How on earth do you expect to show up their ridiculous arguments and shallow propaganda is you "will not share air time with a racist and fascist organisation". Surely the point is to confront and combat them at every opportunity? If they appear on the programme without opposition, they have free reign to spurt their nonsense. Bad ideas need to be confronted and exposed, not silenced. Stand up to them, or they win!

you've really fucked up there haven't you...you've basically allowed the BNP to have an unopposed platform for whatever propaganda they want. Any sane person would realise that countering them with rational arguments is essential, given their totally insane positions. A few seconds of intelligent argument could destroy their feeble, ignorant racist stances

Get it right idiots!

regarding the two commentators above - haven't you heard of NO PLATFORM FOR FASCISTS - the idea is that even by entering into a debate with them you give legitmacy to their views.

I think "Andy Newman" is absolutely right here. The BNP have just been given free access to the airwaves through their "party-political broadcast", which is bad enough! Why now should we be giving them even more credibility by having a debate with them on the BBC. Come on people! Do you seriously think we are gonna defeat the BNP by having an informed, cosy debate with them on the telly?? Get real! It makes far more sense to prevent these bastards from having a platform to me. Christ! postal workars are attempting to prevent their election leaflets from being distributed by refusing to handle them ( http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/06/292679.html), so the least we can do is refuse to allow them airspace. Follow their positive lead for Christs sake! The Beeb should be held to account for inviting these bastards on the air. The only way we can do this is by refusing to take part

Incidently "Bret Lock", I have read too many negative comments made by you on this website, simply criticising people who are actually doing stuff, while suggesting nothing as an alternative. Who are you exacly and what do you do (other than sitting in front of your computer dissing people who are doing stuff!!)?? Do you have some kind of an agenda here?? Are you a Blairite or something?? Is it at all possible for you to make a positive contribution to this website -like something positive??

"regarding the two commentators above - haven't you heard of NO PLATFORM FOR FASCISTS - the idea is that even by entering into a debate with them you give legitmacy to their views."

Well it's a bloody stupid idea!

Obviously there is no reason to provide them with a platform. But there are public "platforms" that you don't control, in which case, passing up the opportunity to provide an opposing view is moronic.

Whether you like it or not, many people do regard their views as legitimate and even more will do so unless other people provide cogent opposing views and information. While you indulge in your armchair philosophical hystrionics, the facist groups will happily go about their business of spreading their poison and enlisting recruits. You can live in fantasy la-la land or deal with the political realities. For all our sake's, I hope it's the latter.

"Incidently "Bret Lock", I have read too many negative comments made by you on this website"

Like, um, name one.

I suppose you're referring to my criticism of 'Respect' for jettisoning women's and gay issues to appease the Muslim Association of Britain and the Muslim Council of Britain. Ooh, how "negative" of me to expect a supposedly progressive party to stand up for progressive values rather than reactionary religious ones. That must make me a Tony "keeps the Bible by his bed" Blairite. Why didn't I see it before?

It seems to me that 'Respect' is fast becoming a religion itself with accusations of "heretic" and "apostate" not far off for anyone who dares question them.

Well, I'm not prepared to vote for a party in bed with right-wing religious groups opposed to women's rights and lesbian and gay human rights unless they can give reasonable assurances that if elected they will uphold progressive social values rather than pandering to the conservative religious ones of a large section of their support base. Call that "negativity" if you like.

..a few threads back you said that you weren't claiming all Muslims were anti-gay and anti-women, have you changed your mind? Or is this another case of special non-racist anti-Muslim prejudice?

(presumably Muslim women are opposed to themselves, ditto gay Muslims)

"..a few threads back you said that you weren't claiming all Muslims were anti-gay and anti-women, have you changed your mind? Or is this another case of special non-racist anti-Muslim prejudice? "

And I still haven't claimed ALL Muslims are anti-gay and anti-women.

You're making that up.

Unless, of course, you (mistakenly) believe that the Muslim Association of Britain and the Muslim Council of Britain represent ALL Muslims. They are both definitely "right-wing religious groups opposed to women's rights and lesbian and gay human rights" - or do you wish to dispute that?

What the hell has this debate got to do with Respect??

If you want a list of negative comments then just scroll down the Newswire, there's tonnes of your drivell!!

So, answer the question: What is your agenda?? What is your political affiliation?? I'm being honest about mine, so why can't you?? It seems to me that you are simply hell-bent on dissing anyone else who is doing anything positive!!??

NAME SOMETHING POSITIVE YOU HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE MOVEMENT RECENTLY (ie -something away from your computer desk!!) -or even a debate??

There's an old saying: If you aint got anything good to say, don't say anything at all. Change the record for f***s sake!

Maybe you should volunteer to debate with the BNP on the BBC and show us ignorant fools how you can have a debate with them without giving them crtedibility??

...go on. I dare you. DO SOMETHING POSITIVE FOR ONCE!! ANYTHING!!

'So, answer the question: What is your agenda?? What is your political affiliation?? I'm being honest about mine, so why can't you??'


Oh, you mean that you are a member of the SWP, the rapidly declining Trotskyist sect,UAF being another front for them. !

btw, there seems to be an influx of swp/respect posters coming onstream, of their own volition or more likely told to do so by the central committee?

Why not get on with discussing the ISSUE: whether or not to engage fascists in debate?

"What the hell has this debate got to do with Respect??"

I don't know. You tell me. Other than the one criticism I mentioned, I haven't really commented on else in a way you might describe as "negative", so I really don't know what you're on about. You made the accusation of "too many negative comments" so back it up or shut up. I asked you to name one (other than a single criticism of Respect) and you can't seem to produce the goods.

"If you want a list of negative comments then just scroll down the Newswire, there's tonnes of your drivell!!"

Really? Where? It isn't constructive to make stuff up. I suppose next you'll be saying it's "negative" to question the wisdom of allowing the BNP to go on a BBC debate unopposed. Eep! Suggesting that racist opinions be challenged and refuted - now *there's* a novel idea!

"NAME SOMETHING POSITIVE YOU HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE MOVEMENT RECENTLY (ie -something away from your computer desk!!) -or even a debate??"

Just google my name - you'll see I do plenty.

"There's an old saying: If you aint got anything good to say, don't say anything at all. Change the record for f***s sake!"

So it's now BAD to ask a political party to be accountable to its potential constituency and its BAD to say that a racist group shouldn't be allowed to air their views unopposed.. what else is BAD?

"Maybe you should volunteer to debate with the BNP on the BBC and show us ignorant fools how you can have a debate with them without giving them crtedibility??"

As it happens, I do plenty of debates... usually with right-wing homophobic Christian groups. That's my, um, speciality. I don't believe they should be allowed to go on radio/TV talkshows and debates unopposed because while I might believe their views are illigitimate there's no guarantee that every viewer/listener will think so. Which is why I suggest you confront the BNP. Oops, there I go being "negative" again.

"...go on. I dare you. DO SOMETHING POSITIVE FOR ONCE!! ANYTHING!!"

Like I say, I do plenty... it just depends on your point of view. You see "negativity" where there isn't any and then fail to produce a single example when challenged. Perhaps it would be more fruitful to debate the issue than to make unfounded personal attacks.

Strange that a site which advocates freedom of speech and provides a forum for minority groups should be advocating censorship.

The BNP are fools. They will win no new converts through appearing on the BBC, only lose them.

"So, answer the question: What is your agenda?? What is your political affiliation?? I'm being honest about mine, so why can't you?? It seems to me that you are simply hell-bent on dissing anyone else who is doing anything positive!!??"

I've already mentioned my "political affiliations" on another thread - funny you missed it while trawling through documenting (or not!) this alleged "negativity".

I am not affiliated to or a member of any political party, but the Greens have my vote if they have a candidate, otherwise I'll vote LibDem.

I have no "agenda" other than expressing an opinion and arguing a point in a sensible, rational manner without resorting to ad hominem attacks on other posters.

Still waiting for an example of this so-called "hell-bent dissing". tum te tum....

Apologies for making this personal but I am tired of reading these "Brett Lock" rantings!! I also beleive that people are abusing the IMC for political point scoring without firstly being honest about their political afiliation, or their agenda. Correct me if I'm wrong but is this the purpose of the IMC?? I mean maybe the IMC should change its name to the "Brett Lock and friends wingeing platform" or something??

OK. Here is my political afiliation:

I am NOT a member of the SWP (I live in Milan and to the best of my knowledge they don't have a branch here??)

I support UAF because this to me represents a very positive initiative to unite people in a single-issue campaign to defeat the BNP. living in Italy, where the fascists are in government with Berlosconi, it really is a releif to see people getting their shit together to stop this scum in the UK!! Last Wednesday I was strolling through the centre of Milan and was utterly shocked by the fact that la Liga Nord (one of the neo-Fascist parties) were holding a rally under the slogan "Stop Islam" -I kid you not. I wonder if this rally would have been allowed if the slogan was "Stop Jews"?? I think not. So beleive me, I know what it is like to live in a place where these scum have "made their breakthrough"!! The BNP have not "made their breakthrough" yet in the UK and it is certainly heartening to see people (like UAF) taking them on -seriously. One of the worst things in Italy is NOBODY DOES ANYTHING TO STOP THEM!! A fine example of "good people doing nothing I think". More important to this debate is ALL of the Fascist parties are on the tv all the time discussing their filth with misslead liberal fools. They are accepted as respectable political parties, and getting on tv with all the other useless politicians is part of how they acheived this.

So anyway. Think yourselves lucky that you have Unite Against fascism. Some of you may not like them (or are even hell-bent on bringing them down -Brett??). But it is better than good people doing nothing!! Beleive me, the situation in Italy is very depressing -scary even!!

Hopefully the big Anti-Bush demo in Rome (which I will try to attend but I think I may be working??) can begin to turn this around.

In short: Don't use your valuable time dissing UAF. Work with them, seperately if you must but work together to stop this growing -European -Fascist movement

I don't know what sort of an activist you are or if you are "negative" or not, but you certainly come across as a right wanker.

Just what the progressive movement needs at this stage. Another stroppy wanker.

For fucks sake.

Prior to nazi germany the nazi party use the democratic apparatus for their own means. when in power, they dismantled the democratic system and hitler pronounced himself as a dictator.

they suppressed all opposition by killing and jailing their opponents .

the BNP will do exuactly the same. they pretend to care for democracy and cry wolf when they are denied a voice.

the BBC will provide the oxygen , they have a record of providing the BNP a platform. it is up to people like the postal workers and every day folk to stop the BNP propaganda.

we have to pile the pressure on the bosses of the BBC and protest against them when they provide a platform.we have to expose the BNP as the nazis they are. most people would totally disagree with nazi ideas, holocaust ect

in relation to brett agruement, no we do not debate with the BNP by doing so gives them credability which they dont deserve. wake up brett cant u see the dangers, it is likely they will win many seats this election, the BNP will gain confidence and will be placing more demands on the BBC and press for more cover.

when the BNP appear on TV or hold press meetings we need to disrupt and sabocharge them, pointing out to people they are nazis using the democratic process for their filth. once they get into power we will not be able to vote them out ,they will be totally unaccountable to anyone but themselves, they will have total control of the BBC.

it is interesting to see that the BNP have not attempted to march or demonstrate because they have learnt from past experience that anti-nazi will show up in bigger numbers. therefore the BNP use desperate measures to gain influence.


reportedly the BNP sent unauthorised emails to all hospital workers (cant rember which hospital) urging them to vote BNP, this is total abuse of hospital resources and is undemocratic way to spread a message.

p.s i agree with the above, brett u appear to be a pain in the arse, my personal opionion is that u are naive and asking geniune questions, but also have suspicions that u have your own agenda.

Hello all. I believe that Mr Lock is a participant in the long standing lesbian and gay civil disobedience campaign OutRage! (www.outrage.nabumedia.com) and has written articles on civil disobedience and campaigning for The Pink Paper, Gay and Lesbian Humanist Magazine and Gay Times. There is no questioning his politically progressive stance on economics, society and religion. Whilst I personally find disagreements with Mr Lock on several points (anti-fascist tactics included!) I am concerned that of late feminist and gay activists on Indymedia have been subject to inordate amounts of (off topic) abuse. Perhaps this is a sad reflection of the level of debate amongst the broad left/progressive and anarchist movements these days. We are, after all, in agreement of the need to change society, and of the need to oppose reactionary elements. Please can this debate be conducted in a (dare I say it) more comradely fashion, and could we be aware that there are anti-feminist and anti-gay posters out there who occasionally use activist websites to go on off-topic bashing sprees.

Thank you

In solidarity

Caz

"Apologies for making this personal but I am tired of reading these "Brett Lock" rantings!! I also beleive that people are abusing the IMC for political point scoring without firstly being honest about their political afiliation, or their agenda. Correct me if I'm wrong but is this the purpose of the IMC?? I mean maybe the IMC should change its name to the "Brett Lock and friends wingeing platform" or something??"

I suppose if you repeat something often enough you can behave as if it's true.

Though I've repeatedly requested you support your assertions by providing examples of these alleged "negative comments" and "rantings" you repeatedly fail to do so, yet you keep repeating the fiction that they exist. It's like something straight out of the Joseph Goebbels school of verbal bullying and obfuscation.

And what the hell does "political affiliation" have to do with anything. Either a person makes a valid point or they don't.

I'm sick of having to defend against unfounded personal attacks by people who neither back up their dubious claims nor are prepared to engage with the issue at hand.

The issue is whether one should provide an alternative voice to the BNP or allow them to participate unopposed on a political programme. I stated that yes providing an opposing voice would be the most sensible course of action, and for that there is a torrent of personal abuse. It is, frankly, quite bewildering.

" i agree with the above, brett u appear to be a pain in the arse, my personal opionion is that u are naive and asking geniune questions, but also have suspicions that u have your own agenda."

So which is it: my own "agenda" (whatever that might be) or am I simply naive? And a "pain in the arse" how? By expressing a straightforward opinion and then being forced to defend against a torent of unfounded personal abuse?

I can assure you I'm not "naive". I don't need to imagine what life under a BNP government would be like because I've lived under one that makes the BNP like like boy scouts. I'm South African and I cut my political teeth as an anti-Apartheid activist in the 1980s. Have you been arrested by hooded policemen for being in a black township after curfew at 2am? Have you been pulled in for questioning by state security officers and had all your papers confiscated? Have you had to hide from the military police for failing to respond to a call-up to fight black civilians in a racist civil war? Somehow I don't think so. Well, when you have, you can come back and call me naive and question my "agenda".

Some perspecive is needed. The BNP aren't about to take over the government in a landslide victory. They may be able to win a handful of keys seats which will is ultimately where their "credibility" will come from (see our OutRage! posting on the issue a few threads back), so the immediate goal should be to counter that threat. They *want* to undo the democratic structures of the country, but they are unlikely to be in a position to do so in the near future. But they will *use* those structures to disseminate their poison (as you point out) so it is up to the progressive movement to provide an antidote - and that means not allowing their propoganda to be aired unchallenged and without refutation. The *reality* is that the BBC is not able to deny them access (if you think they can you're dreaming) because they are a legitimately registered political party contesting an election and (for now) playing by the rules. So forget about trying to get the Beeb to drop them, by law they can't. SO - the only reasonable alternative is to aggressively engage them if an opportunity arises. By all means, use direct-action interventions where feasible but be careful not to shoot yourself in the foot - you wouldn't want *their* spin doctors painting *you* as the intolerant nazi thugs (which in any event they will try to do. so be prepared).

But surely you have some faith in human nature and the democratic process. Do you really believe that people will go BNP if they hear the message - even if it is countered by a credible and sensible alternative?

Look, in principle the position 'No platform for fascists' is a fine idea but if it comes down to a choice between a BNP member being allowed to spew his propaganda unchallenged in rhetoric that may actually appeal to some, or exposing the flimsy arguments as blunt racism through rational criticism, than surely it is better to choose the latter?

"Caz" you have made my point exactly. We need to discuss this in a comeradely manner!! The point is that the IMC newsreel column has turned in to some very sad sectarian point-scoring forum!! I really do think the UK IMC (you don't get this bollox on the Scottish IMC) has rapidly gone down hill recently. I discovered the IMC when I became politicised just after the Bush invasion of Iraq and found it a refreshing forum for alternative news etc. Trajically since probably just after the big ant-Bush demo in London (??), it has rapidly gone down hill. I really do think this is because people ARE abusing the IMC for sectarian point-scoring. Just recently most of this nonesense has come from the person describing themselves as "Bret Lock", so I thought it would be a good idea to get this issue out in the open. So in a way this is not personal, more having a go at how I see the IMC is deteriorating

Bret: I apologise for not knowing who you are. Clearly you do some positive stuff with your Outrage activites (I am certainly NOT anti-gay!! I genuinely did not know who you were!!), so maybe you should stick to your day-time job?? Or at least contribute more of this stuff to the IMC in a positive way (I meant "negitive" in the sense that you appear to disagree with everyone else -particularly people who are affiliated to certain groups- or more worryingly Muslim associations etc). And yes ok, you do clearly have much pollitical credibility from your Ant-Apartheid work (I stand corrected!!). But hold on, that last contriubution you made was very positive!! Maybe we are getting somewhere??

attack. attack. attack. leftist and rightist would have us dead. How many dead comrades? Let unite and respect BNP and Swp eat there own political opertunisim, Why not attack all of them, no platform for stalinist/trotskites/national socialists. Independent peoples use your own autonomy when confronting fascism, leftist want unity but at what cost? fuck the slogans and bullshit, arm your desires, smaSH ALL FASCIST PARTIES LEFT OR RIGHT. A

"I meant "negitive" in the sense that you appear to disagree with everyone else -particularly people who are affiliated to certain groups- or more worryingly Muslim associations etc"

By "Muslim Associations", you mean specifically the Muslim Council of Britain, The Muslim Association of Britain and more recently the PJP in Birmingham.

Well, let's see what these groups say about gays and lesbians:

The MCB on the repeal of Section 28: "This is giving legitimacy to so-called "gay families" and "gay marriage" through the back door... This would mean that councils would be free to spend public money on homosexual youth groups, homosexual youth workers, and homosexual festivals. Ordinary people do not want to see councils spending public funds in this way."
 http://www.mcb.org.uk/news150300.html

The MCB on Section 28: "We do believe that the repeal of Section 28 will expose our young children, even from a very tender age, to immoral values and practices... Any teaching in schools which presents homosexual practices as equivalent to marriage or in a morally neutral way is profoundly offensive and totally unacceptable... The MCB is calling upon all Muslims individually and all mosques and institutions in the country to convey their outrage to their local MPs and to raise public awareness of the dangers of the Government's plans to repeal Clause 28. It also urges them to join with other faith groups who recognise that homosexual practices are morally wrong. It is not without reason that both the Bible and the Qur'an, for example, strongly condemn homosexuality as a grave transgression."
 http://www.mcb.org.uk/news260100.html

The MCB on an equal Age of Consent: "The Muslim Council of Britain today strongly criticised the British government for its use of the controversial Parliament Acts to pass the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill which lowered the age of consent for homosexual acts from 18 to 16 years... Mass public opinion is against these so-called "equalising" measures, and it is an abuse and disregard of our democratic and parliamentary procedures."
 http://www.mcb.org.uk/news041200.html

The MCB on on Age of Consent and S28: "The Muslim Council of Britain has urged the Muslim peers to vote against the lowering of the age of consent for homosexual relations to 16 years... In its letters to the Muslim peers the MCB calls their attention to the unanimous opposition of the British Muslim community to the lowering of the age of consent and to the repeal of Section 28 of the Local Government Act that would allow the promotion of homosexuality in schools... The MCB has also requested the Muslim peers to take part in the debate "and convey to the House the strong and unanimous concerns of the Muslim community." The Muslim community expects that, unlike the two previous occasions, the Muslim peers will play a positive and active role in defeating these two measures."
 http://www.mcb.org.uk/news100400.html

The MCB on adoption: "The MCB is lending its full support to the campaign of Church-based groups, including the Christian Institute, that only married couples and single people can adopt children. It is urging affiliates to lobby MPs not to support the amendment to allow homosexual couples and cohabiting couples to adopt."
 http://www.mcb.org.uk/e33.html
 http://www.mcb.org.uk/Nov2002Newsletter6.pdf

The MAB on pro-choice: "These comments, as well as his statements on faith and God in the same interview, will surely be welcomed by British Muslims who see Respect as a real alternative to the main political parties in the approaching European elections."
 http://www.mabonline.net/media/press_releases/articles/gallowayprolife.htm

"Faith and God?" - we all know what the MAB's theological position on homosexuality is.

See  http://www.mabonline.net/islam/basics/articles/boybboys.pdf for more on their philosophy of gender and sexuality. Patronisingly misogynistic, homophobic and totally unreconstructed.

And then of course there's the PJP whose (apparently now withdrawn) election flyer said: ""Another Lib Dem policy not in favour of the British Muslim community is the teaching of gay sex education to your children at a very young age. The Lib Dems are also in favour of equal rights for gays and lsbians. Do you want this?"

So, NOW do you see why feminist and queer groups take issue with coalitions seeking parliamentary election who include groups so openly hostile to gender issues and gay rights?

Is it not reasonable that gay activists question whether Respect candidates will at best ignore gender and sexuality issues, or at worst actually vote against them if they're elected to office?

If the Green Party formed an election pact with The Christian Institute or decided to court the "Catholic" vote (for example) you can bet I'd be asking exactly the same questions, "pain in the arse" or not.

Well I must admit I hevn't read most of the thread, becasue it seemed to be getting a bit off topic.

After hundreds of e-mails, phone calls and the intervention of two MPs (one Tory, one Labour) to the BBC they pulled the item.

This proves we were right not to participate - because if we had the BNP would have been given the respectability of being on the BBC, whereas by walking away and organising a protest the BNP are not on air at all.

I will write a longer peice later when I have time.

Our UAF lefleting goes ahead as planned:

assemble 11:00 am, Sunday 6th July, car park St Edmunds church, Oxford Rd, Clane, Wilts

It looks like I was wrong. It seemed, from your first post, that the BBC were going to broadcast it regardless but that appears not to be the case.

Well done! It's fantastic that you managed to get the programme dropped. But sooner or later this issue is going to raise it's head again and next time luck may be on their side. I would still strongly urge that it is better to have someone confronting them than to give them the whole platform, if, as was originally suggested the programme will go ahead anyway. I'm almost certain that their lawyers will go into overdrive to assert their legal right as a political party contesting an election to a share of airtime and this is an eventuality that needs to be considered.

Nevertheless, congratulations are still in order for today's success.

The other problem with engaging with the BNP on TV or radio is that the inevitable arguments and conflict will make great radio or television. Better to let them bore the arse off the viewers once on their own than have them appearing repeatedly.

Honestly, after having watched tyrade after tyrade of Italian fascists in suites on Italian tv (thank you mr Berlosconi! -they even had a shite from Liga Nord on the news last night to comment on the anti-Bush demo in Rome!!), it really is encouraging to hear about this kind of stuff from the UK!! The way I see it, a little bit of hard work now with carefull tactics can really stop these bastards in their prime. The UK is our "flag ship" I think against a seriously scarey rising Fascist tide in Europe. If we are successfull in the UK in defeating the BNP, not only will it be a bloww to the Fascists accross Europe (weakening their "Nationalist Block" -as Griffin puts it), it will send a very positive message to the European left (most of whome have been sadly absent in confronting this problem so far -dereliction of duty I think!!).

A very important part of this battle is gonna be confronting what I see as a very scary wave of Islamophobia, which the Fascists are attempting to exploit. Liga Nord held a rally in Piaza del Duomo last Wednesday (Republic Day in Italy -a national holiday) under the slogan of "Stop Islam"!! The fact that they can do this, against the background of the French government banning the Muslim headress in schools (apallingly backed by most of the French left!!), starts alarm bells ringing. These Euro-Fascists (and their pals in the UK) are attempting to exploit the atmosphere of fear that Bush and Blair have stirred up with their "War on Terror", particularly after the Madrid bombings. Muslims are in danger of entering a position the Jews were in throughout Europe in the 30s I think, and we have to be prepared for this politically. In order for this to be successful we are gonna have to work along side Muslim groups who, although may hold some very dodgy views on Homosexuality and women etc, would be quite willing to work with us against the BNP (they were very enthusiastically involved in the anti-war movement remember??). Besides, what better way to engage in an argument with muslims about homosexuality, than while fighting Fascism -the Fascists hate gays as much as Muslims so we have some common ground here at least. I,m not saying we dont confront these issues with Muslims but we do have to be extremely tactical about how we aproach this. We want Muslims on our side here because basically we cant win without them. I think, in this atmosphere of Islamophobia anyone who starts moralising about how Islam is backward is gonna be seen as part of the problem to them. So without completely ducking the issues we have to make them feel welcome to join us. Difficult strategy but doable I think??

Anyway, A very inspiring week all round I think with the news from the UK: BNP get banned from going on telly and posties refusing to deliver their election propaganda. NICE!

Sincere apologies to Brett for having a personal go but you have to admit, IMCUK has been going down hill a bit recently with naff sectarian rants?? This trend is ruining this site and we must move away from this. It reached the point that whenever I saw your name I reached for my gun!! At lest now I know who you are and understand that you clearly have something to contribute here. Tell you what, Ill do you a deal: No more personal attacks if you at least try to treat "other political groups" with a bit of respect (no pun intended!!). I see your point about these Muslim groups. My experience with the MAB has been obviously quite different to yours as I came accross some of these guys in the ant-war groups in Scotland. They seemed pretty progressive to me -certainly not anti-gay?? I think we should avoid confusing individual members with official stances here too!! Valid points though. Maybe you should post your comment above as a new article and we can begin a discussion on this -in a "comradely" manner as it is a very important issue to get out in the open??

Apologies to Andy Newman too for digressing from a very valid and important posting!! I really think we needed to address this sectarian crap and this just seemed to be the right time to do it. At lest we got people talking about it though

Good luck with the UAF leafleting over the weekend!

Regards

Andy

To call the SWP as bad as the BNP is absolutely pathetic. Even to call Trotsky a Fascist is just more anarchist-bullshit, learnt of your infoshop bible. Note to anarchists - not all non-anarchists are fascists!

This thread is a fucking joke. I disagree with most of what Brett Lock says, but that doesn't mean we should sit here and discuss how politically active he is. If you disagree with what he says, discuss it with him. Try and defeat the argument, not the arguer.

Get back to the topic! If the BBC allowed someone to argue with the BNP, then that is fine. But if they don't, it does seem like an unwanted party political broadcast. I was on a high street today leafleting, and it was scary the amount of people who will vote UKIP...they are a threat too. They are also xenophobic + racist, but obviously not to the extent of the BNP. But their views are watered down versions of pure nationalism, and they need to be countered too...

Of course not all nonanarchists are fascists :)

As for the difference between the BNP and SWP, surely the SWP must be the lesser of two evils? I doubt many would disagree with that.

But I have to point out that anti-SWP anger like this (the exaggeration - IMHO - of comparing them to the BNP) is not irrational sectarianism, but is fueled by our experiences of seeing them fuck up, co-opt and suck dry every social movement they can get their claws into... so please take a moment to try to understand before you rant back.

Thank you.

"Lesser of the two evils"

The SWP stands for a world of equality, freedom and peace. The BNP wants a fascist state, fuelled by racism, and built on hatred.

I know that there are many SWP haters on this site, but to compare them to the BNP is just fucking stupid.

"The SWP stands for a world of equality, freedom and peace."

Then they've got a bloody funny way of going about it. They don't exactly lead by example. Anyone with direct experience of them can tell you that.

And can I just remind you I said LESSER of two evils :)