boyfriday Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Incorrect. The BNP candidate had a ticket which allowed him access the hustings (which, incidentally, was advertised as an 'open' event). If the BNP candidate had not been invited, he would have been unable to enter the premises where the event was held - as security and a police officer were on the door. I extend the same courtesy to you. Please state what part of the report you misunderstand and I shall endeavour to explain it to you. No where in any of the reports does it state that the BNP candidate was not invited to the hustings, only that he was gagged from speaking to the audience as a candidate. The overwhelming number of letter writers to the 'Saddleworth News' regard the actions in using six police officers to drag away a candidate in order to prevent him from communicating with his electorate as shameful and a dreadful stain upon democracy. Even the BNP's political opponents campaigning in the constituency (except labour) think that it was a mistake, and might boost the BNP vote. As to 'frightening members of the public', in my experience a sizeable number of the audience at these events is made up of supporters and party activists of the candidates anyway. Labour party supporters dominated the premises that night, thanks to the supposedly 'non-political' organisers. Finally, here is a response from Susan Hilder to her original letter in the 'Saddleworth News': Susan Hilder January 12th, 2011 at 6:12 pm Thank you for printing the ‘letter’. Its heartwarming to read the majority appreciate the importance of freespeech. A message for us all, including the gentleman who has a Doctorate in Finance. When you judge another, you do not define them, you define yourself. regards Susan Hilder http://www.saddleworthnews.com/?p=5396&cpage=2#comments What a shame the BNP dont appreciate the importance of free speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INTERVIEWER Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 What a shame the BNP dont appreciate the importance of free speech. The peaceful protest on Sunday night, highlighting political censorship and the Labour party desire to prevent adults from making up their own minds about election candidates during an election period, came about because the BNP recognises the importance of free speech and democracy in our society - especially during elections. If need be, the BNP candidate was prepared to be arrested in order to confirm just how much these principles mean to him. What other candidate's in the Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election were/are prepared to do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 What a shame the BNP dont appreciate the importance of free speech.Whose free speech do they prevent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Incorrect. The BNP candidate had a ticket which allowed him access the hustings (which, incidentally, was advertised as an 'open' event). So if you were a snooker player and you had a ticket to sit in the audience at an open competition you'd expect to be able to play would you? You are the only one who is continuing with this "he was denied free speech" when most posters on here have tried to explain the difference between a panel member and an audience member. As to being able to speak, if he had behaved in a normal manner he would have been able to question any of the panel members and used that opportunity to put forward his position on local transport. Incidentally, what is the BNPee's position on transport? Is it whites to the front and all others to the back of the bus still? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 So if you were a snooker player and you had a ticket to sit in the audience at an open competition you'd expect to be able to play would you? You are the only one who is continuing with this "he was denied free speech" when most posters on here have tried to explain the difference between a panel member and an audience member. As to being able to speak, if he had behaved in a normal manner he would have been able to question any of the panel members and used that opportunity to put forward his position on local transport. Incidentally, what is the BNPee's position on transport? Is it whites to the front and all others to the back of the bus still? From what I have seen of buses I would imagine anyone can sit where they damn well like ,theres plenty of spaces Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Incidentally, what is the BNPee's position on transport? Is it whites to the front and all others to the back of the bus still?Isn't that because the back seats afford a little more privacy for drug deals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Whose free speech do they prevent? I thought you would be familiar with their constitution? They also don't like people attending their public meetings they dont like the look (ie non whites) http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23759615-non-whites-barred-from-bnp-meeting.do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 The peaceful protest on Sunday night, highlighting political censorship and the Labour party desire to prevent adults from making up their own minds about election candidates during an election period, came about because the BNP recognises the importance of free speech and democracy in our society - especially during elections. If need be, the BNP candidate was prepared to be arrested in order to confirm just how much these principles mean to him. What other candidate's in the Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election were/are prepared to do that? I'll have a little more sympathy for your view when Abu Hamza turns up to the next public BNP meeting and is welcomed to speak from the platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INTERVIEWER Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 So if you were a snooker player and you had a ticket to sit in the audience at an open competition you'd expect to be able to play would you? You are not comparing 'like-with-like'. An election hustings, advertised as 'open' (to members of the public) cannot be seriously compared to a snooker competition, a rock concert or even a bog-snorkeling event. Hustings are a democratic 'enabling device', which give the electorate the opportunity to question those candidates standing for public office. If some candidates are excluded it defeats the purpose of holding the hustings and gives an electoral advantage to those lucky enough to be included. You are the only one who is continuing with this "he was denied free speech" when most posters on here have tried to explain the difference between a panel member and an audience member. I am well aware of the difference between a panel member and an audience member. So are the organisers of the Delph hustings, who knew that by refusing official candidate status (by sitting on the front platform) to the BNP candidate and seating him amongst the audience this would reduce his visibility and effectiveness. He would be at a distinct disadvantage compared to the candidates on the top tables. Interestingly, this fact is noted in electoral law - because if not every single candidate contesting an election is present at an hustings, the cost of the hustings has to be split between the declared expenses of the candidates who do attend. As to being able to speak, if he had behaved in a normal manner he would have been able to question any of the panel members and used that opportunity to put forward his position on local transport. I regard peacefully highlighting a serious democratic deficit at the hustings, which potentially might effect the outcome of the election, as the very definition of the 'good citizen'. Going the extra mile, as BNP candidate Derek Adams did, is not 'normal' I will agree. Putting democracy first, at his own risk, was a very remarkable and selfless act. If only more people behaved in such a courageous manner we might not have gone to war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and tuition fees might not have been imposed. Incidentally, what is the BNPee's position on transport? Is it whites to the front and all others to the back of the bus still? Nothing of the kind! Nationalise public transport, and huge financial investment (paid for by ending all illegal and immoral wars, international aid and EU payments). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 I thought you would be familiar with their constitution?Why would you think that? (I really would like to know). They also don't like people attending their public meetings they dont like the look (ie non whites) http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23759615-non-whites-barred-from-bnp-meeting.do I would have thought it normal for anybody running a meeting to wish to prevent potentially troublesome activists from ruining their meeting. I don't see how that example substantiates your claim that they don't appreciate the importance of free speech? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.