Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Nice bit of electioneering [fight]
- Thread starter Bozza
- Start date
Hornblower
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 1,710
I think there is a big difference at being spat at by a friendly bunch of happy gig goers and being spat at in an aggresive manner. I think anyone of us would have done the same.
Oh and as for Vile policies how about Lib/lab/con party. You are about to see just how vile their policies are. Enjoy
"friendly bunch of happy gig goers" - I guess you never went to an Anti Nowhere League gig then.
Also, comparing the three mainstream parties to the vile BNP just doesn't stack up at all.
coventrygull
the right one
Not really my cup of tea mate.
Oh I think their policies do stack up. You just have to think about it.
- Aug 7, 2003
- 8,017
A right old argy bhajee!
Hornblower
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 1,710
Good grief! Is this a wind-up or is there really that many BNP supporters on NSC - HELP!
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
Most people I have spoken to today (about 80, combined with lecturers and students) all agree with the response of the BNP guy - they see this as the right to defend yourself when being attacked. They class the "spitting" as worse than if he had punched him. Spitting is seen as something which deserves the response it got. The main thrust of the points of view is that whether you like it or not, it is legal electioneering in a democractic country - and the behaviour of the spitter and his mates does not protect that. Whilst I doubt that many of my students are racing off to vote BNP, they are (where they are of voting age) appear to favour the Conservatives. They don't like Labour because of Gordon Brown, they dislike the Lib Dems because of Clegg and his immigration/asylum amnesty, and they think that the Conservatives have the right approach. Most of them have taken the political tests online and come up with centre or slightly right of centre, none of them are extremist and we are not in a particularly wealthy area (historically Lib Dem with Labour tendencies). The results will be interesting.
if you all think its good to use violence to ANY act you are severely lacking in your evolution here.
vengeance is a shitty emotion to have within you.
he would of taken the high ground by doing nothing, and won so much more support.
....who whansa proppa teear up? heheh....just look at danny dyer this week and where that attitude leads to.
vengeance is a shitty emotion to have within you.
he would of taken the high ground by doing nothing, and won so much more support.
....who whansa proppa teear up? heheh....just look at danny dyer this week and where that attitude leads to.
magoo
New member
people seem to be sticking up for the BNP twat but didn't he sort of start it by saying "There's more of us than you" thereby behaving in a threatening manner?
ps. i'm not suggesting he needed a spit in the face, they're all c*nts as far as i'm concerned.
ps. i'm not suggesting he needed a spit in the face, they're all c*nts as far as i'm concerned.
He was also the first to make physical contact.
Hornblower
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 1,710
Absolutely agree (as I said much the same in an earlier post on this thread).
Look, I'm not condoning what the Asian guy did, being spat at is a horrible thing but believing that the correct response is physical violence is hardly the mark of a civilised society. Amongst all the drivel that gets posted on NSC there is still evidence that there are a good number of decent inteligent people on this site and I'm surprised that so many of you think that violence is an answer to provocation. Or is it just youthful macho posturing that prompts you to feel that way?
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
I suggest some people get their blinkers off when watching this, and get the plugs out of their ears! The BNP guy makes contact because the guy in the black polo shirts advances on him. He makes contact to maintain his personal space - perfectly legal if he feels he is going to be attacked. He would have been legally permitted to strike the guy at this point if he felt he was going to be subject to an attack. The next contact is the big Asian who puts his hands across the BNP man's hands. At this point the guy in the black polo shirt raises his hand in a punch (14/15 seconds in) - but only after looking across directly at the camera. I would suggest this probably means that there is a little bit of a set up taking place here. It's polo shirt boy who spits when the conversation is taking place - I believe that is known as assault - try doing it to someone some time. The ensuing scuffle is not helped by the larger lad trying to wade in and getting clobbered. The rolling around the floor is the usual handbags, and if this was John Prescott most of this board would be calling for him to get a medal.
If one of my students came up with the BNP's economic policies as a solution to the current recession they would get an immediate fail for having a total lack of comprehension and understanding of both micro and macro economic relationships, and an inability to generate solutions.
Frankly the BNP's policies would embarrass a first term GCSE candidate.
The asian was only protecting his friend's personal space - perfectly legal if he feels he is going to be attacked. He would have been legally permitted to strike the guy at this point if he felt there was going to be an attack...
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
Oh God - get real. The Asian is advancing on the BNP guy, do better than trying to change my words around. If the Asian had stopped and the BNP guy had taken the step then you would be right - but you aren't. Try again.
I am.
The Asian had effectively stopped and was posturing.
The BNP guy is a bnp guy. Rightly or wrongly, the BNP are famous for spreading hate and prejudice. It's not exactly unreasonable for a non-white/non-british guy to be concerned for his safety (or that of his friends) when contact is initiated by the BNP guy (for whatever reason).
If I were to come running at you, knowing I would stop before colliding with you, you would still brace yourself for collision. I would think your actions unnecessary because I knew nothing was going to happen.
Asain guy may have had no intention of doing anything other than standing close and yelling at the BNP guy. The BNP guy isn't to know his intentions.
Just like the asian guy isn't to know the BNP guy's intentions when he reaches out and touches his friend (after possibly swearing at him, and telling the guy to go away, something he has no jurisdiction to do, and given who it is coming from and who it was aimed toward, would have more severe connotations than the phrase would otherwise).
Neither had any idea what the other was going to do, both have, at least in their own minds, reason to be concerned for their safety, and a right to protect their own personal spaces, within reason.
Besides, my point wasn't about whether one is likely to attack or not, it was the escalating nature of the confrontation.
BNP guy protects his space out of fear (every legal right to do, but as others have pointed out, showing some degree of restraint would help his cause more), this causes the asian guy to protect his friend's space out of fear (every legal right to do, but some restraint would avoid providing "evidence" for BNP guys (or others) to use to point to the less savoury behaviour of anyone non-white) , etc.
