# fascist infiltration of the left



## zakawale (Aug 17, 2004)

Hi, 
   pulled this off the BNP website. Never normally trust anything they have to say, but a quick google search seems to back this one up. 
   Don't wont to be accused of stirring up groundless paranoia, but this aint good.
Duncan

<editor: huge FAQ-ignoring cut and paste odyssey duly snipped while the Dodgy 'New' Poster Alert sounds off in the distance>


----------



## montevideo (Aug 17, 2004)

i'm bored, if he gets past 11 i'll be impressed.


----------



## JHE (Aug 17, 2004)

The two infiltrators "have spent the last 12 months actively campaigning within every prominent left-wing group in Britain", according to the author - but it turns out that they have just misspent part of their youth in the _SWP and its campaigning front groups_.  Many people have made the same mistake (albeit, in most cases, with less malicious intent)!

If they have any interesting dirt on the Social Workers, they should publish it.  So far, they haven't said anything interesting about them.  My guess is that they've found nothing very newsworthy.  We'll have to wait and see.


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

montevideo said:
			
		

> i'm bored, if he gets past 11 i'll be impressed.



Putting other differences aside for a moment, I think you've got this one wrong. Check previous posts.


----------



## editor (Aug 17, 2004)

zakawale said:
			
		

> Hi,
> pulled this off the BNP website.


Fascinating.

Now read the Posting FAQ.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

Hang on...really do.

I know what it's for and why it's now - but there are things in that that are worth talking about - surely

If only to hear why they were 'given' these roles?


----------



## zakawale (Aug 17, 2004)

*sorry*

sorry - have just read FAQ - only used to internal stuff. 
Tend to cut and paste so wont be accused of "editing" or misrepesenting source material.
Please remove thread if possible, did not meant to breach board rules.
Duncan


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Hang on...really do.
> 
> I know what it's for and why it's now - but there are things in that that are worth talking about - surely
> 
> If only to hear why they were 'given' these roles?



Three of the posts have made me go  

WTF? (I really mean as a question!) I think I need someone to type really slowly!

And JHE adds his usual shit.


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

zakawale is either the cleverest fash troll going or absolutely genuine - and i think the latter.  it's an interesting post as well - i smell bullshit on the part of the bnp, but not zakawale.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

Where can I read the link? Anyone pm? 

Have I missed something??


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

Just google for the BNP website - it's the latest article in the "News" section.


----------



## zakawale (Aug 17, 2004)

Hello,
          I’m sorry but I really fucked this one up. 
I normally use U75 to check up on what’s happening down south, so don’t tend to post.
I was therefore surprised when no mention had been made of BNP claims has have successfully infiltrated the SWP, UAF and Respect.
The positions they claim that their members have gained include ones with possible access to membership information for all three organisations. They also claim that these were positions of some influence and knowledge of what should have been secure plans.
A google search seems to lend credence to these claims.
Having now read the FAQ – once again I apologise for not having done so – I won’t post the relevant link, but assume that people know where to look.
I realise that my cack handiness makes this look like the classic fash troll thing - but I did think this, if true, would be of some interest/concern for people down south.
Duncan


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

past caring said:
			
		

> Just google for the BNP website - it's the latest article in the "News" section.



Of course. I just thought there was other stuff.

Apologies.


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

I note you've used your real name whilst posting on here previously - so I wouldn't worry too much. I'm sure that Nigel Irritable or dennisr will be be able to vouch. Not that there's any harm done, anyway.

The story is genuine - the only thing I can't work out is why it looks like the lad's head is stuck on in two of the photos.


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I just thought there was other stuff.



There is. A quick google for SWP and Joe Finnon brought up "Socialist Review" for December 2003. The issue included the following review by one "Joseph Finnon"  - given the location (Salford) I'm assuming it's one and the same person.....



> Sound and vision
> 
> Reds
> The People’s History Museum, Salford
> ...


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

If a troll, a very patient one. 

I think not.

I've met both of those people.

The article does get a lot of things wrong though, including names and so on.


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

christ. thats a crap review even by SR's standards!  They must have really liked him to have bothered printing it!


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

I'm a bit stunned really. I feel naive, - I never put anything past them and this is minor - but they were both chatting to me at Marxism and I just am not on guard ever (I've suddenly realised).


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

More searches find that she had a letter printed about the BNP in SW.

Fucking hell.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

> MANCHESTER HAS suffered at the hands of those who would deprive our thriving multicultural, multi-ethnic and multi-faith city of an anti-racism festival on institutionally racist and inexcusable grounds. I do not want to live in a city which cannot celebrate its diversity openly and honestly.
> 
> Greater Manchester Police, of The Secret Policeman documentary fame, stepped in to cancel our Unite Against Fascism gig due to be held last Sunday. This forced it into the welcoming hands of Liverpool. Those of us who work and campaign hard against the fascist BNP are irate and deeply disappointed at this turn of events.
> 
> ...


.


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> More searches find that she had a letter printed about the BNP in SW.
> 
> Fucking hell.



She's had quite a few letters printed, as it goes. Her details are still up as the contact for SWSS on the University of manchester site.

Still, I'm sure she appeared "keen", so it's perhaps understandable.....


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

I think it is understandable.

It'd be easy, but they have always emphasised youth. Rightly imo. 

I mean, are you seriously slagging off the SWP for this?

In a way, I suppose it feels like a betrayal - but they don't 'reveal' anything that we or they didn't know - and to be fair nothing particularly interesting.

They were on the fucking organising team at Marxism. Solidarnosc was too - I'll ask him about them. He's also in manc.


----------



## JHE (Aug 17, 2004)

*First time as bollocks, second time as piss-take?*




			
				Gullible Social Worker said:
			
		

> MANCHESTER HAS suffered at the hands of those who would deprive our thriving multicultural, multi-ethnic and multi-faith city of an anti-racism festival on institutionally racist and inexcusable grounds.


Those who do not recognise parody are condemned to publish it?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I think it is understandable.
> 
> It'd be easy, but they have always emphasised youth. Rightly imo.
> 
> ...


 That's a really crap and confused repsonse. No way out of this one.


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

hating to agree with JHE...

but I thought that too. Even tho there is a woman in Sheffield SWP who writes the same thing in _every article_ she writes.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> That's a really crap and confused repsonse. No way out of this one.



OK maybe, but Lenin did the same.

I am confused.

Told Solidarnosc. He's stunned. He 'got on with them'.

I think he might end his exile for this thread.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

I'm not saying much at the moment as to be honest, it hasn't quite sunk in yet. I counted these people as my friends, and I now feel that I have been shat on from a great height. Pritty much every other SWP member who knows them will also feel the same. The last time I saw them was at the Manchester SWP forum on Che Guevara, one of the people mentioned in the article and I were chatting about crap safety videos at work. The other lent me a tenner when I was skint.

For the moment, leave the politics aside. I personally feel betrayed. I feel very low indeed. I've been lied to grandly, as have others who considered them comrades and good friends.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

Fair enough Soly. I'm feel sorry for you. Sorry.


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> For the moment, leave the politics aside. I personally feel betrayed. I feel very low indeed. I've been lied to grandly, as have others who considered them comrades. Whether or not you like the SWP, this shows a new low for the BNP.



Sorry - this is bollocks.

When the BBC journalist and Searchlight "mole" were busy infiltrating Bradford BNP, was that a "new low" for the left?


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

sorry, but why does this mark a 'new low'? they seem to have actually revealed, and done, fuck all, apart from make some people feel personally stupid and betrayed.  that's pretty fucking minor as consequences of fascism go!

we do it to them, they do it to us. can't rightfully complain about their trying.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

pc: I think you have to allow him the fact that he's just discovered something about mates of his - rather than twist the knife (probably not your intention, but maybe the effect).

It's also presently based on a bnp article.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> sorry, but why does this mark a 'new low'? they seem to have actually revealed, and done, fuck all, apart from make some people feel personally stupid and betrayed.  that's pretty fucking minor as consequences of fascism go!
> 
> we do it to them, they do it to us. can't rightfully complain about their trying.



I don't think it has any real effect, other than to really piss off some people who felt they became friends with these people.

Hence soly's reply, no?


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

Well, maybe you're right, but they must have been really good. But on a personal level I do sense a deep level of betrayal. Might sound cheesy but it's the truth. They actually managed to gain a high level of political respect in the SWP, managed to get elected to conference, got senior positions in Respect etc. Personally, like I say, I counted these people as my friends, and the end score is that I've been let down. Badly.


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier - I made no comment on his feeling "betrayed". That's understandable and fair enough. I commented on the "new low" thing only (which he's since edited out).


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> pc: I think you have to allow him the fact that he's just discovered something about mates of his - rather than twist the knife (probably not your intention, but maybe the effect).
> 
> It's also presently based on a bnp article.


 Sorry flims, but this ain't getting swept under as a human interest story.There's more here...and you know this.


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

Of course you do, Sol.  But maybe you should also feel angry about how it was allowed to happen.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

BA: I'm genuinely missing it, sorry.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> Of course you do, Sol.  But maybe you should also feel angry about how it was allowed to happen.



You also have to reflec that it 'could' happen to anyone.


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> There's more here...and you know this.



One avenue to pursue might be to ask solidarnosc how convinving he might feel they are in their "real" role as boot-boys and thugs......


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> BA: I'm genuinely missing it, sorry.


 Really? I don't know how - but i'll take your word for it. You don't get what this means?


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> You also have to reflec that it 'could' happen to anyone.



Could it?


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> Of course you do, Sol.  But maybe you should also feel angry about how it was allowed to happen.


 Well that goes without saying. But what can you do? Should we suspect that everyone who joins the SWP is really a BNP infiltrator? I've advocated for a long time the end to the lassiez-faire attitude the SWP has to recruitment, and that the SWP should establish a political relationship with someone before they recruit them.

Hopefully there will be a full and frank discussion. But, if they were determined enough, then what in reality could the SWP do? Like you say, the 'left' has infiltrated the BNP and they have a fairly rigid membership proceedure.


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> You also have to reflec that it 'could' happen to anyone.


that they could join in with activities? yes, of course that could happen to aanyone.  that they gained sorta prominent ppositions?  on the basis of the politics in the things posted and that i've found....well, it seems to be very very basic angry shouty stuff that i can imagine them having a right laugh concocting. Strikes me as the old stroy of pushing people simply because they are 'keen', like PC said.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Really? I don't know how - but i'll take your word for it. You don't get what this means?



Maybe I've drank too much.

Can you spell it out. I'm not taking the piss. You think it means the SWP are just too enthusiastic with anyone?


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Maybe I've drank too much.
> 
> Can you spell it out. I'm not taking the piss. You think it means the SWP are just too enthusiastic with anyone?


 Not with the two mentioned. But I'm keeping mum for the moment until it has been brought up inside the SWP.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> Well that goes without saying. But what can you do? Should we suspect that everyone who joins the SWP is really a BNP infiltrator? I've advocated for a long time the end to the lassiez-faire attitude the SWP has to recruitment, and that the SWP should establish a political relationship with someone before they recruit them.
> 
> Hopefully there will be a full and frank discussion. But, if they were determined enough, then what in reality could the SWP do? Like you say, the 'left' has infiltrated the BNP and they have a fairly rigid membership proceedure.


 So you accept that there could be checks on membership? You could carry out normal checks?  There was a political decision not to.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> that they could join in with activities? yes, of course that could happen to aanyone.  that they gained sorta prominent ppositions?  on the basis of the politics in the things posted and that i've found....well, it seems to be very very basic angry shouty stuff that i can imagine them having a right laugh concocting. Strikes me as the old stroy of pushing people simply because they are 'keen', like PC said.



You and I both know that prominent positions are not 'gained' by letters but by activity mainly and secondarily the contributions and influence day to day. 

An article/ review/ letter never mattered a jot in my experience.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Maybe I've drank too much.
> 
> Can you spell it out. I'm not taking the piss. You think it means the SWP are just too enthusiastic with anyone?


 OK, that will pass for now. Yep, that was what i was saying.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> So you accept that there could be checks on membership? You could carry out normal checks?  There was a political decision not to.



There's no checks carried out. In terms of the actual situation, it ain't that bad imo. 

What difference does it make, other than give the fash a laugh?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> OK, that will pass for now. Yep, that was what i was saying.


But I don't think that is a bad thing, necessarily. Do you think there should be a membership test?


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> So you accept that there could be checks on membership? You could carry out normal checks?  There was a political decision not to.


 No, what I said was that we should get to know someone first before we ask them to join. I never advocated checks on membership, and it's right that we don't. Not to prevent infiltrators - this is the first case of the SWP being infiltrated that I know of - but, more importantly, to make sure that we are recruiting people who are serious about joining a revolutionary socialist party.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> There's no checks carried out. In terms of the actual situation, it ain't that bad imo.
> 
> What difference does it make, other than give the fash a laugh?


 Um..access to membrship listscfor one - all kinds of other info. I cannot believe that you are being so naive over this.


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> You and I both know that prominent positions are not 'gained' by letters but by activity mainly and secondarily the contributions and influence day to day.
> 
> An article/ review/ letter never mattered a jot in my experience.


no of course not (except they articles and letters are printed from people who they want to 'promote' to an extent), i'm just surmising quite a bit about them from what was written and my experience of how it would be really easy to play the eager new recruit -simply by being active, turning up for meetings and paper sales, saying you'd sold a few papers - and how that would lead on to conference, positions in the campaigning groups etc


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> No, what I said was that we should get to know someone first before we ask them to join. I never advocated checks on membership, and it's right that we don't. Not to prevent infiltrators - this is the first case of the SWP being infiltrated that I know of - but, more importantly, to make sure that we are recruiting people who are serious about joining a revolutionary socialist party.



Well, your checks don't fucking work do they? Nothing worked.

So sell me those checks once more.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> But I don't think that is a bad thing, necessarily. Do you think there should be a membership test?


 You shoild know fascist twats when they try and join....


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> this is the first case of the SWP being infiltrated that I know of


there have been umpteen!  a sun reporter during the miners strike springs to mind.  and a bloke from the daily mail tried to join my branch after joy gardener was killed (most of us spotted him, he got a crap story).

For a leninist organisation the SWP _is_ incredibly liberal in its recruitment.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron - No checks. Period.

Belboid - key phrase - _that I know of_ - and you're right, the recruitment should be tightend.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

No checks. Period. - says it all really.


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

a year is deffo the longest i've ever heard of


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> An article/ review/ letter never mattered a jot in my experience.



This simply isn't true. When I was young and "keen" I was encouraged to take positions within the branch/district - and also encouraged to write letters to the paper. It was those seen as "having a future" that were particularly encouraged.

In my experience, and I'm not saying this to have a pop at the SWP, it's just an honest assessment - "enthusiasm" is often valued over and above political nouse. Because it means that you might be more easily pursuaded to spend hours on the phone hectoring the membership to go on a demo/papersale/ to Marxism without questioning. Political education is something which concentrates almost exclusively on SWP literature, rather than wider theory - even within the Leninist/Trotskyist tradition - and it happens for a reason.




			
				flimsier said:
			
		

> There's no checks carried out. In terms of the actual situation, it ain't that bad imo.
> 
> What difference does it make, other than give the fash a laugh?



Well, if the BNP are this bunch of unreconstructed nazi boot-boys/thugs that the SWP and the ANL would have us believe, I'd have thought it makes quite a lot of difference.

These two will certainly have the names and addresses for most of the Manchester region. If they were on the organising team for Marxism it's quite likely they'll have had access to details of quite a few other areas as well. And these won't all be SWP members will they? I'd have thought non-members might feel quite let down by the SWP at the prospect that their details were now with the BNP..........


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

Look - Butchers, *read what I am saying.* I can't be arsed to argue the implications now anyway tbh.


----------



## JHE (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> ...recruitment should be tightend.


Is there  anything wrong with foisting membership cards on all and sundry - including people who haven't a clue what your 'party' stands for?  Surely not!


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

JHE said:
			
		

> Is there  anything wrong with foisting membership cards on all and sundry - including people who haven't a clue what your 'party' stands for?  Surely not!


 Oh, you can *fuck right off* if all you can do is snipe at me.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> Look - Butchers, *read what I am saying.* I can't be arsed to argue the implications now anyway tbh.


 Help me out here..


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

past caring said:
			
		

> These two will certainly have the names and addresses for most of the Manchester region. If they were on the organising team for Marxism it's quite likely they'll have had access to details of quite a few other areas as well. And these won't all be SWP members will they? I'd have thought non-members might feel quite let down by the SWP at the prospect that their details were now with the BNP..........



To be honest, this is something I didn't think of tonight in me being stunned.

It's the most worrying aspect. Utterly.

Shit.

edit: just to clarify: I know I was very very thick not thinking of this. I don't think it'd be hard to infiltrate anyone, but...


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

JHE said:
			
		

> Is there  anything wrong with foisting membership cards on all and sundry - including people who haven't a clue what your 'party' stands for?  Surely not!



You really can fuck off.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Help me out here..


 I'll explain my full position on this - a position I have held for quite some time - later, when I am not such a bag of nerves.

In terms of personal details - shit.


----------



## JHE (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> Oh, you can *fuck right off* if all you can do is snipe at me.


It wasn't a snipe at you - at least, not at you _singular_.

You know that (i) the Social Workers have always had a pretty liberal recruitment policy and (ii) for more than a decade (since about '92?) the 'party' has been frantic in dishing out membership.  In fact, you lot have been so frantic that some people have been 'recruited' without knowing that they've been recruited and that others (more) have joined without knowing what the SWP (thinks it) is.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

OK.

Oh, you can *fuck right off* if all you can do is snipe.

Better?


----------



## JHE (Aug 17, 2004)

OK, I'll fuck off - but not without one last thing...

Your infiltrators (the BNP writers of parodic letters to Social Worker) have, so far, done no more damage than upsetting a few Social Workers.  Upsetting Social Workers is not difficult.  In fact, it can be done very easily, even by accident.

Are there any interesting anti-SWP stories we can expect from them in the next week or so?  Be frank.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

JHE, who knows.

If you are on the left, you need to leave your gloating for another thread.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

JHE said:
			
		

> OK, I'll fuck off - but not without one last thing...
> 
> Your infiltrators (the BNP writers of parodic letters to Social Worker) have, so far, done no more damage than upsetting a few Social Workers.  Upsetting Social Workers is not difficult.  In fact, it can be done very easily, even by accident.
> 
> Are there any interesting anti-SWP stories we can expect from them in the next week or so?  Be frank.


 I don't know. Right now I'm still in shock. It's a lot to take in, especially given those concerned. Maybe, maybe not. Nothing is aluded to, and I guess they wouldn't have found out much that the BNP didn't already know, apart from who was shagging who.


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 17, 2004)

shit! 

If they have been invovled for a whole year theu're gonn know alot of people's personal details - will have probably been round lots of pepole's houses......god, Sol, I'm not suprised it's such a shock for you, mus be awful to find that out about ppl you thought were friends. Dunno what to say really, other than you have my sympathy (FWIW)

Are both these people in their final years? I wouldn't want to be either of them returning to Manchester for uni in september, I wonder if they gave their real contact info to the SWP.....

I'd be interested what other Manc SWPers think of this (altho Rosa is the only one that i can think of who posts on here..)


----------



## JHE (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> ...apart from who was shagging who.


If that's all they've got, there's nothing more to fear.  Political parties are full of tedious gossip about sexual goings-on.  Who's interested in the brief romance between Cde X and Cde Y?  Their mates - and nobody else.

It's not as if the Home Secretary is a member of your sect!  Come to think of it, few people are interested in _his_ love life either.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

No, I think they were in their first years, smash. I also actually know where they live as well, not that it means much to be honest. Oddly enough I can't think of anyone who's been in their flats. However, now they've been outed, a lot of people will want their blood. They might move. 

Thanks for your sympathy as well - to be honest, I'm not arsed at the moment about the political rammifications. There is no getting away with how shit it feels. I don't know if Rosa knew them well - they joined SWSS after she left Uni. 

The article also claims they were involved in AFA - Do you know anything about this smash?

JHE - finally, something constructive. But the bugbear is that they did have access to personal records for ring-rounds etc. I don't think they took anything away with them, but they still had them - alongside a lot of people's phone numbers - including mine. I suppose we'll find out if they did have them soon enough on a fascist hitlist near you...


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> No, I think they were in their first years, smash.



well, the BNP leaders obviously don't have much regard for their members safety....



> I also actually know where they live as well, not that it means much to be honest. Oddly enough I can't think of anyone who's been in their flats. However, now they've been outed, a lot of people will want their blood. They might move.



I would! They should count themselves lucky I never met them 



> Thanks for your sympathy as well - to be honest, I'm not arsed at the moment about the political rammifications. There is no getting away with how shit it feels. I don't know if Rosa knew them well - they joined SWSS after she left Uni.



yeah but they must know most of the Manc SWPers who are active now, not just the students, esp if they were at Marxism 



> The article also claims they were involved in AFA - Do you know anything about this smash?



I thought AFA stopped existing years ago tbh - sounds like bollocks to me.
_if_ there is an AFA group (which i doubt) and _if_ these individuals managed to get involved (which i very much doubt) any AFA type people are probably very worried right now, but I suspect the claim is untrue.


> JHE - finally, something constructive. But the bugbear is that they did have access to personal records for ring-rounds etc. I don't think they took anything away with them, but they still had them - alongside a lot of people's phone numbers - including mine. I suppose we'll find out if they did have them soon enough on a fascist hitlist near you...



sorry, Sol, but if you think they didn't keep / copy this information you are deluding yourself


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

It's pritty easy to figure out who's active in Manc SWP - just go down Market Street every Saturday. Also, at last year's Marxism the NF demonstrated outside SOAS.

Also, in terms of the personal info - yes, it's quite possible that they could have copied it. But the only time they had access to real information - apart from people's phone numbers - they were under constant supervision as we were doing ring-rounds. It would have been impossible to copy it without someone noticing. But then again, I don't know what info they had. 

I'm sure they also have my bank account details as well, as I gave one of them a cheque for some money I owed to UAF, and they said they would pass it on. Fortunatly, I don't use the account anymore, and I'll have to nofity the bank it was from about what's happened. If they believe me!


----------



## john malcolm (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> That's a really crap and confused repsonse. No way out of this one.



Doesnt anyone find this even a bit amusing, SWP wetting themselves over recruiting two working class students trying to massage their ego through quick promotion through the ranks and publishing articles in their "theoretical journal"


----------



## newbie (Aug 17, 2004)

Maybe they were turned - I've read le Carre- and are now moling away at BNP HQ revealing who's shagging who back to the SWP?


----------



## Japey (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> this is the first case of the SWP being infiltrated that I know of



Not according to David Shayler.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

first of all commiseration with solidarnosc


secondly



> Uncovered plans by ‘anti-fascist' veterans to re-form the notoriously violent Anti Fascist Action (AFA). Plans included the arson and kidnap of a senior Manchester BNP activist and a violent enforcement of the ‘No Platform' policy.



some of the report was obviously bollocks, i don't think they would have uncovered this, maybe heard some pissed people in the pub having a laugh at most...

still, it is true about "promising" new people being rapidly pushed into postions of influence - it happened to me - i had full access to the member list within 3 days of joining!!!


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

john malcolm said:
			
		

> Doesnt anyone find this even a bit amusing, SWP wetting themselves over recruiting two working class students trying to massage their ego through quick promotion through the ranks and publishing articles in their "theoretical journal"



I don't. I find it strange that you do. Aren't you an SP member?


----------



## blamblam (Aug 17, 2004)

TBH I can't believe that SWPers would be so naive.

I mean someone writing stuff all about "our wonderful multi-cultural, multi-faith society" etc. etc. are obviously fash! Someone came on the enrager forums doing that and it only took a tiny bit of digging to uncover them as WNP from Sheffield.

If they were on team Marxism I bet they could've easily got hold of the addresses of everyone who bought a ticket - most of the SWP as well as a lot of non-aligned socialists.

This is pretty interesting though... Must be fucking horrible for Solidarnosc + co.


----------



## blamblam (Aug 17, 2004)

PS could someone C&P it, or PM it to me or something - or maybe post it on indymedia cos I can't access the BNP site at work (or at least i don't want to!)


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

I'll pm it.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 17, 2004)

icepick said:
			
		

> PS could someone C&P it, or PM it to me or something - or maybe post it on indymedia cos I can't access the BNP site at work (or at least i don't want to!)



same for me if anyone would be so kind

ta

dan


----------



## flypanam (Aug 17, 2004)

i'd like a pm of it as well, same position as icepick don't want to look up that filth.


----------



## blamblam (Aug 17, 2004)

It's online here:
http://enrager.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2326


----------



## kropotkin (Aug 17, 2004)

Sol and Flimsier et al.

I really have nothing to add beyond what has been said here.

Basically, if you can't see that this really does show up this organisation for the pisstake it is then you have problems. Any organisation that is serious about revolutionary politics needs to approach new members with caution, not have an unsecured open-door policy to make the organisation look as big as possible.

There needs to be a re-think here- i'm sure you will agree. It is either of two things

# a party that looks large
# a party that is effective

I hope that the political naievety of your masters doesn't result in you having midnight visits from the fascists.

Good luck to you all.


----------



## flypanam (Aug 17, 2004)

Cheers flimsy and icepick i've got enougth copies now.

Be careful soli, levien and the manchester people.


----------



## silentNate (Aug 17, 2004)

I'll be really pissed if those racist shits have my phone number or address though it's Sol I feel sorry for seeing that he thought they were genuine


----------



## General Ludd (Aug 17, 2004)

Any group that has no background checks on new members is going to get completely fucked over if it ever starts to threaten the state*. There's a good bit on infilitration of the Black Panthers here.

*Not that the SWP is ever going to be a threat to anyone.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

I do think there is a distinction between the political question of how open the doors should be and the security one of how many checks you should do before someone gets access to national positions and all that entails in terms of lists etc. Even in the days before the doors were thrown open in recruitment terms it was always a bit frightening how quickly anyone who showed enthuasiasm would be invited into the national office to do Marxism mailings etc with ready access to membership details. This at the same time as we were also being asked to come and sleep in the centre over night because the nazis had threatened to attack it! Although ultimately how much can a socialist group do to defend itself against someone determined and talented enough?


----------



## General Ludd (Aug 17, 2004)

> Although ultimately how much can a socialist group do to defend itself against someone determined and talented enough?


If you don't think your forms of organisation are robust enough to resist one individual, let alone the entire state, then maybe you should do some serious thinking about how effective your forms of organisation are.


> I do think there is a distinction between the political question of how open the doors should be and the security one of how many checks you should do before someone gets access to national positions and all that entails in terms of lists etc.


That creates 2 categories of member though, if you don't trust someone enough to give them your home address then you shouldn't be letting them join in the first place.


----------



## levien (Aug 17, 2004)

As soom one named in the article perhaps people will listerned to me on this one.  I'm going to say very little as its our internal issue and frankly non off your business.  I'm also going to ask SWP members not to post on this issue yet for obvious reasons.

I am on the same course as the "lad" and was active in the same branch.  His politics and attitude to others were not great and he was not always popular in our branch.  his willingness to take time consuming jobs on meant he often got them (as no one else wanted them) he never had much influence a mild spanner in the works at best.

Both were incredibly active and helped build many campaigns the BNP would despise.  I am personally wounded at this if true, but it is not a big issue politically.  The SWP unlike the BNP is an open party with nothing to hide.  We wear our politics openly and there is nothing an "infiltrator" can find out that any of you couldn't by turning up to the odd forum STWC meeting.  We are proud of our open recruitment policy and the fact that we aim to get new members as involved as possible.  The fact the BNP have chosen to do this shows that they are not the force they were.  This is a trick of the open far right and not of a party that months ago was looking at MEps.

If anyone in either branch is worried contact the party


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

levien said:
			
		

> As soom one named in the article perhaps people will listerned to me on this one.  I'm going to say very little as its our internal issue and frankly non off your business.  I'm also going to ask SWP members not to post on this issue yet for obvious reasons.
> 
> I am on the same course as the "lad" and was active in the same branch.  His politics and attitude to others were not great and he was not always popular in our branch.  his willingness to take time consuming jobs on meant he often got them (as no one else wanted them) he never had much influence a mild spanner in the works at best.
> 
> ...


 The arrogance and naivity in that post is not going to help things - if you cannot see just _why_ this concerns people beyond the swp i suggest that you ask BB or belboid or someone else who was a long term member to fill you in.

If he was so peripheral and unifluential why was he put forward as a 'leading member'? Why was he invited onto leading bodies etc. 

(And i have _no doubt_ that you'll dissmiss these questions and other posters points as sectarian gloating)


----------



## Joe Reilly (Aug 17, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> The article also claims they were involved in AFA - Do you know anything about this smash?
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> No it dosen't. The AFA reference is about Searchlight trying to set up some sort flag of convenience (son of AFA) off the back of the publication of 'No Retreat' book. The authors had both been expelled form AFA over a decade previously.


----------



## kropotkin (Aug 17, 2004)

Not stopped being a party-hack moron then Cliffite. At least Sol and RMP3 have some bloody sense and independent thought...

Fucking hell.

Your refusal to even countenance that your stupid policy of letting anyone have access to members' information might be a problem is astounding


----------



## levien (Aug 17, 2004)

Remember that your evidence is a BNP article mine is that he's in my laboratory and my course for the last two years.  This is an internal matter and non of your business.  There are definatley no lists for people beyond the two branches involved so it is of no concern beyond the SWP.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> I do think there is a distinction between the political question of how open the doors should be and the security one of how many checks you should do before someone gets access to national positions and all that entails in terms of lists etc. Even in the days before the doors were thrown open in recruitment terms it was always a bit frightening how quickly anyone who showed enthuasiasm would be invited into the national office to do Marxism mailings etc with ready access to membership details. This at the same time as we were also being asked to come and sleep in the centre over night because the nazis had threatened to attack it! Although ultimately how much can a socialist group do to defend itself against someone determined and talented enough?



The last point is a fair question - but surely the answer in this case is _more_ - more than was done to check out these characters - which on the face of it seems to be nothing, zilch. The fact that it's probably impossible to 100% get rid of this activity shouldn't really be used as an excuse to fail to follow min standards in specfic cases (i don't think you were actually trying to do that mind - i can see others picking up the argument though...).


----------



## levien (Aug 17, 2004)

Joe Reilly said:
			
		

> Solidarnosc said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

Joe Reilly said:
			
		

> Solidarnosc said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

"If anyone in either branch is worried contact the party"

Who's gonna answer the phone?


----------



## silentNate (Aug 17, 2004)

Does anyone know what type of checks they use if you try to join the BNp?


----------



## levien (Aug 17, 2004)

Using this as a way of attacking the SWP is low butchers.  Esp when several posters here knew them personally.


----------



## urbanrevolt (Aug 17, 2004)

Whilst this does raise legitimate questions about security has anyone got any hard evidence whatsoever that any of this is true?  I've also met the accused two may a time and worked with them on antifash stuff and am convinced it's an absolute lie.  it seems to me that it's just the BNP playing a shit game of throwing mud to cause paranoia and confusion.  However, it is as well to take issues of security extrremely seriously and of course any allegation should be treated seriously and indeed we whould be extremely careful about giving personal details to anyone when involved in antifash work.

However, until proven otherwise we should absolutely not indulge in rumour mongering or viscious gossip.  I'm sure it's totally unfounded- if anyone has any evidence then come forward otherwise stop spreading their crap, I would say.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

Worth a Hmm...?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

> Um..access to membrship listscfor one - all kinds of other info. I cannot believe that you are being so naive over this.



This is what is worrying. Levien seems to suggest this doesn’t really matter, but to the people who have had their personal details revealed to fascists I should think it would be very worrying.



> enthusiasm is often valued over and above political nouse.



This is also what should be worrying for the SWP. While it is very important not to get paranoid about this kinda thing the SWP recruitment policy (I once saw someone signed up for being “angry”!!) leaves them open for this. Firstly there is the issue of democracy in terms of why should someone have a vote/say on the way forward in the SWP if they know fuck all about the SWPs politics and what they’re about. Do SWPers think that is right? Secondly while it would be very hard to stop fascists (and even more so the state) infiltrating an organisation, do SWPers not find it a madness that these people were promoted and given personal information so quickly? I can’t imagine contacts or members being very pleased.

My experience in the SWP (I was in it for two and a half years) was like bolshiebhoys in terms of I found it worrying how easily personal info was accessed and how easily someone got “promoted” to positions of prominence. In a wannabe revolutionary party enthusiasm should not be the most important thing, political knowledge should be IMO, although obviously enthusiasm is important. That alone would make fascist infiltration much harder.

Lastly I have every sympathy with soli and the others in Manchester. People I know in Manchester are shocked. It’s a madness that it went on for a year. However I hope the SWP can learn some lessons from this….

I think the tone of some of the people on here is totally out of order……


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

levien said:
			
		

> Using this as a way of attacking the SWP is low butchers.  Esp when several posters here knew them personally.


As i said:

 (And i have no doubt that you'll dissmiss these questions and other posters points as sectarian gloating)

Which is why i've done nothing of the sort.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 17, 2004)

levien said:
			
		

> As soom one named in the article perhaps people will listerned to me on this one.  I'm going to say very little as its our internal issue and frankly non off your business.  I'm also going to ask SWP members not to post on this issue yet for obvious reasons.


What a load of bollocks of course this concerns other people -ex members, people who might be thinking of joining, people who work with the SWP etc, not to mention the fack it raises the general issue of infiltration of groups by far right groups or the state.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

In terms of whether it is true or not I haven't accessed the BNP site (won't from here) but apparently there are pictures there. That should be the proof it that's true....


----------



## General Ludd (Aug 17, 2004)

> As soom one named in the article perhaps people will listerned to me on this one. I'm going to say very little as its our internal issue and frankly non off your business.


That's bollocks. It's of concern to anyone who might work with the SWP, has worked with the SWP, was/is/could be a member and just about anyone else vaguelly interested in the left.


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

Can't say I've read the whole thread but I've met a few people who've been on fascist hit lists for years - they're all still walking around. It's not like the brownshirts will turn up tomorrow to do you. British fash are at most going to do low level harassment - shit through your letterbox, bricking your windows or something. It's not nice to be targetted - but you can survive it. What they want is for you to stop being an active anti-fascist (obvious I know). What'll really screw them is if you become twice the anti-fascist you were before. Solidarity forever.


----------



## oisleep (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> In terms of whether it is true or not I haven't accessed the BNP site (won't from here) but apparently there are pictures there. That should be the proof it that's true....



yeah, one with the two of them in the middle of GG and LG, then another with the pair of them in the middle of Nick Griffin and Tony Wentworth


----------



## urbanrevolt (Aug 17, 2004)

yeah, but I haven't seen this.  I apreciate it can't be linked up here but can someone PM me the link?  On the level of threat if a groupm was infiltrated I think we can't be too careful.  Of course, a lot of the fash are into intimidation pure and simple- I've been on their web site and I've never been hit BUT I know people who have- mainly Asians with windows bricked in, cars smashed up, physical attacks and a firebombing of a house.  None of that's to say we should be intimidated but neither should we be blase.


----------



## blamblam (Aug 17, 2004)

For proof without seeing the BNP site, see this former page of manc uni SWSS

http://www.uniservity.net/club_homepage.asp?clubid=5334

edited to add and of course it concerns everyone you plonker - lots of us bought tickets to marxism with home addresses etc. on. Not that it's that big a deal at the mo cos British fascists are pathetic wusses but still...


----------



## our-streets (Aug 17, 2004)

fuckin hell!

... "it was political not personal"


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

our-streets said:
			
		

> fuckin hell!
> 
> ... "it was political not personal"



I read that.

I was almost livid for the people it was aimed at. She must have not been able to hate them all.


----------



## urbanrevolt (Aug 17, 2004)

Shit- that does seem pretty conclusive!  Fuck, well it's just makes all the points about security worth reiterating and implementing if it hasn't been done so already.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

putting xxx at the end was a fucking piss take.....

It will be a madness on campus next year I should think.....

They look like a couple of social misfits to me.....what the fuck is that shirt and tie!

PS If the BNP did get 1,800 people to their RWB festival that is very worrying.....


----------



## Geordiexxx (Aug 17, 2004)

*"*

"


----------



## belboid (Aug 17, 2004)

Geordiexxx said:
			
		

> I hope things can be peaceful between us.


I rather doubt that.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

Geordiexxx said:
			
		

> Just before the Le Pen demo (the Friday) when the SW paper sale never happened, a member of the SWP told me he had or knew of spies in the BNP in Cafe Nero. So don't tell me you don't do it to us because Richard told me so.
> 
> I'll see some of you soon no doubt.
> 
> Diane Stoker xxx


 So you think the BNP is also infiltrated in the same manner then? Interesting.


----------



## Geordiexxx (Aug 17, 2004)

*"*

"


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 17, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> I rather doubt that.


Aye me too.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

> We may disagree politically but I don't want this to come to violence, like at the Le Pen demo.



By the look of you and the other misfit I should think you wouldn’t want it to come to blows!!!!

In terms of it wasn’t personal, what a joke. You’ve just put people at risk of being attacked by fascists who have a track record of physically attacking people and their homes and you think it’s not personal……politics is personal if someone is a fascist ffs!

At one of your recent RWB festivals people made jokes about the holocaust and talked about white dreadlocked slags. You also want all black and Asian people to leave the country. And you say it’s not personal….I mean I just want people to fuck off out of the country because of their race but it's nothing personal mind, you're all scum to me!

If a Nazis member, Franco supporter, Le Pen supporter etc turned around to someone in the CP, an anarchist, a Jewish person etc and said it wasn’t personal would that sound sincere?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

Geordiexxx said:
			
		

> Yes I do, I may have even met them at RWB. I bet they were amused!
> 
> xxx


 So your mob is just as lax on security? And you accept this. Again, interesting


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

i never thought i'd say this ... but

in the picture of the future fuhrers with nick griffin on the bnp website, nick griffin's the best-looking out of a very bad bunch.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

The fucking cheek of it.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> By the look of you and the other misfit I should think you wouldn’t want it to come to blows!!!!


 Fair do's CR  - she's a big girl mind...


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

Pickman's I think you're right....

Do you think they have as a good a taste in waste coats. By the look of that shirt and tie they do.....

As said a bunch of social misfits......


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 17, 2004)

From the BNP's article:



> A massive well done and thank you goes to Joe Finnon and Diane Stoker for the dedication and valour they have conveyed over the last year. With total selflessness and with total disregard for their own safety they have achieved in year what some political activists will only achieve after years of involvement.



"Total disregard for their own safety" my arse.

Whatever their faults, the SWP don't make a habit of beating up their political opponents - or anyone else they deem "undesirable" for that matter.  That cannot be said of the BNP.


----------



## solano (Aug 17, 2004)

A Mackem & a Sanddancer stitch up the SWP?!




_the revolution is not a student affair!!_


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

PM: you just cussed her and her boyfriend (and the other infiltrator tosser obviously). 

Come on, she's trying to be friendly. mad: )

She even aroused suspicion when saying her boyfriend was at Salford Uni. Hindsight is fucking powerful.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

What attracted you to the BNP Diane?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

seriously, though, perhaps this should make the swp and its various vile fronts think a little bit about security. why anyone should wish to waste their time in the swp &c is beyond me, but it's no surprise that people who take anti-fascism seriously have steered clear of the swp for many years. perhaps the bnp sent a couple of unlucky people into the swp because they were unable to get anyone into afa, no platform or other militant anti-fascist groups. a wake-up call for the swp will do some good if they _do_ wake up to what's obviously a prank the bnp will try again in future.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> What attracted you to the BNP Diane?


 

The first bloke she could get to shag her turns out to be the student organiser.

The second? Nope, even SWP members have some taste.


----------



## urbanrevolt (Aug 17, 2004)

This is far from amusing.  The BNP are murdering scum and it's about time the left seriously got its act together on no platforming the bastards.  The BNP are not just a normal political party with vile racist views but a fascist outfit who actively maim and murder.  We should accord them no democratic rights whatsoever and any idea that it can be peaceful between us and the BNP is a sick joke.  I'm now pretty convinced this whole shit must be true but of course time will tell.  I couldn't beleive it at first but unless there's some very clever manipulation going on I suppose it must be.  In which case, things will certainly be stormy if any fascist scum show their faces in the new term.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> The first bloke she could get to shag her turns out to be the student organiser.
> 
> The second? Nope, even SWP members have some taste.


 I'm actually seriously interested in Dianes's response - i think it might be instructive for a few left-wingers here as well (not aimed at you). What's the issues that drives a young kid to join the BNP.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 17, 2004)

i'm amazed they think they can go back to college next year tbh


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

> What attracted you to the BNP Diane?



Feeling at home with the other misfits?

When Nick Griffin is the best looking person in the photo there's gotta be something wrong!

Diane are you as friendly to black and Asian people you want to leave the country? Is that not personal?

Was Nick Griffin not being personal when he said the BNP needed "well directed fists and boots"?

Were Franco and Hitler not being personal and all the other fascist regimes who massacred people?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

...again a hmm..

'Maim and murder'

Is it Joe?


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> ...again a hmm..
> 
> 'Maim and murder'



i agree


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

urbanrevolt said:
			
		

> This is far from amusing.  The BNP are murdering scum and it's about time the left seriously got its act together on no platforming the bastards.  The BNP are not just a normal political party with vile racist views but a fascist outfit who actively maim and murder.  We should accord them no democratic rights whatsoever and any idea that it can be peaceful between us and the BNP is a sick joke.  I'm now pretty convinced this whole shit must be true but of course time will tell.  I couldn't beleive it at first but unless there's some very clever manipulation going on I suppose it must be.  In which case, things will certainly be stormy if any fascist scum show their faces in the new term.


perhaps if the swp didn't "elect" people to important positions within minutes of their joining, then this wouldn't happen. again, if there were some sort of candidate membership to get people's measure then this sort of thing would be less likely to occur. although i doubt even the swp would allow people in who were confessed fash.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> i'm amazed they think they can go back to college next year tbh



That was the naive bit I was surprised about. I thought they'd pull them straight out of Manchester, not just the SWSS group or whatever.

It could be the case that they've been seriously used by the nazis. Do they realise the hatred people will feel towards them? How easily identifiable are they going to be?


----------



## past caring (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> The first bloke she could get to shag her turns out to be the student organiser.
> 
> The second? Nope, even SWP members have some taste.




*SEXIST!!!!!!!!*


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> ...again a hmm..
> 
> 'Maim and murder'
> 
> Is it Joe?



I thought that from the first post.

Someone desperate to get people to engage with him.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

past caring said:
			
		

> *SEXIST!!!!!!!!*




My principles are for sale.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> That was the naive bit I was surprised about. I thought they'd pull them straight out of Manchester, not just the SWSS group or whatever.
> 
> It could be the case that they've been seriously used by the nazis. Do they realise the hatred people will feel towards them? How easily identifiable are they going to be?


 Of course they don't - Griifin and the likes do though, and it's all good publicity -a la Harrington 20 years back.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> to engage with him.


is that newspeak for "a full and frank discussion"?


----------



## blamblam (Aug 17, 2004)

Come on don't all go apeshit at her, this could be interesting...

So Diane I'm curious - I presume you're genuine about your politics? And would you call yourself a Nazi? I mean most BNP people wouldn't... Putting it simply - are you glad England + co won WW2?

If so, then what would be your problem with AFA? I'm sure you know that the BNP used to be an openly Nazi organisation, which was the case most of the time AFA (unrelated to the SWP) was fighting it.

Then again I dunno why I'm trying to be civil, cos you obviously know about mark collet being a complete dick (who seems to dislike black people cos most girls prefer them to him ), and about Griffin being in International Third Position and other fascist groups - not to mention him losing his eye chucking a bullet on a fire at a National Socialist gathering! And knowing this and still being in it you're probably another slightly-mental inadequate, where the only place you're socially accepted is in the BNP.

But y'know any loser can still make friends other ways - you could get a hobby, or join a choir or something, or get involved in Trekkie conventions or summat?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

I know urbanrevolt from WP so it’s not joe or whoever you think it is! The BNP would maim and kill a serious amount of people if they got anywhere near power. What’s funny about saying that? And what’s funny about the posts?

I think UBs first post was because they couldn’t believe it would be true…..


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I know urbanrevolt from WP so it’s not joe or whoever you think it is! The BNP would maim and kill a serious amount of people if they got anywhere near power. What’s funny about saying that? And what’s funny about the posts?
> 
> I think UBs first post was because they couldn’t believe it would be true…..



apols


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

i see "diane stoker" has deleted her posts. can it be she's gone?


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

icepick said:
			
		

> where the only place you're socially accepted is in the BNP.



er....and the swp?  



oh yeah and remember the fash troll a few months back with the same ip address as levien????


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I know urbanrevolt from WP so it’s not joe or whoever you think it is! The BNP would maim and kill a serious amount of people if they got anywhere near power. What’s funny about saying that? And what’s funny about the posts?
> 
> I think UBs first post was because they couldn’t believe it would be true…..


 Claiming that the BNP murder people is what's funny - it's exactly the sort of hyperbole that these two succesfully parodied in their letters to the SWP. That's what got people twitching. And on _this thread_ of all...


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 17, 2004)

rednblack said:
			
		

> oh yeah and remember the fash troll a few months back with the same ip address as levien????


Aye good point.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

rednblack said:
			
		

> oh yeah and remember the fash troll a few months back with the same ip address as levien????


i thought that that wasn't that hard to work out...


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i thought that that wasn't that hard to work out...




  obviously it was for some of the more touchy on this thread!


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

> Claiming that the BNP murder people is what's funny - it's exactly the sort of hyperbole that these two succesfully parodied in their letters to the SWP. That's what got people twitching. And on this thread of all...



I think it was badly put but there's nothing wrong with saying they would do that if they got any power. Look at Griffins "fists and boots" comments....

But I can assure you and rnb that urbanrevolt is in WP....there's no doubt on that one.....

Ashame Diane didn't reply....


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

rednblack said:
			
		

> obviously it was for some of the more touchy on this thread!


namely levien?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

> oh yeah and remember the fash troll a few months back with the same ip address as levien



Didn't that raise any alarms at the time?


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> But I can assure you and rnb that urbanrevolt is in WP....there's no doubt on that one.....



i'll take your word for it, but what were you saying earlier about political education?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I think it was badly put but there's nothing wrong with saying they would do that if they got any power. Look at Griffins "fists and boots" comments....
> 
> But I can assure you and rnb that urbanrevolt is in WP....there's no doubt on that one.....
> 
> Ashame Diane didn't reply....


i think she's scarpered.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Didn't that raise any alarms at the time?



i seem to remember butchers and someone else tried but were shouted down by levien and solidarnosc  all round really


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I think it was badly put but there's nothing wrong with saying they would do that if they got any power. Look at Griffins "fists and boots" comments....
> 
> But I can assure you and rnb that urbanrevolt is in WP....there's no doubt on that one.....
> 
> Ashame Diane didn't reply....


 But that's not what s/he said. That's the point. It's easily parodied hyperbole.

Fucking hell Griffins Fists and boots crack was from the political soldiers period 20 years back - have you not noticed a slight change of approach since then?


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

looking at the photo, whats the bnp policy on gays and lesbians again?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

I think the fact that the BNP “comedians” make jokes about the holocaust and the fact that they talk about white dreadlocked slags means people who go to their RWB festivals must be fairly aware of their politics. Also the overt racism/hatred that is always exposed in the documentaries is also a bit of a give away, or are they only like that when being investigated?!

I’m surprised they were so flippant about the IP address….

RnB you can’t judge someone on a couple of posts. Believe me URs political education is very good. But that was badly phrased……


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

rednblack said:
			
		

> i seem to remember butchers and someone else tried but were shouted down by levien and solidarnosc  all round really




the concern was that levien might himself be the fash troll. Then it was worked out that the IP address came from the uni.

I don't recall anyone saying anything about tracing the person in the uni.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> the concern was that levien might himself be the fash troll. Then it was worked out that the IP address came from the uni.
> 
> I don't recall anyone saying anything about tracing the person in the uni.



butchers tried but any attempt at delving deeper was shouted down, the marxism thread wasnt the place apperently


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i see "diane stoker" has deleted her posts. can it be she's gone?



She also deleted her 'it's not personal' part of the Manchester Met SWSS website. 

Instructions?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> the concern was that levien might himself be the fash troll. Then it was worked out that the IP address came from the uni.


and that's supposed to make it better?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

levien said:
			
		

> Using this as a way of attacking the SWP is low butchers.  Esp when several posters here knew them personally.


I have to say, I don't think the legitimate feelings of betrayal of swpers on here who knew these scumbags should be allowed to stop legitimate questions. It is up for debate why this could happen. As it happens I don't agree with one of the victim's political response about open door policies. But I do think there is a case for asking what measures could have prevented these aresholes getting close to positions where they could see details of people (not just in the swp remember) who might therefore be at risk.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> the concern was that levien might himself be the fash troll. Then it was worked out that the IP address came from the uni.
> 
> I don't recall anyone saying anything about tracing the person in the uni.


 Why not? Get it?

Basic measures.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

while diane looks beefy enough to handle herself, if i was that lad i'd leave manc for a while...surely they aint going to stay


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

> But that's not what s/he said. That's the point. It's easily parodied hyperbole.
> 
> Fucking hell Griffins Fists and boots crack was from the political soldiers period 20 years back - have you not noticed a slight change of approach since then?



I’ve said it was badly phrased, what more do you want me to say! I’m sure UB meant that they will kill and maim people given half the chance (well arguably they already maim people and their members definately have done)…..

As for the fists and boots comments, I think Griffin might have changed tactics, but I have no doubt he wouldn’t bring the boot boys out when needs be. The Nazis didn’t come to power saying they gas the Jews did they!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

rednblack said:
			
		

> butchers tried but any attempt at delving deeper was shouted down, the marxism thread wasnt the place apperently


 This is what i remember - in the end i just got fed up of being insulted for trying to bring peoples attention to something i considered quite serious and stopped posting on that thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

rednblack said:
			
		

> while diane looks beefy enough to handle herself, if i was that lad i'd leave manc for a while...surely they aint going to stay


i bet they're on holiday somewhere in wales at the moment. and term doesn't start for another six weeks...


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

I think they have been well used by the BNP and Griffin, not that that means they aren't racists or fascists. I don’t think they can realise the hatred there will be towards them….

Their student lives could well be an utter misery from now on……

I should imagine there are also plenty of people who will get physical….would be just as worried if I was them as any SWPer….if not more worried…..


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> This is what i remember - in the end i just got fed up of being insulted for trying to bring peoples attention to something i considered quite serious and stopped posting on that thread.



The thread is still there. I just read it.

Your concern was that levien might be sid james.

When it was worked out that he wasn't, you said you were right to tell people to exercise caution about meeting up away from Marxism.

There was no suggestion of finding out who is was at the uni. You backed off from your concern, same as everyone else, as soon as it was revealed that sid james did not = levien.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Why not? Get it?
> 
> Basic measures.



Fine. Just to suggest you actually suggested that when you didn't is wrong though.

Unless in skimming the thread I've missed one post.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I think they have been well used by the BNP and Griffin, not that that means they aren't racists or fascists. I don’t think they can realise the hatred there will be towards them….


do you really mean "well used" or do you mean "badly used"?



> _Their student lives could well be an utter misery from now on……
> 
> I should imagine there are also plenty of people who will get physical….would be just as worried if I was them as any SWPer….if not more worried….._


what do they expect? i think they should consider themselves fortunate to have infiltrated the swp and not some other organisations.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> The thread is still there. I just read it.
> 
> Your concern was that levien might be sid james.
> 
> ...


 Yes, i backed off from expressing any wider concerns because i'd been insulted and ridiculed for being a mummys boy and other such redundant crap - i made my point to others and on others threads at the time (esp the one where the matching IP address was first brought up by the editor). The IP was from the uni - no one else on that thread  seemed capable of drawing the obvious conclusion - and no one was responding to me. Yes, my original concern was that Levien was SJ - but when proven he wasn't thing the thing goes on - it shouldn't stop there. Clearly it did.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> This is what i remember - in the end i just got fed up of being insulted for trying to bring peoples attention to something i considered quite serious and stopped posting on that thread.


In fairness your points were just common sense surely. There _are_ people in the swp who take these things seriously. But for quite obvious reasons this type of question is not always top of the list. But that's not the same as saying (as some swps on here have) that the swp should be an 'open' party with nothing to hide. Bollix to that! From some people quite definitely it should.


----------



## Squatticus (Aug 17, 2004)

*gasp...*

I'm confused... I thought it was Workers Power that was infiltrating Manchester SWP (according to Lindsey German)?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

You were ridiculed because people were under the impression that you were suggesting they shouldn't post that they were going to meet at Marxism.

I agree it shouldn't have stopped. I was just making the point that RednBlack suggesting you were shouted down _on that thread_ because that thread wasn't the place is not true.

The sort of thing he's liable to call a 'lie'.

If you raised it elsewhere, then I'll take your word for it. I didn't mean to take this ff topic.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> In fairness your points were just common sense surely. There _are_ people in the swp who take these things seriously. But for quite obvious reasons this type of question is not always top of the list. But that's not the same as saying (as some swps on here have) that the swp should be an 'open' party with nothing to hide. Bollix to that! From some people quite definitely it should.



When I was a member there was all sorts of advise rearty Notes and so on (obviously moreso with lists). That definitely isn't the case now - but I do think that's because of some twist/ turn/ whatever.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

Squatticus said:
			
		

> I'm confused... I thought it was Workers Power that was infiltrating Manchester SWP (according to Lindsey German)?


it was a two-way infiltration, whilst the bnp were infiltrating the swp, which infiltrators had a drink - unwittingly - with some wp members at an rnb night at mmusu. i think.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> You were ridiculed because people were under the impression that you were suggesting they shouldn't post that they were going to meet at Marxism.
> 
> I agree it shouldn't have stopped. I was just making the point that RednBlack suggesting you were shouted down _on that thread_ because that thread wasn't the place is not true.
> 
> ...



well, i couldnt remember clearly, maybe i should have made that clearer...
he was shouted down though, accussing him of being a mummy's boy etc is pretty much shouting down.
i can't be arsed to check the thread so fuck it, i don't care whatever


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> In fairness your points were just common sense surely. There _are_ people in the swp who take these things seriously. But for quite obvious reasons this type of question is not always top of the list. But that's not the same as saying (as some swps on here have) that the swp should be an 'open' party with nothing to hide. Bollix to that! From some people quite definitely it should.


 Yes, they are what i consider to be simple common sense - nothing extradordinary. But it doesn't seem to get through to some people - i do expect there'll be some internal trainning or something off the back of this - at least i hope so.

(And i'm happy that you seem to recognise i'm not on some point scoring trip on this thread)


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> You were ridiculed because people were under the impression that you were suggesting they shouldn't post that they were going to meet at Marxism.
> 
> I agree it shouldn't have stopped. I was just making the point that RednBlack suggesting you were shouted down _on that thread_ because that thread wasn't the place is not true.
> 
> ...


 Ok - last one - but i _was_ shouted down, and even warned off going to marxism. Respond if you wish, but i'll leave this one alone.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> it was a two-way infiltration, whilst the bnp were infiltrating the swp, which infiltrators had a drink - unwittingly - with some wp members at an rnb night at mmusu. i think.



and don't forget manchester swp were infiltrating the bnp at the same time, some of the swp ranters shouting at the bnp during the election count were actually bnp members, and some of the bnp activists they were ranting at were actually swp members-one a wp member as well


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

rednblack said:
			
		

> and don't forget manchester swp were infiltrating the bnp at the same time, some of the swp ranters shouting at the bnp during the election count were actually bnp members, and some of the bnp activists were actually swp members-one a wp member as well


is that the full sp?


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> is that the full sp?



cw?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2004)

rednblack said:
			
		

> cw?


am?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> When I was a member there was all sorts of advise rearty Notes and so on (obviously moreso with lists). That definitely isn't the case now - but I do think that's because of some twist/ turn/ whatever.


I honestly don't agree mate. There was always a contradictory policy. Advice about Party notes, people told to be careful leaving events, activists asked to come and sleep in the centre etc but at the same time absolutely no real security about who wandered around the national office or was given the job of ringing people for national events etc. I do think that the priorities of organisers in getting good people as involved at as high a level as possible was not always sufficiently balanced by other concerns, not least their political level, and crucuially any minimal security concerns. Same then as now. Political turns don't come into it.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

Seriously though I’d be worried if I was Dianne and Joe. I can’t believe they’ve gotta go back to uni. The BNP obviously don’t give a shit about them if they’re prepared to put them through that much misery and physical risk…..

More pawns in the game…..


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Yes, they are what i consider to be simple common sense - nothing extradordinary. But it doesn't seem to get through to some people - i do expect there'll be some internal trainning or something off the back of this - at least i hope so.
> 
> (And i'm happy that you seem to recognise i'm not on some point scoring trip on this thread)


Not at all, we disagree about most things but you are a serious lad and this a fucking serious issue. And by no means an internal swp one either. I would imagine the likes of Bambo and Smith are cringing big time and vowing never to let this happen again.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

That was hilarious about LG saying the SWP was infiltrated by WP. Utter madness.

If it had of been true would the SWP have been even sorer after a double entry?


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

lets hope they actually do something that will prevent this from happening again

however i don't think they can, the swp is burning up members old and new alike that if they want to keep up this level of hyper activity they have no choice


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 17, 2004)

levien said:
			
		

> As soom one named in the article perhaps people will listerned to me on this one.  I'm going to say very little as its our internal issue and frankly non off your business.



You idiot. These people were involved in the SWP, but they were also put into positions of responsibility in various other bodies by the SWP. This is as much the business of anyone who was in UAF or Respect as it is members of the SWP. The same goes for people who went to Marxism or people who were involved in any other campaigning with them. This is not something that can be kept "internal" to the SWP because it isn't an internal matter.

That said - holy shit. I'm still trying to work out what the consequences will be. Nothing good anyway.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

rednblack said:
			
		

> lets hope they actually do something that will prevent this from happening again
> 
> however i don't think they can, the swp is burning up members old and new alike that if they want to keep up this level of hyper activity they have no choice


Like I said earlier I don't agree that the political and security questions can be conflated like this. You can have active new members given jobs to do without elevating them within weeks/months into national positions that compromise security with absolutely no checks. If anything this is the result of a tension between common sense measures and over-zealous practitioners of the open door policy. Something even the Bolsheviks had no pat answer to.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> If anything this is the result of a tension between common sense measures and over-zealous practitioners of the open door policy. Something even the Bolsheviks had no pat answer to.



i don't think the common sense measures have been in place for a long time, when i joined i had access to the members list litrerally 2 days later!
now things like that can be changed, but i think one way for the swp to tighten up would be to calm down and concentrate on fewer things


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Seriously though I’d be worried if I was Dianne and Joe. I can’t believe they’ve gotta go back to uni. The BNP obviously don’t give a shit about them if they’re prepared to put them through that much misery and physical risk…..
> 
> More pawns in the game…..



Perhaps Joe and Dianne are well aware of the problems they are going to face when they get back to Uni...there will be political capital and publicity a pleanty to be made out of any attack on them.

It might feel easier to see them as simple dupes, who on being cast aside by the BNP will come to their senses, but they could well be up to the necks even more than people on these boards have so far imagined...the game could be a lot longer than merely embarassing (and putting the wind up) Manchester SWP.

Louis Mac


----------



## flypanam (Aug 17, 2004)

Louis MacNeice said:
			
		

> Perhaps Joe and Dianne are well aware of the problems they are going to face when they get back to Uni...there will be political capital and publicity a pleanty to be made out of any attack on them.



Agreed there, i'd push to have the feckers expelled from uni for being in the BNP, or at least push for the SU to carry out a name and shame policy of all bnp members. Apush amoung teaching staff to refuse to teach them would be better than a physical attack in my opinion.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

You could be right Louis.

But there are some physical people out there on the left as well as right and while they might know they’re putting themselves in danger of being severely hospitalised they might not.

In terms of the BNP making political capital I don’t suppose they’ll get much press coverage on a story of a couple of hospitalised members. Hardly big news! They might not even know who did it…..

In any case there lives could be made a misery in many ways other than physical attacks. As for name and shame, they’ve pretty much done it, what would be the point in that!

Agree that a campaign to drive them out of the uni would be good. The bigger that campaign the better. If 100s were involved it would work…..


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

As a petty side point do you really regard the SWP as a party flypanman? Surely the definition of a party means representing something and the SWP in tiny and clearly doesn’t represent anything in real terms. While it might aspire to be a party it’s clearly not by any real definition at the moment….

Also don’t you think there’s something cultish about saying “the” party….


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

No it wouldn't.

As long as fees are involved the uni can't throw them out for their political views, unless explicitly stated in the uni statutes that BNP members are not welcome as students. Throwing them out for their political views would leave the uni open to a law suit and more free publicity for the BNP. An attempt at Salford Uni to have Wentworth booted failed dismally. 

Oh, and by the way, no-one had heard of Tony Wentworth before that campaign, afterwards he didn't have to do anywork to build up his public profile as youth leader of the BNP. Through publicity in the national and academic press, the ANL did all that work for him.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> As a petty side point do you really regard the SWP as a party flypanman? Surely the definition of a party means representing something and the SWP in tiny and clearly doesn’t represent anything in real terms. While it might aspire to be a party it’s clearly not by any real definition at the moment….
> 
> Also don’t you think there’s something cultish about saying “the” party….


your first five words summed this up


----------



## flypanam (Aug 17, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> As a petty side point do you really regard the SWP as a party flypanman? Surely the definition of a party means representing something and the SWP in tiny and clearly doesn’t represent anything in real terms. While it might aspire to be a party it’s clearly not by any real definition at the moment….
> 
> Also don’t you think there’s something cultish about saying “the” party….



your right it is a petty point, and right now is not the place to discuss definitions of the word party as found in the manifesto or in present usage.

maybe it does sound 'cultish' but as a member for a while i slip easily into left verbage. Unlike yourself who would never when talking about WP as 'the Group' or 'the fifth international' etc

If people think they can't be expelled and i'm sure they can for holding views that are likely to discriminate or cause offence of a racial or sexual manner. Students were i work certainly can. then i think the lecturers refusing to teach is a runner...


----------



## Paul Marsh (Aug 17, 2004)

What's the betting that one consequence of this issue is that Searchlight offer to "inspect" the SWPs membership list so as to "check" for other infiltrators?


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

They won't get kicked out of uni for being fascists. Someone mentioned Patrick Harrington - he was a fascist at North West London Poly in the 80s. A very left wing institution then. I believe he wound up being taught as an individual (no lectures or seminars) and generally being treated like a leper. That's what'll happen to these two. Probably reinforce their fascism unfortunately.


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

Paul Marsh said:
			
		

> What's the betting that one consequence of this issue is that Searchlight offer to "inspect" the SWPs membership list so as to "check" for other infiltrators?


You mean they don't already?


----------



## Pilgrim (Aug 17, 2004)

levien said:
			
		

> As soom one named in the article perhaps people will listerned to me on this one.  I'm going to say very little as its our internal issue and frankly non off your business.
> 
> Absolute nonsense. If I remember correctly, other groups such as trade unions and the Green Party are involved with UAF, and doubtless will be thrilled to know that your incompetant policy of recruiting anyone without asking many or any question (reminiscent of the Foreign Legion methinks) has placed members at risk.
> 
> ...


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

HST said:
			
		

> They won't get kicked out of uni for being fascists. Someone mentioned Patrick Harrington - he was a fascist at North West London Poly in the 80s. A very left wing institution then. I believe he wound up being taught as an individual (no lectures or seminars) and generally being treated like a leper. That's what'll happen to these two. Probably reinforce their fascism unfortunately.


God that brings back memories. Nasty old fight that one. But in principle of course anything is possible. If the ACPO can ban the BNP from wearing police uniforms in the present climate then given enough pressure you never know...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 17, 2004)

i don't think anti-fascism is particularly well-served by calls to ban people from jobs or education for the beliefs they hold.


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

There's a difference between being a public servant and being the client of a semi-private instituion (which all universities now are).

membership of the BNP can be proscribed from as many govt agencies as Blunkett & co. see fit.

membership of the BNP cannot be proscribed in the private or semi-private secotr for legal and publicity reasons which should be pretty obvious.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 17, 2004)

I could see  the DUP demanding that Queen's student members of Ógra Sinn Fein be banned, and using bans on fash students as a precedent.

They'd be highly unlikely to get away with it, obv, but they'd still try it on. . . sure you want to be in the same area as the DUP?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

Sorry but the people who ran Britain's universities didn't seem to have many qualms about helping the police and government witch-hunt trots in the 60's so claims of academic freedom ring a little hollow.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 17, 2004)

And the 1960s have precisely what to do with today?

And who precisely has raised the question of 'academic freedom' here?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Sorry but the people who ran Britain's universities didn't seem to have many qualms about helping the police and government witch-hunt trots in the 60's so claims of academic freedom ring a little hollow.



are you just replying to points you *imagine* people are making?


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

which has what to do with anything in the current situation?

Attempts to have them kicked out will fail, or cause protratced litigation which a cash strapped new university (Salford) can;t afford. Appeals to a campaign of persecution against Trots 40 years ago, true or not, means absolutely fuck all here.


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> i don't think anti-fascism is particularly well-served by calls to ban people from jobs or education for the beliefs they hold.


I agree, and I think it can actually get them sympathy as it seems that the system has got it in for them. However, as someone who has had to work with a NF member (this was a very long time ago) I think that the response has to come from the fellow students/workers. Let them do their degrees in isolation. BTW, don't think much for their job prospects.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 17, 2004)

Well the SWP is the political equivalent of the Sealed Knot society, except they re-enact 1968 instead of the Cromwellian wars. . .


----------



## fanciful (Aug 17, 2004)

Like anyone on the Manchester left I knew these two nazi scum infiltrators and they were utterly convincing in their role of activist party hacks, not particularly political of course but how many SWPers are? The SWP enabled their advancement through their encouragement of activity before any understanding, but they weren’t the only ones duped by them. I was taken in by them like everyone else.
On one occasion Diane rung me after a meeting and told me that Wentworth was in the usual left pub. We went over to Wentworth to talk things over with him, two cops then appeared out of nowhere. We were able to explain the situation to them and they left us and we went out separate ways. I remember at the time thinking it was a honey trap. 
While I like others discussed this with them in the general sense and they came to a WP meeting on anti-fa, where we discussed the need for a no platform organisation in general we never did anything with them. This is no doubt the refounding of AFA that they refer to in their bizarre missive.
So what to do now?
They are of course disgusting people. The SWP need to do some explaining about how they were able to be promoted so rapidly up their (Leninist - joke) organisation. Like Wentworth but more so they must be opposed at their respective universities, people need to make their feelings completely clear that we don’t accept these filthy holocaust lovers anywhere. And by the way the personal is political.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> I could see  the DUP demanding that Queen's student members of Ógra Sinn Fein be banned, and using bans on fash students as a precedent.
> 
> They'd be highly unlikely to get away with it, obv, but they'd still try it on. . . sure you want to be in the same area as the DUP?


Leaving aside for the mo the fact that Paisley has more in common with Grifin than the average Ogra member, I'd like to see them try. Funnily enough the same arguments were raised (not by Shinners though, they wanted to go the airport with hurley sticks) when David Irving visited Trinity College Dublin in the 80's: 'Next they'll be banning the SF speakers, or Palestinians'. It all depends where the pressure for a ban on fascists is coming from, not just the formal legalistic side of things. An angry anti-bnp campus is not one to allow Rectors to start banning left/progressive speakers.


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

dream on. you really have no understanding of how university administration works.

besides you've yet to provide evidence of chancellors 'banning left/progressive' speakers anywhere.

What next- academia is inherently right wing and needs an overhaul by Leninists?


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 17, 2004)

I know of a case of a Jewish lecturer who allowed to fash students to attend her classes. I feel nauseous just typing those words. But in the end she was right, it was better to expose them to the truth than to simply chuck them out.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 17, 2004)

> maybe it does sound 'cultish' but as a member for a while i slip easily into left verbage. Unlike yourself who would never when talking about WP as 'the Group' or 'the fifth international'



You know as well as me that WP would never say it was the fifth international. We say we wanna help build an international but clearly we would never say we were it! Also we never say we’re “the” group as far as I know. I certainly wouldn’t say it.

As for what party means, fair enough that’s another thread, but I did used to hate it when I was in the SWP when people talked about “the” party. Firstly I thought it was cultish and secondly I thought it was stupid because the SWP wasn’t/isn’t a party…..but heh I’ll wait for another thread!



> As long as fees are involved the uni can't throw them out for their political views, unless explicitly stated in the uni statutes that BNP members are not welcome as students. Throwing them out for their political views would leave the uni open to a law suit and more free publicity for the BNP. An attempt at Salford Uni to have Wentworth booted failed dismally.
> 
> Oh, and by the way, no-one had heard of Tony Wentworth before that campaign, afterwards he didn't have to do anywork to build up his public profile as youth leader of the BNP. Through publicity in the national and academic press, the ANL did all that work for him.



I didn’t mean it would necessary work from a legal point of view. But a mass campaign of 100s could literally stop them from being able to function at uni. They could be blocaded, disrupted etc to an extent which would make it all but impossible for them to continue.

As for getting them publicity, you’d never oppose them on loadsa levels if you thought that. You can’t just sweep the BNP under the carpet…..


----------



## flypanam (Aug 17, 2004)

So maybe the college can't expell them. But the point is that a concerted campaign by students and staff can force them to leave the college. And that is probably better than someone belting them while they are in attendance of the uni.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

How did I get suckered into a debate with liberals about No Platform on this of all threads.


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> How did I get suckered into a debate with liberals about No Platform on this of all threads.


Who you calling a liberal?


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

There's no debate about no platform you pious wanker.

Your 'kick them out' plan is legally impossible and will only serve to do all their publicity work for them without them lifting a finger (i.e. they announce themselves as BNP members and leave you to plaster their mug all over the national, anti-fascist and academic press for them).

When will the abject wrong headedness of your tactics penetrate your armour plated Trotskyite skull?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

Dr. Christmas said:
			
		

> There's no debate about no platform you pious wanker.
> 
> Your 'kick them out' plan is legally impossible and will only serve to do all their publicity work for them without them lifting a finger (i.e. they announce themselves as BNP members and leave you to plaster their mug all over the national, anti-fascist and academic press for them).
> 
> When will the abject wrong headedness of your tactics penetrate your armour plated Trotskyite skull?


Fuck off till you learn to argue politely ya twat


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

Hmmn.

I don't like my time being wasted by strawmen vendors (bogus introduction of concepts like 'academic freedom' and some nebulous '1960s Trotskyite persecution campaign', with the cherry on the cake being 'left/progressive speaker' banning-vice chancellors.)

Bollocks one and all, and adds little to what has been a sobering debate.

Oh, almost forgot-


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

Don't kick them out. Freeze them out. Send them to Coventry.Blank them out. Let them do their degrees but treat them like shit. That's all it needs.


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

hear, hear


----------



## flypanam (Aug 17, 2004)

Don't see why they should be allowed to do their degrees. get them out now.


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

have you actually bothered reading the last page and a half?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flypanam said:
			
		

> Don't see why they should be allowed to do their degrees. get them out now.


 Same reasons as banning parties mate, could be us next...


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 17, 2004)

Dr Christmas do you see a difference between the uni/state/etc banning them and students/lecturers/the community ostracizing them or applying pressure in other ways?


----------



## flypanam (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Same reasons as banning parties mate, could be us next...



Oh okay, but i'll take that point, but if students through isolating them, making their lives hell by boycotting them and lecturers through the union refusing to teach them then that i think is a good thing.


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

Yes, redsquirrel, I do.


----------



## flypanam (Aug 17, 2004)

Dr. Christmas said:
			
		

> have you actually bothered reading the last page and a half?



 * infinity +1


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

meaning what? 

that your arguments are all shite?

dickhead.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

flypanam said:
			
		

> Oh okay, but i'll take that point, but if students through isolating them, making their lives hell by boycotting them and lecturers through the union refusing to teach them then that i think is a good thing.


 I have no problem at all with that happening - there's a real gap between the state and its institutions doing it and students/teachers doing it off their own bat though.

(And when you moving to Wales?)


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

Dr. Christmas said:
			
		

> Hmmn.
> 
> I don't like my time being wasted by strawmen vendors (bogus introduction of concepts like 'academic freedom' and some nebulous '1960s Trotskyite persecution campaign', with the cherry on the cake being 'left/progressive speaker' banning-vice chancellors.)
> 
> ...


What are you on about? It was Idris who said if we managed to ban the nazis they'd be coming for Sinn Fein in Queens Uni next. Are they 'progressive' or not? Wasn't my strawman old chap. Do keep up.


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

and it was you shitting on about academic freedom, non existent banning chancellors etc etc....


----------



## flypanam (Aug 17, 2004)

Dr. Christmas said:
			
		

> meaning what?
> 
> that your arguments are all shite?
> 
> dickhead.



  

Butchers agreed. and just for the record i want the students of manchester  the lectures, library staff, admin staff cleaners and resturant workers to push them out by isolating them.

i will be in wales in 6 weeks mate!


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

> and just for the record it want the students of manchester the lectures, library staff, admin staff cleaners and resturant workers to push them out by isolating them.



...which in practice won't happen, but yes, in an ideal world....


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

Dr. Christmas said:
			
		

> and it was you shitting on about academic freedom, non existent banning chancellors etc etc....


You really are a know-nothing. What is this if not a hymn to academic freedom:"i don't think anti-fascism is particularly well-served by calls to ban people from jobs or education for the beliefs they hold."?


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

erm, better ask bristle-krs. Who isn't an academic.


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

Dr. Christmas said:
			
		

> ...which in practice won't happen, but yes, in an ideal world....


They'll do their degrees but they won't look back with fondness at their days at uni.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> You really are a know-nothing. What is this if not a hymn to academic freedom:"i don't think anti-fascism is particularly well-served by calls to ban people from jobs or education for the beliefs they hold."?


Whats that got to do with academic freedom?
It's a comment that anti-fascism shouldn't be fought by calling for bans.


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

HST: much like their leader Nick griffin then who was isoalted and despised at cambridge as a student.

I have a feeling such tactics might serve as a vindication, to them, of their twisted beliefs, rather than as a challenge.

Anyway, with lecturers most now on short term deals, with students in massive debt trying to scrape a decent degree in order to pay it back, with library staff paid pitifully, and restaurant staff outsourced to private companies long since, the idea of a 1968 style 'mass action' is a non-starter.

which is obvious to all but the most deluded Trots on this thread.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> You really are a know-nothing. What is this if not a hymn to academic freedom:"i don't think anti-fascism is particularly well-served by calls to ban people from jobs or education for the beliefs they hold."?



let's see, shall we... it has nothing to do with arguments to academic freedom. it has everything to do with you looking like tossers when you start appealing to the powers-that-be to legislate against people's beliefs (however wrong they are) rather than their actions.

thought crime, eh?

not only that, at butchers has pointed out, us lot would be next on the list.

then there's the very real point that it only drives more people into their fold.

simple enough for you?


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> You really are a know-nothing.



self-knowledge is a wonderful thing, eh bolshiebhoy...


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

Gobsmacked


----------



## Dr. Christmas (Aug 17, 2004)

HST said:
			
		

> Gobsmacked



by what?


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> let's see, shall we... it has nothing to do with arguments to academic freedom. it has everything to do with you looking like tossers when you start appealing to the powers-that-be to legislate against people's beliefs (however wrong they are) rather than their actions.
> 
> thought crime, eh?
> 
> ...


I think Dr C understood that already.


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

Dr. Christmas said:
			
		

> by what?


sarcasm


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 17, 2004)

HST said:
			
		

> I think Dr C understood that already.



there was never any doubt in my mind that he did; it was bolshieboy who seemed to be having the problems.


----------



## HST (Aug 17, 2004)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> there was never any doubt in my mind that he did; it was bolshieboy who seemed to be having the problems.


Apologies - no offense meant.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 17, 2004)

none taken.


----------



## layabout (Aug 17, 2004)

As an ex member of the BNP, I really don't see what the point is of banning them. If you tell me that I can't vote or listen to the BNP that is my immidiete concern. That is my imidiate right taken away.

Talking to me about racism would do no good. I would just say "I'm not a victim of racism, but some cunt is trying to stop me from listening to what the BNP have to say"

If most people in the SWP, believe that people in the BNP should be intimitated, hounded and boycotted for their beliefs, then fuck ya's. I hope the BNP spread the SWP membership details far and wide so they can be hounded, boycotted and shunned for their political beliefs.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> none taken.


Are you lot not the most useless tag team ever?

I notice with some quiet satisfaction that not one anarchist has bothered to challenge this middle of the road shite. Attack the swp till the face is blue but defend a basic position on why it is worth confronting fascism head on and why it doesn't just give them publicity...not a fecking chance.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 17, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> As an ex member of the BNP, I really don't see what the point is of banning them. If you tell me that I can't vote or listen to the BNP that is my immidiete concern. That is my imidiate right taken away.
> 
> Talking to me about racism would do no good. I would just say "I'm not a victim of racism, but some cunt is trying to stop me from listening to what the BNP have to say"
> 
> If most people in the SWP, believe that people in the BNP should be intimitated, hounded and boycotted for their beliefs, then fuck ya's. I hope the BNP spread the SWP membership details far and wide so they can be hounded, boycotted and shunned for their political beliefs.


You are personally the best argument against the liberals on here I've heard all night. Carry on mate.


----------



## Pilgrim (Aug 17, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> As an ex member of the BNP, I really don't see what the point is of banning them. If you tell me that I can't vote or listen to the BNP that is my immidiete concern. That is my imidiate right taken away.
> 
> Talking to me about racism would do no good. I would just say "I'm not a victim of racism, but some cunt is trying to stop me from listening to what the BNP have to say"
> 
> If most people in the SWP, believe that people in the BNP should be intimitated, hounded and boycotted for their beliefs, then fuck ya's. I hope the BNP spread the SWP membership details far and wide so they can be hounded, boycotted and shunned for their political beliefs.





So Redwatch is okay then, is it? Since when did the Swappies have a monopoly on intimidating, hounding and boycotting their political opponents?

And why would a sensible discussion about the evils or racism and other bigotry do you no good? 

And since you are so anti SWP members giving fascists a hard time, perhaps you would be even-handed enough to condemn those on the far right who have burned houses and cars belonging to ANL activists, graffiti on the homes of anti-fascist activists, threatening phone calls and obscene mail sent to their homes?

 Perhaps you would be good enough to condemn Holocaust survivors being sent pictures of concentration camps with the words "Wish you were here" scrawled across them?

Besides, it isn't as though Swappies aren't hounded far and wide (often justifiably) by the tabloids and many posters on these boards, including me.
They aren't nearly as popular as they themselves would like to believe, but they do at least try to argue their point (misguided though they often are) in an intelligent and coherent manner. While I may not like their tactics and blind obedience to their leadership, I can at least have a decent argument with them about the issues at hand. And I respect them for arguing their points despite the level of opposition from posters on these boards, including myself.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshieboy, are you on heavy medication?

what's 'radical' about calling for people to be kicked out of universities for having the 'wrong' opinions? 

it's that attitude that drives working class people towards the likes of the bnp.


----------



## Groucho (Aug 17, 2004)

I think Woody Allan may have had a point when he said that the best argument against a fascist is a baseball bat.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> What are you on about? It was Idris who said if we managed to ban the nazis they'd be coming for Sinn Fein in Queens Uni next. Are they 'progressive' or not? Wasn't my strawman old chap. Do keep up.



That's not quite what I said. I said the dupes would try it on, I didn't say they'd get away with it. I was just trying to point out the company you'd be objectively keeping.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> I notice with some quiet satisfaction that not one anarchist has bothered to challenge this middle of the road shite. Attack the swp till the face is blue but defend a basic position on why it is worth confronting fascism head on and why it doesn't just give them publicity...not a fecking chance.



Genuine questions: 

why should anarchists 'challenge this middle road of the road shite'? 

Should any position that happens to be 'middle of the road' automatically be challenged? 

What if those in the middle of the road happen to be right? 

What if there happens to be some common ground between their positions and those of the anarchists?


There's no argument here about the need to confront the far right. There is debate over the best way to do it; your resort to _ad hominem_ attacks is a pretty good sign of who's winning the debate.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 17, 2004)

Has there been any word from any of the infiltrated organisations - SWP, UAF, Respect, Stop the War etc - on these events yet?


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 17, 2004)

Full details will come soon, I guess.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 17, 2004)

We'll see.

I will be particularly interested to see what investigations are carried out by Respect, UAF and Stop the War into how exactly these people gained prominence in those organisations. Did the SWP just appoint them to various positions?


----------



## MACHINE (Aug 17, 2004)

I have been to party meetings in the past of SWP/Respect this has shocked me. I doubt I’ll ever go again, I bet the BNP have my details now I am so angry and afraid. I would imagine the party is highly infiltrated if this is anything to go by, why else would they be willing to lose such high value spies?


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 17, 2004)

Hmmm. First post is on a thread about fascists and you are insinuating that the BNP has more spies in a left organisation...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 17, 2004)

*sniff sniff*

hmmm


----------



## dennisr (Aug 17, 2004)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> *sniff sniff*
> 
> hmmm



aye, funny smell and a sudden interest


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Are you lot not the most useless tag team ever?
> 
> I notice with some quiet satisfaction that not one anarchist has bothered to challenge this middle of the road shite. Attack the swp till the face is blue but defend a basic position on why it is worth confronting fascism head on and why it doesn't just give them publicity...not a fecking chance.


 This is just pathetic.


----------



## Cajmere (Aug 17, 2004)

Would the BNP put their efforts into following up on their June 10 vote or duffing up a few Manchester SWP ? Be careful yeah but I know what I think their priorities are.

They seem likely to use this to have a go at the RUC on their website. 

If this was the other way round, the RUC could be looking at blanket media coverage tomorrow. But that isnt going to happen, not that it damages the BNP when it happens, quite the opposite in fact.

Politically the SWP will now have to admit that not all BNP'ers are mindless boot boys.


----------



## layabout (Aug 17, 2004)

Pilgrim said:
			
		

> So Redwatch is okay then, is it? Since when did the Swappies have a monopoly on intimidating, hounding and boycotting their political opponents?



Who's talking about Redwatch? 

What the fuck makes you think that thousands of BNP members are responsible or agree with the tactics of Redwatch? 

Yes I know Collet doing a sly one with Redwatch on the BBC expose, but Redwatch is no excuse to take the law into your own hands. If you feel that someone is organising violence against you, report it to the police. 



> And why would a sensible discussion about the evils or racism and other bigotry do you no good?



Expand on that please.



> And since you are so anti SWP members giving fascists a hard time, perhaps you would be even-handed enough to condemn those on the far right who have burned houses and cars belonging to ANL activists, graffiti on the homes of anti-fascist activists, threatening phone calls and obscene mail sent to their homes?



I am anti anyone give anyone else a hard time for their beliefs. You're like a child for Christ sakes! "They started it! They started it!" 

Look at the Redwatch website. Their words are no different from yours. "Let's give the Reds a 'hard' time"




> "Perhaps you would be good enough to condemn Holocaust survivors being sent pictures of concentration camps with the words "Wish you were here" scrawled across them?



You're too fucking right I would condem anything like that. The whole reason why I left was because of sickening racism from one particular BNP activist who was too high up in the party for me to do anything about.



> Besides, it isn't as though Swappies aren't hounded far and wide (often justifiably) by the tabloids and many posters on these boards, including me.



You are assuming that I am condoning what Redwatch get up to. I don't. Redwatch hardly looks like the collective work of the BNP membership. Holding the BNP responsible for Redwatch, is as fuckwitted as holding Seinn Feinn responsible for the IRA. 



> They aren't nearly as popular as they themselves would like to believe, but they do at least try to argue their point (misguided though they often are) in an intelligent and coherent manner. While I may not like their tactics and blind obedience to their leadership, I can at least have a decent argument with them about the issues at hand. And I respect them for arguing their points despite the level of opposition from posters on these boards, including myself.



Again you are assuming every BNP member out there condones violence.

Is every New Labour member fair game for violence looking at the amount of Iraqis that have lost their lives?


----------



## urbanrevolt (Aug 17, 2004)

The BNP is a fascist party. Fascists maim and murder.  That’s primarily what I meant by ‘they’  when I posted earlier but I had only just found out that the deception was true so might have been too brief in my arguments.  But are the BNP violent fascists?  Certainly, they maim.  I’ve known several people targeted and injured or narrowly escape injury.  What about murder?  Certainly, there’s no concerted official killing campaign.  Those who have killed may have been isolted loners.  But it’s still worth publicising the criminal connections the BNP do have- as a fascist front party which, all the evidence of history suggests, will become an open party of terror if it gains enough of a foothold.  That’s why we must physically stop them now, as part of a mass campaign.

David Copeland who murdered two people in the Soho nail bombings was convicted of murder.  An Asian councillor and family were firebombed out of their house during the BNP 2001 election campaign- no one was injured but that was only chance.  It could easily have been murder.   And Joe Owens, the BNP Merseyside Organiser whose car we trashed at the LePen demo, has certainly murdered- even has a conviction for manslaughter.  Actually, the murder was not directly related to BNP activity but to his gangland crime empire but what sort of party has convicted killers as their organisers? .  Tony LeComber BNP no. 2 has a conviction for possession of hand-made bombs and timig devices and one of their council candidates in Bradford boasted of his ‘dream’ to set up a machine gun post to murder Muslims after Friday prayers- perhaps, only potential murders and fantasies but hardly comforting.  Are these mere details?  In a sense, yes but they’re symptomatic details- evidence for diagnosing the fascist nature of the BNP.  That is why we must physically smash the BNP.  Fascism is a party of civil war for the bosses against Black people and the working class.  Anyone who underestimates their reactionary nature of fascism in power or near power should look into the many examples from Nazi Germany to 70s Chile where the fascists were a powerful counterrevolutionary force to smash- and maim and murder- the workers’ organisations and pave the way for the brutal Pinochet dictatorship.  

What should we do in Manchester Unis?  Build a united antifascist left determined to 1) physically drive the fascists off the campuses and 2) to politically combat the racist lies of both the BNP and the racist state off which the BNP feeds.  We should oppose state bans and police actions and use mass action to smash the BNP.  We should have a massive leaflet and poster campaign, not to ask the authorities to ban them but to make their political life hell and prevent them from gaining any foothold on the campus.  (And on the personal Politics is fucking personal when you’ve been lied to by Nazi scum so let’s mske their personal life hell as well).  

We need to rebuild a serious antifascist left on the campuses and the communities.  Make no mistake, where the BNP have grown racist attacks and, yes, murders have increased.  The BNP are class warriors for the capitalist class.  We must fight a relentless class war against them and capitalism itself,  The BNP don’t have any solutions for the working class: a mass united black and white workers’ campaign does.

The whole point about No Platform is its self defence.  I'm not arguing for isolated terror tactics- that's the preserve of the BNP.  We should be arguing foir mass mobilisations which will seriously erode the BNP's capacity to launch physical attacks.  And as for reporting to the police?  What the same police exposed as having a hard core of racists, whose members have racially abused and assaulted Asian youth (again widely documented and I've witnessed several times myself).  How many racist murders in the police and how many convictions?

Let's get ready for a mass campaign against these Nazi scum in Manchester and elsewhere.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

You need to think again - which BNP members have been convicted of murder.

The BNP/Tyndal/Copelanl stuff is useless and you don't understand the chronology.

This is kiddy stuf.


----------



## blamblam (Aug 17, 2004)

MACHINE said:
			
		

> I have been to party meetings in the past of SWP/Respect this has shocked me. I doubt I’ll ever go again, I bet the BNP have my details now I am so angry and afraid. I would imagine the party is highly infiltrated if this is anything to go by, why else would they be willing to lose such high value spies?


Lol - see? This is how easy it is to spot a fascist "infiltrator"! It's laughable... shame your average Swiper is such a charicature...


----------



## Zonk (Aug 17, 2004)

Always said the SWP attracts some right wankers.....


----------



## layabout (Aug 17, 2004)

urbanrevolt said:
			
		

> The SWP is a fascist party. Fascists maim and murder.  That’s primarily what I meant by ‘they’  when I posted earlier but I had only just found out that the deception was true so might have been too brief in my arguments.  But are the BNP violent fascists?  Certainly, they maim.  I’ve known several people targeted and injured or narrowly escape injury.



Not suprising, you seem really dodgy to me. I bet you phone up them up for a fight?



> What about murder? Certainly, there’s no concerted official killing campaign.
> Those who have killed may have been isolted loners.



So it's a criminal matter against those loners, rather than running some kind of hate campaign against thousands of people. By the way, I've calmed down now. Hopefully you're SWP chums will see you as a violent loner and ban you from the SWP.  



> But it’s still worth publicising the criminal connections the BNP do have- as a fascist front party which, all the evidence of history suggests, will become an open party of terror if it gains enough of a foothold.  That’s why we must physically stop them now, as part of a mass campaign.



Yes....political violence. It done Northern Ireland wonders you know.  



> David Copeland who murdered two people in the Soho nail bombings was convicted of murder.  An Asian councillor and family were firebombed out of their house during the BNP 2001 election campaign- no one was injured but that was only chance.  It could easily have been murder.   And Joe Owens, the BNP Merseyside Organiser whose car we trashed at the LePen demo, has certainly murdered- even has a conviction for manslaughter.  Actually, the murder was not directly related to BNP activity but to his gangland crime empire but what sort of party has convicted killers as their organisers? .



Like you Copeland was a violent loner. He left the BNP because they was not up to his violent standards. Like wise I hope you leave your SWP chums and get yourself nicked for being a violent pratt.

btw, Joe Owens has not been convicted of murder. However, I must agree Nick Griffin could find better company, but hey, a lot of BNP members most probably do.



> Tony LeComber BNP no. 2 has a conviction for possession of hand-made bombs and timig devices and one of their council candidates in Bradford boasted of his ‘dream’ to set up a machine gun post to murder Muslims after Friday prayers- perhaps, only potential murders and fantasies but hardly comforting.



I don't like Tony LeComer either, but I'm fucked if morons like you are going to go after innocent people down to LeComer being a prize pratt.



> Are these mere details?  In a sense, yes but they’re symptomatic details- evidence for diagnosing the fascist nature of the BNP.






> That is why we must physically smash the BNP.  Fascism is a party of civil war for the bosses against Black people and the working class.  Anyone who underestimates their reactionary nature of fascism in power or near power should look into the many examples from Nazi Germany to 70s Chile where the fascists were a powerful counterrevolutionary force to smash- and maim and murder- the workers’ organisations and pave the way for the brutal Pinochet dictatorship.



Oh please. Do you seriously think the BNP is gonna get in? Well....one thing for sure is......THEY WILL....if they are made up to be some kind of forbidden fruit. If you want to sell something to someone....tell them they can't have it.  

You're talking politics. By the way, if you think violence is the answer, why are you TALKING to us all about using violence. Shouldn't you be telling us, they we all derserve a kicking unless we do what you say?




> What should we do in Manchester Unis?  Build a united antifascist left determined to 1) physically drive the fascists off the campuses and 2) to politically combat the racist lies of both the BNP and the racist state off which the BNP feeds.  We should oppose state bans and police actions and use mass action to smash the BNP.  We should have a massive leaflet and poster campaign, not to ask the authorities to ban them but to make their political life hell and prevent them from gaining any foothold on the campus.  (And on the personal Politics is fucking personal when you’ve been lied to by Nazi scum so let’s mske their personal life hell as well).



And you wonder why Redwatch exists?

You are a prize sectarian pratt. If everyone took up your attitude, this country would descend into a sectaran style civil war, similar to what Northern Ireland suffered before the peace agreement.



> We need to rebuild a serious antifascist left on the campuses and the communities.  Make no mistake, where the BNP have grown racist attacks and, yes, murders have increased.  The BNP are class warriors for the capitalist class.  We must fight a relentless class war against them and capitalism itself,  The BNP don’t have any solutions for the working class: a mass united black and white workers’ campaign does.



Yes........thats right, cloud the issues even more......  



> The whole point about No Platform is its self defence.  I'm not arguing for isolated terror tactics- that's the preserve of the BNP.  We should be arguing foir mass mobilisations which will seriously erode the BNP's capacity to launch physical attacks.  And as for reporting to the police?  What the same police exposed as having a hard core of racists, whose members have racially abused and assaulted Asian youth (again widely documented and I've witnessed several times myself).  How many racist murders in the police and how many convictions?



Funny, Redwatch "justify" their sad sorry existance with words not unlike yours.



> Let's get ready for a mass campaign against these Nazi scum in Manchester and elsewhere.


 
Yes......I hope you get a cell next to Copelands.


----------



## urbanrevolt (Aug 17, 2004)

Alright, then I'll withdraw the murder thing as a substantial point in the sense that Copeland was probably a nutter acting alone and Joe Owens' killing was related to gangland activity (but he is their organiser) but are you denying the BNP are fascists or violent?  Because if you are, then that's serious problem.

What was all the shit exposed on the BBC for, then?  And have people just imagined the brick and firebombing of a house?  

And though the Copeland/ Tyndall stuff is in the past it's surely not irrelevant?  The BNP aren't just a nasty racust outfit- though they're certainly that- but fascists.  Surely, that's a basic starting point.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

urbanrevolt said:
			
		

> Alright, then I'll withdraw the murder thing as a substantial point in the sense that Copeland was probably a nutter acting alone and Joe Owens' killing was related to gangland activity (but he is their organiser) but are you denying the BNP are fascists or violent?  Because if you are, then that's serious problem.
> 
> What was all the shit exposed on the BBC for, then?  And have people just imagined the brick and firebombing of a house?
> 
> And though the Copeland/ Tyndall stuff is in the past it's surely not irrelevant?  The BNP aren't just a nasty racust outfit- though they're certainly that- but fascists.  Surely, that's a basic starting point.


 What, of your original claim stands?


----------



## layabout (Aug 17, 2004)

urbanrevolt said:
			
		

> Alright, then I'll withdraw the murder thing as a substantial point in the sense that Copeland was probably a nutter acting alone and Joe Owens' killing was related to gangland activity (but he is their organiser) but are you denying the BNP are fascists or violent?  Because if you are, then that's serious problem.
> 
> What was all the shit exposed on the BBC for, then?  And have people just imagined the brick and firebombing of a house?
> 
> And though the Copeland/ Tyndall stuff is in the past it's surely not irrelevant?  The BNP aren't just a nasty racust outfit- though they're certainly that- but fascists.  Surely, that's a basic starting point.



I condemn all violence. If people take the law into their own hands they should be locked up. It is not your right or my right, to get any polical party and make a judgement on all it's activists and it's members AND take the law into our own hands. Sorry, it doesn't work like that. Pack it in.


----------



## urbanrevolt (Aug 17, 2004)

Btw my last reply was to butchersapron, the layabout post crossed.  But layabout completely misunderstands the points.  It's not about ti for tat violence.  It's about rebuilding a mass movement which will include physical self-defence not as some kind of euphemism for isolated attacks but to stop the criminal attacks of fascists.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

Do you layabout? So what?


----------



## layabout (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Do you layabout? So what?



The question was put to me on this thread. Nothing like making the point clear.

Some people have been VERY assuming about my beliefs.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> The question was put to me on this thread. Nothing like making the point clear.
> 
> Some people have been VERY assuming about my beliefs.


 Are you sure?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 17, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> We'll see.
> 
> I will be particularly interested to see what investigations are carried out by Respect, UAF and Stop the War into how exactly these people gained prominence in those organisations. Did the SWP just appoint them to various positions?



If you think they're going to announce them outside of their own membership, you clearly think they've learned nothing.

They'll sort their own ship out internally and ignore the embarrassment imo.


----------



## layabout (Aug 17, 2004)

urbanrevolt said:
			
		

> Btw my last reply was to butchersapron, the layabout post crossed.  But layabout completely misunderstands the points.  It's not about ti for tat violence.  It's about rebuilding a mass movement which will include physical self-defence not as some kind of euphemism for isolated attacks but to stop the criminal attacks of fascists.



If I misunderstand your points, then you are going to have to be a lot clearer. I don't see how physically driving students off a campus, who hold views not in agreement, is going to be a receipe to stop political violence. If someone tried to physically stop you from having your right of free speach, I don't think you would take it without a fight. You have no chance of changing peoples minds with the threat of violence or anything else physical.


----------



## layabout (Aug 17, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Are you sure?



LOL Yes!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 17, 2004)

<black humour>

anyway, it's probably all an elaborate 'searchlight' double cross sting...

</black humour>


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 17, 2004)

I win

m


----------



## layabout (Aug 17, 2004)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> <black humour>
> 
> anyway, it's probably all an elaborate 'searchlight' double cross sting...
> 
> </black humour>



ROFL....For all you know, urbanrevolt could be a reporter from the BBC trying to expose violent swappies.....by erm inciting violence and seeing who is crazy enough to buy into it.


----------



## Groucho (Aug 17, 2004)

The BNP clearly have an interest in exagerating the 'prominant positions' these fascists were supposed to have attained in left-wing and anti-fascist organisations. Mostly these appear to have been locally elected positions. e.g. The founding conference of RESPECT was open to all comers but has been written up as if it was a meeting of leading representatives of the movement.

The BNP will be hoping for a paranoid over-reaction from the left.  There is no need to give them any such satisfaction. 

The SWP will certainly not be discussing internal security on an open site such as this one. 

They will not have 'uncovered' anything earth-shattering. The organisations these people became involved in are open and democratic.  

Commiserations to all comrades who may have rubbed shoulders with these individuals.


----------



## fanciful (Aug 17, 2004)

<snip>


----------



## Zonk (Aug 18, 2004)

Well that's just blown any element of suprise then.  

Perhaps next time you should pm that information around for a whole load of different reasons  .


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

Zonk, what the fuck are you doing on this thread? That's the second useless post I've read from you (and I am only counting those on this thread).


----------



## Zonk (Aug 18, 2004)

Giving you amateurs a little friendly advice.....but hey, you obviously know what your doing so I'll leave you to it.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

Yes ok mr expert.


----------



## yozz (Aug 18, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> You need to think again - which BNP members have been convicted of murder.
> 
> The BNP/Tyndal/Copelanl stuff is useless and you don't understand the chronology.
> 
> This is kiddy stuf.



David Copeland held joint membership of the BNP and the NSM. He killed a few only five years ago I believe.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> If you think they're going to announce them outside of their own membership, you clearly think they've learned nothing.
> 
> They'll sort their own ship out internally and ignore the embarrassment imo.



The SWP will have some kind of inquiry I'm sure, which they will keep to themselves. Damage limitation will be the main priority. They may well then give some kind of explanation to local UAF activists or whatever. But is UAF or RESPECT going to have an inquiry, independent of the SWP, into how these people got into positions of responsibility? I'd be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

What positions of responsibility did they hold in UAF or RESPECT nigel? I haven't read of any. Have you?

They went to the founding conference of RESPECT, which as you know anyone could have.

So? 

Or are you slinging mud for the sake of it again?


----------



## layabout (Aug 18, 2004)

yozz said:
			
		

> David Copeland held joint membership of the BNP and the NSM. He killed a few only five years ago I believe.



I heard his BNP membership had lapsed. However, if urbanrevolt is saying what he means, then he has more in common with Copeland than anyone else I have met.


----------



## layabout (Aug 18, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> I heard his BNP membership had lapsed. However, if urbanrevolt is saying what he means, then he has more in common with Copeland than anyone else I have met.



or means what he says even.......


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

The original article (from the ever reliable fascists) claimed that one or both of these people had been on the local Respect steering committee, didn't it?

UAF and Respect should have their own inquiries into exactly what these people did in those organisations - from who they worked with to what ring rounds they were involved in. And who assigned them whatever jobs they had. Do you think that either organisation will?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

I already know some of what's happening, possibly wrongly. I've been asked not to post it on here.

If you were honest, you just want to find a way to slag off the SWP or UAF or RESPECT over this, same as virtually every thread you post on.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

They should not announce anything on here and you shouldn't be aware of what they do. That won't stop you deciding they have dealt with it wrongly.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

You are aware of some of what is happening - in the SWP or in the other organisations directly effected?

And why the hell shouldn't UAF or Respect be open about what they are doing about this? I already know why the SWP won't be. Are the people who bought Marxism tickets, and who therefore handed their details to these people entitled to know what is being done? Or the people who went to a UAF or Respect meeting and put their addresses on the attendence sheets?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

Because it's blatently stupid to tell people how they're going to stop it happening again.

Fucking hell. Have you turned into an utter imbecile?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

I like the fact that you are now announcing in your edit that these people saw various things when you have no idea if that is true or not. 

Most dishonest.

Again.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

You seem to be unable to grasp that declaring that you are holding an investigation, contacting and warning people directly effected, telling those people what the results of your investigation has been and so on is not the same as announcing how you are going to stop future infiltration.

So again: is the investigation you are aware of an SWP one or one being carried out by one of the other groups concerned?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

Nigel, will you fucking read what I wrote.

I'm not getting into it. This is not a fucking game and this is an open website.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

What the fuck is your problem? Did you just not read the original article? One of these people was Respect's regional treasurer. That means he had access to membership lists at the very least. They were on the Marxism organisational team, for fuck's sake. That gives them access to the home addresses of any Marxism attendee who trusted the SWP enough to give it to them. That includes you in all probability.

The next question is what other ring rounds were they involved in? What other lists did they have access to?

And again, you haven't answered my question. Do you think that UAF or Respect will have a serious inquiry independently of the SWP?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

My problem is that you are _desperate_ to slag off the SWP, or RESPECT, or UAF, at any opportunity. You seem to think that if the people don't post on here, or announce publicly what they are doing, that's enough for you to do so.

You are incapable of being critical about the original article.

Now, it wouldn't take a genius to work out that its very fucking likely they've (the SWP/ RESPECT/ whoever) answered that question - but they are not going to post it on here - neither are they going to tell you.

You're not the first to try and score points (JHE and Zonk for example) but you're probably the most unexpected. I even advised people in Manc to chat to people from this thread about what they will do - as I clearly had the wrong attitude.

You're just being a tosser.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 18, 2004)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> bolshieboy, are you on heavy medication?


Why is it liberals can't avoid ad hominem abuse?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> What the fuck is your problem? Did you just not read the original article? One of these people was Respect's regional treasurer. That means he had access to membership lists at the very least. They were on the Marxism organisational team, for fuck's sake. That gives them access to the home addresses of any Marxism attendee who trusted the SWP enough to give it to them. That includes you in all probability.
> 
> The next question is what other ring rounds were they involved in? What other lists did they have access to?
> 
> And again, you haven't answered my question. Do you think that UAF or Respect will have a serious inquiry independently of the SWP?




I've already told you I'm not getting into your 'question'. What the fuck has it got to do with you? You seem desperate to get this onto U75 and score some petty point. 

All of yours above are wrong. But I'm not getting into it.

I don't think you'll ever hear of any inquiry. Rightly.

Now go and slag off RESPECT for something else.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

As for using this to have a dig at the SWP: 

Any organisation can be infiltrated by fascists or state agents with time, energy and a bit of sense. I suspect that the same two would have found things more difficult in left wing groups that pay more attention to the political education of their members rather than encouraging mindless enthusiasm but that wouldn't have been insurmountable with a bit of dedication. 

The telling question is what happens now as it would be for any organisation. And the wall of silence approach doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

People in every organisation on the British left bought tickets to Marxism. Does that mean that anyone who was trusting enough of the SWP to give their full address has now given it to the BNP? Isn't that a question that has to be answered openly?

How many people put their addresses on sign up sheets that these people then had access to?

Did they have access to membership lists of Respect or UAF as well as SWP ones?


----------



## layabout (Aug 18, 2004)

> I'm not getting into it. This is not a fucking game and this is an open website.



Thats a very good point. 

I wouldn't expect anyone to post up the internal goings on of a party on a public messageboard, especially about such a sensitive issue.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

You dick. You'd prefer the SWP to openly discuss 'what happens now' in public less than 24 hours after the event is discovered.

And you slag them off for not doing so.

YOu really have lost it.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> As for using this to have a dig at the SWP:
> 
> Any organisation can be infiltrated by fascists or state agents with time, energy and a bit of sense. I suspect that the same two would have found things more difficult in left wing groups that pay more attention to the political education of their members but that wouldn't have been insurmountable.
> 
> The telling question is what happens now. And the wall of silence approach doesn't exactly inspire confidence.



The above post was replying to this idiotic one.


----------



## layabout (Aug 18, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> As for using this to have a dig at the SWP:
> 
> Any organisation can be infiltrated by fascists or state agents with time, energy and a bit of sense. I suspect that the same two would have found things more difficult in left wing groups that pay more attention to the political education of their members but that wouldn't have been insurmountable.
> 
> The telling question is what happens now. And the wall of silence approach doesn't exactly inspire confidence.



Nigel, you can't expect them to post security tacticts on an open messageboard, surely?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 18, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> Nigel, you can't expect them to post security tacticts on an open messageboard, surely?


Not when people like you you are hoping every piece of info these cunts have gained is spread as widely as possible.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

Keep your temper under control, flimsier. 

This section of the thread began when I asked if Respect and the UAF would be holding investigations independently of the SWP. I haven't got an answer, which is fair enough at the moment although not indefinitely.

If the only answer you have is "I don't know", then again fair enough. You were the one who claimed that you had some knowledge of what was going on.

As I said above, infiltration can happen to anyone although the SWP's organisational style doesn't help. The question is what happens afterwards. I don't expect the SWP or UAF or Respect to publish every last detail but I do expect them to take the event seriously and make that publically clear.

More generally - whether or not there is an investigation is not something that anyone with half a brain should be in favour of keeping secret. Who would want to work with an organisation that was infiltrated by fascists and didn't investigate ever again?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 18, 2004)

Brian this asshole layabout had this to say about this issue and you wonder why we might be reticent:"If most people in the SWP, believe that people in the BNP should be intimitated, hounded and boycotted for their beliefs, then fuck ya's. I hope the BNP spread the SWP membership details far and wide so they can be hounded, boycotted and shunned for their political beliefs."Pick the time and place pal.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

I said stuff was already happening. I also don't think there's any need for you, for example, to know about the results. I object to your stating as fact some theories you have as to what security was compromised. I object to your 'I'd be surprised'.

Then you said 'the wall of silence doesn't inspire confidence' suggesting you want it published or something, by now. 

That's not exactly the same as 'fair enough' is it.

So stop looking for points to score.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

Do you think that all of the people who put their details on lists these people had access to (whichever lists they may be) need to know?

As for wanting answers immediately, the "wall of silence" remark had nothing to do with impatience. It was in response to Cliffite's instructions to other SWP members to shut up and your claim that you had some knowledge but had been told to keep it to yourself.

Things like whether or not UAF and Respect will be investigating this are not things that can be kept quiet.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

I can't believe you have still carried this on. 

I don't think everyone who went to Marxism needs to know. 

Apart from that, I'm not sure - hence I suggested they (people in manc) speak to others who have better advice.

Now leave it; I'm not coming back to this discussion with you and you ain't listening. I'm most puzzled as to why you are _desperate_ for more info to be published on an open site like this one.

And your edit continues to suggest people should publicly post, on open forums, read by anyone and referred to by fash, what they are doing about it. 

Fucking hell


----------



## Pilgrim (Aug 18, 2004)

Personally, I'm not suggesting that the SWP has to give detailed descriptions of whatever security they may put in place as a result of this minor disaster, but surely those whose details are on whatever membership lists these infiltrators had access to should be informed ASAP that they may be under threat.

This isn't only a matter for the SWP and it's front organisations, it's also a matter of grave concern to those other groups and individuals, such as the Green party for instance, who worked with UAF. I just checked the SWP website and there isn't a dickybird about this little farrago.

Considering security, I was vetted before my application to the Green party was accepted. If I remember correctly, this is party policy now. Surely the SWP and its front groups should consider installing similar procedures, should similar infiltrations be attempted again.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

I think that the attempt to hide behind "security" is understandable but it isn't coherent. In fact it reeks of closing the barn doors when the horses are heading for the horizon.

It is perfectly legitimate for the SWP or UAF or Respect or any other body these people infiltrated to want to keep certain things about their response secret. Things like any new procedures they are bringing in to deal with such attempts.

It is not legitimate for them to want to hide such issues as whether or not there is going to be an investigation. Or how that investigation is to be carried out. Or what lists of home addresses these people had access to. Every left wing activist in Manchester has a legitimate interest in knowing if the BNP have their home address and how that situation came to pass. The same goes for people in other parts of the country who may be on other lists that these scumbags had access to. How the hell is anyone supposed to work with them or attend their events otherwise?

Now it may be that the SWP and it auxilliary groupings are not planning to hide such information away. As you point out 24 hours is not a reasonable time to expect a clear response. However the attitude displayed by the likes of Cliffite isn't exactly encouraging in that respect.


----------



## Gumbert (Aug 18, 2004)

nigel, youv'e made your point..

now shut the fuck up...


----------



## layabout (Aug 18, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Brian this asshole layabout had this to say about this issue and you wonder why we might be reticent:"If most people in the SWP, believe that people in the BNP should be intimitated, hounded and boycotted for their beliefs, then fuck ya's. I hope the BNP spread the SWP membership details far and wide so they can be hounded, boycotted and shunned for their political beliefs."Pick the time and place pal.



That's a very big IF.

Ever heard of Devils Advocate? 

Have you actually bothered to read all of my posts on this thread? 

hmmmm?

I believe EVERYONE including the likes of the BNP should not be hounded for their political beliefs. I don't believe in taking the law into my own hands. 

Sorry, if I got your blood racing, but you really do want to stop and think about the consequences of a no platform policy. You damage the reputation of the SWP. Many would never vote for a party that believes in stopping free speech. 

Read my posts.

If most members of the BNP were violent and condoned violence, there would be abosolute war out there. There isn't because they don't. If most of them, were into violence, then they would get what they deserve, but like it or not, they ain't. 

You are insulting the intelligence of people, by trying to take away their democratic rights by phyiscal force.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

Are you taking something for that attitude problem Gumbert? Or are you just feeling betrayed and looking for someone to take it out on?


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 18, 2004)

Two BNP members join SWP,
and the SWP members can't tell them apart,
they even speak the same 'language'. As members of the SWP 
they have 'credentials', supplied by the SWP, how nice of them.
Presume they learned quickly the methods of the SWP and used them.
.
Gluckstein taught them well, the zionist's joined both Stalins party and Hitlers,
they were welcome equally in both.
.
People in other groups coudn't tell them from SWP members either.
Mayhap Trotsky was correct, Stalinism and Fascism ARE two sides of the same coin, made of the same metal.
.
ps. since I mentioned in a previous post the NF in the SWP, has there been any response from the SWP regarding it ?



			
				fanciful said:
			
		

> Like anyone on the Manchester left I knew these two nazi scum infiltrators and they were utterly convincing in their role of activist party hacks, not particularly political of course but how many SWPers are? The SWP enabled their advancement through their encouragement of activity before any understanding, but they weren’t the only ones duped by them. I was taken in by them like everyone else.


And they knew you, and t'others.
---------------------------------------

If you were in a city under seige by fascist's and some org' in the city allowed representatives of the fascist's inside the city and showed them round.

Explained the strengths and weaknesses and introduced them to the other org's in the city, would you call for the fascist reps' to be banned from a university or would you call for the members of the org' that allowed them entry to be stood against a wall and shot as traitors ?
.
.
(Sarajevo)


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 18, 2004)

Because if you were, you could have saved your ire for when this fuckspud showed up.


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 18, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> In fact it reeks of closing the barn doors when the horses are heading for the horizon.
> 
> It is not legitimate for them to want to hide such issues as whether or not there is going to be an investigation. Or how that investigation is to be carried out.
> 
> ...



To clear out all the bnp and nf means the swp will lose some members.shall we have a poll on how many ?

ps sarajevo lives. they shot collaborators.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 18, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Because if you were, you could have saved your ire for when this fuckspud showed up.



lol!

it was inevitable wasn't it


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 18, 2004)

Last year the SWP opened the school gates for the BNP so now they both leaflet and have turned shools into political grounds, wasn't there enough ground already ?

Since the 80's when the BNP leafleted schools and were dealt with - no other group has done, so why the SWP ?

Commonly said over 80% of the popiulation were opposed to the invasion of Iraq, so why the need for school kids ?

So now the betrayal of the manchester 'left' ! 

At what point do people take it seriously ?

Has the SWP now developed a policy to remove the BNP from the schools ?


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 18, 2004)

fuckin hell, this thread has grown in the past twelve hours 




			
				Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Every left wing activist in Manchester has a legitimate interest in knowing if the BNP have their home address and how that situation came to pass. The same goes for people in other parts of the country who may be on other lists that these scumbags had access to. How the hell is anyone supposed to work with them or attend their events otherwise?
> .



I have to agree with Nigel here.

I have had no involvement with the SWP as an organisation (still vaguely in touvh with a few non-active menbers..) for the past 2+ years.

I have moved house and changed phone number numerous times since then, and that us the only reason I am not worried about Diane and Joe and the BNP  having my personal details.

I'm practically conviced that my (very out of date) details were on whatever contact lists they were given for ring rounds because when I was in the  SWP (I was young and foolish  ) we were given lists with ppl's personal info: when they joined, when they stopped paying, address, occupation, trade union, branch, phone no etc etc... and this included people who had left over 2 years ago and people who had just singed petitions 2+ years ago 

As I said to Solidarnosc about 6 pages back, anyone who thinks these infiltrators didnt copy these lists is deluding themselves. 

IMHO, they will be of very little use to the fash since the majority of ppl on them will merely have signed a petition years ago and no longer be at the same address or even be remotely involved in anything even vaguely lefty.
Basically there is too much data there for them to make any sense of.

BUT, there may be certain ppl on these lists who the fash ARE interested in and I feat for them - not just in terms of their physical well-being, but also their emotional state - fearing what the fash may know about them.....

IMO it is not this huge amount of data that the BNP inevitably now possess that is the main worry. It's more the personal stuff that they know about people who got close to them - thats what would really freak me, your mates know all your weaknesses, how to get to you etc. etc.
It must be really awful right now for Solidarnosc and basicaly anyone who has been invovled with Manc / Salford SWP in the past nine months.

I am amazed that these two vile individuals actually have the front to return to uni in september. Yes, the SWP is not the most threatening of organisations, but on a purely personal level, I know that if I had been "friends" with one of these two and found out they were really fash I would have no hesitiation to kick their heads in (and, believe it or not, I am not a violent person generally).


<sorry if this post doesn't make sense / is full of typos / repetitive etc, but I have been in the pub for the past 12 hours, so go easy on me....)


----------



## 888 (Aug 18, 2004)

Past caring's right, there's something dodgy about the photos. There's something wrong with her neck, and the way the shadows fall just isn't right...


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 18, 2004)

888, i see what you mean.......


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 18, 2004)

*soli*

soli
box is full


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 18, 2004)

Sacred Spirit said:
			
		

> Last year the SWP opened the school gates for the BNP so now they both leaflet and have turned shools into political grounds, wasn't there enough ground already ?
> 
> Since the 80's when the BNP leafleted schools and were dealt with - no other group has done, so why the SWP ?
> 
> ...


look, shit-fer-brains, talk some sort of sense or just fuck off, please.


----------



## past caring (Aug 18, 2004)

Jezza - almost everyone has this fuckwit on ignore.

Can you please refrain from quoting him - as it kind of defeats the object.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 18, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> soli
> box is full


 Duly emptied.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 18, 2004)

In terms of what urbanrevolt was saying I think it’s worth expanding on.

While the BNP may have changed tactics to appear more respectable do people think this means they are no longer a fascist outfit? Various fascist outfits in history have made turns in terms of having a respectable/thug image. The Nazis did it. Sometimes the boot boys were let loose, sometimes they stressed they were a parliamentary party. As said they definitely didn’t gain power on the back of saying we’re gonna gas seven million dues and destroy the trade union movement.

One things for sure is that if the BNP ever got into a position of prominence their methods of violence would be unleashed. Their membership is riddled from thugs from the top down.

Just because Griffin is not at this very moment saying we need “well directed fists and boots” do people really think that means he’s changed his mind on the matter? Every under cover documentary there has been has uncovered their violent, racist, fascist, holocaust denying views. Or do they just save these views for the cameras?

The reason the BNP have to be no platformed is because of what they are. Their self professed aim is to remove every black and Asian person from the country, and that’s when they’re in a position of weakness!

There have been attacks on the Asian community around Manchester where the BNP are standing, and I don’t think it’s hard to put two and two together. And do people have any doubt that the BNP would smash up the workers movement and the left given half the chance. Even their organiser on an undercover documentary said we don’t want street battles “at the moment”.

I think the tactic of no platform has to be looked at tactically and should be used in mass action, like the Le Pen demo. But it’s something that needs to be defended to the core. It’s not about mindlessly bashing people as layabout seems to suggest but recognising that the fascists will use violence to smash the workers movement and black and Asian communities. Now leaving aside Diane’s ridiculous assertion that this is not personal, it also means that the left has to defend itself and it has to start when the BNP are small. That’s why Diane and Joe and to face a mass campaign to try and drive them off campus. They represent an organisation that wants to drive every black and Asian person out of the country and smash the worker’s movement given half the chance. Why wait until they can do it to stop them and not stop them now? Would people on here really give a shit if the Nazis had been smashed by physcial means when they were small? Would anyone have given a shit about their rights to free speech if you could have stopped the carrying out the holocaust and smashing the German workers movement? And do people have any doubt that people in the higher echelons wouldn’t smash democracy and anyone in their path given the opportunity?

Also being thinking about Diane/Joe being duped or not know what the BNP is really about. Do people seriously think that people who have gone undercover in the SWP for a whole year aren’t hardcore activists? Of course they are……

Also can I stress my sympathy for the people in the SWP and others over what has happened. I do hope the SWP learns some lessons from this though.

PS What do butchers and Nigel think should be done in terms of Joe and Diane?

PPS I wonder what Diane thinks of the totally sexist views of the BNP?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 18, 2004)

Good post cr!


----------



## fanciful (Aug 18, 2004)

they are a pair of hapless individuals but no more forgiveable for all that. i knew them pretty well. obviously they were hard core if stupid and naieve, just considering the manner of the announcement, it's bizarre photos and commentary tells you plenty about them and the fact that they think they can carry on living their lives as if it was a minor disagreement over which football team you support. that cannot happen. and i'm absolutely confident will not.
as for an enquiry - well its perfectly obvious why it happened - the swp's open door policy - its promotion of mindless activism - their usefulness as voting fodder for the leadership - the key test of a revolutionary - do you understand and can you apply the ideas of your organisation in the class struggle was never asked of them - cause all they had to do was what they were told by the organiser  - the fact that this was valued above all else by the leadership of the swp meant it was a piece of piss to do and will happen again - if the culture and political degeneration of the swp continues - which it will.
a salutory lesson for the anti-fa nonetheless and in a way a good thing insofar as it makes us wake up and take the enemy seriously.
but don't get me wrong they're scum and we're going to have to do all the things everyone's suggested to sort this problem out.


----------



## blamblam (Aug 18, 2004)

888 said:
			
		

> Past caring's right, there's something dodgy about the photos. There's something wrong with her neck, and the way the shadows fall just isn't right...


lol - you photoshopped that right? Put griffin's head on her body?

Surely she can't be that ugly?


----------



## flypanam (Aug 18, 2004)

icepick said:
			
		

> Surely she can't be that ugly?



with pure bred inbreading any monstrosity can appear.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Aug 18, 2004)

I think these two infiltrators would be ideal recruiting material for the Intelligence services, so that they can do similar work in the BNP  They could probably be attracted by appealing to their distorted sense of so called 'patriotism'.  

MI5 could usefully have some more agents in the BNP, agents who have established their credentials within the unsuspecting BNP by their work in the SWP.

Back to the main topic. If it transpires that the BNP does use the information about names and addresses to carry out acts of violence, on individuals then I hope there is enough evidence to point the finger at the infiltrators so that they can be charged as accessories.

Hocus Eye


----------



## Sayjann (Aug 18, 2004)

Hocus Eye. said:
			
		

> I think these two infiltrators would be ideal recruiting material for the Intelligence services, so that they can do similar work in the BNP  They could probably be attracted by appealing to their distorted sense of so called 'patriotism'.
> 
> MI5 could usefully have some more agents in the BNP, agents who have established their credentials within the unsuspecting BNP by their work in the SWP.
> 
> ...



I think the BNP will be very very wary of those two now. There's a real chance that they could be double agents so to speak.

Diane was held in high regard for her work with RESPECT, somethings just dont ring true. Incidentally she was involved in the Anti Nazi League as it then was well before she started courting Colett......

Maybe he will be left with egg on his face, eh

Sayjann


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 18, 2004)

yozz said:
			
		

> David Copeland held joint membership of the BNP and the NSM. He killed a few only five years ago I believe.


 No he didn't. If you knew anything about right-wing politics you'd know why as well.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2004)

perhaps the manc swp could profitably look again at the events of the evening the uaf were launched in manchester.


----------



## fanciful (Aug 18, 2004)

good point. the swp brought them to the MAR organising meeting which arranged stewarding. (or not) more accurately. that was the first time i met them.


----------



## jemima (Aug 18, 2004)

hiya, I'm new to this website but i think i probably know a number of you. i've been reading all this with great interest as i knew the moles, but not very well. i am a bit concerned about the idea of a big campaign to ostracise these two from the campus, though. If you consider 

1. the fact that these people don't seem to have actually achieved anything in their year (!!!) as moles, save for having presumably gotten a huge list of contact details, which is admittedly quite serious

2. the public nature of their coming out, complete with names and photographs

3. the fact that they are probably going to continue their loves at uni etc.

don't you think one should seriously ponder what the bnp were doing all this for? on the face of it, obviously, it simply looks like a primitive, pie-in-your-face act, but considering the fact that the bnp thrive on the idea of themselves as victims (of ethnic invasion, of "left-wing" media, govt. etc.) don't you think they may have been wanting to provoke the sort of ostracising campaign many of you speak of? an earlier entry pointed out the dangers of this for us: wentworth became a celebrity overnight when all that flared up. i honestly believe it would be better to lay off that idea. their lives will be hell at uni in a personal way anyway, without any concerted campaign. i'm worried that this is what they want, and, frankly, they're not worth it.


----------



## jemima (Aug 18, 2004)

that is LIVES, not LOVES, of course, oh dear...


----------



## sihhi (Aug 18, 2004)

jemima said:
			
		

> don't you think they may have been wanting to provoke the sort of ostracising campaign many of you speak of? an earlier entry pointed out the dangers of this for us: wentworth became a celebrity overnight when all that flared up.



Er yeah I broadly agree- it also has backfired with Lawrence Rustem and Tony Collett 

I think a wall of student silence would probably be more effective.


----------



## Bedonteau (Aug 18, 2004)

sihhi said:
			
		

> Er yeah I broadly agree- it also has backfired with Lawrence Rustem and Tony Collett
> 
> I think a wall of student silence would probably be more effective.



Sounds good to me.

Also can U75's very own Sid the sexists keep their crap out of this thread. I don't give a monkeys whether Diane is a "big woman", but it certainly isn't something self-identified lefties should be sniggering about like little school kids.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 18, 2004)

Bedonteau said:
			
		

> Also can U75's very own Sid the sexists keep their crap out of this thread. I don't give a monkeys whether Diane is a "big woman", but it certainly isn't something self-identified lefties should be sniggering about like little school kids.



can't disagree with that. or is it that size/physical appearance etc doesn't count until people turn to the dark side?

grow up, chaps.


----------



## past caring (Aug 18, 2004)

Can I suggest that, until regulars on here vouch for either "jemima" or "Bedonteau" that posters are a little....er, shall we say "circumspect" when dealing with these two.

First posts - and this is where they come to?.......hmmm


----------



## Bedonteau (Aug 18, 2004)

past caring said:
			
		

> Can I suggest that, until regulars on here vouch for either "jemima" or "Bedonteau" that posters are a little....er, shall we say "circumspect" when dealing with these two.
> 
> First posts - and this is where they come to?.......hmmm




Typical newbie-phobia characteristic of internet snobs. 

If you must know I've been following U75 for a long time and have felt moved enough to begin posting on a thread that has seen some of the outrageous sexism I've ever come across on a lefty discussion forum.

Should I have kept my peace until I've accumulated a couple of thousand posts to my name?


----------



## rebel warrior (Aug 18, 2004)

PC - There is a link to U75 on indymedia about this so an influx of new members is to be expected.  

Saying that, I think this issue is one for comrades in manchester to discuss about what sort of response on campus for example is needed as they know the pair concerned, so I am not going to say more than simply point out that  it is very difficult to get BNP members expelled from University.  At Leeds Uni Collett and Beverley, known BNP members, could bring other BNP members onto campus and turn over an ANL stall in front of the Union and intimidate members on it (with about 100 students watching)  - and the University's response?  A 25 quid fine - the same as if a drunken first year student set off a fire extinguisher.  

Basically the University authorities are going to do fuck all if they can help it.   That doesn't mean students should not take action against the BNP, to ensure they know they have no place on campus.  Wherever BNP members are active, racist abuse, grafitti and even attacks etc will follow.  A large anti-racist movement at Manchester Universities will be needed now more than ever.


----------



## kropotkin (Aug 18, 2004)

"outrageous sexism"

bloody hell, you must be a laugh a minute if a few people calling an overweight ugly girl an overweight ugly girl get you this upset. And how is that sexist? If you look at the abuse currently being given to OldhamGeezer or whatever the tit (ooh, should have said arse- that is a non-sexualised bit of language) is called, you'll see the ire is quite evenly spread


----------



## past caring (Aug 18, 2004)

Bedonteau said:
			
		

> Typical newbie-phobia characteristic of internet snobs.



Don't be a cock. There's nothing snobbish or newbie-phobic (is that another made up "phobia" by the way? you know, like "islamaphobia"....) about my post. 

These boards are regularly trolled by fash, as you'd know if you've been following U75 "for a long time".

And this thread, itself, demonstrates;

a) the BNP "infiltrating" the left
b) one of said infiltrators registering and posting on the same thread

Now, most fash that come here give themselves away within a few posts - some last a little longer. But they aren't _all_ idiots. Sooner or later we are bound to get one able to keep their cover.

I notice from another thread that you say you are a member of the Socialist Alliance Democratic Platform. Fine. If that's the case you should understand why some of us might want to exercise caution. You should also know that there's a well known poster here who is also a member. Your group is far from huge. I'm sure he'll vouch for you.


----------



## Bedonteau (Aug 18, 2004)

kropotkin said:
			
		

> "outrageous sexism"
> 
> bloody hell, you must be a laugh a minute if a few people calling an overweight ugly girl an overweight ugly girl get you this upset. And how is that sexist? If you look at the abuse currently being given to OldhamGeezer or whatever the tit (ooh, should have said arse- that is a non-sexualised bit of language) is called, you'll see the ire is quite evenly spread



If she was a "stunna", would you all be publically pondering her tastiness? I doubt it. Next you'll be saying it's okay to take the piss out of Blunkett because he's blind.

This sexist crap is not necessary and quite frankly I'd expect such bollocks from Ukip and the fash. So please, leave it out.


----------



## past caring (Aug 18, 2004)

I object to your use of the word "bollocks"  - it's sexist.


















What's the matter anyway - is she your girlfriend or something?


----------



## Geert (Aug 18, 2004)

This sort of action by the fascists shouldn't be underestimated. It's not just a question of some details of people getting spread amongst the BNP. It's rather a question of the fash going on the offensive by attacking their enemy. This could easily be followed by more open physical violence. 

Just to give some ideas on how to react, I'd like to refer to a campaign we did with the party I'm a member of (Belgian sister organisation of the Socialist Party). In 1996 my branch was infiltrated for 1,5 months by a fascist. This guy couldn't do much damage, because we wouldn't let him do much without the necessary political discussions which were quite hard with this guy - he simply didn't get our points fully, we always felt we hadn't been able to fully convince him. So in a way avoiding infiltration is linked to political education and discussions. 

But this infiltration came at a moment the fascists were on the offensive, moving to physical violence as well, which wasn't a coincidence of course. This was strenghtened by the fact that the infiltrator - who quickly felt his time had come to leave - had used some rightwing publications type Redwatch to publish details of our leading members in that town. 

We perfectly knew what information he had, so we discussed security measures on the issue of avoiding attacks against individual comrades. But we also discussed on how to get offensive about it as well. We produced a poster with this guy's picture on and a slogan saying : "Wanted: Nazi, stupid but dangerous". This poster appeared in the neighboorhood where this nazi lived. We also went campaigning in the neighboorhood and used the example of the infiltration, as this is not a method generally accepted by people. Also not by people who would vote for them as they see no other alternative in elections. The fascists get offensive because they feel strenghtened by the electoral support, but that's not the same as support for physical violence or infiltration methods. Anyway, we finally did a big demo against fascist violence and this demo got more and more support while building it, which led to the fact that the infiltrator got completely isolated and scared. He ended up doing a bomb attack on his own to accuse us. He had to admit this after a while and was in prison for quite some time. Since leaving prison he's not into politics anymore...  

The left should react strongly on this issue in Manchester, but in a political way: campaign in their neighboorhood. Get their methods known and build for a big protest against their methods. Silence and saying it's an internal affair is the worst possible reaction. That would only strenghten them. The left has to become offensive on this.


----------



## jemima (Aug 18, 2004)

well, i guess i'm not surprised at the suspicions some of you have expressed. i'll get a couple of people i know to be regulars to vouch for me asap. until then i hope you give me the benefit of the doubt. i'm off now anyway, just wanted to say my piece.


----------



## Bedonteau (Aug 18, 2004)

past caring said:
			
		

> Don't be a cock. There's nothing snobbish or newbie-phobic (is that another made up "phobia" by the way? you know, like "islamaphobia"....) about my post.
> 
> These boards are regularly trolled by fash, as you'd know if you've been following U75 "for a long time".
> 
> ...



I know this. But treating all newbies as if they've got the plague isn't really on, or is 'innocent until proven guilty' a bourgeois concept unworthy of socialists? 



>Now, most fash that come here give themselves away within a few posts - >some last a little longer. But they aren't _all_ idiots. Sooner or later we >are bound to get one able to keep their cover.

>I notice from another thread that you say you are a member of the Socialist >Alliance Democratic Platform. Fine. If that's the case you should understand >why some of us might want to exercise caution.

Yes, watch out for those evil wreckers from the mighty SADP! Today the 'fascists infiltrate the SWP' thread.Tomorrow - the world!

>You should also know that >there's a well known poster here who is also a >member. Your group is far >from huge. I'm sure he'll vouch for you.[/QUOTE]

76 members may not sound alot, but not everyone lives in each other pockets. So the other SADP regular might not know me for monkeys - unless they happen to be the membership secretary, or one of the handful of SADP'ers I regularly correspond with.

Edit: I'll follow Jemima and get some "references". Anyone would think I'm applying for a spooks job at MFI or something.


----------



## past caring (Aug 18, 2004)

The problem is, Geert, the BNP is a regular target for infiltration by Searchlight - an organisation supported by the SWP. In fact, they might be said to have "thrown the first stone" - so it would be no use the SWP complaining about the morals or underhand tactics of the fascists in this instance.

More to the point, the SWP and the rest of the left are irrelevant to the majority of working class people. I couldn't imagine them giving a fuck. They might laugh though.

@ Bedonteau - I only suggested "circumspection". It's only a gentle reminder of the way that people engaged in anti-fascist work ought to behave anyway when posting on a board viewable to all and sundry.


----------



## fanciful (Aug 18, 2004)

that's dead right. it's not up to the manchester swss to decide what happens, these two nazis were promoted by the swp, introduced to leading positions in MAR, Respect and the student union by the swp and the swp have to accept a large element of responsibility for as a result. The entire left have been endandgered by this infiltration. The idea that the swp the very organisation who so evidently failed to fulfil the most minimal security conditions is able to satisfactorily resolve this question is a joke.
and i don't think its acceptable either if they just blame it on some individual. this was clearly a case of systemtic failure related to the entire culture of the organisation. in short its promotion of obediance as a virtue above all others.
otherwise how do you explain how two nazis were promoted over more experienced and capable comrades into such leading positions so quickly?
no. there will be a mass campaign against this pair irrespective of what the swp decide. hopefully the swp will recognise their failings, take some responsibility and participate in it. but given they haven't been able to even issue a statement a whole day after the outing and after I know they have visited the two and had it personally confirmed by them i don't think we can afford to hold our breath.
can't the swp do anything right?


----------



## past caring (Aug 18, 2004)

fanciful said:
			
		

> no. there will be a mass campaign against this pair irrespective of what the swp decide.



Do you "do" anything but Trot-speak? You need to calm down mate - there won't be a "mass" campaign even if the SWP throw their full weight behind it.

I fucking despair sometimes, I really do.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

fanciful said:
			
		

> I know they have visited the two



I happen to know that to be bollocks, so why did you make it up?

This is why I hate the sniping on here.

Also pc: searchlight being 'supported by' the SWP needs clarifying - as while they are not as critical of them as they should be, they hardly enjoy what could be described as even a fraternal relationship. Just to give the correct impression. I thought they just weren't critical enough but have absolutely nothing to do with them (except when warned that their events might be attacked).


----------



## past caring (Aug 18, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I happen to know that to be bollocks, so why did you make it up?
> 
> This is why I hate the sniping on here.
> 
> Also pc: searchlight being 'supported by' the SWP needs clarifying - as while they are not as critical of them as they should be, they hardly enjoy what could be described as even a fraternal relationship. Just to give the correct impression. I thought they just weren't critical enough but have absolutely nothing to do with them (except when warned that their events might be attacked).



They happily quote Searchlight verbatim when it comes to offering "evidence" of the BNP being violent thugs. There is also the fact that both organisations' "strategies" are based on "exposing" them as such.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

past caring said:
			
		

> They happily quote Searchlight verbatim when it comes to offering "evidence" of the BNP being violent thugs. There is also the fact that both organisations' "strategies" are based on "exposing" them as such.



That's fine. I'm happy to accept that (though there's an argument to be had on 'exposing' but I'm sure I've done that with you) - I just thought that as you were explaining to someone who may not have known much, they may have taken 'support' to mean in the same sense that the SWP 'support' the ANL or whatever.


----------



## fanciful (Aug 18, 2004)

you happen to know sweet F.A. then.
not for the first time.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

There's a big difference between visiting and phoning.

Why did you lie?


----------



## past caring (Aug 18, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I just thought that as you were explaining to someone who may not have known much..........



fanciful is clearly a WP member. If that constitutes "not knowing much" in your book, I suggest that's a discussion best left between the two of you.


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 18, 2004)

How many members do the SWP have in Manchester, How large is the 'left',  the anti war movement, the anti fascist movement, in comparison to the size of the swp ?
It's what needs to be considered, how great the damage, a "vanguard party", not a political joke anymore is it.

Trotsky developed the Political view that Stalin-ism and Fascism were 2 sides of the same thing, made of the same metal, but don't ask the swp members, they don't want you to know, otherwise you may ask, how did 2 members of the BNP manage to join them ? sometimes the metal coincides in the same party.
You may also ask how many more ?       you may ask NF also ?
An organisation of 40-50 years standing that foisted the Anti Nazi league as a way of opposing fascism, the 'Unity against fascism' will be the next to fall flat, who in their right mind can give it any credence anymore ?

How many year of lies regarding the 'teaching of anti fascism' did it take to finally put the ANL to sleep ? as a school of anti fascism all the pupils should sue for their money back for the courses. The teacher, the lectures, the professors of the swp, if they can 'fool' them, can they also fool the other socialist groups and the anarchists  ?  if so how ?  by what means ?

How much longer till 'activists' realise that the SWP is NOT a Trotskyist party But a Stalinist one ? How many more 'anarchist's' will be spouting propaganda for the stalinists of the swp in Opposition to the Real socialists ? how is it that other 'socialist' groups accept the swp as 'socialist' rather than as National socialists' which in real terms are conservatives in practical politics. The world appears to be full of ' believer', interesting how many follow the swp into the religious field.

The 'front' org's, often initiated by the swp, then when sufficient forces have been 'gathered' collapsed and disbanded with large numbers of disillusioned people left behind, is this the action of 'revolutionaries' ? definitely not even the action of lefty liberals. They're already  planning for the G8 conference, to collapse opposition.

The 'diaspora'/dispersal of the anti war movement, the application of small shopkeeper economics, turnover the largest amount and reap a small profit on each item, the turn over of students, whom once used can they be used again ?
An insulting attitude, are the students not fit to be socialists,  were they tried and found wanting ? is that why the policy of use and abuse.

The anti war movement is said to be non political and religious aligned, so why the constant dominance of the swp in the coalition groups (portrayal of one party state mentality) and now 'respect'  ? another 'front' to be abused (seem that there is still uncertainty regarding the SA, is it defunct totally or is it subservient to the respect coalition, do they still have a need for it, are the members of the SA aware that the swp sees them as a subsiduary ? ). Still what we do know is that it has limited life, it will run out just when people have a need for positive change, so as to enforce the conservative.

*Not ONE member of the swp in Manchester could tell the difference between a bnp and swp member, that we know, so the lesson we all learn is that the swp is not a socialist party*.

Large numbers of people have commented on the similarities in development in both Russia under Stalin and Germany under Hitler (both were fascist [Stalin being the left wing fascist) , they were both reconstructed through the use of state capitalist methods as a way of rebuilding capitalist states, NOT the policy of socialists but state capitalism (nationalisation) is the policy of the swp.

The most constructive way of dealing with it in Manchester Uni, is to isolate the swp, call for it's disbanding, only way is to close the door through which they came.


----------



## fanciful (Aug 18, 2004)

you don't believe me. so what?
i could add and I don't care. but that would sound churlish.


----------



## cogg (Aug 18, 2004)

Fimsier:"Also pc: searchlight being 'supported by' the SWP needs clarifying - as while they are not as critical of them as they should be, they hardly enjoy what could be described as even a fraternal relationship. Just to give the correct impression. I thought they just weren't critical enough but have absolutely nothing to do with them (except when warned that their events might be attacked)."

I'm not sure what you mean here.
The searchlight/swp relationship is a strange one. This is hardly surprising as searchlight is pro-israel and the swp is pro-palestine.
Howevever, the SWP take searchlight seriously as an 'anti-fascist' organsation, but searchlight treat the swp as useful idiots and are always happy to 'help' the latter out by looking at their membership lists. Funny they never noticed Joe and Diane...
By the way, Gerry Gable was doing exactly the same stuff in the early 1960s.

I interviewed a guy, let's call him bob who was an anti-fascist in about 1962 and was involved with Gable in a group at the time. The guy I knew was in the CP as was Gable, but when they did a raid on the fash and picked up thousands of documents and left them in a lock up, the next day bob went back to pick the stuff up to meet gable and it had gone. Only him and gable had the keys. Gable never answered his phone calls
What the BNP and Gable have in common is that they are both nationalists; BNP are British nationalists and Gable is an Israeli nationalist.
Leave Searchlight well alone.


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 18, 2004)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> ---  simply point out that it is very difficult to get BNP members expelled from University. At Leeds Uni Collett and Beverley, known BNP members, could bring other BNP members onto campus and turn over an ANL stall in front of the Union and intimidate members on it (with about 100 students watching) -
> 
> ---   That doesn't mean students should not take action against the BNP, to ensure they know they have no place on campus. Wherever BNP members are active, racist abuse, grafitti and even attacks etc will follow. A large anti-racist movement at Manchester Universities will be needed now more than ever.


(RW.  It's a joke that lives in it's own dream world.)

So a hundred students stand by and watch, so the swp have built up an anti fascist force in the uni ? ANL and Unity combined+the swp.

"" A large anti-racist movement at Manchester Universities will be needed now more than ever. "" So at least we know which party will NOT be building it.


----------



## cogg (Aug 18, 2004)

Just thinking about this whole mess from the SWP's perspective and wondered if they will produce a public apology about the whole affair.

I won't hold my breath.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 18, 2004)

cogg said:
			
		

> Fimsier:"Also pc: searchlight being 'supported by' the SWP needs clarifying - as while they are not as critical of them as they should be, they hardly enjoy what could be described as even a fraternal relationship. Just to give the correct impression. I thought they just weren't critical enough but have absolutely nothing to do with them (except when warned that their events might be attacked)."
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean here.
> The searchlight/swp relationship is a strange one. This is hardly surprising as searchlight is pro-israel and the swp is pro-palestine.
> ...



I agree with the stuff about searchlight. I was just suggesting that saying that the swp 'support' searchlight isn't actually accurate. I wasn't saying I was about to do anything but leave them well alone.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 19, 2004)

Fanciful - pm me if you like - how do you know 'they' visited the two?

Given credentials (there's a few SWP members who must know you I presume - a word will do) and an assurance it stays between us, I'll pm you why I know 'they' didn't.

Otherwise I will continue to describe you as a complete and utter liar. Because I know you made it up - it's not about 'not believing' you.


----------



## joeowens (Aug 19, 2004)

*wankers*

Thanks very much Joe and Diane for your excellent work.You will be hearing more of their exploits soon.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 19, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Fanciful - pm me if you like - how do you know 'they' visited the two?
> 
> Given credentials (there's a few SWP members who must know you I presume - a word will do) and an assurance it stays between us, I'll pm you why I know 'they' didn't.
> 
> Otherwise I will continue to describe you as a complete and utter liar. Because I know you made it up - it's not about 'not believing' you.



tbh flim, i wouldnt trust manc swp as far as i can throw them especially after this - i would operate on the assumption they are lying to you.

joeowens - uh oh, better go and check i didnt leave anything on display in my car...


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> In terms of what urbanrevolt was saying I think it’s worth expanding on.
> 
> While the BNP may have changed tactics to appear more respectable do people think this means they are no longer a fascist outfit? Various fascist outfits in history have made turns in terms of having a respectable/thug image. The Nazis did it. Sometimes the boot boys were let loose, sometimes they stressed they were a parliamentary party. As said they definitely didn’t gain power on the back of saying we’re gonna gas seven million dues and destroy the trade union movement.



It would be silly to compare the BNP to 1930s Nazis of Germany. Sorry but it just is. While some of them are out and out Nazis, there is a big battle going on between various factions, from moderate to extreme. 



> One things for sure is that if the BNP ever got into a position of prominence their methods of violence would be unleashed. Their membership is riddled from thugs from the top down.



Yes there is violent people within the BNP, but it's really hard to persuade them to kick out such people, if there are many people out there who believe in using physical violence against them.



> Just because Griffin is not at this very moment saying we need “well directed fists and boots” do people really think that means he’s changed his mind on the matter?



Dunno what the man thinks. He's got a lot on his mind at the moment. He's walking on a tight rope. He's trying to reform the party and one easy way of doing it, is to tell them that the party is being forced into such a position.



> Every under cover documentary there has been has uncovered their violent, racist, fascist, holocaust denying views. Or do they just save these views for the cameras?



It would be foolish to think that the majority of the BNP membership thinks the same way. Also a reporter would be looking for extreme views. Already someone on this thread commenting about BNP infiltration of the SWP has said "Yeah I bet they got some Swappies in a pub having a laugh"



> The reason the BNP have to be no platformed is because of what they are. Their self professed aim is to remove every black and Asian person from the country, and that’s when they’re in a position of weakness!



If you really believe, that the BNP could actually deport every black or asian person unlikely event of getting into power, then you need to sit down and have a good think. Griffin has even admitted himself, that blacks and asians being deported by force, ain't gonna happen. There are even BNP members that would no let that happen.  It's an impossibility. There is a BIG difference, in going to bed and dreaming about a Britain without ethnic minorities and activally campaigning and kicking them out - it won't happen, no matter who gets into power.



> There have been attacks on the Asian community around Manchester where the BNP are standing,



I suggest the police roll their sleeves up and get people in court for racist attacks.



> and I don’t think it’s hard to put two and two together.



And get 3?



> And do people have any doubt that the BNP would smash up the workers movement



You mean the unions? That's a valid political objective as disgusting as you find it. 



> and the left given half the chance.



How would they smash the left? 

One of the main reasons why I joined the BNP (I'm an ex member by the way) is one of the same reasons why I tried drugs. I was told I can't have it!!! 

If the BNP got into power tomorrow and they outlawed the SWP, I would be the next person to join the SWP. 



> Even their organiser on an undercover documentary said we don’t want street battles “at the moment”.



Chill, he's an organiser. He can't autocratically decide BNP policy, nor does he know the BNPs long term policy. He's making the same mistake as you are. He's believing, that a BNP that's much bigger than the size it is now, can actually achieve it's objectives by force. It never can, because the party can't attract that many more extremists. Imagine your worst fears came true and the BNP attracted 5000 members year on year, for the next 5 years. Do you really think all those new members would hold the same extremist views that you cite? If the BNP changed it's policies or tactics back to a more extreme one, they would lose most of those members. 



> I think the tactic of no platform has to be looked at tactically and should be used in mass action, like the Le Pen demo.



It's been discussed many times before. All it would do is get people more entrenched and politics suddenly becomes dangerous for everyone. 



> But it’s something that needs to be defended to the core. It’s not about mindlessly bashing people as layabout seems to suggest but recognising that the fascists will use violence to smash the workers movement and black and Asian communities.



If it's not about bashing people or using physical force then what are you suggesting?



> Now leaving aside Diane’s ridiculous assertion that this is not personal, it also means that the left has to defend itself and it has to start when the BNP are small. That’s why Diane and Joe and to face a mass campaign to try and drive them off campus.



If that is done, then they will look the victims. It's also a receipe for violence. Like it or not, they have the right to attend that university. You have to win the moral argument not make peoples lives hell. Before you ask me about victims of racists having their lives made hell, you have to understand, that the number of people in the BNP who support racist violence isn't actually that large. 



> They represent an organisation that wants to drive every black and Asian person out of the country and smash the worker’s movement given half the chance.



Again. I disagree with that notion. What people want and what they can realistically get, even in power are two completly different things.



> Why wait until they can do it to stop them and not stop them now? Would people on here really give a shit if the Nazis had been smashed by physcial means when they were small?



They can't be broken by physical means. They won't go away and violence won't change their views. Would I be successful in changing your views by introducing your head to a crow bar? I doubt it.



> Would anyone have given a shit about their rights to free speech if you could have stopped the carrying out the holocaust and smashing the German workers movement?



You can't mess with democracy or the intelligence of the electorate. If you do, such people have a bigger chance of getting into power.



> And do people have any doubt that people in the higher echelons wouldn’t smash democracy and anyone in their path given the opportunity?



Again, I repeat, you are insulting the intelligence of voters in this country. The BNP will never get into power with the leadership they have. Griffin might be able to think on his feet, but take it from an ex BNP member.....the rest of them are hopeless. Don't worry, they haven't got a chance if they have free speech. They are only humans and like every other politician I have observed they get too comfortable and let their guard down, they fuck up.



> Also being thinking about Diane/Joe being duped or not know what the BNP is really about. Do people seriously think that people who have gone undercover in the SWP for a whole year aren’t hardcore activists? Of course they are……



Hard core activists...yep...but I don't know what their views are, nor am I too interested in knowing what Dianes view is. But that is different than trying to take away her right to hold views.



> Also can I stress my sympathy for the people in the SWP and others over what has happened. I do hope the SWP learns some lessons from this though.



I hope they learn, that the only way to engage the BNP is through debate without lying. When I was a BNP member, I had to deal with a media outlet and they completly lied about everything I had told them. Shame really, I could have given them some juicy stuff, but my trust was betrayed. If people were to pack in the lies etc about the BNP, then perhaps it would be easy to win the debate with them. Having said that though, I have caught out BNP activists and senior members lying myself. Thats another reason why I'm not a member.  

Now.......if I was to have spent the last 18 months or so, huddled with other BNP members defending myself physically against people like you. I would be more entrenched in the organisation. I'm one of the lucky ones. I've never had to deal with violence because of my BNP membership. 

Remember.....I left the BNP......because someone up the top......made the mistake of thinking that I hate, to coin a phrase from him "Those fucking niggers". 

You have to get into the mindset of why people would vote and support the BNP. If you think it's because BNP members hate blacks & asians....you'll fail. 

Your aim is to deprive the BNP of members. Your mistake, is looking to much at the views of the hardcore extremists of the party. Don't make that mistake, because if you do, you'll have no chance of getting people out of the BNP. Their members are people. People don't like being threatened or intimidated. People in this day and age, won't stop supporting a party, just because you are going to try and make their lives hell. The other thing about people is they don't like being lied to.........

Psstt....the trick is not to make YOURSELF the enemy of the BNP membership...but to make the BNP leadership the enemy of the BNP membership. Thats they only way you're gonna keep em small.


----------



## davgraham (Aug 19, 2004)

[QUOTE When I was a BNP member, SNIP   [/QUOTE]


Layabout

Can you explain why you first joined the BNP. I've had a look at the programme and it has a sort of populist radicalism about it, but definitely not anti-capitalist.


. . .  and others please do not derail this thread. I genuinely want to know how and why the BNP appeals to people because I' fairly certain it's not for the reasons the Left says.


Gra


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

davgraham said:
			
		

> [QUOTE When I was a BNP member, SNIP




Layabout

Can you explain why you first joined the BNP. I've had a look at the programme and it has a sort of populist radicalism about it, but definitely not anti-capitalist.


. . .  and others please do not derail this thread. I genuinely want to know how and why the BNP appeals to people because I' fairly certain it's not for the reasons the Left says.


Gra[/QUOTE]

My motives were mainly to register my displeasure about the immigration + asylum. The final straw for me was when the Tories annouced that 40,000 asylum seekers a year is not a problem.

The figure should be in the hundreds, not thousands. 

You have to remember, that there is a lot of people on the right, that don't trust Michael Howard when it comes to asylum seekers + immigration.

It's the culture of Britains commitments to the world being more important than the electorate that really turns my stomach. 

If there is people being displaced by wars etc, then I would rather we just closed the doors, tear up the 1951 agreement that was made at the UN. Go back to the UN, roll our sleves up and sort out the worlds refugee problem. 

I just get the feeling that dictators around the world, can just chuck out who they deem undersirable, for them to end up here or anywhere else for that matter. 

Look at the mindset of a BNP radical. He's gonna say, "Well if it's OK for a dictator around the other side of the globe to chuck out his 'rubbish' by force, only for the likes of frog face Cherie to defend their rights to high heaven without her husband giving 2 shits about the electorate, then it's OK to eject them here by force.........after all there will be a bleeding heart on the other side of the world to take them........not"

I'm not justifying the BNP. I'm justifying why people are so pissed off with the 3 main parties. 

I've read the immigration thread. Yeah sure, it's all very well saying lets have open borders.......other countries don't and there are countless reasons for that....social security, the welfare state and health services to name a few.

If I had my own way, each economic migrant that comes here, would have to lay down a business case for coming to this country. Fuck em. Really, honestly, I don't care what colour they are, fuck em as hard as we can, it's OUR interests, you know, the 60 million people who are already here an have a vote. Yeah sure you can come here, work, we'll tax you and at the end of it all you can fuck off to where you came from. Sounds harsh, but in this day an d age this country needs to look after it's own interests. Get em in, work em, tax em, fuck em off out. That way we don't have to pay em a pension. They should make their own provisions anyway. 

Say you wanted to go to Japan, and they said, sure you can work here, earn your money at the end of it, you have to go home, you have a choice, you don't have to take it and it's their right. Why should we not have the same right? 

Globalisation is here to stay. That means each country has to ruthlessly protect it's own interests. It's no use being fair, trying to make the world a better place without any other countries co-operation. We need money for our infrastructure etc, not for trying to help rid the world of it's ills......that's a global problem and I'm sorry, if a country is run by a dictator that is displacing people, we should be cutting off all foreign aid apart from food and using economic sanctions AND military force. If the UN doesn't like it, we should just shrug our shoulders and tell them we ain't taking in any more asylum seekers - end of.

Then there's the European Union.................


----------



## Gumbert (Aug 19, 2004)

classic petite bourgoisie ....

gra


----------



## steve_c (Aug 19, 2004)

I'm one of the founders of Manchester Against Racism - and I'm still trying to figure out what the BNP think they've achieved by playing 'Secret Squirrel'.  Those two probably did more to harm the BNP than they did to help them whilst they were with us - hopefully they'll have learned something about being a decent human being at the same time.  However, if they've stolen personal information then they have probably committed an offence under the Data Drotection Act and should be prosecuted for it.


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

steve_c said:
			
		

> However, if they've stolen personal information then they have probably committed an offence under the Data Drotection Act and should be prosecuted for it.


aye that'll show 'em'!

Wonder how many times the SWP could be similarly prosecuted?


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

steve_c said:
			
		

> I'm one of the founders of Manchester Against Racism - and I'm still trying to figure out what the BNP think they've achieved by playing 'Secret Squirrel'.  Those two probably did more to harm the BNP than they did to help them whilst they were with us - hopefully they'll have learned something about being a decent human being at the same time.  However, if they've stolen personal information then they have probably committed an offence under the Data Drotection Act and should be prosecuted for it.



All very well, but what about Sykes and the BNP? 

If memory serves me correctly, personal information about BNP members has been passed on to unions thanks to Sykes. Are you up for the Sykes being prosecuted under the same data protection laws?

Do you argree, that unions should take action against BNP members, as a result of membership information being passed to them?


----------



## todash (Aug 19, 2004)

I wonder how many other infiltrators they have placed in the SWP/Respect etc. I dare say they only revealed themselves because the BNP or worse still C18 now have others in place.


----------



## TremulousTetra (Aug 19, 2004)

Louis MacNeice said:
			
		

> Perhaps Joe and Dianne are well aware of the problems they are going to face when they get back to Uni...there will be political capital and publicity a pleanty to be made out of any attack on them.
> 
> It might feel easier to see them as simple dupes, who on being cast aside by the BNP will come to their senses, but they could well be up to the necks even more than people on these boards have so far imagined...the game could be a lot longer than merely embarassing (and putting the wind up) Manchester SWP.
> 
> Louis Mac


Yes BNP would love them to be attacked IMO. I think Di and Joe should be very carefull. I wouldnt put it past the BNP to do the job themselves. 

AFA issue. I think an X WP member raised at a [MAR] UAF org meeting that UAF should organise a section along AFA lines. The meeting rejected it, he left UAF for "political and personal reasons".

RMP3


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 19, 2004)

todash said:
			
		

> I wonder how many other infiltrators they have placed in the SWP/Respect etc. I dare say they only revealed themselves because the BNP or worse still C18 now have others in place.



That way lies paranoia. 

Frankly I doubt they have that much to gain from it on an ongoing basis compared to having activists doing actual overt BNP work.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

ResistanceMP3 said:
			
		

> Yes BNP would love them to be attacked IMO. I think Di and Joe should be very carefull. I wouldnt put it past the BNP to do the job themselves.
> 
> AFA issue. I think an X WP member raised at a [MAR] UAF org meeting that UAF should organise a section along AFA lines. The meeting rejected it, he left UAF for "political and personal reasons".
> 
> RMP3


Let's be honest, it's reasonably likely someone will have a pop at them. I couldn't care less about that. Obviously it would be disastrous for anyone on the left to even think about orchestrating such an attack. But IMHO it would equally be a disaster for the swp in Manchester uni not to be doing everything in their power starting yesterday to build as big a political campaign as possible to make these two scumbags feel unwelcome on campus come termtime.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Let's be honest, it's reasonably likely someone will have a pop at them. I couldn't care less about that. Obviously it would be disastrous for anyone on the left to even think about orchestrating such an attack. But IMHO it would equally be a disaster for the swp in Manchester uni not to be doing everything in their power starting yesterday to build as big a political campaign as possible to make these two scumbags feel unwelcome on campus come termtime.



Really? I don't think political activity should be allowed on campus myself personally. As disgusting as you find those 2 characters, there is nothing they have done to warrent such treatment. They should be left alone. People should be studying, not settling petty scores.


----------



## Gumbert (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> Really? I don't think political activity should be allowed on campus myself personally.


 S/hes right you know, keep it all pro business studies like...


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> Really? I don't think political activity should be allowed on campus myself personally. As disgusting as you find those 2 characters, there is nothing they have done to warrent such treatment. They should be left alone. People should be studying, not settling petty scores.


I was aiming my remarks at fellow socialists first and foremost, can't be bothered trying to convince you that being a fascist is a bad thing. Why you even bothering to talk to me anyhows, I'm one of those economic immigrants you want to 'Get em in, work em, tax em, fuck em off out.'


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

Gumbert said:
			
		

> S/hes right you know, keep it all pro business studies like...



Please. Perhaps I should have worded my post a bit better. Perhaps ALL politcal activism should be banned from universities. But hey, I must admit, I'm not an expert, but if students are playing games and getting involved in tit for tat revenge then they need expelling..........no matter who they support.


----------



## flypanam (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Let's be honest, it's reasonably likely someone will have a pop at them. I couldn't care less about that. Obviously it would be disastrous for anyone on the left to even think about orchestrating such an attack. But IMHO it would equally be a disaster for the swp in Manchester uni not to be doing everything in their power starting yesterday to build as big a political campaign as possible to make these two scumbags feel unwelcome on campus come termtime.



Too right


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> I was aiming my remarks at fellow socialists first and foremost, can't be bothered trying to convince you that being a fascist is a bad thing. Why you even bothering to talk to me anyhows, I'm one of those economic immigrants you want to 'Get em in, work em, tax em, fuck em off out.'



What, you find it so offensive that this country looks after itself. I've worked in other countries myself, I would not be offended at all, if such a country looked after it's own interests. 

For instance do you know that the Dutch are sick and tired of British druggies? There is a proposed system of repatriation even within the EU for people who can't support themselves down to drugs. I'm not offended by someone drafting such legislation, heck it might even be implemented already. 

Of course I'm not saying you're an undisrable. I'm not even calling for any of our current populace to be deported. I'm all for future migrants to put forward a business case to work here, if thats what they are coming here. I want it to be made clear before they come here, that they can't come here for the full duration. Take it or leave it. They won't be offended, why should they be? There is nothing facist about that. It's putting the interests of the country first.

Back to the main topic. There are many ways for people to be "bad" - it's subjective. You don't take the law into your own hands and harass people. If these 2 individuals have broken the law, report them to the police. Other than that, leave the fuckers alone, otherwise you are no better than a Combat18 thug IMHO.


----------



## JHE (Aug 19, 2004)

*Not exploits, but antics*




			
				joeowens said:
			
		

> Thanks very much Joe and Diane for your excellent work.You will be hearing more of their exploits soon.


LOL!  Can't wait!

What exploits will these be?  The times they sat bravely in the student union bar with a bunch of harmlessly pissed and stoned student Trots gibbering about who they'd 'put up against the wall'?  The times they superhumanly did really early stints trying to sell Social Worker - sometimes even before noon?  The times they and their comrades heroically stuffed unsold copies of Social Worker under their beds?  The times they made really crap speeches at poorly-attended public meetings - using the phrase "fucking Tony Blair" several times because the Social Workers think it sounds really angry and working-class?  Maybe the intrepid infiltrators' greatest exploits were persuading Galloway, German and Bennett to pose for photos with them.

Exploits, my arse!  Wasting a year with a bunch of Toytown revolutionaries ain't exactly Indiana Jones!


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

When I worked in Holland, there was the odd arsehole about that made it perfectly clear that there are too many Brits there. 

One told me in no uncertain terms that he wished I would just fuck off home and it's his country. 

I just shrugged my shoulders and said "Your fucking problem mate".

He didn't ruin my day, I didn't feel the urge to glass him one.


----------



## General Ludd (Aug 19, 2004)

> What, you find it so offensive that this country looks after itself.


Cause I've got much much more in common with a working class guy in Ireland than I ever will have with a British CEO. I don't give a shit about 'British interests', cause in practice that always means the interests of British bosses, politicans and all those shits. What I care about is what is in the interest of my class, and class doesn't stop at national borders.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

meanoldman said:
			
		

> Cause I've got much much more in common with a working class guy in Ireland than I ever will have with a British CEO. I don't give a shit about 'British interests', cause in practice that always means the interests of British bosses, politicans and all those shits. What I care about is what is in the interest of my class, and class doesn't stop at national borders.



All you have done is explain your politics. Nothing more. I can quite easily take you up on your argument. 

Please explain how open borders, letting in people who are working class but foreign, helps working class people in this country. As a matter of fact, I believe working class people in this country would lose out most to open borders.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout while the BNP are not the same as the nazis in every way they are both under the bracket of fascists.

People have mocked other fascist groups in the past and said there's no way they'd carry out ethnic cleansing or there's no way they'd get in power etc And history in some circumstances sadly proved them wrong.

Do you think that every member of the Nazis party as they were growing wanted the holocaust? Of course not, but that didn't change the agenda of the Nazis party as an organisation.

The BNPs stated aim, even in a position of weakness, is to remove every black and Asian person from the country. Why couldn't this happen? It's happened in other countries, what's your evidence that the UK is qualitively different from every other country where it has happened? Indeed the Nazis were in a capitalist democracy when coming to power. If there was a massive economic downturn the BNP could well become a major threat.

The means the BNP will use will be means of violence when needed if they get any real strength. Their leadership says this, as do their organisers, except now they only say it behind closed doors.

Knowing that the BNP is fascist and will use physical violence the left and the workers movement have every right to defend itself, whether the BNP are small or not. As for stopping the BNP through no platform, it's been very successful in the past. How it should be used is a tactical question, but the self-defence against fascism from present or future violence is totally valid.



> Dunno what the man thinks. He's got a lot on his mind at the moment. He's walking on a tight rope. He's trying to reform the party and one easy way of doing it, is to tell them that the party is being forced into such a position.



Do you really believe that Griffin, with his past history, wants to turn the BNP into peaceful right-wing party? In that case why doesn't he join the UKIP? Of course he doesn't. As said loads of past fascist leaders have played the democratic/thug cards at different times as and when necessary.

Layabout all the evidence of what the BNP is about is there to see. If they are reforming themselves so much why do the "comedians" at the RWB "family" festival openly make jokes about the holocaust and leaders make comment about "white dread locked slags".....

Also what are butchers, nigels, past carings views on what should be done in Manchester and the two individuals involved?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Also what are butchers, nigels, past carings views on what should be done in Manchester and the two individuals involved?


Good question mate, I'd like to hear that as well although I'd be inclined to give Nigel the benefit of the doubt on this one.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> Of course I'm not saying you're an undisrable. I'm not even calling for any of our current populace to be deported.


I feel much better now, thanks for that.

As a matter of fact you were, you said 'we'll tax you and at the end of it all you can fuck off to where you came from' so let's not play games here, you do want to deport people. The fact you won't want to do it to me till I'm pension age don't make me feel any better disposed towards you pal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

what should be done in manchester - and nationally - is that the swp should decide which way they want to go. they gather a ton of information on people via their various fronts and their endless petitions: how much information, like membership lists, names and addresses of those foolish enough to sign petitions &c has fallen into the hands of the bnp? imo the swp can either chalk this up to experience and ignore the consequences of potential future infiltration - which has proved so easy it's ridiculous - or they can do something sensible, like having candidate or probationary membership status. 

these two infiltrators seem to have been involved in the organisation of the uaf launch in manchester. the bnp turned up to that (as you'd know if you read the sun but not if you read social worker) - did the infiltrators pass information to their handlers, as seems likely? 

there needs to be a rethink in the swp and its fronts about whether they are playing at being radicals, in which case they may as well continue as before, or whether they are actually serious, in which case security needs to be stepped up and some sort of democracy needs to be constructed. it's no good having people "elected" to responsible positions on the say-so of some senior member of the swp, as such appointments undermines any degree of accountability the office-holders should have.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

Also layabout you seem to see “us” as being a nation. I see “us” as my class. The rulings classes fuck over the working classes internationally. Do you really think the British ruling classes give a fuck about the British working class through patriotism? That would be why they’ve fucked their own working classes over since day dot.

Any struggle of the working class is inevitably linked to international issues, all the more so with globalisation. Also as for you “fuck em” attitude does that also go for the nearly third of doctors and 40% of nurses who are immigrants? Or are foreigners just there to be used for the British?


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 19, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what should be done in manchester - and nationally - is that the swp should decide which way they want to go. they gather a ton of information on people via their various fronts and their endless petitions: how much information, like membership lists, names and addresses of those foolish enough to sign petitions &c has fallen into the hands of the bnp? imo the swp can either chalk this up to experience and ignore the consequences of potential future infiltration - which has proved so easy it's ridiculous - or they can do something sensible, like having candidate or probationary membership status.



how would probationary membership status have stopped these two?
two levels of membership doesn't seem very....horizontal>


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

pickmans I agree, but what do you and the others I mentioned think should be done in terms of the response to the two individuals involved (both by the SWP and others).....


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> how would probationary membership status have stopped these two?
> two levels of membership doesn't seem very....horizontal>


shouldn't matter to the swp. 

and why is probationary membership _not_ "horizontal"? should all groups let anyone who asks in immediately, without knowing anything about them? see what it's done for manc swp!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> pickmans I agree, but what do you and the others I mentioned think should be done in terms of the response to the two individuals involved (both by the SWP and others).....


nechaev's actions leap unbidden to mind when discussing this sort of thing. not that i'd ever advise anyone to imitate him. or not to imitate him, for that matter.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

Not really an answer to cockney's question was it pickman? I am amused by the notion of anarchists advocating candidate membership of an organisation.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> nechaev's actions leap unbidden to mind when discussing this sort of thing. not that i'd ever advise anyone to imitate him. or not to imitate him, for that matter.


Now that's toy-town politics


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Now that's toy-town politics


  

i'm not sure what to make of that, coming as it does from an swper. allegedly.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Not really an answer to cockney's question was it pickman? I am amused by the notion of anarchists advocating candidate membership of an organisation.



Me too.

The only organisation that I know of who claim to be on the left who did this were the RCP.

Strange that CR agrees as well. Do WP have candidate membership?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Not really an answer to cockney's question was it pickman? I am amused by the notion of anarchists advocating candidate membership of an organisation.


what _i_ mean by candidate, or probationary, membership of an organisation is the sort of thing class war do, where people who want to become involved are first met, and for the first three months of their membership is probationary, so people can get the measure of them and see what they're like. at the end of three months, the group takes a decision on their membership at which point they become "full" members. or not.

it's just an obvious security thing, something the swp are clearly not bothered about.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 19, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> what _i_ mean by candidate, or probationary, membership of an organisation is the sort of thing class war do, where people who want to become involved are first met, and for the first three months of their membership is probationary, so people can get the measure of them and see what they're like. at the end of three months, the group takes a decision on their membership at which point they become "full" members. or not.
> 
> it's just an obvious security thing, something the swp are clearly not bothered about.



i don't understand how that would stop people who are on a long term infiltration mission


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i'm not sure what to make of that, coming as it does from an swper. allegedly.


Hang on, you have an unbidden thought that comes to mind, but you won't advocate it and that's serious politics and a reasoned answer to cockney. Uh uh, toy town anarchism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> i don't understand how that would stop people who are on a long term infiltration mission


if someone really wanted to infiltrate any group on the left, they probably could. most of the fash are so cack handed, though, that they swiftly become obvious. look at kim philby and anthony blunt, though - they infiltrated somewhere which had considerable security precautions, so nothing's perfect. no point leaving the keys under the mat, though, and hoping yr infiltrator won't look there, which appears to be the limit of swp security.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Hang on, you have an unbidden thought that comes to mind, but you won't advocate it and that's serious politics and a reasoned answer to cockney. Uh uh, toy town anarchism.


fuck off with yr arsery! the swp's answer to their recent embarrassment seems to be to pretend it never happened, or to whimper into their cocoa. if you want to know what i think i believe i've given a fairly good indication of what previous infiltrated groups have done to the infiltrator. if you know nothing of the laws of incitement, i do - so i'll leave it there.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 19, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> if someone really wanted to infiltrate any group on the left, they probably could. most of the fash are so cack handed, though, that they swiftly become obvious. look at kim philby and anthony blunt, though - they infiltrated somewhere which had considerable security precautions, so nothing's perfect. no point leaving the keys under the mat, though, and hoping yr infiltrator won't look there, which appears to be the limit of swp security.



but these two in manchester didn't become obvious
so class war have two levels of membership is this consistent with your views picky


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> fuck off with yr arsery! the swp's answer to their recent embarrassment seems to be to pretend it never happened, or to whimper into their cocoa. if you want to know what i think i believe i've given a fairly good indication of what previous infiltrated groups have done to the infiltrator. if you know nothing of the laws of incitement, i do - so i'll leave it there.


Temper temper. So your political response is that the swp should do them over. Brilliant and asuming they survive this attack and go back to uni as open bnpers and have bnp stalls etc should the left at Manchester do anything to prevent this or is your advice gonna be yet more things that go bump in the night stuff oh student of Bakunin.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> layabout while the BNP are not the same as the nazis in every way they are both under the bracket of fascists.
> 
> People have mocked other fascist groups in the past and said there's no way they'd carry out ethnic cleansing or there's no way they'd get in power etc And history in some circumstances sadly proved them wrong.
> 
> Do you think that every member of the Nazis party as they were growing wanted the holocaust? Of course not, but that didn't change the agenda of the Nazis party as an organisation.



I already addressed that issue further up this thread.




> The BNPs stated aim, even in a position of weakness, is to remove every black and Asian person from the country. Why couldn't this happen? It's happened in other countries, what's your evidence that the UK is qualitively different from every other country where it has happened? Indeed the Nazis were in a capitalist democracy when coming to power. If there was a massive economic downturn the BNP could well become a major threat.



Wrong! They would not become a major threat just on a major economic downturn. It's impossible for the BNP to be a threat. 
[/quote] 




> The means the BNP will use will be means of violence when needed if they get any real strength. Their leadership says this, as do their organisers, except now they only say it behind closed doors.



For goodness sakes. Some people around here must have the same old arguments written down somewhere. Read up further on this thread. Please don't repeat peoples points, but actually challenge my answers to those points. They can't use violence AND grow. It doesn't work like that. 



> Knowing that the BNP is fascist and will use physical violence the left and the workers movement have every right to defend itself, whether the BNP are small or not. As for stopping the BNP through no platform, it's been very successful in the past. How it should be used is a tactical question, but the self-defence against fascism from present or future violence is totally valid.



It's not succesful. It didn't stop people like me from joining, it actually encourages people like me to join. I despise any organisation which has any policy to stop free speech. You are insulting my intelligence, if you come along and tell me that I'm not to be trusted with the consumption of BNP politics. 



> Do you really believe that Griffin, with his past history, wants to turn the BNP into peaceful right-wing party? In that case why doesn't he join the UKIP? Of course he doesn't. As said loads of past fascist leaders have played the democratic/thug cards at different times as and when necessary.



It doesn't matter what I believe, what Griffin believes or any other individual believes. He can't turn the party back to violence because he would lose support. I explained why further up this thread.



> Layabout all the evidence of what the BNP is about is there to see. If they are reforming themselves so much why do the "comedians" at the RWB "family" festival openly make jokes about the holocaust and leaders make comment about "white dread locked slags".....



But that's politics mate. If I was to have gone along to this years RWB festival and found it do be a den of racists from the security, to the leaders, to even the ladies serving the tea, I would simply just walk away. You know it yourself, that the majority of people in this country hate racism. It doesn't mean however, that we should stop people from hanging themselves with their own rope if they are indeed racist. 

The main jist of my argument is, that no party can lie to its members and get away from it forever. The membership will just walk away. There are not that many violent extremists out there waiting to join the BNP, such people have already played their cards and have joined up to whichever organisation takes their fancy. Most of the new membership the BNP hope to attract, are going to be moderates, most of whom are pissed off with the main 3 parties and would resent racism. Such people have to find out the hard way and are best not being intimidated. I've already said. If you want to damage the BNP, you don't make any enemy out of the BNP members, you need to turn the BNP membership against the leadership, to do that, ya have to treat BNP members with the same kind of respect you would of a customer. You can't turn a BNP member, unless you are friendly with them. The idea is to make yourself look democratic. In their eyes, you'll never be democratic, if you try to abuse their democratic rights.


----------



## Paul Marsh (Aug 19, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> i don't understand how that would stop people who are on a long term infiltration mission



It gives you three months, if you are suspicious, to look into that person's background, and to check anything that does not add up. 

It also makes it clear to potential infiltrators that at the very least you are going to have to expend three months worth of expenses/time/trouble before you even get membership of the group. 

The SWP could take the following immediate steps to improve their security:

1. Stop leaving blank membership cards lying around at Marxism (as has happened often in the past)
2. Require all new members to be proposed and seconded by an existing member only after they have been active in their local branch for three months
3. Develop a membership based in the community rather than the transitory bedsit land of studentville
4. Do not add anyone to e mail or phone lists unless they have a home address that has been checked
5. Avoid a political culture where loyalty to a party official, or fulltimer, is more important than politcal integrity or loyalty to your beliefs
5. Quit working with Searchlight. Given the number of moles Searchlight has in the BNP, it is very likely Searchlight knew about this operation - if so the SWP need to be asking why they let it run. 
6. The SWP are a pretty weedy bunch. They need to beef themselves up a bit, so any infiltrators at least feel slightly wary of taking them on. Lets face it, being threatened by Manchester SWSS is a bit like being threatened by Pike from Dad's army. 

One of the things that must be most disturbing to the SWP is how comfortably people with vastly opposing politics were able to pass themselves off as committed SWPers. I would suspect that is because SWP politics are actually very easy to imitate - just take a liberal position on every single issue, shout "Ra, Ra, Ra" and bob's your uncle.


----------



## past caring (Aug 19, 2004)

Are you now working for Searchlight, layabout?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

> Strange that CR agrees as well. Do WP have candidate membership?



Yeah we do, what’s funny about that? It’s not like it’s a test or something, but if someone has just joined a group surely they need time to see if the group is right for them, they’re not gonna know straight away. Also a branch should be able to work out whether that person is ok. And it’s only for a few months. In terms of people joining WP we ask them to read the manifesto and see if they agree with it before joining. But what do the SWP do on this matter? Ask people to join on the basis of a few paragraphs on “where we stand”?

I don’t think any of these things we stop infiltration and I don’t think people should be paranoid. But even from a point of view of democracy the SWP is wrong. Why should someone be able to join no questions asked and have a vote/say in the direction on the group? And the SWP does sign people up literally without knowing anything about them. As said before I was asked to sign people up in Nice even if I couldn’t understand them and pointing to a paragraph in whatever language I thought they spoke!!!

I don’t think a group could ever totally stop agents of the state as they are too clever and have too many resources, although I shouldn’t think MI5 is too bothered by the English left! However fascist are probably easier to stop, but obviously you can’t do anything 100%

Valuing political knowledge at least as much as activism, having candidate memberships, not promoting people to positions of responsibility as soon as you’ve met them etc will all help. And the SWP falls down on all of these things. They sign people up on no political basis whatsoever and promote them on activism within months.

In terms of why the BNP did this I still can’t quite work it out. It seems they found out fuck all and surely this can’t be worth a year out for two of their good activists?!


----------



## flypanam (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Yeah we do, what’s funny about that? It’s not like it’s a test or something, but if someone has just joined a group surely they need time to see if the group is right for them, they’re not gonna know straight away. Also a branch should be able to work out whether that person is ok. And it’s only for a few months. In terms of people joining WP we ask them to read the manifesto and see if they agree with it before joining. But what do the SWP do on this matter? Ask people to join on the basis of a few paragraphs on “where we stand”?



Sorry but when you have a probationary period it is never to see if the group is right fot them. Its about whether they are right for the group.

at least pickemans was honest.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 19, 2004)

Paul Marsh said:
			
		

> It gives you three months, if you are suspicious, to look into that person's background, and to check anything that does not add up.
> 
> It also makes it clear to potential infiltrators that at the very least you are going to have to expend three months worth of expenses/time/trouble before you even get membership of the group.
> 
> ...



1. i have never in 12 years in and out of the swp been asked for my membership card
2. turns it into a clique i want to be part of an open party not some dirty little club
3. students obviously cant agree with political ideas and even if they do we should ignore them because they move house more.
4. i dont have a home address that could be checked, (checked by who is another thing you lot? what about squats etc..)
5.agreed
5.yeah it is intersesting they didn't tell us.
6. you can only join our group if your hard very non hierachical  

i'll ignore the rest of it


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

flypanam said:
			
		

> Sorry but when you have a probationary period it is never to see if the group is right fot them. Its about whether they are right for the group.
> 
> at least pickemans was honest.


I was offerred a candidate membership of WP last year, I think CRs telling is quite right actually (or at least it would have fitted with my experience).  For me, I had had many of the arguments about why I wouldn't join in advance with members, particularly about points of their programme that i would find it very difficult to argue (I doubt that state cap really comes up that often in normal conversation, but there were obviously more relevant points too). The reply I was given was 'yeah, well we can understand that, but why not _try_ rather than sitting on your arse being a smartaleck.  If after a couple of months, you still feel the same way, then don;'t take up membership, and no hard feelings'.  I think it would also work the same way with someone who had wanted to join because they'd met them (or the SWP or whoever) and seen them as 'really good fighters' that they wanted to get involved with, but hadn't really known about much more of their politics.  For them a candidate membership would allow them to learn about the group more generally and see if it really was for them.  It would then be much easier, I think, for that person after threee months or whatever, to go, 'I cant join because I'mn not a vanguardist' (or whatever) but still be able to keep working together - rather than trying to disappear and avoid the group for the next umpteen years.  Seems perfectly reasonable, honest and practical to me.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

Layabout you seem to base all your evidence of what the BNP is and will become on your personal opinion despite open evidence about their festival, leader, organisers etc It just doesn’t stand up. As said other fascist groups that have come to power haven’t stated all their aims from day one and played the democracy/thug cards when needed. As the BNP do now.

You then go on to say the BNP can never get anywhere using violence, despite the fact that all fascist organisations in the past have all come to power in capitalist democracies using violence. As said is the UK qualitively different from these other countries, and in which case why?

If the BNP has dropped fascism as its ideology and wants to be a right-wing party then why hasn’t it just folded and merged with the UKIP?! The BNP has been exposed again and again for its fascist methods, if you wanna ignore that, fair enough….


PS Flypanman that might be your cynical view but it's not mine or WPs. Or do you think that someone will know if a group is ok for them the moment they join?! As for a probationary membership being a clique, have a look at the SWP leadership and the way the SWP promotes people on how much they are willing to feel a clique, that’s a dirty little club!


----------



## levien (Aug 19, 2004)

BB, flim, fly, rebel PM if you want an idea of whats happening.


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

I'll just stick this post in here, cos altho it is generally irrelevant to the specific discussion, I dont wanna give the nazi's another thread of their own, and most people who are interested are probably reading this one already:

Second Yorkshire Tory quits party and defects to BNP

http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/

A YORKSHIRE Conservative stalwart who has been a
senior party official as well as holding public office
is defecting to the far-Right British National Party,
the Yorkshire Post has learned.

Roger Roberts, the former vice-chairman of the
Dewsbury constituency association and a Tory Mirfield
town councillor, said he had become increasingly
disillusioned with the Conservatives and had made the
"very difficult decision" to join the BNP.

He said he had seen the recent BBC documentary
exposing the openly racist behaviour of BNP members in
Bradford and Keighley but it had not dissuaded him.
Coun Roberts, 60, who has been the Tories' chief whip
on Kirklees Council, is the second prominent Yorkshire
Conservative to join the BNP after Calderdale
councillor Geoffrey Wallace crossed the floor last
year.

Last night, he was warned by Conservative local
government spokesman Eric Pickles MP, that he was now
a pariah as far as the party was concerned. And angry
local Conservatives demanded Coun Roberts resign and
fight a by-election for his Hopton ward seat on
Mirfield Town Council – something he is refusing to
do.

Mr Pickles said: "This is a one-way street. There are
no circumstances under which the Conservative Party
would ever consider his re-admittance to the party.

"We regard the BNP as being completely outside the
mainstream of British politics, as a fringe party
which holds vile and abhorrent views to which we are
wholly opposed."

But Coun Roberts, who has resigned from the party and
given up his position as chairman of the Heckmondwike
branch, said he had not taken the decision lightly and
claimed it was not solely due to racial issues. "It's
been a very, very difficult decision because for 45
years I've been a member of the Conservative Party but
I've been considering my position for some time.

"I've always been to the right of the party and I
believe in true Conservative values about helping
people to help themselves but since losing Margaret
Thatcher we've progressively tried to become all
things to all people.

"A large element of my decision has nothing to do with
race. I've no objection whatsoever to anyone who comes
to this country for whatever reason who abides by our
rules, is prepared to work and make a contribution. It
doesn't matter what race, creed or colour they are.
What I don't like is the country being swamped as it
has been."

Asked about the BBC Secret Agent documentary, which
has led to six BNP activists being arrested, Coun
Roberts claimed many of the remarks had been fuelled
by alcohol and it wasn't representative of the party.

"The film had no bearing on me and I don't think it
has had any bearing on the vast majority of BNP
members." Mirfield Town Council has 16 members, one
Labour, 14 Conservatives and Coun Roberts, who sits on
the finance sub-committee.

Dewsbury's prospective Tory parliamentary candidate
Sayeeda Hussain-Warsi said: "I am disappointed and
probably surprised really. After the recent media
publicity surrounding the BNP I really thought anyone
with any sense would see through the party for what
they really are.

"But if Roger feels his views are those of the BNP,
maybe it's the right place for him and the
Conservative Party shouldn't have people like that."

She called on him to stand down and fight a
by-election as he had been elected on a certain basis
which had now changed. Robert Light, the Tory group
leader on Kirklees Council, said he had known his
former colleague had been considering his position for
some time.

He said: "I'm very disappointed. How anybody could
leave a democratic party for the BNP I find bizarre –
I don't think any rational person would want to be
associated with them."

He felt he should take a principled stand and fight a
by-election. The BNP is fighting a by-election for the
Battyeford ward on Mirfield Town Council next
Thursday.

The BNP's Kirklees organiser, Nick Cass, said he
welcomed Coun Roberts and said his experience would be
very useful.


----------



## past caring (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Also what are butchers, nigels, past carings views on what should be done in Manchester and the two individuals involved?



Student politics are almost entirely irrelevant - unless you're a Trot group that couldn't survive without them. 

Given that, and the fact that I've been very clear previously about how the BNP can best be countered, I've got to say "not a lot", by way of answer.


----------



## flypanam (Aug 19, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> I was offerred a candidate membership of WP last year, I think CRs telling is quite right actually (or at least it would have fitted with my experience).



at a knock down price i take it.  Btw you were in the sparts(?) you'd be used that already no?

and cockknee cynical, well i don't really think so. i do think that if someone joins they will be able to make their own minds about whether the group is right for them. It is the process to find that out, for you it took two years before you decided to leave the swp. now you may argue the swp is shit, i'll disagree but it was an experince that led you to WP. 

I do have a problem when a probabionary period is offered and the 'Candidate' is stuck doing a petition out on a street stall and not allowed to sell the paper a la sparts.


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

flypanam said:
			
		

> at a knock down price i take it.  Btw you were in the sparts(?) you'd be used that already no?


yes, well i was only trying to forge a merger so that i could sell Workers PowerHammer!


----------



## flypanam (Aug 19, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> yes, well i was only trying to forge a merger so that i could sell Workers PowerHammer!


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Layabout you seem to base all your evidence of what the BNP is and will become on your personal opinion despite open evidence about their festival, leader, organisers etc It just doesn’t stand up. As said other fascist groups that have come to power haven’t stated all their aims from day one and played the democracy/thug cards when needed. As the BNP do now.



It doesn't matter what any other entity has done in the past. Comparing facist groups in the past of other countries is like comparing muslims in this country with muslims in Northern Nigeria.......pointless and irrelivant.

What I say about the BNP doesn't even need to stand up, especially, when all that matters, is whether you want to see their membership go up or down. Furthermore, what I think of the BNP doesn't really matter either. The simple fact of the matter is that you can't fuck about with peoples rights to speech - end of. Over and above that there is no fucking way quite a few people in the BNP and the vast majority of any future membership would put up with the true violent facism you talk of.........then there is the rest of the country. ...



> You then go on to say the BNP can never get anywhere using violence, despite the fact that all fascist organisations in the past have all come to power in capitalist democracies using violence.



Oh please. They would never have enough people to do such a thing. The extremists have already stood up and been counted. Any future membership of the BNP are likely to be moderates and not violent. So if you don't want BNP membership to swell, the best way to attack them is though open debate. You may say the leadership would lie, fine fair enough.....but the vast majority of their membership won't suffer it and there would be a huge amount of infighting.  



> As said is the UK qualitively different from these other countries, and in which case why?



The same way as the vast majority of UK muslims are different from muslims from most other countries. Like it or not, this country has it's own culture and way of doing things and it rubs off on all of us.



> If the BNP has dropped fascism as its ideology and wants to be a right-wing party then why hasn’t it just folded and merged with the UKIP?!



1.) At this stage UKIP would do themselves no favours or their objective. The far left would just say the whole organisation is racist, because the usual suspects are still members.

2.) It's not in Griffins interests - end of discussion.



> The BNP has been exposed again and again for its fascist methods, if you wanna ignore that, fair enough….



It's not a question of ignoring it. If individuals from the normal members up to NG break the law, we have the authorities to protect us. I didn't ignore extremists, if I did, I would be still in the BNP and I wouldn't be having this conversation with you. It's democracy remember. If people don't like the BNPs message, they won't vote for them. If you try to muffle what the BNP has to say, the electorate would see you as very undemocratic individual indeed.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

Thanks for the post belboid.

Does anyone here think that after all these years Roger Roberts has suddenly joined the BNP because he hates blacks & asians or wants to see blacks and asians deported? I don't think so. He's joined because he's pissed with the Conservative party and he most probably doesn't even agree with a lot of the BNPs policies.

Does anyone here think that if they had been more physical or intimidating to the BNP, that Roger Roberts would not have joined them? 

Does anyone think that if the BNP suddenly turned a corner a resorted to violence that members like Roger Roberts would hang about in the BNP? 

I don't think so.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> Thanks for the post belboid.
> 
> Does anyone here think that after all these years Roger Roberts has suddenly joined the BNP because he hates blacks & asians or wants to see blacks and asians deported? I don't think so. He's joined because he's pissed with the Conservative party and he most probably doesn't even agree with a lot of the BNPs policies.
> 
> ...



i they started to control the street then i think a lot more peolple would be pulled in,thats why we have to stop them wherever they raise their racist shit


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> i they started to control the street then i think a lot more peolple would be pulled in,thats why we have to stop them wherever they raise their racist shit



And how would they control the street? Would the new members in the BNP want that or have any part of it? 

Please elaborate on what you mean by control of the street and how you see the BNP achieving such an aim.....assuming they want to.


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> Thanks for the post belboid.
> 
> Does anyone here think that after all these years Roger Roberts has suddenly joined the BNP because he hates blacks & asians or wants to see blacks and asians deported? I don't think so. He's joined because he's pissed with the Conservative party and he most probably doesn't even agree with a lot of the BNPs policies.


I think he's probably always held similar views, but there was never a succesful enough far right party for him to join.



> Does anyone here think that if they had been more physical or intimidating to the BNP, that Roger Roberts would not have joined them?


mmm, well, yes - were open fascists being kicked the crap oput of whenever they walked the streets I think most people would think more than once bedfore joining. (not that I would advocate sauch a strategy obviously)


> Does anyone think that if the BNP suddenly turned a corner a resorted to violence that members like Roger Roberts would hang about in the BNP?
> 
> I don't think so.


depends on how sucesful they had been up till then.  If they were a really succesful organisation, then yes, he'd be happy to stay I'm sure, and blame al lthe violence on 'a tiny minority'


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> I think he's probably always held similar views, but there was never a succesful enough far right party for him to join.



Similar views? Please you can't afford to be vague with people about such matters. Honest! You have to be very factual. Your aim is to stop people from joining the BNP or getting people in it, out of it.



> mmm, well, yes - were open fascists being kicked the crap oput of whenever they walked the streets I think most people would think more than once bedfore joining. (not that I would advocate sauch a strategy obviously)



Would you give up your beliefs through the threat of violence? Are you listening to yourself? Do you understand the conflicting messages you are sending out? 

"Don't join the BNP, because they are just a bunch of thugs........btw.........anyone who kicks the shit out of you......isn't a thug!"



> depends on how sucesful they had been up till then.  If they were a really succesful organisation, then yes, he'd be happy to stay I'm sure, and blame al lthe violence on 'a tiny minority'



There is a difference between being sucessful and actually getting into power. There is no way anyone in this country can get into power through violence and most people know that. A few hundred or even a few thousand extremists can't get into power in such a way. The police and the army would have none of that and more to the point neither would the electorate.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 19, 2004)

Both their addresses and DS's phone number have been published in several places on the web, including indiemedia.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Both their addresses and DS's phone number have been published in several places on the web, including indiemedia.



Yes. You can bet the idiot that done that, is quite confident the BNP doesn't have his/her details. How fucking stupid can someone get. That individual is goading the BNP to be just as stupid. Hopefully the BNP will see through the red mist.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

> I do have a problem when a probabionary period is offered and the 'Candidate' is stuck doing a petition out on a street stall and not allowed to sell the paper a la sparts.



The sparts also say they are socialists, does that mean socialism is wrong! Just because the Sparts have a twisted view of candidate membership that doesn't make it wrong.....as belboid says I think it is an honest way of going about things and democratics, especially in very small organisations like the SWP. But the SWP have instead an open membership where people join on no political basis whatsoever and I've across SWPers (both when I've been a member and non-member) telling people it doesn't matter if they say they're not a socialist they should join up anyway!


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 19, 2004)

CR asked me what I would do in Manchester:

The answer is very much dependent on the circumstances on the ground, something I'm in almost complete ignorance of. I don't know what the balance of forces is like in Manchester University, I don't know what the political situation is like there, I don't know if the SU has a no platform policy, I don't even know if these people plan to return to college.

There are some things that can be done regardless of those circumstances. The SWP and every group (UAF, Respect etc) these people were involved in should immediately launch an investigation into what damage these people could have caused and what information they could have access to. What tasks were they assigned, who did they work with, what lists did they have access too, who proposed them for any positions they held and why. Any campaign groups or individuals concerned should be contacted as soon as possible and the full situation explained.

Those groups can all learn lessons from this, whether its about promoting mindless enthusiasm rather than political understanding or whatever.

Then there needs to be a broad campaign built. Exactly what demands that campaign should raise will obviously be dependent on the situation on the ground. I would tend to assume that physical violence is a bad idea.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

> Hopefully the BNP will see through the red mist.



Why do you hope this then? Your posts still seem very defensive about the BNP.....

And your statement that the BNP fascism will be different from every other countries fascism, despite past history, is based on what exactly?

And you evidence that they could never come to power is based on what?

You seem to think that if you say something it makes it so. The fascist agenda and their violence has been exposed again and again. If you wanna ignore that go ahead....


----------



## flimsier (Aug 19, 2004)

I've argued as an SWP member with people to join, and stop being a smart alec - then leave if they really find it's not for them.

Exactly the same sort of thing as WPs candidate membership, except not as formal. It's not unheard of for people to take leading roles in the first three months, but it's certainly rare (I don't know if it was in this case - when I was a member the only person I remember taking on a leading role early in their membership was Anna Chen).


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

> I would tend to assume that physical violence is a bad idea.



Do you think the violence on the Le Pen demo was bad?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

> It's not unheard of for people to take leading roles in the first three months, but it's certainly rare



I think it would be stupid in any situation that I can think of.....


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I've argued as an SWP member with people to join, and stop being a smart alec - then leave if they really find it's not for them.
> 
> Exactly the same sort of thing as WPs candidate membership, except not as formal. It's not unheard of for people to take leading roles in the first three months, but it's certainly rare (I don't know if it was in this case - when I was a member the only person I remember taking on a leading role early in their membership was Anna Chen).


I think there is a difference in that if you do decide not to take up 'full' membership, you are actually more likely to retain a more positive working relationship with them (should you want to) - which is surely a good thing.

And, you dont have subs to pay - always handy.


----------



## past caring (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout - you possibly missed the question the first time I asked it.....

Do you work for Searchlight now?


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I think it would be stupid in any situation that I can think of.....


unless its a 'star' recruit - if, I dunno, [insert name of revolutionary that your group respects a lot here] joined, would you make them wait until htey had proved themselves?  Pretty unusual circumstance that tho.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Do you think the violence on the Le Pen demo was bad?



I do. I was a BNP member at the time. I cringed with embaressment when I heard Le Pen was invited over. Such confrontation only bolsters support for the BNP from people who were wavering and thinking of supporting them. 

The demonstrators would have done a lot more good for their cause if the demo had been peaceful. Instead they looked like a bunch of thugs. 

People need to stop thinking with their hearts and actually bother to think about what kind of message their actions is sending out to people who are thinking of joining the BNP, by being so confrontational.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> I think it would be stupid in any situation that I can think of.....



Trotsky?


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

past caring said:
			
		

> layabout - you possibly missed the question the first time I asked it.....
> 
> Do you work for Searchlight now?



Yes I did miss the question! No I do not. I despise them. They are too full of personal hatred and I would not trust them as far as I could throw them. 

I have deep resentment of any organisation, that is funded by unions and gets too involved in politics. Note the comments about UKIP on their site.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Do you think the violence on the Le Pen demo was bad?



I don't know what it consisted of or what the circumstances were so I can't say. I'm not a pacifist, everything depends on concrete circumstances. The Fascists Out Campaign in the North of Ireland for instance makes no bones about the physical element of their strategy, something that makes sense in their particular situation.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

> I was a BNP member at the time. I cringed with embaressment when I heard Le Pen was invited over. Such confrontation only bolsters support for the BNP from people who were wavering and thinking of supporting them.



Wait a minute, if you were a BNP member at the time, why would you have not wanted, in your eyes, the left to look bad?!?!

All you posts are inconsistent and your justification of the BNP being moderate based on your say so and not much else. Your arguments have no substance whatsoever…..you say BNP fascism is different from all past fascism because, wait for it......you say so!

Are you a troll?


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 19, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> unless its a 'star' recruit - if, I dunno, [insert name of revolutionary that your group respects a lot here] joined, would you make them wait until htey had proved themselves?  Pretty unusual circumstance that tho.



That only happened once that I can think of in the Socialist Party or Militant. Phil Hearse was one of the central leaders of the IMG or whatever they were calling themselves at that time. He jumped ship to join Militant and went straight into some relatively minor positions of responsibility. I think there would be a fairly strong consensus in the SP that recruiting him at all was a mistake. The ease with which he went back to his old politics rather implies that he never really concurred with ours.

He is now with the unspeakably dire Socialist Resistance, although technically he isn't back in the USFI. He has his own closely associated micro-organisation.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

If a world renowned socialist leader joined your group they might go in to a high up position. But we can take anything to the extreme. The SWP recruit people they don't know and then elevate them on how much activity they do and don't take into account their politics....that's the problem....

PS Did we ask belboid to join?! What's happening to our standards


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Why do you hope this then? Your posts still seem very defensive about the BNP.....
> 
> And your statement that the BNP fascism will be different from every other countries fascism, despite past history, is based on what exactly?
> 
> ...



I'm not defensive about the BNP, but I have said in the past, that as an ex member, I'll try my best to give an insite into why people join the BNP. It's quite a tightrope I have to walk, it's very hard to justify why one would join the BNP, without justifying the BNP....which is why I also go to great lengths to explain why I left them. 

There are people on this thread, you are saying that violence against the BNP is justfied, yet at the same time critisize the BNP for having a bunch of thugs in it's ranks. Do you see the hypocrisy? Even if YOU don't and even if YOU could pursaude me otherwise.......it's not about what WE think....it's about the army of people out there, who are wavering and thinking of joining the BNP think. Your objective is to stop such people from joining the BNP. You can't achieve that through any kind of physical intimidation. 

Furthermore, I've explained in detail. At the end of the day, there is not enough far right extremists in this country that are prepared to use violence to take control of the country through force, or do something real sinister such as deport asians & blacks with British citizenship........it ain't gonna happen......whether NG wants it or not. 

You have to look at the mindset of the people joining that party today. They ain't joining it because they want to kick the fuck out of immigrants and a few reds. They are joining it because they are fucked off with mainstream politics and polticians who really couldn't give a fuck about the needs of the working class in this country. It's no use talking to me about what the BNP is about. It's the BNP membership and the POTENTIAL BNP membership you want to be talking to as opposed to intimidating physically. Violence changes nothing. They can't be stopped using violence. If they go to an area to support working class whites and people just parachute in with a load of physical intimidation, you'll just win the BNP a load of votes from those working class whites. Sorry, but thats the way it is. Don't blame me, blame human nature.


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> PS Did we ask belboid to join?! What's happening to our standards


you ever had any?  keith asked, but he was pissed....


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Wait a minute, if you were a BNP member at the time, why would you have not wanted, in your eyes, the left to look bad?!?!
> 
> All you posts are inconsistent and your justification of the BNP being moderate based on your say so and not much else. Your arguments have no substance whatsoever…..you say BNP fascism is different from all past fascism because, wait for it......you say so!
> 
> Are you a troll?



No I am not a troll. You can go through my posts. Go to the dustbin and see what I had to say to a BNP troll.

You are trying to say that an entire movement is just a bunch of thugs. If that were the case, you wouldn't be so worried about them. Thugs can't get into power. It's got nothing to do with what the BNP is about, what you think they are about, or what I think the BNP is about. It's what the WAVERERS think the BNP is about and it's what THIS country is about. Insult the intelligence or the democratic freedoms of someone who takes the BNP seriously, they'll join the BNP and there ain't nothing you, I or anyone else can do about it.

There is nothing in my posts that is contradicting. 

It's quite telling. 

You want to resort to violence and intimidation, because YOU and I mean YOU are not good at debating your own message or are too lazy to. Now that you really haven't got the time, patience or the understanding of what I am talking about, you now ask me if I am a troll. Very telling indeed.


----------



## STFC (Aug 19, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> mmm, well, yes - were open fascists being kicked the crap oput of whenever they walked the streets I think most people would think more than once bedfore joining. (not that I would advocate sauch a strategy obviously)



Let's put it another way - say you had no political allegiances, but were interested in getting involved in politics. You might go along to a meeting held by a political party - the BNP for instance - to listen to what they had to say and make up your mind whether you a) agreed with some or all of their policies and felt like getting involved with them or b) disagreed totally and had nothing to do with them again. Do you think someone should be physically attacked and prevented from attending a meeting held by a legitimate party because people with a different political agenda deem them to be "Nazis"?


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

> There are people on this thread, you are saying that violence against the BNP is justfied, yet at the same time critisize the BNP for having a bunch of thugs in it's ranks. Do you see the hypocrisy?



Would you say the violence of the Jews fighting back against the Nazis was comparable? Or a slave using violence against a slave master? Or the working class against the oppression of the ruling classes?

The BNP will use violence, if they get to any significance, just as every other fascist group has in the past. Their leadership and organisers have openly been shown that they will push for this. While this may alienate some of the membership, history has shown fascist can successfully do this. And as said I don’t believe Britain is somehow qualitively different from every other country in the history of fascism, stiff upper lip or not.

Also in terms of saying the BNP could never carry out their aim of removing all black and Asian people from the country (which isn’t hidden away but their openly stated aim!), well as said people have said many times in history that fascists would never succeed and their complacency led to disaster….

As said there is an argument about how no platform should be used, and obviously the main way to stop the BNP is to have a positive left wing alternative and by mobilising the workers movement. However using self defence against the inevitable violence of fascism is totally legitimate.



> Thugs can't get into power



History, again and again, seems to suggest otherwise…..not thuggery alone, but a strong component part of all fascist regimes and many other regimes…..


PS As I said: Wait a minute, if you were a BNP member at the time, why would you have not wanted, in your eyes, the left to look bad?!?!

PPS Can you quote me where I said the entire BNP membership are thugs? Nothing like putting words in peoples mouths.....


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 19, 2004)

STFC Loyal said:
			
		

> Do you think someone should be physically attacked and prevented from attending a meeting held by a legitimate party because people with a different political agenda deem them to be "Nazis"?



No. I think that "someone" should be unable to attend a fascist meeting in the first place as the BNP should be unable to organise them. The mistake you are making is in calling the BNP (or the White Nationalist Party or the National Front) a "legitimate party".


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

> if you were a BNP member at the time, why would you have not wanted, in your eyes, the left to look bad?!?!



Also, where did I say that I wanted at the time for the left [EDIT!!!] NOT to look bad? 

Where I see something illogical, I will post why I deem it to be illogical. Here and now, I'm saying that while you may look impressive to your like minded pals attempting to physically oppose the BNP, my point is that your objective is squash support for the BNP. Such actions don't, as a matter of fact it sends the waverers into the hands of the BNP as the left are seen as a bunch of anti-democratic thugs, in the eyes of someone who is on the verge of voting for or supporting the BNP.

It's madness.

"Yeah we'll expose the BNP for being a bunch of thugs by phyiscally attacking them right in front of the entire UK media!" - Yeah right.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> No. I think that "someone" should be unable to attend a fascist meeting in the first place as the BNP should be unable to organise them. The mistake you are making is in calling the BNP (or the White Nationalist Party or the National Front) a "legitimate party".



The White Nationalist Party and the National Front can't organise themselves because they are more often than not, operating outside the boundaries of the law. The white nationalist party couldn't even get their own parties name on ballot forms because even it's name is racist. 

The problem is Nigel, you can't legistlate against a party from organising meetings. Also breaking the law to stop a party from holding meetings is also a pretty bad idea as well. 

To make a law up to stop a party from holding meetings, the party has to have set policies which breaks the law. None of the BNPs policies actually break any laws. You can argue........"Hey but I think they have an agenda"....One could say that about any party.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 19, 2004)

Layabout when thousands of people smashed the NF on the streets of Lewisham it was a massive step forward for the anti fascist movement. Also the Le Pen demo gave the BNP a lot of negative publicity.

But as I’ve said you have to be tactical about no platform and as I also said that building a positive left alternative is the main objective…..

Fascism is intrinsically about violence and thuggery, even if at times it’s covered up and we have to expose and recognise that and the legitimacy of no platform as a principle.

In terms of what you said:



> I do. I was a BNP member at the time. I cringed with embaressment when I heard Le Pen was invited over. Such confrontation only bolsters support for the BNP from people who were wavering and thinking of supporting them.



Why would you not want the BNP bolstered if you were a BNP member? How does that make sense?

PS The BNPs agenda has been exposed time and time again!


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> The White Nationalist Party and the National Front can't organise themselves because they are more often than not, operating outside the boundaries of the law. The white nationalist party couldn't even get their own parties name on ballot forms because even it's name is racist.
> 
> The problem is Nigel, you can't legistlate against a party from organising meetings. Also breaking the law to stop a party from holding meetings is also a pretty bad idea as well.
> 
> To make a law up to stop a party from holding meetings, the party has to have set policies which breaks the law. None of the BNPs policies actually break any laws. You can argue........"Hey but I think they have an agenda"....One could say that about any party.



yeah nigel don't disrupt meetings its a pretty bad idea


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

STFC Loyal said:
			
		

> Do you think someone should be physically attacked and prevented from attending a meeting held by a legitimate party because people with a different political agenda deem them to be "Nazis"?


as with nigel - they're not a 'legitimate political party'. - even if they are on the elctoral register as such. They are a semi-openly fascist party (they may not use the word, but a look at their website reveals them to be pretty classically corporate fascists.  With nice ties).  Just because they have achieved a degree of electoral success doesn't mean we should suddenly forget that.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Would you say the violence of the Jews fighting back against the Nazis was comparable? Or a slave using violence against a slave master? Or the working class against the oppression of the ruling classes?



Hold on a minute here. You are being pretty simplistic and very assuming about the populace of this country. 

There are not enough extreme members of the BNP at present, nor will there be in the future, to successfully steer that party into a true violent facist movement on the scale of making UK nationals of various races second class citizens on a slippery slope to something comparable with Nazi Germany. As I have said, it's nothing to do with the BNP, it's got more to do with the culture that we have within this country...which even affects the asperations of the moderate BNP membership. There is no way, that party is going to be able to find the people who would want to take part in such a scheme. Imagine Herr Furher Griffin walks into Downing street and starts to set such a scheme in place. The police and the army would just shrug the shoulders and say "Yeah......whatever......good luck mate."

I keep repeating myself, but I'll say it again. You have to understand the mindset of the people that are deciding to vote or join the BNP. They just ain't interested in that kind of shit, neither is most of the country. The Nazis in Germany managed to carry out their deeds because the general populace believed in them and what they was doing was right. Yes, I'm totally aware they didn't vote for the Nazis with the knowledge of what they was going to do. My point is that this country would not stand for a repeat of that kind of thing. If Griffin ever got into power and tried to pull that stunt, or even anything remotely close, he would be laughed at.



> The BNP will use violence, if they get to any significance, just as every other fascist group has in the past. Their leadership and organisers have openly been shown that they will push for this. While this may alienate some of the membership, history has shown fascist can successfully do this. And as said I don’t believe Britain is somehow qualitively different from every other country in the history of fascism, stiff upper lip or not.



It's got nothing to do with stiff upper lip. Germany was completly fucked after world war one and was looking for scapegoats with a completly different political situation. I'm sorry, but as it is, there are huge rows and internal battles in the BNP as it is between moderates and the extremists about race. The extremists are having a hard time defending their position within the BNP and NG is playing a very interesting game indeed. 

I believe he's reforming, but in being very sly about it. He's using the "Sorry chaps......but if we don't reform.....we'll be legally challenged and we'll most probably lose" - He wins. He gets to reform the party without pissing off the extremists or taking the blame.



> Also in terms of saying the BNP could never carry out their aim of removing all black and Asian people from the country (which isn’t hidden away but their openly stated aim!), well as said people have said many times in history that fascists would never succeed and their complacency led to disaster….



Nooooooooo. Pack it in. They are looking at just upping the incentives already  put in place for voluntary repatriation. Thats not the same as raiding peoples houses and sticking them on the slow boat to China. Besides EVEN if they was looking at forceful repatriation they aint gonna get into power - non issue.



> As said there is an argument about how no platform should be used, and obviously the main way to stop the BNP is to have a positive left wing alternative and by mobilising the workers movement. However using self defence against the inevitable violence of fascism is totally legitimate.



No it's completly illogical. It's like someone who believes in the Rapture saying the bible says the world is going to end..........and then pressing the big red button and then smugly saying told you so.

If there are people out there who are planning and executing violence, they are outside the law and should be locked up  - end of.



> History, again and again, seems to suggest otherwise…..not thuggery alone, but a strong component part of all fascist regimes and many other regimes…..



And your point is? 



> PS As I said: Wait a minute, if you were a BNP member at the time, why would you have not wanted, in your eyes, the left to look bad?!?!



Sorry, I made a typo on my reply. I left out the word "not". 



> PPS Can you quote me where I said the entire BNP membership are thugs? Nothing like putting words in peoples mouths.....



I can't. But hey.....you're the one that wants to treat them as if they all are.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Layabout when thousands of people smashed the NF on the streets of Lewisham it was a massive step forward for the anti fascist movement. Also the Le Pen demo gave the BNP a lot of negative publicity.
> 
> But as I’ve said you have to be tactical about no platform and as I also said that building a positive left alternative is the main objective…..
> 
> ...



It's was possible for me to be a BNP supporter, but not be too enthusiastic about the idea of the party being asscoiated with Le Pen.

Remember I was a moderate. 

The LePen visit would have given the BNP a lot of negative publicty if the left had just had a peaceful protest nearby with a load of banners quoting some of the shite Le Pen has come out with in the past. Instead what we got was a legal meeting marred by physical confrontation and violence. The problem with the people on the left or even the right that was there and who opposed the BNP, is that afterwards, they was all wanking and fingering each other off on their "good" work. Instead of spending your time fucking around and getting involved in mutal arse licking with lefties, you should be out there bothering to win the argument against those who are thinking of joining the BNP or those who are even in the BNP. You should treat them the same way as you would a potential customer.....you should be the sales man. You would be suprised what you can achieve.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> Hold on a minute here. You are being pretty simplistic and very assuming about the populace of this country.
> 
> There are not enough extreme members of the BNP at present, nor will there be in the future, to successfully steer that party into a true violent facist movement on the scale of making UK nationals of various races second class citizens on a slippery slope to something comparable with Nazi Germany. As I have said, it's nothing to do with the BNP, it's got more to do with the culture that we have within this country...which even affects the asperations of the moderate BNP membership. There is no way, that party is going to be able to find the people who would want to take part in such a scheme. Imagine Herr Furher Griffin walks into Downing street and starts to set such a scheme in place. The police and the army would just shrug the shoulders and say "Yeah......whatever......good luck mate."
> 
> I keep repeating myself, but I'll say it again. You have to understand the mindset of the people that are deciding to vote or join the BNP. They just ain't interested in that kind of shit, neither is most of the country. The Nazis in Germany managed to carry out their deeds because the general populace believed in them and what they was doing was right. Yes, I'm totally aware they didn't vote for the Nazis with the knowledge of what they was going to do. My point is that this country would not stand for a repeat of that kind of thing. If Griffin ever got into power and tried to pull that stunt, or even anything remotely close, he would be laughed at.


hold it *right there*. You are making some absolutely fucking HUGE assumptions about the projected possible behaviour - at some point in the future, after an unspecified turn in historical events - of a nation of nearly 60 million people, a nation with huge diversity of region, class, ethnicity, occupation, political affiliations, age - you name it, we divide on it. 
On what magical and mythical inner understanding of the minds and sensibilities of a clear majority of that population do you base those views? becauuse the _only_ way that post could hold water is if it were based on some sort of special insight which you and only you have.
and re; the Nazis. before the Crash of '29 and the pan-European depression it caused, the NSDAP were a JOKE - minimal support, pisspoor polls performance, looked down on by Polite Society. 
The depression changed all that, because the NSDAP served up a scapegoat, and a ready remedy. What makes you so very certain economic collapse could not take gthe UK down the same path?


----------



## HST (Aug 19, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Layabout when thousands of people smashed the NF on the streets of Lewisham it was a massive step forward for the anti fascist movement. Also the Le Pen demo gave the BNP a lot of negative publicity.
> 
> But as I’ve said you have to be tactical about no platform and as I also said that building a positive left alternative is the main objective…..
> 
> ...



I think the election of a tory government with a strong anti-immigrant line coupled with the destructive infighting in the NF (starring one Nick Griffin) around that time explain the NFs decline.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> hold it *right there*. You are making some absolutely fucking HUGE assumptions about the projected possible behaviour - at some point in the future, after an unspecified turn in historical events - of a nation of nearly 60 million people, a nation with huge diversity of region, class, ethnicity, occupation, political affiliations, age - you name it, we divide on it.
> On what magical and mythical inner understanding of the minds and sensibilities of a clear majority of that population do you base those views? becauuse the _only_ way that post could hold water is if it were based on some sort of special insight which you and only you have.
> and re; the Nazis. before the Crash of '29 and the pan-European depression it caused, the NSDAP were a JOKE - minimal support, pisspoor polls performance, looked down on by Polite Society.
> The depression changed all that, because the NSDAP served up a scapegoat, and a ready remedy. What makes you so very certain economic collapse could not take gthe UK down the same path?



What makes you think it would? 

We are living in a completly different era where the populace is quite well educated. 

I'm sorry, but at the end day, your notion that in a depression the general populace of this country would approve of a Nazi or facist government is absurd. Even if you was to argue that we can't risk such a thing from happening, the risks of banning a party or the use of political violence is a far bigger threat to the national security of this country than the remote, if not impossible odds of the populace getting behind a facist government with the intent of an agenda similar to Nazi Germany.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

HST said:
			
		

> I think the election of a tory government with a strong anti-immigrant line coupled with the destructive infighting in the NF (starring one Nick Griffin) around that time explain the NFs decline.



Good point....but the fact that a Tory who goes by the name of Micheal Howard, who has let waved in more asylum seekers than any other home secretary, explains why some Tories have defected to the BNP.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> What makes you think it would?
> 
> We are living in a completly different era where the populace is quite well educated.
> 
> I'm sorry, but at the end day, your notion that in a depression the general populace of this country would approve of a Nazi or facist government is absurd. Even if you was to argue that we can't risk such a thing from happening, the risks of banning a party or the use of political violence is a far bigger threat to the national security of this country than the remote, if not impossible odds of the populace getting behind a facist government with the intent of an agenda similar to Nazi Germany.


woah! nice try at answering the post you *wanted* to answer, but no dice. Either go back and READ my post - properly - or at least take on board the following:
1) at NO point did I make ANY assumptions about the likely future political behaviour and affiliations of any part of the UK populace. I do NOT know how they would respond to another Great Depression, and nor do I know where they might stand in, say, 10 years' time. Nor, equally, what events might happen, and what the popular response would be. Nor do I really grasp the inner mental workings of why non-hardcore fash join that squalid little sect. 

2. My whole point - absolutely obviously, I'd have thought - was that neither do you, and yet you are making some absolutley whopping assumptions on the motivations, behaviour, views, reactions etc of ALL - or as close to all as makes no odds - of the British public, based on godonlyknows what.
3. Equally, I did NOT say my compatriots would automatically rush into the arms of a UK Nazi party given economic disaster - I asked why YOU categorically, if implicitly, ruled such a scenario right out. My only contention is that it's possible. i.e. 'might'. different chappie to 'would'. yet YOUR words are; 


> remote, if not impossible odds of the populace getting behind a facist government


YOUR huge, whopping assumption. based on....nothing concrete whatsoever, AFAIK.
I repeat my question; what makes you so sure?

4. And - guess what! I did NOT advocate banning of far-right/fash parties-I'd rather have the little sods right out here, in the open, firstl7y 'cos their views look ridiculous as soon as held up to the light of sustained public debate, and seconde, because that way we can all keepan eye on them.
Now - do please READ my post again, and try again to answer it.
I'll simplify my key Q for you:
on what do you base your huge and sweeping assumptions on the likely political behaviour of the British People?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

levien said:
			
		

> BB, flim, fly, rebel PM if you want an idea of whats happening.








Manchester SWP are at the highest state of alert.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 19, 2004)

I can't see that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Both their addresses and DS's phone number have been published in several places on the web, including indiemedia.


and what of the addresses, phone numbers and so on which the dreadful duo were able to purloin?

have all the activists whose details may have been passed on the bnp been contacted and advised of this? somehow i doubt it.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I can't see that.



Please read your PMs.

Thanks.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

Can anyone explain what in the name of bejeezus is going on with these PMs?


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Can anyone explain what in the name of bejeezus is going on with these PMs?



yeah, me too, pls 
since my (admittedly out of date) details are probably in the hands of the fash and i was probably the subject of some of this "loose talk" in pubs, i'd be interested to know wtf is going on.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

> I'll simplify my key Q for you:
> on what do you base your huge and sweeping assumptions on the likely political behaviour of the British People?



Neither side of the argument can possibly know for sure that I do concede. However, you haven't read my posts by the looks of it either.

My original point is that any kind of physical intimidation And or banning of a party is a greater threat to the security and stability of this country than the remote possibility of them getting in AND being able to execute a plan they won't even admit to their own membership. 

The fact that you don't want to see the BNP banned is irrelivant to main argument.


----------



## Groucho (Aug 19, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> and what of the addresses, phone numbers and so on which the dreadful duo were able to purloin?
> 
> have all the activists whose details may have been passed on the bnp been contacted and advised of this? somehow i doubt it.



The speculation on this thread is that these nazis may have had access to RESPECT, UAF, SWP address lists etc. However, any lists they may have had access to would have been local lists.  It might suit some on this forum to speculate as to what info they may have obtained, and then to declare that nothing has been done to deal with the problem. 

*Fact is you don't know. * 

It is in the interests of the BNP to inflate the 'achievements' of these two. It is not in the interests of the left. However much some may hate the SWP, it is foolish to attempt to manipulate this to have a dig at SW members, at the risk of providing Nazis with any amunition.

The BNP have been trying hard to build the core of a mass fascist organisation. They have attempted to turn towards electoral 'respectability' as a tactic.  However, they contnue to fall on their arses with members exposed as gangsters, as thugs etc. They have no charasmatic leader, few intellectuals, and have failed to make the significant electoral breakthrough they needed. Now they have apparently passed over the opportunity to maintain a couple of moles in the heart of left and anti-racist organisation to instead engage in nah nah playground politics. 

Why? Perhaps because the two failed to turn up anything particularly useful? Perhaps because the BNP are having such serious internal difficulties (financial, political infighting, leadership challenges) that they needed something - _anything_ - to give to their members that could be billed as a success. 

Why some people on this thread seem to want to assist them is beyond me.


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 19, 2004)

Groucho, of course they will have had access to the lists, ffs! do you think these two were just put in to the SWP for a laugh?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

Groucho said:
			
		

> The speculation on this thread is that these nazis may have had access to RESPECT, UAF, SWP address lists etc. However, any lists they may have had access to would have been local lists.  It might suit some on this forum to speculate as to what info they may have obtained, and then to declare that nothing has been done to deal with the problem.
> 
> *Fact is you don't know. *
> 
> ...


i would be astonished if the bnp were not right now in possession of pilfered records and petitions. 

groucho, what is the point of infiltrating a group if yr _not_ going to get information from them?

what did the swp's mate "searchlight" know about this infiltration? as paul marsh has said above, either searchlight knew _and did nothing about it_, or they didn't know about it, which means that major operations conducted by the bnp can easily escape their notice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Now that's toy-town politics


*you* couldn't be an infiltrator - could you? 

nah, i don't think any fash infiltrator would be _so_ fuckwitted as to blow their cover as to sing "no surrender" at marxism.

 i hope not, anyway!


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 19, 2004)

Groucho said:
			
		

> The speculation on this thread is that these nazis may have had access to RESPECT, UAF, SWP address lists etc. However, any lists they may have had access to would have been local lists..



Well, one of them was RESPECT's regional treasurer which means he almost certainly had access to any lists of North West members/supporters/contacts. They were involved in Manchester Against Racism, UAF, RESPECT, SWP and SWSS. That means there is a strong possibility that they had access to regional lists of members/supporters/contacts held by those bodies.

What else could they have access too? What national meetings were any of them at of any of those bodies. Who did they work with in any of those bodies? Were they involved in Globalise Resistance? Were they involved in national ring rounds for any of those bodies? Were they on the Marxism organisational team?

The answer is that we don't know. None of the people who might have their home details on lists possessed by any of those groups know. The only people who should know are the SWP, although I suspect they are still trying to assemble a better picture of what exactly these people had access to.

The point is that the answers to those questions can only be assembled by the SWP and the various front groups. Those answers however are of direct concern to everyone who could be on a list these people gained access to. It is not an internal matter to the SWP or to the SWP and its fronts.




			
				Groucho said:
			
		

> The BNP have been trying hard to build the core of a mass fascist organisation. They have attempted to turn towards electoral 'respectability' as a tactic.  However, they contnue to fall on their arses with members exposed as gangsters, as thugs etc. They have no charasmatic leader, few intellectuals, and have failed to make the significant electoral breakthrough they needed..



That's a question of perspective isn't it? The BNP are currently the most electorally succesful fascist organisation Britain has seen since the war. If RESPECT had got 800,000 votes in the last election I would bet my last Rollo that people like you would be trumpeting it as the breakthrough of all breakthroughs.




			
				Groucho said:
			
		

> Why some people on this thread seem to want to assist them is beyond me.



What really assists the BNP? Trying to learn lessons from a dismal incident or trying to downplay it?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> *you* couldn't be an infiltrator - could you?


ffs grow up man


----------



## Groucho (Aug 19, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i would be astonished if the bnp were not right now in possession of pilfered records and petitions.
> 
> groucho, what is the point of infiltrating a group if yr _not_ going to get information from them?
> 
> what did the swp's mate "searchlight" know about this infiltration? as paul marsh has said above, either searchlight knew _and did nothing about it_, or they didn't know about it, which means that major operations conducted by the bnp can easily escape their notice.



But as to what info. if any they may have obtained, I don't know and nor do you. Those who have an idea (the local SWP/UAF etc) will be taking action, but neither you nor I wil know the details of that either. You shouldn't base accusatory style points on speculation. 

Even with the BNP infiltrated by Searchlight it is not necessarily the case they would have known. An intelligent infiltration would involve very few in the know, and would require operatives previously unknown, as appears to have been the case here. I doubt if many in Searchlight know who their infiltrators in the BNP are.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 19, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> The answer is that we don't know. None of the people who might have their home details on lists possessed by any of those groups know. The only people who should know are the SWP, although I suspect they are still trying to assemble a better picture of what exactly these people had access to.


Your last sentence is probably closest to the truth. I do agree that people outside the swp have a right to know. But do you really think there won't be a statement soon and wouldn't we rather wait a bit and let them get it right. 

I have to say that when one left group gets done over by fascists like this I'd have thought there would be more of an athmosphere of solidarity from other people on the left rather than some of the snidey attacks from many of the usual suspects (not thinking of you here Nigel).


----------



## Groucho (Aug 19, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> That's a question of perspective isn't it? The BNP are currently the most electorally succesful fascist organisation Britain has seen since the war. If RESPECT had got 800,000 votes in the last election I would bet my last Rollo that people like you would be trumpeting it as the breakthrough of all breakthroughs.
> 
> What really assists the BNP? Trying to learn lessons from a dismal incident or trying to downplay it?



I am not suggesting that the BNP are not a threat. They are apparently in internal turmoil having raised their own expectations in the recent elections far beyond their achievements. Consequently the turn to 'respectability' is being questioned by an ever noisier body of hardliners. The BBC infiltration has done them considerable damage.  Much of their electoral suport is not hardline. I found this myself canvassing against them in the council elections, where they lost a seat they had gained in a by-election.  They have yet to turn their 800,000 votes or significant part, into a hardcore fascist base. 

Nor am I suggesting that there is no issue of concern arising from recent events. But let's not get paranoid. Only recently they were saying they had no interest in the left and said they viewed us as a spent force. Now they are clinging on to the fact that two BNP supporters managed to inflitrate the left for a year as an event of some major significance. It is just as significant that they didn't keep them as moles.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 19, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Your last sentence is probably closest to the truth. I do agree that people outside the swp have a right to know. But do you really think there won't be a statement soon and wouldn't we rather wait a bit and let them get it right.



I would pretty much go along with that. If the SWP were able to assemble all the necessary information within a day and a half and make sense of it and come to a coherent decision then they would have a rather more efficient organisation than I would give them or anyone on the left credit for. Apart from anything else, this is the middle of August and you can bet that people who worked with them in various campaigns are on their holidays etc.

I do think it is important that an initial statement - giving a statement of the facts as they are currently known and announcing that a thorough investigation is underway - should be put out as soon as possible. That goes for MAR/RESPECT etc not just the SWP. I suspect that everyone involved in anti-fascist work for instance in the North West of England is currently more than a bit worried and the SWP etc have a responsibility to left them know what is going on quickly. There is still a lot of speculation going around, nobody even knows if the two people at the centre of all this admit the allegations.

After that they should take their time and get an investigation done right, again announcing their findings when they are sure of them.




			
				bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> I have to say that when one left group gets done over by fascists like this I'd have thought there would be more of an athmosphere of solidarity from other people on the left rather than some of the snidey attacks from many of the usual suspects (not thinking of you here Nigel).



The confrontational nature of this board doesn't really help here - if you look back a few pages I got in a heated row with flimsier about what was in retrospect not very much. As some ex-member of the SWP said on Indymedia, this isn't just an attack on the SWP its an attack on everyone on the left. I have my criticisms of the way the SWP approaches recruitment and the political level it develops in its members but ultimately, with enough dedication, the right or the state can infiltrate any of us.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 19, 2004)

Groucho said:
			
		

> They are apparently in internal turmoil having raised their own expectations in the recent elections far beyond their achievements.



As I understand it, the BNP were predicting a London Assembly seat and a European Parliament one and a substantial vote. RESPECT were predicting a London Assembly seat, two MEPs and at one stage a million votes.

In the end neither got anyone elected to the GLA or the European Parliament but the BNP got more than three times the vote of RESPECT.

Who exactly had massively inflated expectations here? And are you saying that RESPECT are in turmoil as a result?

You (and other SWPers) have to get out of the habit of deluding yourselves that "our" side always do well and their side always fail if you want to understant the world as it actually is rather than as you want it to be.


----------



## fanciful (Aug 19, 2004)

but it is pretty astonishing that there has been no statement issued by the SWP or MAR or UAF or Respect or anyone explaining the extent of their infiltration. its almost as if you don't talk about it then it'll go away. 
we need to know and it is the responsibility of the SWP in particular to tell us what's going on. until they do everyone should assume the worst.
btw WP and others leafleted Finnon's workplace today and we got a very good response. Unison at the MMU are on board and will be mobilising against Stoker. We're investigating the UMU at present.


----------



## layabout (Aug 19, 2004)

*** Stop press. Tory infiltrator caught redhanded by the SWP ***


----------



## Karac (Aug 19, 2004)

Its a bit weird allowing a couple of fresh faced BNP students to become such leading players in the SWP in Manchester.
You dont have to grill the fuckers ,but there must have been some pointers?
When i was in the Militant in Camden we had all sorts joining up!
Heroin addicts and careerist wannabee councillors/MPs!
Dont know who was worst!
But never facists!
What the fuck did they say in meetings?


----------



## FreddyB (Aug 19, 2004)

Karac said:
			
		

> What the fuck did they say in meetings?



Ich bin Ein uber meschen


----------



## Karac (Aug 19, 2004)

That only happened once that I can think of in the Socialist Party or Militant. Phil Hearse was one of the central leaders of the IMG or whatever they were calling themselves at that time. He jumped ship to join Militant and went straight into some relatively minor positions of responsibility. I think there would be a fairly strong consensus in the SP that recruiting him at all was a mistake. The ease with which he went back to his old politics rather implies that he never really concurred with ours.

He is now with the unspeakably dire Socialist Resistance, although technically he isn't back in the USFI. He has his own closely associated micro-organisation
Going to reply to this one because he was in my branch.
Not exactly a facist infiltrater but do you know task we gave him?
Paper organiser.
I think he fucked off soon but at least we didnt give him London responibilities.


----------



## vimto (Aug 19, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> *** Stop press. Tory infiltrator caught redhanded by the SWP ***



You still believe that shite dont you


----------



## Groucho (Aug 19, 2004)

Karac said:
			
		

> That only happened once that I can think of in the Socialist Party or Militant. Phil Hearse was one of the central leaders of the IMG or whatever they were calling themselves at that time. ......I think he fucked off soon but at least we didnt give him London responibilities.



?? I hardly think that compares to Fascist infiltration! You made the point earlier of the left groups hating each other. How stupid that makes us look.  There are genuine points of disagreement but christ we are basically on the same side.


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

Groucho said:
			
		

> ?? I hardly think that compares to Fascist infiltration! You made the point earlier of the left groups hating each other. How stupid that makes us look.  There are genuine points of disagreement but christ we are basically on the same side.


naah, it was a response to a point CR made on post 463 about how quickly any new member might be given some responsibility in an organisation, not about being infiltrated, so its a quite fair coment.

(and the first half of karacs post was actually a quote from nigel)


----------



## Groucho (Aug 19, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> naah, it was a response to a point CR made on post 463 about how quickly any new member might be given some responsibility in an organisation, not about being infiltrated, so its a quite fair coment.
> 
> (and the first half of karacs post was actually a quote from nigel)



OK. I accept that.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 19, 2004)

Their lives in Manchester will certainly involve a lot less "outdoors" from now on, that's for certain.


----------



## belboid (Aug 19, 2004)

hmmm...you think they (the BNP) are gonna make a big fuss aboutneding police protection from the vicious lefties shortly?  Or a fuss about them being refused police protection, unlike the people who infiltrate them?


----------



## urbanrevolt (Aug 19, 2004)

"I do think it is important that an initial statement - giving a statement of the facts as they are currently known and announcing that a thorough investigation is underway - should be put out as soon as possible. That goes for MAR/RESPECT etc not just the SWP. I suspect that everyone involved in anti-fascist work for instance in the North West of England is currently more than a bit worried and the SWP etc have a responsibility to left them know what is going on quickly. "

I think that Nigel Irritable's statement is a very good one.  The SWP should produce a statement on it, as should MAR and the UAF nationally.  After all, people's security has been threatened.  Covering it up would be unprincipled.  This is an attack on all antiracists in the North West and we should launch a campaign in solidarity with the students and workers of the universities to get Finnon and Stoker expelled for:
passing on of information that compromises students' and workers' safety;
contravening antiracist policies;
encouraging racist hate crime;
The workers at Asda, Finnon's workplace, were shocked by the presence of a BNP activist in their workplace and demanded more leaflets.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 20, 2004)

*Morning Star article*

BNP moles infiltrate left parties
(Thursday 19 August 2004)
Louise Nousratpour
MANCHESTER peace and anti-racism campaigners branded the recent infiltration of
the left in the city by the racist BNP as a "desperate idiotic stunt" yesterday.


The Manchester branches of the Respect coalition, Unite Against Fascism and the
Socialist Workers Party discovered that two of their activists - students Joe
Finnon and Diane Stoker - are really far-right moles.

They warned people who had campaigned alongside these infiltrators to be
vigilant about security, as the racist party has a long record of violence and
thuggery.

However, campaigners said that they are not worried about any vital or
confidential information being leaked by Mr Finnon and Ms Stoker "because our
activities are public knowledge."

The groups noted that the infiltration was a desperate ploy by a defeated
fascist group which has lost out to the left in the north-west.

Respect national secretary John Rees said that he regretted the incident, but
pointed out that, ironically, the infiltrators did "more to help than stop us
from fighting fascism."

He added: "We got more work out of them than anything else. They even actively
helped us organise the protest against Le Pen."

The BNP issued a triumphalist statement on its website, crowing about its two
members' "achievements."

But, as Mr Rees put it: "It was hardly News of the World. A good cure for
insomnia though."

UAF joint secretary Weyman Bennett highlighted that the anti-fascism campaign in
the north-west had been the key reason for BNP leader Nick Griffin's defeat as a
European candidate in the June 10 elections.

He said: "The BNP thought that June 10 would be their day, but it was far from
that as the fascists failed miserably. Now they are licking their wounds by
infiltrating and attacking our campaign."

"Such idiotic stunts will not stop us from continuing our effective campaign
against racism and fascism," Mr Bennett urged.

"Every person in this country needs to be vigilant about the BNP because these
fascists attack ordinary black people on the street, never mind anti-racist
campaigners.

"We need to campaign wholeheartedly to root out racism and the BNP if we want to
sleep soundly at night," he added.


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 20, 2004)

looks like john rees is burying his head in the sand if those quotes are a fair representation of what he told the morning star.


----------



## layabout (Aug 20, 2004)

Karac said:
			
		

> Its a bit weird allowing a couple of fresh faced BNP students to become such leading players in the SWP in Manchester.
> You dont have to grill the fuckers ,but there must have been some pointers?
> When i was in the Militant in Camden we had all sorts joining up!
> Heroin addicts and careerist wannabee councillors/MPs!
> ...



I contacted someone today in the UAF by phone who knew Stoker. He's either totally fooled, or doesn't believe that Stoker is really BNP. So yep goint by what he's said Stoker has either done a bloody good job or is not actually Fash....either way, it looks like she would have been near impossible to rumble.


----------



## Groucho (Aug 20, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> BNP moles infiltrate left parties
> (Thursday 19 August 2004)
> Louise Nousratpour
> MANCHESTER peace and anti-racism campaigners branded the recent infiltration of
> ...



Excellent article. Quite right public position.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 20, 2004)

smashthestate said:
			
		

> looks like john rees is burying his head in the sand if those quotes are a fair representation of what he told the morning star.


But you are convinced they've copied membership lists without actually checking.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 20, 2004)

Not a word about an inquiry, which I hope is an oversight. The following bit, however does not fill me with confidence that legitimate worries which anti-racist activists may have about these events are being taken seriously:




			
				Morning Star said:
			
		

> However, campaigners said that they are not worried about any vital or
> confidential information being leaked by Mr Finnon and Ms Stoker "because our
> activities are public knowledge."



The activities of the SWP etc may be public knowledge, but I would be appalled if personal details of members, supporters and contacts are. The possibility of things like addresses falling into the hands of the BNP should be the main concern here. If RESPECT/UAF/SWP are sure that these details have not been passed along they should say so. If they are not sure then the complacency of this quote is foolish in the extreme.




			
				Morning Star said:
			
		

> The groups noted that the infiltration was a desperate ploy by a defeated
> fascist group which has lost out to the left in the north-west.



Griffin failed to get a seat in the European election, something we can all be relieved about. The BNP polled a huge number of votes in the area and has a number of councillors there. Who on earth seriously thinks that they "lost out to the left"? How many votes did RESPECT get in the region again?

Some of the language used in the article seems to imply that RESPECT etc have made a public statement on these events. Does anyone know where such a thing can be found if it exists?


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 20, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> BNP moles infiltrate left parties
> (Thursday 19 August 2004)
> Louise Nousratpour
> MANCHESTER peace and anti-racism campaigners branded the recent infiltration of
> the left in the city by the racist BNP as a "desperate idiotic stunt" yesterday.


i think it was a bit more than that, tbh.



> The Manchester branches of the Respect coalition, Unite Against Fascism and the
> Socialist Workers Party discovered that two of their activists - students Joe
> Finnon and Diane Stoker - are really far-right moles.


*discovered* - hmm......well, thats one way of putting it i suppose.



> They warned people who had campaigned alongside these infiltrators to be
> vigilant about security, as the racist party has a long record of violence and
> thuggery.
> 
> ...


they're not worried???? dear god, who the fuck came out with that?
I very much doubt it was anyone who knew / worked with and was friends with these two nazis for the best part of a year!



> The groups noted that the infiltration was a desperate ploy by a defeated fascist group which has lost out to the left in the north-west.


more evidence of their delusion....



> Respect national secretary John Rees said that he regretted the incident, but pointed out that, ironically, the infiltrators did "more to help than stop us from fighting fascism."


yeah, right 



> He added: "We got more work out of them than anything else.



oh, so its alright then....



> They even actively helped us organise the protest against Le Pen."



interesting, that protest against le pen was actually a big success - looks like the moles fucked up there, if they really were invovled in "organising" - AFAIK it wasn't even the SWP who organised it.



> The BNP issued a triumphalist statement on its website, crowing about its two members' "achievements."
> 
> But, as Mr Rees put it: "It was hardly News of the World. A good cure for
> insomnia though."


eh? yes, i rested much easier in my bed the night after reading this unfold 



> UAF joint secretary Weyman Bennett highlighted that the anti-fascism campaign in
> the north-west had been the key reason for BNP leader Nick Griffin's defeat as a
> European candidate in the June 10 elections.
> 
> ...



er, actually they infiltrated months before the elections, another case of swp delusion and denial...


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 20, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> But you are convinced they've copied membership lists without actually checking.


Yes, flimsier, I am convinced 
I was in the SWP for half the length of time of those two  and had access to all kinds of info on member of SWP, SWSS, GR and ANL - even tho i was never even a member of the ANL.
I was not even in a position of any resposibilty whatsoever.
They will obviously have taken / copied down info.
And of course I can't check, since I thankfully don't know Diane and Joe I can't ask them (as if they would admit it ffs!)


----------



## General Ludd (Aug 20, 2004)

Just to add, I will respond to you Layabout, but I've been very busy wasting my life working but as soon as I have a bit of time you'll have a response.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 20, 2004)

No, but as said, the SWP will know what they had access to.

I believe it to be a lot less than suggested here.

The ridiculous nature of criticisms of the SWP was that the minute I suggested I'd been told something I was told 'not to trust' anything the Manc SWP said - because they'd been infiltrated.

Well for fuck's sake.

The nazis are laughing, by the way, and claiming the reaction of the (non-SWP) members on here is exactly the reaction they wanted. I'd link, but it's not hard to find and would be careless to do so...


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 20, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> No, but as said, the SWP will know what they had access to.


well, arguably... and i bet manc ppl who knew joe and diane are more concerned than john rees.



> I believe it to be a lot less than suggested here.


why?



> The ridiculous nature of criticisms of the SWP was that the minute I suggested I'd been told something I was told 'not to trust' anything the Manc SWP said - because they'd been infiltrated.



i never said that



> Well for fuck's sake.
> 
> The nazis are laughing, by the way, and claiming the reaction of the (non-SWP) members on here is exactly the reaction they wanted. I'd link, but it's not hard to find and would be careless to do so...



well, i can't find it, can you PM it or post a broken link or something?


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 20, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> No, but as said, the SWP will know what they had access to.



Not so long ago you were correctly pointing out that the SWP had only just found out about the infiltration and that it would take time for them to reasonably assess the damage.

Do you think that in this brief time the SWP looked back through every task these two were assigned for the SWP, SWSS, Respect, UAF or other body and found out for sure that they never had access to lists of members/supporters/contacts?

If so why don't they say so clearly and ease people's worries?

If not do you not think that the statement about not worrying because "our activities are public" is complacent to say the least?


----------



## Gumbert (Aug 20, 2004)

*TBH*   this is getting a tad boring this thread. 

As an active swp member whos all over redwatch, yes redwatch, before the sprites photographed the manc demo of love music hate racism,  its gauling to see alot of ifs and buts speculation as to what information will come out about whom, ffs.. 

If it does it will!

Infiltration will and the last days have shown, does happen, on both sides... 

FFS, us people here in leeds have been firebombed by the WNP etc and got our addresses all over the redwatch site. If we gave in dont you think that capital is the winner? Its not cos we understsand the shit we live in and the friction of class politics that produce scummy fuckwits like them two.  

WE are fighting now and to bow to some of the wet bollix of having a policy on this or that about membership would slow down the forward movement of the party and therefore the class, do you think we'd hold our head up high at work and say NO to the Boss worried if we were to be attacked at home all the time and who was being vetted? 

No, the best thing is to move on and take the consequences as they come and they are going to be soft consequences when our side has the support of bus, fire, flight, council, social workers on the frontline. Anyone hear of a nazi supporting a striking worker?

Get real people this is politics 

its a fuckin war and today i'm a slave to my wage

sort out your heads... 

FFS

see beyond the monitor and your political rigidity....

as you were


----------



## smashthestate (Aug 20, 2004)

Gumbert said:
			
		

> *TBH*   this is getting a tad boring this thread.



why are you still reading it then?


----------



## Gumbert (Aug 20, 2004)

smashthestate said:
			
		

> why are you still reading it then?


cos being a social worker i look after the paranoid


----------



## joeowens (Aug 20, 2004)

Do you lot think your getting away with what you done to my car?
Dream on if you think you are.I have that many photos and addresses,i don't know were to start.


----------



## wibble (Aug 20, 2004)

icepick said:
			
		

> And knowing this and still being in it you're probably another slightly-mental inadequate, where the only place you're socially accepted is in the BNP.
> 
> But y'know any loser can still make friends other ways - you could get a hobby, or join a choir or something, or get involved in Trekkie conventions or summat?



 Remembering the SWSS at university I would think that the socially unacceptable  would be best off with them.

 It was always the  angry 4 eyed fat girls or the terminally plain who joined the SWP and hung out with spotty blokes sporting tassels (it was the eighties!) they would sit in the corner and laugh at each others weak jokes (rather like the other misfits the 'Christian forum') and make pathetic attempts to get the rugger boys (always the best looking ) banned from the union bar.


----------



## BarryB (Aug 20, 2004)

Karac said:
			
		

> Its a bit weird allowing a couple of fresh faced BNP students to become such leading players in the SWP in Manchester.
> You dont have to grill the fuckers ,but there must have been some pointers?
> When i was in the Militant in Camden we had all sorts joining up!
> Heroin addicts and careerist wannabee councillors/MPs!
> ...



If the BNP (or whoever) had succesfully infiltrated Militant how would you necessarily know? If an infiltrator had left after, say, a year it would be a mistake to automatically assume that their organisation would necessarily go public on this. There are other ways of doing things.

Barry B


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

BarryB said:
			
		

> If the BNP (or whoever) had succesfully infiltrated Militant how would you necessarily know? If an infiltrator had left after, say, a year it would be a mistake to automatically assume that their organisation would necessarily go public on this. There are other ways of doing things.
> 
> Barry B


exactly! and this is the problem; The BNP have - thanks to the stupidity and naivete of Manchester swappies - blown the trot camp in the NW right open. if 2 zit-faced stoods could do this, what else has gone on? what names do they have? what actions can they f-up? Manchester SWP have dropped us all right in it.


----------



## dennisr (Aug 20, 2004)

Karac said:
			
		

> Going to reply to this one because he was in my branch.
> Not exactly a facist infiltrater but do you know task we gave him?
> Paper organiser.
> I think he fucked off soon but at least we didnt give him London responibilities.



Actually - he was given a lot of responsibility - far too much in retrospect - but this example does not really compare to the open 'other side'.

Do i know you Karac? (from the branch you mentioned - pm me)


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> If not do you not think that the statement about not worrying because "our activities are public" is complacent to say the least?


I must admit I'm hoping this is just the first take and that there will be a more detailed account given in the days to come. Certainly as a first public reply to the scum it's exactly what I'd want them to say.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 20, 2004)

wibble said:
			
		

> Remembering the SWSS at university I would think that the socially unacceptable  would be best off with them.
> 
> It was always the  angry 4 eyed fat girls or the terminally plain who joined the SWP and hung out with spotty blokes sporting tassels (it was the eighties!) they would sit in the corner and laugh at each others weak jokes (rather like the other misfits the 'Christian forum') and make pathetic attempts to get the rugger boys (always the best looking ) banned from the union bar.



You were a member then?



(sorry, couldn't resist)


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> I must admit I'm hoping this is just the first take and that there will be a more detailed account given in the days to come



I agree. It is also possible that the Morning Star article doesn't report everything the various groups had to say or maybe I'm just feeling generous this morning.




			
				bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Certainly as a first public reply to the scum it's exactly what I'd want them to say.



I'm not sure if I'd want to come across in quite such a blustering fashion. Some of it is just delusional.


----------



## Zonk (Aug 20, 2004)

FLIMSIER.


> The nazis are laughing, by the way, and claiming the reaction of the (non-SWP) members on here is exactly the reaction they wanted. I'd link, but it's not hard to find and would be careless to do so...



You are such an SWP twat!


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> No, but as said, the SWP will know what they had access to.
> 
> I believe it to be a lot less than suggested here.
> 
> ...


flim - you're forgetting summink important, mate; becuase the SWP 'will work with anyone' (as they'd put it)-the whole of the Left in the NW is, potentially fucked. How many people have signed their petitions? how many STWC members are now on BNP lists? how many GR? how many old SA Names are on BNP files? how many RESPECT names? how many muslim groupings are now wide open?
sorry, this is serious. If the SWP wanna fuck up (and this looks terrifyingly naive, at best) then that's their problem. However, this looks like it's EVERYONE'S problem now.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Not a word about an inquiry, which I hope is an oversight. The following bit, however does not fill me with confidence that legitimate worries which anti-racist activists may have about these events are being taken seriously:
> 
> 
> 
> The activities of the SWP etc may be public knowledge, but I would be appalled if personal details of members, supporters and contacts are. The possibility of things like addresses falling into the hands of the BNP should be the main concern here. If RESPECT/UAF/SWP are sure that these details have not been passed along they should say so. If they are not sure then the complacency of this quote is foolish in the extreme.


exactly! couldn't agree more.
Right SWP. Thank you very much for dropping us ALL right in it. Now - what do we plan to do, to limit the mess. a statement is well overdue.


----------



## silentNate (Aug 20, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> The nazis are laughing, by the way, and claiming the reaction of the (non-SWP) members on here is exactly the reaction they wanted. I'd link, but it's not hard to find and would be careless to do so...


I'd chill out- they loves quoting me and want my babies....
OldhamGeezer only came here to get in my pants  




			
				Jezza said:
			
		

> because the SWP 'will work with anyone' (as they'd put it)-the whole of the Left in the NW is, potentially fucked. How many people have signed their petitions? how many STWC members are now on BNP lists? how many GR? how many old SA Names are on BNP files? how many RESPECT names? how many muslim groupings are now wide open?
> sorry, this is serious. If the SWP wanna fuck up (and this looks terrifyingly naive, at best) then that's their problem. However, this looks like it's EVERYONE'S problem now.


If the BNP have nothing better to do than attend a few meetings at M2004 to wind up Swappies then they're sadder than even I imagined. Whether they have numbers and addresses is almost irrelevant as by using them they might cause more damage to their 'cause' than any BBC documentary.


----------



## FreddyB (Aug 20, 2004)

Been Following this thread and read the BNP site, as a complete outsider it looks like the BNP building a future for british children by exploiting their naivety and the swp orgs are just desperate for acceptance by anyone.

Do the BNP or the lefties have any real significance to anyone but each other?

Two people little more than children and they're online posing for pics with such a diverse bunch as Nick Griffin to George Galloway, comedy, both extreme left and right will embrace anyone who comes their way. Sad hobbyists masquerading as being serious about politics only good thing about it is that neither one will enjoy any real power outside marginal councils where both sides can demonstrate their inability to organise a bin collection but can put a load of people on the street handing out leaflets or selling dull papers.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

silentNate said:
			
		

> If the BNP have nothing better to do than attend a few meetings at M2004 to wind up Swappies then they're sadder than even I imagined. Whether they have numbers and addresses is almost irrelevant as by using them they might cause more damage to their 'cause' than any BBC documentary.


unfortunately, Nate, it's morre serious than that. 
violence and intimidation are at the heart of the fash MO. always have been, always will be. for all the slick, glib PR skills of Mr Griffin, they are at heart a bunch of bootboys, one of whose core missions has been to fuck up left/anti-racism groups, and to reduce to fear the ethnic minority groupings those groups would defend. for all we know, BNP NW now have the home addresses of; all SWSS members in the NW, all GR, all RESPECT, all UAF....would YOU be happy with your address being in their hands? I wouldn't.   
and that's without even thinking of what they know of planned events/meetings.


----------



## silentNate (Aug 20, 2004)

Jezza- I've never had any problem finding out when an SWP event is happening, fact is that while the SWP is an open party that welcomes newcomers things like this might happen 
No- I don't want the boring nonce party knowing my address but then neither do I want the SWP being closed to new members. A few more membership checks might help but in the long run there might be nothing to this story. I agree with flimsier in that they shouldn't automatically panic as it just plays into the hands of 'violence and intimidation'


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

that's fairy muff. and no, I don't want the swappies to stop organising (but yes, I DO want them to be a *whole lot more* fucking careful). But - think of all the anti-racist groups whose members' details might now be loggec on a PC in fash HQ central. think of all those who the SWP have worked with, in one guise or another. The 'octopus' way the SWP organises means, potentially, that everyone who is active on the left, in the NW is vulnerable.
solutions? The SWP have got to _temporarily_ close the region down - only temporarily. 
then they have to go through their member lists for all branches in the area - and investigate each and every member that's joined in the past (say) 3 years.
there's no choice.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> solutions? The SWP have got to _temporarily_ close the region down - only temporarily.
> then they have to go through their member lists for all branches in the area - and investigate each and every member that's joined in the past (say) 3 years.
> there's no choice.


  
But you don't want the swp to stop organising!


----------



## urbanrevolt (Aug 20, 2004)

I partly agree with SilentNate that it's not in the BNP's immediate interests to act on addresses info i.e. launch attacks.  
My details have been on Redwatch several times and apart from some hate mail (along lines of'you're gonna die bitch') nothing happened.  It's intimidation and we certainly shouldn't panic.
However, that doesn't mean we should be complacent.  Whilst a major tactic of intimidation is to cause panic and confusion in the ranks of the opposition closing our eyes to real danger would be just as bad a response.

At the very least, this should be a wake up call. We should demand a meeting and Inquiry by UAF in the North West.  Complacency is not an option.   We must take fascists seriously, especially if they grow into a serious force and relaunch a violent street war.  We're not in that situation now but must step up security.  

Ultimately the best way to confront the fascist threat is to rejuvenate the left, for a united Black and White workers and youth to take to the streets against not only the fascists but the cuts, wars and summits of capitalism.


----------



## passthesalt (Aug 20, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Me too.
> 
> The only organisation that I know of who claim to be on the left who did this were the RCP.
> 
> Strange that CR agrees as well. Do WP have candidate membership?




Oh yeah - the RCP .  A group that just sat up and screamed "we are SO fucking dodgy". A classic case of middle class wankers who "knew" the answers to "everything".

And where are they now - the same tired old faces behind a set of well funded think tanks who are pushing GM crops, genetic manipulation and another load of free market wank.

When it comes down to it I think I prefer your honest fash rather than those scum. At least the fash don't patronise me.

But "Come the glorious day !" - I bagsy the RCP, a bloody big machine gun and a nearby wall <grin>

Scattering salt at slugs


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

passthesalt said:
			
		

> But "Come the glorious day !" - I bagsy the RCP, a bloody big machine gun and a nearby wall <grin>


Bagsy the 9ft red headed RCPer who left me with a scar, though truth be told I got on better with him after that.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Bagsy the 9ft red headed RCPer who left me with a scar, though truth be told I got on better with him after that.



I hated his mate, W, who had that murderous look in his eyes.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

Yeah flimsier I know what you mean. They seemed to recruit people who either had eyes like the Omen's Damian or else had just walked off the pages of Vogue.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> But you don't want the swp to stop organising!


no - I don't. but they DO have to take NW region back to square one, and look at each member. if they got 2 pimply studes past you, who else?
and you can still organise via other groupings, durijng this process - let's face it the SWP work through so many bloody fronts etc. that they'll hardly notice the change!
it'll be just like old times....


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

But in all seriousness RJ following that logic why not _temporarily_ shut down the _entire_ swp as what guarantee is there that any other region is immune to the same tactic? Oh god why did I say that   For god's sakes what makes you think an 'investigation' would have uncoevered these two in the first place if they were as convincing as they seem to have been?


----------



## editor (Aug 20, 2004)

Just in case there's any confusion with new posters, please note that urban75 has got *absoutely nothing* to do with the SWP, RCP, IWCA, BNP, Marxist whatever, Trots'r'Us or any other political organisation.

The only official accredited associations to urban75 are the Brixton Drinkers Club, urban75 Curry Club, Glastonbury Cider Crew, Urbanites Party Crew, Walk Club, Book Club, football team and the newly formed Drugs Meet'n'Greet Mob. 

This is a public service announcement.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 20, 2004)

It just seems another 'it's the SWPs fault' whereas any group could be infiltrated.


----------



## Zonk (Aug 20, 2004)

> It just seems another 'it's the SWPs fault' whereas any group could be infiltrated.



Many groups get infiltrated. Not many just let people walk right in though....


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 20, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> The only official accredited associations to urban75 are the Brixton Drinkers Club, urban75 Curry Club, Glastonbury Cider Crew, Urbanites Party Crew, Walk Club, Book Club, football team and the newly formed Drugs Meet'n'Greet Mob.
> .



The true revolutionary vanguards of the people.


----------



## editor (Aug 20, 2004)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> The true revolutionary vanguards of the people.


We've certainly had trouble with hardcore activists trying to inflitrate the Curry Club.

The day I start associating urban75 with any political organisation is the day the shit begins. No tedious manifestos and 5 hour long meetings in empty church halls here!


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 20, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> Just in case there's any confusion with new posters, please note that urban75 has got *absoutely nothing* to do with the SWP, RCP, IWCA, BNP, Marxist whatever, Trots'r'Us or any other political organisation.
> 
> The only official accredited associations to urban75 are the Brixton Drinkers Club, urban75 Curry Club, Glastonbury Cider Crew, Urbanites Party Crew, Walk Club, Book Club, football team and the newly formed Drugs Meet'n'Greet Mob.
> 
> This is a public service announcement.



i like the idea of the Urbanites Party Crew (marxist leninist provisional central committee)


----------



## silentNate (Aug 20, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> The only official accredited associations to urban75 are the Brixton Drinkers Club, urban75 Curry Club, Glastonbury Cider Crew, Urbanites Party Crew, Walk Club, Book Club, football team and the newly formed Drugs Meet'n'Greet Mob.


How do the West Norwood Posse get accredited? 
Is there an official U75 application form requiring open meetings and can we expel peeps from Camberwell attempting to infiltrate our great group?


----------



## flypanam (Aug 20, 2004)

silentNate said:
			
		

> How do the West Norwood Posse get accredited?



they were expelled.

deviationist tendancies


----------



## belboid (Aug 20, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> i like the idea of the Urbanites Party Crew (marxist leninist provisional central committee)


are we allowed factions?  is it DC?  have we been written about in the Weekly Worker yet?


----------



## beergut100 (Aug 20, 2004)

I can hardly believe that there are getting on for 600 posts in this thread.

It must be very gratifying for the BNP to see leftists get in such a flap over what is really much ado about nothing.

Trainspotters of the far right and far left - you deserve each other.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> But in all seriousness RJ following that logic why not _temporarily_ shut down the _entire_ swp as what guarantee is there that any other region is immune to the same tactic? Oh god why did I say that   For god's sakes what makes you think an 'investigation' would have uncoevered these two in the first place if they were as convincing as they seem to have been?


firstly - I'm trying to strike a balance here, between the SWP keeping going (on balance, a good thing) and between people getting their heads kicked in.
why an investigation? because such a process can unearth - who they talk to, who they socialise with, communicate with etc..where they go, when, what they do with their time...it reveals patterns of behaviour from which one can draw conclusions. it's not much, but at least it's SOMETHING! right now swappie security seems to run along these lines "we've heard you've got BNP connections. is that true?" "no, of course not!" "OK, that's all right, then..." I despair of their amateurishness and gullibility, I really do.


----------



## editor (Aug 20, 2004)

Try as I might, I can't muster up any enthusiasm for the SWP.


----------



## guinnessdrinker (Aug 20, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> Just in case there's any confusion with new posters, please note that urban75 has got *absoutely nothing* to do with the SWP, RCP, IWCA, BNP, Marxist whatever, Trots'r'Us or any other political organisation.
> 
> The only official accredited associations to urban75 are the Brixton Drinkers Club, urban75 Curry Club, Glastonbury Cider Crew, Urbanites Party Crew, Walk Club, Book Club, football team and the newly formed Drugs Meet'n'Greet Mob.
> 
> This is a public service announcement.



and the newly formed cheese and wine party club?


----------



## editor (Aug 20, 2004)

guinnessdrinker said:
			
		

> and the newly formed cheese and wine party club?


Splitters!


----------



## dennisr (Aug 20, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> Splitters!



no - that would be the cheese and wine party club (ML)


----------



## JHE (Aug 20, 2004)

Karac said:
			
		

> Its a bit weird allowing a couple of fresh faced BNP students to become such leading players in the SWP in Manchester.
> You dont have to grill the fuckers ,but there must have been some pointers?
> When i was in the Militant in Camden we had all sorts joining up!
> Heroin addicts and careerist wannabee councillors/MPs!
> ...


According to an interim report from the politically-neutral National Association of Political Infiltrators (NAPI), the two young moles mostly stuck to talking about leafleting and paper sales, but once or twice they risked giving themselves away with misguided political comment.

Their comments were passed over in embarrassed silence - though as Levien explained earlier on this thread, Finnon's "politics and attitude to others were not great and he was not always popular in our branch."

Joe Finnon (at a branch social):  "_That Oswald Moseley was the greatest Prime Minister we never had._"

Joe Finnon (later, in his cups):  "_I'd have you red scum shot!_"

Diane Stoker (at a branch committee meeting):  "_Wouldn't we do better if we became the National Socialist British Workers Party?_"


A spokesperson for NAPI said: "Some small fringe parties may now become a little more vigilant.  We will shortly be issuing  new guidelines for our members.  We do not encourage infiltrators to boast about their antics."


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> such a process can unearth - who they talk to, who they socialise with, communicate with etc..where they go, when, what they do with their time...it reveals patterns of behaviour from which one can draw conclusions


So the Manc swp or the NW region is supposed to sit down and ask these questions of every member are they? And who is gonna answer those questions or should they just go to everyone's mum and ask who their friends are? Sorry for being flipant but come on this is fantsasyland. When I was in the swp my ex didn't know the answers to those questions (which is why she's my ex) and I'm damn sure the district organiser of the party didn't.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

JHE said:
			
		

> Joe Finnon (later, in his cups):  "_I'd have you red scum shot!_"


Chortle chortle, but hey if you'd been in their branch you could have had a good few laughs about Islamophobia couldn't you?


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> So the Manc swp or the NW region is supposed to sit down and ask these questions of every member are they? And who is gonna answer those questions or should they just go to everyone's mum and ask who their friends are? Sorry for being flipant but come on this is fantsasyland. When I was in the swp my ex didn't know the answers to those questions (which is why she's my ex) and I'm damn sure the district organiser of the party didn't.


you really don't understand this word 'investivgation' do you? or 'security'. 
I am talking - if necessary - of surveillance of those who arouse suspicion. if necessary, use 3rd parties. I find it *impossible* to believe that in this instance, the two didn't leave pointers and tell-tale signs the size of Blackburn. NO 19 year old is that good. I'd bet a fortune that if NW SWP had been anything other than cosmically dozy bastards 
look at class war. They SLOWLY let people into their ranks, checking all the time. any doubts - I do mean ANY - the ranks close. people only get higher responsibilities within that organisation once they've been around, and proven, a fair way down the line. 
I am not suggesting the SWP sets up its' own KGB, but right now they have NO means of knowing. The moral of the story here is that two dimwit freshers tucked up the whole NW region - look how quickly they advanced thru' the ranks - and made them lopok like absolute arses, regardless of the safety implications.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> if necessary, use 3rd parties.


Who?


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> look at class war. They SLOWLY let people into their ranks, checking all the time. any doubts - I do mean ANY - the ranks close. people only get higher responsibilities within that organisation once they've been around, and proven, a fair way down the line. I am not suggesting the SWP sets up its' own KGB


The spirit of Bakunin is alive and well. Remind me to bring this stuff up next time an anrchist has a pop at democratic centralism.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> The spirit of Bakunin is alive and well. Remind me to bring this stuff up next time an anrchist has a pop at democratic centralism.


 ..and remind us to bring up this incident next time a trot (any trot - just like you're using CW to represent all anarchist) tries to argue that DC is essential for security reasons.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> ..and remind us to bring up this incident next time a trot (any trot - just like you're using CW to represent all anarchist) tries to argue that DC is essential for security reasons.


Persoanlly I've never argued that. In fact I said earlier on the thread that the question of security was in one sense not even a political one.

I take it you disagree with CW's approach to these questions then butchers?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Persoanlly I've never argued that. In fact I said earlier on the thread that the question of security was in one sense not even a political one.
> 
> I take it you disagree with CW's approach to these questions then butchers?


 But you are aware that this is an argument that has been historically utilsed by trots/leninist/bolsheviks in defence of their organisational principles - one was on here doing just that last week or the week before.

Put it like this - i know which group i'd feel safer passing on personal information to. Now your point seems to be that tighter security is needed, but when that tighter security is implemented you attack it.

And the chances of me contributing to  letting you turn this fuck up on the SWPs part into yet another of your attacks on anarchists is precisely nil.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> The spirit of Bakunin is alive and well. Remind me to bring this stuff up next time an anrchist has a pop at democratic centralism.


oh for heaven's sake! I am talking about the *extreme* example whereby - as here - BNP moles have infiltrated for long enough, and well enough, and gone far enough, to know some truly serious, important stuff. do you REALLY think these two herberts DIDN'T leave signs all around the shop? that if the SWP had woken up they COULDN'T have rumbled 'em long ago? 
'cos I don't. we ain't dealing with Burgess and MacLean here!


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Now your point seems to be that tighter security is needed, but when that tighter security is implemented you attack it.


My point was that I couldn't see how the questions RJ asked could possibly be answered unless you're in an organisation small enough that everyone lives in the same flat. What is beyond question is that nobody should get into a position of relative authority in any organisation without some assurance that they have a reasonable grounding in the politics beyond being able to say 'Blair is a twat'. If that didn't happen with these two (but for all I know they could quote large chunks of Leon's history of the russian revolution) then that was a mistake. Who is a 'safe' pair of hands is subjective but if it's not even based on a political estimation then that is wrong.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> My point was that I couldn't see how the questions RJ asked could possibly be answered unless you're in an organisation small enough that everyone lives in the same flat. What is beyond question is that nobody should get into a position of relative authority in any organisation without some assurance that they have a reasonable grounding in the politics beyond being able to say 'Blair is a twat'. If that didn't happen with these two (but for all I know they could quote large chunks of Leon's history of the russian revolution) then that was a mistake. Who is a 'safe' pair of hands is subjective but if it's not even based on a political estimation then that is wrong.


 They could be asked nonetheless - that's how you start to build up background on people - put in place a coherent  procedure that is applied to all new members, and a process whereby people can bring up any concerns regarding existing members. No one is expecting the SWP to instantly come up with the info on all NW members - an indication that a formal method of dealing with these issues will be put in place and continued from this point onwards is what i think people are after from them.

Now, i saw nothing in the RESPECT text that filled me with much hope that this is actually going to be the case, but i will await any further developments.

I have no problem whatsover with seeking to ensure that members in psotions of responsibility have a political understanding of the group and it's politics - this should actually *form the basis* for individuals taking postions of responsibility - but there must also be political education within the wider group as a counter-balance to people building up little empires for themselves.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> look at class war. They SLOWLY let people into their ranks, checking all the time. any doubts - I do mean ANY - the ranks close. people only get higher responsibilities within that organisation once they've been around, and proven, a fair way down the line.


hmm...

we are careful about the people who join cw, but responsibilities are shared around the group. we take the threat of infiltration seriously! we don't - however - allow our caution to become paranoia.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 20, 2004)

In a major provocation to the left and the whole antiracist movement, the BNP has announced that it’s infiltrated Unite Against Fascism, The Socialist Workers’ Party and Respect.  

Diane Stoker and Jo Finnon, two students in Manchester SWSS and leading members of Respect North West, have announced themselves to be fascist spies.  They have posted photos of themselves smiling with Nick Griffin, the BNP’s leader, and Tony Wentworth, the North West Youth Organiser, at this years Red White and Blue Festival on the BNP’s website. 

We should unite in demanding that these fascist provocateurs are driven out of the students’ unions and off the campuses.  They have abused the trust of hundreds of students and antiracist campaigners and, we must assume, passed on their personal details to fascist thugs.  Indeed they boast on the BNP website, “Over the last twelve months, there has been nothing that these groups have discussed or planned that hasn't come back to the BNP.”

Now is a time to stand in solidarity with the members of these organisations whose safety has been compromised.  However, we must also demand that the leaders of these organisations do more to publicise the dangers and immediately convene an inquiry to minimise the risk of any future infiltration.


A year ago Finnon and Stoker joined Manchester SWSS, on the instructions of the BNP to discover and undermine the work of Manchester anti-fascists.
Within days of entering the SWP local leadership promoted them over the next year they took:

Responsible positions within Manchester Against Racism
Leadership of student work at Manchester Metropolitan University and Manchester University
Elected to the national SWP conference which agreed the Respect turn
Leadership of Respect in the North West
Globalise Resistance recruitment at Marxism 2004

Throughout this time there was no inkling that they were BNP spies. The SWP undertook no checks on them and allowed them unlimited access to membership lists, petitions, e-mail groups, photo archives and all other internal information of all these organisations at quite a high level.

IF YOU HAVE SIGNED A PETITION, PARTICIPATED IN AN ACTION OR JOINED, MANCHESTER AGAINST RACISM, UNITE AGAINST FASCISM, SWSS, GLOBALISE RESISTANCE OR MANCHESTER SWP IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS BE AWARE THE BNP COULD HAVE YOUR CONTACT DETAILS, ADDRESS, PHONE AND E-MAIL.

Their entry raises questions of a systematic nature.  These two raw fascists who never demonstrated any political understanding or interest in theory or ideas, were promoted over the existing Manchester SWSS leadership because they fulfilled the essential test of SWP membership – obedience. They did what they were told. They unquestioningly accepted instructions from the bureaucratic apparatus and carried them out unswervingly.

But the entryism of Finnon and Stoker was not limited to discovering information on the left. They were genuine agent provocateurs who encouraged the arrest of leading Manchester anti-fascist militants and disrupted and undermined our work.

They were a part of the SWP led Manchester Against Racism organising committee which arranged the stewarding of the launch rally which was notoriously occupied by 20 or so Fascists: the first public presence of the fascists in Manchester for nearly 20 year.   It should be said they didn’t have a difficult job disrupting the stewarding, as the SWP themselves proposed asking the police to steward and rang the police on the day when the fascists showed up.

In an even more sinister twist the following week Workers Power comrades were rung by Diane Stoker informing them that Tony Wentworth, the BNP youth organiser, was attempting to spy on the left by drinking in the main left pub in town. She reported that he was harassing women comrades and making sexist remarks towards them. She said she felt threatened and urged our comrades to come down. Aware of the risks of fascist attack we had no choice but to attend. And indeed Wentworth was there in the pub. We agreed to talk to Wentworth to discuss with him why his behaviour was inappropriate. He was immediately violent and aggressive. When we went outside to further discuss the matter with him two police officers appeared. We explained the situation to them and they escorted Wentworth away. It didn’t feel good at the time. But with the benefit of what we now know this was a clear attempt to have our comrades either attacked or arrested.

Anti-fascists be warned, this spying operation endangered the entire left. 

The SWP must admit to some responsibility for enabling it to take place and apologise for exposing the wider movement. We don’t make these criticisms lightly, nor should we be complacent about our own security.  Certainly, Manchester Workers Power supporters never suspected the two.  We were duped along with the rest of the antiracist movement.  However, we do have basic security measures in place: namely political education, background checks and a system of candidate membership.

All organisations that claim to be revolutionary must ask themselves hard questions when infiltration is discovered.  Was the key test of any revolutionary – do you understand and can you apply the method of revolutionary socialism in the class struggle- ever asked of these two?  Or were they rapidly advanced because they were the ultimate yes people, for obvious reasons they always did exactly what they were told.  Enthusiasm is good; but political understanding and education is not an optional extra.  Determined infiltrators may get over even these hurdles which is one of the reasons for a system of candidate membership (which the SWP does not currently operate) and for the immediate democratic recall of officials by the membership.

The SWP needs to act decisively to change this culture. But it won’t and indeed it can’t, on its current trajectory. The increasingly sudden swerves of position, the abandonment of key principles of revolutionary socialism – working class independence, women’s rights, lesbian and gay rights, secularism and indeed socialism itself, encourages a culture of compliant, obedient, subservient membership which partly enabled these two to advance so rapidly and with such disastrous results is the only type of membership the leadership can tolerate.

Days after this news was released the SWP have made no public comment on the matter, with the exception of the woefully inadequate quotes in the Morning Star report. Silence is not an option in the face of fascist infiltration.

We have yet to hear what campaign the SWP proposes to launch against these two.
We have yet to hear any proposals for correcting the damage.
We have yet to hear an honest accounting of what went wrong or the extent of the damage.

In the meantime, we mustn’t wait but immediately launch a campaign.  Manchester Workers Power has already leafleted Finnon’s workplace, in a local supermarket, where black and white workers alike were disgusted that they’d been working alongside a fascist.

We have also submitted an emergency resolution to Unite Against Fascism to join us in the fight to get Finnon and Stoker expelled from their universities.  We will also put resolutions through the AUT and Unison branches, whose members as well as students have been placed at risk due to Finnon and Stoker’s deceptions.  They have not only used deception to gain access to personal details, they have contravened all the antiracist and equal opportunities policies of the universities, and secretly aided an organisation dedicated to race hate and violent attacks.  


In the new term we will launch a massive publicity campaign amongst students and lecturers demanding-

Expel the fascist students
Kick the fascists out of the students’ unions
Boycott classes if Finnon and Stoker are allowed to attend
No platform for fascists to spread their racist filth


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> The spirit of Bakunin is alive and well. Remind me to bring this stuff up next time an anrchist has a pop at democratic centralism.


i didn't realise that the swp _were_ democratic! i thought they were just centralist.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

err, cheers for that CR, but we kinda knew all that.  
(sorry, why DID you post that up?)


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 20, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> hmm...
> 
> we are careful about the people who join cw, but responsibilities are shared around the group. we take the threat of infiltration seriously! we don't - however - allow our caution to become paranoia.


...which is the kind of balance I referred to earlier in the thread - striking a workable, if not happy, medium. the SWP seem to have ZERO security. if these two fuckwits could waltz through their ranks like Rogers & Astaire, anyone could.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> ...which is the kind of balance I referred to earlier in the thread - striking a workable, if not happy, medium. the SWP seem to have ZERO security. if these two fuckwits could waltz through their ranks like Rogers & Astaire, anyone could.


not so much astaire and rogers but quasimodo and the wicked witch of the (north) west.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> They have not only used deception to gain access to personal details, they have contravened _all the antiracist and equal opportunities policies_ of the universities, and secretly aided an organisation dedicated to race hate and violent attacks.


1. you don't know all the anti-racist and equal ops policies of the universities. most of them won't even relate to students but to recruitment and treatment of staff. when i was a student, the equal ops policy of one london college didn't even mention students till a student noticed this and pointed it out. just cos these two have been nasty and bad doesn't mean they've broken all sorts of university policy - satan, they were members of the swp throughout the period, yet the swp don't appear to have had an inkling they weren't all they appeared. or maybe the swp tolerate anti-racism/equal ops policies being broken?




> _In the new term we will launch a massive publicity campaign amongst students and lecturers demanding-
> 
> Expel the fascist students
> Kick the fascists out of the students’ unions
> ...


you most likely won't see them expelled, as this is a police matter, and if no charges are brought then nothing will happen to them from the universities - after all, there are students i've known of who haven't been expelled for rape when no complaint was made to the police. you cannot - afaik - get them kicked out of the students' union - ie have their membership revoked - as they may not even be members of the union. did the swp ever check to see if they had opted out? students are members of their su unless they opt out - they are members by virtue of being a student. so no luck there either. you might have more luck with number three.


----------



## Squatticus (Aug 20, 2004)

*Fascist's workplace leafleted...*

... co-workers did not seem over-happy... he may have an interesting time when he reports for work...

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/08/296608.html


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> you cannot - afaik - get them kicked out of the students' union - ie have their membership revoked - as they may not even be members of the union. did the swp ever check to see if they had opted out? students are members of their su unless they opt out - they are members by virtue of being a student. so no luck there either. you might have more luck with number three.


Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't these two well known at uni meetings invloved in forwarding anti-racist motions etc? Wouldn't somebody at the union have noticed if opted-out persons were proposing motions? You may not be able to expel them but they can be excluded from Union meetings, union run premisses etc. I know for a fact that happened to people at the LSE while I was there.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 20, 2004)

RJ it was a statement put out by Workers Power so I just thought I'd post it up. No harm there I don't think!

Pickmans it was written by people in Manchester not, so I don't know the ins and outs of MUs policies. In terms of fighting for stuff, sometimes you fight for stuff even if it is gonna be hard. For instance the need for illegal strike action for strikes to be successful.


----------



## bolshiebhoy (Aug 20, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Pickmans it was written by people in Manchester not, so I don't know the ins and outs of MUs policies. In terms of fighting for stuff, sometimes you fight for stuff even if it is gonna be hard. For instance the need for illegal strike action for strikes to be successful.


Fair shout cr. He must be the most legalistic anarchist (if that's not a contradiction in terms it ought to be) I've ever come across.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't these two well known at uni meetings invloved in forwarding anti-racist motions etc? Wouldn't somebody at the union have noticed if opted-out persons were proposing motions? You may not be able to expel them but they can be excluded from Union meetings, union run premisses etc. I know for a fact that happened to people at the LSE while I was there.


i don't know if they opted out or not - the union would have a list. the only people to opt out of their unions who i've heard of were far-right types - one to check, perhaps. 

the problem with disciplining them is that - frankly - criminal offences have almost certainly occurred - theft, for a start. if you don't make a complaint to the police then i feel yr on shaky ground to discipline these two. certainly, were i a sabbatical at mmu or manchester university union, i'd want to see some action from the aggrieved parties before any disciplinary proceedings were brought, in the same way people don't get sacked before they get convicted in a court. if the swp and their associated bodies don't wish to pursue legal action against the pair, then they're (imo) tying the hands of the universities and unions.

again, have swss taken any action against the pair? i would expect the swss constitution to have some means of expelling the pair, which (again) were i a sabb i'd wish to see done first. although that can't really be done till the start of the autumn term, i don't see how union disciplinary proceedings can be started until other avenues have been gone down. 

talk to one of the manc sabbs, but i'd expect the student unions involved to echo what i've said.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2004)

cockneyrebel said:
			
		

> Pickmans it was written by people in Manchester not, so I don't know the ins and outs of MUs policies. In terms of fighting for stuff, sometimes you fight for stuff even if it is gonna be hard. For instance the need for illegal strike action for strikes to be successful.


yr not going to get them expelled, unless they do something particularly stupid next term. yr on shaky ground with chucking them out the su. boycotting the classes _might_ work, it has in the past at north london poly. but the changes in universities might mean this would work against those boycotting the classes more than yr intended target, attendance at classes now generally mandatory.

frankly, unless the aggrieved parties involve the police i cannot see expulsions or union disciplinary action being taken without being challenged in the courts.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Fair shout cr. He must be the most legalistic anarchist (if that's not a contradiction in terms it ought to be) I've ever come across.


if yr going to ignore the rules which govern university and union life, fair enough.


----------



## Ben_1982 (Aug 20, 2004)

Solidarnosc said:
			
		

> at last year's Marxism the NF demonstrated outside SOAS.QUOTE]
> 
> They weren't there because of Marxism.
> 
> The Wolfe Tone Society had Martin McGuinness over to speak to English supporters of Sinn Fein and he was speaking in SOAS


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2004)

Ben_1982 said:
			
		

> Solidarnosc said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


that the nf felt that they could demonstrate with impunity near marxism, where there were hundreds - if not thousands - of alleged anti-fascists should perhaps indicate something about what they think of the swp.


----------



## editor (Aug 21, 2004)

There's quite a few of these sad, friendless, fellas in and around this thread (and others) right now.







Say hello when you spot one!


----------



## layabout (Aug 21, 2004)

It's all gone quiet.


----------



## geordie (Aug 21, 2004)

*advantages of being infiltrated*

Does anyone else remember a documentary about security services and the unions a while back, where someone, i believe it was tony cliff, but not sure, said they had no problems with state agents as you got a full timer, who worked twice as hard as the others, and someone else was picking up the tab, looks like thats what happened here


----------



## rednblack (Aug 21, 2004)

bolshiebhoy said:
			
		

> Fair shout cr. He must be the most legalistic anarchist (if that's not a contradiction in terms it ought to be) I've ever come across.




it's very useful for anarchos to be aware of the law, since we come up against it quite often


----------



## rosa (Aug 21, 2004)

Sorry,coming to this thread late and haven't got time to read it all so apologies if i'm repeating.

Aside from the politics of it it's utterly fucking sickening to be told that two people who you've considered mates have actually been spying on you and your friends for the BNP.Everyone i know in manchester is just utterly stunned,upset and angry.But the truth is there really was nothing anyone could have done-you can't organise political activity on the basis of being suspicious of young enthusiastic people,and there really was nothing to indicate that they were anything but enthusiastic anti-racists.Having just looked at the BNP website (hopefully for the first and last time) it just seems unreal-partly because it's so fucked up seeing people you've been out drinking with after anti-fascist leafletting posing with Griffin and Wentworth,partly because so much of it is pure fiction.i've got to say it seems like they're two naive chancers who've gone to the BNP towards the end of the year rather than it being a genuine mole operation and people should try not to panic,but it's still a total shock.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 21, 2004)

rosa said:
			
		

> But the truth is there really was nothing anyone could have done-you can't organise political activity on the basis of being suspicious of young enthusiastic people,and there really was nothing to indicate that they were anything but enthusiastic anti-racists.



It is fair enough to say that anyone can be infiltrated by people who are dedicated enough. It is stretching it too far to say that "there really was nothing anyone could have done". Perhaps you could start by encouraging political understanding rather than promoting obedience and blind enthusiasm?




			
				rosa said:
			
		

> i've got to say it seems like they're two naive chancers who've gone to the BNP towards the end of the year rather than it being a genuine mole operation and people should try not to panic,but it's still a total shock.



Rosa, I am sympathetic to anyone who was personally taken in by these people, but listen to yourself for a moment.

The idea that these people started off as genuine "enthusiastic anti-racists", spent a year in the SWP and then went "to the BNP towards the end of the year" is not something you should find comforting. That would mean that they found the SWP, their first choice as a political organisation, so unconvincing in its politics that fascists seemed like a better option. Frankly, while the SWPs ability to miseducate its members never ceases to amaze me, even I find that chain of events pretty unlikely.

These people clearly were sent in as moles. The question is what can be done to limit the damage they have caused? The silence of the SWP/UAF/Respect etc so far on the issue has not been encouraging.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 21, 2004)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> These people clearly were sent in as moles. The question is what can be done to limit the damage they have caused? The silence of the SWP/UAF/Respect etc so far on the issue has not been encouraging.



I find myself in complete agreement with this. The incident has happened, the best that can come from an unpleasant situation (and anyone who was taken in by this pair has my complete sympathy, betrayal by people you consider friends and comrades is a betrayal of the worst kind), is that systems are put into place to prevent it happening again. Or at least to make a re-occurrence less likely. 

Unfortunately, the more probable scenario is that a scapegoat will be found, who will be blamed for introducing and promoting them and things will carry on as normal. Or we will be told that the leadership knew that they were moles and was feeding them false information.


----------



## trickytree23 (Aug 21, 2004)

As an SWP and Manchester Uni SWSS member who knew these two fairly well, I was obviously shocked at the news.... 
Obviously in hindsight lots of things now seem rather suspicious. They both threw themselves into all anti racist and anti war activity on campus, and literally signed up to become fully paid members of the SWP on the first caucus they attended. the nature of Joe and Dianes relationship (as in, how they got to know each other) was never really clear, and it now seems possible that they met through the BNP.

To be honest, as we have an open membership policy then its impossible to totally prevent all infiltration although naturally i expect us to be far more careful nominating people for positions of responsibility. For the record all positions within SWSS and the SWP in manchester were democratically voted on. 
HOWEVER it was not just the SWP that threw them into positions, they got involved with a lot of groups (MAR, STW etc).Student Union bureaucracy had a large part to play in all this.

And to be honest i dont think anyone who knew these people, from whatever left wing faction (as workers power mentioned) would have suspected them. It is not simply a case of lack of political sophistication, for as far as we were concerned we had two highly enthusiastic comrades to call apon, who seemed keen on discussing and learning more about Marxism and the dialectic, and were vocal in many of our forums. They by no means had the full support of the student left but they were trusted.


What I dont understand is why this has come out now, Finnon has a year left in university, and Diane has a further two. Seems to me like they've been screwed over by the party they were striving to help, as they will find this next year incredibly difficult to deal with, and rightly so.


----------



## sihhi (Aug 21, 2004)

> To be honest, as we have an open membership policy then its impossible to totally prevent all infiltration although naturally i expect us to be far more careful nominating people for positions of responsibility. For the record all positions within SWSS and the SWP in manchester were democratically voted on.
> HOWEVER it was not just the SWP that threw them into positions, they got involved with a lot of groups (MAR, STW etc) which in Manchester at least are not neccessarily SWP dominated.Student Union bureaucracy had a large part to play in all this.



This just suggests that the whole of student union politics reeks.


----------



## fanciful (Aug 21, 2004)

all these groups are dominated by the swp that's why they were promoted through them.   it's already clear how it happened. we don't know the details cause the swp can't be bothered to tell us them, but it's fundamentally a problem of that organisation, how its run and what it requires of its members. in that sense finnon and stoker were ideal swp members, which goes a long way to explaining why their cover was so good. the further problem is what's happening now. and from i've seen the swp are doing nothing now. which has compounded the problem and is frankly a disgrace. the only positive action the swp have taken up to now is to PROTECT the fascists by refusing to divulge information about them. How shit is that?


----------



## rosa (Aug 22, 2004)

> The idea that these people started off as genuine "enthusiastic anti-racists", spent a year in the SWP and then went "to the BNP towards the end of the year" is not something you should find comforting. That would mean that they found the SWP, their first choice as a political organisation, so unconvincing in its politics that fascists seemed like a better option. Frankly, while the SWPs ability to miseducate its members never ceases to amaze me, even I find that chain of events pretty unlikely.


 I'm not saying they were genuine anti-racists,although obviously that was how they appeared at the time.it just seems a very strange way to carry out this kind of operation if they were genuinely sent in as infiltrators.Why have the BNP announced this now,during the summer holidays,when it's gonna have the least impact? Why not announce it before the election or during freshers fair? Why identify them both rather than cause as much confusion and suspicion as possible by not saying who they are? Why paste their names and pictures on the internet when they both have to come back to manchester for at least a year? Fuck knows what actually happened,i'm just speculating,which probably isn't helping anyone but it's a bit difficult not to when you've been unable to think about anything else all week.But if people want to say it's all the swp's fault,fine,you can't make me feel any worse than i already do.


----------



## aw go on (Aug 24, 2004)

apols!


----------



## flimsier (Aug 24, 2004)

aw go on - That's been posted already.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 24, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> There's quite a few of these sad, friendless, fellas in and around this thread (and others) right now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


edited out as I suddenly realised me stupidity


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> edited out as I suddenly realised me stupidity


----------



## alphaDelta (Aug 25, 2004)

*I only came here for a replacement horse.*

I take great interest in this BNP student nonsense, not least because it centres around my university, and some of my friends (thankfully not these lovely moles). Personally I find it rather amusing - Their "infiltration" of the SWP strikes me as about as useful and effective as me infiltrating Spar in the middle of the afternoon and secretly filling the shelves for them.

As for the Manchester SWP's security; in the end, it's a sliding scale. You either make it inherently easy for anyone to join, but run this risk, or you hold your meetings in Russian at 2am on a dinghy off Salford Quays, but only have one member. Maybe they bollocksed it up and should have seen the signs but retrospect's a beautiful thing and we've all been screwed over at some point.

What does bother me first of all is that these students have somehow fallen in with a clearly fascist group. Whether this is down to some misguided idiot's misconception of what a student should do with their time, or some deeper background (e.g. the BNP's activity in his home of Sunderland), I don't know. They're both as dangerous, but the former means that exploitation is being carried out on campus, which to me is more important. Either way it's naive of me to think "this shouldn't happen to a student" but frankly I've never heard of anyone in my position actively engaging in anything so stupid.

Next is that a (thankfully small) number of these clowns are deliberately acting in a comparatively complex way against other students. By this I mean not just the SWP - who I don't particularly care for - or the Union and its activities, but critically, what it is to be a student, make your own choices and act on them. Their actions are not the same as, for example, the recent infamous exposees of the BNP by outside elements, for the simple reason that they neither came away with any revelations nor provided any beneficial non-partisan service.

So what should happen to them? Personally I've no idea. Initially I'm of the opinion that I'd love to see them removed from their respective universities, whether that be through some policy decision or a randomly chosen technicality. However, you then have to wonder what will happen next. £10,000 debt for nothing, unemployed and unemployable, and entirely ostracised by all their former friends - except for one group - the BNP. Serves them right, undoubtedly, but it doesn't take a genius to see the logical progression from there.

Manchester's largely, and to its credit, a fine multi-cultural and tolerant environment. However to those aware of it, what these two have done and stand for is unforgiveable. Naturally any continuation there is going to be incredibly difficult. They are an embarassment to everyone associated with them. However, are they a lost cause, or is it sensible to expend effort on actually educating them the conventional way? (no bricks)

Finally, hare-brained as it is, I didn't think the BNP were so simultaneously stupid and yet actually capable of such a thing. I guess we'd better watch out, or it's off to BNP Birmingham 5 with the lot of us. Too bad I've already left...


----------



## chegrimandi (Aug 25, 2004)

is it worth me reading this thread? 

could anyone give a brief synopsis if they can be arsed....


----------



## belboid (Aug 25, 2004)

chegrimandi said:
			
		

> is it worth me reading this thread?
> 
> could anyone give a brief synopsis if they can be arsed....


first two pages maybe.

two bnp supporterss joined the swp and were rapidly 'promoted' to various dull posts in other groups the swp participates in.  they may well, therefore have had access to various mailing lists which would have undoubtedly been passed on to the bnp at large.

the swp has issued a bland statement saying 'we don't do nowt illegal, so we don't really give a monkeys'.

there is some debate over how easilly any other leftist organisation could be infiltrated, and over the swp's tendency to promote someone for 'being keen', rather than through agreeing with/understanding their politics.

i think that's about it.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

Synopsis (conclusions not mine but what I think the feeling has been on the thread):

Two SWP members in Manchester SWSS and SWP are really BNP members.

They've had minor positions of responsibility - though more than you'd expect year long members have had.

Some discussion as to how serious them having lists of names, addresses etc is (conclusion ranges from pretty serious to very serious).

Some discussion as to the likelihood of them having names and addresses (conclusion ranges from virtually nil [SWP] to definite [smashthestate/ some others]

Some discussion about whether the SWP should have candidate membership/ more stringent security checks. Conclusion, yes.

Some discussion about what to do next and an argument with a right winger on how appropriate 'no platform' is (imo missing a good opportunity to hear what past caring suggests - I think he was 'crowded out' of the debate [not meant in a negative way towards pc]).

Some people expressing concern that the fash may have their addresses.

One of the infiltrators came on the thread and said 'It wasn't personal, it was political' then edited her post and fucked off (if it was her).

Quite a number of people astounded these people think they can finish their degrees (which seems to be the consensus of what they are planning to do).

And then some random posts at the end.

I might have missed something...?!?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> first two pages maybe.
> 
> two bnp supporterss joined the swp and were rapidly 'promoted' to various dull posts in other groups the swp participates in.  they may well, therefore have had access to various mailing lists which would have undoubtedly been passed on to the bnp at large.
> 
> ...



YOu bastard. I spent ages typing my post.


----------



## belboid (Aug 25, 2004)

and between the two of us it appears we have summed up the thread admirably comrade, you twat


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> you twat


----------



## belboid (Aug 25, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

>


don't call me a bastard then!  

soz if offense taken, like


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

No offence, you idiot.  There just ain't many threads to post on... and I am fresh out of ideas.


----------



## belboid (Aug 25, 2004)

interesting the evolution, and it's interpretation, of the word 'twat'........well, more interesting than this thread has become....


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

I didn't know what it actually meant until I used it in my first few weeks of being in the SWP.

I never used it again until recently. It still offends me even though it didn't for so long.

But I have no idea about the evolution of it though.


----------



## belboid (Aug 25, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> But I have no idea about the evolution of it though.


I just think it's become silly. It's the 'tw' sound at the beginning, you just can't take it seriously (twerp, twaddle, they're _silly_ words)


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

I suppose.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 25, 2004)

Here is the response from the SWP, from their internal notes (already put up on the web by an SWPer). Appalling.



> The 'revelations' of these two is minor tittle tattle. Unfortunately for them it's difficult to 'expose' an open, democratic active organisation. The 'expose' reflects the BNP's crisis at not having made a breakthrough in the Euro elections rather than any strength. The students groups at Manchester are absolutely clear that they will organise for big open recruitment to SWSS and fight to build the biggest most confident left to finish off these scum for good.
> 
> We should, however, be wary if people join & are more interested in technical jobs & getting access to data rather than ideas.
> 
> Victor Serge argued the best way to deal with police spies was to make them work hard & the best way to expose them was through a high level of political discussion.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 25, 2004)

jesus wept, was that IT? are you sure you've not missed any, cr?
if that's all they've got to say, that's truly tragic.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 25, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> jesus wept, was that IT? are you sure you've not missed any, cr?
> if that's all they've got to say, that's truly tragic.



what do you want ??

show trials and public beatings??


----------



## alphaDelta (Aug 25, 2004)

> The 'revelations' of these two is minor tittle tattle. Unfortunately for them it's difficult to 'expose' an open, democratic active organisation


Fair comment. There were no important secrets to give away in the first place, which can be interpreted however you like.



> The 'expose' reflects the BNP's crisis at not having made a breakthrough in the Euro elections rather than any strength.


In terms of timescales of these events, and general lateral thought, that doesn't make any sense.



> ...and fight to build the biggest most confident left to finish off these scum for good.


Very playgroundesque. As for the rest, yes. Clearly someone needs to consider that names and addresses of members might just be considered critical. Then again, with these kind of lacklustre performances, who would want them anyway?

Overall it's a poor statement that smacks of naivety/immaturity/failure to take it seriously, but this issue won't make much difference in the end, except to embarrass them in lefty circles. Nice to see they're still managing to pull out ideological quotes in the face of adversity, mind...


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 25, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> what do you want ??
> 
> show trials and public beatings??


no. 
I want full revelation of whether these two herberts have walked off with confidential data; the general nature of that data; assurances that all individuals whose safety and privacy have been compromised have been/will be informed; open analysis of how two gullible, naive 19-year-olds stitched you up like a kipper; assurances (CONVINCING  ones) recommendations of how the Manc student body should respond to their on-campus presence next year; and a full and public apology to all those who this have fucked over.
In short, a clean breast and sincere acceptance of your monumental, cataclysmic fuck up, rather than the dismal, bland-to-blank whitewash-statement above.
and all open and upfront.
I mean, you ARE an 'open' organisation, aren't you?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

RJ: That was from internal literature. There's no concern about political 'revelations' but they have mentioned concern about data.

*People in Manc SWP don't think they had access to any data other than in a supervised manner* (ring arounds etc) - but I would imagine (I don't know this bit) they are waiting to ensure no-one can recall them doing so before stating anything definitively.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 25, 2004)

that's useful, flim.
and - if they're holding off from an official statement whilst conducting internal disaster recovery, there's sense in that. It's hardly consistent with an organisation that goes so far out of its' way to proclaim itself an open 'organisation', tho'!
I do hope the SWP do realise that there is an urgent need for a full statement, if only for this reason; their cred has been shot to shit by this. people are _laughing_ at them (and I do NOT mean the BNP by that - I refuse to even _think_ of them as people!-I mean other lefties).


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> what do you want ??
> 
> show trials and public beatings??


it would be a start...


----------



## blamblam (Aug 25, 2004)

lol and victor serge was a little grass!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> (and I do NOT mean the BNP by that - I refuse to even _think_ of them as people!-I mean other lefties).


you may wish to reconsider that rash statement. after all, two of them were perfectly palatable to the swp for a ye...

then again...

yr right!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> RJ: That was from internal literature. There's no concern about political 'revelations' but they have mentioned concern about data.
> 
> *People in Manc SWP don't think they had access to any data other than in a supervised manner* (ring arounds etc) - but I would imagine (I don't know this bit) they are waiting to ensure no-one can recall them doing so before stating anything definitively.


they don't THINK they had access to data?

what do they do with their treasurers, supervise them all, all the time?

fucking rubbish, flimsier, it's fucking bollocks. if the bnpers hadn't been able to get any information they'd have been out of the swp in a week or three. as it is, they have information - like phone numbers - for all the people who were mates with them in the last year, all the people they swapped numbers with after demos and meetings, all the names of people who donated money.

if the bnp had had nothing from this arsy fiasco, do you really think they'd trumpet their infiltration?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

swp said:
			
		

> Victor Serge argued the best way to deal with police spies was to make them work hard & the best way to expose them was through a high level of political discussion.


but the swp *didn't* expose these two bnpers -- the bnp did.


----------



## alphaDelta (Aug 25, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> if the bnp had had nothing from this arsy fiasco, do you really think they'd trumpet their infiltration?


Yes. What they actually come out with bears no relation to what they'll go telling everyone about. I'm not, however, suggesting they _haven't_ got any membership data.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> if the bnp had had nothing from this arsy fiasco, do you really think they'd trumpet their infiltration?



Absolutely.

In fact, I think if they had learned a lot, they'd be more likely to keep it quiet.

You can shout rubbish all you like, but we know that no matter what, on any issue, you will seek to make the SWP look as bad as possible - even if it means making statements about events you were not privy to, had no knowledge or clue about, and that no-one has spoken to you about.

So, why do you think you know better than those who actually worked with those people?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

alphaDelta said:
			
		

> Yes. What they actually come out with bears no relation to what they'll go telling everyone about. I'm not, however, suggesting they _haven't_ got any membership data.


i'm saying - quite simply - that a year spent infiltrating the swp, which saw the bnpers gain positions of considerable responsibility in the swp, _HAS_ resulted in confidential information being abstracted by the two infiltrators. without arousing any suspicion, the two were able to get onto the marxism team and to scrutinise financial records, membership lists, petitions, contact lists and so on. one would have to be a total incompetent to fail to photocopy this sort of information, to which stokes at least would have been privy. unless there is some sort of secret system within the swp where no officer - secretary, treasurer, branch organiser - ever handles information on their own, then it is blatantly clear that a considerable amount of information has gone the bnp's way. i really do not see the point in denying the loss of this information.

if nothing went missing, then why are our "comrades" in manchester so concerned?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> if the bnpers hadn't been able to get any information they'd have been out of the swp in a week or three.



So, you think a year is too short a time to get access to information - but they would have sent infiltrators in for a week or three to try and get info - that would have been a realistic timescale for success/ failure.

You're making yourself look stupid.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> i'm saying - quite simply - that a year spent infiltrating the swp, which saw the bnpers gain positions of considerable responsibility in the swp, _HAS_ resulted in confidential information being abstracted by the two infiltrators. without arousing any suspicion, the two were able to get onto the marxism team and to scrutinise financial records, membership lists, petitions, contact lists and so on. one would have to be a total incompetent to fail to photocopy this sort of information, to which stokes at least would have been privy. unless there is some sort of secret system within the swp where no officer - secretary, treasurer, branch organiser - ever handles information on their own, then it is blatantly clear that a considerable amount of information has gone the bnp's way.




How do you know better than people who worked with them? 

Are you just upset because I suggested the SWP weren't quite as incompetent as you are desperate to make out?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Absolutely.
> 
> In fact, I think if they had learned a lot, they'd be more likely to keep it quiet.


like searchlight and ray hill - and assorted other infiltrators.

the simple fact is that they had means, motive and opportunity. are you saying that these two were so incredibly incompetent that over the course of one year they were unable to filch the slightest piece of confidential information?

the upshot of these denials - especially that they never had a chance to photocopy stuff - is such toss it's not worthy of you.

the swp are such a bunch of lying fuckwits it is inconceivable that the depths of their loss will be admitted publicly - but it isn't going to go away just because they won't talk about it.

if i'm wrong, then the swp will PUBLICLY confirm that nothing went missing. the longer they keep their heads in the sand the more convinced i become that a _serious_ breach of security has occurred.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> considering that we're talking about the swp and their grubby fronts, yes.



Right, so Red Jezza et al - forget what the SWP or RESPECT or UAF say - just listen to PM. He knows better.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Right, so Red Jezza et al - forget what the SWP or RESPECT or UAF say - just listen to PM. He knows better.


fucking better than you, certainly!


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

Right, so you worked with them?

Or you've spoken to those that did about what they did?

What details do you know, other than positions these two held or that that is publicly available?

Because you seem to be making definitive statements with no extra evidence at all here.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

I tried to shed a little bit of light (that doesn't necessarily defend the SWP here) with bits that I know - and you deride it as 'bollocks' because it doesn't fit with your 'fuck up at _every_ opportunity assertions'. What are you actually adding to this debate other than: "Fuck off, the SWP really are really shit"?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Right, so you worked with them?


no, i'm saying that i know better than uaf, swp, ruc etc.



> _Or you've spoken to those that did about what they did?
> 
> What details do you know, other than positions these two held or that that is publicly available?
> 
> Because you seem to be making definitive statements with no extra evidence at all here._


what extra evidence do you have?

i have pointed out several times on this thread, with little attention paid, that manchester swp and uaf should look again at the events of the night of the manchester uaf launch - to which the bnp turned up. i understand that at least one of the two was on the team which organised that event. are you saying that there was no possible collusion between one member of the bnp and the others who attended manchester city hall (or whatever it's called)?

are you saying that all the allegations on the bnp website are untrue?

come off it, flimsier. the swp aren't saying how much they've lost - or refuting the bnp's allegations - because it is FUCKING EMBARRASSING how much information they have lost. 

when you were a member of the swp, did yr local treasurer have contact details for you?


----------



## Pilgrim (Aug 25, 2004)

Just checked the relevent website again, and I've found nothing whatsoever from the SWP about this wholly unacceptable mess.

An apology and acceptance of this disaster should surely be forthcoming, if nothing else. Open and accountable organisation, I think not.

The primary task surely is to try and find out precisely, or at least generally, what intelligence these slime had access to, and to make those affected aware of the threat they may now face. Also, surely an open and accountable party would have made some sort of public statement by now, if only as a form of damage limitation. This still has not been forthcoming from the SWP leadership.

This whole affair reeks of unprofessional conduct and incompetance displayed by the SWP leadership. If the only statement available is from SWP internal notes, and nothing more concrete than an SWP internal inquiry is going to happen (and we all know how useful internal inquiries can be in covering up the truth) then it shows up how thoroughly incompetant and desperate to avoid the facts the SWP leadership can be.

Also, and for the umpteenth time, Swappies, this is NOT merely an SWP internal matter. If the two vermin concerned had only been after internal SWP intelligence then this would be the case. It isn't, as other groups and individuals could well be under threat as a result of this mess.

We need a full, open and accountable investigation into this affair, and we need it to happen NOW. If this is not forthcoming, then surely no groups should trust the SWP as partners in a coalition of any kind. The choice is yours, SWP leaders. Do you want to regain some credibility from this fiasco, or are you going to simply sweep it inder the carpet and pretend it hasn't happened? 

One final question, if you can't spot BNP infiltrators after an entire year, and have to rely on their own paymasters to out them for you, then what possible defence can you have against State agents? Hardly the conduct of a credible revolutionary organisation, is it?


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

No, the treasurer didn't have details for me at all. The branch sec did.

Anyway, neither of them were the SWP treasurer.

I have some second hand evidence from some comrades in Manchester and around. But I'm not the one saying I know the facts about how much information they have. In fact, you seem to be the only one saying you know.

You have nothing but blind assertions.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

Pilgrim said:
			
		

> One final question, if you can't spot BNP infiltrators after an entire year, and have to rely on their own paymasters to out them for you, then what possible defence can you have against State agents? Hardly the conduct of a credible revolutionary organisation, is it?



It's virtually impossible to stop infiltrators completely. People accept that their group is likely to be infiltrated. The Bolsheviks were and their infiltrator became their member of parliament! I heard a story about a dying anti-McDonalds group (someone PM and I mutually know was a member) that was kept going by 5 new members - who left after the trial.

That's not to say that there shouldn't be better defences, particularly with sensitive data.

The rest of your post is fine, I agree with the content if not the emphasis, though the SWP in Manchester, as I have said, are doing what you regard as 'the primary task'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I tried to shed a little bit of light (that doesn't necessarily defend the SWP here) with bits that I know - and you deride it as 'bollocks' because it doesn't fit with your 'fuck up at _every_ opportunity assertions'. What are you actually adding to this debate other than: "Fuck off, the SWP really are really shit"?


they can't be all that good, or you'd have never left them.

yeh, the swp _really are_ shit. and as a case in point, this infiltration proves it in ways i'd never imagined existed. if the swp were any good - hypothetically - then they would have issued a swift and cutting response to the bnp's claims. instead they have remained silent. you will look in vain on the swp website for reassurance that security remains uncompromised. you will look without success through this week's social worker, which trumpets more ruc bollox but not the most important issue facing the swp and ruc right now, which is: how much information was STOLEN by the bnp. 

i can understand why the swp should remain reticent about the THEFT of its membership lists. but i find it astonishing that the ruc should not be up in arms about its members details being PURLOINED by a fascist group.

the longer the swp leave it before confirming or denying the bnp claims the more the swp and its front groups will suffer.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

Who said anything about 'all that good'? Please deal with the points raised. Not the ones you wish I'd made.

So you have nothing to add except that you think the SWP should give the BNP more publicity over this (which it seems, _may_ be all they have)?

And as I said, they think there's nothing - I repeat nothing. I would imagine they are making sure of that fact now.

Now, I need to write a list of taxi firms/ hotel rooms/ information etc, so I'll read any further baseless assertions tomorrow (unless you've been keeping something back and you actually know something).


----------



## flimsier (Aug 25, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> the longer the swp leave it before confirming or denying the bnp claims the more the swp and its front groups will suffer.



I missed this. What claims? The BNP claim they infiltrated but make no claim about lists afaik. Do you know differently?

The claims they make in the original statement were just dull.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

bnp said:
			
		

> * Back in October, just a few weeks after making contact, Manchester District Socialist Workers Party organiser Asme Choonara nominated both Joe and Diane as delegates to the secret SWP national conference in London . On the list of delegates they were both described as “leading activists” in Manchester .
> * Diane was almost immediately appointed to the ‘Greater Manchester Stop the War Coalition' treasury and fund raising committee.
> * Recognising the failure of the then existing Manchester University and Manchester Metropolitan SWSS (the SWP's student wing) organisers national SWSS organiser and NUS national executive member Tom Whittaker sacked Robert Owen, Anthony Parkin and David Robinson and replaced them with Joe and Diane. This caused much upset among the reds and a lot of verbal threats were made against the SWSS hierarchy.
> * Both were founder members of SWP front groups Manchester Against Racism and Unite Against Fascism (the latter is successor to the now disbanded Anti Nazi League).
> ...


are you denying this lot?

and considering the bnp's legal team are on the case (and assuming they know the basics of law) do you think it likely they would post up details of *criminal offences* the pair had committed?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> The claims they make in the original statement were just dull.


you'd know better than i as i never made the mistake of joining the swp.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Now, I need to write a list of taxi firms/ hotel rooms/ information etc, so I'll read any further baseless assertions tomorrow (unless you've been keeping something back and you actually know something).


planning something underhand?


----------



## alphaDelta (Aug 25, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> are you denying this lot?


As I understand it, various critical sections of that are indeed untrue - either way someone's been lying to me and, this time at least, I doubt it's the SWP.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Aug 25, 2004)

Just got back from two rainless weeks in Spain so I missed all this.Isn't there a little bit of paranoia here with what info the two infiltrators might have had access to? The SWP have been leaving party notes about in pubs for ages and the fash used to regularly come across petitions and contact lists. As the SWP and Workers Power haven't been able to deliver a no platform strategy then they are unlikely to be victims of any similar strategy by the BNP. It's just a curiosity raid by the BNP to live amongst the 'enemy' for a while.

I was at PNL and was heavily involved in the Harrington Out campaign at a time when Harrington had been recently involved in violent attacks on the left in Chapel Street market with his NF mates.At least three sites of PNL were occupied, two students jailed, and injunctions taken out on twenty others. As guest speaker on behalf of the Harrington Out campaign I receieved the highest number of votes at the NUS conference and we forced the NUS to hold a national demonstration. We still had to settle for him to be taught in isolation . 

The current situation is entirely different both in terms of relevance and in terms of balance.Do we really need a student led campaign against the BNP?

 Incidentially I can remember an NF member being outed in West London when he joined the Hounslow or Isleworth SWP branch in the late 70s.Just by accident me and two others spotted him with a known NFer in a pub, I think he may have been his partner. And does anyone remember Peter Marriner , the British Movement member who I think became a Labour Party election agent in the Midlands ?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2004)

Wasn't Mariner the SB 'agent' who was 'outed' during the Peter Taylor's True Spies series?

He stills seems to be active as well:
http://www.****nationalist.org/airlink/1998/immigration.html

Hmm...


----------



## West68thStreet (Aug 25, 2004)

*Feel a little duped actually*

 

Bit late for this maybe . . . I'm not SWP but I am a member of Respect, for now. I've looked at the pics of the 2 BNPers and I recognise the girl from the post-election meeting we had at Friends Meeting house in Manchester. I remember she was a Geordie, turns out she's from the North East so it was defo her. She said some vaguely 'toeing the party line' things about race and community blah blah which in retro sound wilfully naive since we were at that moment discussing potential for Green coalitions etc. The SWP *should * post up all the info they have on the 2 little piggies on the basic principle that you share antifash info with as many antifascists as poss- common enemy and all that. I live near the Uni, if they're back here in September I'll be round the faculty banging on doors. But forget about SWP for a sec, this was a *Respect * meeting they 'infiltrated' on this occasion, so why haven't Respect put something on their site about this? Or better still emailed us? Since there's lots of inexperienced activists involved in this who might well be concerned that BNP may have access to our info (they have my name, address, phone no., bank details, work address etc) I don't think it's too much to ask for something to be said! There's a Respect meeting tomorrow night, I want answers.


----------



## past caring (Aug 25, 2004)

Chuck's comments pretty much echo my thoughts - I wasn't "forced out of the debate" or whatever term flimsier used; I simply don't think it's all that important.

I can't see the SWP/UAF or Workers Power (this would be the same WP who have supposedly been arguing for an "AFA type" campaign - but who actually left AFA when, far from recruiting, they found themselves losing members to RA and DAM) being able to organise anything of any significance - even amongst students. Any campaign they did mount would likely be as beneficial (or more so) to the BNP as it was to achieve anything.


----------



## sihhi (Aug 25, 2004)

Not sure if I've missed it but I've found nothing in Socialist Worker about it

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/

either this week's copy or last week's one.


----------



## layabout (Aug 25, 2004)

West68thStreet said:
			
		

> Bit late for this maybe . . . I'm not SWP but I am a member of Respect, for now. I've looked at the pics of the 2 BNPers and I recognise the girl from the post-election meeting we had at Friends Meeting house in Manchester. I remember she was a Geordie, turns out she's from the North East so it was defo her. She said some vaguely 'toeing the party line' things about race and community blah blah which in retro sound wilfully naive since we were at that moment discussing potential for Green coalitions etc. The SWP *should * post up all the info they have on the 2 little piggies on the basic principle that you share antifash info with as many antifascists as poss- common enemy and all that. I live near the Uni, if they're back here in September I'll be round the faculty banging on doors. But forget about SWP for a sec, this was a *Respect * meeting they 'infiltrated' on this occasion, so why haven't Respect put something on their site about this? Or better still emailed us? Since there's lots of inexperienced activists involved in this who might well be concerned that BNP may have access to our info (they have my name, address, phone no., bank details, work address etc) I don't think it's too much to ask for something to be said! There's a Respect meeting tomorrow night, I want answers.




I'm sorry, but you won't get anywhere by being confrontational. There would be NOTHING to gain by posting these peoples personal details all over the shop. All you will do is entrench them further into the BNP. 

One day, you'll realise that the only way to change a racist, is to respect their opinion in the first place. Sound's like too much to stomach, I know, but it's the truth. You can't change people's minds by being confronational. 

If you want to do damage against the BNP, you have to make the BNP leadership the enemy of the BNP membership....making yourself the enemy of BNP activists, would not help your cause one jot.


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 26, 2004)

Heard a story mid last year, 'bout Sheffield stop the war group having trouble over fascist activists in and around the anti war events, fascists posing as anti war supporters, at time quite a number of people attended meetings and involvement.

Later in the year over disagrements between the SWP on the one side and opposers on the other, the meetings shrunk to as little as a doz people with a 6 - 6 split.

Effectively brought the anti war group to a standstill.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 26, 2004)

Layabout you want people to respect the views of BNP activists?!

These two people are obviously hardened BNPers so trying to convince them of the error of their ways is hardly a priority…..also the BNP is still tiny and breaking their membership from the leadership is also not a priority. Convincing people who vote BNP that it’s not the way forward is the real issue and convincing the millions of people disillusioned with Labour that we need a socialist alternative.

In terms of confrontation changing peoples minds, that’s not the point of no platform, no platform is about self-defence and stopping fascists from operating to prevent the horrors of fascist society. And it has been successful in the past, even the BNP admit this (and Hitler also said the only way they would have been stopped is if the left had smashed the Nazis when they were small). How and when you use it is a tactical decision though.



> this would be the same WP who have supposedly been arguing for an "AFA type" campaign - but who actually left AFA when, far from recruiting, they found themselves losing members to RA and DAM



What rubbish. Have you got figures for how many activists WP lost to RA and DAM? The reason WP left was over political disagreement, but never mind….

In terms of what has been done, WP, as far as I know are the only group to have done anything with the leafleting of the fascists workplace.

PC I still don’t get what you are saying should be done about this in terms of the two fascists…..


----------



## belboid (Aug 26, 2004)

Sacred Spirit said:
			
		

> Heard a story mid last year, 'bout Sheffield stop the war group having trouble over fascist activists in and around the anti war events, fascists posing as anti war supporters, at time quite a number of people attended meetings and involvement.
> 
> Later in the year over disagrements between the SWP on the one side and opposers on the other, the meetings shrunk to as little as a doz people with a 6 - 6 split.
> 
> Effectively brought the anti war group to a standstill.


total bollocks.  unsurprisingly considering the person making the claims.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 26, 2004)

pls dont quote ss i have them on ignore and kind of like it


----------



## belboid (Aug 26, 2004)

sorry 

but not everyone does, and you never know, someone might believe em!


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 26, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> total bollocks.  unsurprisingly considering the person making the claims.



Rebel warrior may try to cast K Marx in the role of a creator, but I do not post from nothing.

Have you already checked with the members of the Sheffield anti war group ?  or is it Belboid who talks bollocks (again) ? so whom will listen to him ?

Did I not warn of the effect the leafleting of schools was having, with the bnp activity following the swp policies, well prior to the Manchester event becoming public  ?

So now we can add to the growing list - Sheffield. 

Read the above post again and try to fathom as to why the Sheff' co' vastly shrunk and shed support due to the internal splitting of the group over the setting up of a local newsletter, agreed to fully at meetings and minuted, yet then met with limitations imposed by then SWP, when the initial work had already started.

Check the limitations as well ? and then compare to the known swp methods and work out why they use them.

Not long following the spot the fascist events.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 26, 2004)

Why does Sacred Spirit post when it knows everyone has it on ignore!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Why does Sacred Spirit post when it knows everyone has it on ignore!


to make sure people know about the "ignore" list. i suppose, anyway.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 26, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> to make sure people know about the "ignore" list. i suppose, anyway.



its how i found out about it

and its great


----------



## flimsier (Aug 26, 2004)

I wouldn't need it if it wasn't for it.


----------



## belboid (Aug 26, 2004)

Sacred Spirit said:
			
		

> Have you already checked with the members of the Sheffield anti war group ?


i live here arsehole, i am a member of that group.  you are talking 100% proof shite - now fuck off.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 26, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> i live here arsehole, i am a member of that group.  you are talking 100% proof shite - now fuck off.



your doing it again

aaarrrgghh


----------



## flimsier (Aug 26, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> i live here arsehole, i am a member of that group.  you are talking 100% proof shite - now fuck off.



OI! 

You don't need to quote him to us!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> i live here arsehole, i am a member of that group.  you are talking 100% proof shite - now fuck off.


take a tip from me, flimsier and danno_at_work - about the only time we agree - and chuck sacred spirit on ignore.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 26, 2004)

Lol


----------



## belboid (Aug 26, 2004)

good point, humble apols.......

consider it done...


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 26, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> Why does Sacred Spirit post when it knows everyone has it on ignore!


For whom it is meant flimsier and flimsier or so they say the swp is getting, interesting as to how many new ones there are, compare the no. of posters to the view figures, there are more people than you think reading these threads.

The interest in the activities of the bnp and swp are concerning as well as amusing people, the number has risen, they are studying everything the swp members write and also any critique coming from it. 
Some very interesting contributions from others, one of the best threads/discussion of an item so far since I first descended from a better place, to wander amongst you.

They are also considering the friends of the swp as suspect also, I should think you remember when they 'ganged up' on poor SS, drawing out the devil he called it.
How they tried to make out that ALL the socialist/marxists and the anarchist's and 'olynch had been united for the first time ever, -- in defence of the swp - sad it took the lot of you, but revealing.

The swp 2 years last Jan were said to be about 4 and a half thousand, 3 in and around London, recent figures are around 1 and a half thousand, so much for the 'biggest' of the left.
They exist mainly in cities and their policy of leafletting schools is as widespread and so is the area of concern, the bnp in the 70's wanted to leaflet schools, so now they do, thanks to the help of the SWP.

Appears they got it wrong didn't they/you, only the petty bourgeois revisionists uniting in fear wasn't it, did you spot the bnp infiltrator amongst them, only one, schizophrenic ?
(Flimsy - pickman – danno – belboid,  all amongst them, last ten posts  ?)

There was a majority who didn't join in, some have been posting on this topic on the threads against the SWP, so we are in a better position as to who are the closest to the swp.

So hopefully now you have an answer, people will now stick to contributions to the thread topic and leave the classroom antics for when you get home.


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 26, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> i live here arsehole, i am a member of that group.  you are talking 100% proof shite - now fuck off.


.
So that means that I don't have to go into the groups archives, web site, and retreive them for you, as members we have the same access to the circulated discussion.


----------



## belboid (Aug 26, 2004)

Sacred Spirit said:
			
		

> This message is hidden because Sacred Spirit is on your ignore list.


Got it!


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 26, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> Got it!



Well then shall people now accept that the info' regarding Sheff' is correct, you are now in a difficult position, no denial anymore, thought that would sort you out, was right.


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 26, 2004)

belboid said:
			
		

> Got it!



isn't that better?


----------



## silentNate (Aug 26, 2004)

I don't like putting peeps on ignore


----------



## cogg (Aug 26, 2004)

silentNate "I don't like putting peeps on ignore"

I agree in general but it's a bit like cod liver oil. It's not nice but it's good for you.


----------



## silentNate (Aug 26, 2004)

I've had abuse from butchersapron for months- finally had enough and put him on ignore...

I tend to think that ignoring the opinions of others is wrong....

Thats coming from someone who has defended peebs right to post


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 27, 2004)

Liar.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 27, 2004)

don't you believe in the right to FREE SPEECH silentNate... i thought that was something swappies believed in still?

hahahaha


----------



## silentNate (Aug 27, 2004)

I'm not a swappie though innit..........

hahahahaha


----------



## Flavour (Aug 27, 2004)

course you are luvvie, just cos you can't afford the tabs to keep carryin the card

you're SWP to the bone


----------



## silentNate (Aug 27, 2004)

Awwwwwwwww... Your so sweey Flavour 

I always find an excuse not to join 

butchersapon always gives me a reason to however


----------



## layabout (Aug 27, 2004)

Sacred Spirit said:
			
		

> Well then shall people now accept that the info' regarding Sheff' is correct, you are now in a difficult position, no denial anymore, thought that would sort you out, was right.



SS. I think I know who you are. Was you educated in Texas by any chance?


----------



## danno_at_work (Aug 27, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> SS. I think I know who you are. Was you educated in Texas by any chance?



do you think you are doing us a favour by quoting this nutjob??

ignore doesn't work if you keep quoting it!!


----------



## layabout (Aug 27, 2004)

danno_at_work said:
			
		

> do you think you are doing us a favour by quoting this nutjob??
> 
> ignore doesn't work if you keep quoting it!!



ROFL. He's not a complete nut job if he is who I think he is. 

If he is who I think he is, the man is a walking encylopedia. 

He loves to wind up left wingers up by giving them history lessons. I've been looking at his posts and I would be VERY suprised if it's not the bloke who I think it is. 

There is not a lot the man doesn't know, history wise. He can speak quite a few languages and I believe he's fluent in German, French & Spanish. 

He's toying with the lot of you.


----------



## rebel warrior (Aug 27, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> ROFL. He's not a complete nut job if he is who I think he is.
> 
> If he is who I think he is, the man is a walking encylopedia.
> 
> ...



Now that is one of the funniest posts ever.  He cannot be the man you are thinking of, layabout.  If you ever met him in real life (where he is also on 'ignore' - just as he is ignored on line) I think you might form a different opinion.  Rather rapidly.


----------



## layabout (Aug 27, 2004)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> Now that is one of the funniest posts ever.  He cannot be the man you are thinking of, layabout.  If you ever met him in real life (where he is also on 'ignore' - just as he is ignored on line) I think you might form a different opinion.  Rather rapidly.



Ah OK. You've met him in real life. He can't possibly be the same bloke then. The person I'm thinking of lives in Europe.


----------



## rebel warrior (Aug 27, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> Ah OK. You've met him in real life. He can't possibly be the same bloke then. The person I'm thinking of lives in Europe.



The person I am thinking of lives in a world of his own.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 27, 2004)

silentNate said:
			
		

> I've had abuse from butchersapron for months- finally had enough and put him on ignore...



I hope you pmed him details as we all saw promised first! Or was it got someone else to pm details?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 27, 2004)

Nope not a suasage - zilch, nada - as predicted as the time. Talks the talk, but can't walk the walk....


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> He's toying with the lot of you.


it's not very good toying considering the number of people who have him on ignore.

speaking several languages is no evidence of superior intellect - _see_ von ribbentrop, for example.


----------



## silentNate (Aug 27, 2004)

flimsier said:
			
		

> I hope you pmed him details as we all saw promised first! Or was it got someone else to pm details?


 Nah- I'm enjoying the pieceful life. Wish I'd used the ignore button _ages_ ago. All the swappie threads now make little sense however


----------



## flimsier (Aug 27, 2004)

silentNate said:
			
		

> Nah- I'm enjoying the pieceful life. Wish I'd used the ignore button _ages_ ago. All the swappie threads now make little sense however



But you made some accusations, in public, promised to back them up, in public, and then, in public, have shown yourself to be weasel-like.

And you repeat the accusations. Forgive me if I think this to be shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2004)

silentNate said:
			
		

> Nah- I'm enjoying the pieceful life. Wish I'd used the ignore button _ages_ ago. All the swappie threads now make little sense however


sN - it's not like you to duck out of backing up allegations! support yr claims, or retract them, like flimsier says. or should say. one or t'other, anyway.


----------



## flimsier (Aug 27, 2004)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> sN - it's not like you to duck out of backing up allegations! support yr claims, or retract them, like flimsier says. or should say. one or t'other, anyway.



For once, PM puts it better than me.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 27, 2004)

I  wouldn't bother lads - i really don't care, and nates made himself look dishonest again. No more needed.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 27, 2004)

Flavour said:
			
		

> course you are luvvie, just cos you can't afford the tabs to keep carryin the card
> 
> you're SWP to the bone


whatever the handbags between him and BA - which, frankly, is none of my business - I can guarantee you that SilentNate is NOT swappie. a sympathiser, possibly, but not a member. world of difference there.


----------



## RubyToogood (Aug 27, 2004)

Scuse me, can we not have spillover of arguments unrelated to this thread on here please.

Ta.


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 28, 2004)

layabout said:
			
		

> ROFL. He's not a complete nut job if he is who I think he is.
> If he is who I think he is, the man is a walking encylopedia.
> He loves to wind up left wingers up by giving them history lessons. I've been looking at his posts and I would be VERY suprised if it's not the bloke who I think it is.
> There is not a lot the man doesn't know, history wise. He can speak quite a few languages and I believe he's fluent in German, French & Spanish.
> ...



No I wasn't educated in Texas, yes I have been referred to as having an encyclopedic mind on previous occasions, years ago when I used to be politically active, retired for a few years. Used to teach socialist history and theory.
No I don't 'wind up' left wingers, (though some need it, they are so slow).

Friends asked me some time ago to do something with the anti war movement as they were very concerned over the invasion of Afghanistan and the threat to Iraq, they are aware of my capabilities for achieving results, past performance on other campaigns.

Been quite successful so far, position changed both in Britain (policy of the STWC) sept last, from demo on just Iraq, to demo on Iraq and Palestine (moved by MAB rep's, adopted in the states in March). 
The policy, implemented again in March, of having demo's in Any city in the states, rather than just Washington as before (moved by the Arab American Ass's) etc. International answer, on their web site, posted that it was the biggest turn out they have ever had, far surpassed all their expectations.
Both originated from items written by me.
Plus other items still in process.

NO I am not Toying with the SWP or their petty bourgeois acquaintances, I am fully serious in regards to the disbanding of the SWP.

The swp are there to be used and thrown away, I have no support for them but that doesn't stop me from "enlisting" (conscripting) them as and when I have had need, which has been a number of times in the last two years, as they wrote, Jesus entered the 'holy city' on the back of an Ass, it's a bourgeois (citizen) joke, if one need to do a job, get yourself a donkey/s.
(apparently in Manchester the bnp have also heard the joke)
.
Ps nice to see that you have looked at the detail of my posts.


----------



## Sacred Spirit (Aug 28, 2004)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> Now that is one of the funniest posts ever.  He cannot be the man you are thinking of, layabout.  If you ever met him in real life (where he is also on 'ignore' - just as he is ignored on line) I think you might form a different opinion.  Rather rapidly.


and this from one who has been refered to on these threads as "" a middle class twat""  
We know that 'ignore' simply means the swp and their associates, ass' who are shrinking fast since they were all put on* 'spot' * as in spot the fascist, as they are ALL now under suspicion.
--------------------------------------
Rebel Warrior, rebel warrior, hhhhmmmmmmmmm, so 

Seem to remember asking if you had an answer to a question earlier, you thought of one yet ?

Last year *£4,000* 'Given away by the 'coalition' of SWP and NLP, (also held joint chair position of the Leeds against the war group) no. of coaches to be booked decided on at an swp caucus meeting prior to the regular meeting of the group, not a seat taken, not a coach left the yard, money donated by supporters of the anti war movement. How many coaches was that ?
You were the full time worker for the SWP.
The group was in deficit following till more money was collected.

---------------------------------
some more for you, hope you'll enjoy, 

A member of your swp branch was expelled last year, due to action taken By Another swp branch, one that has long term trade unionist members.
It meant that the CC had to send up to Yorkshire people to deal with the matter, the other branch asked for expulsion, you and your branch opposed.

Following the expulsion the individual continued (and so did the swp members of your branch) to relate to them as if still a member. 
The individual was active in the anti war movement on SWP credentials, the *members of the branch that moved expusion are anti racist,* and they do know the language of the NF.

Why did you not support the expusion and why did you continue to work with them and continue to give them credentials ?
Utopians ARE NOT socialists.
If one was to check with the trades council member who monitor racism in Leeds, one would find, coincidentally ?, that the individual lives in the only area in Leeds where the NF are active.
What happened to the Afro Caribbeans that used to visit the anti war meetings ? why did they stop ?
Why when Asians attended with the intention of joining did they change their minds, two of which are now city councillors ? 

Interesting what one learns through enquiry through the unions in Leeds, the SWP have support in only two areas in Leeds, the uni', but so do the bnp their main/best known member is also there (plus branch) and also in one area in south Leeds, the NF are building a branch there, obviously coincidence.
------------------------
*99 city councillors* in Leeds, *non* will sign for a room in the civic hall where the Against the War group meets, originally a green councillor signed but unfortunately they stopped due to compaints regarding the SWP members harrasing other people going into the Civic Hall.

They have been asked again since the local election But refused, is this a practical application of the Marxist theory of alienation ? your ALL totally backwards.

Last year someone talked another councillor they work politically with to sign for the room, no longer a councillor, and NO one else.

£25 each time, say 45 meets a year, £1,125 per year in exchange for a signature, lost to the anti war movement, due to the SWP activities.

So question, why do you pretend to support the anti war movement ?
----------------------------------------
Visited Leeds on Unity day held at woodhouse Moor, event of a number of years, talked to others with stalls after seeing an SWP stall, they said it had been the same all the time they were there.

On a moor crowded with thousands it was near impossible to be more then 2 or 3 yards from other people, all except the SWP stall, it was the only place on the moor with large, large amounts of space around it (do they all have leprosy ? ) if you check with your members in attendance they will verify it.
Or with students at the uni, as it's right next to the moor, many were there.

So many in Leeds can verify it, even the anarchists who thought it was hilarious, it was the best joke of the day.
.


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2004)

MACHINE said:
			
		

> I have been to party meetings in the past of SWP/Respect this has shocked me. I doubt I’ll ever go again, I bet the BNP have my details now I am so angry and afraid. I would imagine the party is highly infiltrated if this is anything to go by, why else would they be willing to lose such high value spies?


Weakest, feeblest troll of the day award goes to MACHINE!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2005)

has anyone else seen the new searchlight?

specifically page 21, bottom right hand corner...

there's a lovely picture of one george galloway with not one but two bnp members! and lindsey german.


----------

