oh blimey - dulwich bnp

[bawdy-nan]

Just had a look at the leaked bnp members list - which is still available on line if you look for it.

Not a great surprise, I suppose, but I was shocked to see some se21, 22 and 23 postodes on there.

[Moos]

Why were you shocked, bawdy-nan?

[Lizziedjango]

Yes, why were you shocked bawdy nan?

[bawdy-nan]

Partly that the information was easily found and so very detailed. It felt odd.

Also I find the BNP repulsive and fidn teh idea taht I live near people who campaign for their aims and values uncomfortable.

Of course, I know already that its likely that people hold these views so my feelings came as a slight surprise - seeing it written down in spreadsheet form, I suppose.

[Moos]

Quick bit of googling (this is from the Mail's site, which so far is the only major paper I saw that had repercussions already on)

Today a DJ was dropped and a Merseyside police officer facing investigation after alarmed bosses started to scour the list for employees' names.

Talksport radio said it would 'no longer use' DJ Rod Lucas who covered late night shifts for the station earlier this year.

Edited for sloppy typing and to add of course police officers aren't allowed to be BNP members so if the Merseyside guy is then serve him right.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Why aren't police members allowed to be members? It is a legitimate political party (I'm not condoning it).

[Moos]

I suppose it would imply that they would be unable to treat all of the civilians whom they police equally and fairly.

One could make the same argument for doctors, teachers or firefighters, but I suppose the additional powers that the police force possess (and I have a feeling the same ban applies to the armed forces) makes it just that bit more urgent.

[Administrator]

Please try and keep this thread East Dulwich specific as there is another discussion about this list in the Lounge area http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,192490

Thank you

[Michael Palaeologus]

I guess that we can easily be lulled into feeling that the rather pleasent comfy world of the EDF relects East Dulwich. Thus to realise that some of the local population of the BNP is a bit of a shock to some. Of course ED reflects the general population with the full range of political views with most of us sitting in the middle.

Would we be as shocked to discover that there are Stalinists in our midst?

[SeanMacGabhann]

is there a legal political party running on a Stalinist ticket ??????

Frankly I would be more surprised

[Brendan]

I think the prefered term is anti-revisionist. And who is to say that a hardline adherence to Marxist and Leninist principles within the USSR is not relevant in 21st century East Dulwich?

[snorky]

theres a few within an easy walk of Snorky hall I have found

Im torn with the BNP- they are scum, but leaking this is a bit off, even if it was their own infighting that did it

better to have them in public as a party where they can be taken to task on their odious views, than skulking around in anon. little cadres, plotting mischief

Theres alot of BNP sympathy amongst the masses, much more than this pitifully small membership list of commmitted nutters.

[Sue]

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I guess that we can easily be lulled into feeling

> that the rather pleasent comfy world of the EDF

> relects East Dulwich.

xxxxxxx

Pleasant comfy world of the EDF? Yes, mostly, perhaps.

I gave up picking up on racist or bordering-on-racist comments on the forum due to the grief I was getting from certain quarters.

There was one post very recently saying something like the poster had had "120 Africans phone me up to ask what was the strange noise from the engine" which I was sorely tempted to respond to but didn't want to start them all off again.

I am not surprised that there are BNP members in Dulwich. I expect they're everywhere. Stupidity and prejudice isn't confined to certain geographical areas.

[tiddles]

actually snorky I don't think there is BNP sympathy amongst the masses. The thing about the BNP is that it is rather unpatriotic. It's just not british. What did we fight WW2 for? (yes alot of pensioners might have a legit gripe given how they are treated) but that is nothing to do with the BNP lot and their twisted world. Lots of people taking advantage of this country and what we offer - brits and non brits. but bottom line is, the BNP are a load of saddo, ignorant, twits. Being british (whatever your origin) is being above them. they are the lowest of the low. got a problem? blame a generic group- that is their answer. I cannot think of any person with an ounce of nouce who would admit to being a member. I have come across racsist people who when, pinned down, actually would not support them. The daily mail reader who is an avid churchill supporter could not really nail their colours alongside the bnp. the Marxis/leninist bunch are just not as obvously offensive as your run of the mill bnp bod.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Sue: We can't just stop picking up people on racist behaviour if we are going to be intimidated by a few posts on a forum. In my experience people displaying genuinely racist beliefs get picked up on quite a lot here

[Keef]

I've not seen the list, but I can think of a couple of locals whom I'd be suprised if they weren't on it!

[mockney piers]

I had a similar thought Keef and checked. THere was a namesake from Derbyshire, but he wasn't there.

As snorky said, some sympathise, but it takes an extra dose of repugnance to be a paid up member (unless using the word derogatorily)

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

I've been mulling over the issue of police not being allowed to join the BNP. I think that's wrong. It reminds me of when I worked in the MOD many moons ago and members of GCHQ were not allowed to strike.

Whether you agree with unions/closed shops/political parties or whatever, if they are legitimate under British law, I don't think anyone should be discriminated against.

My take on it anyway.

[Brendan]

I don?t know if the legality of that rule has been tested yet PGC. It may be an internal police policy that will fall down when put in front of a court.

Or it may have already been tested by a court in which case I doubt the judge would have ruled it legal without sound reasoning not based on the obvious emotive issues.

Anyone got any knowledge on this?

[mockney piers]

I read that it was taken on board in 2004 and was unpopular (not I guess because the forces are rife, more the freedom of thought issue) and this is the first time it's been invoked, and I don't doubt an unfair dismissal hearing will be on its way).

I'm a little torn. Seeing as some forces have been found to be institutionally racist in the past and have taken great strides to change this, and especially as the inner cities have almost 50% ethnic minorities, I do see it as incompatible with maintaining community relations.

Could he be relocated to Hereford or some other 98% white area or something, as I'm filled with the same unease as PGC?

[SeanMacGabhann]

Here is my knowledge

If I was a black person, an asian person or indeed an Irish person living here 20 years ago, I would already feel suspicious of the police. If I also know they are a member of a party that wants me out of the country.. weeeellllll - it doesn't make for effective law r'n order does it?

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

That's almost not the the point though, Sean. I'm sure a lot of people we don't suspect harbour deeply unattractive prejudices (and even some we know).

I am just not comfortable with this ruling. Is justice blind except for some circumstances? Are the tenets of our law sacrosanct except for some circumstances?

[Brendan]

Therein lies the entire problem with the BNP. They actively support an actual ?repatriation? process. At which point does that stop being freedom of thought and become hate speech against legitimate citizens of the country?

This is why we have courts though and for now they are legal so I suppose we have to respect their right to existance if not their ideology.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Ah but that IS the point PGC. Harbouring deep unnatractive prejudices we can't do much about - allowing people to flaunt them we can. And probably should

[mockney piers]

I guess therein lies democracy, they have there stated policies, and if the majority of the voters* agree, then they'll be the government.

That won't happen thankfully, but as long as stated policies don't contravene international law then they are free to espouse them. Though I'd be very suspicious if, say, a muslim burned down the reichstag parliament.

I'm no lawyer and I don't know where 'forced repatriation' stands, but I guess it comes close to contravention, not to mention totally unworkable. As long as they stay in cloud-cuckoo land they are no threat to democracy.

*yeah yeah, a majority government isn't necessarily a popular majority.