Tory Donor Lord Bamford Funds The Reform...
News0 min ago
Was Nick Griffin in the wrong to tweet the home address of the 'B&B gay couple'?
Cards on the table - I think he was wrong and very misguided to do this. His tweet read:
[i]''So Messrs Black & Morgan, at (their address). A British Justice team will come up to Huntington & give you a...
''...bit of drama by way of reminding you that an English couple's home is their castle. Say No to heterophobia!''[i]
By doing this, isn't he explicitly putting this retired couple in real danger?
[i]''So Messrs Black & Morgan, at (their address). A British Justice team will come up to Huntington & give you a...
''...bit of drama by way of reminding you that an English couple's home is their castle. Say No to heterophobia!''[i]
By doing this, isn't he explicitly putting this retired couple in real danger?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The reason that the B&B address is all over the www is because they advertise, for heavens sake!
The gay couple have a wholly 'private' address which Nick Griffin has chosen to post on his Twitter-feed.
I do not think that the B&B should have been subject to any abuse, but posting the private address of a couple is entirely reprehensible!
The gay couple have a wholly 'private' address which Nick Griffin has chosen to post on his Twitter-feed.
I do not think that the B&B should have been subject to any abuse, but posting the private address of a couple is entirely reprehensible!
@AoG - Of course the B&B address was all over the internet or whatever - they are running a business! Its just a false equivalence to attempt to suggest that, by publishing the gay couples address and threatening to send the boys round that somehow evens the score.
And Snafus argument has been adequately addressed - 2 wrongs do not make a right, nor does it establish a precedent. However much we might enjoy the discomfort of the BNP over the leak of the membership list, that does not excuse the fact that it was wrong or against the law. And once again, the fact that such an action has happened, regardless of the response, does not excuse or create a precedent for releasing the contact details of private individuals!
There is no possible defence for these actions of Nick Griffin, and I would hope the police take his actions very seriously indeed....
And Snafus argument has been adequately addressed - 2 wrongs do not make a right, nor does it establish a precedent. However much we might enjoy the discomfort of the BNP over the leak of the membership list, that does not excuse the fact that it was wrong or against the law. And once again, the fact that such an action has happened, regardless of the response, does not excuse or create a precedent for releasing the contact details of private individuals!
There is no possible defence for these actions of Nick Griffin, and I would hope the police take his actions very seriously indeed....
It's wrong of him to do it, but there again it was wrong to publish the BNP list too.
Even thought 2 wrongs dont make a right you can see perhaps why he chose to do it.
Very difficult I would have thought to directly translate "bit of drama " to violence. Although that is no doubt at the fonrt of his mind he did not actually say we're coming round to kick seven shades out of you, I'm sure he will contest that he mean ta peaceful demonstration.
Even thought 2 wrongs dont make a right you can see perhaps why he chose to do it.
Very difficult I would have thought to directly translate "bit of drama " to violence. Although that is no doubt at the fonrt of his mind he did not actually say we're coming round to kick seven shades out of you, I'm sure he will contest that he mean ta peaceful demonstration.
@youngmaf
Well of course he will contest what he meant - but for most reasonable people reading his tweet, the inference is clearly an incitement to followers to gather and create a fuss at the very least.
Regardless of what happened with the BNPs membership list - whose unredacted release was illegal and wrong, however sneakily enjoyable those who dislike the BNP might find it - This action does not justify releasing the private address details of this couple. Wrong, and probably illegal, i would think.
Well of course he will contest what he meant - but for most reasonable people reading his tweet, the inference is clearly an incitement to followers to gather and create a fuss at the very least.
Regardless of what happened with the BNPs membership list - whose unredacted release was illegal and wrong, however sneakily enjoyable those who dislike the BNP might find it - This action does not justify releasing the private address details of this couple. Wrong, and probably illegal, i would think.
Zacs-Master
It's on the front page of Metro and on the CH4 news site, and Telegraph. I think it's pretty much 'out there' already.
Snafu03 - the difference with the BNP membership being leaked was that this was done by a BNP member. It was internal. It wasn't the Socialist Workers party publishing the list and encouraging it's members to 'go down to their houses and give them a "bit of drama".'
I think that's an important difference.
It's on the front page of Metro and on the CH4 news site, and Telegraph. I think it's pretty much 'out there' already.
Snafu03 - the difference with the BNP membership being leaked was that this was done by a BNP member. It was internal. It wasn't the Socialist Workers party publishing the list and encouraging it's members to 'go down to their houses and give them a "bit of drama".'
I think that's an important difference.
jackthehat
/// The reason that the B&B address is all over the www is because they advertise, for heavens sake! ///
My aren't you the clever one, you are only saying the obvious, for heavens sake!
How many of us would know the address or even it's location if it had not been published in the press, for heavens sake!?
But I bet clever you would have found their advertisement on the web, without even looking in the press to find out what it was called?
/// Mr Black, 64, and Mr Morgan, 59, booked a double room at the Swiss Bed and Breakfast in Berkshire via email. ///
/// The reason that the B&B address is all over the www is because they advertise, for heavens sake! ///
My aren't you the clever one, you are only saying the obvious, for heavens sake!
How many of us would know the address or even it's location if it had not been published in the press, for heavens sake!?
But I bet clever you would have found their advertisement on the web, without even looking in the press to find out what it was called?
/// Mr Black, 64, and Mr Morgan, 59, booked a double room at the Swiss Bed and Breakfast in Berkshire via email. ///
AOG
Eh?
You do know that the BNP membership list was published by a member of the BNP, right?
Nothing to do with the rest of us - this was purely from the BNP.
Your point about 'the guest house's address being there for all to see, so why not the gay couple' is shaky at best. The guest house's address is available on the Internet....because it's a guest house.
pdq1 - every single person who threatened (as opposed to sending criticisms) the B&B owners should be prosecuted.
If they have evidence of this, they can simply contact their local police.
Eh?
You do know that the BNP membership list was published by a member of the BNP, right?
Nothing to do with the rest of us - this was purely from the BNP.
Your point about 'the guest house's address being there for all to see, so why not the gay couple' is shaky at best. The guest house's address is available on the Internet....because it's a guest house.
pdq1 - every single person who threatened (as opposed to sending criticisms) the B&B owners should be prosecuted.
If they have evidence of this, they can simply contact their local police.
AOG
I welcome your alternative point of view, but I don't think your argument stands up to scrutiny, because what Nick Griffin is doing (IMO) is intimidating the gay community - "If you stand up for your rights, and a court/court of appeal finds in your favour, then we're going to 'sort you out our way'".
This seems a little dangerous.
I welcome your alternative point of view, but I don't think your argument stands up to scrutiny, because what Nick Griffin is doing (IMO) is intimidating the gay community - "If you stand up for your rights, and a court/court of appeal finds in your favour, then we're going to 'sort you out our way'".
This seems a little dangerous.
Latest Posts
Crosswords1 min ago
Spectator N0 2680 : "Two Of A...
Crosswords4 mins ago
Spam & Scams11 mins ago
ChatterBank13 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.