			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> if it was right then, i see no reason for militant anti-fascism not to carry on now. the antifa website makes it plain that they are not an apolitical group, nor are they a group working for the mainstream parties. though thus far they haven't had the numbers or resources to do all they might desire, i don't believe it fair or proper to libel them as useful idiots.



I've made clear I don't think it's wrong - morally. It's a political issue. 




			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> it's probably unnecessary to remind you that ra was founded by people expelled by the swp for squaddism, for confronting the nf, then pursuing an electoral strategy as well as street politics. when afa and other militant anti-fascists succeeded in smashing the fash off the streets in the 1980s and 1990s it probably looked like job done to those involved. however, the changes in fash strategy seem to have wrong-footed a lot of the left, including ra. the fash haven't gone away, yet there doesn't appear to be a political party fighting elections on a directly anti-fascist/pro-working class political platform in the areas where the bnp are standing.



Eh? It appeared very far from "job done" to those in AFA who were responsible for coming up with the "filling the political vacuum" strategy. RA were amongst this group - but were very far from being the sole authors of same.

It might have appeared as "job done" if it were simply the case that the BNP had been beaten from the streets - and that was the end of the matter. But at the same time as not marching they were already moving (with some success) to a "respectable", electoral strategy. It should be born in mind that , in the "filling the vacuum" strategy, what the fash were up to was only half the story. The other half was an analysis of what the left was up to.....

For years, AFA had based itself on "holding the circle" - on physically stopping the fash from organising in an area, in the hope that the left might succesfully step into the ring. It became apparent that not only had the left failed to do this - but that it was incapable of doing so. The BNP, once it had shifted to the electoral strategy, was effectively set for a clear run.....




			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> so i believe that there is still a role for militant anti-fascist street tactics _and_ a place for people to organise iwca or other pro-w/c local groups in areas as yet unaffected by the bnp's rise. within the areas which the bnp has a foothold, urgent action is required. a continuing rise in bnp activity and success is by no means inevitable - but for people to carp from the sidelines does no one any good. the only solution to the fascist problem is first to recognise there is one, and one which requires action, and then to lay the basis not only for a physical and political/cultural attack on their personnel and arguments but in the longer term envisages w/c control of their areas, based on class politics. to achieve this, i believe that we need to see there's a role for people to play both within groups like antifa and in groups like the iwca. to forget or ignore either strand will lead to defeat.



Someone earlier in the thread (Tom A?) asked why it was that, if anarchists/anti-fascists believed that physical intimidation of new, would-be fascists might stop them getting involved, why the reverse might not be true. I was tempted to answer at the time, but now seems more appropriate....

The answer I was going to give was based (somewhat ironically) on a parallel with the situation in the six-counties. For much of the 80s and 90s the _appeal_ of the BNP to almost all of its potential recruits was one calculated to boost their physical self-esteem. They would "march and grow", dominate the streets, physically intimidate the long-haired student opposition and smash their way to power in "classic" fascist style.

It was no surprise, therefore, that the BNP should attract more than its fair share of social inadequates and misfits - people who could only ever hope to feel good about themselves by bullying and dominating others. It was, equally, of no surprise that many of them should fall by the way-side when it became apparent that part of the opposition, at least, was very far from fitting the student stereotype - but actually prepared to take the battle to them. If you join a movement on the basis that it will make you feel big and hard - but continually end up taking second prize - the gloss soon wears off.

My own view is that a different psychology generally applies to movements that are broadly progressive. OK, it's cod-psychology, I know, but there's more than a kernal of truth to it......there are times, specifically if reactionary movements come to absolute dominance, where those of an "idealistic" (or anarchist, to answer Tom A's question) pursuasion might be _too scared_ to articulate their politics. But, mostly, that very idealism allows people to keep going.

It's for very similar reasons that republicanism in the six-counties has been able to sustain itself and why, on the other hand, loyalism has always been riddled with a rag-bag collection of drug-dealers, nonce cases and touts. So much so that they might be said to define the movement.......

The problem is that the BNP have moved on - and with some success. They are clearly now attracting votes from "ordinary" working-class people whose primary motivation isn't thuggery, isn't the _pyschological_ massaging of their collective egos. Instead, they are people who are thoroughly disenchanted with mainstream politics, who know they have been abandoned by the main parties, who, if they weren't voting for the BNP, simply wouldn't vote at all. I'd say that, very largely, their motivation isn't one of _absolute_ racial hatred - more a resentment at "special" or racially-based funding when contrasted to their own impovrishment and the (correct) perception that the political establishment couldn't care less about their interests.

That sense of being put-upon, of being the underdog is one of the main things that the BNP plays upon. I don't think that such people are quite as easily put-off - either by having their cars smashed up or by getting the odd right-hander. It's certainly much less likely that they'll be put-off unless there's some _positive_ and viable political alternative that can attract some of their well-founded resentment.

There's real evidence that the BNP are turning some of these voters into actual activists - something that's much more worrying.

One last thing here. It's no accident, to my mind, that those areas where the BNP has "a foothold" as you put it, also has no viable pro-working class alternative. I think it's very far from being a coincidence that, in those areas where they are doing best, former AFA branches and activists chose not to go for an IWCA type strategy. No coincidence, either, that those areas were those most heavily penetrated by Searchlight - but that's another matter.

(post too long - part 2 follows)


----------



## past caring (Apr 4, 2005)

*Part 2*




			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> if the bnp's electoral strategy founders, and i believe it will, then they will return to street politics. this, i feel, will happen at some point in the next parliament, and there is already anecdotal evidence of number of bnp members who don't feel comfortable with the respectability griffin's trying to gain wanting a return to street activity. should i be right, then when it occurs there will be an urgent need for anti-fascists to be prepared to physically confront the fash in large numbers. to prepare for that when that happens will be to prepare too late.
> 
> of course it could turn out quite different, but i'd rather be prepared for the worst than have something unexpected and nasty creep up and find us unready.



I'd be interested in some further explanation as to why you believe the electoral strategy will founder - 'cos all you've offered here is assertion. I'd say that, unless the trend towards increasingly lower turn-outs for the main parties reverses itself (and unless those main parties change their political approach, I think we can both agree that's not going to happen) there's every chance that the BNP's electoral strategy will continue to yield results. They may even do better in the general election given that UKIP aren't in a position to bleed the same potential portion of the BNP vote that they were in the Euros.

I don't doubt that there are some tensions within the BNP, but my guess is that Griffin, Lecomber and the rest of the "modernisers" will continue to hold the line whilst their strategy continues to get results.

And if the BNP _were_ to return to street politics, I'd say they'd be very ill-prepared for it. Having seen the physical quality of the activists who showed up as their election team during the Mayorals, they wouldn't have lasted five minutes during the early/mid-nineties. 




			
				Pickman's model said:
			
		

> but, to rewrite bobby sands, everyone, militant anti-fascist or otherwise, has a part to play.



Hardly an apposite reference, sorry. 

Sands was quite clearly pointing out that those who took no part in the armed struggle had a part to play - that the role of those who were in the active service units shouldn't be unduly elevated above those whose main role was political and moral support, propaganda etc.

What he _wasn't_ saying was that whatever _strategy_ republicans chose to pursue was of equal value, much less that there was nothing to choose between those different strategies. If he were alive today, you can be certain he'd have come down on one side or other of the peace process debate............


----------



## Poi E (Apr 4, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> Physical force anti-fascism is a tactical issue, not a moral .



Bullshit. You've already assumed the moral high ground. Physical force is simply an adjunct to that.

Some of the opposition on this thread to the brick throwing is simply that it won't fulfill the purported objectives of those who took the action. It isn't all liberal hand-wringing.


----------



## past caring (Apr 4, 2005)

Poi E said:
			
		

> Bullshit. You've already assumed the moral high ground.



Really? Where, precisely? 

The only position I've "assumed" is that anti-fascism is preferable to anti-fascism - though I believe you'll struggle to point out where any anti-fascism of mine is "moral" in nature....

From an anti-fascist stand-point I'm interested in what _works_ - hence I describe the question as tactical rather than moral.



> Physical force is simply an adjunct to that.



To what? Please be clearer....



> Some of the opposition on this thread to the brick throwing is simply that it won't fulfill the purported objectives of those who took the action. It isn't all liberal hand-wringing.



Did I say it was? Why would I have made the arguments I did, otherwise?

One question, just so we're both clear - are you telling me that _you_ would have no problems with a physical force strategy if you could be convinced that it worked? Or would you _always_ be opposed to it?


----------



## kropotkin (Apr 4, 2005)

good posts pc.

There is something that troubles me here, though.

There seems to be an absolutism present in the ex-RA/current IWCA people that I find disturbing- and I don't ant that top be taken in any way as an insult, as I have the utmost respect for your seriousness and dedication. There does seem to be a denial that any other strategy could be of any value- that your way- and only your way- is the right way. Now, the anarchists (and associated types) who have posted on this thread have made it very clear that they feel pro w/c political activity is of utmost importance, but also that a physical element is useful in tandem to this.

You almost seem to have painted those you are arguing against as opposed to the building of political self-organisation in w/c communities- even though (at a guess) you know several people involved in antifa- and know that they are actively engaged in this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Don't follow the logic of what you say here at all Pickman. On one hand you are acknowledging that the fash tactics are different ie no longer march and grow but a serious attempt to engage politically within local communities, but then you insist that the tactic of physically stopping the BNP marching is still relevant when they no longer march.
> 
> You support the building of local pro working class political organisations  to not only challenge  BNP attempts to gain support over local issues but to advance working class interests and then support  activity which is a direct substitute for this political activity.
> 
> ...


have you had any interaction irl with anyone in antifa, or are your assertions just based, as they appear, on ignorance?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2005)

past caring

thank you for your thoughtful replies to my post.

i agree with much of what you have to say. however, that if the bnp are to be defeated then it has to be both in the "hearts and minds" of their target voters _and_ the bnp have to be kept on their toes, uncertain of their own safety, imo. just because they have chosen - probably temporarily - to follow a respectable path doesn't mean that they should be left alone to get on with it and solely challenged through peaceful means.

obviously a hit, or a couple or hits - or even a score of hits - isn't going to break the bnp. but as i've remarked earlier in the thread, militant anti-fascism is a campaign of attrition. it's important not to ignore the community politics work, which the iwca and other groups pursue. but equally, i feel that confrontational anti-fascism is a tactic which is still valid. when the nf march or when the bnp hold demos (and they do - sometimes) then to my mind it's fair enough to have a full and frank exchange of views with them.

i feel that the tasks of anti-fascists now are to cut off their support in communities, by providing a better and more pleasant alternative to their filth and by organising on a class basis, as well as having a pop at the bnp when we can.

as for the bnp's electoral strategy, i'd suggest that the pisspoor calibre of candidate they put up for election means that in most areas where they currently have councillors they won't after the next local elections. the people they stand are some of the stupidest and most unattractive people ever to grace a ballot paper, and their sheer incompetence undermines the aura of power in waiting i think griffin would like to project. with their much-publicised problems with candidates and councillors, like the woman who withdrew from the party when she "found out" they were racist or that councillor who had to resign cos of fighting, i doubt that they can be attracting the sort of candidate who'd place the party in a good light. they seem to stand anyone who's been in the party a few months.

the strongest candidates they've got haven't a hope in hell of winning seats cos of their 'form'. and until they can stand candidates who are actually up to the job - which could be some time - i rate their chances of success as low.

so, over time, i feel that the electoral strategy which could work with better candidates won't, and that any representatives who are elected, be it to local authorities or, perhaps, parliament, would be one term wonders. after a while i hope it will be obvious to the bnp that they're barking up the wrong tree. and we'll see what happens then.


----------



## hibee (Apr 4, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> past caring
> 
> so, over time, i feel that the electoral strategy which could work with better candidates won't, and that any representatives who are elected, be it to local authorities or, perhaps, parliament, would be one term wonders. after a while i hope it will be obvious to the bnp that they're barking up the wrong tree. and we'll see what happens then.



Thing is, it is working. The fact such poor candidates are getting elected says more about the quality of the opposition and the success of the BNP's strategy than anything else.

There is a vacuum being filled by the BNP for politics based in the community and offering an alternative analysis to the establishment. Only the BNP are offering this, and they are winning people over. They might never form a government, or hold more than a small number of elected posts, but what is dangerous is that they are building pockets of support. 

If they are driven back to the streets - fine, that's the time for the physical stuff. But right now they are building bases in communites (and I don't by any stretch just mean electorally) and I don't see fire being matched with fire.

I'm not going to slag off anyone who gets involved in attacks on the far right - good luck to them. But I know which approach is currently more necessary.


----------



## kropotkin (Apr 4, 2005)

name me one person who you reckon thinks that physical anti-fascism is more important than community organising.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 4, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> past caring
> 
> the strongest candidates they've got haven't a hope in hell of winning seats cos of their 'form'. and until they can stand candidates who are actually up to the job - which could be some time - i rate their chances of success as low.





What - like when Griffin stood in Oldham in the local elections and came either second or third (can't remember exactly) with a very respectable percentage of votes cast?  Or, prior to this, in the last General Election, when he got over 12,000 votes? 

Hardly a man without 'form', as the press/UAF/Searchlight etc are so fond of pointing out.  Did the people of Oldham look bothered? So too has the media highlighted the 'form' of many other BNP candidates up and down the country - some of whom have gone on to win council seats.


----------



## hibee (Apr 4, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> name me one person who you reckon thinks that physical anti-fascism is more important than community organising.



No one. I'm just saying people's energies can be better directed.


----------



## kropotkin (Apr 4, 2005)

But no-one is disagreeing with you- this schism is largely based on misrepresentation.

Everyone I know who is bothered enough about the far-right to put themselves in physical danger is also serious enough about their politics to be involved in community organising (or getting involved).


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> What - like when Griffin stood in Oldham in the local elections and came either second or third (can't remember exactly) with a very respectable percentage of votes cast?  Or, prior to this, in the last General Election, when he got over 12,000 votes?
> 
> Hardly a man without 'form', as the press/UAF/Searchlight etc are so fond of pointing out.  Did the people of Oldham look bothered? So too has the media highlighted the 'form' of many other BNP candidates up and down the country - some of whom have gone on to win council seats.


i was under the impression certain of the bnp leadership were unable to stand because of their criminal records. if my way of putting that confused you, i apologise.

the fact remains that the standard of bnp candidates is very low. i don't deny some get elected - but i very much doubt they'll be re-elected.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> No one. I'm just saying people's energies can be better directed.


some people want to concentrate on one thing, some people want to concentrate on another. as long as the jobs get done, does it matter who does what?


----------



## hibee (Apr 4, 2005)

I'm not sure I misinterpreted anyone. I'm not going to have a go at anybody who puts themselves at risk like that in the name of anti-fascism. But I don't think it's the best way of defeating the far-right at the moment and could be counter-productive given the present state of affairs.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 4, 2005)

_"Antifa aims to tackle fascism from two angles. First, ideologically. We intend to expose the BNP and other far-right parties for what they are: lying racist politicians with no solutions for the British working class. We intend to counter the fear and lies spread by such groups and fight a ‘hearts and minds’ struggle with them. Countering their policies and taking away the basis of their support is a massive part of what Antifa will do (and arguably the most important)."_ 

from antifa action statement


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2005)

i couldn't have put it better myself.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 4, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> have you had any interaction irl with anyone in antifa, or are your assertions just based, as they appear, on ignorance?



What on the 'ignorance' of not having had any interaction with someone from antifa? Or the informed interaction of having read their reports on the web and the debate here and and with mates and associates in Manchester?

If you still feel I need enlightening perhaps you can encourage some one from antifa to post.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 4, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i couldn't have put it better myself.



Put what better? That Antifa will counter the fash propganda by exposing them and  by countering their lies ? Sounds like classic late 20th century anti fascist tactics to me.Ok as they are not calling for a vote for Labour, but where do they pose a political alternative to the BNP?

The BNP's maturity as an organisation has already been reached where for some voters they are a first choice rather than just a protest vote. Do you honestly think that 'anti fascism' is going to reverse that?


----------



## past caring (Apr 4, 2005)

A few points to come back to, but I'll start with this....




			
				kropotkin said:
			
		

> good posts pc.
> 
> There is something that troubles me here, though.
> 
> ...



I'd deny any absolutism (obviously   ).

Obviously, I do think that the IWCA model is the best - or at least, the best currently available. Clearly, I wouldn't be involved otherwise. But I am open to the _possibility_ that there might be other succesful models of organising in working class communities and helping build the confidence of those communities to fight in their own interests.

However, to throw the argument back at you somewhat, what troubles _me_ is,

1) The talk of a "twin-track" approach. This indicates (at least in the abscence of evidence to the contrary) a belief that the "physical" and "political" approaches carry equal weight and that both demand an equal amount of resources. Or, in other words, that there's no difference between the two.

Would you agree with this, as an assessment? If not, why not? What should the division be (70%-30% in favour of "political" work, for example, or someother figure) and why?

2) The almost complete abscence of reports of attempts at pro-working class organising by those involved in the "twin track" approach - either by those directly involved or in touch, politically, with others responsible. 

Over the last couple of years, IWCA posters on here have regularly shared our experiences of campaigns and activities where we are organising. Yes, in part that _has_ been to attract others to the organisation, but it's also been very largely about sharing successes and about questioning the traditional left methodology. 

Why haven't we seen the same from other groups/individuals? I'd genuinely like to know.....

3) Again, the almost complete lack of _analysis_ from antifa. Even at the height of the physical stuff, AFA always attempted to take stock of what the fash were up to, attempted to look at the latest developments within the BNP and wider society in an effort to assess what might develop politically.

In some senses, the sharing of such analysis is much easier now - with forums such as this and the possibilities of carrying articles on antifa's own web-site. I'd assume that you'd agree that such analysis is important - if not crucial for anti-fascists. So why does the antifa web-site not carry any?

ps - not being sarcy, but I only know one activist involved in both forms of activity. Has to remain nameless, obviously.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 4, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Put what better? That Antifa will counter the fash propganda by exposing them and  by countering their lies ? Sounds like classic late 20th century anti fascist tactics to me.Ok as they are not calling for a vote for Labour, but where do they pose a political alternative to the BNP?
> 
> The BNP's maturity as an organisation has already been reached where for some voters they are a first choice rather than just a protest vote. Do you honestly think that 'anti fascism' is going to reverse that?




this indeed is where antifa needs to develop its own internal political dialogue. The bnp is a political party. It has the validity & legitimacy of any political party, as do the iwca (as an example). The point then for antifa is how to avoid the trap of 'chasing the vote' of the disillusioned working class by offering alternatives to the alternatives to mainstream major party politics couched in the language of electoralism. 

The idea of an alternative to the bnp would be the same alternative to new labour. 

The 635 group in yorkshire seem to be heading in a direction that seems interesting as it does coherent:

_"We exist to confront fascist ideas, activities and organisations wherever and however they occur.
We utilise a wide range of tactics and believe it is important to confront fascism on the streets as well as ideologically.
We do not advocate the electoral process as a means of defeating fascism nor will we work with groups that do.

It is a mistake to see fascism solely in terms of extreme far-right nationalist political parties such as the BNP, NF etc. While these are the most obvious target for an anti-fascist campaign, many policies promoted by other parties are equally fascist in nature, and demand an appropriate reaction. "_ 
the 635 group founding statement


----------



## layabout (Apr 4, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> this indeed is where antifa needs to develop its own internal political dialogue. The bnp is a political party. It has the validity & legitimacy of any political party, as do the iwca (as an example). The point then for antifa is how to avoid the trap of 'chasing the vote' of the disillusioned working class by offering alternatives to the alternatives to mainstream major party politics couched in the language of electoralism.
> 
> The idea of an alternative to the bnp would be the same alternative to new labour.
> 
> ...




The 635 group are violent criminal scum who need locking up.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 4, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> The 635 group are violent criminal scum who need locking up.



i would've thought so.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> _"Antifa aims to tackle fascism from two angles. First, ideologically. We intend to expose the BNP and other far-right parties for what they are: lying racist politicians with no solutions for the British working class. We intend to counter the fear and lies spread by such groups and fight a ‘hearts and minds’ struggle with them. Countering their policies and taking away the basis of their support is a massive part of what Antifa will do (and arguably the most important)."_
> 
> from antifa action statement





Countering their policies is all very well, but what are they proposing to counter them with?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> this indeed is where antifa needs to develop its own internal political dialogue. The bnp is a political party. It has the validity & legitimacy of any political party, as do the iwca (as an example). The point then for antifa is how to avoid the trap of 'chasing the vote' of the disillusioned working class by offering alternatives to the alternatives to mainstream major party politics couched in the language of electoralism.





And this 'alternative to the alternative' would look like what exactly?

And have you ever thought that, anarchists aside, nobody seems to have any problem with electoral alternatives?  (Obviously this is not the same as saying that electoral politics is the be-all and end-all and for all time.)  You could argue that declining numbers of people voting is an indication that ever more people are coming round to what anarchists say about elections.  The reality is that people are abstaining not because they see this as an alternative in itself but because there are no longer any alternatives to the mainstream parties.  

Opposition to electoralism on principle, in all situations, is a perfect example of putting ideology before the necessity posed by actual situations.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> The idea of an alternative to the bnp would be the same alternative to new labour.





This statement is hardly some kind of insight. Not sure I exactly get what you mean.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> The 635 group in yorkshire seem to be heading in a direction that seems interesting as it does coherent:
> 
> _"We exist to confront fascist ideas, activities and organisations wherever and however they occur.
> We utilise a wide range of tactics and believe it is important to confront fascism on the streets as well as ideologically.
> ...





You reckon that's coherent?


----------



## Main Street (Apr 5, 2005)

635 er not sure about that.

Is 635 the State?

Is 635 the cops?

Is 635 the fascists?

I only ask cos 635 points out that membership is recommendation only and then at the end asks interested parties to email, er yeah right.


----------



## HST (Apr 5, 2005)

Edited as it added nothing to the debate.


----------



## vimto (Apr 5, 2005)

HST said:
			
		

> Edited as it added nothing to the debate.


Yeah well think about it...the pope is no longer

Have some respect for crying out loud.


----------



## vimto (Apr 5, 2005)

So what happened to Nick's car then?


----------



## vimto (Apr 5, 2005)

Did it get trashed?


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Countering their policies is all very well, but what are they proposing to counter them with?



which is why antifa need to develop their own internal political dialogue. And which is why i mentioned 635 group's acknowledgement that it is a mistake to see fascism solely in terms of extreme far-right nationalist political parties.




			
				LLETSA said:
			
		

> And have you ever thought that, anarchists aside, nobody seems to have any problem with electoral alternatives? (Obviously this is not the same as saying that electoral politics is the be-all and end-all and for all time.) You could argue that declining numbers of people voting is an indication that ever more people are coming round to what anarchists say about elections. The reality is that people are abstaining not because they see this as an alternative in itself but because there are no longer any alternatives to the mainstream parties.



We could all muse on why more & more people aren't engaging with the electoral process, but the alternative to political parties being 'in charge' (on either a national or local level) is having people themselves directly determine their own existences, & not simply just having a say occasionally on who they think the best group for the job is, alternative, mainstream or otherwise.

Bnp are positing themselves as an alternative to the big 3 mainstream parties "the old gang". The iwca (as the example) are offering an alternative to the one offered by the bnp.

"The idea of an alternative to the bnp would be the same alternative to new labour" means simply this: new labour policies & laws passed are as repressive, racist & right wing as any fascist party. An anarchist response to the bnp should be equally applicable to new labour. Indeed we could muse on the fact of political parties, any political party, as government reinforces the centralised powers of repression & control.


----------



## blamblam (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> "The idea of an alternative to the bnp would be the same alternative to new labour" means simply this: new labour policies & laws passed are as repressive, racist & right wing as any fascist party.


Please tell me you're joking - or have you completely lost touch with reality?


> An anarchist response to the bnp should be equally applicable to new labour.


So would you support trashing the cars of or beating up Labour activists?


----------



## blamblam (Apr 5, 2005)

Main Street said:
			
		

> 635 er not sure about that.
> 
> Is 635 the State?
> 
> ...


What's that supposed to mean? You're suggesting they're not sound? Cos if you are you're talking rubbish.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Please tell me you're joking - or have you completely lost touch with reality?
> 
> So would you support trashing the cars of or beating up Labour activists?



the reality of internment is not something you could joke about. Neither is the concept of non-imprisonable offences changing to up to 5 year's imprison, for activities you don't have to be guilty of. Neither is imprisoning people for simply wanting to live here.


----------



## blamblam (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> the reality of internment is not something you could joke about. Neither is the concept of non-imprisonable offences changing to up to 5 year's imprison, for activities you don't have to be guilty of. Neither is imprisoning people for simply wanting to live here.


So you're saying that internment of non-nationals, means the the UK is now officially a fascist state?

And I repeat - if New Labour and the BNP should be treated the same: So would you support trashing the cars of or beating up Labour activists?


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> So you're saying that internment of non-nationals, means the the UK is now officially a fascist state?
> 
> And I repeat - if New Labour and the BNP should be treated the same: So would you support trashing the cars of or beating up Labour activists?




this is what i am saying: 





> new labour policies & laws passed are as repressive, racist & right wing as any fascist party



The guy who had a pop at john prescott gets my full support, but i think the term is 'appropriate action'. An anarchist response is not defined by trashing cars or beating people up. As a liberatrian marxist maybe you're unaware of that.


----------



## blamblam (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> this is what i am saying:
> 
> 
> > new labour policies & laws passed are as repressive, racist & right wing as any fascist party.


Well no you missed the key bit off that. What you said was


> new labour policies & laws passed are as repressive, racist & right wing as any fascist party. _An anarchist response to the bnp should be equally applicable to new labour_.


----------



## kropotkin (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> An anarchist response is not defined by trashing cars or beating people up. As a liberatrian marxist maybe you're unaware of that.



You wouldn't be trying to define who is and who isnt an anarchist would you, monte? I thought you were very much against that...


----------



## Emma Herself (Apr 5, 2005)

At least he's stopped calling people self-styled anarchists, although that one was good fro comedy value...


----------



## blamblam (Apr 5, 2005)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> You wouldn't be trying to define who is and who isnt an anarchist would you, monte? I thought you were very much against that...


You authowitawian!


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

Zoë Herself said:
			
		

> At least he's stopped calling people self-styled anarchists, although that one was good fro comedy value...



...although self-styled libertarian marxist does have a certain quality to it.

Also doing the rounds is middle management anarchist hairdressers!


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> You authowitawian!



said in best posh boy accent?


----------



## blamblam (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> said in best posh boy accent?


Nah that there be Europunk. As in Thessaloniki-style: "You will not let me punch him in face in meeting, you are authowitawian!!"


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Nah that there be Europunk. As in Thessaloniki-style: "You will not let me punch him in face in meeting, you are authowitawian!!"



oh well, i thought hanging around with all those middle class anarchist youthers would've had an affect on your posh boy accent. How wrong can a person be.


----------



## Emma Herself (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> Also doing the rounds is middle management anarchist hairdressers!



Really?! PM me the number, I could do with a bit of a trim...


----------



## Emma Herself (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> oh well, i thought hanging around with all those middle class anarchist youthers would've had an affect on your posh boy accent. How wrong can a person be.



You've lost me now, are you saying icepick is actually aristocracy and by hanging around with middle class AYNers would have made his accent less posh, or he's not posh and hanging around with middle class AYNers would have made him more posh?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> "The idea of an alternative to the bnp would be the same alternative to new labour" means simply this: new labour policies & laws passed are as repressive, racist & right wing as any fascist party. An anarchist response to the bnp should be equally applicable to new labour. Indeed we could muse on the fact of political parties, any political party, as government reinforces the centralised powers of repression & control.





So a BNP government (unlikely as this may be) would be no different to any other?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> We could all muse on why more & more people aren't engaging with the electoral process, but the alternative to political parties being 'in charge' (on either a national or local level) is having people themselves directly determine their own existences, & not simply just having a say occasionally on who they think the best group for the job is, alternative, mainstream or otherwise.





While this might be an ultimately desirable situation, how do you imagine we are going to get from the present state of affairs to that one?  Especially when the active desire for it appears to be close to zero?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> the reality of internment is not something you could joke about. Neither is the concept of non-imprisonable offences changing to up to 5 year's imprison, for activities you don't have to be guilty of. Neither is imprisoning people for simply wanting to live here.





Yes, but none of it means that we are living in a fascist state.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> The guy who had a pop at john prescott gets my full support, but i think the term is 'appropriate action'.




Who? That farmer?  Did it change anything and do you think he shares your political outlook in any way?


----------



## ernestolynch (Apr 5, 2005)

That farmer now stands for UKIP if I recall.


----------



## rednblack (Apr 5, 2005)

i have to admit i sided with prescott on that one one


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> i have to admit i sided with prescott on that one one





Punching UKIP candidates eh?  Sounds like Pressa might be good in the 635 group....


----------



## kropotkin (Apr 5, 2005)

at least they could drive around in style.


----------



## rednblack (Apr 5, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Punching UKIP candidates eh?  Sounds like Pressa might be good in the 635 group....



self defence against a member of the squirerocracy, nowt wrong with that


----------



## cats hammers (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> As a libertarian Marxist maybe you're unaware of that






			
				montevideo said:
			
		

> ...although self-styled libertarian marxist does have a certain quality to it.


"self-styled", eh?   Does it take much effort to make this much of a dick of yourself so frequently?


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Who? That farmer?  Did it change anything and do you think he shares your political outlook in any way?



6 of one half a dozen of the other. Same as punch up's in the russian parliament.


----------



## cats hammers (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> 6 of one half a dozen of the other.



Is this how many pairs of trousers you have on each leg?


----------



## blamblam (Apr 5, 2005)

jackwupton said:
			
		

> Is this how many pairs of trousers you have on each leg?


What when he goes to bed, or all the time?


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> While this might be an ultimately desirable situation, how do you imagine we are going to get from the present state of affairs to that one?  Especially when the active desire for it appears to be close to zero?



which is always going to be the million dollar question. As i've said before i don't have the solutions, i would though say that the starting point from getting 'here to there' should involve the recognition that political parties are not necessary in that process, indeed they are ultimately a barrier to such collective self-organisation.

Who's active desire?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> Who's active desire?





There is no visible active desire for replacing political parties with other forms of organisation among the population at large.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 5, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> which is always going to be the million dollar question. As i've said before i don't have the solutions, i would though say that the starting point from getting 'here to there' should involve the recognition that political parties are not necessary in that process, indeed they are ultimately a barrier to such collective self-organisation.





That you don't have the solutions is quite clear.  For a start you haven't offered any explanation as to why 'the starting point...should involve the explanation that political parties are...ultimately a barrier....' It's no more than an assertion.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 5, 2005)

Utterly incredible political position for monty to hold here , physical force should be applied against fascists, fascism isn't confined to just the BNP but others like UKIP, the anarchist reponse to New Labour should be the same as that to the BNP, and he supports violence against the Deputy Prime Minister who is a member of New Labour( and therefore the same as the BNP) even though his attacker is now UKIP (and therefore the same as the BNP).


----------



## Emma Herself (Apr 5, 2005)

Well he does chose some odd allies, like opposing the banning of Stalinists from an anarchist webspace. 

Which is odd really, cos if yr going to equate new labour with the BNP, then surely Stalinists must come under a similar category, so by that logic surely we should no-platform them to?


----------



## ernestolynch (Apr 5, 2005)

Zoë Herself said:
			
		

> Well he does chose some odd allies, like opposing the banning of Stalinists from an anarchist webspace.
> 
> Which is odd really, cos if yr going to equate new labour with the BNP, then surely Stalinists must come under a similar category, so by that logic surely we should no-platform them to?



'We' being you and yr Tufty Club? I've no intention of going into your treehouse to nick yr crisps.

Edited to add: 

What's a 'Stalinist'?


----------



## Emma Herself (Apr 5, 2005)

Not sure about "we", thinking about it. I think I just meant monty...

What's a Stalinist? Yr the history teacher....


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Utterly incredible political position for monty to hold here , physical force should be applied against fascists, fascism isn't confined to just the BNP but others like UKIP, the anarchist reponse to New Labour should be the same as that to the BNP, and he supports violence against the Deputy Prime Minister who is a member of New Labour( and therefore the same as the BNP) even though his attacker is now UKIP (and therefore the same as the BNP).



& all without taking a breath. 

We could add a punch up between a class traitor with the forces of the state at his disposal & a little englander with a grudge is for amusement value only, never mentioned ukip, the anarchist response to new labour & bnp is they both retain no political legitimacy (that would an ideological rather than a physical response), still haven't mentioned ukip & just for good measure all political parties are simply governments-in-waiting happy to employ the state as a necessary function of a compliant & stable labour force on behalf of capital.


----------



## Main Street (Apr 5, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> What's that supposed to mean? You're suggesting they're not sound? Cos if you are you're talking rubbish.



Hi Icepick,

I'm not suggesting that they're not sound. Yet their recruitment strategy invite only or alternatively sending an email for more details makes me think, no proof however, that the receiver of any such communication could be landing with the plod, the state or the fash.

I will check back to see if there was a phone number. If there is then I guess if you're a local activist you could always arrange to meet in a neutral place and suss the situation out. Perhaps I'm just too cautious but having been jumped by fascists once before and given a beating i guess I have reason to be cautious.

_Looked back - no phone number - still cautious_


----------



## montevideo (Apr 5, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> That you don't have the solutions is quite clear.  For a start you haven't offered any explanation as to why 'the starting point...should involve the explanation that political parties are...ultimately a barrier....' It's no more than an assertion.



of course it is! How on earth could it be anything else. 

The 2 questions though that spring from that are: how do political parties achieve what's so necessary for working class self-emancipation? And could working class people achieve that same thing without political parties?


----------



## blamblam (Apr 6, 2005)

Main Street said:
			
		

> Hi Icepick,
> 
> I'm not suggesting that they're not sound. Yet their recruitment strategy invite only or alternatively sending an email for more details makes me think, no proof however, that the receiver of any such communication could be landing with the plod, the state or the fash.


You're being overly cautious: look at the antifa site - they're linked to as *the* antifa group in west yorkshire. Trust me they're sound, as other people on here can confirm.


----------



## bushphobia (Apr 6, 2005)

editor said:
			
		

> They are challenged. At the ballot box where they don't do awfully well.
> 
> But remind me how people bravely lobbing bricks at empty cars and then legging it are somehow aiding the democratic process.



Good points Mr. Editor.
Groups like the bnp are very good at emotional manipulation. They have only gotten to where they are by manipulating the insecure, the poor, literaly just playing on their mostly unfounded fears.
It's not that much of a stretch of the imagination 
,to imagine how being physically prevented from taking part in the democratic process (which is most certainly how they will see this) that these leeches can improve their public standing after the election.

If we are to truely do something effective against poisonous patriots(?) like the bnp ever gaining credibility, surely we have to concentate on education, maybe understand that many views a person will form throughout their lives first get realised in their formative years. 

I think the uncomfortable reality is that people choose to be one way or another before adulthood, either a school bully, an introvert, a crowd follwer etc.
If this is true, it is going to be hard to change peoples minds. Throwing bricks at people isn't going to do anything but make their beliefs more concrete.

Sure, we could all go the Sun tsue route, and fool ourselves into thinking like bloodthirsty japanese generals, and view opposeing political beliefs of a group in society as an enemy to be fooled, quashed, whatever....but then, when the percieved enemy is gone, we would still be wanting for an enemy. And WE would be still stuck in a certain extremist mindset.  

(I know, no one mentioned sun tsue, but i just thought i should take the arguement for throwing bricks at the bnp to it's logical conclusion.)


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 6, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> & all without taking a breath.
> 
> We could add a punch up between a class traitor with the forces of the state at his disposal & a little englander with a grudge is for amusement value only, never mentioned ukip, the anarchist response to new labour & bnp is they both retain no political legitimacy (that would an ideological rather than a physical response), still haven't mentioned ukip & just for good measure all political parties are simply governments-in-waiting happy to employ the state as a necessary function of a compliant & stable labour force on behalf of capital.



Still having difficulties grasping your position Monty. 





> the anarchist response to new labour & bnp is they both retain no political legitimacy (that would an ideological rather than a physical response),



So are you advocating a Labour are 'social fascists' position or not either ideologically or physically?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 6, 2005)

montevideo/ said:
			
		

> the anarchist response to new labour & bnp is they both retain no political legitimacy





The unfortunate thing for 'the anarchists' is that both do indeed 'retain (?) legitimacy,' in the first case in the eyes of tens of millions, in the second hundreds of thousands, if last years voting figures are anything to go by.  As do several other parties.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 6, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> The unfortunate thing for 'the anarchists' is that both do indeed 'retain (?) legitimacy,' in the first case in the eyes of tens of millions, in the second hundreds of thousands, if last years voting figures are anything to go by.  As do several other parties.



You are right, voting figures are the bench mark of legitimacy for any political party, but when more than 50% of the population don't vote who's going to be in charge & under what mandate? This, if voting trends continue, is looking more & more likely.

More people vote for people on big brother/pop idol than they do for political parties.

so you're a memeber of iwca? Or any political party? What then are your solutions from getting us from where we are now (& have been to varying degrees since the emergence of industrial capitalism) to a classless society? And what are you yourself doing practically towards achieving this?


----------



## montevideo (Apr 6, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Still having difficulties grasping your position Monty.
> 
> So are you advocating a Labour are 'social fascists' position or not either ideologically or physically?



here's what i said chuck



> new labour policies & laws passed are as repressive, racist & right wing as any fascist party


----------



## Main Street (Apr 7, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> You're being overly cautious: look at the antifa site - they're linked to as *the* antifa group in west yorkshire. Trust me they're sound, as other people on here can confirm.



Thanks for the information. 'You're being overly cautious' - you sound like a relative - not being sarky, i do have a tendency to be cautious and for you to say it, well, it just is funny. Thanks again


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 7, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> You are right, voting figures are the bench mark of legitimacy for any political party, but when more than 50% of the population don't vote who's going to be in charge & under what mandate? This, if voting trends continue, is looking more & more likely.
> 
> More people vote for people on big brother/pop idol than they do for political parties.
> 
> so you're a memeber of iwca? Or any political party? What then are your solutions from getting us from where we are now (& have been to varying degrees since the emergence of industrial capitalism) to a classless society? And what are you yourself doing practically towards achieving this?





As the US, and elsewhere, has shown in the past, it is perfectly possible for governments to rule when only a minority of the population has participated in elections.  The clue is in the absence of visible alternatives, although this is by no means the only factor.

Never being able to bring myself to watch the programmes, I'll take your word for it that 'more people vote for people on Big Brother/Pop Idol than they do for political parties,' although I suspect that this is an exaggeration on your part.  But I see what you mean. However, doesn't this tell you something?  We might still be where 'we have been to varying degrees since the emergence of industrial capitalism,' but, if anything, conditions are less favourable to radical change in the current climate than they have been for a century or more.  We live in times where it is overwhelmingly perceived that the only serious attempt to decisively challenge capitalism went down to ignominious defeat and that even those who supported a social democratic defence of working people against the effects of capitalism now all but renounce their past. Is it really any surprise that given this, and the continuing ascendency of consumerist individualism, people are more interested in such crap as Big Brother than in challenging capitalism?  About the best that can be said about the current situation is that the establishment parties cannot take for granted the kind of automatic support they enjoyed until recently. But in no way does that mean that anything progressive is automatically in the offing.

What I, you or anybody else does politically can only have a limited effect on any of this at present. Personally, I support the IWCA because they seem to be the only organised group to have recognised the scale of the failure of the left and the bankruptcy of the old ideologies and yet are proving that it is still possible to gain an audience for progressive politics among working class people, if they are approached in the right way by people who are not outsiders or fly-by-nights in their communities. I look upon what they are doing as the beginning of something, rather than anything more grand, but they, and any others engaged in similar activity, are at least making a start and not just set on carrying on as if the old methods and ideologies still apply.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 9, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> What's that then?  Being shock troops for the ineffectual left and the establishment parties?



Do you class yourself among those in the ineffectual left out out of interest? Do you not think that someone/party always benefits/capitalise from other parties/groups actions? I'm sure the people involved in antifa are opposing the far right because they care as individuals working together....by all means.

ps. sorry for late reply. Not online a lot.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 9, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> Is this directed at me? Do I know you? Want to do me the courtesy of letting on who's dishing out the insults? Maybe a PM?
> 
> Or maybe you're talking about yourself. If so, am I supposed to be impressed? You must be really proud.....
> 
> For reply to the the substantive points, see reply to Pickman's Model - to follow.



Of course it's directed at you, it's in reply to your post isn't it? Well done by the way, you should have been a detective i am indeed the AD as well. This was by no means a ploy to confuse you. I have the problem of commuting between london and somewhere else, which means i have to use my sisters pc, which means a new log in name for u75. I'm sorry if you found my comment insulting but it was not intended to be and as you were a little bit sharp in your reply to me under my other monika i'm sure you can understand the dig. More to add in response to your later posts but not tonight. I'm sure you've had worse insults than that thrown your way in the past....i know i have!


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 9, 2005)

The world would be a better place if Nick Griffin's car was set on fire with him inside it, and I'm confused as to why there's 34 pages of debate on the subject.


----------



## layabout (Apr 9, 2005)

Yossarian said:
			
		

> The world would be a better place if Nick Griffin's car was set on fire with him inside it, and *I'm confused* as to why there's 34 pages of debate on the subject.



Somehow I think you're used to being confused, especially if you can't see what the aftermarth of the leader of a political party being burned alive inside his car.

Fucking idiot.


----------



## Main Street (Apr 9, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Somehow I think you're used to being confused, especially if you can't see what the aftermarth of the leader of a political party being burned alive inside his car.
> 
> Fucking idiot.



That sentence is not gramatically correct and the meaning is unclear.


----------



## layabout (Apr 9, 2005)

Main Street said:
			
		

> That sentence is not gramatically correct and the meaning is unclear.



Idiotville....population 2 and rising.........


----------



## layabout (Apr 9, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Of course it's directed at you, it's in reply to your post isn't it? Well done by the way, you should have been a detective i am indeed the AD as well. This was by no means a ploy to confuse you. I have the problem of commuting between london and somewhere else, *which means i have to use my sisters pc, which means a new log in name for u75*. I'm sorry if you found my comment insulting but it was not intended to be and as you were a little bit sharp in your reply to me under my other monika i'm sure you can understand the dig. More to add in response to your later posts but not tonight. I'm sure you've had worse insults than that thrown your way in the past....i know i have!



No it does not mean a new login. You should only have 1 login. There is NOTHING stopping a person who uses more than 1 PC using his or her normal login. It's against the FAQ to have more than 1 login. 2 reply with a second login is bang out of order.


----------



## Main Street (Apr 9, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Idiotville....population 2 and rising.........



How's that? Oh yeah I forgot you don't do questions....


----------



## danbreen (Apr 9, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> No it does not mean a new login. You should only have 1 login. There is NOTHING stopping a person who uses more than 1 PC using his or her normal login. It's against the FAQ to have more than 1 login. 2 reply with a second login is bang out of order.



Well excuse me Mr. Plod of the world wide web! When i tried to use my log in from another cp it wouldn't let me, so i had to register again. If i use the new name (under my sisters cp set up for my sister of course) then whats the problem? I have been honest about it and i'm not trying to dupe anyone. If the editor has a problem with it then i'm sure i'll hear about it.....why don't you report me, go on you know you want to....


----------



## layabout (Apr 9, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Well excuse me Mr. Plod of the world wide web! When i tried to use my log in from another cp it wouldn't let me, so i had to register again. If i use the new name (under my sisters cp set up for my sister of course) then whats the problem? I have been honest about it and i'm not trying to dupe anyone. If the editor has a problem with it then i'm sure i'll hear about it.....why don't you report me, go on you know you want to....



What's the point in reporting you? It's not like I'd be able to get you banned, is it?


----------



## danbreen (Apr 9, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Don't follow the logic of what you say here at all Pickman. On one hand you are acknowledging that the fash tactics are different ie no longer march and grow but a serious attempt to engage politically within local communities, but then you insist that the tactic of physically stopping the BNP marching is still relevant when they no longer march.
> 
> *They attempted to march in Wickford Essex last year.*
> 
> ...



*So how many wc ppl exactly would you think might be interested in the thoughts of anarchists? Not many. Most wc ppl i know couldn't give a fuck about politics of any persuasion. They are disilusioned, apathetic and (in the case of most that i know) ignorant of whats going on in the world. The political arena is dead for the left. Capitalism/consumerism has won. The only thing most ppl today are interested in is the pursuit of wealth. How they can afford those £100 jeans while wishing they were shagging david beckham or britney. Ppl think that who ever they vote for, they'll be shafted anyway.  Why anyone would want to join any party is beyond me. It's a political deadend in a political ghetto for those involved in organised politics. I hate to speak generally but i speak as i find.*


----------



## flimsier (Apr 9, 2005)

So who is Danbreen otherwise known as?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 9, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> *So how many wc ppl exactly would you think might be interested in the thoughts of anarchists? Not many. Most wc ppl i know couldn't give a fuck about politics of any persuasion. They are disilusioned, apathetic and (in the case of most that i know) ignorant of whats going on in the world. The political arena is dead for the left. Capitalism/consumerism has won. The only thing most ppl today are interested in is the pursuit of wealth. How they can afford those £100 jeans while wishing they were shagging david beckham or britney. Ppl think that who ever they vote for, they'll be shafted anyway.  Why anyone would want to join any party is beyond me. It's a political deadend in a political ghetto for those involved in organised politics. I hate to speak generally but i speak as i find.*



Game's over, might as well pack in now, last one out turn the light out,fat lady has sung sort of analysis here dan which then some how justifies a group of likeminded outlaws continuing an unproductive no platform tactic on the grounds that its a labour saving device because the working class aren't interested in politics so its not worth the effort.I can see you retiring early pal.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 9, 2005)

Lets hope so eh!


----------



## danbreen (Apr 9, 2005)

Just spent 30mins replying to this post then lost the lot when i tried to post....arrrgh!


----------



## past caring (Apr 9, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Well excuse me Mr. Plod of the world wide web! When i tried to use my log in from another cp it wouldn't let me, so i had to register again. If i use the new name (under my sisters cp set up for my sister of course) then whats the problem? I have been honest about it and i'm not trying to dupe anyone. If the editor has a problem with it then i'm sure i'll hear about it.....why don't you report me, go on you know you want to....



Dan/AD - it isn't an issue for me, I just wanted to know who I was talking to.

layabout is right about it being against the FAQ - and whilst personally I don't care - it may be an issue for you (for reasons, see private message).

I manage to use both my home pc and several at work with the past caring log-in. Try this (sorry if I'm telling you how to suck eggs); 

On your sister's pc, go to "internet options" and delete history, then delete cookies. You should now be able to log-in to U75 with the A/D user name.


----------



## layabout (Apr 9, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> ......
> 
> On your sister's pc, go to "internet options" and delete history, then delete cookies. You should now be able to log-in to U75 with the A/D user name.



His sister is likely to kill him if he does that. She should just create him a new Windows logon on her PC and the jobs done.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 9, 2005)

Thanks for the advice, i'll have to get rid of one login i suppose. Genuinely could not access u75, so thought my only option was to re-register. I'm hardly on here now days.


----------



## rednblack (Apr 9, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Just spent 30mins replying to this post then lost the lot when i tried to post....arrrgh!




yeah, yeah


----------



## danbreen (Apr 10, 2005)

I said I'd come back to this - and although Chuck has had a go, there's a few things I want to add.

First, let's get one thing out of the way - I didn't contribute anything of substance earlier in the thread because I didn't want to be seen to be giving any support to the liberal, hand-wringing element. Physical force anti-fascism is a tactical issue, not a moral one - I'd always take your side over that of the moralists on here......

*Glad to hear it.*

It's worth, perhaps, baring in mind where the initial insults - and the source of bad feeling - originated. At the point where AFA analysed that the BNP had moved away from street activity and were set to bypass the left and that this demanded a different approach from anti-fascists, there were three main responses from the nay-sayers withing AFA.....

1) To agree (at least in public) with the analysis - but to do nothing. 

*Not entirerly acurate. I recall leafletting the 'tories in flight jackets' flyer and the iwca flyer in their thousands. I accept this does not constitute playing an active part in the iwca but then many involved with afa at the time (anarchists) did not want to abandon the streets in favour of vote winning as they believed there was still work to be done. Those ppl went on to form N.P. and did just that. Hardly doing nothing.*

2) To agree with the need for a more political focus - but to insist that the physical approach still had its part, simply because the NF and BNP "are still fascists". Some of us might have been more convinced of the "different views, honestly held" nature of the disagreement had those making this argument got on board with any of the subsequent political activity - whether that be under the banner of the IWCA or something else.

*Some did though and some were/are active in community work. If you are aiming that at specific ppl, then you have a fair point but you must accept that ppl will decide their own level of commitment to any cause/movement and the fact that they do anything at all is better than nothing. Anarchists generally keep organised politics at arms length, perferring D.A. to futher any 'cause' they are involved in. Some ppl also have serious restrictions on their time, be it kids, work or having a life of somekind outside the political arena. * 

3) That _our_ analysis wasn't honestly held - that AFA, and more specifically RA were "past it" or had "lost their bottle". This wasn't, of course, an argument that was ever made face-to-face with the people they were accusing (artfuldodge/danbreen - I'm convinced now it's the same person - were among this latter group).

*If this is someting you are 'convinced' of, then wheres the evidence? These accusations have been bandied about for ages and are absolute bollox. I know of no one who has made these comments with any serious intent. If anything it may have been beer talk said in frustration at the time by some. Most ppl have nothing but respect for many in afa and ra. It's just a shame that it's not a two way street. Like the term 'real afa' was an invention made by fuck knows who, it was nowt to do with who you think it was. * 
I've made clear I don't think it's wrong - morally. It's a political issue. 

Eh? It appeared very far from "job done" to those in AFA who were responsible for coming up with the "filling the political vacuum" strategy. RA were amongst this group - but were very far from being the sole authors of same.

It might have appeared as "job done" if it were simply the case that the BNP had been beaten from the streets - and that was the end of the matter. But at the same time as not marching they were already moving (with some success) to a "respectable", electoral strategy. It should be born in mind that , in the "filling the vacuum" strategy, what the fash were up to was only half the story. The other half was an analysis of what the left was up to.....

For years, AFA had based itself on "holding the circle" - on physically stopping the fash from organising in an area, in the hope that the left might succesfully step into the ring. It became apparent that not only had the left failed to do this - but that it was incapable of doing so. The BNP, once it had shifted to the electoral strategy, was effectively set for a clear run.....

*Do you think the large number of anarchists involvd with afa at that time based their involvement on holding a circle for the left to fill....*

Someone earlier in the thread (Tom A?) asked why it was that, if anarchists/anti-fascists believed that physical intimidation of new, would-be fascists might stop them getting involved, why the reverse might not be true. I was tempted to answer at the time, but now seems more appropriate....

The answer I was going to give was based (somewhat ironically) on a parallel with the situation in the six-counties. For much of the 80s and 90s the _appeal_ of the BNP to almost all of its potential recruits was one calculated to boost their physical self-esteem. They would "march and grow", dominate the streets, physically intimidate the long-haired student opposition and smash their way to power in "classic" fascist style.

It was no surprise, therefore, that the BNP should attract more than its fair share of social inadequates and misfits - people who could only ever hope to feel good about themselves by bullying and dominating others. It was, equally, of no surprise that many of them should fall by the way-side when it became apparent that part of the opposition, at least, was very far from fitting the student stereotype - but actually prepared to take the battle to them. If you join a movement on the basis that it will make you feel big and hard - but continually end up taking second prize - the gloss soon wears off.

My own view is that a different psychology generally applies to movements that are broadly progressive. OK, it's cod-psychology, I know, but there's more than a kernal of truth to it......there are times, specifically if reactionary movements come to absolute dominance, where those of an "idealistic" (or anarchist, to answer Tom A's question) pursuasion might be _too scared_ to articulate their politics. But, mostly, that very idealism allows people to keep going.

It's for very similar reasons that republicanism in the six-counties has been able to sustain itself and why, on the other hand, loyalism has always been riddled with a rag-bag collection of drug-dealers, nonce cases and touts. So much so that they might be said to define the movement.......

The problem is that the BNP have moved on - and with some success. They are clearly now attracting votes from "ordinary" working-class people whose primary motivation isn't thuggery, isn't the _pyschological_ massaging of their collective egos. Instead, they are people who are thoroughly disenchanted with mainstream politics, who know they have been abandoned by the main parties, who, if they weren't voting for the BNP, simply wouldn't vote at all. I'd say that, very largely, their motivation isn't one of _absolute_ racial hatred - more a resentment at "special" or racially-based funding when contrasted to their own impovrishment and the (correct) perception that the political establishment couldn't care less about their interests.

*I recently had the dubious honour of meeting one the bnps new candidates (pure chance in a pub). Strangely this new breed of nationalist was exactly like the old breed. He spouted bile until he was near foaming at the mouth. The bloke was an absolute cunt. I take your point though that ordinary folk will and are voting for them but in my eyes, apart from the fact that they are dissallussioned with mainstream parties and concerned about the things we are all concerned about, they have to be either pig shit thick or inherently racist to vote bnp. * 

That sense of being put-upon, of being the underdog is one of the main things that the BNP plays upon. I don't think that such people are quite as easily put-off - either by having their cars smashed up or by getting the odd right-hander. It's certainly much less likely that they'll be put-off unless there's some _positive_ and viable political alternative that can attract some of their well-founded resentment.

*Horses for courses.*

There's real evidence that the BNP are turning some of these voters into actual activists - something that's much more worrying.

*There's also the chance that some will think again if they are on the recieving end of a very persuasive argument.*
One last thing here. It's no accident, to my mind, that those areas where the BNP has "a foothold" as you put it, also has no viable pro-working class alternative. I think it's very far from being a coincidence that, in those areas where they are doing best, former AFA branches and activists chose not to go for an IWCA type strategy. No coincidence, either, that those areas were those most heavily penetrated by Searchlight - but that's another matter.

*It's also no accident that these ares are the ones where the far right are getting a shedload of grief. They may not have a political working class alternative but they certainly have a working class opposition. You cant blame old afa groups not going over to the iwca for any failings in that area, thats rubbish. More that the iwca simply havent the resourses to cover more than a handfull of areas. That old searchlight chesnut has been done to death by the way. Is it still relevent that afa/ra once worked with searchlight? No i didnt think so. Antifa have no connection with searchlight.*

Renblack    
(post too long - part 2 follows)[/QUOTE]


----------



## rednblack (Apr 10, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> . Antifa have connection with searchlight.[/B]



NO connection you mean...


----------



## editor (Apr 10, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Just spent 30mins replying to this post then lost the lot when i tried to post....arrrgh!


Please do not requote a huge swathe of text just to add one pointless line of your own.


----------



## catch (Apr 10, 2005)

montevideo at IWCA member said:
			
		

> What then are your solutions from getting us from where we are now (& have been to varying degrees since the emergence of industrial capitalism) to a classless society? And what are you yourself doing practically towards achieving this?



Monte, I've asked you a similar question before and not got much of a response.


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

Danbreen is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo refreshing. My I've never heard any of this cutting edge stuff being put forward before. 

It's 100% dead cert formula for success.

Danbreen, what the fuck are you doing on here? Why ain't you on the end of a megaphone in the middle of some shopping centre?


----------



## rednblack (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Danbreen is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo refreshing. My I've never heard any of this cutting edge stuff being put forward before.
> 
> It's 100% dead cert formula for success.
> 
> Danbreen, what the fuck are you doing on here? Why ain't you on the end of a megaphone in the middle of some shopping centre?



wow your clevar


----------



## montevideo (Apr 10, 2005)

catch said:
			
		

> Monte, I've asked you a similar question before and not got much of a response.



read this thread again.


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> wow your clevar



I know.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 10, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> NO connection you mean...



Corrected sir!


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

Danbreen.........

Please exapand on this remark:

*"There's also the chance that some will think again if they are on the recieving end of a very persuasive argument."*


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 10, 2005)

*Return of the mack*




			
				editor said:
			
		

> So naturally you wouldn't object if BNP thugs expressed themselves in the same manner and, say, put through your front windows because they didn't like your politics?



They all ready burnt my mates car out a year a so back and twatted one of my mates over the head with a cosh.

So ill be backing bricking the BNP


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> They all ready burnt my mates car out a year a so back and twatted one of my mates over the head with a cosh.
> 
> So ill be backing bricking the BNP



Yeah anyway, some muslim bloke mugged my mate near a mosque a while back. So, who's coming out tonight to mug some muslims?


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Yeah anyway, some muslim bloke mugged my mate near a mosque a while back. So, who's coming out tonight to mug some muslims?



I would expect no less of you layabout.  

I wont be joining you i will be too busy gathering bricks and running at the nearest fash stronghold


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> I would expect no less of you layabout.
> 
> I wont be joining you i will be too busy gathering bricks and running at the nearest fash stronghold



You know I was being sarcastic. I have no intention of going out mugging anyone. 

So you're going to a fash stronghold. Bet that must be a real fucking experience for you, venturing into a real working class slum. Fucking pratt.


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 10, 2005)

Urban 75 Home of the world famous liberal arse sitters.

"When the fash came for me i had no one to stand up with me to fight them, because i clapped and cheered the anti fash into priosn and worshipped the false god of elections and liberal demockery"

Herbert acknowledges this will not apply to layabout as he will have secured a minesterial post within any fascist government.


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You know I was being sarcastic. I have no intention of going out mugging anyone.
> 
> So you're going to a fash stronghold. Bet that must be a real fucking experience for you, venturing into a real working class slum. Fucking pratt.



Layabout i grew up in one of the 'slums' as you put it, i am about to move to one of the slums as you nicely remind me!

I wish i could afford to live in a nice middle class suburbia, but my wages dont allow it. The debts of my middle calss education have seen that im crippled financially.

Dont make throw away remarks about peoples back ground or identity as you do not know me.

Point is  i will be resisting the BNP both physically and ideologically, what will you be doing except typing on the internet.


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Urban 75 Home of the world famous liberal arse sitters.
> 
> "When the fash came for me i had no one to stand up with me to fight them, because i clapped and cheered the anti fash into priosn and worshipped the false god of elections and liberal demockery"
> 
> Herbert acknowledges this will not apply to layabout as he will have secured a minesterial post within any fascist government.



Oh fuck off. You are THE ENEMY of the working classes. YOU are the fascist. You are the one who wants to limit the freedoms of people by using violence. You are NOT an anti-fascist. You look in the mirror and you wank yourself off with self-delusions. You belong in prison and I hope you fall down lots of stairs on the way. I hope you get run down by some cocaine-addled city suit in his 7 series BMW..........and even that cunt would be more in touch with the working classes, but not as he's wiping your sorry arse off his radiator.


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Oh fuck off. You are THE ENEMY of the working classes. YOU are the fascist. You are the one who wants to limit the freedoms of people by using violence. You are NOT an anti-fascist. You look in the mirror and you wank yourself off with self-delusions. You belong in prison and I hope you fall down lots of stairs on the way. I hope you get run down by some cocaine-addled city suit in his 7 series BMW..........and even that cunt would be more in touch with the working classes, but not as he's wiping your sorry arse off his radiator.



Ohhh layabout

Can we forget the real working class are the bank managers, the city types, estate agents, landlords, property developers!

The real salt of the earth, that this system of government and society really works for.

By samshing a brick in the face of a fascist i only limit the freedom of a rampant racist who would deport ethic minorities, deny homosexuals life and liberty, destroy trade unions, ban any political ideology apart from fascism and generally muder, kill and imprison all those who disagree.

I tell you what layabout i can live with that nad after may dust offs with the fash i can and do get to sleep every night.


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Ohhh layabout
> 
> Can we forget the real working class are the bank managers, the city types, estate agents, landlords, property developers!
> 
> ...



You're a fucking pratt and a hypocrite. 

Do you believe in vigilante movements to smash paedophiles?

YES OR NO?


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You're a fucking pratt and a hypocrite.
> 
> Do you believe in vigilante movements to smash paedophiles?
> 
> YES OR NO?



No once again you asume and no very little about me. I spent two years of my life working very closely with sex offenders, having to question my own prejudices and understanding of an issue and practice that absolutely revolts me to the core. I believe in treatmet, control through retributive justice and monitoring and supervision. All though such a delicate issue with the wider community involves tact understanding and the partnership working of lots of agencies.

I do believe in physically opposing fascism, i suppose we will have to agree to disagree on this matter.

YES OR NO a bit junior school, layabout!


----------



## catch (Apr 10, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> read this thread again.



Just went back through your posts and haven't seen it. Anyone can write "political parties are a barrier to working class self-organisation", and "build alternatives outside the electoral process". That's a start, but it's not an adequate answer to this:




			
				montevideo said:
			
		

> What then are your solutions from getting us from where we are now (& have been to varying degrees since the emergence of industrial capitalism) to a classless society? And what are you yourself doing practically towards achieving this?"


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> No once again you asume and no very little about me. I spent two years of my life working very closely with sex offenders, having to question my own prejudices and understanding of an issue and practice that absolutely revolts me to the core. I believe in treatmet, control through retributive justice and monitoring and supervision. All though such a delicate issue with the wider community involves tact understanding and the partnership working of lots of agencies.
> 
> I do believe in physically opposing fascism, i suppose we will have to agree to disagree on this matter.
> 
> YES OR NO a bit junior school, layabout!



You haven't answered the question. It's a simple yes or no question.

If you want to decide to take the law into your own hands because you can't control your temper like a spolit little child, it's not my problem, is fucking yours. At the end of the day, with so many selfish fucking people, who believe that democracy comes second best to their own primitive feelings, I really don't give a fuck anymore. Why? Because at the end of the day, I'm getting my way. I'm a common man and common people appear to be thinking the way I do. Take note. The main political parties have put immigration at the top of the agenda AND capitalists will still be in power after the elections. Oh yeah, if you don't care about the democratic rights of the BNP.......fine.......you're sadly mistaken if you think I do.

I only care about *MY* poltical rights. And it sounds like your's are going to be taken away a long time before they ever try and take away mine. So fuck you and anyone that's ever smiled at you.


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 10, 2005)

I SAID NO IN MY ORIGINAL ANSWER.

I doubt you are a common man, didnt you used to work for the European bank. I recall some post about sipping champagne. I maybe wrong but i do have a good memory.

Just because the bigots as the sun and the mail are bangng on about it and the government and the tory arsehole are doesnt make you a common man with common beliefs.

Media manipulation, biased press have more to do with what the person on the street thinks and assumes!

If i end up in prison i will e mail you, one less scum bag hairy arsed anarchist, you can clap and touch your self and count your tax pennies.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 10, 2005)

catch said:
			
		

> Just went back through your posts and haven't seen it. Anyone can write "political parties are a barrier to working class self-organisation", and "build alternatives outside the electoral process". That's a start, but it's not an adequate answer to this:



if you would've read what i say you would've seen that i said i have no solutions (& damned be the person who thinks he does).

Now if you think you have the solutions for (in lletsa's words) getting us from here to there, please share.


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> I only care about *MY* poltical rights. And it sounds like your's are going to be taken away a long time before they ever try and take away mine. So fuck you and anyone that's ever smiled at you.



Thats the point about liberal arse sitting, by the time they come for you, there will be no one left to help you resist been imprisoned and murdered.


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Thats the point about liberal arse sitting, by the time they come for you, there will be no one left to help you resist been imprisoned and murdered.



What are you on about? You're making the mistake of thinking that I'm fash. I'm not, I'm a Tory. You can go out creating hell on earth on the streets, it will only serve my political agenda and not yours.


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> What are you on about? You're making the mistake of thinking that I'm fash. I'm not, I'm a Tory. You can go out creating hell on earth on the streets, it will only serve my political agenda and not yours.



Thats what i am on about, i once mistakenly and childishly called you a fash i know you are a tory its more obvios than a two foot purple dildo!

By the time the fash come for you and as a ranting tory you would piss them off eventually there would be no one left to help you!

Thats my point!

Its not just my point but a well known one by some German Pastor who the fash did over cant remeber his name.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Danbreen.........
> 
> Please exapand on this remark:
> 
> *"There's also the chance that some will think again if they are on the recieving end of a very persuasive argument."*



Er......no.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Danbreen is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo refreshing. My I've never heard any of this cutting edge stuff being put forward before.
> 
> It's 100% dead cert formula for success.
> 
> Danbreen, what the fuck are you doing on here? Why ain't you on the end of a megaphone in the middle of some shopping centre?



Do you think i should? Awww shucks thanks big fella....


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Oh fuck off. You are THE ENEMY of the working classes. YOU are the fascist. You are the one who wants to limit the freedoms of people by using violence. You are NOT an anti-fascist. You look in the mirror and you wank yourself off with self-delusions. You belong in prison and I hope you fall down lots of stairs on the way. I hope you get run down by some cocaine-addled city suit in his 7 series BMW..........and even that cunt would be more in touch with the working classes, but not as he's wiping your sorry arse off his radiator.





The standard of debate on here is second to none.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> Now if you think you have the solutions for (in lletsa's words) getting us from here to there, please share.





No, they were your words if I remember rightly.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 10, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> No, they were your words if I remember rightly.



paraphrasing you


> While this might be an ultimately desirable situation, how do you imagine we are going to get from the present state of affairs to that one?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> paraphrasing you





Who was paraphrasing you....


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Thats what i am on about, i once mistakenly and childishly called you a fash i know you are a tory its more obvios than a two foot purple dildo!
> 
> By the time the fash come for you and as a ranting tory you would piss them off eventually there would be no one left to help you!
> 
> ...



You don't get it do you?

"Fash" is not coming for me. I'm not worried about "Fash". There is nothing Fash can do to me (Or anyone else) for that matter. But just like you, fash is a means to an end. Just like you, fash is there to be used and abused. You and fash are one in the same. You are both going to be used, to push forward Conservative / Neo Liberal ideals. Congratulations you mug.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Do you class yourself among those in the ineffectual left out out of interest? Do you not think that someone/party always benefits/capitalise from other parties/groups actions? I'm sure the people involved in antifa are opposing the far right because they care as individuals working together....by all means.
> 
> ps. sorry for late reply. Not online a lot.




Question one: no.

Question two: not sure I fully understand this clumsily phrased sentence.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> *So how many wc ppl exactly would you think might be interested in the thoughts of anarchists? Not many. Most wc ppl i know couldn't give a fuck about politics of any persuasion. They are disilusioned, apathetic and (in the case of most that i know) ignorant of whats going on in the world. The political arena is dead for the left. Capitalism/consumerism has won. The only thing most ppl today are interested in is the pursuit of wealth. How they can afford those £100 jeans while wishing they were shagging david beckham or britney. Ppl think that who ever they vote for, they'll be shafted anyway.  Why anyone would want to join any party is beyond me. It's a political deadend in a political ghetto for those involved in organised politics. I hate to speak generally but i speak as i find.*





So then, why bother with your 'bashing the fash'?  If that's all that anybody's interested in, then the BNP haven't much chance of making a breakthrough either.  Have they?

You might as well save yourself the energy and the possibility of a prison sentence for attacking elected politicians and their canvassing teams. Is really worth it if they're in this 'political deadend in a political ghetto...' as well?

When I've used the term 'apolitical anarchists' on here it's mainly been to playfully (honest!) wind up certain other posters (although I think there's a grain of truth there in some respects....) In your case, however, it seems to be entirely applicable.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> *I recently had the dubious honour of meeting one the bnps new candidates (pure chance in a pub). Strangely this new breed of nationalist was exactly like the old breed. He spouted bile until he was near foaming at the mouth. The bloke was an absolute cunt. I take your point though that ordinary folk will and are voting for them but in my eyes, apart from the fact that they are dissallussioned with mainstream parties and concerned about the things we are all concerned about, they have to be either pig shit thick or inherently racist to vote bnp. *





But why get excited about it when, as you claim, consumerist capitalism has won anyway?

The BNP claim to be offering an alternative to consumer capitalism as well as the left, but if things are as you say they haven't a chance of gaining an audience.  Have they?


----------



## montevideo (Apr 10, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> But why get excited about it when, as you claim, consumerist capitalism has won anyway?
> 
> The BNP claim to be offering an alternative to consumer capitalism as well as the left, but if things are as you say they haven't a chance of gaining an audience.  Have they?



No they don't. Where? They defend property rights to the hilt, ownership of the means of production remains with (admittedly vague) 'the british nation & people'. 

_"Our goal is to place more money into our pockets for consumer spending."_ from the bnp website


----------



## montevideo (Apr 10, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Who was paraphrasing you....



where?


----------



## danbreen (Apr 10, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Question one: no.
> 
> Question two: not sure I fully understand this clumsily phrased sentence.



I guess you wont be able to answer it then.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 10, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> So then, why bother with your 'bashing the fash'?  If that's all that anybody's interested in, then the BNP haven't much chance of making a breakthrough either.  Have they?
> 
> You might as well save yourself the energy and the possibility of a prison sentence for attacking elected politicians and their canvassing teams. Is really worth it if they're in this 'political deadend in a political ghetto...' as well?
> 
> When I've used the term 'apolitical anarchists' on here it's mainly been to playfully (honest!) wind up certain other posters (although I think there's a grain of truth there in some respects....) In your case, however, it seems to be entirely applicable.



I dont like fascists. You know, i think i may well be a 'apolitical anarchist'. In fact i'm leaning more towards complete nihilism these days. Maybe theres a few more labels i should consider adopting. like i give a shit.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 10, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> But why get excited about it when, as you claim, consumerist capitalism has won anyway?
> 
> The BNP claim to be offering an alternative to consumer capitalism as well as the left, but if things are as you say they haven't a chance of gaining an audience.  Have they?



Whos getting excited. Has it not won then? Gotta go, football in 40 minutes. I look forward to reading your put downs sometime next week. Lots of love. 

"If you want peace, prepare for war".


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> where?





Over there....


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Whos getting excited. Has it not won then? Gotta go, football in 40 minutes. I look forward to reading your put downs sometime next week. Lots of love.
> 
> "If you want peace, prepare for war".





Not put downs at all - I'm honestly curious as to what is motivating you. 

Enjoy the match.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> I dont like fascists. You know, i think i may well be a 'apolitical anarchist'. In fact i'm leaning more towards complete nihilism these days. Maybe theres a few more labels i should consider adopting. like i give a shit.





Do 'complete nihilists' give a shit about anything then?

Say you got your wish and it all went off big time with the fash and you were unfortunate enough to take a right pasting off a few of them - would you be 'nihilistic' towards the ambulance crew that comes to your aid?  

For example.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 10, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Over there....



precisely.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 10, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Do 'complete nihilists' give a shit about anything then?
> 
> Say you got your wish and it all went off big time with the fash and you were unfortunate enough to take a right pasting off a few of them - would you be 'nihilistic' towards the ambulance crew that comes to your aid?
> 
> For example.



Unlikely in the first instance as anyone who knows me would tell i'd run a mile if i found myself in such a quandry. And no, i'd take them all out to pizza hut for a slap up meal. Ta ta 4 now must dash to the pub.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> No they don't. Where? They defend property rights to the hilt, ownership of the means of production remains with (admittedly vague) 'the british nation & people'.
> 
> _"Our goal is to place more money into our pockets for consumer spending."_ from the bnp website





The programme of the BNP, if you hadn't noticed, is a pretty contradictory document.  I doubt if anything in it can be said to be genuinly anti-capitalist, but BNP members often (incoherently) polemicise against capitalism on their own forums and others, while its leaders often half-heartedly do the same in their pronouncements from time to time.  

It's all a part of their being all things to all people.

But to get back to the point I was making to danbreen, the fact is that the BNP presents itself as an alternative to the status quo; he appears to believe that there is no alternative to it; I ask him why, if this is the case, he gets so hot under the collar about the BNP, since they are, in his world, pissing in the wind as much as anybody else.  Dan avoids the questions and goes off in a huff to watch football.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 10, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Unlikely in the first instance as anyone who knows me would tell i'd run a mile if i found myself in such a quandry. And no, i'd take them all out to pizza hut for a slap up meal. Ta ta 4 now must dash to the pub.





Off you go then.  Nobody's keeping you.  You obviously have nowt coherent to say on here.


----------



## layabout (Apr 10, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Unlikely in the first instance as anyone who knows me would tell i'd run a mile if i found myself in such a quandry. And no, i'd take them all out to pizza hut for a slap up meal. Ta ta 4 now must dash to the pub.



Going for a drink with your BNP mate again?


----------



## Main Street (Apr 10, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> You haven't answered the question. It's a simple yes or no question.



Ring any bells?


----------



## timetofillapit (Apr 10, 2005)

how relevant are the BNP really?
 I mean there mostly wannbe nazi thugs who likely to beat up any ethnic minority gay or allegedy gay or anyone else whose around when they leave the pub  
 But as a politcal force there a little better than a nasty joke.
sort of like the swp but with more violence and less talking


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 10, 2005)

timetofillapit said:
			
		

> how relevant are the BNP really?
> I mean there mostly wannbe nazi thugs who likely to beat up any ethnic minority gay or allegedy gay or anyone else whose around when they leave the pub
> But as a politcal force there a little better than a nasty joke.
> sort of like the swp but with more violence and less talking




 You know nothing


----------



## ernestolynch (Apr 10, 2005)




----------



## montevideo (Apr 10, 2005)

ernestolynch said:
			
		

>



5 out of 10 on the swarthometer.


----------



## timetofillapit (Apr 10, 2005)

so how scary are they then what a couple of councilers thats about it hardly the new reich
in france they got elected here there a joke
or am I missing something?


----------



## IPRN (Apr 10, 2005)

*Don't worry*




			
				danbreen said:
			
		

> Unlikely in the first instance as anyone who knows me would tell i'd run a mile if i found myself in such a quandry. And no, i'd take them all out to pizza hut for a slap up meal. Ta ta 4 now must dash to the pub.


Don't worry mate, I've been giving the bastards pastings for 30 years and never even got a slap off any of them, no matter what the odds.


----------



## Belushi (Apr 10, 2005)

ernestolynch said:
			
		

>



They've airbrushed the watches out!


----------



## ernestolynch (Apr 10, 2005)

Belushi said:
			
		

> They've airbrushed the watches out!



Oh aye! Forgot about thems!


----------



## catch (Apr 11, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> if you would've read what i say you would've seen that i said i have no solutions (& damned be the person who thinks he does).
> 
> Now if you think you have the solutions for (in lletsa's words) getting us from here to there, please share.



No idea whatsoever then?

But you want to get to that kind of society right?


----------



## layabout (Apr 11, 2005)

Main Street said:
			
		

> Ring any bells?



Main Street. You posted up something like a political party broadcast and then you wanted a response. I wanted a simple yes or no answer.


----------



## Main Street (Apr 12, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> He's not. I've got his home number.
> 
> I do think he's dishonest about himself in some way, but I think he's honest about being an ex-bnp member.
> 
> ...



ditto


----------



## danbreen (Apr 12, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Going for a drink with your BNP mate again?



Yeah, we've become really close of late. You know i think i'm coming round to his way of thinking. Muppet.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 12, 2005)

IPRN said:
			
		

> Don't worry mate, I've been giving the bastards pastings for 30 years and never even got a slap off any of them, no matter what the odds.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 12, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Off you go then.  Nobody's keeping you.  You obviously have nowt coherent to say on here.



Actions speak louder than words. Sorry for pulling your chain ever so slightly but i just couldn't resist. Nihilism is not really where i'm at. By the way spurs won 1-0.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 12, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Actions speak louder than words. Sorry for pulling your chain ever so slightly but i just couldn't resist. Nihilism is not really where i'm at. By the way spurs won 1-0.





You didn't pull anything of mine buddy.  I find your posts to be almost entirely absent of any political content and your failure to answer any questions put to you about the 'action' that you claim is necessary to be merely of minor interest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2005)

only 2 more posts...


----------



## rednblack (Apr 12, 2005)

cough


----------



## rednblack (Apr 12, 2005)

cough, cough


----------



## danbreen (Apr 12, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> You didn't pull anything of mine buddy.  I find your posts to be almost entirely absent of any political content and your failure to answer any questions put to you about the 'action' that you claim is necessary to be merely of minor interest.



You must really miss the ra discussion boards. It's all got to be sooo serious hasn't it.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> cough, cough



You off work with flu.....


----------



## rednblack (Apr 12, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> You off work with flu.....



nope just trying to get the 1000th post


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 12, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> You must really miss the ra discussion boards. It's all got to be sooo serious hasn't it.





So anti-fascism is no more than a game to you?


----------



## rednblack (Apr 12, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> So anti-fascism is no more than a game to you?



come off it, where did he say that? you can have a laugh, even about serious subjects

as you well know


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> come off it, where did he say that? you can have a laugh, even about serious subjects
> 
> as you well know





Go back and read his posts.  Right from the bit where he says that there's no alternative to consumer capitalism (watch him come on and backtrack on all that now), right through to his current claims that he was only joking about his supposedly nihilist views, he has refused to answer any questions as to why he is trying to currently push physical force anti-fascism.  And when you consider what is at stake these are pretty serious questions.  Why is he encouraging people to risk prison for ends that he completely refuses to define, for one thing?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 12, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> You must really miss the ra discussion boards. It's all got to be sooo serious hasn't it.





I thought you seemed vaguely familiar. Are you the one who used to post on there as "Durruti C" a couple of years ago, by any chance?

The apoliticism is strikingly similar.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 12, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> I thought you seemed vaguely familiar. Are you the one who used to post on there as "Durruti C" a couple of years ago, by any chance?
> 
> The apoliticism is strikingly similar.



No but obviously im not alone. You assume a lot dont you. I dont have to explain or justify anything to you.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 12, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> You assume a lot dont you. I dont have to explain or justiy anything to you.





Don't you think that you might be the one who's assuming rather a lot?

When you come on a public board advocating that people involve themselves in violent activity for which they could, in theory, be jailed, then not just me, but the whole of this forum, deserves an 'explanation or justification' for it.

So far you have offered no 'justifications or explanations', either political or otherwise.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 12, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Don't you think that you might be the one who's assuming rather a lot?
> 
> When you come on a public board advocating that people involve themselves in violent activity for which they could, in theory, be jailed, then not just me, but the whole of this forum, deserves an 'explanation or justification' for it.
> 
> So far you have offered no 'justifications or explanations', either political or otherwise.



What am i assuming exactly? Where do i say ppl should involve themselves? I think you'll most forms if direct action carries the risk of arrest and imprisonment these days but it does not deter those ppl who enough.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 12, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> What am i assuming exactly? Where do i say ppl should involve themselves? I think you'll most forms if direct action carries the risk of arrest and imprisonment these days but it does not deter those ppl who enough.




Even if you haven't advocated people get involved in what you say you are doing you came in on this thread on the side of those who have.  

You still haven't said exactly WHY you are prepared to take the risks involved yet.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 12, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Even if you haven't advocated people get involved in what you say you are doing you came in on this thread on the side of those who have.
> 
> You still haven't said exactly WHY you are prepared to take the risks involved yet.



Ffs isn't that obvious?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 13, 2005)

danbreen said:
			
		

> Ffs isn't that obvious?





While there is no evidence that what the likes of Antifa have so far done has had any effect whatsoever on the level of support that the BNP is currently enjoying - which is, after all, the thing that matters most - you have throughout this thread refused to give any political justification for it.  

So no, it isn't at all obvious.


----------



## danbreen (Apr 13, 2005)

As i was taught to say many moons ago.....No comment.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 16, 2005)

layabout said:
			
		

> Somehow I think you're used to being confused, especially if you can't see what the aftermarth of the leader of a political party being burned alive inside his car.
> 
> Fucking idiot.



Apologies for the late response to your inspiring post, I've been offline for a bit.

I think the aftermath to any Nick Griffin-car-fire calamity would be widespread hilarity, akin to the reaction of people seeing Charlie Chaplin slipping on a banana peel in a silent film, or indeed to the reaction to that singer out ot Skrewdriver dying in a car crash.

You might think differently, but as a former BNP member you're among the 00.01% of the population with a history of racial extremism, so I consider your opinion worthless.

Fucking Nazi prick.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

Yossarian said:
			
		

> Apologies for the late response to your inspiring post, I've been offline for a bit.
> 
> I think the aftermath to any Nick Griffin-car-fire calamity would be widespread hilarity, akin to the reaction of people seeing Charlie Chaplin slipping on a banana peel in a silent film, or indeed to the reaction to that singer out ot Skrewdriver dying in a car crash.
> 
> ...



 I think that the effect might be more like the response to the Dutch film maker Van Goth's murder had on people in the Netherlands especially if it could be shown that his death was as a direct result of his anti immigration stance. Don't forget that the BNP leadership are past masters of the sympathy vote and every time we are attacked by the state or media we return even stronger. If Mr Griffin was to suffer death at the hands of left wing agitators or even Islamic/Muslims then there is plenty of people who are ready to step in and carry on where he left off. you may be able kill the man but not the party.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I think that the effect might be more like the response to the Dutch film maker Van Goth's murder had on people in the Netherlands especially if it could be shown that his death was as a direct result of his anti immigration stance. Don't forget that the BNP leadership are past masters of the sympathy vote and every time we are attacked by the state or media we return even stronger. If Mr Griffin was to suffer death at the hands of left wing agitators or even Islamic/Muslims then there is plenty of people who are ready to step in and carry on where he left off. you may be able kill the man but not the party.




Aside from the  over optimistic estimation of Griffins importance and the cod-bravado 





> every time we are attacked by the state or media we return even stronger


,this post does illustrate how the BNP would use (and do use ) the no platform tactic against opponents.

The fact that the BNP simply do not use control of the streets as strategy anymore ( having been out punched by AFA )   and are building a political presence by engaging elements of working class communities against the 'old gang' of Lib-Lab-Tory indifference . This requires a political answer rather than just a punch up.

I always find it interesting that whilst within anti fascism there has been a no platform tactic applied when the fash have tried to muscle the streets that very little attention is focussed on the anti fascists political methods especially against Mosley. In 1976 when I joined IS/ SWP Phil Piratins book 'Our flag stays red' was reccomended reading and I remember one part of the book where the CP through the local tenants union fought a succesful camaopaigh to stop evictions. One of the tenants who were saved from eviction was a BUF activist , but because the tenants union showed who the real enemy was ( the landlords) and by sticking together the working class could win on these issue the BUF had very little political credibility on that estate.

As for Olhammers claims re the supposed longetivity of the BNP I seem to recall that in the last seventy or so years that this is the fourth 'great white hope' of fash party that was always going to last the course, the BUF, The union Movement , the NF  all now distant memories.


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Aside from the  over optimistic estimation of Griffins importance and the cod-bravado ,this post does illustrate how the BNP would use (and do use ) the no platform tactic against opponents.
> 
> The fact that the BNP simply do not use control of the streets as strategy anymore ( having been out punched by AFA )   and are building a political presence by engaging elements of working class communities against the 'old gang' of Lib-Lab-Tory indifference . This requires a political answer rather than just a punch up.
> 
> ...



 I do tend to disagree with your thinking on this one Chuck. Mosley's BUF organisational build up was stopped due to the start of the the second world war and as the evidence of the attrocity's committed by Hitlers Nazi's became public knowledge a lot of people who had previously been in favour of the BUF shunned a movement that was so obviously based on Hitlers regime.

 The union movement I admit I know little or nothing about so am not able to comment on this.

 The National front as I recall were looking promising for some small political success as the 1979 elections approched but were thwarted by Thatcher and the Tories jumping on the immigration bandwaggon and stealing the NFs clothes and in the process causing the party financial difficultys from which they never recovered.

 The BNP on the other hand have already got a foothold in the political door with the fact that they  have standing councillors. And due to a well organised leadership have a very professional approach to fund raising and distribution of their Material via the web site which non of the previously mention groups had at the time.

 Of course history could repeat itself and people may well yet again fall for the Tory lie as  many of todays voters will be to young to remember Thatcher and her lies but I think that the 8000,000 voters that chose the BNP in the european elections will increase and even if they do not get an M.P. this time round I think that it will only be a matter of time.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> The BNP on the other hand have already got a foothold in the political door with the fact that they  have standing councillors. And due to a well organised leadership have a very professional approach to fund raising and distribution of their Material via the web site which non of the previously mention groups had at the time.
> 
> Of course history could repeat itself and people may well yet again fall for the Tory lie as  many of todays voters will be to young to remember Thatcher and her lies but I think that the 8000,000 voters that chose the BNP in the european elections will increase and even if they do not get an M.P. this time round I think that it will only be a matter of time.





Are the BNP councillors standing, as opposed to sitting, because they've only just come through the door having failed to realise that today is the day the council is debating the budget? Doh!

It may or may not be 'only a matter of time' before the BNP has an MP.  Or MPs.  That depends on a lot of factors, not all of which are under the BNP's (or anybody's) control.  However, what would a BNP MP mean in terms of the racial makeup of the country?  What would that MP do apart from draw his salary and donate some of it to the party coffers?  Would he be any more effective as an MP than the BNP representatives have so far been as councillors? Because, let's face it, they've hardly set the political landscape alight.  Have they?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Are the BNP councillors standing, as opposed to sitting, because they've only just come through the door having failed to realise that today is the day the council is debating the budget? Doh!
> 
> It may or may not be 'only a matter of time' before the BNP has an MP.  Or MPs.  That depends on a lot of factors, not all of which are under the BNP's (or anybody's) control.  However, what would a BNP MP mean in terms of the racial makeup of the country?  What would that MP do apart from draw his salary and donate some of it to the party coffers?  Would he be any more effective as an MP than the BNP representatives have so far been as councillors? Because, let's face it, they've hardly set the political landscape alight.  Have they?



 Having in the past spoke to a few of the BNP councillors and asking the very same question that you are now. The collective answer appears to be that whatever the councillors attempt to propose is always voted out by the con/lab/lib members of the council solely due to the fact that it is the BNP who proposed it whether it is a good thing for the town or not does not come in to it. On one occasion in Burnley a couple of years back so I have been told the council informed everyone of a full meeting and then changed the date at the last day or so knowing that the BNP councillors had made other commitments for that day and would be unable to attend.

 As for the benifits of a BNP M.P. it would of course be a great responsability for whoever was voted in and the entire future of Nationalism could rest in their hands so I would have thought that the person, if there was to be only one, would need to be some one who could cope with the constant hostility that they will most certainly encounter while showing to the whole country that the BNP is one day capable of taking office. A lot would depend also on the media portrayal of the person, because as most politically aware people know the media can ruin a political career with a few lines. Not a job I'd have to be honest but no doubt the candidates who have put their names forward will have considered this.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Having in the past spoke to a few of the BNP councillors and asking the very same question that you are now. The collective answer appears to be that whatever the councillors attempt to propose is always voted out by the con/lab/lib members of the council solely due to the fact that it is the BNP who proposed it whether it is a good thing for the town or not does not come in to it. On one occasion in Burnley a couple of years back so I have been told the council informed everyone of a full meeting and then changed the date at the last day or so knowing that the BNP councillors had made other commitments for that day and would be unable to attend.
> 
> As for the benifits of a BNP M.P. it would of course be a great responsability for whoever was voted in and the entire future of Nationalism could rest in their hands so I would have thought that the person, if there was to be only one, would need to be some one who could cope with the constant hostility that they will most certainly encounter while showing to the whole country that the BNP is one day capable of taking office. A lot would depend also on the media portrayal of the person, because as most politically aware people know the media can ruin a political career with a few lines. Not a job I'd have to be honest but no doubt the candidates who have put their names forward will have considered this.





Why do they see the need to provide you with a 'collective answer'?

It all sounds like a very convenient excuse.  What exactly have these councilors been proposing to their respective councils?  What do they do to mobilise and help their constituents? 

I've heard that story about Burnley council changing the date of the meeting (from far right sources only, I might add) and, while I would not put it past them, I've also heard it denied. 

It's a long, long step from simply having an MP elected to 'taking office,' but what exactly do you see an elected BNP government being able to carry out?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Why do they see the need to provide you with a 'collective answer'?
> 
> It all sounds like a very convenient excuse.  What exactly have these councilors been proposing to their respective councils?  What do they do to mobilise and help their constituents?
> 
> ...




 The use of the word collective was misleading,sorry. I mean that I have spoken to different councilllors from different towns at different times and the answer to the question is always the same. the proposals have varied from refuse issues to school meals being prepared using Halal slaughtered meat and then given to non Muslim children, but whatever the issue if it is brought up by the BNP it is shouted down.

 An elected BNP government would of course firstly close the door, a complete immigration/asylum ban. The law would be given back the power to come down hard on terror,murder, rape , pedophillia and all crime in general, to return to a era when people had trust and respect for the police.

 The NHS would be given more money to bring it back up to the standard that people expect a heath service to be and a modernisation program to make it once more the envy of the world.

 The immediate withdrawl of British troops from American instigated wars around the globe, British troops should fight only to protect British intrests

 A significent increase in pensions for the old folk and subsedised heating bills in winter.

 Massive training programs to ensure that school leavers have the oppertunity to serve an apprenticeship in their choosen field also training schemes that give older people skills that are usefull in helping them return to the employment market.

 To begin the long haul of bringing the country out of the european union but in a way that ensures that we still have trading links with them.

 The curtailing of overseas aid untill we are sure that the the people of this country are not doing without. If there is any left after our own people have been looked after then certain selective aid based on need given directly to the needy and not first filtered through some tinpot dictators bank account

 The removal of the practise of promoting homosexuality in schools and more information on  British history.

 The banning of the practise of halal/kosher slaughter, if people want to live the traditional Islamic or jewish way then a generous repatreation package would be made available to help them resettle in a more suitable country. This of course would be on the understanding that they would not be able to return.

 The oppertunity for anyone from a different culture who feels unhappy of uncomfortable living in the country to recive a repatreation package again on the understanding that once out you can't come back.

 The removal of all illegal asylum seekers and illegal immigrants back to the first safe country that they entered.

 Renationalisation of the railways and a complete overhaul of the system. 

 A house building program that will bring back home ownership so it is within the reach of all.

 The banning of any left wing orgi-No forget I said that  

 This of course is my own interpretation and not official BNP policy but I would like to think that wenever they do attain power that these ideas will be taken on board


----------



## mk12 (Apr 16, 2005)

> to return to a era when people had trust and respect for the police.



Fear, you mean.



> if people want to live the traditional Islamic or jewish way then a generous repatreation package would be made available to help them resettle in a more suitable country



Dear oh dear...that's good old Nazism, right there.


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

I once visited the BNP website and thought it was frankly, shite. It looked like a kid's school project but anyway, so I've read some of the stuff on there. I want to comment on this post.





			
				Oldhamer said:
			
		

> > The use of the word collective was misleading,sorry. I mean that I have spoken to different councilllors from different towns at different times and the answer to the question is always the same. the proposals have varied from refuse issues to school meals being prepared using Halal slaughtered meat and then given to non Muslim children, but whatever the issue if it is brought up by the BNP it is shouted down.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> Fear, you mean.
> 
> 
> 
> Dear oh dear...that's good old Nazism, right there.




 Why is it Nazism? If people are not happy living in a western culture then why is it wrong to offer them the oppertunity to a alternative and more suitable way of life?


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> If people are not happy living in a western culture then why is it wrong to offer them the oppertunity to a alternative and more suitable way of life?



Sounds like you might need someone to offer you that precise opportunity!


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> I once visited the BNP website and thought it was frankly, shite. It looked like a kid's school project but anyway, so I've read some of the stuff on there. I want to comment on this post.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> winterinmoscow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Oldhamer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> > The implantmentation of certain aspects would as you say be hard and expensive to put in to practise and as most government inspired plans would be bogged down with to much red tape.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Oldhamer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> winterinmoscow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Oldhamer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> > I believe that it would be the only way if this country continues on it's chosen path of multiculturism.
> 
> 
> Mulitculturalism is not to blame
> ...


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Oldhamer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oh for fuck's sake, probably because a lot of extremely deprived areas are populated by ethnic minorities. Y'know, crime and poverty often go hand in hand?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Oh for fuck's sake, probably because a lot of extremely deprived areas are populated by ethnic minorities. Y'know, crime and poverty often go hand in hand?



 So rape ok then as long as the perpetrator is a deprived ethnic.Maybe the victim should just lie back and feel guilty for being a White middle class girl eh?


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> So rape ok then as long as the perpetrator is a deprived ethnic.Maybe the victim should just lie back and feel guilty for being a White middle class girl eh?



Errr... no, don't remember ever saying that.

I'm not saying crime is right but just look at why some crime happens. You know, think outside the box for once?


----------



## audiotech (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> So rape ok then as long as the perpetrator is a deprived ethnic.Maybe the victim should just lie back and feel guilty for being a White middle class girl eh?



I see you've slyly racialised the issue of rape when it's clear that it's an issue to do with men of all races.



> Who are the rapists?
> 
> Women are most likely to be sexually attacked by men they know in some way, most often partners (32%) or acquaintances (22%). ‘Current partners’ (at the time of the attack) were responsible for 45 per cent of rapes reported to the BCS. ‘Strangers’ were only responsible for 8 per cent of rapes.
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Errr... no, don't remember ever saying that.
> 
> I'm not saying crime is right but just look at why some crime happens. You know, think outside the box for once?



 extremly deprived areas are populated by ethnic minorities?

 Crime and poverty go hand in hand?

 I was brought up poor, I lived in a deprived area populated by ethnics?

 I'm not a criminal


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> extremly deprived areas are populated by ethnic minorities?
> 
> Crime and poverty go hand in hand?
> 
> ...




Whatever, arguing with you is fairly pointless


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> I see you've slyly racialised the issue of rape when it's clear that it's an issue to do with men of all races.



 Rape victims in Oldham (according to the extreme left wing Oldham Chronicle) tend as a rule to be White and the rapist according again to the reports tend to be ASIAN OR DARK SKINNED. Which bit don't you understand?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Whatever, arguing with you is fairly pointless



 Then perhaps we should agree to disagree and stay friends


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Then perhaps we should agree to disagree and stay friends



Are you trying to ask me out on a date or something?  Being civil is fine, don't push me on anything more.


----------



## audiotech (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Rape victims in Oldham (according to the extreme left wing Oldham Chronicle) tend as a rule to be White and the rapist according again to the reports tend to be ASIAN OR DARK SKINNED. Which bit don't you understand?



The 'extreme left wing' bit. Can you back up your assertions with some evidence?

"I'm waiting"


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Are you trying to ask me out on a date or something?  Being civil is fine, don't push me on anything more.



 Sorry, taking to much for granted and going a bit to quick for you am I


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Sorry, taking to much for granted and going a bit to quick for you am I



Fuck right off


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The 'extreme left wing' bit. Can you back up your assertions with some evidence?
> 
> "I'm waiting"



 Don't know how to do the posting of other web addresses actually   Fuckin master race eh? If you log on to oldham chronicle .uk.com you will see the sort of stuff that they normally print. and I now and again drink in the pub that their reporters use so I know how they think but to be honest I don't think there will be a link to that ether unless it,s pissheads .com


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Fuck right off



 Damm! back to the drawing board    Err What sort of music do you like


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Damm! back to the drawing board    Err What sort of music do you like



Well if it doesn't include a chorus of Horst Wessel...


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Well if it doesn't include a chorus of Horst Wessel...



 Is that the one where the chorus is tomorrow we march against England?


----------



## winterinmoscow (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Is that the one where the chorus is tomorrow we march against England?


Perhaps, but I think even you can get where I'm going on this one.

Discussion closed.


----------



## audiotech (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Don't know how to do the posting of other web addresses actually   Fuckin master race eh? If you log on to oldham chronicle .uk.com you will see the sort of stuff that they normally print. and I now and again drink in the pub that their reporters use so I know how they think but to be honest I don't think there will be a link to that ether unless it,s pissheads .com



So, in other words you don't have any evidence.

I found this though any comments?



> Six on hate charges
> 
> by our COURT REPORTER
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Perhaps, but I think even you can get where I'm going on this one.
> 
> Discussion closed.




 Curses! I'm so unlucky in love that I even get blown out computer dating


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 16, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> So, in other words you don't have any evidence.
> 
> I found this though any comments?



Kevin Quinn is the founder of the British Nazi party, also known as NS9. The racial volunteer force is just an internet fantesy. Non are known or wanted by the BNP. But do you see what I mean by extreme they have printed this story regardless of the fact that this group of people have absolutly no link to the BNP whatsoever.


----------



## audiotech (Apr 16, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Kevin Quinn is the founder of the British Nazi party, also known as NS9. The racial volunteer force is just an internet fantesy. Non are known or wanted by the BNP. But do you see what I mean by extreme they have printed this story regardless of the fact that this group of people have absolutly no link to the BNP whatsoever.



The British Nazi Party (BNP) has the same initials.

It has been recorded in the past that some BNP members have held dual membership with other loons on the fringes of the far-right and whose to say that's not the reality for some members today?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 17, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> (according to the extreme left wing Oldham Chronicle)





Do you live in a parallel universe?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 17, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> extremly deprived areas are populated by ethnic minorities?
> 
> Crime and poverty go hand in hand?
> 
> ...





Most people who live in poor areas do not commit crime. But, given the lack of opportunities in poor areas and the feeling of missing out on all the goodies that you are supposed to strive for in our consumer society (and being made to feel like a loser if you haven't amassed enough of them), then it is inevitable that more people who live in them will be drawn into crime than in wealthier areas.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 17, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Kevin Quinn is the founder of the British Nazi party, also known as NS9. The racial volunteer force is just an internet fantesy. Non are known or wanted by the BNP. But do you see what I mean by extreme they have printed this story regardless of the fact that this group of people have absolutly no link to the BNP whatsoever.





Wasn't 'Benny' Hill a member of the BNP in Oldham?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 17, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Don't know how to do the posting of other web addresses actually   Fuckin master race eh? If you log on to oldham chronicle .uk.com you will see the sort of stuff that they normally print. and I now and again drink in the pub that their reporters use so I know how they think but to be honest I don't think there will be a link to that ether unless it,s pissheads .com





Does the pub have the initials R.O. by any chance? Maybe you are that certain person after all....

In Friday's OC there was reported the case of a man charged with a sexual offence against a fifteen year-old youth in the toilets at OAFC (!), no race specified but an English name; the fact that police are looking for a man 'wanted for serious offences' who's gone missing: article accompanied by the photo of a white man; the story of a woman raped in the subway at Mumps, race of the attacker not specified; and the race-hate charges against the far-right activists mentioned in an above post.

All in all a pretty average edition of the Chron.  On another night there would be for sure - as you will know very well -a host of articles detailing the crimes committed by members of the town's Asian population.  So the Oldham Chron, it can be said, neither shies away from reporting these offences nor has a bias towards reporting only those committed by the white population.  The Asian youths who firebombed the OC building during the riots had grievances againt the paper that mirror those of Oldham BNP and its support-base- specifically of only reporting them in a bad light.  

So you've found that most of the paper's reporters don't like you then? Maybe you should learn to accept the fact that those who object to what the BNP stands for are not necessarily 'extreme left-wing'? The lazy habit of calling everything they don't like extreme left, Marxist or politically correct is a trait of the BNP that makes it look as cretinous as it takes the general public and, specifically, the poorer elements of the working class, to be.  As it happens, in the 1980s the left in the town used to say exactly what you say now about being unfairly reported by the OC.  Could this indicate that the long-standing editorial policy of the paper favours the status quo and consistently maligns those who would seek to change it?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 17, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Does the pub have the initials R.O. by any chance? Maybe you are that certain person after all....
> 
> In Friday's OC there was reported the case of a man charged with a sexual offence against a fifteen year-old youth in the toilets at OAFC (!), no race specified but an English name; the fact that police are looking for a man 'wanted for serious offences' who's gone missing: article accompanied by the photo of a white man; the story of a woman raped in the subway at Mumps, race of the attacker not specified; and the race-hate charges against the far-right activists mentioned in an above post.
> 
> ...



 Do you mean the Royal oak? who are you, Zowie or Bob ?


----------



## Oldhamer (Apr 17, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Do you live in a parallel universe?



 No I don,t do you?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 18, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> I do tend to disagree with your thinking on this one Chuck. Mosley's BUF organisational build up was stopped due to the start of the the second world war and as the evidence of the attrocity's committed by Hitlers Nazi's became public knowledge a lot of people who had previously been in favour of the BUF shunned a movement that was so obviously based on Hitlers regime.
> 
> The union movement I admit I know little or nothing about so am not able to comment on this.
> 
> ...




The support for the BUF wavered long before the outbreak of the war despite the organisation being backed by the Daily Mail and having a leader who has far greater political and intellectual capital. Despite the war, the atrocities committed by the Naziz and the internment of its leadership the political organsisation that the BUF built pre war still left Moseley with a cadre to launch the Union Movement. 

You would be wrong to under estimate the potential the NF had in the 70s and early 80s, I worked at an engineering firm where they had a handful of members  and a shop steward. They had a sprinkling of union activists up and down the country, a capable street presence and polled well in some areas. Whilst it is true that Thatcherism stopped the monopoly that the NF thought they had on anti immigation , the NF also faced stiff opposition both politically and physically by sections of the left and anti fascism. Internally politically they couldn't square the circle between working class support and the Tories they attracted.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 18, 2005)

Oldhamer said:
			
		

> Do you mean the Royal oak? who are you, Zowie or Bob ?





Neither.  Been in The Royal Oak only about twice in the last five years.  Don't live anywhere near Oldham.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Apr 19, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> But will this action make some people sympathetic to the BNP, and fear antifa? Surely it should be the other way round?


no cos antifa is a single issue campaign that doesn't intend or pretend to be a political movement/ideology/answer whereas the BNP do. Any shit caused by antifa, however badly organised it is, reflects badly on the attempts to become a legitimate 'respectable' party. 

Its a cheap tactic. However it also is effective and utterly neccessary and takes (i would assume) serious courage.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Apr 19, 2005)

oh page 43 eh?  

class. what a load of toss


----------



## charlie mowbray (Apr 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> I don't find it depressing at all.  On the contrary, it can be hilarious.  I recommend the occasional visit to all those who talk about the BNP as some kind of Nazi machine with the potential to set up the Fourth Reich and all that.  When you consider the hard core that post there, it is difficult to be all that intimidated by such a bunch of witless, clueless and deluded tosspots.
> 
> And spotting the spooks and provocateurs can be entertaining too.


Didn't you imply that I was one of those once?


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 27, 2005)

charlie mowbray said:
			
		

> Didn't you imply that I was one of those once?





Doubt it.  When?


----------



## charlie mowbray (Apr 27, 2005)

You accused me of posting on the RA board as a fash. You've now done the same thing with Dan Breen. You seem to be somewhat paranoid.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 27, 2005)

charlie mowbray said:
			
		

> You accused me of posting on the RA board as a fash. You've now done the same thing with Dan Breen. You seem to be somewhat paranoid.





In what way is what you've quoted from me in the previous post directed at Dan Breen?  It was actually referring to Stormfront, as you would be able to recognise if you took the trouble to read the thread properly.  I have no idea if DB-or anybody else on this forum-posts on there using different names or not. Some who are not really far right obviously do.  It was to this that I was alluding.

I remember saying that to you now.  It was when you seemed to be sharing the tendancy of some of the far right, or those purporting to be far right, on the RA board to claim that anybody who says anything articulate or 'clever' must be some kind of academic or teacher type; whatever, there was no way, in their eyes, that you could be working class.  

You might have failed to recognise that you were not the only one I was trying to wind up in that thread. In other words I didn't REALLY think you were one of 'em. Bit of a long time ago though, wasn't it? Do you remember every little slight for ever more?  A bit like Stalin? 

Please don't have me shot when the Glorious Day comes.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 27, 2005)

Or banned from the enrager boards.


----------



## charlie mowbray (Apr 27, 2005)

You seem to be doing the amalgam tactics here, don't you, like dear old Uncle Joe. I like the way you put people down by referring to "clumsily phrased sentences" by the way. Isn't that the other side of the coin of what you were stupidly accusing me of?
You are really not that important to me to think about having you shot. You're too impressed by your own self-importance.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 27, 2005)

or chased out of cheadle hulme?


----------



## charlie mowbray (Apr 27, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Or banned from the enrager boards.


And why don't you shut the fuck up about Swarthy Thug? You're getting really boring.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 27, 2005)

charlie mowbray said:
			
		

> You seem to be doing the amalgam tactics here, don't you, like dear old Uncle Joe. I like the way you put people down by referring to "clumsily phrased sentences" by the way. Isn't that the other side of the coin of what you were stupidly accusing me of?
> You are really not that important to me to think about having you shot. You're too impressed by your own self-importance.





Actually matie, I don't think anybody could fairly accuse me of being one of those on here who takes himself over-seriously.  What are you on about now with 'clumsily phrased sentences?'  How long ago am I supposed to have written that? 

Jesus Christ, it's an internet forum.  That's all.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 27, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> or chased out of cheadle hulme?



I try and steer clear of Cheadle Hulme as a group of anarcho-syndicalists have seized the jukebox in the lounge of the Kennilworth and control large sections of the cocktail section of the Beluga Bar in Bramhall.

You are warm but only luke warm.Actually I am just off to Burnage to pick up my son to watch the match in Weavers in Cheadle, an anarchist free zone.


----------



## charlie mowbray (Apr 27, 2005)

You used that further up this thread, to Dan Breen. And it wasn't that long ago, chummy.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 27, 2005)

charlie mowbray said:
			
		

> And why don't you shut the fuck up about Swarthy Thug? You're getting really boring.





Seems like MC5 isn't the only one on here who gives himself away when his piles are giving him gyp....


----------



## charlie mowbray (Apr 27, 2005)

Better to be a piles sufferer than someone with chronic indigestion as a result of overproduction of bile.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 27, 2005)

charlie mowbray said:
			
		

> You used that further up this thread, to Dan Breen. And it wasn't that long ago, chummy.





It was pretty much a dead thread until you breathed new life into it a few minutes ago Charlie. 

As for me, I can't even remember most of what I said at work this morning let alone every one of my pronouncements on here.


----------



## montevideo (Apr 27, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> I try and steer clear of Cheadle Hulme as a group of anarcho-syndicalists have seized the jukebox in the lounge of the Kennilworth and control large sections of the cocktail section of the Beluga Bar in Bramhall.
> 
> You are warm but only luke warm.Actually I am just off to Burnage to pick up my son to watch the match in Weavers in Cheadle, an anarchist free zone.



no need to be coy mate, those rough estates, those mean streets, you'd be right at home in cheadle. Detached is it?


----------



## audiotech (Apr 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Seems like MC5 isn't the only one on here who gives himself away when his piles are giving him gyp....



No farmer gile's last time I looked.   Checked your arse lately? Could be something firmly stuck up there.


----------



## LLETSA (Apr 27, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> No farmer gile's last time I looked.   Checked your arse lately? Could be something firmly stuck up there.





Never been the same since I arrived early one morning at Belgrade railway station and couldn't understand the sign outside the bogs.  Correct translation: Wash and Brush Up....


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 27, 2005)

charlie mowbray said:
			
		

> And why don't you shut the fuck up about Swarthy Thug? You're getting really boring.



Come on Chas where did I mention Mr lustbather? As far as I know he is still on there unlike brother erno who was shown the door in  a way that  those anarchists who actually fought in the Spainsh Civil war would have turned in their grave to.

Do you post on enrager Chas or is it that you just support the right of people to post? 

I have seen a nasty authoritarian side of anarchism on this site , which I and others feel that you are often behind .What lies beneath Chas?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Apr 27, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> no need to be coy mate, those rough estates, those mean streets, you'd be right at home in cheadle. Detached is it?



I would be indeed Monty but as you know SK8 is so expensive and not all the  anarchists there are selling up to buy student houses out to let in Fallowfield and Burnage. God knows where it will end  but I do understand that they are fed up with the cost of cleaners and gardeners whilst they are out educating the masses.

How about Adswood?


----------



## charlie mowbray (Apr 28, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Come on Chas where did I mention Mr lustbather? As far as I know he is still on there unlike brother erno who was shown the door in  a way that  those anarchists who actually fought in the Spainsh Civil war would have turned in their grave to.
> 
> Do you post on enrager Chas or is it that you just support the right of people to post?
> 
> I have seen a nasty authoritarian side of anarchism on this site , which I and others feel that you are often behind .What lies beneath Chas?


1.I have never posted on Enrager )(or the RA board or Stormfront etc etc etc) Are you taking a paranoid leaf out of LLETSA's book?
2. What I'm behind a "nasty authoritarian side of anarchism" ?
What am I, some sort of anarchist Doctor Fu Manchu ( note to myself- must start growing that beard)
3. Come on Chucky, you can't have it both ways. You have a go at the liberals who pass themselves off as anarchists. And now you're saying the real anarchists are authoritarian.
Swarthy Thug said some interesting things from time to time. But most of the time he was here he was acting the goat. He had plenty of warnings from the Ed. and now he's gawn. So why keep on droning on about it. Don't get Ernestoitis ( repetitive use of same old boring lines meant to be wisecracks)


----------

