itsnotoutthere Posted March 21, 2009 #1 Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) 'BNP membership' officer sacked A police constable whose name appeared on a leaked list of British National Party (BNP) members has been sacked, Merseyside Police said. Pc Steve Bettley's name was on a document listing details of 12,000 people which was published online. Full story :- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7956824.stm Bear this in mind the next time a polititian tells you that you live in a democracy. p.s. :- In July 2007 it was revealed that eight police officers were suspected of having links to extremist Islamic groups, including Al Qaeda. Some of these people were believed to have attended terrorist training camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The names of these officers were featured on a list of alleged radicals said to be working inside the British police. The dossier, drawn up with the help of MI5, was instigated because of fears that Muslim extremists were taking advantage of the “positive discrimination” schemes adopted by the police to attract more ethnic staff. One of the officers under investigation, who worked in the South East of England, was caught circulating Internet images of beheadings and roadside bombings in Iraq. When questioned on his somewhat bizarre choice of recreational activity, the officer came up with the novel excuse that he trying to “enhance” debate about the war in Iraq. These officers were not sacked, because the police said that they lacked the “legal power” to dismiss them. Edited March 21, 2009 by itsnotoutthere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyWeather Posted March 21, 2009 #2 Share Posted March 21, 2009 The BNP may have bad cred. But, is this even legal? I'm sure it's discrimination. So, what next? One party 'democracy'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisius Posted March 21, 2009 #3 Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) Officers and police staff are banned from joining or promoting the BNP. He knew that being a member of the BNP is against the rules, and did it anyway. Would you really want a police officer like that in duty? Whether it is fair or not that officers are not allowed to join the BNP has nothing to do with it. The police has a set of rules on what you can and cannot do, if a police officer breaks any of these rules he is to be automatically suspended. Just like a police officer is not allowed to hold someone for over 24 hours, he is not allowed to be affiliated with that party. If he is willing to break one rule, you can be sure that he will break another. Edited March 21, 2009 by Denisius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itsnotoutthere Posted March 21, 2009 Author #4 Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) He knew that being a member of the BNP is against the rules, and did it anyway. Would you really want a police officer like that in duty? Whether it is fair or not that officers are not allowed to join the BNP has nothing to do with it. The police has a set of rules on what you can and cannot do, if a police officer breaks any of these rules he is to be automatically suspended. Just like a police officer is not allowed to hold someone for over 24 hours, he is not allowed to be affiliated with that party. If he is willing to break one rule, you can be sure that he will break another. But belonging to a radical islamic group is fine. & between the two.......yes the officer belonging to the BNP everytime. The BNP are a legal legitimate political party with elected council members. What does it say about our 'so called' democracy that can allow this. It's a rhetorical question....we don't live in a democracy. If the BNP were elected into power I take it you'd be quite happy if the police changed the rules & that no labour or conservative members were allowed to join the force. discrimination :- definition treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit Edited March 21, 2009 by itsnotoutthere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisius Posted March 21, 2009 #5 Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) But belonging to a radical islamic group is fine. & between the two.......yes the officer belonging to the BNP everytime. The BNP are a legal legitimate political party with elected council members. What does it say about our 'so called' democracy that can allow this. It's a rhetorical question....we don't live in a democracy. If the BNP were elected into power I take it you'd be quite happy if the police changed the rules & that no labour or conservative members were allowed to join the force. As I said before, it being fair has nothing to do with it. As it stands now, being a BNP member is not permitted for police officers. If they don't like it, they can write to their MP of choice and work towards changing that. But if they do break the rules, regardless of what the rules are they are to be punished. Parties that hold radical views are usually banned from democracies, a principal learned the hard way after the way Hitler abused the democratic system in Germany to establish a despotic government. Just as the national socialist party is not allowed, so is the BNP. And so will most parties who seek to harm another group of people in the country, either directly or indirectly. And if you do not think that the BNP is set to do just that, take a look at their platform: *A massively-funded and permanent programme, using and doubling Britain's current foreign aid budget ... to reduce, by voluntary resettlement to their lands of ethnic origin, the proportion of ethnic minorities living in Britain. *The repeal of all equality and anti-discrimination legislation, including measures aimed at employing people with disabilities. (Removing anti-discrimination legislation will mean for example that if a white person decides that he does not want a black person to work for him, then so shall it be.) *The reintroduction of national service and the deprivation of some civil rights from conscientious objectors, including the right to vote. (Depriving a group of people in the country the right to vote. Does not sound very democratic to me) So you see, this is merely democracy defending itself. The moment the BNP is elected as a majority to the government, you can expect democracy in the UK to be a thing of the past. I understand your frustration with the way the radical Islamic groups have been handling themselves in the UK, and believe me I relate, but replacing one thug for another will do absolutely nothing good for neither the country nor it's people. Edited March 21, 2009 by Denisius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itsnotoutthere Posted March 21, 2009 Author #6 Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) As I said before, it being fair has nothing to do with it. As it stands now, being a BNP member is not permitted for police officers. If they don't like it, they can write to their MP of choice and work towards changing that. But if they do break the rules, regardless of what the rules are they are to be punished. Parties that hold radical views are usually banned from democracies, a principal learned the hard way after the way Hitler abused the democratic system in Germany to establish a despotic government. Just as the national socialist party is not allowed, so is the BNP. And so will most parties who seek to harm another group of people in the country, either directly or indirectly. And if you do not think that the BNP is set to do just that, take a look at their platform: *A massively-funded and permanent programme, using and doubling Britain's current foreign aid budget ... to reduce, by voluntary resettlement to their lands of ethnic origin, the proportion of ethnic minorities living in Britain. *The repeal of all equality and anti-discrimination legislation, including measures aimed at employing people with disabilities. (Removing anti-discrimination legislation will mean for example that if a white person decides that he does not want a black person to work for him, then so shall it be.) *The reintroduction of national service and the deprivation of some civil rights from conscientious objectors, including the right to vote. (Depriving a group of people in the country the right to vote. Does not sound very democratic to me) So you see, this is merely democracy defending itself. The moment BNP are elected as a majority to the government, you can expect democracy in the UK to be a thing of the past. I understand your frustration with the way the radical Islamic groups have been handling themselves in the UK, and believe me I relate, but replacing one thug for another will do absolutely nothing good for neither the country nor it's people. 'merely democracy defending itself' ....how naive So then your answer is yes. If the BNP were democratically elected, if they banned conservative or labour supporters from being police officers, even tho' it was 'unfair' that would be o.k. because of course that would just be 'democracy defending itself'. Edited March 21, 2009 by itsnotoutthere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisius Posted March 21, 2009 #7 Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) 'merely democracy defending itself' ....how naive So then your answer is yes. If the BNP were democratically elected, if they banned conservative or labour supporters from being police officers, even tho' it was 'unfair' that would be o.k. Naive? You need to go and educate yourself about how a democracy works, pal. Last time I checked neither the conservative or labor has been supporting an anti-democratic policy. (A radical one, that is. They are not depriving any of the groups in the country of their voting rights, for example) And as such there is no need to ban them. I am fairly confident that if the BNP would have changed it's more radical views, they would have been unbanned. Let me put it this way. Would you allow a National Socialist Party to be formed in the UK? And if it has received a large following, would you allow it to grow and have a chance of being elected to the government, knowing that if they do manage that something similar to what happened to Germany before WW2 would happen in the UK? Edited March 21, 2009 by Denisius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splodgenessabounds Posted March 21, 2009 #8 Share Posted March 21, 2009 It's inconsistent. BNP members are allowed to be elected to local councils and (although none have yet) Parliament, yet BNP members aren't allowed to join the police . If the government are trying to 'defend democracy' then shouldn't they just ban the BNP all together? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisius Posted March 21, 2009 #9 Share Posted March 21, 2009 They should, but for some reason they don't. That's the way most governments act, unfortunately. One step forward and two steps backwards. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Hill Posted March 22, 2009 #10 Share Posted March 22, 2009 These officers were not sacked, because the police said that they lacked the “legal power” to dismiss them. yep good point itsnotoutthere, so hypocritical of the Gov, or whoever decided the BNP members couldn't be part of the police force. I'm not sure who made this decision. Mind you being a member of the BNP might've made them too effective a policeman. He knows what I'm talking about and so does... him, over there. Anyway, how come the liberal waffle poem... they came for, doesn't apply to Bnp members... Then they came for the Bnp members, I did not speak out; Hide mother, it's the BNP sticking up for British people... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splodgenessabounds Posted March 22, 2009 #11 Share Posted March 22, 2009 Hide mother, it's the BNP sticking up for British people... I agree with you up to a point, the BNP are concentrating on issues like no holds bar immigration which is a major problem and I agree with them on that but they go a tad to far. Like for instance as Denisius said (is there a link for his/her source?) under the BNP, employers could refuse to hire someone just because they're black or in a wheelchair. I get annoyed with positive discrimination as much as the next man but the answer to it is not allowing blatant discrimination. Also national service, it's not a solution. Once again I get annoyed with all the little ****s running rampant in the streets, I've been mugged three times in the last two years (maybe I attract trouble I don't know) but to force them to fight and then take away a conscientious objectors right to vote is not the way to go about it. A compromise would be enforced bootcamps or military training instead of limp wristed liberal measures like ASBO's or community service which just do not work. At the end of the day you either ban the BNP from all walks of life or not at all and it's a disgrace when this policeman is sacked for being a BNP member (just a member) when there are policeman with suspected links to terrorist groups who aren't even investigated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hetrodoxly Posted March 22, 2009 #12 Share Posted March 22, 2009 The fact that the police condone racism in the form of the Black Police Officer's Association whereas the BNP don't bar membership on the grounds of colour, who are the racists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splodgenessabounds Posted March 22, 2009 #13 Share Posted March 22, 2009 The fact that the police condone racism in the form of the Black Police Officer's Association whereas the BNP don't bar membership on the grounds of colour, who are the racists? The BPOA . Having a Black Police Officer's Association is positive discrimination. Having a White Police Officer's Association is race discrimination. You figure it out, because if I try to I'll end up banging my head on the desk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisius Posted March 23, 2009 #14 Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) I agree with you up to a point, the BNP are concentrating on issues like no holds bar immigration which is a major problem and I agree with them on that but they go a tad to far. Like for instance as Denisius said (is there a link for his/her source?) under the BNP, employers could refuse to hire someone just because they're black or in a wheelchair. I get annoyed with positive discrimination as much as the next man but the answer to it is not allowing blatant discrimination. Also national service, it's not a solution. Once again I get annoyed with all the little ****s running rampant in the streets, I've been mugged three times in the last two years (maybe I attract trouble I don't know) but to force them to fight and then take away a conscientious objectors right to vote is not the way to go about it. A compromise would be enforced bootcamps or military training instead of limp wristed liberal measures like ASBO's or community service which just do not work. At the end of the day you either ban the BNP from all walks of life or not at all and it's a disgrace when this policeman is sacked for being a BNP member (just a member) when there are policeman with suspected links to terrorist groups who aren't even investigated. There are plenty of sources, you can just google 'BNP Political Views', or use the following source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party#Policies The fact that the police condone racism in the form of the Black Police Officer's Association whereas the BNP don't bar membership on the grounds of colour, who are the racists? I agree, positive discrimination should be eliminated. But it should not be replaced with blatant descrimination, as that suggested by the BNP. Edited March 23, 2009 by Denisius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Hill Posted March 23, 2009 #15 Share Posted March 23, 2009 I agree, positive discrimination should be eliminated. I think most people agree, and yet we still have positive discrimination. Who's going to get rid of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chemical-licker Posted March 23, 2009 #16 Share Posted March 23, 2009 The BPOA . Having a Black Police Officer's Association is positive discrimination. Having a White Police Officer's Association is race discrimination. You figure it out, because if I try to I'll end up banging my head on the desk. dont understand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Hill Posted March 23, 2009 #17 Share Posted March 23, 2009 dont understand you know, the double standards of how one form of discrimination is allowed and encouraged, while another, is frowned upon and is illegal. I prefer to call it basic tribalism. you look after your tribe first. No one actually believes we're all equal. It's just something people say to be cool, but really no one believes it, the ego won't allow it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splodgenessabounds Posted March 23, 2009 #18 Share Posted March 23, 2009 dont understand Exactly, I don't understand it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chemical-licker Posted March 23, 2009 #19 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Exactly, I don't understand it either. you lied you said you would bang your head on the desk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splodgenessabounds Posted March 23, 2009 #20 Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) you lied you said you would bang your head on the desk. !BANG!BANG!THUMP! There you go, I have to lie down I'm feeling a bit woozy now. Edited March 23, 2009 by Splodgenessabounds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Silver Thong Posted March 23, 2009 #21 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Police are suspected terrorists and they say this. "These officers were not sacked, because the police said that they lacked the “legal power” to dismiss them." Holy crap :angry2: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chemical-licker Posted March 23, 2009 #22 Share Posted March 23, 2009 !BANG!BANG!THUMP! There you go, I have to lie down I'm feeling a bit woozy now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Hill Posted March 23, 2009 #23 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Can I join in? BANG.... Ouch I feel... I feel BANG BANG BANG... We need more immigration in the UK, Multiculturalism is great, I mean, who doesn't like a curry..? Everything is fine... look at me I'm dancing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chemical-licker Posted March 23, 2009 #24 Share Posted March 23, 2009 This thread is head banging if we bang our heads long enough we might be on par with the government thinking! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splodgenessabounds Posted March 23, 2009 #25 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Can I join in? BANG.... Ouch I feel... I feel BANG BANG BANG... We need more immigration in the UK, Multiculturalism is great, I mean, who doesn't like a curry..? Everything is fine... look at me I'm dancing! Too funny man . This thread is head banging if we bang our heads long enough we might be on par with the government thinking! Well the way I'm going I'm probably in line with Alistair Darling, only a few more to go until I reach the level of Mandelson and he's a Lord. Can't get much thicker than a Lord. Ah the legend that is Vyvyan. Gonna have to put on some of The Young Ones later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now