I see the BBC report on the Church of England’s decision to stop clergy from being members of the BNP provides an entirely one-sided analysis of the issue. To be clear; I have NO time whatsover for the BNP but I do accept they are a lawful political party. This clear discrimination against them does not meet with the approval of all Anglicans and it would have been nice for the BBC to provide space for those who take issue with this decision. Some people might equally think that a government which has abandoned our national borders, engaged in reckless economic policies, failed in its duty to our armed forces and prostrated itself to Islam is JUST as morally repugnant as the BNP. But the BBC would never consider that possibility or give space to those who might think it. The BNP is the great pariah party for the established political left and so when a decision like this is taken by the General Synod it is celebrated by the BBC.

Bookmark the permalink.

59 Responses to HEAVENS ABOVE.

  1. Jon says:

    Are they also banned from being members of the SWP? Or the Communist Party of Great Britain?


  2. oh bugger says:

    Oh bugger… I promised myself a couple of years back that every time they do something like this I will donate another £100 to the BNP as a small effort to fight back against these infringements on free speach. I can see the runup to the Euro elections is going to get expensive for me.

    To the outraged liberals who will read this and use it as a stick with which to beat this blog, I should point out that I am not a BNP voter, but I am a supporter of free speach. First they came for the BNP but I did nothing..etc.


  3. Jason says:

    My apologies for the off-topic post, the General thread seems too far down for this corker.

    SA TV make ‘Bush is dead’ Bushism

    This example of BBC bias is so clumsy and downright infantile the question must be asked: is the Beeb assigning stories to 6th form students now?

    So a South African TV station accidentally broadcasts a test banner which said that George Bush was dead. Fair enough, that’s a story (although certainly not important enough to appear on the front page of the world news page).

    The moron who wrote this piece obviously suffers from an acute case of Bush Derangement Syndrome, one which should be addressed by a qualified psychiatrist as soon as possible. Are these idiots at the Beeb STILL so desperate to direct sneers at the ex-President that they’ll do it this blatantly and kak-handedly?

    How a technical broadcast error could possibly be construed to resemble what BDS sufferers so smugly call a “Bushism” is beyond me. Ah, but the BBC explain for us:

    “George Bush was well-known for making mistakes when speaking, leading to the phrase “Bushism”.

    He famously said he had been “misunderestimated”. “

    Of course! Mistakenly running the wrong banner on live TV is akin in every way to mispronouncing a word, isn’t it? Even by the BBC’s ridiculously low standards of journalism, this is a humdinger. The relevance to the story is so weak they might as well have just posted a story with the headline “Bush is a dumb cowboy hick who can’t speak” and forgotten about trying to shoehorn it into another story.

    End the Beeb. End it now.


  4. Pat says:

    There was a discussion on the Today programme this morning (Tues) just before 7. The interviewees were a lady named Alison (not sure of surname – Rolf?) and Canon Ivor Smith Cameron, a member of the black clergy. It would have been an interesting discussion but the Canon constantly interrupted the lady speaking and as I recall was only once asked by the interviewer to let her have her say. He took no notice, it was a pointless exercise.


  5. Brummie Dave says:

    I see that this ban was proposed by an employee of the Metropolitan Police, and supported by Sir Ian Blair.
    How nice to see the police showing such similar political impartiality as the BBC.


  6. archduke says:

    hmm… church of england all worried about the BNP

    and yet no comment on the likes of this?


    (warning : not for the squemish. execution in iran…)


  7. caveman says:

    The Christian churches helped to get Mugabe in through support from the World Council of Churches. So who are they to preach (if you will pardon the expression)?


  8. archduke says:

    can somebody point out to the brain dead morons in the church of england that there already exists nationalist parties in the UK – some of whom have power.

    such as the SNP, Sinn Fein, Plaid Cymru.

    only when its an ENGLISH nationalist party that it seems to be a problem.

    therefore, the question that should be asked is – why is the C of E established, when it clearly isn’t nationalist? and if it isnt nationalist , then it is clear that the C of E is one thing only – it is a parasite.

    we are now in alice in wonderland territory – where the church of ENGLAND has turned socialist and wants to bend over backward to Islam.

    Prince Charley boy has a lot to answer for.

    time for a republic.
    (sorry David!… )


  9. Jack Hughes says:

    Not sure if this is a great example of BBC bias. It would be nice if they included the arguments of those who opposed the ban. But it seems like the synod was very largely in favour of the ban.

    At least the BBC have a link to the BNP website nowadays – they had a policy in the past of never including a link to the BNP. (The only party to get this non-linking treatment).

    A few years ago someone said that the CofE was like a Guardian editorial sprinkled with holy water. No change there.


  10. Jack Hughes says:

    The Cof E has lost its way altogether. People are looking for strong Christian leadership in these times and instead they get Catweazle daydreaming about shariah law. And a future King who’s not sure if he really wants to be a muslim or a tampon.

    And don’t forget that Catweazle was appointed by Tony Blair who promptly quit to join the Roman Catholics.


  11. archduke says:

    i presume the c of e will break off all contact with other fascists like Hitz Ut Tahrir and the Gazan Hamasoloons…

    nah – thought not.


  12. weirdvis says:

    Beats me how they can enforce such a decision. Since the BNP isn’t an outlawed organisation isn’t banning membership an infringement of basic human rights and an extremely obnoxious type of political censorship?

    I think we should be told…


  13. disillusioned_german says:

    Well, at least you’re safe from Geert Wilders, people:



  14. weirdvis says:

    Jackboot Smith has lost the plot. It isn’t Wilders that threatens the UK.


  15. martin says:

    Hmm. Can someone remind me which religion hacks off victims heads, uses children as suicide bombers and blows up trains and buses?


  16. archduke says:

    weirdvis | 10.02.09 – 11:07 pm

    well we do have a police force that runs half a mile up the road AWAY from “gaza” protestors..

    there used to be the concept of the british bobbie, which i highly respected.

    sadly, that is no longer the case.



  17. Anna says:

    “To be clear; I have NO time whatsover for the BNP ….”

    Yes we know that David, every time you comment on them you make this statement. Why not just run it as a banner across this site and a tangled web, save you constantly harping on about it.

    I notice you do not have a similar disclaimer when talking about other political parties, even those that have convicted terrorists and murderers amongst their ranks. Still, at least these other people are not racist eh, they just killed people.


  18. public teat says:

    re:SA TV

    isnt the connection obvious?

    The transmission error was a reported as a ‘misbroadcast’… and that seems almost identical to the Bushism word ‘misunderestimated’ (well in the swivelling eyes of Beeboid loon, its close enough).

    Voila!… a reason to dredge up the thicko Texan’s past linguistic sins.


  19. Anonymous says:

    “we are now in alice in wonderland territory – where the church of ENGLAND has turned socialist and wants to bend over backward to Islam.”

    Wrong direction old chap.


  20. Miv Tucker says:

    Jason –

    Re the BBC’s report on SATV and Bush: it doesn’t surprise me in the least.

    Even though Labour won the election in 1997, you might have supposed that it was the Tories who’d actually won, such was the level of criticism (that continues to this very hour, really) being directed against them by the BBC, quite as if they, not Labour, were in government.


  21. Dick the Prick says:

    Maybe they’re right??


  22. dave says:

    One must must the disclaimer “I have no time for the BNP”, as it is no longer what you say so much as what you may omit to say.

    May I say, “I have no time for the BNP”, so please do not come a knocking on my door tonight.

    I am not a racist. Please do not burn me.



  23. Anonymous says:

    “As Britain’s government and banks congratulate themselves on the stunning growth of sharia banking in the UK, do any of them have the slightest understanding of what they are doing?”


  24. Niallster says:

    I can only re-iterate the most intelligent comment above:

    ‘First they came for the BNP and I did nothing’.


  25. TedN says:

    Off topic, but the open thread is so far down..

    I was amused in a sad way by how the World Service played the stock market fall today in the wake of Geitner’s announcing his new toxic assets plan.

    In the US, most reporting seems to be assuming cause & effect: The market tanked because it didn’t like the plan.

    The World Service uses “even though”. Things are so bad that the market tanked “even though” a brilliant plan had just been announced.


  26. Michael Taylor says:

    Look at it this way: the BBC plainly has no objections to denying people a living on the grounds of their political beliefs, particularly if that living is made in the public sector. Cf Carol Thatcher, and now this.

    OK, we may think this is not just authoritarian injustice, but totalitarian injustice. But let that pass.

    I can think of a really good application of this principle: viz, the sacking of any and all BBC personnel who are or have been members of the Labour Party. Plainly, people who hold such abhorrent and dangerous views about liberty and freedom of expression can have no place in a State Broadcaster as we try to decontaminate the radioactive wasteland that the next government will inherit.


  27. mikewineliberal says:

    Coverage of both sides of the debate were covered on Radio 4 throughout the day. However, on this:

    “Some people might equally think that a government which has … blah blah…. is JUST as morally repugnant as the BNP. But the BBC would never consider that possibility or give space to those who might think it.”

    You’re right. Perhaps that’s because these people would form a very small and stupid group who shouldn’t be allowed air space.

    The CoE bans women from holding high office in its ranks of course, as well as gay clergy. Buts it is banning members of an openly racist party that gets David frothing.


  28. Robert says:

    MWL: nice to see you’re back defending the BBC. But why were you so quiet over the last few days, when we discussed:
    a) BBC downplaying of Jacquie Smith debacle
    b) new poll showing Labour collapse ignored
    c) John Reith Spins in his Grave’s listing of BBC-Labour party affiliations (including the Beeb’s links to ‘Reprieve’)
    d) overtly partial presentation of the Ethiopean terrorist (err, ‘British victim of Guantanamo Bay’)?
    Great to have you back, by the way!


  29. weirdvis says:

    Yahoo News article:

    “The motion received support from the Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu and the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams. Dr Sentamu told the Synod he was a member of the Baganda tribe. But he said: “As a Christian, I joined another tribe, it is the tribe of Jesus Christ, and in that tribe all are welcome.”

    Er, is there a definition of “ALL” that I’ve missed somewhere down the line?

    This is shameful. While I don’t have much time for the BNP they are still a legal organisation. All this stupid C of E ban is going to do is make a lot of ordinary people angry. People that have already been politically disenfranchised by the major parties. What comes next? Do they put a ban on members of the congregation being right wing supporters too?

    All this is going to do is push people towards the BNP, not away from it. Well done that man with the beard!


  30. martin says:

    mikewineliberal: Perhaps you might ask your beeboid mates about how women are treated by Islam?


  31. Allan@Aberdeen says:

    Most of you may not be aware of this but in Glasgow on Monday night there was a “good-natured snowball fight between four white men aged around 20 and some Asian youths aged 14 – 16”. This was as reported by BBC Scotland but not on the national news. The reason is that a car full of ‘Asian’ mne drew up, and the men got out and beat-up the whites with clubs causing all four to be admitted to hospital with severe injuries. It is not yet known whether the whites were members of the BNP but, if they were, did they deserve to get their heads smashed in.


  32. Eric says:

    For want of a better thread to put this in…

    On the Toady prog this morning, did anyone catch Professor Danny Dorling from Sheffield University talking about the long-term impacts of unemployment. Given that he was talking about health risks and statistics, I was slightly puzzled by his references to “people who couldn’t find work under the Thatcher government” and the idea that the 1980s recession was the first major “depression” (sic) post-war, ignoring the 1947 recession and the catastrophic stagflationary slump of the 1970s.

    Ten seconds on Google revealed that Professor Dorling is a) not an epidemiologist but a geographer b) a contributor to the Guardian and the New Statesman and c) a self-professed Labour voter.


  33. Grant says:

    The BNP should retaliate by banning its members from joining the Church of England.


  34. vicky says:

    Buts it is banning members of an openly racist party that gets David frothing.
    mikewine(not very)liberal | 11.02.09 – 7:37 am

    and you furiously masturbating over your cornflakes.


  35. jp says:

    OT Not a thing as far as I can see on Geert Wilders being banned from the UK on the beeb website


  36. mikewineliberal says:

    Robert | 11.02.09 – 8:03 am

    What’s it go to do with you? I’ll post when I like, and on what I like.


  37. Beness says:

    Breaking News on Sky: Deep concern over evidence given to the home affairs select committee by Boris Johnson.

    Not sure quite what this entails but expect the BBC to start cranking this up any time soon.


  38. mikewineliberal says:

    vicky | 11.02.09 – 9:17 am

    I much prefer Splenda.


  39. charlie buoy says:


    My opinion, for what it’s worth, is that you on this blog, (to quote your words), form part of a very small and stupid group who shouldn’t be allowed air space. The only problem is that opinions are like ar…..es, everybody has got one, but you seem to talk out of yours.


  40. JohnA says:


    The point is that the BBC under-reports how women are treated in Islamic countries. It glosses over this sort of stuff – failing to report specific incidents may be OK, but failing to report that these are part of a pattern is the BBCturning a blind eye to medieval cruelty :



  41. mikewineliberal says:

    charlie buoy | 11.02.09 – 10:07 am

    Ouch that hurts.

    Better a ringpiece than a another ant in the B-BBC hill.


  42. Muslim Wars says:

    the stunning growth of sharia banking in the UK

    muslims can’t get a mortgage because their religion does not allow lending and charging interest –
    Easy! get a lawyer, change the wording of the mortgage and call it a sharia mortgage, sorry, sharia banking.

    muslims cannot commit adultery:
    just have as many wives as you want – kids even if it takes your fancy – there is a good precedent.
    We will gather in a crowd and hurl hundreds of stones at your head until it cracks open. The we will say ‘Praise Alah!”


  43. Muslim Wars says:

    – 10-15% of the vote in elections
    – win council seats.
    no BBC coverage, except negative

    – 3% ? completely failed as a party
    they have practically merged with the BBC

    disclaimer: I have no……etc etc as per the others above

    Message to the BNP: as a non-Jew I cannot understand your ridiculous hostility towards the Jews – it makes you look like you are friends with the exreme muslims as they take a similar position to yourselves. I have some news for you: socialists are trying to take over the world, muslims are trying to take over the world, Jews are not. They might be trying to get rich, but it is not the same thing.


  44. Zevilyn says:

    The BNP would no doubt point out to you that the Jews like slaughtering British people as much as the Muslims.

    Given that history it would be unwise of the British to trust people who have a history of butchering us.


  45. Nick says:

    MWL, how about some reasoned, intelligent comments (yes you have made some in the past) rather than starting the mud slinging? I think you might be becoming a bit of a troll…


  46. Rapture of the father says:

    Muslim wars good post but please check your facts about bnp policies.

    I understand that the BNP stands up for the jews a great deal of the time.

    They also have jewish council members

    However the MSM has for years deliberately mis-informed of course championed by the bbc


  47. Robert says:

    Mike, 9.33am. I think everyone can draw their own conclusions then…


  48. Cockney says:

    “I understand that the BNP stands up for the jews a great deal of the time.”

    This may be a discrepency between published BNP policy and the views of its supporters. The BNP of course is officially not racist either. I haven’t taken any surveys of political membership but there is a noticeable correlation between the amount of “Spurs are on their way to Auschwitz” chants and hissing noises at any Tottenham game and the BNP membership of the area from which the oppo derive thier support.

    It’s nice to know from MW that Jews are universally great people though, just as Muslims are all evil. For a minute there I was getting tempted by ridiculous concepts like taking individuals as I find them…


  49. mikewineliberal says:

    Muslim Wars | 11.02.09 – 12:00 pm

    “cannot understand your ridiculous hostility towards the Jews”

    Then you know nothing of the history of facist parties in the UK. Cable Street ring any bells? The BNP are direct relations of Mosley and his goons.

    Nick | 11.02.09 – 12:25 pm

    My post said, in rebuttal of David’s post, “Coverage of both sides of the debate were covered on Radio 4 throughout the day.”

    David Vance in classic style is using the pretext of BBC bias (of which there is none in this instance) to grandstand on an issue he has wider views on. He does the same with the Geert Wilders issue elsewhere, and with posts passim on NI, gays etc etc.


  50. Muslim Wars says:

    I was getting tempted by ridiculous concepts like taking individuals as I find them…

    Well don’t get tempted because it is a ridiculous notion that an individual muslim is allowed individual views.

    Muslims are, in fact, more scared of standing out of line than any other group.

    As you know, for example, death is the official penalty for those who leave the religion

    Look at the FITNA fim (linked to inside the blog Where’s Geert’ above)
    Watch the speech makers.
    Then watch the crowd.
    Then come back and tell me you can see individuals.

    How long would one last in that mob who stuck his hand up and said , ‘aren’t you being a bit extreme, mr imaan?’