Category: British Politics

Wadham and the EHRC win.  The existential will go ballistic.

The BBC is reporting on its ticker service that Judge Paul Collins, sitting in the Central London County Court, has ruled that the BNP’s new membership rules are “likely to discriminate”.  The basis for this ruling appears to be that prospective members sign up to principles including a duty to oppose the promotion of any form of “integration or assimilation” that impacted on the “indigenous British”, and to support the “maintenance and existence of the unity and integrity of the indigenous British”.

If this is the case, we have indeed arrived at the existential moment I described in my last blog on the party‘s legal travails:

We have reached a defining moment in the long process of racial destruction which began with the Atlee government turning its back on the people’s rights and instincts in 1948. The BNP has stripped away everything but the one essential principle that it must fight, and fight, and fight. The Establishment has, in attempting to force the discourse of the BNP to match its own, stripped away everything but the one essential principle that the native British must die as native Britons. This is no longer about “fascism” or “the hard right” or even “hate”. It is existential …

We need more information to come out before a proper assessment of the scale of the damage can be made.  But it looks like the BNP will now have to lodge an appeal against the ruling in order to be able to contest the forthcoming General Election.

Downstream from this ruling is the prospect that anti-discrimination law will be clarified and, possible then, hate speech law will be extended to make the expression of nationalist sentiment illegal too.  This, in my view, is the logical end-game.  The British government has already “affirmed” at the UN and in the EU that there is no such thing as an indigenous Briton.  These people really do mean to destroy us.

The consequences of such a legal trajectory would be that thousands of good men and women will be imprisoned and have their lives destroyed because they love their people and they love justice and freedom too much to remain silent, and unknown numbers of others will quickly come to see violence as the only path to our survival still open.

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, March 12, 2010 at 02:47 PM in British Politics
Comments (22) | Tell-a-Friend

Cameron on Griffin and the MultiCult

David Cameron gave a speech sans notes to his party’s Spring Conference today (ie, it was more sincere than usual).  It included a jaw-dropping three-minute passage that makes very satisfying listening for every BNP member.  His theme was “winning it for Britain”.  I won’t write anymore.  Just listen for yourself - in particular for the loudest cheer.

Hat tip to Simon Darby

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, February 28, 2010 at 10:57 PM in British Politics
Comments (68) | Tell-a-Friend

Pay-Back for the BNP

by Rod Cameron

New Labour’s decision to put the EHRC dog onto the BNP has cost New Labour dearly. Not only has New Labour disowned its Working Class roots, but also it has handed over on a silver plate the most precious part of its history, its formative years, to the BNP. History of a century and more ago has repeated. The danger inherent to becoming part of the Establishment is to forget your forebears and their struggles, and then you surrender your political soul. I offer you this analogy.

THE BRITISH LABOUR MOVEMENT AND THE BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY

The decision by Nick Griffin to change the constitution of the BNP to allow blacks and Asians to join, following pressure from the EHRC, should be received by the BNP with a certain sanguinity. Knowledge of the rise of the British Labour Movement will result in a wry acceptance that this is “par for the course”. Not for the first time social realities are being ignored and Establishmentarian forces are arrayed against the political newcomer.

The Social Reality

Trade unionism and opposition to immigration were preservationist/survivalist reactions to social realities. The Labour Movement was motivated by the need for working-class preservation. The BNP arises from the desire for ethnic self-preservation.

Establishmentarian Reactions

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Saturday, February 27, 2010 at 10:29 AM in British Politics
Comments (2) | Tell-a-Friend

Who needs the BNP?

by Alexander Baron

Earlier this month, the British National Party voted to accept non-white members. This was done, ostensibly, under pressure from the grandly styled Equality And Human Rights Commission, a body that has in the past sought and obtained prosecutions for the publication of racist cartoons and poked its proboscis into every aspect of traditional British life attempting to mould it to the race-mixers’ agenda. The far right has of course been the target of the liberal self-styled ruling élite for decades, and in spite of the left’s vacuous and increasingly tiresome charges of the establishment’s racism, there has been a de facto conspiracy to suppress all (white) racial-nationalist movements and parties in both the media and other circles. The contrived prosecutions and convictions of John Tyndall, Nick Griffin, the gullible but sorely misguided Lady Birdwood, and many others, is proof positive of that. Now though that one albeit fringe party has enjoyed a modicum of success, a new tactic has been devised. Suddenly, it has been discovered that the BNP’s constitution is illegal because it discriminates against non-whites, and the BNP has thrown in the towel without so much as a whimper. But does it matter?

There have been racial-nationalist movements in Britain for a century or more; an organisation called the British National Party was formed by a wholesale fish merchant named Edward Godfrey of Hayes, Middlesex (where I grew up incidentally) during the Second World War, but the BNP as it exists today is a child of the National Front. The Front was founded in 1967 by that greatest of British patriots A.K. Chesterton, who had previously founded the League Of Empire Loyalists. Three years later, he was forced out, the Party soon falling under the control of John Tyndall and Martin Webster. In 1980, Tyndall made a bold decision, resigning from the organisation and forming the New National Front. The basis for this was – he claimed – a homosexual network that was operating inside the organisation. In fact, this “network” consisted principally if not entirely of Martin Webster, whose homosexuality could not have been unknown to Tyndall but had been tolerated by him and other senior members because of his undoubted abilities.

The real reason for the split was that the authoritarian Tyndall wanted more or less total control over what had always been a thoroughly democratic organisation – notwithstanding the oft’ repeated and tiresome “Nazi” epithet. Tyndall’s new party was the most successful of the various NF splinter groups, and shortly changed its name to the British National Party, which it remains today under the leadership of Nick Griffin.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, February 18, 2010 at 01:08 PM in British Politics
Comments (23) | Tell-a-Friend

The BNP, the EHRC, and revealing a historical moment

The judge also accepted ‘powerful submissions’ from the Commission that the BNP’s proposed new constitution is likely to remain unlawful. We will be back in court in March where we hope to conclude this matter by ensuring that whatever constitution the BNP adopts does not break discrimination laws.

John Wadham, EHRC, quoted in a Commission press release following the BNP’s return to the county court today.

The two parts of this statement contain the entire purpose of the EHRC in its action against the BNP.  The first part is to make the party non-racial in its politics.  The second is to render it financially incapable of campaigning in the (May 6th) General Election.

It is part one - the exclusion of all reference to the native British in the party constitution - that is of significance, and more for what it reveals about the historical moment than any political or legal aspects.  In fact, I would go further and say that unless the EHRC pushes its luck to the point of taking out a prosecution against one of the BNP’s leaders for publicly speaking of Britain’s native peoples, none of the legal or political consequences of today’s ruling will do any real, lasting damage.  Instead, the party will simply hold the two AGMs required of it and the voting membership will come to the view that, to quote Lee Barnes:

The sole aim of us participating in the political process is to take power.

Amen to that.  Everything is now clarified.  We have reached a defining moment in the long process of racial destruction which began with the Atlee government turning its back on the people’s rights and instincts in 1948.  The BNP has stripped away everything but the one essential principle that it must fight, and fight, and fight.  The Establishment has, in attempting to force the discourse of the BNP to match its own, stripped away everything but the one essential principle that the native British must die as native Britons.  This is no longer about “fascism” or “the hard right” or even “hate”.  It is existential, and well enough put by a commenter to the BNP’s website named Rijker:

This is no longer your country.
You cannot have a culture of your own.
You can not represent yourselves in Parliament.
You are to be persecuted until you no longer exist.

Out of this moment will quickly emerge a new clarity and urgency in racialist discourse, and not the death of racialist discourse the EHRC would wish.  What would have been seen by the public as the most extreme and contentious interpretation of “immigration” - that of a designed genocide by population transfer - will slowly but surely become the accepted version of events.  And when that happens, a general awakening is close.

Inevitablism has just been given a huge shot in the arm.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 09:11 PM in British Politics
Comments (13) | Tell-a-Friend

The conference vote

The three hundred or more delegates to the BNP Conference in Wigan have voted overwhelmingly to commit the party to the leadership’s policy of remaining within the law, remaining a party able to fight elections, and admitting non-whites to membership.  Nick Griffin’s own amendments were accepted.  It is thought this means that sub-groups will be formed to house the non-white applicants.

Does the membership change mean that the party has lost its fourteen-word soul?  Or is it merely a cosmetic and inevitable stratagem to satisfy the requirements of British law?  Or is it, in fact, a golden opportunity for the party to advance its cause by the very laws that the Establishment has used to persecute it?

Here’s Lee Barnes with the upside:

The issue is ... where now for the ‘anti-fascists’ ?

For the general public, who believe their lies, the constant scream of ‘racists’ and ‘nazis’ is the primary weapon in the arsenal of the anti-BNP coalition. But that weapon is now rendered defunct. They cannot call the BNP ‘racist’ anymore as we will have many non-white members joining. They can’t call the BNP ‘nazi’ anymore as our new non-white members are obviously not nazis. They can’t call the BNP ‘racist’ anymore either as non-whites will be joining. Therefore the whole tactics and strategy of the Far Left and the media has to change - but how ?

They haven’t got a clue.

Lee goes on to claim that the membership change is “a political revolution”:

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, November 15, 2009 at 01:24 AM in British Politics
Comments (77) | Tell-a-Friend

Griffin on Question Time - reaction thread

This entry is for MR readers who would like to post their reactions to Nick Griffin’s QT performance.

The programme, which was recorded earlier this evening, was reported as the lead item on BBC News at ten this evening.  Edited highlights on the BBC website are here.  It looks and sounds very like a lynch party, which is perhaps not surprising.  Whether there were any BNP members in the audience to support Griffin I don’t know.  I suspect that there were, and that none of them were permitted to ask searching questions of the other panellists.

Anyhow, it’s time for the real broadcast.  So, see you after that!

UPDATE: QT AND THE BNP BELOW THE FOLD

Thanks to Dan’s find and to Dasein, we can now embed all parts of the programme so readers outside the UK can see exactly what it is we are talking about!

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, October 22, 2009 at 09:18 PM in British Politics
Comments (259) | Tell-a-Friend

John Wadham: father of modern British nationalism!

The curious and unnecessary legal action that John Wadham and the EHRC took against the BNP is washing through the media now, and will soon disappear into the mist.  Much of the coverage is disarmingly silly.  Which tends to suggest that the entire endeavour was impetuous and ill-considered, and offers the Fourth Estate nothing to go at.

The party will hold its conference next month, change its constitution, say thank you for the publicity and gird its loins for the election in May - where it will suffer from David Cameron’s Conservative revival. 

Inside the party nothing will really change.  There will be no huge influx of dark faces.  Those that do join and attend branch meetings will be politely patronised at best or sent to Coventry at worst.  They won’t be able to vote for two years, anyway, or - I believe - stand for office for four.  They will, by their presence, refute the party’s crazed anti-racist critics.  The UAF fanatics will become frustrated and confused, and the anti-BNP hate-fest will become more difficult to sustain.

Meanwhile, the Tories will big win in May.  But the honeymoon period will fade into memory and the polls will turn bad, as they always do.  Labour will re-invent itself under its new leader.  If they are not too Jewish, Cameron’s little circle of advisors may even ponder quietly whether it isn’t actually quite a good idea to relax all that mad-keen anti-racism of the opposition years.  The BNP could make a mighty useful anti-Labour tool in the latter’s northern heartlands.  And if too many people start voting for it, a little touch of the Sarko tiller will always sort it out.

The BNP, meanwhile, will have a new puzzle to solve.  How does it fight a party of the middle-class right?  Should it continue to build its power base in the white working-class north?  For the first time the people who have said all along that it must be a party of the entire country, appealing to the educated middle-class (which is also the political class), will be listened to.  The van-driver blokishness will moderate.  Bright people, untainted by the ill-repute of the past, will materialise.  Ideas, finally, will circulate.  The old party servants, men of good instinct and true heart who bore the wild hatred of the world upon their shoulders with real dignity during all the years of weakness, will be asked to perform one more service.  They must make way unselfishly.

Nationalism will cease to be a vague patriotic impulse signified by flags and army veterans, except to those who can only think in such confines.  It will have come of age in Britain - in time, one hopes, for the general election of October 2014 and the vital breakthrough to representation at Westminster.

And the wiser members will look back and thank John Wadham for getting it so very wrong.  Or so I believe.

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, October 16, 2009 at 10:42 PM in British Politics
Comments (41) | Tell-a-Friend

Labour’s trident

We can now see what I expect to be the final shape of the Establishment response to the BNP’s success in Europe.  The strategy comprises three separate lines of attack which are, in no particular order:

DEATH BY STATUTE

The government of Belgium did it to Vlaams Blok in November 2004.  Now the equality minister Harriet Harman is pursuing a judicial kill with her new bill:

The Equality Bill will outlaw ‘apartheid’ constitution of the BNP

The BNP’s “apartheid” constitution will be outlawed under legislation before parliament, Commons leader Harriet Harman told MPs yesterday.

Ms Harman said she was “shocked and horrified” by the election of BNP leader Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons to the European Parliament last week.

She said there was “no place” in Britain for having a political party that only accepted white people as members and that the Equality Bill would prevent this.

... According to the BNP’s constitution, members must be from the “indigenous British ethnic groups deriving from the class of Indigenous Caucasian“‘.

... A spokeswoman for the Government Equalities Office said: “The Equality Bill would give individuals a right to take legal action against the BNP, in respect of it excluding anyone from membership on grounds of race.”

Unable to contain his enthusiasm long enough for Harman’s new law to become available, John Wadham smooth-moving Trevor Phillips has already brought his, er, big legal instrument of the Race Relations Act to bear.  Wadham told the world on 22nd June that his:

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, August 2, 2009 at 03:42 PM in British Politics
Comments (59) | Tell-a-Friend

Local houses for local workers

by Dan Dare

When Gordon Brown cynically hijacked the BNP’s slogan “British Jobs for British Workers” and featured it so prominently in his keynote speech to the 2008 Labour Party Conference, he could not have had the dimmest inkling of how much grief that would eventually cause him. And yet now, amazingly, and despite all the aggravation he suffered as a result of the “British Jobs” fiasco, he’s been caught out once again trying to steal the BNP’s thunder.

This time the theme is “Local Houses for Local People”, a catchy title for a brand-new wheeze intended to defuse the controversy which has grown-up around the vexatious matter of how social housing (publicly subsidised rentals) should be allocated. The BNP has enjoyed considerable success in promoting the notion that immigrants obtain an unfair share of the limited amount of social housing that is actually available. Predictably enough, Brown’s announcement proposing to modify the allocation rules to favour ‘local people’ over newer emtrants provoked howls of outrage from the usual suspects. Ironically it has even been denounced as illegal, being apparently in direct conflict with the key sections of the raft of Race Relations and Equalities legislation that NuLabor has painstakingly introduced into law since coming to office.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Tuesday, July 28, 2009 at 07:15 AM in British Politics
Comments (24) | Tell-a-Friend

The Big Fear: a white backlash

by David Hamilton

The one thing former Conservative MP K Harvey Proctor constantly warned of was a white backlash.  To keep the indigenous people under control the Caste has devised various underhand and undemocratic methods. The idea was to manage the population into a sort of utopian state. But ideologies need an enemy, and that was “whites”.  We were all held responsible for the slave trade, which meant only a heavily-censored version of slavery with the main dealers – the Arabs - left out of the account.  We are, after all, only allowed to think “correct” thoughts.

What Alan Clarke, the former Conservative government minister and famous diarist, lauded as “the British military spirit” and a matter of honour and pride is scorned as yobbery by the Establishment.

The people who were the backbone of our traditional military prowess are slandered and misused. They are misused because they are not wanted in the armed forces, where they should be cherished as heroes ready to defend our country and control our borders to repel the current invasion. Our troops are held in contempt and not even provided with adequate equipment to save their lives.

People who have committed youthful misadventures but who naturally belong in the forces are barred. At one time young men who were at risk of being sent to young offenders institutions were given the opportunity of joining the military. To the traditional aristocratic-ruling warrior class, they would have been ideal recruits possessed of potential noble virtues.  Now those virtues are now left unexplored, and the young are left in their criminality.

A classic example of how these virtues are presented as wrong or even low-class was in the Daily Mail of 5th July. In this deceitful piece of fiction – a real hatchet piece - the scribbler Niall Firth linked several disconnected phenomena.

Neo-Nazis are plotting a ‘spectacular’ terrorist attack on Britain to fuel racial tension, Scotland Yard’s counter-terrorism officers fear.

Senior officers have increased their surveillance of suspects to monitor their ability to carry out a deadly attack aimed at causing a ‘breakdown in community cohesion’.

The chilling warning comes after last month’s startling gains by the BNP in the local and European elections which many fear may ‘embolden’ violent Far-Right extremists.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sunday, July 19, 2009 at 07:20 PM in British Politics
Comments (45) | Tell-a-Friend

Nick Griffin on the Andrew Marr Show

Nick Griffin has appeared on this morning’s Andrew Marr Show in what Simon Darby had built up as ground-breaking television. 

(That is the full extent of the interview.  Anyone in Britain who wants to see the whole show, however, can view it over the next seven days on the BBC i-Player here.  The Griffin interview runs from 34 min 12 sec to 42 min 22 sec.)

Obviously, there is always going to be a difficulty with media-stereotyping of the BNP.  The prigs need only make up an entirely fictional story about the party or any of its officers, as they so love to do, and then that is picked up by every subsequent interviewer.  Result: no substantive engagement with the too-too awful fascists.

Marr accorded Griffin a little over eight minutes of programme time.  But he invested almost all of it in the customary exploration of the press’s BNP myths.  Griffin defended himself without difficulty, not least because Marr himself was not overtly hostile.  In addition, though, Griffin uttered a few ameliorative policy noises (with which I do not agree).  More importantly, he also spoke fundamental truths that the public needs to hear, specifically:

“… to point out that Trevor MacDonald is not Welsh or English is not to do him down and say he’s not British.  If Trevor MacDonald’s English then the English are nothing, and that’s a racist position and it’s wrong.”

And:

“… we had to fill in a Census Form.  I had to describe myself as white British.  I’m not white.  I’m English.  But I’m not allowed to say that.”

And he managed to say that the alternative to stopping the current wave of African migration to southern Europe is:

“… accepting that Britain, eventually, is going to end up like Africa.  And the liberal elite have no right to impose or to allow that to happen when the British population do not want it to happen.

He did well.  He doesn’t possess the qualities of a truly inspirational leader, the sort who might come along perhaps only once in three or four decades of the nation’s political life.  But I agree with Sean Gabb’s assessment that he is clever and not less competent than his opponents in the mainstream parties.  Good luck to him, and may he find it possible in the future to talk much more about the fundamentals, and less about the lies.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, July 12, 2009 at 02:44 PM in British Politics
Comments (20) | Tell-a-Friend

The Moral high ground?

by David Hamilton

Conservative philosopher Roger Scruton has written that “ an ideology needs an enemy”.  In the West that is us - “whites”.  The chosen method is to dehumanise the enemy so that it can be persecuted or even assassinated without conscience.  They think it will fool the public when they try to outlaw the BNP’s racial admission rules, despite leaving the various black and Asian groups to operate their own racial membership policies.

These comments show the Ideological Caste’s dehumanisation of its enemies in language they would otherwise eagerly attribute to Nazis:

Trevor Phillips: “The BNP should be treated as less than human”.
Nick Bourne - Welsh Tory MP: “The BNP are subhuman”

The voice of whites in Britain is the BNP and the whole establishment is conspiring to de-humanise them with a level of incitement that is unprecedented.  If this type of hate campaign was against another ethnic group they would be facing a seven year jail sentence.  The whole Establishment has shown itself to be the same type of hate-filled ideologues that dehumanised Jews in Nazi Germany.  It is an ideology of hate like those in Soviet Russia, Mao’s China and Cambodia against a particular group.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Saturday, June 27, 2009 at 11:24 PM in British Politics
Comments (102) | Tell-a-Friend

Violence by proxy - the preferred politics of a cowardly Establishment

by David Hamilton

I wrote an article sixteen months ago on how the establishment dehumanises people who threaten their privileged lives.  The ruling ideological caste have no answer to our arguments. So they use not only character assassination but also encourage physical violence against their critics.  They do not like having their corruption exposed.

It is usually done indirectly so they can keep up the appearance of respectability.  But evil Peter Hain, who did so much to bring about famine and genocide in Zimbabwe and South Africa respectively, never apologizes.  He, presumably, is delighted with what his career of advocating confrontation has achieved.  He is trying to do the same here and make himself rich at the same time by corruptly trousering £130 grand:

“It is vital that everyone now isolates and confronts the BNP and works with United Against Fascism to defeat them.”

Everyone can see how it works.  He dehumanises Nick Griffin and his party by calling them “racists” and “fascists”.  The gang of Unite Against Fascism thugs attack their hate objects and get to feel perfectly fine about harming them?

The Mirror of 10/6/09 twisted the truth to present victims of politically motivated violence to be the perpetrators.  What sick, corrupt liars are their journos.

But minutes later they were sent packing by 60 placard-waving protesters chanting: “Nazi scum off our streets.”...then ... Protester Harry Dare was punched in the back by a fleeing far-right supporter. Mr Dare said: “I’m not seriously hurt but I was hit and it was unprovoked. I didn’’t use violence against them. I just told them they were fascists and we didn’t want them anywhere near Parliament.”

In fact, no demonstrators are allowed anywhere near Parliament.  On this occasion, though, the police stood over the road watching.  There is always a high visibility policing in and around Parliament Square, and many carry machine guns.  They’ve got High Definition CCTV cameras all over the streets that can tell the time on someone’s wristwatch.  This demo will have been recorded and monitored from many angles, and the Police nearby would have been immediately informed.  I suggest we all complain to the Metropolitan police.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, June 11, 2009 at 02:20 PM in British Politics
Comments (53) | Tell-a-Friend

Nick Griffin’s post-election assessment

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, June 6, 2009 at 09:33 AM in British Politics
Comments (18) | Tell-a-Friend

And the winner is …

So in Britain it was election day.  Has the world changed?  That’s the question.  Have these European elections signalled a new phase in the development of the BNP, and for the rights of native Britons to their own land?

Well, we shall know all over the next three days, starting with the results of the local authority elections tomorrow morning.

This campaign certainly has been a unique episode in British politics.  By midnight last night, most of the media had stood down from operations against the BNP.  Almost.  Even The Times’ Fiona Hamilton had found another way to make the MultiCult a better and browner place.  Among the party’s campaigners all was anticipation, and a quiet satisfaction that everything that could be done was done.

The only discordant note was sounded by our wonderfully cultured Culture Minister, David Lammy - a man who was in no way chosen for his very important post because of the colour of his skin.  He managed to get his BNP-mugging done at 3.30pm this afternoon.  “Vote to keep out the BNP threat” it said.  Apparently, it’s not enough for Mr Lammy just to keep out the BNP.  That “threat” has to be kept out too, you know.  Don’t worry, though, because nobody pays a blind bit of attention to this entirely pointless person.

That said, Mr Lammy will probably be kept around in Alan Johnson’s new cabinet of superdiversity, given that Gordon’s departure has been guaranteed by the shock news this evening of another ministerial resignation.

As I said, a completely unique episode in British politics.

The result of it all will appear in the form of updates to this post.

And yes my wife and I voted for the BNP in the Europeans.  But we had to vote for Cameron’s crowd in the locals.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, June 4, 2009 at 10:43 PM in British Politics
Comments (166) | Tell-a-Friend

Thinking past Sunday

Gordon Brown’s last throw of the anti-BNP dice before Thursday’s vote was an open letter to be signed, one must suppose, by a few dozen “community leaders” and “inspirational people”.  With him at the head, of course.

Here’s the letter:

Go to the polls to fight BNP hate

We love Britain precisely because of its tolerance and diversity. The British National party and its allies are a threat to everything that makes us proud of this country we love. The BNP is working hard to conceal its extremism because it knows that people in Britain totally reject the politics of racism and hatred.

But the BNP’s record is clear: its 2001 manifesto wanted mixed-race relationships to be outlawed and for any black person who commits a crime to be thrown out of the country, even those who were born here. Nick Griffin, the leader of the BNP, was found guilty of [blah, blah, blah - Ed]

A vote for the BNP is a vote against everything that makes this country great. We are determined to vote on 4 June: please join us in voting for a great Britain.

And here are the signitaries in all their political redundancy and total pointlessness:-

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, June 3, 2009 at 12:47 AM in British Politics
Comments (25) | Tell-a-Friend

Jesus, hubris.

I’m sorry if this succession of posts on the Manichean struggle between the Establishment and the BNP is becoming a little tiresome.  But it is not as repetitive as it seems.  There is a movement to it that is both fascinating to observe and hopeful for those of us looking for cracks in the edifice.

To be precise, that movement is towards a failure of command in the Establishment, and an increasing rebelliousness among the indigenous Brits.  The impressively uniform and multi-layered attempt by the political class and their clients in the media and cultural heirarchies to fence off the BNP is plainly having an unexpected effect in some quarters.  It may not have much impact on next Thursday’s vote.  But the dye is cast.  The Establishment has only one song in its repertoire, and the singing of it over and over again - not just in this election campaign but in the years ahead - is only going to drive more voters to the very “far right” they are meant to fear and loathe.

I can quite see, five or ten years from now, vexed Establishment figures still repeating their magic slogans while the more bloody-minded and laconic members of the public shrug and walk away.  And all the time the less rebellious are tempted to follow.

The 106th (and soon former) Bishop of Rochester, the Pakistani-born Michael Nazir-Ali, has taken to the Telegraph to proffer his electoral advice to the nation.  Let me save you the bother of reading it.  The headline is “Jesus wouldn’t have voted BNP, and neither should any Christian”.

Well, I know that priests and politicians alike have a mission to guide mere sinners and tax-payers towards the promised land.  That’s their business, obviously.  But the direction of the British public to vote for Establishment-friendly parties is so vast now, one is bound to see in it an arrogance of equal scale.  Where did these people get the impression that this is OK?  Do they expect none of us to see what they are doing, judge it, find it high-handed, self-serving and unacceptable?  I think they do.  So confident in their power and inviolability have they grown, they think they can filch from our wallets while they rule over us, and entrench their rule simply by uttering nonsense like this:-

So when we ask “What would Jesus actually do?”, the answer is clear. He would include all in the embrace of his Father’s love, and so change them that they begin to live for others, to meet the needs of strangers and to work for a just and compassionate society.

Nope sorry, that’s politics.  The Gospels don’t mention “a just and compassionate society”.

It hasn’t gone unnoticed by the Telegraph commentariat.  Here’s what they think so far, as of four hours after the Bishop’s article was posted:-

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, May 30, 2009 at 12:49 AM in British Politics
Comments (56) | Tell-a-Friend

BNP party political broadcast

This is the film produced for the BNP’s solitary ppb.  Heavy on old-fashioned patriotism, no horse-frightening on repatriation.

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, May 23, 2009 at 10:21 AM in British Politics
Comments (53) | Tell-a-Friend

Desperate measures: turning on one’s own, the anti-fascist option and the resurrection of UKIP

”Revolutions do not happen in this country, but every now and then the public gives a great heave of boredom and impatience, and something is done with forever.”

These words of the American literary critic Edmund Wilson, writing of Britain in April 1940, contain the explanation to a modern media mystery: why did the Telegraph play Pandora, and launch its ruthless two-week offensive against the political class?

”Radical reform of discredited Commons system” and ”many MPs will be suspended from Labour over expenses” scream the headlines.  This is a political earthquake.  Why would the Telegraph, a party to every level of the Establishment, unleash it?

One is left pondering what might have been said to tip the editorial balance in those chic, glass-walled offices overlooking the Telegraph’s newsroom.  I can think of three factors that might have done that.  There is only one commending caution.

The “go” factors are:-

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, May 21, 2009 at 12:22 AM in British Politics
Comments (117) | Tell-a-Friend

Tough decisions for Brits to make

It’s just the beginning for the good men and women who will vote for the BNP for the first time in the upcoming European elections.  After that, they have a lot to think about.  What will make up their minds for nationalism?

by David Hamilton

There is a relentless and deadly war being conducted against the people of Britain.  That realisation is what distinguishes the mere protest voter from the committed BNP supporter.

So ... where did it begin, this war on our blood?

The ruling-class changed after the Second World War.  They became obsessed with an ideology that calls for sensitivity towards the Third World.  The previous posture of “white man on top” was discarded. The humiliation over Suez put the lid on it.  It was not the loss of the canal but the sheer incompetent debacle of it all that showed us up as being weak and no longer one of the top nations.

The ruling-class had introduced minorities into several countries for commercial reasons.  They introduced Tamils into Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) for rubber. This has saddled the Singalese with a vicious minority.  They spoke a different language and had a different religion from the natives.  It was similar in Malaya were the ruling-class introduced Chinese, then Tamils.  In Guyana they introduced Indians.  There had to be laws introduced to protect the Malays.  That happened, too, in Fiji where the ruling-class imported Indians to cut sugar cane.

In the Malaya of 50 years ago little more than half of the population was Malay.  The ethnic differences showed themselves in the Malays’ lack of commercial mindedness while the Chinese flourished commercially and pushed the Malays out.  The symptoms of discord were already evident in the early part of last century as the Chinese gravitated to the cities, while the Malays lived in the country. 

As early as 1940 the famous politician of the old elite class, the diarist Henry “Chips” Channon, had remarked on the moral failings of the rulers.  There was appeasement of the Nazis in the 30s and appeasement of immigrants since the 50s.  There was a perceived need for a larger body to shelter behind.  The League of Nations was seen as a vehicle for morality and this replaced the quest for power and self-interest.  The dainty British rulers renounced the balance of power for the moral superiority of the League.  The plan to disarm as much as possible when we were the most powerful nation was enshrined in the Covenant of the League.  Since the Second War it was the Commonwealth, then the EU, and ultimately it will be World Government to look after the interests of these poor tender things.

Of our interests they care nothing.

There was racial conflict from the beginning of mass immigration in the UK.  But the elites have avoided having to face it by making us the scapegoats.  If they blame someone else like ordinary British people they don’t have to face their own inadequacy.  In 1948 between 31 July and 2 August in Liverpool, in Deptford on the 18th July; and Birmingham between the 6th and 8th of August 1949 but the idealists ignored them as they had in 1919 when after the racial battles in Liverpool and Cardiff Lord Milner wrote in a Memorandum of June 23rd, On the Repatriation of Coloured Men:  ”I have every reason to fear, that when we get these men back to their own colonies they might be tempted to revenge themselves on the white minorities there…” Milner’s comments on Britain in Egypt are telling: “It is a force making for the triumph of the simplest ideas of honesty, humanity, and justice… If Egyptian prosperity is a British interest so is Egyptian independence.”

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Monday, May 18, 2009 at 09:45 PM in British Politics
Comments (30) | Tell-a-Friend

The state of the body politic

Today the Telegraph leaked some delicious details of MP’s expense scams, beginning with the PM himself and his senior cabinet members.  They include Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, Hazel Blears, the Communities Secretary, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, Geoff Hoon, the Transport Secretary, Andy Burnham, the Culture Secretary, Caroline Flint, the Minister for Europe, and Paul Murphy, the Welsh Secretary.

In high dudgeon the Telegraph leader proclaimed a scandal at the heart of our democracy:-

The systematic misappropriation by MPs of the allowance paid to defray the expense of keeping a second home is one of the great scandals of modern public life. It is a story that our readers, indeed the whole country, need to be told. Now, for the first time, it can be.

As The Daily Telegraph discloses today, it goes far beyond the now familiar tales of barbecue equipment, bath plugs or adult movies bought at the taxpayer’s expense. Many honourable members (of all parties, because this is, explicitly, not a party political matter) have been complicit in what amounts to an officially sanctioned and sustained abuse of public funds perpetrated against their own constituents over many years.

The extent of their rapacity is astonishing; and its scale can only be fully appreciated with the disclosure of the information being published by this newspaper. It will make uncomfortable reading for the MPs, for their families and for their voters. But it is right that the public should know what has been going on.

Not everyone is at this game.  Some honour still obtains.  But not much.  Setting the tone, our beloved leader blames the system for dealing with MPs’ expenses.  It made him do it, apparently.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, May 8, 2009 at 10:54 PM in British Politics
Comments (20) | Tell-a-Friend

Peter Hain, history and the BNP

Today the disgraced former minister and Cabinet member and founder of violent anti-racism, Peter Hain, graced the Guardian today with another of his graceless scribbles.  It was titled We need to wake up and tackle BNP poison head on.  This is the gist of it:-

Unless the rest of us get our act together, the British National party could easily win three seats - and quite possibly six or more - in June’s European election ... the most successful fascist party in Britain ... far-right and fascist parties in Europe ... the BNP’s racist and fascist politics ... the BNP needs to be confronted wherever its supporters march or appear in public ... They wear suits rather than openly flirt with nazism ... scapegoating of black people, Muslims, Jews, foreigners, gays and lesbians for social and economic problems ... racial violence and racial hatred are barely beneath the surface ... desperate to conceal its fascist and racist instincts ... Its poison should be combatted on the doorstep ...

Etcetera.

I don’t think I have left anything out.

On their respective blogs Simon Darby and Martin Wingfield both celebrated this new free exposure for the BNP.  Darby noted:-

This is the best bit though:

There is also a debate on whether leaders of established political parties should steer clear of leading the fight against the BNP. Campaign groups such as Searchlight, the anti-fascist magazine, believe that attacks from mainstream Westminster figures will only add to the BNP’s anti-establishment credentials.

In other words here we have an actual admission that figures like Peter Hain and Ian Austin are so publicly despised that criticising the BNP actually swells the BNP vote. How must that feel, to be told that you are so ineffective that it is in the Labour Party’s best interests to keep your mouths firmly shut?

For his part Wingfield noted:-

This is what Hain has to say in The Guardian this morning:

“The lesson of the Anti-Nazi League’s success is that the BNP needs to be confronted wherever its supporters march or appear in public.”

Well, we know that the “success” of the Anti-Nazi League was based on its violent attacks on innocent people. The BNP don’t hold marches, so it seems Hain is advocating attacks on BNP supporters out campaigning for the forthcoming European and County Council elections.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, April 29, 2009 at 09:48 PM in British Politics
Comments (20) | Tell-a-Friend

Cameron and the Anti-White Alliance

By David Hamilton

On Tommy Boyd’s talkRadio show of 17 February, Weyman Bennett described David Cameron as a supporter of the Marxist UAF! Are the Conservatives, we wonder, still the patriotic party or a Con that pretends to support the nation but, when in power, will carry on with the work of the Labour Party? Bennett accused the BNP of violence but at 2008 Red White Blue, 33 arrests were recorded - including left wing thugs throwing rocks at children and elderly people. Yet no members or supporters of the BNP were arrested. What is Cameron doing with people like that if he is a Tory?

The Daily Mail of 22 January reported his speaking to think tank Demos, which is running The Progressive Conservatism Project to develop policies and ideas that are radical. Conservatives are now pursuing progressive goals like social justice, social mobility and an end to poverty, all of them once left-wing . How, they ask, can these be achieved through “conservative” means? They are turning the Conservative party into a neo-Marxist outfit like Nulab!

Cameron said his party wants to abolish child poverty and increase social mobility. He listed the aims of ‘progressive Conservatism’ as:-

1. Fair society
2. Green environment
3. Safety for citizens
4. Equal opportunity

... and said:

‘Yes, they are ends that we share with people in the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrat Party and right across the mainstream political spectrum. But no, we do not agree about how best to achieve those ends.”

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sunday, March 1, 2009 at 04:42 PM in British Politics
Comments (41) | Tell-a-Friend

Ed Balls’ confession of systemic anti-white racism

I don’t do much in the way of copy ‘n paste posting.  But this story, following on the heels of the BNP’s fine showing in yesterday’s four council elections, is politically interesting.  It appears to represent something of a breakthrough in that government has admitted not only that racist attacks by foreigners are committed in our schools, but also that school, police and legal authorities try to look the other way.  In other words, they are institutionally racist.

Swindon school faces inquiry after brutal ‘racist’ attack by Asian teenagers

It has taken two years, a sustained lobbying campaign and an exhausting round of letter writing for Liz Webster to get some justice for her 17-year-old son.

In January Mrs Webster, 44, met schools secretary Ed Balls, who recommended an inquiry into the savage attack, on school premises, on Henry Webster by a group of Asian teenagers.

It was January 11, 2007, when Henry, then 15 and a ginger-haired star rugby player, popular with his class mates and with no history of being disciplined for poor behaviour, arrived at the tennis court at The Ridgeway School in Swindon to settle, “one on one”, an argument with a fellow pupil. Only it was a baying mob and not a single opponent waiting for him.

What happened next, witnessed by more than 100 pupils – and even filmed by one on a mobile phone – was an ambush so vicious that, at the subsequent court case, the judge described it as a ‘’savage and sustained attack”.

It was, said Judge Carol Hagen when she passed sentence on 13 boys and young men who set upon Henry, a ‘’miracle’’ that Henry had survived.

Though the 13 Asian teenagers and young men who attacked Henry – all members of a gang who called themselves the ‘’Asian Invaders’’ – were given sentences of between eight months and eight years for grievous bodily harm and conspiracy to commit GBH, no independent inquiry into how Henry was brutally assaulted, while at school, in an attack that was described in court as ‘’something out of a Quentin Tarantino film”.

During the trial, Judge Hagen was highly critical of the school, asking why there were no staff present in the tennis courts at the end of the school day, since it was known there had been trouble earlier in the day. 

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, February 22, 2009 at 01:14 AM in British Politics
Comments (56) | Tell-a-Friend