European Parliament Briefing Paper: Christians under attack

Briefing Paper: Christians under attack

  Martin Wingfield Nick Griffin MEP Euro News

 JANUARY 2011: 
In the European Parliament in Strasbourg there will be a debate on the recent attacks on Christians in Nigeria, Egypt and Iraq. Tomorrow there will be a vote on the issue.


 This is a briefing paper provided by European Parliament researcher Patrick Harrington, who is also a key figure in the independent nationalist trade union Solidarity.
"Following the latest at tacks against Christian communities in several countries, the EPP Group has taken the initiative of asking the EU and the High Representative Ashton to plan urgent and concrete measures to defend Christian communities and freedom of religion worldwide. Statistics tell us that last year 75% of religiously-motivated violence in the world was against Christians.
There have been several attacks against Christians during the Winter period, particularly in Nigeria, Iraq and Egypt."
Notes:
Two people were killed and at least 16 wounded in a series of bomb attacks on the homes of minority Christians in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, on Dec. 30.
Over Christmas, six people were killed in attacks on two Christian churches in northeastern Nigeria and six were wounded by a bomb in a Roman Catholic Church on the island of Jolo in the Philippines.
A New Year bombing outside a church in the Egyptian city of Alexandria killed 23 people and wounded dozens, and prompted demonstrations by both Christians and Muslims.
The Vatican has expressed  fears that the attacks, combined with severe restrictions on Christians in countries such as Saudi Arabia, are fuelling a Christian exodus from the Middle East.
Jerzy Buzek, President of the European Parliament, had this to say on the issue:
"It is clear that there are some fundamentalist elements seeking to create sectarian division within the Iraqi society where Christianity has been an integral part of the fabric of Middle-Eastern society for two millennia. We monitor the situation closely, I will continue to highlight the issue, at every possible opportunity, of the situation of Christians in Iraq and the broader Middle East region,"
My opinion:
You should take a strong stance against all attacks on Christians.
The situation in several countries is little short  of an undeclared war on them.
I think the profile of this issue needs to be highlighted by articles and interviews to show the leaders of the Christian communities in these countries and in Europe that there are MEPs who are concerned at the persecution taking place.

Left-wing bias? It's written through the BBC's very DNA, says Peter Sissons | Mail Online

Left-wing bias? It's written through the BBC's very DNA, says Peter Sissons

For 20 years I was a front man at the BBC, anchoring news and current ­affairs programmes, so I reckon nobody is better placed than me to ­answer the question that nags at many of its viewers — is the BBC biased?
In my view, ‘bias’ is too blunt a word to describe the subtleties of the ­pervading culture. The better word is a ‘mindset’. At the core of the BBC, in its very DNA, is a way of thinking that is firmly of the Left.
By far the most popular and widely read newspapers at the BBC are The Guardian and The Independent. ­Producers refer to them routinely for the line to take on ­running stories, and for inspiration on which items to cover. In the later stages of my career, I lost count of the number of times I asked a producer for a brief on a story, only to be handed a copy of The Guardian and told ‘it’s all in there’.

Veterans: Peter Sissons with Six O'Clock News' colleagues Moira Stuart (left) and Anna Ford soon after he joined the BBC

If you want to read one of the few copies of the Daily Mail that find their way into the BBC newsroom, they are difficult to track down, and you would be advised not to make too much of a show of reading them. Wrap them in brown paper or a copy of The Guardian, would be my advice.

I am in no doubt that the majority of BBC staff vote for political parties of the Left. But it’s impossible to do ­anything but guess at the numbers whose beliefs are on the Right or even Centre-Right. This is because the one thing guaranteed to damage your career prospects at the BBC is letting it be known that you are at odds with the prevailing and deep-rooted BBC attitude towards Life, the Universe, and Everything.

At any given time there is a BBC line on everything of importance, a line usually adopted in the light of which way its senior echelons believe the political wind is ­blowing. This line is rarely spelled out explicitly, but percolates subtly throughout the organisation.

Whatever the United Nations is associated with is good — it is heresy to question any of its activities. The EU is also a good thing, but not quite as good as the UN. Soaking the rich is good, despite well-founded economic arguments that the more you tax, the less you get. And Government spending is a good thing, although most BBC ­people prefer to call it investment, in line with New Labour’s terminology.

All green and environmental groups are very good things. Al Gore is a saint. George Bush was a bad thing, and thick into the bargain. Obama was not just the Democratic Party’s candidate for the White House, he was the BBC’s. Blair was good, Brown bad, but the BBC has now lost interest in both.

Trade unions are mostly good things, especially when they are fighting BBC managers. Quangos are also mostly good, and the reports they produce are usually handled uncritically. The Royal Family is a bore. Islam must not be offended at any price, although ­Christians are fair game because they do nothing about it if they are offended.

Queen Elizabeth II was not a favourite at the BBC

The increasing ­tendency for the BBC to interview its own reporters on air exacerbates this mindset. Instead of ­concentrating on interviewing the leading players in a story or spreading the net wide for a range of views, these days the BBC frequently chooses to use the time getting the thoughts of its own correspondents. It is a format intended to help clarify the facts, but which often invites the expression of opinion. When that happens, instead of hearing both sides of a story, the audience at home gets what is, in effect, the BBC’s view presented as fact.

And, inside the organisation, you challenge that collective view at your peril. In today’s BBC only those whose antennae are fully attuned to the corporation’s cultural mindset — or keep quiet about their true feelings — are going to make progress.

Moreover, making progress these days doesn’t mean just achieving the influence and prestige of a senior job with the world’s greatest broadcaster, once considered reward enough. For those breaking through into the senior ranks, there’s now big, big money and a gold-plated pension to be had

Which is why, although there has been plenty of grumbling on the shop floor about the escalation of pay for top BBC managers in recent years, it’s muted. No one wants to wreck his or her chances of a well-paid place in the promised land. The newsroom has many talented journalists of middle rank, who know what’s wrong with the organisation, but who don’t rock the boat for fear of blowing their futures.

Not that talent alone is enough to get on at the BBC. The key to understanding its internal promotions system is that, for every person whose career is advanced on ability, two are promoted because it solves a problem for management.

If Human Resources — or Personnel, as it used to be known — advise that it’s time a woman or someone from an ethnic minority (or a combination of the two) was appointed to the job for which you, a white male, have applied, then that’s who gets it.

But whatever your talent, sex or ethnicity, there’s one sure-fire way at a BBC promotions board to ensure you don’t get the job, indeed to bring your career to a grinding halt. And that’s if, when asked which post-war politician you most admire, you reply: ‘Margaret Thatcher’.

What the BBC wants you, the public, to believe is that it has ‘independence’ woven into its fabric, running through its veins and concreted into its foundations.
The reality, I discovered, was that for the BBC, independence is not a banner it carries ­principally on behalf of the listener or viewer.

Rather, it is the name it gives to its ability to act at all times in its own best interests.
The BBC’s ability to position itself, to decide for itself on which side its bread is buttered, is what it calls its independence. It’s flexible, and acutely sensitive to which way the wind is blowing politically.

Complaints from viewers may invariably be met with the BBC’s stock response, ‘We don’t accept that, so get lost’. But complaints from ministers, though they may be rejected publicly, usually cause consternation — particularly if there is a licence fee settlement in the offing. And not just ministers, if a change of Government is thought likely.

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair was a BBC favourite according to Sissons

Back in October 1995, the then leader of the Opposition, Tony Blair, made his big speech at the Labour Party Conference — but on the Six O’clock News, there was every chance it would be upstaged by the verdict in the sensational OJ Simpson trial in the U.S., which was expected at the same time. Even at the conference itself delegates crowded round TV sets for the news, and it wasn’t to see a rerun of Tony.

Alastair Campbell, Blair’s press secretary, was having none of it. He faxed the BBC and ITN ‘not to lose sight of the importance to the country of Mr Blair’s speech’. He wanted it to lead the news. ITN ignored his letter. The BBC made sure the Six O’clock News complied.

That spoke volumes. Such a letter from a spin doctor would have been binned on principle by the great editors of ITN who I worked for before joining the BBC. At the BBC, the instinct, faced with such a plea from a party of the Left standing on the brink of power, was to do as requested.

All Governments work hard on influencing the news agenda, but what I found uncomfortable during my years presenting the Nine O’clock and Ten O’clock News was how blatant those attempts to pressurise the BBC became, particularly at General Election time.

The party machines all had the internal BBC telephone numbers of the editors of the major news ­programmes, whom they would try to bully in person, both before and after the programmes went out.

I remember a night when the ­editor’s phone rang after the Nine O’Clock News. It was a direct call from No 10, questioning her judgment and complaining about our political coverage that night. This wasn’t a call to the director-general, or the head of news, but to a harassed and tired editor who had been on duty for 14 hours.

‘Tell him to get stuffed,’ I advised her. She rolled her eyes, knowing better than I the row that would be caused by that.
One of the things that always ­puzzled me at the BBC was the lack of inspirational leadership. There were exceptions.

My favourite ­editor when I chaired Question Time was notable for his total ­loyalty to me and the rest of his team. If things went wrong, he saw it as his job to take the bullet. That was not the BBC way — the old ­saying ‘Deputy heads must roll’ still raises a smile, but only because of the truth it contains.

Most of the managers I had over me had status and rank, on paper. In reality, they had little talent except the dark art of surviving at the BBC and alienating those who were answerable to them. I was always struck by how few senior people there were to look up to and to learn from.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html#ixzz1BkVP91sk

eft-wing bias? It's written through the BBC's very DNA, says Peter Sissons | Mail Online: "

Free Speech, Oldham, Hypocrisy and Ukip's Paul Nuttall

Free Speech, Oldham, Hypocrisy and Paul Nuttall

The British National Party Newsroom

By Andrew Moffat--
Free speech is indivisible.  It does not submit to transient political vogue.  Either it is open to all or it does not exist.  It is not selective.

Andrew Moffat

Many members and supporters will be incensed at the treatment of Derek Adams, the British National Party’s candidate in the Oldham by-election. 

At a hustings meeting, Mr Adams was told to leave the hall.  His views – and those of his party – were deemed to fall beyond the Orwellian parameters of permissible discussion. 

The establishment parties and their pale shadow, Ukip, were not prepared to be challenged by Mr Adams on questions judged beyond the artificial boundaries of what may and may not be discussed.  Nor were the candidates prepared to subject themselves to controversial public debate and the right of the public to scrutinise them and their policies.

Complicit in this type of conduct, during the campaign, was Paul Nuttall, MEP and Ukip deputy leader. 

What action did he take to safeguard British free speech and condemn the disgraceful treatment of Mr Adams?  Worse, on the recent Sunday Politics Show, the interviewer stated that Nuttall had refused to engage in debate with Mr Adams, who had to be interviewed separately.

Inexplicably and paradoxically, Nuttall is prepared to debate with those who have treacherously surrendered Britain’s sovereignty to the EU.

Contempt for the Electorate

In June 2009, when elected MEP for the North West, Nuttall made a point of joining the ‘establishment’ parties in dismounting the stage at the announcement of Nick Griffin’s election. 

By his action – no doubt designed as a sycophantic bow to attract the approbation of the establishment – Nuttall displayed his disdain for the electors of his North West constituency.

Failed Objectives

Nuttall knows that Ukip is acknowledged as a safety valve by those who have no allegiance to the concept of the British nation state, both to divide the patriotic anti-EU vote but also to marginalise the British National Party.  Nigel Farage has frequently boasted that his party’s existence has thwarted the BNP.

On the recent Politics programme, Farage made his sole point:  “I want us to thrash the BNP in this constituency.”   Farage and Nuttall have not stinted their party in that respect:  various estimates to date place Ukip’s eye-watering expenditure at anything between £40,000 – £60,000 – a fortune, merely to ‘thrash’ a fellow anti-EU party, which spent approximately £4000.

The result, however, was a disaster for Ukip and an own goal:  Ukip failed to ‘thrash’ the BNP.  It exceeded the BNP’s vote by a paltry 469 votes, at a cost of between £20-£30 in terms of its total vote or £85-£127 in terms of the aforementioned 469 votes.

Nuttall also failed in his own stated objectives:  he did not secure third place and he failed to secure double digit figures.  How much of his money did he contribute to the campaign?

Safety Valve and High Powered Meeting at the BBC

The establishment campaign to back Ukip began in earnest at an important, high level meeting between it and the BBC, prior to the 2004 European Parliamentary elections.  

There, the two organisations agreed to the promotion of Ukip, with the explicit purpose of stifling and undermining the potential of the BNP. 

Readers will have observed the special relationship between the BBC and Ukip, whose current leader, Nigel Farage, has received more appearances on Question Time than any other politician since it began over 30 years ago. 

Similarly, readers will have observed the contrast in the treatment meted out to Nick Griffin by the BBC and its specially selected audience on the one hand and that accorded to Farage, whenever the latter appears on the programme.

The agreement between the two organisations – which has similarly received the approval of allied establishment agencies – is not without obligations.

Ukip is permitted to imply a tough line on immigration but the small print in Ukip’s policy ensures that this refers to EU immigration and there is no policy to deny or revoke citizenship to such elements, erroneously assuming a Ukip administration many decades hence.

As has often been reflected, what is the purpose of preserving the integrity of the nation state when, as a consequence of massive and uninterrupted immigration, there will be no nation within the state worthy of preservations within 50 years?

Indeed, at the present rate of demographic change, there is every risk that the UK, or regions within it, will become Islamic and subject to Sharia law.

Should that occur, the ideal of preserving our ancient rights and freedoms from the EU will become an historical pipe dream. 

The Ukip leadership knows this.  Either elements within it, who should know better, will not act because, contemptibly, they are gutless and spineless or, as is also the case, certain elements will not act because they are complicit with the political process and therefore treacherous to their own members’  and national interests.

Pastor Martin Niemoller

Nuttall and his sanctimonious colleagues cannot fail to appreciate that Ukip’s success – which falls well below that of the BNP in Westminster elections – depends upon the BNP’s fortunes. 

Without the BNP, Ukip and its members would find themselves under similar pressure to that currently experienced by the BNP.

Pastor Martin Niemoller’s statement is relevant:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a communist; then they came for the social democrats and I did not speak out because I was not a social democrat; then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist; then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew; then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Where were Messrs Farage and Nuttall when Trevor Philips and the Government attempted to close down the BNP and alter its policies and fundamental constitution?

Nuttall’s EU Attendance Record

Demonstrative of Nuttall’s performance is his attendance record at the European Parliament.  VoteWatch records Nuttall as the MEP with the poorest attendance record in the UK, bar his colleague, Godfrey Bloom.

Nuttall attempted to defend himself on Sunday’s Politics programme, stating that he voted only on laws affecting the UK.

A perusal of the EU Parliamentary website, however, will demonstrate that Plenary sessions do not allocate voting matter according to countries. 

The main exception is regional or emergency funding, which is only available because of the financial contribution of the UK and is therefore opposed by the BNP’s two MEPs.

Attendance records, moreover, are based upon daily attendance not upon individual votes.

The North West’s constituents sent Nuttall to the EU to vote on legislation, directly or indirectly affecting the UK.  Nuttall must therefore justify his salary and explain his absence.

He might also care to explain why there is no Ukip MEP on the most important Parliamentary Committee, i.e. that which determines constitutional affairs and overseas the transfer of the UK’s sovereignty. 

The only MEP to mind Britain’s interests is Andrew Brons, of the BNP, whose attendance record in Parliament is presently first equal amongst the UK contingent.

Gross Hypocrisy

In spite of Nuttall’s knee-jerk political-correctness in terms of his theatrical hostility to the BNP, his stance in the EU is entirely different.

The long-standing Junius website contains many pages relating to Paul Nuttall.  Amongst them is one which describes his colleagues in the EFD, the EU Parliamentary group, co-led by UKIP. 

As Junius observes, the forerunner of the EFD, prior to Nuttall’s election in 2009, was the Ind Dem Group.  Georgios Karatzaferis, was a member and vice-president of the group in the European Parliament (2004-2007). 

In 2000, Karatzaferis stated: "The New World Order means that we are a puppet at the hands of the Jews... The Global government has taken place in Europe. The common currency too! They are dancing it to their tune. Do you know what kind of money the Jews are profiteering with these ups and downs? We are being led to the fulfillment of targets set 200 years ago."

Junius goes on:  “In 2001, the rhetoric became more menacing: "The Jews have no right to provoke, because they have filled the world with crimes".  He also challenged the Israeli ambassador to come and debate "the Holocaust, the Auschwitz and Dachau myth". 

The US State Department, in its Annual Report on Religious Freedoms in 2005, singled out LAOS, and its leader (and then MEP) Giorgos Karatzaferis, for promoting “radical nationalism, anti-Semitism, racism, and xenophobia”.”

Junius continues:  “Adonis Georgiadis, a LAOS Member of the Greek Parliament, has attracted criticism for his literary activities. A writer and publisher, he has been accused of promoting a book, Jews: the whole truth, by Konstantinos Plevris, himself a former LAOS member, which describes Jews as "subhuman" (p.582).

Plevris is critical of the Nazi regime for "not ridding Europe of Jewish Zionism", and states that Jews should be "rounded-up and executed within 24 hours" (p.742). Plevris, who describes himself in his book as a "Nazi" (p.600) also claims that former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is a "descendant of cannibals".”

Laos currently has two MEPs, attached to the EFD.

Elsewhere on the website is an account of the activities of some of the EFD’s MEPs, including overt and illegal racism, arson, ‘heiling’ Hitler and more.

Doubtless, this type of behaviour was instrumental in persuading Ukip MEPs Mike Nattrass and Nikki Sinclaire to leave the EFD.

The grave question therefore arises, why is it that Nuttall and his colleagues find themselves unable to resist repeated condemnation of the BNP, in order to parade their own politically-correct sycophancy, whilst simultaneously associating themselves with the EFD, some of whose members might cause the BNP to be imagined as a social democratic party?

Is this gross hypocrisy or is it, perhaps, to do with the additional funding EU Parliamentary groups receive, allied to the increased media exposure the EFD’s egoistic leader, Farage, receives?

* Andrew Moffat stood, twice, as a Parliamentary candidate for Ukip, achieving amongst its highest votes at the time.  He departed Ukip, inter alia, because of the leadership’s nonsensical hostility towards an anti-EU party and its determination to split the anti-EU vote.

Stalinist zeal of UK's Political Correct School Teachers

Stalinist zeal of PC teachers

  Martin Wingfield Nick Griffin MEP Euro News

 JANUARY 2011: A former Conservative councillor has written to Nick Griffin MEP with a worrying example of what is going on in our schools today.


 His letter tells of political correctness gone mad and of the Stalinist zeal of teachers and school bureaucrats in vilifying and humiliating youngsters who don't follow the PC code.
The gentleman wrote:
"I had hoped that the new government would right some of the wrongs caused by the last shambolic Labour government but have been sadly disappointed.
"I was appalled by the treatment your candidate received being frog-marched out of the hustings like a common criminal, when the police cannot even catch the real common criminals!
My grandson aged 14, has just been accused of xenophobia and racism because he told a joke about a Polish girl to a Polish boy in the school library and was overhead by the librarian.
He was frog-marched out of the school premises and suspended for two days.
The irony of this whole sorry affair is that I am an Honorary Captain in the former Polish Reserve Forces (Government in exile) and hold the Order of St. Stanislav.
So much for a family that is seen as anti- Polish?"
Responding on behalf of Nick Griffin MEP, Constituency Office manager Tina Wingfield wrote:
"Thank you for your correspondence regarding your grandson’s shocking experience with the self-appointed Politically Correct education police.
"Mr Griffin asked me to convey his sympathies to you and your family. He is well aware how truly alarming, upsetting - and indeed baffling - in can be to suffer the (over)reaction of the PC authorities when they perceive that an act of “racism” has been identified. In many of these cases, it certainly does appear that the world has gone completely mad!
"I understand that your contact details have been forwarded to a local British National Party representative (as requested), and I trust he will be able to assist you in bringing this matter to a sensible conclusion. A conclusion, one hopes, that does not result in a blemish on your grandson’s school record in the form of a documented “racist” incident, nor the diminution of his healthy sense of humour.
"The media, in collusion with Conservative, Labour and Lib-Dem politicians, has portrayed anyone associated with nationalist politics, or simply opposition to excessive and  unrestricted immigration, as ignorant, dangerous or mad - and often all three - for many years. Thankfully, the British public are beginning to see through this media smokescreen, designed simply to impede the inevitable progress of the only Party in British politics that truly reflects the fundamental concerns of the majority population.
"132,094 voters in the 2009 European Elections, for example, placed their faith in the North West Region British National Party candidate, Nick Griffin, in spite of the intense and vicious anti-BNP campaign waged against the Party by an alliance of the media, trade unions, and mainstream political parties.  Advances in communications technology, such as the internet, have moreover, provided the British National Party with the opportunity to by-pass the Establishment media, which is committed to maintaining the status quo. Our independent websites, coupled with a national monthly newspaper and nationwide leaflet campaigns, have enabled us to take our message directly to the public, and to show them that British National Party supporters are ordinary citizens from a range of social backgrounds and occupational professions who recognise that contemporary politics appears to be devoid of any semblance of common sense.
Please do not hesitate to contact Mr Griffin if you require any assistance."

Circulation of UK National anti-BNP newspapers declined again in December 2010

Circulation of anti-BNP newspapers declined again in December

Posted on15 January 2011 by Giuseppe De Santis. Tags: Daily Express, Daily Star, Independent on Sunday, Sunday Express, The Guardian, The Independent, The Observer, The Sun, The Times

As the MSM start the New Year as they mean to go on. busy printing lies about the British National Party, nationalists will be delighted to hear that the circulation of the ‘dead tree press’ declined again in December.
The Telegraph, Guardian, Times, Racing Post, Observer and Scotland on Sunday all posted average circulation figures more than 10 per cent lower than the same month a year ago.
Full breakdown of national newspaper circulation figures for December 2010:
(average sale; percentage change year on year – source ABC)
Dailes
Daily Mirror ; 1,133,440 ; -7.51
Daily Record ; 290,247 ; -7.79
Daily Star ; 713,602 ; -9.09
The Sun ; 2,717,013 ; -5.10
Daily Express ; 623,689 ; -7.98
Daily Mail ; 2,030,968 ; -3.89
The Daily Telegraph ; 631,280 ; -10.23
Financial Times ; 390,121 ; -2.67
The Herald ; 51,469 ; -7.78
The Guardian ; 264,819 ; -11.89
The Independent ; 175,002 ; -6.39
The Scotsman ; 41,572 ; -7.56
The Times ; 448,463 ; -14.01
Racing Post ; 49,274 ; -12.39
Sunday titles
Daily Star Sunday ; 336,868 ; -4.64
News of the World ; 2,600,985 ; -6.83
Sunday Mail ; 352,300 ; -8.95
Sunday Mirror ; 1,047,363 ; -5.92
The People ; 486,669 ; -8.64
Sunday Express ; 544,870 ; -7.74
Sunday Post ; 309,456 ; -7.55
The Mail on Sunday ; 1,951,783 ; -2.43
Independent on Sunday ; 150,437 ; -3.23
The Observer ; 301,457 ; -14.12
Scotland on Sunday ; 48,480 ; -11.77
Sunday Herald ; 39,831 ; -1.94
The Sunday Telegraph ; 490,322 ; -6.62
The Sunday Times ; 1,008,163 ; -9.44
It’s clear that more and more people are getting informed through the internet not only because it’s free but also because they can find stories that are deliberately ignored by MSM.
If it wasn’t for the internet no one would have known that Derek Adams was physically removed by the Police from hustings as no newspaper reported this story and this is not an isolated case.
So why should people spend a fair bit of money to buy newspapers that print rubbish?
Let’s hope that sooner rather than later one or more of those propaganda rags goes bankrupt.
GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

British Nursery School Children Accused of Bigotry by PC UK Govt

Nursery School Children Accused of Bigotry

    BNP News

Figures released under the Freedom of Information Act have revealed that 30,000 school pupils have been labelled racist or homophobic during 2008 and 2009.

The background of these cases relate to harmless school pupil jibes in the playground and at nursery, illustrating the sinister agenda of the government and the limits they will go to in order to politically indoctrinate school pupils.

It emerged that schools are duty bound to report any incidences of ‘racist’ or ‘homophobic’ jibes to their local education authorities who keep a register of all incidents.

Amazingly, it transpired that even toddlers in nursery schools have being penalised for using politically incorrect words.

A sinister aspect to the labelling of school pupils is that their ‘offence’ follows them on their permanent record into secondary school, and ultimately into young adulthood, as many employers require a pupil reference. This means that one harmless primary school jibe can affect an individual for the rest of their life.

As another example of the militant Marxist tendency of the state to subjugate and punish the indigenous people, an incredible 51 cases were reported to the police.

The history behind the figures relates back to 2000 when the Labour Government forced through an amendment to the Race Relations Act, which resulted in schools being required to report any ‘racist’ incidents to their local authority. They would then keep a register of school pupils who had committed an ‘offence’.

It is suspected that some schools fear being branded ‘racist’ and therefore do not report cases that relate to incidences where ethnic minority pupils are the perpetrators. However, many local education authorities criticise school heads who submit ‘nil’ returns, thus leading many heads to report incidences where the perpetrators are white but avoiding minority pupils for fear of being branded as racist.

The British National Party recognises that this is just another way by which the Government seeks to subjugate and indoctrinate the population through creating a climate of fear.

Targeting school pupils for minor language jibes is reminiscent of George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’ and illustrates that the Marxists currently in power will stop at nothing in their effort to increase their control on the population.

Only the British National Party can reverse this process by abolishing the draconian Race Relations Act and introducing sensible educational standards that are devoid of political correctness.

Nick Griffin MEP lights a candle for Persecuted Christians

MEP lights a candle for Christians

  Martin Wingfield Nick Griffin MEP Euro News

JANUARY 2011: 
ALTHOUGH the weather in Strasbourg was a little milder than the bitterly cold North West of England, it was still a little nippy when Nick attended a candlelight vigil yesterday evening.
He was lighting a candle for Christians being persecuted by Muslims in Middle Eastern and African countries. The vigil, held outside the European Parliament building, was organised to highlight the vote on the issue that is taking place there this morning.

British Workers Face Mass Unemployment and Redundancies as Govt Figures Reveal that Foreigners take 2 thirds of new Jobs

As Britons Face Mass Unemployment and Redundancies Figures Reveal that Foreigners take Two out of Three New Jobs

The British National Party Newsroom

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has published figures which reveal that foreigners take two out of three new jobs reducing the employment opportunities for the native British people.

As Britons Face Mass Unemployment and Redundancies, Figures Reveal that Foreigners Take Two Out of Three New Jobs

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) have published figures which reveal that foreigners take two out of three new jobs, reducing the employment opportunities for the native British people.

The figures show that of the 297,000 workers who started new job posts between July and September 2010 only 100,000 of them were indigenous Britons.

This means that only a third of all new jobs created during 2010 went to native British workers.

The news comes as the ONS also recently published figures which showed that youth unemployment has risen to a new record high of close to 1 million as unemployment figures increased by 49,000 to 2.5 million.

There are now fears that with youth unemployment so high and high numbers of new jobs going to foreign workers, we are facing the prospect of a ‘lost generation’ of young British people who will never find work. This will ultimately result in an increasingly fragmented society.

The ONS also revealed that since 2004, the number of native British people in active employment has decreased by 334,000 but almost 1.3 million foreigners have successfully found work in Britain.

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development recently announced that unemployment could soar by a figure of 200,000 to soon reach 2.7 million. In other words this would equate to 9% of the population.

The British National Party believes that Britain will face increasing economic decline until measures are taken to protect British jobs, cease preferential employment of minority groups and stop the influx of foreign workers into Britain.

Britain is facing economic collapse because the economy is credit-based and has a decimated manufacturing sector.

The British National Party recognises that real national wealth is governed by its ability to produce, and not from its ability to create soft service sector jobs which are easily exported abroad in order for big business to benefit from cheap overseas labour.

Save British Jobs and Families Join the British National Party here! 

How Multiculturalism destroyed the ancient Hebrews

Multiculturalism destroyed the ancient Hebrews

Written by John the Yank

It is rather amazing how so many Jews and Christians promote multiculturalism as the best thing ever to of happened to humanity. Strange it is how they only do this in western countries and ignore China as well as most of Asia. However that is not near as strange to me as their ignorance of what multiculturalism did to the ancient Hebrews. It is as if these people have never even read one word of the old testament in the holy bible. If they did they would realize that God commanded the original twelve tribes of Israel not to embrace other cultures that did not follow the instructions set forth by him in the form of the ten commandments. Many other laws can be found in the Book of Deuteronomy. First lets take a look at the Israelites upon their departure from Egypt, better known as the book of Exodus. God had stricken the Egyptians with ten plagues that had all but decimated the land of Egypt with the tenth killing all first-born Egyptian males. One of these happened to be Pharaoh's own son. This of course happened because of Pharaoh's refusal to release the Hebrews in order so they could go and worship the lord. So tell me then, if God embraces multiculturalism then why did he want the Hebrews to leave Egypt?  Couldn't the Lord see the value of the Hebrews embracing the culture of Egypt? Obviously not. He despised the culture of Egypt and wanted his people to have nothing to do with their idols and immoral sexual perversions. Now God did not see this in a racial sense. He saw it in a cultural and religious sense. That is why some Egyptians were allowed to join with the Hebrews upon Exodus. Perhaps another example of God's denial of multiculturalism can be seen with the nephew of one of his most devout followers, Abraham. The nephew's name was Lot and one day he and Abraham looked upon a piece of land. Abraham told him he could take whatever part of it he wanted. Lot chose the best area which was very close to the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham warned him that the cities were very wicked and it would not be a good idea to build a home there. However Lot ignored him and went there anyway. Well one day Lot had to flee the city along with his family and they barely escaped with their lives. God rained in fire from and brimstone from the sky and wiped Sodom and Gomorrah from the face of the earth like a modern day hydrogen bomb. So tell me once again, is God a racist because he hated the culture of Sodom and Gomorrah? What does he have against the homosexual culture of an entire city? The truth is he has never accepted any cultures that contradicts the one he has chosen mankind to follow. So back to the ancient Hebrews again. After they had left Egypt they had to wander in what the Bible calls the wilderness for a period of forty years. This meant they had no real place to call home. No country of their own. It wasn't until they finally reached the "promised land" that they could call themselves Israel. During this time they received an even further set of rules for how to live their lives as commanded by God. These can be found in the book of Deuteronomy. Yet despite these restrictions the Jews never were really content. They noticed the cultures of the other nations around them and decided they wanted to be more like them than the Children of Israel. One of the the things they did to be more diverse was to have a king to rule over them, just like like the other nations whom God disliked. Although he wasn't the first of their kings he is certainly the epitome of what went wrong in Israel. His name was Ahab and he married a woman who was not a Jew by the name of Jezebel. She of course wanted nothing to do with the culture of the Israelites and brought her own peoples foreign gods and practices into the twelve tribes of Israel. This led to complete disaster. The Jews began to marry non Jews and began to worship Baal who was the preferred God of Jezebel.Her marriage to Ahab is not the only occurrence of this sort of thing happening. King Solomon of Israel also did the same  with non Jews and thus the Children of Israel became an ancient melting pot. Multiculturalism was so rampant amongst  Israel that the laws and customs given to them by God were utterly forgotten. So lets jump ahead hundreds of years to the time of Christ as I don't have room in this article to chronicle every enriched mistake committed by the Israelites. The time of Christ has come about. The Jews still consider themselves to be the chosen people of God during this time and still manage to hold on to their temple in Israel. They try to live by the old customs and commandments. Yet they are a far cry from the Israelites from the time of Moses or Joshua. They have intermingled with other cultures for hundreds of years and there are literally no real Jews left. Compared to the days of old they are an absolute joke. Christ points out many flaws amongst their teachings and now the old laws are not even possible to follow even if they tried. He tells them that the future for them will not be one of the past. The temple will be destroyed and so will their birth records. I am of course talking of the Roman destruction of Jerusalem that occurred not long after Christ's death. The Romans burnt the temple to the ground and upon destroying their birth records made it impossible for a Jew ever to trace his lineage from that day on. Today there is not a Jew alive who can trace his history back to the original twelve tribes of Israel. This makes it impossible to establish a priesthood from then or until today. The pitiful truth of the matter is this: The acceptance of other cultures destroyed the original Twelve Tribes of Israel. We should all learn from this sad story and realize that it is permissible to embrace other cultures but to never allow them to become the norm. Lest we all become the modern day Jews.

British mothers and toddlers banned from council-funded playgroup for immigrants | Mail Online

• Local mum booked a place after mixed-race friend had recommended it

Two British mothers who were kicked out of a council-funded playgroup spoke of their humiliation today after being told the group was for immigrant families only.
Emma Knightley, 25, and Kimberley Wildman, 27, turned up at the 'Making Links' playgroup with their children Imogen, 21 months, and Olivia, 18 months.

But they were stunned when organisers at the centre in St Neots, Cambridgeshire, ordered them to leave after demanding to know 'what country are you from?'

Read more:
British mothers and toddlers banned from council-funded playgroup for immigrants | Mail Online: "

Amazing details of exactly what asylum seekers MUST BY LAW be given for free By Bolton Council & the Govt

Amazing details of exactly what asylum seekers MUST BY LAW be given for free.

Were you aware? No you were not... And you are not allowed to become aware either.

UK Freebies Here We Come!

ASYLUM SCANDAL

We know they're going to move asylum seekers in there. All the flats have been done up, central heating, the works. And they've put up brand new net curtains. That's a sure sign.

This is the kind of message that we have been hearing from angry locals all over Britain for the last couple of years. Many of the details change, but the total renovations and the highly visible net curtains crop up time and time again.

So too do the denials by local councils that the premises concerned are going to house asylum seekers. And almost as regular is the spectacle of those same councils being forced to eat their words within weeks as local residents wake up to find that new neighbours from Albania and Somalia have been moved in overnight.

The repetition of this pattern over the entire country has been something of a mystery up until now. Strangest of all has been the sight of so many councils telling lies to local residents and newspapers alike, even though the bureaucrats and local councillors telling the lies must know that they will be exposed and discredited within weeks. Just such a sequence of events, for example, played a major role in the by-election victory of our Robin Evans in Blackburn last autumn.

Secret Tenancy Agreement

The answers to this puzzle lies in a secret 26-page document the Revised Tenancy Agreement April 2001 - produced by the Secretary of State for the Home Office, acting through the Immigration and Nationality Directorate. Its very existence is supposed to be secret, Section 3 (p), on page 8 has this warning for people or companies thinking of making money out of housing asylum seekers:

The Landlord's attention is drawn to the Official Secrets Acts 1911-1989. The landlord shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that all individuals engaged on any work in connection with this Agreement have notice that these statutory provisions apply to them and shall continue to apply after the expiry or termination of the Term.

I don't know whether there is anything to make a reader who is not planning to be a signatory to the document subject to the provisions of the Official Secrets Act. I don't know, and I don't care. This document is so shocking that the truth about it has to be told. All I will say is that this article is published here solely on my authority, so if some Home Office legal bigwigs wants to prosecute over this shockingly democratic breach of their veil of secrecy, they know where to find me.

The anti-free speech restrictions continue on page 9, although by this time the section numbers seem to have become somewhat confused and very unclear. The actual meaning of Section (a) (iii), however, is all too clear:

The Landlord shall ensure that no press release or other public document containing Confidential Information is issued and shall not make any public statement concerning Confidential Information without the prior written approval of the Directorate and the Tenant Company as to its content and the manner and extent of its publication.

This is the answer to one key asylum mystery. This is why local councils and private companies alike, which are providing accommodation for 'refugees', continually refuse to comment or lie about their role in housing asylum seekers. Once they've signed up to this Agreement, they simply don't have a choice.

Detailed list of items for asylum seekers

So what doesn't the Home Office want you to know? Take a look at Schedule 1 on page 14, and you can see for yourself:

This list of requirements for any property being used to house asylum seekers begins, reasonably enough, by insisting that it shall be fit for human habitation, and have adequate light. Let us ignore the fact that many hundreds of thousands of our own people are either homeless or live in houses which are unfit for human habitation because, according to central government and local councils, there isn't enough money to deal with all the problems.

By the time we get to Section 1.3, the secret Agreement begins to lay out requirements which are beyond the reach not just of a relatively small number of the homeless or desperately poor:

all meters shall be of the quarterly type, the use of card or key meters shall not be allowed.

Isn't that nice? If you and your family fall into arrears on your utility bills, particularly electricity, you have to agree to the installation of a card meter set at such a rate that it gobbles up money. British families with children can't be officially cut off but if they run out of meter credit, their lights and heating go off anyway and they have to go to bed at dusk in the winter to try to keep warm. Such hardships are unacceptable, however, when it comes to asylum seekers.

Section 1.7 insists that The Property shall have a full and safe central heating system installed. Paraffin or bottled gas fed heating systems shall not be used. Perish the thought! Such devices are fine for British pensioners and young families shivering on the poverty line, but far too smelly, inconvenient and dangerous for Mr Blunkett's favourites.

New electrical goods

After laying down requirements on issues such as fire safety, the Schedule reaches Point 10: All electrical appliances in the Property shall be either new or, if second hand, shall be supplied complete with a twelve month guarantee. Well, I don't know about you, but when my wife and I got married and set up home, we had to get our first electric cooker and heaters from an auction, completely without any guarantee at all. And, of course, ordinary British youngsters moving into places of their own still face the same choice between paying through the nose for new equipment or going without guarantees.

Pages 15 and 16 go on to provide a long list of the things needed in the kitchen, living room, bedrooms and bathroom of each asylum property. As you're probably expecting by now, this features everything from chip pans to teaspoons, from an easy chair for each bed space to a Boots first aid kit.

The long 'General' list in Section 1.13 even proves that the popular observation about new net curtains showing that asylum seekers are moving in is true, since landlords are ordered to provide net & drawable curtains to all living rooms and bedrooms. They get everything, in fact, including the kitchen sink.

Free colour TV and licence paid!

One item does, however, stand out:

For Each Living/Dining Room

1 new twenty inch screen colour television complete with licence which shall be renewed at each annual anniversary of the Start Date throughout the Term.

Native Brits, of course, have to wait until they are 75 to get a free TV licence, and non-payment of this iniquitous tax is the biggest single 'crime' that puts British women in prison.

Many of those women can't afford a TV licence because they are struggling to bring up young families on pitifully low incomes. As a result, they are also often unable to afford proper child safety equipment. No wonder, then, that the Home Office bureaucrats being so generous with our tax money wanted to keep Section 1.20 secret:

Where there are to be children living in the Property, the Property shall include:

Adequate cot and highchair facilities

Appropriate sterilisation equipment;

Child safety gates on all stairways;

Childproof resistant devices or casement stays on all windows;

Appropriate play areas both inside and outside the Property.

Another thing that ordinary families on average incomes find a big problem is the occasional cost of major repairs. Asylum seekers have no such worries. Under this Agreement, the Landlord is bound to do all repairs within seven days, and to provide an emergency repair service (Section 1.23) where a threat to health and safety is apparent. The rest of us have to turn to Yellow Pages or pay for call out insurance, but it would be unfair to expect asylum seekers to do the same, wouldn't it?

Similarly favourable treatment is also specified in the Letting Provisions, Section (f) of which commits the Landlord to redecorate all parts of the Property in the third year of the Term. The rest of us may have to fork out down at "Do It All", but not Mr Blunkett's special guests.

Perhaps most ludicrous of all, however, is the next section (g) of the Letting Provisions, whereby the Landlord agrees: To have the exterior of all windows of the Property cleaned once every twelve weeks. I kid you not, it's there on page 7. What would George Formby have had to say about it?

Who pays?

So what do all these modcons and services cost the lucky occupants of such premises? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. When various bleeding heart liberals tell us how asylum seekers only get basic income support payments, they don't tell us about the Letting Provisions on page 4 of the Home Office's Revised Tenancy Agreement, do they? Yet these show that not only do asylum seekers get their TV licences paid for them, we also pick up the tab for their rent, water rates, gas, electricity and council tax bills.

Surely, you must think, these people must want to spend night after night on the phone to all their friends and family back home, telling them all about the wonders of Soft Touch Britain? A lot of their pocket money must go on paying the phone bill? No, as you probably guessed, they don't have to pay a penny. Section 1 ((b) of the Letting Provisions sets out the fact that the Tenant Company (funded by the taxpayer) agrees to pick up the phone bill for every single property provided by the Landlord in question to asylum seekers.

Don't forget that every single council or housing association in this land which is housing asylum seekers has signed this document. Thousands of councillors in the ruling party in Labour, Lib Dem and Tory councils alike have either read this document or studiously avoided seeing it so they didn't have to.

It only took one BNP member in one council to leak this insulting and undemocratic document. By contrast, we will never know how many Lib-Lab-Con merchants have seen this Agreement since it first started being used in 2001, but not a single one of them has had the guts to put the interests of democracy and their constituents before asylum seekers and the Home Office.

Take Note Bolton European Union Helps Everyone Except UK

European Union Helps Everyone Except Britain

The British National Party Newsroom

As British National Party MEPs prepared to vote in the final weeks of  last years European Parliament, the BNP renewed its call for withdrawal from the European Union (EU) as more UK money is being used to fund poor, developing and third world countries whilst UK industry suffers terminal decline and massive redundancies.

The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) is an EU body which administers a budget of €500m and its purpose is to help people suffering from being made unemployed and help them to reintegrate into the labour market.

According to the EU, the EGF was “created in order to provide additional assistance to workers suffering from the consequences of major structural changes in world trade patterns.”

In other words, due to the failed policies of globalisation many European countries face massive outsourcing of European jobs to third world countries as European workers could not compete with the low wage standard in the third world.

Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, Poland, Belgium, Austria, and even the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP) as recognised by the EU have all benefited from the EGF.

Recently, EU MEP’s voted on The Banana Accompanying Measures (BAM) in a motion whereby it was proposed that European and inevitably UK money will be used to prop up third world economies by investing €200 million to 10 third world ACP countries for four years.

In contrast, Britain has not received one penny from the EGF, though substantial portions of the EGF is funded from British taxpayers’ money.

Recently BNP MEPs voted on the following proposals to help other states who are suffering from redundancies forced by the failings of globalisation.

These include:

* Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: redundancies in ICT wholesale trade in the Netherlands

* Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: redundancies in diesel engine manufacturing in Poland

* Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: redundancies in the automotive sector in Spain

* Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: redundancies in the automotive industry in Poland

* Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: redundancies in retail trade in Spain

* Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: redundancies in the textile sector in Spain

* Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: redundancies in the manufacture of natural stone products in Spain

If passed, these states would all benefit from financial help.

Britain is also facing a massive decline in industry and has suffered a high number of redundancies. The BNP believes that British taxpayers’ money should be used to help alleviate the hardships our own industries instead of being used to help others.

As an example:

* The UK wholesale energy industry is facing criticism of its pricing policies. Three companies – British Gas, ScottishPower and Scottish & Southern have all increased prices, hitting our elderly at a time we are facing one of the harshest winters in decades. We believe that any portion of UK money currently sat in EU coffers should be reinvested back into helping our own wholesale trade industry, perhaps the energy industry in particular in order to lower energy prices.

* Manufacturing industry. Considering the recent depreciation of sterling, which helps to promote UK exports, we feel it would be wiser to reinvest UK funds back into the UK manufacturing industry. According to Confederation of British Industry (CBI) monthly Industrial Trends survey for December, a balance of 4 per cent more employers reported export orders being above normal rather than below it. With sterling currently weakening, we should reinvest UK funds currently sat in EU coffers back into our recovering export manufacturing industry.

* Automotive industry. In 2008 the automotive manufacturing sector employed more than 163,000 people but two years later it was down to 116,000 - that's a 28 per cent cut according Prof. Garel Rhys, chairman of Welsh Automotive Forum. We believe that UK funds should be reinvested back into the UK automotive industry.

* Retail trade industry. According to a recent report by The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) the recession has claimed over 6,000 insolvencies in the UK. We recommend that any UK portion of EU funds should be reinvested into helping those affected by insolvency.

* Textile industry. According to Co-operatives UK, a national trade body, textile jobs in Britain are lost at rate of one per hour. We say invest our portion of UK money residing in the EU back into helping our own textile industry

Naturally, none of these UK industries will receive any help whatsoever from the EGF.

It is important to make the point that the BNP does not oppose help being given to fellow Europeans hit by the failed policies of economic globalisation and the inevitable outsourcing of jobs to the third world, we only oppose UK taxpayers’ money being used for any other use than its reinvestment back into Britain.

The BNP believes that Britain should withdraw completely from the EU to ensure that all British taxpayers’ money is used solely for the benefit of British interests.

The Truth on Trial in Denmark

Truth on Trial in Denmark

The British National Party Newsroom 

 

A Danish author and historian is set to go on trial for his comments about Muslim sexual abuse and honour killings, in yet another country where the truth is no defence.

Lars Hedegaard, the president of The Danish Free Press Society, will appear in court in Denmark on 24 January on charges of “racism” for speaking about the issue of familial rape in Islamic cultures.

His supposed crime is stating that part of the so-called Muslim honour code includes the act of fathers raping their daughters as a punishment.

 
After drawing heavy fire from politically correct quarters in Denmark, Mr Hedegaard defended his comments by citing both recent honour crimes in Denmark and studies on the issue, including the British Crimes of the Community: Honour-Based Violence in the UK, which states that 17,000 women in Britain alone are victims of various honour crimes every year.

However, despite his reasoning, Mr Hedegaard’s chances in court do not look good, due to the anti-free speech laws entrenched in Denmark’s legal system.

A related case came to court just last month, when Danish MP Jesper Langballe was found guilty of “hate speech” for writing that some Muslims carry out honour killings on their daughters. In a trial reminiscent of Nick Griffin’s, when he dared to speak about the issue of Muslim grooming, Mr Langballe was summarily told that the truth is no defence.

In other words, the Danish “justice” system does not take into account whether a defendant is right or wrong, but merely if what he says could cause offence to those of other races or religions.

That being the case, Mr Langballe subsequently confessed, stating, "With this article in the penal code, I must be assumed convicted in advance. I have no intention of participating in this circus. Therefore I confess.”

He went on to criticise what he called a "culture of offence" that has taken root in Denmark and which is supported by its penal code. “In certain circles it has almost become a hobby to feel offended – by caricatures in a newspaper, by criticism of religion and so on,” he said.

The article to which he referred is Article 266b of the Danish Penal Code, which states:

“Whoever publicly or with the intent of public dissemination issues a pronouncement or other communication by which a group of persons are threatened, insulted or denigrated due to their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, religion or sexual orientation is liable to a fine or incarceration for up to two years.”

Mr Langballe was sentenced to a fine of 5,000 Danish Kroner (approximately £565) or ten days in jail. Both Mr Hedegaard and Mr Langballe also have to face separate libel suits for their remarks in addition to their original court trials.

As in Britain and all other Western countries, free speech is only free if you agree with the government; otherwise it always carries a very heavy price.

Who are the Real Extremists?

Who are the extremists?

Written by BC1959    At the British Resistance Website

Thanks to our very own Bertie Bert, who actually managed to get comments printed online via ''The Guardian'' some time back, regarding the supposed extremist views of the British National Party, and the real, active, and deadly extremism of the establishment. Through this, it is possible to allow readers to sample what opponents call ''British National Party extremism'', and the established puppet governments of the last few decades ''mainstream policies''. Let's take a look at the supposed ''extremist views'' of the British National Party, then look at the actual acts and eventualities of Labour and Conservative governments. Obviously, we have limited time and space for something too detailed, but friend, foe, and potential supporter alike will get the message. THE BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY: A snapshot of major socio-economic-cultural policy. Immediate withdrawal from the EU, saving in total some £200 Billion, including around £60 Billion direct costs to tax payer. Immediate withdrawal from all foreign conflicts, saving in excess of some £4 Billion. Immediate restoration of a scientifically backed death penalty for serious criminals, including child murderers and Paedophiles. Immediate suspension of the ''Equality and Human Rights Act'', which specifically alienates and targets the indigenous peoples of Britain. Nationalise the banks, railways, and transport system, and invest in environmentally sound 21st century systems. Rip up the ''engineered for complexity'' directives that have strangled the rights of workers in Britain, and create a patriotic economically viable investment programme to create jobs, and manufacture products that are required not 'wished for'''. Create an ideas bank, whereby engineering and innovative ideas are produced for the benefit of Briton's, and then exported to foreign markets on a ''surplus to requirements and necessity basis''. Make the NHS more effective, less bureaucratic, and create a system whereby British born students are offered important posts such as surgeons, nurses, and doctors. Retrain British born parents who have had their children, and wish to return, or turn to nursing, this would take the strain off the benefits system, and stop the ''need'' for importing foreign nurses. Halt all benefits to foreign immigrants, and invest the money instead in providing traditional education for home grown youngsters and those in further education. Strengthen Britain's borders, and create a non-military, and military ''National Service'' for two years. No school leaver should enter the jobs market without some form of education in social awareness, helping the elderly, and cleaning up Lib/Lab/Con damaged towns and cities. Introduce a return of the ''Guild System'', so as to produce leaders in specialist fields such as the sciences, engineering, and medical professions. The Guild system should also have a secondary level, whereby those with no natural ability in evidence, can train in subjects such as building, plumbing, and traditional trades useful to the general economic and cultural viability of the nation. THE CONSERVATIVE AND LABOUR GOVERNMENTS: A snapshot of policies previously and currently in evidence from 1948. 1948: introduction of mass immigration, with the immediate effect of robbing our people of opportunities for work, and putting a further strain on the public purse. It is alleged that the original idea was based on a 7 year contract, and then once Britain was stable, immigrants would leaver the UK. The National Health Service introduced, and almost immediately, used along with the benefits system and Welfare State, it produces a debt burdened system that allows commonwealth citizens usage once in the UK. 1958: Harold Macmillan states that we've ''never had it so good'', but in reality all we got was buy now, pay later personal debt, and a national debt that was still being paid for Churchill's secret deals with the bankers. 1962: Reports of an increase in TB and other diseases put a further strain on resources. Stabbings and inter ethnic strife also put a strain on police in the Midlands. Labour win the 1964 general election, and immediately pretend to push forward with ''the white heat of technology''. In reality, the motorcycle industry is dealt a blow, with imports at a record high, and manufacturing hit by strikes from Communist union leaders. By 1968, a mix of immigration from Asia, Africa, and the West Indies sees tensions very high and the national debt increasing. 1965: Abolition of the death penalty for a 5 year trial period. In 1969, it was formally abolished. In those four years alone, the country sees a rise in child rapes and murders, and many more serious crimes including the shooting of police officers ''whilst in the line of duty''. The abortion act is passed in 1967, along with the ''legality'' of homo-sexuality. These two alone were enough to give the ''permissive society'', and homosexuals, rights to engage in both infanticide and lewd acts under law respectively should they wish. 1968: First coins in decimal currency introduced. In 1971, the whole of the UK's currency went decimal, and not a single referendum was allowed. Ted Heath signs a raft of treacherous directives and laws, enabling the EEC (EU), to essentially dictate to the people of Britain. Roy Jenkins and other politicians from both Labour and Conservative parties, employ propaganda to enforce laws which tightens the grip on free speech. 1973, Edward Heath signs Britain up to the supposed ''European Economic Community'', officially. Not too well known is the fact that it was Heath who originally suggested, or agreed, to cut England and Wales into ''Regions'', but stopped at simply ''altering the boundaries'' under the Local Government act. Labour govern the UK under a series of mishaps and possible collusion with ''foreign entities'', and results in manufacturing becoming less competitive. Margaret Thatcher becomes Prime Minister in 1979, and immediately starts to ''capitalise'' the UK. She sells off national assets, and foreign companies, MD's and former and serving politicians, all enjoy the benefits... except the British public. Under Thatcher, employment increases to three million, and over the next 30 plus years, treaties with the EU, increases the anti-British laws, mass immigration, illegal wars, and destruction of economic stability and real growth, enabling foreign bankers to drown the British people in a tide of massive personal, and national debt. 2010: The final solution regarding the ''evil white British'' is implemented. The Coalition carries on as did Tony Blair, who himself essentially sold British traditional values off like a set of cheap jewelry. The EU now makes up over 75% of law in Britain, and the Tri-Partate dictatorship insists that the UK is coming out of recession, even though no attempt at regaining it's independence or a referendum on getting out of the EU is on the cards. Debt is now permanent, and over £50 Billion in interest alone continues to hammer the indigenous peoples. Mass immigration through continued backing of Cameron, who wants Turkey to join the EU, keeps the tax payers under foot. Fuel prices and the cost of living is destroying home and business like never before, and bonuses are still a fat fact of life for Cameron's friends and relatives in the jolly world of ''what debt crises?'' banking. War is no end in sight, and crime is kept a lucrative business for anyone engaging in it, with jails at an all time maximum. Fraud is part and parcel of political life, and millions are going hungry and dying of cold. As stated, this is a simple snapshot, intended to show readers that the word ''Extremist'' is a grave lie when including it in the same sentence as the British National Party. As bertie bert often asks: ''Who Are The Extremists?'' The British people and the British National Party have not got the blood of the innocent on their hands, nor do we support foreign wars. Make your minds up now, for another ten years of the above, and our very culture will be engulfed by the treacherous war mongers, financiers, and political prostitutes and rent boys, whom will make us all know the real meaning of ''Extremism''.

Mosy UK People Want Lower Immigration, Yet They Continue to Vote for More ?

Nearly 80% of People Want Lower Immigration, Yet They Continue to Vote for More

The British National Party Newsroom

Nearly four out of five people in Britain want to see a reduction in immigration, a Government survey has revealed.

The poll, commissioned by the Department for Communities and Local Government, shows that 78% of people in England and Wales want to see immigration into the UK cut back. Twenty-four per cent of participants said they would like to see immigration reduced a little, while 54% said they wanted it cut “a lot”. Conversely, only nineteen per cent said levels should stay the same, and just three per cent said there should be more.

These statistics are all the more remarkable considering that in addition to the 10,000 participants from England and Wales, the survey also added the views of two “boost samples” of 5,000 “ethnic minorities” and 1,200 Muslims, suggesting that it is not just the indigenous people of these islands that want to see immigration slashed.

This begs the question as to why such high numbers of people continue to vote for parties that have created the mass immigration problem in the first place and will only continue to worsen it.

Unfortunately, many may have been fooled by Prime Minister David Cameron’s posturing on the promise of an “immigration cap”, an impossible pledge for a country that is open to unlimited immigration as a member of the European Union.

Mr Cameron’s loophole-riddled promise of reducing visas for less skilled workers from outside Europe by a pathetic 6,300 a year is a pointless drop in the ocean for a country that lets in nearly 600,000 immigrants annually. It is made all the more insignificant by his scrapping of limits on intra-company transfers, his commitment to the EU/India Free Trade Agreement, which will ensure another 20,000 Indians per year gain access to work in Britain's IT sector alone, and his febrile desire to hasten Turkey’s accession to the EU.

The British National Party is the only party that promises to halt all immigration into Britain, with no misleading talk of caps, quotas or politically correct “moratoria”. If this policy is “racist”, then so is the majority of the population.
Please Donate to the British National Party Here