Good old BNP: "Beharry only got the VC because he is black"
Discussion
What a bunch of hateful inadequates these people are. If you are thinking of voting for them, take a long, hard look at yourself first.
king stupid they are. Still, the more rope they're given...Thank Fark that they are actually being reported saying what they really think - rather than being portrayed with a thin varnish of 'almost respectability' which they have got away with recently.
It'll be a cold day in hell before I vote for them (unless it's to be transported to Rockall)
It'll be a cold day in hell before I vote for them (unless it's to be transported to Rockall)
Marf said:
Jasandjules said:
They appear to be intent on letting the UKIP get all the fringe votes........
Is that a full stop stutter you have there or are you inferring that that UKIP and the BNP are in cahoots?Whilst I think that there is a place for the BNP in English politics, if only to provide a counterpoint to the groveling PC attitude of central government. The more they publish this nonesense the less reasons I would have to vote for them.
If they ever get their act together and realise that England IS made up of people of all sorts of backgrounds and beliefs and is better for it, then I could see them becoming a mainstream alternative party.................but cant see this happening soon
If they ever get their act together and realise that England IS made up of people of all sorts of backgrounds and beliefs and is better for it, then I could see them becoming a mainstream alternative party.................but cant see this happening soon
AndrewW-G said:
Whilst I think that there is a place for the BNP in English politics, if only to provide a counterpoint to the groveling PC attitude of central government. The more they publish this nonesense the less reasons I would have to vote for them.
If they ever get their act together and realise that England IS made up of people of all sorts of backgrounds and beliefs and is better for it, then I could see them becoming a mainstream alternative party.................but cant see this happening soon
Exactly - scary how totally knarrow minded and stupid they are, do they not realise the opportunity they have?If they ever get their act together and realise that England IS made up of people of all sorts of backgrounds and beliefs and is better for it, then I could see them becoming a mainstream alternative party.................but cant see this happening soon
Surely it is not good to discriminate against colour!!? It needs to be taken from a moral stance - not a racist one. Attack the people living off our taxes who have never paid a penny into our system, not someone who has been and put his life on the line for us.
Complete idiots.
Mclovin said:
in this day and age a nazi party should have no future....even if they get their act together their still nazis....
No the Nazi party are Nazi's wikipedia said:
The term Nazi is derived from the first two syllables of Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei,[16] the official German language name of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (commonly known in English as the Nazi Party). Party members rarely referred to themselves as Nazis, and instead used the official term, Nationalsozialisten (National Socialists). The word mirrors the term Sozi,[17] a common and slightly derogatory term for members of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands).[18] When Adolf Hitler took power, the use of the term Nazi almost disappeared from Germany, although it was still used by opponents in Austria.[18]
BNP are socialists\racists\nationalists..............equaly as bad, but not NaziEdited by AndrewW-G on Monday 18th May 01:01
garyhun said:
Give the BNP a voice.
The so called "anti-fascist" campaigners who try and prevent the BNP from speaking are helping them far more than they realise. Once people hear the rubbish they will quickly change any direction in which their vote is going.
Just the same as Fred Phelps and Michael Savage.
The BNP are repelant and know nothing of serving their country.
Beharry's actions without doubt saved lives. You dont have to be a 'Rambo' figure in warfare in order to win the VC. Many have been won by people saving others lives.
I have read every VC justification story out there. Beharry's story is comprable to many earlier stories, although these medals are more often won postumously. Without doubt the BNP would have preferred the medal to be postumous.
However, and heres a can of worms. I think that in many similar incedents that have happened over the years a VC would not have been considered, or if considered, would have been rejected. Perhaps the Military needed a 'hero' story, expecially one where the recipiant survives. The fact that he was exposed to two similar events over a short period of time perhaps brought this to a higher level than just the one event? Either way, the citation seems loaded with superlatives and justification. Makes interesting reading besides many other VC citations which seem to need to be less 'persuasive'. Beharry himself says he was 'just doing his job' (duty).
If you compare Beharrys actions to that of recent VC winner Brian Budd, I think you'd agree theres a marked level of what most would call 'heroic' action. Sadly, its Beharrys story that would probably be choosen to publisise life in the military, where without doubt Budds story shows specifically what we would term 'heroic actions' under enemy fire. Budd made no actions that could have been designed to save his own life, and had no armoured vehicle with which to carry them out. I dont really see what Beharrys alternatives were to the actions he took. Brave and 100% doing his duty yes. VC level heroic/selfless actions? I hope so, but cant be sure.
Much of Beharrys actions could be described as 'doing his job' and 'saving himself'. It depends on your perspective. I suggest the BNP are exploiting this. Without doubt, he's a braver indevidual than many others. Beharrys actions were no doubt however exceeded by many others that never got nominated for the VC. Sadly the process of awarding a VC requires the witnessing of actions and the proper citation from senior observing officers. Maybe an oppertunity was seen by 'the brass' for beharrys nomination?
Would we be talking about this if Beharry was white? No. Would we have been talking about this if the army didnt have a bad moral problem in Iraq and very poor public relations issue at home in 2005? Possibly not either.
For the BNP to make political comment on this however is beyond insulting. They know nothing of what it means to serve ones country. They are the last people who should judge what it means to give everything for your country.
Anyway, as I said, can of worms. It did seem that the criteria for the VC had slipped. Maybe thats 'modern war' though.
Beharry's actions without doubt saved lives. You dont have to be a 'Rambo' figure in warfare in order to win the VC. Many have been won by people saving others lives.
I have read every VC justification story out there. Beharry's story is comprable to many earlier stories, although these medals are more often won postumously. Without doubt the BNP would have preferred the medal to be postumous.
However, and heres a can of worms. I think that in many similar incedents that have happened over the years a VC would not have been considered, or if considered, would have been rejected. Perhaps the Military needed a 'hero' story, expecially one where the recipiant survives. The fact that he was exposed to two similar events over a short period of time perhaps brought this to a higher level than just the one event? Either way, the citation seems loaded with superlatives and justification. Makes interesting reading besides many other VC citations which seem to need to be less 'persuasive'. Beharry himself says he was 'just doing his job' (duty).
If you compare Beharrys actions to that of recent VC winner Brian Budd, I think you'd agree theres a marked level of what most would call 'heroic' action. Sadly, its Beharrys story that would probably be choosen to publisise life in the military, where without doubt Budds story shows specifically what we would term 'heroic actions' under enemy fire. Budd made no actions that could have been designed to save his own life, and had no armoured vehicle with which to carry them out. I dont really see what Beharrys alternatives were to the actions he took. Brave and 100% doing his duty yes. VC level heroic/selfless actions? I hope so, but cant be sure.
Much of Beharrys actions could be described as 'doing his job' and 'saving himself'. It depends on your perspective. I suggest the BNP are exploiting this. Without doubt, he's a braver indevidual than many others. Beharrys actions were no doubt however exceeded by many others that never got nominated for the VC. Sadly the process of awarding a VC requires the witnessing of actions and the proper citation from senior observing officers. Maybe an oppertunity was seen by 'the brass' for beharrys nomination?
Would we be talking about this if Beharry was white? No. Would we have been talking about this if the army didnt have a bad moral problem in Iraq and very poor public relations issue at home in 2005? Possibly not either.
For the BNP to make political comment on this however is beyond insulting. They know nothing of what it means to serve ones country. They are the last people who should judge what it means to give everything for your country.
Anyway, as I said, can of worms. It did seem that the criteria for the VC had slipped. Maybe thats 'modern war' though.
Not sure if anyone has seen this yet:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1183890/Br...
After the debacle of the Spitfire (Polish) it seems that they managed it with British Jobs for British Workers, except the men illustrated are American. Given they are clueless idiots, surely getting it wrong once is bad, but twice is incompetence? I mean, as if anyone would vote for this bunch of idiots and madmen?
I did laugh though
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1183890/Br...
After the debacle of the Spitfire (Polish) it seems that they managed it with British Jobs for British Workers, except the men illustrated are American. Given they are clueless idiots, surely getting it wrong once is bad, but twice is incompetence? I mean, as if anyone would vote for this bunch of idiots and madmen?
I did laugh though
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff