Posted by Englander on Sun, 01 Jun 2008 01:48 | #

It depresses me that Barnbrook’s blog might be the first, and perhaps last, exposure many people have to the thoughts and ideas of our side. I sometimes think the best bloggers and those who comment on the blogs should be press-ganged into action.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 01 Jun 2008 03:55 | #

I like Barnbrook.  I like him exceedingly.  Yes he needs to practice giving the appearance of “reserve” and “being above the fray” and not “wearing his heart on his sleeve” as the expression goes (do they have that expression in England?).  But I wouldn’t trade his sincerity, his honesty, his directness, his heartfelt concern, or his brand of straightforward intelligence for all the “reserve” in the universe.  As for integrity, he stands head and shoulders above the whole lot of the others put together and doubled, the ones who walked off the stage when his turn came, the ones who use everyone’s first name but his, the ones who demand the removal of his blog for no reason other than their stupid outmoded hypocritical PC.  These others are beginning to sense things won’t continue to go their way and intend not to take that lying down but to take the gloves off and get as nasty as they think they have to.  Well, it’ll do them no good.  Men like Barnbrook are the future.  Deal with it.

Posted by Bill on Sun, 01 Jun 2008 05:36 | #

It takes balls or insanity to talk the talk in the Guardian, that’s what I admire (or dare I say endears)me to the BNP, I suggest it is not just the depths to which things have sunk in Britain that emboldens them to talk the talk, no, it is because they are sincere and feel the pain (sometimes) I confuse it with with being thick skinned which is being rather unkind.

On a similar theme, what about Hitchen’s piece in the Mail - Wow! (as they say)

Something’s bothering me, (bigtime) there is no let up by the BBC (my bellwether) in pushing RR, it seems almost suicidal to me, and the latest accompanying rash of bans coming from where? EU?  The one I saw on the news yesterday was hammering it up the smokers again with further restrictions.  My concern is, if the elites treat us like this when we are in a position of overwhelming numerical supremacy, what the hell will they be like when we become the minority - my blood runs cold.

Otherwise, things are flying apart so fast I can’t keep up.

Posted by the Narrator... on Sun, 01 Jun 2008 08:35 | #

The sad part is things have to reach a certain level of hell before some people will become bold in their speech and in their politics.
Then the old fears of being ostracized from your peers due to your politically incorrect viewpoints looses all threat since you see your civilization crumbling around you and literally have nothing left to loose…

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 01 Jun 2008 12:23 | #

“Narrator,” that’s an excellent blog you’ve got there.  I just read a little more than half-way down the home page, every word (I couldn’t stop, actually, it was so good).  Good job!  First rate!  You’re a good thinker!

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 01 Jun 2008 12:29 | #

Watch the spelling a bit, though — for example, the verb you want in your comment above is “lose,” not “loose.”  “Loose” can function as a verb, but the one you want there is the other one, the one where the “s” is “voiced” like “z.”  (Spelling can make a difference in how you’re received by readers.)

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 01 Jun 2008 23:14 | #

The Independent on Sunday does Barnbrook:-

Richard Barnbrook: The art-school liberal who now won’t allow blacks in his party

The flags are a bit of a giveaway. No other house in this East London street has a pair of big white poles sticking up and out of the front, flying an enormous Union flag and an equally oversized cross of St George. “Hello Richard,” calls a neighbour, smiling. She’s an elderly lady. White. The young girl who lives over on the other side of this ex-council square in Dagenham just stares at us in silence. She’s black.

“Once Britain has been returned to the British people,” says Richard Barnbrook, opening his front door, “and we have regained our identity, then we will be able to say to others: ‘If you play by the rules we set, you are welcome to become part of us.’”

And if not? Well, his British National Party wants to expel at least two million immigrants from this country as soon as possible, and offer many more cash incentives to go “home”.

For now, though, Barnbrook offers me a pot of tea. This 47-year-old with a cropped nape and floppy fringe is the closest thing the BNP has to a presentable face. He is not dressed in his election suit, described by the Daily Mail as “stormtrooper brown”, but in a sandy-coloured linen version with a gold tie. More Rommel than Hitler? “Yes. Great tactician.”

Barnbrook’s election to the Greater London Assembly in May was described by the analyst Tony Travers as “the biggest prize the extreme right has ever won in British politics”. Tomorrow, it will be one month since Barnbrook began work on the GLA. Something is clear from having watched him closely during that time: unpleasant and neo-fascist as it may be, in London at least, the BNP can no longer be ignored.

Barnbrook has the legal right to speak in GLA debates, even if he only represents the 130,000 Londoners who actually voted BNP. The people of the capital pay him £50,000 a year, a 10th of which he gives to his party. The money helps to fund his campaign to win Dagenham at the next election, which would make him the far right’s first MP.

Clearly, he is the frontman in an attempt to rid the party of its image as a bunch of hate-filled, screaming street-fighters. “Before, we were like: ‘March here! Shout here! Anger, anger, anger!’ It was going nowhere. It was not applying itself to the business of winning elections.” But there is something far more intriguing than all that about Barnbrook himself, who has undergone an extreme and extraordinary transformation.

The son of an army musician, he was hailed in his youth as a gifted artist, graduated from the Royal Academy and became an accomplished painter and sculptor. He collaborated with the likes of the film-maker Derek Jarman and was, he insists, the lover of the radical actor Tilda Swinton. “I’ve got DNA proof that I went out with her.”

Charming. But the point is that Barnbrook, who also worked as an art teacher, was deeply embedded in the “liberal elite” he now despises. So what happened? And where has all the art gone? There is an empty easel in the corner of his front room, but no paintings. “Sold ‘em,” he says quickly.

“I like things clean, neat, orderly,” he says, asking me to take my shoes off to protect the cream carpets – and revealing socks to match the linen suit. His mobile phone rings, with the sound of a chorister singing “Jerusalem”, and while he is out of the room I peek under the cream throw that covers his television. Minority Report, a DVD about an authoritarian future regime with psychic thought-police, is lying on another, folded, flag of St George.

“No regalia,” he says, appearing at the door, suggesting I was looking for Nazi gear. “I’ve got a life.” What he does have, hanging from the gilded frame of a large mirror, is a pair of red satin ballet shoes signed by Simone Clarke, former principal dancer with the English National Ballet.

There were protests outside the Coliseum last year when she danced the lead in Giselle, having just been revealed in the press as a member of the BNP. Barnbrook took her flowers, and the pair became lovers – although the relationship was not helped by a tabloid story that claimed he also wooed a Finnish nurse by sending her photos of “his private parts”.

“Eighty per cent of that was total fabrication,” he says, in a south London accent that is a bit posh because his father gave him a clip round the ear when it wasn’t. “I’ve got a book of Mein Kampf under my bed? Yeah, right. I haven’t even got a bloody copy of it.”

The relationship with Simone is “patching itself back together again after one or two mistakes I have made,” he says. She is up in Leeds with her parents, apparently. “I’ve stopped drinking,” he says, going off to the kitchen to make that tea, “at Simone’s say so.”

How long for? “For ever.” No, I meant how long has he been teetotal so far? “Oh. Twenty days. I look at people slurring and I think: ‘Was I like that?’” How much was he drinking before, then? “Three or four pints a night. Not much. But it’s the perception that counts.”

That is the mantra of the new BNP. The party website describes its new approach as “positive propaganda”. There are still loose cannons, admits Barnbrook. “Every party has nutters. Some of ours are knuckle-dragging junk from the past. But there are fewer left now.”

The BNP complains that the media peddles myths and lies about it. So let’s tell the truth, by quoting from its own online statement of beliefs. First on the list, for no apparent reason, is its disapproval of mixed marriages. Isn’t that a bit of a problem for Barnbrook, whose beloved Simone has a mixed-race daughter by a Cuban-Chinese dancer? “I don’t give a damn,” he says. “She is very beautiful, very bright, really astute.” Right… and in any case, he drops rather sad hints that his devotion to the prima ballerina may no longer be quite so requited. “I made a mistake,” he says. “I apologised about it, again and again and again. I screwed up. I regret it.”

Back to the website, which says races “cannot be directly compared”. It denies racism but “blacks and Asians” are not allowed into the party “for the same reason the Girl Guides don’t allow boys to join”. Its purpose is “to cater for the interests of the indigenous British population”.

To those who protest that there is no such thing, the BNP has an answer. It refers to an “indigenous British genotype” created 1,000 years ago, a blend of Celtic, Scandinavian, Germanic, Norman and Roman blood. This was “a fusion of genetically similar Northern and Western European peoples all coming from within a few hundred miles of each other”. Immigrants from beyond this area are compared to a different species.

In power, the BNP would “deport all the two million-plus who are here illegally” as well as “all those who commit crimes and whose original nationality was not British”.

It would “review” the rights of those recently granted citizenship or residency, to see if they were “appropriate”. It would like “no more than 2 to 3 per cent of population” in any given area to be non-white.

These are the things that Richard Barnbrook really stands for. They are the reason the other candidates left the stage when his results were announced.

He claims “intimidation and bullying” at City Hall, but adds: “My skin is thick. As a teacher, I dealt with hard-nut kids with behavioural problems intent on destruction in Hackney. The assembly is kindergarten.”

The truth is that he looked like a nervous, stroppy toddler when I saw him debate at City Hall earlier in the day. Barnbrook shouted, interrupted, talked across people and appeared deranged at times. But he also wrong-footed his opponents twice: once by asking the new Mayor to work with Winston McKenzie, the former boxer, who is black; and the other by putting himself up for a place on the regional arts council. His arts CV was better than that of any other member, he said, and he was right. So the BNP may yet get to decide on which statues to put up where.

The flaw in his strategy to be taken seriously is that while Barnbrook may be cleverer than most of the people he mixes with, he is not nearly as articulate as he likes to think. His sentences are fractured, confusing and full of ironies he just can’t hear, like describing tolerance as one of the essentials of the British character.

This is a man whose party declares itself against “the flaunting or celebrating of homosexuality”, but who once made a homo-erotic movie called HMS Discovery: A Love Story. “It’s not gay,” he insists. To give you some idea of what it is like to listen to him, here’s his description of the film, written verbatim: “Sexuality and Aids and the concept of a relationship, how does a man and a woman relate, going through history, between Captains Scott and Oates, between Christ and John the Baptist and the Mother Earth walking through carrying the flag ... it’s almost like a still-born child, how does people relate to each other ... it was dealing with the bigotry of attitudes towards people.”

Remarkable. The oldest of five, brought up in a household where nobody was allowed to speak at the dinner table, he suffered at school in Grimsby for being an arty dyslexic with a southern accent. “Head down the toilet a couple of times, but so what?”

But Barnbrook was reasonably successful by the time he married in 1998. His ex-wife has described how he changed suddenly the following year. “His views became very extreme. It was a total shock.”

It sounds, I tell him, like he suffered a bang on the head or a breakdown. Barnbrook says no. “I just walked around London, seeing the feeling of dejection and depravity, thinking: ‘This is not right.’” The BNP was then a discredited shambles, but he has collaborated with chairman Nick Griffin in its repackaging.

Maybe he had a mid-life crisis. Maybe he saw the chance to be a big fish in a passionate little pool. However he got there, Barnbrook is now the most prominent, directly elected representative the British far right has ever had.

On the day he signed in, his supporters stood outside City Hall chanting: “Our storm is coming.” What did they mean by that? “I don’t know,” he says at first, but of course he does. “If the democratic process does not work out within the next five to six years ... you will have strife on the streets… riots on the streets of Britain.”

This is not analysis. It’s not electoral politics. It’s an old-fashioned threat. When he talks in this way, Richard Barnbrook’s face shows fear and anger. He can’t hide that – it is as unmissable as those great big flags on the front of his house.

Rise and rise of the BNP

1982 BNP formed by ex-National Front chair John Tyndall.

1983 Fights 53 seats in general election, losing all 53 deposits.

1989 ‘Rights for Whites’ demo in Dewsbury, Yorkshire, leads to clashes with Asian youths.

1993 Derek Beackon wins party’s first council seat, in Millwall.

1999 Nick Griffin replaces Tyndall as head of the party.

2002 BNP wins three council seats in Burnley.

2004 Griffin, Tyndall and Mark Collett arrested for incitement to racial hatred after BBC undercover documentary.

2005 Griffin and Collett aquitted. Tyndall dies three days before he’s due in court.

2008 Barnbrook takes up first BNP seat in London Assembly.

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 02 Jun 2008 00:59 | #

If this article just posted by Guessedworker lends an accurate impression of Barnbrook’s speaking and inter-personal skills it only reconfirms my impression that he is not equiped to lead the nationalist movement in Britain.  If Barnbrook is the only, best hope to one day replace Griffin as chairman party members should hold on to Griffin with a death grip.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Jun 2008 01:51 | #

Captainchaos, this article was a deliberate hatchet job.  A reporter can do likewise to any political novice, and all the more easily when the subject is race, for obvious reasons (almost anything you say about race that’s not PC has the potential to shock unless it’s crafted with great care, and even then a reporter or editor determined to get you can turn it around so you look bad).  You cannot judge Barnbrook by this article.  Whether or not he has the potential to lead the party remains to be seen; I agree he may not, because of what may be a lack of a certain necessary subtlety.  But for now, he’ll learn to be more clever as he gains experience.

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 02 Jun 2008 03:14 | #

Barnbrook strikes me as a red blooded, stout hearted, earnest guy: these are likable qualities.  It remains to be seen if he can polish his public face sufficiently.  He has the ball, time to run with it.

Posted by the Narrator... on Mon, 02 Jun 2008 08:14 | #

“Watch the spelling a bit, though”
-Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sunday, June 1, 2008 at 11:29 AM | #

Thanks for the comment and you’re right about the spelling. Unfortunately I tend to treat the blog like a book, scribbling my own comments in the margin (so to speak) as I go.

As for Barnbrook, the media has a habit of choosing our leaders and representatives for us by giving certain people (whom they know they can tear down later once they’ve gotten enough attention) a platform just big enough to hang our banner upon before the eggs and tomatoes start flying.
I’m not saying Barnbrook is such a person, but it always pays to be especially cautious in regards to media-elected leaders and spokespersons…

.

Posted by Bill on Mon, 02 Jun 2008 10:10 | #

Despite everything, I still think we are made of the same stuff.

THE VICTORIA CROSS

14471590 Private William Speakman Black Watch (Royal Highland Regiment), attached to the 1st Battalion The King’s Own Scottish Borderers

From 0400 hrs., 4th November, 1951, the defensive positions held by 1st Battalion The King’s Own Scottish Borderers were continuously subjected to heavy and accurate enemy shell and mortar fire. At 1545 hrs., this fire became intense and continued thus for the next two hours, considerably damaging the defences and wounding a number of men.
  At 1645 hrs. the enemy in their hundreds advanced in wave upon wave against the King’s Own Scottish Borderers’ positions, and by 1745 hrs. fierce hand-to-hand fighting was taking place on every position.
  Private Speakman, a member of “B” Company, Headquarters, learning that the section holding the left shoulder of the company’s position had been seriously depleted by casualties, had had its N.C.Os. wounded and was being over-run, decided on his own initiative to drive the enemy off the position and keep them off it. To effect this he collected quickly a large pile of grenades and a party of six men. Then, displaying complete disregard for his own personal safety, he led his party in a series of grenade charges against the enemy; and continued doing so as each successive wave of enemy reached the crest of the hill. The force and determination of his charges broke up each successive enemy onslaught and resulted in an ever-mounting pile of enemy dead.
  Having led some ten charges, through withering enemy machine-gun and mortar fire, Private Speakman was eventually severely wounded in the leg. Undaunted by his wounds, he continued to lead charge after charge against the enemy, and it was only after a direct order from his superior officer that he agreed to pause for a first field dressing to be applied to his wounds. Having had his wounds bandaged, Private Speakman immediately rejoined his comrades and led them again and again forward in a series of grenade charges, up to the time of the withdrawal of his company at 2100 hrs.
  At the critical moment of the withdrawal, amidst an inferno of enemy machine-gun and mortar fire, as well as grenades, Private Speakman led a final charge to clear the crest of the hill and hold it, whilst the remainder of his company withdrew. Encouraging his gallant but by now sadly depleted party, he assailed the enemy with showers of grenades and kept them at bay sufficiently long for his company to effect its withdrawal.
  Under the stress and strain of this battle, Private Speakman’s outstanding powers of leadership were revealed, and he so dominated the situation that he inspired his comrades to stand firm and fight the enemy to a standstill.
  His great gallantry and utter contempt for his own personal safety were an inspiration to all his comrades. He was, by his heroic actions, personally responsible for causing enormous losses to the enemy, assisting his company to maintain their position for some four hours and saving the lives of many of his comrades when they were forced to withdraw from their position.
  Private Speakman’s heroism under intense fire throughout the operation and when painfully wounded was beyond praise and is deserving of supreme recognition.—London Gazette, 28th December, 1951.

I remember seeing this in the press.

No matter what spin the Independent puts on the BNP, it will all count for nought when we feel the tide gently swirling around our ankles.

Posted by calvin on Mon, 02 Jun 2008 23:10 | #

“The flaw in his strategy to be taken seriously is that while Barnbrook may be cleverer than most of the people he mixes with, he is not nearly as articulate as he likes to think”

It’s hardly surprising that an elite that validates its authority on its assumption of superior intelligence perceives cleverness to be the supreme quality of leadership. Barnbrook’s appeal seems to be based more on an old fashioned principle called “telling the truth”, a principle that the clever trevors of the liberal “intelligentsia” may yet have distant memories of.

Our hack seems to posses that special brand of Guardian cleverness that lends spurious credibility to bogus ideals. In reality this is just stupidity in gift wrapping.

Possibly it is that failure of perception that explains the rather thin gruel that seems to be the substance of his objection to Barnbrook. Our servile corporate hack rails and blusters, “These are the things that Richard Barnbrook really stands for”. Our hack journo is referring to the BNP’s promise to deport illegal immigrants. Bugger me! A political party that wants to enforce the law, we can’t have that can we?

Posted by Bill on Tue, 03 Jun 2008 09:12 | #

Reality

Another young girl is discovered stabbed in a lift (This morning’s papers)  I posted recently, that in future,  the media will have an ever increasing problem in fooling all of the people all of the time, for it is they (media) who are doing such a brilliant job of sedating their sheeple viewers.

The media are feeding the sheeple the consumer dream, we all live in a yellow submarine,  the matrix of la-la land, the yellow brick road, ‘you too can be Nancy.’

The scale is falling, you only have to look at the avalanche of vitriol cascading in the tabloid blogs, miles of it, unrelenting bile, disgust and downright hate for our elites and what they are doing.  OK, we all know that these people blogging are the more aware among the sheeple but even so, the Kev’s and Sallies must be now scratching their heads when thy see the morning’s press headlines.

As I say, the BBC will be for ever, notching up a gear in the reality stakes.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 06 Jun 2008 20:00 | #

I’ve been test-driving the Telegraph’s loudly proclaimed liberality as regards reader comments today, actually talking to an opponent named Hyams about his Jewishness and arguing for the morality and practicality of repatriation.  Stormfront it ain’t.  But it is surely progress.

Posted by Englander on Fri, 06 Jun 2008 21:13 | #

Stormfront it ain’t.  But it is surely progress.

I understand you didn’t mean it in this way, but I’m rather glad that ‘Stormfront it ain’t’. The last thing our side needs is for the rational and articulate to be drowned out by a chorus of crudity of the stormfront variety migrating into these very public areas giving our whole cause a bad name and providing easy fodder for the opposition.
So far only the most respectable Nationalists seem to have made the effort to post, and as a result Nationalists/disgruntled Whites have a clear upper hand. I’m not sure how many people bother reading the comments on these articles, but those who do are getting to see us at our best. It would be a crying shame if this were to change.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:33 | #

Englander, you are right, of course.  One idiot turned (see John at June 6, 2008 8:27 PM).  In an attempt to preserve the integrity of our argument, I’ve posted a brief comment to the effect that this guy is surely an agent provocateur.

Posted by Englander on Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:50 | #

If too many of those types turn up then perhaps a number of overtly anti-White racists and extreme liberal wing-nuts will happen to show up to add balance. Maybe they’ll come anyway…

Posted by Lurker on Sat, 07 Jun 2008 02:38 | #

Ive made an effort at Torygraph - twice. Their clunking site forgot I existed (or something) and I had to start a new ID. Its painfully slow as well, ah well Ill keep plugging away.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 08 Jun 2008 21:50 | #

Blimey.  Barely a week after the Telegraph made the mistake of boasting about the liberalty of its comments policy, we’re busy naming Jews.  Whatever next?