Originally Posted by The Nationalist:
What party are you in now wowbanger TIP?

National Front?
England First party?
UKIP?

UKIP.

Only joking.

Given that there is no viable moderate nationalist parties around I'd probably ideally go for the Greens. Obviously theres a hell of a lot of old school Establishment dogma going on there but there is an interesting debate on nationalism in the background and they are the only Party other than the BNP to have grasped the transition to the late modern taking place now.

Practically I'd go Conservative, if I had done that in the first place I could have probably secured myself a nice seat on the local council and had some fun instead of getting involved in a bitter pointless civil war.

However I'm so disillusioned with the whole politics thing that if I ever get involved in any sort of community activity again I'd probably circumvent the whole thing and join the Transition Towns movement. That would probably be the most useful place to be at present and I get to talk doom to a receptive audience, lovely.

Of course as a former BNP member I would probably be hounded out the door by any reasonable organisation in the land, and thats fair enough.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by The Wanderer:
I'm afraid it wont be that many for 2008.

What makes you say that? We have already been told that our current membership is just shy of 10,000 so by the end of 2008 am sure we will be there.

Dont expect anyone to believe me though as people dont but I keep being proven right at the end. Hartlepool hiding away after her stupid idiotic statements on BNP membership figures?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by blueblood1920:
What makes you say that? We have already been told that our current membership is just shy of 10,000 so by the end of 2008 am sure we will be there.

Dont expect anyone to believe me though as people dont but I keep being proven right at the end. Hartlepool hiding away after her stupid idiotic statements on BNP membership figures?

You were told that the membership was just shy of ten thousand on the 31st December 2007, it is now the 31st of July 2008. We were also told it was just shy of ten thousand a year earlier and it was 1,500+ shy of 10,000.

I think one of the principle reasons Griffin did not want a leadership contest against Auty was that he did not want the membership figure disclosed.

After all he would have won easily and the expense minimal. Certainly far less than the barrage of mail shots the Party has been sending out recently.
[Rep]

The Green Party of England and Wales has a membership of 7,441 on the 31st December 2007. Fewer members than the BNP. Will the BNP publicise this?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Wowbanger TIP:
You were told that the membership was just shy of ten thousand on the 31st December 2007, it is now the 31st of July 2008. We were also told it was just shy of ten thousand a year earlier and it was 1,500+ shy of 10,000.

I think one of the principle reasons Griffin did not want a leadership contest against Auty was that he did not want the membership figure disclosed.

After all he would have won easily and the expense minimal. Certainly far less than the barrage of mail shots the Party has been sending out recently.

One of the things that may be responsible is the new rolling membership system that has been implemented so there would of been a little drop but things are levelling out now.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Dissident Congress:
The Green Party of England and Wales has a membership of 7,441 on the 31st December 2007. Fewer members than the BNP. Will the BNP publicise this?

I didnt check their accounts so that is a good thing and think the BNP should make something out of that. I will mention it on the members forum.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Dissident Congress:
The Green Party of England and Wales has a membership of 7,441 on the 31st December 2007. Fewer members than the BNP. Will the BNP publicise this?

Would you?

Seems to me that since the Greens have MEP's, 2 GLA members, House of Lords representation and more councilors than the BNP as well as regularly beat them in important contests like Henley and the GLA's the fact that the BNP has a superior number of members is rather embarrassing.

That the Greens are more effective on all measures with less resources suggests something is badly wrong with the BNP to me.

Thats not even being to take into account the really important thing, the amount of influence the Greens exert in their field, considerable, versus the amount exerted by the BNP in theirs, negligible.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Wowbanger TIP:
Would you?

Seems to me that since the Greens have MEP's, 2 GLA members, House of Lords representation and more councilors than the BNP as well as regularly beat them in important contests like Henley and the GLA's the fact that the BNP has a superior number of members is rather embarrassing.

That the Greens are more effective on all measures with less resources suggests something is badly wrong with the BNP to me.

Thats not even being to take into account the really important thing, the amount of influence the Greens exert in their field, considerable, versus the amount exerted by the BNP in theirs, negligible.

But the greens have the hype of Global Warming in their favour, dont have a campaign by multiple third parties against them, dont have newspapers attacking them every chance they get, dont have members getting sacked, dont have members getting attacked etc... The situation is a bit different.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by blueblood1920:
But the greens have the hype of Global Warming in their favour, dont have a campaign by multiple third parties against them, dont have newspapers attacking them every chance they get, dont have members getting sacked, dont have members getting attacked etc... The situation is a bit different.

They do have the problem of other parties fighting over their ground. Whereas the BNP have a clear field.

They do not have the advantage of the BNP's "sexy" qualities which results in acres of news print.

The BNP's core issue is front center and back pages of every newspaper every day, high on the agenda as the environment is it no where near as high as immigration, identity, democracy, sovereignty, Islam etc.

As for the third parties and other forms of "oppression", you bring it on yourself. You can't consort with Nazis and expect people not to take action. You deserve it.

Oh and global warming isn't hype. 90% of the science community are backing the theory and I would suggest their opinion carries a bit more weight than Alex Jones, Nick Griffin and the other ill informed monomaniac paranoids.
[Rep]

Wowbanger knows this BB, as does everyone else. Just shows how much true depth is put into their belief in this democratic system we live in. I don't recall anybody mouthing off about the rights of individuals who have been attacked for their political beliefs (except a certain grunt known as the Bear - who doesn't really count) yet they squeal like stuck pigs whenever a BNP member/supporter wins an argument against them.

Remember that there are some on this forum who would have us banned for the same reason - nothing else. So much for free speech....

And there goes the 'nazi' tag again. Having been a member of the BNP Wowbanger, were you ever persuaded to don a nazi uniform and salute pictures of Hitler? Did you ever witness anyone doing this? Did you ever walk around shouting obscenities at non-whites just for the fun of it? Or did you ever take part in a black mass where babies were sacrificed to whatever gods were in favour at the time?

Probably not! So why point the finger at anyone else if you know it isn't true.

Several times Searchlight have 'quoted ex-BNP' members with this sort of trash. I hope you're not one of 'them'....:-)
[Rep]