BNP Member List leaker

[Gromit]

I invite you to comment on the words of Judge John Stobart commenting after fining the BNP member list leaker �200.

"It comes as no surprise to me that somebody to do with an organisation that prides itself on Britishness is in fact living off the British people on Job Seeker's Allowance and that is why the fine is so low as to be ridiculous."

I find them rather curious on several levels. What do you think?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/6 121283/BNP-list-leaker-is-living-off-the-Briti sh-people.html

[Gromit]

Sorry, maybe I wasn't being clear enough. I meant I find the Judge's words curious.

[jake-the-peg]

No the Judges comments are curious.

One one hand he seems sympathetic to the BNP's case and seems to wan't to impose a harsher penalty but then portrays its leadership as scroungers.

I think his sympathy is actually just a praiseworthy legal dissociation of those who've been endangered with the cause of this.

You may claim that disclosure of the details of people holding extreme views and public posts like (police offices or teachers) is in the public interest.

He appears to disagree especially as the whole list was published and not just such a subset.

He alludes to this in the comment about some not deserving the protection of the law.

I think on balance he is probably right.

[sp1814]

Did you also notice that Nick Griffin said that publishing the list breached human rights and data protection laws.

Am I right in thinking that one of the BNP's manifesto statements is to repeal the Human Rights Act?

"Hey is that Alanis Morrisette? You won't believe this, but I've got a great idea for another verse for your song 'Ironic'...wanna hear it?"

[Ankou]

i think that the judge is bemoaning an organisation that accuses everyone else of parasitic behaviour, actually harbours people � matthew single was a member of the bnp - who are doing exactly what they preach against. he is not surprised, i guess, because it is a classic case of do as i say, not as i do. i suppose any sympathy as referred to by jake, may be that those belonging to the organisation are within their right to expect that such information (names, addresses etc) should not be published on a web blog.

so he may have some sympathy for the individuals that were harassed and harangued at thier doorsteps as a result, but for the bnp itself ??? only a complete loon would do that.

[BertiWooster]

The point here with the BNP ,is that it is ok to live off the british people , ( including johnny foreigner , who has come over here and pays his/her taxes ) if you are an indigenous inhabitant .

What's wrong with that ?

[rov1200]

Imagine what would happen if someone in AB decided to print the details of every contributor and the fuss that would cause. We only contribute truthfully because of the anonimity.

If we knew his motive for publishing the BNP list it might explain why the judge only fined him �250. But this is not a financial matter but a problem of trust. The upper class believe in honour and the Judge believed the defendent had broken that trust.

[sp1814]

rov1200

The BNP are in danger of becoming a laughing stock over this.

I work in the tech services industry, and I found the story of a disgruntled ex-officer of the BNP distributing the list of members hilarious, because anyone with only a modicum of sense would know that sensitive information like that needs to be locked down in such a way that one person CANNOT just leak it.

I used to think the BNP and their supporters were dangerous...now, like a lot of other (normal/educated) people, I think they're a political sitcom.

Can't wait for the next episode...it's better than 'Outnumbered'!!!

[birdie1971]

Can you get better than �Outnumbered�?

Inspired.

[ludwig]

Good, I could do with a new pair.

[Gromit]

Thank you all for your replies.

[sp1814]

birdie1971

It's genius.

Watched one episode of the second series (by accident) and was so impressed, I went and bought the whole of the first series on DVD the next morning.