Nick Griffin's European Office Questioning Jose Manuel Barroso on his Maoist past

Questioning Barroso on his Maoist past

  Martin Wingfield Nick Griffin MEP Euro News

 NOVEMBER 2010: WHEN Nick Griffin's European Office submitted a Written Question to the European Commission concerning Commission staff with Marxist affiliations, the reply came back from none other than the President of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, himself.

 He said:
"The Honourable Member asks about possible political affiliations of the Commissioners and their support staff in the past.
"According to the Code of Conduct for Commissioners, the Members of the Commission may be active members of political parties. This also applies to officials pursuant to Article 1d(1) of the Staff Regulations. In both cases, they must act solely in the interests of the Union when performing their duties within the Commission.
"It is not the Commission’s task to check or evaluate the political affiliations of Commissioners or officials."
According to political researcher Andrew Moffatt, the reply didn't answer the question so he penned another series of questions to Mr Barroso in an effort to pin the President of the European Commission down and to give a more revealing answer.
Andrew wrote:
"I refer to your reply E8354/10EN.
Given the Commission does not consider the extremist, totalitarian political affiliations of unelected Commissioners and officials - who initiate legislation - to be of significance to the people they govern, kindly advise in specific regard to Commissioner Barroso:
1  For what duration was he a member of a Maoist party?
2  Whether, given the elimination of between 60m-100m persons in Maoist China, Mr Barroso will condemn Maoism?
3  Whether Mr Barroso has ever expressed regret for his past affiliations, which many persons will consider to have been distasteful in the extreme?
4  Whether Mr Barroso will apologise to the people of both Europe and China for his previous membership of such an organisation and, if not, why not?
5  Whether Mr Barroso considers his previous affiliations an error of judgement.?
6  Whether Mr Barroso will condemn, outright, both the organisation to which he was affiliated and its policies?"
The reply from the President of the European Commission will be published on this website  http://www.nickgriffinmep.eu/ when it is received.

"Look, Bolton it's getting warmer every day!"

"Look, it's getting warmer every day!"

 By  Nick Griffin at Nick Griffin MEP Euro News

 NOVEMBER 2010: THIS was a speech I made yesterday in the European Parliament in Strasbourg concerning the next Climate Change Summit in Cancun (right).


 Last year I attended COP15 in Copenhagen, but this time the number of places available for my Environmental Committee have been reduced in what appears to be a deliberate move to exclude me, and my global warming scepticism, from the conference.
This is what I told my fellow MEPs, and it certainly caused upset amongst some of them.
"Choosing sunny Mexico for COP16 was a good move. We should be spared a repeat of last year´s embarrassment, when global warmists shivered in the coldest Copenhagen December for decades.
Likewise, using the deceitfully ambiguous term 'climate change' rather than 'global warming' may blind a few British taxpapers to the irony of holding it just as an unusually cold summer and autumn give way to an early, icy winter. An even better trick would be to hold these events only in the spring - "look, it's getting warmer every day!"
How much longer can the fascistic EU impose ever more punitive taxes and controls on ordinary citizens on the pretext of man-made global warming, when an ever-increasing number of real scientists are rejecting the theory as unfounded and demolished?
AGW is baseless propaganda, a Joseph Goebbels-scale Big Lie from the Green-Industrial complex because they favour massive transfer of wealth from the ´little people´ to carbon trading crooks such as Al Gore and Goldman Sachs.
And it is being exploited by leftist political elites to complete the deindustrialisation of the West, because spineless Conservatives are too brow-beaten by global warming hysteria to stand up and tell the really Inconvenient Truth: Man-made climate change is the most profitable con-trick in history.
This year´s Bilderberg Conference, held in Spain in June, included a session on the dangers of global COOLING. When will the new realism of the people who really shape global politics  creep in here, among the people who merely think they should?"

Million in Foreign Aid to China,£1.2 Million on Hotels for Climate Change talks ,yet British Troops Christmas Dinners Cancelled

£40.2 Million in Foreign Aid to China, £1.2 Million on Hotels for Climate Change, But British Army’s Christmas Dinners Cancelled

The British National Party National Newsroom

The British government spends £40.2 million per year on foreign aid to China, and has spent £1.2 million on “climate change” talks since the election — but now has ordered the army to cancel Christmas dinner for the troops because of “budget cuts.”

The Army is given £30 per soldier for “festive allowance” which is traditionally spent on a Christmas dinner for all serving troops.

As of April 2010, the British Army employed 113,970 regular soldiers, which means that the total allowance would total £3.4 million.

Now, however, a Ministry of Defence order, leaked in a daily newspaper, pert, written by Peter Whitehead, deputy head of the MoD's Financial Management Policy and Development, has said that “It is improper to spend taxpayers' funds on Christmas trees, decorations, carol concerts or parties.”

The order continues: “Team-building or unit cohesiveness events during Christmas would be viewed by taxpayers as partying at their expense and must be avoided” and adds, significantly, that “As always, we want to ensure that the Department does all it can to avoid any adverse Parliamentary or media attention on this topic.”

Meanwhile, the taxpayer has just handed over £40.2 million in foreign aid to China, one of the world’s largest economies and which now manufactures almost every consumer item in British shops.

According to the Department for International Development, this £40.2 million is allocated to “education, growth, water and sanitation, environment, humanitarian assistance, governance, research and other social services.”

In addition, the ConDem regime has spent more than £1.2 million on “international climate change talks” since the election.

The most includes £41,800 on hotel accommodation for a meeting in Bonn, and £17,800 for a meeting at the luxury Hotel Fira Palace in Barcelona in May.

Meanwhile, British soldiers, ordered to fight and die for the ConDem and labour’s illegal foreign wars, have had their £30 per head Christmas dinner cancelled.

So it is with the Westminster parties, always putting the British people last.

The British National Party is the only party to have called for an immediate halt to the “foreign aid” swindle.

The total budget for this racket will soon be close to £13 billion which British taxpayers can ill-afford and which should either be cut completely from the budget or be reallocated to provide services to British people.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs of the british National Party Website

More "Supposed Benefits" of the Tory/Labour Privatisation Racket

More "Benefits" of the Tory/Labour Privatisation Racket

BNP National Newsroom 

Hot on the heels of the news of the £8 billion stumped up by taxpayers to buy new stock for the “privatised” railways, comes news that the privately-owned energy suppliers have reported record profits as millions of Britons slump into fuel poverty.

The rampant profits generated by the Tory and Labour party-supported privatisation of the energy industry has risen by 38 percent over the last financial year.

According to a report by the taxpayer-funded watchdog Ofgem, the average margin on a standard dual-fuel tariff had risen from £65 to £90 since September.

Most energy suppliers, including British Gas, Scottish & Southern and Scottish Power, have recently increased their prices to consumers once again after claiming that prices in the “energy wholesale market” (wherever that might be) left them with no choice.

Ofgem's chief executive Alistair Buchanan was quoted in media reports as saying that he wanted to “make sure [energy] firms were playing it straight with customers.”

Ofgem, set up by the government to monitor the energy market after its privatisation, will now launch an investigation into the accounts to the energy companies to determine if there has been excessive profiteering.

One of the biggest problems facing the energy industry, just like with the privatised rail network, is capital investment.

Only a tiny amount of £200 billion infrastructure investment which is needed before 2020 to meet current demands has been made so far.

Their obligations to shareholders, which has driven profit before investment, has meant that most of the companies simply do not have the cash reserves available to make the investments which are needed to literally keep the lights on.

Earlier this year, Ofgem even drew up proposals which would in effect lead to the renationalisation of major parts of the energy industry so that Britain would be able to provide for the projected increased demand.

Then, Mr Buchanan (previously an enthusiastic supporter of privatisation, told the media, that “"We live in a different energy world" and that he had “revised his view on the market's ability to deliver the investment required.”

Media reports went on to quote Professor Dieter Helm, an expert in the economics of energy at the University of Oxford, as saying that it was an “extraordinary volte-face to admit that a liberalised market won't achieve its objectives. They have argued against intervention and said markets would engage with the issue of security of supply. The irony is incredible."

The revised Ofgem position was a realistic assessment that Britain will suffer power shortages from 2015 onwards unless the way energy companies operate is overhauled. Large investments are needed to repaly old coal and nuclear power plants which are due to be closed down, and North Sea gas reserves are also dwindling, making Britain more dependent on imports.

Mr Buchanan said there was a "two-year" window in which to act, otherwise consumer bills would have to rise steeply to pay for the last-minute investment needed to maintain energy supplies. "Crisis tactics will be paid for by the consumer," he was quoted as saying.

Ofgem’s proposal is to create a new state-owned central energy buyer, identical to the old Central Electricity Generating Board, which would require power plants to sell it electricity at fixed rates, which it would sell on to customers.

This plan would ensure that the "Big Six" energy companies — Centrica, E.ON, npower, Scottish and Southern, Scottish Power and EDF — who own most of the UK's power plants, would not be able to profit take to the consumer’s disadvantage.

(The irony of EDF’s ownership of part of the UK’s energy industry is made even more bizarre by the fact that it is in fact the French state-owned power supply company. No-one has yet been able to explain why it is bad for the British state to own the energy supply industry in Britain, but it is perfectly acceptable for the French state to own it).

Ofgem’s proposals have, of course, been ignored by the ConDem government, which still clings fanatically to the Thatcherite vision of letting profit come before infrastructure or the interests of the state.

The British National Party is all in favour of private enterprise and privatisation where clear benefits can be shown to the consumer. However, where it is clear that this process has been detrimental to the consumers, there is no justification to continue with that policy and it must be reversed.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs of the british naytional Party website

Hypocrisy of the State Would Someone be Arrested for Burning a Bible?

Would Someone be Arrested for Burning a Bible?

The British National Party Newsroom

The arrest of a 15-year old girl for burning a Koran and putting a video of it on Facebook — an act which is doubtless reprehensible — has however raised the obvious question: would someone be arrested for burning a bible?

As appalling as the answer to that question may be, it is of course a resounding ‘no.’

The Sandwell, Birmingham, girl was questioned and bailed by detectives on suspicion of “inciting religious hatred” after the Facebook entry appeared.

The video, made two weeks ago on her school premises, has since been removed by police request from Facebook and reported to the school in question.

According to reports, a 14-year-old boy has also been arrested on “suspicion of making threats.”

While the British National Party accepts that the Koran is full of unbridled hate against non-Muslims, and in fact tells its followers to enforce its dictates by violence, burning books is a medieval mentality.

However, the obvious discrepancy in treatment by the state between the defilement of Islamic holy books and the Christian Bible has made the establishment’s bias very clear.

For example, in 2009, Glasgow City Council allowed a Bible to be defaced with obscene and offensive messages in an exhibition at the city’s Gallery of Modern Art.

No police officers were called in, and no charges were laid, despite the treatment which was clearly designed to give maximum offense to Christians.

Visitors to that exhibition were told: “If you feel you’ve been excluded from the Bible, please write your way back into it.”

A number of crude comments and angry remarks expressing hatred for the Bible’s teaching were left, and Glasgow City Council received hundreds of complaints.

Simon Calvert, of The Christian Institute, said at the time: “We all know that they wouldn’t allow that if it was the sacred text of another religion.

“That a taxpayer subsidised gallery should see fit to give space to something like that is disappointing”, he added.

In 2006 executives at the BBC admitted that they would consider broadcasting a scene where the Bible was thrown into a bin but they would never do the same with the Koran.

In fact, the Internet is full of videos of the Bible being burned, yet the politically correct police who have fallen over themselves to come to the defence of the Koran, have not bothered to get out of bed to act against any of the bible burnings.

The harsh reality stares all but the blind in the face: no-one in modern Britain has ever been arrested for burning a bible, yet the police cannot wait to arrest a kid for a Facebook video of a Koran burning.

If that does not tell the reader all he or she needs to know about the true bias of the state, then nothing will.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costsof the British National party newsroom

Third World Immigration Leads to Death Epidemic in UK and Europe

Immigration Leads to Death Epidemic in UK and Europe

  by David Hannam

The British National Party’s opposition to mass Third World immigration has been vindicated with the release of statistics which show that 63 percent of all new HIV cases in 2009 were black Africans.

In addition, the figures, released by the Health Protection Agency, also revealed that 68 percent of HIV sufferers acquired their infection abroad, mostly from sub-Saharan Africa.

According to official statistics, which the BNP disputes as inaccurate, blacks make up approximately 2 percent of the UK population.

Other statistics revealed that 42 percent of all newly diagnosed cases of HIV were a result of homosexual activity.

The Health Protection Agency estimates that around one third more people are undiagnosed. This means that if 6630 were diagnosed with having HIV during 2009, the actual figure is likely to be around 8000.

HIV/AIDS treatment costs the National Health Service (i.e. the taxpayer) £21.8 million in direct costs, which is known as the Aids Support Grant.

It is therefore inevitable that the number of Aids cases will only rise further, particularly given the recent forecast made by Oxford demography Professor David Coleman, based on Office for National Statistics reports, that Britain will be a white minority country by 2066.

In 2008, the EU Committee on Migration, Refugees and Population estimated that around 2 to 4 million Africans “emigrate” from sub-Saharan Africa every year.

According to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), 19 percent of all reported HIV infections during 2008 originated from sub-Saharan Africa.

Of the 318,233 HIV infections diagnosed in Western Europe by the end of 2008, 35 percent were contracted through homosexual activity, the ECDC figures showed.

Some 42 percent of cases were contracted through heterosexual contact. This figure actually compromises the 19 percent of infections which originated from sub-Saharan Africa. 

The BNP believes that only a complete halt, and reversal, of mass Third World immigration will halt this trend. 

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costsof the british national party Website

Why are British and Horwich homes so expensive?

Why are British homes so expensive?

Written by Finlandia

Saturday 2010

This year has seen a dramatic increase in enquiries to the Citizens' Advice Bureau and housing charities from people troubled by rent arrears, threats of foreclosure or impending homelessness, problems that look set to become more widespread as unemployment rises and government benefit cuts begin to bite. This week, the housing and homelessness charity Shelter launched an art exhibition and auction entitled 52 weeks, "to raise awareness of the thousands of families struggling to keep a roof over their heads". The exhibition/ auction features works by Sir Terence Conran (of Habitat), Sir Peter Blake (creator of the Beatles' Sgt. Pepper album cover), comedian Vic Reeves and others. Many people nowadays struggle to meet rental or mortgage payments on their homes, largely because housing in most parts of the country is more expensive than it has ever been. Economists may give complicated reasons for the high cost of British housing, but ultimately it boils down to supply and demand. The fact is that as long as the number of people seeking affordable homes to rent or buy outstrips the availability of such homes, prices will continue to spiral. As a result, many of those in private accommodation will be priced out altogether, and forced to join the five million already on social housing waiting lists. Throughout most of the post-war period, UK housing costs have risen faster than incomes, and that trend has been accelerating. People seeking homes in modern Britain are squeezed between a slowdown in construction and a rapidly rising population. Powerful groups with vested interests in maintaining the pressure include older, wealthier home owners who for years have used their collective economic and political clout to block the building of new homes, so as to sustain the (ever increasing) value of their own properties. Under bogus banners of environmental or social concern, these NIMBYs ("Not In My Back Yard") have campaigned against proposals that might threaten house prices, and have withheld support from politicians and parties who support house-building programmes. A second interest group is made up of private landlords, some of whom have exploited their freedom to extort unemployed and low-paid people, whilst paying scant attention to the quality or habitability of the accommodation they offer. (Anyone who has spent time looking for rented accommodation in one of our larger towns or cities, and seen some of the overpriced dumps that constitute the majority of private rentals at the lower end of the market, will know what I am talking about.) But most of the blame must be laid at the door of successive governments, who have known about the shortfall in affordable housing but have done little about it. They have failed to control the excesses of unscrupulous landlords, and (most deplorably) have failed to control immigration, which has increased the competition for scarce housing at the same time as depressing wages, making it doubly difficult for many British citizens to afford a decent home. The crisis in housing has hit the young  especially hard, and many young couples earning average, or below average, wages have had to put family plans on hold for years, whilst they try to obtain social housing or save a deposit for a small place of their own. The government says that it will increase the number of low-cost homes built, and that it will generate extra money for this by raising the rents of many existing tenants. However, a report by Shelter called Forgotten Households has shown that government subsidised "affordable housing" schemes have benefited developers and high-middle income earners more than people on low incomes. According to Shelter: "The average wage of households accessing low-cost home ownership is between £28,000 and £32,000, significantly higher than the national average wage of £21,700 and completely out of reach for households earning an average of just £16,000 a year." Doubtless part of the present crisis is due to social changes that have created lots of single households. But a much greater problem is that of our ever-expanding population, as was highlighted last month by London Mayor Boris Johnson: "… the population of the UK is set to rise by an incredible 10 million over the next 20 years.... Thanks very largely to Labour's deliberate failure to control immigration, and to higher birth rates, the Big Society is about to get very big indeed.... We already have huge waiting lists for social housing. On the private market the average age of a first-time buyer has now soared to 37... and we have desperate problems of overcrowding." Johnson predicts that when the economic eventually starts to recover, the housing shortage together with a rapidly rising population will cause prices to "spike more viciously than ever", leaving young people even less able to buy. He acknowledges the need "to increase the supply of affordable homes", but fails to acknowledge the other part of the equation – namely the need to stop, or at least drastically reduce, the flow of immigrants. We shouldn't be surprised at this – after all, it was Boris who only a couple of years ago called for an amnesty for the hundreds of thousands (more than a million, according to some estimates) of illegal immigrants in Britain. (Does anybody still believe that this man's buffoonish persona conceals a sharp intelligence?) Figures released this week by the Home Office show that immigrants have been taking jobs that unemployed British workers are qualified to do, providing further evidence (if it were needed) of the hollowness of economic arguments for unrestrained immigration, and of British employers' greed for cheap foreign labour. If the government were rational, it would tackle the present housing crisis first by reducing demand – in other words by halting mass immigration – before it starts covering more of our countryside with concrete. There are certain basic things that we should expect of a civilised society. They include physical security, food and clean water, and a decent home. I would say that when a government neglects its duty to secure these basics of life, then it begins to lose its claim to legitimacy.

Sajjad Karim MEP North West England and the British National Party

Sajjad Karim MEP and the BNP

Written by Green Arrow   at  the The British Resistance

November 2010

OK, I meant to write about this guy for another reason but will kill two birds with one stone.  Sajjad Karim is the Pakistani MEP for the North West of England and is in the press for reporting that he had received threats from BNP members and supporters and had BNP scrawled on his property. Now when moslems like Karim make these kind of complaints I tend to question whether the events they described really happened.  Surely we all remember when Shahid Malik was an MP and a minister in the Department for International Development, claimed on his website that he had been detained for 40 minutes or more by security officials at Dallas Airport in America.  Of course the truth was something different.  Malik did not expect the US authorities to release a video tape of the alleged incident showing that Malik was lying.  Later the statement by Malik was withdrawn by his office after the video showed it took him the normal 8 minutes to pass through airport security but he never did apologise. Then there was the moslem preacher who made a pile of money by claiming he had been abducted by the British National Party after first having BNP scrawled on his walls.  He also was lying but before being brought to justice, fled to Mauritius.  He was sentenced to one year in prison in his absence.. So you will understand if I am a little bit suspicious of the claims made by Karim, who on arriving in Europe as an MEP, helped establish the European Parliament Friends of Pakistan Group. Thought he was elected to represent the interests of British People.  Then again, blood is thicker than water as they say. Check out this story, where he is fighting for British Interests by demanding the EU continue to give Foreign Aid to Pakistan for decades. Showing who he is really frightened of, Karim is also campaigning to get the names of MP's who voted to support the illegal war in Iraq, removed from websites in case mad moslems decide to track them down and look down their necks having first removed their heads. So why does Sajjad Karim feel threatened by the BNP.  Well he fears that us infidels have taken offence over his objections in Europe to a proposal that the meat from  ritually slaughtered animals be clearly marked as being a Halal product. Of course these labels would have meant that civilised people, knowing just what "ritually slaughtered animals" means, would have avoided the meat like the plague or Toxteth on a Saturday night. Can you imagine the outcry if the EU were to say that they were going to remove the Halal labels from existing "ritually slaughtered" products?  Brussels would be burning now along with the rest of Europe. Well that is one bird.  Now for the next. Reading more about Sajjad Karim, I discover that he is a standing delegate to the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership(Barcolona Process) that is a stepping stone to the creation of Eurabia.  Check out the map. The blue is the current size of the EU.  The yellow are the planned future members of the new Eurabia. And of course once those countries shown on the map are in the enlarged EU, all their citizens will be free to head west into the civilised world to assist with the genocide of the white peoples of Western Europe.

We must protect our British industry from piratical and slave labour economies

We must protect our industry from piratical and slave labour economies

Andrew Brons Andrew Brons MEP Euro News

 NOVEMBER 2010: This was a contribution that I made yesterday under the Catch the Eye procedure to a debate in the European Parliament on the Commission Work Programme for 2011.
I told the Chamber:
"Reading the Commission Work Programme document, one principal point stands out: use of the crisis to grab power or the Commission. Objectives include:
1. co-ordination of economic and fiscal policies;
2. broader and enhanced surveillance of fiscal policies;
3. better co-ordination of macro-economic policy; and (more chillingly)
4. new enforcement mechanisms.
We have heard that these will produce, smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. However, the Commission's Europe 2020 document* was disrarmingly frank:
1. twenty-tree million unemployed;
2. a 4% fall in GDP in 2009; and
3. production back to 1990s levels.
As long as we embrace Globalism, we shall not dig ourselves out of the crisis. The Europe 2020 document refers to member states being the most innovative in the world. However, if emerging, low wage economies are able to steal inventions and innovations with impunity, innovation will not help us..
The 2020 document refers to the peoples of  Europe as talented and creative. Perhaps we should follow demographic policies that foster those talents and protect and preserve that creativity.
* the Commission Work Programme is the implementation of the first part of the Commission's 2020 document.

British National Party Councillor in Stoke-on-Trent Moves to Get Halal Meat Banned in Local Schools

BNP Councillor in Stoke-on-Trent Moves to Get Halal Meat Banned in Local Schools

The British National party Newsroom

British National Party Stoke-on-Trent councillor Michael Coleman has fired the opening round in the war against halal ritual slaughter in Britain with a motion due before his council on 9 December which, if passed, will ban that meat from being served in schools in the town.

“I have had numerous complaints from parents whose children are being fed this unfit meat and who are not being informed of how this meat is acquired,” Cllr Coleman told BNP News.

“Many of the schools which receive the meat are predominantly populated by British children, and so any claim that the authority is simply providing food for Muslim pupils is false.

“Anyway, it’s against the law to procure meat in this way and then sell on to non-Muslims, a point I will be making on the 9th December,” Cllr Coleman continued.

“I find it disgraceful that we have a law here that makes it a crime for you or I to slaughter an animal in this way but enables Muslims to kill in this inhumane way and it is legal.

“It is such legal paradox and duality that will ultimately expose this traitor regime - and will lead to the political awakening and uprising of the British people,” he said.

The exact wording of the motion due before the council is as follows:

“Notice of Motion – City Council 9th December 2010

Moved by Councillor M Coleman

Seconded by Councillor J Burgess

Animal Cruelty

This City Council condemns the cruelty suffered by animals slaughtered to provide halal meat products. Animal welfare organisations such as the Farm Animal Welfare Council, which is the independent advisory body to the government, have called for a ban on halal meat in Britain.  Animals that are not stunned before slaughter suffer incredible pain before death and the current law that permits this barbaric method of slaughter should be changed.

The City Council is asked to note that halal meat products are served in 17 city schools to unsuspecting children and parents. Halal meat products are not labelled and children (or their parents) have no idea what they are eating or provided with an alternative. This is a disgraceful practice and children and their parents should be given information and choice about the products their children are served. 

The City Council is asked to:

1. Write to the Secretary State for seeking a change in the law to minimise or prevent any further animal cruelty as a result of this barbaric method of slaughter.

2. Place an immediate ban on the use of all halal meat products in our schools, City Of Stoke-on-Trent Authority.”

According to information obtained by Cllr Coleman, the schools under the Stoke-on-Trent authority which provide halal meat to their pupils are as follows: Alexandra Junior School; Alexandra Infant School; Belgrave Primary School; Etruscan Primary School; Forest Park Primary School; John Baskeyfield Primary School; Mill Hill Primary School; St Marks Primary School; St Peters RC Primary School; Summerbank Primary School; Thomas Boughey Centre; Waterside Primary School; St Mary’s Tunstall; Birches Head High School; Brownhills High School; Haywood High School; and St Peters High School.

* Meanwhile, North West Tory Muslim MEP Sajjad Karim has run to the local media claiming that people are threatening him after he published an article on his website supporting halal slaughter and expressing his opposition to a proposed EU regulation which would force halal meat to be labelled as such.

Mr Karim, who has of course blamed the BNP for his latest woes, was quoted in the Jewish Chronicle earlier this month as saying he was ‘watching’ the BNP in Europe.

Approached by the media for comment over his latest allegations, BNP spokesman John Walker said that the “British National Party will continue to oppose halal slaughter and support the labelling of halal meat despite a hate campaign against the party launched by Mr Karim.

“Mr Karim, who put up a story on his own website outlining his support for Halal slaughter and his opposition to a new EU regulation which would force all food suppliers to label which meat had been ritually slaughtered,” said Mr Walker.

“On the basis of Mr Karim’s own website, the BNP carried a story pointing out his support for Halal slaughter. If Mr Karrim has angered animal lovers with his support for halal barbarism, it is on the basis of a story which he started on his own website and nowhere else.

“The BNP rejects with contempt all attempts by Mr Karrim to stir up trouble and slur our party,” Mr Walker said.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs