British national party Ideas: Devolution: Bringing Power to the People

Devolution: Bringing Power to the People

British National Party Ideas

We support the democratic nationalist principle that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralised competent authority.

The problem is that this hasty revision of the Constitution has developed a number of unacceptable anomalies. Thus, although English MPs are without authority over devolved decisions affecting the people of Scotland, Wales and Ulster, MPs from those places may vote on legislation affecting the English.

More remarkable, perhaps, is that they cannot vote on issues affecting their own constituents, as this is determined within their devolved chambers.

Another problem is that a number of powers wielded by local parliaments has emanated from authority that was previously overseen by our traditional counties.

In effect this placed power into the hands of pompous and overpaid professional politicians who, for the most part, have done not a stroke in their lives to create wealth but who have absorbed it in the course of their careers.

Such a typically New Labour shambles is a recipe for friction and for future division amongst the British family of nations.

The BNP’s solution to this interlocking group of difficulties is as follows:

- Devolve all powers properly capable of exercise to local level and revived county council government, returning to the ancient and traditional pre-1974 boundaries. These powers are to include control over planning.

- Create an English parliament in Westminster. This, and the Scottish, Welsh and Stormont parliaments would oversee such functions of the present devolved administrations as cannot sensibly be accommodated by the county councils.

- Create a pan-British parliament to oversee those policy areas currently determined by Westminster, plus those powers repatriated from the EU. This body would have its formal base in Westminster, though we envisage it would sit in rotation in each of the national parliaments.

- The BNP would create a standing invitation for Eire to join the pan-British parliament as an equal partner.

The House of Lords

The role of the Lords as a revising chamber, stripped of its political cronies, requires further assessment.

At this stage, however, we can state that we see an opportunity to introduce not a simply elected duplicate of the Lower House, but a body which might provide weight to specialised experience in certain fields, such as expertise in charities, community groups, industry, commerce, agriculture, the armed forces and such like.

There exists, therefore, the opportunity to bring to bear on government the objectivity of non-party political experts and individuals chosen on the grounds of talent and service.

Further work is needed so as to exploit this opportunity for better governance.

Citizens’ Initiative Referenda

The BNP proposes the introduction of citizens’ initiative referenda as an important check and balance on the political class.

Individual citizens need only collect the requisite number of electors’ signatures on any given petition initiative — the wording of which they themselves will determine — in order to compel the local or national government to hold the relevant referendum.

If passed by between 50 and 66 percent of the voting public, such a referendum would create a comprehensive council/parliamentary debate on the topic in hand. If passed by over two thirds of those voting, however, the result would automatically become binding.

A New Bill of Rights

The 1688 Declaration of Rights, which in essence updated the 1215 Magna Carta, was given its parliamentary seal of approval in terms of the 1689 Bill of Rights.

Later described as the most important document of all times by American constitutionalists, the 1689 Bill of Rights provided the Americans with the basis behind their constitution a century later.

The 1688 Declaration, however, was a compact between monarch and people. Its articles are therefore arguably inviolable.

To allay any doubts, we shall set out in a new Bill of Rights those parts of Magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights which are still relevant to the modern age.

We do not necessarily believe that a written document will prevent future governments from seeking to undermine or distort the new guarantees we shall provide.

But by setting out, in readily accessible print, a document of universally-known importance, a tripwire will be available with which to alert any future generation that a ruling class has again arisen with concepts above its station.

The Right to Bear Arms

The right to bear arms is encapsulated in the 1688 Declaration of Rights. Firearms do not kill people; criminals kill people — especially when the innocent people do not possess firearms with which to defend themselves.

The BNP would restore to legitimate and law-abiding sportsmen the right to possess and use those weapons curtailed by the 1968 Firearms Act and subsequently restricted by later legislation.

Protecting the Democratic Process

The democratic process in Britain has been subverted by a number of electoral rule changes which have impacted upon the rights of citizens to organise in democratic parties and freely express their opinions.

As a result, the BNP will introduce legislation which will:

- Guarantee the right of all law-abiding organisations and individuals to organise and campaign free from interference from the state, trades unions, employers’ organisations or commercial entities.

- Protect all political parties and groups from the use of violence or intimidation for political purposes. The violation of this law will carry a minimum two year prison term.

- Disband all state-sponsored efforts to exploit the ethnic minority vote by means of programmes such as Operation Black Vote.

- Restrict postal voting — currently subject to grave abuse — to the sick and elderly or those who are absent overseas.

- Outlaw third party organisations who do not contest elections from issuing material designed to denigrate individual candidates or parties, thereby allowing political rivals to circumvent the proper spending limits on election expenses.

- Outlaw the conducting or publication of opinion polls in the last three weeks of an election campaign to prevent manipulation of the democratic process.

- Ensure that political parties organise and function only with such funds as they are able to raise from their own members and supporters to ensure that the political process is not bought by vested interests. State funding, corporate donations and political dues from trades unions will be outlawed.

- Electors will be enabled to fire or ‘recall’ their MP in circumstances of serious criminality.

- Reintroduce treason legislation to prosecute those who undermine the British constitution.

 Recomended reading from the Horwich Nationalists
 

British Referendum Out of the EU Now Campaign

Referendum Now Campaign.

Dear Friend and Fellow Patriot,

I hope that you like the Referendum NOW leaflet that we've thumb nailed in this email. You may download a leaflet or petition form from this link - www.ReferendumNow.co.uk .

As you'll see, though, it's not a British National Party one. It's actually one of half a million paid for by the European Parliament!

So why have I sent it to you? Because I wrote it and although the EU is paying for it, it's one of the best pieces of anti-EU, pro-British freedom publicity material ever! How's that for a rebate for the long-suffering patriotic taxpayer?

Better still, my EU Communications Allowance is also paying for 50,000 Referendum NOW petition sheets AND for 100 superb table top banners for the stalls that our activists will put them on as we take our message of hope to the streets and people of our Great but Endangered country.

Because this campaign is funded because of my EU seat, we have had to jump through various bureaucratic hoops to get everything approved. That's why the leaflet has the odd bit about me being 'Non-Attached.' It doesn't mean that Jackie's kicked me out in order to get back to a normal life, just that - fortunately - I'm not part of one of the old party blocks that dominate the EU Parliament.

You know, this really is the great issue of our times. Getting out of Europe is the very first thing we have to do, because until we do Britain has no control over our borders, economy or legal system.

The current state of affairs isn't what generations of our bravest and best fought and died in the blood-soaked mud of the Somme or amidst the hail of bullets at Pegasus Bridge and Arnhem.

Only when we break free from the latest manifestation of European totalitarianism will we regain control of our own destiny and keep faith with those who sleep in far corners of so many foreign fields.

With half a million free leaflets ready to go out, this is going to be the biggest ever co-ordinated campaign (outside of election times) in the history of our British National Party. I hope very much that you will get in touch with your local organiser and volunteer to get involved. You don't have to be a member of the British National Party to get involved in the campaign to get out of Europe, however by joining us you are sending a clear message to our European dictators abroad.

If you are in an area still not covered by an active branch, you can get your own supply of leaflets and petition forms simply by phoning Clive Jefferson on 0844 809 451. Clive is a member of my Euro staff and will be delighted to help you join my campaign.

 
Yours Sincerely,

Nick Griffin, MEP
Leader, British National Party

PS Please forward the email addresses of 3 like-minded friends to admin@bnp.org.uk so that they too can receive our updates.

A Northern Agenda what the SNP really stand for

A Northern Agenda

Written by Sarah Albion

I am not sure what the Latin is for “you get what you vote for” however, I suspect the Scottish electorate will soon be discovering the political meaning of caveat emptor (buyer beware). Having voted the Scottish National party a surprise commanding victory at the Scottish Parliamentary elections in May they may soon find out, to their cost, exactly what the SNP stand for. The SNP are rather unique amongst parties who call themselves “Nationalist” in that they apparently couldn’t give a toss about their nation’s nationals. Indeed they tend to take the view that a Scottish person, if such a creature exists, can be anyone from any part of the planet who has happened to land at Glasgow airport, arrived on the East Coast line from Newcastle or swum ashore at Carnoustie. It would appear that their stated desire to break away from the united Kingdom has less to do with the Sovereignty of the native Scots as it is about creating a left wing fantasy multi-cultural melting pot to the  north of Hadrian’s Wall. In pursuit of this aim, and not content to play lip service to the Coalition government’s mythical immigration cap, the SNP Leader Alex Salmond insisted earlier this week that Scotland should be exempt from immigration controls and be allowed to open its boarders to thousands upon thousands on non-European immigrants, and that a wave of non-EU nationals should be allowed to settle north of the border. Mr Salmond also put forward plans to allow thousands of jobless students from abroad to remain in the country. Meanwhile the SNP External Affairs Minister, a plump, and seemingly very drunk woman called Hyslop argued that Scotland should be given an exception from the what she referred to as a 'damaging' and 'negative' migration cap ("damaging" to what one wonders, an agenda perhaps?). Despite the evidence from across Western World where economies such as Greece, Portugal, Ireland Spain and Italy are struggling and collapsing under the weight of immigration, whilst closer to home where after decades of immigration at previously unseen levels the British economy is in the worst state it has ever been and immigrant swamped America is plummeting towards bankruptcy, Alex and his little band of socialists appear to be labouring under the belief that uncontrolled immigration will somehow “boost” the Scottish economy. Can people quite so stupid have actually been voted into even limited regional power, and be seriously aspiring to run an independent nation?. How could this possibly have happened? How could voters have trusted such people to run the Scottish parliament? Recent news reports confirming that Scotland leads the world in cocaine use may offer some clues. However, maybe I am being too generous to little Mr. Salmond and his band of pretend nationalists. Could it be that what I am characterising as stupidity is actually something more malevolent. They are arguing for uncontrolled immigration at a time when joblessness in Scotland is at its highest in and when the economy is suffering from the worst recession generations. They surely must know what damage their proposals would cause. Furthermore, they are fully aware that whilst Scotland remains part of the Union, and even if they left the Union but remained within the EU, there is no legal or practical way by which immigrants arriving in Scotland can be prevented from moving to any other part of the country, thus spreading that damage as widely as possible. There is no benign explanation for this latest political lunacy, yet are these people really lunatics? So what is the plan? As politicians continue to put pursue ever more insane and damaging policies, there comes a time when one has to question their motives and what it is they are trying to achieve. The SNP make no pretense over their ultimate goal of breaking up the United Kingdom, but do they really intend to do so in order to put a viable alternative in its place, or is the break up, the destruction of the nation, in itself, the ultimate aim? Given the SNP appear committed to the creation of an independent Scotland which is no longer Scottish, such a conclusion is hard to resist.

Non UK-Born Workers Increase by 1.7 million in Ten Years

Non UK-Born Workers Increase by 1.7 million in Ten Years

from http://bnpideas.com/

Figures released by the Office for National Statistics have shown that the number of non UK-born workers has increased by 1.7 million over the last decade while the number of UK born workers fell by 223,000.
The employment rate of UK born workers has fallen by 2 percent since the first quarter of 2007 while that of non UK born has increased by 1 percent, the ONS said.
Net migration in the year to last September was the highest for 5 years at 242,000, up 96,000 on the previous year. This is close to the record level of 260,000 set in the year to June 2005.
This means that one in five workers in low-skilled occupations in the UK were not born in this country. The data showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of foreign-born workers in low skilled jobs in the last decade, as they account for 20.6 per cent of such roles compared to 9 per cent in 2002.
By far the biggest increase came from immigrants from the Eastern European ‘A8’ countries that joined the European Union in 2004.
The number of low-skilled workers from these countries, which include Poland and the Baltic states, went up from 4,000 in 2002 to 239,000 this year. However there was also a significant increase in low-skilled workers born outside the EU, a number which rose from 212,000 to 353,000.
The number of UK jobs classified as low skilled has hardly changed in the same period, with statisticians putting this number at 3.2 million.
An ONS statistician was quoted as saying ““Each quarter we publish estimates of the number of workers in the UK and the country in which they were born. For the first time we have looked at the skill level of the jobs of these workers and the analysis shows clear differences in the types of jobs depending on where the worker was born. It’s striking that 36 per cent of EU 14 workers are in high skill jobs, compared with only 8 per cent of those born in A8 countries.”
The figures were released on the same day as the overall migration figures, which showed that net migration continued to rise in the year to September 2010. Entry from Eastern Europe showed no sign of abating, with 50,000 more immigrants than last year.
British emigration was unchanged from last year at 43,000 but was still low compared to pre-recession levels.
Net EU migration increased by 40,000 but still represented only 25% of net foreign immigration. Net non EU migration rose by 54,000 to 215,000.
Immigration for formal study has trebled over the last decade. In the year to September 2010 about 241,000 gave their main reason as study, an increase of 30 percent from the previous year.
The number who gave their reason as work related was 190,000, 20% below the peak seen in 2008.

Stop the Ethnic Cleansing of our British Nation?

Can the British National Party’s Immigration Policy Stop the Ethnic Cleansing of our Nation?

From
http://bnpideas.com/

The news that 25 percent of all primary school pupils and 22 percent of all high school pupils in Britain today are from ethnic “minorities” means that indigenous white British people will be replaced as the majority population within two generations from now.

Can the British National Party’s current immigration policy stop this process?

Official figures released by the Department for Education show the ethnic “minority” school population has increased from 21.9 percent in 2007 to 25 percent in 2010: a three percent increase in just three years.

At this rate of exponential growth, white indigenous children are set to become the minority in schools within the next 15 years. After that, the adult population will reflect the school-age population after one generation.

Contrary to leftist propaganda, mass Third World immigration has not brought “prosperity” and a revived economy. The Department of Education figures show that, in parallel to the increasing ethnic population, the number of pupils are eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) – a measure of poverty – is increasing as well.

According to the official figures, 15.9 percent of pupils in state secondary schools (nearly half a million individuals) are are eligible and claiming the dinners. This figure has risen for the third year in a row, meaning an extra 37,000 pupils are now on free meals than in 2008.

The numbers of FSM pupils in primary schools has also risen, with almost one in five (19.2 per cent), or 743,255 youngsters, now taking up the dinners. This is 106,000 more than three years ago.

In other words, mass Third World immigration is actually harming the economy. Those familiar with the effects of race and demographic displacement on First World society will immediately recognise the issues at stake here: namely that the replacement of the First World white British people with an imported Third World population is only going to turn Britain into a Third World nation—and nothing else.

The British National Party stands as the only party to recognise the inherent threat to our nation’s future existence which this immigration invasion poses.

The party’s current immigration policy is to deport all those illegally present, accept those who are here legally and encourage voluntary repatriation of the latter community. This is, of course, a fair policy.

But is it enough to prevent the British people from being overrun and exterminated through a steady process of ethnic cleansing by out-breeding? The answer is, whether the party likes it or not, no.

The numbers of already present ethnic “minorities” in Britain make it a matter of demographic certainty that, left undisturbed, they will outnumber the British people well before the year 2060.

In this light, some hard decisions face any future nationalist government. They can only be guided by the standards set for all other Second and Third World nations on earth, and act accordingly.

This means that a nationalist government will have to adopt the policies of numerous Second and Third World governments, all of whom have taken active steps to preserve the indigenous nature of their populations. It has simply been a matter of survival, and there is no reason why the indigenous people of Britain do not have the right to claim those self same rights to survival as any other people on earth.

The alternative is extinction. And this is not what the British National Party is all about.

TREVOR PHILLIPS HYPOCRITE AND ANTI CHRISTIAN FASCIST STATEMENT

Guyanan born head of the EHCR Trevor Phillips has stated that "an old time religion incompatible with modern society" is driving the revival in the Anglican and Catholic Churches and clashing with mainstream views, especially on homosexuality.

He accused Christians, and I assume that means all, and particularly evangelicals, of being more militant than Muslims in complaining about discrimination, arguing that many of the claims are motivated by a desire for greater political influence.

However the chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission expressed concern that people of faith are "under siege" from atheists whom he accused of attempting to "drive religion underground".

In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph ahead of a landmark report on religious discrimination in Britain, he said the Commission wants to protect Christians and Muslims from discrimination, admitting his body had not been seen to stand up for the people discriminated against because of their faith in the past.

In a wide-ranging intervention into the debate over the role of religion in modern Britain, Mr Phillips:
* warned it had become "fashionable" to attack and mock religion, singling out atheist polemicist Richard Dawkins for his idiotic atheist views;
* said faith groups should be free from interference in their own affairs, meaning churches should be allowed to block women and homosexuals from being priests and bishops;. the British national party is a faith group, we have faith in our cause, why persecute us then Phillips?
* attacked hardline Christian groups which he said were picking fights - particularly on the issue of homosexuality - for their own political ends; which are the attempt to stop the islamifaction of Britain
* told churches and religious institutions they had to comply with the fascist equality legislation when they delivered services to the public as a whole.
The report, published by the Commission tomorrow, says that some religious groups have been the victims of rising discrimination over the last decade.
It shows that in the course of the last decade, the number of employment tribunal cases on religion or belief brought each year has risen from 70 to 1000 - although only a fraction of cases were upheld.
Mr Phillips spoke after a series of high-profile cases which have featured Christians claiming they have been discriminated against because of their beliefs, with a doctor currently fighting a reprimand from the General Medical Council for harmlessly sharing his faith with a patient. and the case of the hoteliers persecuted for not allowing two sodomites to practice their perversion under their roof.
While the equalities boss promised to fight for the rights of Christians,which will most likely be only a form of lip service in our view of the matter. he expressed concern that many cases were driven by fundamentalist Christians who are holding increasing sway over the mainstream churches because of the influence of African and Caribbean immigrants with "intolerant" views, although we at Horwich Nationalists have no indication of what the views are,and are more likely to based on African superstitions and not Christian beliefs, and also it is a statement that is a sad indictment of how far the British sense of religious and political sense of fair play has been eroded by the mass immigration of alien cultures and peoples into our homeland!
In contrast, Muslims are less vociferous because they are trying to integrate into British "liberal democracy", he said. although the victims of the 7/7 bombings may disagree we say, he also stated
"I think there's an awful lot of noise about the Church being persecuted but there is a more real issue that the conventional churches face that the people who are really driving their revival and success believe in an old time religion which in my view is incompatible with a modern, multi-ethnic, multicultural society," Phillips said.
"Muslim communities in this country are doing their damnedest to try to come to terms with their neighbours to try to integrate and they're doing their best to try to develop an idea of Islam that is compatible with living in a modern liberal democracy. OH Ye! pimping young white girls and abusing of British soldiers amongst other things come to mind.
"The most likely victim of actual religious discrimination in British society is a Muslim but the person who is most likely to feel slighted because of their religion is an evangelical Christian." that last statement just shows from which angle Phillips is coming from in our view at Horwich Nationalists.
Senior clergy, including Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, have attacked equality laws for eroding Christianity and stifling free speech, but Phillips said many of the legal cases brought by Christians on issues surrounding homosexuality were motivated by an attempt to gain political influence. Phillips perhaps you are not realising that people are just fed up of the unnatural posing as normality
"I think for a lot of Christian activists, they want to have a fight and they choose sexual orientation as the ground to fight it on," he said.
"I think the whole argument isn't about the rights of Christians. It's about politics. It's about a group of people who really want to have weight and influence."
He added: "There are a lot of Christian activist voices who appear bent on stressing the kind of persecution that I don't think really exists in this country." how sad and out of touch can you be Phillips.
However, Mr Phillips, who claims to be a  Salvationist from a strong Christian background, expressed concern over the rise in Britain of anti-religious voices, such as Richard Dawkins, who are intolerant of people of faith.
"I understand why a lot of people in faith groups feel a bit under siege," he said. a little like all the indigenous people and culture of these lands Phillips.
"There's no question that there is more anti-religion noise in Britain.
"There's a great deal of polemic which is anti-religious, which is quite fashionable."
Phillips said that the Commission is committed to protecting people of faith against discrimination and also defended the right of religious institutions to be free from Government interference.
The Church of England is under pressure to allow openly gay clergy to be made bishops, while the Catholic Church only permits men to be priests, but the head of the Government-funded equalities watchdog said they are entitled to rule on their own affairs.
"The law doesn't dictate their organisation internally, in the way they appoint their ministers and bishops for example," he said.
"It's perfectly fair that you can't be a Roman Catholic priest unless you're a man. It seems right that the reach of anti-discriminatory law should stop at the door of the church or mosque.
"I'm not keen on the idea of a church run by the state.
"I don't think the law should run to telling churches how they should conduct their own affairs.".Well that is a double standard hypocritical approach to life Mr Phillips if people should be free to run their Church free from the Fascist equality laws then WHY NOT IN POLITICS ALSO! and life in general.  And why did your commission PURSUE THE BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY ?, WHEN IF IT IS OK FOR A CHURCH TO DISCRIMINATE ON MEMBERSHIP THEN WHY NOT IN POLITICS !!!!!! ?
The intervention by the Commission comes after criticism of its £70 million annual unaudited we believe  budget, which is to be cut drastically. Which leads me to conclude that the statement by Phillips has nothing to do with religion but purely politics, and in our belief the continuation of a nice little earner!
Mr Phillips, a former Labour chairman of the Greater London Assembly and television producer was criticised for his £110,000 a year salary and was accused of "pandering to the right" by Ken Livingstone, the former Labour London mayor, for saying that multiculturalism had failed.

UK gives £295m to India – India spends £200m on world’s tallest statue

Britain gives £295m to India – India spends £200m on world’s tallest statue

  News Team at http://www.bnp.org.uk/

The folly of Britain’s moronic foreign aid policy has been underlined once again by India’s plan to blow the equivalent of two-thirds of Britain’s foreign aid contribution on a record-breaking ostentatious statue.
Officials in the state of Gujarat in Western India have announced plans to build a towering 'Statue of Unity' memorial to Sardar Patel, India's first home minister and deputy prime minister, who is regarded in the country as a hero of the independence movement.
Many statues to him already stand in India.
The statue will cost more than £200 million, money which critics say could be used to help the 3.6 million people in the state living below India’s poverty line.
The 'Statue of Unity' monument will be 597 feet high and will dwarf the world's current tallest statue, the 420-foot Spring Temple Buddha, which, ironically, stands in another of Britain’s foreign aid beneficiaries, China.
The statue will also feature a ‘high-tech museum, chronicling 90 years' history of India's freedom fighters’ and will be developed as a research centre for ‘preserving the unity and integrity of India’.
It will only be accessible by boat and will have lifts to take visitors to the top for a panoramic view from Patel's eye. It will be four times the height of the Statue of Liberty and six times that of Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro.
Vijay Parmar, of the charity Janvikas (Working for the Poor), said the statue is a political stunt that will bring no benefit to the public:
‘This money could be spent on health, education, or housing. Large numbers of urban poor people are living on roads. Government-run primary schools are in a pathetic condition. The money could have at least helped improve the educational standards of poor children in Gujarat,’ he said.
Earlier this month an Indian government report revealed that at least £400 million of British foreign aid given to India to help its education system has had no effect and that standards across the country are falling.
India is currently the United Kingdom’s chief recipient of foreign aid, raking in £295 million a year from hapless British taxpayers, despite having its own space and nuclear programmes and even its own foreign aid initiative. India also receives $126.6 a year from the United States.
Last year it was estimated that India has been the world's biggest beneficiary of all foreign aid after World War II, receiving approximately $100 billion from various countries since 1951.
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.

Horwich and Bolton Muslim Grooming: Protect Our Girls Petition

By Horwich Nationalists  Dear Residents of Horwich and Bolton with another trial of several Muslim beginning in Bolton today, the time for complacency has come to and end , it is now time for you to stand up and protect our children from this Evil practice of the Muslims in our midst, you must take action , and a good start would be by emailing your MP using the link below, on the article from the Britain first website.  or alternatively become more active in the political arena of Horwich and Bolton by joining the British National Party.  As the actions of the traitors in the old three parties has shown that they have no intentions of protecting our people from the predatory perverted colonisers of our Nation, in our opinion they seem to be encouraging it! especialy the Labour party a party that seems to be absoloutly riddled with perverts (see evidence ) . From Britian First Website Fellow patriot, The response to our "Muslim Grooming: Protect Our Girls!"  campaign has been very encouraging. We asked concerned people to sign our petition -  so far nearly 1,000 people have. We asked supporters to get behind a new leafleting  campaign (pictured right) - so far hundreds of pounds  have been raised to print the leaflets (I am confident  if we pull together we will hit our target), and thousands have already been downloaded. If you can spare £10 towards our new leafleting campaign  please click the link below: https://web156.secure-secure.co.uk/britainfirst.org/donate/ At this stage in the campaign, it is time to diversify  our activities. Now is the time to start applying real pressure to our elected representatives. The Britain First campaigns team has produced a  unique feature on our website that allows our  supporters to simply input their postcode and name,  click a button, and a special popup window appears  that will deliver your message directly to your local MP. We have also produced a template letter that will make the whole process very quick and easy for you. All those who genuinely care about the young English girls  that are being targeted by Muslim paedophile gangs  should spare a few minutes to send a polite but  hard-hitting message to their MP. Your local MP is duty bound to respond to your message. We have set a target of 2,000 messages to Members of Parliament. Will you help us reach that target? It will only take up 2 minutes of your time, but you will have taken personal action against  the scourge of Muslim grooming. We want to send our "Muslim Grooming: Protect Our Girls!"  campaign into overdrive and FAST in order to protect our  young girls. Please spare 2 minutes to send a polite message  to your local MP. Simply click the link below to visit our special "email your MP" page: http://britainfirst.org/the-muslim-grooming-scandal-email-your-mp/

Look Bolton : Britons at the Back of the Line Again – 9 Out of 10 Jobs Go to Immigrants in UK

Britons at the Back of the Line Again – 9 Out of 10 Jobs Go to Immigrants

  |  News Team @ http://www.bnp.org.uk/

The supposedly anti-immigration ConDem regime has been embarrassed yet again, with the news that nearly nine in ten jobs created under their administration last year went to immigrants.
Since they came to power, 87 per cent of 400,000 newly created jobs have gone to foreigners, with native Britons once again overlooked in their own country.
Incredibly, the percentage is even higher than that of Labour, under whose rule 80 per cent of posts were taken by immigrants.
The figures were revealed by former Labour minister Frank Field, who is acting as a ‘poverty czar’ for the foundering Coalition.
Speaking of the findings, Mr Field said: ‘It is the great paradox of welfare.
‘When Tony Blair won the 1997 election, the total number of benefit claimants of working age stood at 5.7 million. When Gordon Brown went to the country in 2010, the level was the same – even though more than three million jobs had been created under Labour.
‘The problem was that, of those new jobs, 80 per cent went to immigrant workers. And now, the same disturbing pattern is more marked.’
He added: ‘I fear that, at the next election, we will still be having the same debate on welfare reform as we had at the last four.’
The cost of unemployment in Britain was estimated at £61 billion in 2007, and since then the jobless rate has risen to a seventeen-year high of eight per cent.
Recently, it was revealed that despite transparently positioning themselves as an anti-immigration party just before May’s elections, the Conservatives have presided over record levels of immigration into Britain, with nearly 600,000 people arriving in the UK in the twelve months up to September 2010.
Only the British National Party calls for an end to the mass invasion of our country and says, ‘British Jobs for British Workers!’
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.

Protecting Our Children: British National Party Protest in Bolton Against Muslim Paedophile Rape

British National Party Protest in Bolton Against Muslim Paedophile Rape

News Team at http://www.bnp.org.uk/

Photos of today’s protest at Bolton Crown Court. Report and video to follow. 

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British national party  website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.

Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil, Thomas Mann

By, Mark Bernadiner, PH.D.

Muhammad, founder of Islam and author of Koran, was mentally sick psychopath, could not read and write. While in seizure, he uttered disjointed phrases, which his followers represented as Allah divine afflatus. This is the history of Islam that muslims and “honest and free” western media would not like you to know. These facts show that islam is not a religion, but a cult.
Read: “History of Middle Ages” Professor Nikolay A. Osokin, Textbook (in Russian), Publishing house: Imperial University Printing Office, Kazan, 1888, 771 pp.; Publisher: АСТ, Харвест, 2008, 672 pp.
Below is a speech which was delivered by Winston Churchill in 1899.
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!
Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.  The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.  A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity.  The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.  Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.  No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.  Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.  It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."
Sir Winston Churchill; (The River War, first edition, Vol.  II, pages 248-50 London)
In his Cairo speech, Obama accredited to arabs all fundamental inventions human race made over centuries. None of the Obama mentioned is true, as every person graduated from credible high school knows. However, it does not mean that arabs, great nation with centuries of history, has no inventions critical for human life. They have and here they are:

1.   Ethnic Cleansing - invented centuries ago, implemented over 2000 years ago in Israel when they occupied Israel and disseminated Jews around the world; from 1948 through 1953 arab countries expelled a million Jews and stole their properties; in 1974, Turkish armed forces invaded Cyprus, captured 36 percent of its territory, partitioning the island, implemented a policy of “ethnic cleansing” that sent close to 200,000 Greek Cypriots southward as refugees who lost their property; churches and cemeteries were desecrated by Muslim and declared the northern Turkish Republic of Cyprus in 1983; in 1999, Kosovo Liberation Army stormed homes of the last 15 Jews in Kosovo’s capital, who had to clear out, with just the clothes on their backs; currently, Jews in Yemen under attack, including the murder of Jewish community leader Moshe Yaish al-Nahari. “They throw stones at us. They curse us. They want to kill us,” said Salem Suleiman of his former Muslim neighbors.

2. Genocide – invented by Turks and implemented in 1915–1917 in Armenia: over 1.5 mln. Armenians, including children, died.
3. Holocaust – invented by Haj Amin al Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, in 1920s in Palestine (occupied territory of the State of Israel); implemented in Palestine in 1920s-30s; in 1941, Haj Amin al Husseini brought the Holocaust idea to Hitler and helped him to implement Holocaust in Europe from 1941; he organized in Europe two islamofascist brigades that operated under SS. Had their own concentration camp and killed thousand of Europeans, including Jews. 

Islam is based on three fundamental principles:

1. Stealing
2. Killing, and
3. Lying 

Koran says:
"Slay them wherever you find them. Fight against them till idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme" (Sura 2:190),
"Seek out your enemies relentlessly" (Sura 4:103),
"Make war on them till idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme" (Sura 8:36),
"When the sacred months are over slay the unbelievers wherever you find them. Arrest them, beseige them and lie in ambush everywhere for them" (Sura 9:5),
"Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you" (Sura 9:121),
"When you meet the unbelievers on the battlefield strike off their heads" (Sura 47:3),
"Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal sternly with them. Hell shall be their home, evil their fate" (Sura 66:7).

Koran is Islamic Mein Kamf. Islam is fascist cult and must be eliminated from the earth.
Mark Bernadiner, PH.D.

For information or comments, write to Feedback@IslamReview.com

recommended reading 
  

Great Britain Insulted — UK Conservative Government Cowers

Great Britain Insulted — Conservative Government Cowers

Jun 18th, 2011 

By AJM. at http://bnpideas.com/

In what must rank as one of the most deliberately belligerent attacks on Britain in the EU Parliament, Guy Verhofstadt, leader of the Parliament’s Liberal Group, has revealed his and his fellow MEPs’ contempt for the UK.

In the video clip which can be seen beneath, Verhofstadt was referring to the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), which has demanded a significant increase in the EU’s annual budget, at a time of unprecedented austerity at home.

Viewers will note Verhofstadt’s contempt and derision for the nation that created his own state (at the Treaty of London, 1831). Great Britain protected his state twice in the two great conflicts of the 20th Century, from which it was liberated in the closing stages of WW2.

Viewers will also note the applause and support Verhofstadt receives from h is fellow Europhiles. Verhofstadt was the Prime Minister of Belgium between 1999-2008.

In 2011, the UK will make gross contributions of some £16 billion to the EU budget. Between the years 2000-2006 and 2007-2013, the UK’s net contribution will rise by nearly 100 percent.

Since 1973, the UK’s gross contributions to the EU have exceeded £260 billion at nominal values (i.e. without index linking).

In 1973, the Conservative Government signed the Treaty of Rome, after a series of manoeuvres before the British electorate which employed unprecedented subterfuge and deceit. The Public Records Office details the relevant Cabinet records of the time and the extent of the deception.

The Conservative Party supported the UK’s membership of what was described, at the time, as merely a free trading zone during the 1975 Referendum. The Conservatives were ably assisted by the funds of international business interests.

The British electorate, many of whom did not vote in 1975, have never been consulted on the matter of a political and economic European Union and the destruction of our ancient liberties and Constitution.

Under that Constitution, it is forbidden for any overseas power, prelate or jurisdiction or potentate to interfere in the affairs of Great Britain.

On 15 September 2010 Verhofstadt supported the new initiative Spinelli Group, which was founded to reinvigorate the strive for federalisation of the European Union (EU). Other prominent supporters are: Jacques Delors, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Joschka Fischer, Andrew Duff, Elmar Brok. Verhofstadt is also an enthusiastic multiculturalist.

Verhofstadt, along with his numerous allies in the Parliament, Council and Commission, should appreciate that without the UK’s budget contribution, the EU would fail to function.  This is a point our Ministers will not make.

Were the UK to withdraw from the EU – as one day it shall — the EU will only continue to operate by raising the contributions of the remaining member states.

At that point, the EU will rupture and dissolve; Great Britain will once again take the lead and will save the nations of Europe by its example, to employ the words of the late William Pitt.

Readers may care to make their views known to Mr Verhofstadt.  He may be contacted by emailing him at this link

We may be quite certain that the spineless sycophants within the Vichy Conservative-Lib/Dem Alliance will, yet again, fail to stand up for Britain’s interests. The hand-wringers in both parties will meekly fawn before their EU governors. British subjects will, once again, be humiliated and belittled.

Meanwhile, Government Ministers will congratulate themselves on their recent increase to the Overseas Aid budget, shortly set to exceed £11 billion per annum and overseen by the EU, whilst old age pensioners die of hypothermia in winter.

So much for the empty tub-thumping approach of prospective Conservative Ministers in the run-up to last year’s General Election.  The late Lord Palmerston stands out as an almighty colossus in comparison with his current counterparts.

recommended reading


Reflections of a Statesman: The Writings and Speeches of Enoch Powell

East Yorkshire British national Party Branch Raises Funds for Brave Local Boy

East Yorkshire Branch Raises Funds for Brave Local Boy

  News Team @ http://www.bnp.org.uk/

Hull and East Yorkshire British National Party are pleased to announce the raising of £500 towards a special trike and wheelchair for local boy Jack Christmas.

Dawn and Jack Christmas

Two-year-old Jack suffers from global developmental delay, motor development disorder and brain atrophy. He cannot walk or speak, but he knows how to melt you with his smile.
Jack’s parents, Dawn and Tony, are organising a series of fundraising events in Hull to try and raise more than £4,000 for a special trike and wheelchair, which will mean they can take Jack on the beach for the first time.
"When we heard of the attempt to raise over £4,000 for Jack, we felt as a group we must help out," said Hull organiser Jason Carr.
Hull fundholder Fess Traynor said, "The local council seem more concerned for the welfare of asylum seekers, immigrants or anyone with drug issues. We feel it's disgusting that this hardworking family get no help whatsoever. We are able to help, so we feel we must."
The Christmas family, of the Greatfield estate in Hull, said, "We are having to raise money ourselves and are organising numerous events in East Hull. We were over the moon when the local British National Party organisers approached us to help. We didn't think politicians cared about people like us. Only the British National Party have offered help, and we were so happy when they raised over £500 at their last meeting for us."
Despite Jack’s conditions, Mrs Christmas, who works as a teacher, said Jack is such a happy little boy.
"Jack is so laidback. He is so happy all the time; he doesn't speak but his way of saying hello is to clap. We need this specialised trike so we can do things as a family. The trike would also benefit his health.
“We are so grateful to Hull British National Party for all their help and support in this. You hear of all the bad press, but it’s wonderful when you find out the British National Party are there for you and are so helpful."
For details of making donations to this wonderful charity, please contact the Hull and East Yorkshire branch on 07944 635466 or 07854 378700.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again. 

Also their are other ways to help local groups out, by visiting our English Fair Fund Site at http://www.nickgriffinmep.eu/content/english-fair-fund

Article : Interview with David Hamilton of the Nationalist Conservatives

Interview with David Hamilton of the Nationalist Conservatives

Jun  2011

by Brett Stevens.

In my rambles through cyberspace, I have encountered other people attempting to address my three favorite political questions: the national question, the class war question and (underlying the other two) the end-of-ecocide question.
For many years, I’ve realized that the three are linked. You cannot stop ecocide in a society based on personal desire. You cannot have a society not based on personal desire without getting away from personal economic competition of an extreme degree. That in turn requires a society with a center, a shared culture and values system, and that ties intrinsically to concepts of ethnicity and identity.
One of the groups I encountered has been the Nationalist Conservative group, whose goal is to merge traditionalism and conservative politics in a modern context.
In my pursuit of the national question, I am forever looking for people who will spill the truth as it occurs plainly to me: that diversity in all forms does not work, and that nationalism is the only type of society that will conserve anything, whether culture, dignity, the environment, or even sanity.
As a result, I asked a few questions of the National Conservatives leader David Hamilton to see if we could find some common ground. I think the results are interesting, and give us a clear vision of what nationalism is like in Britain and where it is headed.
Image: Enoch Powell, a founding force in British nationalism.
What is nationalism, and why is nationalism important?
It’s the largest natural unit of people before artificial creations like the EU. If you expand beyond it it becomes an Empire. Trying to form close links with similar people abroad is temporary because nations of racially similar people form their own national or ethnic identities.
However, at this stage when the kinship nations are imploding we need alliances across Europe and with the Anglosphere because we need each other for different reasons. I think the US needs Europe to re-link to the culture and forge deeper roots after being truncated at the Revolution while we probably will not be able to free ourselves from multi-racialism without American might. India or China would not let us off our knees without strength. To this end it would be wise for our royal family to marry Australians, Canadians or Anglo-Saxon Americans to strengthen links amongst our kindred.
Definitions like an “ideological or Proposition nation” have no meaning. It is the typical Progressives way of removing the meaning from terms and just leaving air. Pat Buchanan defines it in his robust Conservative way as a Blood and Soil nation.
What are the indigenous or native groups in the UK, and how do you foresee them working together under the type of civilization you would desire?
As things stand Britain is breaking apart. The Scottish are now pushing for independence and the Welsh have been encouraged to develop or revive their language. I would not stop a people having their own language and culture but not to use it in opposition to their neighbouring country; Ireland still harbours hostility to England. The problem is that it is largely English taxpayers money that finances these and the English are beginning to react against it. When the Celtic nations realise that we are all facing the biggest invasion since the fall of Rome and being dispossessed, there is hope that we can transcend the historical grudges they have against us to unite for common defence. One in eight of the population of Eire are asylum seekers so it is politic to stop fighting Ulster. We have to overcome internal, inherited grudges for the survival of or respective children.
If you were given power over the UK tomorrow, how would you change society and what changes would the average person notice immediately?
I would halt immigration and stop state benefits for all but those of British ancestry and deport illegals. Some say other countries would not take them back. They would if we were confident and if they could be shown the benefits educated and presumably trained repatriates could bring to them.
I would re-introduce capital punishment for certain types of murder and child molestation (paedophilia is a euphemism to stop it sounding so bad). There are cases where people whose lives have been destroyed by the murder of a close-one, usually one who should be protected by the authorities, are then treated with sickening cruelty by judges who give light sentences to the malefactor. This is particularly disgusting where evil judges let rapists and child molesters off with light sentences. This deprives innocent people of catharsis and signals to asylum seekers that our corrupt judges will be sympathetic if they rape or murder our people.
Does it seem to you that nationalism is gaining strength?
There is a Liberal defence of Liberal values against Muslim ways, especially Sharia Law, across Europe, personified by Geert Wilders with a nationalism involved. I welcome this but am not a Liberal and base my views on inherited tradition and natural prejudice for one’s own people. As things stand the elites and public authorities are prejudiced in favour of ethnics and give them preferential treatment over us.
The great paradox is that the multi-racial ideology was a righteous reaction to the barbarism of Hitler but has itsaelf become persecutory and not only of we Whites. In Europe, especially france and Sweden, Jewish people are being persecuted by Muslims yet the Jewish leaders try to form alliances ith Muslims who hate them against us who are more or less supportive. I urge ordinary European Jewish people to rebel against their leaders for their own safety and join us in the defence of Europe.
There are Conservative values like Piety that we must promote: respect for our ancetors and what they created. The symbol of this is Aeneas carrying his father Anchises from the burning city of Troy in Virgil’s Aeneid.
Another conservative virtue was Noblesse Oblige. That is the obligations of the noble to their lesser brethren. People balk at this because they have fallen for the equality myth. In practice governments come up with schemes like Race Relations Acts then impose them on the population and the implementation percolates down a hierarchy of public officials to the population.
Europe is turning against immigration but the Nationalist-Conservative explosion is yet to come. It will when people realise that liberalism was replaced by what is called Cultural Marxism in the sixties but kept the name. They changed the traditional Liberal notion of individual rights to group rights then designated ethnics as victims and Whites as oppressers.
From then on Whites had oppressive race laws passed against them and ethnics were given preferential treatment under the guise of “special needs.” If a White speaks out they are subjected to loss of employment, a public show trial by the media and general persecution. Dr.James Watson was an example.
For the sake of our readers, can you define and distinguish the following: UK, English, British, Antipodean?
Antipodean surprised me. It refers to an Australian or New Zealander.
The United Kingdom is Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Most would say Britain, but rarely Great Britain, which refers only to England, Scotland and Wales. However, Britain has sometimes been used as an abbreviation for Great Britain and in certain contexts will therefore mean only England, Scotland and Wales, as in British Railways which did not include Ulster.
British is the category the elites slot ethnics into but they can not become English, Welsh, Irish or Scottish. I regard myself as English and part of the indigenous British family of nations.
Is nationalism separate from racism, or do the two overlap? If so, is nationalism a form of racism, or racism a form of nationalism?
To me nationalism is an expression of the being and interests of a racial group that has developed independently from a close-racial country like Germany in our case into a different ethnicity – culture, manners etc. Conservatism is the temperament that wants to conserve what we have inherited and pass it on to our children. The two complement each other.
I openly admit to being a racialist because I believe in racial differences between people but do not accept the Marxist pejorative term “racist.” When asked if he had caused racism with his speeches Enoch Powell replied:”What’s wrong with racialism? It’s the basis of nationhood.”
I regard prejudice as traditional wisdom received from our ancestors. It saves us learning the hard way and we would have been spared this dispossession by immigrants if our natural prejudices had been used after the last war.
It is silly to pretend that everyone is a new experience and we should open our minds. That is encouraging people to be naïve and gets them into danger in a harsh world. Worldly people who travel learn to judge people on their appearance – looks, body language etc.
If you are walking through city streets and see a group of young Blacks walking towards you unless you are very naïve, you cross the road. That is what we learn from experience.
How does your group hope to influence British politics, and what kind of response are you getting so far?
It is a three-pronged attack: explaining the historical causes of our predicament, exposing the prejudice against the indigenous people of their own elites and trying to suggest ways forward.
Some want to bring certain issues to public attention like the hidden genocide of White South African farmers or the widespread gang rapes of young White girls that were covered up by British police. In Blackpool the police suppressed a report that showed 11 Muslim fast food outlets were being used as “honeytraps” to lure young White girls as young as 11 and 12 into sex and then prostitution. That is an act of war on our people by a rival community.
What I envisage is an “intellectual frontline” taking the establishment head on and creating arguments for our people to justify their natural instincts. We have some excellent writers and these were brought together through the foresight of Paul Morris (aka Green Arrow) on Home of the Green Arrow, and The British Resistance websites who developed a stable of top writers who are better than most establishment writers.
Unfortunately the editor of the BNP website refused to do this, preferring to react to news stories and this held us back. This is also a problem with US blogs. They have no ideas of their own so they discuss the news! I’m pleased that Amerika.org is taking a creative approach. It is ludicrous to let the Establishment make the running, we must take the initiative and lead the debate.
Do you think nationalism must necessarily be paired with conservative politics or values? Are the two cut from the same cloth, or complementary?
To me nationalism qualifies Conservative. I mean a specific type of Conservatism, not monetarism or free market economics, which are forms of liberalism, or reductions in state benefits for the working classes, but a conscious re-linking with our traditions and history – our ancestors.
It could be called traditional Conservatism and the rejecton of universal abstractions for concrete terms is inspired by Edmund Burke’s campaign against the thinking behind The French Revolution which was the beginning of the progressive thinking we have now. The use of concrete terms rather than universal abstractions like English man and woman rather than persons leads to a clearer picture of what we are instead of the vague, umimaginable abstraction, humanity.
There is confusion about what nationalism is and everyone has a different idea. For a time the BNP was seen as our last chance now the leaders are hated and Griffin is thought of as a State op. I am promoting a type born of our traditions and history but ideologues want to start anew with a system of belief written down in a book like Das Kapital, The Thoughts of Chairman Mao or Mein Kampf.
One reason for the failure of “radical nationalism” in Britain is that it has no traditional origins and is an ideology or system of abstract concepts in imitation of Marxism. It appeals only to reason and people have to learn it by rote or be corrected. It is a secular form of religion with heaven on earth in a future utopia. To get there everyone has to be socially ingineered and made to fit into a sterotype. It is a type of thinking derived from The Enlightenment and should be left to Marxists, Liberals and Nazis. Anyone who diverges from doctrine is persecuted or attacked as a red.
A Nationalist Conservative view grows out of our emotions: our sense of belonging and affection for our history and confidence in a future for our civilisation. When were homogenous people trusted each other. Churchill knew this and in 1955 tried to intoduce a Bill to control immigration but had to stand down because of his health. His succesor Anthony Eden shelved it. Churchill also wanted the Conservative Party to campaign for that year’s general election under he slogan:”Keep England White.” There is a role model for us.
Multi-racialism has destroyed trust and is destroying civil society. It takes a police and surveillance state to hold it together. Even schoolchildren are now being fingerprinted for future use and those as young as 3 tested for racist attitudes.
Our views derive from an emotional and instinctive relationship with our people and our territory. It is more profound than rationalising or adopting an artificial blueprint for a Utopian world because it grows from natural, human instinct and emotion.
We must jettison dated Liberal categories like left and right for such as Traditionalist and Globalist, Patriot and Anti-British (or American).
Is nationalism important for reasons of biology, identity, political orientation, values, culture, heritage or all of the above? If all, what does it mean that it applies on so many levels?
Nationalism is the way the values you mention are perpetuated and maintained as opposed to Globalism or The New World Order which is about global money making for an elite group and believes in destroying all that our ancestors created for us in the belief that something else will grow from the ruins. This is why they share our technology with say, China and India. They sell our factories to them and thus give them the means to take over, then they will not want us. It is advanced behind the doctrine of racial equality and if any oppose it they are persecuted as “racists” or “haters”.
Our party has a similar outlook to the direction you have taken, which is to say that diversity itself is destructive, not the ingredients of diversity (specific ethnic groups). What led you to this direction?
Throughout history wars have been fought for territory and by allowing newcomers to stake claims, our corrupt and emasculated ‘elite’ are encouraging them to fight for more. In The Territorial Imperative Robert Ardry explains how much having a country of their own has boosted the confidence of Israelis, but our rulers are handing our ancestral homeland to invaders and protecting their welfare over and above that of our native people.
To give favourable treatment to aliens over our own people, “our kith and kin,” as the great fifth Marquess of Salisbury described them, is morally evil.
Is nationalism a prescriptive worldview, or a method of avoiding negative consequences (e.g. those of intermixing, ethnic crime or IQ differentials, etc)?
The problem is Progrssives have an unrealistic view of immigrants. They deny their human nature like us and pretend they are nice, grateful people coming here to be like us when, in reality, they come here to take advantage and bear us grudges for the Empire and the slave trade.
Ours is the natural worldview and grows from simple but instinctive impulses like the urge to put your own children first. A parent who puts other people’s children first is perverse and this applies on a wider level to the natural prejudice for one’s own nation and “Kith and Kin.”. There is no justification for misappropriating our people’s taxes to pay for foreign schemes like educating Africa or giving to the poor in China or India both of which have stronger economies than ours. This is an example of the moral corruption of Western elites. As Conservative economist P.T. Baur put it: Overseas aid is money taken from the poor in the West and given to the rich in the third world. Another excellent Conservative economist is Ezra Mishan and his The Costs of Economic Growth is essential reading for a Conservative economist.
We have natural bonds with our families, a responsibility for them and a duty to them. We also have a duty to pass on what we have inherited to our children, as they, in turn, will have a duty to their children. We owe a debt to our ancestors who bequeathed to us our nation and culture, and we must honour that.
Our loyalties begin with affection within families and this emanates outward to neighbourhood and nation. Men and women are distinctive sexual beings within their inherited collective identity. We belong to our kin, above strangers, and this affects the type of community we create.
Edmund Burke’s famous definition of society is that it is a continuous community of the living, the dead and those who are yet to be born. Each man and woman is part of a larger body. The individual dies, but descendants live on.
We have positive benefits to offer our people: preferential treatment in their own country, better education, priority in housing and employment for our children and protection from child-rape by older members of a rival community. You only need look at the names of graduates from medical and law schools to see how our young are being dispossessed. We would offer British children more opportunities and a better future without unfair competition from outsiders.
A book that was a great influence on me was Suicide of the West by great American Conservative James Burnham. If I may be bold I should like to suggest that American Conservatives develop a world view to suit contemporary and future needs by developing some of the excellent points made by Pat Buchanan in Death of the West and State of Emergency. He has laid down a superb groundwork. You have Operation Wetback as a precedent.
We have been held back in Britain by the BNP and their leaders who are destroying the party from within and discrediting the movement as a whole. Conservatism has been retarded by Conservative magazine editors like the Salisbury Review and Quarterly Review who are reluctant to face our situation as it is when with their reputations they could do so much good. They must make a more realistic assessment then start fighting for their children’s future. They must take on the elites and PC or they mislead young or unworldly people into thinking things are not too bad when, in fact, our civilisation has nearly been expunged. We are being colonised and wiped out. This no time for polite articles about minor cultural details.
The Traditional Britain Group should get some speakers with more dynamism like Frank Ellis to address them and develop a momentum.
David Hamilton’s Recommended Reading

• Sarah Maid of Albion
• The Green Arrow Forum
• The British Resistance
• National Conservatism
•  Amerika.

Horwich Nationalist recommended reading
 

 

Sacred cow: culpability

  2011

by Brett Stevens.   at  http://www.amerika.org/

Liberalism, the belief system that controls most of the world at this time, has one thing and one only that it holds sacred: the individual.
Liberalism is formed by individuals, wanting to guarantee the collective would not ostracize them, forming a collective to compel the rest of the collective to tolerate them.
One of the sacred cows produced by this non-logic is that of intent. To a liberal, there are two different outcomes if you drive a car over 30 kids while meaning to, or whether you drive the same car over the same 30 kids “by accident.”
This is because at the root of their nature, liberals are immature — they have not fully developed, and they see the world only as it would impact them or someone like them.
Because their ideology is rooted in fear, they always side with the person who is in the weakest position. If the weakest among us is safe, they reason, so we are — as individuals.
When they hear about a car running over 30 kids: if it’s an accident, they imagine themselves as the driver and want that person to escape punishment; if it was deliberate, they imagine themselves as the kids and want the driver punished.
In their view, the only safe intent is to want everyone to get along, because to each individual liberal, that says he or she will be accepted — guaranteed.
Naturally, this clashes with common sense, because 30 dead kids are dead no matter who intended what.

Take the 2000 case of a 40-year-old man we’ll call Alex, whose sexual preferences suddenly began to transform. He developed an interest in child pornography—and not just a little interest, but an overwhelming one. He poured his time into child-pornography Web sites and magazines. He also solicited prostitution at a massage parlor, something he said he had never previously done. He reported later that he’d wanted to stop, but “the pleasure principle overrode” his restraint.
[...]
At the same time, Alex was complaining of worsening headaches. The night before he was to report for prison sentencing, he couldn’t stand the pain anymore, and took himself to the emergency room. He underwent a brain scan, which revealed a massive tumor in his orbitofrontal cortex. Neurosurgeons removed the tumor. Alex’s sexual appetite returned to normal.
[...]
When your biology changes, so can your decision-making and your desires. The drives you take for granted (“I’m a heterosexual/homosexual,” “I’m attracted to children/adults,” “I’m aggressive/not aggressive,” and so on) depend on the intricate details of your neural machinery. Although acting on such drives is popularly thought to be a free choice, the most cursory examination of the evidence demonstrates the limits of that assumption.
[...]
As our understanding of the human brain improves, juries are increasingly challenged with these sorts of questions. When a criminal stands in front of the judge’s bench today, the legal system wants to know whether he is blameworthy. Was it his fault, or his biology’s fault? – The Atlantic

To the liberal mind, it’s unfair to convict anyone who is not culpable for their actions. This means people who are aware of the consequences of their actions, and able to see why those consequences might be bad. People who can control their impulses.
If you want to know why every mass murderer immediately pleads insane, it is because this is a hole in our legal system.
Ironically, this hole was caused by liberal policies. Originally, American justice aimed to eliminate threats to the community. Well-meaning liberals changed this in the 1960s. They wanted to “rehabilitate” criminals, and believed that unless that criminal truly intended to commit his crimes and would have done the same with a cop in the room, well, he was just “mistaken.”
A whole genre of literature came and went, in fiction and non-fiction, about how terrible you would feel if you grew up in poverty, with an alcoholic father who made you rape the sheep, and kids who made fun of you at school.
This culminated in self-parody:

At trial, White’s lawyer argued that he was suffering from “diminished capacity,” a controversial defense then permissible in California courts. White supposedly was suffering from depression and thus incapable of premeditated murder. As evidence of this, psychiatrist Martin Blinder testified that the formerly health-conscious White had recently become a junk food junkie. Blinder commented that too much sugar can affect the chemical balance in the brain and worsen depression, but didn’t blame the crime on bad diet. Rather, he offered junk food use as proof of White’s mental state–in other words, Twinkie consumption was an effect rather than the cause of White’s problems. But the media and public immediately–and misleadingly–dubbed the defense’s argument the “Twinkie defense.”
Whatever they called it, it worked. The jury found White guilty of a lesser charge, voluntary manslaughter. – Straight Dope

While bleating about how the media gets it wrong, the Straight Dope also gets it wrong: whether the twinkies or the pre-existing mental condition (twitch), the argument was that Dan White committed the murder because of mental health problems.
When we used to call people murderers — this became taboo in the 1990s with Sapir-Whorf and the idea that using categorical language about people made us treat them badly — it was not to attribute blame. It was to tag certain people with an implied BAD ANIMAL and remove them from society.
Until we got the moralistic notion, which is shared between populist (but not transcendental) Christianity and all forms of liberalism, that intent defined outcome and that we were “judged” only on our intent, legal process was a relatively simple affair designed to remove threats to the community.
In those days, judgment meant deciding where someone belonged, not whether or not they were good, nice or equal people. You might be equal and nice, but if you run over kids, you need to do that elsewhere. “Rights” meant entitlement to things like land, a place in a community, a journeyman’s position in your trade.
Over the centuries, the notion of moralism — deciding whether someone is good or bad based on whether they treat others as equals (which translates to “more important than the self,” because if there are many of Them and only one of You, there will be constant interruptions requiring that You cease activity so They can go ahead) — trumped any notion of practical justice.
In fact, we came to scorn it. Judging whether someone was a threat to society was how we treated dogs with rabies. Humans are more than dogs; we have control over ourselves even when we’re sick. Therefore, we are morally culpable by intent, or everything was a big accident and we should claim insanity.
Even when the cops find us flossing with the intestines of our victims while they heads boil in pots. In fact, career criminals know that the system will be more likely to not kill you if you manage to behave like a total nutcase. Kill 30 people and keep accurate records and you’re a cold-blooded killer; kill 30 people and make sculptures out of their corpses in homage to your dead abusive mother, and you’re a victim too!

There is an equally interesting perspective from Fairfax County, Virginia, chief of police M. Douglas Scott, a man responsible not only for protecting the public’s safety, but also for allocating the increasingly limited budgets which that public grants him.
“Over the course of my law enforcement career, I have seen very, very few examples where somebody could point out an offender to me and say, ‘That person’s clearly been rehabilitated; that even though they committed a serious felony, they’re back out there leading a productive life today.’
“The public in general sees the good in all people and thinks that most people are capable of being good. The public even wants to believe that evil people can be rehabilitated or brought back into society with some level of assistance. But I think our society would go broke trying to rehabilitate the number of evil individuals that are out there on our streets today.” – Obsession, by John Douglass and Mark Olshanker, p. 349

We like to think everyone is good, because we want to think we are good as individuals.
We project this view onto the world and hope that it’s true. Yet it isn’t.
Ever wonder why drugs are illegal? Wonder no more:

Twenty-seven percent of federal inmates and 61 percent of state inmates had a current or past sentence for a violent crime. Federal inmates (43 percent) were twice as likely as state inmates (19 percent) to have never been on probation or incarcerated before their current offense.
[...]
Among sentenced federal prisoners surveyed, 66 percent of the women and 57 percent of the men were serving time on drug charges. In comparison, 33 percent of the women and 21 percent of the men in state prisons had been convicted on drug charges. – US DOJ

We catch very few of the criminals who have committed crimes. In fact, many crimes go unsolved:

The percentage of homicides that go unsolved in the United States has risen alarmingly even as the homicide rate has fallen to levels last seen in the 1960s.
Despite dramatic improvements in DNA analysis and forensic science, police fail to make an arrest in more than one-third of all homicides. National clearance rates for murder and manslaughter have fallen from about 90 percent in the 1960s to below 65 percent in recent years. – Times Record News

The reason we keep drugs illegal is that it’s an easy way to catch repeat offenders — that is, easier than having them murder, rape or commit armed robbery, which is what they are statistically most likely to do.
Further, we find that 53% of arrested males and 39% of arrested females are re-incarcerated ^{[citation needed]}, and that is within a relatively time period after their arrests. If many if not most crimes go unreported, unprosecuted, unconvicted and unsolved, what does this mean about recidivism rates? They’re higher than we think.
But as individuals, we each like to believe that if we committed those crimes, it would be by accident, or even better, someone or something else would be to blame. We would not be aggressors, but victims. And if that were the case, it sure would be convenient if we could be rehabilitated.
However, we didn’t commit those crimes. Whether from good moral nature, fear of law enforcement, innate cowardice or some mixture of the three, we did not commit those crimes or at least most of us did not. Someone else did. Someone who is likely to re-offend.
Our notion of culpability just gets in the way of the oldest principle of law enforcement, which is consequentialism. Did 30 kids get run over? Did a murder occur? Will it happen again?
While our public is stoned to the eyeballs on the notion of rehabilitation and innocence by lack of intent, the bodies pile up and, thanks to our social welfare system, the murderers are let out and given aid subsidies to help them procreate, ensuring that we’ll have future generations of unhinged and/or stupid people.

For over a year, Mr. Chappell, a schizophrenic with a violent criminal record, had seemed relatively stable in a state-financed group home in Charlestown. But after a fight with another resident, Mr. Chappell was shuttled from home to home, and his mother believed that he had fallen off his medication along the way.
Ms. Chappell said she had tried to communicate this concern to his caretakers, but it was not until mid-January that she found somebody who listened.
The woman introduced herself as Stephanie and said she would be Mr. Chappell’s counselor at his new group home in Revere. She confirmed that Mr. Chappell had stopped getting his antipsychotic injections but made his mother a promise: “She said: ‘Don’t worry. I’m going to get Deshawn back on track.’
“I thought everything was going to be O.K. because he had somebody who cared,” Ms. Chappell said, her voice breaking.
Two days after that conversation, Stephanie Moulton, a petite, street-smart 25-year-old, was dead, and Mr. Chappell was accused of murdering her. They had been alone at the Revere home, where, her family said, Ms. Moulton generally worked a solo shift. Mr. Chappell beat her, stabbed her repeatedly and then dumped her partially nude body in a church parking lot, prosecutors said. – NYT

In the liberal mindset, it’s only fair to convict people if they’re culpable, and they’re only culpable if they intended to do what they did. This translates into most criminals being victims, because no one who has a functional brain decides on violent pointless crime when jobs are easy enough to come by.
Our liberal friends thus pretend that it’s wrong to base a justice system on culpability, since these people have no idea what they were doing; it was just their brain chemistry. While a longer-term solution probably lies on looking for medical reasons for insanity, if we measure by consequences the bottom line remains the same: people who have committed crimes, unless we can medically fix them, will do it again.
Stephanie Moulton was just acting out what her society told her. These people were not broken or bad animals, they were victims. We just need to set aside our fear, treat them like humans — for once! the first kindness since whatever abuse made them do what they do! — and they’ll turn out okay.
Except it turns out in the end, this one like (statistically) most of the others, was a bad animal. And while we’ll now pay to lock him up for life, we can’t bring Stephanie back, or any of the others who have been sacrificed to our oblivious liberal notion that intent defines culpability.

Horwich nationalist recommended reading 

Call It Conspiracy