Thread: Fun with bloggers who hate their County "England"

Gareth Young is a self-appointed judge of the English Democrats who, because he was upset by Steven Uncles sometime ago, discounts all the policies adopted by members in a series of general meetings, and attempts to portray the party in an adverse light with a series of innuendos. He implies that there is something dreadful about any association, however tenuous, the EFP - as though the EFP is contagious. Not once does he explain precisely what are his professed objections to the EFP.

It should be noted that Mr Young does not belong to any political party, and he expresses great pride in not having been a member of any political party. Therefore he can attack and criticise any political party at will, safe in the knowledge that he doesn't have a political party with all its imperfections to defend. How he expects his professed support for a separate parliament for England to be effected without the use of a political party, Gareth has yet to explain.

He, and now Mr Rob and Peekay [Paul Kingsnorth] have all joined forces to attack and to demean the EDP, but they have nothing to say about the big three Brit parties who have all been complicit in creating a discriminatory situation for England but who, with their combined 95% of MPs, have presided over the biggest scandal in Westminster itself for decades. Oh no! Their strictures are reserved for the English Democrats, the major political party most likely to advance England's cause.

Their one-sided, anti-white sanctimony is such that none of them has any criticism of the dozens of 'black only' bodies with public funding which exist in England today. Oh no! Their contrived concern is not for their own people, not for true fairness and equality, not for a diversity which includes the white English, but for ensuring that not a word, not a syllable is uttered of which they in their precious wisdom do not approve.

This is the true nature of these self-appointed, unelected 'sages'. They endeavour to appear balanced and reasoned, when the facts show that they are highly selected, arbitrarily abusive and, when cornered on articular issues, move to other allegations. One has only to look at other threads here to see the intemperate insults and abuse levelled at me . . . 'idiot', 'bigot' to cite but two.

Do not be deceived. These individuals are destructive and have nothing practical or constructive to offer in place of the party they attack. If they are remotely as intelligent as they claim, they do this knowingly to impair attempts to remedy the situation of England and her people - all predicated, you understand, on the misdeeds of Steven Uncles. How unbalanced can you get? As one of the facetious sods posted in reply to me elsewhere, that tells us all we need to know.

.

Have I missed something?- or is a 'blog' not open for allcomers to read- whereas a 'forum' has members with the privacy to discuss whatever they like , without having to go public on every point they make.
To have to defend an opinion at every stage is where we have been driven as citizens- whereas spin is fed back endlessly,mostly at direct or indirect public expense (it's called politics, with a dirty 'P')

Originally Posted by teggers

Have I missed something?- or is a 'blog' not open for allcomers to read- whereas a 'forum' has members with the privacy to discuss whatever they like , without having to go public on every point they make.
To have to defend an opinion at every stage is where we have been driven as citizens- whereas spin is fed back endlessly,mostly at direct or indirect public expense (it's called politics, with a dirty 'P')

Yeah! You've missed a lot, otherwise you wouldn't need to go around - as old Youngy does - inventing rules for others. It's a sure sign of inadequacy!

Forum, shmorum, blogs, shmogs! Who cares, so long as they're interesting!

.

I invented the rules for forums??
You are obviously an anarchist who would like to have no rules whatsoever and revel in the ensuing mess.
The EU is a bit like this, in an 'anti matter' way- in that it lives by a multiplicity of rules equally confusing as your wish to be free of them- apparently!

He, and now Mr Rob and Peekay [Paul Kingsnorth] have all joined forces to attack and to demean the EDP, but they have nothing to say about the big three Brit parties who have all been complicit in creating a discriminatory situation for England but who, with their combined 95% of MPs, have presided over the biggest scandal in Westminster itself for decades. Oh no! Their strictures are reserved for the English Democrats, the major political party most likely to advance England's cause.

Their one-sided, anti-white sanctimony is such that none of them has any criticism of the dozens of 'black only' bodies with public funding which exist in England today. Oh no! Their contrived concern is not for their own people, not for true fairness and equality, not for a diversity which includes the white English, but for ensuring that not a word, not a syllable is uttered of which they in their precious wisdom do not approve.

This is the true nature of these self-appointed, unelected 'sages'. They endeavour to appear balanced and reasoned, when the facts show that they are highly selected, arbitrarily abusive and, when cornered on articular issues, move to other allegations. One has only to look at other threads here to see the intemperate insults and abuse levelled at me . . . 'idiot', 'bigot' to cite but two.

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

Let's see now:

1. If you think that I have 'nothing to say about the big three parties', you've obviously read nothing I've written for the last ten years.

2. Initially interested in the EDP when I first heard about them, I have since become repulsed by the activities of its senior people. This post is a good example of why no reasonable person would vote for you. The last straw was your alliance with the England First Party in these coming elections. Astonishingly, you ask Gareth why he objects to this. Perhaps he has a problem, as I do, with a party which advocates repatriation of non-whites and the banning of all 'non-European religions' in England (as an aside, I wonder if this includes Christianity, which is of course, like Islam, a middle eastern religion. Are we all going back to worshipping Woden and Thunor?)

3. This discussion about English politics then quickly and magically segues into a discussion about - wait for it - white people! And there it is - the real agenda exposed for all to see. Cassie is here to 'defend' white people. And that is precisely why I won't touch the EDP with a bargepole. Not because I am 'anti white' (which really would make me self-hating) but because I don't give a **** about skin colour. Note the automatic assumption, btw, that disagreeing with Cassie means I am a 'liberal self-hater' who favours positive discrimination. Note also the talk of 'their own people'; white people in other words. If I liked hearing this kind of thing I would vote for the BNP, who are also in favour of 'defending' white people and creating an English parliament and have a much better chance at the elections than the EDP. Actually I'll be running a mile from both.

4. As for being an 'unelected self-appointed sage' - which of these words doesn't also apply to you, Cassie? Apart from the last one, obviously.

At the end of the day you can have as many fights on silly forums as you like, but you are going to get nowhere in politics with a 'strategy' like this. I don't expect you to believe that, but it will prove to be true. In the meantime, I await the coming of a democratic, non-racist English party that is not run by idiots.

Originally Posted by teggers

Cassie: My first post was in answer to this-


not yours previously to your last, which I happen to generally empathise with...
PS :My post about your anachistic tendencies seems to have evaporated..

I am suitably chastened!


.