Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

'The islamic flag flying over downing street'

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 08:00 AM
link   
All i want is a Government thats going to stand for the UK. The Government right now, the Conservatives and the Lib Dems aint IMO are not and will not do it. Why is it when i say i want a National Government, a National Party, some people assume Nazi, Racist right away? Is every Muslim a Terrorist?

Am not a Rasict nor am i a Nazi. I haven't got a problem with other countrys and there people. I love to Travel.

The Union Jack should be flying over Downing Street, and nothing else. Just like the America flag should be flying over the White House. At the end of the day, Downing street is where the Brittish Prime Minister stays who happens to govern the UK.

IMO

Tsom87




posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Taikonaut
 



Civil Law, which governs contractual disputes such as business deals, marriages, etc...anything where one person or group enters into an agreement with another. This will be stated at the outset of the contract terms to be resolved under any set of laws you wish...whether English, Scottish, Norwegian, Maritime, or Sharia law, and on the condition that is is a fair and above-board contract that all parties agree to be bound by under terms


If the contract was subject to a court in the UK and any terms of the contract were deemed to be illegal under English law, English law would apply over the stated set of laws. No excepts.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by ENGLISH BOB
 



Why don't we have NO FLAG over Downing street. Stops a load of childish argument. Can anybody explain to me why we have to wave these damn things anyway?


So having pride in one's country and the Union flag, and wanting to promote and defend this is a "childish argument" The Union flag should always fly over Downing Street. This is the official resident of The Prime Minister and we should be proud to have The Union Flag atop. And of course you have a choice not to have pride in this country and its flag.


Anyhoo, as for the video, I wouldn't pay it much attention. It's someone's opinion and we have freedom of speech.
Taking sides is not the answer here. This is a fantastic country, and the way we can live and work together is an example to the world.


Having the ability to express my views on a video that talks about another flag flying over Downing Street is my right. And why would you be on ATS if you did not want to debate a point of view or take a side.


At my workplace we've had British, Iraqi, Afghani, Iranian, Turkish, East European, West European, Canadian, aethiest, Christian, Muslim, Seikh, male, female, straight, gay etc everybody working together, happy together and NO WAR HAS BROKEN OUT BETWEEN US.


And your point? No war has broken out here on ATS or the country in general over this issue. Just people who want to debate both sides of this question.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freedom ERP
reply to post by ENGLISH BOB
 

I think you missunderstand me, to quote you :

So having pride in one's country and the Union flag, and wanting to promote and defend this is a "childish argument" The Union flag should always fly over Downing Street. This is the official resident of The Prime Minister and we should be proud to have The Union Flag atop. And of course you have a choice not to have pride in this country and its flag.

I'm proud of what's been acheived here and most of the world, and wouldn't want any different laws to apply to anyone. I just have trouble seeing what a piece of coloured cloth has to do with it.

Having the ability to express my views on a video that talks about another flag flying over Downing Street is my right. And why would you be on ATS if you did not want to debate a point of view or take a side.

I'll debate a point of view, no problem, but I want everybody to be on the same side talking, not different sides shouting.

And your point? No war has broken out here on ATS or the country in general over this issue. Just people who want to debate both sides of this question.

The point I was trying to make there was we can all exist together quite normally, being different but fully integrated, all part of the same system. No flags required. To be honest if it was up to me all the world would be one country with our (European/American) laws and no flags, but that's just my opinion.

[edit on 15-9-2009 by ENGLISH BOB]

[edit on 15-9-2009 by ENGLISH BOB]

[edit on 15-9-2009 by ENGLISH BOB]

[edit on 15-9-2009 by ENGLISH BOB]

[edit on 15-9-2009 by ENGLISH BOB]



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
i just wanted to say that this english bob, is not me and has nothing to do with me.

I think that maybe they should change their username to stop the two of us getting mixed up.

His/her views are seperate to mine, and i have not made a new account.

[edit on 15-9-2009 by MR BOB]



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freedom ERP
The BNP are not proposing to impose a totally alien belief and legal structure on the indigenous population of the UK.


I beg to differ.

The BNP is founded in facism. It has its roots deep there. Millions died fighting that in WW2. If facism is not a "alien belief" to the UK, then why did we do it?

Griffin is a facist and a racist.

How many other leaders of political parties in the UK can you find photos of in "White power" T-Shirts?



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Well put neformore. There seems to be a lot of nationalism springing up not just where I live but around the world. If this is what the PTB want, to get us in the mood for another stupid conflict that we have to pay them to fight then their plan is going well.
I'm just glad I'm too old to get called up.
Anyhoo, fantastically put. I'm not sure if we're quite in the same corner but I think I gave you a star.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Griffin is a facist and a racist.

How many other leaders of political parties in the UK can you find photos of in "White power" T-Shirts?

Whether Griffin is racist or fascist is your interpretation. He's definitely not a 'fascist' - he's far less guilty of using state powers to suppress opposing ideologies, sometimes by force. Actually, it's ironically the UAF who do that.

And the 'white-power' shirt. Are people not allowed to make mistakes in their youth? Presumably Che Guevara has been forgiven for being a rampant racist and homophobe. Furthermore, a 'white-power' t-shirt is far more innocent than the bombing of thousands of innocent Iraqis and Afghans, yet the same hate and discrimination is never directed at the likes of Tony Blair is it.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


you are aware that the BNP came from the National Front, who came from the National Socialists (Nazi party). so their history is rooted in fascism. Like it or not.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 05:06 AM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


There have been several Conservative MP's who have been exposed as ex-NF supporters.

Numerous Labour MP's were once virulent supporters of Socialist Workers Party and thus followers of an idealogy that has been responsible for at least as many deaths as Nazi Germany!

Some Lib Dem's were anarchists and supporters of Class War.

When Josef Goebbels joined The National Socialist Party he leaned towards The Socialist side of the party gradually falling under Hitler's evil sway he became the vile propagandist for the Nationalist side.

My point, very few of us have the opinions we have today that we once had as youngsters....and that is natural as our experiences continue to shape us.

What annoys me is that anyone who showed signs of 'White Power' or Racism as youngsters are vilified and ridiculed despite there views tempering with time, however, past supporters of Mao / Lenin / Stalin etc are forgiven.
Again hypocrisy and double standards.

I wonder why?



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
you are aware that the BNP came from the National Front, who came from the National Socialists (Nazi party). so their history is rooted in fascism. Like it or not.

I'm aware of that, and the BNP certainly have a lot to be ashamed about. But as Freeborn put it, above, oh-so-well, the BNP are not alone in having a reprehensible past. Somehow though, Lenin-admirers and ex-Communists are immune to criticism.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul
How many other leaders of political parties in the UK can you find photos of in "White power" T-Shirts?

Whether Griffin is racist or fascist is your interpretation. He's definitely not a 'fascist'


Ah. Ok.

So a man who is convicted of distributing material deemed likely to incite racial hatred,gaining a 9 month suspended prison sentence and a £2300 fine in the process, and one who routinely denies the holocaust of WW2, while praising the actions of the Waffen SS and ensuring his party has ties with European facist groups, is not a facist.

I'll take your word for it, eh?


This stuff is all out there in the public arena. How come you don't seem to know about it?



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 

Because, Nef, I learnt long ago to take everything promoted by the mainstream media with a pinch of salt. Close-minded? Perhaps, but that's the fault of the MSM for crying wolf so many times.

I used to be a card-carrying left-wing activist Nef. But when I began to understand the reality of politics and the establishment's true agenda, it became clear that the BNP must be defamed at all costs. Some of the information is true and I'm always more than happy to learn of it, but much of it is not.

For example, the link you offered talks of a nationalist convention of sorts. That there were sieg heil salutes is actually something that was heavily denounced in BNP and nationalist circles (or at least, on the forums I attend where there are BNP supporters). Holocaust denial is another interesting issue, as anyone who simply wants to discuss the accuracy of figures and 'facts' is immediately deemed a 'holocaust denier', giving the public the immediate impression that the person in question denies that any kind of holocaust even took place or is bad in any way. As I understand it Griffin simply chose to question facts and figures, nothing more.

Of course, there are definite skeletons in the BNP closet and that's the reason they do not have my full support. But then again, when the corrupt establishment goes to lengths to portray an organisation as evil, then I instantly know that in that organisation something good and honest may lie. When an organisation has the establishment's support, I know that goodness and honesty are unlikely to dwell there.

In short, I'm predominantly anti-establishment and that's the overriding origin of all my political persuasions. I was drawn to the 'left' in my youth because I thought the establishment was 'right' and all the evils of the world came from the 'right'. I now realise that if anything, the establishment is 'left' and therefore anything 'right' is probably anti-establishment. The left is not 'revolutionary' like so many left-wing activists would like to believe. Still, I refuse alignment with either 'left' or 'right' anymore.



[edit on 16/9/2009 by Cythraul]



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by TSOM87
 


There are alternatives. I may get accused of promoting my party, but I think it is pertinent. Look at my sig for a link to the English Democrats. You may like their immigration policies as well as others.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karilla
We are a nation of immigrants, always have been. Saxon, Norman, Viking, Breton, German (The Royals), all have come and been absorbed, even those that came with invasion in mind.


Indeed and the key word there is absorbed. Oh, the Royals are no more German than you or I, this is a common misconception. Queeny can trace a direct line back to King Harold, the one slain by those Frenchy types in 1066. Oh, also, Bretons are actually British immigrants who migrated to france after the Anglo-Saxon "invasion", they share a language and culture closely linked to Cornish and Welsh.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by phoenix103
You people have no idea what being British is about. I and millions of others are thoroughly ashamed of you.


Millions? Only if you include the Muslim population, maybe. Almost every white British person I speak to, be it at work or out and about, seems to want mass immigration halted, the British language and culture preserved and not have millions of foreigners land on our shores, claim Asylum from some oppressive back water then insist we all conform to their values, lest we offend them.

The most common thing I hear from the people is "They can just all bugger off", but everyone is so scared of being branded a racist or seen as un-PC that this is all said in hushed whispers. Trust me, the people are pissed and mass immigration is not as welcome as you might like to think.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


Good point. No one seems to mind that Madelson attended a Soviet sponsored Youth Movement in havan, Cuba... The Soviet Union and Communism in general is responsible for at least twice as many deaths as the Nazi's and they weren't even at war.

I can dig up more dirty on some Cabinet members pasts if you like..



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Actually, I despise Mandleson almost as much as I despise Griffin.

Not really the point here though, but I thought I'd set that one straight



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


I don't think his conviction for incitement of racial hatred was made up by the media, do you?


As for the holocaust thing (he refers to it as the "holohoax" btw - but he's not a denier....no.... ) - why does he question it in the first place? Even if its "only", say, 200,000 jewish people that were systematically rounded up and exterminated in industrial fashion by the Nazi's, how is that a hoax? (and hey, lets convinently forget the other factions killed in the holocaust like they never existed to suit his argument huh) Why is it not relevant? Why try and minimise it? To make the Nazi's look better perhaps? Sorry but they invaded most of Europe so thats not really going to work is it? As PR stunts go on behalf of herr Furher, its a bit of a downer really.

So maybe he's trying to do it for historical "accuracy", but if he's so interested in history why does he protest that historical record shouldn't be used against the BNP?

Could he then...possibly...maybe...do it just to stick it to jewish people? You have to wonder.

Oh, the guy is slick. Yes. Good PR man for sure. Knows his onions in the propaganda market, but - to quote one of the more memorable lines from the recent US Election - you can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
I don't think his conviction for incitement of racial hatred was made up by the media, do you?

I'm no expert on, or fan of Nick Griffin so you'll have to correct me if I'm wrong here, but the man was declared not-guilty of the most recent set of charges laid against him (which included accusations of such outrageous racist evilness as to say that Stephen Lawrence's murder may well not have been racially-motivated
, and calling Islam a "wicked, vicious faith"
- neither statement is racist and both should be 100% permissable in a society that prides itself on free-speech, hence why Griffin was cleared of all charges).

The first charge, which Griffin was found guilty of, was related to him questioning the holocaust. Griffin claimed the law is an unjust one and I tend to agree with him. I'll explain why in response to the following point:


Originally posted by neformore
As for the holocaust thing (he refers to it as the "holohoax" btw - but he's not a denier....no.... ) - why does he question it in the first place?

Calling it the "holohoax" doesn't necessarily indicate that he believes it didn't happen at all. Why question it? Some of us like to search for the truth. Much like 9/11, the holocaust has impacted upon the world in an enormous way since. It would be good to know that the consequences of these tragic events are legitimate, and to be legitimate it is essential that the truth (facts and figures) about the original event is bulletproof. I don't think anyone in their right mind would suggest that no significant number of Jews were murdered, but even if they did I don't see why it should be a punishable thought.

The truth should never fear scrutiny




Originally posted by neformore
So maybe he's trying to do it for historical "accuracy", but if he's so interested in history why does he protest that historical record shouldn't be used against the BNP?

Because historical record is not used against other politicians, or very rarely so. Griffin does not deny his past and from what I've read and heard is very open about it and distinctly apologetic of it. His grounds for saying his historical record shouldn't be used against the BNP isn't that history should be denied or skewed, but that people should be allowed to grow and develop in their beliefs and ideologies.






top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join