Following on from the blog article below about the article in the Jewish Chronicle, that I provided for any visitors to this blog from the Jewish Chronicle, I hereby also provide the facts about the BNP that David Rowan, the editor of the JC and self appointed spokesman for the Zionist extremist wing of The Labour Party, has failed to inform members of the British Jewish Community about.
http://www.bnp.org.uk/2007/11/10/by-their-fruits-or-lack-of-them-shall-you-know-them/
By their fruits (or lack of them) shall you know them
By News Team ⋅ November 10, 2007 ⋅ Email this post ⋅ Print this post ⋅ Post a comment
Originally published on 21st March 2006 (removed by previous web editor).
If the neo-cons didn’t have the “world-Jewish conspiracy” theorists to hamstring patriotic opposition to their war, they’d have to invent them. Nick Griffin warns against a monumental blunder.
“Don’t let yourself be played like a fiddle” was the warning I received the other day from an American nationalist whose dedication to the cause of white survival is without doubt very sincere. The warning relates to the way in which the British National Party is positioned very firmly to benefit politically from ever-growing popular concern about the rise of Islam. The concern behind it is the belief that the growth of such sentiment is all part of a plot by powerful neo-conservatives to get America, Britain and the nations of Europe to invade the Middle East and make the world safe for the Zionist state of Israel. By extension, anyone who criticises Islam is liable to be accused by hardcore adherents of this theory of “working for the Jews.”
As a matter of fact, I have no doubt at all that the neo-con clique around George Bush are indeed influenced by such considerations; the power of the Zionist lobby in American politics is a straightforward political fact of life. The purpose of this article is neither to rehash nor to deny the material that proves this to be the case.
Nor am I launching a personal attack on Michael Hoffmann, author of the excellent book ‘They Were White and They Were Slaves’, who has recently criticised me for describing Islam as an evil religion (actually I said it was a “vicious, wicked faith”, but I’ll go with “evil” too). But it is to sound in return my own warning to people whose one-track concern about “the Jews” is blinding them to the clear and present danger of resurgent Islam.
Mike is one such person. “What is it about the Koran or Muhammad that makes Islam evil?” he asks, alleging as he does so that such claims are “racist neo-con propaganda”. Oh dear, the words “lost” and “plot” spring to mind, although there’s nothing here that a day or two living with a white (or, for that matter, Hindu or Pakistani Christian) family in Muslim-dominated parts of Bradford wouldn’t cure.
Bloody history
So for those who haven’t had the benefit of such intensive diversity training, where should we start? How about the Koran’s advocacy of world conquest and the subjugation or murder of non-Muslims? How about the fact that Allah told his followers that the whole world is their Promised Land (tough on the previous occupants), which is surely a bit more drastic than the most extreme Zionists’ claim on the bit of desert between the Nile and the Euphrates?
Or how about the mass beheadings of POWs, the rape of their wives and the enslavement of their children, as practised with gusto by Muhammad, thereby providing religious justification for such horrors and an example of Islamic ‘best practice’ for all time? What’s evil about Islam? Go ask the Serbs, go ask the Sikhs, go ask the remnants of once vibrant Christian communities in Pakistan or Egypt, come ask the mothers of Keighley.
I cannot for the life of me see how the fact that there are also some thoroughly unpleasant ‘racist’ sections in the Talmud can in some way make it wrong for genuine European patriots to warn of the danger posed by mass Muslim immigration. Not least because the Talmud is only a collection of ancient and often contradictory commentaries and debates, which individual Jews are not obliged to study or believe. This is very different from the position with the Koran, which all Muslims are obliged - on pain of death for apostasy - to follow as the literal word of Allah.
Furthermore, in real politics in the real world, one’s proper choice of enemy is a group who you gain a worthwhile level of extra support by identifying, who you have a realistic chance of beating, and whose defeat will take you the furthest towards your goal. With millions of our people desperately and very reasonably worried by the spread of Islam and its adherents, and with the mass media - for a variety of reasons, to which we will come later in this essay - playing ‘Islamophobic’ messages like a scratched CD, the proper choice of enemy needn’t be left to rocket scientists.
British future
Mr. Hoffmann’s polemic may look good on paper, but here in Britain, we are not, contrary to his analysis, fighting Islamification on behalf either of the US Federal government or the ‘right’ of Elton John to ‘marry’ his boyfriend. We fight it because it is incompatible with the fundamental values of our civilisation, and because its followers would, if victorious, reduce our grandchildren to tax cows and sexual playthings.
Yes, I know, you can say such things have already come to pass under our present masters, and if we had a record of silence on such things we could indeed fairly be criticised as hypocrites. But we do not. The BNP has always taken a strong position on such issues, and continues to do so. We do not need lectures from anyone about the dangers and injustices of free market capitalism, and not only would we not allow Elton John to marry his boyfriend but our proposals for a strengthened Clause 28 would prevent such a sick parody of real marriage being shown on TV in any case.
Nor can we accept Mr. Hoffmann’s ridiculous suggestion that “If King Alfred the Great or Edward I could see Britain today they would join the Muslims in their protests and demonstrations rather than support so foul and degenerate a system.” For a start, Alfred was not that far from being a contemporary of Charles Martel, and would no doubt have reacted the same way to that great Frankish king had a Moorish invasion fleet landed on the coast of Dorset. And Edward I came from the era of the Crusades, when huge Western armies battled not only to secure access for Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land, but also in a vital defensive backlash against centuries of Muslim aggression on the shrinking frontiers of Christendom itself.
Failure of American nationalists
Now, Mr. Hoffmann is a well-read man with a genuinely wide knowledge of European history, and he for one is certainly not in it for the money. The underlying problem here is not ignorance, nor even, in reality, a soft spot for Muslim immigration. It is the utter failure of people like him in the USA to build a political power-winning machine for genuine nationalism. This is what leads to the absurd idea that the only choice is between supporting Muslim demonstrators or favouring the degenerate, atomised and crassly materialistic society that they want to tear down.
If people like Mr. Hoffmann had spent more time working out how to build a serious grassroots political movement, and less time worrying about whether the Moon Landings actually happened or not, then they would perhaps realise that it is possible to oppose both the Islamification of the Western world and the neo-cons’ drive to annexe the Middle East.
They might also work out that to give such opposition the slightest chance of success one has to make hardball political decisions about engaging with the public in terms that they can understand, instead of treating them with thinly veiled contempt or even hatred and damning them for failing to grasp at once the brilliance of one’s own esoteric insights.
So allow me to return the favour of the well-intended caution at the start of this essay by issuing a sincere warning of my own to the same people who are worrying - or in some cases seeking to make political mischief with the allegation - that the BNP is “dancing to the neocon tune.”
First of all, let’s recap on just how many positions we take which are diametrically opposed to the neo-con agenda:
We are against the war in Iraq;
We are against overseas military adventures generally (though sending an SAS platoon to arrest and hang Robert Mugabe, and halt the persecution and extermination of the last white Rhodesians would be the exception to prove the rule);
We don’t want to export our political system to the Third World;
We don’t believe in imposing our economic system by force;
We don’t believe in multi-culturalism;
We don’t believe in laissez-faire economics domestically;
We oppose international free trade;
We don’t believe in ‘propositional nations’;
We don’t seek to impose Western culture on the whole world.
This final point leads us, in passing, to note the fundamental similarity between Islam and neo-conservatism, whereby both favour one all-encompassing global system, against which resistance is regarded as immoral heresy, and whose triumph will usher in the ‘end of history’.
In statistical terms, the individuals who - despite all the evidence to the contrary - confuse us with, or accuse us of supporting, the neo-cons, are utterly irrelevant. But in the white nationalist movement in its broadest sense they are, while clearly in the minority, still a significant element. Particularly in the United States, in Germany, and among small theoretical groups in most European countries (Britain included), there are a fair few sincere people who are quite convinced that we shouldn’t be nasty to Islam and that “the real enemy is the Jew.”
Warning
So here’s my warning to these people: The enemy of your old enemy may turn out not to be your friend, but something much worse. And, on top of that piece of facts-of-life commonsense, there is a piece of plain realpolitik that those who attack the BNP stance on Islam should also take into account:
They are perilously close to entrenching themselves in political dead ground from which there can be no escape. Instead of working to take advantage of the biggest crisis that the genocidal multi-culti ‘experiment’ has ever faced, they are in danger of turning themselves into a despised, powerless and doomed cartoon caricature - a composite of Tokyo Rose, Lord Haw Haw and Jane Fonda. Truly, they are living examples of the old adage that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, and then as farce.
When the overwhelming majority of the instinctively patriotic people of our nations feel threatened by an alien force which is self-evidently evil by Christian and democratic secular values alike, to place oneself in the position whereby our political opponents can portray you as an enemy sympathiser, a collaborator, a traitor, is political suicide.
Dishonour
That a significant number of US-based white nationalists look set to make precisely this catastrophic blunder is, as a matter of fact, no surprise: The USA is, after all, the country whose ‘far-right’ leadership has consistently failed even to establish a viable national organisation. They have freedoms, opportunities and resources that we European nationalists can only dream of, yet the USA shares with Ireland alone in the white world the dishonour of not having a proper nationalist political party.
By what monumental arrogance do such pathetic failures claim the right to criticise others, while their own people are doomed to perish not just for want of a realistic vision, but even of an organisation that will even try to save them?
The Irish have a valid excuse - the IRA threaten, beat and are willing to shoot anyone who opposes their ethnocidal neo-Marxist multi-culti version of ‘nationalism’ - but the American leaders have none. “The country’s too big”? Nonsense; distance and sparse population didn’t stop Pauline Hanson frightening the life out of the Australian Establishment, before her inexperience, naivety and a clique of liberal civic nationalist advisors killed off her grassroots rebellion. “Americans are too individualistic on account of their Anglo-Celtic roots?” That won’t do either. Again, Australians are even more so, and, in any case, Americans of German, Italian, Slavic, etc descent almost certainly outnumber those whose ancestors hailed from the British Isles, so this old excuse is precisely that.
No! If you seek the reason for the organisational void in American nationalism, blame several generations of self-appointed leaders and self-publicists who have consistently let down their dedicated, loyal, generous, good-hearted followers by one shatteringly bad judgement call after another.
Now they are doing it again, by abandoning the proper nationalist stance of complete neutrality and isolationism in connection with the endless quarrel between two rival bands of Middle Easterners. Siding with Islam against the neocons is no more a viable tactic than volunteering to infect yourself with the Ebola virus instead of AIDS.
Most ironic of all, in doing so, by defending and excusing Islam, they are cutting themselves off so thoroughly from any possibility of winning public support, and thus they are playing into the hands of the very neo-cons they are so desperate to oppose.
Reality
The neocon push for an endless war in Iraq, Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia, for the ‘democratisation’ of the entire Muslim world is a reality. And it is wrong - wrong strategically, tactically, practically and morally. But precisely because the people pushing for it are so influential and so ruthless, the only thing that can stop their war (and it can be stopped, because they are ordinary mortals, not demigods or the Devil incarnate) is the effective mobilisation of mass support for the withdrawal of Western troops from the Middle East, and non-involvement over the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
To do that, those who oppose the neocons’ schemes in the Middle East have to be able to connect with huge numbers of ordinary people in order to mobilise that mass support. Our message must therefore be within the reach of the mass mind.
That doesn’t mean that we have to repeat slavishly what is said in the mainstream media, but it does mean that our message must be couched in terms close enough to popular opinion, as shaped by that media, to be listened to with interest and sympathy, rather than being instantly dismissed as the ravings of lunatics.
The aims must be principled and inflexible; the means as flexible as required to be achievable; and when it comes to the ways in which those means are ’sold’ to the public, ‘will they buy this?’ is the only question worth asking. I’m sorry if that makes me sound like a Leninist, but the ability and willingness to grasp these hard political realities is the thing that marks out the serious would-be revolutionaries from the tough-talking do-nothings, the cranks and the Snake Oil salesmen.
Closed shop
Only a vanishingly small proportion of the general population of the West even know about, let alone give any credence to, the plethora of ‘right-wing’ websites that maintain that “9/11 was carried out by the Mossad” or that Iran is a great place because it hosts the occasional conference on Holocaust revisionism. But such is human nature - especially as amplified by the World Wide Web’s hyper-democracy in ideas - that those who believe such things unwittingly set up a closed feedback loop among themselves.
This makes them ever more certain that they are right and - what is far more dangerous among people who need to win popular support to achieve anything - more and more certain that the public only have to be told “the truth” for them to jump to their side, and that anyone who proposes a different strategy is a fool, an enemy agent or a traitor (if that sounds just like the neo-cons, their Marxist predecessors, or their Muslim alter-egos that’s no surprise, for all these mindsets are quintessentially non-European in origin and totalitarian by nature).
So, without a second thought as to the effectiveness of their ‘strategy’, these Internet cockerels of the anti-Semitic new dawn stand on their virtual dung heaps and crow that “We’re in the Middle East for the Jews. This is a war for Israel, organised as part of a Jewish plot to rule the world.”
To which, and here’s the problem in practical terms: Perhaps 30% of the entire population immediately think “great, let’s hope the Jews and Our Boys win and wipe out those limb-amputating, suicide-bombing Arab Muslims,” and go back to their sitcoms and football games.
Probably another 60% of the entire population have been trained from infancy by the TV stations and teachers of the most efficient brainwashing machine in human history to regard any criticism of Israel, especially coming from white nationalists, as proof of a secret desire to herd Jews into gas chambers. Accordingly, they also turn their backs against anyone saying such things.
Thus the claim that “We’re in the Middle East for the Jews. This is a war for Israel organised as part of a Jewish plot to rule the world” has precisely the opposite effect on around 90% of the population to that which we must presume is intended by those who make it (though bitter experience tells us that some of those screaming such things the loudest are agent provocateurs seeking to demonise and disrupt the nationalist movement).
Tactics for losing
Such Charge of the Light Brigade tactics may, by a certain distorted light, be ‘magnificent’, but they are certainly not politics. And, unless abandoned by a defining majority of the people who should be organising the resistance to current trends and policies, they won’t just kill a few hundred unfortunate cavalrymen (in an earlier daft war that was nothing to do with us) but our entire race.
Even if every single bombing attack on Western targets, 9/11, Paris, Bali, Madrid, assorted embassies and 7/7 included, was carried out by Mossad agents, it wouldn’t advance our cause one iota to say so. In fact such an idea is so out of kilter with overwhelming popular belief that it marks out to the public those who propagate it as mad.
This is not good politics, and can only be indulged in by those who have spent so much time talking and emailing only with their fellow ‘extremists’ that they have lost touch with reality as the rest of the world sees it - or by individuals to whom those same ‘extremists’ are not potential allies with whom to work to break out of the nationalist ghetto, but a meal ticket.
It’s bad enough in the United States, but it is positively suicidal in Europe, Britain included, because the vast majority of the population which is most likely to be receptive to our nationalist message is already wary (to use what is probably a gross understatement) of Muslims. To even hint of making common cause with Islam - or put ourselves in a position when opponents can suggest to the masses that this is the case - is political insanity.
And yet this is precisely what some nationalists in Germany, for example, did in the wake of 9/11, and it is exactly what some nationalist revisionists in Britain, the USA, Italy, and so on are doing over the Danish cartoon controversy.
“Mossad plot”
Untold millions of white Europeans watched with growing anger as mobs of perfectly ordinary observant Muslims burnt embassies, butchered policemen and threatened Holy War over a few not particularly unflattering pictures of their prophet. But, meanwhile, various nationalist writers and self-appointed spokesmen were showing their growing disconnection from political reality by repeating Islamic claims (which may or may not contain some elements of truth) that the whole affair was part of a Mossad plot to poison relations between Muslims and white Europeans.
Poison relations between us and these charming people? Let me take you by the hand and lead you through the streets of London or Oldham or Keighley or Bradford. Or, for that matter, Malmo or Paris or Sydney or Brooklyn. I’ll show you poison, and it doesn’t come from our people, or even from those busy boys in the Mossad. It comes from a set of beliefs and resultant tactics that have come within a whisker of destroying our Europe altogether twice in the last fifteen hundred years, and are close to doing so again. The real Clash of Civilisations is not fated to take place in Persia or Arabia, but here in the heart of the West.
“May or may not contain some elements of truth,” I said. Is that too cynical for the purists? Then they need to wake up to the rules of real life politics rather than settling for last place every time. It’s better to be a little cynical on this issue and stand a chance of winning than to fret about which bunch of liars are lying in this particular instance and in so doing miss a great political opportunity to surf our message into the public mind on the back of a media tsunami of ‘Islamophobia’.
Media U-turn
What has caused this mainstream media U-turn whereby quite strident criticism of Islam is now commonplace? It could all be part of that same neo-con conspiracy, or it could be the fact that liberal and homosexual chatterati are beginning to feel as threatened by the growth of Islam as the white working class communities they despise so much started to several decades ago. Perhaps journalists and editors are simply reflecting the changing views and prejudices of the population of which they form a part. Or it might be a simple marketing decision - knocking asylum seekers and Muslims sells newspapers.
My best guess is that it’s a combination of many such factors, but who knows? Frankly, who cares? We don’t have the media clout ourselves to swim against the tide, but as it’s running in our favour in terms of boosting public rejection of mass immigration and the multi-cult, why should we even want to? Instead of wasting time worrying about it, we should - to mix metaphors - be organising to make hay while the sun shines.
Whatever is causing the media shift on matters multi-cultural, here in Britain it has gone as far as leading to some remarkably fair coverage of the British National Party in general, and some stunning publicity opportunities for yours truly in particular. Here the real conspiracy nuts are having a field day: “Griffin’s sold out to the Jews, that’s why he gets media coverage and such fair treatment,” they squeal hysterically. Well, I can assure you that I’ve never had a midnight visit from a group of black clad rabbis to offer to exchange my soul for ten minutes with Eamonn Holmes on Sky News.
One or two others, slightly less hysterical but still obsessed by “the Jews”, suggest that my motivation for being so critical of Islam is the hope that “the Jewish media will go easy on the BNP.” In fact, I would have thought it self-evident that the BNP is critical of Islam for the simple reason that it is an aggressive imperialistic, anti-white, anti-Christian, anti-scientific, anti-human menace, and that it is on the verge - in historical terms - of conquering the whole of Europe (America would follow later, by instalments).
If a growing number of Jewish media personnel have also come to the conclusion that allowing large numbers of Third Worlders in general and Muslims in particular wasn’t such a good idea after all, and that it’s time to start bailing out their European lifeboat before it’s too late, then any resulting lowering in their traditional (and actually, in the wake of Mr. Hitler, understandable) tendency to be hostile to European ethnic consciousness can only be a good thing.
I had an interesting conversation with one of the Judeo-obsessives a couple of weeks ago. Although at least giving me credit for not having sold my soul for a purse full of shekels from the Learned Elders, but he did opine that “the Jews will never treat you fairly, they hate us too much.” When I pointed out that, during the Leeds Free Speech Trial, huge sections of the British media did indeed treat us remarkably fairly, he did a sudden about-face from the usual claim that said media are rigidly controlled.
“They don’t have every day control. Owners and editors just set the general tone and work by nudges rather than direct orders.” As you like it, but if that’s true then it stands to reason that adopting an ‘Islamophobic’ position that appeals to huge numbers of ordinary people - including un-nudged journalists - is going to produce on average much better media coverage than siding with Iran and banging on about “Jewish power”, which is guaranteed to raise the hackles of virtually every single journalist in the Western world.
Focus on the real goal
Some people may not like this fact, but that won’t make it any less potent, and it won’t make ignoring it any less disastrous in the real world - which, the ‘hardliners’ must try to remember, is the one in which those who would save our race must operate.
Since, for whatever reason, our recent position does seem to be softening media hostility towards us, it is clearly something we should continue with, and which fellow nationalists in other countries would do well to emulate. The alternative is to adopt the approach of London’s infamous Millwall soccer hooligans - “no one likes us, we don’t care.”
In case anyone hasn’t quite got how democratic politics - and even physical force, for that matter - works, let me spell it out in simple terms: If no one likes you, you won’t have enough people on your side to win. Perhaps some people are happy to live off collections from the converted or off selling books, but I want to win, because unless we win our people face extinction.
That is not to say that I necessarily want to be liked. I am sure, for a start, that this essay is going to upset some people and lose me a few friends, especially in the USA. That’s unfortunate, but it can’t be helped, for I simply cannot bear any longer to see people who should be working effectively for the survival of all we hold dear led down a blind alley by a small number of cranks, fools, crooks, self-publicists and (the larger number) good folks whose only failing is that they have never been forced to sit down and think logically about possible paths to the power without which all ideology and principles are in vain.
I have in the past been in that last category myself, so I know that there is a way out of it, that it’s better (though not necessarily more comfortable) to be out of it, and that I have a duty to help as many as possible of the willing victims of that mentality to get out of it.
For the truth is that, far from the BNP “dancing to the neo-con tune”, it is those ‘hardliners’ who would rather attack the Jews than the Muslims who are performing an extraordinarily useful function for the neo-cons: Demonising white nationalist opposition to their war as the preserve of KKKlowns, Nutzi crazies and conspiracy cultists.
In addition to this tactical consideration, there is also the little matter of truth: The neo-cons are mainly Jewish, but they are not “the Jews”. When it comes to Middle Eastern policy, they are a particular faction, an unofficial overseas agitprop department of Israel’s ruling Likud party.
To oppose their war is not to oppose “the Jews”, but only one group of Jews and their Christian-Zionist and plutocrat allies.
Jewish opponents to neo-cons
In fact, any anti-Semite worth his salt could just as easily ‘prove’ that it is “the Jews” who are behind the efforts to stop those nice Christians George Bush and Dick Cheney from making the world safe for American capitalism by killing all those A-rabs and confiscating their oil. Just look at the key players in the ‘American’ anti-war movement: Within days of 9/11, Susan “the white race is the cancer of history” Sontag was widely quoted in the US media sympathising with the Saudi kamikazes. And the now late and unlamented Sontag was by no means unusual.
Take a look at the list of leftist ‘opinion-formers’ who signed the “Not in Our Name” denunciation of the war in Iraq. Glance at the ‘intellectuals’ who formed the so-called New Left in the 1960s - Gerda Lerner, Maurice Zeitlin, Leslie Cagan, James Weinstein et al, and you’ll find them still active, manning the high command positions of all the groups that came together for the massive Stop the War demonstrations in the run up to the second Gulf War. Just take a look at the number of Jewish radical leftists in the American Civil Liberties Union.
Most striking of all is the report in Frontpage magazine about MoveOn.org. This is perhaps the biggest of the various American Internet organisations which worked during the 2004 primaries to win the Democratic nomination for the anti-war candidate Howard Dean. MoveOn.org was helped in this quest by a $15 million gift from none other than George Soros.
Now, if George, who despite his name is most definitely not of Greek extraction, had given a donation of that size to a pro-war think tank, the world Jewish conspiracy crowd would never let us hear the last of it. But since this inconvenient fact doesn’t fit in with their pre-determined thesis, they consign it to the memory hole. Even anti-Establishment ‘historical researchers’ have their own Ministry of Truth operations, which mix real facts, repeat research errors or downright lies, and ‘lose’ items that don’t fit the pattern they want to see.
But such dishonest or blindside self-censorship cannot change the actual facts: While the neo-cons are pushing for the ‘War on Terror’ (not actually for a Clash of Civilisations, for they are fervent multi-culturalists and supporters of mass cheap labour immigration, and so constantly reiterate the fiction that it’s only Islamist extremism that’s the problem, rather than Islam itself), their radical leftist Jewish cousins are frantically pulling in the other direction.
It may not always be Politically Correct even to name them as an ethnic group, but the plain truth is that individual Jews are prominent on both sides of this quarrel. Wow! There’s a surprise, since individual Christians, individual white atheists, and no doubt individual Red Indians find themselves in exactly the same position, on the opposite side of the war fence to their parents, siblings, cousins and childhood friends: Some for, some against, some don’t know.
Defensive position
Why are a disproportionate number of Jews involved in various movements? “So they can control both sides of the argument,” is the fallback position of the doctrinaire anti-Semites, and the fact that they can shift so quickly from ignoring inconvenient facts to incorporating them in their Grand Scheme is an indicator that we are dealing here with cultist faith rather than a rational assessment of facts.
Come on, George Soros doesn’t give $15 million to a cause with which he doesn’t agree, and all those leftwing Jews running the anti-war movement aren’t really pro-war and cunningly pretending to be anti-war just to stop the tactical geniuses of the anti-Semitic American ‘right’ from building a mass support base and sweeping to power. The sad truth is that most of them have shown themselves incapable of working out how to sweep a floor, let alone how to sweep to power.
This is not to say that all Jews are angels who can do no wrong. While some Jews have made valuable contributions to our civilisation, others have not. Marxism, the Frankfurt School, feminism, the multi-cult - one only has to make the most cursory study of the origin of such socially devastating movements to find radical leftists from East European Ashkenazi stock playing a vastly disproportionate role. Why?
Partly because it was in their ethnic self-interest - a weak gentile society is less likely to identify and persecute Jews than certain kinds of strong one. Conversely, evolutionary biological theory would predict that, in the coming war between Islam and the West (which predates the founding of the Zionist state, stemming as it does from the oil wealth of Wahhabi-dominated Saudi Arabia) that same ethnic self-interest will lead to some Jews becoming champions of the survival of Western civilisation. After all, if they don’t, their kind will be the first to have their throats cut along the road to the eternal night of Islamic despotism.
High intelligence
But there’s another reason for Jewish over-representation in all sorts of intellectual movements, which has no connection with ethno-centrism at all: On average, Jews are the cleverest people on the planet. Someone had to be, after all, and a people who have been selectively bred for intelligence by internal choice and external pressure for nearly two thousand years were always more likely to be brighter than groups which valued brawn more than brains. As a result, unless a certain intellectual, political or economic trend is directly opposed to self-perceived Jewish interests, it is likely to contain at or near the top a disproportionate number of individual Jews.
As a matter of fact, even intellectual movements that are opposed to self-perceived Jewish interests often attract individual Jews. Thus a young secular American Jew like David Cole could go to Auschwitz and make revisionist videos, and because they were happy with his message the anti-Semites thought he was the best thing since sliced bread.
Now the same people are happily sending around the press statement from Iran’s state-run news agency, Mehr, about the Tehran Holocaust revisionist conference. “Several anti-Zionist rabbis are in Tehran to take part in the conference,” said the statement. What have we here? Good Jews? Mad Jews? Or Satanically devious bad Jews who want to take over Holocaust revisionism and use it in their plot to take over the world?
See what I mean about this conspiracy drivel driving people mad? It is one thing to have a proper history of political conspiracy, such as a history of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Revolution, that accepts the standards of normal historical evidence. It is quite another to have a conspiracy theory that won’t accept such evidence because it believes that the conspiracy is so powerful that it can fake any evidence it needs, and therefore forms an intellectual ‘closed loop’ from which there is no escape. Such a theory can ‘prove’ any possible claim and ignore any possible fact. Even if some of the facts on which it relies are true, the overall effect is therefore to take the theory out of the world of real history and to place it in the realms of pseudo-religious faith.
Jews in all camps
So let’s move on from the twistings and turnings and omissions of the conspiracy cult theorists and get back to some solid facts. What are we to make of the presence of Jews in movements that, far from being anti-white, are regarded by most white nationalists - conspiracy cranks included - as being good things? This is well illustrated by the briefest of glances at two pre- and post-WW2 ‘right-wing’ phenomena: The rise of Italian fascism, in which assimilated Italian Jews played a major part, not least the fact that Mussolini’s long-term Jewish mistress financed the March on Rome to the tune of 1 million lire.
More recently, Prof. Herrnstein was part of the duo of scientists whose Bell Curve was the book that broke the logjam holding back the now almost complete normalisation of scientific studies of genetically determined average racial difference, while Prof. Levin’s Why Race Matters also helped greatly in doing away with the lethal propaganda myth that to discuss such things was to seek to reopen Auschwitz.
Of course it is possible to point to negatives such as the NKVD and the Gulag system, the Frankfurt School or Richard Perle, but to fail to set these against positives - even if the latter are outweighed - is to leave the realms of fact and to descend through selective research to the madness which blamed Jews for the Black Death, and which marks out the proponents of such fantasies as cranks whom 99% of ordinary people will avoid like the plague.
Which brings me back to current events in the Middle East. Even if the war against Iraq, and the coming attack on Iran was a “Jewish plot”, to make that the great public reason for opposing would so terrify many Jews that they will be unable to accept that mass non-white immigration and multi-culturalism are now bigger threats to Jewish survival than anything else. Thus we would throw away the clear chance of some Jews who in the past have campaigned for immigration and against those who oppose it moving towards a position of confused neutrality on this issue, or even of seeing that helping us to reverse the tide of colour and Islamification is their only hope.
[Anyone who scoffs at this, and who is unaware of the furious private debate going on behind the superficially monolithic pro-immigration facade of American Jewish organisations in particular should read Dr. Stephen Steinlight’s thoroughly Judeocentric High Noon to Midnight - why current immigration policy dooms American Jewry, produced for the Center for Immigration Studies and available here.
The right words
The neo-Nazi “global Jewish conspiracy” line also triggers a Pavlovian PC reaction among most educated gentiles as well. Most journalists are not directly ordered to write or to bury specific stories, they just know the kind of things that can and cannot safely be said, and inevitably they also reflect the opinions of the wider society of which they are a part. Let’s look at how this works in practice:
Phrase A: “British or American soldiers should not be sent off to die in a dusty desert in order to bring ‘democracy’ to people who have never bothered to secure it for themselves and who do not appear to want it.”
This is to express the fundamental nationalist policy of keeping out of foreign wars that have nothing to do with us, in a way which guarantees the instinctive agreement of a large section of the population, and which even those who favour such intervention will admit is a position with its roots in commonsense, normal opinions well within our homegrown political traditions. Try it out in a bar or works canteen or bus queue near you, and see what I mean. Hard pressed to find anyone who disagrees? I’m not surprised.
Then rephrase the same demand for troop withdrawal and neutrality in the terminology of the knee-jerk anti-Semites who say that the BNP has ‘sold out’: “British or American soldiers should not be sent off to die in a dusty desert to serve the Jewish conspiracy for world domination.”
Try this Phrase B out on your non-political friends, workmates or neighbours and see what proportion agree. Go on, I’m serious - at least as far as saying that I don’t want to hear a squeak of disagreement with this article from anyone who isn’t willing to do so.
Consequences of siding with Islam
Having settled that point, let’s take a look at the longer term consequence of abandoning the true nationalist position of non-involvement in other people’s quarrels and siding with the Muslims: Those who agree with Iran that Israel should be wiped off the face of the map are - if they are involved in real life politics as opposed to juvenile posturing - setting themselves up to be asked, ‘what would you do with the Jews, then?’
What can those who want to see Hamas win actually say? Will they reveal psychopathic fantasies about exterminating five million Israelis - including many who are at this very moment campaigning for a peace deal with the Palestinians, and quite a few ultra-Orthodox ones who believe that the Zionist state is blasphemous (strange monolithic conspiracy, this one!) - or accept a flood of additional refugees into our already overcrowded West? Is it not far more realistic to be neutral, as nationalists are supposed to be? Let’s get real, it just isn’t our job to bother about the Middle East.
We should campaign to stop the EU helping to fund the Palestinian Authority and sucking up to the Arab world, not because we are or should be pro-Israel, but because there are far better things to do with our money, because we don’t want to drift into Eurabia, and because the entire place is of no proper concern of ours.
Even the question of oil should be dealt with by a Swedish-style crash programme to wean ourselves off the stuff, not least because it’s an environmental disaster and is going to become scarce and so impossibly expensive sooner or later anyway. The only thing of any interest to us is that potential flood of refugees. Apart from that, what happens in the Middle East should be a matter of sublime indifference to a properly run Western nation.
That reminds us that no Western nations are properly run at present, which is of course what we’re here to change. The proper approach for us to take to the adventures of Bush & Blair and those behind them is therefore to look for ways in which this conflict could help us on the road to power.
Clearly the neo-cons/oil companies/vain or stupid politicians, etc hope that they can have their Clash in the Middle East without paying any price closer to home. Perhaps they can pull this off, but past historical examples and a commonsense appraisal of the situation suggest this is very unlikely. The price they could easily pay for that war propaganda and pressure for the West to do their bidding in Middle East could be to so destabilise multi-racial Western societies that nationalists will stand a real chance of winning political power.
Psychological judo
Pretty much everyone with any experience in building and sustaining any kind of nationalist organisation knows that we get publicity by playing judo with the power of the media. With so much at stake, and so little time left, however, it is time to give much more careful thought about the aim of such tactics.
If it is just to get publicity for individuals, then harping on about “the Jews” is a very effective tactic. After all, it gets publicity, as it gives every single person with a scrap of power in the media - many but not all individuals from each of the following groups: liberals, capitalists, homosexuals, ethnic minorities, Jews, Marxists - both the means and often the motive to smear us all by association with crazies. In addition, it allows pro-war lobby to characterise opposition to their schemes as insane or wicked. If the neo-cons didn’t have the baggage-laden anti-Semites, especially in America, as bogeymen, they’d have to invent them.
Yet despite the glaring obviousness of this fact, there is still competition among some self-styled nationalists to see who can say the toughest things about “Jewish wars for Israel.” No doubt it pays rather well, for the historical actions of some Jews and Jewish organisations have created a sizeable (though statistically and politically irrelevant) number of people alienated from normal politics and willing to hand over their wallets to individuals or groups willing to deal in such material.
No doubt some of those (activists of German descent in particular) who push such material do so with the very best of intentions. Probably only a minority do so because it’s the most profitable form of Snake Oil they’ve been able to find. But whatever the motivation, the actual effect of their propaganda operations is the same: To widen the gulf between nationalism and the public, to make our job harder, and to leave the neo-cons even freer to push us into their wars, safe in the knowledge that nationalism will not be able to take advantage of the stresses their schemes place on the genocidal multi-cult that is destroying our world.
Laying out our stall
It is time for all nationalists to oppose Bush and Blair’s and the neo-cons’ Middle Eastern ventures on proper nationalist grounds. We should oppose the war-mongers on grounds of what they do, not what they are. For simple propaganda reasons we should go out of our way to avoid criticism of neo-cons being portrayed as ‘anti-Semitism’ by pointing to the contra-indicators: The huge peace movement in Israel, the radical left Jews opposed to the war in Western countries, the role of other motivations and interest groups - oil, reconstruction contracts, and the vanity of individual politicians.
Saying this is not a matter of “trying to get the support of the Jews in the media” (although looking for ways to weaken, even slightly, old hostilities that make the job of winning power harder is the proper concern of organisations that are serious about getting somewhere in the real world, as opposed to standing for ever on the sidelines hoping that a warm feeling of being virtuous will make up for the pain of losing) it is a matter of commonsense political tactics.
We should be positioning ourselves to take advantage for our own political ends of the growing wave of public hostility to Islam currently being whipped up by the mass media. This is not a matter of dancing to neo-con tunes, but of finding members of the public who are already used to the sound of that kind of music willing to cross over and dance to our tune.
For reasons of natural sentiment and neo-con war propaganda alike, the public will not join in any group dance which appears to include Muslims (in Britain and Europe in particular) or A-rabs (in the USA especially). And the more of our boys who come home in body bags, and the more the irresponsible neo-con project inflames the Islamic world against us, the more strongly this factor will affect the political climate.
In the real world, it doesn’t matter in the slightest whether the Danish cartoons furore or 9/11 were the work of Islamic fundamentalists with huge levels of support among ‘ordinary’ Muslims (for the record, my belief); or of Muslim extremists who no more represent mainstream Islam than the KKK represents white America; or of CIA or Mossad black bag teams seeking to stampede us into World War Three.
Spanner in the works
From the point of view of those of us working and organising to save the nations of the West and the great race that built them from irreversible subjection and subsequent extinction, it really doesn’t matter which group Providence has chosen to drop - at the eleventh hour - a giant spanner into the works of the multi-culti tolerance machine, and of the even bigger debt-recycling contraption that passes for the American economy on which it is perched.
Who dropped that spanner, and why they did so, will be a matter of interest to future generations of historians, and even perhaps the next generation of Western politicians. But for our generation, such arguments are - like putting ourselves in a position where the public could be persuaded that we are sympathetic to the enemy in the now unavoidable Clash of Civilisations - a luxury we cannot afford.
All we need to know is that the spanner has been dropped in among the whirring, clanking cogs and wheels, and that pieces of the multi-racial genocide machine are already breaking and flying off as a result. Sooner or later, one of those pieces may well in turn foul up something in the workings of the debt-recycling machine, and then opportunity will knock for those who are already organised and positioned to take full advantage of it.
In the meantime, we need to redouble our efforts to organise a credible and acceptable political alternative to the old parties and governing institutions which are so closely identified with those interlinked machines, and are going to be very badly damaged indeed as they fall apart under the strains of a war without borders or mercy.
In 1914, the Crowned Heads of Europe scarcely paused for thought as they gave the signal to start the First World War that, within three or four years, left them lying broken in the dust, their power destroyed forever. By the time this new conflict is over, those who started it may in turn have reason to rue the day they let slip the dogs of hate and war.
Our job is not to apportion blame for the chaos, but to position ourselves so as to take maximum advantage of it. There is no point standing like King Canute, ordering the tide to go and flood a different beach; rather, we must ride the wave of public opinion and harness its power for our own use.
http://www.think-israel.org/locke.bnp.html
THE BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY (BNP) GOES STRAIGHT
by Robert Locke
The depth of the crisis facing Israel and other Western nations from Moslem terrorism, and more profoundly from Moslem immigration, is such that some unconventional political allies deserve a glance they would not otherwise merit. The small hard-right nationalist parties of Europe are among them, if only because they are sometimes the only political forces that are serious about this crisis in nations where the mainstream left is deluded and the mainstream right feckless.
The destruction of America by mass immigration is mirrored in most Western nations. The temptations of cheap labor for the business class that dominates rightist parties, and of electoral cannon fodder for the permanent-government class that dominates leftist parties, are the same everywhere. Even Israel has been affected, in the form of a not-so-secret addiction to cheap Arab labor that has created behind-the-scenes pressures to hang onto[1] a dangerous population.
Although mainstream anti-immigration groups in most Western nations have had no particular association with anti-Semitism in recent years, this has unfortunately not been true of the political parties that have taken opposition to immigration as their raison d'être. With some exceptions, these parties -- which exist in all Western nations except Ireland and the USA -- have tended to base themselves on old-school ethno-nationalism that is at best suspicious of Jews, and at worst sympathetic to Hitlerism[2]
But this is, fortunately, changing, which may eventually make such parties useful participants in the Clash of Civilizations. Let's take Britain as our example, and look at the changes in the British National Party (www.bnp.org.uk.)[3]
The BNP's origins are utterly unpleasant. It began as something called the National Front (NF) in the late 1960's, a noisy and occasionally violent protest group known for shaven heads and combat boots. If the NF wasn't formally Nazi -- this is Britain, after all, within living memory of the Blitz -- it clearly at least sympathized with Nazism. It was correct about immigration -- for which there is absolutely no conceivable reason in a small overcrowded island like Britain -- but otherwise a colorful horror show. Its rump version (natfront.org.uk)[4] still exists, and its founder, John Tyndall, recently died, unrepentant to the last.
The NF had no lasting accomplishments, though it was at one point in the early 70's the 4th-largest political movement in Britain, after Labour, the Conservatives, and the Liberal Party. But in the late 1990's, elements of the British National Party, as a faction of the NF had renamed itself, sought to break out of fringe politics and go mainstream. They believed the country needed to be saved from immigration and the submersion of Britain in the EU[5] before it was too late.
Objectively, the immigration situation in the UK is not as bad as in the US, though deteriorating fast. Britain is currently 93% British, but decaying at about 1% per year. At present rates of immigration and demographic change, the British people will be a minority in Britain by 2050, as they already are in London. The present Blair government has done everything it can, lawfully and unlawfully, to increase immigration.
In the BNP, matters came to a head in a leadership struggle in 1999, in which the aforementioned Mr. Tyndall was ousted and replaced by Nick Griffin, a charismatic Cambridge-educated lawyer. Griffin set about reshaping the party into an organization capable of waging mainstream politics without abandoning its core convictions.
The party's core conviction has always been, in whatever incarnation, a fairly straightforward "Britain for the British" message: foreigners out, national sovereignty in. What is new is that today it is, by world standards, a fairly conventional right-wing populist ethno-nationalist party, having abandoned the fascistic trappings, tendency to violence, and weird obsessions that once characterized it.
The party's transformation is not wholly complete as of this writing. Some of the rank-and-file membership is clearly not as far along as its leadership. But, after four years of reform, the BNP seems to have managed a decisive break with its past and become a credible "major minor party," as they say in Britain. (In the UK, minor parties are considerably more important than in the US, both electorally and ideologically, though not as important as in Israel.)
The BNP's new ideological complexion is generally denied by its opponents, both on the left and on the establishment "right," which is as hostile to serious nationalism as the Republican Party in the US. But it seems to be real. The accusations of "sell-out" hurled at present BNP leadership by devotees of the old ways make this clear, if nothing else does.
It would seem, in fact, that there is no longer any basis to consider the party outside the scope of legitimate democratic politics - begging, of course, the question whether even truly noxious parties should be banned, if we take democracy seriously. Such participation is something the party's opponents, from the Blair government on down, are trying to deny it, sometimes in ways that raise questions about Britain's claim to be democratic.
When last in the UK, I interviewed chairman Nick Griffin about his party at his farmhouse in the mountains of Wales, soaking wet from opening farm gates in the rain but gradually drying out in front of his fireplace. The root change, as he saw it, was the change from being centered on hating foreigners to being centered on a love of one's own country. As he put it,
"At the end of the day, it's always the positive agendas that win in politics. Anger about what is being done to this country is legitimate, but mere anger just leads to hooliganism and political impotence. It attracts angry activists who can't behave themselves or articulate an agenda, and once you've milked the public's resentments, you've got nothing more to offer them and you stall politically. It's the positive vision of a restored and redeemed Britain that's the key for us now."
In the last year or so, the BNP has completed the final stages of its ideological reforms. The three big things that had to go were anti-Semitism, anti-Americanism, and fascist-socialist economics. To wit:
1. The BNP has now evolved to the point where it doesn't have any significant antagonism towards Jews as such, or towards Israel. Unlike the left, it has no interest in Palestinians or the larger Arab cause, and it takes the Islamic threat seriously. It has zero inclination to actively side against Israel, simply because it really wants to have nothing to do with the Middle East at all. Griffin said:
"As nationalists, our duty is to work to build a better country for our own people, not to worry about or interfere in the affairs of others. The Middle East is simply not our problem or our business."
To some extent, this attitude just reflects the fact that ethno-nationalist parties ultimately reflect, naturally enough, the national characters of the nations they represent. Britain, although snobbish, is simply not a particularly anti-Semitic culture by European standards. It has historically had, going back to Benjamin Disraeli's tenure as Prime Minister in the 1870's, a greater presence of Jews on the political right than, say, the US or France, let alone Russia or Germany. Thatcher had a lot more Jewish support in her country than Reagan had in the US.
This attitude is also a reflection of the fact that Britain's great religious enemy right now, Islam, is not only obviously not Jewish, but is itself an obvious enemy of Jews, and thus tends to put British and Israeli nationalists on the same side of a global struggle. And the BNP is immensely serious about fighting the Islamification of Britain. As Griffin put it,
"We are deeply concerned about the mainly -- though not exclusively - French elite project to morph the EU, Turkey and the Mahgreb into 'Eurabia'. Bat Y'eor is 100% right about this. If this now far-advanced scheme comes to fruition then it would in turn lead to the Islamification of the whole European continent. A generation ago the revival of the historic Islamic threat to Europe would have been unthinkable; now it is clearly destined to be the great issue and decision of our time. For us, the closely linked threats of mass Third World immigration and Islamification outweigh all other considerations.
On the specific question of anti-Semitism, Griffin said this:
"Look -- we have very serious enemies in this country, both at home and abroad. If you're going to go with that old [National Front] nonsense of Jews under every bed and responsible for all the ills of the world, then you're going to have a crazy strategic vision of who you're fighting and what to do about it. The idea that 'the Jew is the enemy' is simply over for us now, and not a moment too soon, because now we can get on with the real struggles."
He qualified this by saying:
"We insist on the right to criticize individual Jews who do wrong or Jewish groups which use the influence and power that all organized and motivated groups have to lobby, for example, for British foreign policy to take directions at odds with our national interest. But there is a world of difference between such criticism and the old fantasies about Learned Elders of Zion controlling the world, and the rabid anti-Semitism that they reflect and incite."
Clearly, this qualification is elastic, and could be abused. But one notes that it would rule out, if sincere, even a Pat Buchanan level of anti-Israelism or anti-Semitism. And the BNP does seem to have dropped the Jewish Conspiracy angle: while it opposed the Iraq war, and did complain about Jews who lobbied for Britain to fight in it, this was not generalized into attacks on the Jewish community as such and was peripheral to blaming the war on Tony Blair and the pursuit of oil.
One sign of this reformed attitude towards Jews is that the BNP not only has Jewish members, but even has a Jewish officeholder: Councilor Pat Richardson, elected last year by residents of the borough of Epping Forest, just north of London.
2. The old National Front had been suspicious towards the United States as a foreign power occupying Britain, an antagonism muted during the Cold War by fanatic anti-communism. But the BNP has now adopted a foreign-policy stance whose self-described essence is "staying out of trouble," i.e. avoiding foreign conflicts. So while it is unwilling to fight wars on behalf of the US, it has rejected doctrinaire anti-Americanism. It even suggested, in its official 2005 manifesto,[6] that it would allow American military bases to remain on British soil -- albeit, it seems, reluctantly and on account of realpolitik considerations of not wanting to provoke American opposition and needing a counterbalance to the power of continental Europe.
3. The BNP was originally, and until recently, at heart a socialist party with an economic policy based on 1930's fascist models that have largely been forgotten outside far-right fringe movements. The party's generally working-class orientation (its voters are largely alienated white working class; its leadership is generally upper-working-class with a sprinkling of the exceptionally independent-minded highly educated) made socialism natural, as did its early recognition that mass immigration to Britain was largely driven by business interests. However, Margaret Thatcher killed the credibility of socialism in Britain, so the party has since moved towards a form of economic nationalism that combines worker-owned ESOP capitalism (Employee Stock Ownership Plan) with an admiration for the paternalistic developmental economics of East Asian nations like Japan and the Asian "tigers."
Economics has not generally been the center of its message, but may become more prominent if Britain suffers a serious recession, which seems to be impending. The party has for some time been accusing the present government of selling out the nation's long-term economic future, so it probably stands to benefit from a downturn.
Despite these changes, the party is still handicapped by its past, simply because its pre-reform era remains a recent memory in the mind of the British public. Its opponents can still plausibly, if inaccurately, call it "fascist" and bring up past violent incidents of its supporters. Although it is impossible to quantify with absolute confidence, probably 10-15% of currently reported incidents are actually real, the rest being either a) ancient history, b) wholly fabricated, c) exaggerated, d) perpetrated by other organizations, e) routine working-class rowdiness, or f) speech crimes and other offences that would not be considered crimes at all in the US.
Given that the British government is known to employ agents provocateurs, given the interest of the British race-relations industry in fabricating or exaggerating incidents to justify its own power, and given the plethora of left-wing groups involved in seeking, stirring up, or faking trouble, one must apply some discount to what one hears about the BNP. Equally, one must remember that some of these stories are true. But given that the ruling Labour Party still has its labor-union thugs and the Conservatives its crooked businessmen, it is doubtful that the BNP is more indictable for lawlessness than the major parties.
The British voting public -- which is deeply dissatisfied with the mainstream political establishment in Britain and eager for alternatives to listen to, if not actually vote for -- seems to be gradually, and with due skepticism, picking up on the fact that the BNP has changed. This will take longer with the political and journalistic establishment, which has a vested interest in keeping this newly-mainstream political competitor "beyond the pale." When the BNP isn't criticizing the destruction of Britain by immigration and the EU, it is usually, criticizing the incompetence, corruption, and fraudulence of the present government and opposition, something that hardly endears it to them.
The BNP has accused Tony Blair's ruling Labour government of waging an empty war on terror. It has accused this government of ignoring supposedly effective solutions, like establishing effective border controls and ending Moslem immigration, and resorting instead to measures that either make the problem worse, like invading Iraq, or amount to mere power grabs and authoritarian posturing. It has claimed that while the government's proposed new anti-terror law will violate legal due process and the rights of the accused, this government has so vitiated the police with political correctness that it is unable to enforce existing laws with ethnic minorities. It has argued that without serious enforcement of such laws against crimes like illegal immigration, people smuggling, illegal weapons, ordinary gangsterism, and drug smuggling, any anti-terror effort is doomed from the start, because such non-political crimes are the foundation of terrorist operations.
The BNP has also opposed the government's attempts to abolish such basic legal rights as trial-by-jury even for non-terrorist cases. It has a curious de facto ideological alliance on such questions with some British civil libertarians, which extends to its opposition to national identification cards and other illiberal measures.
In the May 2005 British election, the BNP hounded the opposition Conservatives with accusations of insincerity in their pledge to reduce immigration. As this pledge has been made and broken by successive Conservative governments for decades, this seems to have resonated with the public, and the BNP probably thus played at least a small role in Michael Howard's defeat. That British voting turnouts are at record lows suggests that the BNP's main electoral effect, thus far, has been to undermine public confidence in both major parties, despite not capturing a large vote for itself.
The BNP is subject to continuous harassment by the government, which subjects it to police surveillance and other measures that are quite surprising to learn of in a democratic nation -- though similar things are, of course, done in Israel to dissident parties. Arbitrary arrests of its leadership, seizures of party literature, interference with its bank accounts, and attempts to fire its members from public-sector employment are routine. This harassment may subside in future, if the party's new-found legitimacy becomes more widely recognized, or it may not, probably depending on how much public sympathy it wins.
Most Americans are unaware that British law makes it actually illegal to say things like,
"Islam[7] is a wicked and evil faith,"
Which BNP chairman Griffin is soon to be on trial for saying, with real jail time as a possible outcome. Americans who admire Tony Blair because he consented to send Britain's tiny army to Iraq have no idea how terribly he is repressing basic freedom of speech at home. The penetration of European Union law into British law only makes things worse, based as it is on a Napoleonic tradition that lacks Anglo-American ideas about freedom of speech.
The BNP's effectiveness is enhanced by the existence of a "respectable" doppelganger, the United Kingdom Independence Party (ukip.org),[8] which began as a quit-the-European-Union movement but has morphed into a polite bourgeois imitation of about 80% of what the BNP stands for. The mainstream political establishment seems to have deliberately promoted UKIP to steal the BNP's thunder, but then the respectability of UKIP has meant that the BNP's ideas, which are mostly similar, can no longer be dismissed as fringe. And the BNP has "street cred" (credibility) with the alienated working class, which its genteel doppelganger doesn't, and Britain still being Britain, class still matters.
The EU is an aspiring superstate[9] that aims to displace America from its dominant world position, if not become the outright nucleus of a world government.[10] Recent popular votes in several European states against further EU integration have been answered by the EU establishment with plans to continue with the federal project regardless. It has been giving a billion Euros a year (roughly a billion dollars) to the Palestinian Authority, plus the legitimacy of recognition. The BNP's opposition to such funding, and to the EU itself, therefore places it in a very interesting position for anyone who cares about Israel. It is, at the very least, an interesting creature to watch, and not the monster it once was.
Footnotes
1. Locke, Robert, "Is Population Transfer the Solution to the Palestinian Problem -- And Some Others?," July 8, 2003,
"http://www.vdare.com/locke/palestinian_problem.htm
2. Locke, Robert, Rethinking History: Were the Nazis Really Nationalists?" August 28, 2001,
http://frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1280
3. http://www.bnp.org.uk/
4. http://www.natfront.com/
5. Locke, Robert, "Abolish The European Union," June 5, 2002,
http://frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1231
6. http://www.bnp.org.uk/candidates2005/manifesto.htm
7. Locke, Robert, "Islam: A Defective Civilization?" February 28, 2002,
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1237
8. http://www.ukip.org/
9. Locke, Robert, "Abolish The European Union," June 5, 2002,
http://frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1231
10. Locke, Robert, "Conspiracy Theory and the National Question," July 24, 2004,
http://www.bestwriters.com/good/archives/00000031.htm
Friday, 4 April 2008
Libertarian Alliance Banking Proposals
Very interesting proposals below from the Libertarian Alliance - but wrong in parts as the US Federal Bank and Bank of England are not government banks, they are private banks who create money for their own enrichment. The Bank of England is independent, not a government bank.
http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/frcourt.html
What we should do is create a Bank Of Britain which is based on the gold standard - in other words its deposits are assured by gold deposits. At the same time we can then use that bank to subsidise the credit unions we want our people to use to replace the control of the private banks and also to subsidise the public works projects we propose.
That way we create a bank we control totally whilst allowing the private banking system to destroy itself.
NEWS RELEASE FROM THE LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE
In Association with the Libertarian International
Release Date: Friday 4th April 2008
Release Time: Immediate
Contact Details:
Dr Sean Gabb on 07956 472 199 or via sean@libertarian.co.uk
For other contact and link details, see the foot of this message
Release url: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/news/nr065.htm
Statement by the Libertarian Alliance on the Financial Crisis: Time to
Return to Gold
The Libertarian Alliance, the radical free market and civil liberties
policy institute, today issues the following statement on the present run
of crises in the financial markets. This statement is prompted by the
various calls made for closer regulation of the financial sector.
Libertarian Alliance Director, Dr Sean Gabb, says:
"The world may or may not be on the edge of financial collapse. But the
present run of banking crises is only the latest consequence of the
ending of the gold standard. Since 1914, and more particularly since
1971, the ability of governments to create unlimited amounts of fiat
money has led to bubble after bubble, each one larger than before.
Financial markets have become little more than casinos. Immense resources
have been diverted into the promotion and management of speculation. All
other economic activity has been subordinated to and therefore distorted
by such speculation.
"The latest set of problems, brought on by fooling lending on property in
America, is not a failure of the free market system. It is ultimately the
effect of government monetary policies. The answer does not lie in some
new set of regulations, which may prevent the next speculative frenzy.
The true answer lies in the return to a more sensible and more honest set
of monetary arrangements.
"We mean by this the return to a fully convertible gold standard.
"The Libertarian Alliance calls on the British Government to do the
following:
* To order the conversion of all foreign currency reserves held by in the
Bank of England into gold;
* To sell every reasonably marketable asset of the British State, to
convert the proceeds into gold, and to lodge these at the Bank of England;
* To revalue the Pound, so that all claims on the Bank of England were
equal to the gold reserve of the Bank of England:
* To impose on the Bank of England a legal obligation to pay all claims
on it in gold, on demand and without limit:
* To impose on the Bank of England an obligation to do all within its
ability, and nothing other than this, to maintain the new parity between
the Pound and gold:
* To impose on all deposit receivers operating in the United Kingdom
(unless explicitly exempted by contract) to pay all claims on them in
gold, on demand and without limit;
* To make the directors or, if they are without the jurisdiction, the
most senior management of all deposit receivers in the United Kingdom
personally responsible for any failure to make such payments:
* To impress on any foreign government or central bank that might choose
to fix a parity against the Pound that no assistance whatever would be
given to maintain such a parity.
"We note that these measures would bring about first a severe devaluation
of the Pound, and then a credit squeeze that deflated the value of real
and financial assets. But this is what we seem already to be facing. A
return to the gold standard would provide us with a stable financial
system, and would tend to protect us against future bubbles, and would
abolish the need for intrusive financial regulation.
"We also note that a fully convertible gold standard would make all money
laundering laws unenforceable, and would severely limit the ability of
the British State to finance its activities by the unlimited sale of
bonds to the banking system. We would unreservedly welcome both these
effects.
"We look forward to a Britain, and preferably a world, in which fiat
money has become as unusual as state ownership of telephone networks, and
in which paper and electronic money is a rare substitute for gold and
silver and copper coins."
END OF COPY
Note(s) to Editors
Dr Sean Gabb is the Director of the Libertarian Alliance. His latest
book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England,
and How to Get It Back, may be downloaded for free from
http://tinyurl.com/34e2o3. It may also be bought. His other books are
available from Hampden Press at http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk.
He can be contacted for further comment on 07956 472 199 or by email at
sean@libertarian.co.uk
Extended Contact Details:
The Libertarian Alliance is Britain's most radical free market and civil
liberties policy institute. It has published over 700 articles, pamphlets
and books in support of freedom and against statism in all its forms.
These are freely available at http://www.libertarian.co.uk
Our postal address is
The Libertarian Alliance
Suite 35
2 Landsdowne Row
Mayfair
London
W1J 6HL
Tel: 07956 472 199
Associated Organisations
The Libertarian International - http://www.libertarian.to - is a sister
organisation to the Libertarian Alliance. Its mission is to coordinate
various initiatives in the defence of individual liberty throughout the
world.
Sean Gabb's personal website - http://www.seangabb.co.uk - contains about
a million words of writings on themes interesting to libertarians and
conservatives.
Hampden Press - http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk.- the publishing house of
the Libertarian Alliance.
Liberalia - http://www.liberalia.com - maintained by by LA Executive
member Christian Michel, Liberalia publishes in-depth papers in French
and English on libertarianism and free enterprise. It is a prime source
of documentation on these issues for students and scholars.
http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/frcourt.html
What we should do is create a Bank Of Britain which is based on the gold standard - in other words its deposits are assured by gold deposits. At the same time we can then use that bank to subsidise the credit unions we want our people to use to replace the control of the private banks and also to subsidise the public works projects we propose.
That way we create a bank we control totally whilst allowing the private banking system to destroy itself.
NEWS RELEASE FROM THE LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE
In Association with the Libertarian International
Release Date: Friday 4th April 2008
Release Time: Immediate
Contact Details:
Dr Sean Gabb on 07956 472 199 or via sean@libertarian.co.uk
For other contact and link details, see the foot of this message
Release url: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/news/nr065.htm
Statement by the Libertarian Alliance on the Financial Crisis: Time to
Return to Gold
The Libertarian Alliance, the radical free market and civil liberties
policy institute, today issues the following statement on the present run
of crises in the financial markets. This statement is prompted by the
various calls made for closer regulation of the financial sector.
Libertarian Alliance Director, Dr Sean Gabb, says:
"The world may or may not be on the edge of financial collapse. But the
present run of banking crises is only the latest consequence of the
ending of the gold standard. Since 1914, and more particularly since
1971, the ability of governments to create unlimited amounts of fiat
money has led to bubble after bubble, each one larger than before.
Financial markets have become little more than casinos. Immense resources
have been diverted into the promotion and management of speculation. All
other economic activity has been subordinated to and therefore distorted
by such speculation.
"The latest set of problems, brought on by fooling lending on property in
America, is not a failure of the free market system. It is ultimately the
effect of government monetary policies. The answer does not lie in some
new set of regulations, which may prevent the next speculative frenzy.
The true answer lies in the return to a more sensible and more honest set
of monetary arrangements.
"We mean by this the return to a fully convertible gold standard.
"The Libertarian Alliance calls on the British Government to do the
following:
* To order the conversion of all foreign currency reserves held by in the
Bank of England into gold;
* To sell every reasonably marketable asset of the British State, to
convert the proceeds into gold, and to lodge these at the Bank of England;
* To revalue the Pound, so that all claims on the Bank of England were
equal to the gold reserve of the Bank of England:
* To impose on the Bank of England a legal obligation to pay all claims
on it in gold, on demand and without limit:
* To impose on the Bank of England an obligation to do all within its
ability, and nothing other than this, to maintain the new parity between
the Pound and gold:
* To impose on all deposit receivers operating in the United Kingdom
(unless explicitly exempted by contract) to pay all claims on them in
gold, on demand and without limit;
* To make the directors or, if they are without the jurisdiction, the
most senior management of all deposit receivers in the United Kingdom
personally responsible for any failure to make such payments:
* To impress on any foreign government or central bank that might choose
to fix a parity against the Pound that no assistance whatever would be
given to maintain such a parity.
"We note that these measures would bring about first a severe devaluation
of the Pound, and then a credit squeeze that deflated the value of real
and financial assets. But this is what we seem already to be facing. A
return to the gold standard would provide us with a stable financial
system, and would tend to protect us against future bubbles, and would
abolish the need for intrusive financial regulation.
"We also note that a fully convertible gold standard would make all money
laundering laws unenforceable, and would severely limit the ability of
the British State to finance its activities by the unlimited sale of
bonds to the banking system. We would unreservedly welcome both these
effects.
"We look forward to a Britain, and preferably a world, in which fiat
money has become as unusual as state ownership of telephone networks, and
in which paper and electronic money is a rare substitute for gold and
silver and copper coins."
END OF COPY
Note(s) to Editors
Dr Sean Gabb is the Director of the Libertarian Alliance. His latest
book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England,
and How to Get It Back, may be downloaded for free from
http://tinyurl.com/34e2o3. It may also be bought. His other books are
available from Hampden Press at http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk.
He can be contacted for further comment on 07956 472 199 or by email at
sean@libertarian.co.uk
Extended Contact Details:
The Libertarian Alliance is Britain's most radical free market and civil
liberties policy institute. It has published over 700 articles, pamphlets
and books in support of freedom and against statism in all its forms.
These are freely available at http://www.libertarian.co.uk
Our postal address is
The Libertarian Alliance
Suite 35
2 Landsdowne Row
Mayfair
London
W1J 6HL
Tel: 07956 472 199
Associated Organisations
The Libertarian International - http://www.libertarian.to - is a sister
organisation to the Libertarian Alliance. Its mission is to coordinate
various initiatives in the defence of individual liberty throughout the
world.
Sean Gabb's personal website - http://www.seangabb.co.uk - contains about
a million words of writings on themes interesting to libertarians and
conservatives.
Hampden Press - http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk.- the publishing house of
the Libertarian Alliance.
Liberalia - http://www.liberalia.com - maintained by by LA Executive
member Christian Michel, Liberalia publishes in-depth papers in French
and English on libertarianism and free enterprise. It is a prime source
of documentation on these issues for students and scholars.
The Second Great Depression
For a long time I have been stating that the era where cheap mortgages were given to people that were between 6-9 times their salaries was in order to support the Labour Party and its policy of mass immigration ;
1) It allowed the White Working Class to be controlled by ensuring they had the illusion of being able to own their homes, when in reality it was the banks that own your home until you pay off the mortgage
2) It took pressure off of council housing and allowed millions of immigrants to come into the country and take the council housing that had been formerly used by the White Working Class
3) That it allowed the White Working Class to think they had stake in the country when they bought their own homes
All the above 1,2,3 haves been revealed to be false.
We are about to witness an era of mass evictions, homelessness and poverty unseen since the 1930's in America.
Millions of households are about to lose their homes and wen they do they wont be able to go to their council and ask for a house because they are homeless - as they are filled up by asylum seekers and immigrants.
The government can either pay billions of pounds to the banks from the public purse, in other words subsidise the big banks and incompetent and greedy bankers with our taxes, or they can sit back and watch as millions of British people see their houses taken from them.
Either way - house prices are going to fall by a third so millions of people will be in a negative equity trap at the same time as the credit crunch is going to stop people buying homes as the banks refuse to lend to new mortgage applicants.
At the same time banks will also be cutting back on credit to business so the economy will stagnate and throw workers onto the dole - thereby increasing the numbers of people that go into default on their mortgages.
An era of stagflation beckons that will make the Grapes of Wrath look like a sunday school picnic.
The reason why this has not become 'apparent' yet in the media is simply because the media are afraid to publicise it before the GLA, Mayoral and Local Elections in case they terrify the sheeple that vote Labour, Tory and Lib Dem.
This British sub prime crisis is being hidden until after the elections to make sure the BNP does not do well in the elections - as simple as that. The media role in the political process is to create optimism or hide pessimism until it can bemanaged for the benefit of the puppet parties controlled by the media.
Do not expect to be told the truth about this crisis until after the May elections.
Those who have lived on credit cards and the hope that that house price rises will cover their debts are about to witness the collapse of the credit escalator.
Prepare for the same sites as witnessed in Los Angeles in the US, where tent cities of evicted families have sprung up on abandoned land on the edge of the city, shanty towns of homeless workers who have had their homes taken from them and then left to live with their families in poverty and homelessness.
That is the legacy of the New Labour Fabian experiment - poverty, homelessness and the enrichment of the international banking cartels and greedy fat cat bankers.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/04/ncredit604.xml
Based on a survey carried out by the credit reference agency Experian, the map rates the country's parliamentary constituencies according to how many struggling households - in what they term a "sub-prime" category - each contains.
The stark contrast between those who are struggling and those who are least at risk can be seen along purely geographical lines on the map. But there is a political discrepancy, too.
According to the analysis, most of the 5.1 million households in danger are in Labour strongholds.
Over the past few weeks, Downing Street has finally realised that the credit crunch is no longer an international problem - impacting only the City of London and Northern Rock - but a phenomenon sweeping through Middle England and causing sleepless nights.
First came the sharp rise in utility bills and petrol prices last autumn. Then grocery bills started rocketing, with everyday essentials such as bread, milk and eggs all rising sharply. And now the country's mortgage lenders are locked in a race to see who can increase rates or deposits the fastest.
The triple whammy has combined to spread alarm through the key voting constituencies of "Essex Man" and "GMTV family". Yesterday's admission that Mr Brown has claimed groceries and utilities on his taxpayer-funded expenses is hardly likely to reassure voters that he feels their pain.
The worst 10 constituencies:
1 Sheffield Brightside (Lab)72.16%
2 Birmingham Ladywood (Ind Lab) 69.26
3 Nottingham North (Lab) 65.56
4 Liverpool, Walton (Lab) 64.60
5 Birmingham, Sparkbrook and Small Heath (Lab) 64.47
6 Manchester, Blackley (Lab) 63.47
7 Birmingham, Hodge Hill (Lab) 63.31
8 Bootle (Lab) 63.15
9 Tyne Bridge (Lab) 62.04
10 Belfast West (Sinn Fein) 59.43
* Figures show percentage of households which are so badly in debt their homes are at risk of being repossessed.
The best 10 constituencies:
1 Kensington and Chelsea (Con)0.54%
2 Wimbledon (Con) 0.65
3 Richmond Park (Lib Dem)0.68
4 Enfield, Southgate (Con)1.06
5 Buckingham (Con)1.38
6 Finchley and Golders Green (Lab)1.50
7 Tooting (Lab)1.57
8 Twickenham (Lib Dem)1.59
9 Beaconsfield (Con) 1.60
10 Brent North (Lab) 1.64
Thursday, 3 April 2008
The Green Party and Paedophilia
Compare and Contrast ;
Nick Ericksen of the BNP makes a few idiotic comments on a blog to incite debate in 2005, is reported in the Jewish Chronicle as part of their racist campaign to prevent the indigenous British people having a voice in the Multi-Cultural political process and then resigns as a candidate for the BNP in the GLA elections.
Peter Tatchell, the parliamentary candidate for the Green Party in the Oxford East constituency once said,
“Several of my friends… had sex with adults from the ages of 9 to 13… It is time society acknowleged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwarranted, abusive or harmful”.
Will the Green Party Mayoral candidate, Sion Berry, be demanding that Mr Tatchell withdraw from the London elections, or does she and her party also endorse the sexual abuse of children?
I suspect that the Green Party endorses both Peter Tatchell and his comments on paedophilia and child rape.
UPDATE ;
Here is an article by Tatchell where he blames the 'straight males' of the world for all evil on the planet from the death of the dinosaurs to The Wurzels. I thought sexism was illegal and Heterophobia unnacceptable ;
http://www.petertatchell.net/
Here is when he stood in the previous Oxford East elections - we can assume he is going to be the candidate in the next one ;
http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2977
More here ;
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=233345798
The Femi-Nazis and Their Support For Child Rape
I was going to post this on the comments section of the BNP site but it was too long, so I post it here instead.
Let me start by saying I am a supporter of free speech, and that though I disagree with Nick Ericksens views that I follow the principle stated by Charles BRADLAUGH the British social reformer (1833-1891) "Without free speech no search for truth is possible... no discovery of truth is useful... Better a thousandfold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech. The abuse dies in a day, but the denial slays the life of the people, and entombs the hope of the race."
I am also a supporter of Voltaires dictum ; I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it." Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE, The Friends of Voltaire, 1907, French philosopher and writer (1694-1778)
Nicks comments on his blog in 2005 were just that, they were comments. They were not policy and were nothing to do with the BNP. The fact that the Jewish Chronicle, a racist organisation, decided to 'save' these comments up before deploying them to try and damage the BNP's chances in an election is a sign of utmost cynical manipulation of the public by the JC.
If it really was 'concerned' by these comments why wait until now to release them - the answer is simply cynical electioneering by a newspaper who have decided to subvert our democratic politicial system and attack a party that stands against the Labour Party and the Labour Friends of Israel.
Unlike the media such as the Jewish Chronicle, the Daily Mail and the London Standard Nick Ericksens views have no power to influence peoples minds or define the nature of societ, only the media can do that. The utter rubbish, lies and pure nonsense pumped out by the British media, such as we saw with the recent scandal about the lies being told about McCann family, means they are in no position to moralise to the British people. The media are parasites and pimps and nothing more.
Unlike the radical Feminists like Marilyn French who wrote' All men are rapists and that's all they are. They rape us with their eyes, their laws, and their codes', Nick Ericksen is not worshipped as an icon by members of the Labour government, the media and the Establishment.
Below are the quotes from the so called 'feminists' in British society. Nicks comments may have been crass and stupid, but they are protected as a fundamental part of our right to free speech. As the case of Handyside V the UK states ;
http://www.robin.no/~dadwatch/echr/handy.html
" The Court's supervisory functions oblige it to pay the utmost attention to the principles characterising a "democratic society". Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of such a society, one of the basic conditions for its progress and for the development of every man. Subject to paragraph 2 of Article 10 (art. 10-2), it is applicable not only to "information" or "ideas"
that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no
"democratic society".
At the moment we have Ken Livingstone, an apologist of IRA-Nazism and Islamo-Fascism, running London and Boris Johnson probably going to win the job.
As a former member of the Bullingdon club
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullingdon_Club with David Cameron, a group of rich tossers who got drunk at university and smashed pubs up before throwing money at shocked bar staff he once said, "I'm backing David Cameron's campaign out of pure, cynical self-interest."
Here are some of Boris's other classic gaffes ;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6901161.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/oct/04/uk.conservatives20061
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/mar/09/boris.localgovernment
Let us not listen to what the vipers and snakes of the media hiss in their papers, they are paid too lie and pimp out the political parties their corporate owners support.
Below are some of the real comments about the femi-nazis that need to be understood.
These are people teaching in our schools whose followers influence government and media and whose poison is being injected into young minds at universities and colleges as you read this.
What High-Profile Feminists Believe (and feminism has not been attacked for)
Please pay particular attention to the professional position of the individuals below, many of whom run colleges, magazines, or work in government:
"Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience." (Catherine Comin, Vassar College. Assistant Dean of Students).
We are, as a sex, infinitely superior to men..." (Elizabeth Cady Stanton, "One Woman, One Vote", Wheeler, p.58.)
"All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." .... "You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs." (Catherine MacKinnon - Prominent feminist scholar at the University of Michigan and Yale)
"I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He's just incapable of it." (Former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan)
"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig"....."Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman." ...."for a woman, the home is the most dangerous place in the world!" .... "The traditional flowers of courtship are the traditional flowers of the grave, delivered to the victim before the kill. The cadaver is dressed up and made up and laid down and ritually violated and consecrated to an eternity of being used." .... "Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." (Andrea Dworkin).
"Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release." (Germaine Greer)
"All men are rapists and that's all they are." (Marilyn French, Author; and advisor to Al Gore's Presidential Campaign)
"To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo." Scum Manifesto. (Valerie Solanas)
"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." (Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor)
" "We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." -from Sisterhood Is Powerful, Robin Morgan (ed), 1970, p.537.
"Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage" (Sheila Cronan, 1988 Houston National Organization for Women {NOW} Conference for Women.).
"The incest taboo can be destroyed only by destroying the nuclear family as the primary institution of the culture. The nuclear family is the school of values in a sexist, sexually repressed society... The alternative to the nuclear family at the moment is the extended family or the tribe. The growth of tribe is part of the process of destroying particularized roles and fixed erotic identity. As people develop fluid androgynous identity, they will also develop the forms of community appropriate to it. We cannot really imagine what those forms will be." (Shulamith Firestone - The Dialectics of Sex)
"We are, as a sex, infinitely superior to men..." Elizabeth Cady Stanton, "One Woman, One Vote", Wheeler, p.58
"The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it." (Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in "Women and the New Rage," p.67.)
"Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage." (Radical feminist leader Sheila Cronan)
"Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of radical feminism is to change that." (Vivian Gornick, feminist author, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981.
"In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them." (Dr. Mary Jo Bane, assistant professor of education at Wellesley College and associate director of the school's Center for Research on Woman)
"The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft." ("The Declaration of Feminism," November 1971).
"By the year 2000 we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in human potential, not God." (Gloria Steinhem, former editor of 'MS' magazine.)
"The simple fact is that every woman must be willing to be identified as a lesbian to be fully feminist."
( Sheila Cronan, National NOW Times, Jan.1988)
ANALYSIS OF THE PREVIOUS QUOTE: This sentence reveals that N.O.W.'s internal goal was to convert as many women as possible to lesbianism; the ostensible external political goal being to form the large-enough base of victim-class activists needed create female-female "super-family" marriage.
It also publicly admits that N.O.W.'s political goal was not to help those who are (by genetic or other substantial predilection) lesbians, but to force as many women as possible to become lesbians (or to pretend they are lesbians), or face exclusion from the feminist movement. It also admits that the dominant feminist organization no longer sought equal rights for women, but instead was pursuing an agenda that despises heterosexuality and is anti-family, antisocial, misandric, and secessionist in nature.
How Femi-Nazis Support Paedophilia and Rape.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/mcelroy2.html
In the award-winning radical feminist play by Eve Ensler entitled The Vagina Monologues, a 24-year-old woman plies a 13-year-old girl with alcohol, then sexually seduces her. By statute and by feminist definition, this "seduction" is rape.
Yet, from the stage, the little girl declares, "Now people say it was a kind of rape ... Well, I say if it was rape, it was a good rape..."
Apparently, the reference to "good rape" has been deleted from some performances but the surrounding language makes the rape’s goodness clear. For example, the little girl eulogizes her orgasm:
"She gently and slowly lays me out on the bed..." She gratefully concludes, "I’ll never need to rely on a man."
The above is the child rape that feminists support, for the rape creates a feminist.
The Vagina monologues have been on the BBC, the West End and toured around the country, it is an agenda for female rapists.
Femi-Nazis are sick but they are in the mainstream of our society and academia.
They must be exposed and removed from their positions.
Wednesday, 2 April 2008
The Nick Ericksen Story
"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for
people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
-Noam Chomsky
Let me start this article by saying that I fundamentally disagree with the views of Nick Eriksen as he stated them in his blog concerning the issue of rape.
But thats not new, I tend to disagree with everyone.
As Hubert Horatio HUMPHREY U.S. Vice President 1965–69 (1911–78) said ;
"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously."
The comments Nick made were in 2005 on his own blog and were attempts to ignite a debate (however dull and stupid) on issues that are frankly irrelevant as per their lack of debate already in society.
They were not manifesto promises and were not part of his own agenda.
I feel that he made a serious mistake in talking a load of nonsense about female rape, when issues that need do addressing in our society are being ignored such as ;
1) The rise in domestic violence against men by women and the lack of support for the male victims of domestic violence. How many shelters are their for men abused by women in the country ?
2) The rise in male rapes across the country which is not being researched and studied
3) The numbers of women making false accusations of rape against men and how this happening more and more , and at the same time the government is proposing to allow rape convictions to be brought in on a lower evidential threshold and thereby making sure more innocent men go to prison for crimes they did not commit simply on the word of women who have lied in court.
Each of these above serious issues are totally ignored by the media, just as the issue of deaths from prostrate cancer are ignored whilst the issue of breast cancer is always in the media. The issue of rape has its own lobby groups, femi-nazi extremists to promulgate lies and hatred against mne, its own legal groups and its own media experts and propagandists.
The issues of male rape, false rape accusations against men and domestic violence against men have no such groups to promote debate in public.
On every issue those that impact upon men are ignored and minimised, whilst the issues that affect women are addressed and publicised.
It is these issues affecting men that need to be addressed but that get zero attention.
Nick Ericksen was talking bollocks, but then again so do the 'All men are Rapists' femi-nazis that hide their hatred of men in the garb of political correctness.
The media talk bollocks every day, but unlike Nick Ericksen they have the ability to influence peoples minds and shape the nature of our society. Whilst Nick Ericksens comments were crass and stupid, the media causes real damage to our society.
The most revealing aspect of this whole sorry affair though was once again the alliance between the Stormfront Nazis and the Lancaster Unity Communists. Yet again it appears that the UAF and Nazis have much more in common than they have in opposition to each other. Reading Stomfront and Lancaster Unity the same old suspects appeared with the same old comments, even the hag Eanks appeared on Lancaster Unity again to try and stir the pot.
It appears that both the Nazis on Stormfront and Communists on Lancaster Unity hold free speech in total contempt.
Let me remind people of the law here ;
In the case of Handyside v The UK, the law states ;
http://www.robin.no/~dadwatch/echr/handy.html
" The Court's supervisory functions oblige it to pay the utmost
attention to the principles characterising a "democratic society".
Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of
such a society, one of the basic conditions for its progress and for
the development of every man. Subject to paragraph 2 of Article 10
(art. 10-2), it is applicable not only to "information" or "ideas"
that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter
of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the
State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that
pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no
"democratic society".
I may think Nick was talking bollocks, but he has a right to talk bollocks - as much right as the media and the rest of the politicians.
Nick may talk bollocks, but he has done nothing else but excercise his right of free speech.
He is not an animal torturer like this Labour politician ;
Senior city councillor Paul Shotton has been convicted of animal cruelty after leaving his family's 13-year-old pet labrador to die while he went on holiday with his wife.
The 47-year-old, city council portfolio holder for public safety, pictured, was convicted alongside his wife Annette, aged 45, of causing unnecessary suffering to Baron, between June 24 and July 15 last year.
Sentencing the couple, deputy district judge John Maxwell told them: "You two have committed a despicable crime.
"You left an old family friend in your yard to die while you went on holiday - no doubt hoping it would all be over by the time you got back."
http://www.thesentinel.co.uk/display...entPK=18923115
Nor is he someone who has called for the poor to be exterminated like this Tory ;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=543688&in_page_id=1770&ito=newsnow
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/7313716.stm
" A Medway councillor has resigned after claiming on his website that there should be compulsory sterilisation for parents on benefits.
John Ward prompted comparisons with the Nazis after attacking what he called "professional spongers" whom he claimed "breed for greed". "
Nor is he demanding that disabled children be guillotened like this Tory Deputy mayor ;
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16167590%26method=full%26siteid=94762%26headline=tory-deputy-mayor--the-best-thing-for-disabled-children-is-the-guillotine--name_page.html
A TORY deputy mayor has sparked outrage by calling for disabled kids to be guillotined to avoid wasting cash on their care.
Retired GP Owen Lister made his sick suggestion to fellow councillors as they discussed sending the youngsters to a £3,000-a-week care home.
Mr Lister, 79, told them: "I would guillotine them."
He has now quit as deputy mayor but yesterday stood by his outburst.
He said: "I indicated at that point that perhaps the guillotine might be better.
"These are children you can't educate. It's merely a matter of caring for them until they die.
"The only difference between a terminally ill patient and a severely handicapped child is time." The councillor, of Swindon, Wilts, argued the funds should instead be used to cut NHS waiting lists.
He added: "It shows how peculiar we are as a society on this matter that we spend this vast amount of money caring for disabled youngsters to very little purpose at all.
"It would be better spent on those who might actually benefit, such as cancer sufferers. We have 5,800 people waiting to go into hospital in Swindon. A percentage of those will die as a result of waiting too long."
Nor is he a member of UKIP who discriminate against disabled people in UKIP ;
http://www.scope.org.uk/cgi-bin/np/viewnews.cgi?id=1172761543
Nick Ericksen is someone who made some silly comments three years on his private blog. Andrew Gilligan, the UAF, Stormfront Nazis and the rest of the idiots that spouted their opinions on this as an issue did so with an already pre-existing agenda which was to damage the BNP as much as possible.
Andrew Gilligan is an enemy of the British people as he works for a newspaper that represents its own sectarian interests above that of British society as a whole. The UAF and Lancaster Unity are the enemies of the British people as they despise free speech and free debate as much as the Stormfront Nazis do.
The idea that Gilligans Pygmy Army of Neo-Nazis and UAF Communists should give anyone moral lectures or give us their pathetic demonstrations of moral outrage concerning free speech is farscical.
Each of them are the enemies of democracy and the enemies of free speech.
The idea that Gilligan, a journalist, should criticise anyone for talking bollocks when he was sacked from the BBC for talking bollocks is hilarous.
It appears that the media now seem to think they have a right to tell us not who just to vote for but also how we may excercise our right of free speech.
Below are some comments from people who truly understand the value of free speech and who are not a bunch of hypocritical arseholes waving their fans and having a fake swoon over someone who talks as much bollocks as they do ;
"Free speech"
"Free speech is to a great people what winds are to oceans and malarial regions, which waft away the elements of disease and bring new elements of health; and where free speech is stopped, miasma is bred, and death comes fast."
Henry Ward BEECHER
American Congregational preacher, orator, and lecturer (1813-1887)
"Without free speech no search for truth is possible... no discovery of truth is useful... Better a thousandfold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech. The abuse dies in a day, but the denial slays the life of the people, and entombs the hope of the race."
Charles BRADLAUGH
British social reformer (1833-1891)
"Everybody favours free speech in the slack moments when no axes are being ground."
Heywood C. BROUN
U.S. journalist and author (1888-1939)
"Freedom of expression is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom."
Benjamin Nathan CARDOZO
American jurist (1870–1938)
"Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down. They know its power. Thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers, founded in injustice and wrong, are sure to tremble, if men are allowed to reason…
There can be on right of speech where any man…[is] compelled to suppress his honest sentiments. Equally clear is the right to hear. To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker."
Frederick DOUGLASS
In famous plea for free speech in Boston 1860
American abolitionist, author, orator (1817-1895)
"Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want rain without thunder and lightning."
Frederick DOUGLASS
American abolitionist, author, orator (1817-1895)
"We who officially value freedom of speech above life itself seem to have nothing to talk about but the weather."
Barbara EHRENREICH
American writer, political activist (1941-)
"Freedom of speech and freedom of action are meaningless without freedom to think. And there is no freedom of thought without doubt."
Bergen EVANS
"The Freedoms of Speech and Press are the necessary Conditions for the Enlightenment of Human Life, which again is the only Thing, that can save Peoples and Nations, and Experience teaches, that where these Freedoms exist, one will find comfort from much other Burdensomeness and Unpleasantness; but where it is not, and in particular where one feels deprived from it, the People either descends to the Beast or cut up rough like the Wild Animals, and in both Cases it is indeed the End to Human Life."
Niels Frederik Severin GRUNDTVIG
Danish social reformer and educationist, 1845 (1773-1872)
"To limit the press is to insult a nation; to prohibit reading of certain books is to declare the inhabitants to be either fools or slaves."
Claude Adrien HELVÉTIUS
French philosopher (1715–71)
"To speak his thoughts is every freeman's right, in peace and war, in council and in fight."
HOMER
The Iliad
Principal figure of ancient Greek literature (before 700 B.C.)
"It is clear that the freedom of expression and opinion is a fundamental right, the mother of all rights."
Abid HUSSAIN
Speech in Sri Lanka, 1999
UN Special Rapporteur on the Freedom of Information
"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
Søren KIERKEGAARD
Danish philosopher and religious thinker (1813-1855)
"Free speech is a bourgeois prejudice."
Vladimir Ilyich LENIN
Explanation to Emma Goldman in 1920
Russian revolutionary (1870-1924)
"Freedom to speak... can be maintained only by promoting debate."
Walter LIPPMANN
1955
American journalist (1889-1974)
"Freedom of expression must be considered sacred and thought can only be corrected by counter thought."
Naguib MAHFOUZ
Egyptian novelist and screenwriter (1911-)
"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties."
John MILTON
Areopagitica
English poet (1608-1674)
"A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything."
NAPOLEON Bonaparte
French general and emperor of France (1769-1821)
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."
Eric Arthur Blair or George ORWELL
British novelist and essayist (1903-1950)
"Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4. If that is granted, all else follows."
Eric Arthur Blair or George ORWELL
"1984"
British novelist and essayist (1903-1950)
"Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself."
Salman RUSHDIE
Indian-born British novelist (1947-)
"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist."
Salman RUSHDIE
Indian-born British novelist (1947-)
"The greatest threat to freedom is the absence of criticism."
Wole SOYINKA
Nigerian playwright, poet, novelist, and political activist (1934-)
"In America - as elsewhere - free speech is confined to the dead."
Samuel Langhorne Clemens or Mark TWAIN
Notebook, 1904
American author (1835-1910)
"The essential support and encouragement comes from within, arising out of the mad notion that your society needs to know what only you can tell it."
John UPDIKE
American author and poet (1932- )
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."
Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE
The Friends of Voltaire, 1907
French philosopher and writer (1694-1778)
"We have a natural right to make use of our pens as of our tongue, at our peril, risk and hazard."
Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE
Dictionnaire Philosophique, 1764
French philosopher and writer (1694-1778)
"I have always been among those who believed that the greatest freedom of speech was the greatest safety, because if a man is a fool the best thing to do is to encourage him to advertise the fact by speaking."
Woodrow WILSON 28th President of the United States (1856-1924)
people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
-Noam Chomsky
Let me start this article by saying that I fundamentally disagree with the views of Nick Eriksen as he stated them in his blog concerning the issue of rape.
But thats not new, I tend to disagree with everyone.
As Hubert Horatio HUMPHREY U.S. Vice President 1965–69 (1911–78) said ;
"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously."
The comments Nick made were in 2005 on his own blog and were attempts to ignite a debate (however dull and stupid) on issues that are frankly irrelevant as per their lack of debate already in society.
They were not manifesto promises and were not part of his own agenda.
I feel that he made a serious mistake in talking a load of nonsense about female rape, when issues that need do addressing in our society are being ignored such as ;
1) The rise in domestic violence against men by women and the lack of support for the male victims of domestic violence. How many shelters are their for men abused by women in the country ?
2) The rise in male rapes across the country which is not being researched and studied
3) The numbers of women making false accusations of rape against men and how this happening more and more , and at the same time the government is proposing to allow rape convictions to be brought in on a lower evidential threshold and thereby making sure more innocent men go to prison for crimes they did not commit simply on the word of women who have lied in court.
Each of these above serious issues are totally ignored by the media, just as the issue of deaths from prostrate cancer are ignored whilst the issue of breast cancer is always in the media. The issue of rape has its own lobby groups, femi-nazi extremists to promulgate lies and hatred against mne, its own legal groups and its own media experts and propagandists.
The issues of male rape, false rape accusations against men and domestic violence against men have no such groups to promote debate in public.
On every issue those that impact upon men are ignored and minimised, whilst the issues that affect women are addressed and publicised.
It is these issues affecting men that need to be addressed but that get zero attention.
Nick Ericksen was talking bollocks, but then again so do the 'All men are Rapists' femi-nazis that hide their hatred of men in the garb of political correctness.
The media talk bollocks every day, but unlike Nick Ericksen they have the ability to influence peoples minds and shape the nature of our society. Whilst Nick Ericksens comments were crass and stupid, the media causes real damage to our society.
The most revealing aspect of this whole sorry affair though was once again the alliance between the Stormfront Nazis and the Lancaster Unity Communists. Yet again it appears that the UAF and Nazis have much more in common than they have in opposition to each other. Reading Stomfront and Lancaster Unity the same old suspects appeared with the same old comments, even the hag Eanks appeared on Lancaster Unity again to try and stir the pot.
It appears that both the Nazis on Stormfront and Communists on Lancaster Unity hold free speech in total contempt.
Let me remind people of the law here ;
In the case of Handyside v The UK, the law states ;
http://www.robin.no/~dadwatch/echr/handy.html
" The Court's supervisory functions oblige it to pay the utmost
attention to the principles characterising a "democratic society".
Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of
such a society, one of the basic conditions for its progress and for
the development of every man. Subject to paragraph 2 of Article 10
(art. 10-2), it is applicable not only to "information" or "ideas"
that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter
of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the
State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that
pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no
"democratic society".
I may think Nick was talking bollocks, but he has a right to talk bollocks - as much right as the media and the rest of the politicians.
Nick may talk bollocks, but he has done nothing else but excercise his right of free speech.
He is not an animal torturer like this Labour politician ;
Senior city councillor Paul Shotton has been convicted of animal cruelty after leaving his family's 13-year-old pet labrador to die while he went on holiday with his wife.
The 47-year-old, city council portfolio holder for public safety, pictured, was convicted alongside his wife Annette, aged 45, of causing unnecessary suffering to Baron, between June 24 and July 15 last year.
Sentencing the couple, deputy district judge John Maxwell told them: "You two have committed a despicable crime.
"You left an old family friend in your yard to die while you went on holiday - no doubt hoping it would all be over by the time you got back."
http://www.thesentinel.co.uk/display...entPK=18923115
Nor is he someone who has called for the poor to be exterminated like this Tory ;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=543688&in_page_id=1770&ito=newsnow
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/7313716.stm
" A Medway councillor has resigned after claiming on his website that there should be compulsory sterilisation for parents on benefits.
John Ward prompted comparisons with the Nazis after attacking what he called "professional spongers" whom he claimed "breed for greed". "
Nor is he demanding that disabled children be guillotened like this Tory Deputy mayor ;
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16167590%26method=full%26siteid=94762%26headline=tory-deputy-mayor--the-best-thing-for-disabled-children-is-the-guillotine--name_page.html
A TORY deputy mayor has sparked outrage by calling for disabled kids to be guillotined to avoid wasting cash on their care.
Retired GP Owen Lister made his sick suggestion to fellow councillors as they discussed sending the youngsters to a £3,000-a-week care home.
Mr Lister, 79, told them: "I would guillotine them."
He has now quit as deputy mayor but yesterday stood by his outburst.
He said: "I indicated at that point that perhaps the guillotine might be better.
"These are children you can't educate. It's merely a matter of caring for them until they die.
"The only difference between a terminally ill patient and a severely handicapped child is time." The councillor, of Swindon, Wilts, argued the funds should instead be used to cut NHS waiting lists.
He added: "It shows how peculiar we are as a society on this matter that we spend this vast amount of money caring for disabled youngsters to very little purpose at all.
"It would be better spent on those who might actually benefit, such as cancer sufferers. We have 5,800 people waiting to go into hospital in Swindon. A percentage of those will die as a result of waiting too long."
Nor is he a member of UKIP who discriminate against disabled people in UKIP ;
http://www.scope.org.uk/cgi-bin/np/viewnews.cgi?id=1172761543
Nick Ericksen is someone who made some silly comments three years on his private blog. Andrew Gilligan, the UAF, Stormfront Nazis and the rest of the idiots that spouted their opinions on this as an issue did so with an already pre-existing agenda which was to damage the BNP as much as possible.
Andrew Gilligan is an enemy of the British people as he works for a newspaper that represents its own sectarian interests above that of British society as a whole. The UAF and Lancaster Unity are the enemies of the British people as they despise free speech and free debate as much as the Stormfront Nazis do.
The idea that Gilligans Pygmy Army of Neo-Nazis and UAF Communists should give anyone moral lectures or give us their pathetic demonstrations of moral outrage concerning free speech is farscical.
Each of them are the enemies of democracy and the enemies of free speech.
The idea that Gilligan, a journalist, should criticise anyone for talking bollocks when he was sacked from the BBC for talking bollocks is hilarous.
It appears that the media now seem to think they have a right to tell us not who just to vote for but also how we may excercise our right of free speech.
Below are some comments from people who truly understand the value of free speech and who are not a bunch of hypocritical arseholes waving their fans and having a fake swoon over someone who talks as much bollocks as they do ;
"Free speech"
"Free speech is to a great people what winds are to oceans and malarial regions, which waft away the elements of disease and bring new elements of health; and where free speech is stopped, miasma is bred, and death comes fast."
Henry Ward BEECHER
American Congregational preacher, orator, and lecturer (1813-1887)
"Without free speech no search for truth is possible... no discovery of truth is useful... Better a thousandfold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech. The abuse dies in a day, but the denial slays the life of the people, and entombs the hope of the race."
Charles BRADLAUGH
British social reformer (1833-1891)
"Everybody favours free speech in the slack moments when no axes are being ground."
Heywood C. BROUN
U.S. journalist and author (1888-1939)
"Freedom of expression is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom."
Benjamin Nathan CARDOZO
American jurist (1870–1938)
"Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down. They know its power. Thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers, founded in injustice and wrong, are sure to tremble, if men are allowed to reason…
There can be on right of speech where any man…[is] compelled to suppress his honest sentiments. Equally clear is the right to hear. To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker."
Frederick DOUGLASS
In famous plea for free speech in Boston 1860
American abolitionist, author, orator (1817-1895)
"Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want rain without thunder and lightning."
Frederick DOUGLASS
American abolitionist, author, orator (1817-1895)
"We who officially value freedom of speech above life itself seem to have nothing to talk about but the weather."
Barbara EHRENREICH
American writer, political activist (1941-)
"Freedom of speech and freedom of action are meaningless without freedom to think. And there is no freedom of thought without doubt."
Bergen EVANS
"The Freedoms of Speech and Press are the necessary Conditions for the Enlightenment of Human Life, which again is the only Thing, that can save Peoples and Nations, and Experience teaches, that where these Freedoms exist, one will find comfort from much other Burdensomeness and Unpleasantness; but where it is not, and in particular where one feels deprived from it, the People either descends to the Beast or cut up rough like the Wild Animals, and in both Cases it is indeed the End to Human Life."
Niels Frederik Severin GRUNDTVIG
Danish social reformer and educationist, 1845 (1773-1872)
"To limit the press is to insult a nation; to prohibit reading of certain books is to declare the inhabitants to be either fools or slaves."
Claude Adrien HELVÉTIUS
French philosopher (1715–71)
"To speak his thoughts is every freeman's right, in peace and war, in council and in fight."
HOMER
The Iliad
Principal figure of ancient Greek literature (before 700 B.C.)
"It is clear that the freedom of expression and opinion is a fundamental right, the mother of all rights."
Abid HUSSAIN
Speech in Sri Lanka, 1999
UN Special Rapporteur on the Freedom of Information
"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
Søren KIERKEGAARD
Danish philosopher and religious thinker (1813-1855)
"Free speech is a bourgeois prejudice."
Vladimir Ilyich LENIN
Explanation to Emma Goldman in 1920
Russian revolutionary (1870-1924)
"Freedom to speak... can be maintained only by promoting debate."
Walter LIPPMANN
1955
American journalist (1889-1974)
"Freedom of expression must be considered sacred and thought can only be corrected by counter thought."
Naguib MAHFOUZ
Egyptian novelist and screenwriter (1911-)
"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties."
John MILTON
Areopagitica
English poet (1608-1674)
"A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything."
NAPOLEON Bonaparte
French general and emperor of France (1769-1821)
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."
Eric Arthur Blair or George ORWELL
British novelist and essayist (1903-1950)
"Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4. If that is granted, all else follows."
Eric Arthur Blair or George ORWELL
"1984"
British novelist and essayist (1903-1950)
"Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself."
Salman RUSHDIE
Indian-born British novelist (1947-)
"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist."
Salman RUSHDIE
Indian-born British novelist (1947-)
"The greatest threat to freedom is the absence of criticism."
Wole SOYINKA
Nigerian playwright, poet, novelist, and political activist (1934-)
"In America - as elsewhere - free speech is confined to the dead."
Samuel Langhorne Clemens or Mark TWAIN
Notebook, 1904
American author (1835-1910)
"The essential support and encouragement comes from within, arising out of the mad notion that your society needs to know what only you can tell it."
John UPDIKE
American author and poet (1932- )
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."
Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE
The Friends of Voltaire, 1907
French philosopher and writer (1694-1778)
"We have a natural right to make use of our pens as of our tongue, at our peril, risk and hazard."
Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE
Dictionnaire Philosophique, 1764
French philosopher and writer (1694-1778)
"I have always been among those who believed that the greatest freedom of speech was the greatest safety, because if a man is a fool the best thing to do is to encourage him to advertise the fact by speaking."
Woodrow WILSON 28th President of the United States (1856-1924)
Interview With The Jewish Chronicle
Below I publish for your comment a series of e mails from the Jewish Chronicle who are presently supporting the Searchlight campaign against the BNP.
The Jewish Chronicle is a racist organisation. It demands that the only people in Britain who be prohibited from organising to protect and represent their community interests in the political, cultural, social and economic sphere of our multi-cultural society are the indigenous British people.
It appears that for organisations like the Jewish Chronicle the principle of universality that should apply to equal rights, and also the right to organise as a community in the Multi-Cultural system, applies only to ethnic minority groups like themselves and that the rights and interests of the ethnic majority must never be allowed to exist within the system of multi-culturalism.
This is clearly a racist position, for in effect it demands the exclusion of only one community, that of the indigenous British, from organising as a community to protect their interests within British society.
It appears that for groups like the Jewish Chroncile the indigenous British people must be like the indigenous Native American people and we must live on our reservations and keep quiet as we fade away quietly into extinction.
And so it has been. There is not one single charity in the country for the Indigenous British people, not one community centre for our people whilst their are thousands of ethno-specific community centres for every other ethnic minority groups, not one organisation to represent us legally as an ethnic community, we have no communiy leaders feted by the police and asked to sit on government task forces to assist our community and no public funds awarded to groups that represent the interests of our people.
Instead we have had our communities torn apart whilst every ethnic minority community group has been funded by our taxes. Whilst the government plans to shut down local village schools, local posts offices, sell of our kids playing fields, shut down youth clubs in our towns and villages and in effect destroy all those community structures that knit our community together - all other ethnic groups in the country have been funded by the state to create ethno-centric communal structures in the name of multi-culturalism.
The Jewish Chronicle is a perfect example of this. A newsaper that seeks to give a voice to the Jewish people in Britain, but at the same time campaigns to silence the voice of the indigenous British people.
A recent Newsnight poll stated that 58 % of the white working class felt no-one spoke for them and their interests in todays Britain.
In the same poll 77 % of white British people felt that they could not criticise immigration without being called racist.
The climate of fear engendered by multi-culturalism, and those that have exploited it in order to benefit themselves (even at the expense of their own ethnic community like the Jewish Chronicle), has resulted in our community becoming vioceless and impotent.
This was not an 'accident' of the process of multi-culturalism, instead the whole process of multi-culturalism demanded that the indigenous British people be terrified into silence by the word 'racist' as their country was stolen way from them. Those that dared speak out against the process, unless they are dressed in the robes and ermine of the House Of Lords, were villified, abused, hounded and sacked from their jobs in racist pogroms directed only against those in the indigenous British community that spoke up for their people.
And as we have also seen, the moment that the indigenous British people have begun to wak up, demand their voice in our own country and started to vote en mass for a party that represents their interests - then all those who have exploited multi-culturalism for themseves and their own communities have opened fire on the BNP for giving our people a voice.
Below is an exchange of e mails with the Jewish Chronicle.
Note that with the typical arrogance of the multi-cultural fascists that feed primarily off their own community and who seek to deny others the same rights as them in the multi-cultural process they did not deign to answer any of my specific questions about their racism and incompetence ;
Dear Simon, Thanks for your time just now. Please find attached a file in which I have copied some statements made by Mr Barnes in various posts on his personal blog. The last entry is one in which he professes that the BNP is not a racist party. With particular regard to the article on the Jewish Chronicle and its employees, on whatgrounds does Mr Barnes make his comments about employees of the paper, such as that we are, in his words, "funders of terrorism" and that our relatives fight in the IDF? If he could also address the other entries I have copied into the attachment that would be great. thanks indeed. Please find my direct line below, should there be any queries.Thanks again,Dana Gloger Reporter Jewish Chronicle 25 Furnival Street London EC4A 1JTDL: ------- End of forwarded message -------
Dear Ms. Gloger,
Thank you for your inquiry. I have answered the questions you listed on your
e mail, though I cannot open up the documents you attached to your e mail as
I do not open attachments on e mails for obvious security reasons.
Any further questions you have please get in touch.
(1) The Jewish Chronicle has been involved with the Searchlight organisation
in its anti-BNP campaigning activities for decades. Searchlight is an
organisation based on the principle of hounding and terrorising members of
British Nationalist parties into leaving politics and is run by a convicted
criminal, Gerry Gable, who has direct links with terrorist organisations
such as Anti-Fascist Action and Red Action who have targeted and physically
attacked BNP members. Searchlight activities and hounding of individual
nationalists have caused many BNP members to lose their jobs, homes and
pensions. Your support for this Searchlight campaign through your
advertising the anti-BNP propaganda peddled by Searchlight in your newspaper
is the direct subsidising of an organisation that we consider is an unlawful
terrorist organisation, and one that we intend to proscribe when we come to
power as an hostile agent of a foreign state. Advertising in your paper
costs money. The Jewish Chronicle has been a long time associate,
propagandist and supporter of Gerry Gable and Searchlight, and are therefore
complicit in the actions of Mr. Gable and the organisations he is linked
too.
http://www.thejc.com/home.aspx?ParentId=m11&SecId=11&AId=58867&ATypeId=1
Your paper is also linked with the Board of Deputies of British Jews who
offer unconditional loyalty to the principle of Israel and Zionism and who
have attacked the BNP many times. The BOD just like Searchlight and the
Community Security Trust also collects, stores and passes on information it
collects on Nationalists and others to harass and intimidate those people
its perceives as its opponents including BNP members and officials.
Even the UAF regards Searchlight as a Zionist Front Group ;
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/07/316360.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/07/318329.html
http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=146
2) Family members of Mr. Gerry Gable have served in the IDF. I am sure that
many members of the families of staff of the Jewish Chronicle and their
extended families have also served in the IDF. Many Zionist Jews in Britain
leave the UK to serve in the IDF every year.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/23/israel
http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/sept2007/children_fight.html
The New Statesman has also compared IDF training of British citizens to
terrorism ;
http://jewishbreakingnews.blogspot.com/2007/09/british-jews-condemn-new-statesman.html
As David Aaronovitch wrote in The Times Online on September 22, 2006 ;
Therefore, I wouldn't join such an organisation. Neither would I join the
Israeli Army. That's for Israelis to do. I only say this because a girl who
went to school with my 16-year-old daughter - a lovely, clever young woman -
apparently wants, having visited Israel, to serve with the IDF for a year or
two.
I expressed amazement at this to a couple of friends, one of whom lights the
candles, says the words and maintains contact with the family ghosts, and
that's more or less it. When we discussed the military thing, he sort of
said, "The Israeli army, what could be more natural?" To which I replied,
"The British army?"
http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/2006/09/jews_for_justic.html
(3) Zionism is defined as Racism by the UN.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism_and_racism_allegations# The_claim_that_Zionism_is_racism
In November 1975, the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379 declared that "Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination. "In December 1991, the General Assembly rescinded this resolution throughResolution 4686. At the time, the Soviet Union, a major sponsor of the "Zionism is racism" doctrine (see Zionology), had completed its rapid collapse. Israel made revocation of resolution 3379 a condition of its participation in the Madrid Peace Conference. The Madrid Conference was hosted by the government of Spain and co-sponsored by the USA and the USSR. It convened on October 30, 1991 and lasted for three days. It was an early attempt by the international community to start a peace process through negotiations involving Israel and the Arab countries including Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and the Palestinians.
In the aftermath of the 1991 Gulf War, US President George H.W. Bush and his Secretary of State James Baker formulated the framework of objectives, and together with the Soviet Union extended a letter of invitation, dated October 30, 1991 to Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and the Palestinians. Therefore the revocation of the 1975 definition of Zionism was based solely on political considerations relating to the formation of that (failed) conference and therefore did not relate to any re-definition of Zionism as not being racist. Zionism is clearly racist. The UN resolution did not rehabilitate Zionism, it merely dropped the first resolution in order to get Israel into the conference.
The BNP accept the right of Israel as a nation to exist and also supportits right to defend itself as it sees fit from all internal and externalthreats to its National Security. We admire the ethno-centric communalism ofthe Jewish peoples and also the national spirit that allowed them to rebuildIsrael after it had ceased to exist for 2000 years. I personally am frequently attacked by anti-semitic Neo-Nazis for my supportof Israel as a nation, almost as much as I am called an Nazi extremist by the Zionist media such as Searchlight - as a cursory internet search will reveal.
We do not accept that British citizens may be allowed to organise to place the interests of Israel before those of Britain and nor do we accept that British citizens may fight for and wear the uniform of a foreign state. Those that leave the UK to fight for Israel, the Taliban or Islam should forfeit their British citizenship rights. We are not anti-Israel nor anti-semitic but neither are we philo-semitic. We serve only the interests of our people and national community.
Neither are we anti-Muslim or anti-Islam. We are as much anti-Zionist as we are anti-Jihadist. Those whose primary loyalty is to Great Britain regardless of their race,religion or creed need not worry about the BNP getting into power. All those present within our national borders that regard the UK simply as a base to serve the interests of a foreign power or their particular religion, and who also actively work to undermine our national interests, would not be tolerated once we got into power.
Zionist extremists both inside and outside Israel, and also the Christian Zionists in the US who work to use its foreign policy to benefit Israel, we regard as threats to world peace.The power of pro-Israeli lobby groups comprised of Zionist political fanatics and also Zionist Christian Fundamentalists must be curbed and their ability to influence both our domestic and foreign policy ended. These Zionist lobby and media groups are as much a threat to the UK as the Saudi Arabian Wahhabist lobby groups and media organisations that seek toinfluence our domestic and foreign policies for their benefit and that also seek to influence the domestic and foreign policies of our internationalallies such as the US.
Any organisation that puts the interests of a foreign nation or the interests of their religion before the interests of the British people and the British nation must be regarded as a threat to the security of the British state.
It was an alliance of Christian Zionists, the Pro-Israel Zionists and the Saudi Arabian Wahhabists that all pushed for the Iraq War and the removal of Saddam Hussein. Without these groups giving their explicit backing to the Iraq War then it would not have happened. We believe that British Jews have been betrayed by the self appointed community representatives who have spoken in their name over the last five decades. These organisations have all supported Multi-Culturalism, Mass Immigration, the de-culturalisation of the indigenous British people, the Islamisation of British society, the racist policies of the Israeli government against the indigenous Palestinian peoples and also the Iraq War.
These groups have also facilitated the Islamisation of our society by aligning themselves with organisations such as the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain and at the same time have fought against the indigenous British community organising to protect and represent politically ourcommunity interests in the multi-cultural system. We believe that the people who have been running, and who still are running,the so called 'Jewish community groups' in Britain have only been looking after either themselves or the interests of Israel. The last thing they have been looking after is the interests of individual Jews and the British Jewish community. Race and faith attacks against Jews are at an all time high, but are not being perpetrated by the BNP , but simply by either Muslims or activists of the Far Left.
The recent CST report on attacks on Jews reveals the fiction of a threat to Jews from the BNP. The constant lie that the Jewish community in Britain is threatened by the BNP is promulgated only by those who are complicit in the decades long exploitation of the British Jewish community for their own sectarian interests. It is time the British Jewish community rejected the self appointed fools and charlatans that have led them and us into clear and present danger, and realise that the BNP and the British Jewish community now need each other if both of our communities are going to survive the threat that radical Islam offers to future generations of our children and grandchildren.
L.J. Barnes
(2) > Dear Mr Barnes,
>
> Many thanks indeed for your response.
>
> Below I have pasted what is in the document I had attached to the
> original email, in case you want to comment on this. They are some of
> your posts from your blog.
>
> Many thanks indeed.
>
> Pasted below:
>
> March 21 2008
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Gloger" <
To: "lee barnes" <>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: RE: (Fwd) FAO Simon Derby - My Response
Dear Ms. Gloger,
I have been wondering why the JC campaign against the BNP on behalf of
Searchlight run by a convicted criminal with links to terrorist groups who
have used physical violence against our members, but the JC have not ever
campaigned against the Respect Party which is an organisation whose
membership comprises of anti-Semitic Islamists and anti-Semitic Stalinists ?
As the CST states in its report on anti-Semitism in the UK that the vast
majority of attacks on Jews are perpetrated by Islamist Muslims and
Leftists, then this begs the question - to what agenda are the JC really
operating ?
Is it because the JC are propagandising the bogus issue of 'BNP
anti-Semitism' in order to deceive the Jewish community and thereby support
the Labour Party in elections and undermine the BNP vote ?
If the intent of the JC was to prevent anti-semitic attacks then why does
the JC not campaign to deal with the real Islamist and Leftist threat
affecting the Jewish community by telling the truth about the real attackers
of the Jewish community to their readers, and target groups like Respect
instead of the BNP ?
I believe it is because the JC has become a racist organisation. It appears
for the JC that it is acceptable that the Jewish community, and all other
ethnic communities in the country, are encouraged to organise politically,
culturally, economically and socially to represent their interests as a
community - but for the indigenous people of the country when they do the
same we are slandered as 'racists' and 'extremists'
Is this not a racist position for the JC to adopt - to demand that only the
indigenous peoples of Britain have no groups or organisations that
articulate their community interests in the multi-cultural system ?
Are we supposed to just sit back and watch as our country, culture,
traditions, heritage and way of life are submerged beneath a tide of mass
immigration, political correctness and ethnic lobby groups who use the law
to promote their individual minority ethnic interests above our interests
and the interests of the ethnic majority ?
To benefit as a community from the principle of ethno-centric communalism
in the multi-cultural system whilst only denying one group in the country
the same rights you yourself as a community claim, exploit and take for
granted is racist - the JC support the right of Jewish citizens in Israel
who wish Israel to remain a nation with a Jewish ethos, so then why do the
JC denigrate the indigenous British people who wish their nation to remain a
nation with a British ethos ?
I believe the Jewish community in Britain have been betrayed by their so
called community leaders.
Those leaders have been complicit in supporting the political parties that
have allowed the most dangerous ideology in human history, that of radical
Islamism, to enter and infect our nation.
By about 2040 when the demographic growth of the Islamists in the UK has
reached the point where the appeasers in the government cannot contain via
the police those Islamists who are determined to support the creation of
Sharia Zones through military force in our cities then the nightmare will
begin ;
First they will come for the Jews, their oldest enemy
Then they will come for the British Nationalists, for they are the only ones
who could organise the final resistance to their takeover
Then they will come for the Liberals, who wrung their hands but did nothing
as the threat grew
Then finally they will impose their will under the shadow of the sword
across the whole of this nation,
And on that day any Jews and British Nationalists that still remain in the
country and who have not fled to Israel (if it still exists and has not
become an irradiated crater courtesy of Iran) or Australia, will find
themselves forced to share each others company forever by the Islamists -
either hanging from the lamposts of our cities or paying the Jizya.
It is an historical inveitability that at some point the Jewish community
will reject those fools and charlatans that have so misled them for decades
and they will become the most active supporters of the BNP. This is because
we both share the burden of the undying hatred of the same mortal enemy.
Only fools cast stones at sheep when the wolf is at their door.
L. J. Barnes
> Hi Mr Barnes,
>
> Thanks for your email.
> I'm afraid I would not be in a position to make any official comment on
> behalf of the JC, given that I am a reporter, and not an editor or
> spokesperson.
>
> The reason I was asking for your comments, was in order to give you
> every opportunity to have your say.
>
> Many thanks again,
>
> Dana Gloger
> Reporter
> Jewish Chronicle
> 25 Furnival Street
> London EC4A 1JT
Hi Dana,
Would it be possible to ask the editor or the owners of the paper why they
are misleading the Jewish community about the real nature of the threats
they are facing from Islamo-Fascism and Far Left anti-Semitism and why they
are instead propagandising and peddling the bogus threat of the BNP to their
readers ?
Could you also ask them why he has adopted the explicitly racist position of
only targeting the indigenous British community with a JC sponsored
Searchlight hate campaign designed to subvert the democratic political
process when they alone seek to organise to represent their community
interests and protect their British way of life ?
Also wow much money has the Labour Party spent on advertising in your paper
over the years ;
A Labour campaign advert in the Jewish Chronicle boasted:
Since 1997 a record 57 Labour MPs have visited Israel, mostly with
Labour Friends of Israel, swelling the number of MPS willing to ensure
balance on the Middle East in the House of Commons. More Labour MPs have
visited Israel than from any other party.
The advert also boasted that the new Terrorism Act of 2000 - for which
LFI actively lobbied - "proscribes terrorist organizations like Hamas,
Hizbollah and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Predictably enough there was no
mention of the mutli-million pound military aid to Israel's occupying
forces.
Some of the MPs, who had their trips to Israel sponsored by LFI in recent
years include Ivor Caplin, Paul Clark, Oona King, Ashok Kumar, Ivan Lewis,
Anne McGuire, Rosemary McKenna, Margaret Moran, Jim Murphy, Sandra Osborne,
Gareth Thomas, Frank Roy, Joan Ryan, Angela Smith, Graham Stringer, Rudi
Vis, David Watts, Gillian Merron, Peter Pike, Lorna Fitzsimons, Louise
Ellman, Caroline Flint, Linda Perham, Douglas Alexander, Fabian Hamilton,
Anthony Colman, Dan Norris, Andy Burnham, David Cairns, Tony Cunningham,
Eric Joyce, Huw Irranca-Davies, David Wayne, Parmjit Dhanda, Meg Munn, Mike
Gapes, Stephen Twigg and Andrew Dismore. Former MI6 officer and member of
the House of Lords Baroness Margaret Ramsay has also been on LFI sponsored
trips.
The reason I was asking for your answers to these questions, was in order to
give you every opportunity to have your say.
Also has David Rowan the editor of the JC now stopped accusing those who are not zionists in the Labour Party such as Tam Dalyell,
David Tredinnick and Richard Ingrams of anti-Semitism as he did here ;
Once again, a Jewish financier is cast as the villain of the piece
No, of course anti-Semitism is not what is driving the cash-for-honours
inquiry. Serious allegations merit thorough police investigation, however
awkward that is proving for Lord Levy and the many anxious Jewish charities
with which he is associated. But what is disturbing Jewish Chronicle readers
is the all-too-familiar role he is being assigned in the swirl of
unattributable briefings and nudge-nudge language. How very convenient for
No. 10 and its friends in the press if Levy can be scapegoated as the
traditional outsider-turned-court-Jew whose casting-out might finally purge
the corrupt body politic.
So it is of deep concern to the Jewish community - among his friends and
detractors alike - that Levy is clearly being lined up as the convenient
personification of the financial lust that has so polluted the New Labour
project. Yet it is just too neat for those wielding genuine political power
to assume their well-practised role of pointing fingers at the upstart
Jewish money man. The unashamedly anti-Semitic and conspiratorial rhetoric
surrounding him has long been self-evident. Levy was one of Tam Dalyell MP's
"cabal of Jewish advisers" driving foreign policy, whose personal influence
on the Prime Minister "led to what I see as this awful war [in Iraq]". Levy,
according to David Tredinnick MP, raised cash for Blair on the "tacit
understanding that Labour would never again, while Blair was leader, be
anti-Israel". Levy, wrote Richard Ingrams in this very newspaper, is "an
active Zionist well known in Israel" whose malign influence has ensured that
"this country is so craven in its support of Israel and the United States".
(The Independent, 10 March 2007)
It seems that the JC seems desperate to accuse everyone of anti-Semitism
except it appears for the actual anti-semites who are targeting the Jewish
community !
How strange.
L. J. Barnes
The Jewish Chronicle is a racist organisation. It demands that the only people in Britain who be prohibited from organising to protect and represent their community interests in the political, cultural, social and economic sphere of our multi-cultural society are the indigenous British people.
It appears that for organisations like the Jewish Chronicle the principle of universality that should apply to equal rights, and also the right to organise as a community in the Multi-Cultural system, applies only to ethnic minority groups like themselves and that the rights and interests of the ethnic majority must never be allowed to exist within the system of multi-culturalism.
This is clearly a racist position, for in effect it demands the exclusion of only one community, that of the indigenous British, from organising as a community to protect their interests within British society.
It appears that for groups like the Jewish Chroncile the indigenous British people must be like the indigenous Native American people and we must live on our reservations and keep quiet as we fade away quietly into extinction.
And so it has been. There is not one single charity in the country for the Indigenous British people, not one community centre for our people whilst their are thousands of ethno-specific community centres for every other ethnic minority groups, not one organisation to represent us legally as an ethnic community, we have no communiy leaders feted by the police and asked to sit on government task forces to assist our community and no public funds awarded to groups that represent the interests of our people.
Instead we have had our communities torn apart whilst every ethnic minority community group has been funded by our taxes. Whilst the government plans to shut down local village schools, local posts offices, sell of our kids playing fields, shut down youth clubs in our towns and villages and in effect destroy all those community structures that knit our community together - all other ethnic groups in the country have been funded by the state to create ethno-centric communal structures in the name of multi-culturalism.
The Jewish Chronicle is a perfect example of this. A newsaper that seeks to give a voice to the Jewish people in Britain, but at the same time campaigns to silence the voice of the indigenous British people.
A recent Newsnight poll stated that 58 % of the white working class felt no-one spoke for them and their interests in todays Britain.
In the same poll 77 % of white British people felt that they could not criticise immigration without being called racist.
The climate of fear engendered by multi-culturalism, and those that have exploited it in order to benefit themselves (even at the expense of their own ethnic community like the Jewish Chronicle), has resulted in our community becoming vioceless and impotent.
This was not an 'accident' of the process of multi-culturalism, instead the whole process of multi-culturalism demanded that the indigenous British people be terrified into silence by the word 'racist' as their country was stolen way from them. Those that dared speak out against the process, unless they are dressed in the robes and ermine of the House Of Lords, were villified, abused, hounded and sacked from their jobs in racist pogroms directed only against those in the indigenous British community that spoke up for their people.
And as we have also seen, the moment that the indigenous British people have begun to wak up, demand their voice in our own country and started to vote en mass for a party that represents their interests - then all those who have exploited multi-culturalism for themseves and their own communities have opened fire on the BNP for giving our people a voice.
Below is an exchange of e mails with the Jewish Chronicle.
Note that with the typical arrogance of the multi-cultural fascists that feed primarily off their own community and who seek to deny others the same rights as them in the multi-cultural process they did not deign to answer any of my specific questions about their racism and incompetence ;
Dear Simon, Thanks for your time just now. Please find attached a file in which I have copied some statements made by Mr Barnes in various posts on his personal blog. The last entry is one in which he professes that the BNP is not a racist party. With particular regard to the article on the Jewish Chronicle and its employees, on whatgrounds does Mr Barnes make his comments about employees of the paper, such as that we are, in his words, "funders of terrorism" and that our relatives fight in the IDF? If he could also address the other entries I have copied into the attachment that would be great. thanks indeed. Please find my direct line below, should there be any queries.Thanks again,Dana Gloger Reporter Jewish Chronicle 25 Furnival Street London EC4A 1JTDL: ------- End of forwarded message -------
Dear Ms. Gloger,
Thank you for your inquiry. I have answered the questions you listed on your
e mail, though I cannot open up the documents you attached to your e mail as
I do not open attachments on e mails for obvious security reasons.
Any further questions you have please get in touch.
(1) The Jewish Chronicle has been involved with the Searchlight organisation
in its anti-BNP campaigning activities for decades. Searchlight is an
organisation based on the principle of hounding and terrorising members of
British Nationalist parties into leaving politics and is run by a convicted
criminal, Gerry Gable, who has direct links with terrorist organisations
such as Anti-Fascist Action and Red Action who have targeted and physically
attacked BNP members. Searchlight activities and hounding of individual
nationalists have caused many BNP members to lose their jobs, homes and
pensions. Your support for this Searchlight campaign through your
advertising the anti-BNP propaganda peddled by Searchlight in your newspaper
is the direct subsidising of an organisation that we consider is an unlawful
terrorist organisation, and one that we intend to proscribe when we come to
power as an hostile agent of a foreign state. Advertising in your paper
costs money. The Jewish Chronicle has been a long time associate,
propagandist and supporter of Gerry Gable and Searchlight, and are therefore
complicit in the actions of Mr. Gable and the organisations he is linked
too.
http://www.thejc.com/home.aspx?ParentId=m11&SecId=11&AId=58867&ATypeId=1
Your paper is also linked with the Board of Deputies of British Jews who
offer unconditional loyalty to the principle of Israel and Zionism and who
have attacked the BNP many times. The BOD just like Searchlight and the
Community Security Trust also collects, stores and passes on information it
collects on Nationalists and others to harass and intimidate those people
its perceives as its opponents including BNP members and officials.
Even the UAF regards Searchlight as a Zionist Front Group ;
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/07/316360.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/07/318329.html
http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=146
2) Family members of Mr. Gerry Gable have served in the IDF. I am sure that
many members of the families of staff of the Jewish Chronicle and their
extended families have also served in the IDF. Many Zionist Jews in Britain
leave the UK to serve in the IDF every year.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/23/israel
http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/sept2007/children_fight.html
The New Statesman has also compared IDF training of British citizens to
terrorism ;
http://jewishbreakingnews.blogspot.com/2007/09/british-jews-condemn-new-statesman.html
As David Aaronovitch wrote in The Times Online on September 22, 2006 ;
Therefore, I wouldn't join such an organisation. Neither would I join the
Israeli Army. That's for Israelis to do. I only say this because a girl who
went to school with my 16-year-old daughter - a lovely, clever young woman -
apparently wants, having visited Israel, to serve with the IDF for a year or
two.
I expressed amazement at this to a couple of friends, one of whom lights the
candles, says the words and maintains contact with the family ghosts, and
that's more or less it. When we discussed the military thing, he sort of
said, "The Israeli army, what could be more natural?" To which I replied,
"The British army?"
http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/2006/09/jews_for_justic.html
(3) Zionism is defined as Racism by the UN.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism_and_racism_allegations# The_claim_that_Zionism_is_racism
In November 1975, the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379 declared that "Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination. "In December 1991, the General Assembly rescinded this resolution throughResolution 4686. At the time, the Soviet Union, a major sponsor of the "Zionism is racism" doctrine (see Zionology), had completed its rapid collapse. Israel made revocation of resolution 3379 a condition of its participation in the Madrid Peace Conference. The Madrid Conference was hosted by the government of Spain and co-sponsored by the USA and the USSR. It convened on October 30, 1991 and lasted for three days. It was an early attempt by the international community to start a peace process through negotiations involving Israel and the Arab countries including Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and the Palestinians.
In the aftermath of the 1991 Gulf War, US President George H.W. Bush and his Secretary of State James Baker formulated the framework of objectives, and together with the Soviet Union extended a letter of invitation, dated October 30, 1991 to Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and the Palestinians. Therefore the revocation of the 1975 definition of Zionism was based solely on political considerations relating to the formation of that (failed) conference and therefore did not relate to any re-definition of Zionism as not being racist. Zionism is clearly racist. The UN resolution did not rehabilitate Zionism, it merely dropped the first resolution in order to get Israel into the conference.
The BNP accept the right of Israel as a nation to exist and also supportits right to defend itself as it sees fit from all internal and externalthreats to its National Security. We admire the ethno-centric communalism ofthe Jewish peoples and also the national spirit that allowed them to rebuildIsrael after it had ceased to exist for 2000 years. I personally am frequently attacked by anti-semitic Neo-Nazis for my supportof Israel as a nation, almost as much as I am called an Nazi extremist by the Zionist media such as Searchlight - as a cursory internet search will reveal.
We do not accept that British citizens may be allowed to organise to place the interests of Israel before those of Britain and nor do we accept that British citizens may fight for and wear the uniform of a foreign state. Those that leave the UK to fight for Israel, the Taliban or Islam should forfeit their British citizenship rights. We are not anti-Israel nor anti-semitic but neither are we philo-semitic. We serve only the interests of our people and national community.
Neither are we anti-Muslim or anti-Islam. We are as much anti-Zionist as we are anti-Jihadist. Those whose primary loyalty is to Great Britain regardless of their race,religion or creed need not worry about the BNP getting into power. All those present within our national borders that regard the UK simply as a base to serve the interests of a foreign power or their particular religion, and who also actively work to undermine our national interests, would not be tolerated once we got into power.
Zionist extremists both inside and outside Israel, and also the Christian Zionists in the US who work to use its foreign policy to benefit Israel, we regard as threats to world peace.The power of pro-Israeli lobby groups comprised of Zionist political fanatics and also Zionist Christian Fundamentalists must be curbed and their ability to influence both our domestic and foreign policy ended. These Zionist lobby and media groups are as much a threat to the UK as the Saudi Arabian Wahhabist lobby groups and media organisations that seek toinfluence our domestic and foreign policies for their benefit and that also seek to influence the domestic and foreign policies of our internationalallies such as the US.
Any organisation that puts the interests of a foreign nation or the interests of their religion before the interests of the British people and the British nation must be regarded as a threat to the security of the British state.
It was an alliance of Christian Zionists, the Pro-Israel Zionists and the Saudi Arabian Wahhabists that all pushed for the Iraq War and the removal of Saddam Hussein. Without these groups giving their explicit backing to the Iraq War then it would not have happened. We believe that British Jews have been betrayed by the self appointed community representatives who have spoken in their name over the last five decades. These organisations have all supported Multi-Culturalism, Mass Immigration, the de-culturalisation of the indigenous British people, the Islamisation of British society, the racist policies of the Israeli government against the indigenous Palestinian peoples and also the Iraq War.
These groups have also facilitated the Islamisation of our society by aligning themselves with organisations such as the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain and at the same time have fought against the indigenous British community organising to protect and represent politically ourcommunity interests in the multi-cultural system. We believe that the people who have been running, and who still are running,the so called 'Jewish community groups' in Britain have only been looking after either themselves or the interests of Israel. The last thing they have been looking after is the interests of individual Jews and the British Jewish community. Race and faith attacks against Jews are at an all time high, but are not being perpetrated by the BNP , but simply by either Muslims or activists of the Far Left.
The recent CST report on attacks on Jews reveals the fiction of a threat to Jews from the BNP. The constant lie that the Jewish community in Britain is threatened by the BNP is promulgated only by those who are complicit in the decades long exploitation of the British Jewish community for their own sectarian interests. It is time the British Jewish community rejected the self appointed fools and charlatans that have led them and us into clear and present danger, and realise that the BNP and the British Jewish community now need each other if both of our communities are going to survive the threat that radical Islam offers to future generations of our children and grandchildren.
L.J. Barnes
(2) > Dear Mr Barnes,
>
> Many thanks indeed for your response.
>
> Below I have pasted what is in the document I had attached to the
> original email, in case you want to comment on this. They are some of
> your posts from your blog.
>
> Many thanks indeed.
>
> Pasted below:
>
> March 21 2008
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dana Gloger" <
To: "lee barnes" <>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: RE: (Fwd) FAO Simon Derby - My Response
Dear Ms. Gloger,
I have been wondering why the JC campaign against the BNP on behalf of
Searchlight run by a convicted criminal with links to terrorist groups who
have used physical violence against our members, but the JC have not ever
campaigned against the Respect Party which is an organisation whose
membership comprises of anti-Semitic Islamists and anti-Semitic Stalinists ?
As the CST states in its report on anti-Semitism in the UK that the vast
majority of attacks on Jews are perpetrated by Islamist Muslims and
Leftists, then this begs the question - to what agenda are the JC really
operating ?
Is it because the JC are propagandising the bogus issue of 'BNP
anti-Semitism' in order to deceive the Jewish community and thereby support
the Labour Party in elections and undermine the BNP vote ?
If the intent of the JC was to prevent anti-semitic attacks then why does
the JC not campaign to deal with the real Islamist and Leftist threat
affecting the Jewish community by telling the truth about the real attackers
of the Jewish community to their readers, and target groups like Respect
instead of the BNP ?
I believe it is because the JC has become a racist organisation. It appears
for the JC that it is acceptable that the Jewish community, and all other
ethnic communities in the country, are encouraged to organise politically,
culturally, economically and socially to represent their interests as a
community - but for the indigenous people of the country when they do the
same we are slandered as 'racists' and 'extremists'
Is this not a racist position for the JC to adopt - to demand that only the
indigenous peoples of Britain have no groups or organisations that
articulate their community interests in the multi-cultural system ?
Are we supposed to just sit back and watch as our country, culture,
traditions, heritage and way of life are submerged beneath a tide of mass
immigration, political correctness and ethnic lobby groups who use the law
to promote their individual minority ethnic interests above our interests
and the interests of the ethnic majority ?
To benefit as a community from the principle of ethno-centric communalism
in the multi-cultural system whilst only denying one group in the country
the same rights you yourself as a community claim, exploit and take for
granted is racist - the JC support the right of Jewish citizens in Israel
who wish Israel to remain a nation with a Jewish ethos, so then why do the
JC denigrate the indigenous British people who wish their nation to remain a
nation with a British ethos ?
I believe the Jewish community in Britain have been betrayed by their so
called community leaders.
Those leaders have been complicit in supporting the political parties that
have allowed the most dangerous ideology in human history, that of radical
Islamism, to enter and infect our nation.
By about 2040 when the demographic growth of the Islamists in the UK has
reached the point where the appeasers in the government cannot contain via
the police those Islamists who are determined to support the creation of
Sharia Zones through military force in our cities then the nightmare will
begin ;
First they will come for the Jews, their oldest enemy
Then they will come for the British Nationalists, for they are the only ones
who could organise the final resistance to their takeover
Then they will come for the Liberals, who wrung their hands but did nothing
as the threat grew
Then finally they will impose their will under the shadow of the sword
across the whole of this nation,
And on that day any Jews and British Nationalists that still remain in the
country and who have not fled to Israel (if it still exists and has not
become an irradiated crater courtesy of Iran) or Australia, will find
themselves forced to share each others company forever by the Islamists -
either hanging from the lamposts of our cities or paying the Jizya.
It is an historical inveitability that at some point the Jewish community
will reject those fools and charlatans that have so misled them for decades
and they will become the most active supporters of the BNP. This is because
we both share the burden of the undying hatred of the same mortal enemy.
Only fools cast stones at sheep when the wolf is at their door.
L. J. Barnes
> Hi Mr Barnes,
>
> Thanks for your email.
> I'm afraid I would not be in a position to make any official comment on
> behalf of the JC, given that I am a reporter, and not an editor or
> spokesperson.
>
> The reason I was asking for your comments, was in order to give you
> every opportunity to have your say.
>
> Many thanks again,
>
> Dana Gloger
> Reporter
> Jewish Chronicle
> 25 Furnival Street
> London EC4A 1JT
Hi Dana,
Would it be possible to ask the editor or the owners of the paper why they
are misleading the Jewish community about the real nature of the threats
they are facing from Islamo-Fascism and Far Left anti-Semitism and why they
are instead propagandising and peddling the bogus threat of the BNP to their
readers ?
Could you also ask them why he has adopted the explicitly racist position of
only targeting the indigenous British community with a JC sponsored
Searchlight hate campaign designed to subvert the democratic political
process when they alone seek to organise to represent their community
interests and protect their British way of life ?
Also wow much money has the Labour Party spent on advertising in your paper
over the years ;
A Labour campaign advert in the Jewish Chronicle boasted:
Since 1997 a record 57 Labour MPs have visited Israel, mostly with
Labour Friends of Israel, swelling the number of MPS willing to ensure
balance on the Middle East in the House of Commons. More Labour MPs have
visited Israel than from any other party.
The advert also boasted that the new Terrorism Act of 2000 - for which
LFI actively lobbied - "proscribes terrorist organizations like Hamas,
Hizbollah and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Predictably enough there was no
mention of the mutli-million pound military aid to Israel's occupying
forces.
Some of the MPs, who had their trips to Israel sponsored by LFI in recent
years include Ivor Caplin, Paul Clark, Oona King, Ashok Kumar, Ivan Lewis,
Anne McGuire, Rosemary McKenna, Margaret Moran, Jim Murphy, Sandra Osborne,
Gareth Thomas, Frank Roy, Joan Ryan, Angela Smith, Graham Stringer, Rudi
Vis, David Watts, Gillian Merron, Peter Pike, Lorna Fitzsimons, Louise
Ellman, Caroline Flint, Linda Perham, Douglas Alexander, Fabian Hamilton,
Anthony Colman, Dan Norris, Andy Burnham, David Cairns, Tony Cunningham,
Eric Joyce, Huw Irranca-Davies, David Wayne, Parmjit Dhanda, Meg Munn, Mike
Gapes, Stephen Twigg and Andrew Dismore. Former MI6 officer and member of
the House of Lords Baroness Margaret Ramsay has also been on LFI sponsored
trips.
The reason I was asking for your answers to these questions, was in order to
give you every opportunity to have your say.
Also has David Rowan the editor of the JC now stopped accusing those who are not zionists in the Labour Party such as Tam Dalyell,
David Tredinnick and Richard Ingrams of anti-Semitism as he did here ;
Once again, a Jewish financier is cast as the villain of the piece
No, of course anti-Semitism is not what is driving the cash-for-honours
inquiry. Serious allegations merit thorough police investigation, however
awkward that is proving for Lord Levy and the many anxious Jewish charities
with which he is associated. But what is disturbing Jewish Chronicle readers
is the all-too-familiar role he is being assigned in the swirl of
unattributable briefings and nudge-nudge language. How very convenient for
No. 10 and its friends in the press if Levy can be scapegoated as the
traditional outsider-turned-court-Jew whose casting-out might finally purge
the corrupt body politic.
So it is of deep concern to the Jewish community - among his friends and
detractors alike - that Levy is clearly being lined up as the convenient
personification of the financial lust that has so polluted the New Labour
project. Yet it is just too neat for those wielding genuine political power
to assume their well-practised role of pointing fingers at the upstart
Jewish money man. The unashamedly anti-Semitic and conspiratorial rhetoric
surrounding him has long been self-evident. Levy was one of Tam Dalyell MP's
"cabal of Jewish advisers" driving foreign policy, whose personal influence
on the Prime Minister "led to what I see as this awful war [in Iraq]". Levy,
according to David Tredinnick MP, raised cash for Blair on the "tacit
understanding that Labour would never again, while Blair was leader, be
anti-Israel". Levy, wrote Richard Ingrams in this very newspaper, is "an
active Zionist well known in Israel" whose malign influence has ensured that
"this country is so craven in its support of Israel and the United States".
(The Independent, 10 March 2007)
It seems that the JC seems desperate to accuse everyone of anti-Semitism
except it appears for the actual anti-semites who are targeting the Jewish
community !
How strange.
L. J. Barnes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
