Showing posts with label BNP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BNP. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

The BNP Making Sense On Global Warming . . .

The BNP (British National Party) has just gone another notch up in my estimation. The Guardian has posted the following exchange between the BNP's Nick Griffin and a BBC interviewer who had just spent five minutes trying to get Griffin to say something that could be characterized as racist:

Nick Griffin: The BBC is obsessed with race and immigration. It would be great to talk about something else for once.

Nicky Campbell: What would you like to talk about? What's the thing you'd like to say given this platform to speak to the nation this morning?

Nick Griffin: OK, how about the fact that I believe, along with the Czech politician [Vaclav Klaus] everyone is berating, that global warming is essentially a hoax. It is being exploited by the liberal elite as a means of taxing and controlling us and the real crisis is peak oil. We're running out of proper, real energy. And it is something with an immediate and catastrophic effect in a few years' time potentially — not worrying about floating polar bears in a 150 years.

That about sums up reality in a paragraph. And if he is making sense while the left is doing nothing but making ad hominem attacks, the BNP might find itself on a real upward trend over the next few years. Let's hope they moderate a bit more, though. They may see global warming as a hoax, but, as EU Referendum points out, they have previously said that the Holocaust was a hoax also.

Update: Add to the above this article from the NYT:

The British National Party opposes what Mr. Griffin calls the “creeping Islamification” of Britain, supports voluntary repatriation of immigrants and wants to take Britain out of the European Union and NATO.

. . . Mr. Griffin’s victory is the culmination of a campaign to modernize the party and shake off a reputation for anti-Semitism and the politics of incitement it earned in a previous era.

I don't know about that drop out of the NATO bit. I'll have to read up a bit more on that.







Read More...

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Another Word On The BNP


I've posted on the EU election here, noting the fact that the BNP won two seats and my thoughts on that outcome. Brits At Their Best has a post on the election that also includes a discussion of the reasons for the BNP's growing popularity. They quote Andrew Stuttaford from the The Corner, who writes:

The relative success (it won two seats) of the. . .British National Party. . .in the U.K. slice of the EU elections is best seen primarily as the product of five factors: (a) the largely accurate perception that the Blair-Brown governments were enablers of mass immigration; (b) not-unconnected fears over the rise of militant Islam within the U.K.; (c) dislike of the EU; (d) the economic crisis; (e) globalization (on economics & trade policy the party is quite some way to the left) and; (f) the widespread perception, flowing in no small part from points a-e, that no parliamentary party is prepared to stick up for the interests of the white working class, a perception that explains the BNP's recent success in finding support amongst former Labour voters. Throw in the the way that the expenses scandal now roiling parliament has discredited much of the existing political class, and there you have it . . .

I would add that the new "Equality" legislation being considered by Parliament in effect would institutionalize reverse racism against white male workers in the UK. As the Daily Times describes it, "[e]mployers will be given legal powers to discriminate in favour of women and black job candidates under a controversial equality shake-up." Its not surprising that there is finally a back lash being felt to all of this. It's long overdue.

I can't see the BNP winning an electoral majority in the UK in the foreseeable future. But I can see their growing popularity marking a real change to the terms of the debate. And in the UK, where for example even minor criticism of such things as immigration has been enough to get one labled a racist and ridden out of politics on a rail, that is a good thing indeed.








Read More...

Sunday, June 7, 2009

Labour's "Long, Dark Night Of Humiliation" - Britain & Europe Swing Right


Labour did not just lose the latest 4 June EU Parliament elections, they got toasted. According to the Guardian:

. . . Labour trailed humiliatingly behind UKIP in the European elections and was expected to garner about 16% or 17% of the vote, its lowest share since the First World War and below the party's worst expectations.

During a dramatic night of unremitting gloom for Downing Street, the Tories appeared to have pulled more than 10 points ahead of Labour, with UKIP in ­second. The BNP also secured its first ­significant wins in British politics when its leader Nick Griffin became an MEP in the north-west, and Andrew Brons – a former leader of the National Front - won in Yorkshire and Humber.

Read the entire article. The gains by the BNP in particular have the left spitting blood. The British left did all they could to demonize the BNP, including trotting out the Archbishop of Canterbury, the odious Rowan Williams, to rail against voting for the BNP. All to no avail, it seems, as the Daily Mail reports: "The triumph for the [BNP] neo-fascist party, which will now send two MEPs to Brussels - including its leader Nick Griffin - sent shockwaves through Westminster . . ."

I do not know if its fair to characterize today's BNP as a "neo-facist" party, but I do know that they seem to be the only party speaking out on taboo issues that threaten the very fabric of the UK, not the least of which is immigration. They are tapping into a lot of angst among the rank and file that the Tory Party, which has sought to emulate the Labour Party in so many ways, simply is not. I think the best possible thing for British politics would be for the BNP to have a stand on the national stage. So long as they don't evince overt racism, they may be able to spark a true national debate free of PC restrictions on such things as freedom of speech, health and safety, multiculturalism, nationalism, and immigration - all areas where socialist policies have done immense damage to the fabric of British life.

Indeed, having watched the socialists in Labour deconstruct British society and attack Christianity over the past decade and then turn Britain into a province of the EU without a vote of the British electorate, its nice to see the pendulum swing and swing hard. Certainly a good portion of this vote was a reaction to the scandal over MP expenses. But it was part of a greater movement all across Europe that saw big gains by right and center-right parties, including most notably Geert Wilder's anti-EU, anti-immigration party which "shot to second place behind the ruling Christian Democrats by taking 17 per cent of the vote in the Netherlands." Wilders is outspoken in his stance against the predations of Islamists throughout Europe and is perhaps best known for his production of the movie short, Fitna (see here).

This also from the above-linked Guardian article:

Labour's European meltdown was amplified on a continental scale last night as the centre-left across the EU suffered defeats despite an economic climate from which it should profit. The most significant outcome was in Germany, the EU's biggest member country, where the Social Democrats (SPD) came in 17 points behind Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats and their Bavarian CSU ally.

In France, and Italy the centre-right also scored victories while Spain's socialist government lost to the conservatives.

Now if we can only get our own socialist left out of power, perhaps there is yet a chance for Western Civilization to survive.








Read More...

Thursday, July 3, 2008

For Every Action, There Is An Equal & Opposite Reaction


The title is a statement of Newton's 3rd Law of Motion. But it applies in many ways to society where imposing tyrannical acts against the will of the majority will cause a reaction over time. And so it is in Britain, where the Labour government and chattering class have opened the flood gates to immigration - and particularly to immigration from Islamic countries - and where the British are watching their nation being changed against their will and without their say. Indeed, to criticize immigration, multiculturalism, or Islam leads inevitably to being demonized by the socialist echo chamber - if not prosecuted by the state. The British people are incredibly slow to act, but act they are. Melanie Phillips writes that it is showing today in support for the British National Party, a party with deeply racist roots.
_______________________________________________________

This from Melanie Phillips:

It is a source of great concern that far too many otherwise decent British people now refuse to believe that the British National Party is what it is -- a bunch of viciously racist and anti-Jewish bigots. The recent debacle in the Henley by-election, where the BNP did better than either the Labour party or UKIP , shows that it is now tapping into a disturbing level of support.

This is for two reasons. First, like all far right parties it opportunistically seizes upon genuine grievances that mainstream politicians will not address. At present these centre around the deliberate erosion of British national identity through unlimited immigration and a refusal to tackle the growing Islamisation of Britain. Mainstream liberal opinion holds that even to identify this as a problem is racist or ‘Islamophobic’. The result is that the truly racist BNP (which uses concern about Muslims to camouflage its real animosity against all Asians, people of colour and Jews) has seized upon these issues – with the further result that because it has done so, this ‘proves’ to the liberal classes that these issues are indeed racist. Which, of course, they are not. The idea that the only alternative to cultural and national suicide is neo-fascism is ludicrous. Yet that is precisely what liberal opinion, which demonises all attempts to uphold national identity as racist, holds.

The second reason is the fact that the BNP set out to sanitise its image of such unfortunate connotations of bigotry -- going so far as to brandish support for Israel against Hezbollah, for example, to underpin its claim to be an entirely respectable party backed by Jews, black people and other minorities, all united in the mainstream cause of defending British national identity and western values against attack.

. . . And so on, and rabidly on. So much for the supposedly sanitised BNP. When it comes to bigotry, it’s just more of the same old same old.

To repeat: fascists and neo-fascists have always exploited genuine grievances which have been ignored by mainstream politicians. As the Muslim Tory candidate Ali Miraj points out, it is the fact that our current mainstream political class has either ignored or actually caused the destruction of British national identity and is now busily appeasing the Islamists who seek to colonise the ruins which has created a powder keg among the indigenous British community and given the BNP its current opportunity. The two are symbiotically linked.

Who is to blame for the rise of the BNP? Labour’s zealot nation-destroyers and the feeble hand-wringers of the Conservative party.


Read the entire article. The BNP may be an odious organization, but they are touching ever greater mainstream grievances that not only have the chattering classes demonized, but Labour has sought to suppress with the police power of the state. To give you a feel for just how oppressive the Labour party is in silencing free speech and intolerant of any dissent, here is a short recounting of the BNP prosecution:



In 2004, the BBC surreptitiously filmed a speech by members of the British Nationalist Party (BNP). Caught on film were BNP members who described Islam as a "wicked, vicious faith" and who said that Muslims were turning Britain into a "multi-racial hell hole". The Crown used the Public Order Act of 1986 to prosecute the BNP members for stirring up racial hatred. After two lengthy trials, the first of which ended in a partial hung jury, the BNP members were acquitted. Their attorney argued at both trials that the speech was a part of legitimate political discourse. Gordon Brown commented after the trial:

Laws protecting Britain's ethnic and religious minorities may be tightened after the leader of the British National Party was cleared of trying to stir up racial hatred, Chancellor Gordon Brown said last night.The Chancellor promised a fresh look at the law in the light of the decision of a jury at Leeds Crown Court yesterday to clear BNP leader Nick Griffin and his fellow activist. . . Mr Brown said: "Mainstream opinion in this country will be offended by some of the statements that they have heard made. Any preaching of religious or racial hatred will offend mainstream opinion in this country. And I think we have got to do whatever we can to root it out, from whatever quarter it comes."

Does that take your breath away - trying to convict someone and sentincing them for up to seven years in prison for "offending" "mainstream opinion?" PM Gordon Brown will never be confused in the history books with Voltaire. It is both amazing and telling that Brown's statement raised not a hue and cry in Britain. . . .

Read the entire post. It says much that the electorate of Britain are turning to the BNP as their only outlet as they watch society being deconstructed around them. That this will all come to a head at some point is inevitable.


Read More...

Saturday, May 3, 2008

Might Britain Survive After All

Over the last decade, the socialist/marxist policies of the Labour government and the European Union combined in a horrendous synergism to drag down the economy of Britain and quite literally war against anglo-saxon culture and history. On Thursday, the British people seemingly stirred a bit from their stupor. In local elections, they handed Labour their worst electoral defeat in a half century. And that was just the beginning of the good news.

____________________________________________________

When the votes were totaled, the Tories – ostensibly Britain’s conservative party, though they would be seen as well to the left of center in the U.S. political continuum – picked up the lion’s shared of the vote at 44%. The Liberal Democrat Party, a relatively new party that is trying to mark out the mid point between the Tories and the Labour party, came in second with 25% of the vote while the ruling Labour Party was in third with 24% of the vote. Both the UK Independence Party - the true home of conservatives in the UK - and the British National Party increased their margins.

What all that means is a royal drubbing for Labour in the local councils. Labour lost 331 Councilors and control of 12 Local Councils. The Tories picked up 256 Councilors, which gives them now a huge lead at the local level over Labour. This bodes ill indeed for the Labour Party, who are searching today for any message in the election results that they can latch onto and perhaps salavage their party before the next general election. As several commentators, the most colorful of which was The Times' Matthew Parris, have noted, there are no life preservers in the electoral sea in which Labour now finds itself adrift:

It's over. There was nothing constructive in the voters' message. These elections were not an invitation to change. They were a big two-fingered salute [the Brit equivalent of the middle finger salute on this side of the pond], a raspberry, a pressing of the de-trousered national buttocks to the window of the polling station. The voters are bored, tired, disillusioned and out of love. The affair [with Labour], which in 1997 was (for the British people) uncharacteristically intense, is over, and the falling out is correspondingly bitter. Such flames are not rekindled - and certainly not by Mr Brown, whose personal stamp characterises this administration.

Read the entire article. Not everyone agrees, of course. At least one ardent leftist, John Kampfner - not surprisingly a BBC personality, writing at the Guardian has suggested that Labour can win by taking an even harder turn to left, apparently readopting the marxian economic ideas of large scale income redistribution and nationalization of major businesses jettisoned from the Labour plank only a bit over a decade ago by Tony Blair. Good luck with that.

The most important part of the local election was the race for Mayor of London, a post held for the past eight years by the odious Ken Livingstone – better known as Red Ken – a true enemy of Western civilization. Red Ken has thankfully been handed his walking papers by London's voters who gave victory to the Tory candidate, Boris Johnson, by a wide margin.

This is all good news, though only a small first step, really. In the end, the most important question will be whether Britain is consumed by the EU in a transfer of sovereignty with no referendum of the Brtish electorate. And thus the big news of the week may well be the little noted court approval given to a case brought by Stuart Wheeler to force the UK government to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. More on that court decision here.

Showing how history repeats itself if you survive as a nation for a millenium, the good folk at Brits at Their Best saw the apparent mood of an angry electorate summed up in in John of Gaunt's speech about the state of England in Shakespeare’s Richard II.

This land of such dear souls, this dear dear land,
Dear for her reputation through the world,
Is now leased out, I die pronouncing it,
Like to a tenement or pelting farm:
England, bound in with the triumphant sea
Whose rocky shore beats back the envious siege
Of watery Neptune, is now bound in with shame,
With inky blots and rotten parchment bonds:
That England, that was wont to conquer others,
Hath made a shameful conquest of itself.

Read the entire post. And another British blog, EU Referendum, one of the best blogs on either side of the pond, puts the election in perspective.

. . . [T]his was a catastrophe for the Labour party of some magnitude and one from which they will find it difficult to recover.

However, for the rest of us, life goes on and, let us face it, these were just local elections, which will change little and which were decided on a low turn-out as usual. In other words, for the majority of the population, even in the affected areas, they were of little concern. This will not change until there is a root-and-branch reform . . . [of local and national government].

. . . We have a new mayor, though many of us prefer not to have one at all. Nor are we all that desperate to have a London Assembly or the rest of those quangos that together make up the GLA or, more widely, “London’s government”. London does not need a government as it has managed spectacularly well without one for centuries. This supposed government is little more than a money-hungry incubus on the whole city.

On the other hand, if we do have a mayor, even temporarily, it is better not to have a power-hungry, self-centred, no-much-reformed socialist who brought in huge white elephants, thought of new ways to fleece the public and saw himself and his entourage as another foreign office. The truth of how much those trips abroad to places like Venezuela or to conferences about global warming has not yet come out.

. . . On to the new Mayor. Boris Johnson has won very handsomely. Despite the ridiculous system of three ballot papers, two preferences for the mayor and two separate votes for the assembly, which has consistently created more spoilt ballots in London than anywhere else, the victory is clear and uncontestable.

The turn-out seems to have been around 45 per cent, about ten per cent higher than last time and about 13 per cent higher than the time before. This is still not spectacularly high but by standards of local elections, not bad.

The irony here is that we were told twice by pundits of the stature of Simon Jenkins that the magical personality and popularity of Ken Livingstone would bring the voters out in far greater droves than ever before. It didn’t and neither did the media blitz on the subject. It was actually the presence of a credible rival that did the trick.

. . . David Cameron must have some ambivalent feelings. It does not take too many brain cells to work out that Boris Johnson will now have power base that is completely independent of the leader and, unlike Livingstone, he has never made the mistake of antagonizing other members of his party.

. . . Final count was 1,168,738 for Mayor Johnson and 1,028,966 for ex-Mayor Livingstone. One can but hope he will now disappear from public life and go back to spending more time with his newts.

Contrary to what the media tells us, Livingstone has not been a success in his life. Nothing but a career local politician, he actually helped Thatcher to destroy the GLC, which he had seen as his power base. Then he became an MP, only to find that as a back-bencher and a greatly disliked one at that, he had no role to play.

. . . It was time for [Red Ken] to go. Otherwise, the Conservative have not done as well as they had hoped in London. They lost one first-past-the-post seat in the Assembly and failed to gain another one they had high hopes for. They have gone down to eight constituency members with Labour having six. However, their vote across London has gone up by 6.20 per cent, so they will make the seats up, from the top-up list system. Labour’s vote went up by 3.36 per cent. A combination of higher turn-out and smaller parties being squeezed. It was rare to see any group quite as glum as the Greens were in the Great Glass Egg yesterday.

What about those top-up members? The big news is that, as expected, the BNP has passed the 5 per cent threshold and now has one member in the Assembly. Incidentally, if it is true that the main party candidates walked out of the room when the BNP mayoral candidate spoke but happily listened to the tyrant- and terrorist-supporting Lindsay Germain of the Left List, one can only marvel at their stupidity as well as bad manners. Then they wonder why people vote BNP. Richard Barnbrook, the man in question, will now be in the Assembly, so, as the song has it “ho, ho, ho, who’s laughing now”.

Having found the full list, I can say that the Conservatives have got three top-up seats, so two mayoral hopefuls, Andrew Boff and Victoria Borwick will be in the Assembly. Again, one can but wonder at their notion of what constitutes important political placing.

Labour has two top-up seats, with Nicky Gavron and Murad Qureshi back in place. That means there will be 11 Tory members and 8 Labour ones. The Lib-Dims have lost two seats and are down to three and the Greens have retained the two they had. BNP has one. What a jolly set-up that is going to be. . . .

Read the entire post.

Read More...

Friday, January 18, 2008

Lionheart and the BNP

Lionheart deserves our support. To the extent that there is any controversy about that, his support of the British National Party (BNP) needs to be put in perspective. Lionheart is not a white supremacist. He is not a racist. Indeed, his actions clearly prove to the contrary. He is a man on the front lines of the fight against radical Islam who is now facing prosecution for his speech.

Lionheart is a British blogger under threat of arrest in Bedfordshire, UK for "stirring up racial hatred." Specifically, Lionheart maintains a blog which he has used to post his criticism of radical Islam that is ever growing in the UK and that is well entrenched in Lionheart's hometown of Luton. Britain is using its police powers to enforce its brand of Orwellian multiculturalism on Lionheart and the British populace as a whole.

I posted on Lionheart's situation here. In the wake of that post, several items appeared in UK papers discussing how significant the problem of radical Isalm had grown in the UK, and discussing how none of the three major political parties were willing to discuss radical Islam or the multicultural ethos that had allowed it to fester and grow in Britain's mosques. Those are included as updates to my original post.

In response to my post, it came to light that Lionheart had supported the BNP - and LGF put a disclaimer in his own blog post that expressed full support for Lionheart's freedom of speech, but noted that such support was in no way to be construed as support for the BNP. Lionheart overreacted. He needed simply to explain the situation. And he has done so now in an interview posted on the Us or Them Blog. I urge you to read the whole interview. And then I urge you to give Lionheart your full support in any way that you can, including by monetary donations through his blog.

Lionheart will be appearing on The Gathering Storm radio show at 3 p.m. EDT today.

Read More...

Saturday, January 12, 2008

What Ridiculousness (Updated & Somewhat Resolved)

2nd Update: Since I wrote this post last night, Lionheart has reacted more or less appropriately to the situation. See his post here. Clearly he is still mistaking LGF's post stating reservations about the BNP with a personal attack on himself. While I hope that Lionheart will further mull this over, the apology he has issued is, for me, enough to satisfy me at the moment - at least in light of what I believe at the moment to be the reality of the relationship between Lionheart and the BNP, as discussed below. Thus, for my part and as I perceive the facts now, I will, and I urge all people who care about freedom of speech and the assault we face from radical Islam, give Lionheart full support in every possible way. I still see him as a lone voice in a critical situation that concerns all of us, though perhaps in need of better skills in discrimination.


Several days ago, I blogged about the plight of Lionheart, a British blogger under threat of imprisonment in the UK for criticizing Islam. You can see the post here. Between LGF, Pajamas Media, Dr. Sanity and numerous other sites, the post ended up getting several thousand hits. Because of my role in publicizing the situation, I need to weigh in on some very intemperate remarks made by Lionheart since then.

As mentioned, LGF picked up my post linked above and ran the following:

In an absolute travesty of justice, a British blogger who uses the name Lionheart is apparently going to be prosecuted for “stirring up racial hatred”—in other words, for railing against Islam: . . .

There is a good reason why America’s founders strictly limited the government’s power to regulate speech. Modern Britain is an object lesson in the Orwellian consequences of failing to do so, and the inevitable abuse of power that results.

UPDATE at 1/7/08 10:43:47 am:
Konservo notes that Lionheart is a supporter of the neo-fascist British National Party, which leads me to state clearly that by posting about the case, I am not supporting what Lionheart says on his blog—just his right to say it.



LGF does not wish to be associated with or seen as supporting organizations or people who espouse a racist / neo-facist ideology. I am not going to get into the nuances of the blog war between LGF and other sites. I am vaguely aware of what is happening, I don't know the nuances and to be completely honest, I don't care. Agree with it or not, LGF espouses a principled position that needs to be accorded full respect. Further, irrespective of whether Lionheart associated with the BNP, LGF offered full support for his right of free speech.

In a subsequent blog post of which I have just become aware, Lionheart made the following statement in response:

Little Green Footballs you are a traitor, nothing less than the equivalent of a Second World War Nazi collaborator who would have been shot because of his treason - I am sure there are many who would have obliged!

Read the post here. That response shows a degree of immaturity and venom with which I do not wish to be associated.

Since this is playing out on blogs, I must respond here in kind with my two cents. It appears from the comments in LGF that Lionheart has supported the BNP in the past merely because, as he saw it, that was the only political party that was willing to take a stand against the growth of radical Islam in Britain. And that appears to be an accurate reading of the political situation in Britain. In the Telegraph, Britain's conservative newspaper, an editorial the other day explicitly made the point that all three major political parties in Britain are courting the Muslim vote and refusing to criticize Islam in the UK. Lionheart, to his credit, has actively supported Israel and people of all races and nationalities. His support for the BNP appears to be on the sole ground of their stand against the growth of radical Islam in the UK. Lionheart appears a brave person in an ever dire situation.

The way for this to be handled was by way of simple explanation, either by e-mail to LGF asking LGF for an opportunity to explain the situation or an even tempered blog post by Lionheart explaining the situation. This is a situation that cried - and cries - for reasoned response, not histrionics.

Unless and until Lionheart acts publicly to withdraw his remarks and correct this situation, I will no longer support him in any way with the exception that I will support his right of free speech. We all make mistakes and do things that, in the light of day, we wish we could retract. I do hope that Lionheart realizes that he has severely mishandled this situation. Should he choose to respond in a measured way to resolve this situation, I am prepared to again offer him my full support in all of his very worthy and brave endeavors.

Read More...