BNP megathread (again)

[pk014b7161]

was some of the public so disgusted or was it just the rantings of the anti bnp brigade who decided that nobody should listen to the bnp

[Glamrock]

Sorry Glam, disagree - they might have denied the folks at the meeting the ability to talk at that particular venue at that particular time, but they could easily rearrange another date and another venue, could they not?

And!! they object to the next venue,..and the next..and the next..whichever way you look at it they are denying them their right,why should they object, if they dont want to listen to what they have to say just stay away..its that simple,nobody is being forced to attend its freedom of choice

[boyfriday]

Catch 22 though by expressing their right to express their freedom of speech they denied the participitants in the meeting their right to express their freedom of speech

 

I would also endorse the BNP's right to freedom of expression, and equally the valid reasons for the meetings cancellation, which were about public objections rather than political or legal intervention. However the BNP were not denied their freedom to speak, it was the venue that was denied to them.

 

I don't know how the constitution of Southey WMC works, but presumably they were receiving objections from their membership which they would have to take account of?

[Glamrock]

Surely a meeting can be arranged if enough people want it - but in an appropriate venue? Perhaps they could try Rotherham? I say that because there are now 2 BNP councillors - and Maltby and Brinsworth/Catcliffe aren't too far away. Perhaps find out which venues they used for their campaigns?

I dont think it matters where it is,people will object,I wouldnt mind betting that a lot of the people who objected to the meeting wouldnt be able to tell you the way to Sheffield never mind Southey

[pk014b7161]

I dont think it matters where it is,people will object,I wouldnt mind betting that a lot of the people who objected to the meeting wouldnt be able to tell you the way to Sheffield never mind Southey

because they dont like the bnp full stop and decide that no one else should

[Ms Macbeth]

I dont think it matters where it is,people will object,I wouldnt mind betting that a lot of the people who objected to the meeting wouldnt be able to tell you the way to Sheffield never mind Southey

 

Perhaps the successfully elected Rotherham Councillors could share their secrets with their party faithful from Sheffield. Obviously the public in their areas couldn't have objected too much, as they were voted in at the last local election.

[fox20thc]

They had their meeting:

 

Quote from the Star:

 

"Today the BNP's spokesman in Sheffield, Jim Brown, said the meeting went ahead in a secret location which will be used again. He claimed party leader Nick Griffin attended the meeting along with around 150 members of the public.

 

"We were outraged that we got 1,000 votes from the people of Southey Green in the last council election but they were denied the right to attend one of our meetings in their own community," he said.

[Wildcat]

And!! they object to the next venue,..and the next..and the next..whichever way you look at it they are denying them their right,why should they object, if they dont want to listen to what they have to say just stay away..its that simple,nobody is being forced to attend its freedom of choice

 

I didn't hear the BNP defending Abu Qatada's freedom of speech.

 

In fact they argued the muslim community should have been protesting about him speaking in mosques (which they did, if I recall he had to go on to the streets to preach).

 

It is exactly the same.

 

Freedom of speech allows someone to argue for the limitation of someone else's freedoms. A right the BNP routinely exercise about minorities, trade unionists and anyone to the left of genghis khan.

[Glamrock]

I would also endorse the BNP's right to freedom of expression, and equally the valid reasons for the meetings cancellation, which were about public objections rather than political or legal intervention. However the BNP were not denied their freedom to speak, it was the venue that was denied to them.

 

I don't know how the constitution of Southey WMC works, but presumably they were receiving objections from their membership which they would have to take account of?

But what resons were put forward to warrant the venue denying the meeting,it was to held in a closed environment rather than in public,the people who would have attended the meeting were going by choice and more than likely hold the BNP's views.As i stated it is a free choice if you attend,you dont want to listen to it you stay away.

This could set a precedent in which every venue that is booked for BNP meeting is going to be objected to and Im pretty sure the BNP will be wise to that fact and use it to there advantage.

The club bottled it through obvious outside influences,they must have known what was going to happen prior to booking but I dont think it had has much to do with their own members objections as it had from outside influences.

[Glamrock]

I didn't hear the BNP defending Abu Qatada's freedom of speech.

 

In fact they argued the muslim community should have been protesting about him speaking in mosques (which they did, if I recall he had to go on to the streets to preach).

 

It is exactly the same.

 

Freedom of speech allows someone to argue for the limitation of someone else's freedoms. A right the BNP routinely exercise about minorities, trade unionists and anyone to the left of genghis khan.

Abu Qatada is known for preaching religious hatred,the majority of the muslim community is supposed to be against religious hatred so surely the BNP's objections were valid.

Preaching religious hatred is a criminal offence and as such the right of freedom of speech in that situation is no longer an issue and that right is forfeited