Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Today it was discovered that the British National Party's membership database had been copied by a defecting member and was posted to a public website.

The BNP is a far right wing party strongly suspected of being racist. They are also very lax about their accounts and sources of funding.

The BNP leader has accused the Labour Party (currently in government) of pulling off this scam -- I don't quite understand what for, as the BNP is a very small party and has had very little electoral success.

A public outcry has arisen, since a number of BNP members have been found to be in the police, prison service, National Health Service, or education services.

The BNP leader says that since human rights guarantee freedom of political views, it would be wrong to sack members from their jobs. However, the BNP's policy is that the Human Rights Act is a piece of pernicious Euro meddling and should be revoked.

This is a tricky one.

Do the BNP have the moral right to insist on the maintenance of their members' interests by means of laws they have condemned?

Do the general public have the right to ban people from certain jobs because of their political affiliation?

Kilkrazy wrote:
Do the BNP have the moral right to insist on the maintenance of their members' interests by means of laws they have condemned?

Yes, but they should also eat massive amounts of crow through the entire process. Publicly, privately, and otherwise.

Kilkrazy wrote:
Do the general public have the right to ban people from certain jobs because of their political affiliation?

No. Unless that political affiliation presents a serious conflict of interests. To use a US analogy a person who is a known member of a group like the KKK should not be allowed to work for the Department of Child and Family Services.

1) Do they have a moral right? Not from my perspective (but then im not a member of the BNP, they have different moral standing to myself). Morally they cant continue to demounce something while making use of it. Do they have a legal (arguablly a human right) right? Yes. Everyone has these rights as layed down in the act, and the BNP are no exception.

2) No. It would be similar to say that someone should be banned for being a socialist or a catholic. There will be certain jobs where it has to be down to employer discression, if any BNP members work for the immigration service for example, but objectively everyone should be free from discrimination on the grounds of political affiliation.

The BNP are arguably the most far right party. They advocate Britain for the British (which usually means Britain for the whites). they want to cease all immigration into this county, remove the immigrants that are already here, remove britain from the EU and castle up in our tiny little island throing rocks at anyone that comes too close. Thier policies are at best suspicious and at worst incite racial hated. Their members have been linked to race related violence accross the country (much denied by the party itself of course) and, as has been made apparent, many hold possitions in high authority.

they could be considered the KKK-lite, same views, less killing.

The BNP probably don’t have the moral claim to protection under legislation they want to remove, and it reflects poorly on the strength of their convictions.

But ultimately, you don’t need a moral claim to have a right to its protection. Sure, they're racist pratts, but they're racist pratts with access to the same legal protections as everyone else.

Should you be penalised for being a member of a legal political party- no.

Should the person who released this info be investigated for wrongdoing be investigated for possible law breaking- yes.

Would there be a hue and cry if this had happened to Labor, The Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats- Yes.

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Should you be penalised for being a member of a legal political party- no.

Should the person who released this info be investigated for wrongdoing be investigated for possible law breaking- yes.

Would there be a hue and cry if this had happened to Labor, The Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats- Yes.

Do the other parties have secret memberships? What does that tell you?

It's a smart move by the BNP leader. Think of it like using enemy tanks for cover: you'll trash them when you have the chance, but you might as well use them before you get that opportunity.

The leaders of the BNP have all been recorded saying some abhorently racist things, including the current youth recruitment leader (I beleive) was recorded on tape as saying he was 'a huge fan of Hitler'. This isn't a legitimate party, it's a bunch of daft racists. Daft racists should not be police officers, teachers or in any position of social responsibility.

true the BNP are not a legitimate party, sadly from what i have gathered they do have some strong followings up North,

however you must take into consideration that not all people that are a members of the party are going to be as far right as some of the more vocal 'daft racists' as you put them, my father was extremely worried about the party, being from Solihull (a small town outside Brum) we were shocked to learn that it has for a small party a considerable following and he is convinced we will have a civil war if they ever do get into power.

however also if you look at the current political climate in Britain there are a lot of disgrunteld people living in this country, and with that some views that are not normally considered even plausible become listened too, take 1930's Germany as an example and consider the political and economic climate back then with the great depression etc,

still i have to agree, perhaps something then like the sex offenders register should be bought out for racism to stop said people getting positions of social responsibility, of course that then leads to the argument of the 'big brother state' sadly i think its a vicious cycle

Its not just in the north they have strong followings. There was an incident recently where a guy in London came out in support of the BNP.

What made it unusual was that this guy was from a Pakistani family (although he had been born in Britain) and supported BNP immigration policy so as to stop Poles and other eastern European immigrants from coming over here and taking his job...


As to the original question, while their moral position is dubious (although as far as I can gather they are not opposed to human rights law as long as it originated in Westminster instead of Brussels) they can easily contest this kind of information release under human rights law.

Equally, if any person on this list suffers any problems at work, they'll have immediate recourse to claim based on discrimination. Sadly, this may make people's jobs bulletproof if they are on this list even if they are incompetant and would have been sacked had this list not come out.

1. Under law members of far right and far left orgnisations past or present are prohibited from holding office in the police or armed services.

So legally they can sack army personnel and police who are in the BNP. However this old rule of law included the Communist party on the prohibited list. Jack Straw as a member, as he is home secretary and in charge of the police.
Will he also have to go?

2. Even here on Dakka some above posters having been assuming that a BNP member is automatically evil. Just one repeated view from the peanut gallery:
"Morally they cant continue to demounce something while making use of it." "BNP probably don’t have the moral claim to protection under legislation they want to remove"
This is typical of opinions shown in the press. BNP is often used synonymously with 'Nazi'.

Meanwhile we are asked if they have nothing to hide, why complain about exposure. With these types of labels wouldn't you?

3. I am yet to see reliable press reports of BNP violence, only criticism of their opinions. I am sure there are plenty of people outside the BNP with similar viewpoints who are not under censure, so why the witchhunt.
After all I have known and met islamic extremists who can quite opnely continue with their jobs, including in the police, and many make no attemtpt to conceal their hatreds. So long as they do not actually execute of fund terrorism that is just an opinion.
Meanwhile if a polcieman is known to have views in accordance with the BNP, let alone join, let alone act on those views - you are out.
I remember a scandal of police cadets with racist views exposd by an undercover journalist. They were all sacked, none had any complaints raised against them for actually doing anything beyond holding opinions.
I also remember Al-Mouhajiroun handing out leaflets in the streets of my town calling for women to have to wear the burqua (isnt that sexism?) and jihad against America and Israel with impunity.

4. BNP have much to change but in recent elections in East London they polled age number of ethnic votes, including those of blacks because the BNP were the only party openly critical of Islamic militancy rising in the UK. Most other parties have long underplayed this issue for fear of being labelled as bigots.
This is what worries the government, and is why there is an extensive campaign to label the BNP and prevent them from successfully making a transition to the mainstream. From what little I know of the BNP (I dont know anyone in the party) the whites only element is dying out and may even be mythical continuancy of a more ethically violent past. After all how could they profess that and successfully target black voters?
National Front was definately a 'whites only' group, BNP are different from them in a number of areas, however from student placards the 'Anti-Nazi league' is still going strong and primarily targets BNP. Are they really Nazis? or is it just a conveneient brush to tar them with. Perhaps they are more sinned against than sinning.

Should any teacher at a higher end school is found to be a member of the labor party be sacked because of residual anti-class members and a history of class hatred by the party?

That was put forward by the BBC world service tonight to give an example of how trying to discriminate against the people named by sacking them.

The lawyers would have a field day.

Orlanth wrote:

3. I am yet to see reliable press reports of BNP violence, only criticism of their opinions.

linky

National Front was definately a 'whites only' group, BNP are different from them in a number of areas, however from student placards the 'Anti-Nazi league' is still going strong and primarily targets BNP. Are they really Nazis? or is it just a conveneient brush to tar them with. Perhaps they are more sinned against than sinning.

More sinned agianst than sinning ? Laughable. They don't have a problem with "their" Redwatch magazine and website.

Are they Nazis ... well they dislike Germans to be fair but as to their views :

On the Nazi holocaust:
Nick Griffin, who is likely to be an
MEP candidate in the North West
said ‘I have concluded that the
‘exterminination’ is a mixture of
... propoganda, profitable lies and
hysteria.’ BNP publications have
called the holocaust a ‘hoax’.


BNP youth: Mark Collett the
party’s former youth leader was
exposed on TV praising Hitler, and
saying Nazi Germany in the 1930s
was a better place to live than
Burnley or Oldham, areas with large
Muslim communities. He opposed
black people being in Britain saying
‘it burns into me...thousands of
ethnics passing me all the time’
and called AIDS a ‘friendly disease’
because, in his view, it only kills
black and LGB people.


Racists: As well as calling for
an ‘all white Britain’, the BNP has
launched a ‘Campaign against Islam’
and ‘Islam out of Britain’ posters to
whip up further hatred against the
Muslim community. The BNP has
urged parents to pull pupils out of
lessons that include teaching on
Islam, and opposed Muslims having
places of worship in Britain.
The BNP is a homophobic
party. Following the bombing
of a gay pub in Soho by a BNP
supporter which killed four people
Nick Griffin said: ‘TV footage of
…gay demonstrators flaunting their
perversion in front of journalists
showed why so many ordinary
people find these creatures so
repulsive.’


On people with
disabilities: Tony Lecomber
a full-time BNP organiser called
people with learning difficulties
“sub-human” and people with
disabilities “genetically inferior”
and advocated Britain following a
eugenics programme to create a
super Aryan state.

Yeah ! Those disabled they deserve everything they get !

reds8n wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

3. I am yet to see reliable press reports of BNP violence, only criticism of their opinions.

linky

Very unpleasant yes, but you can hear that sort of bragging right accross pubs in the UK now, with varied targets, its chav culture etc. A lot of it likely is just bragging, baloon reports are not inditements. Where are the cases, where are the convictions?

reds8n wrote:
More sinned agianst than sinning ? Laughable. They don't have a problem with "their" Redwatch magazine and website.

Who makes Redwatch, you imply it is not the BNP. I won't click the link and dont recommend anyone else does either. Those who watch extremist sites might not concern themselves to ascertain your motive for visiting them.
Admittedly this does mean I dont know the sites content.

reds8n wrote:
Are they Nazis ... well they dislike Germans to be fair but as to their views :

Not nice reading. Nick Griffin and his cronies are not people to support but again you may be mistaking what some say with what others have signed up for. After all was every member of the Labour Party in favour of the Iraq war and other key policies of the government. Is it fair to assume that the people on the membership list think the same way as the quotes above.

I am by no means supporting BNP, but I am asking for justification of the witchhunt we are seeing right now, and there isnt one. If your arguement is 'they deserve what they get' then I should ask, who are 'they'? And by what right do you condemn them all.

Fear not, above Redwatch link takes to the wiki article, I wouldn't like to a piece of dross like the actual thing.

Where are the convictions ? See here. I was especially taken with

Robert Bennett. A leading activist in Oldham BNP during the 2002 elections campaign, Bennett has served five years in prison for the gang rape of a woman. He has also served seven years for armed robbery and has over 30 convictions in total

Lovely people !

Not nice reading. Nick Griffin and his cronies are not people to support but again you may be mistaking what some say with what others have signed up for. After all was every member of the Labour Party in favour of the Iraq war and other key policies of the government. Is it fair to assume that the people on the membership list think the same way as the quotes above.

I would say the majority of Labour Party members were/are against the war. Of course that was never a key tenet of either the Labour Party cause or something they ran with. Hence the disappointment of so many, as trhe move was viewed as being contrary to what they had espoused. The typical quotes above are entirely indicative of the BNP's views. Let's be charitable and say they really really REALLY have no truck with combat 18 or their ilk anymore.... ( ... uh-uh....) : if you hear/read the above and sign up then you've no-one to blame but yourself for guilt by association.

The main reason for joining the BNP is ignorance. Most of their voters probably don't have any idea of quite how abhorent their views are, and just blindly swallow the firendly face they try and put on. Members, I would postulate, have a far better understanding, as they have taken the move to pay for membership and so strongly support the leadership. As for sacking people 'just because they are racist, not because they've done anything', so we have to wait for unfair convictions and beatings to happen do we? Come on, someone who is racist cannot fairly and safely police a country as ethnically diverse as Britain. I suggest watching soe documentaries that have infiltrated the BNP (I'll come back with a link when I remember the titles). Fact is, these people support an all-white England, and are therefore idiotic, backwards f***wits with the raw intelligence of onions who have no place taking any sort of power in modern Britain. Sod them.

Kilkrazy wrote:Do the BNP have the moral right to insist on the maintenance of their members' interests by means of laws they have condemned?

Do the general public have the right to ban people from certain jobs because of their political affiliation?

Until such time as the law is repealed, they have the right to insist that it be followed. Or that they be allowed similar leeway in ignoring laws that they disagree with.

Only if that affiliation prevents them fulfilling their duties.

Well ithose in the BNP who only think hate thety certainly hate less than those that act on it. Already at least one person on the list have been targeted by arson attacks.

The fanatic who did this burned the wong car too, and thr intended target was a former member, not a current one. The irony in hating the 'haters' hatred increases and its real hatred bourne of action and not the hatred that is in every mans mind to some degree or other.

It's like when the Daily Mail printed the paedophile list and some bunch of dimwits attacked a paediatrician.

In that case it was partly the Mail's fault for whipping up the mob frenzy. In the case of the BNP, a lot of people hate them naturally without a Daily Hate campaign.

It's still wrong to go around burning down people's houses, anyway.

Kilkrazy wrote:It's like when the Daily Mail printed the paedophile list and some bunch of dimwits attacked a paediatrician.

In that case it was partly the Mail's fault for whipping up the mob frenzy. In the case of the BNP, a lot of people hate them naturally without a Daily Hate campaign.

It's still wrong to go around burning down people's houses, anyway.

I heard about that, or something similar, but the outing was in The Sun. Mugshots were put in the paper, one person was wrongly identified and killed.

Once again, mere words are just as dangerous as guns.