Originally Posted by Unionist:
I see that this thread has degenerated into the usual mire.

The issue is a very simple one, which is whether it is a legitimate tactic for candidates to 'out' the signatories for their opponents.

Legally speaking the names are in the public domain anyway so unless the leaflet could be shown to be inciting violence against individuals it is not likely to be a legal issue.

However, it does look as though it is trying to bully people by 'exposing' them to public condemnation, problems with their employers or worse. I do not accept that this is a legitimate political tactic against people who may not be 'political' at all - indeed, may not even vote for the BNP but have simply agreed to sign the nomination papers.

As long as the BNP is a legally constituted political party it is entitled to participate in the democratic process whatever anyone thinks of its policies, ideology or personnel. The Bear may think that the BNP should be proscribed but that is only his opinion and until the law agrees with him the BNP should be treated like any other party in terms of the electoral process.

As a matter of fact, some 59 organisations have been proscribed under anti-terrorism legislation. If there was any specific legal justification for proscribing the BNP I'm sure it would have happened by now.

An excellent post. I couldn't have put it better myself!
[Rep]

Originally Posted by The Bear:
Each and every opportunity to "out" BNP members should and in fact MUST be taken.

Why, exactly?
So that they can be abused and vilified?
So that they can be attacked at any available opportunity?
So much for democracy, eh Bear?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Seasider:
Why, exactly?
So that they can be abused and vilified?
So that they can be attacked at any available opportunity?
So much for democracy, eh Bear?

No, simply that in the future when people come across them they will know the nature of the people they are dealing with and can take whatever action they feel appropriate based on that knowledge.
[Rep]

But the people who sign the nomination papers may not support the party. As it has been known for candidates to get less votes than nominations and also that a sitting Lib Dem councillor has signed the nomination papers of the BNP to stand in the same ward to contest the seat.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by The Bear:

In fact all racist and nationalist oriented plots I have lost and that makes me not some inferior being, but actually a very much better man and a very much better person all round than the nasty racist scum who have not “lost the plot”.

Actually you have lost the plot, just like most of our indoctrinated society have. How do I know? Because like most people, you feel a pavlovian urge to hurl abuse at the BNP for being......evil of all evils...."racist".

The word 'racist' is a word I despise because it is exploited, overused and utterly meaningless. It is a verbal weapon used to demonise anyone who stands against the ideology forced upon us in UK society.

And while making yourself pure by throwing abuse at the BNP, you have yet to mention a word of criticism for the Labour person who "exposed" the BNP backers. Labour are the party responsible for the UK's role in the 500,000+ deaths in Iraq, a war which has caused more hatred, more racial, religious and ethnic rage, more thuggery and fascism and more corruption than the BNP could manage in a millennium. So yes, Bear, I would say you have "lost the plot" because like most of the robots in our multicultural, politically correct society, you have lost any sense of proportion or focus.

And no, I don't vote BNP. Never have done, I just hate hypocrisy.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by The Bear:
No, simply that in the future when people come across them they will know the nature of the people they are dealing with and can take whatever action they feel appropriate based on that knowledge.

So, in your book, The Bear, those who have signed nomination papers for a BNP candidate, are legitimate targets for 'whatever action THEY feel appropriate'.

So those in possession of such damning evidence can use it and act on it?

Those Labour people who put the BNP signatories in such an invidious position were well within their rights then as far as you are concerned?

This is bullying, cowardly and completely undemocratic.

Again, no one forces people to vote BNP, so if you don't like them, vote for someone else. It's that simple.
But no...scapegoats are required...people to lambast and vilify.
To keep those pc robots toeing the line and make absolutely sure that they keep saying the mantra over and over again

Multiculturalism is lovely
We love multiculturalism
Multiculturalism is lovely
We love multiculturalism
[Rep]

Originally Posted by The Bear:
No, simply that in the future when people come across them they will know the nature of the people they are dealing with and can take whatever action they feel appropriate based on that knowledge.

Who do you mean by "they"?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by claire stone:
Who do you mean by "they"?

Are you being serious?

Are you really incapable of understanding a simple if lengthy sentence in plain English?

The first use of the word “they” links to the word “people” that precedes it, the second appetence of the word “they” is identical to the first and its target by that association.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by The Bear:
Are you being serious?

Are you really incapable of understanding a simple if lengthy sentence in plain English?

The first use of the word “they” links to the word “people” that precedes it, the second appetence of the word “they” is identical to the first and its target by that association.

Right lets cut out the abuse. I'll user the word "people" then. What/who are exactly the "people" you refer to?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by claire stone:
Right lets cut out the abuse. I'll user the word "people" then. What/who are exactly the "people" you refer to?

THEY are everybody who comes across the people who have supported the BNP or worse yet have been members of the odious so called political party.

THEY are the future employers those who are seeking employment, those who provide goods and services, those responsible for arranging credit, in short the general DECENT public.

Think of it as a “mark of Cain”.

is that sufficiently simple for you to understand?
[Rep]