214 replies to this topic

[Joeb Wan Kenobi]

It's not a question of opinion, and I haven't seen a solid fact yet.
Co-Founder of the Black Panther Party.

Ok here are your solid facts about what happened George Galloway spoke out against the government was then accused by the government of all sorts of things with no actual evidence. Nick Griffin spoke out against the was was then accused by the government of all sorts of things with no actual evidence.

[Dryth]

Gah, a page back now, but still needs to be addressed:

I seriously doubt the statistic that 80% of Americans are Christians. How many do you think really practice Christianity? A person who attends church on Christmas and Passover week, but who doesn't open his Bible for the rest of the year (ie. most Americans) isn't Christian.

It's great that you think that, but as with so many religious issues, it's not your place to pass judgment by setting the bar.

In 2001, according to the 2003 census, just under 77% of Americans are Christian. As the census identifies, these people feel that they truly are Christian. While you may still choose to draw distinctions on other matters, I'd venture that the strength of their conviction isn't an issue when it comes to the likes of Charlie Brown's Christmas and Christmas decorations; this isn't gay marriage or abortion.

If you want evidence just look around Northampton Town Centre.

One mall isn't a valid example, particularly when the accusation is that there's a broad governmental conspiracy to suppress Christian imagery from Christmas.

Im finding this hard to explain to most of you as you dont live in England and dont know what its like.

A handful of my friends in university came over from England, as well as three of my professors, and have identified no such issue. Several have in the past identified the BNP as a hate group.

And the real reason Nick Griffin (Leader of the BNP.) was arrested was because he was gaining to much support and the government wanted to damage his image the government in this case made some really harsh accusations with no factual backing whatsoever.

They had audio tape recordings and his own admission of the incriminating nature of some of his statements. Heck, just read the articles on the front of the BNP's website. Read their own mission statement. Heck, read their own policy page; anti-immigration policies in industrialized nations are racist ideals masked by fearmongering of cultural minority, which is why most industrialized nations phased them out when they phased out racial segregation. Not to mention that he was arrested in 1998 for passing out hate literature with the evidence being... y'know... the literature itself! That doesn't even touch upon him denying the holocaust.

People being persecuted for criticism of the government doesn't make all criticism of the government valid. I could just as easily claim that New Labour is a bigot group bowing to muslim radicals for not allowing people to lick lamp posts. When's the last time you've seen someone lick a lamp post, after all? They're just bowing to bigoted government hate propoganda! And I bet you those muslim radicals hate people licking lamp posts!

[Joeb Wan Kenobi]

     
     
 One mall isn't a valid example, particularly when the accusation is that there's a broad governmental conspiracy to suppress Christian imagery from Christmas.  
     
 A handful of my friends in university came over from England, as well as three of my professors, and have identified no such issue. Several have in the past identified the BNP as a hate group.
     
 They had audio tape recordings and his own admission of the incriminating nature of some of his statements. Heck, just read the articles on the front of the BNP's website. Read their own mission statement. Heck, read their own policy page; anti-immigration policies in industrialized nations are racist ideals masked by fearmongering of cultural minority, which is why most industrialized nations phased them out when they phased out racial segregation. Not to mention that he was arrested in 1998 for passing out hate literature with the evidence being... y'know... the literature itself! That doesn't even touch upon him denying the holocaust.
     
People being persecuted for criticism of the government doesn't make all criticism of the government valid. I could just as easily claim that New Labour is a bigot group bowing to muslim radicals for not allowing people to lick lamp posts. When's the last time you've seen someone lick a lamp post, after all? They're just bowing to bigoted government hate propoganda! And I bet you those muslim radicals hate people licking lamp posts!

1. I was just using that as an example there are others.
2.Your friends may have had there opinions made up for them by the BBC
3.What is it you find so offensive on the website I want to see quotes.
4.He was arrested in 1998 for having an opinion.
5.Denying the holocaust is wrong but that is not the view of the whole BNP and theres nothing wrong with having an opinion.
6. Whats licking lamp posts got to do with anything.

[Kwicky Koala]

2.Your friends may have had there opinions made up for them by the BBC

A BNP representative came to our school. An Asian student asked if he would be deported should the BNP come in power. The representative said "yes". I don't believe the BBC accentuates what the BNP stands for.

[Korhend]

Trust me, we have dealt with BNP supporters coming to our site. They are indeed a hate group, theres a reason they cant get ties with us, or any other legitimate right wing authoritarian party. As for there being nothing wrong with an opinion, well, thats your opinion, and its wrong.

[Dryth]

1. I was just using that as an example there are others.

Then bring it on.

2.Your friends may have had there opinions made up for them by the BBC

So your opinion as someone from England is more valid than the opinions of my friends because... they've had their opinions "made up for them?" Ironic that you're defending a group so fond of the term "bigot." Bigot.

Or might it be that, as a far-right group, the BNP is... y'know... offensive to many people? Like Jews, and Muslims, and rational Christians, both left- and right-wing alike, not to mention foreigners in general?

3.What is it you find so offensive on the website I want to see quotes.

Look at their main page for yourself. It should be pretty easy. Several of the article titles alone stand out. Feel free to defend them. I've also already identified the policy page, and discussed the nature of anti-immigration policies. While I hate to tread on Godwin's law, it seems appropriate: Asking me for specific quotes regarding offensive BNP material is like asking me for offensive quotes to justify my distaste for Hitler.

4.He was arrested in 1998 for having an opinion.

He was arrested and jailed in 1998 for expressing the opinion through hand-out literature that denied that the holocaust took place, claiming that no Jews suffered under Hitler's regime and accusing the Jews of a conspiracy to overthrow British society, specifically violating the Public Order Act.

5.Denying the holocaust is wrong but that is not the view of the whole BNP and theres nothing wrong with having an opinion.

It's the view of Nick Griffin, who speaks on behalf of the party, and who you've chosen to defend. While there's nothing wrong with having an opinion, it's illegal to express that opinion if it's directed toward promoting racially driven hate. Again, the Public Order Act applies.

6. Whats licking lamp posts got to do with anything.

It's an analogy. I claimed that licking lamp posts has been banned by New Labour bigots, similar to how the BNP claims that New Labour is pressuring to remove all Christian references from Christmas. You seem to feel that we should be the ones to prove that Christian references haven't been banned. By the same logic, you should easily be able to prove that licking lamp posts hasn't been banned.

[Alakhriveion]

[quote]What is it you find so offensive on the website I want to see quotes.[/quote]With Pleasure.
[quote name='http://www.bnp.org.uk/news_detail.php?newsId=84']In the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday 14th December 2004 Iqbal Sacranie, the whinging General Secretary of the Muslim Council of Great Britain (a classic oxymoron) stated how the British people should be prepared to surrender their right to free speech to ensure Muslims feel 'comfortable' in Britain. One wonders why we as a nation once bothered to fight people like Hitler, Lenin or Stalin to defend our British freedoms when we should now so willing to accommodate Islamo-Fascism in our country and surrender our rights to Islamic fundamentalism today.[/quote]

[GraniteJJ]

Oh boy. I love it when Dryth gets passionate about a subject and throws delicious logic out for his enemies in a debate to choke on.

[Joeb Wan Kenobi]

Originally Posted by http://www.bnp.org.u...l.php?newsId=84
In the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday 14th December 2004 Iqbal Sacranie, the whinging General Secretary of the Muslim Council of Great Britain (a classic oxymoron) stated how the British people should be prepared to surrender their right to free speech to ensure Muslims feel 'comfortable' in Britain. One wonders why we as a nation once bothered to fight people like Hitler, Lenin or Stalin to defend our British freedoms when we should now so willing to accommodate Islamo-Fascism in our country and surrender our rights to Islamic fundamentalism today.
To Alakhariveion
How do you find that offensive?

To Dryth
1. Other evidence- Some primary schools have stopped putting on nativity performences so as not to offend the muslim community, the scottish assembly has stopped any reference to "christmas" on its official greeting cards and the red cross have banned all referance to the nativity in there shops.
2.As you dont live in England this is hard to explain to you but some of the news stations here e.g the BBC give out very opinionated reports. They will show you some of the more extremist people in the party and then tell you that everyone in the BNP is like that to shock the audience into the opinion that the BNP are all a bunch of bigots.
3.I cant see what you find so offensive give examples.
4.He had an opinon that I didnt agree with. So your telling me that you agree with everything your party leader who ever that may be says.
5. So people were offended by his opinion should we lock everyone away who has an opinion that offeneds people.
6.Why should I prove anything about licking lamposts as it has nothing to do with the argument.

[arunma]

1. Other evidence- Some primary schools have stopped putting on nativity performences so as not to offend the muslim community

???

Muslims believe in the nativity, you know.

[Korhend]

Originally Posted by http://www.bnp.org.u...l.php?newsId=84
In the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday 14th December 2004 Iqbal Sacranie, the whinging General Secretary of the Muslim Council of Great Britain (a classic oxymoron) stated how the British people should be prepared to surrender their right to free speech to ensure Muslims feel 'comfortable' in Britain. One wonders why we as a nation once bothered to fight people like Hitler, Lenin or Stalin to defend our British freedoms when we should now so willing to accommodate Islamo-Fascism in our country and surrender our rights to Islamic fundamentalism today.
To Alakhariveion

How do you find that offensive?

Well for one, England did roughly Jack Shit to ward off Lenin and Stalin. What ties do we have to Islam? Are you counting Kataeb? Or Moorish Mercenaries 60 years ago?

5. So people were offended by his opinion should we lock everyone away who has an opinion that offeneds people.

South Park offends people, BNP is criminally opinionated.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

JWK, I'll have you know that the Government doesn't need to get rid of political opponents. As long as there is no effective opposition party, as long as the Tory Party cannot be seen to be any more different than the Labour Party, our current Government is safe in the knowledge that future governments will always be Labour Governments. Surely, you must agree with that statement?

However, to get back on topic and go away from the BNP=racist argument:

I just noticed the post before my last post, so I decided to post concerning those because I have opinions on what Arunma said.

Tsolfan, let me put it this way. Would you like it if Christians and Muslims started celebrating the Jewish Passover, but inserted our own traditions into it (a la "Messianic" Passovers)? Probably not, and I wouldn't blame you. Likewise, we Christians don't like it when secularists desecrate Christmas.

You mean, the way Christians technically desecreated whatever cult used to celebrate on the 25th? I mean, sure it doesn't look like it but when you move the celebration of your most important (or second most important if you don't believe Christ IS God and that God is the most important) holiday so it coincides with another religion's holiday and assimilate their traditions, don't you think that's just the same?

I guess though that was a long time ago and we shouldn't dwell on something that far back in the past. Forget and forgive, I guess you could say.

Oh by the way, Christianity isn't dualistic. Satan is viewed as evil, but as an unwitting servant of God. God can destroy Satan anytime he likes.

Well, that's a certain set view of Christianity. As you may know, there are many different views on Christianity, one of which is the dualistic view.

[Alakhriveion]

How do you find that offensive?

Let's start with the word "Islamo-Fascism." Actually, I think that's enough.

[arunma]

it is actually second i believe. i'm pretty sure that easter is regarded as being the most important christian celebration.

back to the subject, people should be more tolerant. if tolerance was practiced more readily in today's society, things would be so much better.

Yes, Passover week is clearly the most important Christian holy day. Of course, secular Christians, who know next to nothing about Christianity, falsely think that Jesus is dead, so they wouldn't understand the importance of Easter. This is probably why they chose to hijack Christmas instead.

[Joeb Wan Kenobi]

1.Let's start with the word "Islamo-Fascism." Actually, I think that's enough. Whats so offensive about that?
2.And if Muslims belive in the nativity why have they got a problem with it.
3. The BNP is not criminaly opinonated.
4.Britain fought of communism during the cold war.

[Joeb Wan Kenobi]

Yer at school.

[Alakhriveion]

Whats so offensive about that?

Equating a Muslims with Nazis? You tell me.

The BNP is not criminaly opinonated.

They ARE criminally active, though.

[Joeb Wan Kenobi]

1.Well there not all good solid citizens take Bin Laden for example.
2.Well if the ends justify the means.

[Alakhriveion]

1.Well there not all good solid citizens take Bin Laden for example.

Your next post better explains this. Sounds like hate speech to me. We have rules against that here.

2.Well if the ends justify the means.

WHAT? Beating up immigrants- what ends could possibly be justefied here?

[Joeb Wan Kenobi]

1.Some muslims are extremists in this country who hate white people just because the they are white and not muslim.
2.It may not be the best way to deal with it. However if the government continues not to do anything about the countrys immigrant problems then people will continue to take the law into there own hands.

[Alakhriveion]

2.It may not be the best way to deal with it. However if the government continues not to do anything about the countrys immigrant problems then people will continue to take the law into there own hands.

Immigrant "problem?" Xenophobia, check. Also, taking the law into your own hands is called "Terrorism."

1.Some muslims are extremists in this country who hate white people just because the they are white and not muslim.

This doesn't justify your previous comments.

[Dryth]

1. Other evidence- Some primary schools have stopped putting on nativity performences so as not to offend the muslim community, the scottish assembly has stopped any reference to "christmas" on its official greeting cards and the red cross have banned all referance to the nativity in there shops.

"Some primary schools so as not to offend the muslim community..." any evidence of this? Specifically that they've done so to avoid offending muslims? Rather than... y'know... broad abstract notions of church and state and the right to choose not to have a nativity scene without having their actions deemed "Islamo-fascism"?

The Scottish Assembly has been phasing out religious references for decades now. They don't associated with any particular faith, and have phased out references by choice. A secular-leaning organization choosing not to promote icons from any particular religion isn't some broad act of conspiracy. There's constant debate within the Scottish Parliament regarding admissable religious activity and participation, but it's a matter of internal concern, and the BNP is attributing more malice to such activity than the proceedings would reflect.

The Red Cross is a secular organization, as discussed earlier. It's part of the organization's policy on the international scale to remove all religious imagery from their organization, and is by no means the result of pressure from "bigots." As an international aid organization devoted to universal human aid, the last thing they want to do is promote strong association with any religion, nation, political party, or political icon, the only exception being Switzerland, being where the organization was founded, and where the organization's name derives from (in case there's any misconception regarding the "cross" being a Christian reference).

2.As you dont live in England this is hard to explain to you but some of the news stations here e.g the BBC give out very opinionated reports. They will show you some of the more extremist people in the party and then tell you that everyone in the BNP is like that to shock the audience into the opinion that the BNP are all a bunch of bigots.

As a Canadian, I watch the BBC as often as I watch the CBC, and take both with a grain of salt. As a rational human being, I take the BNP on its own word, and their own word is racist and xenophobic. As an individual familiar with Canadian, US, and British, and European history as a whole, I know that the policies the likes of which the BNP are supporting have existed in the past in each region, were phased out as relics of extreme and violent racism, and is the exact logic applied by the likes of Hitler in villifying and persecuting the Jews.

3.I cant see what you find so offensive give examples.

Yes, I've noticed, given your reply to Alak. I suppose there's nothing I can do to help the matter.

That said, since you don't find it offensive, I can take the gloves off: You're just a racist bigot Christo-fascist out to rape British society with neo-McCarthy xenophobia. But then, you're a Brit, so wouldn't understand (that one being your own, mind you).

(May my own burning corpse serve as an example. )

4.He had an opinon that I didnt agree with. So your telling me that you agree with everything your party leader who ever that may be says.

Not everything, certainly, but if my party leader were to... say... deny that the holocaust took place and promote hatemongering toward muslims, I'd find a new party if I truly disagreed with him. If the party continues to support said leader after making such comments on a consistent basis, and continues to enable them, then such statements become de facto party policy.

The leaflet you originally cited seems to agree with me regarding leader representation of ideals: They're happy to abstract the government as the "Blair regime."

5. So people were offended by his opinion should we lock everyone away who has an opinion that offeneds people.

Get it through your head: His opinion violated the law because of its nature and the fact that he expressed it publicly. Anyone's free to have an opinion, and most of those opinions are free to be expressed, but when you start claiming in public that the Jews are behind a massive conspiracy to undermine British society, that they invented the holocaust, and that muslims are a plague upon British society, you're hatemongering. It's also illegal in most developed nations.

6.Why should I prove anything about licking lamposts as it has nothing to do with the argument.

Sure it does. It's an analogy. We use analogies to demonstrate things. In the case of our argument, to demonstrate the unprovability of abstract legal restriction based on select observation.

Or, to put it more simply, because I clearly question your intelligence, and wanted to provide you with a graceful way out of this argument?

[Selena]

1.Some muslims are extremists in this country who hate white people just because the they are white and not muslim.

Wow. You know, that sounds like almost every other religion out there. Get with it, there are extremist bastards all over the place for a variety of reasons, be they religious or social in nature. There are corrupt Muslims, just like there are corrupted Jews and Christians. The KKK for example thinks that they are upstanding Christians who are doing what their god would want them to. Might as well get rid of all the white folk too, huh? After all, some of them are extremist Christians who hate people that aren't white or Christian. So I think it's rather ignorant to be wary of Muslims simply because of a few dickwads who commit terrorist acts. That's fear coming into play.


"The Ends Justify the Means."


Y'know... if we were to nuke every single ethnic or religious group out there that isn't white or Christian, heh... there'd be less of this damned religious feuding and war, right? The ends justify the means, after all! Sounds like a plan, don't it? You wouldn't have to worry about immigrants!

[Joeb Wan Kenobi]

Ok I never said all muslims are terrorists I was just saying there not all perfect as some of you may think. Britain has an Immigrant problem. Its not so much a case xenophobia its more of an economic and social issues. The fact that some Muslims want to kill us because were not Muslim justifies quite [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img].

[Alakhriveion]

Y'know... if we were to nuke every single ethnic or religious group out there that isn't white or Christian, heh... there'd be less of this damned religious feuding and war, right? The ends justify the means, after all! Sounds like a plan, don't it? You wouldn't have to worry about immigrants!

I got a better one: Kill Whitey!

[Khuffie]

1.Some muslims are extremists in this country who hate white people just because the they are white and not muslim.

The fact that some Muslims want to kill us because were not Muslim justifies quite [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img].

Some extremist [Americans/British/Austrialian/Canadians] hate [Arabs/Jews/Muslims/Indians/Blacks] just because they aren't white, and want to kill them just because they're white. What's your point?

Point me to a Muslim who says all non-Muslims must die, and I'll point you to a homocidal maniac.

Oh, and just before you go on. We haven't met. My name is Ahmed El-Khuffash. I'm Muslim. I live in Canada.

Oh, and I run these forums.