Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think

Lewes Forum New message

BNP membership list

On 18 Nov 2008 at 6:56pm Nullify wrote:
See the BNP membership list is on the web - that's going to cause embarrassment to some people. Try google and look for bnpmembershiplist blog
On 18 Nov 2008 at 7:03pm FA wrote:
Can't understand why BMP members would be embarrassed for being named for something they believe in
On 18 Nov 2008 at 7:27pm Nullify wrote:
Might be because people are in jobs where they're expected to treat everyone equally - difficult if you're a racist.
On 18 Nov 2008 at 7:59pm fireball wrote:
well said f.a
On 18 Nov 2008 at 8:00pm Spinster Of This Parish wrote:
Is Sid Hilton's name on the list?!!!!!
On 18 Nov 2008 at 8:48pm Chav wrote:
Can you pass on the addy please mate because I'm looking for me dad. He's bound to be on there.
On 18 Nov 2008 at 11:49pm sashka wrote:
Well, apart from being a racist political party, it very badly organized, and the people representing members are regularly being caught breaking the law. Mind you, if you are dumb enough to join, you probably don't care.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 8:56am The Tooth Fairy wrote:
That's quite a generalisation sashka. bit like saying 'most people that vote labour are complete d1cks'
On 19 Nov 2008 at 10:37am sashimi wrote:
The blog has disappeared. Are there any Lewes names on the list?
On 19 Nov 2008 at 10:42am An economist wrote:
I saw it last night Sashimi. There were two Lewes names on the list. I believe the list had 12,500 names. I guess that means 1 in 5000 of the population is a member, so statistically speaking, BNP membership in Lewes is slightly below the national average!
I did not recognise either name, and have now erased them from my mind.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 10:51am Nullify wrote:
... and the list has now been taken off the internet.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 11:32am sashka wrote:
Out of interest, do other parties have an accessible membership list?
On 19 Nov 2008 at 11:44am Toque wrote:
The list is still available, Google: BNP membership list peter marshall
On 19 Nov 2008 at 12:19pm sashka wrote:
One of the funniest things I have read in ages. Lots of ex police men, and army, frightening numbers of young people, a doctor, and even a police woman. One claims to be a lecturer in human rights, and ....data protection!
I am delighted to know who to avoid.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 12:26pm Nullify wrote:
And there's a doctors' practice in Lewes that calls itself 'Christian'. A bit worrying I've always thought.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 12:32pm Lewes Laugher wrote:
Thanks Toque. Found it - (pete marshall). There's a pdf file to download for future reference.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 12:39pm not from around here wrote:
Isn't it the right of everybody to keep their 'political' affiliations to themselves? The fact that I might not agree with a persons politics does not mean they should be 'outed' by having their membership of a party published.
Sashka, as far as law-breaking is concerned - don't forget that at least one prominent member of Transition Town Lewes - Dirk Campbell - was arrested a short time ago, or is that different? Are all BNP members racist? I doubt it. Are all TTL members law-breakers - I doubt it.
I would defend the right of anybody to hold beliefs which are contrary to mine without fear of victimization.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 1:16pm Nullify wrote:
The problem, Not from around here, is that all BNP members ARE racist, that's the point of the party and it's something they are proud of.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 2:47pm Toque wrote:
I'm not so sure that all members of the BNP are racist. Some undoubtedly are, and some are also fascists and nazi sympathisers.
All are sick of mass immigration, and as Frank Field has pointed out Labour's failure to address this problem has led to Labour supporters turning to the BNP.
Racists or not, I hope that the person that published the list is caught and prosecuted for it. Even neo-nazis are entitled to their privacy. The people listed will now be scared for their jobs, and frightened of the reaction of their neighbours, and I shudder to think of the ramifications for the children that are listed under family memberships. And living in the authoritarian times that we do, they should also be afraid of the Government and the possibility that they will now be under surveillance.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 4:04pm ex-scouser wrote:
Freedom of expression and freedom of political belief are what makes this country what it is - and for those who don't know if you have been born in a country that does not protect its own people from religious, economic or political oppression then your likely 1st choice as a place to live is the UK. This country welcomes everyone - unlike the USA and Australia. If my ability to support any political party is restricted then this country will be little removed from Iraq (before the invasion), Zimbabwe (as it was/is), and Germany pre-1945 (can't say the "N" word as most forums deny usage of it for fear of offending people's feelings). If people support the BNP they should receive all the rights and protections that everyone else does.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 4:28pm Nullify wrote:
Yes Ex-scouser but what attitude do you do take towards parties that exist to take away that freedom of expression of political belief you rightly love so much?
On 19 Nov 2008 at 4:51pm Toque wrote:
A valid point Nullify, but this Labour government is more of a threat to our civil liberties than the BNP.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 4:54pm Nullify wrote:
True Toque, but that's because they're in office at present. We can vote them out in 2009 or 2010. Once the BNP got into power we'd find an Enabling Act would keep them in forever.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 4:58pm Anon wrote:
Andy Robertson Lewes, as a search brings up an interesting article.
He seems to live quite a life. I can't express how shocking I find it (inevitable as it may be) that I share this country, and now this town, with these people.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 5:47pm dataextractor wrote:
** Names removed **
On 19 Nov 2008 at 6:01pm fireball wrote:
good for then. so why not post membership of the labour party !
On 19 Nov 2008 at 6:38pm Toque wrote:
The BNP aren't a credible party, so they're not the worry. We in England voted Labour out of power at the 2005 election - the Conservatives polled more votes - but they are still in power thanks to gerrymandered boundaries.
If they win next time they will be in power at the behest of Scottish and Welsh MPs whose constituents are represented through their own national parliaments.
Hopefully at least some of our brain-dead electorate will watch the Devil's Whore tonight, instead of rotting their minds with I'm A Celebrity, and feel a twinge of latent English radicalism rising to the surface. However, I fear that most of them will have heard more about the half-wits on ITV than Freeborn John.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 6:41pm Toque wrote:
It's illegal to post those names you know. See Section 55 of the Data Protection Act.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 8:00pm Drone wrote:
Some bloke in Station Street is on the list. Never heard of him before.
On 19 Nov 2008 at 8:39pm An economist wrote:
I have not read the section of the DPA referred to by Toque above. Nevertheless, I am not happy that names and addresses of alleged BNP members are being posted on this forum. Clearly it is your call Webby, but I would urge you to remove these details asap. Yes, if one of the people named above was a friend of mine, I would from now on look at them in a substantially different light. But I would go no further than that. The same cannot be said of everyone who stumbles across www.lewes.co.uk. For the safety of the people named above, and their children should they have any, please remove this information Webby.
On 20 Nov 2008 at 1:04am Sashka wrote:
I have no idea what Dirk Campbell has to do with anything, or even who he is. The BNP are a nasty group of racists wishing to remove people from this country, on the basis of skin colour. Members regularly break the law and are convicted, and act improperly, including colluding with at least one police officer, to keep secret her BNP membership. They are just as likely to be criticised for data protection, as whoever leaked the list. Political parties standing for election need to be transparent in my opinion, as if elected they represent everyone, including me. I believe I am entitled to know who is a member of any party standing for election, and who is funding them. I don't know if this is the case, which is why I asked. I am not a member of any party, and if i was, I'd let you know.
And incidentally, don't moan about 2005 election, it is the same system that worked in the Tories favour for years. I do agree with you thogh about the brain dead electorate, and I'm a celebrity. It is tragic, and we are getting the politicians we deserve.
On 20 Nov 2008 at 1:54am DATAEXTRACTOR wrote:
To clarify,
Details of Lewes BNP members are in the public domain and any details publicised and information posted has been made accessible by bnpmemberslist DOT blogspot DOT com
Details are for informational purposes only. Actions based on this information, whether obtained through this forum or from any of the many other sites publishing the same details, against those individuals and their families are the sole responsibility of who commits them.
It is assumed that we live in a country where we respect and tolerate (but not limited to) the view, belief, religion, ethnic origin and sexuality of individuals. There has been no encouragement whatsoever to judge, discriminate or to exclude those individuals. Details published provide the reader with the opportunity to network with any of the individuals named as a local point of contact if they wish to know more, support or join the BNP. It is no crime to be a member of the BNP like it is no crime to be a member of any other political party. The question has been asked whether a list of Labour Party members can be published. There is no fundamental objection but the issue is that every time a CD containing the membership list is sent out by Labour it gets 'lost in the post'. The BNP appears to be the only party to operate efficient and to maintain transparency.
Fact is that we do not live in a country that embraces aforementioned freedom at government level. Google: blackbox uk government
On 20 Nov 2008 at 7:27am Toque wrote:
Sashka, Since I'm not a Tory, I don't care that it worked in the Tories favour for years - and I'm not old enough to remember if it did. So I will complain about 2005 because it was undemocratic and we've had to put up with this authoritarian morally bankrupt regime for years because of it.
And that is perhaps why the BNP have continued to rise - unfortunately people see them as a protest vote against Labour, who continue to ignore the public's views on mass immigration. In this respect the BNP actually serve a useful democratic purpose. I've had personal experience of the BNP so I know how nasty they are, they are much nastier in the flesh. But still I would hesitate to say that *all* members are racist, just as I would hesitate to say that all Labour members are morons. Some are just ignorant.
On 20 Nov 2008 at 11:55am Auntie Fascist wrote:
Members listed here, poscode search:
One in Nevil one down by the railway station. Sad.
oldest bonfire society is Borough, webmaster
On 20 Nov 2008 at 11:59am lenin wrote:
I think it's important to know who these vile racists are- hopefully they'll lose their jobs and be hounded out of town
On 20 Nov 2008 at 12:27pm Sashka wrote:
Toque, I agree with you that when you just look at total votes, election results look unfair, but Electoral systems are not that simple. If we had a national vote on parties, without consituancies, you cannot pressume that the result would be the same as the figures you are looking at. Both tories and labour could change the system, but haven't. Ask yourself why. The BNP hasn't risen in a meaningful way, it has just had a period of better PR representation. In the 70's it was the national front, in the 1930'swe had Oswald mosely. I think there are always a small number of politically active racist idiots. In a way 13500, is a reassuringly small number. they are certainly not very effective.
BNP members are racist. It is the very nature of BNP's manifesto, which is to repatriate based on skin colour. Sadly the BNP do not understand equality, or even genetic mixes. I pressume that the people who dislike mass immigration, will also ban mass emigration from the UK, to Australia, Florida and Spain? I would agree that Labour have failed to consider early enough the issues created by an open Europe, but that is a very different issue to repatriating 'non-whites'
On 20 Nov 2008 at 2:01pm Toque wrote:
You don't need to describe the BNP's warts to me, when I say that I've had personal experience of them it was because I was acting in opposition to them. I can't remember how they described me on their website, it's since been taken down, but it wasn't very flattering.
But it's too simplistic to simply label everyone who supports - or is a member of - the BNP, as a racist. Many of them have turned to them out of pure frustration and anger. Demographers have informed us that England is in "third demographic transition", which means that the national ancestry has been permanently and radically altered by high immigration. And the people at the coal-face are traditional Labour supporters, the white-working class of the inner cities, whose communities have been altered beyond recognition in under 50 years. Are they simply "racists"?
The reason why Labour and the Tories haven't changed the system is because the system is biased in their favour, essentially a permanent duopoly in power, it doesn't take a genius to work it out.
I'm against mass immigration into an overcrowded island that has already had too much inward migration, helping to create conditions that favour the BNP, and making us more overcrowded. I'm not against immigration - I am married to an immigrant, and in the past have lived in other countries. Although I would put a stop to mass immigration I would not ban mass emigration; whether other countries want to take disaffected Brits is a matter for them.
On 20 Nov 2008 at 6:06pm Do Gooder wrote:
Only 4 BNP but a surprisingly large number of Taliban supporters in the town.
On 20 Nov 2008 at 8:32pm Toque wrote:
It gets really scary if you google Robertson's supposed pseudonym "JohnJoyTree".
And scarier still if you read this www.solargeneral.com/library/wnpositionstatements.pdf
On 21 Nov 2008 at 9:33am Duke wrote:
Whatever your political views, redistribution of this material on this forum is a criminal offence. Webmaster, you have been made aware of this fact (in any case, ignorance of the law is no defence). By continuing to publish it you are proving your guilt.
On 22 Nov 2008 at 12:39am Paul Wilson wrote:
if the bnp membership is allowed to be published then why not disclose the details of everyone who votes! Freedom of speech, privacy, ect, surely everbody is entited to there own opinion! Why is everybody jumping on the bandwagon n torching cars, threatening phone calls and physical violence, i can't remember this happening when labour got in power, this seems to be more of a religious vendenta than politics (muslims where i live,why?) surely the two are separate issues! I used to be a BNP member (for 1 year after being assault by 2 asians, so i joined up when i was drunk, ever since i've being receiving invitations to re-join, which i declined) I can invisage this getting really out of hand now and i am quite concerned as i have 2 young children in my house, politics and religion should be kept apart, whatever a persons political beliefs they are private beliefs, do you know how your kneighbour votes?
On 22 Nov 2008 at 12:56am Observer wrote:
Saw on the main news tonight that a member of the BNP had his car blown up.It was blamed on the list.But the car turned out to belong to his neighbour....
On 22 Nov 2008 at 7:27pm pikelet wrote:
But now we KNOW where they live. For definite.
On 26 Nov 2008 at 5:08pm mmmf wrote:
Interesting. If you use certain search terms in Google, the names and addresses appear on the Google results page connected to this thread, even though the names have now been deleted.
Whose problem is that I wonder, from a legal POV - Google or this forum?
On 20 Apr 2009 at 10:21pm BurtJ wrote:
Just joined the forum, it's my first post just wated to say hello to everyone.
On 20 May 2009 at 5:05pm DAG wrote:
predudice is OK. we need to wake up, this is a recesion we need to focus mainly on those born on this land.
for too long have the goverment realised or Dr's and nur's and teacher are underated but overworked and defitly under cut by back benchers with 2 houses and we pay for that.

This thread has reached its limit now
Why not start another one


Dripping Pan View 34:132
Dripping Pan View

Ugh, you give TP an inch and he takes a mile with eugenics and other wackadoodle stuff. I do sense though that the power is... more
Liberty cannot be preserved without general knowledge among the people.
John Adams