Friday, December 24, 2010
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Spanish book seller and patriot Pedro Varela enters jail in this video. Varela was jailed for selling books that the New World Order does not want people to read.
Here is a blog that supports Padro Varela;
More news as we get it...................
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
"The Israeli newspaper Haaretz accused the rightists of "trading in their Jewish demon-enemy for the Muslim criminal-immigrant model" and visiting Israel only to get "Jewish absolution that will bring them closer to political power." '
Reuters - Monday 20th December 2010 - 2:55pm GMT
by Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor
PARIS - Far-right political parties in Europe are stepping up their anti-Muslim rhetoric and forging ties across borders, even going so far as to visit Israel to hail the Jewish state as a bulwark against militant Islam.
National Front leader Marine Le Pen has shocked the French political elite in recent days by comparing Muslims who pray outside crowded mosques -- a common sight during the holy month of Ramadan -- to the World War Two Nazi occupation.
Oskar Freysinger, a champion of the Swiss ban on minarets, warned a far-right meeting in Paris Saturday against "the demographic, sociological and psychological Islamisation of Europe". German and Belgian activists also addressed the crowd.
Geert Wilders, whose populist far-right party supports the Dutch minority government, told Reuters last week he was organising an "international freedom alliance" to link grass-roots groups active in "the fight against Islam."
Earlier this month, Wilders visited Israel and backed its West Bank settlements, saying Palestinians there should move to Jordan. Like-minded German, Austrian, Belgian, Swedish and other far-rightists were on their own Israel tour at the same time.
"Our culture is based on Christianity, Judaism and humanism and (the Israelis) are fighting our fight," Wilders told Reuters in Amsterdam last week. "If Jerusalem falls, Amsterdam and New York will be next."
While he seeks anti-Muslim allies abroad, Wilders said some older far-right parties such as France's National Front or the British National Party were "blunt racist parties I don't care for" and he would avoid cooperating with them.
CONCERN ABOUT SOVEREIGNTY
Campaigns aimed at Muslims have been gaining ground in Europe, most notably with the Swiss minaret ban last year and France's law this year against full facial veils in public, which Wilders said the Netherlands should copy next year.
Support for these steps has spread beyond anti-immigrant parties and towards the political centre as globalisation and the ageing of Europe's population fuel voters' concerns about national sovereignty, according to a leading French analyst.
Political scientist Dominique Reynie said the financial crisis had prompted more voters to agree with the far right that their political elites were incompetent.
"Some people refuse what they see as a change in their cultural or religious surroundings," he told the Paris daily Le Monde. "These are the problems posed by mosques, burqas and the provisions of halal food."
Some on the far right see similar trends in the United States. Wilders attended a rally in New York on September 11 to protest against a mosque planned near Ground Zero and the leader of the Austrian Freedom Party, Heinz Christian Strache, has said he wants to visit the United States to meet leaders of the Tea Party movement.
Marine Le Pen, who is preparing to succeed her father Jean-Marie as head of the National Front, had in recent years toed a more moderate line before her anti-Muslim comments. She notably refused to echo the anti-Semitic views expressed by her father.
Sunday, she insisted all public subsidies for building mosques must stop. Several politicians and Muslim leaders have said Muslims often pray in the street because they do not have enough space in mosques and urged that more be built.
NEW FAR RIGHT
The rightists' Israel visits set what some analysts call the "new far right" apart from older extremists who were often anti-Semitic and backed Arab countries against the Jewish state.
Declaring support for Israel gives them an opportunity to oppose Muslim opinion in their home countries, since European Muslims are often pro-Palestinian, as well as celebrate the Jewish state as the front line against militant Islam.
"It is not Israel's duty to provide a Palestinian state," Wilders said in a speech in Tel Aviv. "There already is a Palestinian state and that state is Jordan."
A so-called "Jerusalem Declaration" issued by four other European rightists during their Israel visit also staunchly defended the country's existence and its right to defend itself "against all aggression, especially Islamic terror."
Heinz-Christian Strache from Austria, German Freedom Party head Rene Stadtkewitz, Sweden Democrat MP Kent Ekeroth and Filip Dewinter, head of Belgium's Vlaams Belang party, denied they were stoking Islamophobia with their statement.
"The Arab-Israeli conflict illustrates the struggle between Western culture and radical Islam," Dewinter said in Tel Aviv.
Strache made a similar link to Europe, telling a conference in Ashkelon -- a city that has been hit by rockets from the nearby Gaza Strip -- that Israel faced "an Islamic terror threat that aims right for the heart of our society."
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz accused the rightists of "trading in their Jewish demon-enemy for the Muslim criminal-immigrant model" and visiting Israel only to get "Jewish absolution that will bring them closer to political power."
*Additional reporting by Sara Webb in Amsterdam; editing by Andrew Dobbie.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Just shows how ineffectual the BNPs MEPs are when we are praising Farage a reactionary tory !
This short speech is well worth a look.
It just shows how Griffin has demasculated the BNP when we are having to give praise to Farage when we see a rare glimpse of our message and a ray of hope. Not that you will get that in the UKIP, but it shows that the UKIP are now 'stealing the nationalist message' due to the ineptness of Messrs Griffin and Brons.
Friday, December 17, 2010
Spanish dissident sent to prison
BARCELONA — To all my friends and supporters around the world!
My close friend, Spanish dissident Pedro Varela, has been sent to a Catalonian prison to begin serving a one-year three-month sentence for disseminating Politically Incorrect materials.
Mr. Varela is the owner of the Barcelona bookshop Librería Europa was accused of disseminating books that dare to have opinions that conflict with the orthodoxy of the mass media. He has dared to publish books by historians, educators, political figures and others who have disagree with the controlled media. The Zionists control the mass media, TV, Movies, Newspapers, Magazine and Book publishing. That same media puts out endless sick garbage promoting sadism, masochism, violence, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, the destruction of the Palestinian people and the wars that have racked this world and killed millions of innocents, but they cannot bear the freedom of one man who has a tiny bookshop and who publishes just a few thousand copies of politically incorrect books. No, they cannot afford one tiny expression of dissidence to their evil! So they send their thugs to kidnap him from this family and imprison him for having the courage to act according to his conscience.
Pedro has suffered for years under court case after court case. His book shop has been destroyed by Communist and Jewish extremist mobs and he and his patrons have been physically attacked. I was there personally for a speech when we were attacked and the store was shattered by club wielding terrorists who also burned and attacked the neighborhood and injured many innocents. All of this because he has made available books that dared to intellectually question and offering countering evidence or opinion on aspects of the Second World War and that one HOLY event called the Holocaust. As the Iranian President Ahmadinejad so correctly stated. “In the West one may freely question God, any and every historical event, but cannot even ask legitimate questions about the “The Holocaust.” It is the only historical event in Western countries that can’t be questioned in any way. If someone has even the slightest disagreement on any aspect of the official Holocaust story, he or she can face years in prison.
As Mr. Varela pointed out, the laws in Europe today are actually more draconian than the those of the Inquisition during the Middle Ages. In the Middle Ages the Church put out a list of proscribed books, the law was clear. Today, one publishes a book and then finds out that he has somehow offended the masters of the modern age by completely capricious standards and finds himself kidnapped and jailed for simply uttering his opinion or simply publishing the opinion of someone else.
Whether or not one agrees with Mr. Varela’s opinions, or even the opinions expressed in the books that he published, everyone who truly believes in the basic human right of freedom of speech, thought and expression, should protest this man’s imprisonment and kidnapping from his work, his wife and his children simply for allowing dissenting academic opinions to be heard and published!
If a jailed Chinese free speech activist should win the Nobel Prize, why not Pedro Varela, for he has fought and sacrificed for true free speech in the same way? What hypocrisy for the West to criticize China or Iran for suppression of speech and thought when there are thousands of Europeans jailed for having “wrong” opinions or beliefs about historical events that happened over 65 years ago!
Whether or not one agrees with what the media says are the beliefs of Pedro Varela, the imprisonment of this courageous, NON-VIOLENT, kind and decent, free speech activist is the real crime.
Those who would kidnap a man from his family and imprison him for expressing his political or historical opinion are the real criminals here. They are the ones guilty of the violation of human rights, and indeed, they are the ones who should be sent to prison in a truly free society, not Pedro Varela! It is they who are the real criminals.
I urge all true friends of freedom, and all those who oppose tyranny, and intolerance and violation of human rights — to protest the imprisonment of Pedro Varela!
Here is his address and I hope that every single person reading this will take a moment right now to sit down and write him a letter wishing him a Merry Christmas, even while he is behind bars, for he is a man who even through the hardship he now faces, should hear from all of us how he respect him and honor him. He is a real man, a courageous man, a man of principle, unlike those who have imprisoned him in violation of the most elemental of human rights!
Sincerely, Dr. David Duke
Here is his address, please write him and please send him my greetings and yours from all over the world. Let him know that we look to him as a true hero of our times!
Señor Pedro VARELA
Centro penitenciario Brians 1, Apartado de Correos 1000,
(Codigo Postal 08760) Barcelona,
Thursday, December 16, 2010
This videotape shows Russian Navy commandos on a Somalian pirate ship shortly after the pirates had captured a Russian oil tanker. The Euro Union navy that patrols these waters would not interfere because they feared there could be "casualties" and Human Rights issues.
All explanations are in Russian with a single exception of when a wounded pirate says something in English. All conversations between the commandos are in Russian. If you don't understand Russian, the pictures speak for themselves.
The soldiers freed their compatriots and the tanker. The Russian Navy Commandos moved the pirates back to their own (pirate) ship, searched the pirate ship for weapons and explosives, and then they left the ship and exploded it with all remaining pirates hand-cuffed to it.
The commandos sank the pirate ship along with the pirates and without any court proceedings, lawyers etc. That is, they used the anti-piracy laws of the 18th and 19th centuries where the captain of the rescuing ship has the right to decide what to do with the pirates. Usually, they were hung.
I would think from now on, Russian ships will not be targets for Somalia pirates !!
Monday, December 06, 2010
By Paul Craig Roberts
The reaction to WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange tells us all we need to know about the total corruption of our "modern" world, which in fact is a throwback to the Dark Ages.
Some member of the United States government released to WikiLeaks the documents that are now controversial. The documents are controversial, because they are official US documents and show all too clearly that the US government is a duplicitous entity whose raison d'être is to control every other government.
The media, not merely in the US but also throughout the English speaking world and Europe, has shown its hostility to WikiLeaks. The reason is obvious. WikiLeaks reveals truth, while the media covers up for the US government and its puppet states.
Why would anyone with a lick of sense read the media when they can read original material from WikiLeaks? The average American reporter and editor must be very angry that his/her own cowardice is so clearly exposed by Julian Assange. The American media is a whore, whereas the courageous blood of warriors runs through WikiLeaks’ veins.
Just as American politicians want Bradley Manning executed because he revealed crimes of the US government, they want Julian Assange executed. In the past few days the more notorious of the dumbshits that sit in the US Congress have denounced Assange as a "traitor to America." What total ignorance. Assange is an Australian, not an American citizen. To be a traitor to America, one has to be of the nationality. An Australian cannot be a traitor to America any more than an American can be a traitor to Australia. But don’t expect the morons who represent the lobbyists to know this much.
Mike Huckabee, the redneck Baptist preacher who was governor of Arkansas and, to America's already overwhelming shame, was third runner up to the Republican presidential nomination, has called for Assange’s execution. So here we have a "man of God" calling for the US government to murder an Australian citizen. And Americans wonder why the rest of the world hates their guts.
The material leaked from the US government to WikiLeaks shows that the US government is an extremely disreputable gang of gangsters. The US government was able to get British prime minister Brown to "fix" the official Chilcot Investigation into how former prime minister Tony Blair manipulated and lied the British government into
being mercenaries for the US invasion of Iraq. One of the "diplomatic" cables released has UK Defense Ministry official Jon Day promising the United States government that prime minister Brown’s government has "put measures in place to protect your interests."
Other cables show the US government threatening Spanish prime minister Zapatero, ordering him to stop his criticisms of the Iraq war or else. I mean, really, how dare these foreign governments to think that they are sovereign.
Not only foreign governments are under the US thumb. So is Amazon.com. Joe Lieberman from Connecticut, who is Israel’s most influential senator in the US Senate, delivered sufficiently credible threats to Amazon to cause the company to oust WikiLeaks content from their hosting service.
So there you have it. On the one hand the US government and the prostitute American media declare that there is nothing new in the hundreds of thousands of documents, yet on the other hand both pull out all stops to shut down WikiLeaks and its founder. Obviously, despite the US government’s denials, the documents are extremely damaging. The documents show that the US government is not what it pretends to be.
Assange is in hiding. He fears CIA and Mossad assassination, and to add to his troubles the government of Sweden has changed its mind, perhaps as a result of American persuasion and money, about sex charges that the Swedish government had previously dismissed for lack of credibility. If reports are correct, two women, who possibly could be CIA or Mossad assets, have brought sex charges against Assange. One claims that she was having consensual sexual intercourse with him, but that he didn’t stop when she asked him to when the condom broke.
Think about this for a minute. Other than male porn stars who are bored with it all, how many men can stop at the point of orgasm or when approaching orgasm? How does anyone know where Assange was in the process of the sex act?
Would a real government that had any integrity and commitment to truth try to blacken the name of the prime truth teller of our time on the basis of such flimsy charges?
Obviously, Sweden has become another two-bit punk puppet government of the US.
The US government has got away with telling lies for so long that it no longer hesitates to lie in the most blatant way. WikiLeaks released a US classified document signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that explicitly orders US diplomats to spy on UN Security council officials and on the Secretary General of the United Nations. The cable is now in the public record. No one challenges its authenticity. Yet, today the Obama regime, precisely White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, declared that Hillary had never ordered or even asked US officials to spy on UN officials.
As Antiwar.com asked: Who do you believe, the printed word with Hillary’s signature or the White House?
Anyone who believes the US government about anything is the epitome of gullibility.
Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Wikileaks exposes Zionist Treachery
David Duke explains what is happening with these 'Wikileaks' that is all over the news feeds at the moment. If I were the guy who owns Wikileaks, I would get some top class bodyguards as the insiders will want to 'rid themselves of this troublesome priest' .
But of course we nationalists knew all this stuff was going on. It's not news to us. Another excellent video from David Duke here. Watch it !
Monday, November 29, 2010
Saturday, November 20, 2010
The Guardian’s definition of “far right”, and mine, differ considerably, which is the reason why I have not rushed to its web site to read a two-page article published a few of days ago about “the threat of the far right in Europe” (
The Financial Times simultaneously published a similar one-page survey, but this included a brief post-script item (pasted below) about the failure of the BNP to mobilise the full potential of anti-immigration sentiment persisting amongst the British electorate.
The impression I have gained in recent years is that the only “far right” parties in Europe who have been able (allowed) to flutter near to the flame of power are those that have been able to convince the Establishment, the media and Jewry that they are most definitely not anti-Jewish, not “racist”, not against all coloured immigration (but only against the immigration of Muslims!) and not against the multi-racial society (just so long as it doesn’t include Muslims!) The Jobbik Party in Hungary may be the only notable exception to this.
This “far right” anti-Muslim/anti-Islam rhetoric is designed, of course, to make these “kosher fascists” more appealing to Jewry and, hence, the mass media. Whether that line of ingratiation really impresses Jewry’s learned elders — as distinct from their lesser brethren — is a matter I will touch on in due course.
The first of these post-WW2 “kosher fascists” was Gianfranco Fini, who started out his political career in Italy as an arm-in-the-air, Mussolini-admiring, Giovinezza-singing, MSI Blackshirt in the late 1970s, but within a decade or so was grovelling at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem begging forgiveness. Since then his career zoomed upwards.
Until recently Fini occupied the post of Speaker of parliament in Bercusconi’s (“right wing”) government, but now that Bercusconi’s administration is on the skids (due to old roué’s extra curricular activities) Fini has resigned and is now positioning himself to become Prime Minister after the next general election.
It is no doubt a mere happenstance that the period of Fini’s conversion and rise to high office and the period when Italy became the No. 1 target for endless boatloads of illegal immigrants from Africa coincided.
FOLLOWING FINI INTO THE WILDERNESS OF “SUCCESS”
The Dutch “far right” politician Geert Wilders is currently building a political career by means of a strenuous anti-Muslim/anti-Islam agitation which he promotes in tandem with a strident pro-Jewish/pro-Israel campaign. The one is part-and-parcel of the other.
On Sunday 14th December 2008, just as Israel was preparing to drop white phosphorous bombs on the crammed civilian areas in the Gaza concentration camp, Wilders was at the Begin Memorial Hall, Jerusalem, sharing the platform with some of the most rabid Arab-hating Jewish racists in the Zionist fold, including Arieh Eldad, a “far right” member of Israel’s parliament. You can find Eldad’s post-conference press statement here: (
Wilders knew well that the Begin Memorial Hall was built in honour of Menachem Begin who in the late 1940s was the leader of the Irgun Zvai Leumi terrorist gang. Among many other atrocities, Begin instigated and personally participated in the massacre of Palestinian villagers at Dir Yassein, the bombing of the King David Hotel and the kidnapping and slow-hanging with piano wire British Army Sergeants Mervyn Paice and Clifford Martin. In the foreword to his autobiography The Revolt he insists: “Yes....I would do at all again”. The Israeli public were so grateful to Begin that they elected him prime minister in 1977.
Wilders is clearly hell-bent on out-grovelling Fini. But are his ‘brown nose’ snufflings doing him any good with the people who really count?
At the recent general election in Holland his party obtained, so it was reported, sufficient votes to influence which of the major parties formed the government. He has been given the additional advantage of being prosecuted under Holland’s version of the UK’s “Incitement to Racial Hatred” laws. I may not have been paying close attention, but I haven’t heard the final outcome of those two situations. Perhaps a reader can update me.
But is Wilders getting the backing of Zionist-Jewry’s Establishment — or just the support of chancers, mavericks and opportunists like himself?
Prof. Kevin MacDonald (Professor of Psychology at California State University, Long Beach) whose commentaries on Jewish supremacist strategies appear on The Occidental Observer web site, wrote a commentary on Wilders (and, by implication, other Populist grovellers) which you can read here:
MacDonald’s final two paragraphs read:
The reality is that this is what the entire Jewish political spectrum wants, from the far left to the neoconservative right. Again we see that despite the well-oiled myth ( http://theoccidentalobserver.net/tooblog/?p=3547 ) that Jews are beset by fundamental disagreements about policy, Jewish power is pushing in one direction throughout the West: Multiculturalism and the end of racially and culturally homogeneous White societies.
And it should be obvious that White advocates who attempt to recruit Jewish support in opposition to multiculturalism are engaging in a futile undertaking. The fact that the organized Jewish community favors Muslim immigration throughout the West even when so many Muslims are hostile to Israel and to Jews (to the point that Jews have been forced to vacate Muslim areas in many places, including Sweden) shows how committed they are to their campaign against the people and the culture of the West.
This explanation is probably broadly correct, but I venture to suggest that there may be exceptions, if temporary, to this global Jewish drive to destroy white-gentile ethnic homogeneity: most notably here in Britain.
The size of the Muslim population in many British towns and cities — especially in the north of England and the east of London — both in terms of overall numbers and as a proportion of the population, puts anything to be seen in Sweden in the shade.
From the point of view of Jewry in the UK, the issue is not the number of indigenous white gentiles resorting to ‘White Flight’ from the home towns of their youth, but the increasing number of parliamentary constituencies which are electing Muslims to Parliament; constituencies which will never welcome Jewish candidates of any political party — even those which, two or three decades ago, were represented by frequently re-elected Jewish (usually Labour Party) MPs.
On top of this demographically charged political change there is the rise of Muslim business empires in Britain. These are increasingly able to bestow financial patronage to the major Establishment political parties, and do so.
These developments indicate that a power base is evolving which could have the potential to challenge the Jewish money-and-media dominance over the British body politic and this is making UK Jewry jittery, no matter what may be world Jewry’s overall strategy of encouraging white European nations to dissolve themselves into a multi-racial stew.
Hence, in the Jewish-owned sections of the UK media, there is a flood of anti-Muslim, anti-Islam stories. This barrage is so relentless that for the average Briton the words “Muslim” and “Islam” have become hardwired to the word “terrorist”. In the long run this campaign and the associated activities of the Jewish-backed English Defence League might be intensified to the point that Muslims return to their homelands — no bad thing, providing other varieties of immigrant followed in their footsteps!
At the moment, however, the campaign seems designed simply to put all but the most fanatical Islamists among the Muslim population on the back foot and, in particular, to scare Muslim religious, political and business leaders away from any thought of challenging the current status quo for fear of being depicted by media character assassins as “extremists” and “promoters of terrorism” — allegations which terminate careers, destroy businesses and ruin lives.
No similar such mainstream media campaign has ever been mounted in the UK against Afro-Caribbeans, who perpetrate more homicides and maimings per year in our country than have ever been inflicted by Islamic terrorists. Were any such campaign to be launched the “hatemongers” responsible would soon find themselves facing “Incitement to Racial Hatred” charges. The difference is that the Afro-Caribbeans do not represent a threat to Jewry’s scruff-of-the-neck grip on Britain’s Establishment.
Prof. MacDonald’s description of Jewry’s global strategy of promoting alien immigration to white European lands could well be a large part of the explanation why British National Party chairman Nick Gri££in failed so signally with his decade-long charm offensive with Jewry.
The other parts of the explanation must surely also include:
•Gri££in’s long earlier career as an anti-semite — including in the mid-1990s his claimed authorship of a factual magazine exposing Jewish media ownership and influence (in fact written by Dr. Mark Deavin) — before he adopted what the more perceptive among the Jews recognised was a cynical, careerist-opportunist volte face. Why should the Jews take a chance with Gri££in? There are plenty genuinely philo-semitic gentiles on the “far right” to pick from, as the media-backed progress of the so-called English Defence League (with its Jewish Division, its rabbinical advisers and its pro-Israel demonstrations outside the Israeli Embassy) makes all too clear.
•Gri££in’s long career as a swindler (concerning which I have ample evidence) during which he has manifested signs of mental instability. Yes, there are plenty of Jewish crooks and nutters, but why should Jewry, whose leaders like to present themselves as respectable, reputable and stable members of society, want to associate themselves with a man who looks headed for a sequence of train crashes in the civil and criminal courts and who may be only a few steps ahead of burly men with flapping white coats?
Thus the terms in which the Financial Times discusses Gri££in’s “failure” are inaccurate and unfair.
The long and the short of it is that it was the Jews who let Gri££in down! .... If only they had grasped the hand of friendship that he extended for so long .... if only they had rewarded his conversion to philo-semitism .... If only they had got the media a bit more on his side .... then by now they would have had a firm and obedient ally not only in the European Parliament but in the House of Commons and all his/the BNP’s financial problems would now be a forgotten nightmare!
Now read what the Financial Times had to say — and then see why I want the the Equalities and Human Right Commission to lose its case against the BNP, judgment in which is pending:
Financial Times - Tuesday 16th November 2010
The far right’s strategic failures leave anti-migrant feeling untapped
Before the 2009 European parliamentary elections, the head of the far-right British National Party
acknowledged that the UK public would never accept “jackboots marching down Whitehall”,
writes James Boxell.
In a pub garden in Birkenhead, a blighted post-industrial suburb in England’s north-west, Nick Griffin told the Financial Times that his party had a “once in a lifetime” chance to escape its white supremacist roots and emerge as an alternative for millions scorned by the London elite.
Less than 18 months later – following this year’s disastrous national election campaign, a savage internal power struggle and a court battle with the country’s equality watchdog that threatens to bankrupt the party – his dream is over.
The failure is largely of Mr Griffin’s making. The Cambridge-educated son of a Tory councillor believed he had the intellect and electoral savvy to transform the BNP’s image. But his performances – notably on the BBC current affairs programme Question Time last year – bolstered the impression of an extremist unable to give up links with the Ku Klux Klan.
Strategic errors, such as concentrating much of the party’s firepower on the all but unwinnable seat of Barking in England’s south-east and taking on the equality watchdog rather than allowing non-whites to join the party, compounded the crisis.
Some observers ascribe the BNP’s failure to a UK strain of anti-extremism harking back to the second world war fight against fascism. But James Bethell of Nothing British, a group campaigning against the BNP, says a large section of society still feels its fears on immigration and Islam are being ignored. “These are people left behind by globalisation,” he says. “They don’t understand the country any more. All the things they love and champion have been vilified.”
The BNP won about 1m votes in last year’s European vote. If you add this to 2.5m votes for the europhobic UK Independence party, it means British populists won more than a fifth of the European election votes.
Even allowing for the fact that voters often use such elections to protest, that is still a big group. Should Ukip decide to branch out from its heartlands in the Conservative shires to pursue an explicit anti-immigration agenda, that rump of discontent may yet be exploited.
A political party has the right to regulate its membership
recruitment to accordance with its lawful political objectives.
However low my opinion is of Gri££in, I want the Equalities and Human Rights Commission to lose its current litigation against the BNP so that a matter of principle may be upheld, i.e.:
That in a democracy, the government and its agencies have no right to dictate the terms of the constitutions of a political parties, and thereby to dictate their policies. The sole judge on those kinds of matters should be the electorate.
I fear the EHRC may win because the BNP has not fought the case on this matter of principle. It surrendered that principle at an early stage, as Gri££in admitted in a bulletin to members deploring the EHRC’s continuation with the case, in which he said: “We’ve given them everything they demanded....”
Gri££in has only fought the case on a sequence of technical issues and not on the issue that in a democracy a political party has the right to regulate its membership recruitment to accordance with its lawful political objectives.
I hope that their Lordships in the High Court will not hold against the BNP the unprincipled tactics which Gri££in has, thus far, deployed to advanced its defence and will see that a great issue of freedom is involved here, not merely for the BNP but for the British public at large and will give a ruling that neither the state nor any other official or private body may prescribe what may or may not be adopted by free associations, such as political parties, in their constitutions and statements of policy.
In connection swith this case, Dr. Andrew Emerson, a BNP member and frequent BNP candidate issued a statement on his blog (
“....Back in 2004, he [BNP chairman Nick Gri££in] sought to open up the party to ethnic aliens, before it was necessary to do so. On seeing the strength of the opposition to this move from within the party, led by genuine nationalists like John Tyndall, Richard Edmonds, and Chris Jackson, he hastily rowed back from this, and in order to try to cover his tracks, fabricated a fictitious letter (which he has naturally never seen fit to publish) from the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE), as it was known at the time, in which the CRE supposedly demanded that the party change its constitution in order to enable the admission of ethnic aliens. If I am wrong in this surmise, I challenge Mr Griffin to publish the alleged 2004 letter from the CRE.”
If true — and I have no reason to doubt Dr. Emerson’s veracity, unless I can be provided one — then the claim that Gri££in “fabricated a fictitious letter from the CRE” (the EHRC’s predecessor) demanding that the BNP change its constitution so as to eliminate its “racist” membership recruitment rules has huge implications.
If the letter was “fabricated” by Gri££in then it could well be that it provoked the EHRC into action. Who likes to have letters attributed to them which they never wrote? The forgery — if it was a forgery — put ideas into the EHRC’s head. What better way could there be to inflict revenge and hoist Gri££in with his own petard than by issuing a genuine letter making demands very similar to those contained in his forgery and then issuing court proceedings to enforce them?
If what Dr. Emerson claims is true, and if the case goes in favour of the EHRC — which I hope it does not — then Gri££in is the author of his own and the BNP’s misfortune!
P.S. Just as I’ve finished this, a reader has sent me a posting from Gri££in on the BNP web site stating that his lawyers have applied for a further two days of pleadings and applications in court and that, as a result, a judgment cannot be expected until December.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Thursday, November 04, 2010
Quite an amusing item, Don't Panic! Everything's Fine On Planet Griffin!, posted recently on the LUAF blog, has been forwarded to me:
http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2010/1 ... lanet.html .
Its contents need to be verified, bearing in mind it comes from an “anti-fascist” source, but from other information recently received from various sources, it would appear to be substantially true. I think it’s worth a read.
I have also been sent copies of the letter from the BNP offering its creditors “20p in the £1 for full and final settlement” of what they are owed. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that some small(ish) firms existing on a knife edge of credit in this current recession — like a printer in the North-East who is owed £16,000+ — could be put out of business and many decent people made redundant.
So much for integrity and “British Jobs for British Workers”!
Those who still need proof that BNP chairman Nick Gri££in is a common criminal — specifically, a financial confidence-trickster, a swindler — should consider the following:
At the time that Gri££in and his business manager Jim Dow$on was sending out what they thought was a confidential letter to the party’s creditors offering them one-fifth of what they are owed — which is an admission that the party is insolvent and unlikely to be able to continue in existence — they was also frantically pumping out e-mails to party members and supporters offering them “Life Membership” at the never-to-be-repeated reduced rate of £350 instead of £500.
How can it be honest to induce patriots to part with hundreds of pounds for “Life Membership” of a party without giving them essential information about whether the party is likely to survive the next few months, let alone for the rest of their lives?
Political parties are not categorised in law as companies but as “unincorporated associations”. This does not, I am advised by a barrister, make all members of the BNP “jointly and severally liable” for the party debts (alleged to be £600,000+ and rising), but it does put Gri££in and other senior party officials who concluded contracts on behalf of the party in the frame for bankruptcy proceedings.
Whatever is finally decided by M’Learned Friends concerning who, in addition to Gri££in, is liable for these huge debts, all members — especially those who have been or are in process of being conned into buying “Life Membership” — should have been advised immediately the party became insolvent and sent copies of the letter to creditors offering the “20p in the £” to settle party debts now in excess of £600,000 (and rising!). So please circulate this bulletin to all your contacts in the BNP as soon as you have read it.
THE “BNP” AND THE “BNP2010” SWINDLE
As I have already pointed out in two widely-circulated recent bulletins, the appeals to members of the “British National Party” (“BNP”) to sign up for £350 “Life Memberships” and to remit advance payments for accommodation at the “BNP” annual conference, were issued by an entity proclaiming itself to be “British National Party 2010” (BNP2010). This was specified in small print at the very bottom of those documents.
Unless I am very much mistaken, any money received in respect of memberships, products and services advertised in documents issued by “BNP2010” will be lodged in bank accounts quite separate from those operated by the “BNP”.
Thus if, as and when the “BNP” is declared insolvent and is dissolved and/or when Gri££in and his immediate associates are required to settle its debts or be made bankrupt, (the 2nd time for Gri££in!) creditors of the “BNP” will not (so Gri££in hopes) be able to lay their hands of funds raised by the “separate” entity “BNP2010”.
If that is another of Gri££in’s “cunning plans”, and if he does appear before a bankruptcy court, then it is a circumstance which will outrage creditors and also, I think, the presiding judge when it is drawn to his attention. The judges have a discretion as to how theycategorise bankrupts (in terms of their culpability and intent) and how harsh their bankruptcy orders will be. We can only hope that all creditors will be made aware of this “BNP”/“BNP2010” issue in advance of any bankruptcy proceedings.
And what will happen to the money raised in the name of “BNP2010”? We are entitled to presume that it will be used to keep Gri££in’s nose above the water because, if he were to be declared bankrupt, then the European Parliament would cease to pay him his substantial salary, his considerable expenses and would cease to pay the salaries of the various party officials who act as his assistants.
The damage all this is doing to the credibility of the cause of British nationalism is immense. This is why Gri££in has had so much help and protection from the media and sundry law enforcement departments. The Establishment knew exactly what kind of creature he is and what he is capable of. Can we imagine the smug smiles of satisfaction which are now lighting up their faces?
I hope that BNP members and supporters who receive my bulletins are not surprised by all this. I have been warning them what kind of a political and financial crook, spiv and liar Gri££in is for the past decade. Many of them allowed desperation and hope to suppress their common sense, have said to me: “Oh, that’s just your personal sour grapes!”
Well now those grapes are now being harvested and pressed. Those people who dismissed my warnings will soon have to drink deeply of that sour vintage. Will they exclaim, in true wine-pseud’s style: “He’s a saucy fellow — his presumption will amuse you!”
Gri££in’s latest begging-letter.
No sooner had I completed the above, when into my In Box popped Gri££in’s latest toe-curling begging letter dated 2 November 2010 17:34, concerning his “David and Goliath battle” in the High Court against the Commission for Equalities and Human Rights, due to take place in a couple of days.
I hope any who receive the hysterical screed remember (or if newcomers to the Cause, are made aware) that it comes from the man who....
(a) Told the BBC Radio 4’s World at One in 2003: “Repatriation is unfeasible and inhumane ..... Britain can take a little ‘salt in the soup’.” (Since he said that London and many another major city in London have achieved the ‘tipping point’ of having a population of which more than 50% are not indigenous Britons. What indigenous Britons are now facing is not a matter of mere population ‘seasoning’, but the deliberate infliction of a policy of genocide against them.)
(b) Allowed the BNP’s Voice of Freedom paper (Editor: Martin Wingfield) to run a story about a BNP local official saying how proud he was to have an African as a son-in-law. The report was accompanied by a photo showing the silly old fool hugging the coal black, dreadlock-decorated Zimbabwean tribesman who was going to sire his grandchildren.
(c) Cultivated contacts with the Sikh community (N.B.: They’ve got loads of dosh!).
(d) Ditto the Jewish community. BNP officials to attend Holocaust Day wreath-layings; grovelling letters were sent to the Jewish Chronicle; cringing articles appeared in party publications, and much more besides.
All this was designed to ingratiate Gri££in and the BNP into the good books of the media and the Establishment by showing that he had “modernised” the party which now accepted the multi-racial society, racial integration, the production of mixed-race children (the ‘salt’ in our ‘soup’!) and was desperately keen to get on good terms with Jewry.
In the face of all that BNP ‘modernising’ propaganda, how can the ‘Equalities’ people be blamed for taking him seriously in wanting to create a multi-racial BNP? After all, leaders of the ‘Modernist’ faction which propelled Gri££in into the leadership of the BNP in 1999 — people like Eddy Butler — had long urged on him the need for the party to ‘take the plunge’ on multi-racial membership, along with a cuddle-up to Zionist-Jewry.
If ever Butler becomes BNP chairman, he will continue with Gri££in’s multi-racial pro-Jewish policies. Let Butler deny this if he will. But he won’t. He’ll keep quiet and let Gri££in be the lightening-conductor for members’ rage.
It is feasible that the Commission launched the law case to make the BNP change its “racist” membership admission rules as a method both of testing Gri££in’s sincerity and providing him with a device to spare his blushes and confound any remaining “racist diehards” in the party by being able to say: “This is not my decision. It was imposed by a court order”.
But instead of picking up the Commission’s ball and running with it (directly to a cheap touchdown settlement before a costly legal scrum commenced), he fumbled and dropped the ball — just as he has fumbled and bungled the management of a whole raft of other legal actions brought by companies (for copyright theft or unpaid debts) and sundry party ex-employees who he had sacked contrary to employment law.
To this day we cannot be certain whether Gri££in....
1.sincerely bought into Butler’s ‘Modernist’ multi-racial, pro-Jewish transformation of the BNP; or
2.regarded it as “a cunning plan” to sneak into power by means of a trick; or
3.has become so cynical that he regards policies and strategies as things to distract fools while he concentrates on the really important job of relieving them of their money.
Guess where I am inclined to place my bet!
Whatever — he is in the place where he is. It is the place where all unprincipled opportunist-careerist criminals should end up.
I do not take Gri££in’s situation as evidence that there is, after all, a God. Let’s keep a sense of proportion! But if I were to live to see Tony Blair in the same situation ..... well that might be another thing!
Sunday, October 24, 2010
The BNP seems to be in complete' freefall'. We can't keep up with all the shenanigans.
For those that haven't seen this sort of thing before, yes, they can get even worse !
The latest news is that Dowson has left(or was he pushed ?) and as a result his mate the other very strange character Paul Golding, who has in the past left, then re-appeared, has also gone. Where these two originally came from, is anyones guess ?
Now we hear that crackpot Patrick Harrington is gaining in influence more and more within the BNP. Harrington is a member of a rival political party which consists of some old mates of Nick Griffin. So because of that ,and the way that Griffin has run and run down the BNP over the last 11 years. Harrington is a new untouchable within the BNP.
For those that were around the last time the nationalist movement went into oblivion in the 1980's, there are one or two names that have cropped up yet again at the centre of all this madness and destruction. Once again the names of Griffin, Harrington, Wingfield and Brons are in there.
Why do we keep giving these people the levers of power within the nationalist movement ?
We can add others to the above mix, who have certainly done their best to create this whole damned mess - Messrs. Lecomber and Butler certainly haven't been safe with the 'torch handed down' have they ?
Is the BNP to go the same way, under the mismanagement of this same gang who trashed the NF in the 1980's ? Or will someone or group of people save the day ? The only group that seems to want to save the BNP are even less nationalist than the likes of 'sell out' Griffin and Co..
All this must be 'manna from Heaven' for the National Front who should be working overtime reaching out to the mass of disillusioned and expelled who are falling out with the BNP .
People should read all about the fall of the NF in the mid to late 1980's, it will certainly give them a true understanding of the French phrase 'Deja Vu' !
Friday, October 15, 2010
The above is a new logo for the new split from Eddy Butlers group within the BNP. Butler has now been expelled by crook Griffin. What will Butler now do ? What will Richard Edmonds do? What will they all do ?
Meanwhile, Crook Griffin is still running the BNP into the ground.
This further drive to destroy British nationalism by demoralisation continues apace. And these liberal types are now being run by ex-BNP webmaster Simon Bennett, who actually is pro-multi racial as he himself wrote on this forum a couple of months ago. He is so multi-racial though, that he lives in 'darkest' Cornwall where the only black face they see is on the television.
Just for the idiots is this. Nationalism means race. You cannot have any form of nationalism without the concept of race. Your drives to multi-racialism are in effect anti-nationalist.
A nation is it's people, not just the geographic piece of land they just happen to stand on. Genuine nationalists need to re-take the movement away from these clowns and idiots.
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Over 50 nationalists attended a memorial rally this afternoon in Preston,Lancashire. The audience were treated to a plethora of speakers including those mentioned above.
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
By Rev. Ted Pike
3 Oct 10
The Internet was probably the least foreseen of events challenging ADL/Israel’s agenda for world control. Leaping across previously Jewish-dominated media boundaries, the worldwide web has given people of conscience unfettered privileges to criticize Jewish supremacism and misbehavior of the state of Israel.
However, in my April 27 article, “Israeli Cyber-Warriors Crash Internet,” I detail how Israel, unable to legitimately dispel overwhelming world criticism, has been marshalling hundreds of thousands of Jews worldwide into an army of internet “cyber-warriors.” These act in unison to skew polls about Israel and disproportionately flood the internet with opinion favorable to the Jewish state – and against its critics. Israel is also known to engage in active cyber-terrorism against its opponents, such as its sabotage of Syrian cyber-space preceding its September 6, 2007 aerial attack on Syria’s insipient nuclear program. The PBS news hour last week said that the particularly perverse Stuxnet worm virus, spread worldwide but heavily concentrated in Iran, probably originated in Israel.
Last week, after flooding YouTube with thousands of emails critical of David Duke, the Jewish Internet Task Force persuaded it to remove his videos. JITF claims to “promote Jewish pride,” and “Israel advocacy” and to “support Israel and fight Jew hatred and terrorism online.” Its victory announcement claims to possess “A massive, active, pro-Israel-Jewish audience…of over 270,000.” JITF boasts that Duke is only one of “THOUSANDS of channels we have been directly responsible for removing.” Any start-up Jewish organization with that level of participation is, by definition, orchestrated from Israel and supported by a myriad of Zionist groups worldwide.
Duke: First Domino to Fall?
After Canada passed ADL/B’nai B’rith’s hate law in 1971, the Jewish Gestapo’s strategy was to first indict those least in favor with Canadians: holocaust questioners and racists. While Duke is increasingly listened to on the far right, he will receive little sympathy in this controversy from mainstream Christian/conservatives who have been deeply imprinted with the negative stereotype of his KKK past and animus against blacks. Yet, in viewing several of his recent YouTube videos, I found everything he said to be factual and logical, without anything that could legitimately be described as racist or anti-semitic.
Knocking Duke off YouTube represents a significant starting point for the Israel-directed JITF and other Jewish groups in their attempts to force off many other internet videos including those of Brother Nathanial Kapner and myself. More mainline Christian/conservatives, however, should be aware that just as B’nai B’rith Canada graduated to persecution of Christians after the turn of the century—indicting their real quarry: pastors, churches, church schools, pro-lifers, etc, the same will happen if Jewish cyber-censors are allowed to effectively control the internet. JITF says it also is bombarding Google, who may soon make the same decision, accepting Israel’s definition of “hate,” “anti-semitism,” and even “terrorist sympathizers,” as all who criticize Israel.
It is vital NOW that these internet media giants realize they are being pressured by an Israeli-inspired propaganda campaign—not by honest objections from most internet users. We must convince YouTube, Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc., that the world, in fact, deeply appreciates honest criticism of Jewish supremacism and human rights abuses by Israel. Such expression is not hateful or anti-semitic. If we do not speak out, eventually it will be anyone who represents an evangelical, populist, America-first agenda who will become the enemy of Israeli cyber-warriors.
There is no time to lose. Send this email (or your own thoughts) to YouTube (email@example.com) telling them:
“I deplore YouTube’s censorship of David Duke and others like him, in response to Israeli-directed pressure groups. Freedom of speech should extend to those we disagree with, as long as their opinions are not libelous or advocate violence. I demand that YouTube reverse its censorship and reinstate Duke. I also demand that Google resist pressure to demonize as “anti-semitic” videos and content critical of Israeli injustices.”
Speak out boldly in criticism of YouTube on every internet and talk radio forum you can.
If good people allow freedom of speech to be taken from one, they empower evil to take it from all.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Brothers at war: As Ed Miliband uses his maiden speech to declare Iraq invasion was wrong, David can't hide his bitterness
David snipes at Harriet Harman during brother's speech
Defeated Miliband will announce if he'll stay on today
Ed Miliband denies he has betrayed his older brother
Ed drops hint on Davids future: 'I don't think you've heard the last of him'
Ed Miliband today fuelled speculation his brother David will quit frontline politics as the issue continued to overshadow his leadership.
The new Labour leader was forced to deny he had 'betrayed' his brother and stolen his crown this morning as he desperately tried to play down the sibling rivalry.
But he said in one interview: 'I certainly don't think you've heard the last of him. I think he's going to make a big contribution in the future.'
After keeping Ed dangling for days, David must declare by this evening whether he will stand in elections for the shadow cabinet or if he will refuse to work in his brother's top team.
He is expected to reject calls from senior party figures, including former Chancellor Alistair Darling, to stay and keep the New Labour flame alive.
Tense moment: How Channel 4 screened the exchange between Mr Miliband and Miss Harman
Shadow cabinet member Peter Hain today said he believed David Miliband will not seek a post in his brother's team.
Mr Hain said: 'It looks like David is going to decide to do something else. If that is the case it will be sad for him and the party but we've got a strong team. We wish him well and we hope he'll be back at some point.'
More...'Red' Ed: I WILL get married and I'm embarrassed my name isn't on birth certificate (and I don't believe in God)
ANDREW PIERCE: How Gordon melted the Queen's heart
QUENTIN LETTS: His brother steamed nicely in the front row
JAN MOIR: Clever girl! A new look without breaking the bank
STEPHEN GLOVER: Red Ed? More like Dead Ed
JAN MOIR: Clever girl! A new look without breaking the bank
The former foreign secretary left Manchester, where the Labour conference is being held, last night and was said to have switched off his mobile phone.
Mr Miliband’s wife Louise is understood to be deeply upset at his treatment by his brother and the party.
His mother, Marion Kozak, is also said to have been distressed by the fractious tone of the contest.
Simmering tensions between the pair erupted yesterday when David was caught denouncing Ed’s crowd-pleasing attack on the Iraq War in his debut speech as leader.
As 40-year-old Ed attempted to turn the page on New Labour by declaring that a ‘new generation’ had taken over and insisting it had been ‘wrong to take Britain to war’, his brother sat stony-faced in the front row.
David, 45, then turned to the party’s deputy leader Harriet Harman, who was applauding enthusiastically, and sniped: ‘You voted for it, why are you clapping?’
A stunned Miss Harman hit back: ‘I’m clapping because he is the leader, and as you know, I’m supporting him.’
David was later seen shaking his head as Ed complained about the nickname said to have been ascribed to him by some of his brother’s supporters - ‘Forrest Gump’, after the dim-witted and innocent character in the Tom Hanks film.
His remarks, picked up by an ITV News camera, undermined attempts by Labour’s high command to paper over the cracks between the brothers turned leadership rivals.
They appeared to end any prospect of David, who was beaten by the narrowest of margins thanks to the votes of the trades unions, staying on.
Ed Miliband insisted today that David would be 'around in one way or another' even if he steps down from frontline politics.
'I know he will make a big contribution to politics in the future and he will have different ways of doing it, either inside the shadow cabinet or outside the shadow cabinet, but I think that is his decision,' he said.
'He has just been through a leadership contest, and a leadership contest he lost. He has got to decide what he wants to do. It is most important that he makes the right decision for himself and his family and a decision he is comfortable with.'
The new leader denied that he had 'betrayed' his older brother, and insisted David did not feel like that either.
Asked if he felt he had stolen his brother's crown, he said: 'It isn't the way I see it because I think it wasn't me, it was the Labour Party that made its decision.'
Pressure: Ed Miliband with partner Justine Thornton arriving at the conference hall yesterday
New leader: Ed Miliband waves to the conference crowd and then embraces his partner Justine Thornton
He did admit he was worried about how his victory had affected his brother. 'I worry always about the effects of any decisions I make on my family because family comes first.
'But I thought it was the right thing to do to stand in this election because I had a distinctive message. Of course I worry about him and my family but I think it was right to stand.'
He stressed that he had 'absolutely' thought through the implications of his standing on his relationship with David and insisted it was strong enough to survive.
David Miliband and wife Louise Shackelton arrive back in London last night
'The biggest obstacle for me standing in this contest was the relationship with David, because I thought long and hard about it.
'But in the end I concluded that if I had something to say which was distinctive, if I felt I would be the best leader of this party, for me not to stand in those circumstances would actually be an abdication of my responsibility, my responsibility to this party, my responsibility to this country and that is why I stood.
'My love for David is very deep, and his for me is too. It has been a difficult time, obviously, but it will withstand this.'
Mr Miliband also defended his blunt condemnation of the decision to invade Iraq, saying: 'The journey begins with humility about our record.'
He insisted he was not being an 'opportunist' by attacking Labour's record and insisted he wasn't trying to 'deny' his associations with the previous government.
It was vital to 'show we understand the reasons we lost trust and Iraq was one of those reasons. I have got to be honest about that as leader of this party,' he said.
Yesterday, the victorious younger Miliband used his conference speech to reject another of his nicknames, ‘Red Ed’, telling critics: ‘Come off it. Let’s start to have a grown-up debate in this country.’
He attempted to distance himself from his union backers by insisting that he will not back ‘waves of irresponsible strikes’ over cuts to public spending.
But he went out of his way to praise the role of unions in society and made a series of Left-wing policy pledges, apparently designed to persuade his anxious party that it has not picked the wrong brother.
He also admitted Labour had made mistakes on a series of issues, including immigration, civil liberties and the economy.
But it was the section on Iraq that prompted his defeated brother to let his mask slip after days of carefully-scripted calls for unity.
In an apparent reference to Tony Blair, Ed said some people had ‘sincerely believed that the world faced a real threat’.
But he went on: ‘I do believe that we were wrong. Wrong to take Britain to war and we need to be honest about that. Wrong because that war was not a last resort, because we did not build sufficient alliances and because we undermined the United Nations.’
David’s irritation at his brother’s stance on Iraq is just one of a series of policy splits which have opened up between Ed and party grandees. In his speech, the new leader emphasised his belief in civil liberties and distanced himself from New Labour’s tough counter-terror plans.
But that immediately put him at odds with Shadow Home Secretary Alan Johnson, who warned: ‘You do not demonstrate your commitment to civil liberties by failing to protect the most important civil liberty of all; the right to be safe on our streets.’
And while Ed backed Justice Secretary Ken Clarke’s call to spare thousands of prisoners from jail, Shadow Justice Secretary Jack Straw denounced that view as ‘madness’.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1315969/LABOUR-CONFERENCE-As-Ed-Miliband-criticises-Iraq-invasion-David-hide-bitterness.html#ixzz10vXV7TSR
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
September 21, 2010
Weekend reports - BNP chased out of Glasgow, "gutless" Griffin flees Liverpool
Posted by Denise BNP & SDL chased out of Glasgow
Saturday 18 September saw a hugely successful day of anti-fascist direct action against the racist thugs of the BNP and the Scottish Defence League – both of whom attempted to carry out public activity in Glasgow on the day.
Another of these 'class heroes' apparently hails from that other multi racial melting pot of the Island of Arran. Still, he probably has an excuse for still living in 1936.
What wasn't surprising was how the Police did their usual 'feetdragging' when nationalists need their help. According to many, this area of Glasgow is one of the most highly CCTV'd areas in the UK, and it took the Police over 15 minutes to arrive from round the corner. Then proceed to just stand there and do nothing. No arrests were made - typical British Police 'modus operandi' when it is nationalists on the receiving end ! But if ever the BNP are the culprits, we suffer smashed down doors and the like - the full force of the law as they say.
Hopefully, these naive Griffinite BNPers will lay siege at the Police, and get the services of a Solicitor to pursue the real thugs of the left.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
And this is the news from the Butler liberal type nationalists who aspire to take over from 'crook' Gri££in as leaders of the BNP. Other pics showed people wearing 'dicky bows', no doubt also wearing the compulsory cummerbunds. A weekend of 'schmoozing' seems to have been enjoyed.
These people who hijacked the BNP under Griffin and now a supposed challenge to Griffins fiefdom see success at holding dinners as being success at politics !
The zionist EDL are having some success at drawing away some people who would take to the streets in 'demos', and these people seem to be having some success at junketing in posh hotels in Yorkshire.
Griffin and Butler have succeeded in getting rid of politics and political activity away from the BNP. Instead of discussing radical politics at their weekend retreat they had a fine display of folk music apparently, availed themselves of the pool and 'had the best food ever served at a nationalist meeting'.
It was a shame to see Richard Edmonds tucking into this fine food.
Meanwhile the British people suffer on under a madness without any nationalist political leadership !
Sunday, September 05, 2010
Nick Gri££in, Chairman of the British National Party, has updated his 1986 classic.....
– The State / Reactionary Plot Against the National Front’
(regarded by many as the definitive exhibition of political paranoia)
......with a new diatribe of paranoid delusion and self-justification entitled:
‘SEX, MANIPULATION, LIES and SUBVERSION
– Real Life Studies of Anti-Nationalist Dirty Tricks’
This latest opus is designed to convince naïve newcomers to the nationalist movement in Britain that the blame for the British National Party turning into a political, financial and legal train wreck is not his – even though he has had personal dictatorial control over all aspects of the party’s operation for ten years.
The blame for the catastrophe must be imposed on the Satanic conspiracies of Sonia Gable of Searchlight (who, I am sorry to say, comments accurately on his financial shenanigans) and any number of un-named infiltrators from State security agencies who, working in tandem, were behind such “plots” as to try and prompt an election this August for the leadership of the BNP as provided for (just about) in the party’s constitution.
Just how evil can these conspirators get?
I will not run out the text of Sex, Manipulation, Lies and Subversion here as it is a very long text. I won’t say more about as I don’t want to put people off reading it. I want people to read it at least once so that they can compare it with the contents of his 1986 work Attempted Murder. In fact, I ask everybody to read Attempted Murder first.
Attempted Murder, published as a booklet by a faction of the crumbling National Front in 1986, can be seen at:
Sex, Manipulation, Lies and Subversion, published on the BNP web site last Saturday, can be seen at:
To those able to persevere with a reading of both documents will be struck by their essential similarity.
In 1983 Gri££in, with the support of Andrew Brons, Ian Anderson, Joe Pearce and sundry other members of the NF’s National Directorate seized control of the party by means which, months later, a High Court Judge described as “....unconstitutional....illegal....disgraceful....” This ruling and various court injunctions in my favour were given too late to rescue the NF from ruination.
By 1986 the NF was riven with factional warfare. There were bloody street fights between them. The faction which Gri££in ran (motto: “Long Live Death!” – I kid you not) had control of the party’s Head Office and its administrative and financial affairs became a shambles. Cheque payments for supplies of books and leaflets were cashed but the goods not despatched was just one of myriad complaints, most of which focused on money.
In an attempt the fend off the crisis brought about by his and his associates’ maladministration and dishonesty he brought out the booklet Attempted Murder in order to try and demonstrate that the party was the victim of a conspiracy by (among others!) State security agencies and the Post Office....and, of course, members of the faction which opposed his little crew of International Third Position nut-cases led by the Italian crook Roberto Fiore, (with whom Gri££in and his family are still in business relationships which involve the importation of Afro-Asian “students” into Britain!)
This inane – insane – propaganda ploy failed and within another year or so the NF finally succumbed to all that the loonies had inflicted on it, and died. The group which nowadays parades about using the name “National Front” is not a legitimate continuance of the original party and has policies and a constitution considerably different from the original party.
I will not attempt to summarise Attempted Murder beyond what I have said above, other than to ask those who read it to look out for Gri££in’s vituperations against his then factional opponents, and then reflect on how many of these “poisonous subversives” of 1986 are now “valued close colleagues” of 2010! (See what Gri££in has to say about his current best mate Martin Wingfield, for example!)
Having read Attempted Murder, and come up for air, you should then turn to Gri££in’s August 2010 screed Sex, Manipulation, Lies and Subversion. You will find yourself of familiar ground.
The BNP is crumbling politically, administratively, financially and legally as a result of his decade long maladministration. The keys to the collapse are improper and dishonest maladministration of the party’s financial affairs and cowardice and surrender in the face of the legal challenge by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).
What is Gri££in’s response to the situation – other than to send out almost daily begging letters and e-mails to people who have already given till it hurts?
His response is to devise a long turgid text designed to show that all the trouble the party faces is not down to him, the dictator of the party since 1999, but down to the machinations of Sonia Gable, State security agents and senior members of the party who have either infiltrated the party as enemies from the outset, or who have been suborned.
How Gri££in has had the time to churn out such self-serving paranoid drivel when his party is facing crisis on a number of fronts, all of which require the attention of a proper leader, is proof enough of this man’s lack of balance and sense of proportion.
The time is soon coming when the men with the flapping white coats and a secure van will be calling at a certain farmhouse in Wales. Will they precede the bailiffs?
Wednesday, September 01, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
If he isn't, he must be the dimmest person in the UK !
Here is an e-mail that proffers one view on Mr.Brons.
Thanks for your very prompt response to my e-mail/circular of this morning.
Two days ago I was approached by a dedicated BNP member (who I first met when we were both in the National Front in the 1970s/1980s).
He asked for an explanation about how the ‘skimming’ of, firstly, the Collett / Gri££in “print farming” set-up and, secondly, the Downson / Gri££in arrangement. He also asked if somehow Andrew Brons was the man to assume a leadership role and sort the situation out.
As this BNP member has been a friend for nearly 40 years, I took some trouble to respond to his requests for information. My effort is run out below. If you or anybody else wishes to onwardly-circulate this information, you / they have my permission to do so.
From: Martin Webster
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 03:22:45 +0100
To: [A former BNP local official living in Bucks]
Subject: Skimming & print farming; Brons
The information given by Lee Barnes conforms with information I have been given from numerous other sources over a period of several years.
The ‘skim’ system began when Gri££in gave his young pal Mark Collett the work not only to do the digital graphical origination (i.e.: the typesetting, design and layouts ready for the printer to make his litho plate) of the party’s various leaflets, papers, magazines and booklets, for which the party paid him a fee, but also to set up his own independent graphical origination / printing / publishing enterprise called, I think, “Vanguard Productions”.
Collett could have been kept ‘in house’, that is, he could have been retained as an employee of the party to do its graphical origination work, and paid a suitable salary for that work. By allowing Collett to set up his own independent firm, he could start invoicing the party for his work as if he were just another commercial service provider.
Vanguard Productions (Collett) then was allowed to expand its range of activities by being given permission to become “on paper” the party’s printer in addition to being its source of graphical origination services. Collett obviously did not have a factory filled with printing equipment and skilled printers to do the actual printing, so in effect he was given permission to sub-contract the printing work to genuine printers.
The point is that the order to the genuine printers who did the work did not come from the party — it came from Vanguard Productions (i.e. Collett). The printing, once done, would be delivered by the actual printers to any address or addresses which Collett instructed, but the printers’ invoices would be addressed to Vanguard Productions.
Vanguard Productions would then send its own invoice for the printing to the BNP with a mark-up.
This kind of operation is known in the printing trade as “print farming”. It is perfectly legal — providing all the people involved who are entitled to know what is going on do indeed know what is going on. Genuine printers generally don’t like working for “print farmers” as they have a notorious habit of securing payment from end-user clients, but then delaying or ducking paying the actual printers. Print farmers have a reputation for being serial bankrupts.
In the case of a political party existing on the generosity of subscription and donation paying members, to allow such a “print farming” set-up is wholly unnecessary as it self-evidently adds to the final cost to the membership of the printed product!
You will know that things were not organised in that way by the pre-1983 National Front. The small profit which the party added to the production cost of, say, its election leaflets simply covered essential administrative expenses so that the party did not make a loss on an election operation. Local organisers were fully appraised of all elements which made up the final cost to their branches. But then, before I got the heave-ho in December 1983, I was earning a wage of about £40 a week, so paying individuals was never an NF priority. The NF members and branches “got a bang for their buck”!
Why should head office ‘insiders’ set up within the party a trading monopoly — and, what is more, a secret trading monopoly known only to the ‘insiders’? There can only be one answer to that question: to allow the head office ‘insiders’ to make for themselves a profit on the necessary printing activities of the party in addition to whatever above-board salaries they earn.
In the insurance and other financial service industries, the technique of involving a product in a chain of unnecessary transactions, each with their own separate invoice including a ‘mark-up’, whereby lots of insiders get a ‘skim’ of the final price paid by the unfortunate end-user, is known as “churning”.
So Collett would be allowed to put on his invoices to the party a significant mark-up on the printers’ invoices to him, and the party would pay Collett’s invoices promptly, so that he could pay the printers promptly, on the understanding that Gri££in would get from Collett a ‘kick-back’ or ‘skim’ of the mark-up.
Now all this worked very well until Gri££in came in contact with Jim Dowson. As you know, Dowson runs a business services company whereby for a fee his firm will take over all the administrative work of other businesses: invoicing, statements, accountancy, debt-chasing, data management, advertising promotions via postal and e-mail lists etc. In addition to that, because he is active in the anti-abortion movement in Ireland, he has developed a variety of hard-sell fund-raising techniques using postal and e-mail address data.
Our friend “E.N. Ronn” has calculated that the BNP raised nearly £1 million in 2009, and that about £300,000 of this was paid to Dowson’s enterprise in fees for the various services he provided. Less than 10 per cent of the total turnover that year was spent on political campaigning!
The skim here is that Gri££in allows Dowson to put in huge fees for his services, and Gri££in authorises prompt payment — on the understanding that Gri££in will get an agreed ‘kick-back’. It is to cement this agreement that Gri££in insisted that one of his daughters (the one he wants to take over the party when he retires!) be appointed a director of Dowson’s firm and base herself at Dowson’s office in Belfast, so as to keep an eye on what Dowson was up to and look after her father’s interests.
The Gri££in / Collett arrangement exploded last March / April when Gri££in and Dowson got greedy and decided to outsource to Dowson nearly ALL the party’s various administrative functions, in particular, the PRINTING operation! They drooled over the huge cost of the party general election printing requirements. In a trice, Collett was out in the cold.
That is the reason why Collett made that notorious phone call to David Hannam in which he is said to have made threats against his former patron, Gri££in and also Dowson. Gri££in lodged a complaint with Humberside Police, backing up his allegation with a tape of the Collett / Hannam conversation.
The Police quickly realised that the tape was not the original complete version, but an edited version. (This was the version played to a select group of dunderhead officials in a private room during a conference of BNP officials. The dunderheads emerged from the private room to proclaimed to the conference that the tape verified Gri££in’s allegations against Collett.)
The Police requested Gri££in provide the original complete tape. He was unable to do this as the complete tape would provide the Police with evidence to consider prosecutions against him! So the Police released Collett without any charge. Tony Hancock believes that Gri££in has paid Collett off to keep him silent. Both could expect legal trouble if the truth about their former arrangement came out.
The media have allowed this Gri££in / Collett matter to drop. Why? They didn’t let MPs involved in bogus expenses claims off so lightly.
Gri££in really did think he was in with a chance of winning a Dagenham and that Barking BNP would not only retain all their seats on the Borough Council but also add to them to become the governing party. He believed the BNP would see an even bigger splurge of media publicity than was seen after the EU elections of last year, which prompted an unprecedented surge of income. This was Hubris. As you know, Nemesis always follows Hubris.
The perceived failure of the BNP in the general election and council elections, became all mixed up with the stench of financial corruption and a growing welter of factional divisions. The party has huge debts, not least in the area of legal actions. Only ONE of these (the EHRC’s action) can be said to be ‘state’ sponsored. There are big bills for a variety of other cases brought on solely by Gri££in’s stupidity and arrogance. In addition to these legal bills, there are all sorts of other debts. Gri££in has admitted to £500,000 worth of debts. I think this may be a significant underestimate.
In this atmosphere, it is hardly to be wondered at that the donations machine operated by Dowson has run out of steam. “Donation fatigue” has merged into widespread disillusionment. Unless some ‘Sugar Daddy’ comes along, then I think it is going to be all these mounting debts plus the party’s failure to present proper accounts to the Electoral Commission (and, for all I know, to the taxation and PAYE authorities ) that will subject the party to a slow strangulation.
If the party goes bankrupt, then its individual members could face a “joint and several” liability before the courts.
As to Brons, he was a lecturer in Law. If he didn’t have some suspicion that all was not right with Gri££in and his inner circle before he got elected with Gri££in to the EU Parliament (and he should have had!) then having been brought in close proximity to Gri££in after getting elected and having some of his EU funds mixed up with Gri££in’s to pay for support staff, then he should have been smelling stinking fish for quite some months. But he has kept his trap shut, other than to say that he will not stand again at the next EU election.
As to my opinion of Brons, I expressed this fully in an e-mail sent on 27th April this year to a Yorkshire BNP member who had earlier claimed to me that he had some contact with Brons and who had suggested that Brons might be the man to lead the BNP. Below is a shortened version of my reply to him:
“.....some months ago you sought to sell the virtues you think are possessed by this man [Andrew Brons]. Your text even hinted that Brons would be a fit and proper person to rescue the reputation of the BNP if as and when Gri££in departed from it. Both were elected as members of the European Parliament in June last year.
“I have had direct personal experience of Brons’ probity in office when in 1983, as Chairman of the National Front, he encouraged, facilitated and, finally, openly joined Gri££in, Joe Pearce, Ian Anderson and sundry others then on the NF National Directorate to act in flagrant disregard of the party’s constitution in order to mount an unlawful ‘coup’ which removed me from the party I had served faithfully, for pocket-money wages, since 1969.
“I was out of the door with one week’s wages in my pocket (after 14 years service!) and robbed of £1,250 of private funds (the only cash I had in the world) which I had lodged with the party for safe-keeping (!!!) whilst I was fighting a libel action launched by Peter Hain, then head of Anti Nazi League.
“These people even reneged on a Directorate decision to pay the £850 fine I had incurred as a result of being arrested for heckling Home Secretary Willie Whitelaw over the arrest and imprisonment of Young National Front leader Joe Pearce.
“So you see the financial corruption discussed in the below Searchlight article did not begin with last year’s translation of Gri££in and Brons to the EU parliament. Their behaviour patterns were well-established 26 years earlier.
“My companion, Mike, was likewise summarily dismissed. He, it may be noted, had been urged by Brons, whilst on a weekend social visit to Brons’ home a few years earlier, to give up his career with the civil service and join the party’s full-time staff to earn pittance wages, which he did willingly because he thought highly of Brons. Since that betrayal he has had nothing further to do with the nationalist cause. Forget the treatment accorded to me; the treatment of Mike is all the clue you need as to Brons’ shabby character.
“Brons, Gri££in, Pearce, Anderson & Co’s conduct in December 1983 was denounced by a High Court judge Mr. Justice Scott (now a Lord Justice of Appeal) as ‘contrary to the party’s constitution and unlawful. It was certainly disgraceful behaviour’. He awarded me a range of injunctions and Costs ..... but that verdict, due to the slowness of High Court litigation, came months too late to do me or the NF any good.
“In the face of such an admonition from a High Court judge, the chairman of any other association – from political party to bowls club – would have resigned his post in shame, but not Brons (who had a day job as a college law lecturer!).
“Brons did resign a year or so later, but not on a point of honour or principle, but simply because he could detect that the ship of which he was captain was sinking. Yes, ‘Captain’ Brons was the first, not the last, of that horrid crew to abandon ship.
“From these facts it can been seen that Brons behaved improperly to the point of dishonesty as NF Chairman in the period immediately before I was ousted from the party. Thereafter, when it became evident to him that he had helped the loonies take over the asylum, instead of doing his duty by making an effort to restore order and constitutional conduct, he abandoned the party to its fate and slunk away in the manner of a coward.
“The final collapse of the authentic NF can only be laid at the door of one man: Andrew Brons, the man who you have suggested is capable of rescuing the BNP from the financial squalor into which it is being pulled by Gri££in.
“That man is no more capable to saving the the BNP from Gri££in and his current cronies than he was capable of saving the NF from Gri££in and his then cronies in 1983. He’ll go with the flow and then when things go bad he’ll tip-toe as fast as he can out of the back door.
“I’m sorry if you find my account disillusioning, but you have a whole lot more disillusionment to come. The sooner you ‘get real’, the less pain you will feel.”
I hope all the above covers the areas of information of concern to you.