Barry Gardiner hits out at BNP over Wembley video

A FAR right group has described scenes of Wembley's diverse population as “horrific” in an online video.

Members of the British National Party (BNP) from South Wales can be heard saying “it's not our country anymore” as they drive down High Road, in footage uploaded to video sharing website Youtube.

As residents from the area's diverse communities walk passed the camera voices can be heard in the background saying “how can anybody say immigration is a good thing”.

One man says “you've got your pajamas on” as the camera, aimed out of a car window, passes a man wearing traditional clothing.

Barry Gardiner, MP for Brent North, hit out at the BNP in Parliament, describing the footage as “revolting” and challenging the party to contest his Brent North seat.

He said: “My understanding is that if you are born here you are British. To say “Briton” means people who came here several hundred years ago is simply rubbish.

“You can apply for citizenship or you can be born here. Most of the people in Wembley were born here.”

Simon Darby, vice chairman of the BNP, said: “There may well be a case for putting up a candidate in Brent North, I don't know.”

He added: “This isn't integration it's colonisation. It's not a question of integrating it's replacing the local population.

“That area was predominantly indigenous, white and British. It's fallen down and down where we are on course for there being no, or a negligible amount of indigenous people.” continues here

Submit A Story

Back to Top

BNP 'will take its first council' at next election

The British National Party is poised to win control of its first council in Britain to add to its success in the European elections earlier this year.

The Labour Party high command has been told that activists in east London believe Barking and Dagenham Council may well fall to the neo-fascist party in local elections next year.

The BNP’s leader has already announced he will stand against Labour minister Margaret Hodge in next year’s general election, and senior party figures now fear a “double-whammy” in the BNP’s heartland. It won 17 per cent of the vote in the 2005 general election.

The party, which has a long history of antisemitism, already holds 12 of the council’s 51 seats but only fielded 13 candidates at the last local elections. Labour, which controls the council, fears that a full slate of candidates could sweep the board and benefit from the carnival surrounding Nick Griffin.

BNP councillors in Barking include Richard Barnbrook, who also represents the party in the London Assembly.

Mrs Hodge, the daughter of Jewish refugees, is already raising money for a war chest to fight off the threat. Such is the parlous state of Labour finances that funds for staff for the campaign will have to be raised privately. Her supporters estimate she will need at least £100,000 to build a team that includes an experienced campaign manager and a dedicated press officer. The Minister for Culture and Tourism is likely to be making a direct appeal to high-value donors from the Jewish community.

She is likely to run a campaign based on her own high profile locally, recognising that the party and Gordon Brown are unpopular in Barking. Local activists will look to shore up her support by concentrating on the anti-BNP vote rather than attempting to win back Labour voters who have defected to the BNP. She will also have to deal with the fact that six per cent of BNP voters in her constituency are non-white.

One source close to the Labour MP said: “In the general election we will be selling the Margaret Hodge brand, but there could well be a BNP-controlled council.”

In 2006, Mrs Hodge said that 80 per cent of her constituents were tempted to vote BNP. She was criticised for boosting the extremist vote when the party became the largest after Labour in council elections later that year.

She said: “I have spent my life fighting racism and that’s as a result of experiencing antisemitism as a child as a first generation immigrant and the daughter of Jewish refugees. But I never thought I would have to take on the leader of a fascist party.

“I have spent three years exposing the true nature of BNP councillors in Barking and I am determined to expel them. continues here

Editorial : So there you have it ladies and gentlemen, proof positive of Semitic interference in parliamentary democracy, of course for me and indeed others, we recognised long ago now that the democracy lauded in the owned press and crowed about by duplicitous politicians, as our sons and daughters march with guns in other peoples lands, was not democracy at all, but simply a charade, a sham. Today of course, much of what passes for nationalism champions the party political system, champions it even as it knows it for the very fraud it is, many espouse electioneering as the be all and end all, which of course is perhaps the biggest lie.

Yet electioneering is important, important because it shows a nationalist face to the body politic, it presents to the people an alternative, an alternative that can never win of course but an alternative nonetheless. The BNP have endeavoured to embrace the Jewish community, even to the extent of advocating their pro-Zionist agenda, an agenda that breeds hate, kills with impunity civilians of all ages and leads to a very real threat upon our own streets, it is for this reason that nationalists like myself can never support the BNP, oh we can support certain actions, praise when praise is needed, yet on fundamental issues traditional nationalism can never agree and after all, the killing of civilians and the stealing of a nation state can never be condoned by true nationalists.

For many, the very experience of the multicultural experiment leads them down the road of only hate, so bitter have they become at the behaviour of non-whites that they cannot and indeed will not, address issues clearly; they simply cannot see the wood for the trees. I myself have faced assault and physical attack over the years, in one case knife wielding Muslims endeavoured to dispatch me from this world and of course, growing up amongst it all from an early age, I know only too well the range and indeed scope of attacks against my community. Yet understanding the motivation, does not mean I can condone the result, certainly it is somewhat difficult to campaign for justice for others, whose brethren do the very same thing within your own land, that is to say, colonise it and attack for religious or racial reasons the people within, it is this very resentment that pro-Zionist forces now channel, with the result ironically of shoring up the hatred.

Yet we must remember here that the firebrands within the Muslim community are indeed a minority and it would not come as much of a surprise, if in later times it was discovered that many such people worked for other masters, masters wholly unconnected with the cause they now espouse, in the middle-east such people are well-known and indeed even amongst the nationalist community such people have played out actions and it is believed still do. The fact is that Islam is a religion, nothing more nothing less, its practices grate against western sensibilities yet it is a child of the east and should of course reside there, the real issue is racial, cultural and demographical. It is not Islam per-se that is the threat but the sheer amount of non-whites permitted entrance, the loss of whole towns and soon cities to these people, it is not about the religion, Sikhs and Hindus have a similar effect upon our chances of survival, as indeed do Christian negroes from the West Indies, yet forces alien in themselves conspire to present it as an Islamic threat only, this then the split within nationalism, this then the divide defined.

Yet for all their pro-Zionist rhetoric, for all their support of Israel the Jewish community still attack them, crow about it openly in the press, yet pro-BNP websites and weblogs will still maintain the, Islam is evil and Jews are really quite nice nonsense, in point of fact there are good and bad in all races, many Jews are lovely people, have no desire to alter the west and seek to exist peacefully in co-existence, yet the same can be said for many Muslims, who wish also merely to live and co-exist, the issue for many is economic, in that the chances for a better life here far surpass that of their respective homelands, yet whilst understandable on a personal level, this in no way equates to a good enough reason, to literally stealThe Minister for Culture and Tourism is likely to be making a direct appeal to high-value donors from the Jewish community. a country and indeed a continent from an indigenous people, which is now the case. Another point to make here is that, it is the Jewish community in the main, that fund and maintain organisations that have been set up with the express purpose of beating down the voices of indigenous disapproval, it is the Jewish community that openly declare war upon nationalists, it beggars belief therefore the support they then receive from the anti-Islamic crank fringe that like to portray themselves as nationalist.

We can never know the absolute true facts of gentile, Jewish relations, all we have to go on is historical record that will in any event come down in favour of the community the writer hails from, yet if we are to take anything away from such testimony it is this, the Jewish community for whatever reason have consistently undermined and attacked the structure and traditions of the west, from every position. Today of course we live to all intents and purposes in a secular democracy and it would appear that thee only religion that still opposes from a spiritual standpoint is Islam, we may not like this truth however it is truth nonetheless. At one time Christianity acted as a buffer to all, even to Islam yet the attacks upon it which reached conclusions in the heady days of the sixties proved disastrous and now the church or much of it is collaborative in nature, assisting the rise of secular individualism rather than combating the many evils that beset us.

The very first way to undermine a belief system and indeed a life-system is to vilify it. to make of it an ostracized creed, further if one can literally split said belief system right down the middle, create a liberal and hard-line split, then the job is on the way to completion, the old maxim, divide and conquer rings ever true. Of course as I have written before, this was done originally against Christianity, a time now known as the reformation, yet it was the dissemination of reformist ideas that ushered in decline, not in fact the ideas behind them. Certainly Martin Luther recognised Semitic influence and indeed famously railed against it, yet it is the minor splits within that were augmented in Amsterdam that ended Christian unity and would help to crush its dominance sometime later.

Mrs Hodge, the daughter of Jewish refugees, is already raising money for a war chest to fight off the threat. We see to this day its effects, the fratricide amongst kindred peoples within Europe based upon that very split ,the rise of the lodge system ,the re-admittance of Jewry, the formation of the banking system and the eventual warring between the nation states of Europe. Certainly then, the aim was to remove power from Christianity and place power within an, at that time, powerful and naturally separate country, a country geographically challenging to invaders, that country our own. On the continent the lodge system had infiltrated Flanders, Christians were butchered, men women and children, priests tortured and hung, nuns raped repeatedly, tortured ,dismembered and an attack of such intensity directed against traditional Christianity as to be a holocaust, we hear much of the inquisition yet little of this. Much of the bloodshed was carried out by Jews, by individuals who had hidden their faith at first espousing the Protestant faith although later Calvinism, which is itself sometimes referred to as reformed.

Unsurprisingly Calvinism held out no opposition to usury espousing the charging of interest as being, not immoral nor indeed against gods teaching, this then set the stage for much debate, much killing and much chaos, certain elements thrive under chaos’s clock and indeed they did, the early reformers, influenced by the merchants of Amsterdam and Venice killed off Europe’s defence, rendered future peoples to supranational evil and heralded in our extinction, would they but know, it some did. Behind this of course Jewry ,oh some can dispute it, some can call it anti-Semitism however, it is all historical fact, all truth and nothing more, yet the attack upon the west, whether instigated out of fear or indeed out of loathing is an attack nonetheless and as such the Jewish community, merited and still do contestation. It is a lie, a dammed lie to even suggest that Jewry works for any other interest bar its own, yet there are those who would persist with this lie, further they disparage in this age the truth teller, the honest, call them a hater, just as those who would contest non-white colonisation are belittled as haters.

Recognising the hand of Jewry within anti-people movements in no way equates to hatred ,recognising that on the surface water appears weaker than stone in no way equates to a hatred of water, merely that one recognises that water has disproportionate power when contrasted with its appearance, the same to with the Jewish community. In this JC article it is stated that Mrs Hodge “is already raising money for a war chest” and that, “funds for staff for the campaign will have to be raised privately”, one can only imagine from what community such funds will come, is it not the case therefore that merely by this act parliamentary democracy as they tell us it is, is swayed by the moneymen ,that those who have the largest “war chest” ,win the battle, history tells us it is so.


Submit A Story

Back to Top

ANGER AT £143K COST OF PROTECTING BNP BOSS

POLICE protection for BNP leader Nick Griffin when he appeared on the BBC’s Question Time cost taxpayers £143,000, it emerged yesterday.

Critics of the decision to have him on the programme said BBC bosses and the BNP should have shouldered the cost and not the public.

The Metropolitan Police were forced to stage a huge operation last month when anti-BNP campaigners protested outside the BBC’s west London HQ.

Dealing with the demo cost the Met £109,000 to pay for the thousands of extra officers required, another £13,000 in overtime and £21,000 to close roads, put up barriers and fly a helicopter.

The force is funded by the Exchequer and the Greater London Authority. Labour MP Andy Slaughter, whose constituency covers the Wood Lane Television Centre, said BBC bosses should pay out of the £17.5 million they received in bonuses last year.

Labour former minister Denis MacShane added: “The BBC and the BNP should be splitting that bill between them. It was a BBC stunt. It was not a normal Question Time and it gave him a chance to get huge exposure.

“The test will be in the next round of local and Parliamentary elections, where I fear the BNP vote will go up because of the grotesque misjudgment of the BBC. They shouldn’t expect taxpayers to foot the bill for their folly.’’

A BBC spokesman would only say: “We never discuss security matters.’’ continues here

Submit A Story

Back to Top

NHS contractors in blackmail probe

MADRID — Spanish police Saturday detained 28 members of a far-right party who tried to disrupt an event held by a rival far-right group attended by British National Party leader Nick Griffin at a Madrid hotel.

The detained are all members of Spain's far-right Patriotic Socialist Movement and they were arrested after they attacked doormen at the hotel who were trying to prevent them from entering, a police spokesman said.

Four people were lightly injured in the scuffle but did not require medical care, he added.

The National Democracy Party which staged the event said it had requested police protection because of fears that far-left groups might try to disrupt it as has happened in the past.

It was not immediately clear why members of the Patriotic Socialist Movement tried to disrupt the event, which featured in addition to Griffin, the leader of Italian far-right party Forza Nuova, Roberto Fiore, and National Democracy leader Manuel Canduela.continues here

Back to Top

BNP signs its first non-white member...

... but he's only joined because he hates Muslims

An elderly Sikh who describes Islam as a "beast" and once provided a character reference for Nick Griffin during his racial hatred trial is set to become the British National Party's first non-white member.

Rajinder Singh, an anti-Islam activist in his late seventies who blames Muslims for the death of his father during the Partition of India in 1947, has been sympathetic towards Britain's far-right party for much of the past decade even though he currently remains barred from becoming a member because of the colour of his skin.

But last weekend the BNP's leadership took their first steps towards dropping its membership ban on non-whites after the Human Rights Commission threatened the party with legal action. The move will be put to a vote of members soon.

Martin Wingfield, the BNP's communications and campaigns officer, has already put forward the case for Mr Singh's membership, telling members on its website: "I say adapt and survive and give the brave and loyal Rajinder Singh the honour of becoming the first ethnic minority member of the BNP."

A BNP spokesman said last night: "He is perhaps the kind of immigrant you want if you are going to have them."

Mr Singh, a former teacher from Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, says he would be "honoured" to become a card-carrying member of the BNP.

Explaining his motives, Mr Singh said: "I am a retired teacher, living a quiet life. I got in touch with the BNP on certain core policies that appeal to me. I also admire them since they are on their own patch, and do not wish to let anyone else oust them from the land of their ancestors."

Mr Singh and another Sikh from Slough who goes by the pseudonym Ammo Singh have previously co-operated with the BNP and have been used by the party's leadership to try to woo Asian supporters, particularly Hindus and Sikhs living in areas where tensions with Muslims run high. The party has had little success, however, with all mainstream Sikh and Hindu groups widely condemning the BNP.

But Rajinder Singh and Ammo Singh – who keeps his identity secret but is thought to be an accountant in his late thirties – have answered Mr Griffin's call, thanks to the BNP's staunchly anti-Islamic rhetoric since September 11.

In December 2001, Ammo Singh claimed he had helped the BNP distribute thousands of anti-Islamic leaflets in Southall, west London, but recently he has kept a low profile. Rajinder Singh, on the other hand, has begun to appear in BNP literature more frequently, writing for the party's newspaper, Freedom, and appearing on the internet television channel, BNPTV.

His intense dislike of Islam appears to stem back to his father's death during the Partition of India, which led to the deaths of an estimated two million Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus. "I come from partitioned Punjab that saw a lot of bloodshed in 1947," he said. "Anyone escaping that genocide would pray to God, [say] never again and vote for BNP." continues here

Back to Top

Christians 'would rather vote BNP than Labour', pastor claims

Christians would rather vote for the British National Party than Labour because they are so disillusioned with the Government’s discrimination against them, a pastor has claimed. 

Reverend George Hargreaves, who leads the conservative Christian Party, said people were “sick” of “Labour’s anti-Christian, anti-free speech agenda and laws”.

Rev Hargreaves said: “Christians in the past may have voted Labour, but [they] have silenced Christians and their anti-traditional family policies have created a vacuum which Nick Griffin can fill."

Earlier, this week, Mr Griffin, the BNP's leader, announced he was to stand against Margaret Hodge, the culture minister, in her constituency of Barking, in east London.

Mr Griffin claimed Labour had “let the borough down in a catastrophic way”.

Rev Hargreaves said Gordon Brown should stop Mrs Hodge from seeking re-election and let his party’s candidate, Paula Watson, stand against Mr Griffin, as she had the only chance of “stopping the racist”.

Mrs Hodge has a majority of 8,883. The BNP won its first two seats in the European Parliament last June.

Last September, Shirley Chaplin, 54, a Christian nurse, felt forced to leave her job for an administrative position at the Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital, after her managers ordered her to remove her crucifix for health and safety reasons. continues here

Back to Top

BNP Annual Conference Gives Go-Ahead for Constitutional Change

The British National Party’s annual conference has given the green light for an amended party constitution containing changed admission criteria to be put to a vote by the general membership of the party, deputy leader and party press officer Simon Darby said tonight.

The decision, taken after what Mr Darby described as a “sensible and rational debate” means that the party is now in compliance with the London County Court order.

“The actual amended constitution was not submitted to the conference,” Mr Darby said. “That will be submitted to an EGM to be held before the end of this year or early January.”

The amended constitution will ensure that the BNP will fully comply with the yet to be enacted Equalities Act with regard to party membership.

The conference also ratified the BNP’s participation in the new European Nationalist group which was formally launched last week.

The third and last motion to be dealt with on the first day of the conference was to discuss a Family Law document designed to provide a comprehensive policy statement on the topic. continues here

Editorial :

Well that was easy, easier in fact than the publics move towards reluctant acceptance, we now have no real representation, certainly the National Front endeavour to grow in strength, yet this is a long way from completion and so we have no voice, no voice at all for assailed whites in this country. It matters not the voice of a lone nationalist blogger, matters not the condemnation of a nationalist minded women of some years nor indeed the angry bitter vitriol of a young rightist male, all of us recognising capitulation and indeed betrayal. Typing this isn’t easy, there are those who profess nationalism, who attack the BNP on a purely personal basis, holding a dislike for Mr Griffin or some such grievance, there are also some who desire a street war, blood to flow and see no other solution, whilst there are nationalists like me, ordinary men and women, surrounded by a strange alien world, denied of our heritage, our country, jobs stolen and homes hard to come by, eking an existence in a world gone mad.

We, living in a country changed by force and condemned for opposing it ,nationalists like me realise that a violent revolution as espoused by some, is not the preferred option, how indeed can we support such a course, that will surely lead to the death of the innocent and the break-up of our country and indeed Europe. Yet having some intellect we realise that Europe is on course for bloodshed, that history dictates that disparate peoples simply cannot live together whilst one offends the other. This stance is far, far from racism, far from simply hating for hatreds sake, people such as I harbour no secret desire to take over the world, we have no plans for camps, wholesale slaughter or tyranny. Yet for nationalists like me, we fight for our very right to exist, to, it is hoped, prevent conflict and to adhere to natures plan, rather than impose against the will of the people, an agenda, it would seem that the BNP, for all their good, travel another road.

I could never have envisaged a day when a purported nationalist party, would simply bow down to leftist evil, when politically motivated spite would win the day over truth, realism and fact. It is a sad day, an awful day, a day in which I question greatly any chance now for my people, for if we have no representation, no decent party, offering a non-violent alternative to this madness then what chance we, what chance to free ourselves from the chains set upon us. I don’t really care what nu-nationalists think anymore, I don’t care what those who advocate violence or hatred think, for me it is and regardless it will continue to be above all, my people, my race the white race. Yet you never hear this from the BNP, today it is indigenous, it is coded wording, it comes across as deceitful and does I imagine, put off potential support and give a very real case to our enemies.

I ask you what is wrong with advocating racially, what is wrong with supporting your genotype, whilst wishing peace amongst all men, again what is wrong with recognising the detrimental influence of organised Jewry in our state of affairs, of recognising the immense power of money and the evil it conjures up within our society. What is wrong with speaking truth, striving for change without bowing to the very evil one claims to fight against, this proposed legislation was an attack for political reasons, motivated by opposition, by the fear that the people would have a voice and now at a stroke the BNP have silenced that voice, denied the people and help to usher in a new order. In many ways I consider nationalists like myself the middle ground, we not advocating pointless hatred and refusing on principle to fall at the feet of evil, we standing between the two sides espousing truth.

This site has been contacted many times, one subject of note, AAWR’s resistance to organised Jewry, I remember vividly one letter whereby the writer stated, “I would link to you if you dropped this stance”, of course I write now from memory, the said letter long since deleted, yet the theme crops up on many occasions, however, this site and indeed its author and those connected hold no hatred for Jewry per-se, just as we hold no hatred for the negro or the south Asian or indeed any non-white grouping or minority interest group. Our stance regarding Jewry is based upon historical fact, which is that, organised Jewry has attacked with relish gentile culture, tradition and yes genotype, it has attacked and continues to do so, pro-white parties and groups and it has crafted laws designed purely to inhibit or silence white dissent. At every level Jewry, for its own reasons has attacked the gentile world, certainly I would never advocate violence against this community, I recognise that they have as much right to practice their belief system as I mine, however, it is I believe a two way street and as long as Jewry en-bloc attacks the west then it must be opposed.

Some will balk at such a stance and in truth I no longer care, for truth is truth and to veer from it is akin to lying, yet I would ask the open-minded reader to simply investigate for themselves the crafters of race-relations law, the hand behind communism and its leftist incarnation in western Europe, I would ask the reader to recognise the very hypocrisy of the settled Jewish community within this country, in that they advocate for Israel whilst thwarting any endeavour for we to regain our country. There will never be a day that I will advocate the merciless killing of Jews or any other non-European individuals or groups, yet I will not sink to my knees purely to placate a hoodwinked people or indeed, a now hoodwinked nationalist movement.

It is hypocritical in extremis to support Jewry whilst maintaining a contrary position regarding Islam, or to lay claim to the moniker nationalist whilst supporting Israel, as she systematically slaughters a civilian population, all this and more contemporary nationalism advocates, I cannot and will not be a part of that. I believe that the Jewish question is as pertinent now as it has ever been, I take the position that no non-European group should dictate European affairs, why we lament the rise of Islamic political power whilst we are too frightened to mention the Jewish lobby, we complain incessantly about Islamic fraud within the political system whilst never contesting the immense influencing, on both a national and international stage, Jewry commits, so why one and not the other, have we really lost our principles to the extent that we will forego one evil and simply attack another because it is fashionable and is therefore an easier target. If that is the case then we are not nationalists, merely moulded by exterior forces, as has proved to be the case over this issue, at one time I heard, “why it’ll destroy the party if we contest this thing”, destroy the party, the party, is the party more important now than truth, reason or indeed the besieged white peoples of Europe.

What the BNP are doing is a great, great wrong, I know not if it has been infiltrated as some say or if Mr Griffin desires great wealth as others state, I don’t and cannot know the reasoning but I can lament the decision, I can comment on direction, on betrayal and capitulation. There some within what passes for British nationalism that oppose the BNP regardless, it is as if they can do nothing right, there are others, equally as damaging who support the BNP regardless and yet lost in their ridiculous warring, covered by the smoke of stupidity a people remain lost, declining and heading for extinction, that is the truth the real truth and that is what the BNP now fail to defend, by their very acceptance of this policy. So I don’t know, perhaps it is the end, perhaps it has been the end for a very long time and I didn’t know it, certainly upon the street nationalism has no voice, amongst our community any cautioning voice has long-sine drifted away in a egalitarian wind, the people befuddled and led and no force to defend them.

I grow tired I suppose, so much rubbish, one group against the other, such squabbling, yet true nationalism is so very much more than that, so much more than politician point-scoring, ego-driven sparring and abject capitulation to malevolence. I don’t know how the BNP can go on, certainly it cannot consider itself nationalist and I know that, those that follow it now will not accept such a position, fooling themselves and indeed those new to the fray, yet they are not nationalist and have not been for a very long time. There must be a middle-ground within nationalism, a central place where real truth remains, where individuals can turn in times of need, where for our country and much more importantly, for our people, there is always hope, for if we grab it, tomorrow belongs to us.

Back to top

New far-right pan-European party set for launch

A new pan-European alliance of far-right political parties will be launched in parliament later this week.

The alliance was unable to muster the minimum membership of seven member states which is required to form a pan-European party under EU funding rules.

It currently has members from six countries, including the UK, France, Belgium, Italy, Hungary and Austria.

Under parliamentary rules, the pan-European party would have had to be registered by 1 October in order to qualify for EU funding for the coming 12 months.

Depending on the number of MEPs who signed up to it, the party could have qualified for up to €1m in funding.

Nick Griffin, whose British National party is one of those which has signed up to the new party, admitted, however, that it had been unable to meet the necessary deadline.

But he said the aim was still to set up a party, to be called the Alliance of European National Movements.

"The only difference is that we will not have EU funding which I suppose will save the taxpayer a bob or two," he said.

The group will be formally announced at a news conference in parliament on Thursday.

Griffin, who will attend the event, said, "We missed the deadline this year but still intend to form a Europe-wide alliance of like-minded parties. We have support from six member states which is still one short of the number required but there is nothing to stop us still establishing a party.

"The party can still make an impact even if we will not benefit from EU funding."

Its members, who also include France's National Front, have agreed to abide by a declaration of common goals drafted by the far-right leader.

The coalition has pledged to oppose "supranational bodies like the EU which seek to limit the rights of individual countries". continues here

Man cleared of BNP racial abuse

A man accused of racially abusing British National Party (BNP) leader Nick Griffin has been cleared.

A jury at Preston Crown Court took just 45 minutes to find Tauriq Khalid not guilty of using racially abusive threatening behaviour.

The 23-year-old was accused of shouting derisory comments at Mr Griffin and fellow BNP members outside Burnley police station last November. "I think it's unfortunate and I think it's wrong but that's the jury's right. They saw all the evidence, I accept their decision

Mr Griffin said he "would not lose any sleep" over the verdict.

Mr Khalid had admitted shouting "get out of Burnley" but denied being racist.

He said his actions had been "spur of the moment". He admitted sticking two fingers up at the BNP members, but denied any racial motivation.

Mr Griffin had accused Mr Khalid of making a gun gesture towards him as he drove past him, but Mr Khalid had strongly denied the BNP leader's accusations.

He told the jury he stopped his silver Vauxhall Astra and swore at him while making the V-sign with his fingers.

Mr Griffin, however, claimed he was being sworn at by the young Asian man because he was white.

Although he did not hear everything that Mr Khalid said, he told the jury he interpreted his words as a threat to kill or shoot him, prompting him to leave the demonstration fearing for his safety.

Mr Khalid declined to comment as he left court.

Mr Griffin said the verdict was "unfortunate" but that he accepted the jury's decision.

"I think it's unfortunate and I think it's wrong but that's the jury's right," he said. "They saw all the evidence, I accept their decision.

"I know that man threatened me without a shadow of a doubt but he, or his defence counsel, have managed to convince them otherwise. continues here

BNP's Nick Griffin greeted with protest in Lanarkshire

Far-right party leader pelted with eggs as he arrives for radio phone-in.

British National Party leader Nick Griffin has been met with protests as he appeared at a radio station in Hamilton.

The far-right politician was pelted with eggs as he made his way to the station's studios.

Around 40 demonstrators heckled him as he arrived for a morning phone-in on the L107 station less than a week after his controversial appearance on the BBC's Question Time.

L107 programme director Derek McIntyre defended the decision to have the BNP leader on but admitted it was "commercial suicide".
He said: "We have received 50 emails this morning from people withdrawing their support for the station and two or three advertisers have said they are pulling out."

Strathclyde Police said three arrests were made at the protest. continues here

BNP frozen out at the Commons

All Euro MPs will today be barred from the Commons in the wake of the British National Party's poll victories.

BNP leader Nick Griffin and his fascist sidekick Andrew Brons are entitled to Westminster security passes after being elected to the European Parliament in June.

But the pair and 70 other British MEPs will lose them under a Commons motion due to be passed this evening.

Harriet Harman tabled it in her role as Leader of the House because of "growing pressure on facilities".

Her spokesman said the BNP was not singled out and added: "It is about all MEPs."

But one Labour whip said of the far-right, racist BNP: "These are not people you want around. Some of their supporters are not beyond doing physical harm." continues here

BNP 'exploiting military charities' as it plans to hijack poppy appeal

The BNP has been exploiting public support for British troops by holding fundraising drives for military charities.

The far-right party has offered its help to struggling charities, claiming that it is “in the interests of the British people”, and has highlighted a series of donations to soldiers and veterans’ organisations on its website. The party intends to hijack the Poppy Appeal by calling on its members to sell poppies for the Royal British Legion. There are also plans to hold a book auction to raise money for Help for Heroes, a charity for injured soldiers.

However, The Times has learnt that the BNP has vastly exaggerated the amount of money it has given. On other occasions it has taken credit for donations given by individual members.

Nick Griffin, the party leader, claimed on its website that the BNP gave £25,000 “worth of help” to a struggling veterans’ charity in Scotland known as FEBA, an acronym for the military term, Forward Edge of Battle Area. But the organisation, which accepted support from the BNP, saying that otherwise it would have to shut down, said it had been given just £3,000 by a local party activist and some heating equipment from the party.

Simon Darby, the deputy leader of the BNP, said that “sometimes we gild the lily a little bit” in relation to its website claims. “But all political parties do that,” he told The Times.

Anti-BNP campaigners accused the party of exploiting the concerns of voters about British involvement in Afghanistan for political gain. They said that its donation claims were more likely to be “hollow promises”.

The party has also highlighted, on its website, individual donations by its members to organisations including the Royal British Legion and the Gurkha Welfare Trust.

Mr Darby said: “Sometimes it’s not us, it’s our members giving it on our behalf. It’s much the same thing. We’re one big family. That’s the way we are.”

Charities expressed concern that individual donations were being used for political gain, placing them in an awkward position because it was impossible to track the origin of payments. The Royal British Legion was recently offered a donation from Rachel Firth, from Huddersfield, who happened to be a member of the BNP.

The Legion, which does not accept party donations, agreed to take the money when Ms Firth assured the charity that it would not be used for political gain.

Robert Lee, a spokesman for the Legion, said that news of the donation was subsequently on the BNP website even though the money had not yet arrived.

The Gurkha Welfare Trust has repeatedly asked the BNP to take down news from its website of a donation that was made by an individual BNP member. The party has refused.

Help For Heroes said that it would accept money from any source, provided that it was legal.

The BNP plans to auction two books by Andy McNab, the former SAS trooper, to raise money for the charity. Mr McNab has demanded the books back and said that he was “sick to the stomach” about the situation. continues here

We must fight BNP, not just try to ignore it

Later this month, British National Party leader Nick Griffin will be on the panel of the BBC's Question Time programme. It is a totemic achievement for his political movement and the far-Right in Britain, granting Griffin and the BNP all the dignity of the political mainstream.

The ensuing hysterics and denunciations remind us yet again that most British politicians, and the chattering class as a whole, have not the least idea how to combat the BNP. Nor do they have any understanding of how it now manages to boast quite a few local councillors and, since early June, two British seats in the European Parliament. 

One needs scarcely restate that the British National Party is a repugnant outfit of racist ideology and repulsive aims. Only white, 'indigenous' people are allowed to join. The BNP's central, although increasingly coded, policy is the expulsion of millions of our fellow citizens, purely on account of the colour of their skin - including people who are the great-grandchildren of immigrants.

In addition, the BNP is anti-Semitic, although these days it pays more public attention to Muslims. Griffin himself is a Holocaust denier, insisting that 'nonsense about gas chambers is exposed as a total lie'.

His party seeks the repeal of all our anti-discrimination laws, thinks we should all be allowed to keep guns and bullets in our homes, wants to restore both capital and corporal punishment, and takes a touching interest in the humane treatment of animals. Griffin, a Cambridge graduate and an able man, has worked hard to recast the BNP image. Today it is increasingly one of family men, sharp suits and soothing tones. And recent policy resolutions have shrouded the BNP's views in misleading new language.

Virtually every tenet is at once affirmed and repudiated in a mist of words. Any attempt to assert, quite accurately, what the BNP truly believes is met with outraged citation of some recent, determinedly fudged 'official' position.

Yet a succession of undercover reporters and hidden-camera documentaries have pitilessly exposed the yawning gulf between what the party declares aloud and what its Obergruppenfuhrers say in private.

Back in 2005, BNP press officer Phil Edwards declared: 'Black kids are growing up dysfunctional, low IQ, low achievers that drain our welfare benefits and the prison system and probably go and mug you.'

Confronted with the tape by Sky News the following year, he argued: 'If I had thought I was going to be recorded... I would not have used such intemperate language but, let's be honest, the facts are there.'

Nevertheless, no sensible person can blame the BBC for granting the British National Party its spot on Question Time. The Corporation' s charter expressly enjoins impartiality in all things political, and there is no just ground on which a perfectly legal political party with significant electoral support can be denied a seat at the cool kids' table.

In Scotland, for the time being, the BNP has failed to win any traction - not because the Scots are peculiarly urbane and tolerant but because this is a distinctly different social landscape.

Here, there have been other, more respectable outlets for political frustration, from the SNP to the far-Left. But the SNP is now the Establishment at Holyrood, the Scottish Socialist Party has imploded, and Fife no longer elects Communist councillors. We remain far too complacent about our own supposed immunity to racist politics - there is nothing funny about our own baleful hatred of the English - and there should be legitimate concern about the advance of far-Right racist politics elsewhere in these islands.

Even in the 1930s, Sir Oswald Mosley and the faintly comic Blackshirts came nowhere near the mass support currently enjoyed by the BNP. In fact, sympathy for the far-Right tends to build under protracted periods of government by the Left.

In the 1970s, the National Front briefly boomed in Britain, winning the odd council seat and beating the Liberals (and, on one appalling occasion, even the Conservatives) in Parliamentary by-elections.

And it is worth remembering the hinge-point in its sudden and very rapid decline - when Margaret Thatcher, then Leader of the Opposition, in January 1978, took doughty advantage of a TV interview and refused to duck a question on immigration.

'People are really rather afraid that this country might be swamped by people with a different culture,' she declared.

' We do have to hold out the prospect of an end to immigration - except, of course, for compassionate cases.'

She pointed out that many recent arrivals, too, were 'fearful that their position might be put in jeopardy, or people might be hostile to them, unless we cut down the incoming numbers'.

Not since Enoch Powell's infamous Birmingham speech, a decade earlier, had a British politician dared say anything so racially provocative. Today, a mere Tory candidate would be thrown out just for saying 'swamped'.

Thatcher, of course, was no bigot. In government, apart from firmly tightening rules on British citizenship, she did very little to match her rhetoric. But what she had done - and it was important - was to acknowledge widespread public concern and to touch base with millions of ordinary, anxious voters. From that point, National Front fortunes declined remorselessly.

The British National Party cannot be beaten by ostracism. It cannot be dissected, exposed and destroyed when its opponents refuse to share a platform or a studio with its leaders, refuse even to engage in argument and offer no rebuttal, save the cry of 'racists!'.

In fact, the BNP rejoices in just such martyrdom. It positively prospers when blasted by mainstream politicians who denounce it in language that, by implication, insults those who vote for it. The BNP takes full, current advantage of an order where at present, on certain issues such as immigration, our relations with Europe, violent crime and family breakdown, our political class holds a position dangerously at variance with public opinion.

Nor is the BNP taking the fight to the intensely contested marginal seats, but to the Labour rotten-boroughs of Greater London and, especially, northern England.

Scarcely any MPs have direct experience of confronting the BNP. Only a handful, such as Jon Cruddas of Dagenham, are any good at it and none holds high position in any of the major parties. Most MPs fatally underestimate the guile of Nick Griffin, who has spent his entire career demonstrating he is more than a thug in a suit.

Racist, far-Right politics will not be destroyed as a serious force by righteous flight, but by engagement; not by name-calling, but by scrutiny. Above all, there must be wholesale reform of our professional politics, with open-primary selection of candidates and 'recall' procedures to remove corrupt and dead-beat MPs.

And we must pay attention to valid anxieties - the extraordinary looseness of our borders, and the unabashed, hateful, cultural war waged by members of the minority lunatic fringe of British Islam against their adopted country. continues here

Should charities accept cash from the BNP?

The Royal British Legion is reconsidering plans to accept a donation from a member of the far-right party, but Help for Heroes has confirmed it will accept money from a fundraising auction. Mathew Little explores a dilemma that divides the sector

The question of whether charities should accept donations from the far-right British National Party has come to the fore because of the Royal British Legion case.

The legion last week said it would reverse the decision to accept an expected donation from a BNP member if it felt the gift was being politically exploited. But Help for Heroes has said it would take the proceeds from a book auction that the party is planning to run.

The BNP itself has insisted that its members and local branches will continue to raise money for charity. It has promised to publicise charitable donations by members and branches, so more charities might soon face the glare of publicity after receiving donations they could begin to wish had never been offered.

Richard Marsh, an independent commentator and former director of the Impact Coalition, said that donations from sources such as the BNP would be "profoundly uncomfortable" for a charity and, for the sake of their reputation, they should say no in such circumstances.

"One of the greatest assets any charity has is its reputation, and one of the things that can damage that reputation is receiving donations from sources that don't share the same set of values," he said. "The BNP doesn't believe in the sort of things we do. A charity is perfectly at liberty to say no".

Of seven major charities contacted by Third Sector to find out if they would accept donations from the BNP, only two responded. The Children's Society said "of course not"; Cancer Research UK said it reserved the right to refuse donations where they might damage its reputation or offend supporters, and would consider whether a donation from the BNP would be damaging if the case arose.

Patrick Cox, chief executive of the Small Charities Coalition, said charities should be sure a donation would damage other fundraising efforts before declining it. "You have to have a good reason to turn money away, wherever it comes from," he said. "I don't think you can reject it because you might upset a few people. If it's just because you don't believe in their views, then I don't think that's good enough."

Cox is also chief executive of the Male Cancer Awareness Campaign and said his charity probably would accept a donation from the BNP. "To be honest, I suppose we would," he said. "We are trying to educate every man, so we would take it." continues here

Far-right MEP Griffin denies reports of 'financial collapse

British National Party leader Nick Griffin has hit back at allegations his party is on the verge of financial collapse.

Reports in the British press suggest that Griffin, an MEP for north west England, has written to every BNP member asking for donations "to keep the wolves from the door".

According to the Times newspaper he is looking for over €160,000 to shore up the party's finances, while insisting that the €650,000 used to fight the European election campaign in June was spent wisely.

The letter sent to members says, "Our success [in the European elections] has unleashed the furies of hell against us, now our very existence is being challenged, and it is costing us dear. Precisely because of our political success we are now fighting for our very existence."

It is reported that the letter than offers the party faithful a special life-membership package, costing €430, to try to raise the levels of their coffers.

However, Griffin told this website that the mail shot was "part of regular fund-raising activity" and the party had a turnover of €2.5m, making it "the only party in the UK that wasn't massively in the red".

He says that there is certainly "lots of money coming in and lots going out", but this is the result of groups such as the equality and human rights commission trying "to bleed our coffers dry ahead of an election so we can't fight it as well".

The Times also claims that Griffin's party is to be assessed by the UK's electoral commission over concerns that although large amounts were spent in the June election, no donations were recorded for the same period. continues here

Nick Griffin appeals for donations as BNP ‘fights for its existence’

Nick Griffin has warned that the BNP is on the verge of collapse and has written to every party activist appealing for money, The Times has learnt.

As he prepares to make his debut on BBC1’s Question Time next month, the far-right leader urged supporters to hand over £150,000 to “keep the wolves at bay”. He said that attacks on the party were to blame for its ailing fortunes, singling out Operation Black Vote, which campaigns for ethnic minority candidates. Mr Griffin accused the organisation of trying “to flood the party in order to take over and destroy it”.

He insisted that his party had spent wisely the £600,000 it used to fight the European election campaign in June. Fresh questions have been raised about the party’s financing because no single donation was registered to the Electoral Commission during the relevant quarter.

Mr Griffin added: “Our success [in the European elections] has unleashed the furies of hell against us, now our very existence is being challenged, and it is costing us dear! Precisely because of our political success we are now fighting for our very existence!”.

The party has devised a special life-membership package, costing £395 which includes a watch inscribed with F.S.I.D — Freedom, security, identity, democracy — as part of the opening offer. New members also get a life-membership certificate parchment scroll and a limited edition signed portrait of Mr Griffin, as well as a gold embossed life-membership card. In the elections in June, the party achieved its best result, gaining two seats in the European Parliament after an aggressive leafleting campaign around the country.

Last month Peter Wardle, the chief executive of the Electoral Commission, said that the watchdog would assess the BNP’s accounting systems. Mr Griffin said yesterday that donations needed to be registered only if they exceeded £5,000 and that most of the BNP’s funding comes from branch meetings and from a large members database where people donate £10-£20. He said that there were no outstanding issues with the commission as far as he was aware.

Mr Griffin will appear with a panel including Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, on an edition of Question Time to be recorded in London on October 22. continues here

EDITOR'S Comment: Didn't the Times used to be an honest newspaper or at least less of a gutter press rag.

Who's afraid of the BNP?

With two seats in the European Parliament the BNP has made a leap towards the political mainstream. But, asks Kenan Malik, should those who have so far shunned the party now engage with them?

Next month Nick Griffin, leader of the far-right British National Party, will take his seat at the BBC's Question Time table. Around that table there will be the justice secretary and Labour MP, Jack Straw, and representatives from the other two main political parties.

Mr Straw's decision to share a platform with the BNP is a reversal of Labour Party policy has prompted soul searching among some members. Until now, Labour has refused to appear alongside the BNP and Home Secretary Alan Johnson has publicly stated that he would not debate with someone he considers to be a racist.

For the BBC, the success of two BNP candidates - including Mr Griffin himself - in the Euro elections in June meant that an invitation to Question Time was inevitable. Ric Bailey, chief political advisor to the BBC, says that the corporation "cannot discriminate between parties according to their policies. That would be a breach of impartiality".

With others, however, the impartiality argument cuts little ice. Chris Keates, general secretary of Britain's largest teachers' union, the NASUWT, which has been running a campaign to stop the BNP, is outraged at the idea of Nick Griffin on Question Time.

"The BBC can quite legitimately make a distinction between the BNP and other political parties, and not give them a platform to promote racial hatred, intolerance and violence," she says.

The controversy over Question Time puts in sharp focus a debate that has been brewing since the BNP's success in the Euro elections: how should a liberal democratic society respond to an organisation such as the BNP? Should the political mainstream ostracise the BNP, or engage with it? And if engage, how?

Unlike in other European nations, the far right has never won mass support in Britain, nor tasted electoral success.

Oswald Mosley's Blackshirts in the 1930s and the National Front in the 1970s were openly racist organisations, many of whose members were involved in violent actions. Compared with their Continental cousins, however, they were marginal groups, with virtually no political presence.

The roots of today's BNP lie in that political tradition. Formed in 1982, it was, in its early years, very similar to the NF in its ideas, policies and support. From the late 1990s onwards, however, the party embarked on a programme of "modernisation" under its new leader, Nick Griffin.

Learning from the successes of French Front National, the party tried to give up its skinhead image, swapping bovver boots for sober suits.

Nick Griffin says the bovver boot image of the BNP is "something created mainly by hysterical media lies" and insists the BNP is no longer a racist party.

How genuine the conversion has been may be gauged by the party's constitution which is still, and I quote from it, "wholly opposed to any form of racial integration between British and non-European peoples" and believes in restoring "the overwhelmingly white make up of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948".

Osmosis

While one might rightly be cynical about the rebranding of the BNP, what has indubitably changed is the nature of its support.
During June's Euro elections, the polling organisation YouGov conducted a survey of about 32,000 voters, including more than 1,100 BNP supporters. About half the BNP voters, YouGov found, were out-and-out racists, many of whom would probably have supported the party in its pre-modernization days.

But they've been joined by a swath of new supporters whose hostility towards immigrants is shaped less by old-fashioned racism than by a new-fangled sense of fear and insecurity. Many are traditional Labour supporters who now feel abandoned by the political mainstream, anxious about their future and distrustful of any figure of authority.

Little will sway the views of the hard-line racists, YouGov's Peter Kellner believes. But those drawn to the BNP because they have become alienated from the mainstream political process should not simply be dismissed as bigots by the mainstream. It is the failure to engage with them, and with their fears and concerns, that helped pave their way to the far right.

But just as fear is driving many towards the BNP, it is also shaping much of the response to the BNP.

The result is an incoherent and illiberal reaction, vacillating between demonising the BNP and pandering to its prejudices. Some critics of the BNP fear that allowing the party into public forums, such as Question Time, can only increase its support.

The writer and economist Philippe Legrain is unimpressed. "It shows a complete lack of trust in the British people to suggest that if they're exposed to racist views on television, they'll all be swayed by them."

The best way to deal with obnoxious views is through open debate, not censorship, he says.

Others fear that support for the BNP will continue to grow unless mainstream politicians accept that indigenous Britons are being unfairly treated. It's a view that has led many politicians who are not racist nevertheless to echo the claims of the far-right.

When Gordon Brown talked of "British jobs for British workers", he adopted a slogan last heard on National Front demonstrations in the 1980s. continues here

Anger at BNP's BBC platform

THE BBC's decision to give airtime to the BNP has upset community leaders.


BNP leader Nick Griffin has expressed his delight after being told he will be able to appear on the BBC's Question Time - although a formal invitation has yet to be extended.

Other parties, especially Labour, are opposed to sitting on any programme with a BNP representative.

But after the BNP gained two seats in the European elections, the BBC has found it a problem in stopping BNP representatives sharing a platform with other party spokesmen.

A BBC spokesperson said that any legal political party registered with the Electoral Commission had to be treated with impartiality.

He added: "Our audiences and the electorate will make up their own minds about the different policies offered by elected politicians."

Mark Gardner, of the Community Security Trust, told the Jewish Telegraph that BNP arguments should certainly be countered and defeated.

He added: "The CST is opposed in principle to the Question Time proposal."

He explained that it was their long-standing belief that "public money should not be used to provide a public platform for racists and furthermore we do not believe in sharing a public platform with the racists".

A Board of Deputies spokeswoman said: "The Question Time format, concentrating as it does on current affairs, is unlikely to provide an opportunity to show that Nick Griffin is an unreconstructed Holocaust denier and conspiracy theorist against Jews."

A Labour party spokesman said they have now been forced to review their policy of never sharing a platform with the BNP and the Conservatives took the view that they would treat a Griffin appearance on Question Time as "any other programme" promising that a senior party member would be present to ensure their views were fully represented.

As for the Liberal Democrats, a spokesman said that if the BNP were given an opportunity to debate they would appear, doing their best "to argue against them vigorously and shut out their support".

Gerry Gable, former editor of the anti-fascist Searchlight magazine, described the decision as "disgusting".

He said: "He shouldn't be given a platform to spout his poisonous views by the national broadcaster. continues here

EDITOR'S Comment: You see even becoming the most pro-Zionist site on the web, cuts no ice with Jewry, Jewry quite simply opposes the gentile, the goyim, because it believes us a threat, therefore extending the hand of friendship is ridiculous. Jewry works for its own interest and quite simply we should do the same, yet there are many supposed “nationalist” sites out there that are pro-Israel, such cannot be considered nationalism, more delusion.

The English Defence League — A Statement from the BNP’s National Organiser

The British National Party has declared the “English Defence League” a proscribed organisation and it will be a disciplinary offence for any party member to be involved with that group.

Making the announcement today in a special organiser’s bulletin circulated within the party, national organiser Eddy Butler said that although the proscription had been ordered a while ago, it was being made public today because the controlled media continues to lie about the BNP and the EDL.

“Time and time again the lying media has linked the BNP with the EDL’s activities,” said Mr Butler.

“Most recently the media and the BBC Eastern regional service, in particular, lost no time in blaming the BNP when Muslim rioters attacked police in Luton.

“The BBC coverage of that event specifically said that the BNP had planned to march through Luton, and this was why the Muslims had rioted,” he said.

“This is, of course, an utter lie. The BNP does not march in the streets but rather campaigns in an ordinary democratic fashion in elections, door-to-door canvassing and leafleting,” Mr Butler continued.

“It is completely malicious and unwarranted to blame the supposed activities of organisations such as the EDL on the BNP, when there is no common ground between the two groups at all.”

The EDL has, in fact, gone out of its way to distance itself from the BNP, while the party has no interest in the sort of confrontation in which the EDL seems to seek.

In his official statement, Mr Butler said the proscription of the EDL meant that it “will be a disciplinary offence for British National Party members to associate or participate in any event or activity organised by the English Defence League or hold membership of the English Defence League.

“The reasons for this proscription are that the English Defence League, through its activities, brings nationalist and patriotic politics into disrepute. If the English Defence League is not instigated by and its activities are not encouraged by the state (which it quite possibly is), then the track record of this organisation shows that it is run by people who will only bring discredit and probable arrest for anyone who attends its events. continues here

EDITOR'S Note: Well done to the BNP for proscribing this organisation, an organisation that endeavours to provoke and run, it would seem to both me and other nationalists, that this group aids only the state, its malevolent orthodoxy and represents dire threat to young impressionable whites, far, far better for whites to stand behind the banner of Britain’s primary upcoming party, better to fight for freedom under a true banner, that banner the National Front. I make no bones about the fact that the NF is growing, that nationalists from all walks of life now gravitate, because we must, there is nothing else, towards the National Front, one hopes that one day this growing party will become Britain’s foremost defender.

In my time my politics have been considered somewhat too hard-line for the National Front, my abject refusal to bow to Zion and my recognition that Jewry split brothers under an orange flag. Yet we are now at the eleventh hour, facing calamitous times and it is my belief that it is only the National Front, that offer contestation, of late I have personally noted many nationalists turning to the NF, one hopes that this will continue and we will once again, forge ahead for truth and indeed race and nation. Certainly the British National Party offer little, I believe they have had their time, time spent whittling down nationalism until it is wholly changed, they have believed for some time, in a rather snobbish way, that it is they that are the voice of nationalism, I say it is the people, the activists of that and indeed any party.

Recently the National Front held out the hand of friendship, offering to stand with the British National Party over the Membership issue, I as an independent nationalist disagreed with such an overture, realising that the BNP would see standing with the Front as an injurious act. I believe strongly that the National Front have no need of the BNP, neither its Tory-nationalism nor indeed its constant belittlement, it is I believe time for the National Front to come out of the shadows and reclaim its rightful place and I believe that it may be upon course to do so. Groups such as the EDL and UBA are merely Zionist front-groups, mechanisms to channel justified anger and temper its edge, I believe this to be true of the BNP also, although on a much larger scale, so for true nationalists eyes turn to the re-emerging Front, in the earnest hope that we are not let down again, by another group/organisation. 

The National Front

- National Front - Join the National Front PoliciesContact the National FrontDonate to the NFNational Front NewsDownloadsNF Activities

NATIONAL FRONT WEBSITES AND SUPPORT BLOGS

- National Front - Main Site NF NorthThe British Nationalist – Main NF Support BlogNational Front London National Front Swindon National Front Ulster Blog National Front Ulster Site National Front Yorkshire Website Young National Front Website

The BNP Will Have to Adapt or Die, Warns Party Leader

The British National Party will have to adapt to the undemocratic Orwellian ‘equality laws’ with regards to party membership criteria, or it will die, party leader Nick Griffin warned in reaction to today’s court hearing brought by the Commission for Equality & Human Rights (CEHR).

“The CEHR move is a deadly serious threat to our very existence,” Mr Griffin said in a statement this evening. He pointed out that the severe danger to the party was illustrated by the fact that the court ordered the BNP to pay the costs of today’s hearing — which amount to thousands of pounds — and yet nothing had been decided.

To pursue the case all the way to an appeal in the House of Lords could cost the party more than a million pounds, he continued. This would effectively strip the party of its ability to fight the next general election.

Even though the outcome of the case is still undecided, Mr Griffin said that whatever the court might decide, “the forthcoming Equality Bill will, in any case, simply and unavoidably ban any political party from discriminating on grounds of ethnicity.”

The entire court case is therefore pointless even from the CEHR’s position, and is clearly designed only to bleed the party of its funding.

Mr Griffin said any decision on amending the BNP’s constitution in this matter would “stick in the craw of all dedicated nationalists” but that it was a choice of “evolving and living to fight another day or going down in a blaze of glory.”

Mr Griffin said the starting point for any debate had to be “an understanding that the new law will shortly ban ethnically defined parties anyway. This makes the CEHR`s waste of public money so disgraceful and their attempt to bleed us to death by a totally unnecessary legal action so cynical and despicable.

“We could still fight it all the way on a point of stubborn principle — I think that most party old hands have worked out some time ago that I can be pretty damn stubborn when the time is right. The decision is not just mine to make,” he said, adding that it was a decision which must be taken by the party as a collective whole.

Mr Griffin said that if the party wanted to fight the case all the way, it would need to raise an extra £80,000 in the next four weeks. Some £20,000 would be needed this week to buy in more top lawyers’ time to triple check and hone to perfection the changes the party would have to make in its constitution and organisation.

“I have no doubt that it is possible to redraft our constitution so as to ensure we comply with the new law while at the same time holding true to our core principles and most importantly of all, to our purpose — which is to secure a future for the true children of our islands,” Mr Griffin said.

“By taking this as far as a court hearing, we have ensured that party unity will be maintained, because whatever steps we take, it is now crystal clear to all concerned that we simply do not have a choice.

“Adapt or die is the only decision left to make, for failure to adapt would lead either to our being bled white through the courts or crushed by new criminal laws. Party unity is priceless, because a party of brothers standing shoulder to shoulder can be persecuted, but it can never be beaten or broken.”

Mr Griffin concluded with a promise that once the party had moved to a “truly defensible position, we will go on the attack. Not just politically, so that our enemies quickly rue the day when they broke the very stick with which they have beaten us for so long, but also legally.

“We will be going into legal battle against Trevor Phillips and the rest of the ‘curs’, but it will be fought on ground that we choose, at the time that we appoint, and with our maximum strength directed against their weakest point. Our time will come — and sooner than they think.”

Mr Griffin’s full statement is as follows:

Statement from BNP leader Nick Griffin MEP on the Commission for Equality & Human Rights (CEHR) Case

02 September 2009

The barrister representing the party was at court on our behalf and got what we wanted — a seven week adjournment. This gives us the time and space we need to continue the urgent debate which opened with the very constructive and mature discussion meeting at the Red, White and Blue.

But most important of all, we have established two crucial points that had to be made, and could only be made by taking this as far as court, despite the inevitable cost.

The first is that the CEHR move, although motivated by their own internal political feuds as much as anything else, is a deadly serious threat to our very existence.

This is neither a game nor a phantom concern conjured up in order to push through changes to the constitution — which might well be electorally advantageous — but would stick in the craw of us dedicated nationalists.

Either we shift our position or we will be utterly crushed. That fact was established beyond any possible doubt when the judge ruled that we must pay the thousands of pounds of costs of today’s hearing.

How much that bill will be, we cannot tell, because part of the grotesque unfairness of this is that we will be forced to hire the services of a very good legal firm simply to argue that the figure which will be proposed by Trevor Phillips and co will be far too high and has to be reduced to something sensible and proportionate.

For us to take this case to the next hearing would mean raising and risking at least £80,000. To take it all the way to the House of Lords would swallow up well over a million Pounds.

Even if we were likely to win, we could only afford this with a super human effort which would involve, among other sacrifices, virtually abandoning the next general election.

What makes that course of action even more of a Charge of the Light Brigade gesture is, that whatever the court decides in October, the forthcoming Equality Bill will, in any case, simply and unavoidably ban any political party from discriminating on grounds of ethnicity.

By taking this as far as a court hearing, we have ensured that party unity will be maintained, because whatever steps we take, it is now crystal clear to all concerned that we simply do not have a choice.

Adapt or die is the only decision left to make, for failure to adapt would lead either to our being bled white through the courts or crushed by new criminal laws.

Party unity is priceless, because a party of brothers standing shoulder to shoulder can be persecuted, but it can never be beaten or broken.

The second vital point we’ve made clear by letting this get all the way to court is that traditional British justice – indeed, the very essence of Britishness — is dead, murdered as part of New Labour´s creeping coup d’état.

Two of the great and ancient cornerstones of our true British identity are fairness and the unbreakable rule that institutions of the state must be bound by the rule of law.

The creation of CEHR and this persecution shattered both of those cornerstones. It is grotesquely unfair that a state-funded bureaucracy with 70 top lawyers and £70 million to burn, can decide, without showing a shred of evidence of any wrongdoing, to persecute a group of twelve and a half thousand mainly working class volunteers.

When the CEHR was established, it was originally intended to be bound by the kind of restrictions that are rightly imposed on all state bodies. The Labour government and the political elite have scrapped the safeguards.

The CEHR is an autocratic power block which can go before any court and follow the maxim of Humpty Dumpty in Alice through the Looking Glass that “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

Our lawyers’ highly compelling argument that the principle of Equality of Arms means that CEHR should fund our defence (as they would indeed assist any organisation representing literally any other ethnic group) was simply brushed aside by CEHR’s own lawyers, and thus not even considered by the court.

The shocking truth is that not even the Inland Revenue has this amount of power. The tax-grabbers are at least required to be, and to show, that they are fair.

The CEHR are empowered to do whatever they think fit. This is not British; it isn’t cricket. It is a fundamental change not just in our law but in our entire culture.

The scale of CEHR’s power and monstrous arrogance is best shown by the fact that their lawyers seriously proposed to the court to settle in a mere two hours the fundamental question raised by this case: namely whether indigenous groups recognised in law as having their ethnic origins in these islands (Eilias v MoD) and covered by the liberal-left’s own Race Relations Act are entitled to form associations of their own kind.

“Of course, they know perfectly well that we are. They know that we are, hence the brutal use of their legal steamroller to ensure that we cannot afford to make this particular case the Cause Celebre that would bring the point home to untold numbers more who are at present in blissful ignorance of our rights and duties as the first peoples of these, our islands.

So where do we go from here? The starting point for the debate has to be an understanding that the new law will shortly ban ethnically defined parties anyway, which makes CEHR`s waste of public money so disgraceful, and their attempt to bleed us to death by a totally unnecessary legal action, so cynical and despicable.

We could still fight it all the way on a point of stubborn principle — I think that most party old hands have worked out some time ago that I can be pretty damn stubborn when the time is right. The decision as to whether this is the right time to stand and go down in a blaze of glory, or to evolve and live to fight another day, is one that is not just mine to make. It is yours as well.

If the party collectively wants to fight, then we have to raise £80,000 extra in the next four weeks. If the party collectively wants to guarantee its survival, then we need £20,000 this week to buy in more top lawyers’ time to triple check and hone to perfection the changes we would have to make to our constitution and organisation. continues here

Should the BNP "adapt" or not