UK government adds National Action to list of proscribed orgs.

www.google.co.uk...


As far as I can tell, from what I have read, these are a neo nazi bunch who don't practice terrorist or illegal acts.

As unsavoury as nazis may be as an ideology, are the neos really on a par with groups such as IS and Continuity IRA?
They don't blow stuff up or try to kill anyone.

They seem to be a political group only.

Now the government is going to add them to their terrorist list which means that you can go to jail for wearing a t shirt with their symbol on or even tweeting support for them.

Is this right?
At what point does our perceived right to freedom of speech and association become nothing more than an empty ideal?

a reply to: SprocketUK

That's messed up.

You know... I see people here at ATS from the UK and how they're always saying how messed up things are here in America and how stupid we were to vote Trump in to office.

...then I see stories like this and it reminds me of just how thankful I am to live in the US and not there in the UK. I believe people who are acting like a bunch of 3 year olds in the US who think their $#@^ don't stink and their opinions are gold, should consider this as well. The fact that we have the right to say and display what and how we want (for the most part) without hindrance shows that we are more free than the world around us. Also based on the story here, it makes me feel that we're better off than the rest of the world.


Your story is appalling. It's the simple freedoms that are stripped away from you that often feels most important.

a reply to: StallionDuck

Well said.
For all the problems the US might have, I think the constitution serves you pretty well.

a reply to: SprocketUK

They train their members in hand to hand combat, and flyer their intention to establish "White Only Zones" in areas in which they live. Remind you of anyone? More specifically, remind you of any group that has been done to death in the press for AGES for similar reasons?

A member of the group, Zack Davis, was convicted of the attempted murder of a Sikh gentleman, allegedly in revenge for the murder of Lee Rigby, who was killed by people of a completely different faith than that of Davis victim. Benjamin Raymond, the leader of National Action, reportedly denied that the assailant had any connection to his organisation, which I do not buy for a second, by the way. It ought to be noted, that Tommy Mair, the man who killed Jo Cox MP, quoted their propaganda perfectly in saying "Freedom for Britain, death to traitors!" during the period between his arrest and conviction.

The chances of their being no connection between Mair and National Action are pretty bloody slim, given the circles Mair mixed in. In short, this IS a group with connections to White Supremacist terrorism, and not therefore a peaceful protest group which means they ought not to have the same protections as every organisation utilising exclusively PEACEFUL freedom of speech to achieve their aims.

a reply to: SprocketUK

It must be a pain for the police.

They look organised.

I smell a rat now. http://www.dailystormer.com/national-action-conference-2015/

That's ridiculously provocative. Flashing hypno-signs saying start a revolution? It's got to be a spook job.

a reply to: Kester

To be realistic, any pleb could have knocked that together with a solid few hours of photoshopping under their belt.

The ability to create gif does not an agent provocateur make.

a reply to: TrueBrit

True, Brit.

a reply to: TrueBrit

They have scumbags in their ranks. No argument about that.
Their message isn't one that any reasonable person could subscribe to either, but does that make them terrorists?

To misquote someone from twitter, anti semitic, homophobic group banned...Not Islam not Christianity though....

I think Thomas Mair quoted Britain First stuff didn't he?

Anyway, is this not a mental overreaction to this group? As I said, I'm not aware of any terror plots they may be hatching and they seem to be a talking shop more than anything. (Well, shouting shop).

I remember being a teen and hearing some of the older lads at school talk about the NF and nazis...When they got round to the bit about the holocaust not happening, that was when pretty much everyone else realised they were talking rubbish in general.
The biggest danger to this group would be letting their ideas be open to scrutiny rather than wasting resources criminalising them.

originally posted by: StallionDuck
a reply to: SprocketUK

That's messed up.

You know... I see people here at ATS from the UK and how they're always saying how messed up things are here in America and how stupid we were to vote Trump in to office.

...then I see stories like this and it reminds me of just how thankful I am to live in the US and not there in the UK. I believe people who are acting like a bunch of 3 year olds in the US who think their $#@^ don't stink and their opinions are gold, should consider this as well. The fact that we have the right to say and display what and how we want (for the most part) without hindrance shows that we are more free than the world around us. Also based on the story here, it makes me feel that we're better off than the rest of the world.


Your story is appalling. It's the simple freedoms that are stripped away from you that often feels most important.

Do you think publicly declaring allegiance to a group that openly advocates violence on others based on the colour of their skin, their politics or their religion is a good thing then and should be encouraged?

I'm fairly sure the 1st amendment doesn't cover direct incitement for violence at individuals - does it?

a reply to: Kester

I can't take them seriously mate. Those vid look well made but this is a group that is a tiny, loony fringe of the right wing.

Makes me wonder though if this is the first move in an operation to shut out the alt right, fake news and all the other stuff that weakens the grip of the establishment over the people.

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: StallionDuck
a reply to: SprocketUK

That's messed up.

You know... I see people here at ATS from the UK and how they're always saying how messed up things are here in America and how stupid we were to vote Trump in to office.

...then I see stories like this and it reminds me of just how thankful I am to live in the US and not there in the UK. I believe people who are acting like a bunch of 3 year olds in the US who think their $#@^ don't stink and their opinions are gold, should consider this as well. The fact that we have the right to say and display what and how we want (for the most part) without hindrance shows that we are more free than the world around us. Also based on the story here, it makes me feel that we're better off than the rest of the world.


Your story is appalling. It's the simple freedoms that are stripped away from you that often feels most important.

Do you think publicly declaring allegiance to a group that openly advocates violence on others based on the colour of their skin, their politics or their religion is a good thing then and should be encouraged?

I'm fairly sure the 1st amendment doesn't cover direct incitement for violence at individuals - does it?

I'd like to see your source for the allegation that they promote violence in pursuit of their political ambitions...

a reply to: SprocketUK

I think its more accurate to say, that in the case of the Jo Cox killing, Mair was involved with, or in communication with members of, a huge number of White Supremacist groups throughout the nation, had done hours and hours of research on the entire spectrum of supremacist groups both current and historical. To be honest, if anything needed proscribing, its the entire concept of supremacist thinking itself, which is absolutely a disease on the arse of humanity, an irony, considering how many White Supremacists believe that their cultures, beliefs, and methods are the only pure things on the Earth.

It is not a waste of resources to prevent people like Tommy Mair and Zack Davis from freely going about the business of killing MPs and attempting to kill Sikhs, Muslims, people who speak a different language to ours, people who look different to us, just because they feel they have a right to. And as Britons, we have a responsibility to make sure that people who believe what Tommy Mair believes, what Zack Davis believes, and indeed what National Action believe, are NEVER allowed to flourish on this soil. This soil is reserved for those who would fight Nazis until every last one of them was dead, and must never become a haven for those who would betray the sacrifices of our ancestors in such an overt and disgusting manner. There must be a point at which we say enough is enough, and cast down these groups to the deep hole in which they belong, lest they become the norm, and take over by osmosis, that which ought to be reserved for compassionate, noble, decent and inclusive persons.

originally posted by: SprocketUK
www.google.co.uk...


As far as I can tell, from what I have read, these are a neo nazi bunch who don't practice terrorist or illegal acts.

As unsavoury as nazis may be as an ideology, are the neos really on a par with groups such as IS and Continuity IRA?
They don't blow stuff up or try to kill anyone.

They seem to be a political group only.

Now the government is going to add them to their terrorist list which means that you can go to jail for wearing a t shirt with their symbol on or even tweeting support for them.

Is this right?
At what point does our perceived right to freedom of speech and association become nothing more than an empty ideal?

a reply to: TrueBrit

As individuals, definitely.
But to tar a whole group with their membership?
As for supremacist thinking, that is something that can only exist in a vacuum. Any exposure to wider ideas just blows it away.

Yes, they may be an unsavoury group, but are they a threat to our society? Are they an actual, bona fide terrorist group? After reading more than I'm comfortable with, I'd have to say no.
So why use anti terror legislation against them? And if it's ok in this case, who the hell is next?

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: StallionDuck
a reply to: SprocketUK

That's messed up.

You know... I see people here at ATS from the UK and how they're always saying how messed up things are here in America and how stupid we were to vote Trump in to office.

...then I see stories like this and it reminds me of just how thankful I am to live in the US and not there in the UK. I believe people who are acting like a bunch of 3 year olds in the US who think their $#@^ don't stink and their opinions are gold, should consider this as well. The fact that we have the right to say and display what and how we want (for the most part) without hindrance shows that we are more free than the world around us. Also based on the story here, it makes me feel that we're better off than the rest of the world.


Your story is appalling. It's the simple freedoms that are stripped away from you that often feels most important.

Do you think publicly declaring allegiance to a group that openly advocates violence on others based on the colour of their skin, their politics or their religion is a good thing then and should be encouraged?

I'm fairly sure the 1st amendment doesn't cover direct incitement for violence at individuals - does it?

Alleged? If they had, I assume they would have been arrested, right? If not... then by our own standards, everyone has the right to say their peace. Look at it as a way of venting the pot to prevent it from exploding. What would you rather have?

Remember, the US has it's KKK too. They can say and believe what they want so long as they don't act on it to cause harm. Hurting someone's feelings isn't exactly harming someone.

Then again... this day and age...

a reply to: SprocketUK

Well, all I can say, is that if an organisation which trains its members in combat, advocates for aggressive, violent behaviour toward others (which they absolutely do), and intends to use that violence to spread a political message, then I would say that the organisation involved is a terrorist organisation, and needs dismantling with all possible haste and effectiveness. And the members of that organisation need to be monitored, so that any groups they start, or join afterward, suffer the same fate. Eventually, they will either get themselves into so much crap that they never escape its consequences, or they will realise their ideology has no place on my homelands soil, and give it up.

a reply to: SprocketUK

a saying of my grandfathers : you dont join a cycling club if you want to ride a pony

a reply to: SprocketUK

Much like the Westboro Babtist Church, they have the right to believe whatever slime they wish and should be able to speak about whatever they want to, but NOT to harm others. Once that happens, they are open for a fight. You don't have to agree with their message to support their right to say it. (IMHO)

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: StallionDuck
a reply to: SprocketUK

That's messed up.

You know... I see people here at ATS from the UK and how they're always saying how messed up things are here in America and how stupid we were to vote Trump in to office.

...then I see stories like this and it reminds me of just how thankful I am to live in the US and not there in the UK. I believe people who are acting like a bunch of 3 year olds in the US who think their $#@^ don't stink and their opinions are gold, should consider this as well. The fact that we have the right to say and display what and how we want (for the most part) without hindrance shows that we are more free than the world around us. Also based on the story here, it makes me feel that we're better off than the rest of the world.


Your story is appalling. It's the simple freedoms that are stripped away from you that often feels most important.

Do you think publicly declaring allegiance to a group that openly advocates violence on others based on the colour of their skin, their politics or their religion is a good thing then and should be encouraged?

I'm fairly sure the 1st amendment doesn't cover direct incitement for violence at individuals - does it?

I'd like to see your source for the allegation that they promote violence in pursuit of their political ambitions...

TrueBrit has put this more eloquently than I could without effectively repeating his words.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Even if they avow to only ever use violence in self defence?

Because that is what they advocate.
They state their aims of change through lawful protest over and over...
We have yet to see any evidence of organised illegality by this group at all.