News1 min ago
Should Britain First Use Lee Rigby's Name In Their Campaigns?
Lee Rigby's family have repeatedly asked Britain First not to use their son's name in their broadcast and online materials, but they have ignored this.
As Lee is a national public figure, are BF right to go ahead and include references to him - or should they take into account the wishes of his family?
http://
As Lee is a national public figure, are BF right to go ahead and include references to him - or should they take into account the wishes of his family?
http://
Answers
jno - //I can't see why not. Rigby was a grown man. At some point, parents cease to have proprietoria
08:05 Thu 21st Apr 2016
BF has been repeatedly asked by Rigbys mother not to use images of him in their broadcasts and literature, but they continue to ignore her requests. BF have also had runs-ins with the British Legion.
Nobody should be misled by BF. It is a very nasty, rabid wolf, dressed in scabby sheep's clothing. It is just a variation on your usual far-right fascist organisation, comprised of ex-Members of the BNP and other thugs.
In fact, it could be described as an off-shoot of the BNP, comprised of ex-BNP Members who were too extreme, even for the BNP. It also has direct connections to Ulster terrorists.
It tries to give itself a veneer of respectability, with its use of the Crown and Union Jack. It even tries to pass itself off as a "Christian" organisation !
But 5 mins looking at its WIKI site will reveal all.
Nobody should be misled by BF. It is a very nasty, rabid wolf, dressed in scabby sheep's clothing. It is just a variation on your usual far-right fascist organisation, comprised of ex-Members of the BNP and other thugs.
In fact, it could be described as an off-shoot of the BNP, comprised of ex-BNP Members who were too extreme, even for the BNP. It also has direct connections to Ulster terrorists.
It tries to give itself a veneer of respectability, with its use of the Crown and Union Jack. It even tries to pass itself off as a "Christian" organisation !
But 5 mins looking at its WIKI site will reveal all.
Dougie....only slight ? BF is a loathsome organisation, and this is the Telegraph saying so ::::
http://
Or perhaps you mean my hostility to people who support far-right fascist groups ?
http://
Or perhaps you mean my hostility to people who support far-right fascist groups ?
It appears there is no legal objection that can be used to prevent Britain First from using the Rigby name, but it shows a distinct absence of simple courtesy and sympathy, to say nothing of basic morality, to use the name in direct defiance of the wishes of the family.
Hopefully it's highlighting will enable potential supporters of the party to think twice about the attitudes of those in charge of it.
But I doubt it!
Hopefully it's highlighting will enable potential supporters of the party to think twice about the attitudes of those in charge of it.
But I doubt it!
Andy...I doubt it was well.
I have had to remove 2 individuals from my Facebook "friends" because of their constant posting of BF images. When I tackled both of them, they eventually confessed not to know what BF really is......just the sort of intellectual laziness that BF relies on to spread it vile poison through social media.
If Dr Goebbels had had access to Facebook, we would all be goose-stepping around by now.
I have had to remove 2 individuals from my Facebook "friends" because of their constant posting of BF images. When I tackled both of them, they eventually confessed not to know what BF really is......just the sort of intellectual laziness that BF relies on to spread it vile poison through social media.
If Dr Goebbels had had access to Facebook, we would all be goose-stepping around by now.
jno - //I can't see why not. Rigby was a grown man. At some point, parents cease to have proprietorial rights over their children's identity. //
That is true, but when their child meets a violent end at the hands of murderers, then the moral right to defend the use of his name by a fascist organisation surely reverts back to them?
No doubt Lee Rigby would speak for himself if he were here - but he is not, so it falls to his family to speak for him - ignored or not.
That is true, but when their child meets a violent end at the hands of murderers, then the moral right to defend the use of his name by a fascist organisation surely reverts back to them?
No doubt Lee Rigby would speak for himself if he were here - but he is not, so it falls to his family to speak for him - ignored or not.
It would be better if they respected the family's wishes, but the outrage happened in the name of Islam, and this organisation wants to use that fact for a purpose.
It would be a compromise if they referred to the incident (everyone knows what it is) without using his actual name; e.g. "British soldier murdered on London street".
It would be a compromise if they referred to the incident (everyone knows what it is) without using his actual name; e.g. "British soldier murdered on London street".
Mikey, //BF has its share of supporters here on AB, and I expect, like London buses, one will be along any minute ! //
I think you misunderstand. I don't know if anyone here is a member of Britain First, but there is acknowledgement that some of what that organisation says is accurate. That acknowledgement doesn't indicate support the group as a whole.
I think you misunderstand. I don't know if anyone here is a member of Britain First, but there is acknowledgement that some of what that organisation says is accurate. That acknowledgement doesn't indicate support the group as a whole.
Khandro - //It would be better if they respected the family's wishes, but the outrage happened in the name of Islam, and this organisation wants to use that fact for a purpose. //
I don't think there is any confusion about the motives behind BF using the name - but that is not the issue.
The point is, the family have asked that the name not be used, and the BF have ignored them, which is morally wrong.
Their reasons for doing so are irrelevant.
I don't think there is any confusion about the motives behind BF using the name - but that is not the issue.
The point is, the family have asked that the name not be used, and the BF have ignored them, which is morally wrong.
Their reasons for doing so are irrelevant.
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.