Are we really saying that a BNP supporter is incapable of doing his job as a police officer? If an officer displays any degree of racial discrimination during the course of carrying out his duties, then I would be the first to say that disciplinary action should be taken, but a blanket ban is wrong, and in itself discriminatory. Should we also fire any police officer who supports any political party, or just those ones we don’t happen to approve of?
Is it wrong to discriminate against people that discriminate? Do Labour, the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats want the removal of people from the country depending on their colour?
The British National Party stands for the preservation of the national and ethnic character of the British people and is wholly opposed to any form of racial integration between British and non-European peoples. It is therefore committed to stemming and reversing the tide of non-white immigrationand to restoring, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, the overwhelmingly white makeup of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948.
That statement in the BNPs’ constitution isn’t just about declaring their dislike for a certain section of society, it is a declaration to ethnically cleanse anyone that the BNP decides do not belong.
Membership of the BNP isn’t like the church where there are differing opinions on particular areas of thought. For example. Some members of the Church of England don’t give a monkeys’ about homosexuality and some think it’s abhorrent. Every member of the BNP has read (or should’ve done) and agrees with it. Every member of the BNP thinks that non-white European people shouldn’t be here, have no right to be here, is taking something away from the white people.
What do you think ‘negotiation’ and ‘consent’ mean? BNP member have been arrested for ‘negotiating’ with non-white citizens.
At the moment the BNP are not able to get rid of people by legal changes, but if they did, what do you think that would involve? Forced deportations, removing civil liberties, there will be probably be organisations that are deniable to help ‘persuade’ people to leave.
The BNP aren’t fucking about.
Having said that, and much more could be said, if someone believes that much that someone, who’s family have lived in this country, 3 generations or so born here, no connections to anywhere else, works, pays taxes etc, does not belong just because of the colour of that persons skin, why would they help them? Any occasion that requires someone to call the police is a bad situation. A bad situation could help someone decide to leave. The BNP member is committed to getting non-white people to leave.
There are several arguements that go with this, mostly ‘whatabouteries’. The two most common appear in The Fail Dales post and comments. These are religion and the National Black Police Association.
Well, the religion one, as explained earlier using what could be said is a parallel situation, does not have a definative, stated viewpoint, policy, or objective with regards to homosexuality. Some strands of religion accept it, some don’t. Some are still deciding. It may be the case that religion and being a police officer are incompatible, but that is a different discussion. The two things, religion and being a copper, and BNP membership and being a police officer, are separate issues. One does not dictate the result of the other.
With NBPA, it states on the front page of their website…
Membership of the NBPA is open to all in policing on application.
There is no bar to membership based on colour.
The NBPA is also not trying to deny anybody anything. They are not calling for the removal of white police officers or the denial of employment rights from a certain section of the force.
The BNP want to solve the problem of ‘British workers for British people’, racial discrimination, and social housing problems by removing sections of British citizenry. Not just recent immigrants or asylum seekers but also people that know nothing else. People that don’t just feel British but are British.
Ooh, I nearly forgot. Another arguement is that the BNP is a legal political party so why not? Well, the BNP is a racist organisation pushing racist idea and policies. This means that the question shouldn’t be ‘should police officers be allowed to join the BNP’ but ‘should the BNP be legal’?
The truth is that supporting the BNP is itself a racist act: it makes a person guilty of contributing to a climate of racism and prejudice in this country, which is harmful to racial and ethnic minorities. That is true whether or not the person considers him/herself to be a racist. We ought to be upfront about this fact, and more willing to openly condemn supporters of the BNP. Saying that supporting the BNP is a mere ‘protest’ gives the party, and its supporters, a veneer of legitimacy that they just doesn’t deserve. If someone supports the BNP, in any capacity, they are complicit in racism. They have contributed to making life that little bit harder for racial and ethnic groups in Britain, and that is something of which they should be ashamed.
I reckon if Britain was still exporting it’s criminals to Australia, Thomas Payne would’ve been on the next boat out of here.
A 19 year old lad was taken to court and found guilty. His punishment? £50 costs, a 36-hour community order, which he has to do for three hours at a time for the next 12 Saturdays. Oh and he has to wear an electronic tag with a curfew from 8pm to 6am for the next four months.
What’s his crime? Is it Burgulary? Assault, maybe? Did he breach an ASBO, perhaps?
A police charge notice said he had ‘intentionally and without authority or reasonable cause, caused sweets to be on a road, namely Lancaster Circus, in such circumstances that it would have been obvious to a reasonable person that to do so would be dangerous’ contrary to the Road Traffic Act.
The lad forgot to zip up his pocket when he dusted off down the road on his Yamaha DT175 and some mint imperials fell out.
They were just falling out of my pocket. Because of the time they followed me for they said I should have known.
Yes, he should’ve known, but he didn’t. Dropping some sweets isn’t worth community service and a curfew. It’s not just the big stories that erode confidence in and respect for the police. The punishment may be harsh, and the judge needs a word in his ear, but it should never have got that far.
The video of the latest incident to emerge was released by Climate Camp protesters. In it, 24-year-old IT worker Alex Cinnane is shown being forcibly hit in the left temple with a round shield by a policeman wearing a balaclava and a visor.
Well, that’s torn to shit any excuses that may (or have already come up) about Ian Tomlinson death being an isolated incident.
Now a fresh post-mortem examination has found he died of abdominal bleeding, not a heart attack, as first thought.
Now, I’m not a doctor or anything like that, my medical expertise ranges from a couple of ibuprofen for a headache to ‘hair of the dog’ for, ahem, more serious illness, so I could be a little out here.
A heart attack doesn’t neccersarily result in internal bleeding, but a heart attack can result from loss of blood as the heart works harder to keep blood pressure without enough blood.
So, the first post mortem wasn’t exactly wrong, more incomplete because yes Ian died of a heart attack, but is was brought about from abdominal heamorraging, which in turn was brought about from, say, being knocked about.
The footage shows the woman swearing at a police officer who then appears to hit her in the face before apparently striking her on the leg with his baton.
The woman is swearing at the copper, but he only appears to slap her with the back of his hand, whilst wearing leather gloves that wouldn’t look out of place on a biker, and then he strikes her on the leg, apparently.
If we’re going down that sort of path, then surely, the woman only looks like she is swearing at the Filth.
But then, the girl probably hasn’t got institutions the size of the Met and the IPCC to defend her honour, has she?
Update:
The officer, a sergeant, it would appear, has been suspended.
David Howarth (LbDem justice spokesman)…
“The fact that this video shows another example of an officer with his number obscured assaulting a member of the public indicates that there is a systematic problem here, not just a series of individual acts of misconduct.
“The question is on my mind whether the police are using a some kind of ‘designated hitter’ system.”
Link via Rwendland in the comments on Bloggerheads.
Then there’s the house raid that goes a little wrong and one of the occupants, who is innocent as it happens, ends up getting shot.
Well, the information the coppers had meant that firearms were appropriate for the raid, and when a raid gets started there is lot of noise and confusion, everyone is hyped up and it’s usually dark as they are carried out in the early hours of the morning. It’s quite scary, even for the officers. I know, I’ve seen them on telly.
It’s surprising, really, that more people hurt. All it needs is the suspect to not put there hands up, or make a wrong move and, well…
Or there’s the suicide bomber that wasn’t. Armed officers, in a stressful situation, the tube full of people. OK, so there were errors made. Would you have done any better?
The thing is, with all those examples, we weren’t there. It doesn’t matter what witnesses say, you’re own mind can add little caveats, little excuses, that still leave the rozzers The Good Guys.
What happened at the G20 shattered that completely.
The assault was unprovoked, cowardly and on film.
As you can see, Ian is strolling along with his hands in his pockets, the fuzz come up behind him, a dog sniffing him, and then he gets a whack on the back of the legs and an almighty shove to the ground.
Why? What purpose did it serve? Ian wasn’t giving them abuse, the coppers could see his hands were in his pockets, so he wasn’t gonna be able to do anything before they could get to him, and he wasn’t giving them abuse. It was just malicious.
The game has changed. Why the hell else are coppers leaving off a letter or number from their lapels? ‘If you’ve got nothing to hide…’ applies to them too. Why else were the police telling people in the Climate Camp to delete photos of plod or have their cameras seized? Was the Climate Camp full of terrorists, was it?
A lie can be delivered by innuendo. The so-called “Independent Police Complaints Commission” – whose investigations in this case are being conducted by the City of London Police – had put out a statement saying that “it appeared that Mr Tomlinson had contact with the Police.” If we had not seen the video, what image does that conjure up in your mind?
John O’Connor, a former Flying Squad commander, defended kettling in extraordinarily totalitarian terms, saying that
…using these tactics in a non-selective way does cause inconvenience to persons who are legally trying to make their point, but it is effective in controlling the troublemakers.
The same could be said of subjecting the entire population to house arrest or amputating the limbs of anyone not in the police. Certainly, what he says is a clear admission that kettling does not ‘facilitate peaceful protest’.
Do I need to spell out what message is that sending to the ordinary plod on the beat? The modern policeman already wears a quasi-military uniform, with their stab vest and utility belt. They do work under some tremendous pressures, and you can excuse them with that and the adrenaline and all sorts of other reasons, but that is what training is for. If a copper goes loses it, makes an error of judgement or gets power crazy and attacks an innocent person, he either needs to be fired or retrained. As well as prosecuted.
The example needs to be set from the top and that is what is missing. Last word goes to Craig Murray…
We have reached the stage in the UK where we need a revolutionary change. We have to sweep out the old order of corrupt politicians whose one guiding principle is to keep their own snouts in the trough: of City bankers who are multi-millionaires from their bubble scams and whose lifestyles and jobs the ordinary people are now supporting by a massive tax and debt burden, while nobody guarantees the jobs of those ordinary people who fund it all.
We have to realise that the end of the centuries old prohibition of torture by agents of the state is of a piece with the freedom of the police to maintain the system of power by fatal force, in both cases without consequence. You cannot separate this brutalisation of power from the illegal war that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and thousands of our own soldiers, on the basis of a lie but really to secure oil.
The whole system stinks from the head like a fish. And people are starting at last to understand where the smell comes from.