BNP List of the named and shamed

[Moos]

Quite apart from shamelessly nicking what I said a few posts up, Boberino, I just feel that you can't say 'f@ck 'em'. Horrid though it is, in this instance we're all in it together.

But now I'm wondering why I've spent 5 posts defending the BNP.

*goes off to have a lie down*

[cdonline]

Can we have another name and shame list for the Tories?

About time they were outed for their vile ways.

[bawdy-nan]

I think there was an injunction granted against ex-members using or revealing the lists which may be the issue here.

Some of the entries are oddd - they list job title and hobbies - retired teacher with a penchant for knitting and caravanning and a sidelinein racist thuggery anyone?

[ratty]

The BNP should remain as legal as any other racist institution or religion. Free Country innit.

Sad but undeniably true!

[Keef]

What ratty said.

At least whilst they're legal they have some rules to abide by. If they were totally "underground" they'd be even worse.

I am very uneasy about the publication of addresses and phone numbers, especially if some kid gets a kicking in school because his thick dad paid the ?40 for a family membership!

Hate them and everything they stand for, but don't want to see mob rule and public kickings!

[mockney piers]

inclined to agree with ratty and keef.

I guess that the person who publicised this will claim (for it will almost certainly result in prosecution (apparently political party membership isn't in the public domain, which actually surprises me)) that it was in the public interest. And the fact that a few old school racist policemen have/will get the sack (BNP membership is incompatible with police commitments to racial tolerance) may go some way to supporting that stance.

[lizzie]

I've had a look at the list and not only are their names and addresses listed but also their phone numbers and email addresses! At least there are only 2 in SE22 and I don't know them, whew.

[giggirl]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Another thing about this list - it wouldn't take

> much for someone malicious to add some names of

> people who aren't members - next thing you know,

> teh neighbours pay a visit tothe wrong person

>

That's exactly what I was thinking Sean. I don't know if this is true or not but I have heard that many of the people named in the Salem Witch trials were named by malicious neighbours who wanted to buy their land cheaply.

My guess is that BNP does not ask to see photo ID/utility bill or any other KYC (know your customer) type information before signing new members up; so easy then to sign someone you don't like up as a malicious act.

I'm not crying about this list going public but it is very wrong.

[SeanMacGabhann]

There might be a case for the BNP to be nicked for contravening the Data protection Act mind you...

[Rolo Tomasi]

Ok...who has the list that they can give me or a link?

[ratty]

Just had a gander at the list - got bored very quickly!

[ratty]

OK I lied - quite interesting when you get into it!!! Just found someone I used to work with on it! Back in Pompey this is!

WAC!

[Huguenot]

This revelation certainly looks illegal, and in that case I couldn't possibly condone it.

However I would campaign for active membership of political organisations to be public. Members of political parties are campaigning for changes to be made to our social structure which have an impact on the rest of us.

It seems bizarre that any people should be able to campaign in deceptive anonymity - a sixth column of snoops and double agents spreading wily tentacles through the fabric of society.

It also seems reasonable that people should be wary of organisations that have policies of violence (e.g. ethnic cleansing) as they may be subject to retribution. It strikes me that these are natural balances against extremist views.

[????]

Right - devil's advocate time.

Now, let's just suppose everyone on the Child Sex Registrar (sorry i'm sure that's not the proper name but I can't remember) had their name address and telephone number published on the internet...what would be our 'liberal' take on that? Bearing in mind that's based on committing a criminal offence rather than belonging to an obnoxious but peferctly legal political party?

[citizenED]

The Mash's take on it here

[*Bob*]

The BNP is (supposed to be) a political party.

Political parties are (supposed to be) a cause. Something you believe in - or at least give your democratic support for whatever reason you feel is right. This isn't some private fetish club which consenting adults attend to fulfil their secret desires.. these people actually knock on your door, seek funding to further and expand their cause, and solicit your vote.

I agree with Hugue that active memberships of political parties should be public. In any case - if you believe in something, at least grow some balls and be prepared to say so.

None of this means that the list should have been made public in the way it has (I think most are in agreement there, despite some tittering and smirking, myself included). But it's interesting that the responses by some of those 'named' on the list are akin to them being caught red-handed wanking into the gravy at the family Christmas dinner, as opposed to taking a moral stand about invasion of privacy etc.

[ratty]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> being caught red-handed

> wanking into the gravy at the family Christmas

> dinner, as opposed to taking a moral stand about

> invasion of privacy etc.

Happened to me once!