Just to clarify a few points.
Most members who arent 'Posture Nationalists' live in the real world.
They are pragmatic nationalists who will not leave the party as a result of this case, in fact most decent members are repulsed by the nazi saluters and golliwog burners who follow the 'Posture Nationalist' line and who will try and use this case as an excuse to incite trouble in the party.
There is nothing more sickening than listening to the bone idle, do nothing, gobshites on some internet forums talking about what BNP activists should do when they do nothing but talk rubbish from behind a keyboard.
It is a political truism that the mouthiest keyboard warriors are usually the least active nationalists.
Therefore those armchair nationalist and keyboard warriors who pontificate about defending 'activists' or the BNP are usually hollow and hypocritical platitudes from bone idle scumbags who spend all their time mouthing off on the internet attacking real nationalists and do nothing else.
The idea that new labour have initiated this case in order to turn us into a civic nationalist party is simply a sign of insanity. If the BNP were truly a civic nationalist party then we would probably have about 'fifty MEP's by now. The fact is that if we wanted to abandon our policies on protecting indigenous rights and british culture and become a civic nationalist party that would ensure we become a massive mainstream party overnight - only deluded idiots think that a racial nationalist party = electoral success.
I think the fact that the NF are a political joke with no council seats proves that point is baseless and idiotic. If the public wanted to vote for a racial nationalist party the NF would have the MEP's, not us.
Only the extremists see value in extremist policies - the public reject extremism.
The plan by the equality commission is to cause internal problems by inciting the more extremist elements in the party, who dont give a damn about how succesful we are as a political party as long as we remain a purist 'racist' party, or whether we are banned as a political party, to kick up a fuss.
That makes the extremists morons who say the BNP should surrender and go out in a 'blaze of glory' a tool of the labour government, for they are so dim they cannot even see they are doing the governments work for them.
When individuals join the party they are are not required to give away their rights, their civil rights remain with them at all times.
What we can say is that if you choose to exert those rights against the party then you voluntarily self remove yourself from the party.
You can still exert those rights if you wish, but to do so means you will be kicked out of the party.
An association is able to define its membership in any way it wants as long as it doesnt infringe the rights and freedoms of others as defined in law eg we cannot bar membership on the grounds or race or skin colour which are expressly banned and prohibited under the race relations acts and under Article 11 of the ECHR.
In other words we can impose a membership condition that allows us to expel on the grounds listed, but we do not have the power to say those people do not have those rights and nor could we.
THIS IS SIMPLY BECAUSE EVEN IF WANTED TO REMOVE THEIR RIGHTS WE DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO REMOVE THEIR RIGHTS.
Their rights remain with them at all times, but if they choose to use those rights to attack another member or the party, then if they choose to use those rights that will give us legitmate grounds to remove them from the party.
The provision ON ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP STATUS would apply to all associate members equally regardless of race, therefore is neither discrminatory directly or indirectly EITHER IN FUNCTION OR APPLICATION.
As ALL Associate Members are barred from attending meetings, then neither can direct or indirect racial discrimination be claimed or proved. ( Re Redfearn V Serco )
As for the requirement to disclose previous political afficliations and memberships -We can ask anyone to disclose anything we want before they become a member, and that they agree to provide us with that information before they join.
IF THEY DONT WANT TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION, THEN THEY ARENT ALLOWED TO JOIN.
Those that spend more time attacking the BNP than doing anything else should just leave the party and join the NF.
Those who are sincere in their wish to fight this case on principle need to do the follwing;
1) Set up a BNP Nationalist Supporters Group as a limited association
2) Raise enough money to hire a lawyer
3) Take the Equality Commission to court in the name of the BNP supporters group and not the BNP as that way costs fall on the supporters group and not the BNP
4) Take on a judicial review case to challenge the authority of the Equality Commission to bring this case and also challenge them on the fact that other organisations are not being targeted by the Equality Commission
5) Seek an order for a Declaration from the court and an order for Certoriari from the court over turning the previous court decision to award them costs and not to allow the BNP to claim legal aid under the issue of Equality of Arms
If you arent prepared to put up, then shut up.
In relation to the NF membership criteria ;
" The National Front is a radical racial nationalist movement made up of a confederation of semi-autonomous branches. The primary object of the National Front is to ensure the survival and advancement of the White Race and the British Nation.
Compliance with the terms of this Constitution shall be a necessary condition of membership of the National Front. "
Two problems ;
1) The Equality Commission uses the internal propaganda of the party under investigation as evidence of its 'white only' racist membership policy, so I wonder if the NF have ever said they are a 'white race' only organisation in their internal propaganda at all ? Hmmm a hard one that.
2) The Equality Commission will send them a formal legal notice giving the NF twenty one days to state whether they racially discriminate in relation to their membership policy and secondly do they have a whites only membership policy which is what they did to the BNP - and if they refuse to answer then they will take them to court to get a 'clarification ' on the position of the NF as regarding those two issues.
Now I wonder if the NF would be willing to say ;
1) We do not racially discriminate in relation to new members and we allow non-whites to join the NF
2) Our party is not a whites only party and our definition of the 'white race' is not based on race or skin colour.
Hmmmm, hard one that.
If they did not respond, did not reply or did not clarify their membership criteria -then they will be banned.
Simple as that.
Problem is that reality doesnt matter to some people does it.
As for the simpleton Ravenser (!) a national front sock puppet on one idiot internet forum who states ;
" None of them have any legal force. If it were otherwise, legislation such as the Minimum Wage would be unenforcable, because unscrupulous employers would simply insist that their workforce agree in advance to 'sign away' their protection. "
Errrr - the laws on employment rights relate to EMPLOYMENT and the legal duties on EMPLOYERS in relation to an employment situation based on an employment contract.
Joining the BNP isnt being employed by the BNP is it dumb ass.
Legislation covers a specific area of law eg employment law - and NO legislation, other than the race relations acts, defines what the constitution of a voluntary membership association has to be. In fact case law on membership associations states quite clearly that voluntary membership associations can impose ANY rules on membership criteria as no-one is forced to join a voluntary association unless a law exists, eg the race relations acts, that places a legal duty on the organisation to abide by that law - and funnily enough this right for voluntary associations to self define their own membership critteria for themselves was confirmed in the ASLEF V Lee case in the ECHR.
Sock puppets backing up sock puppets = sock puppet logic.
If, as the reds keep suggesting, every single non-white person of voting age where to join the BNP the net effect would be an increase in BNP income by £30 for each new member, say £60 million conservatively.
None of these probationary members would be entitled to vote in General Meetings for two years as per the present constitution, or seven years if my proposed plan is adopted, after which period the BNP could simply wind itself up, and re-constitute itself as a new party as the Vlaams Blok did a few years ago.
And we get to keep all the dosh - and then re-constitute the party again and again etc etc
Friday, 4 September 2009
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I understood Nick Griffin was arranging for a party wide discussion over the coming weeks on what action to take. Your comments here and in numerous edits over the last two days (and your proximity to the leadership) suggests that 'discussion' is not going to happen in any meaningful way.
I also don't know how you claim to have such a direct line into the inner motivations of The Equality Commission - "bleed the party dry" "set factions against each other" but you seem to be structuring your assumptions in this regard in a dishonest way to try to steamroller members who aren't yet won over to the leaderships clear position.
It may be that this is the best / only course of action to take but regardless of this you don't exactly seem to be fighting fair to win the undecided over to your banner..
I would be surprised if the EHRC did actually take any action against the NF, because the establishment plan is that by forcing the membership change on the BNP, it will force those BNP members who are too stupid to realise the reality fo the situation to join the NF, thus they hope to cause internal destabilisation in the BNP. This is just one aspect of their attack.
But I say good riddance to anyone who leaves for NF or UKIP, or whatever... we are better off without them, no doubt they would be exactly the type of people who have in their own way been holding back progression of British nationalism all these years. The NF can have them, let them all wallow in their insignificance and stupidity.
If the EHRC do go for the NF, the NF will dissappear without so much of a whimper, they have no where near the ability or resources to fight the legal action. They are simply posturing to big themselves up off the back of the BNP's situation.
Ben, this is my blog, not the BNP site - what the BNP site and nick decide to do is down to them.
What Nick decides to do is down to him, not me. I already have stated that I disagreed from fighting this when we got the initial complaint - so that proves that the party and nick make their own decisions, not me.
I have dealt with both the CRE and the equality commission on many occasions - and I understand what they think and how they act.
If one doesnt learn from engagments with the enemy, then one is a an idiot. In order to defeat the enemy you must first seek to understand the enemy - and then you gain an insight into their strategy and tactics.
Since when did 'fighting fair' win a war - and it is a war.
I am a REVOLUTIONARY NATIONALIST, that means I am not pissing about when I say I want us to be in power.
Pissing about with Posture Politics is a total waste of time, and I am sick of the fantasy politics taking precedence over real politics.
I regard those who indulge in such pseudo-politics as a total waste of space, so therefore dont expect me to be anything other than contemptuous of them.
If you're undecided as to whether you want to win or lose you should join the losers while you make up your mind.
Also, Lee is campaigning to win, so while you're hanging out with the losers you can campaign to lose if you want.
If you can't work it out now there's a strong probabilty you never will, and that's assuming you even want to in the first place.
I totally agree with the way the party is handling this. There is no other way. It is adapt or die as the chairman says.
This idea has probably been mentioned elsewhere but could the cost for new full members be raised to something like say £500 or more? At the same time create a new associate membership at the old £30 rate that can never lead to voting rights.
Promising potential candidates(of any race) could become full members by special invitation and avoid full membership fee.
The cost of joining on masse to shut us down would be finacialy crippling for any group and anyway would supply us with the money to defend ourselves.
Anyway theres my 2 pence worth!
Keep up the good work
@ Richard H
I believe it is best to only be able to attain full membership after 5 years continued affiliate membership. You should not be able to buy it at all. I appreciate your point but I think you would still get agitators and provocateurs joining even if the full membership cost was £500, and it only takes a handful of them with full membership status to start causing problems - which could easily be funded by many organisations. The other way of 5 years continued affiliate membership before full membership makes it almost inconceivable that a provocateur would be willing to stick it out that long.
The establishment thought we would be destroyed by our enemies joing en masse as threated by the likes of operatoin black vote, however this method ensures this is not possible.
Theres the door chris, you can either like it, lump it or join the NF.
Or in your case you can always fly to Israel, take Israeli citizenship and join the IDF seeing as you are such a big fan of Zionism.
You post a comment shouting your mouth off calling people sell outs, and then say that is making a reasonable point.
Make your point with logic and remove the abuse it will go up - come on here waving your dick about and giving it large = delete button.
So if you comment in a way that is polite, logical and productive and it goes up.
Post a comment like a hysterical schoolgirl = delete button.
Over to you.
"And we get to keep all the dosh - and then re-constitute the party again and again etc etc"
I thought the reason the case the EHRC brought against us couldn't be fought because we had very little dosh?
Read the article again - if the enemy sought to try and infiltrate by paying membership fees for 7 years until they become a voting member in sufficient numbers to cause us problems, then all we do is close the party down and re-constitute it and impose again another 7 year membership criteria,
so if every ethnic minority in the UK joined the party nad gave us 6 million quid per year in membership fees for 7 years, then we keep the money, close down the party and start the whole process again.
so therefore the idea that the enemy can infiltrate the party is utter nonsense.
Did I not agree with you and say changes now had to be made? My sell-out retort was in response to your "Nazi saluters and golly burner" rhetoric so it's a bit rich for you to have a go at me when you were the one being impolite and smearing and screaming like a lefty and you know I made that point in my reply. Seems you can give it but not take it Lee.
My "sell-out" reference and again you know the context was about identity and referring to ethnics as "non-white British". Do you not think this important? Because OK we HAVE to change, fine, but the issue of identity is very important and I feel it is being ignored. If we're now to refer to ethnics as British then I regard that as a sell-out and I will withdraw my support for the BNP, it is that important to me.
And your comment about me being a Zionist who should fly off to Israel was not merited either. I'm not Jewish or Zionist but I fully support the right of Israel to exist not least because of how the conflict is being used against us. You'd be outraged if said that your opposition to Israel made you a nazi but I wouldn't stoop to that level. And you talk about polite?
I got the message a while ago that I was no longer welcome here which is fair enough. If you could address the genuine concern I have about British identity I'd be grateful.
I wasnt referring to you when i mentioned nazi saluters and goliwog burners - i was referring to those who are so idiotic that they cannot understand that doing such things at party events is moronic.
How you took that to refer to you I dont know - were you the golliwog burner or the nazi saluter ?
The fact is that there are two types of British people in fact and law - Indigenous Britons based on Jus Sanginius and Naturalised British Citizens based on Jus Solis.
But there is also another British citizen - THE COLONIST.
The Black British Naturalised citizen born in Britain, raised as a Christian, brought up with British culture, who is proud of Britain, who may have served in the British army fighting the Taliban and who wants to preserve British culture from the Islamists are our natural allies against the colonists.
The colonists are those given a bit of paper that says they are British but they are not christian, they keep their alien cultures, and they want to impose their culture and values on us - and they are the cause of most of the problems for our people and naturalised Black, Hindu, Sikh British citizens who are proud of their heritage and race but who are also proud to be British.
The issue of Indigenous rights and identity is also linked to culture - a degenerate culture spawns a degenerate people.
Therefore those who wish to become our allies in defending British culture against the colonists are welcome to work with us.
You want us to work with Jews against Islamists - but then say we shouldnt work with Black British citizens who are christians and who also want to to deal with the threat of colonists and islamists - that is total hypocrisy and illogical.
We can retain our core values as a nationalist party and protect the interests of the indigenous British AND work with Jewish, Black people etc who want to protect their community and dfend British culture.
You are welcome here chris, but you need to reassess what you believe in, as at the moment your lack of logical consistency means you are getting pissed off about things that of you thought clearly about you would in reality wish to support,
Thanks for the reply Lee,just a couple of clarifications.
1.I had no idea that some imbeciles had done that. I thought you were making a general lefty-"nazi-racist" type smear against those who are refusing to accept the changes now required.
2. I have never suggested we ally with the Jews in fact I have stated we should be self sufficient. But I am not against ethnics joining us and supporting us on condition that they agree they are ethnically British. I have heard Nick and Simon argue this point many times through the print and broadcast media and I have always thought it reasonable.
I can never be a Pakistani, an Indian, a Chinese, a Turk, an Arab, a Jamaican an African etc. and I fully respect the identity of those people. It seems to me everybody has a right to their own identity AND British identity yet we Brits do not have a right to be British and I really resent this Lee. As Nick once famously said: Friends not family.
It isn't that I don't want to work with others who share our goals it's that I don't want to surrender my identity for doing so and I hope you can understand how I feel about this, it is so important to me.
1) No mate they were arrested and fined for nazi salutes at the RWB and photographed and an undercover news of the screws reporter filmed some burning a golliwog.
2) I think you missed out 'not' - they know they are not ethnic british and we will never accept them saying they are, but they are Naturalised British and British culturally, and so share with us a desire to retain British culture and prevent a future race war or Islamists taking over.
3) We have a right to our own identity, its just that we have to participate in the present electoral system run by our enemies so we must evolve and adapt in order to survive.
I resent it too, but we can either bend in the wind or break.
Remember this - ITS NOT HOW WE GET INTO POWER THAT IS IMPORTANT, IT IS WHAT WE DO ONCE WE GET INTO POWER.
What a vile rag that is and I hope those scum have been severely dealt with by the party. Unbelievable.
Your answers have eased my concerns Lee, thank you for your reply and I also agree fully with your last sentence.
No problems mate.
remember we need the ethno-nationalists to stay in the power in order to ensure ethno-nationalist principles are protected in the party - the last thing we need is for ethno-nationalists to leave as that way the liberal wing gains in power,
Post a Comment