Disgrace

[felix]

Dont forget Dubai, built with Arab money granted, but the top people are European, Australian, American and Japanese.......so my point is, whats your point?

I keep getting hit with the racist tag, I worked in Abu Dhabi for close on 9 years, hardly a work destination for a racist? (but I do miss the Ally Pally)

 

Abu Dhabi and Dubai are cities built by an uper "class" funded via exploitation of third world labour.

They're both perfect destinations for racists.

[shaun.lawson]

Abu Dhabi and Dubai are cities built by an uper "class" funded via exploitation of third world labour.

They're both perfect destinations for racists.

 

Quite. It's highly ironic Ratcatcher complains about the treatment of "indigenous Britons" so much, then cites the UAE - whose treatment of their own poor defies belief - as some sort of example!

[Boris]

Why are we all giving the OP the "oxygen of publicity" anyway?

 

(self-defeating post, imho)

[BlackJAC?]

Quite.

[Heaven98]

Why are we all giving the OP the "oxygen of publicity" anyway?

 

(self-defeating post, imho)

 

 

No matter how much oxygen we supply it won't change the fact that he's brain-dead anyway.

[Debut 4]

I`ve not trawled all the posts on this thread but i would expect many of the mollycoddled to sniff and turn their noses up at this.

 

I was speakiong to my Dad the other day and we had a chat about "modern" Britain.

 

My Dad has been a Labour man most of his days but now can`t stand them, he`s even thinking about voting Tory. I said, and it would be extreme, that alot of people will turn to the BNP because absolutely nothing is being done on tightening asylum seeking/immigration.

 

Alot of people out there brought up in the "modern" society, were it`s scared to say how you feel or voice your opinion, will eventually realise Britain is headng the extreme way because the country has gone PC mad and doesn`t care about the people from the past who brought it`s freedom of speech and rights.

 

Now, we have country of tree huggers in prominent postitions taking the pesh out of the country.

[djf]

The BNP suggest that many will turn to them in protest at the other parties but their poor results in elections suggest differently. Whilst it would be naive to be complacent to them, I can't see them ever getting any sort of real success due to their own complete incompetence. At the end of the day, no matter how much polish you apply, a turd is still a turd and the vast majority of the population are enlightened enough to see that.

 

Unfortunately a minority of idiots will vote for them in anger at their own failings. I don't even offer these people the defence of ignorance anymore. Everyone is aware of who the BNP are and what they stand for.

[shaun.lawson]

I`ve not trawled all the posts on this thread but i would expect many of the mollycoddled to sniff and turn their noses up at this.

 

I was speakiong to my Dad the other day and we had a chat about "modern" Britain.

 

My Dad has been a Labour man most of his days but now can`t stand them, he`s even thinking about voting Tory. I said, and it would be extreme, that alot of people will turn to the BNP because absolutely nothing is being done on tightening asylum seeking/immigration.

 

Alot of people out there brought up in the "modern" society, were it`s scared to say how you feel or voice your opinion, will eventually realise Britain is headng the extreme way because the country has gone PC mad and doesn`t care about the people from the past who brought it`s freedom of speech and rights.

 

Now, we have country of tree huggers in prominent postitions taking the pesh out of the country.

 

I think this is monumental "everything was better in the past" (common to human nature throughout history, by the way) drivel. In times of economic hardship, some people veer towards the extremes because they scapegoat a particular group for their own problems. Meanwhile, those who fought for our freedoms should be proud of political correctness: all political correctness actually involves is treating others as you'd wish to be treated yourself, based on the content of their character: and not discriminating because of the colour of their skin, their faith, their gender, their sexuality, or where they happened to be born.

[shaun.lawson]

Why are we all giving the OP the "oxygen of publicity" anyway?

 

(self-defeating post, imho)

 

Oh c'mon, Boris! Think of Rosa Luxemburg! She'd want you to take our far right friend on...

[Debut 4]

I think this is monumental "everything was better in the past" (common to human nature throughout history, by the way) drivel. In times of economic hardship, some people veer towards the extremes because they scapegoat a particular group for their own problems. Meanwhile, those who fought for our freedoms should be proud of political correctness: all political correctness actually involves is treating others as you'd wish to be treated yourself, based on the content of their character: and not discriminating because of the colour of their skin, their faith, their gender, their sexuality, or where they happened to be born.

 

pesh. PC has been put upon the British society. You know, people can`t take jokes or lightheartedness nowadays, its a society frightened of itself. People say racism was worse years ago and now its being sorted, is it really?

 

Wer live in a fearful world now.

[shaun.lawson]

pesh. PC has been put upon the British society. You know, people can`t take jokes or lightheartedness nowadays, its a society frightened of itself. People say racism was worse years ago and now its being sorted, is it really?

 

Wer live in a fearful world now.

 

Of course they can! Ever watched Frankie Boyle on telly, for example? He's the epitome of political incorrectness, and I love every minute of it. Politically incorrect humour is profoundly British, and we'd be lost without it; we're just not allowed to be racist into the bargain, which is a profoundly good thing if you ask me.

 

If people are fearful, they've probably spent far too much time reading the Daily Mail with its constant complaints about absolutely everything and uncontextualised spotlighting of extreme cases which are anything but the norm. There's a lot of things wrong with Britain today, but there are a lot of things great about it too; ditto, I'm sure, when your Dad was growing up. It's just human nature not to remember the bad things from the past, and put life back then on a pedestal: that's one of the first things any historian needs to learn before conducting interviews, incidentally.

 

Life is for the living. Lord knows, I spent far too much time on here for my own good; but it's a fantastic country we live in. Most of us are really very lucky indeed to do so.

[Harry Palmer]

I'm sure the OP is putting across his opinion like everyone else that has replied on this thread... is that a crime?

 

I haven't looked at what anyone's wrote and no idea what it's about...therefore I'll try and provide an objective view which hopefully won't involve FTH as being a way to unite everyone...

 

I can understand there being a defensive position against well, everything...how many times do we hear Polis doing this Govt doing that,this happening, that happening, relating to both..yet there is very little action because it is on a local scale...Strangely, I'm with the polis.. without the polis what would society be like? Now we have several officers being questioned. One of whom would not have been 'caught' if video had not 'caught' him/her, yet several complain of the 'Police state' and '1984' realised etc etc etc.

 

I do think society, and it does, reacts to what is occurring and this is filtered to them via red trash papers,tv news and internet. Witness the horse manure surroundin Ms Goody.

 

Anyway, I think there should be more ? to our 'elderly' for care as the current status is crap.

 

Dementia; already affecting approx 700'000. This number will grow as the Uk population is an ageing population. Would you like yourself and loved ones to die with dignity?

 

(Why are we the only* species that attempts to prolong life?)

 

*are we?

[Heaven98]

 

I haven't looked at what anyone's wrote and no idea what it's about...

 

I love people that can't be bothered to read a thread but nevertheless think we'll all be riveted by their piercing insight on the matter.

[Rab]

Slightly off topic, but hopefully you'll humour me for a moment: your post made me think of two practicing Christians I've met in the past

 

Any chance we can leave Christians out of this?

 

Such a position is fine on most issues, Rab. But on the Holocaust? Ever wondered why no leader of any reputable political party anywhere in the Western world subscribes to Nick Griffin's bonkers opinions?

 

You're missing the point. In a democracy every man, woman and child has a right to an opinion, and the right to express that opinion. You seem to imply an event that has been surpassed many times in terms of the savagery you are portraying somehow dilutes that right. It does not.

 

Calling this thread in neanderthal terms, I have far more sympathy for the OP to express his opinion than I have for the others savaging him for it.

 

Taking what you say at face value, though, many of us have been happy to engage with Ratcatcher in what he thinks, as opposed to what his party leader thinks. Unfortunately, as many others have remarked, he rather spectacularly blew it with this nauseating post:

 

I'm not defending the OP, I'm defending his right to say what he thinks.

 

all political correctness actually involves is treating others as you'd wish to be treated yourself, based on the content of their character: and not discriminating because of the colour of their skin, their faith, their gender, their sexuality, or where they happened to be born.

 

I'm sorry dude, but IMO that's what political correctness should mean, but the reality makes your definition at best idealistic, at worst naive.

 

In practical terms, political correctness has come to mean reverse discrimination. I'll give you an example. The affirmative action laws in mnay US states actually force local government and employers to hire a disproportionate amount of minorities. That is not "treating others as you'd wish to be treated yourself", that is making a futile gesture to try to rid yourself of guilt, and it serves noone.

[BlackJAC?]

I'm sorry dude, but IMO that's what political correctness should mean, but the reality makes your definition at best idealistic, at worst naive.

 

 

There's nothing naive about what he wrote. After all, everyone and i mean absolutely everyone defines "political correctness" to suit their own agendas.

 

What it should mean and what it actually means is open to debate, a debate neither side will ever agree on simply because what one individual will say 'no' to isn't necessarily what the next individual with say 'no' to.

[wibble]

Anyone else find it slightly ironic that Ratcatchers avatar is from Clockwork Orange, a film created by an Austro/Hungarian Jew? The son of 2 immigrants.

[Ron Burgundy]

Anyone else find it slightly ironic that Ratcatchers avatar is from Clockwork Orange, a film created by an Austro/Hungarian Jew? The son of 2 immigrants.

 

Not really.

[felix]

Anyone else find it slightly ironic that Ratcatchers avatar is from Clockwork Orange, a film created by an Austro/Hungarian Jew? The son of 2 immigrants.

 

Even Ratcatcher would concede ( I think) we're all immigrants to some degree.

Clockwork Orange was created by an American btw;

[The Doctor]

Even Ratcatcher would concede ( I think) we're all immigrants to some degree.

Clockwork Orange was created by an American btw;

 

Anthony Burgess (who wrote A Clockwork Orange) was born in Manchester, he was about as archetypal an Englishman as you could imagine.

[Ulysses]

Calling this thread in neanderthal terms, I have far more sympathy for the OP to express his opinion than I have for the others savaging him for it.

 

Why?

[shaun.lawson]

Why?

 

Because Rab seems to think it's more acceptable for someone to be a racist than for others to castigate them for being so!

[felix]

Anthony Burgess (who wrote A Clockwork Orange) was born in Manchester, he was about as archetypal an Englishman as you could imagine.

 

I think Melbourne Jambo was referring to the film, by Stanley Kubrick.

[shaun.lawson]

Any chance we can leave Christians out of this?

 

My post was in response to something The Doctor wrote which got me thinking. He seemed to like it; I don't see what your problem is.

 

 

You're missing the point. In a democracy every man, woman and child has a right to an opinion, and the right to express that opinion. You seem to imply an event that has been surpassed many times in terms of the savagery you are portraying somehow dilutes that right. It does not.

 

Calling this thread in neanderthal terms, I have far more sympathy for the OP to express his opinion than I have for the others savaging him for it.

 

I'm not defending the OP, I'm defending his right to say what he thinks.

 

Of course Ratcatcher has the right to say what he thinks. So does Nick Griffin; so do all those respondents on here who've castigated both for believing various examples of nonsense. No-one's freedom of speech has been undermined at any point.

 

Meanwhile, it's you who seems to be turning the Holocaust and other disasters into some sort of competition; and when someone denies the documented events behind such a tragedy, it's for others to judge whether they're likely to have credible views on other matters. Clearly, many people on this thread don't regard either Ratcatcher or Griffin as credible authorities: a problem for the two individuals concerned, who in their comments and opinions, bring such opprobrium on themselves.

 

I'm sorry dude, but IMO that's what political correctness should mean, but the reality makes your definition at best idealistic, at worst naive.

 

In practical terms, political correctness has come to mean reverse discrimination. I'll give you an example. The affirmative action laws in mnay US states actually force local government and employers to hire a disproportionate amount of minorities. That is not "treating others as you'd wish to be treated yourself", that is making a futile gesture to try to rid yourself of guilt, and it serves noone.

 

I don't see what's idealistic or naive about my description at all. Nor do I see what affirmative action has to do with political correctness: it's an entirely separate issue. When the 1965 Civil Rights legislation was passed in the US, do you honestly think that was it? That everyone was now equal, and everyone had the same opportunities, regardless of where they were brought up or the colour of their skin?

 

That's not what the record shows. The stats say that if you're born black in the US, your life chances are less than if you're born white: you're more likely to be more poorly educated, earn less, or end up living in areas riddled with crime and poverty. Yes, some escape, and make fantastic lives for themselves: more power to their collective elbow. But many others don't, and simply don't enjoy a level playing field.

 

Obama's election is a fantastic moment in terms of the history of the civil rights movement, and what it'll say to black men, women and especially kids everywhere. "You are a part of this great nation. We do value you, and want you to have the same opportunities everyone else enjoys". But segregation in many American cities is simply shocking; and in almost every US city I've ever been to, black people tend to live in poorer, more run down areas. That isn't because they're somehow inferior or work less hard.

 

So affirmative action has been necessary to attempt to redress the balance. In a different way, universities over here have had to look for more students from the state sector, many of whom start at a massive disadvantage compared to privately educated kids. As someone who went to a state school between four and nine, and two private schools beyond that, I can certainly testify to that: my state primary school didn't even seem aware of 11-plus entrance exams; the school I went to between 9 and 11 was about a year ahead in terms of what it was teaching, and made a point of training and preparing pupils for those exams very, very thoroughly.

 

If you're a kid amongst other clever kids at a school because of either selection or parental wealth, you're more likely to be challenged, and more likely to fulfil your potential. Not in all cases - I didn't like my secondary school at all, because it was an exam factory lacking in any sense of community or pastoral care. But certainly in most. And if you're a smart kid at a much lower calibre school, with teachers spending most of their time keeping less bright pupils in line and dealing with the consequences of family breakdown and poverty, you're less likely to be challenged, less likely to be motivated, less likely to fulfil your potential.

 

It all depends on what kind of society we all want. A genuine meritocracy, based on the abilities of all citizens? Or a society still based on wealth, in which where you're born and the money your parents have counts for a lot in whether you make it or not?

[felix]

BTW Ratcatcher's article does contain some debatable points....like why does the UK donate a huge proportion of charitable funds to India, whilst their upper caste have an unfeasible wealth and the government invest in a nuclear programme, as the population starve ?

[Sheriff Fatman]

The BNP doesn't seem to think much of it's own members and supporters.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/20/bnp-handbook-european-elections

[Tazio]

The BNP doesn't seem to think much of it's own members and supporters.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/20/bnp-handbook-european-elections

 

Who'da thunk it!!

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

My post was in response to something The Doctor wrote which got me thinking. He seemed to like it; I don't see what your problem is.

 

 

 

 

Of course Ratcatcher has the right to say what he thinks. So does Nick Griffin; so do all those respondents on here who've castigated both for believing various examples of nonsense. No-one's freedom of speech has been undermined at any point.

 

Meanwhile, it's you who seems to be turning the Holocaust and other disasters into some sort of competition; and when someone denies the documented events behind such a tragedy, it's for others to judge whether they're likely to have credible views on other matters. Clearly, many people on this thread don't regard either Ratcatcher or Griffin as credible authorities: a problem for the two individuals concerned, who in their comments and opinions, bring such opprobrium on themselves.

 

 

 

I don't see what's idealistic or naive about my description at all. Nor do I see what affirmative action has to do with political correctness: it's an entirely separate issue. When the 1965 Civil Rights legislation was passed in the US, do you honestly think that was it? That everyone was now equal, and everyone had the same opportunities, regardless of where they were brought up or the colour of their skin?

 

That's not what the record shows. The stats say that if you're born black in the US, your life chances are less than if you're born white: you're more likely to be more poorly educated, earn less, or end up living in areas riddled with crime and poverty. Yes, some escape, and make fantastic lives for themselves: more power to their collective elbow. But many others don't, and simply don't enjoy a level playing field.

 

Obama's election is a fantastic moment in terms of the history of the civil rights movement, and what it'll say to black men, women and especially kids everywhere. "You are a part of this great nation. We do value you, and want you to have the same opportunities everyone else enjoys". But segregation in many American cities is simply shocking; and in almost every US city I've ever been to, black people tend to live in poorer, more run down areas. That isn't because they're somehow inferior or work less hard.

 

So affirmative action has been necessary to attempt to redress the balance. In a different way, universities over here have had to look for more students from the state sector, many of whom start at a massive disadvantage compared to privately educated kids. As someone who went to a state school between four and nine, and two private schools beyond that, I can certainly testify to that: my state primary school didn't even seem aware of 11-plus entrance exams; the school I went to between 9 and 11 was about a year ahead in terms of what it was teaching, and made a point of training and preparing pupils for those exams very, very thoroughly.

 

If you're a kid amongst other clever kids at a school because of either selection or parental wealth, you're more likely to be challenged, and more likely to fulfil your potential. Not in all cases - I didn't like my secondary school at all, because it was an exam factory lacking in any sense of community or pastoral care. But certainly in most. And if you're a smart kid at a much lower calibre school, with teachers spending most of their time keeping less bright pupils in line and dealing with the consequences of family breakdown and poverty, you're less likely to be challenged, less likely to be motivated, less likely to fulfil your potential.

 

It all depends on what kind of society we all want. A genuine meritocracy, based on the abilities of all citizens? Or a society still based on wealth, in which where you're born and the money your parents have counts for a lot in whether you make it or not?

 

On your education thing Shaun, there are a few interesting points here. I went to a grammar school in Northern Ireland which offered an 'escape route' for more intelligent kids like myself, irrespective of background, if you passed your 11 plus. Are you arguing that selective education should return in the rest of the UK? Sinn Fein are trying to scrap it in Northern Ireland but are facing massive popular reaction against the idea, even though the teacher unions back it.

 

And, on a side note, I completely disagree with affirmative action programmes. It leads to quotas, which is why I followed my Dad's example and became a Hindu on every one of these kind of diversity surveys

[Rab]

Why?

 

Because he's being denied the right to have an opinion.

[Rab]

Because Rab seems to think it's more acceptable for someone to be a racist than for others to castigate them for being so!

 

Did everyone see what I did there?

 

I spoke without moving my lips!

[Rab]

Meanwhile, it's you who seems to be turning the Holocaust and other disasters into some sort of competition; and when someone denies the documented events behind such a tragedy, it's for others to judge whether they're likely to have credible views on other matters. Clearly, many people on this thread don't regard either Ratcatcher or Griffin as credible authorities: a problem for the two individuals concerned, who in their comments and opinions, bring such opprobrium on themselves.

 

The only point I'm trying to make re. the Holocaust is that I don't think it belongs in this discussion.

 

I don't see what's idealistic or naive about my description at all. Nor do I see what affirmative action has to do with political correctness: it's an entirely separate issue. When the 1965 Civil Rights legislation was passed in the US, do you honestly think that was it? That everyone was now equal, and everyone had the same opportunities, regardless of where they were brought up or the colour of their skin?

 

That's not what the record shows. The stats say that if you're born black in the US, your life chances are less than if you're born white: you're more likely to be more poorly educated, earn less, or end up living in areas riddled with crime and poverty. Yes, some escape, and make fantastic lives for themselves: more power to their collective elbow. But many others don't, and simply don't enjoy a level playing field.

 

Obama's election is a fantastic moment in terms of the history of the civil rights movement, and what it'll say to black men, women and especially kids everywhere. "You are a part of this great nation. We do value you, and want you to have the same opportunities everyone else enjoys". But segregation in many American cities is simply shocking; and in almost every US city I've ever been to, black people tend to live in poorer, more run down areas. That isn't because they're somehow inferior or work less hard.

 

So affirmative action has been necessary to attempt to redress the balance. In a different way, universities over here have had to look for more students from the state sector, many of whom start at a massive disadvantage compared to privately educated kids. As someone who went to a state school between four and nine, and two private schools beyond that, I can certainly testify to that: my state primary school didn't even seem aware of 11-plus entrance exams; the school I went to between 9 and 11 was about a year ahead in terms of what it was teaching, and made a point of training and preparing pupils for those exams very, very thoroughly.

 

If you're a kid amongst other clever kids at a school because of either selection or parental wealth, you're more likely to be challenged, and more likely to fulfil your potential. Not in all cases - I didn't like my secondary school at all, because it was an exam factory lacking in any sense of community or pastoral care. But certainly in most. And if you're a smart kid at a much lower calibre school, with teachers spending most of their time keeping less bright pupils in line and dealing with the consequences of family breakdown and poverty, you're less likely to be challenged, less likely to be motivated, less likely to fulfil your potential.

 

It all depends on what kind of society we all want. A genuine meritocracy, based on the abilities of all citizens? Or a society still based on wealth, in which where you're born and the money your parents have counts for a lot in whether you make it or not?

 

I agree with much of that, and disagree with a lot too

 

I think it's a separate topic tho, I'd be more than happy to talk to you about it on a separate thread

[Boaby Ewing]

Because he's being denied the right to have an opinion.

 

Hardly.

 

Ripping someone's opinion is hardly the same as denying their right to hold it in the first place.

[Sherlock]

Because he's being denied the right to have an opinion.

 

What a strange post.

 

How is he being denied the right to have an opinion?

[BlackJAC?]

No ****, Sherlock!

 

Sorry. I just felt the urge to say that.

[SlyNB]

It's strange how the OP has largely been forgotton and its turned into an argument over the BNP by the same people who were defending the right of a few looney protesters to shout abuse at returning troops in a thread a couple of weeks ago.

 

It's strange how they can lend such support and understanding to these people.

[I.J]

It's strange how the OP has largely been forgotton and its turned into an argument over the BNP by the same people who were defending the right of a few looney protesters to shout abuse at returning troops in a thread a couple of weeks ago.

 

It's strange how they can lend such support and understanding to these people.

 

The protesters had the right to shout abuse, just as the BNP have the right to spew their s***e.

 

The protesters were dangerous extremists who were very, very wrong however, and the exact same can be said for the BNP.

 

Not one person in that previous argument said they agreed with the protestors by the way. I know that won't fit the agenda, but I thought it should be mentioned.

[CraigSN1]

Wonderful post, Sir. The final sentence especially is what I've thought when hearing that line trotted out over and over again.

 

Slightly off topic, but hopefully you'll humour me for a moment: your post made me think of two practicing Christians I've met in the past. One, a student here, was one of the kindest, humblest, most gentle people you could ever come across. He never raised his voice, and always spoke with quiet dignity; and on finishing his degree here, travelled to the former Soviet Union to work as a missionary. Not in the preaching way which alienates some; but always with self-effacement and self-awareness. Before he left, he left a copy of C. S. Lewis' Mere Christianity in my college pigeonhole: not in some daft effort to convert me, but purely as a moral guide, and I hope as some sort of compliment too.

 

Then there was someone else: an old friend of my best friend who we met for a drink in Islington. Sarah had been on the Alpha Course, and insisted it had changed her life massively: unfortunately, her whole existence now seemed to revolve around religion, and not in a good way. All the people she hung out with were devout Christians; and she even told my best friend and I we were going to hell for not being so! The worst bit of all, though, was when the subject of giving homeless people a bit of change came up. She said it was far better to pray for them than give charity to anyone: I could not get my head around that at all.

 

Some Christians, and more generally some people, know what's important in life and act accordingly. Others not only don't, but completely abdicate responsibility in the process. Such fatalism I cannot stomach.

 

Irvine Jambo syndrome.

[SlyNB]

The protesters had the right to shout abuse, just as the BNP have the right to spew their s***e.

 

The protesters were dangerous extremists who were very, very wrong however, and the exact same can be said for the BNP.

 

Not one person in that previous argument said they agreed with the protestors by the way. I know that won't fit the agenda, but I thought it should be mentioned.

 

And not one person condemned them either, preferring to turn it into a slanging match against the British army and Britain in general.

 

Their agenda's are very clear.

[djf]

And not one person condemned them either, preferring to turn it into a slanging match against the British army and Britain in general.

 

Their agenda's are very clear.

 

No, it mainly moved into a discussion over the nature of free speech and freedom of assembly.

 

Are you senile?

[SlyNB]

No, it mainly moved into a discussion over the nature of free speech and freedom of assembly.

 

Are you senile?

 

No, what happened was you and people like you refused to condemn their actions and went off on a tirade against the armed forces and anything else related to the UK.

 

Also, why do you feel the need for petty insults, the first sign of losing the argument, a bit sad and pathetic as I presume you are an adult?

[Professor.Arturo]

And not one person condemned them either, preferring to turn it into a slanging match against the British army and Britain in general.

 

Their agenda's are very clear.

I gave up on this thread as its been hijacked by the resident looney left (the usual suspects). But you are spot on Sly, any pro British threads of any kind need to be suppresed by the dreadlocked lefties on this board, and we can always rely on ShaunLawson to chip in with his holocaust obsession. I get the feeling they are slightly worried about the BNP support currently snowballing. June the 4th will tell.

 

This thread was about our pensioners suffering while we send billions to ungratefull and undeserving 3rd world countries (undeserving as in when they are put before our own people). But the OP seems to have been lost thanks to the red Hyenas rounding on me and the party I am a member of.

 

Just because the BNP report the story, does not make it any less true, even if we did introduce the foreign aid disgrace into the mix, its still a fact.

 

Now do your worst!

[djf]

No, what happened was you and people like you refused to condemn their actions and went off on a tirade against the armed forces and anything else related to the UK.

 

Also, why do you feel the need for petty insults, the first sign of losing the argument, a bit sad and pathetic as I presume you are an adult?

 

Why would I condemn somebody for protesting? At least they bother their arse to get up and stand up for something they believe in.

 

If you want my views on what they were protesting about feel free to re-visit the thread.

 

And I didn't realise it was obligatory to support the British Army. Apologies. You might want to tell the millions who took part in anti-war demonstrations throughout the country.

[djf]

I gave up on this thread as its been hijacked by the resident looney left (the usual suspects). But you are spot on Sly, any pro British threads of any kind need to be suppresed by the dreadlocked lefties on this board, and we can always rely on ShaunLawson to chip in with his holocaust obsession. I get the feeling they are slightly worried about the BNP support currently snowballing. June the 4th will tell.

 

This thread was about our pensioners suffering while we send billions to ungratefull and undeserving 3rd world countries (undeserving as in when they are put before our own people). But the OP seems to have been lost thanks to the red Hyenas rounding on me and the party I am a member of.

 

Just because the BNP report the story, does not make it any less true, even if we did introduce the foreign aid disgrace into the mix, its still a fact.

 

Now do your worst!

 

People disagree with you. Get over it.

[Ulysses]

resident looney left ..... the dreadlocked lefties .... the red Hyenas....

 

My 70-year old aunt hates socialism. She's not much gone on what people call political correctness either.

 

What's the story with her voluntary resettlement? You forgot to say.

[SlyNB]

I gave up on this thread as its been hijacked by the resident looney left (the usual suspects). But you are spot on Sly, any pro British threads of any kind need to be suppresed by the dreadlocked lefties on this board, and we can always rely on ShaunLawson to chip in with his holocaust obsession. I get the feeling they are slightly worried about the BNP support currently snowballing. June the 4th will tell.

 

This thread was about our pensioners suffering while we send billions to ungratefull and undeserving 3rd world countries (undeserving as in when they are put before our own people). But the OP seems to have been lost thanks to the red Hyenas rounding on me and the party I am a member of.

 

Just because the BNP report the story, does not make it any less true, even if we did introduce the foreign aid disgrace into the mix, its still a fact.

 

Now do your worst!

 

I know RC, the OP bears no relation to the rest of this thread as usual it's been turned round into attacking the BNP, regardless of the content of the article. It's also funny to note that people who proclaim to be so morally correct are the only ones to resort to personal abuse.

 

I take solace from the fact that their opinions are in the minority in the real world.

[Ulysses]

Because he's being denied the right to have an opinion.

 

I refer you to posts 231 and 232.

 

What they said.

 

[djf]

I know RC, the OP bears no relation to the rest of this thread as usual it's been turned round into attacking the BNP, regardless of the content of the article. It's also funny to note that people who proclaim to be so morally correct are the only ones to resort to personal abuse.

 

I take solace from the fact that their opinions are in the minority in the real world.

 

I bet the "silent majority" on JKB agree with you.

[Professor.Arturo]

People disagree with you. Get over it.

Read it again, I have no problem with people disagreeing with me or my views, what I said is you 'liberals' have managed to turn around yet another pro British thread and change it into another tirade against the British national party (and myself) because they are not afraid to say what most think (the OP)

[SlyNB]

Why would I condemn somebody for protesting? At least they bother their arse to get up and stand up for something they believe in.

 

If you want my views on what they were protesting about feel free to re-visit the thread.

 

And I didn't realise it was obligatory to support the British Army. Apologies. You might want to tell the millions who took part in anti-war demonstrations throughout the country.

 

Not for the protests but the content of the prostests. As I've already said, your hatred for everything British really seems to be eating away at you.

 

The anti-war demonstrators weren't protesting against the BA but the government for sending troops in. Do you not realise this? Your problem is your hypocritical in your beliefs.

 

I would also like an apology for your childlike jibe in your previous post, or is that above you? You are an adult aren't you?

[djf]

Read it again, I have no problem with people disagreeing with me or my views, what I said is you 'liberals' have managed to turn around yet another pro British thread and change it into another tirade against the British national party (and myself) because they are not afraid to say what most think (the OP)

 

How the hell was this a pro-Britain thread? I thought you were trying to highlight the plight of pensioners in our country? albeit in a fallacious fashion.

 

Ps. If most think like the BNP how do you explain their constantly pish election results?

[SlyNB]

I bet the "silent majority" on JKB agree with you.

 

Wouldn't bother me either way, this is an Internet messageboard. It's still nice to treat people with respect though, something you seem to be sadly lacking in.