Despite Phil Andrews claiming, in his previous post, that his opponents take his remarks out of context, and that we are guilty of "spin" and "deceit", it's worth looking at the following thread I began a few months ago. It was entitled "The BNP and violence":- ------Back in March, Councillor Phil Andrews made a rather bizarre remark on this forum about the issue of the far right. He stated:"The BNP indeed does not advocate violence, neither in point of fact does the National Front."In the interests of balance and accuracy, I will now reproduce the next part of his posting:-"However there is little doubt that the presence of an active BNP or NF branch in an area heightens racial tensions and begets violence whether the organisation itself is involved or not."I think all reasonable people will agree with the sentiments of the second half of Phil's statement. However, the first half has raised quite a few eyebrows among some of my anti fascist colleagues.------Surely everyone would agree that the above was a well-balanced interpretation of something that Phil had said (and that every effort was gone to to put his remarks IN context).Sadly, it didn't receive any plaudits from Phil, who still wanted to make out that I had misrepresented him.So it is clear that even those of us who try to be fair to Phil still get abused by him (and lied about, into the bargain).
Robin Taylor ● 6001d