Jump to content

Manx Members Of The Bnp


Recommended Posts

If it is covered by the Data Protection Act (as it may well be since not just a simple membership list), then it goes further than this.

 

It would be an offence just to obtain the list - e.g. by downloading it or opening the website.

 

55 Unlawful obtaining etc. of personal data

 

(1) A person must not knowingly or recklessly, without the consent of the data controller—

 

(a) obtain .... personal data or the information contained in personal data

 

However that does not apply to a person who shows

 

"that he acted in the reasonable belief that he had in law the right to obtain or disclose the data or information"

 

I'm not sure that this applies when the information has become public domain.

 

When it is published on the Internet, people at large will believe they have 'in law the right' to read it, much in the same vain that if it were published in the newspapers, the readership of that newspaper would not be liable to prosecution for reading what was in front of them.

Edited by mannin
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 242
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Despite what people may feel or think, the BNP is a legal political party. Membership of it should not be a reason to be fired from your job, at least legally anyway.

 

I think they should be fired if they are known to belong to the BNP but have a job such as bing a policeman for example.

 

They actually are quite intelligent proffessionals so I am finding the whole thing a bit confusing really!

 

Because you can be intelligent but also ignorant and prejudiced. And being professional means nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure that this applies when the information has become public domain.

 

When it is published on the Internet, people at large will believe they have 'in law the right' to read it, much in the same vain that if it were published in the newspapers, the readership of that newspaper would not be liable to prosecution for reading what was in front of them.

 

That's what I'd have thought - but it depends on whether it has become public domain. It is possible that though available to the public it isn't in the public domain - if it hasn't been made public lawfully. If it is protected personal information that has been disclosed without authorisation, then under the Data Protection Act it seems it might still be an offence. (Though you could claim that you obtained it in the reasonable belief that in law you have the right to obtain or disclose the data or information).

 

On the other hand if you are simply exercising freedom of expression - and say published the list in your own IoM website (don't try MF), then there'd probably be nothing wrong with that if you obtained it in reasonable belief that ok to do so.

 

After that, anything a Manx court does which might effect the Convention Right of Freedom of Expression has to take into account if it is 'journalistic' (or involves conduct connected with journalistic material - such as discussion of local news). Also the extent to which -

 

(i) the material has, or is about to, become available to the public; or

(ii) it is, or would be, in the public interest for the material to be published;

 

So even if not strictly in public domain, the material has become 'available to the public'. (once out, it's out).

 

UK law is much the same, so my guess is that now yes, this list is public domain, and even if not, then if you have already obtained it in reasonable belief, then now no reason why names can't be given if connected with valid 'journalistic' material.

 

(But that doesn't mean that this should be done on MF - the answer to that is quite clear).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think it's hilarious. A bunch of racist bullies now know first hand what it's like to be harassed and scared. And a leader showing what a rag taggle bunch of idiots they are: "Mr Griffin admitted that the Human Rights Act was one of the BNP's pet hates, but denied that using it to enforce the privacy of its members was hypocrisy. No, we are not in favour of the Human Rights Act, it is a European piece of legislation, but as it is there we will happily use it if we can," he said."

Link to post
Share on other sites
After my attempts at discussing the BNP in another thread, I realise the depth of feeling against them after being told to get back to Britain etc. (Strange since I'm Manx?) I'm prepared to accept that there is a racist element yet they seem to insist that they are not?

 

So you're prepared to believe that the BNP ARE racist, but you claim their own literature says they are NOT.

 

If they ARE racist, then they are clearly lying, which must surely tell you something about them.

 

If they are NOT racist, then why are you prepared to believe that they ARE? It's a strange way for a friend to behave.

 

When I am approached for a donation for research into brain replacement surgery I shall respond most generously on your behalf.

 

S

 

I said I'm prepared to believe there's a racist element, meaning there are obviously racists in the BNP. There are racists on here, in the Labour, Conservative and Liberal parties I'm sure! Their literature says the party itself is not racist!

 

What are you talking about when you say 'strange way for a friend to behave'? I'm no friend of the BNP or any political organisation.

 

Are you having a selective interpretation moment?

 

As I said before, this should at least mean that the true nature of the BNP will be revealed to all of us one way or the other. That would be a good thing!

 

I thought democracy was being able to support any legal political body without fear of persecution. Unless the BNP is made illegal surely the leaking of personal details of members to the general public and any action against them is illegal?

 

I repeat, I am not a member or supporter of any organisation!

Edited by Alan Partridge
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure that this applies when the information has become public domain.

 

When it is published on the Internet, people at large will believe they have 'in law the right' to read it, much in the same vain that if it were published in the newspapers, the readership of that newspaper would not be liable to prosecution for reading what was in front of them.

 

That's what I'd have thought - but it depends on whether it has become public domain. It is possible that though available to the public it isn't in the public domain - if it hasn't been made public lawfully. If it is protected personal information that has been disclosed without authorisation, then under the Data Protection Act it seems it might still be an offence. (Though you could claim that you obtained it in the reasonable belief that in law you have the right to obtain or disclose the data or information).

 

 

very grey area, you wouldn't expect 'its on the internet' to apply to kiddie porn would you?? or do the kiddie porn rules only apply to images and not text??

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Many of the members' occupations are listed, revealing a small number of police, two solicitors, four ministers of religion, at least one doctor and a number of primary and secondary school teachers."

 

And my favourite:

 

"Objects to being told he shouldn't wear a bomber jacket."

 

Ah yes, the BNP - home to sartorial elegance...

Link to post
Share on other sites
I said I'm prepared to believe there's a racist element, meaning there are obviously racists in the BNP. There are racists on here, in the Labour, Conservative and Liberal parties I'm sure! Their litrature says the party itself is not racist!

Their literature might claim that, but if you look at the BNP it's pretty clear they are racist and advocate racial discrimination.

 

United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination:

the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.

 

BNP ideology and core values are based on racial discrimination - to favour 'the indigenous British people', to instill 'white culture'

 

As for BNP being racist - see this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/7475690.stm

 

A BNP activist was found guilty of committing a racially aggravated offence in relation to posters promoting the BNP.

 

BNP is an unincorporated association - the actions of one member on behalf of the association are imputable to all the members collectively - clearly so if they ratify that action - e.g. by not disciplining the member concerned, expelling him or distancing themselves from that behaviour - which AFAIK did not happen. As far as I can see they are members of a racist political party.

 

Alan - are you a bit naive or what?

 

ETA: Alan - where exactly does their literature say they are not racist - can you provide the link please.

Edited by Skeddan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...