This is how the UAF operate against a legal political party by their own admittance.
However, it soon turned out that the SDL were not the only group of far-right thugs in town that day. At 1pm, a number of BNP activists were spotted in George Square, setting up a stall and posing for photos with their ‘Support our Troops’ banner. They left soon after, but quickly set up again on Buchanan Street. Anti-fascists from across the city quickly mobilised, and by 1.30 there was a small gathering around the stall, preventing the BNP from engaging with the public. Ten minutes later, a larger group of anti-fascist arrived. Within seconds, the stall was smashed up and the BNP material was scattered and destroyed. The 5-6 BNP members were forced to stand beside the ruins of their stall waiting for the police to show up, which they did – about 15 minutes later.
Now perhaps that is the political activity that you see as justified. It does however hark back to the dark days of the 30s in a country not so far away.
And that is it? A broken stall and some leaflets scattered around? That is equal to the violent thuggery demonstrated by the EDL? Seriously?
Your accusation that the UAF were "as equally violent," as the EDL. The only peace of footage you dig up was some numpties apparently defacing a war memorial. You were then presented with evidence of the EDL's level of violent thuggery, and your response is: "If I could be bothered we could swap links all day?" You have nothing to prove your allegations, so voluntarily removing yourself from the debate seemed like the best possible option for you.
i feel i have to comment on this just to show you how violent the UAF can get.
I am not a fan of the BNP, nor will i ever be, but you need to see that these peaceful protestors can be anything but.
what the article won't mention though is the aftermath of destruction caused by the UAF at this demo (my neighbour went up to see what was happening as the police helicopter was hovering over head for ages). he saw how the UAF had ripped up fences, hedgerows and stone walls so they had missiles to throw at the police. people who lived there told him how they caught people urinating and defecating in their gardens. the UAF also blockaded the road by setting fire to tyres stolen from another of the farms on this road, and then damaged neighbours cars as they tried to access their properties.
the UAF were vile that day, and i have posted this to give some form of balance.
It was not me who made the claim that pubs are losing business because of the smoking ban. Surely, even you ought to realise that the person making the claim is the one who should find something to support it.
Or is that not how it works on Digital Spy? Is it a case of person A making a clam and person B being the one to find the evidence?
the point is, the staff would be working in a properly ventilated area.
And that is it? A broken stall and some leaflets scattered around? That is equal to the violent thuggery demonstrated by the EDL? Seriously?
You asked for an example, you got it. WE could discuss all day the policy of the Guardian selecting photos to illustrate the evil EDL or the evil BNP and to report 'facts' that are misleading we could argue all day why the BBC reporting of the Bristol demonstration had to finally admit the violence was initiated by groups of the UAF and we could argue all day on the demonstrations in Luton, where it all began, which was violently attacked by bussed in personnel for that very purpose or where the EDL do not turn up and the police become the targets of the anti-fascists. However I managed one little illustration of the antidemocratic nature of the UAF and you still cannot bring yourself to say, this is wrong. So be it.
You asked for an example, you got it. WE could discuss all day the policy of the Guardian selecting photos to illustrate the evil EDL or the evil BNP and to report 'facts' that are misleading we could argue all day why the BBC reporting of the Bristol demonstration had to finally admit the violence was initiated by groups of the UAF and we could argue all day on the demonstrations in Luton, where it all began, which was violently attacked by bussed in personnel for that very purpose or where the EDL do not turn up and the police become the targets of the anti-fascists. However I managed one little illustration of the antidemocratic nature of the UAF and you still cannot bring yourself to say, this is wrong. So be it.
Violence is only acceptable if its the right side thats being violent
Violence is only acceptable if its the right side thats being violent
Violence should not be acceptable from any side. However much some people want to say "Well they are just as bad" are pathetic. As for the BNP being in Glasgow, their sole aim was to stir up trouble and to suggest anything else is ludicrous. Same as the EDL thugs in George Square on the 19th Sept were there for a fight.
Nobody has posted anything to suggest that there are no links between UKIP and the EDL and these links will become clearer and more visible the closer we get to the GE.
UKIP are going to be under scrutiny as never before and it will be revealing to see what "the disinfectant of sunlight" shows up.
Violence should not be acceptable from any side. However much some people want to say "Well they are just as bad" are pathetic. As for the BNP being in Glasgow, their sole aim was to stir up trouble and to suggest anything else is ludicrous. Same as the EDL thugs in George Square on the 19th Sept were there for a fight.
Nobody has posted anything to suggest that there are no links between UKIP and the EDL and these links will become clearer and more visible the closer we get to the GE.
UKIP are going to be under scrutiny as never before and it will be revealing to see what "the disinfectant of sunlight" shows up.
If you want UKIP who have no affiliation to the EDL to come under close scrutiny then the same should also happen with Labour and their ties to groups such as Militant and the SWP , fairs fair
I am not a fan of the BNP, nor will i ever be, but you need to see that these peaceful protestors can be anything but.
what the article won't mention though is the aftermath of destruction caused by the UAF at this demo (my neighbour went up to see what was happening as the police helicopter was hovering over head for ages). he saw how the UAF had ripped up fences, hedgerows and stone walls so they had missiles to throw at the police. people who lived there told him how they caught people urinating and defecating in their gardens. the UAF also blockaded the road by setting fire to tyres stolen from another of the farms on this road, and then damaged neighbours cars as they tried to access their properties.
Yes, that is a bit odd, isn't it? You would have thought that they would, wouldn't you. Strange that there are no pictures. How many convictions resulted from these arrests? A bit of a contrast to the demonstration by the EDL in London a couple of years ago, when the EDL thugs threw bottles at the police and they just stood and took it.
the UAF were vile that day, and i have posted this to give some form of balance.
Would you like to see some footage of the violence carried out by the EDL, there is a lot of it about?
I have never denied that the opponents to fascist and racist organisation have not been paragons of virtue, but I have most certainly disagreed with the claim that they are "equally as violent" as the EDL and nothing that you, or anybody else, has produced, has been strong enough to convince anyone of that.
If you want UKIP who have no affiliation to the EDL to come under close scrutiny then the same should also happen with Labour and their ties to groups such as Militant and the SWP , fairs fair
Read the thread title again. There are plenty threads where posters can discuss Labour. BTW did you not read the articles posted showing that there are links between the EDL and UKIP or is this just selective viewing by you?
the point is, the staff would be working in a properly ventilated area.
No they wouldn't. There is not enough ventilation to remove all the smoke for a room. If you are concerned about the viability of a pub's business, it would cost more than the pub can make from smokers, to provide a ventilation system powerful enough to clean the atmosphere of tobacco smoke from a room.
Besides, pubs already provide a well ventilated area for smokers, it's called the car park. If pubs were that concerned about catering for smokers, they can stop serving food, or they can provide shelters outside.
Read the thread title again. There are plenty threads where posters can discuss Labour. BTW did you not read the articles posted showing that there are links between the EDL and UKIP or is this just selective viewing by you?
The point is the political views of both the BNP/EDL and UAF are perfectly legal and there will be members of both who believe in the "cause" but you will also have people who are just out and out thugs and are in it for the violence
Violence is only acceptable if its the right side that's being violent
Some people find it easier to point a finger than to look in a mirror. They become so wrapped up in their little war that they fail to see the line where they become what they claim to be fighting against.
Anyone who isn't with them is obviously the enemy - evidenced in this case where even the mildest critics get labeled "right wing" ie:"Someone who has nothing worthwhile to say".
UAV v BNP/EDL/Whatever is nothing more than the new incarnation of Far Left v Far Right and f**k anyone who gets caught in the middle.
The point is the political views of both the BNP/EDL and UAF are perfectly legal and there will be members of both who believe in the "cause" but you will also have people who are just out and out thugs and are in it for the violence
The point is that the EDL and BNP are racist thugs and that UKIP say they will not have them in the party. As has been shown this is bollocks and shows that UKIP pay only lip service to their policy of not having former members of far right groups in the party.
Wriggle all you like but those are the facts.
The point is that the EDL and BNP are racist thugs and that UKIP say they will not have them in the party. As has been shown this is bollocks and shows that UKIP pay only lip service to their policy of not having former members of far right groups in the party.
Wriggle all you like but those are the facts.
And UAF and Labour have members who are out and out thugs , those are the facts , do you think Labour turns down members who were once in Militant or the SWP ?
And UAF and Labour have members who are out and out thugs , those are the facts , do you think Labour turns down members who were once in Militant or the SWP ?
Dear God this is like talking to a five year old. Labour don't make it a rule that former members of the SWP or Militant cannot join the party> UKIP have a rule which is posted many times on here by Kipsters that UKIP do not accept former members of the NF< BNP or the EDL(except of course they do)
Do you understand the difference and the sheer stupidity of UKIP in having these people in the party despite their own rules????
You asked for an example, you got it. WE could discuss all day the policy of the Guardian selecting photos to illustrate the evil EDL or the evil BNP and to report 'facts' that are misleading we could argue all day why the BBC reporting of the Bristol demonstration had to finally admit the violence was initiated by groups of the UAF and we could argue all day on the demonstrations in Luton, where it all began, which was violently attacked by bussed in personnel for that very purpose or where the EDL do not turn up and the police become the targets of the anti-fascists. However I managed one little illustration of the antidemocratic nature of the UAF and you still cannot bring yourself to say, this is wrong. So be it.
No I did not. I asked for an example of opponents to fascism being "equally as violent" as the EDL and examples of anti-fascist disrupting a BNP stall is not comparable to the behaviour typically demonstrated by the EDL.
Dear God this is like talking to a five year old. Labour don't make it a rule that former members of the SWP or Militant cannot join the party> UKIP have a rule which is posted many times on here by Kipsters that UKIP do not accept former members of the NF< BNP or the EDL(except of course they do)
Do you understand the difference and the sheer stupidity of UKIP in having these people in the party despite their own rules????
Spoken with true naivety do you really think that people who have been members of extremist groups and have changed their opinions readily admit to their past
Spoken with true naivety do you really think that people who have been members of extremist groups and have changed their opinions readily admit to their past
Farage's own election campaign manger seems to have no trouble in defending his membership of the National Front.
Spoken with true naivety do you really think that people who have been members of extremist groups and have changed their opinions readily admit to their past
Then why does not UKIP expel them from the party? Or do their rules mean nothing?
Because David Cameron and Ed Miliband (or successors) would rather form a coalition government with each other, than either one of them do a separate deal with Nigel Farage.
Yes, that is a bit odd, isn't it? You would have thought that they would, wouldn't you. Strange that there are no pictures. How many convictions resulted from these arrests? A bit of a contrast to the demonstration by the EDL in London a couple of years ago, when the EDL thugs threw bottles at the police and they just stood and took it.
there would have been pictures on facebook at the time (i don't do facebook so can't show you, but my neighbours son put some pictures up - my daughter told me at the time).
you have to ask the local media why they didn't put pictures on their news mediums.
why do you need to know how many convictions there were out of the 33 arrests? does the number of convictions make this behaviour any more acceptable?
it's a hell of a contrast, the UAF were thugs that day, and no amount of weasel words or "yeah, but what about.............." can excuse their behaviour.
I have never denied that the opponents to fascist and racist organisation have not been paragons of virtue, but I have most certainly disagreed with the claim that they are "equally as violent" as the EDL and nothing that you, or anybody else, has produced, has been strong enough to convince anyone of that.
they can be as equally violent, as i have shown, although not as often as the BNP or EDL. I think you are confusing how violent they can be to the number of times they are as equally violent.
No they wouldn't. There is not enough ventilation to remove all the smoke for a room. If you are concerned about the viability of a pub's business, it would cost more than the pub can make from smokers, to provide a ventilation system powerful enough to clean the atmosphere of tobacco smoke from a room.
Besides, pubs already provide a well ventilated area for smokers, it's called the car park. If pubs were that concerned about catering for smokers, they can stop serving food, or they can provide shelters outside.
are you a ventilation expert? are UKIP wrong in what they said (and what you posted earlier)?
No I did not. I asked for an example of opponents to fascism being "equally as violent" as the EDL and examples of anti-fascist disrupting a BNP stall is not comparable to the behaviour typically demonstrated by the EDL.
You have a strange interpretation of 'equally as violent'. There is a fairly well documented history of convictions on both sides, if you wish to include arrests then the UAF come out ahead but that may just be a reflection of the numbers involved. However the illustration I gave you was where a legal political party was violently disrupted from presenting its policies, and the public were threateningly excluded from hearing it, by a group of thugs. Now in terms of equality of operations this seems to be principally UAF territory. As I said it is the political violent methods associated with some groups with a much murkier history.
Comments
And that is it? A broken stall and some leaflets scattered around? That is equal to the violent thuggery demonstrated by the EDL? Seriously?
Where have I told anyone about what, where or when they can post?
i feel i have to comment on this just to show you how violent the UAF can get.
http://www.ripleyandheanornews.co.uk/news/local/video-police-arrest-33-at-anti-bnp-march-1-724582
of the 33 arrested, guess how many were BNP.;-)
I am not a fan of the BNP, nor will i ever be, but you need to see that these peaceful protestors can be anything but.
what the article won't mention though is the aftermath of destruction caused by the UAF at this demo (my neighbour went up to see what was happening as the police helicopter was hovering over head for ages). he saw how the UAF had ripped up fences, hedgerows and stone walls so they had missiles to throw at the police. people who lived there told him how they caught people urinating and defecating in their gardens. the UAF also blockaded the road by setting fire to tyres stolen from another of the farms on this road, and then damaged neighbours cars as they tried to access their properties.
the UAF were vile that day, and i have posted this to give some form of balance.
the point is, the staff would be working in a properly ventilated area.
You asked for an example, you got it. WE could discuss all day the policy of the Guardian selecting photos to illustrate the evil EDL or the evil BNP and to report 'facts' that are misleading we could argue all day why the BBC reporting of the Bristol demonstration had to finally admit the violence was initiated by groups of the UAF and we could argue all day on the demonstrations in Luton, where it all began, which was violently attacked by bussed in personnel for that very purpose or where the EDL do not turn up and the police become the targets of the anti-fascists. However I managed one little illustration of the antidemocratic nature of the UAF and you still cannot bring yourself to say, this is wrong. So be it.
Violence is only acceptable if its the right side thats being violent
Violence should not be acceptable from any side. However much some people want to say "Well they are just as bad" are pathetic. As for the BNP being in Glasgow, their sole aim was to stir up trouble and to suggest anything else is ludicrous. Same as the EDL thugs in George Square on the 19th Sept were there for a fight.
Nobody has posted anything to suggest that there are no links between UKIP and the EDL and these links will become clearer and more visible the closer we get to the GE.
UKIP are going to be under scrutiny as never before and it will be revealing to see what "the disinfectant of sunlight" shows up.
And the Left also have a long history of violence
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/hardleft-violence-hurting-antiracist-organisations-1504398.html
And more recently
http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/Left-wing-activists-clash-riot-police-anti-BNP-protest/story-11640091-detail/story.html
If you want UKIP who have no affiliation to the EDL to come under close scrutiny then the same should also happen with Labour and their ties to groups such as Militant and the SWP , fairs fair
Yes, that is a bit odd, isn't it? You would have thought that they would, wouldn't you. Strange that there are no pictures. How many convictions resulted from these arrests? A bit of a contrast to the demonstration by the EDL in London a couple of years ago, when the EDL thugs threw bottles at the police and they just stood and took it.
Would you like to see some footage of the violence carried out by the EDL, there is a lot of it about?
I have never denied that the opponents to fascist and racist organisation have not been paragons of virtue, but I have most certainly disagreed with the claim that they are "equally as violent" as the EDL and nothing that you, or anybody else, has produced, has been strong enough to convince anyone of that.
Read the thread title again. There are plenty threads where posters can discuss Labour. BTW did you not read the articles posted showing that there are links between the EDL and UKIP or is this just selective viewing by you?
No they wouldn't. There is not enough ventilation to remove all the smoke for a room. If you are concerned about the viability of a pub's business, it would cost more than the pub can make from smokers, to provide a ventilation system powerful enough to clean the atmosphere of tobacco smoke from a room.
Besides, pubs already provide a well ventilated area for smokers, it's called the car park. If pubs were that concerned about catering for smokers, they can stop serving food, or they can provide shelters outside.
The point is the political views of both the BNP/EDL and UAF are perfectly legal and there will be members of both who believe in the "cause" but you will also have people who are just out and out thugs and are in it for the violence
Some people find it easier to point a finger than to look in a mirror. They become so wrapped up in their little war that they fail to see the line where they become what they claim to be fighting against.
Anyone who isn't with them is obviously the enemy - evidenced in this case where even the mildest critics get labeled "right wing" ie:"Someone who has nothing worthwhile to say".
UAV v BNP/EDL/Whatever is nothing more than the new incarnation of Far Left v Far Right and f**k anyone who gets caught in the middle.
The point is that the EDL and BNP are racist thugs and that UKIP say they will not have them in the party. As has been shown this is bollocks and shows that UKIP pay only lip service to their policy of not having former members of far right groups in the party.
Wriggle all you like but those are the facts.
And UAF and Labour have members who are out and out thugs , those are the facts , do you think Labour turns down members who were once in Militant or the SWP ?
Dear God this is like talking to a five year old. Labour don't make it a rule that former members of the SWP or Militant cannot join the party> UKIP have a rule which is posted many times on here by Kipsters that UKIP do not accept former members of the NF< BNP or the EDL(except of course they do)
Do you understand the difference and the sheer stupidity of UKIP in having these people in the party despite their own rules????
No I did not. I asked for an example of opponents to fascism being "equally as violent" as the EDL and examples of anti-fascist disrupting a BNP stall is not comparable to the behaviour typically demonstrated by the EDL.
Spoken with true naivety do you really think that people who have been members of extremist groups and have changed their opinions readily admit to their past
Resorting to insults doesn't make you right any more than it does for the other side of the coin.
Farage's own election campaign manger seems to have no trouble in defending his membership of the National Front.
Then why does not UKIP expel them from the party? Or do their rules mean nothing?
Not that worried.
Because David Cameron and Ed Miliband (or successors) would rather form a coalition government with each other, than either one of them do a separate deal with Nigel Farage.
there would have been pictures on facebook at the time (i don't do facebook so can't show you, but my neighbours son put some pictures up - my daughter told me at the time).
you have to ask the local media why they didn't put pictures on their news mediums.
why do you need to know how many convictions there were out of the 33 arrests? does the number of convictions make this behaviour any more acceptable?
it's a hell of a contrast, the UAF were thugs that day, and no amount of weasel words or "yeah, but what about.............." can excuse their behaviour.
no. i believe you. i am no fan of EDL, nor will i ever be, so i don't condone their thuggish behaviour.
they can be as equally violent, as i have shown, although not as often as the BNP or EDL. I think you are confusing how violent they can be to the number of times they are as equally violent.
are you a ventilation expert? are UKIP wrong in what they said (and what you posted earlier)?
You have a strange interpretation of 'equally as violent'. There is a fairly well documented history of convictions on both sides, if you wish to include arrests then the UAF come out ahead but that may just be a reflection of the numbers involved. However the illustration I gave you was where a legal political party was violently disrupted from presenting its policies, and the public were threateningly excluded from hearing it, by a group of thugs. Now in terms of equality of operations this seems to be principally UAF territory. As I said it is the political violent methods associated with some groups with a much murkier history.