Metropol

Sput wrote:I don't like it when this happens. They might be abhorrent in their opinions but they still have a right to privacy. As far as I'm aware they don't have lists of gay people and where they live (right?) in order to harass them so by publishing this list it's really not a moral victory.

What has being gay got to do with being a paid-up member of a political party? You're comparing apples with another type of fruit altogether.

One doesn't have a choice of one's sexuality (no matter what some people may say), but one does have a choice to sign up for a political party who cast judgement on others because of the colour of their skin - and would deny them their rights to live and work in Britain.

I have no sympathy for any of these individuals.

Interesting to see that for all this talk of, "we're from all walks of life and aren't just skinheads and oiks", they're all rather terrified of people finding out they hold such views.

An no bloody wonder.

Hell mend them.

Gavin Scott wrote:

Sput wrote:I don't like it when this happens. They might be abhorrent in their opinions but they still have a right to privacy. As far as I'm aware they don't have lists of gay people and where they live (right?) in order to harass them so by publishing this list it's really not a moral victory.

What has being gay got to do with being a paid-up member of a political party? You're comparing apples with another type of fruit altogether.

One doesn't have a choice of one's sexuality (no matter what some people may say), but one does have a choice to sign up for a political party who cast judgement on others because of the colour of their skin - and would deny them their rights to live and work in Britain.

nono, I just made a piss poor attempt to explain myself. I was trying to say that anyone that might say "that's what they deserve" would be wrong because they don't go infringing privacy like that despite the fact that they're reasonably bigoted. It doesn't work quite so well to say black people because they're more obvious, visually speaking

Sput wrote:nono, I just made a piss poor attempt to explain myself. I was trying to say that anyone that might say "that's what they deserve" would be wrong because they don't go infringing privacy like that despite the fact that they're reasonably bigoted. It doesn't work quite so well to say black people because they're more obvious, visually speaking

I'm certainly not going to tie myself in knots regarding the right of privacy for someone in the BNP - I'm just not.

I wouldn't personally have published the list, but I'm certainly not about to defend the rights of people who would deny others their rights.

Then again you can't condone tactics that would lead to harassment or discrimination either! I mean, if ONE employer decided to look at that list and denied someone a job solely because of it, then it's doing harm. I like to think we (the rest of the civilised world) is rather better than that. Don't want to give them any ammunition.

This is - in some ways - similar to the situation with Mrs Iris Robinson MLA MP and her fundamentalist homophobic rantings of the summer.

Is it better that we know people's opinions on such things, even if they are offensive?

If they are in positions of power/responsibility then yes, I think it is.

Has this data breach *actually* been reported to the police? I know Nick Griffin says it has been. But has it really? Has Dyfed-Powys police stated they are investigating a complaint? And why that force in particular?

There is a theory that they've done this deliberately as some form of publicity stunt, though it would seem a very odd way to go about things.

Sput wrote:Then again you can't condone tactics that would lead to harassment or discrimination either! I mean, if ONE employer decided to look at that list and denied someone a job solely because of it, then it's doing harm. I like to think we (the rest of the civilised world) is rather better than that. Don't want to give them any ammunition.

As an employer I would, in fact, be entitled to make a judgement on whether someone was suitable for service based on whether I believe they may discriminate against my customers, or other members of my staff.

That's why the police are banned from being paid-up members.

It is illogical to suggest that we should protect those from discrimination who actively discriminate against others.

Gavin Scott wrote:

Sput wrote:nono, I just made a piss poor attempt to explain myself. I was trying to say that anyone that might say "that's what they deserve" would be wrong because they don't go infringing privacy like that despite the fact that they're reasonably bigoted. It doesn't work quite so well to say black people because they're more obvious, visually speaking

I'm certainly not going to tie myself in knots regarding the right of privacy for someone in the BNP - I'm just not.

I wouldn't personally have published the list, but I'm certainly not about to defend the rights of people who would deny others their rights.

Gav, I don't feel that two wrongs necessarily make a right in this instance.

I haven't personally spotted anyone on the list that I know, and it certainly wouldn't change my opinion of them, provided that they don't extend their political views into their everyday life by targeting racial minorities.

However I do believe that it's slightly hypocritical that as a party who derided the Human Rights Act, Griffin is now attempting to use that very Act to give his party members the right to privacy. Despite this, I don't feel or hope that any members of the party come under attack because of the leak. I do, however, hope that the party re-jigs its policy as a result. How can the party claim to oppose the HRA when it now has the desperate need for it?

Also, when conducting a job interview would you ask for information on someone's political views? You just can't do that - because it's discrimination in itself.

Sput is the anti-cdd here - he is 100% right. Members of the BNP might well be bigots, but they're entitled to their point of view. They have joined a party, and at least some will have done so on the basis that their membership will not be advertised. It is precisely the same as any individual choosing to join a sports club, sign up for a store loyalty programme or take out a bank account. Their privacy has been violated here - that is the issue. I have no sympathy for their views, but I do have sympathy for their plight.

Interesting also to note that the BNP site is crashing at the moment, due to the heavy volume of traffic.

Makes me think there's something more to this "leak".

Mr Q wrote:Sput is the anti-cdd here - he is 100% right. Members of the BNP might well be bigots, but they're entitled to their point of view. They have joined a party, and at least some will have done so on the basis that their membership will not be advertised. It is precisely the same as any individual choosing to join a sports club, sign up for a store loyalty programme or take out a bank account. Their privacy has been violated here - that is the issue. I have no sympathy for their views, but I do have sympathy for their plight.

How can you sympathise with the plight of bigots?

Baffling.