http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/

I am finding it rather interesting. You might well not agree with what the writer says, but he says it pretty well, I think. He also has some mouthwatering pictures of fine food on the side.

No I was not present when that occurred but I know all about it and I am really shocked by it. I could not believe my eyes when I saw the picture of the Times reporter being ejected from the conference. Yes, he deserved it, but that is not the point, there was nothing he could possibly have written which would be as damaging as that picture.

That particular journalist specialises in attending BNP events and then lying about them. He was asked to leave, refused and the security officers ejected him a bit too roughly. However, it looks absolutely awful. The BNP need tough security people because there is always a serious threat of violence from the Communists who regularly attack BNP gatherings, but unfortunately those men were too tough.

We despair over such stupidity. It gives the opposition a very negative immage to use against us.

The BNP is the only hope the country has, but they need to learn about politics.

So, there you have it from an intelligent member of the BNP, one who evidently was not present at this particular event, but that is pretty familiar with events overall.

In many respects, politics is a far less civil affair than it was 50 years ago. At that time, a man campaigning for office would travel from place to place, stop to make a speech, and those who were interested would gather to hear him and those who were not would simply go on about their business in most cases.It was rare to have speakers disrupted; people wanted to hear what they had to say, so that they coulld decide how to vote in November, and the people had enough respect for each other to allow everybody to listen. This is not so any longer.

It appears to me that the UK is much further advanced down this road of uncivility than the US is, although we are struggling to catch up. For generations, it has been accepted practice in Parliament to make ad hominem attacks, etc. a rather vile practice, something we are only now seeing with regularity in America. You will recall the threat from the muzzie “peer” Lord whatever, to have 10,000 muzzies demonstrate in the streets outside Parliament. That was a genuine threat of violence against Parliament itself. We have not yet had a member of Congress threaten to have 10,000 of his personal guard invade the Capital grounds, but it is probably coming.

My point in all of this is simply that rough handling is becoming a much more common event, and I think the British are further down that road than we are. Therefore I suggest that what the BNP did was not that surprising, but rather fits into the general picture of the world, and the UK in particular.

This is however an incorrect statement and based on non Quranic facts. You can not say that cause you have no facts to present. This is based on Sunni/Shia doctrine and not Qurnic.

You also seem to want to marginalyze the Quran when it comes to talking about Muhammad or Islam. So in that sense you and the Sects are equal. Both want to marginalyze the Quran from any topic concerning Muhammad and both rely on the same oral sources to make judgements about Muhammad.

Only the Quran speaks for Islam just like only the Gospel speaks for Jesus. Yes, we are adversraies, you are a Trinitarian Marxist trotskyist Neocon revolutionary and I am a follower of the Gospel.

Bid difference.

Torah, Gospel and Quran is from God and Talmud, Trinity and Sunnah is from man. So who do you trust?

Quran is peace!

Everything you say about Sarah Palin is no doubt true (I am not aware of some of the things you say about her with regard to Buchanan, but that is just my lack of knowledge.)

While I think that there is no doubt that Cheney has the executive experience to do the job, I don’t think he could possibly win an election. He was enormously unpopular during the Bush Presidency, even more than W I think. He was often characterized as the evil driver behind all the “bad things” that Bush did. I don’t think he would have a prayer of a chance.

I really disagree with you strongly about Huckabee. I find him absolutely frightening. I think he is extremely pro-illegal alien, and he demonstrated remarkably bad judgment in releasing convicts will he was governor of Arkansas. He has confused Christianity with moral muddy thinking and softness; they are not the same at all, but the Huck can’t tell the difference. I will campaign against him for all I’m worth if he is the candidate. What an idiot!

Romney seems fully qualified, but he just does not attract a following. There are probably at least 1000 people that well qualified, but none of them can attract the attention required to get elected. They don’t have the charisma. He would be a fine way to lose the election.

I voted for Ron Paul in the 2008 caucus, and I think he would do a world of good for this country. I just don’t think he can get elected, and I’m pretty sure he knows that.

This is why I asked you to name three of those great prospects for me since we don’t need Sarah Palin. I can’t see any of them. So I am back to square one in terms of having an electable candidate. She is the only one I see at this time.

I hear a few people mention Scott Brown’s name, but he just appeared on the national scene. We don’t know anything at all about him. He has not even had the brief exposure that Sarah Palin has gotten. I think that would be utter insanity. The last time we picked an utter unknown, we got The Won. That has not worked out too well.

You do surprise me, Howard, with your assertion, “…it is not remotely true that recent generations of American politicians generally lacked integrity” I have difficulty understanding how you can say that of folks who go to Washington, take an oath to abide by the Constitution, and then act utterly contrary to it. They resent it when it is pointed out to them that they are doing this. What was it Nancy Pelosi said recently when ask about the Constitutional justification for national health care? I think the quote was, “Seriously? Seriously? Seriously?” To my mind, that lacks integrity. I could go on and on in this vein, talking about the misdeeds of Congressmen, and how I see that as a lack of integrity and a violation of the public trust in sending them to Washington.

At the state level, we could talk about Rod Blagoviech (sp?) in Illinois, or the numerous governors of Louisiana. Perhaps we could talk about state government in NJ, another garden spot. Or maybe we could talk about city government in Washington, DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Camden, Chicago, etc. Do you really see integrity in all of these places, Howard? Could you explain that to me? One of us needs new glasses.

Rendar, you’re kind of rude but, whatever.

There is almost always someone more knowledgable than the politician who wins the election, but that person is not the person who is able to win the election and get elected. Getting elected is the necessary first step. After that, any reasonably competent person can find the more competent people to serve as advisors.

The thing that Sarah Palin is offering that has been virtually unheard of in recent generations of American politicans is INTEGRITY. We simply have not seen this in the land in so long we hardly recognize it or understand it any more. It is a rare and endangered species. And at the same time, it resonants with the American people like nothing else has in the past 35 years.

- TD

- TD