# BNP national demo in Keighley



## belboid (Sep 26, 2005)

on november 5th, under the title “ARREST RACIST CHILD RAPISTS”  (the caps are there's!), & in conjunction with Mothers Against Paediphiles apparently (are they a front group for the bnp?) complaining about the disbandment of an police unit set up to " investigat[e] the sexual abuse of hundreds of young white girls by gangs of Muslim men in West and South Yorkshire"  Couldn't possibly have been disbanded cos they found no evidence for it, could it?

Sounds like it could be a fun day out for those West Yorks anti-fascists that get mentioned round here every noe and then.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 26, 2005)

I'd not heard this.

Bit of a shift for the BNP. Back to marches and street politics? There are great dangers for them. The danger that their membership base is largely passive and won't show. The danger that members of other organisations will show  to suport; perhaps waving swastikas and sieg heiling. The danger that they will get a thrashing. The danger that a return to street politics (and resulting street violence) will scare off many of their recent recruits.

(If I were the BNP I wouldn't choose to march on 5 Nov. All those legitimately purchased explosives on the streets.)


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Sep 26, 2005)

what a turnaround. Wonder what will happen?


----------



## belboid (Sep 26, 2005)

provocative demo, called with a 'respectable' (??) partner - I _imagine_ that they hope that some local asians kick off and cause a ruck that they can exploit 'muslims and PC lefties protect paedos' type bollocks.

The story is linked from the frontpage of the bnp website.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> what a turnaround. Wonder what will happen?


probably nothing. i'd be somewhat surprised if they turned out, and i would expect there to be a turnout the size of the recent nf chatham mobilisation if they do.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 26, 2005)

This has got 'just another publicity stunt' written all over it. 

Probably hoping that Blair's 'politically correct Marxist police state,' will ban it.


----------



## blamblam (Sep 26, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Probably hoping that Blair's 'politically correct Marxist police state,' will ban it.


Hmmm or maybe that Muslim kids + lefties attack it, showing them to be anti-white nonce-supporters?

Hmmm could be interesting.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 26, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Hmmm or maybe that Muslim kids + lefties attack it, *showing them to be anti-white nonce-supporters?*
> Hmmm could be interesting.



My emphasis in bold on your post above.

I assume that this is just poor wording on your part and that you meant to say that the BNP will attribute such motivation being the lying slime that they are??


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Sep 26, 2005)

no icepick actually thinks lefties and muslims are towel headed kiddy fiddlers.


----------



## Oxpecker (Sep 26, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> no icepick actually thinks lefties and muslims are towel headed kiddy fiddlers.



 blimey, and I thought icepick was ok


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Sep 26, 2005)

Blimey! Has anyone given cockers/red hippy/workers power member/solidarnosc a bell so that they can assemble the Workers Defence Squad? I'd better get hold of the verger so they can practice at the Church Hall.


----------



## kropotkin (Sep 26, 2005)

Oxpecker said:
			
		

> blimey, and I thought icepick was ok


 sarcamacasm mate


----------



## oisleep (Sep 26, 2005)

perhaps he who can not be mentioned could welcome them in?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Sep 26, 2005)

oisleep said:
			
		

> perhaps he who can not be mentioned could welcome them in?



There seems to be a growing list of they that cannot be mentioned.Is it me or has their been a bit of a cull on here recently ?


----------



## rebel warrior (Sep 27, 2005)

I think that what is going on here is a publicity seeking stunt by the Nazis.  They waited until UAF called a national conference against the BNP in London on 5th November - see www.uaf.org.uk - and then thought - aha - while the leadership of the national anti-fascist movement are all busy down in London lets call a 'march' in Keighley.  

I think this is another example of how 'clever' at strategy and tactics the BNP leadership are.  Not.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Sep 27, 2005)

dream on.They don't give a fuck what you do i reckon.


----------



## BAKU9 (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> They waited until UAF called a national conference against the BNP in London on 5th November - see www.uaf.org.uk - and then thought - aha - while the leadership of the national anti-fascist movement are all busy down in London lets call a 'march' in Keighley.



A-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!  

You keep coming up with the goods don't you webel!

What a melon!


----------



## knopf (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> I think that what is going on here is a publicity seeking stunt by the Nazis.  They waited until UAF called a national conference against the BNP in London on 5th November - see www.uaf.org.uk - and then thought - aha - while the leadership of the national anti-fascist movement are all busy down in London lets call a 'march' in Keighley.



Assuming, of course, that the BNP have as inflated an opinion of the effectiveness of UAF as..... er....... UAF.


----------



## red_hippy (Sep 27, 2005)

I don't reckon that the fash are too bothered by UAF, but it does seem somewhat of a coincidence that they have called the demo on the same day as the UAF conference. Previously to this the BNP in West Yorkshire had been making a big thing of Griffin and Collet's court date three days earlier on Nov 2nd, and saying that they wanted a big turn out for a protest outside the court.

Aside of whether the BNP purposefully called the march on the same day as the UAF conference, I think its fucking stupid for UAF to push on with holding another pointless conference on vote saving when the BNP are holding what they've said they want to be the biggest demonstration for years.

Contrary to what Pickmans said about expecting a low turnout, I reckon there's likely to be a worringly large turnout. The last time Griffin was in court in Leeds, on a weekday, there was around a hundred/hundred and fifty of them there, plus another sixty odd from the nationalist alliance. This campaign that they've been running in Keighley managed to get them alot of support around the election, and this demo is being held just after Griffin will have been dealt with by the court...  I think its likely that alot of people will turn out for it.


----------



## james_walsh (Sep 27, 2005)

BAKU9 said:
			
		

> A-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!
> 
> You keep coming up with the goods don't you webel!
> 
> What a melon!



Rw is a funny guy.
Perhas its because its a saterday and 400 years since some mad religious nut bombers got beaten. or (i admit less likely)they heard Class War where haveing a bonfire night in london.


----------



## The Black Hand (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> This has got 'just another publicity stunt' written all over it.
> 
> Probably hoping that Blair's 'politically correct Marxist police state,' will ban it.



well you would say that wouldn't you? Given that your entire political approach is based on them NOT returning to a 'march and grow' strategy. Kinda fuks you up don't it?


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> I think that what is going on here is a publicity seeking stunt by the Nazis.  They waited until UAF called a national conference against the BNP in London on 5th November - see www.uaf.org.uk - and then thought - aha - while the leadership of the national anti-fascist movement are all busy down in London lets call a 'march' in Keighley.
> 
> I think this is another example of how 'clever' at strategy and tactics the BNP leadership are.  Not.



1) The BNP are fascist, not  Nazi: it is the SWPs stupid refusal to realise this distinction that guarantees failure.

2) If the UAF are really the "leadership" of the national anti-fascist movement, anti-fascism is in more dire state than I thought...

3) Now the UAF hasn't got the Searchlight 'team' whispering sweet nothings into their ear, the grasp of the BNP from the UAF is going to be fascinating (for humorous reasons).


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Sep 27, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> on november 5th, under the title “ARREST RACIST CHILD RAPISTS”  (the caps are there's!), & in conjunction with Mothers Against Paediphiles apparently (are they a front group for the bnp?) complaining about the disbandment of an police unit set up to " investigat[e] the sexual abuse of hundreds of young white girls by gangs of Muslim men in West and South Yorkshire"  Couldn't possibly have been disbanded cos they found no evidence for it, could it?
> .



1) Mothers Against Paedophilia is a BNP front group

2) On the other hand, as illustrated by the Anna Hall C4 'Edge of the City' documentary (shown 26/8/04) there is a genuine abuse issue in the area--while the Metropolitan/PC Left deny it, this only vacates political space for the BNP to move into.  That _Searchlight_ have admitted this (after I did   ) does not make it any the less true.  Those people in Keighley/Bradford who have voted BNP did not do so because they fancy Griffin as the new Goebbels (or Nick Cass as Heydrich) but because serious political concerns have not been addressed by New Labour, whose essential message for the white working class is 'fuck off & die' (soon).


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

*March and shrink*




			
				Attica said:
			
		

> well you would say that wouldn't you? Given that your entire political approach is based on them NOT returning to a 'march and grow' strategy. Kinda fuks you up don't it?




Well, we shall see.  If they do return to it, it means that the period of their breakthrough into the mainstream is coming to an end.

Meanwhile, your 'entire political approach' is based on what exactly?


----------



## flimsier (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> If they do return to it, it means that the period of their breakthrough into the mainstream is coming to an end.



Why?


----------



## The Black Hand (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Well, we shall see.  If they do return to it, it means that the period of their breakthrough into the mainstream is coming to an end.
> 
> Meanwhile, your 'entire political approach' is based on what exactly?



There is another reading of events. Perhaps during their previous 'march and grow' period they never actually stood any chance of growing given the Tory power structure, so there weren't going to be any receptive communities. Perhaps this has changed with their choice of march location, building on the 4200 votes they got in the general election? We shall see... 

Your abc formula anti fascism is quite mechanistic...


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

Attica said:
			
		

> Your abc formula anti fascism is quite mechanistic...





Whereas your xyz formula anti-fascism is quite prosaic.

You never mentioned what your 'entire political approach' is when it's at home.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Why?





Because.


----------



## flimsier (Sep 27, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Why?



While you are online Lletsa, this is a genuine question. I'd like to know why you think that such a scenario would mean the end of their breakthrough into the mainstream?


----------



## flimsier (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Because.



Thanks for that. Are you trying to discuss politics or have you no answer.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Thanks for that. Are you trying to discuss politics or have you no answer.





'S all right.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> While you are online Lletsa, this is a genuine question. I'd like to know why you think that such a scenario would mean the end of their breakthrough into the mainstream?





Seriously, I have to go off-line now.  Back later.


----------



## flimsier (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> 'S all right.



So you act like a know-it-all, then when questioned you don't explain.

You're worse than rebel warrior.


----------



## flimsier (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Seriously, I have to go off-line now.  Back later.



OK, let you off, and take it back.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> OK, let you off, and take it back.





Ta.

Meanwhile, there's nowt to stop you saying what you think.


----------



## flimsier (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Meanwhile, there's nowt to stop you saying what you think.



Well I pretty much think that wherever they raise their heads we should stop them and expose them for what they are.

But we've had that conversation. I'm actually interested in knowing why you think a turn to the street would indicate their time on the rise is at an end. If that's the same as what you were saying.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 27, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> But we've had that conversation. I'm actually interested in knowing why you think a turn to the street would indicate their time on the rise is at an end.



I presume his line of argument is that it is their abandonment of attempts to "control the streets", fistfights with anti-fascists, bootboys on marches etc in favour of a community based parish-pump racism that has enabled them to achieve the limited success they have so far had.


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> I presume his line of argument is that it is their abandonment of attempts to "control the streets", fistfights with anti-fascists, bootboys on marches etc in favour of a community based parish-pump racism that has enabled them to achieve the limited success they have so far had.



Which is a fairly incontravertible statement of fact.


----------



## flimsier (Sep 27, 2005)

but which doesn't necessarily lead to the conclusion Lletsa is pushing. 

I'll be seriously disappointed if that is his level of analysis.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Sep 27, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> but which doesn't necessarily lead to the conclusion Lletsa is pushing.
> 
> I'll be seriously disappointed if that is his level of analysis.


why?

(and don't say 'because' )


----------



## Groucho (Sep 27, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> I presume his line of argument is that it is their abandonment of attempts to "control the streets", fistfights with anti-fascists, bootboys on marches etc in favour of a community based parish-pump racism that has enabled them to achieve the limited success they have so far had.



I think there is something in that. However, the aim of Fascists (and Nazis) will always be to be more than just electorally competent (not that they have been all that) but also to control the streets. I don't really think they are yet ready to take a turn to the streets, I suspect this is just a posture and that they are expecting a ban. But there will always be an aim to turn to street politics at some point.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

Groucho said:
			
		

> I think there is something in that. However, the aim of Fascists (and Nazis) will always be to be more than just electorally competent (not that they have been all that) but also to control the streets. I don't really think they are yet ready to take a turn to the streets, I suspect this is just a posture and that they are expecting a ban. But there will always be an aim to turn to street politics at some point.


 Says who? We're not in a re-run of the 20s and 30s (at _any_ speed).


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

Groucho said:
			
		

> I think there is something in that. However, the aim of Fascists (and Nazis) will always be to be more than just electorally competent (not that they have been all that) but also to control the streets. I don't really think they are yet ready to take a turn to the streets, I suspect this is just a posture and that they are expecting a ban. But there will always be an aim to turn to street politics at some point.



Why? Is there something about the fascist character that hankers after marches and banners?

Europe's most successfull proponents of the far right in Austria and Italy don't go anywhere near the streets, they've realised the electoral road is serving them much better.

As Butchers says, the analysis of some on the left re: fascism hasn't moved with the times; much like their view of how they hope to take power.


----------



## mk12 (Sep 27, 2005)

Building a left alternative to counter fascism. What's wrong with that policy?


----------



## Random (Sep 27, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> Building a left alternative to counter fascism. What's wrong with that policy?



How does forming an anti-fascist organisation with various right wingers do that?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

Random said:
			
		

> How does forming an anti-fascist organisation with various right wingers do that?


 We must protect capitalist democracy against these facist monsters!

Or alternatively fostering the conditions in which the far right is currently flourishing by encouraging people to 'vote anyone but the BNP' - an effective call to vote for the status quo and for those who've brought about the current situation.


----------



## rebel warrior (Sep 27, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> We must protect capitalist democracy against these facist monsters!
> 
> Or alternatively fostering the conditions in which the far right is currently flourishing by encouraging people to 'vote anyone but the BNP' - an effective call to vote for the status quo and for those who've brought about the current situation.



Yeah. forward to the Third Period eh butchers?

Smash 'capitalist democracy'!  Expose social fascism!  Revolution now!  After Griffin, our turn!


----------



## mk12 (Sep 27, 2005)

Building a left alternative to counter fascism. What's wrong with that policy?


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> Building a left alternative to counter fascism. What's wrong with that policy?



I was taking issue with Groucho's fairly bizarre claim that fascists will always hanker after a return to the streets, when the more intelligent among them will see very clearly there is a more profitable route.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> Yeah. forward to the Third Period eh butchers?
> 
> Smash 'capitalist democracy'!  Expose social fascism!  Revolution now!  After Griffin, our turn!


 Back to the Popular Front eh RW? Let's ally ourselves with the capitalists, the small middle class parties and elements of the state. Oh look, the UAF is already there. 

And could you please, please try and make some posts analysing the far right that don't rely on an approach developed specifically for the 1930s and vey different conditions.


----------



## mk12 (Sep 27, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> I was taking issue with Groucho's fairly bizarre claim that fascists will always hanker after a return to the streets, when the more intelligent among them will see very clearly there is a more profitable route.



Ok.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> Building a left alternative to counter fascism. What's wrong with that policy?


 It's a pretty bland and meaninglessly vague platitude that serves to justify itself in an almost tautological manner - as if by describing what you think you're doing (and i cannot see at all how the UAF could ever fit that description) makes it the case in reality. There's not much else to it.


----------



## mk12 (Sep 27, 2005)

I wasn't specifically referring to the UAF. I thought that Hibee had a problem with the idea of building a strong left to counter the potential dangers of fascism. He'd claim the IWCA is doing just that, as you would for the A-Fed etc etc...

edit: tautological: "Needless repetition of the same sense in different words; redundancy"   dictionary.com is good.


----------



## rebel warrior (Sep 27, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Back to the Popular Front eh RW? Let's ally ourselves with the capitalists, the small middle class parties and elements of the state. Oh look, the UAF is already there.



Which capitalists, which small middle class parties and which elements of the state are in UAF?  



> And could you please, please try and make some posts analysing the far right that don't rely on an approach developed specifically for the 1930s and vey different conditions.



So the BNP are never ever now going to return to marches and street fighting with the left?  Is that what you are saying?


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> So the BNP are never ever now going to return to marches and street fighting with the left?  Is that what you are saying?



I don't think he is. Only that likewise they are not destined to do so. Indeed are doing very well by staying off the streets and engaging with the people in a way the traditional left do not.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> Which capitalists, which small middle class parties and which elements of the state are in UAF?



Is this a joke? Here's a clue - and god knows you need one.



> So the BNP are never ever now going to return to marches and street fighting with the left?  Is that what you are saying?



I'm saying that the chances of them following the exact same path as the NSDAP and under the same social conditions could more than justifiably be discounted as minimal and therefore basing a long term strategy around an expectation of them repeating that historical process is likely to prove not only pointless but counter-productive and possibly harmful. The far right are not genetically wired to endlessly repeat past approaches. (That appears  not to be the case with much of the left though).


----------



## Groucho (Sep 27, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> I was taking issue with Groucho's fairly bizarre claim that fascists will always hanker after a return to the streets, when the more intelligent among them will see very clearly there is a more profitable route.



The electoral strategy is only part of their agenda. The far more electorally succesful far right parties in Europe also seek to harden up a street fighting element when the time is right. Much division in their ranks stems from arguing over when the time is right. Why is this a feature of Fascist politics?

What is their aim? It is not to be a right-wing anti-immigration Tory party in Government, though that is the surface impression their electoral turn gives. Their aim is to create a racially exclusive country with an authoritarian regime able to eliminate the opposition. This is why they HOPE for a 1930s style crisis. They ultimately need sections of the ruling class to turn to them in desperation. In the meantime they wish to build a 'resctable' racist party with a hardened fascist core. 

The likes of Griffin believe that in times such as these they need to make steady progress electorally but this fails to keep many of their members satisfied (not just the Nazi fanatics and thugs who Griffin would rather be rid of). The BNP say cearly that they are a revolutionary party. They use military terms for their local organisation - 'Units.' They (both Griffin and the more impatient members) seek ultimately to build a movement thast can control the streets not just the council chambers. So far they have not come close to either.

Violence is always barely hidden beneeth the surface of these organisations. Wherever they build a presence racist attacks increase. 

However, the 'respectable' turn to electoral politics and the (temporary) dropping of some key policies do require a different strategy than during their street marching, flag waving street violent periods.


----------



## rebel warrior (Sep 27, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> I don't think he is. Only that likewise they are not destined to do so. Indeed are doing very well by staying off the streets and engaging with the people in a way the traditional left do not.



But they know they can never get into power that way - fascists will never win a majority of votes in any country - even more after the experience of the horrors of Nazi Germany.  They can pick up some votes now - but for real power they have to try to build a street fighting force.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Sep 27, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> I don't think he is. Only that likewise they are not destined to do so. Indeed are doing very well by staying off the streets and engaging with the people in a way the traditional left do not.



Agreed.  The fact is

1) The BNP have grown by a mixture of adroit propaganda, slick organisation, tactical opportunism & street politics a la traditional Liberals, therefore they have neither the cadre nor the membership who are used to such a traditional strategy.

2) They have intermittently engaged in street demos: outside courts, Finsbury Park Mosque etc, but these are the exception rather than the rule.

3) Were the BNP to continue massively growing, at some point a street presence/arm might be re-introduced, but it is not within their strategic arsenal as currently constituted, other than a low-level security/stewarding structure headed up by Warren Bennett.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> But they know they can never get into power that way - fascists will never win a majority of votes in any country - even more after the experience of the horrors of Nazi Germany.  They can pick up some votes now - but for real power they have to try to build a street fighting force.


 Which two western european countries have fascists been in central govt (in coalitions) in since WW2 and how did they get there?

(Excluding Spain and Portugal).


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> But they know they can never get into power that way - fascists will never win a majority of votes in any country - even more after the experience of the horrors of Nazi Germany.  They can pick up some votes now - but for real power they have to try to build a street fighting force.



1) Fascists never won a majority of votes even in Nazi Germany FFS!

2) AS for all this hankering back to 1930s as a sole point of reference, to paraphrase Marx, if the German Left failure then was tragedy, the SWP/UAF strategy now is the ultimate farce.

3) Not even a logical farce--for if the UAF really believe the BNP are going to build a gang of street thugs a la SA *by necessity*, and the existing state will not sufficiently resist that, are the UAF in street-fighting mode (a la traditional AFA for example?).  No!  Please retreat back behind police lines & wave your yellow lollipops why don't you...


----------



## rebel warrior (Sep 27, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Which two western european countries have fascists been in central govt (in coalitions) in since WW2 and how did they get there?
> 
> (Excluding Spain and Portugal).



Exactly - they have not got real power though - their own govt - which is what I said.  They cannot do it by picking up votes alone - and they know it.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> But they know they can never get into power that way - fascists will never win a majority of votes in any country - even more after the experience of the horrors of Nazi Germany.  They can pick up some votes now - but for real power they have to try to build a street fighting force.


 Does that analysis hold for the left as well then? For RESPECT or the SWP? If not, why not?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> Exactly - they have not got real power though - their own govt - which is what I said.  They cannot do it by picking up votes alone - and they know it.


 What?


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

Groucho said:
			
		

> The electoral strategy is only part of their agenda. The far more electorally succesful far right parties in Europe also seek to harden up a street fighting element when the time is right. Much division in their ranks stems from arguing over when the time is right. Why is this a feature of Fascist politics?
> 
> What is their aim? It is not to be a right-wing anti-immigration Tory party in Government, though that is the surface impression their electoral turn gives. Their aim is to create a racially exclusive country with an authoritarian regime able to eliminate the opposition. This is why they HOPE for a 1930s style crisis. They ultimately need sections of the ruling class to turn to them in desperation. In the meantime they wish to build a 'resctable' racist party with a hardened fascist core.
> 
> ...



Yet again you have to fall back on the 1930s because your conception of fascism has not moved on since then. If a "crisis" comes it will be substantially different to that decade, as indeed have several "crises" since then.

Any semi-sensible fascist will contrast the fortunes of the electoral BNP with the street-based NF, BPP etc. It won't take them into "power", I agree - but what does "power" mean for them? The brighter elements among them realise there is no way they are going to ever achieve their stated ambitions. They can, however, by the electoral route achieve some quite cuchy numbers for themselves. The Italian National Alliance, safely in coalition, have realised this very well.

The "nazi fanatics and thugs" are not the real threat becuase they have hived themselves off into irrelevant organisations which can in any case be kicked off the streets. Trots like yourself completely fail to accept the reality that times have changed and so has the nature of fascism. Your analysis completely ignores the rise of "euro-nationalism", which is a road this country has a lot further to travel down before it reaches the level of France, Holland, Austria, Italy etc. The BNP leadership know this and are biding their time.

None of this is to say that the BNP are not a threat. But the biggest danger they pose is not that they will somehow try to enact a final solution any time soon. They could, however, fill the vacuum for radical politics where the left fails to engange with rather than talk down to the working class.


----------



## oisleep (Sep 27, 2005)

thank fuck for people like hibee and butchers existence on these boards (sorry and larry to), i'd never learn anything if i was subjected to this patent nonsense from rebel and co  all the time


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

Ta my Mogwai-referencing friend, although to be honest it's a case that's been made far more eloquently on these boards by people other than me.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> but which doesn't necessarily lead to the conclusion Lletsa is pushing.
> 
> I'll be seriously disappointed if that is his level of analysis.





Flimsier, when your own 'level of analysis' so far amounts to this:




			
				flimsier said:
			
		

> Well I pretty much think that wherever they raise their heads we should stop them and expose them for what they are.
> 
> But we've had that conversation. I'm actually interested in knowing why you think a turn to the street would indicate their time on the rise is at an end. If that's the same as what you were saying.



then your disappointment could be said to be a little unjustified, I feel.

But there you go.  

As it happens, much of what I would have said has already been covered in some excellent posts by L o' H, Butchersapron and Hibee.  But keep tuned in for the next exciting episode, as I'm sure I'll find somewhere to chip in with my two pen'orth.


----------



## grogwilton (Sep 27, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> What?



its quite simple, rebel warrior said that the BNP would not be able to get enough votes and govern outright. you gave the example of fascists being in government, but only when they were in coalition. so you were supporting rather then undermining his point.  

although i disagree with rebels analysis that the BNP will at some point have to have street armies, if the situation was right certain elements in britain im thinking the mail, and a whole load of business men who currently support ukip would go over to the BNP. then i can see the BNP getting into government and they wont need a street army, the plod'll do that for them, and lets face it a lot of filth would probably relish the opportunity. remember hitler destroyed the SA in the night of the long knives, most of the rounding up etc was done by the states muscle.

hibee is right


----------



## oisleep (Sep 27, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Ta my Mogwai-referencing friend, although to be honest it's a case that's been made far more eloquently on these boards by people other than me.



perhaps so, you shining example of the east stand's finest, but at least it's one that i can understand and make use of


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

grogwilton said:
			
		

> its quite simple, rebel warrior said that the BNP would not be able to get enough votes and govern outright. you gave the example of fascists being in government, but only when they were in coalition. so you were supporting rather then undermining his point.
> 
> although i disagree with rebels analysis that the BNP will at some point have to have street armies, if the situation was right certain elements in britain im thinking the mail, and a whole load of business men who currently support ukip would go over to the BNP. then i can see the BNP getting into government and they wont need a street army, the plod'll do that for them. remember hitler destroyed the SA in the night of the long knives, most of the rounding up etc was done by the states muscle.



Again, this is real 1930s stuff. The businessmen who support Ukip are marginal. Look at the mainstream of capital, ie the CBI - they do not want withdrawal from the EU and they actually argue for immigration.

The razor in their hands is not the BNP but new labour.

The BNP will look to the continent and realise that, sicne it will be impossible for them both to win majority support and put their stated aims into practice, their best case scenario would be control of councils, a number of MPs and perhaps even a coalition. Office without power, because "power" won't be any use to them.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

grogwilton said:
			
		

> its quite simple, rebel warrior said that the BNP would not be able to get enough votes and govern outright. you gave the example of fascists being in government, but only when they were in coalition. so you were supporting rather then undermining his point.



No, it's quite hopelessly confused. Look at this:

"Exactly - they have not got real power though - their own govt - which is what I said.They cannot do it by picking up votes alone - and they know it."

Aside from the fact that power that comes via a coalition with other parties is still power (and can and does mean real power in situations of federalism and local decentralisation) nonetheless  - which in fact actively supports my argument and pulls the rug out from under his - this doesn't appear to say anything that even approches what you claim that it does. It doesn't explain who or what the series of vague and free floating they/their refer to or what 'it' is they can or cannot do - it doesn't say what 'excactly' refers to, or how real power is defined. All you've actually done is repeat his previous post on this question.


----------



## mk12 (Sep 27, 2005)

Come on butchers. You know Rebel meant that fascists throughout history (Spain, Italy, Germany) were _not_ elected by the majority, but gained power through other means.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

Groucho said:
			
		

> Violence is always barely hidden beneeth the surface of these organisations. Wherever they build a presence racist attacks increase.





Why is no staistical evidence ever offered for this claim?  I'm not necessarily saying that it is not the case, but the way it gets trotted out as a matter of course by UAF types isn't particularly helpful.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that, in recent years, in many places where racial tension has a presence, BNP support increases?


----------



## grogwilton (Sep 27, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Again, this is real 1930s stuff. The businessmen who support Ukip are marginal. Look at the mainstream of capital, ie the CBI - they do not want withdrawal from the EU and they actually argue for immigration.
> 
> The razor in their hands is not the BNP but new labour.
> 
> The BNP will look to the continent and realise that, sicne it will be impossible for them both to win majority support and put their stated aims into practice, their best case scenario would be control of councils, a number of MPs and perhaps even a coalition. Office without power, because "power" won't be any use to them.



well then what is the threat? if they cant have power they cant use the arms of the state. im pretty sure the streets could be kept safe from the boot boys as you correctly see thay have minimal support. if the allt the fascists would have is a few councils, mps but no street army, wheres the threat? those positions hold no real power. no power-no threat surely?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> Come on butchers. You know Rebel meant that fascists throughout history (Spain, Italy, Germany) were _not_ elected by the majority, but gained power through other means.



Do you think that's maybe why i presented the case of Austria and Italy where fascist parties have sine WW2 entered the national governments via the electoral path? Maybe  in order to point out that set in stone approach such as adopted by RW inevitably leads to contemporary developments not only being ignored but actively dismissed as being of no importance?


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

On the subject of being razor in the hands of the bosses, which I realise is a slight derail, it's worth making the point that 30 years ago at a time of greater "crisis" than we have had since capital chose not to throw its lot in with the NF. This despite all sorts of fears being raised about an Allende-style left wing govt and subsequent coup.

Even then capital realised that an anti-immigrant, anti-europe party would act against their own interests. This explains why both the bosses backed Maggie and then New Labour.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

Groucho said:
			
		

> The electoral strategy is only part of their agenda. The far more electorally succesful far right parties in Europe also seek to harden up a street fighting element when the time is right. Much division in their ranks stems from arguing over when the time is right. Why is this a feature of Fascist politics?





Well, in some parts of Europe the fascists have had so much electoral success that they have participated in government (without any noticable parallels to the 1930s occurring.)  Has there been any corresponding 'hardening up of the street fighting element' in countries where their votes are counted in millions?  (And I do not mean increases in attacks on immigrants that may or may not be carried out by fascist activists, but moves towards building serious 'street fighting wings' of the fascist parties, which have threatened immigrant and working class communities, the left and the labour movement?)


----------



## mk12 (Sep 27, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> On the subject of being razor in the hands of the bosses, which I realise is a slight derail, it's worth making the point that 30 years ago at a time of greater "crisis" than we have had since capital chose not to throw its lot in with the NF. This despite all sorts of fears being raised about an Allende-style left wing govt and subsequent coup.
> 
> Even then capital realised that an anti-immigrant, anti-europe party would act against their own interests. This explains why both the bosses backed Maggie and then New Labour.



So what is your point? That the BNP are _not really_ a threat? That their threat is over-exaggerated?


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

grogwilton said:
			
		

> well then what is the threat? if they cant have power they cant use the arms of the state. im pretty sure the streets could be kept safe from the boot boys as you correctly see thay have minimal support. if the allt the fascists would have is a few councils, mps but no street army, wheres the threat? those positions hold no real power. no power-no threat surely?



On the contrary, I would see a mainstream (even if minority) fascist party as a huge threat. You don't have to be organising mass deporations of non-whites to be a threat, not that they could anyway. 

But by drawing disillutioned working class support into the dead end of conspiracy theories and paranioa they would hamper the prosprect of a working class movement building momentum, and exacerbate the divisions they were built on.


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> So what is your point? That the BNP are _not really_ a threat? That their threat is over-exaggerated?



No. See post number 80 for what kind of threat I think they pose, which is a serious enough one without fantasies about stormtroopers.


----------



## rebel warrior (Sep 27, 2005)

The thing about fascists building up a street fighting force only really comes when the working class movement is taking over the streets and workplaces and the bosses need a counterweight to this.


----------



## sihhi (Sep 27, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Which two western european countries have fascists been in central govt (in coalitions) in since WW2 and how did they get there?
> 
> (Excluding Spain and Portugal).



What do you count as Western Europe?

Austria: Freedom Party.

Switzerland: Swiss People's Party.

Italy: National Alliance.

All did well in general elections.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

Groucho said:
			
		

> The likes of Griffin believe that in times such as these they need to make steady progress electorally but this fails to keep many of their members satisfied (not just the Nazi fanatics and thugs who Griffin would rather be rid of). The BNP say cearly that they are a revolutionary party. They use military terms for their local organisation - 'Units.' They (both Griffin and the more impatient members) seek ultimately to build a movement thast can control the streets not just the council chambers. So far they have not come close to either.





Isn't it the case that they call their local organisations branches, and only where they have too few activists to form a fully fledged branch use the term unit?  (I could be wrong about this, so it's a genuine question.) 

And if they have not yet even come close to controlling the council chambers, doesn't this contradict the notion that they are on the verge of 'returning to the streets'?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> The thing about fascists building up a street fighting force only really comes when the working class movement is taking over the streets and workplaces and the bosses need a counterweight to this.


 So you and Groucho presumably think we're in this position now following your above posts about the soon expected turn to the streets from the BNP? 

(You do realise history doesn't follow a series of pre-determined infinite repititions don't you? I thought you claimed to be a marxist btw)


----------



## mk12 (Sep 27, 2005)

> infinte repitions



Is that Latin?


----------



## hibee (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> The thing about fascists building up a street fighting force only really comes when the working class movement is taking over the streets and workplaces and the bosses need a counterweight to this.



This is not borne out by history. See post 77.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> Is that Latin?


 Yep, it means even the pope is laughing at RW's analysis.


----------



## sihhi (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Has there been any corresponding 'hardening up of the street fighting element' in countries where their votes are counted in millions?  (And I do not mean increases in attacks on immigrants that may or may not be carried out by fascist activists, but moves towards building serious 'street fighting wings' of the fascist parties, which have threatened immigrant and working class communities, the left and the labour movement?)



In general no not at all.

Although the League of Polish Families' youth movement- All-Polish Youth has certainly grown with its votes and it has I believe attacked gypsy/Roma districts and pro-gay rights activists but not "the labour movement" as such I don't think.


----------



## rebel warrior (Sep 27, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> So you and Groucho presumably think we're in this position now following your above posts about the soon expected turn to the streets from the BNP?



No - that is why I regard this national demo as a 'publicity stunt' that does not remark a return to the streets - see my first post on this thread.

Hibee - the depth of the capitalist crisis determines the extent the bosses look to private armies and fascists - so in the 1970s the crisis was not the same as the 1930s and today it is not as deep as the 1970s.  

However, was capitalism to go into massive crisis today then of course the bosses would increasingly turn to fascists if their usual parties were not able to keep workers in line and profits up.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> What do you count as Western Europe?
> 
> Austria: Freedom Party.
> 
> ...





But none of them ever came close to being able to force through even a fraction of their programmes.  A lot of voters had thrown in their lot with them, though, and for a variety of reasons, while the left was arguing the largely unchanged line of the last eighty years and being outflanked.  

Some nice careers were built for representatives of the fascist parties though, so there's compensation for not having a hope in hell of their vision coming to pass.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> However, was capitalism to go into massive crisis today then of course the bosses would increasingly turn to fascists if their usual parties were not able to keep workers in line and profits up.





Why?


----------



## Random (Sep 27, 2005)

I'd imagine that life has got a lot worse for many people in fascist-run areas, e.g. the many towns in the South of France that the NF hold -- and this is without any siezure of central state power.  Fascism is worse, the bigger a hold it has, it's not an off/on situation.


----------



## sihhi (Sep 27, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> The thing about fascists building up a street fighting force only really comes when the working class movement is taking over the streets and workplaces and the bosses need a counterweight to this.



This is factually wrong though isn't it- fascists have built up street fighting forces independent of what the working class movement is doing nd the needs of bosses.

Fr instance the Falange Party in the 1970s, Serbian Radical Party 1980s 1990s, Russian Republic today (who assasinated Nikolai Girenko) have all built up their street fighting forces arguably without a working class movement at all.


----------



## sihhi (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> But *none of them ever came close to being able to force through even a fraction of their programmes*.  A lot of voters had thrown in their lot with them, though, and for a variety of reasons, while the left was arguing the largely unchanged line of the last eighty years and being outflanked.
> 
> Some nice careers were built for representatives of the fascist parties though, so there's compensation for not having a hope in hell of their vision coming to pass.



In general I'd agree- but due to SPP money from their cabinet posts- their "No" campaign on easing citizenship (and voting) rights to non-Swiss people in Switzerland back in September 2004 was won.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3694076.stm

Pretty indiscriminate police round ups of Roma people/gypsies and their expulsion to Hungary and Romania also increased iirc.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Sep 27, 2005)

The BNP announce that they will attend a march called by a front group and within one day we are on to fascism serving the needs of capital in crisis and how it could take over the streets. Funniliy enough they turned up at Griffins trial dates and at the UAF launch in Manchester but this  didn't signal a return to the streets.

I agree with many of the points that Larry put forward. A cursory glance at their website reveals their 'plucky' respectebility in the face of a PC state. Even Jones's question on question time is framed as proof that they are part of the mainstream. The rabble of losers and glue sniffers who long for pure fascism in the National Alliance/British Peoples Party/NF might want to march and grow but their own existence is very much  in threat rather than being on the cusp of expansion and the BNP would not want them spoiling their publicity event.

Rather than argue what UAF might be doing at the 11th hour to react to the march what are RESPECT doing in Keighly politically to provide an alternative to those in the working class who have been  taken for granted by Lab/Libs/Toires?


----------



## tollbar (Sep 27, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Rather than argue what UAF might be doing at the 11th hour to react to the march what are RESPECT doing in Keighly politically to provide an alternative to those in the working class who have been  taken for granted by Lab/Libs/Toires?




If they are coming out with the sort of fuckwittery reported from one of the participants at a Chris Bambery meeting in York, reported in Workers Liberty, that the Ashes victory parade was reminiscent of a Nuremburg rally the BNP must be having a recruitment field day.

http://www.workersliberty.org/node/view/4827


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 27, 2005)

Random said:
			
		

> I'd imagine that life has got a lot worse for many people in fascist-run areas, e.g. the many towns in the South of France that the NF hold -- and this is without any siezure of central state power.  Fascism is worse, the bigger a hold it has, it's not an off/on situation.





Do you know where any accounts can be found of exactly what has happened in such towns?


----------



## soulrebel (Sep 27, 2005)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> 1) The BNP are fascist, not  Nazi: it is the SWPs stupid refusal to realise this distinction that guarantees failure.


sort of quibble here: as i understand the definitions (obviously in v simplistic terms):

Nazi = ultra-violent, ultra-authoritarian, racist extreme nationalist with (loosely) state-socialist economics
Fascist = likewise (but not so _necessarily_ racist) with capitalist/corporatist economics...

therefore, from the little that i have actually bothered to read of the BNP's economic "policy" and working class recruitment strategy, doesn't that make them more Nazi than Fascist (with them, of course, trying to downplay those associations)?

or are they more corporatist rather than state-industry "socialist" now?

regardless, it would be nice if all the non-white drugs gangs and suchlike in the north were alerted to the bnp march, and turned up to drive-by the lot of them...


----------



## WasGeri (Sep 27, 2005)

soulrebel said:
			
		

> regardless, it would be nice if all the non-white drugs gangs and suchlike in the north were alerted to the bnp march, and turned up to drive-by the lot of them...



What a peculiar thing to say. Are white drug gangs allowed to be opposed to the BNP in your world?


----------



## harpo (Sep 27, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Isn't it the case that they call their local organisations branches, and only where they have too few activists to form a fully fledged branch use the term unit?  (I could be wrong about this, so it's a genuine question.)



Groucho posting -

Yes, you are wrong.


----------



## hibee (Sep 28, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> Hibee - the depth of the capitalist crisis determines the extent the bosses look to private armies and fascists - so in the 1970s the crisis was not the same as the 1930s and today it is not as deep as the 1970s.
> 
> However, was capitalism to go into massive crisis today then of course the bosses would increasingly turn to fascists if their usual parties were not able to keep workers in line and profits up.



The point is that capital historically has only fallen back on fascism when it has no better option. Its interests are much better served through the political centre which has the advantage of greater stability.

In Spain, Chile, Germany, Italy etc a change in this state of affairs has needed three requirements:

a) a collapse/absence of credibility of the centre ground
b) a stong fascist/reactionary movement
c) (most important, this) a strong working class movement threatening a change in the status quo in their favour.

Today none of these are the case. The political centre is stronger than it ever has been and there is no prospect of this changing. While the BNP is resurgent and attracting support it is hardly a mass movement. And most vitally, there is no immediate liklihood of the workers mobilizing against capital.

Capital has no need to fall back on a movement which would be, in two important respects, contrary to their interests: anti europe and anti immigration. Given that this state of affairs is not likely to change in the near future they will continue to back new labour. 

This means two things

a) your concept of anti fascism is hopelessly out of date
b) by falling back on support for Labour, you are backing the class enemy.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 28, 2005)

harpo said:
			
		

> Groucho posting -
> 
> Yes, you are wrong.





And?


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Sep 28, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> The point is that capital historically has only fallen back on fascism when it has no better option. Its interests are much better served through the political centre which has the advantage of greater stability.
> 
> In Spain, Chile, Germany, Italy etc a change in this state of affairs has needed three requirements:
> 
> ...


Thats an excellent post and all true. But this was the throughout AFAs existence too. Were they wrong too? And don't you think that things can change a lot faster anyway? so capital is served by the centre left happily at the moment, but the point about financial crises is you don't see them coming. And as for the bnp not being a mass movement, no but do you want to wait till they are one to tackle them? When it will mean guns and civil war possibly? 

(if you only look at one question, answer the AFA one. I really am puzzled)


----------



## sihhi (Sep 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Do you know where any accounts can be found of exactly what has happened in such towns?



Vitrolles is a banlieu type suburb of Marseilles of 400,000+ voters where FN won in 1997 in a two-way race after Gaullists, Socialists, PCFers and Trotskyists all agreed to put just one candidate forward.

They lost in 2002 partly as a result of the cuts ordered from higher above on Vitrolles mayorship's budget meaning they couldn't do all the things they promised, partly as a result of failing to control crime. iirc correctly there was again a pact and two-way race and the Socialists' Guy Obino won.

A quick google of "Front National Vitrolles" gives the following *beware of sources and translations*.



> The party has tended to cut back on social services for immigrants as well as cultural activities deemed "anti-family" or "multicultural." Spending has been redirected to the municipal police and other services.
> In Orange the Front National reduced school spending by 50%. In Vitrolles 150 civil employees were fired, while the police force was expanded from 34 to 70 officers. During the election campaign, members of the Department of Protection-Security shot and killed 17-year old Ibrahim Ali. In Vitrolles, the party sought to give 500 euros to the families of each French baby born, but was unable to do so for constitutional reasons. In Vitrolles the director of the cinema was fired because he had shown a movie about homosexuality and AIDS.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Front_(France)



> In both Orange and Marignane, the chief librarians have had their employment terminated and been replaced by non-professionals who are more sympathetic to the Front National's right-wing perspective....
> 'Those who are still working in the libraries are very afraid,' says Claudine Belayache, President of French library association LBF, 'so they do not talk easily to colleagues and information is difficult to come by. They have become mute.'


http://www.la-hq.org.uk/directory/record/r199707/orange.html




			
				Claudine Belayache said:
			
		

> At Orange, because of local conditions, mayor Bompard immediately turned his attention to the library and its acquisitions. From the end of 1995 titles were removed from the lists of acquisitions proposed by the librarian in charge, and new titles were imposed. A conflict had started in which the evident purpose of the local government was to remove all initiative of ordering from the professionals, to make the library a stake in the unmistakable political propaganda.....
> The periodical ‘Le Métier de Bibliothécaire’ is considered ‘too specialised’ (it’s the professional book for training librarians) and is excluded.


http://www.ifla.org/faife/papers/others/belayc_e.htm

http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2003-4pp227-236.pdf



> Subsidies have been withdrawn from rap and ethnic musicians and from festivals which showed gay movies; cultural centres which held "non-French" events have been closed; schools stopped from offering special meals to Jewish and Muslim children; municipal libraries banned from subscribing to leftwing publications.
> In Vitrolles the Front town council briefly offered an illegal £500 "baby subsidy" to couples who added to their family - providing that both parents were of white European origin.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,11882,1045358,00.html



> Rene Guiffrey, a sculptor, learned by chance recently that the City Council of Toulon, which is run by the extreme-right National Front, had destroyed an abstract fountain he completed for the city a couple of years ago.
> So when hundreds of artists, actors and writers descended on the city this week to protest what they describe as the National Front's assault on contemporary forms of expression, Mr. Guiffrey was there with them.


http://www.iht.com/articles/1997/02/15/france.t_3.php



> striking drivers in Vitrolles, near Marseille, were assaulted by squad of National Front thugs during national truckers strike, 5 November 1997.  (Photo: L’Humanité)
> In another case in 1997, workers struck the Valéo auto headlight plant in Evreux (Eure) in April when plans were announced to shut it down. In response, in early June the management contracted with a private security company, OGS (Management and Security Organization) led by the mercenary Gonzague du Cheyron du Pavillon (a former member of the OAS), which supplied a squad of 80 thugs, including numerous DPS members, to block workers protesting the removal of the machinery from the plant. At one point the fascist goons tried to break through the workers’ pickets, but trucks were turned back as the picketers heaved rocks at them. Earlier, in February 1997, the Normandy security agency sent a squad of 24 thugs led by fascists of the GUD to carry out an attack on the CGT union at a paper plant in Corbeil (Essone).


http://www.internationalist.org/nationalfront&strongstate0602.html


----------



## hibee (Sep 28, 2005)

As far as AFA goes, I wasn't involved in it (my anti fascism to date has consisted of a bit of misguided lollipop waving). But I expect they would make the case that during their existence the BNP was very much pursuing a street strategy, breaking heads and marching, and needed to be countered in kind; now it has moved onto communtiy work/"euronationalism" it needs to be taken on differently. 

I think you misunderstand what I'm saying, Taxamo. I think they do need to be taken on and do I think they are a threat. But if you want to find the way to tackle them you need up-to-date maps.

For what its worth if the BNP were to suddenly revert to type and keep their support I'd reckon the likes of RW were right. But I don't see that happening any time soon for reasons I've explained.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Sep 28, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> As far as AFA goes, I wasn't involved in it (my anti fascism to date has consisted of a bit of misguided lollipop waving). But I expect they would make the case that during their existence the BNP was very much pursuing a street strategy, breaking heads and marching, and needed to be countered in kind; now it has moved onto communtiy work/"euronationalism" it needs to be taken on differently.


 Ok, but thats pretty much  irrelevant to what you said before. Thats the reason generally given to why AFA is no more by its ex members who went on to form the IWCA. What you were saying was that the far right only became a threat when capital  needed them.... Which was not the case during the 80's and 90's when afa was active. 

I understand and agree with what you are saying by the way, but they still need to be tackled in the same way as before imho. Otherwise if we get on to the 'economic conditions are not X, class forces need to be Y' road and always wait for some certain balance we might as well go back to waving lollipops again for all we will achieve.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Sep 29, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Ok, but thats pretty much  irrelevant to what you said before. Thats the reason generally given to why AFA is no more by its ex members who went on to form the IWCA. What you were saying was that the far right only became a threat when capital  needed them.... Which was not the case during the 80's and 90's when afa was active.
> 
> I understand and agree with what you are saying by the way, but they still need to be tackled in the same way as before imho. Otherwise if we get on to the 'economic conditions are not X, class forces need to be Y' road and always wait for some certain balance we might as well go back to waving lollipops again for all we will achieve.



So there is no need to build a political alternative to the BNP then for working class communities betrayed by New Labour?


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 29, 2005)

Its not just about street fighting such as cracking heads, but limiting the capacity they have to hold meetings by targeting property, attacking the organisation is central to minimising their ability to organise in a confident and co-ordinated manner.

Waiting for certain conditions before you physically oppose fascism is like swpies waiting for the stated conditions for the perfect revolutionary moment.


----------



## hibee (Sep 29, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Ok, but thats pretty much  irrelevant to what you said before. Thats the reason generally given to why AFA is no more by its ex members who went on to form the IWCA. What you were saying was that the far right only became a threat when capital  needed them.... Which was not the case during the 80's and 90's when afa was active.
> 
> I understand and agree with what you are saying by the way, but they still need to be tackled in the same way as before imho. Otherwise if we get on to the 'economic conditions are not X, class forces need to be Y' road and always wait for some certain balance we might as well go back to waving lollipops again for all we will achieve.



I don't think the far right in the 80s the far right were ever in danger of organising mass deportations and herding dissident into forced labour camps, just like today's BNP. That doesn't mean theat they didn't and don't pose a threat. In the "march and grow" days the fear was that they would attract young white males from the terraces from a pedestal of being these tough streetfighters etc so it made sense to kick fuck out of them and show them up. Nowadays their orientation is very different and mrs mop from the estate isn't going to be impressed by all that, so you respond differently.

As I've said I'm a bit uneasy about telling people how they should respond to the far right as my own efforts in this department were misguided to say the least. I'm not going to slag off anyone who uses militant tactics and it certainly makes sense to batter the remnants of street fascism (NF,BPP etc, not that they're any sort of threat) according to the logic of the above paragraph.

But ultimately, as Chuck said, the real way of taking on a community-orientated BNP is to offer a political alternative. Like it or not, doing otherwise you are effectively urging a vote for Labour - because I don't see any other movements being formed to fill the vacuum.


----------



## hibee (Sep 29, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Its not just about street fighting such as cracking heads, but limiting the capacity they have to hold meetings by targeting property, attacking the organisation is central to minimising their ability to organise in a confident and co-ordinated manner.
> 
> Waiting for certain conditions before you physically oppose fascism is like swpies waiting for the stated conditions for the perfect revolutionary moment.



I'm not saying certain conditions have to be met before you oppose fascism. I'm arguing that when you do so you use tactics appropriate to the present time.

Harrassing them is all well and good and if people want to do it I have no problem with that. But without building an alternative that working class people can turn to it just becomes like Millie and Cuthbert from the Young Conservatives pouring sugar into the Labour candidate's petrol tank.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Sep 29, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> So there is no need to build a political alternative to the BNP then for working class communities betrayed by New Labour?


what?! No. Blimey!


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Sep 29, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Its not just about street fighting such as cracking heads, but limiting the capacity they have to hold meetings by targeting property, attacking the organisation is central to minimising their ability to organise in a confident and co-ordinated manner.
> 
> Waiting for certain conditions before you physically oppose fascism is like swpies waiting for the stated conditions for the perfect revolutionary moment.


i said that before you   
But you said it better  

To chuck and hibee: I believe in doing both. And it looks like you have no objection to that hibee, so cool   end of


----------



## audiotech (Sep 29, 2005)

In 1979 it was school students who distributed and wore badges, tenants who organised to clean off fascist graffiti, groups set-up around RAR and in some instances, strikes by workers who really saw off the NF at that time.

The organised counter-demonstrations forced the fascists to shuffle along their planned route protected by thousands of police, their banners and flags hidden and their vitriol drowned out by the ebullience of anti-fascists.

It should be noted that most who attended counter-demo's against the NF weren't hardened street-fighters, but just ordinary people making a stand against racism and fascism.

Eventually the NF found it increasingly difficult to march. Their marches would be re-routed into a park, or industrial estate and eventually they began to march less and less as it became impossible for the police to guarantee their safety.

This opposition, that grew over a period of time, was the real force that led to the demise of the NF in 1979 and it's subsequent fracture into at least four factions.

Again, this time around, it won't be a handful of people secretly planning attacks on individual fascists, which will see off the present fascist incarnation, the BNP, but a broad based, non-sectarian, anti-fascist movement involving many.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 29, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Its not just about street fighting such as cracking heads, but limiting the capacity they have to hold meetings by targeting property, attacking the organisation is central to minimising their ability to organise in a confident and co-ordinated manner.
> 
> Waiting for certain conditions before you physically oppose fascism is like swpies waiting for the stated conditions for the perfect revolutionary moment.





But most of the contemporary examples of this kind of activity seem to be  directed not at the BNP, but at other tiny far-right sects.  And they seem far from 'confident and co-ordinated.'

It has often been said on these boards that demonstrations held by today's NF usually seem to be made up, at best, of about fifty people, and that they appear to be roughly the same fifty people no matter which part of the country the demo takes place.  What does this say about the level of threat they represent?  They don't even seem to be able to attract the more extreme elements of the BNP who are disgruntled by the "modernisers'" approach in any significant numbers.  There has recently been a thread on Stormfront in which a cross-section of fascist opinion seems agreed, to one degree or another, that the NF is past it's sell-by date. The best that even NF members themselves seem able to offer is that 'everybody must be encouraged to contribute in their own way' (where have I heard that one before?), or that at least the NF isn't the 'sell-out' BNP, with its Jewish and Turkish candidates and alliances with Sikhs etc etc.  

Meanwhile, is there any evidence that the WNP/Nationalist Alliance/BPP, or whatever they are calling themselves this week, actually have any membership beyond the small bunch of discredited individuals that make up the central core?  (Has anybody noticed that, when they put photos of their rallies online, it's more or less the same line-up of platform speakers, no matter where the meeting is claimed to have taken place-and even the room in every photgraph looks similar to...the last photo.)

Again, where is the fascist threat here? The venom of the BPP is obviously directed, primarily, not at immigrants or the working class but at the BNP. 

And while all this is going on, the BNP continues to gather support in working class areas, where a large percentage of the local population feels abandoned by the mainstream parties.  If they can portray themselves as victims of violence for doing nothing other than campaigning, in a legal and peaceful manner, for the interests of local people (what they actually do about them is beside the point), what is the view of the average punter contemplating voting BNP going to be regarding the perpetrators of the violence?  This is especially problematic when no coherent alternative to what the BNP is offering is ever put to these people.  Which is, of course, the crux of the problem.  

Where is the political analysis?


----------



## tollbar (Sep 29, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> In 1979 it was school students who distributed and wore badges, tenants who organised to clean off fascist graffiti, groups set-up around RAR and in some instances, strikes by workers who really saw off the NF at that time.
> 
> The organised counter-demonstrations forced the fascists to shuffle along their planned route protected by thousands of police, their banners and flags hidden and their vitriol drowned out by the ebullience of anti-fascists.
> 
> ...



The NF were certainly weakened by the above tactics, but what finally fucked them was Thatcher and the tories moving to the right and stealing their political space,


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> I'm not saying certain conditions have to be met before you oppose fascism. I'm arguing that when you do so you use tactics appropriate to the present time.
> 
> Harrassing them is all well and good and if people want to do it I have no problem with that. But without building an alternative that working class people can turn to it just becomes like Millie and Cuthbert from the Young Conservatives pouring sugar into the Labour candidate's petrol tank.



You assume i want to build an electoral alternative. 
I oppose fascism as i do not want to live under a fascist government, i also oppose electoralism as i believe parliamentary democracy and local government is a sham.

Harrassment and attacking an organisation to hinder growth are entirely appropriate in present conditions.


----------



## hibee (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> You assume i want to build an electoral alternative.
> I oppose fascism as i do not want to live under a fascist government, i also oppose electoralism as i believe parliamentary democracy and local government is a sham.
> 
> Harrassment and attacking an organisation to hinder growth are entirely appropriate in present conditions.
> ...




Where exactly did I say you want to build an electoral alternative? 

As for me, I think elections can be a useful tactic in this process but it's clearly the work on the ground that's important. Much as I feel about putting itching powder down that rotter of a BNP candidate's collar.


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Where exactly did I say you want to build an electoral alternative?
> 
> As for me, I think elections can be a useful tactic in this process but it's clearly the work on the ground that's important. Much as I feel about putting itching powder down that rotter of a BNP candidate's collar.



Its good to see you mock militant anti fascism i have had friends go to prison for what you are making light of.


----------



## hibee (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Its good to see you mock militant anti fascism i have had friends go to prison for what you are making light of.



Any fair minded person reading my posts will realise you are talking utter bollocks, misrepresenting my views like you did in the post above about elections. 

Grow up.


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> But ultimately, as Chuck said, the real way of taking on a community-orientated BNP is to offer a political alternative. Like it or not, doing otherwise you are effectively urging a vote for Labour - because I don't see any other movements being formed to fill the vacuum.



How do i mis represent your views the only alternative is to build a political organisation that stands in elections. This is hardly new or actually really inspirational or amazing. its the same old re hash of vote for me politics where better than them.

Its failed before and it will fail again.

As for the grow up comment, i think you should looke further at your self next time you stuff IWCA election leaflets through the door. 
One day you will reach political maturity and realise that elections and government are a sham.

I apologise if you feel mis represented, i took the itching powder remark to be deregotary and a flippant swipe at militant anti fascism. If it was not please accept my humble apols.


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> But most of the contemporary examples of this kind of activity seem to be  directed not at the BNP, but at other tiny far-right sects.  And they seem far from 'confident and co-ordinated.'
> 
> It has often been said on these boards that demonstrations held by today's NF usually seem to be made up, at best, of about fifty people, and that they appear to be roughly the same fifty people no matter which part of the country the demo takes place.  What does this say about the level of threat they represent?  They don't even seem to be able to attract the more extreme elements of the BNP who are disgruntled by the "modernisers'" approach in any significant numbers.  There has recently been a thread on Stormfront in which a cross-section of fascist opinion seems agreed, to one degree or another, that the NF is past it's sell-by date. The best that even NF members themselves seem able to offer is that 'everybody must be encouraged to contribute in their own way' (where have I heard that one before?), or that at least the NF isn't the 'sell-out' BNP, with its Jewish and Turkish candidates and alliances with Sikhs etc etc.
> 
> ...



In West yorkshire both the BNP and NA have been opposed physically.

You have to judge it on a local basis which far right group has the most impact physically as well as politically. Nationally the BNP are the bigger threat but locally a smaller group could have a big impact in localities.

There are groups in the west yorks area and social centres been built that act in similar ways to the IWCA, as i have explained to you before. 
People have recognised that there is a vacuum and successful attempts have been made to fill it. Its not either or as both are essential and needed. 

We will always disagree on the use of electoralism as a tactic though


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> In West yorkshire both the BNP and NA have been opposed physically.
> 
> You have to judge it on a local basis which far right group has the most impact physically as well as politically. Nationally the BNP are the bigger threat but locally a smaller group could have a big impact in localities.
> 
> ...




What is electoralism?


----------



## Paul Marsh (Sep 30, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> What is electoralism?



Standing in elections?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

*Herbie the nihilist: the very model of political maturity*




			
				Herbert Read said:
			
		

> One day you will reach political maturity and realise that elections and government are a sham.





I'm off on my well deserved two week holiday in the morning.  Thanks for getting me in light-hearted mood, Herbie!


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> I oppose fascism as i do not want to live under a fascist government, i also oppose electoralism as i believe parliamentary democracy and local government is a sham.





Political maturity in action.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> You have to judge it on a local basis which far right group has the most impact physically as well as politically. Nationally the BNP are the bigger threat but locally a smaller group could have a big impact in localities.





These smaller groups: between the end of AFA's physical tactics and recent times, the field has been almost entirely clear for street-orientated fascism, such as that of the NF and, ahem, the WNP/NA/BPP.  On which localities have they 'had a big impact'?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> How do i mis represent your views the only alternative is to build a political organisation that stands in elections. This is hardly new or actually really inspirational or amazing. its the same old re hash of vote for me politics where better than them.





Leaving aside your usual misrepresentation of the IWCA approach regarding elections, can you give an example of the type of politics that can be said to have not failed and explain why it was successful?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> I oppose fascism as i do not want to live under a fascist government





Don't we all.

But are you seriously suggesting that the BNP, let alone the NF and BPP, represent the potential for a fascist government?


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> These smaller groups: between the end of AFA's physical tactics and recent times, the field has been almost entirely clear for street-orientated fascism, such as that of the NF and, ahem, the WNP/NA/BPP.  On which localities have they 'had a big impact'?



You seem to think that  because red action took the bat and ball with AFA that all physical confrontation against fascism stopped. 

This is incorrect and far from reality LLETSA.

LLETSA your political analysis is a broad one, do you know claim to speak for every area in the U.K with your vast knowledge and insight into anti fascism.


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Don't we all.
> 
> But are you seriously suggesting that the BNP, let alone the NF and BPP, represent the potential for a fascist government?



I have never said that, i have pointed out that fascist meetings should be opposed and confronted when they appear in your area. 

They should be hampered and attacked to halt organisation and development.


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Leaving aside your usual misrepresentation of the IWCA approach regarding elections, can you give an example of the type of politics that can be said to have not failed and explain why it was successful?



If you explain to me why electoralism as a tactic is not pointless and serving only to further a system that is as moribund as your banal political analysis.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> You seem to think that  because red action took the bat and ball with AFA that all physical confrontation against fascism stopped.
> 
> This is incorrect and far from reality LLETSA.
> 
> LLETSA your political analysis is a broad one, do you know claim to speak for every area in the U.K with your vast knowledge and insight into anti fascism.





No I don't think it all stopped, and I have no axe to grind for RA.  However, I see no evidence of anything even approaching the scale of the battles AFA fought with the BNP and others, taking place after the BNP abandoned the streets and AFA's tactics changed accordingly.  Although you and others claim that this is not so, the case you usually present always seems a bit evidence-lite (for security purposes, you understand....)


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> I have never said that, i have pointed out that fascist meetings should be opposed and confronted when they appear in your area.
> 
> They should be hampered and attacked to halt organisation and development.





With a million votes in 2004 and twenty-odd councillors, and something approaching 5% in the last General Election, the only fascist organisation that counts for anything in the UK today, far from having its organisation and development halted, seems to be going from strength to strength.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> If you explain to me why electoralism as a tactic is not pointless and serving only to further a system that is as moribund as your banal political analysis.






What's the point when it's already been done to death?  No matter which way anybody puts it, you always but always respond with the same old Anarchism for Infants-gleaned remarks.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Sep 30, 2005)

Paul Marsh said:
			
		

> Standing in elections?



Any elections ? Standing for  shop steward, being elected to a conference or AGM, being a residents rep, council, parliament?


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> What's the point when it's already been done to death?  No matter which way anybody puts it, you always but always respond with the same old Anarchism for Infants-gleaned remarks.



Much the same as your arm chair prattle on the benefits of socail democracy, elections and realistic working class twoddle.

What ever analysis you put on it democarcy is and will continue to be a sham


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

.


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

.


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> With a million votes in 2004 and twenty-odd councillors, and something approaching 5% in the last General Election, the only fascist organisation that counts for anything in the UK today, far from having its organisation and development halted, seems to be going from strength to strength.



Then the more reason to orgainse militant anti fascism to oppose the growth, with new tactics of hitting them.

Its a lot more realistic then waiting for the IWCA to steal the grass roots support of fascism


----------



## Herbert Read (Sep 30, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> No I don't think it all stopped, and I have no axe to grind for RA.  However, I see no evidence of anything even approaching the scale of the battles AFA fought with the BNP and others, taking place after the BNP abandoned the streets and AFA's tactics changed accordingly.  Although you and others claim that this is not so, the case you usually present always seems a bit evidence-lite (for security purposes, you understand....)



do you really think that people should talk about recent actions on an open forum, the only reason people talk about the old AFA battles is becuse they are in the past, some over 15-20 years ago.

Not only are you a vast social consevative but an arm chair goading loon fuck wit.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> do you really think that people should talk about recent actions on an open forum, the only reason people talk about the old AFA battles is becuse they are in the past, some over 15-20 years ago.
> 
> Not only are you a vast social consevative but an arm chair goading loon fuck wit.





I seem to remember, reading the old RA paper back in the late eigthies and early nineties, that they often talked about what AFA had been up to only the previous month. 

Nobody is asking anybody to name those involved or give specifics.  In any case, as illustrated by a post that you recently put on here yourself, you are quick enough to boast about what you perceive as your successes when it suits you. You can't have your cake and eat it, Herbie. All I am saying is that the things that you have boasted about on here, and your comrades have boasted about on other sites, are usually directed at the no-hope fringe of fascism.  Meanwhile the BNP makes steady progress in the political arena, among working class people who do not share your fetishistic anti-electoralism-at -all-times attitude.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Then the more reason to orgainse militant anti fascism to oppose the growth, with new tactics of hitting them.
> 
> Its a lot more realistic then waiting for the IWCA to steal the grass roots support of fascism





Nowhere do the IWCA claim that it has to be them alone who 'steal the grass roots support of fascism.'  What they have done is offer an example of how they can win the support of the same kind of audience that the BNP has.

This statement says about all that needs to be said about your politics, Herbie.  They are, at base, elitest.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Then the more reason to orgainse militant anti fascism to oppose the growth, with new tactics of hitting them.
> 
> Its a lot more realistic then waiting for the IWCA to steal the grass roots support of fascism





By the way, Herbert, can you explain in what way the above is an answer to the points made in the quote below?




			
				LLETSA said:
			
		

> And while all this is going on, the BNP continues to gather support in working class areas, where a large percentage of the local population feels abandoned by the mainstream parties.  If they can portray themselves as victims of violence for doing nothing other than campaigning, in a legal and peaceful manner, for the interests of local people (what they actually do about them is beside the point), what is the view of the average punter contemplating voting BNP going to be regarding the perpetrators of the violence?  This is especially problematic when no coherent alternative to what the BNP is offering is ever put to these people.  Which is, of course, the crux of the problem.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 30, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Much the same as your arm chair prattle on the benefits of socail democracy, elections and realistic working class twoddle.
> 
> What ever analysis you put on it democarcy is and will continue to be a sham





Nothing like a petulant outburst of nonsense to send me off on me hols.

I will depart with a rich store of Herbie's Komic Kutz committed to memory.  If anybody sees a bloke sniggering over his pint in a south coast pub, it's probably me thinking of our Herbert.


----------



## sihhi (Oct 1, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Any elections ? Standing for  shop steward, being elected to a conference or AGM, being a residents rep, council, parliament?


Electoralism is standing for national parliaments I think- 
not local council elections or residents representative or shop steward etc etc


----------



## flimsier (Oct 1, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> Electoralism is standing for national parliaments I think-
> not local council elections or residents representative or shop steward etc etc



According to whom? 

Surely electoralism is standing for elections to change things?


----------



## sihhi (Oct 1, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> According to whom?
> 
> Surely electoralism is standing for elections to change things?



According to me- I said "I think".

There are those who believe that voting (!), let alone standing in any election whatsoever is a form of electoralism and thus wrong.


----------



## flimsier (Oct 1, 2005)

So are you saying that you are defining 'electoralism' as being standing for national parliament?

Isn't that just a self-serving definition?

I'd call it (adjusting my previous definition) "standing in elections as the primary method of bringing about change" as how people on the left generally see it.


----------



## rednblack (Oct 1, 2005)

electoralism is fetishising the tactic of standing in elections as a primary way of changing things

so flimsier is right i think


----------



## flimsier (Oct 1, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> so flimsier is right i think



   

I must be wrong.


----------



## rednblack (Oct 1, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I must be wrong.



if it feels so right...it can't be wrong


----------



## james_walsh (Oct 1, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> electoralism is fetishising the tactic of standing in elections as a primary way of changing things
> 
> so flimsier is right i think



Thats how i understand the phrase. RnB had to clarify your post filmsier , so deafently correct.


----------



## sihhi (Oct 1, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> So are you saying that you are defining 'electoralism' as being standing for national parliament?
> 
> Isn't that just a self-serving definition?
> 
> I'd call it (adjusting my previous definition) "standing in elections as the *primary * method of bringing about change" as how people on the left generally see it.



You're a better definer than me- I thought my definition was a standard Leninist one.   

In which case the IWCA aren't electoralist- based on the use of the word "primarily".


----------



## rednblack (Oct 1, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> In which case the IWCA aren't electoralist- based on the use of the word "primarily".



no, i don't think they are


----------



## flimsier (Oct 1, 2005)

james_walsh said:
			
		

> deafently correct.



Is that correct but no-one can hear me?

I'm really going. Cup game.


----------



## flimsier (Oct 1, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> no, i don't think they are



I didn't, but I think since the mayoral election they've opened themselves up to the charge, particularly with the General Election and so on. 

However, we've also done that one and I am late!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 1, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Is that correct but no-one can hear me?
> 
> I'm really going. Cup game.


go! and never darken this thread again!


----------



## hibee (Oct 1, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> How do i mis represent your views the only alternative is to build a political organisation that stands in elections. This is hardly new or actually really inspirational or amazing. its the same old re hash of vote for me politics where better than them.
> 
> Its failed before and it will fail again.
> 
> ...



I've been a busy lad in the real world for the last couple of days so I haven't had time to reply to this.

If you can be bothered to read my posts on this thread, rather than just deciding what you think I must have said and "replying" accordingly, you'll see I take a horses for courses approach to this. Militant tactics are apppropriate against militant groups. When the far right are building their strength in communites similar tactics are needed to counter them. This might or might not involve standing in elections. Sometimes there may be a grey area but, in the present climate, chucking rocks through windows without an accompanying political stategy seems of little value.

I'm aware that you think standing for the council is tantamount to selling your soul. Fair enough, I disagree with you, I've voiced those arguments elsewhere. But whether because you are unwilling or unable to listen to my arguments you fail to distinguish between those who see elections as the be all and end all of change (social democrats) and others like myself who are well aware they will not achieve my objectives but are prepared to use them as a tactic. If I said militant anti-fascists saw violence as the only way forward you would rightly come down on me like a ton of bricks. So why the double standards?

I have never said, once, that "the only alternative is to build a political organisation that stands in elections." That's a lie. I want a political alternative that may or may not use elections as a tactic. If you think that invalidates the whole approach fair enough, but argue with me rather than some Labour left straw man in your head.

As it happens I've never stuffed an IWCA leaflet through a door, I'm not even a member. The idea of someone as vacant as yourself lecturing me on maturity is one of the funniest things I've seen this year.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 1, 2005)

tollbar said:
			
		

> The NF were certainly weakened by the above tactics, but what finally fucked them was Thatcher and the tories moving to the right and stealing their political space,



The only way to halt the BNP now is to wait for a conservative leader to make a racist speech then?

Answer this, why were fascists able to organise violent attacks in 1978 and not five years later? Wasn't anything to do with Thatcher's 'swamped' speech was it, or the tories moving to the right?

Remember, in France the National Front, led by Le Pen, increased it's support every time conservative politicians made racist speeches in an attempt to attract his supporters.

You seem to be arguing that political action has minimal political impact outside parliament?

However, the then leaders of the NF and it's membership became to know differently.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 1, 2005)

oh god what do you do when you agree with both camps?


----------



## Herbert Read (Oct 3, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> I seem to remember, reading the old RA paper back in the late eigthies and early nineties, that they often talked about what AFA had been up to only the previous month.
> 
> Nobody is asking anybody to name those involved or give specifics.  In any case, as illustrated by a post that you recently put on here yourself, you are quick enough to boast about what you perceive as your successes when it suits you. You can't have your cake and eat it, Herbie. All I am saying is that the things that you have boasted about on here, and your comrades have boasted about on other sites, are usually directed at the no-hope fringe of fascism.  Meanwhile the BNP makes steady progress in the political arena, among working class people who do not share your fetishistic anti-electoralism-at -all-times attitude.



Im not involved with militant anti fascism the post was anonymous on indymedia.

I linked it to this site and in fact made no boastful comments apart from supporting the action verbally.

I am merely expressing support for tactics.

I have and never will be involved in militant anti fascism.


----------



## rednblack (Oct 3, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> oh god what do you do when you agree with both camps?



rise above it and feel quietly superior - i do


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 3, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Im not involved with militant anti fascism the post was anonymous on indymedia.
> 
> I am merely expressing support for tactics.
> 
> I have and never will be involved in militant anti fascism.



Paranoid.


----------



## Herbert Read (Oct 3, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Paranoid.



no im just a spectator passing comment i am active just in more nice areas of direct action, i usually stick to stealing biscuits as you well know.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 3, 2005)

i keep having these attacks of deja vu... about urban.

I can remeber icepick saying something about stealing biscuits maybe three years ago but maybe not...  

herbert read is is not involved in militant antifascism - that is violence aimed at fascism

he is involved in militant nihilism though - that is violence aimed at... Everyone including himself? 

I wanna destroy
passers by   

Only joshing herb


----------



## CUMBRIANDRAGON (Oct 8, 2005)

Larry O'Hara said:
			
		

> 1) Mothers Against Paedophilia is a BNP front group
> 
> 2) On the other hand, as illustrated by the Anna Hall C4 'Edge of the City' documentary (shown 26/8/04) there is a genuine abuse issue in the area--while the Metropolitan/PC Left deny it, this only vacates political space for the BNP to move into.  That _Searchlight_ have admitted this (after I did   ) does not make it any the less true.  Those people in Keighley/Bradford who have voted BNP did not do so because they fancy Griffin as the new Goebbels (or Nick Cass as Heydrich) but because serious political concerns have not been addressed by New Labour, whose essential message for the white working class is 'fuck off & die' (soon).



I think we are entering dangerous ground.There is a pakistan/muslim child abuse ring. I know people in the area [its blatant gangs of young girls ages 10 -16 wait for the gang to pick them up.We have two choices we either let the fascists go to the rescue of these young girls or we organise our selves against the ring.I've got a feeling this is going to come back and haunt the left.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 8, 2005)

CUMBRIANDRAGON said:
			
		

> I think we are entering dangerous ground.There is a pakistan/muslim child abuse ring. I know people in the area [its blatant gangs of young girls ages 10 -16 wait for the gang to pick them up.We have two choices we either let the fascists go to the rescue of these young girls or we organise our selves against the ring.I've got a feeling this is going to come back and haunt the left.


no i think you are on dangerous ground, imho. Can you give some evidence to the claim of child abuse rings? How do they work and for what purpose? To provide brothels with underage girls? I have never really understood this issue due to its amazing ability to sound like total bollocks. There was however a BBC documentary on it that got pulled - so i am not properly filled in yet. However, if what you are saying is true then yes the left should tear these scum apart using the tactics that we know best.


----------



## CUMBRIANDRAGON (Oct 13, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> no i think you are on dangerous ground, imho. Can you give some evidence to the claim of child abuse rings? How do they work and for what purpose? To provide brothels with underage girls? I have never really understood this issue due to its amazing ability to sound like total bollocks. There was however a BBC documentary on it that got pulled - so i am not properly filled in yet. However, if what you are saying is true then yes the left should tear these scum apart using the tactics that we know best.



I can't give any evidence no. Maybe if I took a cam down to Keithley I could film what is going on.
Its common knowledge there was something going off in Keithley scores of very young girls meeting on the corners waiting to get picked up .
What I'm basicly saying is we can't just pretend none of it is true.If we do the fash will have alot more councillors in Yorkshire.
Like I said this is dangerous ground and if we are not carefull this is going to play right into the bnp's hands.As they will be trying to capitalise and milk this for all its worth.


----------



## belboid (Oct 13, 2005)

CUMBRIANDRAGON said:
			
		

> There is a pakistan/muslim child abuse ring.


from the reports I saw, I recall that there was certainly evidence of such child abuse rings, and that there were muslims involved in (some of) them.  But there were also substantial numbers of white blokes involved in them as well, it was not an 'all muslim' thing at all.


----------



## CUMBRIANDRAGON (Oct 13, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> from the reports I saw, I recall that there was certainly evidence of such child abuse rings, and that there were muslims involved in (some of) them.  But there were also substantial numbers of white blokes involved in them as well, it was not an 'all muslim' thing at all.



Maybe we should try and find out exactly what is going on.
On the documentary it never mentioned the white blokes .
If there was white blokes involved then c4 should of mentioned this instead of blaming just the pakistani/muslims.


----------



## rebel warrior (Oct 18, 2005)

*Unite have called a protest...*

From www.uaf.org.uk

Demonstrate against the fascist BNP in Keighley - Saturday 5th November

Assemble at Keighley Town Hall at 12 noon, Saturday 05 November

The BNP is organising two demonstrations in Yorkshire in November. To build their demonstration in Keighley they are promoting the racist myth that Asian Muslim paedophile gangs are preying on young people and that Police failure to "get tough" is "institutional anti-white racism".

This event is clearly intended to whip up racism against the local Muslim and Asian communities and to damage community relations. The BNP is planning to end their protest with a bonfire and fireworks. 

UAF, Yorkshire TUC, and the local MPs have all urged the police to ban the BNP demonstration in Keighley. 

At present the BNP protest has not been banned. Therefore UAF is asking its supporters to mobilise for the demonstration against the BNP and to organise coaches to Keighley.

For further information contact UAF on 020 7833 4916

There is also an important protest in Leeds:

Peace and Unity in our communities - Don't Let the BNP divide us 

Yorkshire and the Humber TUC and Unite Against Fascism are organising a rally and protest to coincide with BNP leader Nick Griffin’s appearance in Leeds Court on 2 November 2005.

This is a peaceful, positive response to show our rejection of the fascist BNP and their politics of hatred and fear, but to make it successful we need YOU to join us! Come in your lunch hour, come for the whole day, come alone or with friends and colleagues, but make sure you’re there.

WEDNESDAY 2ND NOVEMBER 2005, 9AM 

PROTEST OUTSIDE LEEDS CROWN COURT, OXFORD ROW

12 NOON, MAJOR RALLY OUTSIDE LEEDS ART GALLERY


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 18, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> From www.uaf.org.uk
> The BNP is organising two demonstrations in Yorkshire in November. To build their demonstration in Keighley they are promoting the racist myth that Asian Muslim paedophile gangs are preying on young people and that Police failure to "get tough" is "institutional anti-white racism".


Do you have any proof its a myth love? Do you even read our fucking threads here? LOOK UP.


----------



## hibee (Oct 18, 2005)

Evidence please rebel.

I'm afraid even your typical lazy cut and pastes demand some backup


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 18, 2005)

I want evidence it will be a MAJOR RALLY too.


----------



## rebel warrior (Oct 18, 2005)

So hibee and Taxamo Wolf - do you think that there is firstly an ethnic dynamic to paedophilia, and secondly that there is a religious dynamic to paedophilia?  

I doubt all that somehow - and agree with what belboid said about this.  

The problem then becomes not anything to do with 'anti-white racism' or 'asian muslims' but simply paedophilia. 

In that case, why are the BNP having a demo about this?  They are simply doing it to stir up even more racism against a very demonised and marginalised minority community in the area.  The job of anti-racists is to stand with that community - not further isolate them as New Labour want to do.  That is why is it is right to protest against them - and make sure they are kicked out of the area.  

If you start -like New Labour do - with the main problem being Muslims and not racism and fascism then you end up not protesting against the BNP at all.  If the BNP organised a 'hang paedophile scum demo' in your area would you think 'oh, thats a good cause'? 

Better background on the protests here: http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=7611


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 18, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> I want evidence it will be a MAJOR RALLY too.



Don't shoot the messanger (although it is tempting)... From what webel posted it looks like there will be a demo. I remember going to Leicester about 2001 on an 'anti fascist' march, and there was a coupla hundred. I should think there will be about the same on this, probably more (I don't know). In terms of it being a major rally, I think anything would be 'major' given that there has been NOTHING so far. I think a lot of old yorkshire activists might get aggrieved that the BNP are organising a demo in a former working class heartland... Certainly worth a look for a number of reasons... I may even go, though I haven't decided yet, as there's a previous commitment I have made for that day.


----------



## where to (Oct 18, 2005)

a muslim friend of mine would only go out with virgins. yes, that has nothing to do with paesdophilia, but i can imagine where such an obsession towards 'cleanliness' could lead one.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 19, 2005)

where to said:
			
		

> a muslim friend of mine would only go out with virgins. yes, that has nothing to do with paesdophilia, but i can imagine where such an obsession towards 'cleanliness' could lead one.



 Do Muslims have an obsession with 'cleanliness'? and how would an obession with 'cleanliness' have anything to do with expolitive sex with  children?

The issue the BNP have picked up on is about groups of young males apparantly grooming vulnerable girls for sex and prostitution.


----------



## where to (Oct 19, 2005)

firstly, i was refering to rebels question: "do you think that there a religious dynamic to paedophilia?"

secondly, i didn't say that muslims do have an obsession with 'cleanliness'.

and how would an obession with 'cleanliness' have anything to do with expolitive sex with children? what i am suggesting is that for a man who wants only to have sex with virgins, child virgins may become something that they may.... seek? value?

by the way - i am not saying that there is a religious dynamic to paedophilia - i am just suggesting where the practicalities of certain peoples sexual desires may lead them....

it would be a good moment for that weblink with the age of consent of various nations in the world to appear, i cannie mind what it says mind.


----------



## where to (Oct 19, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Do Muslims have an obsession with 'cleanliness'?



oh and yes, the muslim i am talking about, and he is only one, does have an obsession with cleanliness. sexual or otherwise.

he will only take a shit in his own house.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 19, 2005)

Does he travel well?


----------



## Oxpecker (Oct 19, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Does he travel well?



Does he travel far is a far more apposite question.


----------



## where to (Oct 19, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Does he travel well?



tell ya, it sounded like a fucking weird excuse the first time, 'scuse me i've got to go home to take a shit.' and that was him an hour from his house.


----------



## where to (Oct 19, 2005)

by the way i am not suggesting for one second that this person is inclined in this way (sexually). couldn't be further from the truth.

i think i've kind of derailed this thread a bit. apologies.


----------



## hibee (Oct 19, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> So hibee and Taxamo Wolf - do you think that there is firstly an ethnic dynamic to paedophilia, and secondly that there is a religious dynamic to paedophilia?



Where in the name of fuck did I imply that? Is that the best you can do, lie and smear?

I don't know the first thing about Keighley, I've never been there. All I asked you to do was back up your claim (or your cut and paste's claim) that reports of these gangs being asian was a "myth". Because I've read plenty claiming otherwise. If you can prove your assertions I'll accept your premise.

Obviously being a paedophile has nothing to do with race or religion and everything to do with being a cunt. But this case looks startlingly similar to the debate on here about Oldham a few weeks ago, where out of towner lefties swore blind in the face of contrary evidence from people who were on the ground that there were no such things as asian gangs carrying out race attacks against white people. For good measure they smeared an elderly man who was beaten up.

This victim mentality, this idea that only one community can be the agressors is a mirror image of what the BNP like to do. The left will have no credility with ordinary people if it carries on with this inability to tell the truth.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> So hibee and Taxamo Wolf - do you think that there is firstly an ethnic dynamic to paedophilia, and secondly that there is a religious dynamic to paedophilia?



This sort of thing is why you're widely hated here - you're an utter embarassment.


----------



## Herbert Read (Oct 19, 2005)

RW-you are wrong there is an underage sex problem in this area with  british asian men and young white UK girls, its well documented. For once i am in total agreement with hibee. Your delusionalism knows no boundaries.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> This sort of thing is why you're widely hated here - you're an utter embarassment.


It's hard to see how this posting adds much to the debate or to its tone.

Let's have a look. RW refers [post #172] to: _the racist myth that Asian Muslim paedophile gangs are preying on young people_. TW then responds [post #173]: _Do you have any proof its a myth love?_

Now, apart from the inherent impossibility of proving a negative, given that TW has challenged RW on this very point it sees entirely in order to ask [post #176]whether TW is, in fact, claiming that there are Asian Muslim paedophile gangs preying on young peope. _Is_ that the suggestion? Because I confess I don't understand TW's posting if it is not.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> It's hard to see how this posting adds much to the debate or to its tone.
> 
> Let's have a look. RW refers [post #172] to: _the racist myth that Asian Muslim paedophile gangs are preying on young people_. TW then responds [post #173]: _Do you have any proof its a myth love?_
> 
> Now, apart from the inherent impossibility of proving a negative, given that TW has challenged RW on this very point it sees entirely in order to ask [post #176]whether TW is, in fact, claiming that there are Asian Muslim paedophile gangs preying on young peope. _Is_ that the suggestion? Because I confess I don't understand TW's posting if it is not.


 I fail to see how either your post or RW's suggestion that hibee and Tax believe that asian men, esp Muslims are more prone to be active paedophiles does that either. But it's not the original slur that you pick up on is it? No, it's the angry responses that it provokes. Once again you demonstrate that you only demand certain standards of those who you dislike and more importantly _disagree_ with. That's commonly called hypocrisy - people would be far more inclined to take your constant complaints about this forum more seriously if you displayed more consistency in who/what you choose to pick up on.

Edit: in response to your edit: no, Tax asked if he had any prooft that _specific crimes_ were not being committed in Keighly, _not_ if RW had any proof dispelling the myth that asian men, esp Muslims are more prone to engage in active paedophilia. That's something entirely different. And it's a difference that i believe you and RW have chosen to ignore for your own dubious purposes.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

RW specifically referred to something as a myth,TW objected, RW asked whether TW thought it _wasn't_ a myth. RW then gets slagged off and I don't see why. That was a specific point: I think it merits answring. This can't be done by refernce to other things in other places, which I'm afraid is how you tend to respond far too often: don't deal with the actual point, refer to something else and say "why aren't you asking about that instead?".

Well, I ain't going to do that: I'm going to ask my straightforward question about this particular point. The question stands and I don't see that you've answered it: TW _specifically_ referred to the term that RW had specifically mentioned in the post above.

"Dubious purposes" is good though. Heh.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> RW specifically referred to something as a myth,TW objected, RW asked whether TW thought it _wasn't_ a myth. RW then gets slagged off and I don't see why. That was a specific point: I think it merits answring. This can't be done by refernce to other things in other places, which I'm afraid is how you tend to respond far too often: don't deal with the actual point, refer to something else and say "why aren't you asking about that instead?".
> 
> Well, I ain't going to do that: I'm going to ask my straightforward question about this particular point. The question stands and I don't see that you've answered it: TW _specifically_ referred to the term that RW had specifically mentioned in the post above.
> 
> "Dubious purposes" is good though. Heh.



What's that 'something' though Donna? It's the claim that there are Paedophile gangs active in Keighly, _not_ the idea that asian men, esp Muslims are more prone to active Paedophilia. And that's where you're going wrong by following RWs implication that the latter was what was being referred to rather than the former - you're both misreading, and i think deliberately so .


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

Well, not really. I think RW could scarcely have avoided asking whether there was an "ethnic" or "religious" element involved since the suggestion is that the perpetrators were specifically Asian and Muslim. I think they're entitled to ask what exactly _is_ being said here.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2005)

To answer the question (that was directed to RW btw and not the other way around), you might like to read some of Anne Cryer's recent comments, being the sitting MP and all. The fact is, and this does have some significant bearing on this, that Searchlight and UAF (who RW is a member of) recently split over this issue. In brief, UAF denied that there is any such activty going on and refused to work with Searchlight in aiming to target it. Searchlight believe that the issue is being ignored by the authorities and that it's driving many people into the arms of the far right as they're the only people who even make a pretence of caring about the issue. 

Now, having nailed their colours to this mast for their own internal reasons, the UAF/SWP/RESPECT supporters and members have to flat out deny that any of the sort of stuff that Cryer, Searchlight and other residents are adamant is occouring exists. That's the crux of this. And no amount of suggesting that people who take up a dissenting view are racists, islamophobes or have a belief in asian muslims as genetivcally pre-disposed to paedophilia can change that.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Well, not really. I think RW could scarcely have avoided asking whether there was an "ethnic" or "religious" element involved since the suggestion is that the perpetrators were specifically Asian and Muslim. I think they're entitled to ask what exactly _is_ being said here.



It's quite straightforward what he was being asked - you need only scroll a few posts upwards and you'll see it's as clear as day. Of course, what was really going on, and your faux-naivity about this does you no favours at all - was RW once again, going down the road of attempting to smear people who disagree with him as racists and muslim-haters, as being in sympathy with the ideas of the far-right etc


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

Of course, a lot of people who put this stuff about (or believe it) _are_ thoroughgoing racists and there are therefore very good reasons for asking for rather better evidence than is normally forthcoming.

I think we could do without crap like "faux-naivety". You have a very large and intellectually disabling inability to deal with differing points of view without accusing those who hold them of ulterior motives. It's what makes you such a charmless and aggressive debater.


----------



## rednblack (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> It's what makes you such a charmless and aggressive debater.



you accuse someone of being charmless! now that's funny? isnt there a line of old ladies waiting to check their latest agatha christie out or summat?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

Not in a medical library, dear boy.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2005)

Ok, _genuine_ naivity as to RW's motivations and what he was intending to suggest. And suprising naivity for one whose been on here and around the left for some considerable time.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 19, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> To answer the question (that was directed to RW btw and not the other way around), you might like to read some of Anne Cryer's recent comments, being the sitting MP and all. The fact is, and this does have some significant bearing on this, that Searchlight and UAF (who RW is a member of) recently split over this issue. In brief, UAF denied that there is any such activty going on and refused to work with Searchlight in aiming to target it. Searchlight believe that the issue is being ignored by the authorities and that it's driving many people into the arms of the far right as they're the only people who even make a pretence of caring about the issue.
> 
> Now, having nailed their colours to this mast for their own internal reasons, the UAF/SWP/RESPECT supporters and members have to flat out deny that any of the sort of stuff that Cryer, Searchlight and other residents are adamant is occouring exists. That's the crux of this. And no amount of suggesting that people who take up a dissenting view are racists, islamophobes or have a belief in asian muslims as genetivcally pre-disposed to paedophilia can change that.



A few comments

1) I doubt that this issue was the only reason for the Searchlight split with UAF

2) Nonetheless, it was one factor

3) Moreover, it is not just Searchlight who have noticed this issue--there is not only Anna Hall's excellent 'Edge of the City' documentary (screened 26/8/04 C4), but also the article by (for example) the strongly anti-BNP Rob Waugh (Yorkshire Post 11/8/04).  Indeed, given the way in which Searchlight/their academic quislings have hijacked my research elsewhere/previously, the fact that NFB 6 (out in February) commented on this issue (p.32-33) should not be discounted either.  

In other words, that even the Searchlight 'team' who usually barely give a fuck about fighting fascism on the ground in w/class communities when it matters, on the issues that matter, have been forced to admit the reality of this issue as something the BNP are capitalising on, is itself significant.  

Given that I myself (& others as noted) were cognisant of the reality of this issue before Searchlight, there is no way that truth should be denied just because Searchlight have jumped on the band-wagon for their own reasons.  In other words, as Hibee & TW have pointed out, there is an undeniable issue here that the BNP are seeking to capitalise on.  We (anti-fascists, white & ethnic minority communities) allow them to do so at our peril--and the SWP/UAF determination to ignore what is actually going on on the streets is yet further testament to just far how removed these perennial placard-wavers & political poseurs are from real life.  End of.


----------



## rednblack (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Not in a medical library, dear boy.




http://www.leisuretown.com/library/lotd/6.jpg


----------



## where to (Oct 19, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> RW-you are wrong there is an underage sex problem in this area with  british asian men and young white UK girls, its well documented. For once i am in total agreement with hibee. Your delusionalism knows no boundaries.



it was even on radio5 a few weeks ago. actually, their website might be worth checking for the 'listen again' feature.


----------



## where to (Oct 19, 2005)

"Searchlight believe that the issue is being ignored by the authorities and that it's driving many people into the arms of the far right as they're the only people who even make a pretence of caring about the issue."

aye, and thats propably why this unusual show was broadcast on FiveLive on a sunday morning....  

shame that the issue is not enough to warrant proper investigation- only when it doubles up with the threat of fascist activity etc does it become a problem that needs to be tackled for these cunts..........


----------



## audiotech (Oct 19, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Where in the name of fuck did I imply that? Is that the best you can do, lie and smear?
> 
> I don't know the first thing about Keighley, I've never been there. All I asked you to do was back up your claim (or your cut and paste's claim) that reports of these gangs being asian was a "myth". Because I've read plenty claiming otherwise. If you can prove your assertions I'll accept your premise.
> 
> ...



It was one idiot not "out of towner lefties".


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 19, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> So hibee and Taxamo Wolf - do you think that i will get away with answering your question with a question? Perhaps if you say you are not trotskyists i can assume you are therefore neo-liberal capitalists too?
> 
> If you don't accept that coloureds are victims 365 days a year, you are a rascist




Its spelt welf. Like wealth you numpty.

Donna i think you are being deliberately obtuse, though i agree that butchersapron is often overly aggressive*. I do not suggest there is any link between any race and paedophilia, nor religion. I asked for evidence that the situation in Keighley really was a 'myth'. I have received no evidence other than that which proves the opposite: see mr O'Hara's post for that.

ok? 

* you are. You tear into some characters with insane fury that most of us do not know the backstory too anyway. In 99.99% of cases you are right to do so, but from the outside it does look... aggy. However in this case RW is so widely reviled as a liar and a fool, you are in the right. And what you said wasn't aggressive anyway so donna can untwist her knickers


----------



## CUMBRIANDRAGON (Oct 19, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Where in the name of fuck did I imply that? Is that the best you can do, lie and smear?
> 
> I don't know the first thing about Keighley, I've never been there. All I asked you to do was back up your claim (or your cut and paste's claim) that reports of these gangs being asian was a "myth". Because I've read plenty claiming otherwise. If you can prove your assertions I'll accept your premise.
> 
> ...



This is what I wanted to say but did'nt want to be called a fascist troll.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> I asked for evidence that the situation in Keighley really was a 'myth'.


I appreciate that, but that's not what you said: RW mentioned a specific myth and then you responded to it. If that wasn't precisely what you meant than that's fine, words aren't exact and nor is our usage of them, and there's too much round here of the habit of trying to prove that somebody's said something they ain't by insisting on a rigid interpretation of their words.

But by the same token, you can see why RW made the response that he did and it was wrong for people to plough into him for it.


----------



## hibee (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> I appreciate that, but that's not what you said: RW mentioned a specific myth and then you responded to it. If that wasn't precisely what you meant than that's fine, words aren't exact and nor is our usage of them, and there's too much round here of the habit of trying to prove that somebody's said something they ain't by insisting on a rigid interpretation of their words.
> 
> But by the same token, you can see why RW made the response that he did and it was wrong for people to plough into him for it.



No it'a not. He tried to make out anyone who was disagreeing with him was implying paedophelia was linked to Islam, when all myself and taxamo were asking him to to do was back up his assertions.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> No it'a not. He tried to make out anyone who was disagreeing with him was implying paedophelia was linked to Islam, when all myself and taxamo were asking him to to do was back up his assertions.


No he didn't h, he asked you to clarify what you were saying.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 19, 2005)

why the fuck should we? [she?] was asserting that it WAS a myth, we asked for evidence. [she?] responded by asking us a question, not answering.

As it turns put in our experience of reb w we knew she wasn't asking us if we thought there was a link between islam and paedophilia, but asking us that instead of giving evidence that we asked for, she was saying ''your with us or against us, question us and your a racist''

Donna i don't really know you but you are being incredibly tiresome this matter is settled please please leave it or add something constructive. Do YOU think the keighley situation is true or untrue?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Donna i don't really know you but you are being incredibly tiresome this matter is settled please please leave it or add something constructive.


Well hang on, TW, I thought it was too until hibee decided otherwise.




			
				Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Do YOU think the keighley situation is true or untrue?


Genuinely? I haven't a bleedin' clue.


----------



## hibee (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> No he didn't h, he asked you to clarify what you were saying.



He put words into my mouth implying I was a racist. Which is no better than I expect from him.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> He put words into my mouth implying I was a racist. Which is no better than I expect from him.


I think you need to be careful with "implying", it's half the problem.


----------



## hibee (Oct 19, 2005)

What the fuck are you on about? He asked if I thought paedophila was either an asian thing or a muslim thing, which had the dual function of a) smearing me and b) avoiding the question.

As a result, everyone rightly came down on him like a ton of bricks.

I like you Donna, but sometimes you go at entirely the wrong targets, and now is such a time.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> What the fuck are you on about? He asked if I thought paedophila was an asian thing or a muslim thing,


Well yes, because he'd referred specifically to that and been quarrelled with for it. Come on man, follow the posts, I've set it all out above.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Genuinely? I haven't a bleedin' clue.


well thanks for that   So your whole involvement in this thread is because the bigger boys were being mean to RW?

Oh my god [groan]


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> well thanks for that   So your whole involvement in this thread is because the bigger boys were being mean to RW?


Roughly, yes. In the interests of everybody being nice to one another, you know.


----------



## flimsier (Oct 19, 2005)

Perhaps you should ask to be a moderator.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Perhaps you should ask to be a moderator.


There's not enough delete buttons in the world.


----------



## hibee (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Well yes, because he'd referred specifically to that and been quarrelled with for it. Come on man, follow the posts, I've set it all out above.



Donna, I see no value in this but all I asked him to do was provide some evidence for what he said (or more likely cut and pasted) that reports of asian paedo gangs were a "myth". He made the assertion, it was fair enough to ask him to back it up. He then went off on a tangent by playing the race card.

If your intention was to stop people bullying rebel you picked entirely the wrong occasion, me and taxamo are hardly the heavy mob and he brought this one on himself.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Donna, I see no value in this but all I asked him to do was provide some evidence for what he said (or more likely cut and pasted) that reports of asian paedo gangs were a "myth". He made the assertion, it was fair enough to ask him to back it up. He then went off on a tangent by playing the race card.


But I do not think that he did: he mentioned that other people were and, having referred to a "myth" of that nature, was asked to prove its falsehood. My sympathies are not with those who then flew off the handle.


----------



## hibee (Oct 19, 2005)

Donna. There is a lot of evidence out there that these gangs exist. The ball was in his court to back up his claims they don't. Instead he implied the people asking him to justify his position were racist.

And intelligent man like you really should know better than to defend a liar like that.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 19, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> And intelligent man like you really should know better than to defend a liar like that.


You're not really expecting me to debate in those terms? Pity's sake man.


----------



## Boo (Oct 20, 2005)

*Protest on the 5th!*

 

Can't really comprehend this bloody thread!!! For god's sake if you must keep on wittering on between yourselves then fine but at least actually do something and be in Keighley to oppose the BNP on the 5th. Unite has cancelled it's conference and called a national mobilisation. A strong, unopposed BNP 'event' will only strengthen then in the run up to the elections next year: something West Yorkshire can really do without.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 20, 2005)

*Unity!*

Well said that man. There's also an anti-racist concert at Victoria Hall, Keighley on the 29th.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 20, 2005)

i'm not gping anywhere to deny the truth, and thats what the SWP (whatever front) are hellbent on doing.

That will really help the situation - a big bunch of outsiders telling them there is no spoon.

And don't give this Oppose SHIT. Oppos schmose. There will be a speech or ten by some twat and then its home for tea.


----------



## CUMBRIANDRAGON (Oct 20, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> No it'a not. He tried to make out anyone who was disagreeing with him was implying paedophelia was linked to Islam, when all myself and taxamo were asking him to to do was back up his assertions.



Did'nt Mohammed have a 9yr old wife who had his children?.Also its not uncommon for someone in some parts of the far east to have a 10 yr old wife.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 20, 2005)

*Yer what?*




			
				Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> That will really help the situation - a big bunch of outsiders telling them there is no spoon.





There fuckin' is-I ate me Weetabix with one only this morning!


----------



## hibee (Oct 20, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> There fuckin' is-I ate me Weetabix with one only this morning!



They got spoons in your b+b then?

The landlady'll think you want hot water in the bath next.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 20, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> They got spoons in your b+b then?
> 
> The landlady'll think you want hot water in the bath next.





I've been back since Sunday.  Just been trying to psyche myself up for posting again.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 20, 2005)

CUMBRIANDRAGON said:
			
		

> Did'nt Mohammed have a 9yr old wife who had his children?.Also its not uncommon for someone in some parts of the far east to have a 10 yr old wife.



Didn't jerry Lee Lewis  marry someone in their early teens which apparntly was not/is not uncommon in the Southern States of America, weren't the sons and daughters of the Royal also married at a similar age in medieval times?? But don't tell me that this explains grooming children into prostitution in either USA or medieval England.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 20, 2005)

CD comes a little unveiled...


----------



## past caring (Oct 20, 2005)

To coin a phrase....


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 20, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> i'm not going anywhere to deny the truth, and thats what the SWP (whatever front) are hellbent on doing.



Give it a fucking rest Taxamo...  the SWP aren't the only people mobilising for the 5th. I'm from that part of the Bradford area, and I know a lot of people who don't want the fash marching through their town, and will do whatever it takes to stop them.... paedophiles or none. 

This demonstration was being built for way before UAF decided to cancel their conference. There is a massive problem with fascism in Leeds and Bradford, and to try and claim that mobilising against the BNP is simply a case of 'denying the truth' is sickening nonsense. How many times have you had to deal with fascists harassing you when your in the street, or vicitimising your entire community for the actions of a few?

So lets say yes, there is a paedophile ring operating... obviously it needs closing down and being dealt with. That doesn't alter the fact that this is likely to be the biggest fascist march thats happened in ten years, and there has to be opposition to it.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 20, 2005)

He was doing so well as well...

Everyone of you nothings - we've seen you.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 20, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> So lets say yes, there is a paedophile ring operating... obviously it needs closing down and being dealt with. That doesn't alter the fact that this is likely to be the biggest fascist march thats happened in ten years, and there has to be opposition to it.


 No, let's not 'say'. Is it happening?


----------



## pk (Oct 20, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> Do YOU think the keighley situation is true or untrue?



Ever been to Keighley?

Or Bradford, for that matter?

I doubt it, given your tender years and public school upbringing.

Makes me wonder what your involvement in this thread is all about TBH.

When I lived up there, the prostitute industry had nothing to do with the Pakistani businesses as far as I know (though I despise the kind of men who pay for sex and wasn't exactly asking around, my understanding was that it was controlled by British madams and enforced by the white gangsters).

Rumours of a paedophile ring involving the Asians started around the same time as the riots - if you ask me it's a load of old bollocks started by the NF to stir things up, but there we go.

Anyway - if a load of nazi scum die alongside a load of genuine paedophiles - who is really going to care anyway? 

Fill up a truck and stick them in an unmarked hole under a motorway somewhere, fuck the lot of them.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 20, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> No, let's not 'say'. Is it happening?



I dont know in detail, all I know is that there's been alot of fash leaflets about it given out in Keighley rumoring it, and there have been some cases reported by searchlight. Certainly nobody in the area that I know seems to think it is more widespread than child abuse in any other town in the country. 

But as I pointed out already, its fucking nuts for anyone who claims to be an anti-fascist not to oppose the BNP in this case, to say that activists should deal with child abuse as an alternative to fighting off the BNP is agreeing with their propaganda and allowing them to further sink their teeth into a town where Griffin got the best part of 8,000 votes and asian people are getting their heads kicked in for walking in the street.

Its nice and easy for people who don't have a clue how strong the fascists are in West Yorkshire to somehow seperate the issues and say 'oh well, lets investigate what the BNP and searchlight are claiming... then we can deal with the fact that the fascists are ripping the town apart later'


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 20, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> And don't give this Oppose SHIT. Oppos schmose. There will be a speech or ten by some twat and then its home for tea.



And I suppose you come face to face with fascists all the time do you Taxamo?  ...do you bollocks, come up to Leeds or Bradford and have a drink in one of the pubs thats full of nazi scum, they'd chew you up and spit you out before the door could hit you on the arse.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 20, 2005)

Well, there's a shed load of evidence that it is happening. 

That aside, and looking at this tactically you're going to give them exactly what they want, where they want it and with who they want it. Your agendas co-incide here.

Yes, please accuse posters who doesn't agree with you of arm-chair sitting as well. That's always good.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 20, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> And I suppose you come face to face with fascists all the time do you Taxamo?  ...do you bollocks, come up to Leeds or Bradford and have a drink in one of the pubs thats full of nazi scum, they'd chew you up and spit you out before the door could hit you on the arse.


 There it is.


----------



## pk (Oct 20, 2005)

Can't say I disagree with any of that red_hippy, even before the riots the casual animosity between the Islamic communities (many of whom are British and have been since the cotton mills and industry arrived) and the white townies was palpable.

I also doubt the "young girls picked up by Asians for some kind of paedo ring" story though.

If there is any kind of ring involving child abuse it'll likely involve plenty of white men too, many of them possibly BNP members...


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 20, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> I dont know in detail, all I know is that there's been alot of fash leaflets about it given out in Keighley rumoring it, and there have been some cases reported by searchlight. Certainly nobody in the area that I know seems to think it is more widespread than child abuse in any other town in the country.



This is the rigour that's giving the BNP a hand in Keighley.


----------



## pk (Oct 20, 2005)

... but the underlying point is that many of the working class white W.Yorkshire residents DO feel that elements of the Pakistani communities are taking the piss.

And it would be far more beneficial to address this honestly before wading in and attacking anything and everything the BNP happpen to be saying just because it's the BNP.

In a lot of ways they're saying things the left should have done years ago, IMO, before it got to this.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 20, 2005)

pk said:
			
		

> ... but the underlying point is that many of the working class white W.Yorkshire residents DO feel that elements of the Pakistani communities are taking the piss.
> 
> And it would be far more beneficial to address this honestly before wading in and attacking anything and everything the BNP happpen to be saying just because it's the BNP.
> 
> In a lot of ways they're saying things the left should have done years ago, IMO, before it got to this.


 But that's EXACTLY my (and other posters) point. And asking why that's the case.

(And pk, i'm not after a fight tonight, i've got enough on my plate, i'd appreciate it if you held back, i'll do the same for you when needed, just remind me)


----------



## past caring (Oct 20, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Its nice and easy for people who don't have a clue how strong the fascists are in West Yorkshire to somehow seperate the issues and say 'oh well, lets investigate what the BNP and searchlight are claiming... then we can deal with the fact that the fascists are ripping the town apart later'



There are enough sources quoted on the thread to evidence the fact that's it's far from rumour - I've even heard the local MP admitting the problem on R4.

It seems to have escaped your notice that the BNP are strong in West Yorkshire for precisely this kind of reason - _they_ are prepared to take up the issue (or at least be seeing to) whilst they left buries its collective head in the sand. Fucking shower.....


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 20, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Well, there's a shed load of evidence that it is happening.



that means nothing, there's 'shed loads' of evidence that child abuse goes on all over the place. It just happens that in Keighley the BNP are using it to exploit racial tensions that they have already built.




			
				butchersapron said:
			
		

> That aside, and looking at this tactically you're going to give them exactly what they want, where they want it and with who they want it. Your agendas co-incide here.



No. Giving them what they want would be allowing them, unhindered, to hold the biggest fascist demonstration in the north for years


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 20, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> that means nothing, there's 'shed loads' of evidence that child abuse goes on all over the place. It just happens that in Keighley the BNP are using it to exploit racial tensions that they have already built.



That's all very well but does it work in theory.

You never ever learn. You refuse to learn in fact. You're part of the problem.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> that means nothing, there's 'shed loads' of evidence that child abuse goes on all over the place. It just happens that in Keighley the BNP are using it to exploit racial tensions that they have already built.
> 
> 
> 
> No. Giving them what they want would be allowing them, unhindered, to hold the biggest fascist demonstration in the north for years


 Let me get this right then, you're saying that the accusations regarding what goes on in Keighley are false. What has led you to this definitive conclusion? What sources have you used ?


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> It seems to have escaped your notice that the BNP are strong in West Yorkshire for precisely this kind of reason - _they_ are prepared to take up the issue (or at least be seeing to) whilst they left buries its collective head in the sand. Fucking shower.....



The BNP are strong in West Yorkshire because there have been un-addressed issues around racism allowed to fester for year after year. As Pk said, the rumors started following the riots in 2001. The left has failed on doing consistent, effective anti-racist work in these communities. The BNP wouldn't be able to use these partially substansiated rumors to stoke publicity if that issue had been tackled.


----------



## pk (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> But that's EXACTLY my (and other posters) point. And asking why that's the case.
> 
> (And pk, i'm not after a fight tonight, i've got enough on my plate, i'd appreciate it if you held back, i'll do the same for you when needed, just remind me)



Hey... I'm not fighting - this kind of affects me, I lived up there for a year and maintain links with the place.

Issues that I think stir up deep resentment are things like the arranged and enforced marriage of young women born in this country, taken to Pakistan and made effectively slaves.

Also the notion of a young woman from a relatively high caste of Pakistani culture dating a white man has led to serious assault and murder of said young woman. I dated a Muslim girl (in Croydon actually, but still) she made it known on no uncertain terms that her brothers would kill her, and possibly me, if they ever found out.

There are a lot of issues that do genuinely seem to be hushed away so as not to create a debate, "keep the pakis sweet" kind of attitude amongst the council executives in Bradford - and people aren't stupid.

That's my honest take on it anyway. It was difficult to engage with any of the Pakistani community, until they figured I was a Londoner and not born there most wouldn't talk to me, once they sussed I was not bothered by race issues they'd be really friendly, but they'd always disappear when my mates who were locals were around.

Fucking sad really.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Let me get this right then, you're saying that the accusations regarding what goes on in Keighley are false. What has led you to this definitive conclusion? What sources have you used ?



Living in the area, knowing people in the area, seeing the BNP churn out rumor after rumor after bullshit rumor to deepen racial divides in Bradford.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

Why do you think so many people disagree with you? Two national programs, C4, a series of Radio programs, countless paper articles, the standing MP and so on. Are these all BNP stuff?


----------



## past caring (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Let me get this right then, you're saying that the accusations regarding what goes on in Keighley are false. What has led you to this definitive conclusion? What sources have you used ?



Sources? Don't hold your breath. This joker seems to have trouble remembering what he's said from one post to the next....




			
				red_hippy said:
			
		

> *I dont know in detail*, all I know is that there's been alot of fash leaflets about it given out in Keighley rumoring it, and there have been some cases reported by searchlight.






			
				red_hippy said:
			
		

> that means nothing, there's 'shed loads' of evidence that child abuse goes on all over the place. It just happens that in Keighley the BNP are using it to exploit racial tensions that they have already built.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

Yep. More of that rigour.


----------



## pk (Oct 21, 2005)

If these rumours are true, and there really is a paedo ring, something exclusively organised and used only by Pakistani men, then that's one thing.

If Pakistani men are taking a cut of the profits from the money these girls earn by selling themselves to local white men, that's another matter.

Either way - I would have thought some strength of opposition against the BNP would be a starting point for a much wider discussion and outlining of ways forward, so that everyone in the Pakistani community knows where they stand, and to report any incidences of known child sex activity, and also to ensure the local white communities know where they stand too, that they can actually live in perfect harmony with the ethnic communities and both can condone the same thing, whilst diverting resources to mutually beneficial causes.

Ignoring what may amount to be a huge show of jackboots sends a clear message to both communities though - that is - the left don't give a fuck and we just want whatever we can get... and the situation is obviously so volatile it could well be another riot.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

Past Caring, if you'd bothered to quote the whole of that first post, then people could say that in fact both say exactly the same thing.

Anyway, really can't be arsed making the same points over and again. Think what you like. The BNP demo on the 5th needs countering, the fascists need to be shown that can't have free reign in Keighley or anywhere else in West Yorkshire. Anybody who considers themself an anti-fascist and knows fuck all about the area can work it out pretty easily. I'm off to bed.


----------



## pk (Oct 21, 2005)

White and Asian men involved in sex ring 

Bradford police attack reports of documentary as inciting hatred 

Vikram Dodd
Saturday May 22, 2004
The Guardian 


> The chief constable who had a television documentary about young girls being "groomed" for sex in Bradford postponed said yesterday his force's investigation had uncovered that both white and Asian men were involved.
> 
> Mr Cramphorn said some press coverage could face prosecution for inciting racial hatred. He said a Daily Mirror headline, "Asian perverts show axed in race riots fear", was false and incendiary.
> 
> "I think that gets very close to the criminal standard of inciting public disorder. What basis is there for the words 'Asian perverts'? The investigation we have done has arrested both Asian and white men."


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Past Caring, if you'd bothered to quote the whole of that first post, then people could say that in fact both say exactly the same thing.
> 
> Anyway, really can't be arsed making the same points over and again. Think what you like. The BNP demo on the 5th needs countering, the fascists need to be shown that can't have free reign in Keighley or anywhere else in West Yorkshire. Anybody who considers themself an anti-fascist and knows fuck all about the area can work it out pretty easily. I'm off to bed.


 I think that's best.


----------



## pk (Oct 21, 2005)

So... anyone actually going up there then?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

To be part of the anti-white pro-paedo mob?


----------



## rebel warrior (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> To be part of the anti-white pro-paedo mob?



So your going to do sweet fa about the Nazi BNP now they are trying to march again for the first time in ten years because you agree with the New Labour/Searchlight/State line that the real issue in Keighley is not racism or poverty but paedophilia.   Brilliant. 

It would be nice if you stopped backing up racists/fascists on this thread (CumbrianDragon?) for a bit in order to justify to yourself that doing nothing about the BNP is better than joining an anti-fascist protest that will try to stop the Nazis trying to start a riot in Keighley or elsewhere. 

[and before you try to misinterpret this post of mine - I do not think that hibee or TW are racist - in fact I specifically said after I asked them whether they though there was a racial or religious dynamic to paedophilia that 'I doubt all of that somehow' - implying that I doubted they really did think that]


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

Oh please.


----------



## pk (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> To be part of the anti-white pro-paedo mob?



No, just anti-BNP.

If you think opposition to their bullshit amounts to anti-white pro-paedo then maybe they have won up there after all.

Again... fucking shame.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

No, of course i don't think that - i was trying to highlight the trap that UAF and associated idiots are walking into. They'll do more damage with this stuff than the BNP could alone.  Talk about isolating a community and calling it's members liars and racists (antiwhite and pro-paedo) - that's how you build against the far right is it RW?


----------



## rebel warrior (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Oh please.



You have already made it quite clear you prefer to support the 'standing MP' - a member of New Labour - rather than the Asian community of Keighley which has been attacked by racists and demonised by the Government.   

What a fucking hero.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> You have already made it quite clear you prefer to support the 'standing MP' - a member of New Labour - rather than the Asian community of Keighley which has been attacked by racists and demonised by the Government.
> 
> What a fucking hero.


 What to say. 

How are:

John Cryer MP
Leroy Logan 
Metrpolitan Black Police Association Chair
Rev W Martin Smyth MP

these days?


----------



## rebel warrior (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> No, of course i don't think that - i was trying to highlight the trap that UAF and associated idiots are walking into. They'll do more damage with this stuff than the BNP could alone.  Talk about isolating a community and calling it's members liars and racists (antiwhite and pro-paedo) - that's how you build against the far right is it RW?



So by trying to stop the BNP running riot in Keighley the UAF are playing into the hands of the BNP?  

You think Nazi fireworks and bonfires are just the thing Keighley needs to bring communities together?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

Again...

Yes, i love the BNP - you've finally caught me and exposed my game.


----------



## pk (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> No, of course i don't think that - i was trying to highlight the trap that UAF and associated idiots are walking into. They'll do more damage with this stuff than the BNP could alone.  Talk about isolating a community and calling it's members liars and racists (antiwhite and pro-paedo) - that's how you build against the far right is it RW?



Damned if you do, damned if you don't... seems to be the situation.

I still say you don't have to alienate the white communities, if, as the cops reported, white men as well as Asians were charged with sex traffic/child abuse offences, why not publicise that with counter-leafletting.

Nobody seems to have bothered, that's the thing.

Both sides are now so entrenched - bearing in mind there was Hamas graffitti as long ago as 1997 in some areas... seems like it's too much of a risk politically for anyone to step up and take some stock.

Meanwhile, the BNP are convincing lower class low income white families that they're helpless, nobody wants to listen.

Maybe they're right.

Fucking shame.


----------



## rebel warrior (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> What to say.
> 
> How are:
> 
> ...



I am sure they are happy to know that you, Searchlight and Cumbrian Dragon are all getting on marvellously.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> I am sure they are happy to know that you, Searchlight and Cumbrian Dragon are all getting on marvellously.


 In the UAF with you then? Well i'm not a member -  all the above are though. 

Happy the comrade eh?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2005)

Come on chappy!


----------



## past caring (Oct 21, 2005)

pk said:
			
		

> Damned if you do, damned if you don't... seems to be the situation.
> 
> I still say you don't have to alienate the white communities, if, as the cops reported, white men as well as Asians were charged with sex traffic/child abuse offences, why not publicise that with counter-leafletting.
> 
> ...



A sensible post.

It's possible pk, that the police were telling the truth, that white men were involved too - although it's perhaps interesting to note that in the piece you quote no numbers are mentioned; the quote from the Mirror could be strictly "accurate" whilst out of a group of, say, fifty men, only two of them were white....

It seems to me, though, that the real problem here is that the left is unable to even countenance the possibility that the paedos were Asian, whilst their victims were white - and that anyone who _is_ prepared to at least say it's worth examining _automatically_ has a racist or BNP agenda. The weight of the evidence _so far_ suggests there might be something to the BNP's claims. 

To oppose the BNP demo in such circumstances - simply because it is a BNP demo - whilst at the same time doing absolutely nothing to establish the actual facts (and more importantly, having the guts to face reality and do something about it, regardless of the ethnic background of the perps) is a fucking gift to the BNP.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> The BNP are strong in West Yorkshire because there have been un-addressed issues around racism allowed to fester for year after year. As Pk said, the rumors started following the riots in 2001. The left has failed on doing consistent, effective anti-racist work in these communities. The BNP wouldn't be able to use these partially substansiated rumors to stoke publicity if that issue had been tackled.



Piss poor anlysis of why the BNP 'are strong' in West Yorkshire. Whether or not we are really at the 11th hour of the equvalent of a fascist coup in this area ( and I must say that the situation seems to  worsen with every Red Hippy post) the question is why hasn't the left adopted the same community based tactics as the BNP instead of being obsessed with Iraq and globalisation. Funnily enough achieving something  locally might have been more achievable that campaigning for the instant withdrawal of British troops from Iraq. Who was it that said the real enemy is at home?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

I remember people on U75 saying that this was a hoax and they doubted very much that the BNP would return to the streets. I guess this means they were wrong.



> It seems to me, though, that the real problem here is that the left is unable to even countenance the possibility that the paedos were Asian, whilst their victims were white - and that anyone who is prepared to at least say it's worth examining automatically has a racist or BNP agenda. The weight of the evidence so far suggests there might be something to the BNP's claims.



Say it's true, and it was mainly Asian nonces and white victims. Surely the point is to show how fucking ridiculous the BNP agenda is. What are the national statistics for child abusers? Are they disproportionate in terms of ethnicity? Because I'm sure that when I last saw them they were overwhelmingly disproportionate in terms of men, and were slightly disproportionate in terms of white men. Should this be made into a point? It's a joke. Should people start demonstrating against men because they are overwhelmingly responsible for child abuse?

If there are nonce rings going on, then that needs dealing with. But for sick fucks like the BNP to try and make out they care about this kind of issue (while their leader supported an organisation who hearded 100,000s of children into gas chambers) is, again, a joke.

The fact that people will protest against the BNP, whatever their agenda. If the BNP were protesting for more social housing, against nonces, or a better NHS, it doesn't matter. They should be exposed for what they are at every turn if possible (anti-working class fascists), and that includes having counter demonstrations.

And a genuine question for being like BA. What do you think the answer is if you write off a counter demonstration. There are AF members in Bradford and Leeds and there is an anarcho "social centre" scene. What do you think should be done? What are the AF members in the area doing to stop the growing influence of the BNP?

As far as I know the AF member on U75 who lives near the area is going to the demo.


----------



## hibee (Oct 21, 2005)

I would counter the absolute bollocks "rebel" "warrior" is talking, but butchers and chuck have said everything I would have said far more eloquently than I could have managed.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

But that's not much of an answer. Other than saying rebel warrior is talking bollox, what would you actually do? And as the AF actually has members in the area it's not like this is just a theoretical discussion.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> But that's not much of an answer. Other than saying rebel warrior is talking bollox, what would you actually do? And as the AF actually has members in the area it's not like this is just a theoretical discussion.



No its not, and AF members in Bradford are definetley going to Keighley, spoke to one of them on tuesday.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> No its not, and AF members in Bradford are definetley going to Keighley, spoke to one of them on tuesday.



You better have a word butchers. You don't want the AF to be part of the problem as well do you.


----------



## Boo (Oct 21, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> There are enough sources quoted on the thread to evidence the fact that's it's far from rumour - I've even heard the local MP admitting the problem on R4.
> 
> It seems to have escaped your notice that the BNP are strong in West Yorkshire for precisely this kind of reason - _they_ are prepared to take up the issue (or at least be seeing to) whilst they left buries its collective head in the sand. Fucking shower.....



The BNP do not take up issues! They try to exploit them for their own gain and to try and spread their influence - which basically means a rise in racial tension, violence against asian and black people and riots. Look at Burnley - the BNP did fuck all on the council. How is 'the left' burying it's head? People have different opinions on the paedophile rumours and will have different responses - the main thing is that we stop the BNP! Like others have said on here, lots of people will want to stop the BNP stirring up trouble in their area-it bigger than 'the left'.


----------



## Boo (Oct 21, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> No, of course i don't think that - i was trying to highlight the trap that UAF and associated idiots are walking into. They'll do more damage with this stuff than the BNP could alone.  Talk about isolating a community and calling it's members liars and racists (antiwhite and pro-paedo) - that's how you build against the far right is it RW?



You idiot. You are equating the BNP with white people in Keighley. It's the BNP who are liars and racists, how is that 'anti white'?


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

Boo said:
			
		

> The BNP do not take up issues! They try to exploit them for their own gain and to try and spread their influence - which basically means a rise in racial tension, violence against asian and black people and riots.



Thank you... somebody who understands the need to actually defend the community in Keighley against the BNP, and isn't prepared to second that to stories from a Labour MP, some journo, or the fascists themselves.


----------



## where to (Oct 21, 2005)

rebel warrior - you are falling right into their trap, hook line and sinker. 

to be honest probably the thing that could be done would be to join their demonstration with a big swastika flag to discredit them.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> join their demonstration with a big swastika flag to discredit them.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

Boo said:
			
		

> The BNP do not take up issues! They try to exploit them for their own gain and to try and spread their influence -





It is sometimes enough to be seen to be taking up issues (as PC has pointed out).  That the BNP actually does very little about the issues it campaigns on can ultimately only be countered by pro-working class organisations that take up many of the same concerns and prove in practice that there are answers to these problems.  

Easier said than done, but that is the only way that a grass roots alternative to the BNP can be built.  Relying on 'exposing the Nazis' does not, as we have already seen, prevent the BNP's progress towards replacing the labour movement as the main political identification of a not insignificant minority of the white working class.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

I agree that a significant political alternative needs to be built.

You would place your hopes in the IWCA. I'm yet to be convinced and outside Oxford and Islington the IWCA doesn't seem to have much going on. Indeed I doubt the IWCA is any bigger than Workers Power.

I'd say that a new workers party, coming out of the TUs is a better option. The conference the RMT is holding in the new year could potentially be a platform for this. However even small groups like Workers Power can have a part to play in this, and it was a Workers Power member in the RMT who was the driving force behind getting the national conference to pass a resolution saying such a conference was needed. But I'd say a national alternative is the only thing that will prove a real answer, along with doing local work.

But the left can also oppose the BNP here and now. And taking them on when they turn to street demonstrations is one way of doing this.

As said above their stance on child abuse in Keighley can easily be shown up for the sick joke that it is. As Boo points out, you can't mix up the BNP with the local white working class population, who overwhelming propably have very little time for the BNP at all.


----------



## hibee (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> But that's not much of an answer. Other than saying rebel warrior is talking bollox, what would you actually do? And as the AF actually has members in the area it's not like this is just a theoretical discussion.



I refer the honourable gentleman to what I said way back on this thread.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

Which is? I can't work out what you're saying in terms of an alternative.

All I can see is that you're saying people are stuck in the 1930s, and street marches is not the main issue. You're not actually giving any alternatives.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> And I suppose you come face to face with fascists all the time do you Taxamo?  ...do you bollocks, come up to Leeds or Bradford and have a drink in one of the pubs thats full of nazi scum, they'd chew you up and spit you out before the door could hit you on the arse.


No i try not to drink in pubs full of fascists and your right, i don't come into contact with them day to day. I'm not going into it here, i'm not trying aggrandise myself, i believe that what the UAF has planned is a) incensive to the problem if they are going to put out that leaflet that calls it a myth b) will not directly oppose the BNP march anyway. They will have a 'counter demonstratiuon elsewhere, or line up on the route of the march and chant 'nazi' at the BNP marchers and possibly some local mums.

If you think i am advocating doing nothing please send me a PM. I am advocating not making the situation worse - by telling people that what they can see is in fact a 'rascist myth'. Also if the BNP actually have mummies marching i think there are better times to counter them. 

However i understand why you are angry, you are right - i do sound like an armchair man, and no, i am not from bradford or leeds - i am from london as you probably know cos... You know me. You also know i wouldn't last one slap, nay, one nipple cripple in a pub full BNP bods, and i am not saying otherwise. Please read what i have said carefully. I did not come to this position out of blind hatred of the SWP, i am well aware Wokers Power and other groups will be there.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> Wokers Power



Are they a cooking group?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I agree that a significant political alternative needs to be built.
> 
> You would place your hopes in the IWCA. I'm yet to be convinced and outside Oxford and Islington the IWCA doesn't seem to have much going on. Indeed I doubt the IWCA is any bigger than Workers Power.
> 
> ...





The size of the IWCA is irrelevant to the argument.  The importance of what the IWCA represents is in the fact that it gathers all its support among the working class, including, crucially, the very same kind of white working class voters who have little or no time for the left and are susceptible to the propaganda of the BNP. Nowhere have I said that only the IWCA could or should do this kind of work, by the way.

Talk of a new workers' party is just so much of the same old same old.  The old left is dead in the water, both organisationally and ideologically.  At best, it would inevitably be run by the tiny minority of bureaucrats willing to jump off the New Labour gravy train (and their numbers would dwindle if Brown gets the leadership anyway), talking the time-honoured language of the 
past, hankering after a social democracy the conditions for which have disappeared.  What is attractive about this to grouplets like WP is that they would be able to fulfil their role of 'exposing' these 'sell-out' leaders ( a subconcious psychological need), while going through the tired motions of 'fighting for a revolutionary platform,' or some such failed notion from the past. The beauty of the type of politics the IWCA represents is that there is no blueprint; it has the potential to develope through responding to changing conditions. 

Would you say that 8000 BNP votes in the General Election is entirely insignificant, by the way? I'd say that to get that kind of support a certain chord must have been struck.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

I know you are fond of talking about "the old left" but I really don't want to go over all that again.

In terms of the IWCA, its size does have some relevance. It's been around a few years now and the fact that its membership is probably around the same size as Workers Power suggests that its resonance in the working class might not be that great, to put it mildly. As does the fact that it hasn't moved outside of Oxford and Islington.

And as for the "beauty" of IWCA politics. Sorry but it's all been done before and is just as tired as any other tactic or ideology.

I know your views on a new workers party, so again there is no point going over the same old ground. I think a union like the RMT could be a catalyst for a new workers party that could gain significant support in the working class. You don't.

Anyway, it's Friday afternoon, and this has all been done before. So although I know you have your own subconscious need to rave on about the old left I really can't be bothered.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Say it's true, and it was mainly Asian nonces and white victims. Surely the point is to show how fucking ridiculous the BNP agenda is. What are the national statistics for child abusers? Are they disproportionate in terms of ethnicity? Because I'm sure that when I last saw them they were overwhelmingly disproportionate in terms of men, and were slightly disproportionate in terms of white men. Should this be made into a point? It's a joke. Should people start demonstrating against men because they are overwhelmingly responsible for child abuse?





This is entirely typical of what the left has become.  Rather than address a given local situation, the left sticks its had in the sand and talks in generalisations.  That what you are saying is true undermines this statement not at all, because, as pointed out elsewhere, the BNP have definitely struck a chord with this, and it can only be countered by sticking closely to the facts of what has been going on in Keighly.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> That what you are saying is true undermines this statement not at all, because, as pointed out elsewhere, the BNP have definitely struck a chord with this, and it can only be countered by sticking closely to the facts of what has been going on in Keighly.



How do you know?

I'm sure the majority of white working class people in Keighley still think the BNP are a joke. The police will deal with child abusers in Keighley as they do with child abusers in other parts of the country. The fact that their record on dealing with this kind of crime is pretty useless is another matter.

It still comes down to the fact that the BNPs "answers" to this are a sick joke. And this should be pointed out. And where is the left, anywhere, saying that if there are child abusers in Keighley the situation shouldn't be dealt with?

Also, as with hibee, you seem to be providing very little answers as to what you think the left in Keighley should do here and now.

Do you think the BNP demonstration should just be ignored by the left?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I know you are fond of talking about "the old left" but I really don't want to go over all that again.
> 
> In terms of the IWCA, its size does have some relevance. It's been around a few years now and the fact that its membership is probably around the same size as Workers Power suggests that its resonance in the working class might not be that great, to put it mildly. As does the fact that it hasn't moved outside of Oxford and Islington.
> 
> ...




So you raise a subject and then can't be bothered pursuing it?  And wasn't it you who raised the subject of the IWCA, not me?  Others have pointed out your trait of recycling old arguments in the hope that people will have forgotten what an arse-smacking you took the last time around. But there you go.

I haven't the time right now to go into it in any depth, but the difference between IWCA-type politics and the notion of a new workers' party is that, as said already, in the slim chance of it ever coming about, the new party would inevitably be run by bureaucrats; the far-left will no more able to gain control of it than it was in the ILP or the SLP (not that this would be a good thing anyway; the far left would wreck any sizeable organisation it ever got its hands on-its record speaks for itself.)  The IWCA, and any similar organisation, on the other hand, has the advantage of being a grass roots organisation that attempts to respond to the immediate concerns of the working class people whose support it attempts to win.  And while community campaigning has been done before, it has usually been those whose agenda is driven by ideological dogma; I don't think that is something the IWCA could be accused of. Rather than being sentimentally attached to past failure, it has the potential to develop with the changing situation.  The bewilderment with which the far-left greets the fact that there is no IWCA programme for world transformation is only one instance of its dogmatism and inability to grasp the idea that an organisation needs to primarily address the situation it finds itself in and can change as the situation changes 

As for membership, these kind of organisations are not going to arise spontaneously.  This takes nothing away from the fact that where the IWCA has organised it has, as pointed out, been able to win the support of precisely that constituency so vital to the BNP.  The lesson has yet to be learned, I think. 

I await your customary reference to the SSP; oh no, I forgot; you can't be bothered going over old ground, can you? (Even if this is precisely what you've been doing, in this thread and others, on and off all day.)


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I'm sure the majority of white working class people in Keighley still think the BNP are a joke.





What of the 8000 who voted for 'em?  Keighley's only a small town too.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> So you raise a subject and then can't be bothered pursuing it? And wasn't it you who raised the subject of the IWCA, not me? Others have pointed out your trait of recycling old arguments in the hope that people will have forgotten what an arse-smacking you took the last time around. But there you go.



I can't remember the last time I brought up the IWCA and I've hardly gone into a critique of them, just pointed out what a tiny organisation they are. On the other hand some IWCA supporters on here seem to have a worrying obsession with Workers Power. As for "arse smacking" is your subconscious kicking in again?

Have a nice weekend.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> It still comes down to the fact that the BNPs "answers" to this are a sick joke. And this should be pointed out. And where is the left, anywhere, saying that if there are child abusers in Keighley the situation shouldn't be dealt with?





The fact that the BNP's answers are a sick joke is neither here nor there when their vote runs into the thousands.

The left is not saying that child abusers should not be dealt with; what they are doing is shying away from contemplating the possibility that some of these abusers might be Pakistanis.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> The left is not saying that child abusers should not be dealt with; what they are doing is shying away from contemplating the possibility that some of these abusers might be Pakistanis.



Who is saying this? Some of the abusers might be Pakistanis. And what?

Leaving aside the tired old arguments about the tired old left you still seem very short on suggestions.

What should the left in the area do about the BNP demo? Are you saying they should just ignore it? If so, what else should be done here and now?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I can't remember the last time I brought up the IWCA and I've hardly gone into a critique of them, just pointed out what a tiny organisation they are. On the other hand some IWCA supporters on here seem to have a worrying obsession with Workers Power. As for "arse smacking" is your subconscious kicking in again?
> 
> Have a nice weekend.





Tell you what-why not spend your weekend practising getting to the heart of the matter rather than sticking your tongue out and running away?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> Tell you what-why not spend your weekend practising getting to the heart of the matter rather than sticking your tongue out and running away?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Oct 21, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Tell you what-why not spend your weekend practising getting to the heart of the matter


How would you do that? Are there classes? Weekend retreats?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

It's getting bigger as we speak....................

pubs awash with fascists.... attacks on Asians in the street.... strength of fascism in West Yorkshire..... biggest BNP march for ten years...... BNP are back to the streets.... defend the community in Keighley....and the need for a workers party to come out of the the TUC.

"Is this the  real world 
or is it Timperley?"

(Frank Sidebottom salutes the magic of Fredie Mercury and Queen)


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

*Little cockney exposes himself again*




			
				cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> The fact that people will protest against the BNP, whatever their agenda. If the BNP were protesting for more social housing, against nonces, or a better NHS, it doesn't matter. They should be exposed for what they are at every turn if possible (anti-working class fascists), and that includes having counter demonstrations.





Talking of 'exposing' things, this exposes the contemporary far-lefts function as a mere liberal pressure group.  

The modern far-left is a strange phenomenon, with its dogmatic addiction to the ideology, politics and (supposedly) stirring rhetoric of late nineteenth century Russia, while in practice spending much of its time providing the personnel for the campaigns of the liberal middle classes. 

It's a funny old world.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> It's a funny old world.



It is indeed.

Walked into the barbers the other day and said, how much for a hair cut?

£6 he said. How much for a shave then? £3.

I said shave me head then.

Boom Boom. Tommy Cooper by the way.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

*"Oh Donna I'll stand on my head for you...."*




			
				Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> How would you do that? Are there classes? Weekend retreats?





You don't need classes in thinking for yourself. 

Robotrots might; others don't.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> It is indeed.




Thought you'd gone.  Run along now-go get focussed on Dowie's finest.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Tell you what-why not spend your weekend practising getting to the heart of the matter rather than sticking your tongue out and running away?



You seem to be making alot of broad judgements about the whole of the left in west yorkshire, and using the mistakes of UAF to do that. 

Whose said anything about running away? 

I can't speak for any other groups, but it's not WP's intention to plough in, cause trouble and fuck off. The reason I never joined the SWP is because I saw them do that in Bradford in 2001, and saw them stand back whilst local people, mates, got banged up for 6yrs at a time.

We don't have anybody in Keighley, aside of a few people I know, but we having been working to build a community anti-racist campaign (mainly with youth) in Beeston, Leeds. After the bombings It would have been quite easy for us to piss around holding mean-nothing peace marches with a few buisness owners, and then fuck off when it got out of the press... but thats not what we've done, and its not what we'll do in Keighley. WP are doing what they can to organise a militant response to the BNP on the 5th, and to do the same sort of youth work we've been doing in Leeds afterwards.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

What I can't understand is what Cockers's lot have been doing in West Yorkshire whilst the Fourth Reich has been gathering pace.Surely their eagle eyed cadre would have spotted it, one minute REVO days of action going into banks and asking to see the manager  in order for him to cancel world debt and the next minute pubs full of all day drinkers sporting BNP leaflets. Pre revolutionary days indeed!


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> Thought you'd gone. Run along now-go get focussed on Dowie's finest.



Thank you Mr LLETSA.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> It's getting bigger as we speak....................
> 
> pubs awash with fascists.... attacks on Asians in the street.... strength of fascism in West Yorkshire..... biggest BNP march for ten years...... BNP are back to the streets.... defend the community in Keighley....and the need for a workers party to come out of the the TUC.
> 
> ...





Neither; it's 1977.

All together now: 'no Elvis, Beatles or Rolling Stones....'


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Thank you Mr LLETSA.





Don't mention it.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> You seem to be making alot of broad judgements about the whole of the left in west yorkshire, and using the mistakes of UAF to do that.
> 
> Whose said anything about running away?





This is the disadvantage of not reading all of the posts.  The reference to running away was directed at cockneyrebel, with his habit of reducing all arguments to the issue of how many members the IWCA has got and then signing off.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

> Neither; it's 1977.
> 
> All together now: 'no Elvis, Beatles or Rolling Stones....'



That's gone over my head, but one request. Can you not quote Mr Wilson, it means I have to see his posts. And they're so repetively boring.


----------



## hibee (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I remember people on U75 saying that this was a hoax and they doubted very much that the BNP would return to the streets. I guess this means they were wrong.



I remember in days gone by the Labour party used to hold marches, rallies and demos. This did not mean they were "on the streets" in the sense we're talking about; I don't remember tooled-up Kinnockites roaming the cities and commiting random arson attacks at the homes of Tory councillors.

You ask what my alternatives are. Since I dont have much time and I can't really be bothered repeating myself for the hard of understanding, here are some bullet points:

- Tell the truth. End the kneejerk reaction that anyone with brown skin must be innocent. Doing otherwise will be counterproductive. Make the fairly obvious point that, if there are organised asian paedos in keiley they should be dealth with; likewise the organised and disorganised paedos of all colours across the country.
- Face facts about the BNP. Calling them Nazis  has utterly failed for the same reason that tory buffoons wittering on about the "socialist government" never get anywhere. Accept that far-right populism is a very different beast to the voters from Nazism; they're clever enough to see it even if you're not.
-Orientate yourselves towards communities, not union buraucrats and party hacks in your "new workers party".
-Most importantly, win some credibility and pull the rug from under the BNP by getting things done on the ground instead of pretending you can end the war in Iraq.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Surely their eagle eyed cadre would have spotted it, one minute REVO days of action going into banks and asking to see the manager  in order for him to cancel world debt and the next minute pubs full of all day drinkers sporting BNP leaflets. Pre revolutionary days indeed!



Give it a rest y'sad bastard. No amount of sarcy rhetoric changes the fact that the fash are back on the streets in West Yorkshire...  

They burnt two mosques here after the bombings, burnt a shop round the corner from my house, and have been setting off brawls between asian and white youth at the secondary school in Beeston, where the bombers were from...  they've been attacking people in the street in Beeston and Holbeck. The month after the bombings a mob of about 50 of them were tooling round kicking the shit of any non-white person they could find.

So, say what you want, they are coming back on to the street....  and if your interested in finding some of the BNP/WNP pubs, I can direct you towards them...  see how far you get talking about the IWCA before you get an ashtray in your gob.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> They burnt two mosques here after the bombings, burnt a shop round the corner from my house, and have been setting off brawls between asian and white youth at the secondary school in Beeston, where the bombers were from...  they've been attacking people in the street in Beeston and Holbeck. The month after the bombings a mob of about 50 of them were tooling round kicking the shit of any non-white person they could find.





Who was doing this?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> So, say what you want, they are coming back on to the street....  and if your interested in finding some of the BNP/WNP pubs, I can direct you towards them...  see how far you get talking about the IWCA before you get an ashtray in your gob.





What's a WNP/BNP pub?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 21, 2005)

hibee you still aren't saying what should be done here and now. Do you think the BNP march should just be ignored by the left?

What you've said just sounds like rhetoric to me.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> What's a WNP/BNP pub?



Pubs landlorded and frequented by BNP or White Nationalist Party members and supporters... not too hard to work out is it?


----------



## hibee (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> hibee you still aren't saying what should be done here and now. Do you think the BNP march should just be ignored by the left?
> 
> What you've said just sounds like rhetoric to me.



I'm saying the left in Keighley shouldn't bleat on, rebel warrior-style, about "myths" which are well documented. If they're going to oppose the BNP don't treat the punters like they're stupid; listen to their concerns, articulate them and see what you can do yourselves. So that when you have your counter demo they can't say you're the ones sweeping the paedos under the carpet.

And have that counter demo by all means but don't pretend that waving lollipops is going to advance your cause one iota; I've been there, done that. The real work isnt done will loudspeakers and banners.


----------



## hibee (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Pubs landlorded and frequented by BNP or White Nationalist Party members and supporters... not too hard to work out is it?



Where are these WNP pubs?

Especially given the WNP don't exist anymore, and at any rate had only a handful of washed up weirdos and pissheads as members.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Who was doing this?



The 50 or so people in Holbeck and Beeston were BNP, as were those provoking the fights at south leeds high school. Don't know about the mosque and shop burnings, but coupled with the other stuff that was definetly BNP... and the fact that in the last month me and other WP members have been threatened by the likes of Mark Collett and Chris Beverly in the street more times than we have in the last year... I'm willing to make an educated guess.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Where are these WNP pubs?
> 
> Especially given the WNP don't exist anymore, and at any rate had only a handful of washed up weirdos and pissheads as members.



Right... they don't exist?   that'd explain the 60 odd of them who turned up the last time Griffin was in court.  

Where are the pubs...  

The Malvern in Holbeck
The Three Legs on the Headrow
The White Hart opposite Elland Rd.

and various other places around leeds. I wasn't claiming they are specifically WNP pubs, but that alot of fascists from either organisation drink there


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> That's gone over my head, but one request. Can you not quote Mr Wilson, it means I have to see his posts. And they're so repetively boring.



Grow up you fucking student , you spent hours on your REVO web board going on about me that's how boring I  am.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Give it a rest y'sad bastard. No amount of sarcy rhetoric changes the fact that the fash are back on the streets in West Yorkshire...
> 
> They burnt two mosques here after the bombings, burnt a shop round the corner from my house, and have been setting off brawls between asian and white youth at the secondary school in Beeston, where the bombers were from...  they've been attacking people in the street in Beeston and Holbeck. The month after the bombings a mob of about 50 of them were tooling round kicking the shit of any non-white person they could find.
> 
> So, say what you want, they are coming back on to the street....  and if your interested in finding some of the BNP/WNP pubs, I can direct you towards them...  see how far you get talking about the IWCA before you get an ashtray in your gob.



The BNP/WNP did this? Any one remember  Chicken licken ?


----------



## hibee (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Right... they don't exist?   that'd explain the 60 odd of them who turned up the last time Griffin was in court.



The WNP folded earlier this year. They subsumed themselves into the nationalist alliance, then the BPP and by now whatever little grouplet eddy morrison dreamed up on his last trip down the shops to buy paint stripper.

Do keep up.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> The BNP/WNP did this? Any one remember  Chicken licken ?



I've already posted what I know about who did this, maybe you could be bothered to read it.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> The WNP folded earlier this year. They subsumed themselves into the nationalist alliance, then the BPP and by now whatever little grouplet eddy morrison dreamed up on his last trip down the shops to buy paint stripper.



Alright, but I don't really give a shit what they call themselves... they are a bunch of violent fascists who frequent the same pubs in Leeds, and from what I know have been involved in attacks on people in Leeds. Whether they are nationalist alliance BPP, whatever, its the same people doing the same thing.


----------



## hibee (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Alright, but I don't really give a shit what they call themselves... they are a bunch of violent fascists who frequent the same pubs in Leeds, and from what I know have been involved in attacks on people in Leeds. Whether they are nationalist alliance BPP, whatever, its the same people doing the same thing.



Point is, while it's not very pleasant to have Mark Collet give you the vickys in the street, and burning down mosques is obviously a serious matter for your community, the WNP/BPP whatever nationally are an irrelvent sect of less than a hundred oddballs who are reduced to the odd bit of fireraising because they can do fuck all else.

The real threat from comes from the BNP who, despite the left trying to pretend it isn't happening, have won mass support by ditching the Nazi baggage and giving solutions, however dead end, to people's concerns. Rather than telling them what they should be angry about.


----------



## CUMBRIANDRAGON (Oct 21, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Didn't jerry Lee Lewis  marry someone in their early teens which apparntly was not/is not uncommon in the Southern States of America, weren't the sons and daughters of the Royal also married at a similar age in medieval times?? But don't tell me that this explains grooming children into prostitution in either USA or medieval England.[/QUO
> TE]
> 
> This is the point I'm getting at chuck some cultures , religeons etc have different beliefs.


----------



## CUMBRIANDRAGON (Oct 21, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> So your going to do sweet fa about the Nazi BNP now they are trying to march again for the first time in ten years because you agree with the New Labour/Searchlight/State line that the real issue in Keighley is not racism or poverty but paedophilia.   Brilliant.
> 
> It would be nice if you stopped backing up racists/fascists on this thread (CumbrianDragon?) for a bit in order to justify to yourself that doing nothing about the BNP is better than joining an anti-fascist protest that will try to stop the Nazis trying to start a riot in Keighley or elsewhere.
> 
> [and before you try to misinterpret this post of mine - I do not think that hibee or TW are racist - in fact I specifically said after I asked them whether they though there was a racial or religious dynamic to paedophilia that 'I doubt all of that somehow' - implying that I doubted they really did think that]



I'm not backing up racists or fascists on this thread . Maybe stirring things up abit.  .Sometimes I do get carried away  
I just think attacking the bnp and map demo and march is going to play into the fash's hands. 4 Councillors are way too many and I would not like to see another fascist in the chamber.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Pubs landlorded and frequented by BNP or White Nationalist Party members and supporters... not too hard to work out is it?





Have you ever encountered a member of the WNP?


----------



## CUMBRIANDRAGON (Oct 21, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> A sensible post.
> 
> It's possible pk, that the police were telling the truth, that white men were involved too - although it's perhaps interesting to note that in the piece you quote no numbers are mentioned; the quote from the Mirror could be strictly "accurate" whilst out of a group of, say, fifty men, only two of them were white....
> 
> ...



Why is there not a demo against the bnp and this paedaphile ring? .Does it really matter what race or creed these paedaphiles are. This would also steal the bnp's thunder abit.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 21, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Have you ever encountered a member of the WNP?



The 'voice of experience' is back (not of fighting fascism though). You teachers seem to get a lot of holidays? Was it Tuscany again this year?


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Have you ever encountered a member of the WNP?



I've encoutnered several people wearing bomber jackets with 'white power' 'white brotherhood' 'kkk' patches... skinheads, jackboots and pretty mean looking rotweiler's... whether they are WNP, nationalist alliance, BPP or any other nutty right-wing sect, the do the same fucking thing....  so why not give up the nit picking about who did what, where and which group they were in and accept from somebody who lives in Leeds that the fash are back on the street.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> I've already posted what I know about who did this, maybe you could be bothered to read it.



Maybe I am a slow typer?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

Meanwhile back in North Manchester a better example of the BNP's threat. A BNP member has got himself installed of a residents community group and was part of a group of local people who were demonstrating against evictions from properties that are being compulsory purchased through regeneration. SWP members who are UNISON members join the lobby and have a verbal go at said BNP member. 

Letter in Manchester evening news from Mike Killian from UAF protesting about his involvement and saying that local people won't be decieved by the BNP. Letter by Chair of the local Tenants group against evictions who defends the BNP member on the grounds that this is his personal politics which everyone has a right to and then describes the campaign against the evictions.

Obviously no member of the left involved in the campaign who actually lives there.

I find this more worrying than the appearance of a few skins in retro fashion gear.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> I find this more worrying than the appearance of a few skins in retro fashion gear.



Good. I'd answer, but I have a perfectly good brick wall next to me that I can smash me head against with less effort.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Oct 21, 2005)

I wouldn't bother with Chuck if I were you, r_h.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Good. I'd answer, but I have a perfectly good brick wall next to me that I can smash me head against with less effort.



Shouldn't you have stopped doing that a few years ago?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> I wouldn't bother with Chuck if I were you, r_h.



Are you still the good shepherd or have you been promoted to being one of Wankers Powers minders these days my little trotskyist pet.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Are you still the good shepherd or have you been promoted to being one of Wankers Powers minders these days my little trotskyist pet.



Christ Chuck, the interlect you exhbit in swapping Worker's for Wanker's blinds me...  everyone in the IWCA got such a sharp wit?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Christ Chuck, the interlect you exhbit in swapping Worker's for Wanker's blinds me...  everyone in the IWCA got such a sharp wit?



Please don't call me Christ and remember not to take any drugs to the demo. Btw UAF have called for a peaceful demo , how does that fit the 'no platform ' policy of WP?


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> remember not to take any drugs to the demo.



very original... yes I made a mistake, over a year ago, yes I learnt from it. Thats how life works funnily enough. 

As for our No Platform policy, come along and find out if you give a toss... otherwise, what does it matter to you?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 21, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Right... they don't exist?   that'd explain the 60 odd of them who turned up the last time Griffin was in court.
> 
> Where are the pubs...
> 
> ...



I've been in the White Hart when Chelsea used to play Leeds at Elland Road I think, is it the one with the beer garden at the back where people bring there kids in?










Menu looks quite reasonable...........
http://www.pub-explorer.com/spiritmenus/steakout.htm

no smoking area, sky football but no quiz night?


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

yawn. 

yes chuck, I bow down to your superior knowledge of Leeds and everything else in the universe.


----------



## rebel warrior (Oct 21, 2005)

Chuck - this post




			
				Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> What I can't understand is what Cockers's lot have been doing in West Yorkshire whilst the Fourth Reich has been gathering pace.Surely their eagle eyed cadre would have spotted it, one minute REVO days of action going into banks and asking to see the manager  in order for him to cancel world debt and the next minute pubs full of all day drinkers sporting BNP leaflets. Pre revolutionary days indeed!



really is a work of genius and does deserve some sort of acknowledgement.  Congratulations.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 21, 2005)

Who'd a thunk it...  Chuck and RW...  talk about a united front of a special kind.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Oct 22, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Are you still the good shepherd or have you been promoted to being one of Wankers Powers minders these days my little trotskyist pet.


 I might be able to give you an answer - if I knew what you were on about.


----------



## WP member (Oct 22, 2005)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> I might be able to give you an answer - if I knew what you were on about.



Chuck, so obsessed with little old WP that he really should seek help, manages to derail the thread, nice one!

Anyway for those of you who aren'ty complete fools we will see you in Keighley..  The real question is how long can the liberal, wet SWP hang around with the community leaders calling for 'peace and unity in our community' as the best way of stopping a fascist demonstration?  How long before these particular Trotskyists are mugged by reality? 

As for the Three Legs pub, some guy I know who teaches Refugees at College took 15 of them into that pub for a drink, the bar staff screamed at him to get out, pointing at his students saying 'we don't serve your lot in here'.

I am sure Chuck knows loads about Leeds of course. Maybe I could take you round the pubs in Morley, we might bump into Mark Collet!     Of course for poor Chuck being in the company of a member of Workers Power would probably send him into such an apoplectic rage he might be seized by a convulsion and collapse to the floor, trying to make another joke about 'workers defence squads' as drool comes out of his mouth.


----------



## where to (Oct 22, 2005)

why is there no chat on this demonstration on stormfront?


----------



## audiotech (Oct 22, 2005)

WP member said:
			
		

> As for the Three Legs pub, some guy I know who teaches Refugees at College took 15 of them into that pub for a drink, the bar staff screamed at him to get out, pointing at his students saying 'we don't serve your lot in here'.



The Three Legs has changed a lot then, as the SWP used to have weekly meetings in the upstairs room for years. It was The Vine next door which had a fascist presence, has did a number of pubs in the Beeston area - a NF stronghold one time.


----------



## pk (Oct 22, 2005)

"Why is there no chat on this demo on Stormfront?"

If there were it probably wouldn't have developed into this kind of petty secular bitching, which achieves fuck all apart from highlighting why most of those who consider themselves radical left wing will never contribute to or amount to anything.

I can't believe the shit being talked on this thread.

Can the little insignificant little parties not just sort it out with a game of rock paper scissors?

If any BNP were reading this they'd fucking laugh...


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 23, 2005)

Trotskyists being mugged by reality is a regular occurence imo but like a punch drunk boxer their are no lessons learnt.

Must be really exciting to be able to bump into Mark Collett he seems a really tough ex graduate. Leeds has always had a few fash around so what .As to what the 'real question' is I am just interested in why the fash have had a clear run in what should be the domain of the left, the  working class areas in Leeds.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The 'voice of experience' is back (not of fighting fascism though). You teachers seem to get a lot of holidays? Was it Tuscany again this year?





You crying again, Mr Experience?  You never learn, it seems.  I'm not going through it all again when our respective posting histories already show who came off worst on the previous occasions you chose to go down this road.

Why not try addressing the issues for a change?  For somebody who claims to be such a hardened class warrior you don't half get indignant about any criticism of your chosen brand of left-liberalism (albeit with archaic revolutionary rhetoric.)  You are tiresomely repetitive with it, as well. Some imagination required in SWP HQ perhaps? 

I've never been to Tuscany.  If you want to get personal, however, do the research: there are posts of mine where I referred to where I went on me hols, and I never even left this country.  (Tell you what-if you find it, you can cut-and-paste it, like you do with everything else.) I've been to a lot of other places though, such as the ones you and I have argued about from time to time on other boards; arguments that showed up the inadequacy your substituting what the Sacred Texts of the Great Masters say for actually seeing things for yourself and drawing some conclusions.  A lot of water has flowed under the bridge since the heyday of the failed Bolshevik experiment, tovarisch.  Still, mantras can be comforting, I suppose.

Funny, too, that you, like so many of your fellow Robotrots, tend to throw out the 'teacher' accusations when you get frustrated by even the mildest of criticism of the dogmas that you hold most dear.  You should know from other boards that this is something you share with plenty of the dullard far-right dogmatists, so many of whose traits you so unwittingly share (comes from being slaves to ideology): neither of you can genuninely accept the idea of any working class person who doesn't chant the approved recitations being able to articulate political opinions. Therefore thay must be 'teachers'.  (It's always teachers; I wonder why....) However, I don't think half-term comes in the first two weeks of October anywhere (the period I was away), does it?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> very original... yes I made a mistake, over a year ago, yes I learnt from it. Thats how life works funnily enough.
> 
> As for our No Platform policy, come along and find out if you give a toss... otherwise, what does it matter to you?





How come you haven't No Platformed Mr crying-on-the-phone-to-Nick Collett and his bushy eyebrowed buddy when they 'threatened' you by walking past your stall baring their teeth and going 'grrr'?  

Surely a chance to put the Workers' Defence Squads on the map was missed there?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

*Laugh and the world laughs with you....*




			
				pk said:
			
		

> "
> If any BNP were reading this they'd fucking laugh...





Undoubtedly.  They've been laughing for a few years now.  But not for the reasons you might be thinking.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

*Red Hippy's film of the moment?*




			
				red_hippy said:
			
		

> I've encoutnered several people wearing bomber jackets with 'white power' 'white brotherhood' 'kkk' patches... skinheads, jackboots and pretty mean looking rotweiler's... whether they are WNP, nationalist alliance, BPP or any other nutty right-wing sect, the do the same fucking thing....  so why not give up the nit picking about who did what, where and which group they were in and accept from somebody who lives in Leeds that the fash are back on the street.





Kinky Boots. Tsk boom!

What do you get out of writing this kind of stuff? Is it the recreational drug experimentation that's distorting your already questionable perceptions? 

I spent a weekend in Leeds back in May.  And, while I saw a few 'mean looking rottweilers' (thankfully on leads), the whole of the time I was there I never saw a single person wearing jackboots.  Obviously they need to start stocking 'em in Harvey Nics.  Or maybe I just don't know the same clubs that you maybe frequent? 

For 'somebody who lives in Leeds', you seem not to have noticed that, whatever they might be, the WNP/NA/BPP do not 'do the same things' as the BNP. That is why the BNP is a household name while almost nobody has ever heard o't'other lot.  And helps explain why the former are proscribed by the BNP.  You need to brush up on the facts before you start getting shirty, Hippy lad.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Please don't call me Christ and remember not to take any drugs to the demo. Btw UAF have called for a peaceful demo , how does that fit the 'no platform ' policy of WP?






I wondered that when I read WP Member's above post bemoaning SWP wet liberalism.

Could the day when the true vanguard bursts forth into the conciousness of the most advanced workers be close at hand?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The Three Legs has changed a lot then, as the SWP used to have weekly meetings in the upstairs room for years. It was The Vine next door which had a fascist presence, has did a number of pubs in the Beeston area - a NF stronghold one time.




So much of a NF stronghold that the 'No Platform' SWP held meetings in the pub next door to theirs?


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> You crying again, Mr Experience?  You never learn, it seems.  I'm not going through it all again when our respective posting histories already show who came off worst on the previous occasions you chose to go down this road.



Other posters can make their own minds about that. It does seem though that rather than deal with fascists intimidating Asians in Keighley, all that concerns you is the deluded idea that you somehow won an argument based on ignoring fascists stirring up racial tensions in West Yorkshire and intimidating anyone who stands up to that.




			
				LLETSA said:
			
		

> Why not try addressing the issues for a change?  For somebody who claims to be such a hardened class warrior you don't half get indignant about any criticism of your chosen brand of left-liberalism (albeit with archaic revolutionary rhetoric.)  You are tiresomely repetitive with it, as well. Some imagination required in SWP HQ perhaps?



I have addressed the issue, but you choose to ignore the threat of fascists marching in West Yorkshire. The only time I get 'indignant' is at those more holier than thou making crass statements of something they nothing about.




			
				LLETSA said:
			
		

> I've never been to Tuscany.  If you want to get personal, however, do the research: there are posts of mine where I referred to where I went on me hols, and I never even left this country.  (Tell you what-if you find it, you can cut-and-paste it, like you do with everything else.) I've been to a lot of other places though, such as the ones you and I have argued about from time to time on other boards; arguments that showed up the inadequacy your substituting what the Sacred Texts of the Great Masters say for actually seeing things for yourself and drawing some conclusions.  A lot of water has flowed under the bridge since the heyday of the failed Bolshevik experiment, tovarisch.  Still, mantras can be comforting, I suppose.



It was a harmless bit of fun to wind you up LLETSA old boy. I coundn't give two hoots where you went to for your jollies. To be clear, I do see things for myself with some reading of history. Your conclusion about this issue is to ignore it.




			
				LLETSA said:
			
		

> Funny, too, that you, like so many of your fellow Robotrots, tend to throw out the 'teacher' accusations when you get frustrated by even the mildest of criticism of the dogmas that you hold most dear.  You should know from other boards that this is something you share with plenty of the dullard far-right dogmatists, so many of whose traits you so unwittingly share (comes from being slaves to ideology): neither of you can genuninely accept the idea of any working class person who doesn't chant the approved recitations being able to articulate political opinions. Therefore thay must be 'teachers'.  (It's always teachers; I wonder why....) However, I don't think half-term comes in the first two weeks of October anywhere (the period I was away), does it?



Nice bit of spin to a harmless piss-take LLETSA. Some of my best friends are teachers. I don't get frustrated by criticisms of dogma, nor am I a slave to any ideology. However, when someone replies to a post by saying: 





> Have you ever encountered a member of the WNP?


 (have you?), then that is not about articulating a political opinion, but rather gearing up to take the piss (out of someone who appears to be committed to fighting fascism) which ironically is the one thing you can't deal with when it's thrown in your direction.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> So much of a NF stronghold that the 'No Platform' SWP held meetings in the pub next door to theirs?



Some individuals drank there on a Saturday afternoon when no meetings took place. Unlike you, sat in your box at Man City, some anti-fascists took it upon themselves to make them feel unwelcome when the time was appropriate.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Some individuals drank there on a Saturday afternoon when no meetings took place. Unlike you, sat in your box at Man City, some anti-fascists took it upon themselves to make them feel unwelcome when the time was appropriate.





More boasting about unverifiable events, I see MC5. 

However, boasting about unverifiable events is merely the other side of your mindless cut-and-paste political hackery, innit?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Other posters can make their own minds about that. It does seem though that rather than deal with fascists intimidating Asians in Keighley, all that concerns you is the deluded idea that you somehow won an argument based on ignoring fascists stirring up racial tensions in West Yorkshire and intimidating anyone who stands up to that.





I'm sure that you intend to enlighten us as to exactly how you've 'stood up' to fascists intimidating Asians and how they have in turn 'intimidated' you, MC5.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> To be clear, I do see things for myself with some reading of history.





Been for a Sunday dinner sesh in the Three Legs?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> . Your conclusion about this issue is to ignore it.





Nowhere on this thread do I advocate ignoring anything. You seem to be unable to distinguish between this thread and another one from a couple of months ago. Still, I know the pressure you must be under, facing the bastards down while they're intimidating Asians in the Three Legs.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> More boasting about unverifiable events, I see MC5.
> 
> However, boasting about unverifiable events is merely the other side of your mindless cut-and-paste political hackery, innit?



I don't see that as boasting. Where's all this cut and paste political hackery you speak of?


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Been for a Sunday dinner sesh in the Three Legs?



Nah, yorkshire puddings not up to much.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> However, when someone replies to a post by saying:  (have you?), then that is not about articulating a political opinion, but rather gearing up to take the piss (out of someone who appears to be committed to fighting fascism) which ironically is the one thing you can't deal with when it's thrown in your direction.





As I suspected-you seem to have gone to sleep it off for a bit.  Best thing, if this gibberish is how it affects you.  Have I ever encountered a member of the WNP?  No.  And I don't think many others have either.  Which was precisely my point.  As you might have been able to see had you removed that slice of fried potato from the shoulder of your denim waistcoat.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> I don't see that as boasting. Where's all this cut and paste political hackery you speak of?





Three quarters of your contribution to the RA board.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> I'm sure that you intend to enlighten us as to exactly how you've 'stood up' to fascists intimidating Asians and how they have in turn 'intimidated' you, MC5.



Dewsbury town hall, ended up in a room where the NF were to meet with two elderly Asians and another anti-fascist.

I found out that fascists had been told told to target me if seen on the streets (it's what they do to opponents). A friend had her windows put through and a swastika was painted on her house. Another friend was attacked by a local fascist loon (a teacher), but unbeknown to him, someone else was with him at the time and saw the fascist off.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Three quarters of your contribution to the RA board.



Bollocks.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

*MC5 finds his 'punk rock' roots.*




			
				MC5 said:
			
		

> Bollocks.





Yes, a lot of it was.

Have you recently fused with Attica and Pickman's Model, by any chance?


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> As I suspected-you seem to have gone to sleep it off for a bit.  Best thing, if this gibberish is how it affects you.  Have I ever encountered a member of the WNP?  No.  And I don't think many others have either.  Which was precisely my point.  As you might have been able to see had you removed that slice of fried potato from the shoulder of your denim waistcoat.



You might not have encountered these idiots in the leafy suburbs where you are, but in Leeds the fascist crazy gang that inhabit it's environs is out to cause problems in West Yorkshire before they hang their jackboots up.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Yes, a lot of it was.
> 
> Have you recently fused with Attica and Pickman's Model, by any chance?



Have you with the IWCA yet?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

*All our yesterdays*




			
				MC5 said:
			
		

> Dewsbury town hall, ended up in a room where the NF were to meet with two elderly Asians and another anti-fascist.
> 
> I found out that fascists had been told told to target me if seen on the streets (it's what they do to opponents). A friend had her windows put through and a swastika was painted on her house. Another friend was attacked by a local fascist loon (a teacher), but unbeknown to him, someone else was with him at the time and saw the fascist off.





And there was I, thinking you were talking about the here and now- you know, the very issue that the BNP are going on about, the central issue of their supposed demo on the 5th Nov?  I thought you were going to tell me about how they were using it to victimise a whole community (which they are) and what you are doing about it-you know, avowedly being a man of action? Silly me. Imagine my disappointment to discover it's just another excuse for MC5 to take a walk down Memory Lane. (Is that a road in Leeds?)

Still, I suppose all your tales will be verified when the latest of Eamonn Andrews' successors shoves that red book into your hands, eh MC5?  Now, I know youy keep jumping up with a 'Grrr! I'll show him a thing or two, the Man City supporting scoundrel!' and rushing over to the computer every time you try to get settled on the divan, but just try and blot out what I've said and you'll soon be able to sleep it off.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 23, 2005)

*How can I argue with that?*




			
				MC5 said:
			
		

> You might not have encountered these idiots in the leafy suburbs where you are, but in Leeds the fascist crazy gang that inhabit it's environs is out to cause problems in West Yorkshire before they hang their jackboots up.





Oh right then.  I never looked at it like that before. You win.

After all, it must be hard for you, sneering at Eddie and Tony over the rim of your Mackeson glass.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> ...avowedly being a man of action? Silly me. Imagine my disappointment to discover it's just another excuse for MC5 to take a walk down Memory Lane. (Is that a road in Leeds?)



Working class history has been covered by many (not enough working-class class ones though), here's one that does mention a road in Leeds - that exists.

The Making of the English Working Class, by E.P. Thompson.

As for the 'action' bit? That is meant by the second letter of the R and A board you keep mentioning.


----------



## Boo (Oct 24, 2005)

After the bombings It would have been quite easy for us to piss around holding mean-nothing peace marches with a few buisness owners

!!!!


----------



## Boo (Oct 24, 2005)

Boo said:
			
		

> After the bombings It would have been quite easy for us to piss around holding mean-nothing peace marches with a few buisness owners
> 
> !!!!



Oh no, this looks like I wrote it...was trying to demonstrate my astonishment at this analysis from red hippy - thought that peace marches were quite important in the wake of the bombings especially in Leeds...


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 24, 2005)

Boo said:
			
		

> Oh no, this looks like I wrote it...was trying to demonstrate my astonishment at this analysis from red hippy - thought that peace marches were quite important in the wake of the bombings especially in Leeds...



Yeah, I  didn't mean to misrepresent the importance of community action after the bombings. However, my experience of being on one of these marches was that rather than being the beginning of a road towards the community fighting back against the backlash, they were built in an obstructive way....  subordinating what the majority of young people on the demos wanted to the pro-government objectives of the religious leaders and buisness owners who were on the demonstration (clerics ripping megaphones of young women and warning them 'I know your father blah blah' because they didn't like what they were chanting,  standing in the way of organising very necesarry defence against the police and racists attacks) Anyways, bit of a de-rail... PM if you want to talk more about this.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 24, 2005)

Just had a brief search on the internet and this info came up. Do people know if it is accurate?

If it is it kind of brings into question whether an organisation who had a leading organiser who was a gang rapist and current members who take part in wife beating, terrorism and beating up a pensioner are best placed to take on the serious issue of child abuse. It's also interesting to read the searchlight article about one of the mums in Keighley who helped make the documentary exposing child abuse in Keighley. She slams the BNP for their cynical use of such a sensitive subject. As I said, they're sick fuckers.


From Searchlight

On Sunday 14 April 2002 was the day the tide turned in Oldham. BNP members woke up to a large feature in the Sunday Mirror exposing their leafleting organiser Robert Bennett as a convicted gang rapist and armed robber.

From Wikipedia:

While they claim any individuals involved with criminality would be immediately expelled from the BNP, Brian Turner, a Burnley local authority BNP councillor found guilty of attacking his wife and a police officer – has recently been told he will keep his job. Turner was arrested on February 5th 2005 at Cuthbert Street in Burnley, after reports of a domestic violence incident at a house in St Cuthbert Street, Burnley. The court was told at a previous hearing how Turner, who has 11 previous convictions, was aggressive towards the police officer who tried to restrain him, and kicked him in the leg.

Tony Lecomber, is a convicted bomber and racist attacker, almost killing a man on the London Underground. He was never expelled from the party, and is now the BNP's national development officer.

Paul Bennett, BNP council candidate for Barnsley (assaulting a pensioner.)


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 24, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Just had a brief search on the internet and this info came up. Do people know if it is accurate?
> 
> If it is it kind of brings into question whether an organisation who had a leading organiser who was a gang rapist and current members who take part in wife beating, terrorism and beating up a pensioner are best placed to take on the serious issue of child abuse. It's also interesting to read the searchlight article about one of the mums in Keighley who helped make the documentary exposing child abuse in Keighley. She slams the BNP for their cynical use of such a sensitive subject. As I said, they're sick fuckers.
> 
> ...





Given that this kind of stuff has been used against them for years already, to little effect on their growth, why do you appear to assume that it's going to have any great effect now?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Oct 24, 2005)

> Given that this kind of stuff has been used against them for years already, to little effect on their growth, why do you appear to assume that it's going to have any great effect now?



I don't think it's a be all and end all factor that will stop the BNP. But I don't think it's a bad thing to point out that a group that has members who have been convicted for beating up a pensioner, abusing and beating their wife and terrorism aren't the best people to deal with the issue of child abuse.

I also think that the stuff about the woman who helped make the documentary is damaging to the BNP.

And I doubt it helped their campaign in Oldham when it was revealed that one of their main organisers was a gang rapist. Hardly fits in with the family friendly image they're trying to promote.

I do think this kind of thing could make some people think twice about getting involved in the BNP, even if in and of itself it won't stop them growing.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 25, 2005)

*a spoon full of sugar.............*



> Oldham
> Far right runs Lib Dem candidate close
> 
> Candidate fails by 91 votes after recount
> ...



Always read the manufacturers advice when taking  medicine.


----------



## rebel warrior (Oct 28, 2005)

The demo on the 5th has been banned - see www.uaf.org.uk 

However, it is important that people who can try to get to Leeds on the 2nd still.


----------



## articul8 (Oct 28, 2005)

I'll be working next door to the City Art Gallery on Tuesday and Wednesday of next week.  So will be right on the spot for anti-fash demo as well


----------



## blamblam (Oct 28, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I don't think it's a be all and end all factor that will stop the BNP. But I don't think it's a bad thing to point out that a group that has members who have been convicted for beating up a pensioner, abusing and beating their wife and terrorism aren't the best people to deal with the issue of child abuse.
> 
> I also think that the stuff about the woman who helped make the documentary is damaging to the BNP.
> 
> ...


I agree - LLETSA surely you can't deny that where the BNP are going after the law+order vote, or an anti-rapist vote, showing their organisers as criminals or rapists isn't going to help them!


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 28, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> I agree - LLETSA surely you can't deny that where the BNP are going after the law+order vote, or an anti-rapist vote, showing their organisers as criminals or rapists isn't going to help them!





It doesn't help them.  But neither does it seem to affect their core vote all that much.


----------



## blamblam (Oct 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> It doesn't help them.  But neither does it seem to affect their core vote all that much.


No but it may well stop the vote growing beyond the core... difficult to know for sure. 

But in general media smear campaigns (true or invented) work very well against the left or radical workers (firefighters' strike etc.) so there's no reason they shouldn't work against the far right as well.


----------



## sihhi (Oct 28, 2005)

Fixating on past criminal convictions is absurd.

Are people who *previously* assaulted women or attacked people not allowed to be involved in politics?

Many ex-criminals have become lefties/socialists in one form or another etc etc.

The BNP currently does not use violence in any meaningful sense its strategy has changed.


----------



## sihhi (Oct 28, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> But in general media smear campaigns (true or invented) work very well against the left or radical workers (firefighters' strike etc.) so there's no reason they shouldn't work against the far right as well.



IMHO They've patently not worked.
NB 1 councillor --------> 20 councillors etc


----------



## blamblam (Oct 28, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> IMHO They've patently not worked.
> NB 1 councillor --------> 20 councillors etc


What on earth are you talking about?

They obviously have worked, cos if people took the BNP for what they claimed to be they'd be a lot more popular (left-wing economics, anti-immigration). 

The fact is most people despise them and won't give them a second's serious thought cos they think (rightly) that they're fascist, racist, neo-nazis arseholes. This view is echoed/shaped by the mainstream media.


----------



## blamblam (Oct 28, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> Fixating on past criminal convictions is absurd.
> 
> Are people who *previously* assaulted women or attacked people not allowed to be involved in politics?
> 
> Many ex-criminals have become lefties/socialists in one form or another etc etc.


So what? It tars them in people's minds. It's not progressive to focus on criminal pasts like Searchlight can do, especially economic crimes which large numbers of poor people are forced into, but rapists + the like fair enough. And it will still damage the BNP's image in some (most) quarters.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 28, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> No but it may well stop the vote growing beyond the core... difficult to know for sure.
> 
> But in general media smear campaigns (true or invented) work very well against the left or radical workers (firefighters' strike etc.) so there's no reason they shouldn't work against the far right as well.





On other boards I've often argued with 'BNP members' and others purporting to be on the far-right who talk as if they're the first organisation in history to be subjected to smear campaigns.  I pointed out that, compared with what was dished out to the left and militant trade unionsists in the days when they were still considered a threat, they haven't seen anything yet.

However, I think it says something about what the left has become when sections of it are prepared to not only adopt the tactics their enemies used against them, but will even go as far as joining forces with elements among those enemies.


----------



## sihhi (Oct 28, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> What on earth are you talking about?
> 
> They obviously have worked, cos if people took the BNP for what they claimed to be they'd be a lot more popular (left-wing economics, anti-immigration).
> 
> The fact is most people despise them and won't give them a second's serious thought cos they think (rightly) that they're fascist, racist, neo-nazis arseholes. This view is echoed/shaped by the mainstream media.



Just so we're clear by- "they" I mean media smear stories.

So why is the BNP as LLETSA and others point out gaining support in spite of media smear stories? 

See Joseph Rowntree Foundation report (PDF!)
http://www.jrrt.org.uk/Far_Right_REPORT.pdf

BNP's support has grown considerably since late 90s.


For the sake of comparison.
In France the FN were smeared to hell consistently throughout the 1990s and they still managed to grow. In spite of *every* single  daily newspaper in France (to my knowledge) calling for a vote to Chirac in the Presidential elections- got nearly a fifth (18% I think) of the vote


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 28, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> What on earth are you talking about?
> 
> They obviously have worked, cos if people took the BNP for what they claimed to be they'd be a lot more popular (left-wing economics, anti-immigration).
> 
> The fact is most people despise them and won't give them a second's serious thought cos they think (rightly) that they're fascist, racist, neo-nazis arseholes. This view is echoed/shaped by the mainstream media.





But that core vote that doesn't care about the past criminal records of BNP members-primarily white working class people- are the BNP voters that any pro-working class forces should be most concerned about.

After all, it isn't as if the BNP, even in the most favourable situation for them, is ever going to have the power to transform society in the way they say they want to.  The system would, however, prefer the 'lower elements' of the white working class to support a bunch of dead-end racists rather than any kind of dynamic working class movement.


----------



## sihhi (Oct 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> After all, it isn't as if the BNP, even in the most favourable situation for them, is ever going to have the power to transform society in the way they say they want to.  The system would, however, prefer
> *the 'lower elements' of the white working class* to support a bunch of dead-end racists rather than any kind of dynamic working class movement.



'lower elements'- lower by what definition?

do you mean just _some_ elements?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 28, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> 'lower elements'- lower by what definition?
> 
> do you mean just _some_ elements?





Those who have been the BNP's primary support base for the past few years: that section of the white working class who live on estates and in other areas that are perceived to have been-and often actually have been- neglected by local and central government. 

I put the term in inverted commas, you will have noticed, but what I also meant was that any analysis would reveal this section of the working class to be at the bottom of the white working class pile economically.


----------



## sihhi (Oct 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Those who have been the BNP's primary support base for the past few years: that section of the white working class who live on estates and in other areas that are perceived to have been-and often actually have been- neglected by local and central government.
> 
> I put the term in inverted commas, you will have noticed, but what I also meant was that any analysis would reveal this section of the working class to be at the bottom of the white working class pile economically.



I get you- agreed. I also believe BNP support is significant amongst other cross-sections of the working class. 

For instance _young-ish working class males (18-25) not living on estates but in homes in centre/suburb still with their families_ in certain towns at least.
(As far as I understand Oldham etc have a more particular dynamic.)


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 28, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> After all, it isn't as if the BNP, even in the most favourable situation for them, is ever going to have the power to transform society in the way they say they want to.  The system would, however, prefer the 'lower elements' of the white working class to support a bunch of dead-end racists rather than any kind of dynamic working class movement.


aha! Thats smart that is.

So overall you don't think the state will let the BNP grow bigger than it is now?Is this whyb you don't see the point in antifascism rather than building that other 'kind of dynamic working class movement' ?


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 29, 2005)

Taxamo Welf said:
			
		

> aha! Thats smart that is.
> 
> So overall you don't think the state will let the BNP grow bigger than it is now?Is this whyb you don't see the point in antifascism rather than building that other 'kind of dynamic working class movement' ?





I don't know if the state can entirely control how big the BNP gets, although I suspect that a lot of its intervention is designed to contain it in a situation where it is widely seen as a party which is mostly supported by what the liberal (and not so liberal) middle classes would consider the 'dumb white proles.' 

I've never said that I 'don't see the point in antifacism.'  What I have said is that I agree with those who point out that different tactics are appropriate to different situations.


----------



## Larry O'Hara (Oct 29, 2005)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Just had a brief search on the internet and this info came up. Do people know if it is accurate?
> 
> From Searchlight
> 
> On Sunday 14 April 2002 was the day the tide turned in Oldham. BNP members woke up to a large feature in the Sunday Mirror exposing their leafleting organiser Robert Bennett as a convicted gang rapist and armed robber.



Unless I am very much mistaken, this guy turned out to have close family connections with Oldham Labour Party, and there is (more) than a hint of suspicion he was tasked to enter the BNP by either them and/or local Special Branch, with precisely the propaganda effect his 'exposure' had.  Anyway, haven't the SWP/UAF fallen out with _Searchlight_ this month--in which case,if you wouldn't accept their characterisation of you as accurate, why should their reportage of anybody else be accurate either? 

In short, _Searchlight_ is & always has been a secret state disinformation sewage outlet--and the SWP/UAF are rightly tinged by association.

There is no doubring the racist crminality of some BNP members--but as pointed out elsewhere on this thread, the 'criminal' tag is no substitute for political contestation, indeed it wasn't in Weimar Germany either.  Not that the BNP are 'Nazi', but the point stands.  And as for contestation, the stance taken by UAF/SWP/Respect on accusations of paedophilia in Keighley is diametrically opposed to that which is actually required to defeat the BNP.  So, no change there then.


----------



## blamblam (Oct 29, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> On other boards I've often argued with 'BNP members' and others purporting to be on the far-right who talk as if they're the first organisation in history to be subjected to smear campaigns.  I pointed out that, compared with what was dished out to the left and militant trade unionsists in the days when they were still considered a threat, they haven't seen anything yet.


Yeah totally - especially as much of the media does actually push a pro-BNP policy agenda, and win them probably almost all the support they do have (especially outside their activist stronghold areas).


> However, I think it says something about what the left has become when sections of it are prepared to not only adopt the tactics their enemies used against them, but will even go as far as joining forces with elements among those enemies.


Again, true. I hope that's not what you're accusing me of, cos I'm not saying that searchlight/media smears are great, just that they do damage the BNP. Generally I think the idea of exposing the true nature of the BNP + its leadership is politically useful (though not attacking them for having been pressured into economic or possibly minor violent crime, since this happens to a large proportion of the poor w/c).




			
				sihhi said:
			
		

> So why is the BNP as LLETSA and others point out gaining support in spite of media smear stories?
> 
> See Joseph Rowntree Foundation report (PDF!)
> http://www.jrrt.org.uk/Far_Right_REPORT.pdf
> ...


Are you being serious? Of course I know it's grown. It's still tiny though. The reason for this is most people think/know that they're a bunch of racist, violent, fascist dicks! Are you saying that if the media stopped printing anti-BNP stories and started printing pro-BNP ones, that would have no effect as well?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Oct 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Yeah totally - especially as much of the media does actually push a pro-BNP policy agenda, and win them probably almost all the support they do have (especially outside their activist stronghold areas).



Actually just about every national and regional paper has run front page and 'exclusive' invetigations into the BNP telling every one how nasty they are.


----------



## blamblam (Oct 30, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Actually just about every national and regional paper has run front page and 'exclusive' invetigations into the BNP telling every one how nasty they are.


Have you not seen my posts? I know they have. It doesn't mean that sections of the media don't have a pro-BNP policy agenda (I should have specified that maybe, though I thought it'd be obvious)


----------



## hibee (Oct 30, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Yeah totally - especially as much of the media does actually push a pro-BNP policy agenda, and win them probably almost all the support they do have (especially outside their activist stronghold areas).
> 
> Are you being serious? Of course I know it's grown. It's still tiny though. The reason for this is most people think/know that they're a bunch of racist, violent, fascist dicks! Are you saying that if the media stopped printing anti-BNP stories and started printing pro-BNP ones, that would have no effect as well?



Nobody's saying that.  But you cannot rely on this stuff when it has clearly not stalled an alarming growth in the BNP in recent years. Indeed the "dangerous", anti-establishment credentials it gives them may have actually won them votes in some alienated communities.

To talk of nearly a million BNP votes as "tiny" is complacent in the extreme. I really don't know why so many on the left prefer to pretend they are still the fringe movement they were 15 or 20 years ago as opposed to the very different, and much more dangerous, beast they are today.


----------



## Pilgrim (Oct 31, 2005)

Late to this thread, so apologies if this has already been posted.

According to a report on www.libcom.org, the Home Secretary has signed  a banning order for the 5th November BNP protest.

They are apparently going to make the banned protest a 'day of activity' however.


----------



## LLETSA (Oct 31, 2005)

icepick said:
			
		

> Have you not seen my posts? I know they have. It doesn't mean that sections of the media don't have a pro-BNP policy agenda (I should have specified that maybe, though I thought it'd be obvious)





What's 'a pro-BNP policy agenda'?


----------



## Herbert Read (Nov 1, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Actually just about every national and regional paper has run front page and 'exclusive' invetigations into the BNP telling every one how nasty they are.



but at the same time they alos run stories on asylum seekers, muslim terrorists, the invasion of our borders. While they pay lip service and denounce them as the nasty gang there stories of fear feed into the larger framework of BNP propoganda.

The BNP are growing and have moved from strength to strength.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Nov 1, 2005)

Run for the hills.......


----------



## Harold Hill (Nov 1, 2005)

So in the space of one thread the BNP are growing, very dangerous, not that big, trying to look respectable and threatening activists in Leeds at the same time.  

To those that keep asking to the critics of the march 'Well what would you do' well why don;t the UAF do their own investigation and then campaign for justice for any victims of paedophiles in Keighley'.  I've not heard of anyone being attacked off the back of this (if I'm wrong then please show me) so if Rebel is making a big song and dance about this and nothing about the accusations that kids are being abused then hes more fcuked up in the head than I thought.

PC had a point about the policeman.  I'm more than willing to bet that the consensus amongst some on the ground in Keighley upon hearing there were Muslim and white people arrested was 'Well they would say that wouldn't they'.  After what happened around the date of the original time the doc was due to air, many might think WYP are more concerned about BNP publicity rather than the public being made aware of an alleged ring of paedophiles in their area.  I wouldn't be surprised if the meddling just help galvanise the BNP vote even more.

And  anyone who thinks you could convince parents up there that something that would possibly affect their childs safety is more important than the BNP scoring a few extra votes lives in a funny old world.


----------



## audiotech (Nov 1, 2005)

The latest research reveals that:



> ...until recently, [in northern towns] the BNP attracted votes from young people and from some former Conservative Party supporters in wealthier wards around Burnley and Calderdale, in London, it remained older, working-class voters who had turned to the far Right, after becoming dissatisfied with the Labour Party.
> http://www.irr.org.uk/2005/october/ak000035.html


----------



## audiotech (Nov 1, 2005)

Harold Hill said:
			
		

> To those that keep asking to the critics of the march 'Well what would you do' well why don;t the UAF do their own investigation and then campaign for justice for any victims of paedophiles in Keighley'.



I went to an apparent 'anti-racist concert' in Keighley last Saturday, organised and very much controlled by Keighley Town Council, with proceeds going to the Mayor's charity appeal.

Very few people turned out. Reading comments from those organising it there has been some strange things going off. One poster made the point that Keighley Town Council told Love Music Hate Racism, ANL and UAF '...not to get involved in anything to do with Keighley...'


----------



## audiotech (Nov 1, 2005)

A five-mile exclusion "cordon" is to be thrown around Keighley on bonfire night in a bid to keep right and left wing extremists out of town.



> As the duly elected Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the politically neutral Keighley Town Council, we recognise that we have a `duty of care'...



http://www.thisisbradford.co.uk/bradford__district/keighley/news/KEIG_NEWS0.html


----------



## sihhi (Nov 1, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> A five-mile exclusion "cordon" is to be thrown around Keighley on bonfire night in a bid to keep right and left wing extremists out of town.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.thisisbradford.co.uk/bradford__district/keighley/news/KEIG_NEWS0.html



Bloody hell! Anyone from there able to comment?


----------



## LLETSA (Nov 1, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The latest research reveals that:





Don't see how that necessarily follows from the bit of my post that you quote.


----------



## sihhi (Nov 1, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Nobody's saying that.  But you cannot rely on this stuff when it has clearly not stalled an alarming growth in the BNP in recent years. Indeed the "dangerous", anti-establishment credentials it gives them may have actually won them votes in some alienated communities.
> 
> To talk of nearly a million BNP votes as "tiny" is complacent in the extreme. I really don't know why so many on the left prefer to pretend they are still the fringe movement they were 15 or 20 years ago as opposed to the very different, and much more dangerous, beast they are today.



It's not tiny it's very significant especially since many of those voting BNP are voting for the first time for BNP after having not bothered voting in years/at all.


----------



## audiotech (Nov 1, 2005)

LLETSA said:
			
		

> Don't see how that necessarily follows from the bit of my post that you quote.



My mistake.


----------



## durruti02 (Nov 12, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> Meanwhile back in North Manchester a better example of the BNP's threat. A BNP member has got himself installed of a residents community group and was part of a group of local people who were demonstrating against evictions from properties that are being compulsory purchased through regeneration. SWP members who are UNISON members join the lobby and have a verbal go at said BNP member.
> 
> Letter in Manchester evening news from Mike Killian from UAF protesting about his involvement and saying that local people won't be decieved by the BNP. Letter by Chair of the local Tenants group against evictions who defends the BNP member on the grounds that this is his personal politics which everyone has a right to and then describes the campaign against the evictions.
> 
> ...




chuck the lefties do not  and can not deal with this .. and your example is being replicated over the whole country while the swp/wp etc worry about offing with a few nut nuts .. wankers ( thats icelandic for people with short sight!)


----------

