British Taxpayers Now Liable for £2 Billion of Greek Debt

Monday, 10 May 2010

British Taxpayers Now Liable for £2 Billion of Greek Debt

The proposed British share of the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) bailout of Greece has risen to nearly £2 billion, despite Britain being buried in debt due to decades of Tory and Labour mismanagement.

The £2 billion annual fee could be Britain’s pro-rata share of the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) bailout of Greece, a nation which has a deficit almost identical to that of Britain.

Originally the IMF had planned on contributing €15 billion, which would have made the UK’s share £650 million. That number was then raised to €20 billion, pushing the UK’s share up to £1 billion, and now has been raised again to €40 billion, of which the UK will have to pay £2 billion.

The collapsing 11-year-old euro fell 4.3 percent last week. In addition, spreads on Greek, Spanish and Portuguese bonds widened, further indicating a lack of confidence in the EU. European banks have suffered big losses, especially those with exposure to Greece, Portugal and Spain.

The fundamental flaw in the EU superstate is the notion that all members are economically comparable in terms of productivity, development, employment, inflation and other factors which determine overall economic performance.

Simon Tilford, chief economist at the Center for European Reform in London, said that the southern countries, meaning Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy, are so uncompetitive compared with the others, especially Germany, that there are permanent trade imbalances that will destroy the euro.

“The myth of European integration and solidarity has been exposed as wishful thinking,” said Mr Tilford.

According to researchers at Morgan Stanley, “[A] stabilisation fund is just buying time for distressed borrowers. The fiscal policy action taken in these countries during this ‘extra time’ is essential. If yet another rescue mechanism isn't followed by aggressive austerity measures, the problem just continues to fester — and could eventually spread even wider."

Professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University and New York Times columnist, Paul Krugman, explained it thus:

“During the years of easy money, wages and prices in the crisis countries rose much faster than in the rest of Europe. Now that the money is no longer rolling in, those countries need to get costs back in line.

“But that’s a much harder thing to do now than it was when each European nation had its own currency. Back then, costs could be brought in line by adjusting exchange rates — e.g., Greece could cut its wages relative to German wages simply by reducing the value of the drachma in terms of Deutsche marks. Now that Greece and Germany share the same currency, however, the only way to reduce Greek relative costs is through some combination of German inflation and Greek deflation. And since Germany won’t accept inflation, deflation it is.

“The problem is that deflation — falling wages and prices — is always and everywhere a deeply painful process. It invariably involves a prolonged slump with high unemployment. And it also aggravates debt problems, both public and private, because incomes fall while the debt burden doesn’t.

“Hence the crisis. Greece’s fiscal woes would be serious but probably manageable if the Greek economy’s prospects for the next few years looked even moderately favorable. But they don’t. Earlier this week, when it downgraded Greek debt, Standard & Poor’s suggested that the euro value of Greek G.D.P. may not return to its 2008 level until 2017, meaning that Greece has no hope of growing out of its troubles.”

Today is the 60th anniversary of the Schuman Declaration, the proposal by France’s foreign minister, Robert Schuman, to create a supranational organization of states in war-ravaged Europe, which is now celebrated as Europe Day.

While the early pact between France and Germany led to the free-trade zone known as the European Economic Community, the European Union still lacks serious economic cohesion, due to the disparity between the individual member countries.

The British National Party resolutely opposes the single European currency, supports the overwhelming majority of the British people in their desire to keep the pound and our traditional weights and measures, and would withdraw from the European Union.

British tax money should be used to rescue Britain first, and not to bail out other nations.

read more from kevin  http://kevinnmoore.blogspot.com/

Britains Wholly Corrupt Politics

Wholly Corrupt Politics

Created: Sunday, 09 May 2010 06:36 Author: rugfish |  

It's official

The UK has the most corrupt electoral system in the world

The other week I remember reading something or other about the corrupt excuse for an election we just went through being officially monitored by 'commonwealth inspectors'.
This election, which saw laughing witch Hodge elected in Barking based on the timely arrival of bins full of late delivered Labour votes via the postal system.
That is what these OFFICIAL MONITORS are talking about when they say the system in the UK is more corrupt than any other country in the world including Kenya.

They questioned the legitimacy of the result after thousands of voters were turned away from crowded polling stations. The observers were also shocked by allegations that the electoral roll was being filled out with “ghost” voters. Ababu Namwamba, an MP in Kenya, said: “The allegations of fraud and of voters being turned away threaten the integrity of the vote, especially in marginal constituencies where candidates have a majority of less than 1,000.

Many of our own candidates took notice of the bins full of Labour votes arriving at the last minute too. They knew this system was flawed and corrupt, and they knew many constituencies would be attacked by them.
Yes attacked!
For we are indeed under attack by a political elite who wishes to keep hold of the corrupt levers of power.
They will 'take all measures necessary to keep stability'.....i.e. The Status Quo where nothing changes.
These OFFICIAL INSPECTORS have openly stated the system is corrupt.
I will now state my own and others observations.
1 - Postal voting has been allowed from other countries under what the corrupt leaders say is a 'trial'.
The only 'trial' I want is a trial againt the corrupt leaders who a) didn't ask us, b) didn't think to tell us, c) didn't involve the entire political party choices but instead 'campaigned' in 'other countries', with banners of the LibLabCon. This is political fraud in itself and I'd like to know how funds were made available for that 'trial'.
2 - Postal voting throughout England and Wales at least, was subject to open fraudulent vote gathering.
Gangs of vote gatherers were making up names for voting slips which they simply sent in the post without any checks. Secondly, gangs going door to door getting signatures on blank paper from 'residents' who couldn't speak English and didn't know what they were signing. Thirdly, harassing and threatening people at polling booths by standing ominously near asking 'who will you vote for' before voters went in.
This is organised crime:
It is no good burying your head, thinking they will sort it out because it is they who are the criminals. (Remember they took part in the trial which excluded other parties.)
The police are investigating 50 cases of fraud, but their investigations cannot be completed until AFTER the election result.
Where were the powers of the police to halt an illegal practice prior to it being committed? i.e. Why did the police not stop the election going ahead!
Answer: Because the police are part of the crime.
If they were not part of the crime, then we would by now have seen some faces of the arrested gangs of criminals who were used to corrupt our election, and able to because the LibLabCon allowed it, and who were assisted in their efforts with taxpayers money and benefits coupled with non-existent immigrant controls, so that 'illegal immigrants' could carry out any crime they like and never be traced as they simply disappeared into crowds of ordinary innocent people, who thought they lived in a democracy.
As for my own assumption, I will refer you to something I said at least a month before the election.
I said: "It is my view that the election result has already been decided, and that this will occur by reason that they have already got bins full of Labour votes in the numbers they need, and they'll bring them out on the day".
Now all we need to do is to put a name to who gave the order to fiddle the votes in Barking, Stoke Central, Neath and other places where the simple job of having pre-arranged 100,000 fraudulent postal votes could swing an entire political process into action, to 'smash the BNP'.
As it happened, if you removed those 100,000 fraudulent votes from those areas, then just as we see across the country as a whole, we would be looking at seats where there was very little difference between the votes belonging to the top two places, so I find it quite strange why there'd be such a dramatic difference in the number for Labour in three seats which were political hot potatoes.
Not to leave the point of known corruption, the question now is what will be done about it and what will be done if they refuse to change a system which is completely corrupt.

Ignore Us At Your Peril

Ignore Us At Your Peril

Another excellent Analysis by rugfish

 

Created: Sunday, 09 May 2010 14:03 Author: rugfish |  

Lord Tebbit

Lord Tebbit is a giant in politics with an enviable reputation for straight talk. I recall listening to his speeches on YouTube at the Bruges Group, when he smattered his speech on the future of where Britain's place in Europe lies, with both humour and unarguable definition, that no one except the idiot left or the misplaced republican within the ranks of liberal democrats could find reason to argue.
Read that speech here: LINK which I saved as an historical account of a man who for me at least will always be known for having spoken the truth succinctly, and which I will continue to remind readers of at times when clarity is missing from others less brave.
I have always admired this man, as I do any man, or woman for that matter, who speaks their mind honestly and with a clarity of purpose which when summoned, shows that they are loyal to their country and loyal to its people and this is why I hold him and people like him in high esteem. People like Enoch Powell, people like Churchill, people like Thatcher, and people like Nick Griffin. Whose only interest has been to dedicate their political thoughts to the betterment of the British people.
This is why, regardless he may have been on the wrong end of the media at times with his 'advice' that out of work Brits should "get on their bikes", I can now better understand, given my knowledge of the media today, and I can carefully deselect that 'advice' as having been nothing more than an off the cuff remark made into glorious headlines at a time when the media were doing their best to 'smash Margaret Thatcher', just as they now want to 'smash the BNP'.
Doubtless others will have their own opinions but that is mine and it will not change.
So when I read today that he has made a "ferocious attack on David Cameron", I am minded to look beyond the headline and see why.
Lord Tebbit argues against Cameron doing a deal with Clegg.
He says a second election is inevitable and says to do a deal with Clegg will put fiscal controls, i.e. cuts at risk.
Which it will. He is right, because Clegg's party and top priority is 'fairness in the tax system'.
Remember that the LibDems and Labour are all about 'fairness', and the Tories are all about being 'unfair' if you believe the papers, and this is why the Tory leader David Cameron has been banging on so much about 'being more fair'.
Lord Tebbit isn't the only Tory grandee to be spitting blood over Cameron's ineptitude at the polls, but he's the only one currently speaking out about it.
But the fact he is speaking out should give warning to all the fake Tories out there who think they are in the Conservative party under Cameron, when nothing could be further from the truth.
The minute Cameron conceded to liberal thought was the minute I left the Tory Party.
For a Conservative can NEVER be a liberal and a Conservative can NEVER put 'fairness' to minorities above clear pragmatism, both when dealing with an entire populace with beliefs which are not the minority and with an economic and monetary problem which will effect the lives of all.
These problems, if dealt with on the basis of 'fairness' will sink the ship and will cause retaliatory strikes against the political direction he is proceeding by a majority which thinks otherwise to what he attempted to force down their throats, and was trounced at the polls because the people didn't want it.
He must come off this pedestal of 'fairness' and look toward a pragmatic approach which is Conservative thinking or I doubt he will remain Conservative leader much longer than another election.
Lord Tebbit also said; "Enoch Powell was right", and that should be taken as another warning.
At this point I have to wonder why I bother relating Lord Tebbit's warnings to someone who is clearly incapable of understanding them, but in the spirit of an Englishman I will give Cameron if not his aides, one last chance to take heed, before he completely smashes the Tory Party with his liberal thinking.
But I'm British National Party, so why do I care you might ask.
Well I care because I understand Lord Tebbit has more in common with the British National Party than many might think including him and the media. I see Lord Tebbit as the Nick Griffin who hasn't been 'got at', and the Margaret Thatcher they couldn't shut up.
Lord Tebbit with his clear sound advice that the British people will think like he does that if David Cameron abandons his manifesto for the sake of a third rate party leader who was beaten to a pulp by the electorate, then they like him will think he is "daft".
What Cameron needs and what the people needs is a way out of this mess, and that should start by listening to the people and to what they actually voted for.
One part of what the people told the political elite the other day on 6th May 2010, was that they wanted immigration to be dealt with properly and they wanted the question of the EU answered.
Remember, the only two parties who favour our membership of the EU got a drubbing at the polls.
David Cameron can step forward with a clear plan now:
1 - He should say 'no deals'.
2 - He should say this has gone on long enough and we must ask the people about Europe.
3 - He should open the books and tell the people what cuts to really expect.
4 - He should say that NOTHING will stand in the way of British democracy and I will honor the decision of the people in what they decide on a set number of choices for electoral reform which will include proportional representation.
5 - He should speak out now AGAINST the unelected subversives who he aligned himself to, promise to put them out of action if he is elected, retract the disgraceful way he conducted himself when referring to an elected MEP as 'ghastly filth', and openly recognise a need to discuss the politics of this country with a man who holds over 563,000 votes in his hand from only half the country, and who WILL gain a voice with or without him in any event as the polls open next time.
Cameron should also consider that his bully boy tactics did not work but instead worked against him.
If he doesn't learn from that then he will take an even bigger drubbing in the polls next time as the British National Party I am confident will redouble its efforts and will field a lot more candidates than they did last time.
The old cliche of racist, fascist and Nazi will undoubtedly be seen as complete lies when the British people have their eyes opened at how ordinary people, the men and women of Britain, who stood against the establishment and came out top, whose only aim was like Lord Tebbit's in that they wanted to save their country, were people just like them who you will ignore at your peril.
NORMAN TEBBIT, UPWARDLY MOBILE

STEPPING UP A GEAR, THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE NATION

STEPPING UP A GEAR THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE NATION!

A Nation and its people are built upon a common culture, which in itself shares a common philosophy, which in turn is based on a theology!

These are the core principles on which the Marxist Antonio Gramsci (1891 - 1937) realised that were the means of attack upon Western culture and values. As he had realised after a visit to Stalin's Russia in 1922 that the means of exporting the revolution by traditional methods would never work on the culture of the West.
  
He realised that Western Culture was based on the morality of the Judea Christian traditions of the individual’s knowledge of good and evil and personal & social responsibility concerning them in the matter of their outlook on all matters both public and private.

therefore the 1st stratagem of the Marxist cultural attack on the west and it’s values must be to attack and destroy the Christian faith 1st in it’s role in public life and then in it’s relevance to the individual, in effect, the Christian Tradition is the foundations of our society and if you destroy the foundations of any structure the edifice will collapse!
The pathway to socialist oppression is no longer bloody revolutions. The omnipresent dialectic process is far more subtle and effective. Enhanced by the steady drumbeat of the media's pervasive, suggestive and anti-Christian stimuli, minds are dulled and the masses indoctrinated everywhere. While people in the Soviet Union knew they were trapped in a cruel system, many could still think factually and logically. Today's managers of mind-control have nearly perfected the social "science" of collective brainwashing.

So using this principle later worked on by other Marxists mainly Herbert Marcuse the Frankfurt school, it was used in the so called sexual revolution of the 1960,s amongst the younger members of society especially the students and their campuses ,were the future leaders of the west are educated ! 
Were it was claimed that the free use of sexual gratification of any nature was a personal liberty and was being denied by the antiquated views of the Christian church and western culture on personal freedoms. And that to warn against the so called sexual freedoms was the sign of intolerance, and therefore the views of a bigoted and uneducated mind.



  Well it is quite obvious that hormone ridden young men and women of the 1960,s would have their attention grabbed by such notions especially as when the use of cheap and free contraception had been introduced.
And they would be easily led to believe that the Christian Church was a institution of oppression of their personal freedoms and choices and therefore become a irrelevance in their lives and personal choices, both in their private and public lives, which could lead to all kinds of personal gratification if not curbed by the morality and traditions of the Church and western culture which quite clearly stated what was good and what was evil in mankind!

So if you destroy the moral teachings and traditions of the Church what did they conclude would they replace it with, A RELIGION CALLED TOLERANCE! 

This is something that can easily be controlled by the communist state as in the eyes of the Marxists a moral choice is not fixed for all time! they argue that something that was morally acceptable in the 19th century may not be acceptable in the 21st century, so in effect morality can be changed to suit the needs of the moment in time, example their are to many old people euthanasia is a good moral choice for the good of the proletariat. Or their are too many children forced abortions are a good moral choice, in effect a moral equivalency for any action (see china’s Birth policy).

And as today it is acceptable that divorce can be had at the drop of a hat, that fathers have no responsibility for their children apart from a mediocre maintenance payment, and on and on, till you get a fragmented & disorganised host society, as in the UK today, where even the main stream Churches the victim of this first stratagem is now blindly arguing against itself blowing Satan's trumpet in the cause of tolerance.



But not being stupid even Stalin realised the use of a spiritual aspect to some of the proletariat lives was essential in keeping them in check in case they fought against the moral equivalency of the state, at 1st they tried to introduce the shamanistic religions of the East, But an even better Cult was found for their ends, Islam and a mass introduction the followers of this cult into the Western World would help also, what better a cult based on the basis of submission to higher authority, and who’s moral precepts were based on the acceptability of death as a tool of control, and the added benefit of a multi cultural society that is fractured on all aspects of social life, IE diversity means division! A divided society can not rise to supplant its political elite!



So what is the remedy to this situation 1st educate your self about the tactics of these monsters. And secondly it must be within yourselves you must 1st rediscover your moral and spiritual traditions and by publicly declaring and living at all times in your life, put pressure on your Church leaders to not hide them selves away hoping for divine intervention as a cure all they themselves must take the battle to Satan's door, and also put pressure on all members of public society make them know how strong in numbers we are, and how tired we are of all the perversion and moral decay that pollutes our lives , write to TV advertisers the papers where your voice can be heard, They will try to attack you with their tolerance lies but like the Emperors news clothes people will see that if you show a lead many other will follow, In the Words of our Lord Jesus Christ "Seek the truth! It will open your eyes and then you will see things as they really are!
Our Mission is just not political It is now a spiritual one also!
The Greening the Environmentalists Drive for Global Power, 

Islam 2 Christianity Nil , Laws biased against Christians in UK Today

Islam 2 Christianity Nil

Created: Sunday, 09 May 2010 08:38 Author: rugfish |  

Under a law designed to bar religious discrimination, it is now perfectly legal to discriminate against someone's beliefs so long as these are based on religion – eg Christianity (but not of course Islam)

"Under a law designed to bar religious discrimination, it is now perfectly legal to discriminate against someone's beliefs so long as these are based on religion - eg Christianity (but not of course Islam)" Telegraph columnist Christopher Booker
The case I am referring to is the dismissal of Gary McFarlane, an evangelical Christian who lost his job as a counsellor at Relate, because he refused to give "sex therapy lessons" to gay couples because it was against his Christian principles.
Now perhaps I can ask whether there are any Islamic Relate counsellors, and whether there is any evidence that an Islamic counsellor has refused to give sex therapy lessons to a gay couple, and whether if so this is or were the case, would he or she be sacked for refusing.
Secondly, the ruling last year that Climate change evangelist Tim Nicholson's "philosophical belief" in man-made global warming was on a par with religious belief and must therefore be given legal protection under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003, issued under the 1972 European Communities Act to implement EC directive 2000/78......Is questionable as to whether he would be unfairly sacked if he refused to give therapy in a position of say a climate counsellor, to people who fundamentally disagreed with his views. Or perhaps refused to carry out a reasonable instruction of his employer who happened to think that man-made climate change was a complete load of nonsense, and the instruction ran against his 'beliefs'.
But sticking with Islam here, why is it acceptable for a nurse to not wash and bare her arms as a nurse, because she happens to find this to be unacceptable because of her Islamic beliefs. Yet a Christian who put the lives of patients in danger as a result of her refusal to adhere to the requirements of basic personal hygiene, would be dismissed.
If anyone needs evidence that the law is complete ass, and  that it is also intentionally being used to discriminate against Christians, then this is it.

Order of the White Feather

Order of the White Feather

Created: Saturday, 08 May 2010 09:07 Author: rugfish |  

A white feather has been a traditional symbol of cowardice, which has been used and recognised within the British Army since the 18th century. Never has it been more appropriate than today to award the Order of the White Feather to the Enemies of Democracy, and I'd like fellow comrades, patriots and brave activists to know when they collect their own awards for bravery, that this white feather is for all those who deliberately tried to sabotage your brave, valiant and wholly democratic efforts in this last election.
As said, your efforts tripled votes for the British National Party, and Chairman Mr Nick Griffin has revealed thousands of enquiries were made and followed up as a result of your work.
UAF leader and criminal Weyman on the other hand, should have a large white feather for his repulsive and abusive attempts to overthrow the democratic process using bricks, darts, metal railings and other lethal weapons, whilst trying to convince the populations in cities up and down England which have been colonised by foreigners, that he was on their side.
Needless to say, a Marxist can only ever use lies to further his aims, and there has not been one Marxist in history, just like Weyman, who has not resorted to violence when confronted with the fact that people just don't agree with their wierd beliefs or their criminal and obvious undemocratic actions.
This can be attested if you simply look at public reaction to Weyman and other criminals when they tried to block Mr Griffin's appearance on Question Time.
If we were really at war in the 18th or 19th centuries, then Weyman would undoubtedly have faced a firing squad for cowardice and subversion, but rather than bringing charges against him, the cowardly government has instead offered financial backing through their many grubby fingered unions and activists in an attempt to cling to power with their bitten nails.
Gordon Brown and Peter Hain must surely share a feather between them for what amounts to the highest degree of political cowardice which is quite visible by all but their other bullying friends. Their punishment will be that they are out on their arse as soon as Nick Clegg can convince Cameron that democracy is a good way to reach the top in politics as opposed to using hammers, bricks and darts and placed people who agree with you.
Another white feather for cowardice must surely go to David Cameron for his continuing support of the criminal subversive Weyman.
He also abuses political priviledge as he hides behind the apron strings of an established party leadership. With the weight of media in front of him along with armed guards, it is without doubt a measure of his cowardice that from his position, he deliberately hurls abuse toward the brave leader of the British National Party Mr Nick Griffin, who in contrast was prepared to put his own life on the line in Wootton Basset to halt an illegal demonstration, whilst Cowardly Cameron buried his head under the blankets back in his Tory bunker.
Cameron is a coward of a particular kind as he ducks the major issues of immigration and the EU, and he refuses to confront Nick Griffin in open debate.
Cameron should receive a white feather, a bar from politics and a community order to see if he can help run another television station but this time without making it bankrupt whilst seeking only personal gain.
After that, maybe if there's an old scrap car dealer handy in his area, then they could be persuaded to have him take a job such as washing cars for which cowardly Cameron would be more suited.
Next white feather goes to HopeNotHate, who were busily engaged in trying to destroy the democractic process with 1,000 activists, all bought and paid by the Daily Mirror, NUJ, Socialist Workers Party, and Morning Star. i.e. Marxists.
None of these cowards had the bottle to stand for election but instead chose to interfere with the democratic process and sought to peddle lies about people who were brave enough to walk the streets knocking on doors and seeking votes in a country where an entire establishment had gathered against them.
HopeNotHate are advised to check their budget to see if they have any money left and they are ordered to submit accounts to the nearest BNP office for inspection where interested parties will be delighted to take them to see exactly who donated to their Marxist cause which was designed to subvert democracy in our country.
Nothing British is another subversive which is hardly worth a mention saying as their pathetic propaganda could really only be believe by a halfwit like those who run it.
Shifty eyed coward Lord Bethel might want to come and collect his feather himself if he can muster up the courage to leave his little office at Westminster where he continues to hide himself from public gaze with his other compatriots and traitors whose only achievement has been to prove they are Nothing British.
Green Arrows will be pleased to snap a pic of cowards on the day, or on some other day in the not too distant future if they are too scared to collect it.
Meanwhile, BNP victory medals are to be awarded for all once we get a democracy in Britain.
THE GREAT IMMIGRATION SCANDAL.

Was Marx a Satanist?

“The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of man is a requisite for their real happiness." Karl Marx (page 5)

---

Excerpts from Was Marx a Satanist? By Richard Wurmbrand, a faithful Romanian Christian who spent eight years in in a Communist prison for sharing the Gospel and refusing to deny his Lord. His best known book is Tortured for Christhis testimony of God's triumph in the midst of Communist persecution. See Communist Exploitation of Religion, Hearing Before the Subcommittee to Invetsigate the Administration of the Internal Security Act and Other Internal Security Laws of the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate Eight-Ninth Congress, Second...

Home

---

First, some background information about the uncompromising faithfulness of Pastor Wurmbrand from Voice of the Martyrs:

"Two months after the Communist 'People’s Republic of Romania' was established, Pastor Richard Wurmbrand was arrested. Labeled 'Prisoner Number 1,' he was locked in a solitary cell, where he endured horrendous torture at the hands of the brutal secret police. More than eight years later, 'a doctor masquerading as a Communist Party member discovered Richard alive.' Released in 1956, he 'resumed his work with the ‘underground’ churches....He was re-arrested in 1959 through the conspiracy of an associate, and sentenced to 25 years... accused of preaching ideas contrary to Communist doctrine."

"In 1967, Richard and Sabrina Wurmbrand founded a ministry that would serve the persecuted church. Its name was eventually changed to Voice of the Martyrs. By the mid-1980s, it was reaching out to "80 restricted nations with offices in 30 countries around the world." His book, Tortured for Christ, became a source of encouragement among the persecuted throughout the Soviet system."

Richard Wurmbrand's book about Karl Marx begins with a rebuttal of a widespread misconception: that Marx himself was a compassionate visionary who truly cared for the poor. In reality, both Marx and Engels grew up in wealthy families, far removed from the life of poverty. Together they pursued an anti-Christian utopia that -- from the beginning -- focused on political power, not on meeting the needs of the poor. Like today's seductive vision of change, their socialist/communist transformation required a "crisis" and a "purpose" that would capture public attention and provide the needed momentum.

Thomas Sowell summarized it well in his 1993 book, Is Reality Optional (Hoover Institution, p. 81):

"Running left-wing movements has always been the prerogative of spoiled rich kids. This pattern goes all the way back to the days when an over-indulged and affluent young man named Karl Marx combined with another over-indulged youth from a wealthy family named Friedrich Engels to create the Communist ideology.

"The phoniness of the claim to be a movement of the working class was blatant from the beginning. When Engels was elected as a delegate to the Communist League in 1847, in his own words, 'a working man was proposed for appearances sake, but those who proposed him voted for me.' It may have been the first rigged 'election' of the Communist movement but it was certainly not the last.... The anointed have always wanted to create their own kind of people, as well as their own kind of society."[13]T

Next, ponder the following excerpts from Was Marx a Satanist

Notice that Karl Marx was introduced early to Christianity. In his youth, he even appeared to be a devout Christian. But his views had radically changed soon after he finished the German high school.

Today one third of the world is Marxist. Marxism in one form or another is embraced by many in Capitalist countries, too. There are even Christians, yes, and clergymen, some of high standing, who are sure that while Jesus might have had the right answers about how to get to heaven, Marx had the right answers about how to help the hungry, destitute, and oppressed on earth. "Marx, it is said, was deeply humane. He was dominated by one idea: how to help the exploited masses. What impoverishes them, he maintained, is capitalism. Once this rotten system is overthrown, after a transitional period of dictatorship of the proletariat, a society will emerge in which everyone will work according to his abilities in factories and farms belonging to the collective, and will be rewarded according to his needs. There will be... no wars, no revolutions, only an everlasting, universal brotherhood.... [p. 5] "Marx writes: “The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of man is a requisite for their real happiness. The call to abandon their illusions about their conditions is a call to abandon a condition which requires illusion...."[p. 6] "Marx was anti-religious because religion obstructs the fulfillment of the Communist ideal which he considers the only answer to the world's problems."[p. 6] "...a new Marx began to emerge. He writes in a poem, “I wish to avenge myself against the One who rules above.”[7] So he was convinced that there is One above who rules.... Marx belonged to a relatively well-to-do family. He had not hungered in his childhood. He was much better off than many fellow students. What produced this terrible hatred against God? No personal motive is known.  ...why should he have written these lines in his poem Invocation of One in Despair? [9] So a god has snatched from me my all In the curse and rack of destiny. All his worlds are gone beyond recall! Nothing but revenge is left to me! I shall build my throne high overhead, Cold, tremendous shall its summit be. For its bulwark -- superstitious dread. For its Marshall -- blackest agony.[8] The words “I shall build my throne high overhead” and the confession that from the one sitting on this throne will emanate only dread and agony, remind us of Lucifer’s proud boast: 'I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) But why does Marx wish such a throne? The answer is found in a little-known drama which he also composed during his student years. It is called Oulanem. To explain this title a digression is needed.[9] There exists a Satanist church. One of its rituals is the black mass which Satanist priests recite at midnight....An orgy follows... [pp.10-11] We will be able to understand the drama Oulanem only in the light of a strange confession which Marx made in a poem called The Player, later down-played by both himself and his followers: The hellish vapors rise and fill the brain, Till I go mad and my heart is utterly changed. See this sword? The prince of darkness sold it to me. - For me beats the time and gives the signs. Ever more boldly I play the dance of death.[p.12] Now I quote from [Marx's] drama Oulanem: And they are also Oulanem, Oulanem. The name rings forth like death, rings forth Until it dies away in a wretched crawl. Stop, I’ve got it now! It rises from my soul.... Yet I have power within my youthful arms To clench and crush you [i.e., personified humanity] with tempestuous force, While for us both the abyss yawns in darkness. You will sink down and I shall follow laughing, Whispering in your ears, “Descend, come with me, friend.” [p.12] The Bible which Marx had studied in his high school years... says that the devil will be bound by an angel and cast into the bottomless pit (abyssos in Greek: see Revelation 20:3). Marx wishes to draw the whole of mankind into this pit reserved for the devil and his angels....[p.12-13] Marx had loved the words of Mephistopheles in Faust, “Everything in existence is worth being destroyed.” Everything — including the proletariat and the comrades. Marx quoted these words.... Stalin acted on them and destroyed even his own family. [p.13] The Satanist sect is not materialistic. It believes in eternal life. Oulanem, the person for whom Marx speaks, does not contest eternal life. He asserts it, but as a life of hate magnified to its extreme. It is worth noting that eternity for the devils means 'torment.” Thus Jesus was reproached by the demons: “Art you come hither to torment us before our time?” (Matthew 8:29).... [Marx'] correspondence with his father testifies to his squandering great sums of money on pleasures and his constant quarreling with parental authority about this and other matters. Then he might have fallen in with the tenets of the highly secret Satanist church and received the rites of initiation. Satan, whom his worshippers see in their hallucinatory orgies, speaks through them. Thus Marx is only Satan’s mouthpiece when he utters in his poem Invocation of One in Despair the words, “I wish to avenge myself against the One who rules above.” Listen to the end of Oulanem: If there is a Something which devours, I’ll leap within it, though I bring the world to ruins— The world which bulks between me and the abyss I will smash to pieces with my enduring curses.... In Oulanem Marx does what the devil does: he consigns the entire human race to damnation. Oulanem is probably the only drama in the world in which all the characters are aware of their own corruption, which they flaunt and celebrate with conviction. In this drama there is no black and white... All are satanic, corrupt, and doomed.[p.15] When he wrote these things, Marx... was eighteen. His life’s program had already been established. There was no word about serving mankind, the proletariat, or socialism. He wished to bring the world to ruin. He wished to build for himself a throne whose bulwark should be human shudder.[p.16]

   Wurmbrand found some "cryptic passages" as he read the letters between Marx and his father:

The son writes, "My holy of holies was rent asunder and new gods had to be installed."[p.16] On March 2, 1837, Marx’s father writes to his son: “Your advancement, the dear hope to see your name being once of great repute, and your earthly well-being are not the only desires of my heart.... Only if your heart remains pure and beats humanly and if no demon will be able to alienate your heart from better feelings, only then will I be happy.” [p.16]                                                                   What made a father express suddenly the fear of demonic influence upon a young son who until then had been a confessed Christian? Was it the poems he received as a present from his son for his 55th birthday? The following quotation is taken from Marx’s poem On Hegel: Words I teach all mixed up into a devilish muddle. Thus, anyone may think just what he chooses to think. [p.17] In his poem The Pale Maiden, he writes: Thus heaven I’ve forfeited, I know it full well. My soul, once true to God, is chosen for hell. [p.20]

   Connections that led to socialism, then Communism

Marx met Moses Hess, the man who... made him embrace the Socialist idea. Hess calls him "Dr. Marx--my idol, who will give the last kick to medieval religion and politics."...[[p.20] Georg Jung, another friend of Marx at that time, writes in 1841... that Marx will surely chase God from his heaven.... Marx calls Christianity one of the most immoral religions. [p.20] One of his partners in the First International was Mikhail Bakunin, a Russian anarchist, who wrote: "...here steps in Satan, the eternal rebel, the first freethinker and the emancipator of worlds...[urges] him to disobey and eat the fruit of knowledge."... He writes: "In this revolution we will have to awaken the devil in the people, to stir up the basest passions." [p.22] Bakunin reveals that Proudhon, another major Socialist thinker and at that time a friend of Karl Marx, also “worshipped Satan.” ... Proudhon...declared that God was the prototype for injustice. "... Every step forward is a victory in which we overcome the Divine."... [p.23] In Marx’s poems Invocation of One in Despair and Human Pride, man’s supreme ‘supplication is for his own greatness. If man is doomed to perish through his own greatness, this will be a cosmic catastrophe, but he will die as a godlike being, mourned by demons. Marx' ballad The Player records the singer’s complaints against a God who neither knows nor respects his art. It emerges from the dark abyss of hell, bedeviling the mind and bewitching the heart, and his dance is the dance of death.... Art emerging from the dark abyss of hell, bedeviling the mind.... This reminds us of the words of the American revolutionist Jerry Rubin in Do It: “We’ve combined youth, music, sex, drugs, and rebellion with treason — and that’s a combination hard to beat.” [24] In His poem Human Pride, Marx admits that his aim is not to improve the world, reform or revolutionize it, but simply to ruin it and the enjoy it being ruined: With disdain I will throw my gauntlet full in the face of the world, And see the collapse of this pygmy giant whose fall will not stifle my ardor. Then will I wander godlike and victorious through the ruins of the world And, giving my words an active force, I will feel equal to the Creator. [24] ...The overriding reason for Marx’s conversion to Communism appears clearly in a letter of his friend Georg Jung to Ruge. It is not the emancipation of the proletariat, nor the establishing of a better social order. Jung writes: “If Marx, Bruno Bauer and Feuerbach associate to found a theological-political review, God would do well to surround himself with all his angels and indulge in self-pity, for these three will certainly drive Him out of heaven..." [24] The man who convinced Engels to become a Communist was the same Moses Hess who had convinced Marx before. Hess writes after he met Engels in Cologne, “He parted from me as an over-zealous Communist. This is how I produce ravages.“ To produce ravages — was this Hess’s supreme purpose in life? It is Lucifer’s, too."[28]

See From Marx to Lenin, Gramsci & Alinsky and Communist Exploitation of Religion

---

Was Marx a Satanist

General Election 2010 Analysis Nick Griffin BNP Leader

General Election 2010 Analysis

Dear Fellow Patriot,

I appreciate that everybody is feeling very tired after this bruising campaign and some disappointing headline results. In fact, as you will see later in this message, behind the media's sneers, there is real concern about the progress that we have made in this extraordinarily hard-fought contest.

With the result now in, Britain faces its first "hung parliament" since 1974 and the next Government - if there is to be one and not a new election in a few months' time - will be a coalition of two of the main parties.

Ironically, this provides the British National Party (which spectacularly almost tripled its vote from 2005, jumping from 192,746 to a healthy 563,743 in yesterday's contest) with its best window of opportunity yet.

The kingmaker in any coalition will be the Liberal Democrats under Nick Clegg. Their key demand for participation in a coalition is electoral reform, and in particular the abolition of the current "first-past-the-post" election system. The reason why the Liberal Democrats oppose the first-past-the-post system is that it clearly puts a smaller party (which is what the Liberal Democrats are) at a hugely unfair disadvantage.

The figures tell the story: yesterday the Liberal Democrats won around 23 percent of the vote, but will end up with only 7 percent of the seats in Parliament. The BNP, which polled close to a million votes in June 2009, and over half a million yesterday (despite only fighting half of all the available 650 seats), will end up with no seats at all.

In effect, the first-past-the-post system simply throws millions of votes onto the rubbish heap where they are ignored. As a result, the Liberal Democrats have argued for the introduction of proportional representation (PR) in Britain.

Under a PR system, if a party gets 10 percent of the votes, it gets 10 percent of the seats in Parliament. If it gets 32 percent of the vote, it gets 32 percent of the seats, and so on.

It is an obviously fairer way of allowing all votes cast in an election be reflected in Parliament. In fact, a slightly amended system of PR is used in European Parliamentary elections, which allowed the BNP to win its two seats in that body in June 2009.

If the Liberal Democrats are involved in a coalition with either Labour or Conservatives, it is inevitable that they will set the demand for a PR system as one of the preconditions for their cooperation.

In fact, Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg has already made this demand in public - and both Labour and Conservatives have announced their willingness to consider it or, at the very least, hold a referendum on the topic.

What does this mean for the BNP? The tripling of the BNP vote on 6 May has some important implications.

Firstly, where we went head-to-head with UKIP and the Greens, we thrashed them. We outvoted UKIP in 178 seats and they beat us in 123. We outvoted the Greens in 134 seats for the Greens 23. UKIP had a huge budget and their campaign was backed by 13 MEPs, in it must not be forgotten that both UKIP and the Greens enjoy favourable treatment at the hands of the controlled media.

Secondly, while all minority parties were pushed out to the edge by the 'big boys', our vote not only held up but proportionately increased when compared to our June 2009 Euro election results.

When put into perspective, yesterday's result becomes even more interesting:

- In 1983, the BNP fought 54 seats and polled 14,000 votes.

- In 1987, the BNP fought 2 seats and polled 563 votes.

- In 1992, the BNP fought 13 seats and polled 7,000 votes.

- In 1997, the BNP fought 54 seats and polled 35,000 votes.

- In 2001, the BNP fought 33 seats and polled 47,000 votes.

- In 2005, the BNP fought 117 seats and polled 192,746 votes.

- In 2010, the BNP fought 339 seats and polled 563,743 votes.

Based on yesterday's impressive vote totals, the BNP would win in excess of 60 seats in Westminster under a PR system.

Some of the more perceptive Conservative journalists, such as Norman Tebbit, have already realised this as a possibility and have written about it in national newspapers.

In addition, many political commentators have already remarked that, on a night which saw all the smaller parties squeezed - including the Lib-Dems, who lost five seats - the strong showing and turnout of the BNP vote was "a source of great concern."

They have seen how the public hostility towards us is fast disappearing. I felt it on the streets and I'm sure you did too.

Compare this with a few years ago when we endured frequent confrontations and 'screamers'. This election we enjoyed a very friendly response on the streets and no aggravation (apart from the exception of activists from Labour's far left thuggish allies).

I have heard reports from all over the country, and have experienced it for myself, that the 'screamers' who used to pop out of the woodwork in almost every street, have all but completely vanished.

The shift in the public's perception of us now is really very encouraging. Unfortunately in this much hyped General Election, people voted for a change in government and have (some with gritted teeth) reverted back to the old parties.

Our adversaries recognised this probably before us and have done everything to keep us as a small fringe party. Under PR we could easily fill a bus with BNP MPs.

As the coalition negotiations begin, let those who might feel disappointed at the BNP's failure to secure a parliamentary seat yesterday reflect on what might happen in a short while.

The introduction of PR to Britain will dramatically change the face of British politics and propel the BNP into the mainstream political debate once and for all.

Unfortunately, the high turnout generated by the General Election hype meant that we were also squeezed severely in local elections nationwide.

Our vote remained rock solid but the percentages were against us.

Perhaps the most sobering reality we must now face is the demographic disaster unfolding all over the country, but especially in Barking & Dagenham and London generally. The simple fact is this: we have been swamped by immigrants.

Labour is carrying out a policy of gerrymandering through immigration. This has meant the death of the old East End and by the time of the next General Election, London will be completely unassailable, colonised and in truth no longer part of Britain.

We need to develop a new strategy to protect our dispossessed and marginalised people in these 'occupied territories.' As our people are pushed first into political impotence and then into absolute minority status, to continue fighting first-past-the-post elections and securing an ever-dwindling vote is simply a recipe for demoralisation and failure.

We will instead develop a new strategy for these areas, based on civil rights agitation and legal challenges to the authorities whenever they marginalise our white minority.

I know how hard everybody worked and I know there is a positive change in the public's attitude towards the BNP. You must have felt it too. This tended to lead to raised expectations which, while they have not been this time in the ballot box, do truly reflect the undercurrent of ever growing sympathy for our party and our message. We all know the feeling is there and growing.

At the end of the day, we tripled our vote and we can now build on the huge experience we have gained through fighting two national elections in less than a year.

The glaring item lacking in the BNP armoury is our underdeveloped Elections Department. This will now be the focus of a huge overhaul and re-structuring, bringing it into line with the very best and almost futuristic election machines of Labour and the Lib-Dems.

The BNP has the courage and determination and some of the best politically motivated people of all the parties. However, our methods, tactics and electioneering apparatus are basically 20 years out of date.

This was discussed at a leadership meeting in February and while we recognised the urgent need for modernisation, there was no way we could start to reform and modernise before the election.

Through a substantial investment in administration, fundraising and logistics, the BNP possesses a finely tuned administrative regime. As an example of what the administrative staff can do is illustrated by the fact that all of the 8,000 inquiries received centrally in the six weeks of the campaign, have already been sent information packs.

Some 6,000 have already been databased and passed on to the regional organisers so that follow-up work can start immediately. This is a very rapid and efficient turnaround of an absolutely crucial job.

We do however need to acknowledge that there were very serious problems in the campaign, particularly in the Publicity Department. The new team which took over - Clive Jefferson, Alwyn Deacon and all others involved - did a fantastic job under the most difficult of circumstances in rescuing that situation by the skin of our teeth.

Now we need to focus all of our attention and energies in harnessing and utilising the very best in modern electioneering practices. This will start immediately and this month will see the first event in our new training programme being rolled out.

We need to grasp the huge potential in exploiting postal votes, tele-canvassing and other modern methods and techniques. We also need to equip ourselves to perform well in community politics.

Although the Greens were practically wiped out in this election, they still managed to secure their first MP. How did they do this? They invested heavily on the ground by being fully involved in local community politics. This afforded them 'credibility' through an effective presence in community politics. Minority parties can overcome obstacles by producing effective councillors. To do that we need to invest heavily in training for our people who are at the 'coalface '

We are now stronger than ever and have proven ourselves capable of planning, fighting and financing two national election campaigns on the largest scale ever, one after another.

We will now focus on a massive overhaul of our political machinery.

External attacks disguised as internal friction will be a common feature as our political enemies spin their web of lies and deceit designed to prevent us from reaching our true potential. Our enemies' weapons will be disharmony, conflict, misinformation and never-ending legal warfare.

They will not succeed, but we all must remain ever vigilant. If someone tells you a piece of 'shocking' internal gossip which clearly is aimed at undermining the people now working to propel the party forward, then you need to treat such lies with the contempt they deserve. Don't believe, let alone pass on, any such disinformation without telling the target about the allegation and hearing the truth. Our enemies have huge resources at their disposal and will exploit the slightest chink in our armour to inject their poison amongst us.

So let us build on the lessons of the last two years of spectacular growth and advances. We have all worked incredibly hard and I know the price our families pay. Take a break; spend time with your family - because we will have all this to do again in a very short time.

This election has been a shambolic farce for our democracy. However, this is an opportunity for us and now is the time to re-structure, modernise and invest in this party's election machine and that's exactly what we ARE going to do.

Yours sincerely,

Nick Griffin, MEP
Leader, British National Party