Griffin and BNP strategy

[durruti02]

Eh? I am all for people building communities, but not quaint niave and idealised ones. Are you telling me there are not thousands of empties in London? It could seem that it is you who needs to be a bit more honest about possibilities.

Here, we get beyond those who have no real need and are happy to talk about it, towards those with real need, whose actions rest in that place between necessity and desire, and who do not care where they get their housing from, or where it is, as long as they get housing.

where the fuck does 'quaint and idealised ones' come from?????? i am saying we defend what we have got and build on that .. you come out with, sorry, theoretical nonsense about globalised communities .. we have had that for a 100 years

and no there are NOT thousends of empties in london .. and there were not when you were here ..

your second sentance makes no sense ..

 

[The Black Hand]

where the fuck does 'quaint and idealised ones' come from?????? i am saying we defend what we have got and build on that .. you come out with, sorry, theoretical nonsense about globalised communities .. we have had that for a 100 years

and no there are NOT thousends of empties in london .. and there were not when you were here ..

your second sentance makes no sense ..

Sorry but there are 1000s of empties in London, and you come out with ahistorical nonsense about globalisation which shows no understanding at all of the current period. Romantisising what 'we have got' is going to get us nowhere is what I was saying...

 

[durruti02]

Sorry but there are 1000s of empties in London, and you come out with a historical nonsense about globalisation which shows no understanding at all of the current period. Romantisising what 'we have got' is going to get us nowhere is what I was saying...

there you go again ... 'romanticising' ... wtf! sorry that is rubbish .. and exposes to me again you do not understand the importance of community and of fighting to rebuild community ..

there are not thousends of empties in london .. and turn over when social housing is temporaly empty is much much lower than it used to be ..

the current period?? .. differs in terms of community from when marx and engels talk of manchester and new york?? there was more movement then than now ..

 

[The Black Hand]

there you go again ... 'romanticising' ... wtf! sorry that is rubbish .. and exposes to me again you do not understand the importance of community and of fighting to rebuild community ..

there are not thousends of empties in london .. and turn over when social housing is temporaly empty is much much lower than it used to be ..

the current period?? .. differs in terms of community from when marx and engels talk of manchester and new york?? there was more movement then than now ..

1. We live in different times now and the possibilities are therefore different (between now and 100/50 yrs ago). As for that community comment of yours I disagree (but then I would). But I do not think we are best served with building simplistic/reductionist communities (there I go again) Anyway, come out with a different critique pls. My point is that todays communities are not the simplistic one dimensional ones that orthodox leftists (eg IWCA) /people say they want to encourage. Those days are gone forever, when the 'community' worked at one workplace.... Instead, there are many communities/networks, overlaying each other. Place has lost its importance

2. There are thousands of empties in London. (and the last punctuation was FULL STOP) They maybe more efficient at disposing of them, but I was including all buildings, offices,factories, private housing stock. Anything.

3. 'The current period' differs in many many more ways than you have stated...

 

[durruti02]

1. We live in different times now and the possibilities are therefore different (between now and 100/50 yrs ago). As for that community comment of yours I disagree (but then I would). But I do not think we are best served with building simplistic/reductionist communities (there I go again) Anyway, come out with a different critique pls. My point is that todays communities are not the simplistic one dimensional ones that orthodox leftists (eg IWCA) /people say they want to encourage. Those days are gone forever, when the 'community' worked at one workplace.... Instead, there are many communities/networks, overlaying each other. Place has lost its importance

2. There are thousands of empties in London. (and the last punctuation was FULL STOP) They maybe more efficient at disposing of them, but I was including all buildings, offices,factories, private housing stock. Anything.

3. 'The current period' differs in many many more ways than you have stated...

1) and again simplistic / reductionist / one dimensional / quaint / romanticsed / nieve and idealised .. excuse me but talk about straw men and putting words into peoples mouths .. all of what you suggest is simply wrong .. you think i do not understand that communities are multi layered???

but your assertion that this is a new historical fact is not correct .. and that place has lost its importnace with the implication we should do react to that is nonsense .. you'll be onto the end of history soon at this rate ..

2) oh right! so a couple in barking should go and squat a old factory unit in barkingside .. or a low occupancy office in the west end .. it is impractical does nowt for community and you as ever ignore the importance of struggles that have collective solutions instead of individulistic ones as is squatting

3) i do not disagree that times change .. the importance of the collective does not

 

[The Black Hand]

1a) and again simplistic / reductionist / one dimensional / quaint / romanticsed / nieve and idealised .. excuse me but talk about straw men and putting words into peoples mouths .. all of what you suggest is simply wrong .. you think i do not understand that communities are multi layered???

1b)but your assertion that this is a new historical fact is not correct .. and that place has lost its importnace with the implication we should do react to that is nonsense .. you'll be onto the end of history soon at this rate ..

2) oh right! so a couple in barking should go and squat a old factory unit in barkingside .. or a low occupancy office in the west end .. it is impractical does nowt for community and you as ever ignore the importance of struggles that have collective solutions instead of individulistic ones as is squatting

3) i do not disagree that times change .. the importance of the collective does not

1a) perhaps there should be a discussion on communities then, cos I've got that feeling from others...

1b) I do not understand your para.

2)I disagree that squatting is always individualistic, they can be small communities in themselves (one large squat). Also Colin Ward showed that squatting can have a class base, and of course this would be what I would be promoting... Class struggle for housing is a collective solution, continuously, and that is what squatting can be. I do not see your 'collective solution' which you claim exists, and so I will call it utopian

3) Does the pope shit in the woods?

 

[nino_savatte]

i do not know any housing officers .. (should i??) ... that is why i ask you

and you continue to still slip and slide and deflect and ignore

you carry on ( and on and on) using the straw man that i am suggesting migrants queue jump .. [ to qoute .. "the illusion that "migrants" (as you put it) go to the top of the housing list.." ]

i am not and never have .. not once .. ever and ever .. suggested that migrants, as migrants, get any preferential treatment ever

get it?????

you then finally show us some refereneces .. which state EXACTLY what i know and understand and have been saying on here all along

that priority is given to homeless and the most needy

yes do you agree??

ok now .. so the assertion / the myth if you will have it is that this policy ( which differs form previous ones that gave more weight to local connections) implicitly favour migrants families

THIS is what is under discussion and what i ask you to comment on

so is it true??

you also ignored my question so .." how do the migrants who have social housing in london get that housing?"

Durutti, you have made your mind up that I'm lying and that "migrants" are automatically entitled to social housing. There is nothing I can do to change your mind. Therefore I will let you wallow in your ignorance.

This is a classic

i am not and never have .. not once .. ever and ever .. suggested that migrants, as migrants, get any preferential treatment ever

You're a liar.

I answered this and you could not be bothered to pay attention

you also ignored my question so .." how do the migrants who have social housing in london get that housing?

Go back and read the relevant post, dimwit.

 

[durruti02]

Durutti, you have made your mind up that I'm lying and that "migrants" are automatically entitled to social housing.

FFS .. never once have i said that " .. "migrants" are automatically entitled to social housing..." it shows how weak is your position that you resort continually to lies .. show me anywhere where i have said or even suggested this .. indeed i have consistently stated that it is NEEDS that gives PRIORITY .. and that this MAY favour migrants ..


There is nothing I can do to change your mind. Therefore I will let you wallow in your ignorance.

nonsense .. i am asking you to share your experiance .. you will not and instead continually lie

This is a classic ... You're a liar.

god you are great! .. if i am lying,( as i guess that you know i am not but whatever ),then show it!! ffs you told me my best mate was not black .. who the fuck are you to continuously tell people what they are and what they think!!


I answered this and you could not be bothered to pay attention

sorry i see you blathering about immigrants just joining the queue .. was that your answer!! .. pretty poor answer then as you rightly point out later that there is no strict queue .. allocation is based on needs/priority NOT length on a queue .. you and i know it is the same as a n e .. your sprai ned ankel won't count for a thing if theres a bomb/pile up or injuries of more needs/priority

Go back and read the relevant post, dimwit.

well if it was that then it was a bullshit response .. unless mybe i did miss something .. what post was it?

.....

 

[JimPage]

BNP Results yesterday
27.3% in Nuneaton
21.6% in Sandwell
21.3% in Barnoldswick
16.4% in Pendle

First time votes in the 3 wards other than Sandwell- vote up a modest 1.5% there.

 

[audiotech]

By-election results for June 28th 2007

Craven ward by-election, Pendle BC


Lib Dem 632
Con 260
Ind 241
BNP 237 (16.4%)
Lab 76


Previous BNP electoral history in this ward:
2004: 447 votes (21.9%)
2006: 459 votes (25.0%)

Slough ward(Nuneaton & Bedworth)

Turnout 40.57%
Labour Gain from Tories

Labour 862
BNP Alwyn Deacon 582 (27.3%)
Tories 499
Eng Dems 102
Lib Dems 83

Charlemont/Grove Vale by-election(Sandwell)

Con 870
Lab 801
BNP 544 (21.6%)
Lib/Dem 238
Greens 71

Whaddon Ward (Milton Keynes) by-election result from last night was

LAB 1108 - 43.8%
CON 914 - 36.1%
EFP 221 - 8.7% England First Party
LIB 129 - 5.1%
UKIP 109 - 4.3%
IND 49 - 1.9%

 

[nino_savatte]

.....

You're slipping and sliding around, durutti. How about coming clean? How about being a wee bit more honest for a change? You presented a 'scenario' and then asked me to comment. What you were trying to say in that 'scenario', was that, despite what I have said regarding the points system, 'migrants' are being advanced up the housing list: your posts indicate this and the tone of your query indicates this.

nonsense .. i am asking you to share your experiance .. you will not and instead continually lie

No, you aren't. You're trying to trip me up in the hope that you will be vindicated. You're a shabby trickster.

Here you contradict what you've said in the first part of your post

sorry i see you blathering about immigrants just joining the queue .. was that your answer!! .. pretty poor answer then as you rightly point out later that there is no strict queue .. allocation is based on needs/priority NOT length on a queue .. you and i know it is the same as a n e .. your sprai ned ankel won't count for a thing if theres a bomb/pile up or injuries of more needs/priority

Where did I say that there was "no strict queue" and what the fuck does that phrase mean? You either won't or you refuse to pay attention to what I've said and you've made up the replies in your wee head.

Wtf does a "sprained ankle" have to do with anything? You're off your heid, pal.

 

[durruti02]

You're slipping and sliding around, durutti. How about coming clean? How about being a wee bit more honest for a change? You presented a 'scenario' and then asked me to comment. What you were trying to say in that 'scenario', was that, despite what I have said regarding the points system, 'migrants' are being advanced up the housing list: your posts indicate this and the tone of your query indicates this.


again you lie .. i have, to repeat again, NEVER EVER EVER said migrants are being ' advanced' .. do you really have so much of a problem reading?? it is quite clear what i am saying to anyone but you and i'll repeat what i said couple of days ago " .. i have consistently stated that it is NEEDS that gives PRIORITY .. and that this MAY favour migrants .."

why not try and reply to this??

No, you aren't. You're trying to trip me up in the hope that you will be vindicated. You're a shabby trickster.

a shabby trickster! .. youhave occassionally a nioce turn of phrase

Here you contradict what you've said in the first part of your post

how?? you know , give reasons and an argument ...ffs you were an FE lecturer you must have said this enough to your studnets mate!

Where did I say that there was "no strict queue" and what the fuck does that phrase mean? You either won't or you refuse to pay attention to what I've said and you've made up the replies in your wee head.

er no again .. it is not that complicated really what i am saying, that housing allocation APPEARS to be based on needs not queueing or being local etc . and i am asking you with your experuinace to actually comment

Wtf does a "sprained ankle" have to do with anything? You're off your heid, pal.

again quite simple mate .. i am drawing an analogy with being in A n E .. if others have worse injuries you will be left waiting .. yep?

what i would have thought you would have done with this housing thing is actually deal with the scenarios i have put up .. MC5 made a good contribution that showed that small flats wil not get given to families , attica agreed with the idea that it is needs based but you conistently refuse to share your knowledge of the system .. why??

it does not look good for you ..

p.s this was one of the scenarios

a " young local couple with secure (if cramped) accomodation at their mums and dads will NOT get housed and will see immigrants ( from wherever) get housed IF they are in 'greater need' e.g. childen "

the other was about a family with cramped accomodation will not get housed before a homelss family in greater need

tbh i think the answer to these is fairly obvious as attica has a stated .. he question then is by how much does this favour migrant families?

you also still did not honestly answer the question ' how do migrants get housed?'

you said they go on the queue lke everyone else but this is untenable answer as the queue is soo big/long no migrant would ever get housed then would they?

 

[durruti02]

1a) perhaps there should be a discussion on communities then, cos I've got that feeling from others...

1b) I do not understand your para.

2)I disagree that squatting is always individualistic, they can be small communities in themselves (one large squat). Also Colin Ward showed that squatting can have a class base, and of course this would be what I would be promoting... Class struggle for housing is a collective solution, continuously, and that is what squatting can be. I do not see your 'collective solution' which you claim exists, and so I will call it utopian

1a) while i do not dispute that that would be a good thread i am disappointed that you can not make an apology for putting half a dozen words in my mouth .. i do not assume what you believe .. i would appreciate it if you did likewise..

1b) you appear to be asserting that we are in a differrent historical times re migration .. i was commenting that tbh 100 years ago was little differrent .. you also stated catagorically that place has lost its importnace with argument or reason .. this maybe what the bosses want us to think .. it can not be what a progressive thinks

2) rarely is squating collective .. this is not the 194ts .. as ward comments on .. and you think tenants fghting for some sort of control of where they live is 'utopian'???? i am shocked

 

[The Black Hand]

1a) while i do not dispute that that would be a good thread i am disappointed that you can not make an apology for putting half a dozen words in my mouth .. i do not assume what you believe .. i would appreciate it if you did likewise..

1b) you appear to be asserting that we are in a differrent historical times re migration .. i was commenting that tbh 100 years ago was little differrent .. you also stated catagorically that place has lost its importnace with argument or reason .. this maybe what the bosses want us to think .. it can not be what a progressive thinks

2) rarely is squating collective .. this is not the 194ts .. as ward comments on .. and you think tenants fghting for some sort of control of where they live is 'utopian'???? i am shocked

I am not always arguing directly against you, others are brought in cos others are reading and there is some baggage (i agree a conference format is better for discussion than the web).

I am though arguing against reductionism of any sort, and that includes people like the IWCA who bang on about localism in the age of globalisation - the defining character of the epoch they have got completely wrong. 15 years of banging on about it has got them precisely nowhere, their class struggles have been meaningless and non effective. For a thinking Marxist (soc or @) this should be enough time to realise that their theory is at best utopian and they need to rethink - but as they are old left I do not expect that anything will change...

We are in way different times to 100 years ago in terms of economics and migration in the UK. I do not think place has lost its importance, as I live in a place with a large class pedigree 'Northernism' is part of class consciousness and part of life. BUT, I am emphasising that there are no outsiders in the working class, that IWCA primitive localism is a formulation that cannot work in this epoch (it is not enough by a long way, and that is if you accept 'Town Hall Leninism' is the way to go - which many do not).

I think squatting communties have and can again be collective, some of it isn't, true, but that doesn't mean it won't be again - especially if things get a little more desperate on the housing front in the uk. So 'tenants fighting for some form of control' in relation to their council or housing assoc landlord is your position is it. Well, it can be utopian though not necessarily. I think more control is a better thing but it is only one struggle for those already in housing. The class struggle for housing, even locally, can be bigger than that. I think your class struggles should continue...

 

[nino_savatte]

what i would have thought you would have done with this housing thing is actually deal with the scenarios i have put up .. MC5 made a good contribution that showed that small flats wil not get given to families , attica agreed with the idea that it is needs based but you conistently refuse to share your knowledge of the system .. why??

it does not look good for you ..

p.s this was one of the scenarios

a " young local couple with secure (if cramped) accomodation at their mums and dads will NOT get housed and will see immigrants ( from wherever) get housed IF they are in 'greater need' e.g. childen "

the other was about a family with cramped accomodation will not get housed before a homelss family in greater need

tbh i think the answer to these is fairly obvious as attica has a stated .. he question then is by how much does this favour migrant families?

you also still did not honestly answer the question ' how do migrants get housed?'

you said they go on the queue lke everyone else but this is untenable answer as the queue is soo big/long no migrant would ever get housed then would they?

it does not look good for you ..

Au contraire, it doesn't look good for you.

Here you demonstrate your inability to read anything that does not support your already ossified beliefs.

you conistently refuse to share your knowledge of the system .. why??

I have told you how the system works and you refused to accept it. No doubt it is because I said it and not torres or one of your mates.

If you don't believe me, go to your local town hall...or do you think they are conspiring to hide the facts from you?

You're fucking dim.

 

[Groucho]

probably him, although solidarity claim to have suspended harrington in an arguement, unsurprisingly, about money....

'Solidarity', the fascist 'union', has split assunder. The three man executive has split and there are now two opposing 'leaderships' of a 'union' that has almost as many leadership factions as members. The split is over a number of issues including how overtly and obviously affiliated to the BNP it should be, but mostly over the fact that the three unelected (but then there are no members to elect them) leaders hate each other.

 

[nino_savatte]

'Solidarity', the fascist 'union', has split assunder. The three man executive has split and there are now two opposing 'leaderships' of a 'union' that has almost as many leadership factions as members. The split is over a number of issues including how overtly and obviously affiliated to the BNP it should be, but mostly over the fact that the three unelected (but then there are no members to elect them) leaders hate each other.

I'm loving it!

 

[durruti02]

'Solidarity', the fascist 'union', has split assunder. The three man executive has split and there are now two opposing 'leaderships' of a 'union' that has almost as many leadership factions as members. The split is over a number of issues including how overtly and obviously affiliated to the BNP it should be, but mostly over the fact that the three unelected (but then there are no members to elect them) leaders hate each other.

he he

 

[durruti02]

Au contraire, it doesn't look good for you.

Here you demonstrate your inability to read anything that does not support your already ossified beliefs.


I have told you how the system works and you refused to accept it. No doubt it is because I said it and not torres or one of your mates.

If you don't believe me, go to your local town hall...or do you think they are conspiring to hide the facts from you?

You're fucking dim.

you still will not answer the question will you!


p.s what do you make of this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/02/nmigrant102.xml

 

[becky p]

you still will not answer the question will you!


p.s what do you make of this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/02/nmigrant102.xml

200,000 is not that many really though is it durruti02.But it has had much more effect in some areas than others.

 

[durruti02]

200,000 is not that many really though is it durruti02.But it has had much more effect in some areas than others.

yes the figure was originally said to be 1% but then they said it was 5% .. so no not massive as a total but in the context, partly as you say it is not the same everywhere, yes it is very large number ..

i did not pick up though whether it refers to refugees or just economic migrants .. so maybe it is not a relevent figure at all!

 

[nino_savatte]

you still will not answer the question will you!


p.s what do you make of this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/02/nmigrant102.xml

Interestingly enough, there was absolutely no mention of that in the programme. Did you watch it? I didn't think so. How do you think immigrants get social housing? They apply for it like everyone else and they live in temporary accommodation - which a lot of 'native born' applicants refuse. Do you know how long some folk stay in temporary accommodation? Do you understand what is meant by the phrase "temporary accommodation"?

What do you make of that?

ETA: The programme also discussed the lack of of new build social housing: another problem that seems to have been lightly dismissed by you in order to promote your anti-immigrant thesis.

 

[nino_savatte]

yes the figure was originally said to be 1% but then they said it was 5% .. so no not massive as a total but in the context, partly as you say it is not the same everywhere, yes it is very large number ..

i did not pick up though whether it refers to refugees or just economic migrants .. so maybe it is not a relevent figure at all!

Migrant workers are not entitled to social housing. But you keep insisting that they are, in spite of the what the law says.

 

[durruti02]

Migrant workers are not entitled to social housing. But you keep insisting that they are, in spite of the what the law says.

and so who are these people tevor macdonald refers to?

no i have not ever said that migrnats who have ben hee a short time are entitled .. but migrant workers after 5 years are entitled to housing arnt they??

why do you not just be useful and go thru the facts for us?? with references ..

 

[durruti02]

Interestingly enough, there was absolutely no mention of that in the programme. Did you watch it? I didn't think so. How do you think immigrants get social housing? They apply for it like everyone else and they live in temporary accommodation - which a lot of 'native born' applicants refuse. Do you know how long some folk stay in temporary accommodation? Do you understand what is meant by the phrase "temporary accommodation"?

What do you make of that?

ETA: The programme also discussed the lack of of new build social housing: another problem that seems to have been lightly dismissed by you in order to promote your anti-immigrant thesis.

p.s. i never got even that far but yes mnanypof my mates had shitty temp accomodation for years .. and so??

and for gods sake!! i'm a delegate a DCH next week and you accuse me o not bing interested in social housing LOL

but it still does not answer how migrants do get social housing .. 200,000 a year .. is that a millionover 5years?

 

[audiotech]

and so who are these people tevor macdonald refers to?

no i have not ever said that migrnats who have ben hee a short time are entitled .. but migrant workers after 5 years are entitled to housing arnt they??

No, they are entitled to apply for housing, but with more conditions on them than other applicants for housing. There has also been murmerings amongst Labour ministers of taking even this right to apply away, to hide their lack of providing decent homes for all.

 

[durruti02]

No, they are entitled to apply for housing, but with more conditions on them than other applicants for housing. There has also been murmerings amongst Labour ministers of taking even this right to apply away, to hide their lack of providing decent homes for all.

can you help us with who the 200,00 are?

 

[audiotech]

can you help us with who the 200,00 are?

Sorry, I only have two bedrooms here.

 

[nino_savatte]

and so who are these people tevor macdonald refers to?

no i have not ever said that migrnats who have ben hee a short time are entitled .. but migrant workers after 5 years are entitled to housing arnt they??

why do you not just be useful and go thru the facts for us?? with references ..

Trevor McDonald didn't present the report. You continue to tie yourself up in knots in a desperate attempt to prove me wrong. Migrants workers come here for a short while and then go back to their country of origin. It would appear that you still have trouble distinguishing between a "migrant worker", an "immigrant" and a "refugee". Furthermore, you appear to be totally ignorant with regards to the status of migrants from the new EU countries, because you continue to suggest that they can come here and go straight to the top of the housing list and claim benefits. They can do neither of those things.

You can Google this stuff btw. Why the hell should I do your job for you? You'll be demanding that I wipe your arse next.

Carry on lying and digging yourself ever deeper.

 

[nino_savatte]

p.s. i never got even that far but yes mnanypof my mates had shitty temp accomodation for years .. and so??

and for gods sake!! i'm a delegate a DCH next week and you accuse me o not bing interested in social housing LOL

but it still does not answer how migrants do get social housing .. 200,000 a year .. is that a millionover 5years?

You continue to lie: migrant workers are not entitled to social housing.

I think you're totally ignorant with regards to social housing: how the system works and how the lack of new build social housing has led to a crisis....that you blame on immigrants. How utterly shabby.