"If the Oxford University is indeed the apex of intellect it professes to be, then where better to forensically dismantle some bampot fascist ideas and show them up as historically illiterate, morally indefensible and politically naive?"

The reason they don't is because they fear that the myths about the BNP would be exposed and the BNP policies would be seen as uncomfortably close to what many intelligent, ordinary people think.

The 'anti-facists' will only allow the public to 'learn' about the BNP through their own heavily censored literature, but never directly from the BNP themselves. The NUJ even have 'special guidelines' for reporting on the BNP. They want people to believe that the BNP consist of unemployed skinheads whose viewpoints consist of easy to destroy, shallow rants (eg "they take our jobs and rape our women" type arguments). Clearly you believe this too, which is why you thnk they'd be easily beaten in a debate. I assure you they would not.

This is the image the Left want to keep alive, which is the real reason they won't allow the BNP a platform - people would see they've been fed a lie. Jeremy Paxman once thought he'd destroy Griffin on TV, but the opposite happened.

"There are laws in place to ensure that if BNP statements stray into incitement to racial hatred they become a criminal offence."
These laws are not there to prevent 'hatred', they are deliberately ambiguous and exist to intimidate and restrict debate on immigration. These laws mean that I could go to prison for saying, for example, that race X commits more voilent crime than race Y, even if what I'm saying is FACT. Are you comfortable with laws that persuade us to believe lies? Strangely, those who act to prosecute those uttering 'hate speech' are never incited to 'hate', even after being exposed to the unlawful speech themselves.

Vlaams Blok, a very large Belgian opposition party, was banned by a handful of judges f

Kenny,

I thought it was meant to be Wendy Alexander today?

Kenny

is Wendy Alexander's position now tenable? Should she resign. And should she and those also implicated (Whitton, Gordon) resign or their parliamentary seats?

Post #2:

I think it says below the story that comment on any 'issue of the day' will be addressed by Kenny.

I think, should he not object to having to formulate two responses, I will broach the above subject and THE issue of the day.

Firstly, Kenny, I must admit to being more of a devotee of Isaiah Berlin's two concepts of liberty. The right to be able to express oneself with as little external objections as possible (freedom or liberty); and the second concept, the right of others to be free from the unwanted side effects of someone else's exercise of personal freedom.

The BNP's right to the former type of freedom (its right to free speech) is not the problem (although BNP activists attempt, with all the flourishes of the seasoned actor, to present themselves as martyrs of free speech); the problem with the BNP is the second. They advocate a nation state constructed along racial and mono-cultural (though what that monoculture is, they fail to reasonably articulate - usually brown sause and bisto, pounds and ounces and other anachronisic misty-eyed romanticism) lines.

This message really does impact upon others. It encourages the idea that, people born and bred in Europe, and whose original culture has contributed to the rich tapestry that is Western European culture, somehow do not belong and should be seen as a threat. Thus the freedom of the immigrant community to express itself culturally and economically is denied.

In this equation of the two concepts, one abstract (the bnp's right to free speech) and the other concrete (the right of a community to live free from fear) are in direct conflict. This calls for a sensible appraisal of which concept has more right by it.

The two concepts theory requires constant evaluation of the rights and wrongs of particular cases. That is a good thing for the our collective demcratic intellect.

Now to the issue of the day.

Do you think that Gordon Brown's alledged order

Hello! I'm online now.
So, in a mo I'll be addressing some of the points you've already made.
In the meantime, feel free to ask me another...

#2 Jock
Wendy was doing our On The Spot feature last week when she answers readers questions that emailed in to the paper. Her answers are in today's SoS

# 3 Ayrshire Scot

Not a good day for Wendy. She could of course try to struggle on, but if there's substance to the latest revelations today, I think she's toast.

6 Kenny
and what about Whitton, who briefedd on the CPS donation angle, apparently knowing it was false if today's revelations are substantiated, and Gordon?

#1 JamesS

Yes, I do think they would be easily beaten in debate. In fact, it wouldn't need a debate. All you need to do is wind-up Griffin and watch him make a complete buffoon of himself, as he has done on so many other occasions. I find he is especially ridiculous precisely when he thinks he is being clever. Are you sure he isn't an MI5 plant?

#7
Ayrshire Scot

If it can be demonstrated that Whitton deliberately told an untruth on this point, then he'd have to resign from the shadow front bench too. Goes without saying.

Kenny. The editorial policy today has been that of pretend this scandal doesn't exist. Is this to be taken that your papers extending a professional curtousy?

The coverage is , for an aleged free press. Abysmal and partisan.

# 4 malcolmcean

Brown can say wheatever he likes to Wendy. The issue is whether or not she'd do what she was told. I think she knows full well that the leader of the Scottish Labour Party - or any Scottish party, for that matter - has to be free from Westminster control.
I doubt very much, for example, that Brown is enamoured with her ideas on expanding the powers of the Scottish parliament.

9 Kenny

should Alexander resign her MSP seat if charged with a criminal offence over this? Or, if not charged but criticsed, for example by the parliamentary standards commissioner?

# 10 Juan
Er, have you read the paper? Labour's donations scandal is SoS's splash, our p2 lead, our lead Focus in the Insight section, our main Leader subject and the issue discussed in columns by Tom Brown and Eddie Barnes. And Labour takes a kicking in them all.

Kenny #11 writes: "The issue is whether or not she'd do what she was told. I think she knows full well that the leader of the Scottish Labour Party - or any Scottish party, for that matter - has to be free from Westminster control."

I cannot imagine that she would not do exactly do what her boss (because, surely, Gordon Brown is her boss - there is virtually no distinct Scottish party, as there is a distinct Tory Scottish pary) wanted.

I have no doubt that she knows full well what needs be done. I have no doubt, also, that Westminster Scottish MPs will do all in their power to stop her followin this logical (electorally) path.

Which, perhaps, begs the question (and suggest an answer to), 'who leaked this story to the press?'

#12 Ayrshire Scot
(like the 'TM', by the way - very cute)

Not just because she's been charged. There is due process, after all. But if she was charged she'd definitely have to resign the leadership
(if she's still in post).

If found guilty under curcumstances where she was shown to have been delibertely dishonest (rather than just incompetent) then yes, there would be an argument that she'd have to resign as an MSP.

# 14 malcolmcean
..writes "who leaked this story to the press?"

I have my strong suspicions, but I canna tell you.

15 Kenny, thanks for your reply.

Is Gordon Brown now permanently damaged, by the taint of haplessness and bad luck?

Who do you see as the front runners to replace Alexander and Brown respectively should the shoogley nails holding their jackets be dislodged by dodgy-donations-gate?

What happend to Mungo McKay's Diary ? Be interested in his take on the WendyGate affair.

If Wendy doies resign it'll be a disaster for the future of Scottish Labour, because I doubt if there is anyone else in the party as well equipped to recast it as an autonomous Scottish entity committed to more powers for Holyrood, which quite apart from being the right thing to do is the only way it can win back its lost authority.

# AndyBhoy

I personally took Mungo out for a walk around Salisbury Crags, and he tripped and fell to his death. A terrible accident, I assured the police.

# 17 Ayrshire Scot

Brown's position is far stronger than Wendy's and yes, he can survive.

Kenny #16:

Do we think that this person would have much to lose (vocationally) should Wendy's proposed 'greater powers' package? Or do you suspect a more personal motivation?

A simple former or latter would suffice for a response.

#22

latter

tough old game, politics

Sorry: for 'should' read 'from'

fyi, this was released from Wendy's office at 15.32 this afternoon

Labour's Holyrood leader Wendy Alexander today said:

"I deeply regret the damage which recent publicity has brought to the Labour party. However, I reject any suggestion of intentional wrong doing on my part. I intend to address these matters with the electoral commission with whom I am co operating fully. I am confident when all the facts are known I will be exonerated of any intentional wrong doing. There is a great deal more I would like to say on the matter, but in light of the ongoing enquiry by the electoral commission it would be inappropriate for me to do so.

"I offered myself to lead Labour in the Scottish parliament in the autumn because I believed and continue to believe I have a contribution to make to improve the lives of my fellow Scots."

Wendy says this..
"I have a contribution to make to improve the lives of my fellow Scots."
She's right and it would be bad for Scottish politics as a whole if she had to resign. For one thing the average IQ would fall by about a dozen points.

This paper stands on it's epoch , Kenny. It currently though is backing the wrong pony. Editorialy and Journalism wise it is too slanted for all too see. People can no longer hold the word or view credible.

A bit more truth and less soft soaping would be a good start for the readership. We buy this because we want news not tabloid journalism.

I doubt very much if the bloodied and bruised Labour former ministers that have suffered grievously at Eddie's hands over the past seven years would agree with you.

#29 - Has Eddies youngest bairnn then currently taken his place? :-) I would say his current handling is akin to a hamster mauling a lion?

Or too put it another way , a mouse shagging an elephant........

#28 Juan

I'm not sure what "stands on its epoch" means..?

As for 'slanted', let me just say this, because it bears repeating: SoS is a paper that subjects all political parties to intense scrutiny, but particularly the party of government, whatever or wherever it may be. The paper has gone though a number of changes in recent years (ownership, editors) and its stance now is somewhat different to the one it took a few years ago under Andrew Neil and the Barclays. For example I doubt very much if they would have backed an SNP administration at the last Holyrood election.
I suspect that a lot of the criticism the paper gets in these forums comes from people who are responsing to what the paper was like in the past, and not what it is like at present.

Juan
Eddie's new baby is doing very well, thank you. Your concern is touching.
Anyway, gott a go and make the tea. A pleasure bandying ideas with you all, as usual.
see ya next time. But in the meantime if you want to contact me directly, my email address is kenny.farquharson@scotlandonsunday.com
See ya.

#32 - Kenny - Epoch as in deffining momment.

The paper is clearly not balanced. As purchasers , we could do without being fed. The currently policy is that if labour are going bad, either pretend it doesn't exist or only print minimal. Also balance up with Alex Salmond eats puppies/Blairs kids article.

The Herald to it's credit is at least beginning to cover events and investigate. Get under the Skin. This papers adherence to whatever their told by labour has worn thin.

#33 - Kenny- Aye Bigups to Eddies bairn. Word to Eddie. Tresure this time. As it's the only time you and the wean will have the same level of hair.

Kenny, what do you feel about Gerry McCann being on the list of Scot of the Year nominees? I know that many people are disgusted by the choice and have mailed the paper to say so, but so far none have had a reply, why would that be?

#1 malcolmcean
Your derogatory and deliberately limited definition of British culture paved the way for the rest of your post. Do you make snide comments about ethnic cultures too?

Your post makes it very clear that multiculturalism IS a threat, namely to freedom of speech. And yet you are questioning people's right to say this and everyone else's right to hear it.

"This message really does impact upon others. It encourages the idea that, people born and bred in Europe, and whose original culture has contributed to the rich tapestry that is Western European culture, somehow do not belong and should be seen as a threat. Thus the freedom of the immigrant community to express itself culturally and economically is denied."

"Really impacts on others"? And mass immigration doesn't "really impact" on the host community? Why should the immigrant community automatically have the right to express itself culturally and economically? Do you expect the 'right' to make jokes about Allah in Saudi Arabia, or stage black and white minstrel shows in Detroit? Shouldn't the same protective rights be afforded to people who don't welcome the enforced changes happening where they live?

Are you honestly suggesting that, say, the traditional culture of London's east end hasn't been decimated by massive post war immigration? How about Paris or Holland? Don't people who find themselves rapidly engulfed by foreign people, culture and language have a right to see it as a threat? How can illegal immigrants 'belong'? If the effects of immigration are harmful, or even if I just believe they are harmful, then I have every right to say so and everyone has a right to hear my opinion.

Perhaps you could kindly provide us with a list of the 'rights' we can expect to surrender in future to accommodate the blessing of multiculturalism. You clearly know nothing about the BNP other than what you seen on pseudo-documentaries knocked out by h