Peter Lake;1471953 wrote: I'll ask Adam saturday if we can send you a link. That's probably the best we can do. It's actually no different to the policies published on the website with the addition of new motions they passed in Blackpool.
With all due respect (that is always ominous) the BNP Manifesto ought to be available for all to see the same as all the proper parties.
Calling yourself marginal when you are seeking to gain political power seems a cop out to me............making excuses for your failure up front.
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
-
Peter Lake
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:02 pm
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Bruv;1471954 wrote: With all due respect (that is always ominous) the BNP Manifesto ought to be available for all to see the same as all the proper parties.
Calling yourself marginal when you are seeking to gain political power seems a cop out to me............making excuses for your failure up front. Personally, i don't care if it's available on the internet. It's an interesting one and one i am going to seek other opinions on saturday.
Calling yourself marginal when you are seeking to gain political power seems a cop out to me............making excuses for your failure up front. Personally, i don't care if it's available on the internet. It's an interesting one and one i am going to seek other opinions on saturday.
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
1. Charging Assault cases
When deciding on the appropriate charge in most assault cases, prosecutors and police officers should base their decisions on:
The level of injuries that have resulted; and
The likely sentence that the court will pass.
In more serious cases where offences of inflicting grievous bodily harm or wounding with intent or attempted murder are being considered, the level of intent will also be a key determining factor.
For all other cases, it is the level of injuries and the likely sentence that are crucial. In simple terms, Parliament has determined that there should be separate offences reflecting three levels of injury - Common Assault, ABH and GBH.
(Offences against the Person: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service)
True, I wasn't aware that there was a difference between Assault & Common Assault, so I looked it up, and there didn't seem to be a difference as such. As the above quote states, there are 3 levels of assault. Common, ABH & GBH - all of which have the word 'Assault' in them. However, I only used the word 'Assault', I didn't refer to the higher levels of ABH or GBH, thus refering to the lesser of the three - or are you annoyed that I never attributed the higher levels to you? Maybe that is the case. It seems that ever since I have been on these forums you have been glorifying yourself as a martyr of the legal system.
2. You were the one to raise the subject of convictions, after making claims of the BNP being morally whiter than white (or should that be more Arian than Arian). We just seem to have different perspectives on what is morally right & what is morally wrong.
3. As you say, and quite rightly so, I loathe the BNP & everything it stands for, but your only fallback when attacking Labour is to constantly fall back on the tactic of constantly attacking Labour's failing to act on the reports of the paedophile rings. Yes, I agree that was wrong, but it should, however, be noted that, rightly or wrongly, at the time it was considered the wiser course of action to take because of the country being a powder keg of race riots.
4. I only respond in kind whenever you begin on your tirades of wild rantings. Note that in other threads, where politics are kept out of it, I respect them & post accordingly.
5. You are constantly hypocritical in blaming such media as the BBC for being blatantly biased against the BNP, but are the first to use them whenever they put anything you say in a favourable light.
6. You continue to make a standing joke out of yourself by going on about how you are campaigning for votes, whilst at the same time saying that you don't want votes because of your being a 'fringe' party.
7. You make accusations of others not knowing what is in the manifesto, whilst keeping it a closely guarded secret.
Lord Sutch had nothing on you!
When deciding on the appropriate charge in most assault cases, prosecutors and police officers should base their decisions on:
The level of injuries that have resulted; and
The likely sentence that the court will pass.
In more serious cases where offences of inflicting grievous bodily harm or wounding with intent or attempted murder are being considered, the level of intent will also be a key determining factor.
For all other cases, it is the level of injuries and the likely sentence that are crucial. In simple terms, Parliament has determined that there should be separate offences reflecting three levels of injury - Common Assault, ABH and GBH.
(Offences against the Person: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service)
True, I wasn't aware that there was a difference between Assault & Common Assault, so I looked it up, and there didn't seem to be a difference as such. As the above quote states, there are 3 levels of assault. Common, ABH & GBH - all of which have the word 'Assault' in them. However, I only used the word 'Assault', I didn't refer to the higher levels of ABH or GBH, thus refering to the lesser of the three - or are you annoyed that I never attributed the higher levels to you? Maybe that is the case. It seems that ever since I have been on these forums you have been glorifying yourself as a martyr of the legal system.
2. You were the one to raise the subject of convictions, after making claims of the BNP being morally whiter than white (or should that be more Arian than Arian). We just seem to have different perspectives on what is morally right & what is morally wrong.
3. As you say, and quite rightly so, I loathe the BNP & everything it stands for, but your only fallback when attacking Labour is to constantly fall back on the tactic of constantly attacking Labour's failing to act on the reports of the paedophile rings. Yes, I agree that was wrong, but it should, however, be noted that, rightly or wrongly, at the time it was considered the wiser course of action to take because of the country being a powder keg of race riots.
4. I only respond in kind whenever you begin on your tirades of wild rantings. Note that in other threads, where politics are kept out of it, I respect them & post accordingly.
5. You are constantly hypocritical in blaming such media as the BBC for being blatantly biased against the BNP, but are the first to use them whenever they put anything you say in a favourable light.
6. You continue to make a standing joke out of yourself by going on about how you are campaigning for votes, whilst at the same time saying that you don't want votes because of your being a 'fringe' party.
7. You make accusations of others not knowing what is in the manifesto, whilst keeping it a closely guarded secret.
Lord Sutch had nothing on you!
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
:yh_ttth:yh_ttth:yh_ttth:yh_ttth
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
FourPart;1471962 wrote: 1.
(Offences against the Person: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service)
True, I wasn't aware that there was a difference between Assault & Common Assault, so I looked it up, and there didn't seem to be a difference as such. As the above quote states, there are 3 levels of assault. Common, ABH & GBH - all of which have the word 'Assault' in them. However, I only used the word 'Assault', I didn't refer to the higher levels of ABH or GBH, thus refering to the lesser of the three - or are you annoyed that I never attributed the higher levels to you? Maybe that is the case. It seems that ever since I have been on these forums you have been glorifying yourself as a martyr of the legal system.
2. You were the one to raise the subject of convictions, after making claims of the BNP being morally whiter than white (or should that be more Arian than Arian). We just seem to have different perspectives on what is morally right & what is morally wrong.
3. As you say, and quite rightly so, I loathe the BNP & everything it stands for, but your only fallback when attacking Labour is to constantly fall back on the tactic of constantly attacking Labour's failing to act on the reports of the paedophile rings. Yes, I agree that was wrong, but it should, however, be noted that, rightly or wrongly, at the time it was considered the wiser course of action to take because of the country being a powder keg of race riots.
4. I only respond in kind whenever you begin on your tirades of wild rantings. Note that in other threads, where politics are kept out of it, I respect them & post accordingly.
5. You are constantly hypocritical in blaming such media as the BBC for being blatantly biased against the BNP, but are the first to use them whenever they put anything you say in a favourable light.
6. You continue to make a standing joke out of yourself by going on about how you are campaigning for votes, whilst at the same time saying that you don't want votes because of your being a 'fringe' party.
7. You make accusations of others not knowing what is in the manifesto, whilst keeping it a closely guarded secret.
Lord Sutch had nothing on you!
Yet, can you not see the peril you put this forum In by not researching enough ? You make yourself look stupid not me. You state that you can't see Labour or The Tories using someone with a sex shop and that makes you look stupid when Cameron wheels out the biggest sex shop owner to help their election campaign.
Writing that Adam Walker assaulted his pupils could have seen Bryn with a lawsuit and why? because you're too arrogant or lazy to actually read about the trial on the Internet.
All I am saying to you, Is that you need to be more cautious and get fact before you write here. It doesn't matter how much you loathe something, you simply can't make It up about them as you go along. It's called libel.
The problem here, Is that there are many people like you who assume a Nationalist Party Is made up of shaven headed, tatoo'd morons. There may be many voters like that but you are grossly underestimating Key Figures In the Party. You have probably never even heard of the key figures but the Party has a frightening and vicious legal team that you underestimate and would come after you In the blink of the eye. That's not a threat either. You are putting this forum In danger. Look at the 17 court cases In the past 15 years. Invariably, we win most of them because of the legal team. At present, we are suing Cumbria CPS. Write these people off as Idiots at your peril. All It needs Is one of them looking In one day and you have brought the forum a shed load of grief and why ? Just to score points and because you feel you can say what you like without researching fact before you do. It only needs someone like Pat Harrington to be looking In one day.
All I am saying to you, Is loathe our Party all you like but don't assume and libel It's people at the peril of Bryn and this forum.
You need to be more cautious when writing about any Individual because In court, saying ' oh sorry, I meant to say abused when I said assaulted' won't wash.
It's just friendly advice... take It or leave It. What you've done here, Is not attack our Party per say but personally attack Individuals you don't know and will never meet and you have libeled Individuals. Stop this nasty practice and I'll have no need to reply to your posts.
(Offences against the Person: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service)
True, I wasn't aware that there was a difference between Assault & Common Assault, so I looked it up, and there didn't seem to be a difference as such. As the above quote states, there are 3 levels of assault. Common, ABH & GBH - all of which have the word 'Assault' in them. However, I only used the word 'Assault', I didn't refer to the higher levels of ABH or GBH, thus refering to the lesser of the three - or are you annoyed that I never attributed the higher levels to you? Maybe that is the case. It seems that ever since I have been on these forums you have been glorifying yourself as a martyr of the legal system.
2. You were the one to raise the subject of convictions, after making claims of the BNP being morally whiter than white (or should that be more Arian than Arian). We just seem to have different perspectives on what is morally right & what is morally wrong.
3. As you say, and quite rightly so, I loathe the BNP & everything it stands for, but your only fallback when attacking Labour is to constantly fall back on the tactic of constantly attacking Labour's failing to act on the reports of the paedophile rings. Yes, I agree that was wrong, but it should, however, be noted that, rightly or wrongly, at the time it was considered the wiser course of action to take because of the country being a powder keg of race riots.
4. I only respond in kind whenever you begin on your tirades of wild rantings. Note that in other threads, where politics are kept out of it, I respect them & post accordingly.
5. You are constantly hypocritical in blaming such media as the BBC for being blatantly biased against the BNP, but are the first to use them whenever they put anything you say in a favourable light.
6. You continue to make a standing joke out of yourself by going on about how you are campaigning for votes, whilst at the same time saying that you don't want votes because of your being a 'fringe' party.
7. You make accusations of others not knowing what is in the manifesto, whilst keeping it a closely guarded secret.
Lord Sutch had nothing on you!
Yet, can you not see the peril you put this forum In by not researching enough ? You make yourself look stupid not me. You state that you can't see Labour or The Tories using someone with a sex shop and that makes you look stupid when Cameron wheels out the biggest sex shop owner to help their election campaign.
Writing that Adam Walker assaulted his pupils could have seen Bryn with a lawsuit and why? because you're too arrogant or lazy to actually read about the trial on the Internet.
All I am saying to you, Is that you need to be more cautious and get fact before you write here. It doesn't matter how much you loathe something, you simply can't make It up about them as you go along. It's called libel.
The problem here, Is that there are many people like you who assume a Nationalist Party Is made up of shaven headed, tatoo'd morons. There may be many voters like that but you are grossly underestimating Key Figures In the Party. You have probably never even heard of the key figures but the Party has a frightening and vicious legal team that you underestimate and would come after you In the blink of the eye. That's not a threat either. You are putting this forum In danger. Look at the 17 court cases In the past 15 years. Invariably, we win most of them because of the legal team. At present, we are suing Cumbria CPS. Write these people off as Idiots at your peril. All It needs Is one of them looking In one day and you have brought the forum a shed load of grief and why ? Just to score points and because you feel you can say what you like without researching fact before you do. It only needs someone like Pat Harrington to be looking In one day.
All I am saying to you, Is loathe our Party all you like but don't assume and libel It's people at the peril of Bryn and this forum.
You need to be more cautious when writing about any Individual because In court, saying ' oh sorry, I meant to say abused when I said assaulted' won't wash.
It's just friendly advice... take It or leave It. What you've done here, Is not attack our Party per say but personally attack Individuals you don't know and will never meet and you have libeled Individuals. Stop this nasty practice and I'll have no need to reply to your posts.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
If it were a respectable party it wouldn't need such a legal team.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
FourPart;1471996 wrote: If it were a respectable party it wouldn't need such a legal team.
Well now you've just shown complete and utter Ignorance. All political parties have legal advisors.
Grow up and do some research.
http://www.societyoflabourlawyers.org.u ... r-lawyers/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of ... ve_Lawyers
Tell me... how many lawyers did Labour need In your so respectable party to deal with all those key figures convicted of child abuse?
Well now you've just shown complete and utter Ignorance. All political parties have legal advisors.
Grow up and do some research.
http://www.societyoflabourlawyers.org.u ... r-lawyers/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of ... ve_Lawyers
Tell me... how many lawyers did Labour need In your so respectable party to deal with all those key figures convicted of child abuse?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
The link to the Labour Lawyers site looks to me to be more of a Subscription based membership, more along the lines of a Trade Union, rather than a matter of employing an 'elite legal team'.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
FourPart;1472017 wrote: The link to the Labour Lawyers site looks to me to be more of a Subscription based membership, more along the lines of a Trade Union, rather than a matter of employing an 'elite legal team'.
What does It matter.... Are you seriously trying to believe that Political Parties do not have legal teams ?
What does It matter.... Are you seriously trying to believe that Political Parties do not have legal teams ?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Of course they have lawyers - just as any business does. The difference is in the way you portray the legal team of the BNP. You emphasise how they are always on the offensive. Making lawsuits left right & centre. Constantly stirring up trouble.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
FourPart;1472021 wrote: Of course they have lawyers - just as any business does. The difference is in the way you portray the legal team of the BNP. You emphasise how they are always on the offensive. Making lawsuits left right & centre. Constantly stirring up trouble.
No I didn't... that's your distorted Interpretation skewed out of hatred for people you don't know. If they are on the offensive, why shouldn't they be ? If they were not, the country would be full of people like you who actually know nothing about the people they are filling forums with.
You are a good example. I'll bet you any amount of money that before you went looking for anything to throw In this thread, you had never heard of Steve Squire's.. You were probably trawling through the Internet looking for something and anything when bingo, up pops Hope Not Hate's blog. Or you see a title of an article that Adam Walker has been convicted over a row with some youths. Being too arrogant or bone Idle to check the facts, you then write your libel which Is your own Interpretation and not fact.
You are not critisizing a Party per say on their policies ( all available on the website that you're probably too arrogant to find) but you are attacking Individuals who you have never heard of before because In your arrogant world, you believe that your hatred for something you know nothing about, gives you a green light to personally attack anyone who's remotely connected to the Party. You do not have a right to libel anyone, whoever they are or whatever they have done.
And now, the best part Is, from your post, you seem to be complaining that after libeling people you know nothing about, they may sue you If they happen to see your libel. You actually have the brass neck to be put out that having libeled them, how dare they come after me ? So call It what you life. Offensive or defensive. I offered you some advice. You can not leave this forum as a sitting duck for a libel lawsuit just because you think you're being terribly clever by distorting facts for this forum to put the Parties people In a bad light to members here. And then you whine that they may come after you ? Really ? Seriously ?
I'll go one further... I bet you did actually read the report on Adam Walker's trial and I bet you knew damn well that he never assaulted them nor came near to putting his hands on them. I bet you even read the report that quoted the judge saying he had been more than goaded at the time. Yet, you believed In your arrogance that you could write what you liked here In the attempt to portray the case or him far worse than It was and I believe you did that deliberately. You are a liability.
No I didn't... that's your distorted Interpretation skewed out of hatred for people you don't know. If they are on the offensive, why shouldn't they be ? If they were not, the country would be full of people like you who actually know nothing about the people they are filling forums with.
You are a good example. I'll bet you any amount of money that before you went looking for anything to throw In this thread, you had never heard of Steve Squire's.. You were probably trawling through the Internet looking for something and anything when bingo, up pops Hope Not Hate's blog. Or you see a title of an article that Adam Walker has been convicted over a row with some youths. Being too arrogant or bone Idle to check the facts, you then write your libel which Is your own Interpretation and not fact.
You are not critisizing a Party per say on their policies ( all available on the website that you're probably too arrogant to find) but you are attacking Individuals who you have never heard of before because In your arrogant world, you believe that your hatred for something you know nothing about, gives you a green light to personally attack anyone who's remotely connected to the Party. You do not have a right to libel anyone, whoever they are or whatever they have done.
And now, the best part Is, from your post, you seem to be complaining that after libeling people you know nothing about, they may sue you If they happen to see your libel. You actually have the brass neck to be put out that having libeled them, how dare they come after me ? So call It what you life. Offensive or defensive. I offered you some advice. You can not leave this forum as a sitting duck for a libel lawsuit just because you think you're being terribly clever by distorting facts for this forum to put the Parties people In a bad light to members here. And then you whine that they may come after you ? Really ? Seriously ?
I'll go one further... I bet you did actually read the report on Adam Walker's trial and I bet you knew damn well that he never assaulted them nor came near to putting his hands on them. I bet you even read the report that quoted the judge saying he had been more than goaded at the time. Yet, you believed In your arrogance that you could write what you liked here In the attempt to portray the case or him far worse than It was and I believe you did that deliberately. You are a liability.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Are you reading the same thread that I am reading ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
-
Peter Lake
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:02 pm
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
FourPart;1471996 wrote: If it were a respectable party it wouldn't need such a legal team.
From your threads and posts, you talk much about being involved in the church so i assume from that, you are a religious man. Does your church not practice what it preaches in kindness and goodwill to all men? Since you came here you have attacked individual members in the B.N.P. all from salacious inaccuracy on the internet, even the Rev Robert West who brings comfort to the families of dying members. I haven't been in the party long and to be honest, i was wary at first. I'd also read the negative press on the internet. I expected to hear racism and i expected to meet people who were the nazi's and fascists portrayed by the media. I even expected hate, and hate for those not born here but i have never witnessed it once. What i met was just ordinary people. No hate filled speeches, no hate rants, no idolising, just normal people and kind people such as Marlene Guest who offered counselling to children who were victims of gang rape while authorities in Rotherham offered nothing. I've seen the funds raised for holidays for the victims and their families while government continue's to ignore them. I've seen the food banks created by donations from members for the elderly in winter. I've seen the campaigns to bring animal abusers to justice and i continue to see these acts every day all over the country without press or seeking gratitude and recognition. I've even seen the support offered to local Sikh's and Hindu's in communities. Wherever we go, there's fun and laughs, rather alien to the nature of your church it appears going by the hatred you have shown on this forum.
Hang on though. You're the church goer and we are the nazi party. Something is not right there. I don't expect anyone to agree with our party especially by the negative that is written about us but the difference with us, is that i have seen more hatred from you toward ordinary people you don't know anything about than i have ever seen from anyone in that party. If i did, it would not be the place for me yet you are the hypocrite here. How can you go to church and preach goodwill to all men and be so eaten away with hatred? Think what you like about us and our party but give it a rest will you? I am in no doubt your personal attacks on members are nothing short of baiting to deliberately bait Oscar because you know these people are her friends and colleagues. I think you know exactly what you are doing here. Hardly the actions of a holy man in my book. We'll continue to correct the libel you litter this forum with but we will leave you alone, with your hate.
From your threads and posts, you talk much about being involved in the church so i assume from that, you are a religious man. Does your church not practice what it preaches in kindness and goodwill to all men? Since you came here you have attacked individual members in the B.N.P. all from salacious inaccuracy on the internet, even the Rev Robert West who brings comfort to the families of dying members. I haven't been in the party long and to be honest, i was wary at first. I'd also read the negative press on the internet. I expected to hear racism and i expected to meet people who were the nazi's and fascists portrayed by the media. I even expected hate, and hate for those not born here but i have never witnessed it once. What i met was just ordinary people. No hate filled speeches, no hate rants, no idolising, just normal people and kind people such as Marlene Guest who offered counselling to children who were victims of gang rape while authorities in Rotherham offered nothing. I've seen the funds raised for holidays for the victims and their families while government continue's to ignore them. I've seen the food banks created by donations from members for the elderly in winter. I've seen the campaigns to bring animal abusers to justice and i continue to see these acts every day all over the country without press or seeking gratitude and recognition. I've even seen the support offered to local Sikh's and Hindu's in communities. Wherever we go, there's fun and laughs, rather alien to the nature of your church it appears going by the hatred you have shown on this forum.
Hang on though. You're the church goer and we are the nazi party. Something is not right there. I don't expect anyone to agree with our party especially by the negative that is written about us but the difference with us, is that i have seen more hatred from you toward ordinary people you don't know anything about than i have ever seen from anyone in that party. If i did, it would not be the place for me yet you are the hypocrite here. How can you go to church and preach goodwill to all men and be so eaten away with hatred? Think what you like about us and our party but give it a rest will you? I am in no doubt your personal attacks on members are nothing short of baiting to deliberately bait Oscar because you know these people are her friends and colleagues. I think you know exactly what you are doing here. Hardly the actions of a holy man in my book. We'll continue to correct the libel you litter this forum with but we will leave you alone, with your hate.
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Is there a parallel thread running alongside this one that I can't see ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Bruv;1472069 wrote: Is there a parallel thread running alongside this one that I can't see ?
Beats me, I tuned in to see what could keep a thread like this running for twelve pages but I'm totally lost.
Beats me, I tuned in to see what could keep a thread like this running for twelve pages but I'm totally lost.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Saint_;1472071 wrote: Beats me, I tuned in to see what could keep a thread like this running for twelve pages but I'm totally lost.
I hope It's the end of It. We're sick to death of It. Seriously though, what do you do you ? Leave outright libel there ?
I hope It's the end of It. We're sick to death of It. Seriously though, what do you do you ? Leave outright libel there ?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Actually, if you had read any of my threads on my view of Religion, you would know that I am not only Atheist, but Anti-Religious in general. Religion (or, at least, it's banner) has been the cause of 99% of wars since the beginning of time.
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Oscar Namechange;1471745 wrote: And why the reluctance to answer a simple question? Why do you want to read It ?
You expect an answer from me yet you nor Bruv can answer my question.
Only recently you posted that you do not agree with all your Parties policies but the majority of them yet by the same token you believe that I must agree with everything my party proposes. Do you not see the hypocrisy of your words.
Answer my question truthfully and the answer will come to you.
The answer is very, very, simple - how can anyone rationally decide whether to vote for a party until they have read what the party stands for and what policies they expect to enact if they get into power.
Any party that attempts to limit access to these documents to known supporters only would appear to be attempting to gain support by manipulation and deceit - this is not democracy, it's the Christian Scientist approach to politics.
You expect an answer from me yet you nor Bruv can answer my question.
Only recently you posted that you do not agree with all your Parties policies but the majority of them yet by the same token you believe that I must agree with everything my party proposes. Do you not see the hypocrisy of your words.
Answer my question truthfully and the answer will come to you.
The answer is very, very, simple - how can anyone rationally decide whether to vote for a party until they have read what the party stands for and what policies they expect to enact if they get into power.
Any party that attempts to limit access to these documents to known supporters only would appear to be attempting to gain support by manipulation and deceit - this is not democracy, it's the Christian Scientist approach to politics.
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Bryn Mawr;1472159 wrote: The answer is very, very, simple - how can anyone rationally decide whether to vote for a party until they have read what the party stands for and what policies they expect to enact if they get into power.
Any party that attempts to limit access to these documents to known supporters only would appear to be attempting to gain support by manipulation and deceit - this is not democracy, it's the Christian Scientist approach to politics.
You too will have to answer the qualifying question before you get one sent to your mail box Bryn, "Why exactly do you want to see their Manifesto?"
None of that "It's a legal requirement" nonsense please.
(I can be so very annoying with my sarcasm and stuff.......I don't even like myself)
Any party that attempts to limit access to these documents to known supporters only would appear to be attempting to gain support by manipulation and deceit - this is not democracy, it's the Christian Scientist approach to politics.
You too will have to answer the qualifying question before you get one sent to your mail box Bryn, "Why exactly do you want to see their Manifesto?"
None of that "It's a legal requirement" nonsense please.
(I can be so very annoying with my sarcasm and stuff.......I don't even like myself)
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
FourPart;1472146 wrote: Actually, if you had read any of my threads on my view of Religion, you would know that I am not only Atheist, but Anti-Religious in general. Religion (or, at least, it's banner) has been the cause of 99% of wars since the beginning of time.
Most people In our Party are just ordinary people. Mothers, Fathers and Grandparents. Even Steve Squires who you brought Into the mix... so he owns a sex shop? He's not scrounging benefit, pissing up his benefit In the pub or taking drugs. He works long hours, he pays tax. He employs others who pay tax.
Let's call a truce here because I don't actually feel In any way malicious toward you. Understand that you can't just write ' he assaulted his pupils' just because that makes more Interesting reading here. Of course we get pillocks In the party, every party does. Look at the loons In UKIP. Yet, we are pretty swift at dealing with our pillocks.... just ask Nick Griffin.
I am quite religious. I go to church. We have a friend who came Into some money recently and the first thing he did was give £5,000 to his local church and £5,000 to the homeless shelter In Bath run by the church. He's a BNP member... see ? Don't pre-judge.
Most people In our Party are just ordinary people. Mothers, Fathers and Grandparents. Even Steve Squires who you brought Into the mix... so he owns a sex shop? He's not scrounging benefit, pissing up his benefit In the pub or taking drugs. He works long hours, he pays tax. He employs others who pay tax.
Let's call a truce here because I don't actually feel In any way malicious toward you. Understand that you can't just write ' he assaulted his pupils' just because that makes more Interesting reading here. Of course we get pillocks In the party, every party does. Look at the loons In UKIP. Yet, we are pretty swift at dealing with our pillocks.... just ask Nick Griffin.
I am quite religious. I go to church. We have a friend who came Into some money recently and the first thing he did was give £5,000 to his local church and £5,000 to the homeless shelter In Bath run by the church. He's a BNP member... see ? Don't pre-judge.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Hey Islam Lighten Up SMILE
Oscar Namechange;1472165 wrote: I am quite religious. I go to church. We have a friend who came Into some money recently and the first thing he did was give £5,000 to his local church and £5,000 to the homeless shelter In Bath run by the church. He's a BNP member... see ? Don't pre-judge.
I would have prefered it if he had given £10,000 to the shelter.
As I posted elsewhere on this forum, instead of having a Secret Santa, we had a collection of what we would have spent on one & gave it to Crisis instead. While looking at their website I was looking at their scrolling list of recent donations. The size of the donations was amazing - and so many of them listed as 'Anonymous'. Really heart warming.
I would have prefered it if he had given £10,000 to the shelter.
As I posted elsewhere on this forum, instead of having a Secret Santa, we had a collection of what we would have spent on one & gave it to Crisis instead. While looking at their website I was looking at their scrolling list of recent donations. The size of the donations was amazing - and so many of them listed as 'Anonymous'. Really heart warming.