Britain First - Paul Golding

[agchristie]

Appears at court today but what of the charges he faces? The 'uniform' charge is bizarre to say the least. Short video in the link where Golding outlines the situation.

https://www.britainfirst.org/video-britain-first-leader-paul-golding-speaks-essex-court-today/

[Ellipsis]

> anybody can buy

Again, thanks for that. Not advertising in any way ...

> The reason I mentioned the merchandise was purely because if anybody can buy and wear it in public they must be guilty too!

That's two separate issues - buying it and wearing it in public. Golding was not arrested for buying it, so why do you keep mentioning that it can be bought?

[agchristie]

Ellipsis,

Let's try another way. Does it not stand to reason that if Golding is wearing anything which is freely available to wear, thenquote[any]wearer is in contravention of the 1936 Public Order Act which prohibits the wearing of political uniform in 'public places or public meetings'. I cannot put it any clearer than this.

[vetuste_ennemi]

The propaganda value of the thread (to which you alluded earlier) benefits your side of the argument rather than AG's, doesn't it, Ellipsis? You've established (with good documentary evidence) the true character and lineage of the BF movement. So much so that nobody has yet attempted a total defence of BF as a political movement. The nearest to a defence of SOME BF policies came in a post which I wrote. Ichkeria and Mikey were able to expose very easily the fallacies in the case I presented, as well as the racist and Islamophobic attitudes implicit in my arguments. Having different standards of logic and truth from them I wasn't that impressed by their rebuttals, but obviously you and others were as you saw no need to support or add to their posts. Nonetheless, I applaud the zeal with which you and the other good guys on this thread oppose the bullying, coercion and intimidation of this country's law-abiding citizens by some fascist organisations..

[agchristie]

v_e

Much of this debate and part of the OP was the charge of wearing a political 'uniform'. Given the circumstances I have outlined, what are your thoughts out of interest?

[vetuste_ennemi]

Sorry to offer you poor comfort, AG, but I think BF are probably much as Mikey etc. portray them, so I'm not in the least interested in arguing for or against Mr. Golding and his uniform, the subject of your OP. The point I was trying to make to the purblind (after reading the expected Pavlovian responses to the OP) is that there are factions (that's spelled F A C T I O N S, Mikey, geddit?) in the Muslim community which pose bigger threats to civilised values and the rule of law in the UK than any which have been, are being, or will be posed by BF, the EDL, the BNP or (back when I was a boy) the old National Front of Tindall and co. Ellipsis and mates would be better employed assessing the extent of that threat: it's the one that gives succour to the neo-fascist organisations which disturb Mikey's sleep.

[Answerprancer]

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/12-things-britain-first.html

[THECORBYLOON]

I have not done any more research but that is not my throwing in the towel. I honestly have no idea who the leader is so can you enlighten me please?

[agchristie]

v_e

No comfort required thanks ;-)

You have though made a good point about perspective. Who should be feared the most? For those who cry 'alarmist' should wake up to the threat posed from Islamic extremists which is evidenced by the current official threat level.

Answerprancer

Keep up, that's the third time that link has been posted. I've commented on this way back.

[agchristie]

TCL

Look at Al Muhajaroun and you will get there.

Methyl

Third time you have made that statement. People are willing to discuss what is one of the longest ever threads in this section. Why is it a waste?

[THECORBYLOON]

In Whelan v DPP in 1975 the Appeal Court held that a group of men wearing a beret and under a Provisional Sinn Fein banner were in uniform so the fact that an item of clothing is readily available is of no help to Mr Golding.

[Answerprancer]

Sorry AG ;-) I should have scanned back.

[Ellipsis]

> Ellipsis and mates would be better employed assessing the extent of that threat

As I said earlier in the thread, I like the rule of law so naturally I dislike both terrorism and vigilantism. I do not trust vigilantes to make my country a safer place. In fact I think, like terrorists, vigilantes make my country a more dangerous place.

> Who should be feared the most?

Both terrorism and vigilantism are to be abhorred. The difference between them can be quite small, depending just how political the vigilante's aims and just how far the vigilante is prepared to push things, as this definition shows:

terrorism: the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

[agchristie]

TCL

Case law correct. What Ive tried to explain is that Golding has worn the same clothing countless times as have others with him in public and they have never been arrested before. Why? Can you see my point?

Answerprancer

Wood for the trees.;-)

[agchristie]

Ellipsis

///How far the vigilante is prepared to push things///

A non racist leaflet, containing news already published by the media, was pushed through letterboxes.

[THECORBYLOON]

The fact that a potenially unlawful act has not been challenged previously does not make future instances lawful. Perhaps the Attorney General was busy with other matters and had not had the time to authorise the prosecution.

[agchristie]

TCL

I used the analogy previously that a person seriously injures others in five attacks, does the CPS wait for a sixth offence to be committed which results in a murder?

Attorney General 'too busy...' - that's a weak point.

[THECORBYLOON]

The prosecution has to be authorised by the Attorney-General, it is not an everyday offence but I am sure it did not rank highly in the A-G's priorities. Maybe the A-G was unaware until recently, I have no idea.

[agchristie]

TCL

BF have attended numerous towns and cities this year alone. If it was so obvious a uniform numerous arrests would have been made. It's very old legislation.

Anyway, let's see what the court makes of it...

[agchristie]

Part of this thread has involved discussing the issue of Medway's decision to approve the building of a mosque. Last night, we have this from Dudley:-

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/dudley-mega-mosque-plans-approved-after-8087707