Take a look here
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
YOUR SITE, YOUR CITY, YOUR SAY. WE HAVE MOVED!! WWW.PITSNPOTS.CO.UK
FOCAL RADIO
LISTEN LIVE! - CLICK HERE
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(150)
-
▼
November
(53)
- THAT WAS THE WEEK ,THAT WAS! - WOLS SUNDAY COMMENT!
- £36 MILLION INVESTMENT INTO THE STAFFORDSHIRE UNIV...
- CCTV CITY BUS SHELTER TRIAL
- THE LIBDEM'S ARE ALIVE! - BUT ARE THEY KICKING?
- THE ORACLE IS MISINFORMED?
- FORTNIGHTLY BIN COLLECTIONS ON THE WAY
- COUNCIL SERVICES TO BE HIT BY CUTS
- THAT WAS THE WEEK ,THAT WAS! WOLS SUNDAY COMMENT!
- VAT CUT FOR RECOVERY PLAN
- NOW THAT'S A JOKE - THAT! 3
- SCHOOLS COSTS SET TO SPIRAL AS COUNCIL DISCLOSE MI...
- WELFARE PLAN MAY CAUSE POVERTY
- TRAGEDY AFTER BOY SPRAYS DEODRANT
- IN MODERATION!
- STOP POLICE! - IS IT RIGHT OR WRONG?
- SUCCESSFUL ANTI-CRIME SCHEMES TO CLOSE DOWN
- 'ALLO 'ALLO 'ALLO - THE POLICE & BIG BROTHER ARE W...
- BNP MEMBERSHIP LIST LEAKED! - 10000 IS THAT IT?
- COSTA DEL EDENSOR GETS NASTY IN THE BUNKER!
- FORMER LORD MAYOR ALAN JONES QUITS LABOUR(and the ...
- MONDAY, MONDAY!
- WOL'S SUNDAY COMMENT!
- ICEBERG DEAD AHEAD!
- MIKE BARNES - THE RESPONSE!
- RIGBY - A MAN OF INTEGRITY? A FUTURE LEADER?
- LAME DUCK MAYOR GETS HIS OWN BACK!
- STOKE ON TRENT'S SPECIAL SCHOOLS SHAKE-UP
- IS THIS THE WORSE EVER CASE OF SLEAZE?
- ROWAN VILLAGE WINS NATIONAL HOUSING AWARD
- THE MAINSTREAM PARTIES DO BATTLE!
- SPEAK TO THE PRESS AND WE'LL SUE! EDENSOR (WISH YO...
- FAMILY FIRED AROUND THE COUNTRY LIKE A PINBALL!
- MP'S CALL FOR HAPPY HOUR BAN
- OFSTED VISIT LONGTON HIGH - WHAT A RESULT!
- KNIFE AND GUN CRIME
- PITSNPOTS NEEDS YOU! - WE HIT THE AIR NEXT WEEK!
- THEY AREN'T LAUGHING NOW!
- THEY RUN SCARED OF BLOGGERS BECAUSE WE SAY IT AS I...
- NHS TO BE PROUD OF?
- PITSNPOTS - A TURNING POINT!
- EDENSOR GOVERNORS BITE BACK!
- TOM REYNOLDS - BLOGS AGAIN!!
- BREAKING NEWS: TRENTHAM HIGH TO CLOSE - FINAL!
- JIM KNIGHT – DESTROYER OF EDUCATION!
- GOODBYE GEORGE: PITSNPOTS PAYS TRIBUTE TO A GREAT ...
- REMEMBRANCE SUNDAY - LEST WE FORGET
- A MEMBER OF THE TRANSITION BOARD SPEAK TO PITSNPOTS!
- ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS - NAILED!
- ACADEMY SCHOOLS - LEGAL CHALLENGE
- BREAKING NEWS: D4S TO SHADOW BOARD!
- VOTER APATHY
- FOCAL RADIO TEST BROADCAST ON DAB - NOW!
- STOP OTHERS USING YOUR NAME TO POST COMMENTS - GET...
-
▼
November
(53)
Our Favourite Blogs/Sites
- Stoke Sociology Blog
- The Labour Party Web Site
- The BNP Site
- Simon Darby's BNP Blog
- The Closest to a Local LibDem Site
- The Closest to a Local Tory Site
- Pro Mayoral Campaign Site
- Longton North Labour Site
- LabourBoy (Labour Blog)
- Guido Fawkes (Adult Tory Blog)
- LibDem Blog
- Sir Findo Gask (pitsnpots want Sir Findo For Mayor!)
- Havocinstoke (does exactly what it says on the tin!)
- Hands off Haywood
- Democracy4stoke (anti mayoral site)
- The Sentinel
- Save Trentham High
- Gavin Webb (Libertarian) Blog
- Peter Kent-Bagleys Blog (Potteries Alliance)
Followers
FOCAL RADIO
CLICK HERE TO LISTEN LIVE
FOCAL RADIO
LISTEN LIVE NOW! - CLICK HERE
78 comments:
Too right!
The Unions are all about inclusiveness of all ethnic and racial backgrounds.
Where as the BNP are all about exclusiveness, Whites Only if you will!
Love em or loath em there is no doubt that these two gentlemen look the part of the well dressed profesional politician.
For a middle aged 50 something that Alby fellow dresses well and he could take me out for a candlelit dinner with afters any day of the week.
Lets hear what folk have to say, not about ol' Alby as a well dressed fella. Personly my feelings are a little mixed, as the first post points out a union sould be all inclusive, that includes members of other partys other then Labour. I'am a union person, a rep and while I find some of the BNP logic sickening I think if a person pays there fees each week then they have a right to be in a union. It realy as not the first thing to do with Labour, or indeed any other party.
anonymous, I wonder if you would relate a similar comment if Alby were of black or chinese origin, I charge you sir with the henious crime of being a "racist" and my evidence for the prosecution is your own published words.
What do others think, you be the jury, is racism a one way street or is anonymous guilty.
"Open Minded", you seem to believe that referring to someone as an albino is an insult, so therefore the "racist" accusation is firmly back in your court!
Open minded.
Well spotted. One of the things you will quickly pick up about the lefty dross that post on here, is that it is alright to make racists remarks, as long as they are aginst the indigenous population.
This is one of the methods that the Labour party use in order to try and control you, to programme you to react a certain way, as Pavlov did with his dogs.
Surprise surprise, another set of nasty comments submitted by an
anonymous 2@. Grow up and get a spine.
Oracle.
Yes we are laughing now! If the government allow the commie scum that run the unions to ban us, we have our own union! This is being fought because it is just another demonstration of Labours inability to grasp the concept of dempocracy!
It seems criminally bizarre that the unions support the immigrants,
but won't let indigenous workers
be protected. This is about working conditions, not politics,
sh*ite like Derek Simpson shouldn't be allowed to make decisions about real human beings,
seeing as the lefty tosser isn't one himself.
NO Warren, you misinterpreted my comments (perhaps purposely).
The whole ethos of a Union is all inclusiveness of all people whether racial, ethnic, religious, gender and sexuality for the greater good of all different groups.
A BNP members mentality is the complete opposite (White Only, Heterosexual Only, Christian Only) and is therefore incompatible with membership of Union organisations.
Point in case, Craig's last post.
He seems to believe that only White indigenous people are "real human beings".
So, Brooneyes, anyone who opposes the BNP is a Lefty.
A little shortsighted don't you think?
anonymous, as I have charged you with racism to prove my case I will use the exact criteria that is used by the police to judge whether a crime is racialy motivated before an investigation takes place. "A racist incident is any incident that is percieved to be racist by the victim or any other person".
anonymous I as "any other person" percieved racist intent by you in your description of Alby as "the albino".
Try to wriggle out of this if you can but if as I said before if the boot was on the other foot and Alby or one of his colleagues described an ethnic person in simple but truthfull terms ther would be a hue and crie.
Your comments were at least aimed at demeaning Sexy Sandra for fancying Alby (not my cup of tea all the same) and at worst racialy aimed at demeaning Albino's.
Of course this has yet to be proven
"Open Minded", I perceive your view that being called an albino is an insult to be racist also!
So, by your aforementioned criteria, you are also guilty of the heinous crime of racism!
Eyup yew lor, ar anner bin on ere befower. Arl tell the wot, non on em on ere no ow ter spell. Ar ewest ter get ten owter ten in me spellin test. Dunno abeyt them on ere theym ow fick or summat the must ow b Keyndslers or interlecterals !!!
Ay up ar anner bin on ere befower, dunno abeyt anythin else t spellin is dam owful. Ar ewest ter ger abeyt 10 owter 10 fer me spellin tests marnd ewe the woz ownlee free letter werds.
So then, Mr. Stalin, you think that if a person surports the BNP then that stops them from being in a union, that makes you as bad as the BNP then. Look at it this way pay up each week be in a union, inclusive of what you belive is right, no one as the right to say 'shove off, we dont like how you think.'
Tell you what I think, I think what Craig said about Pavlovs dogs might be spot on. Jesus, who cares what the hell you think, its all about working together to a common goal.
By all means, Warren, carry on being an apologist for BNP agenda but "Working together for a common goal" you say.
You see, that's the problem. The goal of a Union is the benefit of all mankind.
The goal of the BNP is the supremacy of just one particular group to the detriment of all other. That's their mentality, incompatible.
If being open minded, and infact willing to work and talk with others then yes, I will keep being a apologist for the BNP agenda. Get in the real world man, we can all work together, no matter what you think is right.
Warren, your last post was excellent but "being open minded, and in fact willing to work and talk with others" and "we can all work together, no matter what you think is right" is the antithesis of the BNP.
Hey Sexy Sandra you have got a point there.
Alby could decorate my bedroom anytime!
Yes, he can cut my lawn anytime!
Warren, it's no good trying to talk commonsense to someone who posts as Stalin, a mass murderer that makes Hitler look like a tourist! What we'll have to do is get the BNP voted in and running the council, then all these bellyaching whingers who landed us in this mess in the first place, can b*gger off somewhere else!
Joseph Stalin, where did I say only white indigenous are real people? You stupid communist, what
I actually said was Derek Simpson isn't human and therefore shouldn't have the chance to decide the fate of real ones. You
bloody lefties like to misquote!
Two points:
To open minded: the point of Tony Lloyd's Amendment was that nearly every organisation that has a membership - whether it's a political party or the National Trust - includes in the terms of membership that the member agrees to the principles of the organisation, and the organisation reserves the right to withdraw membership if a person argues against the principles of that organisation. (The National Trust a few years ago attempted to kick out a whole load of members who were anti-fox hunting - something the National Trust supports). This right to remove members does not, in law, apply to trade unions, and the European Court of Human Rights said that it should. Tony Lloyd's Amendment sought to make sure the judgement of the ECHR was enshrined firmly in British law, but after a debate on Tuesday, the Amendment was withdrawn and not voted on.
The second point of this is why would a BNP member, who does not support anything that trade unions stand for if s/he supports their Party's policies, want to be a member of a trade union, except to seek to destroy that union from the inside?
Anonymous,
Correct, I sat on the committee of a members sports club a few years ago and to get sports club status from HMRC they made us change the rules and the constitution of the club so that members could be expelled..
Craig,oh Craig, you fell for it again!
Do you really think I support the actions of far-left extremist Joseph Stalin?
I was baiting and waiting, it worked.
It doesn't take much to wind you up does it!
It's a bit rich for the BNP to complain about this. They exclude people on the grounds of ethnicity but are upset because the unions want to exclude their members. It's a blatant double standard and clearly illustrates a high level of hypocrisy, and what's worse, they clearly can't see the irony.
Stalin.
What is the point of making posts that run contrary to your beliefs??
Like I said, stupid!
Big Stokie Yoof.
Why is it we never hear bleeding heart PC liberals like you telling us the Black Police Officers Association is a racist group? Why should black police officers need their own group? Why aren't you complaining about the muslim council of Great Britain? How many white members sit on the board of that? Or how about the oily Keith
Vaz. He's chairman of the Black Socialists Society. That's a political group based on ethnicity.
All these groups above are formed along the same lines as the BNP, so why aren't you castigating them?
There is an ethnic based group for just about every race Labour have allowed to flood into our country, but when the indigenous people try to form a group to look after their interests, we're racist! Do the Girl Guides allow
boys in? No. Does that mean they are a sexist group? No, it just means they are there to cater for
girls.
The second point is that membership of a union is supposed to be about job protection. It should make no difference what your politics are, everyone should
have the right of cover of union
membership, if they so desire.
I'm not the one who can't see the hypocrisy, it's clearly imprinted
all over your post!
Warren, you have made some excellent points on this one and so very well expressed.
There are BNP policies I am very much against but I wouldn't advocate excluding anyone from a union for being a party member. OK if someone, anyone with any view, behaves in an unacceptable way then that needs to be dealt with. But they shouldn't be discriminated against just for a political view.
I think unions are primarily about standing up for workers rights and arguing for decent conditions. It may need to get a bit political to achieve this but it's mostly about the workers, all workers.
This just shows how far labour have shifted away from socialism that they are willing to suggest such exclusion.
By the way, it's stop bullying at work day today.
Nicky, which policies of the BNP
cause you so much distress? Do tell, and let me clear up your misconceptions.
Why do BNP members want to be in a Union? To offer racism on fellow members?
Trades Union members in 1950-60's were notorious for racist practices and organised protests against incoming ethnic immigrants.
Today, through education, Trades Union members are the model of reason and understanding.
Maybe BNP members have small brains?
I wonder how many Trades Unionists live in Alby's Abbey?
I'm a TU member and I feel an empathy with my comrades on his patch:-)
This is absolutly briliant, Craig is a flaming drama Queen.
I wouldn't even say that I'm anti BNP but it's worth making negative comments about them JUST to see what crazy old Craig will say next!
Joseph Stalin.
Don't mistake me being annoyed for me being a drama queen. You will always get a reaction from me because what you say is flawed or stupid. Saying things that are flawed or stupid just to get me to reply, makes you flawed and stupid!
If you were wearing soundproof underpants, nothing you said would be heard!
Nicky, I'am a trade unionest and have been all my adult life. I can not see the point in barring anyone from a union. If New Labour can not see this then then this bunch of Thathcer wanabes in red we have in power at the moment dont desirve union surport or funding. Craig, I think the BNP views that Nicky as a problem with are the same as I have one hell of a problem with, you know the ones I mean.
Again, you just cant resist can you, Craig.
Every time you comment you appear more and more foolish, you are your own worst enemy!
We are still laughing, as there is a union we can join that is not polititicaly motorvated by Labour, and one I am a member of, its called solidarity.
I did not want a penny of my hard earned money paying to prop up a corrupt Government.
As for the Unions, well just take a look at the fat cats running them.
They are so popular their membership has been dwindling for years, through their innaction to fight for the rights of the working man.
They used to be able to bring the country too its knees, now they are just apolagists for the bosses.
and their paymasters (back pocket brown envelopes) in Downing street.
Ask the thousands of workers in this City made redundant, what they did when potts, steel and coal dissappeared overseas.
Terry, some unions are still strong, working with enpolyers to inprove working condisons and workers rights and safty. I must agree with you on your point on local potterys unions, very week. Your point on fat cat leaders is also spot on, these leaders always crash back down to earth in the end or are forced back into line.If you feel yu can handle any probems you have in your employment, good on you, but som are mre timmed then you mate some need a bit of surport , that where the unions come in,and by Jesus, you should've seen me go at it in the personel office. Dont do to much of it at the moment but I'm geting there.
I'm glad the person posing as Joseph Stalin has raised the issue of banning BNP members from trade unions. This is an issue upon which I have been appauled. I'm afraid I can't possibly see the justification for allowing Trade Unions to exclude people just because they are a member of a political party they find objectionable.
Are BNP members not then entitled to fairness or protection of their rights in the workplace? Supposing we have a trade unionist who has never actively campaigned for the BNP, who has never said anything 'racist' but who happens to beleive that the BNP are the right party to protect the interests of the country; is he to be expelled from the union because of his voting preferences?
And where does it end? Will Conservative party members then be expelled from their trade unions because their views are 'incompatible' with the socialist doctrines? Indeed, will trade union leaders not be happy until only those members who support Labour and socialist principles be granted rights in the workplace?
How on earth can the contributor posing as Joseph Stalin say with a straight face that the unions principles are of inclusiveness and so they should have the right to exclude? Surely you should need to PROVE that genuine offence has been caused to someone before you throw them out of an organisation.
It seems to me that a lot of left wing activists want to create a situation where simple membership of a specific political party can be taken as proof that that person is repulsive and that their views are intolerable. If that were the case, then why not simply stop pretending and ban membership of the BNP altogether? They talk the talk of democracy and rights but they are not prepared to walk the walk.
So in their strange democratic world, its ok to disagree with them so long as you don't get support; its ok to campaign for your views so long as you don't actually win; and we're not going to take the undemocratic step of banning a legitimate political party, but we will make its supporters pariahs wherever we find them, and we will try to make their lives difficult in any way that we can to punish them for their evil behaviour.
Doesn't this all make the left's view of democracy little more than a sham? Doesn't it make THEM the intolerant ones? Doesn't it make martyrs of the BNP yet again and give them yet another platform upon which to appeal to the British sense of justice?
If we carry on along this route and start banning members of a political party from have rights in society, then we are on the road to a Fascist state with Labour's leaders as our Fuhrer.
I've no idea which policies you and Nicky are having problems with Warren. When you need or want an explanation of our manifesto, just give me a call, I'll be more than happy to go through it with you.
P.S. why BNP members would WANT to be in a so called union and give more power and money to a few lazy union bosses who wouldn't know what its like to do a real days work is beyond me. I for one have never been, and never intend to be in a union. Personally, I think that the time is approaching when they will no longer be necessary-and indeed, that is what we should strive towards.
So long as employers are fair, there should be no need for trade unions. Fairness can be imposed by the law, we don't need a bunch of firebrand trouble makers to cause fights where none exist; and I'm afraid that in the past union leaders have shown that thats all they really care about.
Its all about power and influence for THEM whilst giving them something to keep THEM off the dole que's!
Crage, I have got a copy of the BNP menifesto and frankly argee with meny points in it, most of them stolen from Old Labour. Now, points I dont argee with, the partys stance on the EU for one, how the hell would you build a working reationship up with the rest of the EU if the first thing you do is pull out. There are more, but I would pefere to keep them to myself at this time. As for you Shaun, you again make some valid points and its a pity you have blue blood, and keep banging away at it, you may indeed find one or two other Torys hiding round hear.
Warren, I think you might be mixing up the EU and Europe.
Withdrawal from the EU is an absolute must for any political party looking to implement laws and policies in this country, because at the minute, a little more than 80% of ALL laws and regulations in this country are made by the EU!!
We would withdraw from the EU and then gain membership to EFTA,
or something like it. EFTA is the
European Free Trade Area. All of the most successful countries on the european continent will be found here. We would continue to work with our european friends, only this time we would decide who we traded with, what we traded, and how we traded. As it stands at the minute, the EU tell Britain who we can and can't trade with, and the obvious outcome of that is that we rarely benefit from their decisions! A couple of examples are the common agricultural policy
and the common fisheries policy.
Both of these have been very damaging to this country, the CAP by fixing prices for milk for instance, in favour of the French farmers, and this is damaging British farming as well. The CFP
is responsible for the grossest wastages of fish, seeing thousands of tons per year thrown back into the sea when they are already dead. It is also to blame for the devastating collapse of our own fishing industries. At the minute,
just about any bugger with a boat can come and fish British waters, except the British!
Some will try and tell you that if we leave the EU, countries like Germany and France will not trade with us. This is complete testicles Warren! Can you imagine Germany refusing to trade with us when we are one of the biggest markets in the world for BMW? then
there's Audi, Porsche, Mercedes, and Volkswagen too! And that's just cars. It's the same with the French. Peugeot, Citroen, Renault,
all the wine, champagne, and food we import from them? We would arrange our own trade agreements with these countries, and we would base it on what was best for Britain! One more point. EU regulations cost British businesses
in excess of £67 billion per year!!
That's more than is made in Britain through tourism!!!!
The EU is a monster that is going to take everything from the British
and turn Britain into nothing more than the westernmost outpost of the
federal Europe your LibLabCon politicians want.
I have to say, as a signatorie of Better Off Out, I fully agree that we need to come out of the EU. But there are other parties than the BNP who support that view. Neither is it racist, extremist or reprehensible for people to want to do that.
Points taken in, things to think about,thank you both for your points, see what we meen about working together Mr. Stalin. Who would think a Tory, a member of the BNP and a old Labour big mouth could work like this.
Poor Shaun and Warren, you fell for it too!
Do you seriously think someone signing off as one of history's most infamous mass murderers has something genuine to say, other than of course on a wind up mission!
I dont think so Mr. Stalin,I belive the wind ups on you comrade.
So Gary Elsby YOU destroy the Abbey Green Labour Party with the help of your 'has been' friends and now openly admit that it is now "Alby's Abbey".
You should be ashamed to call yourself a socialist and whenever has the boss been part of the workers union?
Craig,
I doubt that I have misconceptions about the BNP policies as they are there available on the web site, but I'm sure you'll correct me if I have. But I wouldn't say I'm distressed about them as such, because the ones that bother me the most are not ones the BNP could implement at the local level, so they are not nice but at the same time not going to happen. On the other hand some of the local approaches, for example on schools, are good.
Bear in mind I'm not a politician, just an ordinary person, but nevertheless my views are important to me.
Now Warren mentioned the EU. That would probably not have been one I would have picked out as especially bothersome for me. I'm going to be accused of sitting on the fence on that one I expect as I have mixed views. I'm strongly in favour of cooperation but on the other hand don't like it when it becomes undemocratic like forcing a constitution on us through the back door. You and Warren both have decent points to make on the EU.
Warren's not keen to mention the others at present, but I think he's right, I think you can guess. I will mention them, I mentioned them briefly before in another comment on another blog.
I don't like the policy on capital punishment. That's because I fundamentally do not condone one human being harming another. It could be argued that one person does that so they deserve it back. But I don't buy that one as I figure it is detrimental to the one taking the revenge because they end up nearly as bad as the other one.
I don't like the policy on national service. Whilst I'm aware this does not need to be military, I'm also aware that this can be detrimental and a waste of valuable time for the individual. I really can't go into details relating to other people on the web, but I know enough.
I don't like the policy on incentives for people to return to coutry of ethnic origin. I know plenty of people and again will not give details, who are British but not born British. I'd hate for them to feel under any pressure to 'return' anywhere they don't want to go. It can be argued this is optional, but I expect we all have been picked on at some time for some reason, it could be for where we are from, it could be for something else about us. But you know how it feels to not be wanted and it's not very nice is it? On a related point, I am sure that there are many members of the BNP who do not hold racist views and the policies are not in themselves racist, they couldn't be by law. On the other hand if someone were a racist and were looking for a political party, they would be more drawn to the BNP than to other parties because the policies are the least tolerant. So whilst racism exists to some extent everywhere, there may well be a larger proportion in the BNP than other parties.
Well those are the main ones I don't like, you did ask.
But the point I was really making earlier is that someone should not be excluded from a union because of beliefs that are in line with the policies of a legal political party. In fact it is pretty sinister to oppress people in this way. Quite unsocialist in my view and it should not be suited to the labour party to do that, except it's now 'new' labour of course. Quite apart from the principle involved, I'm an inclusive type of personality, plus I believe in Warren's view of working together towards a common goal.
On these blogs there are different types of political 'debate'. There are the debates that involve people trying to wind each other up and emphasising differences. That's sometimes a bit of fun, sometimes much less so. In a way that's what I'm doing now because you asked so I thought ok then I'll tell you. In some ways I have to do so much fighting, for example with TAG, that I maybe don't need too much more. Then there is the other type of debate, which I would like to do a bit more of, which says ok, what are our points of agreement and what sort of things would we like to see done in our city on the basis of those agreements. How could democracy work well (because we know it hasn't been here) and what would we like to see happen if only democracy did start to work well.
Shaun, once again you can't spell - there is no "u" in "appalling" - how precisely did you get a degree with your atrocious spelling (a product of Thatcher's education system I suppose!).
However you show your ignorance by totally misrepresenting the issue of trade unions expelling BNP members.
There is no suggestion that they should be allowed to expel someone who votes BNP - after all how would they know unless that person made their secret vote public?
Warren, I'm no supporter of "New Labour", but again you have missed the whole thrust of this debate - it was the European Court of Human Rights that upheld ASLEF's right to expel a BNP activist from their Union; all the Government are doing is bringing UK law into line with that judgment. You can blame "New Labour" for many things, but are you seriously suggesting they should break the law in this instance?
Nicky, thanks for your honesty. It is only with this approach that we will be able to change those things holding us down.
The death penalty doesn't seem to leave space for sitting on the fence, and so its for or against.
We are for it because it represents true justice, it puts the onus of responsibility onto the individual as to their behaviour. Two years ago, a man named Darren Hargreaves was beaten to death 2 minutes from where I live. 3 local scumbags were sent to prison for it, but they will be out and able to continue their lives. Mr Hargreaves had done nothing to provoke the attack, and he left behind his partner and their two children. The people that did this should have been hanged in our opinion.
I'm really surprised that you don't like the idea of national service.
This is primarily about putting some national pride back into the lives of our youngsters, and making sure the morals and principles they will need for a productive life are in place. Putting something into the community in this way is likely to produce strong ties that will pull it together. It also gives our youngsters an idea of what life is like for the different groups, kids, pensioners, etc.Helping to promote a closer, more understanding society would be on everyones list, or so I would have thought.
Nicky, according to population watch, the optimum population size
of these islands is between 30/35
million. We are at least double the largest figure. The problem is that when we've shipped out all those that shouldn't be here, when those who are here legally are the only foreigners here, there are still too many. There are differences between our cultures that must be taken into account, and the top one is the far greater reproduction rate of immigrants compared to indigenous stock. The
presence of too many immigrants marks disaster for the indigenous population. The other thing that goes hand in hand with what I've just said, is the people of Britain
were never given a chance to voice their concerns on these matters. The Tories and Labour have bulldozed these deeply damaging policies through without the consent of the people who would be most affected! And it is this above all else, that needs to be rectified. The indigenous people must be allowed their say on whether all this immigration is what they want. But there was no mandate.
This homeward bound scheme is the best of a bad job. We cannot let such large numbers of foreigners stay without altering our culture and identity permanently and for the worse, forced repatriation for those here legally is not an option, so getting them to return home with their pockets stuffed with cash at least provides some use to both countries involved. I completely agree that it is an unsatisfactory
situation to find ourselves in, but this is at the direct stupidity of the LibLabCon, with Labour in particular causing more than their fair share of damage.
Like it or not, this is a mess that has to be cleaned up. I didn't
want all this immigration, I wasn't
asked if I did, and I wasn't offered the chance to put my views forward! This was foisted on us for political expediency, the natives of this country not even being considered as part of the equation. Well, there is a vast majority that consider this the number 1 priority for an incoming government, and I have to say that
we would agree with that.
Nicky, thanks for bringing theres things up. I can say thay you and myself think very much alike, and give Crage his dew, he talked back with such commitment. What we prove hear is that we can get along, exchange and talk without winding each other up. At times disagreing with what someone says and belives, be lestening to them and takeing abord what they say, with is the subject Oracle tryed to bring up in the first place.
Shaun, you need to calm down.
Trades Union members have every right to be concerned with racists among them. It's not what Unions are for and besides the real reason for a Trade Union and its membership is to represent fairness in legal terms, where no fairness may exist.
To 'Sutton' who has now joined us. This may be one of two Sutton brothers who I helped to expel from the Labour Party.
As you can see, they (he) continues to hound me for being a Company director and a member of a Trade Union.
Please re read the Hazel Blears blog kindly put up and see where she attacks the notion of 'researchers' being the sole conscience of Socialism.
Company Director/managers are a rarity in modern Labour and I have no hesitation in professing how proud I am of being both.
Company Director,Trade Union Member and a life long member of the Labour Party.
No contradidction whatsoever. Sutton, however, is a 'sour grapes' ex member of everything who cheered the roof off Kings Hall when it was announced that the BNP beat me (he stood as 'independent')."Anything to beat Elsby" (quote unquote).
Joseph Stalin, Gary Elsby, how do you equate what you state about the "racist BNP" with what Trevor Phillips (chairman for the Commission for Equality and Human Rights?) says.
"BNP members are less than human"
"Labour is institutionally racist"
Now the unions following suit, just who is not "racist".
Having been a member of the union for many years, and felt the innability of them to act, resolving differances with management myself rather than involve them.
That was until 2006 when my membership was refused and I joined Solidarity.
What I think, and believe is of no importance to the union, or anyone else for that matter.
I also believed the unions were there to protect my rights in the workplace, not try to control what I think.
At the moment Management can do what the hell they like, due to past stupidity on the part of the unions behavior in the past, where power became more important than their members rights.
This was the direct cause of the unions downfall, and they are not going to change, with the attitude they have at the moment.
Trevor Phillips is not saying that Labour is institutionally racist.He makes a point of it being more difficult for black people to get through the system.
I say he's wrong. I don't believe he's wrong, I know he is.
He quotes the Conservatives as being more black friendly because they impose black candidates upon a onstituency.
I say they are wrong also.
OK then clever old 'know all' Gary Elsby.
Why don't the Abbey Green Labour Party back what you are saying and stand an ethnic candidate against Alby at the next elections.
Alby is known as an excellent councillor whatever you think of the BNP and my guess as to if this happened it would just help Alby's majority go throuth the roof.
Once again an independent goes public with an opinion that shows that they are anything but "independent" One more BNP supporter hiding under another identity. I would ask people to remember that you can dress a pig in a suit but you can't stop it squealing!
I heard that Stoke Central is being scrapped and that gary is going to stand against Rob Flello in protest.One socialist against another.
I keep telling you Tony, we have more support than you think! lol
Warren,
I agree totally that we can all on here if we want discuss and debate issues without having to take a stance against a person. It is possible sometimes also to see things from the other person's view, understand why they might hold that view, but not necessarily hold that view yourself.
I really think that unions ought to take the same approach, it should be more about people on a personal level, their needs and rights at work and not about discriminating against a person's viewpoint.
Craig,
I can certainly understand from examples of the type you gave why people can feel that they want an extreme punishment. But although it's not quite the same thing, looking at all those years of conflict in Northern Ireland with revenge killings on both sides, it just seemed to be destroying families and not solving anything. Although it's not perfect now it just seems it has to be a whole lot better if the revenge can be brought to a stop. I'm sure we won't agree on capital punishment and will have to agree to disagree. I am however for long prison sentences to keep the violent types out of society for our safety.
I agree with you about national (and I would add local) pride, morals and principles in our youngsters and about helping to promote a closer, more understanding society. I just don't think national service is necessary to achieve it. You talk about putting these things back into youngsters, as if it's disappeared. Well it may have for some, but I'm more optimistic than you that many of our youngsters do actually have these things. It may not need much more than good parenting to achieve this. There are things that youngsters do while still at school that create links with the community. For example performing music out in the community at churches and hospitals etc. And those doing Duke of Edinburgh awards have a community service section in that. It can involve learning about the work of the fire service for example or doing some work tidying up a piece of land in the community that has become neglected. There is also the work experience they do in year 10 (I think most schools do it and it's mostly year 10) which I think is a very good idea and gives the youngsters a taste of experience of a real job and its responsibilities. Whereas national service could get in the way. For those going to university it wouldn't fit well between school and uni, some students take a gap year but for many it works best to keep up the momentum of studying. Then afterwards they may serve society just as well by pursuing a graduate career. Plus any further delay in getting a decently paid job isn't going to help with paying off those massive student loans.
On the immigration issue, I agree that we are crowded and there needs to be very good controls on it. I just wouldn't want those who have been allowed in and made their home here to feel pressured to leave.
Tim, stop being so petty. When the passion takes me and I start typing away, of course one or two spelling errors will slip through the net. We're not writing a Phd thesis here!
The person posting as Stalin, all I can say to you is that I don't really care for what reasons you post on the site, I simply take all comments as I find them and respond as such.
Gary, I agree with you that unions have a right to deal with racists. But simple membership of a political party CANNOT be used as evidence that someone signs up to individual views as you seem to suggest. Labour seem to want to say that ALL BNP party members are evil racists whether they have said or done anything to prove that or not.
Why on earth can't unions just be allowed to expel people who ACT in a racist way? Why have what is in effect a blanket ban on a specified group of people? If you continue down this route it will be the Labour Party who is establishing the Facist state because you will be legislating to attack a group of people that you dislike whether they have done anything to deserve it or not. How much longer before employers have the right to dismiss employees who are BNP party members, and then how long before that right is expanded to other parties?
Why on earth does party politics have to determine whether you are entitled to trade union protection? I consider this act as a blatant abuse of power by Labour and you risk putting yourselves down at the level that you claim the BNP are at.
Shaun, I wasn't being petty - just that I've pointed out your inability to spell appalling before, and I thought as a product of Thatcher's education system you might have taken the point.
I notice you ignored the main thrust of my argument, and also referred to lazy union bosses who have never done a proper days work in their lives; may I suggest, just as a lone example, you never mention that at a Ford car plant, where AMICUS-TGWU General Secretary, Tony Woodley, spent 30+ years building cars? And, erm, just how many of your MPs (Cameron, Osborne, etc.) have done a proper days work? What did your newest MP Mr Timpson do? Oh that's right, he inherited his family's business! That must have been a real struggle for him!
I can see where you are coming from, Shaun, but something positive has to be done to curb the desire of BNP activists from infiltrating reasoned organisations that have no prejudice. The BNP play the game of politics by far better than any other Fascist Party since the BUF (BU) infliltrated Longton in the 1930's.
Unions, curbed under Thatcher,have every right (from where I've always stood) to hit back hard and make a decisive opinion turn into decisive action.
I'm a lost cause in knowing that the BNP is a Fascist racist organisation determined to fool the uneducated into thinking the opposite.
I know this crowd personally and know what they can do when challenged.Coleman, Walker, sandland and the rest are hardened Nazis and most of the rest are drifters following trouble.
PS. During my two attempts at gaining a seat on the Council, my home was attacked around 10 times. Graffiti plastered across numerous houses in my street and two cars attacked (£1500) Nazi swastikas carved on the bonnets (the entire bonnet). All recorded by the police and security was put in place immediately prior to elections.
Please don't try and persuade me of anything other than their intimidation. They are an evil party with an evil membership.
Gary Elsby.
It always amazes me that your
accusations ALWAYS come without any proof of wrongdoing, yet here you are deliberately libeling serving councillors with more of your communist bullsh*t! If you're going to say things like this then you should be able to back them up with facts, or proof of some sort.
This is why you're never voted in,
people don't like the way you go about your business.
Craig,
Gary stated that these incidents were reported to the police and they are logged. How much proof do you want?
I want proof that the people he accuses actually did it, that's what I want Tony!
Brooneyes, I think if you re-read Gary's comments you'll find that he doesn't actually accuse those three fine, respectable and downright handsome men of the vandalism of his property!
Tim, you have now outed yourself as someone with a grudge against the Conservative Party. Would you like to go the whole hog and actually reveal which party you are a member of-as if we couldn't work it out for ourselves!
Your argument on the lazy trade union elite seems to be 'well its good enough for Tory MPs'. It says a lot for your defence of trade union bosses doesn't it when you have to resort to comparing their work record with certain Tory MPs. Do we take it then that these trade union bosses are trying to follow in the footsteps of Tory MPs?
As for not replying to the substantive point you made, I'm afraid that I probably missed it under the mountain of nit-picking. Presumably it was your point that unions will not be allowed to expel BNP voters because they won't know who they are thanks to the secret ballot.
But doesn't that just further undermine the case for automatic expulsion for BNP MEMBERS? Presumably the VOTERS who support the BNP are in your view showing as much an active expression of racism as those who join the party? If the party is in your view 'evil' and that all their members are in your view 'evil' then why are their voters not also 'evil'?
If someone declares themselves to be a BNP voter (but not a party member) then will they too be open to discrimination by their trade union?
The answer to your point surely is that whilst trade unions should have the right to defend against racism, surely they can do that by simply expelling those who have acted in a racist way? Why should membership of a party be presumed guilt of racist actions? If you are right and all of these BNP party members are raving nutcases who commit racist atrocities every day of their lives, then why can't we have a law that holds their actions against them rather than their membership of the party? Would that guilt be too difficult to prove?
If in your view the BNP is an evil party to the extent that you are prepared to enact laws to discriminate against their members and 'punish' them for their membership of the party, then why is it right to allow the party to continue as a legal organisation? Is it just to satisfy a farce of democracy?
If the party membership itself is so bad, then ban it. If not, then don't enact blanket laws to hit the members of that party unless they have actually committed an offence under the law.
As for your point on the EU court making this decision, I'm afraid that it just goes to show how the principles of democracy are extremely flexible when in the hands of our European neighbours. Their judgement is incompatible with the British principles of fairness, and I just see it as another very good reason for adopting a policy of EU Withdrawel!
P.S. Hope you have hours of fun trawling through that lot for the spelling mistakes. Lets see if you can find all the ones I've hidden for you.
I think you will find that those "three handsome men" are two good looking ladies and one handsome man.
One thing is for sure the most dangerous thing in the city is not the BNP but Gary Elsby's wife after a sesion on the vino when she decides to go runabout around Burslem in the van.
Not the behaviour required of the wife of a future MP!
Yes Baddeley Green/Craig, "two good looking ladies and one handsome man".
I think you will find Gary (as loathsome as I find him) did not accuse those three either!
I heard that gary's wife had a nervous breakdown when her children were targetted by the BNP.
If gary had been my dog, I would have starved him to death and gone on holiday without a care in the world.
Yes, if Gary had been a child I would of......
Some very well argued points made there Shaun about why union members should of course be entitled to freedom in their political views. I especially agree with:
"If the party membership itself is so bad, then ban it. If not, then don't enact blanket laws to hit the members of that party unless they have actually committed an offence under the law."
This is an interesting turn of events. Did I say something?
nb. I have no criminal record.
Nicky: Who's law?
Adolph Hitler made the laws and brutalised germans (jews) with that law.
Perfectly legal.
Unions have a right to deny membership, or so that is the claim, besides what is wrong with them joining their own?
Post a Comment