More than likely may 2010 when we have a general election. This is local and euro not general.
The all encompassing BNP thread - keep all crap in here.
- Thread starter Stolly
- Start date
More than likely may 2010 when we have a general election. This is local and euro not general.
But people like Cameron and the shadow chancellor who have never had a job outside politics will have all the answers
They realise the answer isn't in them trying to control the economy or make jobs at the taxpayers expense, so yes, I have more confidence in them than I do in Labour (or the BNP for that matter), who think the government can fix everything by economic control...
When politicians stop trying to control and run the economy their economic inexperience matters a lot less...
Now your in denial.
But at least she has 1 fan left
Do you have any idea of the state of the country and the British economy 30 years ago?
People need to take off their rose tinted spectacles when looking back at the past.
Please invite Stormfront here, that would be so much fun.
In a popcorn.gif type of way.
Come now people. The only reason that BNP supporters are banned from working in the police, nurse, etc is for government fear of litigation. If a black patient dies and the nurse was a BNP supporter, well you can imagine.
The whole litigation PC and health and safety brigade will destroy this countries ability to be a world leader. Where the best person for the job no longer gets the job as it has gone to someone else just so the company does not get sued for being
racist;
sexist;
ageist;
disriminate against gays; the disabled.
The 'common' white man has less rights than anyone. Sure the guys running the country are mainly "white middle aged men", but don't tar all white middle aged men with the same brush. Those guys are part of the old school tie brigade, and they are the ones responsible for causing conflict between the different races in the UK, as they prefer it if we argue against each other rather than us unite and question why only their friends and family get the best jobs (despite often being appalling at them). The BNP are probably funded by these guys (obviously not traceable back to them)
Personally I would hang the lot of them...
The whole litigation PC and health and safety brigade will destroy this countries ability to be a world leader. Where the best person for the job no longer gets the job as it has gone to someone else just so the company does not get sued for being
racist;
sexist;
ageist;
disriminate against gays; the disabled.
The 'common' white man has less rights than anyone. Sure the guys running the country are mainly "white middle aged men", but don't tar all white middle aged men with the same brush. Those guys are part of the old school tie brigade, and they are the ones responsible for causing conflict between the different races in the UK, as they prefer it if we argue against each other rather than us unite and question why only their friends and family get the best jobs (despite often being appalling at them). The BNP are probably funded by these guys (obviously not traceable back to them)
Personally I would hang the lot of them...
Last edited:
why?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
This thread suddenly got even more confusing with the merging of a couple of vaguely similar ones.
I really can't decide whether I'm delighted or appalled that the BNP would use a piece of legislation it is against (given it doesn't think we should be in the EU nor that these rights are an absolute to be extended to everyone) to support it's right to exist - it's a quite startling example of hypocrisy but despite that I'm pleased that the usefulness of the ECHR is being recognised.
Because the BPNA doesn't restrict membership based on ethnicity or skin colour, it might be a more attractive organisation for black or asian officers but it is not exclusive to them. Dolph has already explained above why seeking extra rights would be racist, seeking the same rights would not be.
A lovely idea but you also judge people all the time, if you can judge them for what they say, what they do or even how they look then the very least you can expect is that they can do the same in return.
I really can't decide whether I'm delighted or appalled that the BNP would use a piece of legislation it is against (given it doesn't think we should be in the EU nor that these rights are an absolute to be extended to everyone) to support it's right to exist - it's a quite startling example of hypocrisy but despite that I'm pleased that the usefulness of the ECHR is being recognised.
Because the BPNA doesn't restrict membership based on ethnicity or skin colour, it might be a more attractive organisation for black or asian officers but it is not exclusive to them. Dolph has already explained above why seeking extra rights would be racist, seeking the same rights would not be.
A lovely idea but you also judge people all the time, if you can judge them for what they say, what they do or even how they look then the very least you can expect is that they can do the same in return.
I know, but it's the societal level we need to think of. I'm a white male and I fully accept the possibility that I could be passed over for an equally-qualified woman or an equally-qualified ethnic minority: it's for the greater good.
He already has, there are several threads on Stormfront where dirtydog encourages people to come and promote nationalism here. (Available from a cursory Google, I'm not sure about whether I can link to Stormfront or indeed whether I want to.)
Just seems silly spacing out the elections like that.
Surely if, for instance a Conservative was leader of a county, then they can't really put their plans across as they would then interfere with the rules of the main party in power?
I dunno.
I am 51.
I know all about maggie the hun and how she said " we are in a world recession"
No we was not, it was a euro one and she had a big hand in it.
I know all about her lies, ask the people of liverpool about her.
When labour went out there was 500,000 unemployed when she left
there was about 3.3 mil..well done maggie the hun..
they aren't the same, local decide local issues. Main one being council tax and how it's spent.
and most of those people were not doing productive jobs, hence why our economy was completely *******.
The simple fact that when we stopped employing people for non-jobs the economy boomed shows this.
Now we have Labour who have shoved several million non-jobs into the civil service (as they didn't have nationalised industry to put them in) and have to go through the whole process again, as our national borrowing and predicted borrowing clearly demonstrates.
'Employing' people in non-productive tasks at the taxpayer's expense isn't employment, it's economic suicide, and it's one of Labour's core policies.
the fact that you think the early 80's recession was euro only also shows how you either lack knowledge about the time, or lack perspective due to politics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions
This is for the USA, scroll down to the 1980s...
What he said ^^
Permabanned
- Joined
- 6 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 798
- Location
- Twilight zone (Britain)
Now your in denial.
But at least she has 1 fan left
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
As AcidHell2 says they aren't to decide the same things being as they are at very different levels of overall importance, while your local councillor might be say an independent candidate and doing a very competent job for his constituency you can't vote for them or their party on a national level.
Also can you imagine the confusion if all elections were conducted within the same week or even same month, it's hard enough getting people motivated to vote in one election and separating the issues nevermind trying to do three in a short space of time.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 6 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 798
- Location
- Twilight zone (Britain)
As former "parasite" should your care be less until we can fully make babies in tubes?