Also see the BNP Manifesto 2010. The British National Party (BNP) is a far-right political party with strong racist and fascist roots. Formed as a splinter group from the racist/fascist National Front by John Tyndall in 1982. Until 2009, when the BNP was challenged in the courts on grounds of racial discrimination, it restricted membership […]
Continue Reading Reasons to Vote British National Party : BNP 2010 General Election
David,
With regard to your concern about the British National Party and conspiracy theories. I know we shouldn’t believe anything, sorry, I meant to say everything that we read in the newspapers but I have just come across an article in the Times newspaper dated Thursday 14th May, 2009 by Roger Boyes and John Carr. It is headed ‘The illuminati meet in secret – and here’s their address.’ It is very interesting. Read it and then you can make up your own mind. Thats strange, isn’t it. A working class person like me reading the Times. Regards Michael
View Comment
If it’s this article https://www.thetimes.co.uk/ then the title is “Shadowy Bilderberg group meet in Greece — and here’s their address” not as you said “The Illuminati meet in secret – and here’s their address.”.
From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group
I own a conspiracy theory website http://www.conspiracy-theories-hoax.com/ eldest son was interested in conspiracy theories (the Apollo Moon Landing Hoax articles are his when he was around 12, 18 now and still mixes up as and has :-)).
All because people on the Internet believe in a conspiracy theory does not make it true, there are loads of silly conspiracy theories, but it never ceases to amaze me how some people believe them without real evidence.
So 130 influential people meet once a year to discuss world matters and don’t publish what they discuss. What is so wrong with that?
Millions of people do similar through out the world, we are doing it on this website now, it doesn’t mean they are part of some New World Order group!
I find it hard to respect people who seriously believe in conspiracy theories, a health mistrust of those in power, fine, but believing in New World Order type conspiracies borders on crazy talk for me.
Intelligent/sane people do not make the leap from “their meetings are closed” to “their meetings are closed because they are trying to take over the world” without serious evidence to support those beliefs.
I bet the average BNP supporter sits watching 24 on TV believing it’s a documentary series :-) I love a good conspiracy theory film BTW, Manchurian Candidate for example.
David
View Comment
David,
Why would I want to lie to you. I have the newspaper article in front of me and it is headed as I said ‘The illuminati meet in secret – and here’s their address’. I think you owe me an apology, don’t you.
Regards,
Michael
I have had a look for this as well the only thing I can find remotely close is this
A quote from the article:
“Bed space is a bit tight there for the next two days while the Bilderberg illuminati hold their private conclave in the five-star Greek hotel. Every year since 1954 a club of about 130 senior or up-and-coming politicians gather at the fireside of a secluded hotel with top bankers and a sprinkling of royalty to discuss burning issues, to trade confidences and just stay abreast of the I-know-something-you-don’t-know circuit. No lists of participants are disclosed, no press conferences are held; spill the beans and you’re out of the magic circle. ”
Is that the one you refer to?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/
If so I need to ask a question (another one I wonder if i’ll get a proper answer for)
I thought that the Bilderberg Group and the Illuminati where different groups, is it just me or is this article now suggesting they are one in the same?
If that’s the case the BNP will have to alter it’s believes and decide whether they believe in the Bilderberg Group the Illuminati (or do they now believe in the combination of the two?
Or of course the illuminati could be the control group that controls the bilderberg grouo, it does get difficult to keep up with which one is in charge in these conspiracy theories.
View Comment
I think you owe me an apology as well. The one thing the British National Party doesn’t do is tell lies. That is why we are feared by the three main parties because we are prepared to stand up and tell it as it is. I have the page in front of me. It might be from one of the Times supplements. The date at the top of the page is Thursday, May 14, 2009. The article is by Roger Boyes and John Carr. The article is headed ‘The illuminati meet in secret – and here’s their address’ and refers to the organisation as the Bilderberg Illuminati.If David cares to E mail me I will scan the article to him. I never said that I believe in conspiracy theories. I only mentioned the article to David as a matter of interest. As a former Police Inspector I only ever relied on evidence before I made a decision about anything. I certainly don’t believe what I read in the national press. The only truth that national newspapers print are the football results. As I can get them from the television I no longer buy newspapers.
Regards,
Michael
View Comment
The BNP doesn’t TELL LIES well heres ONE for you;
The BNP Claimed they spent £600,000 on the European Elections in 2009, yet the figures they gave to the Electoral Commission clearly show they actually only spent £283,843 (or something VERY close)
That’s publically available information on the Electoral Commission website (so clearly a LIE)
Now would you care to rephrase you last statement?
And as for an appology if you can find and reference the exact article you are reffering to then we cannot verify what you are claiming therefore no appology required.
View Comment
Bit of extra evidence for you to digest Michael:
“Mr Griffin has often claimed that the BNP spent more than £500,000 during the campaign. In fact, the party spent much less, £282,843 — only £54,000 more than it did during 2004.”
Source: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/
Link to the actual invoices the BNP submitted:
Link to the main page of ALL party spending on the EU Elections:
View Comment
More evidence of the BNP claims of £600,000
“Nick Griffin has warned that the BNP is on the verge of collapse and has written to every party activist appealing for money, The Times has learnt.
As he prepares to make his debut on BBC1’s Question Time next month, the far-right leader urged supporters to hand over £150,000 to “keep the wolves at bay”. He said that attacks on the party were to blame for its ailing fortunes, singling out Operation Black Vote, which campaigns for ethnic minority candidates. Mr Griffin accused the organisation of trying “to flood the party in order to take over and destroy it”.
He insisted that his party had spent wisely the £600,000 it used to fight the European election campaign in June. Fresh questions have been raised about the party’s financing because no single donation was registered to the Electoral Commission during the relevant quarter.
Mr Griffin added: “Our success [in the European elections] has unleashed the furies of hell against us, now our very existence is being challenged, and it is costing us dear! Precisely because of our political success we are now fighting for our very existence!”.”
Source: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/
Still saying they DON’T Lie?
View Comment
I’d expect someone with 30 years experience as a police officer and fighting corruption in politics you’d have at least understood my comment as intended. I try not to make too many assumptions and prematurely jump to conclusions (it’s why I ask so many questions, I don’t have enough information).
The first few words says it all “If it’s this article”
Note the IF, means I’m not 100% sure since you said the article had the title:
“The Illuminati meet in secret – and here’s their address.”
And I could only find an article from the Times of the same date you mentioned, covering the same material, but with the title:
“Shadowy Bilderberg group meet in Greece — and here’s their address”
I take it it’s the same article (the content, not the title)?
I was thinking you might have made a mistake (recalling it from memory incorrectly for example, not lied: what on Earth would you gain from a lie like this?), but I couldn’t be 100% sure (maybe there’s another article).
If (note the if again) you have a paper copy of the Times with the title “The Illuminati meet in secret – and here’s their address.” then it would suggest they changed the name for the online version.
What have I got to apologise about?
I wonder why they changed the title if these are the same article?
David
View Comment
David,
Sorry, no offence intended. You must appreciate that I am suffering from fatigue having spent the last 24 hours answering questions from you and ‘Notobnp’. As I said, E mail me and I will scan the article back to you. I am afraid I cannot do it any other way as I am not very good on computers.
Regards,
Michael
View Comment
You do realize that virtually all of the above is a lie and is not true? I don’t see why you are spreading lies on your website David, it makes little sense to me.
Just for starters the BNP don’t want to take away anyones vote; yet you say they do.
You say they want to restore the white ethnicity to how it was in 1948, when this is not true. Nick Griffin has openly stated many times that even if they wanted to it would be physically impossible, however, the BNP do not want this anyway.
I would be happy to edit the above for you and take out the lies in it if you liked; or you could leave the lies in and be undemocratic and fascist if you like.
View Comment
“Just for starters the BNP don’t want to take away anyones vote; yet you say they do.”
Then why on the BNP’s own party materials does it say that if someone refuses to do military service they will have to do community service instead and lose their right to vote or to hold a Citizens Riffle?
That’s in the BNP’s own manifesto not made up.
“You say they want to restore the white ethnicity to how it was in 1948, when this is not true.”
If I remember correctly Nick Griffin said that himself on Question Time (i’ll look out the vid tomorrow and check that)
View Comment
Quotes from the last BNP GE Manifesto:
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/BNP_uk_manifesto.pdf
“Under this all law-abiding adults who have successfully completed their
period of military service are required to keep in a safe locker in their homes a
standard-issue military assault rifle and ammunition.”
“The compulsory National Service system discussed elsewhere in this Manifesto would begin at the age of 18 with a period of basic training in the army. This would include full training with the citizens’ assault rifle. Conscientious objectors who refuse to undertake military service would be allocated other constructive work for the community, but would not receive the citizen’s right to be armed, or the right to vote.”
View Comment
David,
All this talk about you being anti British National Party. I’m not sure whether that is the case or whether you pretend to be so in order to encouage debate. It certainly does that. The only way to discover the truth is to attend your local British National Party meetings where you can actually come face to face with members. Admission is usually by means of a membership card or failing that, a Senior Citizens bus pass.
Regards,
Michael
View Comment
You caught me out Michael, I’m really a life long BNP supporter with aspirations of grandeur :-)
I can confirm I’m in no way a BNP supporter and would be quite happy to have no comments from or about the BNP on my site. Almost every single debate that starts turns into a BNP discussion.
Seriously you actually believe I created this site to encourage debate about the BNP?
Another BNP conspiracy maybe :-)
Adding BNP policies along with UKIP and Greens was an after thought, I originally planned to only include the main three parties policies for debate, but I’m a bit of a perfectionist and it didn’t seem right to not include as much information as possible.
Before some smart arse checks the dates on when each policy was posted on the site I manually edited the date to try to evenly spread the policies from each party over the month of September so when visitors browse the home page archives they are mixed together. For example the BNP don’t have that many policies so they got one policy posted per day in September (2nd to the 17th), but I added them all on one day (near the end of September). UKIP have a lot more policies than the BNP and so on some days got two policies posted, again the UKIP policies was posted as one lot (think that was over 2 days though). The Green party have so many policies I still haven’t finished posting them!!! Any new policies from the Green party that I add will be added under September.
I will say the creation of the “Reasons to Vote #### Party” pages are a direct result of BNP supporters commenting on the “Who will you vote for in the 2010 general election poll” page. There was so many comments about the BNP I needed somewhere to put them. I’ve been trying to push the BNP comments onto the BNP pages (failing miserably mind you).
Since I’m not a member of the BNP or a pensioner I guess a local British National Party meeting isn’t open to me. Does partially explain why when I see BNP videos of BNP meetings there’s not a lot of people in attendance. I wouldn’t be able to attend anyway, had an operation on my back last year and still not up for being on my feet for anything beyond an hour or two on a good day.
David
View Comment
As you go to BNP meetings maybe you’ve heard more about the BNP’s National Service policy?
All I have is from their current BNP Defence policy:
And the BNP General Election 2005 manifesto:
It sounds like everyone is going to have to do National Service or be penalised by a loss of services and those that refuse to do the military form will loose the right to vote! This is an awful policy, more than enough reason not to vote BNP, but I’d still like more information.
As an ex police officer how do you feel about the idea of anyone who has done the military form of National Service has the right to own a rifle?
Won’t this mean our police will have to all carry fire arms like the US have as unlike now when they turn up to a domestic dispute there’s going to be a damn good chance there’s a weapon in the home?
David
View Comment
My bet is he will be 100% supportive of the policy (just a feeling I get)
David,
As you have already made your views clear on this issue when you said ” The BNP’s National Service Policy that all 18+ year olds do military service or lose the right to vote is more than enough reason NOT to vote for the BNP” is more than enough reason not to enter into a debate on the subject with you as it would be a waste of time for both of us. Before I sign off I would urge you and other visitors to this site to visit www.uktabloid.co.uk. There is an article about Early Day Motion 1299 of 20.4.2009 relating to the rights of tribal and indigenous people’s. The EDM was signed by a cross party of more than 122 MPs which explicitly states that whilst they support the rights of indigenous people’s across the world to keep their own lands and culture from immigration and invasion, they do not believe that the indigenous British people even exist. This statement is backed up by the EDM that notes the Government’s continued refusal to put these rights on a legal footing and ratify Convention 169 on the grounds that there are no indigenous people’s in the United Kingdom. In effect the document is a declaration of intent to destroy the entire British people. It begs the question “How could anyone not vote for the British National Party?”
Regards,
Michael
View Comment
Sorry Michael but it seem you actually either have NO answers or simply don’t want to answer what are legitimate questions.
Why even make one comment if you have no intention of attempting to answer legitimate questions.
Surely as a BNP member (who has even been muted as a possible candidate for election) you should be more than willing to defend and debate and even support the BNP policies with much more vigor than the average BNP supporter.
If you do intend to stand for election I can assure you that you will face far more questioning which can’t be answered with no reply as you seem to be doing here.
View Comment
It is not that I cannot answer or refuse to answer legitimate questions. This is the first time that I have made comments on a political website. I didn’t realise that it would be so time consuming. This is the fourteenth posting that I have made since last night and I have a conspiracy theory. I think you and David are trying to wear me down so that I won’t have the energy to fight the next General Election. I have been sitting at this computer for so long now I am developing bedsores. I think it is a bit unfair to accuse me of not being prepared to take part in a debate but I do need to take time off. As they used to say when I was a police officer “Give us a break Guv.”
Regards,
Michael
View Comment
“I think you and David are trying to wear me down so that I won’t have the energy to fight the next General Election”
Come on Michael get real, if you can’t handle a few questions on a website you HAVE NO chance of getting anywhere answering voters questions on the doorstep.
It’s far harder to answer questions on the doorstep than it is on the net (I know I’ve done it plenty)
View Comment
See my response on this page.
Regards,
Michael
That’s not my intention Michael, you are only the second ‘high’ profile BNP member/supporter to comment on the site and if you do intend to stand as a BNP candidate in the general election it’s a chance to get some questions I’ve been asking of BNP supporters who quite frankly haven’t got a clue finally answered. Making an assumption here that if you are to be a candidate you’ll have some insider knowledge, maybe not right now, but as the election approaches.
If you do intend to stand as a BNP candidate you could consider this a place to get used to the sorts of questions you might get asked by the media. I know for a fact some newspaper researchers are reading my site based on some of the IPs being used to connect to the site (I won’t say which ones as might scare them off).
I recall cringing at a recent by-election when the Scottish bloke who knocked down that flaming terrorist at Glasgow airport was asked a political question and he didn’t have a clue what the party that was paying for his election stood for.
Unlike when in front of a camera on BBC news, you have as much time as you need to research relevant information etc… online (give Nick Griffin a quick text message maybe :-)) before compiling a reply and you can of course ignore a question (it’s a website, not a court of law), though as you’ve seen it won’t be taken well by some. Would be cool if we saw some of the questions asked here asked by various media groups etc… I’ve not seen them all asked before, the media tends to concentrate only on BNP immigration policy which as a non-BNP supporter is a mistake IMO.
I will add if you went on to many anti-BNP groups on Facebook etc…, particularly those with a strong UAF contingent you’d be treated far worse than you have been here.
David
View Comment
David,
Thank you for the comments. I don’t think either you or notobnp have treated me badly, just tried to give me a hard time. You are entitled to do that of course. All’s fair in love and war. You have to have thick skin to be a member of my party. The problem with putting personal comments on a website, as I have learned in the last 24 hours, is that some individuals might take those comments to be official party policy, which is not always the case. I now know what it must have been like when I was interrogating prisoners in police custody and throwing quick fire questions at them. I am my own man and cannot answer for the sins of others. I can assure you of one thing though, you will not find anything detrimental about me in any newspaper or on any website. When you have made as many enemies as I have in my fight against corruption, you have to be squeaky clean. I am not naive enough to realise that I could be on some establishment list for future retribution and I am not being paranoid when I say that. The problem with being a member of the British National Party is that if you are brave enough to put your head above the parapet and take it from me, sometimes you have to be brave, you lay yourself open to all sorts of abuse, both verbal and physical and in many cases, the threat of losing your employment. If that is what you call democracy I will do everything in my power to help change it. Contrary to public perception, many of our members are elderly and are not prepared to subject themselves to the threat of violence. We are all entitled to our political affiliations and I respect the fact that we have different views on what is the best way forward for our country. I am fearful however what is in store for us if Labour is re elected. I am reading an interesting book by Orlando Figes called ‘the whisperers’. It is all about life in Russia during the Stalin era. I would urge you to read it. It is all about how ordinary people’s lives were controlled by the state. If I had said to you five years ago that this country would reach a stage when you could be fined for putting the wrong rubbish in your bin or putting your dustbin out on the wrong day, you would have locked me up for being mentally unstable and thrown away the key. Now we all accept these kinds of intrusions into our daily lives as a matter of course. Frightening, isn’t it.
Regards,
Michael
View Comment
Well Michael I do have to say something here (I guess you are that going to be at all suprised by that), but in a few of your comments you have referred to reading certain books ….. the types of books the BNP suggest the anti-BNP read (I’ve had them suggested to me many times)
The only difference between you and the what we call “Stanard BNP” is that you have avoided insulting anyone (which is a breath of fresh air in my opinion and I do actually thank you for that one, and again you have avoided making the standard BNP accusations against people like us who don’t trust the BNP as being UAF or paid by certain parties etc, (again thanks for that).
But that said all you have actually done with your comments here is avoid the real questions, denied any evidence provided to you (very politely but denied never the less), so you are actually just a polite member of the BNP who still can’t answer any questions (that as David said you should really be expected to be able to do given you are a potential candidate).
You haven’t really added anything to what we already know, and again in my opinion you haven’t managed to do anything here that would in any way convince anyone to even consider voting BNP.
You’ve made polite claims but not really provided any serious evidence to back them up, so I have to ask why did you feel the need to come to this site if you didn’t have any intention of proving your points? surely you at least expected to be asked to prove your statements/claims?
View Comment
Thank you for your comments which I will attempt to answer. Firstly I am confused as to why you do not identify yourself by your name. Is there any reason for that?
I visited the website for exactly the reasons you have stated and that is to prove that I am one of many members of the British National Party who can take part in a debate without being abusive or make untoward comments against individuals who have a different political affiliation to ourselves. I would also point out that it is not the practice of our candidates to walk away or refuse to shake hands when when others are elected, which I consider to be disrespectful to another member of the human race. Contrary to your statement I have only mentioned one book, which is not available from any British National Party bookshop, only from W H Smith or Waterstones. The only reason for mentioning it was to show a resemblance between the Stalin era and where I think our country is heading for now.Your comment about me failing to answer questions is answered by yourself when you intimated that you already knew the answers. The whole exercise was no more than a fishing expedition. I could make the same accusation about you when I mentioned Harriet Harman or the EDM. I would have expected you to have jumped to her defence but you didn’t. After all, she could be your Leader one day. With reference to your comment about why would anyone want to vote for the British National Party. I can only say that on all three occasions that I have stood in Council Elections I have polled more votes than the Labour candidate and on two of those occasions more than the Lib Dem Candidate. Hopefully in May it will also be the Conservative candidate. I will concede that both you and David are very politically astute and despite all the point scoring I have thoroughly enjoyed engaging with you both. My wife. who is not at all political, is threatening to put my dinner over my head if I do not come off of the computer so I intend to sign off now. I do intend to visit this site again and who knows, it might even be in the position of at least a councillor or hopefully a Member of Parliament. I wish both you and your families a peaceful New Year.
Regards,
Michael
View Comment
Thanks for the answers Micahel, as you can see by Potters response that is the normal type of responses we receive from the BNP (which is why they drop so many voters who ask questions) so I hope you see that the BNP’s own supporters are actually part of the BNP’s problems by the way the react to people.
My reasons for not defending Harmon is simple I am not a Labour voter so not that interested in defending them really, I am a Tory voter.
But if you do want to get involved in debate I would welcome that as you do have far more ability to debate than people like potter who resorts to the standard insults within seconds, and frankly in my opinion does nothing to further the cause of the BNP or to attract voters to the party.
Maybe part of your debating here could be used to show the rest of the BNP supporters here the importance of engaging in actual debate rather than resorting to insult, it would certainly make the site more interesting.
View Comment
“The only difference between you and the what we call “Stanard BNP” is that you have avoided insulting anyone (which is a breath of fresh air in my opinion and I do actually thank you for that one, and again you have avoided making the standard BNP accusations against people like us who don’t trust the BNP as being UAF or paid by certain parties etc, (again thanks for that).”
I’ll second that, does make a nice change not to be called a traitor because I vote Labour and not BNP! Note the recent comments from Potter, another conspiracy theory, Vote No To BNP and I are the same person :-)
The UAF troll accusations are particularly amusing for me, the reason BNP supporters found my site in the first place was because I was arguing on a UAF Facebook group (I wasn’t that familiar with who the UAF was then) that Nick Griffin should be invited on Question Time as he’s an elected MEP. I was called by one UAF activist a fascist sympathiser! I wrote this article https://general-election-2010.co.uk/unite-against-fascism-uaf/ not long after :-)
David
View Comment
Michael,
Thank you for sticking up for the BNP…
going by past debates I have had with VoteNoToBNP, I think you will find that he and David are indeed one and the same person… VoteNoeToBNP actually admits this and laughs in the face of other BNP supporters he has been arguing with on another thread.
We know the truth – that pressure groups like the UAF have been formed for the sole reason (in their own words) to STOP the BNP. When visiting their website it is clear from their list of Sponsors that the three main political partys & some Lords are behind this group of thugs… who were clearly seen to be thugs when they put some police officers and camera men in hospital at the gates of the BBC when protesting about Nick Griffin being on Question Time.
This is no Conspiricy Theory – the fact that the likes of David Cameron, Ken Livingstone, Anthony Wedgewood-Benn, G Kinnock, Jack Straw are all arm in arm & putting money into the UAF is the TRUTH…
There is Only one Party who is aiming to put the Great back into Britain again, who has the guts to speak out against Islamification of Britain & Europe, who will not pander to the Political Correct brigade and who will put the true British People first – instead of last……. and that is the British National Party.
VOTE BNP in the 2010 General Election!
View Comment
By the way. I am aware of what is in store for me, having stood in the 2005 General Election and three council elections. You woould have been aware of these facts when you googled my name.
Regards,
Michael
Well ok Michael try answer the questions for Sarah then as she has stated she could be a potential BNP voter who would like to see your answers.
Did I say that??
I don’t remember… I’m sure I said something along the lines of voting for UKIP but wouldn’t be surprised I end up voting Conservatives if they pulled a fluffy white bunny out of the hat….!
Are you sure it was me?
That said, if there was a general election the day after the news broke about the secret immigration policy for electoral gains I probably would have voted BNP in my anger!
I’m confused now! Who am I voting for??? Oh god it’s been a stressful week!
View Comment
Bugger! Just scrolled down and realised there’s another Sarah! little “s” though, I’m big “S”!
It’s a different Sarah, I know hard to believe out of billions of people another person has the same first name :-)
Direct link to the other Sarah comment: https://general-election-2010.co.uk/reasons-to-vote-british-national-party-bnp-2010-general-election/comment-page-21/#comment-3774
David
I’ve changed my user name, will it tag all the other comments I’ve made or just from this point forward?
Just the new ones Sarah, I’ll see if I can run a search and replace through the MYSQL database to change them all, though last time I tried that I managed to delete ~4,000 comments on one of my sites!!!! So if the site vanishes for 15 minutes…
Fortunately I had a backup, was embarrassing though as I should have known better :-)
If you want to highlight your comments better signup for a free Avatar at www.gravatar.com, that way if someone uses the same/similar name you at least have a unique image.
My wife made me a funny Christmas present of screensaver images with my head cropped on them all, there’s some funny ones and considering using one of them for my Avatar :-) My current Avatar was drawn by my youngest son (13).
David
View Comment
Set it up the gravatar I think so here goes…!
I know! What a cheek? Who said they could all share my name??
Sorry Sarah I did get you mixed up oops (Laura I meant to say)
Standing as a UKIP MP and standing as a BNP MP are going to result in a different set of questions, I expect the media will work under the assumption you hold racist views and want to remove all non-whites from Britain.
Not suggesting that’s true of you, that’s the perception I get from the media when they engage with the BNP. It’s a shame as IMO it lets the BNP off the hook with some of their dumb policies like the national service policy and owning a rifle! I find it hard to believe an ex copper would support mass gun ownership!
Reading between the lines of what you’ve wrote in your comments I get the impression you are backing the BNP not because you agree with everything they stand for (your lack of knowledge on the BNP national service policy for example suggests you’ve not understood all their policies and plans), but because after turning your back on UKIP (for legitimate reasons I’ll add) there’s only one other party that’s Eurosceptic and you can only support a Eurosceptic party.
If getting us out of Europe is your thing and you see UKIP as corrupt, BNP are your only choice, there is no other Eurosceptic party. If you’ve read my reasons for voting Labour we are to some degree in the same boat. I don’t agree with everything Labour does/plans to do, (government weakness really irritates me for example) but I agree with more of the important things to me from Labour than the other parties (I also like the Lib Dems, but they are unlikely to gain power).
So if I’m reading things correctly I do understand where you are coming from.
Maybe a discussion on Europe would be more to your strengths?
Ignoring that you appear to be planning on becoming a BNP candidate at this general election for a minute, do you agree with the BNP plan to stop immigration completely (sounds like forever) or do you prefer the UKIP plan of halting immigration for 5 years, whilst allowing in workers we need (not foreign workers to pick fruit, but doctors, dentists etc…) before considering whether to restart immigration into Britain?
Do you accept like UKIP accepts that some immigration is not only needed (skilled workers), but is also good for the country economically?
In a nutshell should we stop immigration completely (forever?) or have MUCH, MUCH better controls on who enters Britain and have it that those who do enter actually benefit the country?
I agree with the latter, we need to tighten the rules and have a system where immigration benefits the country far more than it damages it. Yes, I accept the levels of recent immigration is unsustainable and dumb, I can not understand why we need foreign workers to do menial jobs when we have 2.5 million unemployed!!!
David
View Comment
i didnt vote last time my husband did vote bnp as a protest 4 the liblabcon lies.
this time we are both thinkign abuot vote bnp 4 there asylum policy but we didnt no about the nationservice thing untl reading this site
we would want to no the answer to the question the poster david has asked before we vote bnp
sarah
View Comment
Sorry Sarah but I think the only answer you are likely to receive is to read the website it’s all explained there (even though by David’s legitimate questions it isn’t actually answered in full I have read it all)
Sarah,
David was quoting from the 2005 manifesto. If you visit the British National Party website at www.bnp.org.uk, click onto manifestos, then click onto 2007 mini manifesto, then scroll down to ‘Education’ you will find all the information you need.
Regards,
Michael
pmsl what did I say, see the website lol loving the inability to answer:
And the question Sarah actually asked was related to the National Service (NOT Education) so why refer to the education policy?
Actually my first quote is from which is the most recent BNP policy document and my second quotes from the 2005 general election manifesto.
I’d looked through the BNP 2007 mini manifesto, but couldn’t find a reference to national service and owning of guns which according to the BNP 2005 general election manifesto starts at 18 years of age.
The only thing from the BNP 2007 mini manifesto is a reference to 17-18 year olds, (final year of education) since the 2005 manifesto said all 18+ year olds would do compulsory national service it sounds like this is a different policy.
From the 2007 BNP mini manifesto document.
What does the BNP policy document at refer to when it says:
David
View Comment
So basically David this Voluntary Service thing is the same thing they will be doing when they get to 18 if they should decide they don’t want to do the Military Service.
So they have to do the Community Service stuff twice, and the BNP are forgetting something here Labour have a new policy that begins this year whereby all student will as a matter of course stay in education un till they are 18, this one has been going through since 2006 (before the 2007 mini was written) so goes to show their ack of knowledge of policy that is going to be enacted.
I believe the Labour policy is called “Staying On” or something similar can’t remember the full title.
View Comment
Just quickly correcting myself re Staying On, did some quick research on the subject and here is the precise info:
“he Commission’s Staying On project
The focus of this report is to identify ways to improve the delivery of the Commission’s Staying On initiative, which is in response to the Education and Skills Act 2008. The new legislation will mean that, from 2013 teenagers in England will remain in education or training until at least their 17th birthday, rising to 18 by 2016. The first cohort to stay on entered secondary school in September 2008.
This video, played at our launch event for the publication of our report, shows innovative ways for engaging young people in education and training through until 18.”
More Here:
View Comment
Good to see you are reading the commonsense BNP Policies…
So you are finding it hard to criticise the truth in them then!
VOTE BNP
Time for Change !
Someone has to read them, it’s not like the average BNP voter will.
ROFLOL
David
It is obvious that VoteNoToBNP & David are one & the same person… Probably these names are being used by several people, the organisers of this website, arguing against the BNP – how else could VoteNoToBNP keep going with arguments 24/7 as he seems to do?.
I would have thought that the organisers of this website are supposed to be impartial… but sadly they are as determined to extinguish the fire of the BNP as the main Parties are – but the general public of Great Britain are sick of the main parties and will stand up against political correctness in favour of good old British common sense.
Read the BNP Policies and take no notice of what these anti-BNP people say… Rad the BNP Policies and make up your own mind.
Your vote at the ballot box will be anoymous (so don’t worry about your job being threatened by the anti BNP lot (the Unions have joined the UAF too!)
Stand up for the Democratic Right of the British electorate by voting BNP – don’t join the Lab/Cons/Lib who will sleep walk you into Europe and take away your right of Self determination.
READ the BNP POLICIES & you will see they stand for truth and commonsense… make up your own mind and ignore the lies of that facist organisation called the UAF.
VOTE BNP – make your vote count!
It is Time For Change!
View Comment
Do you see what I mean Michael about the average BNP supporters and conspiracy theories, (I think this is the third one to say me and Vote No To BNP are one and the same), gives BNP supporters a bad name (AKA: dumb)! Why they can’t just accept I’m an individual who owns a website about politics is beyond me!
Even the most basic of online research would indicate I’m a real person, (I’ve never hid who I am, my name is David) it’s not very hard to confirm, I’m actually surprised I’ve not been accused of being David Cameron yet as my middle name is Cameron and I have used it as a bit of fun on some places I post :-)
Would be hilarious if I ever stood as an MP, using my full name would be so confusing :-)
You can track my online activities to at least 10 years ago if you know where to look.
I suppose Vote No To BNP could be several people, just like anyone posting here could be, I don’t know, if it is they are very good at using the same sort of posting style which is why I tend to believe it’s one person, also he doesn’t post 24/7 he clearly goes to sleep (unlike me up at going on 3 am). I know as much about Vote No To BNP as you do: tell a lie I know his IP addresses and a couple of free email addresses he’s used.
It’s not hard to write a response here when the level of debate from the average BNP supporter is:
“lib/lab/con BAD, BNP GOOD, but please don’t ask me about BNP policy, because I’ve not actually read them all, I just know people like Nick Griffin are decent and that’s good enough for me, they also do a decent sandwich at BNP meetings. If you do point out a dumb policy from the BNP, that’s OK, the BNP immigration policy is all I’m voting for anyway and I’m sure Nick will see us good in the end, he is an indigenous Brit and Christian after all and so can’t do any wrong.”
This comment for example has taken no research and has taken all of about five minutes to write, spell check and post.
It’s only when a more savvy BNP supporters posts here that it takes more time to compile a response, I’ll research what they’ve said to see if it’s true or not. Michael Barnbrook comments required me to look up some immigration legislation and double check the BNP 2007 mini manifesto (I read it all again) to make sure I’d not missed anything about their national service for the over 18s policy.
David
View Comment
Many people here are just being silly and prejudice, assuming that those who speak for the BNP represent the party, as if they were officials; they are not. They are simply supporters, just like yourself.
Secondly many people think that Nick Griffin is the BNP and is a symbol and icon for every single supporter. Is Gordon Brown holding together the Labour party and an iconic symbol to their voters? No most of his voters hate him, as do most of his own party. Leaders are not perfect icons of a part, just as Labour is not the perfect icon for Britain. To accuse every BNP member of being a ‘racist’ or ‘fascist’ or saying that they adore Nick Griffin is no better than an American, for example, thinking that Gordon brown is what every man in England looks like. Its foolish.
Its about time we stopped spinning facts in our own opinions and throwing around accusations like children, all the while insulting the government for doing the same thing.
If you support a part say why. If you don’t say why. If you’re struggling for who to vote for say why. If you want to state any relevant facts, you guessed it, say why. That is the purpose and meaning of democracy, or it use to be.
You can not scream,shout,squeal or yelp common sense or logic. Only explain it.
View Comment
To answer your points from my perspective,
1. I have NEVER on this website called anyone racist (no point in it lowers debate)
2. I have given my reasons for voting Tory (they are spread around this site)
3. I don’t vote for the party leader I vote on policy
4. I have explained MANY MANY times why I don’t agree with BNP policy and provided plenty of supporting evidence.
Hope this answers your points.
View Comment
I wasn’t asking questions, I was trying to set guidelines.
The fact you’re posting comments about Dr Who and somehow relating that to the idea of the BNP is pathetic, you’ve lost all credibility in my eyes and I’m fairly ashamed at the admin for not removing that comment and your account. I’m sure ‘Voteno toBNP’ is not your real name..
Many people won’t vote for the BNP simply because of their own stereo type of a BNP member. I know for a fact that many of the founding members have left the group, voluntarily or forcibly, who were ‘extreme’ and without a doubt they are racist and are Nazis. I’m not going to deny that because it would simply be ignorant not to. Just as it would be ignorant for Labour to say it doesn’t get any votes from drug dealers or terrorists; they do, whether they like it or not and whether they want it or not.
Someone on this site said that isolationism never works and it only ever destroys countries; however that person, whomever it may be, seems to have forgotten that America because a super power in the world through isolationism during the first world war and also after the war America went into isolationism. Each time America pounced out of isolationism it made massive gains in every area, so the ‘fact’ that isolationism always fails is a complete and utter lie. Many people within the UK feel that we should leave the EU and that we should go into semi-isolationism.
I will leave on this point; in a poll run by sky news people were told the policies of the BNP without being told they were the BNPs. Over 50 percent said that agreed with those policies. When told that those policies were the BNPs that 50 percent turned into 40’s. Why? Probably because of their prejudice I’d assume, but we can each have our own answer. At the end of the day the manifesto is the core of every party; the book of policies.
View Comment
I’ll be moving the BNP Doctor Who joke to the Political Jokes pages when I do the next set of forced comment repatriation :-)
David
My bad, forgot the jokes pages was there lol
Hey Jaymie, been a while since you commented (one of the first commenter’s on the site).
When I’m commenting I try to separate BNP supporters from BNP officials, I’m sure I’ve slipped up occasionally where I’ll say BNP when I mean BNP supporter, but I don’t believe you for example have any say in BNP policy (unless you are a BNP party official?) just like I have no say in Labour policy.
To date I think we’ve had two BNP officials post comments and one of them (Michael Barnbrook) hasn’t confirmed he’s running as a BNP candidate in the general election, so with Michael I try to be careful not to suggest what he says IS BNP official comments (if he does become a BNP candidate then his comments hold more importance).
“Secondly many people think that Nick Griffin is the BNP and is a symbol and icon for every single supporter.”
In some respects Nick Griffin is the BNP, Labour/Conservative have hundreds of MPs, the BNP has two MEP’s, so they are not the same scale wise. Labour/Conservative BIG, BNP small.
It’s not surprising with a small party like the BNP people associate it’s leader as the party, not true of course, but far more accurate than if you said Gordon Brown is the Labour party.
“Its about time we stopped spinning facts in our own opinions and throwing around accusations like children, all the while insulting the government for doing the same thing.
If you support a part say why. If you don’t say why. If you’re struggling for who to vote for say why. If you want to state any relevant facts, you guessed it, say why. That is the purpose and meaning of democracy, or it use to be.”
I couldn’t agree more, unfortunately every time a comment thread starts on a subject unrelated to the BNP it quickly turns to the BNP.
Example: https://general-election-2010.co.uk/who-will-you-vote-for-in-the-2010-general-election-poll/comment-page-4/#comment-2794 Terence ruins the debate with two stupid BNP comments.
Another one https://general-election-2010.co.uk/who-will-you-vote-for-in-the-2010-general-election-poll/comment-page-4/#comment-2860 talking about how Labour in the poll have increased, turns to BNP.
Both examples above started by Vote No To BNP, so he tries to discuss things beyond the BNP, but BNP commenter’s won’t let a thread run without bringing in party politics :-(
David
View Comment
Yeh, haven’t commented in a while, been pretty busy and completely forgot about this place if I’m honest. Maybe if you got an email when someone replied more people would debate and comment? Would also encourage debate since a lot of people just forget.
I understand what you’re saying with the second paragraph, however whenever a BNP official or member or just a voter makes a comment we need to remember that this is just a single persons opinion; not the entire parties. It does not matter who says what, to sum up everyone in that group because of one persons views is not very wise in my eyes.
The reason I’m so behind the BNP, personally of course, isn’t because of Nick Griffin by any means, I respect the man and I think he’s extremely clever
(For example one of the BNP’s main points in the coming election campaign will be revolving around Afghanistan and foreign wars…the Islam4UK march, which I’m sure you’ve heard about, is a huge topic at the moment and relates back to Afghanistan which in turn relates back to the Lib-Dems and the BNP, the only two parties that I can think of that aren’t dedicated to foreign wars)
But that does not mean I ‘love’ or adore the man or see him as an icon. He is simply someone to take orders from and people seem to forget that in the BNP as soon as you have been in the party for two years you can vote on topics relating to policies or the constitution; the members make the choices, in that respect, not Nick.
I am not a BNP official, however, I am a BNP activist and have been offer jobs (voluntarily ones) within certain branches of the party.
I’d just like to say that with a name such as ‘VoteNo ToBNP’ how can you ever expect the thread not to eventually resolve around his name? Every single comment no matter what it says will resolve around the BNP simply because of his name. It is only right that whenever a person with that ‘name’ speaks someone defends the party, no?
If you’re sick of people defending what they support or about the threads simply turning back to the BNP then for a start you could remove that guys name and create a suitable substitute, one that doesn’t provoke anyone or evoke emotions..for example ‘bob’ and then we could get somewhere.
I may be a member of the BNP but unlike the said person I would never say ‘dont vote for someone’ because I’m simply happy that people vote at all. Less and less people are getting involved in politics and that’s very worrying and could easily lead to dictatorships.
I might be politically bias, without a doubt since I’m a member, but I will respect the other parties is what I’m saying; unlike said person.
Cheers for replying David.
View Comment
But we have a democratic system in the UK which means that I (as well as you) have the right to agree or disagree with anything or anyone (be that on political issues or any other issue), that also affords me the right to use any name I wish to use on any website I choice to go to.
Now I have said this many times before to be automatically called a lier, but I will say it again the reason for me NOT using my real name on this or any other website is simple, I used to do just that but within days of doing that my name/address/telephone number and pictures of myself and my family appeared on several BNP support websites and we then started receiving threatening phone calls (to the extent we had to have all caller ID with held numbers blocked from our line, and we installed a call recording system where by every call we receive is recorded (we are still receiving the odd call now, six months later).
I was physically attacked shortly after all that started and the Police are still dealing with that now, I still receive threatening message through my Facebook profile from people setting up fake profiles just to do that (all these are still even now being passed to the Police).
But even after having to go through all this all it has managed to do is make me more determined against the BNP (because of what it’s supporters have done to me in the past six months, I can’t say party officials as there is no proof of that).
But I no doubt expect to be called a lier yet again for stating these facts, all I get is the BNP Supporters demanding to know my name which as I am sure you will agree is not a safe thing for me to do.
Even using this name people on this (and other websites) have attempted to “identify me” and publish those details directly on the BNP’s own website (see Andrew Phillips comments for evidence of this).
The BNP Supporters seem to for some reason be set on “identifying me” and letting my personal details known, if they are such a democratic political party why would the BNP allow their own supporters to do this to people who disagree with them?
I know they can’t control the activities of the other BNP support websites but they do control there website, yet haven’t attempted to remove this attempt to identify me personally.
I hope you accept this explanation of the reasons for using this name, and the obvious reason why I have no intention of changing it.
View Comment
I have to say I don’t get the big deal over the posting name, yes it’s going to wind up die hard BNP supporters, but that’s no different to when BNP supporters post things like Liebor, lib/lab/con voters are traitors and things that suggest you aren’t patriotic if you don’t vote BNP!
Then there’s ending the vast majority of comments with Vote BNP, how is ending a comment with “Vote BNP” any different than having the name “Vote No To BNP” or similar?
I don’t know about how Vote No To BNP feels about ending his posts with Vote Conservative, but when I’ve ended the odd comment with Vote Labour I’ve felt stupid! It shouldn’t be needed in a debate, you put your point across and leave it to the reader to decide who to vote for. If your arguments are strong and valid they should speak for themselves. I note the lower quality comments are the ones that tend to include the “Vote BNP” within them. It does come across as desperate, “I can’t form a valid argument, I know Vote BNP”.
Just to distinguish the difference, I’m not talking about commenter’s that explain why they vote for a party, just the ones that paste it in a comment (sometime in the middle of a comment) when it wasn’t needed to make a point.
Not that I’m going to force a name change on anyone who doesn’t use offensive words, but if I did wouldn’t I also have to insist on no more adding “Vote BNP” (or any other party) within comments?
You know even if I did change his name and he agreed to post new stuff under a new name, (no way for me to force him) there would be nothing stopping him posting Vote No To BNP at the end of every comment and as long as his comments are valid (not just one line with half of it Vote No To BNP) I wouldn’t delete it.
BTW Some posters have used BNP in their names, a “Vote Yes to BNP” and “Richard the BNP Meerkat” spring to mind, doesn’t bother me as I’m far more interested in what they have to say. Richard the BNP Meerkats comments for example are far more interesting than what Terence posts, but I don’t automatically jump down Richard’s throat because he has BNP in his posting name.
IMO the reason why some (so not all) BNP supporters keep bring Vote No To BNP’s posting name up (it’s come up a fair number of times) is they can’t handle him in reasoned debate. They’d find something else to complain about if he posted under a name like Bob as well: UAF troll, paid by the Tories, he’s a Marxist Commie Fascist :-), he’s me, I’m him, he’s a fully paid up member of the NWO and Common Purpose secret society, wink, wink funny handshake…..
David
View Comment
“IMO the reason why some (so not all) BNP supporters keep bring Vote No To BNP’s posting name up (it’s come up a fair number of times) is they can’t handle him in reasoned debate. They’d find something else to complain about if he posted under a name like Bob as well: UAF troll, paid by the Tories, he’s a Marxist Commie Fascist :-), he’s me, I’m him, he’s a fully paid up member of the NWO and Common Purpose secret society, wink, wink funny handshake…..”
I couldn’t agree more David, but I think the real issue is simply because I do post rather a lot of comments the BNP supporters are worried that the more the name Vote No To BNP appears the more people will (rightly) assume this site isn’t a pro-BNP website and therefore won’t be read there comments (which we know by the standard of the comments are generally all the same style of post, and it’s this general style of posting that the BNP supporters assume will win them votes).
I again do not attribute this to ALL BNP Supporters I also agree that there are the odd few that have excellent debating abilities and I actually enjoy debating with them.
But you are correct in saying that what I see as the average BNP supporter doesn’t have that ability and resorts to attacking on basic name calling and then complaining about my user name, which in my opinion is simply designed to get you (David) to ban me from the site, therefore leaving it open to the BNP to basically be able to comment how ever they like with only you and the odd other poster to say anything to counter their arguments.
Not wishing to blow my own trumpet so to speak (in fact I think this will be the first time I have ever said this), but it can’t remember a time where (on this site) I have lost any particular debate, because I am prepared to do the research and find the evidence to back up the majority of my claims.
I even correct myself when I have given the wrong info (example yesterday with the “Staying On” info I posted).
I am all for debate as long as it is constructive and reasoned and supported by evidence sourced from more places that the BNP website. I personally try to provide as much evidence as I can to support my arguments/statements.
What I do tend to get annoyed with is the rather standard responses of UAF Troll/Paid by the Tories/Part of the NWO etc etc etc, that isn’t debate that to me simply shows the person posting it has no ability to debate and therefore reverts to what I term as the playground bully who can do nothing more than name call etc.
View Comment
How arrogant is it to assume people don’t like your name because they can’t debate with you. Seriously, you think you intimidate people with your comments to the point where they feel threatened and feel they can’t reply or possibly ‘win’? (although you can’t win a debate, simply put your views across in a better way)
I’m amazed that a man in his 40’s would post Dr Who jokes, which have no realistic basis, on a political website, then go on to say the majority of BNP supporters are unable to debate or argue, not mentioning the fact that you think its possible to win or lose a debate. Immature seems to be consistent throughout these attributes.
As I said in the above comment; why can we simply not debate policies and topics? It always comes down to someone or other, whether its David or the ‘threatening intimidating person who no BNP member can hope to debate with’, insulting the BNP or BNP members or saying they disagree with them.
So, to throw a spanner in the cogs of this bullsh*t how about we talk about the environment.
Global warming; man made, natural or a bit of both?
View Comment
“I don’t know about how Vote No To BNP feels about ending his posts with Vote Conservative”
Pretty pointless in my opinion, simple because I actually don’t have any 100% party loyalty I can’t just vote for someone because it’s a specific party.
I change my vote dependent on policy, I examine policy each election and make the choice based on which party offers me the most policies I can agree with.
For instance in 2005 I voted Labour because at that point they had more to offer me than any other party, this time the Conservatives have more policy that I can agree with and that I see will best benefit me personally and the wider country as a whole.
View Comment
Then perhaps you could change it to something else, such as Incognito, so it would not offend anyone and aggravate people. Its small wonder you’ve had the troubles you have in the past and still do when you wind people up.
I have yet to hear your reasons for you being against the BNP, since I have not read every single comment page, and whenever a reader see’s your name they will just think…”well, why should I not?”
I’d like to hear your reasons.
View Comment
If you read my previous post the problems I had re-threats and actual assault that was when I used my real name, it doesn’t happen with this particular user name as I haven’t made it in anyway easy for people to find me at all.
As for my reasons for being against the BNP, they are a mixture of the history of the party itself and it’s leaders, to me their backgrounds (and that of the party as a whole) will not be good for the image of the UK on the world stage, the changes the BNP have been making in recent years are nowhere near enough yet for many people.
The other reasons I disagree with the BNP are based on policy with the main one being the economy policy, creating a protectionist state will destroy this country as protectionism doesn’t work when you consider the way the world works in terms of world trade etc and our need to be part of that system.
One person here pointed out the semi-protectionist system the US used pre WW1, it may have worked then but look at the way the world has changed since then, worldwide communications in seconds, mass movement of people/good anywhere in the world withing hours and not months as used to be.
We cannot compete on the world stage with countries like China (who as of today are the worlds biggest exporter (also producing goods far cheaper than anyone else in the world), we could not compete with that under protectionism our prices for export goods would be so high that we would be pricing our buyers out of the market as countries like China will basically hammer us in to the ground on price.
Education – the BNP’s policy is to wind the education clock back 20 (or more years) which to me will damage our children when it comes to competing in the market place for jobs etc. Education need to move forward and develop not go backwards (I agree the system isn’t perfect now the Labour Gov hasn’t made enough improvements to it), but the BNP will wind it back not improve it.
Immigration – Whilst I accept that we need to have far tighter control over immigration the BNP answer to stop it all dead isn’t the answer, the country needs economic migrants to take up the slack in the skilled jobs that British people are NOT qualified to do either through lack of correct education or lazyness of British children and parents towards education, either way it still creates the same problem.
I could go through more of the policies, but I think you can see I have realistic objections to policy and not some stuff I have been told to believe.
View Comment
“Maybe if you got an email when someone replied more people would debate and comment?”
I had a plugin setup for such a thing, but it broke the commenting on the site (after posting a comment the page went blank). Been meaning to try out other plugins, seem to spend all my time moving comments around right now!
Made a post on the Islam4UK march https://general-election-2010.co.uk/should-the-government-ban-the-islam4uk-wootton-bassett-march-poll/ an interesting comment or two there like this thread https://general-election-2010.co.uk/should-the-government-ban-the-islam4uk-wootton-bassett-march-poll/comment-page-2/#comment-3694
David
View Comment
Entrenched positions on all sides.
No point in debate.
Moderator heavily biased, and I mean heavily.
Mod provides link to VotenotoBNP blog.
Voteno blog is a rant, no opportunity to reply.
Pic of Voteno(?), is it him(?) – looks far too young to have an informed opinion on politics – how far back does his adult memory go?
Yet Voteno and moderator HOG the so called debate.
Both should be muted for a month, then maybe some real debate might take place.
Why David, do you not include a running total of all first-time visitors right next to the ‘total votes’ number? That way we can get an idea of how many people don’t bother voting on this site.
You say 2000 hits a day? That’s an awful lot of people who are not bothering to click any party, not even a ‘none of above’.
So, do something useful and give us all a better idea of how the votes are going/not going. Please.
This site was a good site in the beginning David, but you and voteno are hogging it and ruining it.
I am sure visitors want to read other comments besides your rants against the BNP.
Rosie.G.
View Comment
Hi Rosie,
The picture on the blog isn’t me, for obvious reasons (it’s a free wordpress template), I don’t allow comments as it’s purely designed for me to write on and I don’t want to waste time moderating comments on it.
I am in my 40’s so have plenty of life experience to work from, and plenty of ability to debate. If you would like to engage me in real debate I would be happy to do that.
View Comment
“Entrenched positions on all sides.”
I’m not entrenched in my views, I can certainly be swayed by reasoned argument, I don’t see me ever voting BNP, but that would be like asking a BNP voter to vote for Stalin! My opinions are movable, I have moved further right on immigration for example, just not as far as you want me to.
When I first posted the BNP policies I liked the concept of National Service for young people, still do, but not for everyone like the BNP policy and not tied to your right to vote and not involving fire arms ownership either.
I’ve been trying to get BNP supporters to debate with me about National Service and I get ignored pretty much. I’d like to understand how far National Service would go under a BNP government, how disabled people (like myself) would be treated (if I can’t do military service do I loose my right to vote?) and then as I think the current BNP National Service policy is ill thought out, come up with a better idea, because like I said I do like the concept.
“Moderator heavily biased, and I mean heavily.”
Yep.
“Mod provides link to VotenotoBNP blog.
Voteno blog is a rant, no opportunity to reply.”
It’s a good resource for those wanting to read another side of the BNP.
“Pic of Voteno(?), is it him(?) – looks far too young to have an informed opinion on politics – how far back does his adult memory go?”
ROFLOL, though I knew that’s not a picture of Vote No To BNP, (it’s come up before) talk about ageism!!! Are you saying young people can’t understand politics as well as a 25+ year old? Have you seen some of the dumb things Terence says for example and he’s a pensioner, by your style of argument old people shouldn’t be allowed an opinion either because some are not informed!
I’m a little gobsmacked you brought age in to this. My 18 year old son posted a few comments under the Reasons to Vote BNP” page and he wiped the floor with those who responded.
“Yet Voteno and moderator HOG the so called debate.”
How can we HOG the debate, unless you are suggesting I’m deleting hundreds of comments or something? The comments are open and since I made this new BNP Commenting Policy on the 1st of January (8 days ago) https://general-election-2010.co.uk/commenting-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-3497 I’ve deleted 41 comments (upgraded WordPress and they now go in a Trash folder, so not actually deleted).
Of those 4 are mine, 2 are from VoteNo ToBNP, 3 from Andrew Phillips (2 of them were posted twice), 26 from Terence, most of these are of the form Vote BNP, blah, blah, blah (no value) and a few double posts. The rest are from various posters who posted the Vote blah, no value. The trashed comments date back as far as November 18th, so not new comments. the last comments deleted are 3 from Terence on the 2nd January, not deleted anything since.
“Both should be muted for a month, then maybe some real debate might take place.”
LOL, you mean all pro BNP comments?
“Why David, do you not include a running total of all first-time visitors right next to the ‘total votes’ number?”
I don’t have that option, it’s not part of the plugin I used to create the polls.
“That way we can get an idea of how many people don’t bother voting on this site.”
I can tell you it’s most people don’t vote. I don’t have a running total of how many people vote per day or anything. I do have basic logs from the plugin, but to pull daily voting numbers from it would mean manually counting votes each day!!!
Most people don’t comment either, this is becoming my most commented site. I have a site that gets 10,000 visitors a day and it doesn’t get this many comments.
“You say 2000 hits a day? That’s an awful lot of people who are not bothering to click any party, not even a ‘none of above’.”
You assume they are all finding the site looking for a general election poll to vote on. If someone searches for BNP Policies in Google this page is number 5 currently: https://general-election-2010.co.uk/bnp-policies-immigration-time-to-say-enough/ they don’t necessarily care about voting in a poll. Even most of those that find their way to this poll page aren’t searching for a poll, they are searching for General election 2010, UK General Election etc…
Also it was 2,000 visitors not hits, hits is a bit misleading, each visitor can generate multiple hits, so when a webmaster says they get 2,000 hits it could man 100 visitors, 500 visitors, depends on the site design. After the general election announcements in the news went out, visitor numbers has increased, too early to say it will hold, but currently around 2,500 visitors a day. General election fever hasn’t hit yet.
“So, do something useful and give us all a better idea of how the votes are going/not going. Please.”
I don’t see how the percentage of people who visit this site vote is a helpful statistic to be honest. I don’t think pollsters like Gallop include things like “we stood outside a polling station and asked 2,500 voters who they voted for, 22% replied”. Everyone knows when it comes to polls most people say they are too busy.
Even if I wanted to include this information it’s not a feature of the plugin used, so it’s not even an option.
“This site was a good site in the beginning David, but you and voteno are hogging it and ruining it.”
You mean it was a good site when I didn’t know enough about the BNP to comment effectively and BNP supporters got to comment without having their sources called into question like Vote No To BNP does?
“I am sure visitors want to read other comments besides your rants against the BNP.”
I’d rephrase that slightly:
I am sure visitors want to read other comments besides BNP comments.
David
View Comment
Many people seem to forget that, just like yourself, Nick Griffin has a disability. Despite what crap you hear the BNP are not ‘evil’ or ‘cruel’ and would respect those that can not do military service by offering alternatives.
You’ve seen how many people think its hopeless for the BNP to get power, is there really much point building a manifesto based on having a majority in parliament when that is not an aim and is not realistic. The BNP Manifesto will develop when the power comes to them, otherwise it would just be hot air.
E.g. National service would not be possible if the party has 1 MP or 100 MP’s. They would need, realistically in the current political environment, around 250 seats or more. Makes little sense to go into detail when they’re going to struggle to win one seat.
And for the love of God can people stop tarring the morons with those of us who actually want to debate? I’ve seen many people argue that others should vote labour simply because of Thatcher; yet I don’t disrespect every labour supporter or member by insulting them with a bit of petty ‘prejudicness’. However statistics have shown that the majority of coloured people in the country (89% black Caribbeans in the last general election for example) do vote for labour because of their immigration policy most of the time.
View Comment
“And for the love of God can people stop tarring the morons with those of us who actually want to debate?”
Well Jaymie can I suggest that people like you UK Forever, Michael Barnbrook and the other BNP supporters who are capable of debate try taling to your own supporters who do nothing but post the daft comments full of insults etc and only post when they have some realistic debatable points.
If more BNP supporters where willing to enter in to actual debate and stop resorting to mindless name calling etc then maybe the BNP could even win a few extra votes fro sites like this.
As much as I actually disagree with BNP policy I personally think that the BNP getting even one elected MP in this years GE would actually in some small way benefit the country as a whole, it would be the wake up call the main parties need to get their heads out of their arses on subjects like immigration which in my opinion does need to be made far tougher than it currently is, I just don’t agree that ending all immigration is the answer.
But the BNP won’t get that one MP elected if the majority of the BNP supporters are just fixated on the personal attack method, all that does is push people away from voting BNP and reinforces the sterotype image that the general voting public currently has of the BNP.
I’d be interested in your opinion on this.
View Comment
The majority of comments on the last few pages have been against the BNP, in fact.
David why can you not remain neutral in this? The fact that you’re an admin kind of undermines the whole point of this since you can move and delete comments at will.
It would be like the cabinet arguing with Gordon Brown; some did and they were shortly kicked out.
Who knows, maybe I’ll pick a silly name and make comments with that from now since ‘Voteno toBNP’ is allowed.
I have yet to see a single accurate argument against the modern BNP. Every comment either insults the members or looks at the BNPs past and judges it or looks at Nick Griffin and judges it. I saw one comment about the policies which was laughably incorrect, stating that the BNPs environmental policy is that immigrants damage the environment…er…that is not their policy…
This website has become less accurate than even the shoddy celeb newspapers such as ‘Daily mirror’.
View Comment
“I saw one comment about the policies which was laughably incorrect, stating that the BNPs environmental policy is that immigrants damage the environment…er…that is not their policy…”
Have you actually read the BNP’s own website?
Source: https://bnp.org.uk/policies/environment/
“Unlike the fake “Greens” who are merely a front for the far left of the Labour regime, the BNP is the only party to recognise that overpopulation – whose primary driver is immigration, as revealed by the government’s own figures – is the cause of the destruction of our environment.”
From the BNP’s own website in their own words.
View Comment
“David why can you not remain neutral in this? The fact that you’re an admin kind of undermines the whole point of this since you can move and delete comments at will.”
I’ve explained my position so many times I might just make a copy and paste comment for every time a BNP supporters asks why I’m not unbiased about the BNP etc…
Do you own any websites or involved in moderating comments Jaymie?
Would you as a BNP supporter sit by and let commenter’s trash the BNP and say nothing?
Based on many pro BNP commenter’s comments if they moderated this site they’d delete all of Vote No To BNPs comments and he makes some of the better comments here, both about and not about the BNP.
I agree with Vote No To BNP, the vast majority of BNP commenter’s here can’t handle him in reasoned debate and resort to distracting name calling and trying to drive comments to about him not using his real name, which is completely irrelevant. I don’t care if he’s David Cameron on his days off, his comments are still interesting, I also don’t care if the name you’ve posted under is real or not. It’s the value of a persons comments that’s of interest to me: other than when you create posts like these, yours are worth debating with as well Jaymie.
I understand the moderators of the BNP website regularly deletes anti-BNP comments that ask difficult questions (like those asked here), if I had that approach (deleting pro BNP comments) BNP supporters would scream foul play and call me undemocratic and against free speech (they’d be right as well if I did that).
Why is it acceptable for BNP officials to delete anti-BNP comments, curtailing free speech on the BNP website, but I can’t post anti-BNP comments on my own site?
Why are the BNP website moderators not neutral, by your argument it undermines the whole point of the BNP website having comments open if they are only going to allow pro BNP comments through?
In comparison I’ve let through around 99% of pro BNP comments, (99% of all comments) based on this comparing my general election site to the BNP site, which supports free speech and the democratic process?
At least I try to be fair, interesting comments no matter what the subject matter will not be deleted.
You can not seriously expect me as a personal website owner to not get involved on my own site, especially as the whole point of having open comments is to generate interesting debate.
Only BNP supporters seem to think my site is some sort of public property, it’s not, it’s mine. This is not an altruistic project (that’s consuming a lot of my time!), I want to get something out of it: interesting political debate and learn more about politics and maybe persuade some 2005 general election Labour voters to continue to vote Labour (the latter of which is going sooo well :-)).
I can not dictate what visitors to my site want to discuss, I try to guide discussions via new articles at times (National Minimum wage and the Islam4UK march articles for example), but I can’t force anyone NOT to comment on particular subjects (beyond deleting good comments which I will not do, worst case scenario is I move a comment thread to a relevant article).
BTW I’ve added a new plugin that when a visitor uses the search function at the top of the site it now searches comments as well. Doesn’t link right to a comment, so not perfect, but better than just searching the main articles.
I honestly didn’t think it would be so much about the BNP when I decided to make this site**, expected the sort of response Green Party supporters give, the odd comment now and a again, but discussing the BNP is what my current commenting visitors want to discuss.
** I create a lot of sites on what you might call a whim, no planning, basically “that might be a good idea for a site, an hour later I’ve bought a new domain and installed WordPress etc… and made a couple of starting articles”. Many are in the “added a couple of articles stage a year plus later and that’s it” like http://virtual-light.com/ and others like this site interest me and get a lot more of my time.
David
View Comment
And just for the record:
This is what you’ve been complaining about and insulting. Dreadful, truly.
Have I ever said the BNP couldn’t do anything good or even come up with a good idea or two?
If the BNP are helping elderly people during the cold weather, excellent, keep up the good work.
When I was younger I used to go out with a shovel and clear the paths at my grans warden controlled complex. Can’t do things like that now because of my back, but if I was still able I’d be out clearing paths as it makes a big difference to old people that they can get out and about even during bad weather (they need to buy shopping like everyone else). Despite my back problems, yesterday I offered to pick up some shopping for our elderly neighbours, their daughter had already been though.
Is it just me or do shop owners no longer care about snow and ice outside their premises? Maybe I’m remembering things through rose coloured glasses, but I do recall town paths cleared of snow and gritted when I was young (I’ll be 40 later this year). I also remember more people clearing their own paths and parts of the public paths in front of their homes.
In the town I live now, we walked down the main high street the other day and only noticed one business had cleared a path to it’s doors (was a pub as well). Iceland had gritted it’s loading dock, but not it’s customer entrance! Argos had a leaky guttering and had ice over it’s frontage that was really dangerous!
What has any of this got to do with if climate change is man made or not?
David
View Comment
Jaymie you also claimed in one of your previous posts (can’t find the exact one at the moment) that the BNP do not have anywhere in their policy etc that they want to return Britain to the overwhelmingly white make up of Britain prior to 1948?
So I would like to ask have you ever actually read the BNP’s own party constitution? as it clearly says it in their (I quote)
“(b) The British National Party stands for the preservation of the national and ethnic character of the British people and is wholly opposed to any form of racial integration between British and non-European peoples. It is therefore committed to stemming and reversing the tide of non-white immigration and to restoring, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, the overwhelmingly white make up of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948.”
Source:
So that’s twice I have shown you don’t even know the Constitution or the policies of your own party by providing quotes directly from the BNP’s own website on this issue and also on the environment.
So maybe you should actually read the information about the party you are so dedicated to supporting.
View Comment