Royal Mail refuse to carry Britain First election leaflet

[wabbithunta]

oops.. better take note next time. just woken up.


Apologies to zx135, from me, for saying that I'm a racist.


But fact remains that the point still stands.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Ive seen the "offending" leaflet and in my opinion it was a very clever and not too subtle attempt to raise religious tensions. The leaflet purported to be against a "Super Mosque" and the immigration if would bring (in their opinion) not against the faithful of that religion. So did it have a picture of a "Super Mosque" with warning stamped on it. No it had a women in a Hijab Veil, with the background and her skin falsely coloured red with the word "Warning" emblazoned below her eyes.

I personally don't have a problem with people who don't want a Mosque in their area, and who campaign peacefully and legally against it (although I did not support a similar campaign in my area), but I do think it goes beyond the realms of legitimate protest/campaigning to use a picture in this way. I would also think it wrong if the SWP were against the BNP or Britain First setting up a meeting house in Brick Lane because it could raise local tensions, but in doing so used pictures of historical fascists with the same colouration and warning style.

There is a choice If you are against a Mosque but not the people who worship there then use a picture of a Mosque. If you are against muslims and their mosque then use a picture like they did in the leaflet. The picture sent one message clearer than the rest.

[DGP1]

Maybe if Britain First was just made a prescribed organisation (like other hate groups) things would be much simpler.

[Tman]

What, you can really get "Britain First" on the NHS now?

Must be a full-time job for a whole government department, with all these calls for banning going on these days...

[dvbuk55]

Royalmail should deliver any material no matter what it says because Royalmail are a posting company

My local Tesco is a shop but it doesn't sell AK47s and Cocaine just because it's a shop.

Well it may help them to get out of their current financial position, I can do without the cocaine but hellfire who doesn't need an AK47, look at all the third world countries we continually provide aid to and count the number of AKs and bandoliers of ammunition on view

[bustedflush]

Maybe if Britain First was just made a prescribed organisation (like other hate groups) things would be much simpler.

I see...if you disagree they MUST be a 'hate' group and thus banned. The twisted, perverted and fascistic logic of the liberal and his idea of democracy.

[highbury67]

I heard about that. However Royal Mail has no problems in its employees participating in Britain First or other such marches, in their own clothes, which makes its stance on handling bf leaflets, pretty hypocritical.

RM is run by clueless people, for sure. No wonder it is despised by some of the public.

[dvbuk55]

I heard about that. However Royal Mail has no problems in its employees participating in Britain First or other such marches, in their own clothes, which makes its stance on handling bf leaflets, pretty hypocritical.

RM is run by clueless people, for sure. No wonder it is despised by some of the public.

Well I'm pretty sure they would refuse to deliver leaflets on dogging but when employees are in or out of their own clothes what could they do about it?

[highbury67]

Maybe so, but RM has a large Asian community in its offices and it is failing them by its stance on marches.

If it has no objection to marches, it should have kept its mouth shut and either consulted an independent body or let the public decide. I am not sure even if its whether they can stop such marches, its top level being out of touch too imo. They do not relate to our world, they have never been in it. Yét they make decisions on our lives! It beggars belief.

[dvbuk55]

Maybe so, but RM has a large Asian community in its offices and it is failing them by its stance on marches.

If it has no objection to marches, it should have kept its mouth shut and either consulted an independent body or let the public decide. I am not sure even if its whether they can stop such marches, its top level being out of touch too imo. They do not relate to our world, they have never been in it. Yét they make decisions on our lives! It beggars belief.

Just how could RM stop the marches, stop employees in their own time marching and influence those employees in their personal belief. They aren't making a decision on our lives at all they are making a corporate decision on the matter not dictating anyone's personal preference.

[highbury67]

I don't understand that last sentance, but you are missing my point by your point about influencing those employees in their own beliefs. That then creates racial disharmony. You have also missed my points on RM hypocrisy and top level inadequacy.

It may not be able to physically be able to police its employees on such marches, but it can encourage its employees not to do so, and put mental pressure but it chooses not to do so.

No doubt you will have a reply, but that's all I will say. I have no confidence in upper levels of rm. Maybe that point even you and others might agree on!

[dvbuk55]

You paint a very frightening picture whereby an employer actively coerces it's employees into following a certain mind set, how wrong that would be.

[highbury67]

I give up! I cannot make you see sense!Thats what employers do by forcing rules!

[dvbuk55]

I give up! I cannot make you see sense!Thats what employers do by forcing rules!

You are totally out of kilter. RM force rules concerning their business, not ours. We work according to the rules set by RM, outside of work we set our own beliefs and standards. You seem to be confusing one with the other.

[Tman]

I give up! I cannot make you see sense!Thats what employers do by forcing rules!

The concept contained in the sentence above perfectly encapsulates the whole problem with "people of strong beliefs".
You seem unable to grasp that it's not a case of "I cannot make you see sense" but that opinions differ, and your way may be far from the "correct" way.
Kim Jong Il was a good example of my way or the wrong way, would you then like to see that level of control imposed, or would you rather stick to the traditional British way of debate and agreement?