Off duty police officer sacked

[Softus]

I concur, on the last one I thought at first (assumption opinion) you knew how to close debate down by using the race card (good closure) if that fails do derogatory attack

Don't take this the wrong way, but I'm really not in tune with your vernacular. I'll get there, but I'm struggling.

Regarding "the race card", race was mentioned in the very first two posts on this topic, and yet not mentioned in either of my first two posts on this topic.

You can't separate race issues from the BNP. You might regard criticism of the BNP mandate on race as being derogatory, whereas the reality is that many of its members have been prosecuted and imprisoned for race related crimes.

Is it derogatory to refer to those people as criminals and bigots, when the record shows that that's exactly what they are, and when the topic is all about the effect of the image of the party on a police officer? Personally, I think not. You can't separate a person's personality from their core beliefs and values; unlike a rather unsavoury and unfashionable old coat, you can't remove someones thoughts and put them in the washing machine.

 

[gant]

I`ll try and explain where I`m coming from Softus, I`ll try and be brief but the subject depending on your knowledge of it can lead to debates long into the night and that is modern day politics.
So we start off a policeman can`t be a member of the BNP who are a legit party, can he a member of Nulab, Con, LIb?
Ted Heath (bless him) signed up for Britain to be part of the European Union, which was not advertised as such in the early days, fearing if it was put to the electorate they`d knock it back and from that time on we`ve had obfuscation to the point present day where 80% of Britains path is governed by directives from Europe.To get to this position the three main parties have had to adopt a position where you`d be hard pressed to get a cigarette paper between them.
Now with the help of smoke and mirrors, copious amounts of alchol, dumbed down television and money in their pockets, the electorate although not happy in seeing the country being given away were happy to be in the comfort zone.
During this period the BNP decided to change their spots because they could see an opportunity to increase their standing with parts of the electorate, who in their eyes had become disenfranchised and as can be seen are gaining support. Enter LibLabCon diss the BNP with the help of the media (BBCespecially)
Now this is where I`m coming from having "suffered" both a Tory and a NuTory sorry Nulabour government, at the next election I`ll be one of the I`m not too happy the way things are panning out here. Where do I cast my vote. So is it a case of shut my eyes and put a cross next to anyone of the LibLabCon and it`ll all turn out alright in the wash, or do a take a gamble on if enough moderate thinking people voted for the BNP you`d be able to affect policy within the BNP which hopefully close an obvious void that is begining to develop between the electorate and the government.

 

[JohnD]

a confusing and rambling post, but you appear to be asking who you can vote for. the answer is that you can vote for anyone who is a candidate in your constituency. If you can get a bit of support you can be a candidate yourself.

you can vote for a Monster Raving Racist if one is available and there will be nothing to stop you.

You are voting by secret ballot so it does not matter if you are a policeman or a plumber.

you can do this whether or not the UK is part of the EU.

All of this has nothing to do with the question "if you take up a job where you are forbidden to do something, is it right that you should be sacked if you do it anyway?"

 

[Blasphemous]

You're still not listening man! As JohnD has said above, if you join ANY organisation and you break the rules then you can expect to be thrown out of said organisation. If you don't like the rules, don't join! It really is VERY SIMPLE to understand... for some anyway!

 

[gant]

You're still not listening man!

Going off the replies why would I do that.

 

[Blasphemous]

You're still not listening man!

Going off the replies why would I do that.

Whatever, I give up!

 

[Thermo]

I`ll try and explain where I`m coming from Softus, I`ll try and be brief but the subject depending on your knowledge of it can lead to debates long into the night and that is modern day politics.
So we start off a policeman can`t be a member of the BNP who are a legit party, can he a member of Nulab, Con, LIb?
Ted Heath (bless him) signed up for Britain to be part of the European Union, which was not advertised as such in the early days, fearing if it was put to the electorate they`d knock it back and from that time on we`ve had obfuscation to the point present day where 80% of Britains path is governed by directives from Europe.To get to this position the three main parties have had to adopt a position where you`d be hard pressed to get a cigarette paper between them.
Now with the help of smoke and mirrors, copious amounts of alchol, dumbed down television and money in their pockets, the electorate although not happy in seeing the country being given away were happy to be in the comfort zone.
During this period the BNP decided to change their spots because they could see an opportunity to increase their standing with parts of the electorate, who in their eyes had become disenfranchised and as can be seen are gaining support. Enter LibLabCon diss the BNP with the help of the media (BBCespecially)
Now this is where I`m coming from having "suffered" both a Tory and a NuTory sorry Nulabour government, at the next election I`ll be one of the I`m not too happy the way things are panning out here. Where do I cast my vote. So is it a case of shut my eyes and put a cross next to anyone of the LibLabCon and it`ll all turn out alright in the wash, or do a take a gamble on if enough moderate thinking people voted for the BNP you`d be able to affect policy within the BNP which hopefully close an obvious void that is begining to develop between the electorate and the government.

keeping it simple as ive said before, he cannot be a memeber of ANY political party. He can vote for who he likes, but he cannot be a memeber.

As for the rest of the stuff, cant be arsed to get involved!

 

[gant]

As for the rest of the stuff, cant be a***d to get involved!

I understand.

 

[AtoZ]

You're still not listening man! As JohnD has said above, if you join ANY organisation and you break the rules then you can expect to be thrown out of said organisation. If you don't like the rules, don't join! It really is VERY SIMPLE to understand... for some anyway!

who made those rules?
if you are trying to make things ''very simple'' then you are doing a **** poor job.

who implemented the rules?
lets be fair now, you dont know.
that said, how the hell can it be argued that there were rules in place?
rules are changed everyday, they are also abused everyday.

how do you know that it was not me' that made up those rules, or that it was softus or thermo.


weakest argument possible

..
softus
every time there is an argument like this you resort to snippets of other peoples posts.
just because you dont want the bnp policies doesnt mean that other people wont want them.
i would agree that most are over simplistic but the sentiment of some of them are ok imo.
mainstream parties cannot put any of these policies in their manifesto because there are enough immigrants to swing a national election.

anyway.
i wish you would alter your style. gant beat you this time.

...
police see real life, the rest of us see the bbc,s view.
no wonder some of them would be bnp....

 

[Thermo]

er i didnt make them up, my old employer the police authority did under the legislation handed down to them by the home office. As you say i saw it with my own eyes, a very restrictive employer, but then i knew that when i joined.

alternativley you can view the regulations here if you have the time or inclination. Regulation 6.1 is the main one applicable to whats being discussed here, but if you look at the others youll see how restrictive they are.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20030527.htm#6


cant say i ever felt like joining the bnp, or any other party for that matter as a result of what i saw or dealt with. theyre all crap, they all talk crap, and they all have their own intrests at heart, and never change the lot of those that really need it.

 

[Sylvan Tieger]

That's what they said about Hitler in the 20s.

What's wrong with having a party that speaks for the white voiceless majority that IS this country? We are all sick of hearing about the Black Police Officers Association or the Black Lawyers Assoc or the Muslim Council of GB. We are the people of this this country. We are white and our ancestry goes back thousands of years. We are the majority. Ignore us at your peril.

Joe, welcome to the liberal world agenda

In America they have the "United Negro college fund" but God forbid someone had a white college fund they are labeled racists

It is ok to put in a store front " this is a black owned business support it" But don't you dare put White owned and operated


If you vote against a black candidate your a raciest

The double and triple standards are alive and well.

Police are owned by the government like most law enforcement personal as governments like to have this control over people and the best way to maintain control is have like minded zombies in power.

Revolutions cure this type of thinking and they have it going on in many countries around the globe.

The problem is a government afraid of its citizens is a true democracy a citizen afraid to speak out or restricted in their beliefs is a tyranny and it starts slowly with gun confiscation then loss of free speech or being told what groups are permitted for a bloke to join.

Welcome to the new UN World order as all English speaking countries share the wealth by being taxed to support other countries that are out to destroy freedoms as we know them

Also see below

here a member of a police force, or a relative included in his family, has a business interest within the meaning of this regulation which the chief officer has determined, under paragraph (2), to be incompatible with his remaining a member of the force and either the member has not appealed against that decision under paragraph (3) or, subject to paragraph (5), on such appeal, the police authority has upheld that decision, then, the chief officer may, subject to the approval of the police authority, dispense with the services of that member; and before giving such approval, the police authority shall give the member concerned an opportunity to make representations and shall consider any representations so made.

If your a law abiding police officer and a relative is not then the English police can discharge the good guy because a family member may not be what the powers that be feel a good citizen

I wonder how the Church would feel knowing a lot of priests have brothers who are in crime should these priests be defrocked because of a blood tie?


See how easy it is to lose ones rights GUILTY by blood relations Sounds more like Hitlers kind of thinking "Master race" need only apply .

It is a shame how one never takes notice as their rights are slowly taken away

 

[JohnD]

If you think that what we call "the holocaust" is comparable to the Wacko siege, then you are insane.

 

[Softus]

who made those rules?

It was the government.

if you are trying to make things ''very simple'' then you are doing a p**s poor job.

Nobody needs to do anything to make things simple - they already are simple.

who implemented the rules?

It was the police force.

how do you know that it was not me' that made up those rules, or that it was softus or thermo.

If it was me, would I know?

softus

Hello AtoZ.

every time there is an argument like this you resort to snippets of other peoples posts.

That's because it's a handy way of responding to each individual point that someone is making. I know that some people don't like it, but I do. But you're under no obligation to read my posts.

just because you dont want the bnp policies doesnt mean that other people wont want them.

I agree. But an awful lot of people can't read between the lines and realise the insincerity of the sanitised BNP propaganda.

i would agree that most are over simplistic but the sentiment of some of them are ok imo.

OK.

mainstream parties cannot put any of these policies in their manifesto because there are enough immigrants to swing a national election.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all in favour of the BNP having representation in Parliament. Hell, it provides good entertainment for one thing. A bit like the now outmoded habit of filming chimps dressed in human clothing and having tea and cakes.

i wish you would alter your style. gant beat you this time.

If you wish to see it like that, so be it. I wasn't aware of anyone attempting to, or failing to, "beat" anyone else.

 

[Norcon]

Wasn't Waco that siege where the FBI went in and murdered innocent women children and blamed the carnage on Karesh afterwards.
They rammed the building with tanks and poured gas in and then ignited the gas.
Over 70 people died.

 

[JohnD]

They rammed the building with tanks and poured gas in and then ignited the gas.

have you evidence for this assertion?

The Waco Siege[11] (also known as the Waco Massacre[12] ) took place on February 28, 1993 when the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) attempted to execute a search warrant.....

Branch Davidians

50+ men (trained on the use of weapons)[6],

75+ women and children

weapons:
243 total firearms, including two 50 caliber semi-automatic rifles, numerous assault rifles (semiautomatic AK-47s and AR-15s), shotguns, revolvers and pistols[6]
46 semiautomatic firearms modified to fire in full automatic mode (included on above list): 22 M-16 Type Rifles, 20 AK-47 Type Rifles, 2 Heckler and Koch SP-89, 2 M-11/Nine[7]
two AR-15 lower receivers also modified to fire in full automatic mode[7]
4 Live M-21 Practice Hand Grenades[7]

Material bought prior to raid:[8][6]
16 handguns,
10 rifles
39 "full auto sears" devices used to convert semi-automatic weapons into automatic weapons,
parts for fully automatic AK-47 and M-16 rifles,
30 round magazines and 100 round magazines for M-16 and AK-47 rifles,
pouches to carry large ammunition magazines,
substantial quantities of ammunition of various sizes (including .50 caliber armor piercing ammunition, 10,000 rounds of 9 mm ammunition and 10,000 rounds of .223 caliber ammunition),
grenade launcher parts,
flare launchers,
K-bar fighting knives,
night vision equipment,
hundreds of practice hand grenades hulls and components (including 200+ Inert M31 Practice Rifle Grenades, 100+ Modified M-21 Practice Hand Grenade bodies, 219 Grenade Safety Pins, 243 Grenade Safety Levers found after the fire[7]),
kevlar helmets,
bullet proof vests
other similar equipment.
88 lower receivers for the AR-15 rifle
21 Sound suppressors or silencers (found after assault)[7]

I suppose if you try to execute a search warrant on a bunch of insane Americans who are armed to the teeth, there is a chance there will be trouble


I don't know if keeping an arsenal of machineguns and grenades is considered normal law-abiding behaviour over there