Saturday, February 6, 2010

About Friggin' Time!

After all the evasiveness and deceptive tactics the Bishop's been employing, he finally decided to respond to my queries regarding cribbing chunks of material from BNP sources.

Unfortunately, he's pared down what I said to one, simple, ambiguous line:
Do you have any sympathy or affiliation towards the Party? - Anthony Hogg, Australia.
That's a tiny sliver of what I wrote, as you'd be aware from my previous postings on the matter. The Party I referred to, was of course, the British National Party (BNP). Once again, here's how they're described on Wikipedia (footnotes omitted):
The BNP seeks to restore the overwhelmingly white ethnicity of Britain that existed prior to 1948 through legal means, including "firm but voluntary incentives for immigrants and their descendants to return home", and the repeal of anti-discrimination legislation. It believes that there are significant differences between races. The party is ostracised by mainstream political parties in the UK.
Thus, his response is deliberately out of context with what I wrote. Even though the Bishop claims that he has
absolutely no faith in the political system and suspect I would be found unacceptable to any party which approached me today. I am content with that situation.
It still doesn't explain why he a) commentated on a political figure in the first place and b) stole chunks of his "opinion" from the right-wing BNP blog.

Clearly, he's being evasive and deceptive. Again.

But, I'll play along with his sick little game. So, here's my follow-up comment:

This should be good. At this rate, I might as well get a bloody Twitter account for this blog.

No comments:


Related Posts with Thumbnails