Identify your local neighbourhood facist

[Guest alex]

Who do you think are better looking people in general Krauts or English?

 

An inherently biased question meaning that even the most impartial of observers is unable to judge this unless they have led a very strange life.

 

If anyone is interested in Oppenheimer's work, here is an article by him in Prospect Magazine from 2006.

 

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article...mer&id=7817

That's the article I was on about. I think you posted it on here and/or N-O at the time.

[Ketsbaia 0]

For someone who seems to find 'r@cism' in the most innocent of things, DannyB does seem to have a lot of time for the BNP. Ironically, I'd suggest many amongst their members are exactly the types who think the hissing (to represent the gas chambers) which Chelsea and West Ham fans etc. direct at Spurs is fair enough. He is at pains to point out he doesn't support the BNP mind.

The focus of the BNP, and all far right wing political organisations for over a century was against the four be's. Now there are even jews in the BNP, they are no longer the target, the target are muslims, which suggests that there'll always be a non-white English target. However....I repeat SOME of the targets and values of the BNP are not bad at all. I mean muslims are here to stay now, they've been here 60 years and there's fuck all we can do now, but proper integration is not too much to ask and coming here for the right reasons.

 

I agree completely, but the BNP are opposed to intergration.

[Park Life 71]

Who do you think are better looking people in general Krauts or English?

 

An inherently biased question meaning that even the most impartial of observers is unable to judge this unless they have led a very strange life.

 

If anyone is interested in Oppenheimer's work, here is an article by him in Prospect Magazine from 2006.

 

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article...mer&id=7817

That's the article I was on about. I think you posted it on here and/or N-O at the time.

 

 

Yup still got the old link in my bookmarks.

[Guest alex]

Fascinating read again.

[NJS 4252]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

[Renton 20414]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

 

Why on earth did you get that done?

[ChezGiven 0]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

 

Why on earth did you get that done?

 

Being eliminated from enquiries would be my guess.

[Park Life 71]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

 

Why on earth did you get that done?

 

Being eliminated from enquiries would be my guess.

[Guest alex]

[Fop 1]

Im back from work so I can finally voice my views on some of the shit written on here.

 

Does supporting the BNP, make you any less able to do your job? No.

 

Does supporting the BNP make you racist? Does it bollox.

 

If you are worried immigration, crime and positive descrimination, who else are you go to be a member of?

 

I DO NOT SUPPORT THE BNP.

 

 

 

The irony here is that you support ID Cards, which frankly make issues like that (both governmental control and disallowing and data theft and publication) much easier.

[NJS 4252]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

 

Why on earth did you get that done?

 

Just personal interest after reading the books with the methodology/existing data in them.

[NJS 4252]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

 

Why on earth did you get that done?

 

Being eliminated from enquiries would be my guess.

 

It's a while since I left any DNA anywhere incriminating

[Ketsbaia 0]

Im back from work so I can finally voice my views on some of the shit written on here.

 

Does supporting the BNP, make you any less able to do your job? No.

 

Does supporting the BNP make you racist? Does it bollox.

 

If you are worried immigration, crime and positive descrimination, who else are you go to be a member of?

 

I DO NOT SUPPORT THE BNP.

 

 

 

The irony here is that you support ID Cards, which frankly make issues like that (both governmental control and disallowing and data theft and publication) much easier.

 

Danny B supports ID cards?

 

Ooooh, we can have a brilliant 'discussion' about that. I'm shit hot on erosion of civil liberties at the minute Bet he supports the 48 day terror detention an'aal.

[Guest Stevie]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

 

Why on earth did you get that done?

Must've been worried in case he had the rogue mackem gene given his location.

[NJS 4252]

Danny B supports ID cards?

 

Ooooh, we can have a brilliant 'discussion' about that. I'm shit hot on erosion of civil liberties at the minute Bet he supports the 48 day terror detention an'aal.

 

Didn't realise he mentioned crime as well - don't forget to mention the free rifle for every white male from the BNP.

[Fop 1]

Regardless of any of this, it doesn't make it right that their details are posted publically on the internet does it?

 

The ideals of the people who are members of this party is not the argument. Tell me this, how would you feel if your name, address, phone number & email address were posted on the internet without your consent or knowledge?

 

I think I said in my first post in this thread that the privacy angle was something I agree with.

 

I also think sacking people for membership is a dangerous road to travel down but at the same time companies and organisations have to consider their reputation. I know the BNP is legal and I think that's fair enough but to some extent I do think that people have to think carefully before they join simply because of their history and their reputation.

 

 

It's still McCarthyism though (whether officially sanctioned or a blind eye turned by the back-door).

 

It doesn't make it any better just because people happen to agree with it....... because the next time maybe people won't happen to agree with the group chosen for exclusion/prejudice.

 

And of course it's impossible to decry and yet support prejudice at the same time with any moral credibility.

 

 

 

 

Which is what I genuinely don't understand legally, either the party is illegal or it's not, it's a strange shadowy world where it's legal, but semi-illegal too.

[NJS 4252]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

 

Why on earth did you get that done?

Must've been worried in case he had the rogue mackem gene given his location.

 

 

For more ammo for you (though no Mackem) - it also made me do a bit of genealogy which showed I have roots 3 or 4 generations ago in Cumbria and Berwick (as well as solid Shields and Jarra) - I presume you can prove centuries in Newcastle.

[Happy Face 29]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

 

Why on earth did you get that done?

Must've been worried in case he had the rogue mackem gene given his location.

 

 

For more ammo for you (though no Mackem) - it also made me do a bit of genealogy which showed I have roots 3 or 4 generations ago in Cumbria and Berwick (as well as solid Shields and Jarra) - I presume you can prove centuries in Newcastle.

 

Stevie only has Geordie Genes. Tha specially tight around the arse.

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

Stevie only has Geordie Genes. Tha specially tight around the arse.

[NJS 4252]

Regardless of any of this, it doesn't make it right that their details are posted publically on the internet does it?

 

The ideals of the people who are members of this party is not the argument. Tell me this, how would you feel if your name, address, phone number & email address were posted on the internet without your consent or knowledge?

 

I think I said in my first post in this thread that the privacy angle was something I agree with.

 

I also think sacking people for membership is a dangerous road to travel down but at the same time companies and organisations have to consider their reputation. I know the BNP is legal and I think that's fair enough but to some extent I do think that people have to think carefully before they join simply because of their history and their reputation.

 

 

It's still McCarthyism though (whether officially sanctioned or a blind eye turned by the back-door).

 

It doesn't make it any better just because people happen to agree with it....... because the next time maybe people won't happen to agree with the group chosen for exclusion/prejudice.

 

And of course it's impossible to decry and yet support prejudice at the same time with any moral credibility.

 

 

 

 

Which is what I genuinely don't understand legally, either the party is illegal or it's not, it's a strange shadowy world where it's legal, but semi-illegal too.

 

 

It is strange - I remember a lot of outrage stemming from McCarthyism which was aimed at people who were falsely accused which I found the wrong angle as they should have been outraged for the people who were communists which should have been okay (as long as they weren't spys obviously).

 

I think people are a bit wary of the BNP for two reasons - the history of thuggery and the association with the right which makes people think of Hitler. Having said that I remember a World in Action years ago where a company was selling businesses list of people who were communists or SWP members.

 

I'd like to see a world where there is no discrimination based on opinions/beliefs but sometimes I think there has to be limits. What those limits are I think is up for debate.

[Fop 1]

Regardless of any of this, it doesn't make it right that their details are posted publically on the internet does it?

 

The ideals of the people who are members of this party is not the argument. Tell me this, how would you feel if your name, address, phone number & email address were posted on the internet without your consent or knowledge?

 

I think I said in my first post in this thread that the privacy angle was something I agree with.

 

I also think sacking people for membership is a dangerous road to travel down but at the same time companies and organisations have to consider their reputation. I know the BNP is legal and I think that's fair enough but to some extent I do think that people have to think carefully before they join simply because of their history and their reputation.

 

 

It's still McCarthyism though (whether officially sanctioned or a blind eye turned by the back-door).

 

It doesn't make it any better just because people happen to agree with it....... because the next time maybe people won't happen to agree with the group chosen for exclusion/prejudice.

 

And of course it's impossible to decry and yet support prejudice at the same time with any moral credibility.

 

 

 

 

Which is what I genuinely don't understand legally, either the party is illegal or it's not, it's a strange shadowy world where it's legal, but semi-illegal too.

 

 

It is strange - I remember a lot of outrage stemming from McCarthyism which was aimed at people who were falsely accused which I found the wrong angle as they should have been outraged for the people who were communists which should have been okay (as long as they weren't spys obviously).

 

I think people are a bit wary of the BNP for two reasons - the history of thuggery and the association with the right which makes people think of Hitler. Having said that I remember a World in Action years ago where a company was selling businesses list of people who were communists or SWP members.

 

I'd like to see a world where there is no discrimination based on opinions/beliefs but sometimes I think there has to be limits. What those limits are I think is up for debate.

 

 

That's the point though, there's a legal definition of that point.

 

 

The BNP doesn't reach that point (apparently), but instead there's a lot of semi and pseudo-legal exceptions being made. That's very dangerous IMO. That's in fact people playing by the same rules they claim to hate the BNP for...

 

McCathyism's biggest issue IMO wasn't that the "innocent" could be accused to satisfy other agendas (although that was a big part of it - and frankly similar things could be done with this, imagine if you have the same name as someone on that list and live in the same town or nearby street ), but that it was using "freedom" to excuse oppression.

[Guest Stevie]

I had my genes categorised earlier this year - it was both interesting and to some extent diappointing in that I am distinctly "average" belonging to the most common male and female groupings. This was a basic test though - you can get more sequences analysed which provides more granularity but that costs a bit more.

 

Why on earth did you get that done?

Must've been worried in case he had the rogue mackem gene given his location.

 

 

For more ammo for you (though no Mackem) - it also made me do a bit of genealogy which showed I have roots 3 or 4 generations ago in Cumbria and Berwick (as well as solid Shields and Jarra) - I presume you can prove centuries in Newcastle.

Can prove 100 years in Newcastle, one strain of my family came from Ireland via Glasgow Seems like I had a lucky escape.

[NJS 4252]

Can prove 100 years in Newcastle, one strain of my family came from Ireland via Glasgow Seems like I had a lucky escape.

 

My great-grandparents are all in the 1901 census in Jarra or Shields (one couple had moved to Jarra in about 1880). I think my surname however has its roots in Ireland or the Isle of Man.

[manc-mag 1]

We've all got codified human rights these days (and that includes company employers, which have legal personality).

 

The BNP is obviously a legal party so that much is clear. On the flip side of the coin the police (for instance) clearly feel that their objectives would be prejudiced by having BNP members as serving officers and hence they exclude on that basis. Immigration for instance is something which the police (and certain other agencies) deal with at the 'hard end' so

that's a fair enough balance to draw in the complex society that they serve and again is also clear enough to most in the non-ideal world that we live in.

 

Once you step outside of public sector agencies such as the police however then I think it becomes far more complicated provided the political party that the employee is a member of is a legitimate one. Then you're way down the scale to issues of a company's reputation and employment law rights as opposed to headline grabbers such as deaths in custody and deportation of asylum seekers. Life and limb stuff in other words.

[Guest alex]

Surely it isn't a case of legality, as (I think) Fop is suggesting. In a similar way to members of the Police Force being unable to strike or join a trade union, they also undertake an agreement not to join the BNP when they become a police officer. I would imagine this is clearly defined by an Act of Parliament and hence, covered by UK law. The argument, therefore, surely falls with a philosophical / ethical debate as to whether that should be the case.