BRITISH National Party MEPs, Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons Votes this week in Strasbourg

Votes this week in Strasbourg

  Tina Wingfield at http://www.nickgriffinmep.eu/news

 OCTOBER 2010: 
THE BRITISH National Party MEPs, Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons, have an extremely busy week scheduled in Strasbourg. This week’s plenary session follows the usual EU format, whereby the business agenda is so absurdly packed that it is impossible to subject the reports presented to any truly meaningful debate.

 Nonetheless, this is what the MEP’s must strive to do. The level of legislation emanating from the European super-bureaucracy is immense and the regulations, directives and diktats disseminated encompass just about every aspect of social and economic policy. While the ultimate aim of our MEPs is to withdraw Britain from this unnecessary time, money and resource-draining entity, they take very seriously their responsibility to use their influence as elected Members of the European Parliament to shape EU legislation in accordance with the best interests of Britain and the British people.  
The MEPs, along with their Constituency Staff teams, invest many hours in assessing the content of resolutions and motions that are debated and then put to the vote in the plenary sessions held in Strasbourg.
The Women’s Rights and Gender Equality Committee (FEMM), for example, has a controversial report listed for debate and voting in this week’s session which tables amendments to the Council’s Directive on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding. The FEMM Committee considers that the Commission’s proposed re-working of the Directive falls short of delivering the required changes to effectively promote gender equality in the labour market and to encourage parenting based on shared responsibilities. To redress these shortcomings, the Committee proposes 81 amendments to the Commission’s revised proposals which seek to significantly strengthen maternity rights.
In order to help the MEPs decide whether to vote in favour of adopting a motion the Constituency teams assess all the proposals from a British Nationalist perspective. Given that we are committed to opposing any increase in the level of EU interference in matters which are rightly the concern of national parliament, the proposed amendments have to be considered within this framework. However, our MEPs do not want to abdicate from their responsibilities, so unlike many of the UKIP MEPs, they are not content to simply oppose all new legislation in blanket fashion. Where new laws and regulations are likely to be adopted, the British National Party MEPs will seek, wherever possible, to mitigate the impact and scope of the content.
With regard to the FEMM’s amendments, from a British Nationalist viewpoint, the Committee’s “life-cycle” approach to work, which recognises that male and female workers have different needs and priorities at various stages of their lives, is commendable. Legislation that enables mothers to spend extra time at home with their newborn and facilitates a longer breastfeeding period is wholly desirable; as is the encouragement of shared parenting between mothers and fathers.
Desirable employment outcomes for one particular social group should be assessed, however, within the wider economic framework. Increasing maternity legislation will significantly impact on British business and the perceived benefits to women workers (and family life) must be balanced against the interests of employers. The rightful place for employment legislation to be debated and decided upon is within our national Parliament.
As British Nationalists, we are wary, moreover, of EU-generated proposals which purport to improve the balance between family life and work. Our interpretation of an “improved balance” is likely to differ from the EU’s, which assesses workers primarily in terms of their function as economic units within a global market. Our framework of reference is more holistic: for example, while it may make sense in purely economic terms to increase the activity of women within the workforce, in social welfare terms it might actually be more beneficial to introduce employment and economic measures which promote and facilitate the right of mothers to remain outside of the paid workforce. Motherhood is, after all, a full-time job in itself and in many cases it is economic imperative and devaluing of the full-time carer role which forces mothers into the public workforce, rather than personal choice.  
FEMM’s amendments largely serve to further increase European-level bureaucracy and, in line with our opposition to EU interference in our national concerns, a “no” vote is therefore, generally recommended by the Constituency team. However, a number of amendments are identified which are viewed as constituting positive additions or changes to the motion, which will not in effect add to the excess of Brussels bureaucracy which is making life increasingly difficult for  British organisations and businesses. A “yes” vote is advised for instance, in relation to a text change which clarifies the protection of pregnant women from performing tasks that pose health risks, and a new point which gives workers on maternity leave the right to receive automatically any general increase in salary.
Another motion likely to court controversy in Strasbourg this week is the Employment and Social Affairs Committee’s (EMPL) Report on the Role of Minimum Income in Combating Poverty and Promoting an Inclusive Society in Europe. Although the EMPL Committee rejected an amendment calling on the European Commission to propose a framework directive on minimum income (which would have established minimum income systems in the EU), this report nonetheless calls on the Commission to present “an initiative” in the area of introducing minimum income schemes in all EU Member States.
The report encompasses an extensive range of economic and social fields with its call for Commission and national policies to ensure universal access to the labour market. The introduction of minimum income schemes (set at the suggested level of 60% of average income in the Member State concerned) in all EU Member States is considered to be an essential measure in order to combat poverty.
Reference is made within the Report to the Europe 2020 strategy, which is founded on the assertion that no Member State can address global challenges effectively by acting in isolation. From a Nationalist perspective, it is unfortunate that neither the EU generally (in its economic and social policy briefings), or the EMPL Committee’s Report specifically, takes this assertion to its logical conclusion. If they did, it might actually be possible to achieve some of the laudable goals set in respect to improving average living standards across the entire European Union. The Eurocrats’ pursuit of their (utopian) European social market economy is doomed to failure because they fail to establish the necessary economic parameters to deliver their dream.
Sustaining a minimum income would serve to reduce poverty, but such a strategy could only work within a closed European market. The reality is that as long as European jobs and the produce of EU workers are not protected from being undercut by imported goods from non-European Union, low-wage economies, raising EU labour costs to a minimum level will in practice, serve to worsen the balance of trade and increase unemployment across the EU. At the present time, an advantage held by the poorer European nations is the fact that their cheaper labour costs enable them to produce goods at lower prices than their more developed and wealthier European competitors. Increasing labour costs across Europe, without introducing measures to protect the European economy from non-European competition, will expose the EU to unfair and unmatchable pressures. European goods and services will be undercut by products and services supplied by Third World countries. The consequent collapse in European GDP levels will be accompanied by a parallel increase in poverty and social exclusion rates... the very opposite outcome of what the EU’s social and economic engineering was intended to achieve.
Whilst the Constituency team is sympathetic to the worthy aspirations embodied within EMPL’s proposals, the view was taken that, the only way they can be achieved in practice is by withdrawing Europe from the global market economy and protecting European jobs and wage levels behind high trade walls. As the EU is unlikely to accept an amendment promoting such a protectionist approach, a vote to reject the motion is advised.

EU Budget - Turkey would add to the British Peoples TAX Burden

EU Budget - Turkey would add to the UK's burden

  Martin Wingfield at http://www.andrewbronsmep.eu/?q=news

19TH OCTOBER 2010: THE British National Party MEP for Yorkshire & North East Lincolnshire made the following contribution to a debate held in the European Parliament in Strasbourg this afternoon on the European Union Budget for 2011.
 "The Report* says:
'the EU Budget should in no way be perceived as.......a burden to national budgets'.
"For countries like the United Kingdom that are forced to endure cuts in expenditure at home, any increase in the EU budget - let alone the 5.9% increase originally proposed by the Commission, would be inappropriate.
"A money terms cut or a freeze would be more appropriate.
"The United Kingdom has had a double dose of the bitter pill. We have seen our rebate reduced by a third in the last year alone, making us even more of a net contributor than we were.
"It has been said that whilst the United Kingdom has been a net contributor, the new member countries have been net recipients, for which, of course, their populations cannot be blamed. However, in light of that undeniable fact, would it not be madness to continue to pursue expansion to include even poorer and undeniably burdensome countries, including Turkey, which is not only poor but not European by any stretch of the imagination."
*the report from Sidonia Elzbieta Jedrzejewska and Helga Trüpel

Radio RWB’s Eurofile: The Work of Party Researchers behind the BNP's MEPs

Radio RWB’s Eurofile: The Work of Party Researchers behind the MEPs

The British Party Newsroom 

Radio Red White and Blue has just posted up the latest issue of its “Eurofile” programme which outlines the work of party researchers who support the MEPs in their voting decisions.

The half hour show features two of the researchers, the recently-appointed David Hannam and Radio RWB’s own John Walker, discussing how decisions are made as to how the British National Party’s MEPs are advised to vote on the huge number of resolutions and motions which come before the parliament.

Click here to listen to this fascinating interview in full, and then click on the RWB player launch button.

Labours Horwich Council House Rent Hike Alert

which way to our new council house!

Labours Horwich Council House Rent Hike Alert by Horwich Nationalists
It is with sadness that we have to report to all those who were silly enough to vote Labour in the previous election, and live in a council House in Horwich that I am afraid your rent is to rise alarmingly, of course the Labour Zanu PF party of Bolton claim that is all the Con/Dem Zanu PF Govt's fault, instead of just admitting that is all the three parties fault.
perhaps they should look at all the free housing given to bogus asylum seekers and dubious immigrants whom the Labour and Con/Dem alliance have let and are still letting into the country. And also the expense of the cultural refurbishment of the Local authorities properties as asylum seekers must have a list of new items in properties such as a Internet connection and free phone! that they occupy, instead of the British families who should be occupying them.
Remember that the British National Party is the only party who will put British people at the top of the list for Housing and will through sound economics make more homes more affordable!!!!

What did you do in the war Daddy an Apt Poem for Today

What did you do in the war Daddy

from the Wigan Patriot

What did you do in the war Daddy , the war to save our race. Come on, please tell me true Daddy, I am sure it’s no disgrace….

Did you march with your British brothers Daddy, did you hold our banner high, or did you just sit at home and watch our country die?

Did you take to the streets Daddy, when right was on our side, or did you think of your own skin, and run away to hide?

When you saw the jobs for “Muslims only” Daddy, did you shout out loud in protest, or did you keep silent just like all the rest?

When the union bullies told you Daddy not to vote for our men, did you tell them all to go to Hell and not come back again?

Did you speak out for the truth Daddy, did you spread the word, or did you live in fear Daddy and not let your voice be heard?

Please tell me what you did Daddy. I’ve often wondered who could see the British race overrun, and why we are so few.

You need not feel ashamed, my son because I had a dream, to open up my kinfolk’s eyes to Islams infernal scheme.

But when I spoke, they turned away and closed up their ears. I could not make them understand the reason for my fears, and when we marched we were so few, just fifty men and me. The others stayed at home in fear and watched it on TV.

I’m proud to say I played a part and say that I fought well, that’s why I lost my livelihood and wound up in a cell.

The reason that we lost, my son was not that we weren’t brave, but that the ones we battled for were not worth our while to save

Another £1 Billion Set to be Added to the EU Membership Finacial BLackhole

Another £1 Billion Set to be Added to the EU Membership Bill

The British National party Newsroom

On the same day that the ConDem regime announced massive cuts to frontline services to British people, the European Parliament voted in a new budget which is set to increase the cost of British membership of the EU membership by nearly a billion pounds every year.

MEPs voted to increase the annual EU budget from nearly £108 billion this year to more than £114 billion in 2011, a rise of 5.9 percent. There were 546 votes in favour of the budget, with only 88 against (including, of course, the British National Party’s two MEPs, Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons).

The issue goes now goes into arbitration between MEPs, EU ministers and the European Commission, with this year's budget being rolled over into 2011 if no deal is done by January.

Nearly £400 million has been allocated to finance the new EU diplomatic service which will open offices in New York, Beijing and Moscow, despite all EU members already having embassies in those nations.

Another EU budget allocation which was doubled end was that of the “entertainment” department. This body puts on champagne receptions and courtesy limousines, amongst other things.

Most of the increased spend would however be directed toward agricultural subsidies and aid to the Continent’s poorer regions, particularly those southern European nations who are already struck by financial instability.

It was therefore not surprising to see almost all the Greek, Spanish and Portuguese MEPs vote in favour of the budget, with many rebelling against their political group policy on the matter.

The Lisbon Treaty has put more pressure on the budget by giving the EU new tasks and creating new senior posts, something which David Cameron claimed to have opposed but who now, infamously, accepts as a done deal.

* The EU’s Budget Commissioner has also proposed a new VAT tax which, if approved, will be applied in all member states.

Commissioner Janusz Lewandowski has announced that he wants to revivie stalled plans for a taxation system across all 27 member nations to help finance the EU’s operations.

Other taxes under consideration include levies on carbon emissions, air transport, financial transactions or bank profits.

EU chiefs have already indicated that they want to scrap the remains of

Britain’s multi-billion pound annual rebate.

Islamists terrorise Met Police so This is England Today

So this is England
In this shocking video you can see what has become of our nation through the traitorous actions of the 3 main political parties. 
 

Secret Green Climate Warming” Hoax Tax Emerges: £1 Billion in “Carbon Emission”

Now, the Secret Tax Emerges: £1 Billion in “Carbon Emission”

The BNP Newsroom

In what is the inevitable result of the “climate warming” hoax against which the British National Party alone warned, taxpayers are to be hit with a new £1 billion secret tax hike on “carbon emissions,” it has emerged.

The tax, which was not mentioned by Chancellor George Osborne in his Spending Review speech to the House of Commons, was contained in the small print of the accompanying documentation.

The nature of the new tax and its difference from previous “carbon emission” tax proposals makes it clear that the new tax is nothing but an additional way of raising revenue to help clear the deficit.

Previous “carbon emission” tax proposals which were due to be introduced in Spring next year would have seen companies buy “allowances” at £12 for every tonne of carbon dioxide they emit.

If companies reduced emissions, they would then receive rebates in relation to the amount they “saved.”

Now however, the scheme will simply charge companies per tonne of carbon dioxide no matter what.

The new tax will, it has been estimated, add 11 percent to the energy bills of British companies which will inevitably be passed on to the consumer.

Reports indicate that about 5,000 large and medium-sized companies with bills of more than £500,000 per year will bear the brunt of the new tax.

The business community was unanimous in its rejection of the tax plans which will cause a ripple increase in the consumer inflation index across the board.

Stephen Robertson, director-general of the British Retail Consortium, was quoted as saying that his organisation was “surprised and dismayed that the £1bn per year participating businesses will put in to the Carbon Reduction Commitment scheme is no longer to be recycled to participants but is instead to be pocketed by the Exchequer.

"A tax of this size surely merits a mention in the Chancellor's speech. It is appalling that the Government is sneaking this in, introducing a new burden on businesses that are trying to create new jobs to offset the public sector cutbacks and growing the economy to generate the tax base to pay down the debt."

Additional reports quoted analysts from PriceWaterhouseCooper as saying that the new tax will cost an extra £76,000 per year in the first year, rising to £114,000 per year by 2015, for a business with an average £1 million gas and electricity bill.

The shock effect of this tax and the retardation it will have on medium size enterprises is massive.

The BNP was the only party to warn from the beginning that “climate change” was little more than an attempt to extort taxpayers in Western countries by using the “threat” of temperature changes as a reason to raise taxes.

Now that warning has come home to roost as the ConDem regime has latched onto the ongoing “climate change” scam as yet another method through which they can raise taxes to pay off their madcap schemes which have caused the deficit in the first place.

The new tax clearly has nothing to do with paying for “climate change” and has everything to do with paying for the massive borrowing that the previous Labour regime and their ConDem twins have engaged in to keep their bankster friends bailed out, to keep the foreign aid budget going, to keep up Britain’s EU membership fees and to pay for the Afghanistan war, amongst other madcap schemes.

The UK Governments £83 Billion Cut with 500,000 Job Losses vs the BNP Financial Plan of £83 Billion in Cuts With No Job Losses

The ConDem Plan=£83 Billion Cut with 500,000 Job Losses vs the BNP Plan= £83 Billion Cut With No Job Losses

The British National party Newsroom

The British National Party’s plan to cut the budget deficit consists of slashing all expenditure not in Britain’s interests with no job losses — in marked contrast to the ConDem plan which will cause half a million people to lose their jobs and much further economic damage further down the road.

The £83 billion which the ConDem regime claims is necessary to bring down the budget deficit will bring unprecedented misery to the British public and the economy.

The 500,000 projected job losses will have a massive ripple impact upon welfare and ancillary business which are dependent on state contracts — but all of that could have been prevented by using simple logic and cutting those things not serving any useful purpose.

The British National Party has long argued that the best way to reduce the deficit is simply to cut expenditure which is not vital to Britain’s national interest.

Areas which could be cut immediately without impacting any frontline services to the British people would include:

- Halting British involvement in the Afghanistan war which would cut £5 billion a year off the deficit. The cost of that war has steadily escalated over the years, and will cost even more in the near future as the compensation payouts to the thousands wounded carry on being paid out for decades to come.

- Halting the ‘asylum’ racket which costs Britain around £4 billion per year. There are no legal asylum seekers in Britain, and all such claims are bogus. Asylum seekers who have crossed dozens of safe countries to reach soft-touch Britain are just illegal immigrants, and nothing else.

- Halting the immigration swindle which costs Britain around £13 billion per year. This figure was calculated by Migrationwatch and is a compilation of the direct costs of benefits, housing, incarceration costs, schooling and what the immigrants then send home by way of financial repatriations.

- Halting the £9.9 billion per year foreign aid budget. This figure is set to increase even more under ConDem plans to set foreign aid at 0.7 percent of Britain’s Gross National Income. There is no excuse for giving British tax money away while there are massive shortfalls at home.

- Halting British membership of the European Union which, according to estimates by the Bruges Group costs Britain at least £60.1 billion per year gross, or £50.6 billion net.

According to the Bruges Group figures, this amount is made up as follows:

- £28 billion for business to comply with EU regulations;

- £17 billion of additional food costs resulting from the Common Agricultural Policy;

- £3.3 billion - the value of the catch lost when the Common Fisheries Policy let other countries fish in our territorial waters;

- £14.6 billion gross paid into the EU budget and other EU funds.

In addition, the Bruges Group says, since 1973 the UK has made contributions to the EC budget of almost £213.6 billion gross or £66.3 billion net. By 2013, this figure will have increased to £299.8 billion gross, or £102.2 billion net.

Finally, Britain's accumulated trade deficit with the other EU member states since we joined has risen to £359.5 billion.

If the ConDem regime had the interests of the British people at heart, they would first have cut all of the expenditures listed above before putting the boot into civil servants and the economy in general.

But then again, those who are familiar with the Tory and Lib Dem leadership know that patriotism and a desire to protect Britain are the very last things those people think about.

ConDems Foreign Aid Budget is Twice as Much as British Higher Education Budget Outrage

Scandal: Foreign Aid Budget is Twice as Much as British Higher Education Budget

British National party Newsroom

Evidence of the vicious anti-British nature of the Westminster parties has come with the “education budget cut” announced by the ConDem regime — which inadvertently revealed that the foreign aid budget is now twice as high as the higher education budget.

The shocking news was contained in the announcement by Chancellor George Osborne that the spending review cuts have meant that the higher education budget will be cut from £7.1 billion to £4.2 billion by 2014.

As bad as that news is, a quick look at the “ring fenced” foreign aid budget reveals that even prior to the recession, more money was being put aside for foreign aid than for higher education.

A “revised spending budget” issued by the Department for International Development (DFID) in June 2009 showed that the foreign aid budget for 2009/10 was £6.8 billion and was set to rise to £7.7 billion in the 2010/11 financial year.

The DFID announcement has deliberately understated the figures, hiding the true cost with an administrative trick. The figures they announced are only the direct aid programme, and not the total cost, which is called the “Gross Public Expenditure on Development” (GPEX) – which adds nearly £2 billion each year to total DFID expenditure.

For example, the GPEX in 2007/08 amounted to £6.027 billion, of which £5.2 billion was direct aid. The GPEX for 2006/07 was £7.4 billion, of which £4.9 billion was direct aid, and the GPEX for 2005/06 was £6.6 billion, of which £4.4 billion was direct aid.

This means that in the financial year 2010/2011 the GPEX for the DFID amounted to some £9.9 billion.

Given the higher education budget cuts, this means that British taxpayers now spend more than twice as much handing out cash to countries like India and China than what is spent educating British kids.

The budget cut announced by Mr Osborne amount to a 40 percent cut in higher education teaching budgets.

In addition, universities will be allowed to charge higher tuition fees, which will mean that the debts with which those kids lucky enough to get into university leave those institutions, will be even higher than before.

According to a report which quoted Professor Steve Smith, president of the vice-chancellors' association, the stagnation of investment in the science budget has meant that Britain is “now one of the only countries in the industrialised world that is not increasing our investment in science and research.”

It seems that the ConDem regime, and its Labour twin, are perfectly happy to keep funding nuclear power India and buying schoolbooks in China than ensuring that British kids have a fair chance at obtaining a higher education.

How much more treason do they have to perpetrate before the public sees through the Westminster party scam?

* Mr Osborne also announced that the government will establish a new £150m national scholarship fund to support students from “disadvantaged backgrounds.”

While the principle behind such a scheme is praiseworthy, observers have pointed out that the ConDem’s own definition of “disadvantaged” has generally meant to be those of ethnic origin.

Time will tell if this scheme is just another affirmative action handout or no

Solidarity — A Nationalist Union Which Wins Cases

Solidarity — A Nationalist Union Which Wins Cases

The BNP Newsroom

Solidarity Trade Union National Executive member David Kerr has called on all patriots and Nationalists to join the Solidarity Trade Union and register with its website to receive regular updates.

The Solidarity site has recently featured articles looking at social inequality, the Liberal Democrat’s views on immigration, capitalism and cheap labour and the strikes on the London Underground. 

There’s also a thought-provoking article which asks how British workers can counter the power and influence of the establishment media — and especially the likes of the Sun. 

The most up-to-date articles include a look at the Labour leadership contest and the influence of the establishment Unions and an announcement that Solidarity will be looking into the whole banking system. Here they will also look at “practical alternatives to the banks like Credit Unions, the Islamic banking system, Zopas — 'zone of possible agreement' — and Local Exchange Trading Systems (LETS).”

The union is particularly interested in getting a wide range of views in their examination of the whole banking system and alternatives. Therefore BNP members/sympathisers who have experience in the financial sector or an interest in economics may wish to participate in this debate.

Mr Kerr reminded patriots that Solidarity does not go in for political vetting: “we just win cases and do our job.”

Many disciplinary cases have been won for members, but more serious cases have been taken to Tribunal. Often settlements can be brokered by the Union in the interests of our members.

Recently our Representatives won a settlement for a member who was not correctly paid the National Minimum Wage over many months and compensation for another worker who claimed he was a victim of 'religious discrimination' by a public employer.

As the latter case highlights, although most of our cases are related to everyday disputes at work, we are not afraid of taking on discrimination cases whether political, religious or other grounds.

Solidarity is the only union that favours economic Nationalism and resists all attempts to discriminate against or harm the interests of British workers.

Join the Union now!

Join for just £5 a month by clicking on this link.

If you prefer to pay by standing order you can request a form from: Solidarity, P O Box 93, Spennymoor, DL16 9AN, United Kingdom.

UK Leftists Union Leaders and Third World Sadists

Western Leftists and Third World Sadists

by Paul Bogdanor
Andy Newman is a member of Respect Renewal. He is on the National Steering Committee of the Stop the War Coalition. Recently he paid tribute to a pair of “great socialist heros” [sic].
One of them was a military dictator who banned trade unions and opposition parties. And here is the other:

Samora Machel was a former nurse and the son of a peasant, who became a guerilla leader in the Frelimo army to defeat the brutal Portuguese colonialist rule over Mozambique. He was then elected to became Mozambique’s first president.

Newman’s Machel comes across as a saintly figure:

He was determined to prevent a new elite forming… Machel used to say, there are no small or big people, all people are equal.

All this is nonsense. Machel left no doubt as to his political proclivities. He championed the “wise leadership” of Maoist China, celebrated the “glorious tradition” of Stalinist Vietnam and Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and promised to establish the “dictatorship of the proletariat” under his Frelimo “vanguard” in Mozambique. [1]
Machel was not “elected to became Mozambique’s first president.” He came to power by murdering his rivals:

The accused were given anything between 15 and 80 lashes… Executions were carried out by strangulation, blows with the butt of a rifle, stabbing, or even burning with firebrands. [2]

Machel was not interested in preventing a “new elite.” He was interested in forming a totalitarian elite. His secret police force quickly became notorious for its savagery:

Some 100,000 people are thought to be held in nearly 30 camps on suspicion of opposing Frelimo’s policies. The inmates, including many women and children, are made to work 12 hours a day. The effects of fever, exhaustion and disease are exacerbated by brutal treatment. Beatings and rape by the guards are commonplace in the camps, say the escapers. [3]

A foreign detainee met the victims of Machel’s concentration camps:

Some had owned small businesses or farms; two had owned taxis. The government had simply taken these from them and thrown the owners into prison.
Most had been transferred from Machava Prison, where they had been tortured. They held up swollen and scarred hands to show where knives had been inserted between tied fingers and twisted, so that the knuckles were cut and prized apart. Some had been thrown into chin-deep water in a squatting position and had weights piled on their heads. Others had their faces held over spikes while guards danced on their shoulders – all this to find if they owned more property, or if and where they might have some money hidden. [4]

Witnesses reported seeing inmates reduced to “walking skeletons.” Kept underground, “Many prisoners suffocated to death.” Beatings occurred “invariably twice a day, with whips and sticks.” Under interrogation, a condemned prisoner “was willing to confess anything. All he wanted was to avoid an agonizing death.” Forced labour was “unbearable as we had nothing to eat.” [5]
Any minority that incurred Machel’s displeasure was a target. After Machel personally ordered the imprisonment of Mozambique’s 7,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses – men, women and children – the state media disclosed that many would be “crippled for life” as a result of torture. [6] Even children who refused compulsory “training” in Castro’s Cuba were not spared. “We sent them to re-education camps, for forced labour,” boasted Machel. “Some of them have vanished from schools.” [7]
According to a high-ranking official, “Frelimo had in 12 months of governance proportionally tortured and executed more people than the Portugese in 500 years of colonial rule.” Such criticisms could not go unanswered, so the official was put to death as well. [8]
Needless to say, Machel’s state terrorism had nothing to do with helping the impoverished masses. Quite the contrary: within months of his takeover, Frelimo cadres were “active along the Tanzanian frontier trying to prevent thousands of Mozambiquans escaping from famine.” [9]
Why do Western far leftists admire Third World sadists such as Samora Machel? Why would they make a hero out of a dictator who inflicted systematic torture and murder, concentration camps, religious apartheid, slavery and famine on one of the world’s poorest societies? I can think of two possibilities:
1. They want to impose the same tyranny and commit the same atrocities here.
2. They can’t stomach that kind of regime in Britain but they consider it appropriate for the population of an African country.
If the first explanation is true, they are totalitarian psychopaths. If the second is true, they are obnoxious racists. Which one fits Socialist Unity?
 Perhaps Andy Newman will tell us?

British People Put Last 40,000 British Jobs to Go, Defence Budget Cuts but Foreign Aid Increase

British People Put Last Again: 40,000 British Jobs to Go, but Defence Budget Cuts Less Than Foreign Aid Increase

BNP Newsroom

Some 40,000 British people are to lose their jobs in terms of the defence budget cuts which are in real terms a billion pounds less than the increase in the foreign aid budget, a BNP News analysis has revealed.

The current UK defence budget is £43.8 billion, and the 8 percent cut will see around £3.5 billion shaved off this figure.

This reduction will result in the scrapping of the Royal Navy’s flagship, the mothballing of one of two aircraft carriers being built, the phasing out of UK-built aircraft to fly on the remaining carrier, the closing down of army bases, a reduction in the number of standing army personnel and a downsizing in the number of military vehicles and arms.

At the same time, the “ring fenced” foreign aid budget is to be increased from its current £9.1 billion to over £13.1 billion, an increase of over £4 billion as the ConDem regime is committed to spending 0.7 percent of Britain’s Gross National Income on foreign aid.

The disparity in expenditure has proven once again that the interests and jobs of British people have been made subordinate to those of foreigners.

David Cameron and the rest of the ConDem regime, enthusiastically supported by their Labour Party clones, would rather see 40,000 British people lose their livelihoods than have foreign aid to nuclear power- and spaceship-launching India cut.

The total budget cuts in the “public spending review” are set to amount to some £83 billion, according to a report in a Tory-supporting newspaper.

Observers have pointed out that if the defence budget cuts alone will cause 40,000 job losses, the number of job losses which will be caused by the budget cuts in other departments will be astronomical.

It is not, of course, only the direct civil service jobs which are negatively affected by these cuts. A large number of ancillary enterprises who employ private workers are also dependent on state contracts. As these are cut, the job loss effect will ripple out further and further.

Ironically, the £83 billion which the ConDem regime seeks to implement is precisely the amount which could be shaved off the budget by cutting foreign aid, immigration, asylum, EU membership and the illegal foreign wars.

* The defence budget cuts will see the Royal Navy reduced to its smallest size since Henry VIII’s time.

Marianne Top French Magazine courts the BNP's Nick Griffin MEP !

Marianne courts Nick!

   Author Martin Wingfield

 OCTOBER 2010: NICK Griffin is to be interviewed by the prestigious French weekly political magazine, Marianne.


 The interview will be to seek Nick's opinion on the growing evidence, identified by experts on European politics, that nationalist political parties are having a much greater influence today on mainstream politics.
"I also want to collect Mr Griffin's opinion on his influence on the European Parliament. Does he think he has one and what kind of influence is it?" explained journalist Snejana Jovanovic.
Paris-based Marianne has a circulation of 300,000 copies per week which topped at 580,000 with French news magazine record breaker "The True Sarkozy" (right) in April 2007.

Read more at http://www.nickgriffinmep.eu/news
Listen to interviews from Nick griffin and Andrew Brons
at RWB Euro News 

Thinking of Supporting Socialism Warning Left-Wing Bloodbaths

Left-Wing Bloodbaths 
Radical leftists would have us believe that they stand for democracy, progress, human rights and social justice – but when they seize power, they impose slavery, terror, famine, concentration camps and mass murder. As the Marxists used to say, this is no accident. 

General John Kekes, Why Robespierre Chose Terror

The human costs of radical left-wing ideology during the French Revolution: “A remarkable feature of the ideological frame of mind is that those in its grip actually believe these justifications for disemboweling, lynching, mutilating, burying alive, drowning, and hacking to pieces their unfortunate victims.”

Paul Bogdanor, The Communists As They Really Are

Quotations not taught in the average history class.

Paul Hollander, The Distinctive Features of Repression in Communist States [PDF]

Comprehensive analysis of communist tyranny and mass murder all over the world.

David Marcus, Famine Crimes in International Law [PDF]

Superb paper on the role of the state in creating famines, with detailed case studies of communist famines in the Soviet Union, Ethiopia and North Korea.

Steven Bela Vardy and Agnes Huszar Vardy, Cannibalism in Stalin’s Russia and Mao’s China [PDF]

Cannibalism was one of the countless horrors awaiting the victims of communist famines and purges.

Soviet Union - Pre-Stalin Sergei Melgunov, The Record of the Red Terror [PDF]

Lenin mercilessly tortured and massacred hundreds of thousands after 1917.

Peter Boettke, The Soviet Experiment With Pure Communism [PDF]
Peter Boettke, The Political Economy of Utopia: Communism in Soviet Russia, 1918-1921 [PDF]
Peter Boettke, Soviet Admissions: Communism Doesn’t Work [PDF]

Lenin, Trotsky, Bukharin and other Soviet planners admitted to inflicting catastrophe on tens of millions.

Nicolas Walter, The Legacy of Bolshevism [PDF]

A British anarchist on the Bolshevik concentration camps.

- Genocides Inquiry Reveals Lenin Unleashed Systematic Murder of 200,000 Clergy
Communist Reign of Terror Killed 200,000 Clergymen

Victims were “crucified on royal gates and shot in the basements of the Cheka, scalped, strangled, drowned and submitted to other bestial tortures.”

Soviet Order to Exterminate Cossacks is Unearthed
Peter Holquist, “Conduct Merciless Mass Terror”: Decossackization on the Don, 1919

Bolshevik genocide against the Don Cossacks.

Samuel D. Sinner, The Open Wound: The Genocide of German Ethnic Minorities in Russia and the Soviet Union
Samuel D. Sinner, The German-Russian Genocide: Remembrance in the 21st Century [PDF]

Atrocities included “mass rape of the elderly, women and children, mass drownings, prolonged torture sessions, mutilations, hacking up of bodies, mass shootings of hundreds, even thousands in a single action, the holocaust of entire villages – including the burning of all inhabitants and building structures.”

Edige Kirimal, Complete Destruction of National Groups as Groups: The Crimean Turks
Aurelie Campana, Surgun: The Crimean Tatars’ Deportation and Exile [PDF]

Massacres, famines and ethnic cleansing wiped out hundreds of thousands of Crimean Muslims.

Aleksandr M. Nekrich, The Punished Peoples [PDF, 4.9 MB]
Aurelie Campana, The Massive Deportation of the Chechen People [PDF]
Elza‐Bair Guchinova, Deportation of the Kalmyks (1943–1956) [PDF]
For Victims of Stalin’s Deportations, War Lives On

Genocidal deportations of national minorities created an apartheid system that lasted for decades.

- Famines Roman Serbyn, Famine in Ukraine

Summary of the 1921 and 1933 famines.

Kazuo Nakai, Soviet Agricultural Policies in the Ukraine and the 1921-1922 Famine [PDF]
Roman Serbyn, The First Man-Made Famine in Soviet Ukraine, 1921-1923

Forgotten Bolshevik famine, in which millions died.

Simon Ertz, The Kazakh Catastrophe and Stalin’s Order of Priorities 1929-1933 [PDF]

Soviet grain confiscations killed a third of the population of Kazakhstan.

James Mace, The Man-Made Famine of 1933 in Soviet Ukraine: What Happened and Why
James Mace, The Famine: Stalin Imposes a Final Solution
D’Ann Penner, Stalin and the Ital’ianka of 1932-1933 in the Don Region
Michael Ellman, The Role of Leadership Perceptions and of Intent in the Soviet Famine of 1931-1934 [PDF]
Michael Ellman, Stalin and the Soviet Famine of 1932-33 Revisited [PDF]
Stanislav Kulchytsky, Why Did Stalin Exterminate the Ukrainians?
Roman Serbyn, The Ukrainian Famine of 1932-1933 as Genocide in the Light of the UN Convention [PDF]
Roman Serbyn, Is There a “Smoking Gun” For the Holodomor?
Roman Serbyn, The Holodomor: Reflections on the Ukrainian Genocide [PDF]
Sergei Maksudov, Genocide Remembered
Nicolas Werth, The Great Ukrainian Famine of 1932-33 [PDF]
Yevhen Zakharov, Legal Classification of Holodomor 1932-1933 in Ukraine and in Kuban

This Soviet famine was the worst peacetime mass murder in the history of Europe.

Michael Ellman, The 1947 Soviet Famine and the Entitlement Approach to Famines [PDF]

Another forgotten famine, in which the Soviets withheld food from the victims.

- Purges Harvest of Bones: A Geologist Uncovers One of Stalin’s Killing Fields
A City Built on Bones
Forest Skulls May Tell Where 30,000 Stalin Victims Lie

Examples of the huge mass graves containing victims of the Soviet regime.

Poisons Tested on Stalin’s Prisoners

The Soviets, like the Nazis, perpetrated medical experiments on conscious victims.

Top Soviet Denounces Stalin’s Gulags [PDF]

The true scale of the Gulag.

- Death Tolls Robert Conquest, Coming to Terms With the Past

Glasnost revelations about the Soviet death toll.

Papers on Soviet Repression Statistics

Post-Cold War academic papers on Soviet mass murder.

Steven Rosefielde, Documented Homicides and Excess Deaths [PDF]

Demonstrates that the number of killings documented in the Soviet archives was only a fraction of the total, which reached 10 million during the 1927-38 period alone.

- Post-Stalin David Satter, The System of Forced Labor in Russia [PDF]
Juliana Geran Pilon, Slave Labor and the Soviet Pipeline [PDF]

Slavery in the post-Stalin Gulag.

Who Says No Soviet Concentration Camps? [PDF]
Peter Reddaway, Inside Russia’s Concentration Camps [PDF]
Alexander Shatravka, Man of Peace Finds None in Soviet Camp [PDF]
The Gulag: Lost Millions
Human Rights Survey Deplores Soviet Prison Camp Conditions [PDF]

The atrocities included forced starvation, medical neglect, systematic beatings and death by radiation.

Soviet Prisoners Exposed to Fatal Radiation in Uranium Mines
George Schopflin, Radiating a False Picture: Focus on the Difference Between Soviet PR and Reality

On the Nuclear Gulag, where victims were murdered by radiation poisoning.

Eastern Europe Red Army Troops Raped Even Russian Women As They Freed Them From Camps
Anthony Beevor, “They Raped Every German Female From Eight to 80”
German Rape Victims Find a Voice at Last

The Soviets mercilessly gang-raped millions of women and girls in Eastern Europe.

Jean C. Bingle, Labor For Bread: The Exploitation of Polish Labor in the Soviet Union [PDF]
Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, Interrogation Methods of the Communist Secret Police in Poland [PDF]

Hundreds of thousands were killed by deportation, massacre and torture in Poland.

Tamas Stark, Genocide or Genocidal Massacre? The Case of Hungarian Prisoners in Soviet Custody [PDF]
Agnes Huszar Vardy, Forgotten Victims of World War II [PDF]

The Soviets deported hundreds of thousands of Hungarians to their deaths.

Communist Atrocities to be Aired at Prison Camp Commander Trial

Mass killings in the Romanian Gulag.

Iron Curtain’s 100,000 Dead
Germans Find Mass Graves at an Ex-Soviet Camp

The Soviets used former Nazi concentration camps to wipe out political prisoners in East Germany.

Death Camps, Torture, Experiments on Children
Germany’s Guilty Secret: Beaten, Drugged, Skewered
“More Than 1,000 Died” Trying to Flee East Germany

Systematic torture, medical experiments and mass murder in East Germany.

Jeffrey Herf, An Age of Murder: Ideology and Terror in Germany [PDF]

The terrorism and antisemitism of the Stasi-sponsored Red Brigades in West Germany.

Michael Portmann, Communist Retaliation and Persecution on Yugoslav Territory [PDF]
Piles of Bones in Yugoslavia Point to Partisan Massacres
Italy Foots the Bill For Tito’s Ethnic Cleansing

Communist mass murder in Yugoslavia, now erased from the historical record.

Bulgaria Ran Brutal Camps For Prisoners [PDF]

The brutality of the Bulgarian Gulag.

Justice Delayed For Those Tortured Under Communism

Tens of thousands were tortured and murdered in Czechoslovakia.

Afghanistan Afghan Driver Says He Saw Soldiers Blind and Strangle Children [PDF]
Afghans Disclose Deaths of 11,000

Communist mass murder in the pre-invasion years.

Atrocities and Violations of Human Rights and International Law in Afghanistan [PDF]
Eyewitnesses to Afghanistan at War [PDF]

Accounts of terror bombing and other war crimes.

Rosanne Klass, Lifting the Curtain on Afghanistan’s Horror [PDF]

Freedom House describes the Nazi-style methods of the Soviet invaders, including massacre, torture, maiming and rape.

The Soviets’ Ugly Exit [PDF]

Retreating Soviet forces scattered millions of anti-personnel mines, planted explosive devices disguised as toys in order to blow off children’s limbs, poisoned food supplies and waged chemical warfare against the civilian population.

M. Hassan Kakar, The Story of Genocide in Afghanistan

Academic history of the Soviet genocide.

China - Mao Two Millions [PDF]
Human Rights in Mainland China [PDF]
Uncounted Millions: Mass Death in Mao’s China
Scholars Continue to Reveal Mao’s Monstrosities

The communists slaughtered many tens of millions in China through massacre, slavery and famine.

Basil Ashton et al., Famine in China, 1958-61 [PDF]
Jasper Becker, Ex-NPC Chief Admits Maoism Killed Millions
Vaclav Smil, China’s Great Famine: 40 Years Later [PDF]

How the communists caused the greatest man-made catastrophe in the history of the world.

Miriam and Ivan D. London, The Other China: The Three Red Flags of Death [PDF]
Miriam and Ivan D. London, The Other China: The Case of the Missing Beggars [PDF]
Miriam and Ivan D. London, Hunger in China: The “Norm of Truth” [PDF]
Miriam and Ivan D. London, Hunger in China: The Failure of a System? [PDF]

Forced starvation under communism.

Yongyi Song, The Cultural Revolution and the War Against Fascism [PDF]
Yongyi Song, The Dao County Massacre of 1967 [PDF]
Youqin Wang, Student Attacks Against Teachers: The Revolution of 1966
Youqin Wang, The Second Wave of Violent Persecution of Teachers: The Revolution of 1968

Mass murder during the Cultural Revolution.

Ex-Inmate Recalls Life in China’s Gulag [PDF]
“We Felt We Had Been Buried Alive”

“Class enemies” endured slavery and mass death in concentration camps.

- Post-Mao

Stephen W. Mosher, China’s One-Child Policy: Twenty-Five Years Later

Population control ideology and the resulting atrocities against tens of millions of women.

China: Human Rights Violations and Coercion in One-Child Policy Enforcement [PDF]
Chinese Region “Must Conduct 20,000 Abortions”

Forced abortions and infanticide under the totalitarian one-child policy.

China Reviews “Apartheid” For 900m Peasants

The cruel system of class discrimination imposed on hundreds of millions of peasants.

Tibet Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy, Kuxing: Torture in Tibet [PDF]

Report on communist savagery against the population of Tibet.

Mongolia Mass Buddhist Grave Reported in Mongolia

The communist slaughter in Mongolia.

North Korea Jack Rendler, The Last Worst Place on Earth: Human Rights in North Korea [PDF]

From Henry D. Sokolski, ed., Planning For a Peaceful Korea [PDF]. An excellent overview of this totalitarian slave state, where millions have been starved to death or murdered in concentration camps.

Jack Rendler, Horrific Conditions and Suffering Make It the Last Worst Place on Earth

A shorter and more recent account.

Fiona Terry, The Deadly Secrets of North Korea

Forced starvation has claimed millions of victims, primarily the elderly, the young and the sick.

David Hawk, The Hidden Gulag: Exposing North Korea’s Prison Camps [PDF, 8 MB]
Death, Terror in N. Korea Gulag
North Korean Prison Guard Remembers Atrocities
7 Years of Torture in N. Korean Prison Camp
North Korean Imprisoned at Age 10 For Grandparents’ Dissent
Gulag Nation         

Extensive evidence of torture and mass murder in the North Korean Gulag.

Regime That Kills Babies of Foreign Blood
“I Saw an Entire Family Being Killed”
Young Howard, The Hidden Gulag

Torture, medical experiments and racist infanticide.

Vietnam - Pre-1975 Lam Thanh Liem, Ho Chi Minh’s Land Reform: Mistake or Crime? [Excerpt]
50 Years On, Vietnamese Remember Land Reform Terror

The bloodbath inflicted during the North Vietnamese land reform was effectively whitewashed by leftist pseudo-scholars in the West, but the victims were not so quick to forget.

The Blood-Red Hands of Ho Chi Minh

Stomach-churning accounts of communist mass murder during the Vietnam War.

The Massacre of Hue

In this communist massacre, thousands of men, women and children were mercilessly slaughtered.

Stephen T. Hosmer, Viet Cong Repression and its Implications For the Future [PDF, 4.9 MB]

Detailed analysis of Viet Cong mass murder campaigns.

The Human Cost of Communism in Vietnam: 1-31 32-65 66-99 101-23 [PDF]

Compilation of research and newspaper reports on communist terror in Vietnam.

- Post-1975 Le Thi Anh, Let the Vietnamese Speak For Themselves [PDF]
M. Stanton Evans, Westerners Ignore Vietnam Gulag [PDF]
Ginetta Sagan, Vietnam’s Postwar Hell [PDF]

Concentration camps and mass murder in post-1975 Vietnam.

Declaration of Disinherited Vietnamese on Human Rights [PDF]
Testament of Patriotic Prisoners in Vietnam [PDF]

Victims of state terror beg the outside world for help.

Nguyen Cong Hoan, Human Rights in Vietnam I [PDF, 2.8 MB] II [PDF, 2.7 MB]
Nguyen Cong Hoan, Why I Escaped From Vietnam

Defector’s account of totalitarian slavery in post-1975 Vietnam.

Doan Van Toai, In Vietnam’s Gulag, the Captives Die a Slow Death [PDF]

Survivor’s account of the hidden mass killings of political prisoners in the Vietnamese Gulag.

Theodore Jacqueney, They Are Us, We Were Vietnamese [PDF]
Ginetta Sagan and Stephen Denney, Re-education in Unliberated Vietnam: Loneliness, Suffering and Death
Stephen J. Morris, Glasnost and the Gulag: The Numbers Game [PDF]
Anh Do and Hieu Tran Phan, Camp Z30-D: The Survivors

Starvation, torture and murder in the Vietnamese Gulag.

Hanoi Regime Reported Resolved to Oust Nearly All Ethnic Chinese [PDF]
Vietnam Refugees Fleeced of Possessions, Expelled [PDF]
Escape From Vietnam: Nightmare at Sea Haunts Refugee Who Survived [PDF]
Vietnam Goes on Trial in Geneva Over Its Refugees [PDF]

Communist ethnic cleansing literally drove the Chinese population into the sea, where hundreds of thousands of boat people suffered and drowned.

Stephen Denney, Human Rights and Daily Life in Vietnam

Ongoing political persecution and class discrimination.

Laos 40,000 Reported Held in Harsh Laos Camps [PDF]
Thorns Appear in Lotus Land

Tens of thousands of political prisoners were sent to die in concentration camps.

The End of the Hmong
Lao Human Rights Council, White Paper on Genocide in Laos

The Vietnamese and Laotian communists waged a genocidal war against Hmong tribespeople.

Cambodia - Civil War The Agony of Phnom Penh [PDF]
Khmer Rouge’s Bloody War on Trapped Villagers [PDF]
“I Watched Them Saw Him 3 Days” [PDF]
Priest Won’t Leave Refugees Despite Khmer Rouge Threat [PDF]

The savagery of the Khmer Rouge was easily discoverable before 1975.

President Ford, News Conference on Cambodia [PDF]

President Ford warns of “an unbelievable horror story” if the communists capture Cambodia.

Fear of Cambodian Bloodbath Seen Key to Senate Vote on Aid [PDF]

More bloodbath predictions; anti-war leftists in Congress successfully cut off the aid shortly afterwards.

- Killing Fields The Khmer Rouge: Rampant Terror
Yin Savannary, Diary From Darkness [PDF]
Asian Blood Bath [PDF]
Cambodia – An Outlaw Nation [PDF]

Early reports from survivors and journalists.

Leo Cherne, The Terror in Cambodia [PDF]
Leo Cherne, Cambodia – Auschwitz of Asia [PDF]

The chairman of the International Rescue Committee describes the genocide.

Craig Etcheson, The Number: Quantifying Crimes Against Humanity in Cambodia
Bruce Sharp, Counting Hell

Studies demonstrating that the death toll was in the millions.

Henri Locard, State Violence in Democratic Kampuchea (1975-1979) and Retribution (1979-2004) [PDF]

This is the best summary of the Khmer Rouge bloodbath.

Cambodia Steps Slowly Toward a Genocide Trial

Feeble attempts to prosecute the butchers.

Africa Ethiopian Ex-Rulers Go on Trial
Peter Niggli, Ethiopian Resettlement: Vomit and Death [PDF]
Dawit Wolde Giorgis, Power and Famine in Ethiopia [PDF]

The communists caused a million deaths through terror and forced starvation in Ethiopia.

National Society for Human Rights, Ending the Angolan Conflict [PDF]
National Society for Human Rights, Criminal Liability in Angola [PDF]
Global Witness, A Crude Awakening [PDF]
As Guerrilla War Ends, Corruption Now Bleeds Angola to Death

The MPLA dictatorship’s responsibility for civil war and mass starvation in Angola.

Terror of Maputo Jail

Torture, rape, slavery and starvation in Mozambique’s Gulag.

John Sweeney, Inside the Terror-Camp

The genocidal massacre of tens of thousands in Zimbabwe.

Cuba Mary Anastasia O’Grady, Counting Castro’s Victims
Cuba’s Lost Population

Mass killings under communism in Cuba.

Deaths in Prison [PDF]
Victims of Che Guevara [PDF]
Executions by Raul Castro [PDF]

Shooting dissidents, murdering pregnant women, drowning children, etc.

The Cuban Rafter Phenomenon
Mary Anastasia O’Grady, The Lives of Cubans

The communists also murder boat people as they try to escape.

Alfred G. Cuzan, Castro’s “Revolutionary” Despotism [PDF]

The enslavement of the Cuban people.

Armando Valladares, Torture in Castro’s Cuba
Armando Valladares, Castro’s Gulag
From the Prisons of Cuba: A Cry For Help [PDF]
Chronicle of an Unforgettable Agony: Cuba’s Political Prisons
Cuba’s Abuses of Psychiatry

The realities of political imprisonment and torture in Cuba.

Nicaragua Nicaragua Executions Put at 500-1,000 [PDF]

Mass executions started within weeks of the Sandinista takeover.

Jose Esteban Gonzalez, Remember Nicaragua [PDF]

Nicaragua’s leading human rights activist on Sandinista persecution and terror.

New Regime, Old Methods
Inside Communist Nicaragua: The Miguel Bolanos Transcripts [PDF]

Defectors accuse the Sandinistas of atrocities in Nicaragua and aggression throughout Central America.

Inside the Sandinista Regime: A Special Investigator’s Perspective [PDF, 2.4 MB]
Defector Describes “Bloody,” “Corrupt” Regime [PDF]

A former high-ranking official explains how the Sandinistas murdered thousands.

Alfred G. Cuzan, Sandinista Goals Were Evident Long Ago [PDF]
Alfred G. Cuzan, The Nicaraguan Revolution: From Autocracy to Totalitarian Dictatorship? [PDF]
John Norton Moore, The Secret War in Central America and the Future of World Order [PDF, 5 MB]

Comprehensive record of the Sandinista role in provoking violence and war throughout the region.

J. Michael Waller, Will Sandinistas Face Justice?
J. Michael Waller, Tropical Chekists: The Sandinista Secret Police Legacy in Nicaragua

How the Sandinistas tried to build a police state through torture, rape, mutilation and murder.

Peru Peru Indians Take Up Arms Against Rebel Terror

Mass murder and enslavement of the poor by the Shining Path terrorists in Peru.

Other - Campaigns For Eugenics Jonathan Freedland, Master Race of the Left

“Nearly every one of the left’s most cherished, iconic figures espoused views which today’s progressives would find repulsive... Indeed, contempt for ordinary people and outright racism were two of the defining creeds of British socialism.”

- Collaboration With Fascists Oliver Kamm, The Far Left Meets the Far Right: A Historical Note

Japanese communist support for genocidal racist expansionism.

Nazi-Soviet Relations 1939-1941

Soviet-Nazi collaboration was the immediate cause of World War II.

E. Germany Ran Antisemitic Campaign in West in ’60s
Stasi Supported West German Neo-Nazi Groups

East Germany essentially created the neo-Nazi movement in West Germany.

- Collaboration With Jihadists Paul Bogdanor, Leftists For a Second Holocaust
Eugene Goodheart, The London Review of Hezbollah

How the radical left embraced jihadist mass murderers who plan to annihilate the Jewish people.

Steven Stalinsky, Islamist-Left Alliance A Growing Force
John Perazzo, Platforms of the Enemy

The radical left’s open collaboration with the most virulent hatemongers in the Middle East.

- The Post-9/11 Left Brink Lindsey, Terrorism’s Fellow Travelers [PDF]
Paul Hollander, The Resilience of the Adversary Culture

Radical leftists blamed the victims and excused the perpetrators of the 9/11 massacres.

Edward Alexander, Suicide Bombers and Professors
Edward Alexander, Ward Churchill and the Politics of Campus Extremism

The murderous fanaticism of the American campus left.

Railway Privatisation Horro as Chickens Come Home to Roost

Railway Privatisation Nightmare Chickens Come Home to Roost

  BNP Newsat the British National Party Newsroom

The announcement that rail fares are to rise by around 40 percent over the next four years is the inevitable result of the Tory-generated and Labour-supported railway privatisation project.

Despite the much-vaunted “privatisation” programme having stared in 1993 with legislation enacted by the John Major government, the railways network has remained chaotic, particularly with the splitting of track ownership from the train operator companies.

Furthermore, although the original idea was to “save the taxpayers money,” the reality is that the state has been forced to continue subsidising all the railway companies, and in some cases, even take them back under state control.

This happened as recently as last year with the National Express East Coast company, which took over the Scotland-London route running through Anglia. That company is still directly owned by the Department for Transport through a subsidiary, Directly Operated Railways Limited.

Exactly how much the “privatised” rail network costs the British taxpayer is still the subject of much speculation. According to an article published by the authoritative Daily Finance website, the total UK rail subsidy runs into the £5 billion a year figure.

According to that analysis, state “money changes hands between track owner Network Rail and train operating companies on a weekly basis, wasting millions of pounds of taxpayers' money” because of the complex system of multiple ownership of the network.

“Network Rail pays the train operating companies, such as Virgin Trains, when its equipment causes delays. But the companies pay Network Rail when it does better than expected,” the Daily Finance continued.

“Network Rail claims that in the six months to November 2009, the companies paid it a net contribution of £58m.

“Exactly how much each train operator is paid or the most paid for a single incident is, apparently, ‘commercially sensitive’ but Network Rail can pay out anything from £20/minute of delay to £400/minute. Delays to south-east commuter trains are the most expensive.

“There's a rail regulation department with a boss on not far short of £200,000, though, on top of National Rail, whose boss gets more than £600,000 in basic, plus a near 50 percent bonus for the great running of the service. The trains may not run on time, but there's a chuffing lot of money going round,” the article concluded.

Now, commuters have been told that rail fares are set to rise by as much as 30 or 40 percent as a result of “changes to subsidies” to be announced next week.

According to reports, Transport Secretary Philip Hammond is “known to want to continue investment in the railways and is not ruling out fare rises to help pay for it during a time of retrenchment in public spending.”

Apparently Mr Hammond has fold train operating companies that the formula by which regulated rail fares are set may have to be changed.

What he actually means is that their taxpayer-funded subsidy will be cut, which will leave them with no alternative but to increase their fare prices dramatically, if they still want to pay profits to their private investors first.

Currently, almost half of all train fares are regulated, including popular commuter routes, season tickets and long-distance off-peak journeys.

Once again, it is the taxpayer and consumer who will be forced to pay for the ongoing disaster inflicted upon us by the Westminster parties.