From the main HOPE not hate blog:
Last week we ran a successful campaign to stop a right wing Islamophobic football hooligan march through the streets of Luton. Over 14,000 letters were sent to the Home Secretary and Chief Constable of Bedfordshire police within 24 hours.
It proved decisive and the march was subsequently banned.
Now we need your help once again. On Saturday 5 September the right wing football hooligan group, the English Defence League, plans to use the England v Slovenia match as an excuse to whip up hatred and trouble in central Birmingham. The last time they demonstrated there were 19 arrests as the city centre came to a standstill after running battles broke out. With the England game drawing thousands to city centre pubs the potential for further trouble is severe.
Unfortunately the local council seem unwilling to act. That’s why we have set up a tool so our supporters can contact the council directly and urge them to reconsider. So far we have only sent out 5,000 to people on our email list who live in and around Birmingham but within 24 hours over 800 emails have already been sent in to the council.
With your help we can push this to 1,000.
http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/page/speakout/birmingham
We will be writing to every Birmingham councillor early next week to encourage them to take a stand against hatred. We want to do that with the backing of a huge number of local people. So please do sign up and send a message loud and clear to the council that the football hooligans are not welcome.
http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/page/speakout/birmingham
posted by: Nick Lowles on: Friday, 28 August 2009, 17:43
Friday, 28 August 2009
Thursday, 27 August 2009
BNP says it submitted donations report
From Searchlight by Sonia Gable :
The BNP says it submitted its latest quarterly donations report in July and suggests that the Electoral Commission has made an "administrative error" in stating that the party had not complied with the requirement.
Simon Darby wrote on his blog late last night after most of the media had reported the supposed failure: "On checking the awful publicity generated today I quickly find out that our submission was sent by recorded delivery and after a couple of calls to the Electoral Commission they begin to realise that a mistake is a distinct possibility".
Complaining that the Commission had nevertheless failed to remove a strong statement from its website that the BNP's failure to deliver the return was "unacceptable", he continued:
"Tomorrow morning if I do not get a satisfactory solution to this problem I am very seriously considering calling in the Metropolitan Police".
----------------------------------------------------------
HOPE not hate, Norfolk checked BNP's Simon Darby blog, and found this interesting paragraph:
Can anyone remember the article attributed to a senior member of the Electoral Commission some few months, possibly years back in which they advocated an electoral system which would "keep the BNP out" or words to that effect. If someone could provide me with a link it would be most useful.
Mr Darby cites "a senior member of the Electoral Commission" and actually gives a direct quote (that he qualifies in the next phrase).
What could Mr Darby be hinting here? Seems to be suggesting some wrong-doing by the Commission.
Not a very clever move, in the circumstances.
The BNP says it submitted its latest quarterly donations report in July and suggests that the Electoral Commission has made an "administrative error" in stating that the party had not complied with the requirement.
Simon Darby wrote on his blog late last night after most of the media had reported the supposed failure: "On checking the awful publicity generated today I quickly find out that our submission was sent by recorded delivery and after a couple of calls to the Electoral Commission they begin to realise that a mistake is a distinct possibility".
Complaining that the Commission had nevertheless failed to remove a strong statement from its website that the BNP's failure to deliver the return was "unacceptable", he continued:
"Tomorrow morning if I do not get a satisfactory solution to this problem I am very seriously considering calling in the Metropolitan Police".
----------------------------------------------------------
HOPE not hate, Norfolk checked BNP's Simon Darby blog, and found this interesting paragraph:
Can anyone remember the article attributed to a senior member of the Electoral Commission some few months, possibly years back in which they advocated an electoral system which would "keep the BNP out" or words to that effect. If someone could provide me with a link it would be most useful.
Mr Darby cites "a senior member of the Electoral Commission" and actually gives a direct quote (that he qualifies in the next phrase).
What could Mr Darby be hinting here? Seems to be suggesting some wrong-doing by the Commission.
Not a very clever move, in the circumstances.
BNP bullyboy tactics in Essex
***Please note this update: Apparently the following story was a fantasy, and Mr Ramjanally was arrested.
Noor Ramjanally abducted and threatened unless he stops Islamic prayer services at Murray Hall
From This is Local London:
A MUSLIM community leader was kidnapped from his home by two men and taken to Epping Forest where he was ordered at knifepoint to stop his religious work.
Details are starting to emerge of the latest attack on Noor Ramjanally, whose home was firebombed last month.
He was in his flat in Valley Hill, Loughton, on Monday when he heard someone repeatedly ringing the intercom outside.
He said: The doorbell kept ringing, I thought it was someone to fix up the flat. I came down and they grabbed me. They put a weapon, I think a knife, at the back of me and force me into a 4x4.
They didn't say anything until I was in the forest. They said they didn't want the Islamic group in Loughton.
Noor Ramjanally
Last month he received hate mail threatening his family and later suffered an arson attack at his home.
Essex Police have confirmed they are treating the latest attack as a hate crime and are linking it to the two previous incidents and the use of Murray Hall.
Superintendent Simon Williams said: "We are treating these offences with the utmost seriousness and are putting considerable resources into the investigation.
"While that investigation continues we will be working with the whole population of Loughton to ensure that all members of the community are free to practise their religion and beliefs safely and freely."
By Edmund Tobin
Extra From Harry's Place:
There is an astonishing quote from Pat Richardson:
Councillor Pat Richardson, leader of the BNP group on the local council, said her party was not behind the attacks on Ramjanally. “Firebombing is not a British method. A brick through the window is a British method, but firebombing is not a way of showing displeasure,” she said.
The BNP is a party of thugs and gangsters.
By David T
Noor Ramjanally abducted and threatened unless he stops Islamic prayer services at Murray Hall
From This is Local London:
A MUSLIM community leader was kidnapped from his home by two men and taken to Epping Forest where he was ordered at knifepoint to stop his religious work.
Details are starting to emerge of the latest attack on Noor Ramjanally, whose home was firebombed last month.
He was in his flat in Valley Hill, Loughton, on Monday when he heard someone repeatedly ringing the intercom outside.
He said: The doorbell kept ringing, I thought it was someone to fix up the flat. I came down and they grabbed me. They put a weapon, I think a knife, at the back of me and force me into a 4x4.
They didn't say anything until I was in the forest. They said they didn't want the Islamic group in Loughton.
Noor Ramjanally
After the man drove off Mr Ramjanlly was able to attract a dogwalker passing by who phoned the police. He said: “It was very shocking. I was still shaking when I got inside. It's killing me.”
The abduction marks the third time that Mr Ramjanally has been targeted since he set up Islamic prayer meetings in Murray Hall, in Borders Lane, Loughton, earlier this year.Last month he received hate mail threatening his family and later suffered an arson attack at his home.
Essex Police have confirmed they are treating the latest attack as a hate crime and are linking it to the two previous incidents and the use of Murray Hall.
Superintendent Simon Williams said: "We are treating these offences with the utmost seriousness and are putting considerable resources into the investigation.
"While that investigation continues we will be working with the whole population of Loughton to ensure that all members of the community are free to practise their religion and beliefs safely and freely."
By Edmund Tobin
Extra From Harry's Place:
There is an astonishing quote from Pat Richardson:
Councillor Pat Richardson, leader of the BNP group on the local council, said her party was not behind the attacks on Ramjanally. “Firebombing is not a British method. A brick through the window is a British method, but firebombing is not a way of showing displeasure,” she said.
The BNP is a party of thugs and gangsters.
By David T
Wednesday, 26 August 2009
A winning formula
Paul Meszaros of Hope not Hate says that Keiron Farrow’s analysis of the BNP threat is complacent and self-indulgent
From Red Pepper:
We recognise that there needs to be a debate concerning the efficacy of different approaches to undermining support for the far right if we are to refine our intervention. Unfortunately, Keiron Farrow offers little in terms of a positive way forward.
His piece casually runs together the Hope not Hate (HNH) and Unite Against Fascism (UAF) campaigns, two organisations he says have ‘broadly similar approaches’, and in doing so blatantly confuses their methods and approaches.
The first important thing to say regarding HNH is that it is a constantly evolving campaign. Because we are not stuck with any old dogma we are able to gauge what works, refine those elements that are helpful and move away from tactics that do not work. For a long period, especially during the 1990s, anti-fascism was something of a minority interest, with a few committed groups and individuals either spying on or beating the far right. This approach might be described as proportional as the BNP offered no political threat in those days, although they posed a physical threat to those they targeted. This changed in the early years of this decade as the BNP for a number of reasons was able, under Nick Griffin’s leadership, to present itself increasingly as a political solution to the problems faced in certain communities.
Since that time we have seen a growth in the far-right vote that is without precedent. During this period the anti-fascist movement has had to learn how to deal with a party that knows how to win elections. We have also had to deal with an organisation that has moved out of its traditional strongholds and is able to gather a sizeable vote almost anywhere. The BNP vote can now longer be dismissed as a protest; rather, the BNP has become the first choice for a significant number of voters.
Certainly, 10 or 15 years ago, the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight would highlight the criminal convictions of far-right activists and candidates. However, this tactic is used far more sparingly these days as we know it has a limited appeal. Rather what we have seen is a growing realisation and understanding that anti-fascism has to address the political, social and economic issues that are giving rise to the far right.
At HNH we know that most people who vote BNP are not Nazis, and we also know that there is a whole host of issues on which they feel ignored. Even here, though, there is an ongoing debate about what these social issues are. We are told often that it revolves around job and housing insecurity. These clearly play a part, but it is also about other less tangible discontents. We are sometimes told that the question is about identity and in particular English and working-class identities ... but are we really being told, in a polite way, that the big issue is immigration? The BNP has managed to give racial ideology and, in particular, fear of immigration a growing political outlet. It is tapping into large reservoirs of racism that have for too long gone unchallenged.
For HNH, taking on the BNP is primarily about working with those communities under threat from the BNP. We have seen in some of our exemplary work, such as in Keighley, that grass-roots campaigning where local people take ownership of the fight against the BNP can be absolutely effective in defeating them. Keighley went from being a BNP ‘capital’ in 2004 to having no BNP organisation or even candidates by 2007. This was achieved by some old-fashioned proper community development work with residents on the threatened estate.
Ironically, the leaders of that particular community came from the mums at the local Sure Start, which suggest to me that it is vital to defend what working-class communities have gained what has been gained over recent years, something Farrow neglects to mention. It is through this careful and patient work that the broad-based alliances necessary to defeat the BNP can be built.
There is also the point that third-party campaigning is limited in what it can achieve. For the BNP to lose an election, another party has to win. Hope not Hate is not an appendage of the Labour Party, but clearly it is often the case that Labour that needs to get more votes than the BNP for the BNP to lose! We disagree entirely with the claim that the BNP can never fulfil its programme and that its real crime is delaying the rise of independent working-class opposition. This seems both complacent and self-indulgent. It almost seems that Farrow believes that voting Labour is a worse crime than voting BNP. What is astonishing is that our hard-left critics have not managed to make any headway over the past few years; their derisory election scores are indicative of how irrelevant they are to the working class of which they speak so much and understand so little.
Farrow is right to suggest that the battle for hearts and minds continues on the estates devoid of the far left. But if at the end of this the working people reject the hate of the BNP and vote Labour it will be called a victory. The election of Griffin and Brons as MEPs is devastating, but we must bear in mind that there was no massive surge to the BNP. Rather, the Labour vote collapsed. It is worth remarking, however, that in Bradford, for example, where HNH is long established, the BNP vote went down while the Labour vote went up. Intelligent community-based campaigning exposes the BNP for what it is, as well as providing a defence of civil society.
by Paul Meszaros, Hope Not Hate Yorkshirehq[at]hopeyorks.org.uk
From Red Pepper:
We recognise that there needs to be a debate concerning the efficacy of different approaches to undermining support for the far right if we are to refine our intervention. Unfortunately, Keiron Farrow offers little in terms of a positive way forward.
His piece casually runs together the Hope not Hate (HNH) and Unite Against Fascism (UAF) campaigns, two organisations he says have ‘broadly similar approaches’, and in doing so blatantly confuses their methods and approaches.
The first important thing to say regarding HNH is that it is a constantly evolving campaign. Because we are not stuck with any old dogma we are able to gauge what works, refine those elements that are helpful and move away from tactics that do not work. For a long period, especially during the 1990s, anti-fascism was something of a minority interest, with a few committed groups and individuals either spying on or beating the far right. This approach might be described as proportional as the BNP offered no political threat in those days, although they posed a physical threat to those they targeted. This changed in the early years of this decade as the BNP for a number of reasons was able, under Nick Griffin’s leadership, to present itself increasingly as a political solution to the problems faced in certain communities.
Since that time we have seen a growth in the far-right vote that is without precedent. During this period the anti-fascist movement has had to learn how to deal with a party that knows how to win elections. We have also had to deal with an organisation that has moved out of its traditional strongholds and is able to gather a sizeable vote almost anywhere. The BNP vote can now longer be dismissed as a protest; rather, the BNP has become the first choice for a significant number of voters.
Certainly, 10 or 15 years ago, the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight would highlight the criminal convictions of far-right activists and candidates. However, this tactic is used far more sparingly these days as we know it has a limited appeal. Rather what we have seen is a growing realisation and understanding that anti-fascism has to address the political, social and economic issues that are giving rise to the far right.
At HNH we know that most people who vote BNP are not Nazis, and we also know that there is a whole host of issues on which they feel ignored. Even here, though, there is an ongoing debate about what these social issues are. We are told often that it revolves around job and housing insecurity. These clearly play a part, but it is also about other less tangible discontents. We are sometimes told that the question is about identity and in particular English and working-class identities ... but are we really being told, in a polite way, that the big issue is immigration? The BNP has managed to give racial ideology and, in particular, fear of immigration a growing political outlet. It is tapping into large reservoirs of racism that have for too long gone unchallenged.
For HNH, taking on the BNP is primarily about working with those communities under threat from the BNP. We have seen in some of our exemplary work, such as in Keighley, that grass-roots campaigning where local people take ownership of the fight against the BNP can be absolutely effective in defeating them. Keighley went from being a BNP ‘capital’ in 2004 to having no BNP organisation or even candidates by 2007. This was achieved by some old-fashioned proper community development work with residents on the threatened estate.
Ironically, the leaders of that particular community came from the mums at the local Sure Start, which suggest to me that it is vital to defend what working-class communities have gained what has been gained over recent years, something Farrow neglects to mention. It is through this careful and patient work that the broad-based alliances necessary to defeat the BNP can be built.
There is also the point that third-party campaigning is limited in what it can achieve. For the BNP to lose an election, another party has to win. Hope not Hate is not an appendage of the Labour Party, but clearly it is often the case that Labour that needs to get more votes than the BNP for the BNP to lose! We disagree entirely with the claim that the BNP can never fulfil its programme and that its real crime is delaying the rise of independent working-class opposition. This seems both complacent and self-indulgent. It almost seems that Farrow believes that voting Labour is a worse crime than voting BNP. What is astonishing is that our hard-left critics have not managed to make any headway over the past few years; their derisory election scores are indicative of how irrelevant they are to the working class of which they speak so much and understand so little.
Farrow is right to suggest that the battle for hearts and minds continues on the estates devoid of the far left. But if at the end of this the working people reject the hate of the BNP and vote Labour it will be called a victory. The election of Griffin and Brons as MEPs is devastating, but we must bear in mind that there was no massive surge to the BNP. Rather, the Labour vote collapsed. It is worth remarking, however, that in Bradford, for example, where HNH is long established, the BNP vote went down while the Labour vote went up. Intelligent community-based campaigning exposes the BNP for what it is, as well as providing a defence of civil society.
by Paul Meszaros, Hope Not Hate Yorkshirehq[at]hopeyorks.org.uk
BNP guilty of 'unacceptable' rule breach
From ePolitix:
The British National Party is to be fined for failing for failing to report its donations and accounts to the Electoral Commission.
Under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, parties are required to report donations on a quarterly basis to the watchdog, and must also submit their annual reports and accounts.
The BNP's breach of the rules was described as "unacceptable" by Electoral Commission chief executive Peter Wardle.
From politics.co.uk:
The British National party (BNP) will be issued with a fine for failing to issue a return to the Electoral Commission concerning its donations. The party will be issued with a separate fine for failing to deliver their latest annual statement of accounts.
"This is unacceptable and the party will be issued with fines for both reporting failures," said Peter Wardle, chief executive of the Electoral Commission. "We will also be assessing the systems they have in place to ensure compliance with the law.”
The BNP were not the only small party to face the disapproval of the commission, with the Co-operative party and the Christian party both reporting "very large" donations late.
"We'll be assessing the systems they have in place to ensure compliance with the law and expect to see them reporting donations on time in the future," Mr Wardle said.
The Conservatives received the most donations, with £6,394,673 going to the opposition. Labour received £4,391,632, while the Liberal Democrats received £1,132,079. The 20 political parties registered in Great Britain received a total of £13.2 million in donations between April and June 2009, according to returns handed in to the commission. Figures were higher than normal, a fact most analysts put down to the local and European elections.
“This was the fourth highest quarter ever for donations – the second highest outside a general election quarter – and we received donations reports from a larger number of parties than usual," Mr Wardle said.
The British National Party is to be fined for failing for failing to report its donations and accounts to the Electoral Commission.
Under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, parties are required to report donations on a quarterly basis to the watchdog, and must also submit their annual reports and accounts.
The BNP's breach of the rules was described as "unacceptable" by Electoral Commission chief executive Peter Wardle.
We have not yet received a donation return for this quarter from the British National Party. This comes on top of their failure to deliver their latest annual statement of accounts to the Commission.
This is unacceptable and the party will be issued with fines for both reporting failures.
We will also be assessing the systems they have in place to ensure compliance with the law.
From politics.co.uk:
The British National party (BNP) will be issued with a fine for failing to issue a return to the Electoral Commission concerning its donations. The party will be issued with a separate fine for failing to deliver their latest annual statement of accounts.
"This is unacceptable and the party will be issued with fines for both reporting failures," said Peter Wardle, chief executive of the Electoral Commission. "We will also be assessing the systems they have in place to ensure compliance with the law.”
The BNP were not the only small party to face the disapproval of the commission, with the Co-operative party and the Christian party both reporting "very large" donations late.
"We'll be assessing the systems they have in place to ensure compliance with the law and expect to see them reporting donations on time in the future," Mr Wardle said.
The Conservatives received the most donations, with £6,394,673 going to the opposition. Labour received £4,391,632, while the Liberal Democrats received £1,132,079. The 20 political parties registered in Great Britain received a total of £13.2 million in donations between April and June 2009, according to returns handed in to the commission. Figures were higher than normal, a fact most analysts put down to the local and European elections.
“This was the fourth highest quarter ever for donations – the second highest outside a general election quarter – and we received donations reports from a larger number of parties than usual," Mr Wardle said.
Let’s out-smart the BNP instead
From Pickled Politics blog:
Another call to challenge the obnoxious nonsense spouted by the far-right
Following the BNP’s annual event ‘Red, White and Blue’ the other weekend, what should have grabbed the headlines (and which was only mentioned in passing was the racism endemic in the event itself.
What in fact grabbed the headlines were the 19 protestors arrested largely for public order offences (4 of whom were charged), and the £500,000 policing cost at public expense. Only a few weeks ago, violence had already made the headlines.
Whilst I am by no means undermining the importance of peaceful protest as a legitimate method of getting heard (I do, in fact, attend rallies), if the right-wing extremists remain predominantly challenged by the left-wing extremists, the argument against the BNP gets distorted. In fact, it can serve to bolster the BNP’s message as did the photographs of young Asian men attacking white-protestors during the Birmingham riots. Moderates need to reclaim the upper hand by systematically challenging the BNP’s ideology rather than resorting to violence.
Since about 2006, particularly post-7/7, the BNP has consciously changed their rhetoric from being anti-Asian, -Black and -Jewish, to being ardently anti-Muslim. In a paper that I authored entitled In Defence of British Muslims: A response to BNP racist propaganda (pdf), I therefore took 10 of the key accusations directed against Islam and British Muslims by the BNP and systematically deconstructed them by highlighting their intellectual inconsistencies and factual weaknesses.
Such arguments are easily undermined using proper statistics, and historical and textual evidence. For one, Islam is not a religion with a cunning master-plan for its adherents to emigrate with the intention of mass conversion. The Islamic concept of migration (hijrah) is to flee from religious persecution rather than a calculated drive for world domination.
The incredible level to which the BNP will stoop was revealed by Lee Barnes in a blog on the drugs problem in the UK. Referring to a young student, Rachel Whitear, who died of a heroin overdose Barnes wrote:
The BNP’s accusations against Islam are offensive to any Muslim, but easily torn apart by intellectually countering these arguments. The BNP are drastically short of funds, and the number of votes has not actually increased on 2004 (rather their share of the vote increased with the slump in Labour support). We don’t need to panic. Instead, members of British society, Muslim and non-Muslim, desperately need to start intellectually reclaiming the debate and systematically challenge the BNP’s racist and inaccurate arguments.
By Lucy James from the Quilliam Foundation
Another call to challenge the obnoxious nonsense spouted by the far-right
Following the BNP’s annual event ‘Red, White and Blue’ the other weekend, what should have grabbed the headlines (and which was only mentioned in passing was the racism endemic in the event itself.
What in fact grabbed the headlines were the 19 protestors arrested largely for public order offences (4 of whom were charged), and the £500,000 policing cost at public expense. Only a few weeks ago, violence had already made the headlines.
Whilst I am by no means undermining the importance of peaceful protest as a legitimate method of getting heard (I do, in fact, attend rallies), if the right-wing extremists remain predominantly challenged by the left-wing extremists, the argument against the BNP gets distorted. In fact, it can serve to bolster the BNP’s message as did the photographs of young Asian men attacking white-protestors during the Birmingham riots. Moderates need to reclaim the upper hand by systematically challenging the BNP’s ideology rather than resorting to violence.
Since about 2006, particularly post-7/7, the BNP has consciously changed their rhetoric from being anti-Asian, -Black and -Jewish, to being ardently anti-Muslim. In a paper that I authored entitled In Defence of British Muslims: A response to BNP racist propaganda (pdf), I therefore took 10 of the key accusations directed against Islam and British Muslims by the BNP and systematically deconstructed them by highlighting their intellectual inconsistencies and factual weaknesses.
Such arguments are easily undermined using proper statistics, and historical and textual evidence. For one, Islam is not a religion with a cunning master-plan for its adherents to emigrate with the intention of mass conversion. The Islamic concept of migration (hijrah) is to flee from religious persecution rather than a calculated drive for world domination.
The incredible level to which the BNP will stoop was revealed by Lee Barnes in a blog on the drugs problem in the UK. Referring to a young student, Rachel Whitear, who died of a heroin overdose Barnes wrote:
The BNP will stop at nothing it seems—not the manipulation of the death of an innocent young girl’s life or the damning of an entire religion— for the furthering of their cause. Luckily for common sense, a man was charged with incitement to religious hatred the other week for distributing the said leaflets.She was not an angel, she was an accomplice to genocide, terrorism and a funder of the most vicious criminal gangs on the planet as she funded the terrorists and gangsters that cause such misery across the planet. The idea that she should be regarded as a victim is repulsive. Every junkie is a criminal, not a victim.
The body of every dead junkie should be photographed and hung on a wall of shame in every community so that young kids can see the real price of heroin. Their lives should be regarded as a disgrace not as victims.
The BNP’s accusations against Islam are offensive to any Muslim, but easily torn apart by intellectually countering these arguments. The BNP are drastically short of funds, and the number of votes has not actually increased on 2004 (rather their share of the vote increased with the slump in Labour support). We don’t need to panic. Instead, members of British society, Muslim and non-Muslim, desperately need to start intellectually reclaiming the debate and systematically challenge the BNP’s racist and inaccurate arguments.
By Lucy James from the Quilliam Foundation
Bringing the BNP to book
From Operation Black Vote (OBV) blog:
Some people argue there are no limits to free speech, but the law and unwritten constitution does set boundaries. Simon Woolley argued that the BNP cannot be allowed to operate outside these limits
The BNP and their supporters must have a good old laugh every time defenders of our liberal democracy try to defend the indefensible. The liberals argue: ‘I hate the BNP, but however loathsome they are we mustn’t close down debate.’ Or they say: ‘I disagree with what they say, but I’ll defend to the death their right to say it.’
And so the pseudo-political debate is framed, not about what the BNP stand for, or what they stand against but simply about their right, in a modern society, to say it.
It is of course a cul-de-sac debate which the BNP can never lose so as long as they stay within a nat’s hair of the incitement to racial hatred law. Moreover, many of the BNP’s detractors quickly become their defenders when discussing the almost sacred cow that is freedom of speech.
There are two principal debates we should focus ourselves on in regards to the BNP. First and foremost, the ideological debate. The battle for ideas. What type of society do we want? How can we all get on with each other? How much immigration can this nation support? How do we fairly dispense limited public resources, particularly in a recession? Who should come first, and why? How do we create real opportunity for all? What is our national identity?
Legitimate questions that are rarely framed without the hysteria and hyperbole that polarises the debate. Having spineless politicians, who pander to a bigoted agenda rather than face it down, means that important questions are not properly explored because the debate is too infected with prejudice and fear.
But if we park the ideological debate for a moment, there is another area of discussion which has hardly been discussed before the Equality and Human Rights Commission raised it by challenging the legality of the BNP constitution.
This question goes to the very core of what are the limits to our democracy, and how much are we fight to uphold and protect them.
Over centuries our unwritten constitution has given us a framework for our democracy. From Magna Carta to the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, our democracy has evolved to reflect our changing times. This framework gives us a democracy which, for all its limitations, seeks to balance individual freedoms with fairness and tolerance.
More importantly, anyone wanting to play a part in the governance of this country must subscribe to these rules. And for good reason. As absurd as the proposition may sound, our democracy would not accommodate the extreme prejudices of the Taliban, not just because the British voters wouldn’t accept it, but also because the Taliban’s imposition on women, -that they remain veiled and uneducated for example-, would be against our law.
If our values and the laws that help enshrine them are to mean anything then surely it is right to challenge any political party that so blatantly flouts our nation’s basic principals?
Surely it is a basic principal for any British citizen to join any political party either because they subscribe to their values, and or they may want to join to be a part of a change within it.
At the moment a Black person is powerless to democratically change the BNP’s constitution or their policies that so blatantly seek to discriminate against them. One of the more unpalatable policies would be the right for British employers not to employ Black people.
Some people would argue that challenging the BNP in this way, particularly after their recent European electoral success, will seem like a spiteful move to suppress ideas we don’t like. But this is not about suppressing ideas.
Their odious ideology needs to be effectively challenged on the door step up and down the country. This particular aspect is fundamentally about political parties operating within the law. A law that enshrines our freedoms and equality.
by Simon Woolley
Some people argue there are no limits to free speech, but the law and unwritten constitution does set boundaries. Simon Woolley argued that the BNP cannot be allowed to operate outside these limits
The BNP and their supporters must have a good old laugh every time defenders of our liberal democracy try to defend the indefensible. The liberals argue: ‘I hate the BNP, but however loathsome they are we mustn’t close down debate.’ Or they say: ‘I disagree with what they say, but I’ll defend to the death their right to say it.’
And so the pseudo-political debate is framed, not about what the BNP stand for, or what they stand against but simply about their right, in a modern society, to say it.
It is of course a cul-de-sac debate which the BNP can never lose so as long as they stay within a nat’s hair of the incitement to racial hatred law. Moreover, many of the BNP’s detractors quickly become their defenders when discussing the almost sacred cow that is freedom of speech.
There are two principal debates we should focus ourselves on in regards to the BNP. First and foremost, the ideological debate. The battle for ideas. What type of society do we want? How can we all get on with each other? How much immigration can this nation support? How do we fairly dispense limited public resources, particularly in a recession? Who should come first, and why? How do we create real opportunity for all? What is our national identity?
Legitimate questions that are rarely framed without the hysteria and hyperbole that polarises the debate. Having spineless politicians, who pander to a bigoted agenda rather than face it down, means that important questions are not properly explored because the debate is too infected with prejudice and fear.
But if we park the ideological debate for a moment, there is another area of discussion which has hardly been discussed before the Equality and Human Rights Commission raised it by challenging the legality of the BNP constitution.
This question goes to the very core of what are the limits to our democracy, and how much are we fight to uphold and protect them.
Over centuries our unwritten constitution has given us a framework for our democracy. From Magna Carta to the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, our democracy has evolved to reflect our changing times. This framework gives us a democracy which, for all its limitations, seeks to balance individual freedoms with fairness and tolerance.
More importantly, anyone wanting to play a part in the governance of this country must subscribe to these rules. And for good reason. As absurd as the proposition may sound, our democracy would not accommodate the extreme prejudices of the Taliban, not just because the British voters wouldn’t accept it, but also because the Taliban’s imposition on women, -that they remain veiled and uneducated for example-, would be against our law.
If our values and the laws that help enshrine them are to mean anything then surely it is right to challenge any political party that so blatantly flouts our nation’s basic principals?
Surely it is a basic principal for any British citizen to join any political party either because they subscribe to their values, and or they may want to join to be a part of a change within it.
At the moment a Black person is powerless to democratically change the BNP’s constitution or their policies that so blatantly seek to discriminate against them. One of the more unpalatable policies would be the right for British employers not to employ Black people.
Some people would argue that challenging the BNP in this way, particularly after their recent European electoral success, will seem like a spiteful move to suppress ideas we don’t like. But this is not about suppressing ideas.
Their odious ideology needs to be effectively challenged on the door step up and down the country. This particular aspect is fundamentally about political parties operating within the law. A law that enshrines our freedoms and equality.
by Simon Woolley
‘We should have challenged the BNP years ago’
From Operation Black Vote (OBV) blog:
The decision of Trevor Phillips’ equalities body to take the British National Party to court over the far-right outfit’s “apartheid constitution” is a brave gamble, but one which seems to enjoy fairly widespread support.
One community activist, who first mooted the idea of challenging the BNP’s very legitimacy three years ago, said he couldn’t understand why it had not been done earlier.
Nic Careem, a former Labour activist from Camden in north London, who is now with the Conservatives, said he originally argued that black and Asian people should join the BNP en mass to cause chaos and expose the extent of racism inside the party of Nick Griffin.
He told OBV Blog today:
The point about the BNP’s policy of discriminating on the grounds of race matters because they are a party that on the surface competes for the votes of all voters, and seeks to govern for all races, even though we know that, in their hearts, they only wish to serve white people.
It’s a very different situation compared, say, to the Black Police Association, a body that does not seek to police only for Black people but wants to a quality service for everyone. The BPA, like any Black association in a large public authority, is simply a coming together of Black people to lobby for equality.
Unlike the BNP, who want to actively discriminate in favour of white people, I have never come across any BPA member who wants preferential treatment for Black officers.
The key difference seems to have been lost on Telegraph columnist Gerald Warner, who claims today that the move against the BNP by the Equality and Human Rights Commission will end up “backfiring” and lead to the BPA being outlawed. Warner writes:
There is a world of difference between an organisation that believes in racial supremacy, and a group that comes together because they know strength-in-numbers is the only way to tackle institutional racism. But it’s time to make this argument all over again now.
The decision of Trevor Phillips’ equalities body to take the British National Party to court over the far-right outfit’s “apartheid constitution” is a brave gamble, but one which seems to enjoy fairly widespread support.
One community activist, who first mooted the idea of challenging the BNP’s very legitimacy three years ago, said he couldn’t understand why it had not been done earlier.
Nic Careem, a former Labour activist from Camden in north London, who is now with the Conservatives, said he originally argued that black and Asian people should join the BNP en mass to cause chaos and expose the extent of racism inside the party of Nick Griffin.
He told OBV Blog today:
I was speaking about this at meetings three years ago, saying that we should challenge the BNP’s legitimacy from within. I’m glad that the equalities commission are now doing it. I’ve never understood why the old CRE [Commission for Racial Equality] never challenged it.It’s doubtful whether many Black people could be persuaded to become BNP ‘entryists’ in order to destroy the far right party from within, but there is certainly merit in the legal challenge to the BNP’s constitution, which forbids non-white people from joining.
The point about the BNP’s policy of discriminating on the grounds of race matters because they are a party that on the surface competes for the votes of all voters, and seeks to govern for all races, even though we know that, in their hearts, they only wish to serve white people.
It’s a very different situation compared, say, to the Black Police Association, a body that does not seek to police only for Black people but wants to a quality service for everyone. The BPA, like any Black association in a large public authority, is simply a coming together of Black people to lobby for equality.
Unlike the BNP, who want to actively discriminate in favour of white people, I have never come across any BPA member who wants preferential treatment for Black officers.
The key difference seems to have been lost on Telegraph columnist Gerald Warner, who claims today that the move against the BNP by the Equality and Human Rights Commission will end up “backfiring” and lead to the BPA being outlawed. Warner writes:
Many people feel considerable unease about our police force being Balkanised into ethnic groupings. (Would a National White Police Association be tolerated?) It is difficult to avoid the impression that Trevor Phillips is tugging at a thread on his pullover that could unravel the whole garment.While Warner is voicing a commonly-held opinion, his misguided views need to be challenged head-on if the EHRC’s legal action against the BNP is to be taken seriously by the public at large.
There is a world of difference between an organisation that believes in racial supremacy, and a group that comes together because they know strength-in-numbers is the only way to tackle institutional racism. But it’s time to make this argument all over again now.
BNP faces court case over membership rules
Equality and Human Rights Commission believes far right party discriminates against 'potential or actual members on racial grounds'
From the Guardian:
The British National party is being taken to court over claims its membership criteria breach human rights law.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission said it had issued county court proceedings against the party leader, Nick Griffin, and two other officials today over the BNP's membership rules.
The party's constitution limits members to people who are "'indigenous Caucasian' and defined 'ethnic groups' emanating from that race".
The commission first wrote to the BNP in June stating that it believed the party is in breach of the Race Relations Act. The far right organisation responded by saying it intended to clarify the word "white" on its website.
However, the commission said today that it believes the BNP is still discriminating against "potential or actual members on racial grounds".
"The BNP has said that it is not willing to amend its membership criteria which we believe are discriminatory and unlawful," said John Wadham the commission's group director.
"The commission has a statutory duty to use our regulatory powers to enforce compliance with the law so we have today issued county court proceedings against the BNP."
Wadham said the BNP could still avoid court action if it moved quickly to change its membership rules.
However, a spokesman for the party said it intended to fight the move, claiming the action was politically motivated.
"It is strange that this is happening now when these rules have been in place for a long time," said the BNP's deputy leader, Simon Darby. "And we certainly resent the fact that some unelected body which is 70% ethnic can accuse us of racism."
The commission said it had decided not to take action on two other grounds set out in its original letter to the BNP after the party agreed to comply with the law.
by Matthew Taylor
Whilst some anti-fascists fear that this is a hasty and ill-thought-out move by the EHRC, others believe that the racist constitution of the BNP should be challenged. It doesn't seem right that a political party seeking legislative power over all Brits should exclude some Brits from the party and that process because of anything as superficial as skin colour.
But if the BNP were to change its membership rules, it will alienate the racists who are most drawn to the party, so the BNP is facing a real dilemma.
As CST blog writes:
From the Guardian:
The British National party is being taken to court over claims its membership criteria breach human rights law.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission said it had issued county court proceedings against the party leader, Nick Griffin, and two other officials today over the BNP's membership rules.
The party's constitution limits members to people who are "'indigenous Caucasian' and defined 'ethnic groups' emanating from that race".
The commission first wrote to the BNP in June stating that it believed the party is in breach of the Race Relations Act. The far right organisation responded by saying it intended to clarify the word "white" on its website.
However, the commission said today that it believes the BNP is still discriminating against "potential or actual members on racial grounds".
"The BNP has said that it is not willing to amend its membership criteria which we believe are discriminatory and unlawful," said John Wadham the commission's group director.
"The commission has a statutory duty to use our regulatory powers to enforce compliance with the law so we have today issued county court proceedings against the BNP."
Wadham said the BNP could still avoid court action if it moved quickly to change its membership rules.
However, a spokesman for the party said it intended to fight the move, claiming the action was politically motivated.
"It is strange that this is happening now when these rules have been in place for a long time," said the BNP's deputy leader, Simon Darby. "And we certainly resent the fact that some unelected body which is 70% ethnic can accuse us of racism."
The commission said it had decided not to take action on two other grounds set out in its original letter to the BNP after the party agreed to comply with the law.
by Matthew Taylor
Whilst some anti-fascists fear that this is a hasty and ill-thought-out move by the EHRC, others believe that the racist constitution of the BNP should be challenged. It doesn't seem right that a political party seeking legislative power over all Brits should exclude some Brits from the party and that process because of anything as superficial as skin colour.
But if the BNP were to change its membership rules, it will alienate the racists who are most drawn to the party, so the BNP is facing a real dilemma.
As CST blog writes:
If the BNP is to avoid a legal injunction in this case, it may have to alter its character to such an extent that it ceases to serve its purpose for most BNP members. BNP spokesman John Walker told the BBC that the BNP would be prepared to change its membership rules “to remain within the law…[but] I don’t think we should be bullied by outside forces. They are asking us to change our whole political ideology.” This quote outlines perfectly the dilemma facing the BNP. It wants to be a normal political party, offering itself at election and winning seats. So far, it has had moderate success in local and European elections doing just that. But its “whole political ideology” is based on discrimination on the basis of colour, religion and ethnicity.
The BNP’s efforts to ditch its extremist, racist image have so far been entirely superficial; you do not have to scratch very far beneath the surface to find the same racism that has always been there, because it is written into the constitution of the party. The EHRC seem determined to put this to the test.
Monday, 24 August 2009
Real face of the BNP ‘family festival’ exposed
From stroppybird at Liberal Conspiracy:Yeah I know its the News of The World, but they have done an undercover expose of the real nature of the ‘family’ Red White and Blue festival.
Demos against the BNP event are good, but the numbers won’t match those that voted for them . What is needed is to take apart their arguments, policies and expose what they really stand for and seems like the NOTW has done a good job of that last element.
It’s not enough to shout racist, we need to argue why they are wrong to blame immigrants for a lack of decent social housing and jobs if we are to counter their hate filled message.
Although I’m saying its good the NOTW has exposed this, I’m in not in anyway saying the Murdoch press are on our side, but lets use what they have discovered in our arguments and campaigns.Pop over to read in full, but its pretty stomach churning:
For £1 a go, people were throwing wet sponges at a man in a Barack Obama mask locked in stocks.
Elsewhere stalls were selling T-shirts with slogans like It’s A White Thing and books such as Race, Evolution and Behavior – which insists whites give birth to larger-brained babies and blacks are prone to crime.
Supporters gave Nazi-style salutes and shouted Sieg Heil.
But the most sickening bit was :
…local council candidates John Coombes, of Maidenhead, Berks, and Dick Hamilton of Marlow, Bucks, were sitting with others around a brazier.
Hamilton’s ghettoblaster blared out songs supporting Hitler and attacking “ni**ers”.
Then began the “trial” led by Coombes, 45.
A 12-year-old girl there with her dad (we are protecting her identity) held a golly called Winston over the fire as Coombes “charged” him with “mugging, rape, drug dealing”.
He sneered: “Right Winston, you’re about to get cooked. Anything else to say?
“Says he ain’t a drug dealer. He thinks he’s not black. He’s charged with being black. Now get on there.”
Skinhead Hamilton chipped in: “If he jumps off he’s innocent.” Coombes went on: “He’s guilty, guilty as charged.
“Let’s get a real one – in the town we’ll find one or two. They’ll also be guilty of the heinous crimes I charged him with – may God forgive your horrible soul.” Coombes repeated the charges then added: “He may have appeared innocent to you lot but I’m sure he done lots of things wrong.”
Much as I dislike the NOTW, the reality is I’d much rather this was in their paper than a leftie one due the the numbers who will read it .
BNP face legal action over membership rules
From the Daily Telegraph:
The Equality and Human Rights Commission are taking legal action against the British National Party over concerns about its admissions policy.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission are taking legal action against the British National Party over concerns about its admissions policy.
BNP Party Leader Nick Griffin Photo: PA
The Equality and Human Rights Commission today began legal action against the British National Party over concerns about ethnic restrictions of its membership.
The Commission issued county court proceedings against the party after voicing concerns in June about the BNP's constitution and membership criteria.
The BNP responded by saying that it intended to clarify the word ''white'' on its website, but the Commission said it believed the party will continue to discriminate against potential or actual members on racial grounds.
''The BNP's membership criteria appear to restrict membership to those within what the BNP regards as particular ''ethnic groups'' and those whose skin colour is white. This exclusion is contrary to the Race Relations Act.
''The Commission believes the BNP's constitution and membership criteria are discriminatory and, further, that the continued publication of them on the BNP website is unlawful. It has therefore issued county court proceedings against party leader Nick Griffin and two other officials,'' said the Commission in a statement.
John Wadham, group director, Legal at the Equality and Human Rights Commission said: ''The BNP has said that it is not willing to amend its membership criteria which we believe are discriminatory and unlawful.
''The Commission has a statutory duty to use our regulatory powers to enforce compliance with the law, so we have today issued county court proceedings against the BNP. However, the party still has an opportunity to resolve this quickly by giving the undertaking on its membership criteria that the Commission requires.''
BNP launches Facebook application
From Nothing British About the BNP:
The BNP is continuing its substantial online campaign with the launch of an ambitious Facebook application. Supporters can download the application to their Facebook page where it prompts people who view their profile to join the BNP mailing list and donate online.
The BNP are continuing to take the online initiative, spreading its message using popular social networking sites. The party has even developed its own social network site.
Nothing British believes that the fight against the party could be won or lost via the internet, and encourages other political parties and movements to invest time and energy into expanding their online campaigns.
The BNP is continuing its substantial online campaign with the launch of an ambitious Facebook application. Supporters can download the application to their Facebook page where it prompts people who view their profile to join the BNP mailing list and donate online.
The BNP are continuing to take the online initiative, spreading its message using popular social networking sites. The party has even developed its own social network site.
Nothing British believes that the fight against the party could be won or lost via the internet, and encourages other political parties and movements to invest time and energy into expanding their online campaigns.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
