Welsh Tory and “Independent” Bridgend Councillors Want Democracy Banned

Tory and “Independent” Bridgend Councillors Want Democracy Banned

The British National Party newsroom

Tory and so-called “independent” councillors in Bridgend, south Wales, have joined together to try and suppress all democratic political activity in the town, reports regional organiser Brian Mahoney.

The proposed ban, reported in a local newspaper, is the councils’ response to a recent British National Party stall held in the town centre where local members gathered hundreds of signatures in support of the ‘bring our boys home’ campaign.

“Shoppers and passers-by in Bridgend queued up to sign the petition at the British National Party stall, ignoring the infantile rants of a Labour councillor who was present and who witnessed for himself the queue of people waiting to sign the petition,” Mr Mahoney said.

“Councillor Peter Foley, sitting as an Independent on the council but actually involved with the far-left, violent UAF organisation and known locally for his links to Libya, called for only ‘far-right’ groups [sic] to be banned from political activity in Bridgend town centre.

By this he clearly means the British National Party should be banned, but not the Socialist Workers Party Trotskyites who he supports.

“Conservative councillor David Unwin went further by calling for all political activity to be banned,” Mr Mahoney continued.

“It is not clear if by this he includes the South Wales Police headquarters in the town which each year promotes the political ambitions of the homosexual lobby by flying the rainbow flag each year during ‘Gay Pride’ week.

“What is clear is that Bridgend councillors seek to deny the taxpaying constituents of Bridgend their fundamental rights to freedom and democracy in their own town,” Mr Mahoney said.

“Wales BNP would therefore remind the anti-democratic councillors in Bridgend that political organisations do not require local authority consent to sell or distribute literature on the streets.

“The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Article 10 states that, and I quote, everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority regardless of frontiers.”

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party  website.

BOLTON PATRIOT: Race Gestapo Lose Bid to Kill British National Par...

BOLTON PATRIOT: Race Gestapo Lose Bid to Kill British National Par...: "The state-funded race Gestapo, known by its official name as the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (ECHR), has been defeated in its bi..."

Marxist Socialists and Leftists For a Second Holocaust ?

Leftists For a Second Holocaust 
Paul Bogdanor,

“Before Israel dies, it must be humiliated and degraded. Allah willing, before they die, they will experience humiliation and degradation every day... Allah willing, we will make them lose their eyesight, we will make them lose their brains.”
- Khaled Mashal, Hamas leader “... the vote for Hamas was actually a vote for peace.”
- John Pilger, far-left journalist and filmmaker It would be difficult to imagine a clearer expression of genocidal hatred than the ideology of today’s jihadist armies. What is even harder to accept is that these bloodthirsty killers, with their graphic incitement to the massacre of millions of Jews, are admired and defended by legions of intellectuals, journalists, agitators and demonstrators on the anti-Zionist left. All sane observers understand that the official program of Hamas, if implemented, would result in an epoch-making bloodbath. One broadcast by Hamas activists announced: “My message to the loathed Jews is that there is no god but Allah, we will chase you everywhere! We are a nation that drinks blood, and we know that there is no blood better than the blood of Jews.” But in the organs of the Israel-hating left, we read that the Hamas election victory is “the best news from the Middle East for a long time” (The Guardian). We read that it is time “to reinforce Hamas resistance [to Zionist ideology]” and its “ethical cry to the world” (CounterPunch). The goal of “reinforcing Hamas resistance” is quite widely shared in the anti-Zionist camp. Left-wing American activists in the International Solidarity Movement openly admit to collaborating with Hamas and Islamic Jihad. In the Israeli communist journal News From Within, Jennifer Loewenstein, who is currently ensconced in Oxford University, urges that “Hamas, its allies and solidarity activists abroad genuinely attempt to make a difference.” Editor Michel Warschawski anticipates that the Hamas regime will bring about “Palestinian unity in fighting the Occupation… It may provide new hopes and new confidence.” As these writers know very well, the “resistance” that is to be “reinforced” entails the calculated murder of small children, pregnant women, the elderly and the disabled; the bombing of buses, cafes and restaurants; and occasional attempts to demolish whole skyscrapers. Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah’s Hezbollah is another jihadist faction much admired by today’s left-wing anti-Zionists. Claiming responsibility for massacres of Jewish civilians as far afield as South America, a Hezbollah statement pledged “an open war until the elimination of Israel and until the death of the last Jew on earth.” Yet Norman Finkelstein – best-selling author of The Holocaust Industry and other classics in the field of Jewish antisemitism – can hardly find the words to express his enthusiasm. “I truly honor [Hezbollah] for having inflicted an exceptional and deserving defeat on their foreign occupiers,” he once exclaimed. “It’s another wonderful chapter in the long and painful struggle for human emancipation and even liberty and certainly one that every human being can take inspiration from.” During the recent war, he echoed the sentiments of countless leftists who marched to the slogan: “We are all Hezbollah.” In his visit to Lebanon earlier this year, Noam Chomsky justified Hezbollah’s military arsenal as a “deterrent to potential aggression.” Lebanese commentators were quick to express their disgust, warning that failure to disarm Hezbollah would lead to war – a prophesy that was fulfilled shortly afterward. Was it in spite of this prospect, or because of it, that Chomsky allowed himself to be filmed greeting the terrorist commanders as long-lost friends? Could any parodist capture the scene of the taxpayer-financed American Jewish professor advising these murderers of Americans and Jews that instead of surrendering their weapons they should “inform the public and get them to understand your position” so that “they will put pressure on the politicians” to capitulate? Writing in the London Review of Books, Charles Glass was impressed by Hezbollah’s ability to use rockets and suicide bombers “intelligently, in conjunction with an uncompromising political programme.” Critics promptly drew his attention to the words of Sheikh Nasrallah: “If they [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.” Such statements, replied Glass, “are in all likelihood fabrications.” Surely the “intelligent” masterminds of rocket barrages and suicide bombings could not possibly embrace such an “uncompromising political programme.” After all, the editors of the Lebanese Daily Star were anxious to distance themselves from the journalist who had originally recorded Nasrallah’s outburst. If true, that would be a shocking indictment of their own professional standards, given that in the space of a year they had published no fewer than 170 reports by the employee whose veracity they supposedly did not trust. But Glass would no more share this consideration with his readers than he would mention the antisemitic bloodlust of Al-Manar, or the Shiite scholar Amal Saad-Ghorayeb’s carefully documented conclusion that for Hezbollah, “the Israeli Jew becomes a legitimate target for extermination. And it also legitimizes attacks on non-Israeli Jews.” Even so, Charles Glass can hardly compete with his more flamboyant radical colleagues in his enthusiasm for terrorists and suicide bombers. For the widely read columnist and documentary maker John Pilger – who ascribes Britain’s Middle East policy to the nefarious machinations of a single Jewish businessman – Hezbollah embodies “resistance to rapacious power... humanity at its noblest.” For the political firebrand George Galloway, Hezbollah terrorists are “martyrs and heroes,” while Sheikh Nasrallah’s “name now rings in joy around the world.” The sickening list of far-left apologists for Nazi-style Jew-haters seems almost endless. While the jihadists of Hamas and Hezbollah dream of a second Holocaust, the ayatollahs of Iran are pursuing the means to achieve it. Representative of the “moderates” in the Iranian regime is former President Rafsanjani, who predicts that “the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.” The “extremists,” as everyone knows, take their cue from President Ahmadinejad, with his assurance that “the Zionist regime is headed toward annihilation.” But few tyrants are so depraved that radical leftists will not leap to their defense. Virginia Tilley, academic proponent of the “one-state solution” to the “problem” of Israel’s continued existence, believes that Ahmadinejad’s words promise the sort of “profound political change” that is “necessary to creating a just peace.” Doubtless relying on her professional knowledge of Iranian dialects, she maintains that Ahmadinejad’s threat to “wipe Israel off the map” is correctly translated as a pious hope that the Zionist regime will “vanish from the page of time” – the “just peace” of her imagination. She also contends that Ahmadinejad is not really a Holocaust denier; in her view, “skepticism” about the “Holocaust narrative” arises quite naturally if the “narrative” is used in support of Israel. Noam Chomsky offers further insights: in his mental universe, “Israel and the United States are both threatening Iran with destruction [emphasis added].” The ayatollahs would be “crazy” if they did not develop nuclear weapons to counter the military threat from the West. British communist intellectual Alex Callinicos is equally certain of the correct ideological approach: “If Bush attacks Iran tomorrow, which side are you on?” he asks. “I would be on Iran’s but – as Lenin put it – I would refuse to paint Ahmadinejad in communist colours; in other words, I would be for an Iranian victory despite his anti-Semitic rantings...” Perhaps, in the annals of political lunacy, historians will eventually discover a 1930s leftist who was insisting on the duty of all revolutionaries to side with the Nazi regime, while cautioning that Hitler was not a communist and that a Nazi victory would be desirable in spite of his policies towards the Jews – not because of them. If it seems that these are the isolated opinions of a few individuals, albeit figures of some prominence, it is worth pointing out that Britain’s Stop the War Coalition has informed Iranian refugees that they will not be permitted to speak at its protests, since the movement “cannot allow any statement against the Islamic regime in Iran from the platform.” While left-wing extremists refuse to tolerate Iranian critics of the Iranian regime, respectable universities are quite happy to offer a platform for meetings organized by the most bigoted spokesmen of that very regime. In July I had the memorable experience of attending such a conference at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London. The event had two main sponsors. The first was the Islamic Human Rights Commission, described by Melanie Phillips as “the most conspicuous promoter of Khomeini jihadism in the UK.” Its advisory board includes the likes of Mohammed al-Massari, a Saudi exile with al-Qaeda sympathies whose website implores Allah to “grant his mujaheddin victory” over “the Jews, the Americans and the apostates.” The second sponsor was the NEDA Institute, an Iranian body whose main function seems to be the dissemination of “research” that denies the Holocaust. The theme of the conference was the need to do away with Zionism. A newsletter distributed at the entrance applauded Ayatollah Khomeini’s “arguments” for the destruction of Israel. Speakers included three Marxist-Leninist writers (Uri Davis, Michel Warschawski and John Rose) and a notorious left-wing American Jewish antisemite (Jeffrey Blankfort). Apparently they were only too happy to offer their intellectual services to the advocates of a second Holocaust. It must be stressed that the genocidal fanaticism of Hamas and Hezbollah and their Iranian sponsors barely differs from that of al-Qaeda. In the words of bin Laden: “We are sure of our victory against the Americans and the Jews as promised by the Prophet: Judgment day shall not come until the Muslim fights the Jew, where the Jew will hide behind trees and stones, and the tree and the stone will speak and say, ‘Muslim, behind me is a Jew. Come and kill him.’” What is truly incredible is that some radical leftists are so consumed with hatred that they are prepared to make excuses for these mass murderers as well. Three months after 9/11, CounterPunch published a revealing interview with Norman Finkelstein: “it’s payback time for the Americans,” he gloated, adding that “we deserve the problem on our hands because some things bin Laden says are true.” Finkelstein kept a studied silence about the implication of these thoughts for his fellow Jews. Another line of argument was suggested by Noam Chomsky: “It’s entirely possible,” he hypothesized, “that bin Laden’s telling the truth when he says that he didn’t know about the [9/11] operation,” and in any case bin Laden was “courageously fighting oppressors, who are quite real,” although regrettably his crimes were “extremely harmful” to the Palestinian cause. Not content with these observations, Chomsky traveled to Pakistan, where he hastened to assist al-Qaeda’s recruitment efforts by informing his audiences that the Bush Administration was planning to impose mass starvation on the Afghan people. For the gold standard in collaboration with genocidal antisemites, we must look to the radical lawyer Lynne Stewart, convicted last year of providing material support for the terrorism of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman. The so-called “Blind Sheikh” was linked to the attempted massacre of 250,000 people in the 1993 World Trade Center attack. The bombers expected that most of the victims would be Jews. Stewart’s actions on behalf of her imprisoned client included refusing to disclaim a fatwa inciting Muslims “to fight the Jews and to kill them wherever they are.” It is of no small significance that she is acclaimed as a martyr by her comrades at the National Lawyers Guild and the Center for Constitutional Rights, not to mention far-left media such as Z Magazine, CounterPunch and Democracy Now. In Britain, where I live, the anti-Zionist left has broken all records in its promotion of Jew-killers. So deep is the malaise that a major national newspaper, The Guardian, has seen fit to open its opinion pages to the jihadists and their admirers. One fanatic managed to insert a series of columns proclaiming that “Israel simply has no right to exist” and that “martyr-bombers” are “heroes defending the things we hold sacred.” Other op-ed contributors have included a well-known Hamas ideologue, official leaders of Hamas and a member of Hezbollah’s executive committee. Neither these outrages nor The Guardian’s countless libels of Israel and “Zionist” Jews have evoked the slightest dissent from its politically correct readership. The British far left’s infatuation with jihadists has even produced a new political party. In 2004, the country’s leading Marxist-Leninist and Islamic extremist groups announced the formation of RESPECT: The Unity Coalition, which now functions as a national megaphone for antisemites, Holocaust deniers and would-be destroyers of Israel. But is this development any more surprising than the public political romance between Ken Livingstone, the hard-left Mayor of London, and Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Middle East hatemonger who demands the mass slaughter of Jews? Or the insistence of the world-famous journalist Robert Fisk that the Bush Administration is controlled by “the Perles and the Wolfowitzes and the Cohens,” and that “I’m amazed that Muslims have been so restrained”? The enthusiasm of today’s radical leftists for the genocidal antisemites of the far right is not without precedent. The opening of communist archives revealed that for decades the Soviet bloc had tried to destabilize West Germany by orchestrating neo-Nazi violence. To embarrass its rivals on the other side of the Berlin Wall, the Stasi created movements such as the “Veterans of the Waffen-SS” and financed a campaign by the “German Imperial Party” to “justify the need for exterminating the Jews.” These examples can be multiplied. It is tempting to conclude, with Ecclesiastes, that there is nothing new under the sun. There is, however, an important difference. Yesterday’s communists sponsored Nazis in the hope of discrediting their enemies. Today’s ultra-leftists think that their alliance with Nazis brings credit to themselves.

British National Party Youth Organisation the Crusaders is a “Civil Rights Movement”

British National Party Youth Organisation is a “Civil Rights Movement”

The British National party Newsroom

The British National Party’s youth organisation, the Crusaders, will work towards being a civil rights movement working for the “preservation of our constitutional rights secured by millennia of struggle,” new organiser Kieren Trent has said.

Speaking after his election to lead the Crusaders at the party’s recent conference, 20-year old Mr Trent said that the “Crusaders demand the same rights granted to every other indigenous peoples across the world.

“Young indigenous Britons feel they are second-class citizens in their own country. Our youth have vast cultural capital that the government and media conspire to hide from them,” Mr Trent said.

“It will be the Crusaders’ task to stop this negative programming and to awaken our youth to their heritage and cultural wealth.

“Inside every young person is a natural feeling of nationhood waiting to be unleashed. Our organisation must instill a feeling of national identity into the downtrodden young people of Britain. Only then can we see a national rebirth,” he said.

Mr Trent also thanked the previous Crusaders leader, Joey Smith, for the sterling work he had done in getting the organisation off the ground.

“The name Crusaders relates to our battle against the onslaught of creeping Islam. I would like then to endorse Nick Griffin’s pledge of increased militancy in future.

“As proven by the recent demonstration I organised in Bletchley against the building of a new mosque, the Crusaders are not going to bow down to the Islamofascist fifth column.

“I live in 21st century Britain. Politics is not a hobby. Young people can no longer choose their political brand based on class alignment or family partisan alignment.

“We are desperately running out of time to save our people from destruction. It is time for every Briton to stand up and be counted and I am proud to say the crusaders are standing up for the indigenous British people and our Christian heritage,” Mr Trent concluded.

for those who are interested in the right age bracket see,

The Crusaders facebook Page 

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party  website.

Are Golliwogs offensive? Only to the Lunatic PC Brigade

Are golliwogs offensive?

Written by The Pilgrim

15 December 2010

"Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots?" This quotation from the book of Jeremiah (13:23) would probably be considered offensive if it were found anywhere other than in The Bible. Apparently Enid Blyton once wrote a story about a black doll that longed to be pink, which was subsequently rewritten as a story about a pink doll that longed to be black.   In a similar vein, the Daily Mail recently reported that “Golliwogs are deeply offensive” – an allegation which lacks any basis in fact. The golliwog (originally written as golliwogg) was the creation of Florence Kate Upton.  A young English woman living in late Victorian London, she took to writing illustrated books for children, but struggled to find a suitable protagonist until the discovery of a rag doll in the form of a black man gave her the inspiration she needed.  Her books, co-written with her mother, were an immediate success, and thirteen Golliwogg storybooks were published between 1895 and 1909.  Before long other writers were writing stories about golliwogs. Upton’s golliwogg was a charming and heroic black man in a minstrel’s outfit, who was accompanied by two wooden peg dolls (white females, apparently neither racist nor sexist).  In the first golliwogg book, the dolls first see him as a “horrid sight”, but they soon realise that he is in fact friendly. Then all look round, as well they may To see a horrid sight! The blackest gnome Stands there alone, They scatter in their fright. With kindly smile he nearer draws; Begs them to feel no fear. "What is your name?" Cries Sarah Jane; "The 'Golliwogg' my dear." Their fears allayed--each takes an arm, While up and down they walk; With sidelong glance Each tries her chance, And charms him with "small talk". Golliwogs were sometimes presented by other writers as mischievous or even threatening, but more often than not they were shown in a positive light.  The original Noddy books featured naughty gollies, which have long since been replaced by the goblins Sly and Gobbo, whereas another Enid Blyton book called The Three Golliwogs featured gollies who were resourceful and friendly.  In the 1960s and 1970s, Ruth Ainsworth wrote books about a golliwog called Rufty Tufty, another example of gollies as friendly protagonists. Jars of Robertson’s jam and marmalade featured gollies on their labels from 1910 to the 1980s, and the company produced golly badges until 2001.  They were commonly portrayed as cheerful characters, and they were referenced in the 1980s in the BBC television show The Two Ronnies.  One of the sketches featured an Arab businessman (Ronnie Corbett) buying marmalade, and the shopkeeper (Ronnie Barker) took pleasure in telling him that the jar had one of his little cousins on the side.  In those days that was considered to be a joke. The eventual demise of the Robertsons’s golly badges was not based on any lame response to political correctness, but rather on an acceptance that their appeal was by this time limited to adult collectors.  Of course to be fair this was indirectly a result of political correctness.  Gollies no longer featured in children’s books, and so they no longer held much appeal for children.  Golly badges continue to be traded, and often fetch high prices. Those of us who care about The Bible should take a stand against the enemies of the gollywog.  Otherwise it may not be too long before the Harriet Harman brigade demand that The Book of Jeremiah be purged of its offensive reference to black people.

Claim: 60 Young White Females Victims of Muslim Paedophile Gangs in Shropshire

Claim: 60 Victims of Muslim Paedophile Gangs in Shropshire

The British National Party newsroom

There are at least 60 victims, all young white females, of Muslim paedophile gangs operating in Shropshire, centred around Telford, a mother of one of the girls interviewed in connection with an attack has told the British National Party.

The hidden epidemic in Shropshire has effectively been covered up by the national media, and only occasional reports have made it into the local county press,” said Phil Spencer, south Shropshire organiser.

“The information about the number of victims came from a response to a new leafleting campaign the British National Party has been conducting in Telford warning of the dangers which the local population face,” Mr Spencer said.

The striking leaflets focussed on one attack in particular, where a Muslim gang from Wellington abducted and raped a young woman in September.

According to reports, the attack began after the victim went into the ‘Flames’ kebab shop in Market Square, Wellington.

The shop has ceased trading since the incident, which saw five Muslims arrested, including an illegal immigrant who needed an interpreter during his court appearance.

In addition, the reverse side of the leaflet contained a list of a number of other immigrant-origin attacks in Shropshire.

The leaflet contains local party contact details, and Mr Spencer said he had been approached by a member of the public who had received one of the leaflets.

“She revealed that her daughter was due to be video interviewed regarding one of the cases mentioned,” Mr Spencer said.

The person, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said that she thought it was “fantastic” that the British National Party was “highlighting these issues and making the public aware of what is going on. 

“Obviously I am not allowed to say too much about the case, but am aware that there is a large ring of people involved not only from Telford but other areas. 

“I was told by the C.I.D that there have been at least 60 victims of this crime just in Shropshire alone,” she said.

Another shocking revelation from this person dealt with the double standards given to Muslim and British offenders.

“I also know that suspects of the Muslim community were bailed until trial.  One of the conditions of their bail was that they do not come back to Telford,” she continued.

“However just the other week when the Eid festival was happening, they were allowed to return to Telford for religious reasons.  I think that was a disgraceful decision that was made by the courts to allow this. 

“Had the suspects been non-Muslim, this decision would never have been allowed,” she correctly pointed out.

The British National Party in Shropshire can be followed on their blog here.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party  website.

The Fundamentalist Luton Connection

The Luton Connection

Written by Finlandia    The British Resistance Site

December 2010

Today we learn that the Stockholm suicide bomber lived and studied in Luton, Bedfordshire: "An Islamic fundamentalist was radicalised in Britain before carrying out a suicide bombing on a busy street in Sweden. Iraqi-born Taimour Abdulwahab Al-Abdaly, 28, blew up his car, then himself, in the capital Stockholm. He had spent much of the last decade in Luton – long known as a hotbed of terrorism – where he studied for a degree and continued living there with his wife and children. Police were searching a property in the town today as part of the probe into the suicide attack" (Mail, 13 December).  Whilst the ghost of Al-Abdaly is enjoying his 72 virgins in paradise, we must once again address the question of how to deter fanatics who are determined to kill themselves. The Israelis have a policy of bulldozing the family homes of terrorists and those who harbour and support them. Contrary to antisemitic leftist opinion, they do not do this for reasons of vengeance or spite, but to make it clear to other would-be killers that if they carry out a mission, their families and communities will suffer after they are gone. The idea is that even if the towel-headed, semtex-clad losers care nothing for their own physical well-being, they might still have some regard for the people close to them, and this might – just might – make them think twice. I would welcome a similar policy here in the UK, so that in the wake of an atrocity the authorities can: Seize all assets of the perpetrator's extended family, then deport them to their country of origin; Investigate the perpetrator's places of socialisation and education for evidence of extremist teaching or indoctrination; Where evidence is found, close down the mosques or madrassas, slash funding to the colleges or universities (bulldozing would not normally be necessary); Immediately deport those responsible for such teaching; Freeze all inward movement of nationals from the perpetrator's country of origin for a period of five years. Whilst we cannot be sure that such a policy would work, it would certainly be worth a try. Excellent informative article, images and videos of the islamificaiton of Sweden can be found over on the NorthField Patriot.

EU hands off our medicines Nick helps Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)

EU hands off our medicines

  Martin Wingfield  at Nick Griffin MEP Euro News

DECEMBER 2010: 
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has contacted Nick Griffin over its concerns about new trade agreements which will have a detrimental effect on access to medicines.


 This is what the organisation told the MEP for the North West of England:
"Millions of people in developing countries rely on affordable generic medicines produced in countries like India to stay alive.
"MSF relies very heavily on these medicines to treat diseases such as TB, malaria and other common infectious diseases.
"MSF is concerned that the European Commission's trade policies that will severely restrict people’s access to these life-saving medicines.
"This attack is taking a number of different forms – free trade agreements, international treaties, customs regulations.   
"For this reason has recently launched a campaign called 'EU Hands Off our Medicines', to ask the Commission to drop the damaging provisions it is negotiating in a number of international agreements, like the EU-India FTA and ACTA."
Responding to Medecins San Frontieres (MSF) on behalf of Nick Griffin MEP, Constituency Office manager Tina Wingfield wrote:
"Mr Griffin notes your concerns that the provisions in the Trade Agreements under discussion could detrimentally affect the production, registration, transportation and exportation of generic medicines and thus seriously impede generic medicines producers in India from delivering more affordable and quality generic versions of medicines for people in developing countries.
In particular, he appreciates your concerns regarding the EU-India Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and the danger that the requirement for data exclusivity could (where no patent is granted under Indian law and thus no compulsory licence gained to lift data exclusivity) create a monopoly that blocks generic producers. It is imperative to ensure that unnecessary and excessive European Union bureaucracy does not interfere with or impede the effective delivery of medical care to people outside of the European Single Market.
He agrees that the scope of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is too broad and that the proposed new enforcement measures are draconian. Moreover, the disturbing scarcity of information about this agreement and a total lack of transparency in the negotiation process renders informed consultation impossible and undermines democratic debate.
Until and unless these concerns are addressed, Mr Griffin will oppose these Agreements."

Islamic Londonistan Strikes Again as “British” Islamist Bombs Stockholm

Londonistan Strikes Again as “British” Islamist Bombs Stockholm

The British National Party newsroom

Britain’s deserved reputation as the centre of Muslim-colonised extremism in Europe has been highlighted again with the suicide bombing in Sweden and the release of new US diplomatic cables which describe Muslims living in Britain travelling overseas for “jihadi tourism.”

As police searched the Bedfordshire house of Iraq-born invader Taimour Abdulwahab al-Abdaly, who the liberal press described as a “Swede,” for evidence related to the bomb attack in Stockholm, the latest leaked US diplomatic cables, from the US embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, revealed that:

“There is believed to be a certain amount of so-called 'jihadi tourism' to southern Somalia by UK citizens of Somali ethnicity.

“The threat from Somalia is compounded by the fact that within East Africa there is a lack of local government recognition of the terrorist threat."

The cable continued by saying that there were concerns that the ConDem government would take a “simplistic” approach to fighting terrorism.

“Many of the people who will form the new government have been outside of government policy circles for a long time, and they may have a simplistic point of view on CT [counter-terrorism] issues,” the cable said.

Other points of interest in the cables revealed that it was now seriously considered that a “Mumbai-style attack” would inevitably take place in Britain, and that the “highly controversial military operations ongoing in Afghanistan” are a “massive” political issue.

Meanwhile, the investigation into the suicide bombing in Sweden has revealed that the perpetrator, although living in Britain, was actively advertising for a “second wife” on a Muslim internet dating site.

British law currently forbids bigamy — unless the marriages are conducted outside of Britain by a legal system recognised by this country.

Muslims therefore marry multiple wives overseas and then can legally bring them back to Britain and claim child support benefits which would be denied to indigenous Britons with multiple wives.

This “exception” to the rules indicates precisely how far the Islamic colonisation of Britain has proceeded, beyond even the point where Islamists feel confident enough to launch attacks on other European countries.

For example, the 2004 Muslim Madrid train bombers called their spiritual leader, an imam in London, just prior to their joint suicide after being surrounded by Spanish police.

Other attacks by Muslims based in Britain led the French police to derisively call London “Londonistan” in reference to the utterly radicalised and colonised nature of the city.

The latest bombing in Stockholm has shown that ultimately, Islam and western democracy are incompatible.

Either one, or the other, will triumph. Co-existence is impossible. It has become clear that the only salvation for the West lies in a policy which halts and reverses the Islamic colonisation of not just Britain, but all of Europe.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.

 

 

Leading European Commissioners say: “Europe Needs More Third World Immigration”

EU Commissioners: “Europe Needs More Third World Immigration”

The British National Party newsroom

Two leading European Commissioners have called for even more Third World immigration into Europe in order to meet what they call “skill shortages” but which in fact are nothing of the sort, as record levels of unemployment in Europe attest.

According to an article written by European Commissioners Cecilia Malmström and László Andor, Europe “needs more immigration if it wishes to remain globally competitive.”

In reality, EU-wide unemployment levels were 9.6 percent in September 2010, according to the EC’s own eurostat website.

With an unemployment rate of nearly ten percent, the suggestion by the EC Commissioners that what Europe needs is even more immigration, is little short of criminal.

Eurostat predictions suggest that the EU workforce could shrink by as much as 50 million over the next 50 years, a projection which is used as an excuse by the liberals to justify ever-increasing immigration.

In reality, even if those figures are correct, the EU currently has a population of 500 million, which means that a reduction of 50 million is “only” ten percent.

The two liberal EC Commissioners somehow believe that a reduced EU-wide population of 450 million will somehow require “between 384,000 and 700,000 IT workers by 2015, and by 2020, between one and two million health-care workers” from outside Europe, is typically flawed and illogical.

Europe does not need a larger population. If anything, overcrowding and congestion suggests that it needs a smaller, more sustainable population, in proportion to its needs and what the environment can support.

The plan to swamp Europe with ever increasing waves of immigrants is not a new EU plan.

In May 2009, the European Parliament passed its “Blue Card” legislation which was aimed at introducing American “Green Card” style immigration processes.

The Blue Card aims to make it easier for those with skills which are in demand to live and work in Europe, as well as to move across national borders.

The EU legislation set a standard series of rights for Card holders and gave favourable conditions for family reunification and rights.

The period of validity of the EU Blue Card was set at between one and four years, with possibility of renewal. After two years in the first country, a holder may move, under certain conditions to another of the Member States.

The new law is supposed to take effect by mid-2011.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party  website.

Friday 17/12/10 is Judgement in EHCR Race Gestapo’s Case: Nick Griffin Calls for Demonstration

Friday is Judgement in Race Gestapo’s Case: Nick Griffin Calls for Demonstration

The British National party newsroom

British National Party members have been called upon to demonstrate once again outside the Royal Courts of Justice this Friday from 9:30 am when judgement will be given in the Equalities and Human Rights Commission court case against the party.

Making the call for a renewed demonstration, Nick Griffin MEP said that he had just received the advisory from the court officials this afternoon.

“Judgement will be handed down at 10am sharp,” Mr Griffin said. “The timing is a surprise to us as all indications were that it was going to be earlier, or failing that, after the new year.

“Nonetheless, we remain confident over the outcome, but need as many supporters as possible to be outside the court once again.

“Please come with banners, loudhailers, properly dressed against the cold and let the establishment know that whatever the decision, the members and supporters of the British National Party remain defiant.”

The Royal Courts of Justice are at the Strand, London WC2A 2LL. Local organisers are requested to make necessary preparations to ensure that as many people as possible are able to attend given the short notice.

Q: What are the nearest underground stations?

A: Temple on the District and Circle lines, Holborn on the Central and Piccadilly lines and Chancery Lane on the Central Line.

 Q: What buses go to the RCJ?

A: Bus numbers 4, 11, 15, 23, 26, 76, 172, and 341 stop outside the RCJ. Bus numbers 1, 59, 68, 91, 168, 171, 188, 243, 521 and X68 stop on Kingsway and Aldwych. Go to www.tfl.gov.uk for more detailed travel information.

 Q: Where are the nearest public car parking facilities?

A: There is parking available in Lincolns Inn Fields and Maltravers St. The nearest car park is in New Court, Carey Street, with additional ones at Drury Lane, Holborn and Shoe Lane.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party  website.

EU backs covert campaign to dupe consumers on ritually slaughtered meat

EU backs covert campaign to dupe consumers on ritually slaughtered meat

  Martin Wingfield  Nick griffin MEP Euro News

 DECEMBER 2010: EUROPEAN Ministers have dropped plans to ensure that halal and kosher meat from animals slaughtered without pre-stunning is accurately labelled.


 Earlier this year MEPs voted in favour of German MEP Renate Sommer’s proposed amendment to draft legislation on food labelling which would mean that meat and meat products from ritually slaughtered animals must carry the label “Meat from slaughter without stunning”.
However, the European Council of Ministers have now approved a draft of new food information regulation that did not include amendment 205.
The latest move to drop the proposal follows a Europe-wide lobbying campaign by the Jewish food lobby group Shechita UK, which has targeted European Ministers representing their various governments at the Council of Ministers.
Shechita UK has argued that unless meat from religiously slaughtered animals is allowed to slip into the general market covertly, this meat will become commercially unviable. Electrical pre-stunning is not allowed under strict Jewish traditions.
To make matters worse the British Government has backed the decision of the European Ministers. Jim Paice MP, Minister of State for Agriculture and Food, signalled the UK Government’s intention to oppose the labelling amendment saying that he had recently met with Shechita UK to help him “understand the concerns driving their opposition to labelling”.
This morning on hearing the news while on his way to Strasbourg for a week of voting in the European Parliament, Nick Griffin pulled no punches in condemning the dropping of Amendment 205.
"This disgraceful decision yet again highlights two sad truths of modern British politics: First, that the noisy voices of those who persist in inflicting the most hideous cruelty on defenceless animals in the name of religion continue to drown out the voice of the vast majority who believe in humane killing of animals and equality before the law among the different communities living in Britain.
"Second, that democratically elected MEPs seeking to represent the wishes of thier constituents are continually thwarted and trumped by the unelected bureaucrats who really call the shots in the European Union.
"Both problems illustrate the shocking democratic deficit in the system, something that only the British National Party really works to highlight and is serious about addressing."

http://www.christiantoday.co.uk/article/street.preacher.who.spoke.out.against.homosexuality.wins.wrongful.arrest.case/27225.htm

http://www.christiantoday.co.uk/article/street.preacher.who.spoke.out.against.homosexuality.wins.wrongful.arrest.case/27225.htm

The British National Party Unveils it's New Party Logo Emblem

British National Party Unveils New Party Logo

The BNP Newsroom

British National Party leader Nick Griffin has unveiled the party’s new official logo, a Union flag emblazoned heart with the party’s name, on the first official day of the party’s annual conference in the East Midlands.

“This logo will illustrate exactly what this party is about,” Mr Griffin told the 200-strong conference.

The logo was created after a long period of consultation with professional designers and input from the Advisory Council. It forms part of a rebrand of the party in the run-up to the next local and national elections.

The new logo will shortly officially replace the “BNP” logo and the party will also stop using the acronym “BNP” in all official logos and literature.

Delegates interviewed about the new logo were all unanimous in their support for it.

Simone Clarke said that she “loved it,” while Lisa Hicks said that “it was absolutely perfect. 

Alwyn Deacon said “I did not like the new logo to start with, but it is growing on me and the more I think about it, the more I like it.”

Derek Adams said the new logo was “good as softens the image a bit which is what we need.”

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.

British National Party will Promise “Increased Militancy in Future” in it's Actions

British National Party Promises “Increased Militancy in Future”

The British National party Newsroom

The British National Party will become more militant in physically defending British troops against Islamic militant abuse and against mosque-building programs, party leader Nick Griffin has announced.

Speaking to a 120-strong audience attending a black tie dinner to launch the party’s 2010 conference in the East Midlands, Mr Griffin said that in future, the party would start acting as well as talking about protecting Britain.

“We are going to start attending homecoming parades of British troops, and when the Islamic militants abuse our troops and threaten them, we are going to physically stand in their way,” Mr Griffin said to thunderous applause from the crowd.

He also said that the party would increasingly start demonstrations against mosque-building programmes in Britain, using the recent demonstration organised by the party’s branch in Milton Keynes as an example.

“The British people have already shown that they are willing to start supporting the British National Party in increasing numbers,” Mr Griffin said.

“When we hand in the ‘bring our boys home’ petition next year, with ex-servicemen and widows in attendance, there will be around 100,000 signatures on those forms,” he said.

“It will be one of the largest anti-war petitions ever handed in, and the fact that so many people are prepared to put their names to a petition organised by the most demonised political party in British history, shows the latent support we have.

“For those who think the British National Party is going away, we have a surprise. We are here and we are here to stay,” he said to a standing ovation.

* Mr Griffin also gave the attendees a glimpse of the new party logo which will be officially unveiled during the conference itself.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.

BOLTON PATRIOT: British National Party Promises “Increased Militan...

BOLTON PATRIOT: British National Party Promises “Increased Militan...: "The British National Party will become more militant in physically defending British troops against Islamic militant abuse and against mos..."

Far Leftist Marxist Hijacking of Student Protests Spotlights Vicious Media and Establishment Bias

Far Leftist Hijacking of Student Protests Highlights Vicious Media and Establishment Bias

The British National Party Newsroom

The communist and anarchist hijacking of the student protests in London — which have included a physical attack on Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall — have highlighted once again the vicious bias of the media and establishment in favour of all causes and ideology of the far left.

Time and time again the British National Party has been the subject of media infiltrations, secret filming, disruptions and subversion.

Yet never once has the BNP been responsible for mass public violence and disorder, physical attacks on the police, or, as happened yesterday again, the defilement of war memorials, statues and even a physical attack on the Royal family.

In fact, the “worst” that the BNP has ever been accused of in all of these subversive media attacks is one or two individuals making comments which are politically incorrect.

As there are members of all political parties who make politically incorrect comments from time to time (remember Tory MP Ann Winterton’s comments about Chinese people, or veteran Labour Party MP Tam Dalyell who declared in May 2003 that the British and American governments were controlled by Jews), not even that is exactly a hanging offence.

The odd non-pc comment here and there in fact pales into insignificance when compared to the street violence and criminality displayed by the far left and the “UAF” organisation.

Since August 2009, nearly 200 members of the UAF have, for example, been arrested by police for public violence, mostly for attacks on the police and members of the public.

Undeterred, the far left Socialist Workers Party (SWP) types who are behind the UAF and the Hope not Hate/Searchlight cabal have hijacked the otherwise legitimate student protests against tuition fee hikes.

Attaching themselves to the crowds of students, these far leftists have seized the opportunity to create chaos and proceed with the plans for “class war” (hence their attack on the Prince of Wales) and general anarchy.

And herein lies the rub: not once have any of these far leftist and clearly criminal organisations ever been the subject of a media investigation.

Not once has the BBC sent undercover filming crews to record internal UAF or SWP meetings to record their members making plans (which obviously include public violence).

Not once has the media trawled anarchist or far leftist websites looking for anonymous “quotes” with which to smear the UAF or the SWP.

Not once has any TV channel decided to make a “fly-on-the-wall” documentary about the far leftist anarchists who hurl petrol bombs at the police, deface statues with spray paint and desecrate the Cenotaph.

The media’s cover-up of the far left is in fact an extension of the establishment’s own approach to these criminals, as reflected in the actions of the police in the ongoing ‘student’ protest violence.

Policing authorities regularly try to disrupt BNP activities from taking place, either by placing planning objections before councils or physical intimidation of party activists on the street.

Yet, it would seem, the police freely let the far left organise in large numbers to create mayhem and public violence without even so much as a single complaint or objection, despite similar events showing a clear pattern of violence.

Why is it that the authorities “allow” the far left a free hand to literally smash up city centres, yet threaten and intimidate BNP supporters when they hold private, peaceful family gatherings on a tent in a remote field?

Without wishing to sound conspiratorial, the answer might just be that the establishment actually wants the public to be distracted by the sight of mad anarchists in London city centre.

It is just possibly the panem et circenses (‘bread and circuses”) which the establishment needs to keep the public’s eye off the real ball, namely the destruction of Britain by the EU, mass immigration and globalisation.

* It is not only in their pro-leftist coverage of current events that the media displays its true face.

When covering other news items which have an obvious ethnic angle to them, the media regularly attempt to cover up the truth with staged photographs designed to hide the truth.

So, for example, whenever the issue of knife crime is discussed, the media almost always use a staged photograph of a white youth holding a knife (see for example the Daily Mail of 28 October 2007) even though all the official statistics show that this is overwhelmingly a problem amongst the urban black population.

Similarly, whenever the problem of immigration is discussed in the media, photographs of supposed white or European immigrants are used as illustrations (see for example the Guardian of 7 December 2010, discussing non-EU student visas but showing a group of blonde-haired girls as ‘students’).

Another good example came with the Daily Mail’s coverage of 8 December 2010 of the gunshot sensor system installed in Lozells in Birmingham.

That newspaper saw fit to illustrate their article with a picture of a white man holding a gun, even though the system had been installed in an area which was 90 percent nonwhite.

These, and many other examples, show up the agenda of the mass media more than anything else. Their role in the destruction of Britain is one which has been noted and one day they must be called to account for their crimes against this nation.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party  website.

Tuition Fees Debacle: £4 Billion Slashed off University Budgets, but £20 Billion Spent on Illegal Wars

Tuition Fees Debacle: £4 Billion Cut off University Budget, but £20 Billion Spent on Illegal Wars

The British National Party Newsroom

The controlled media has refused to compare the £4 billion university budget cut — which is at the heart of the decision to raise tuition fees and the student riots in London — to the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which have now exceeded £20 billion.

Television viewers the world over have been shown the riots on Parliament Square, but not one of the mass media outlets has dared mention the fact that the Labour, Liberal Democratic and Conservative parties have all supported far bigger expenditures on fighting illegal and unjustified wars in the Middle East than on educating British kids.

There is, of course, no excuse for scenes witnessed on television and in the media of “students” urinating on statues and attacking police.

However, the British National Party can fully understand student anger over the cuts which have led to the tuition fee increases.

According to official figures released in June this year, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have cost the British taxpayer more than £20 billion.

This includes £18 billion for military operations as well as “overseas development and aid” which has, as recent Wikileaks cable releases have shown, has largely been siphoned off by corrupt Afghan warlords.

The total figure of £20.34 billion does not include the salaries of soldiers or paying for their long-term injuries and mental health care.

The current unrest amongst students has its root cause in the fact that universities in England have had their subsidies cut by more than £4 billion.

The cuts have forced universities to resort to increased fees in order to make up the shortfall in public funding.

The spending review cuts announced by Chancellor George Osborne included a cut in the higher education budget from £7.1 billion to £4.2 billion.

As a result of the latest vote in Parliament, universities have been granted the right to increase tuition fees from the current maximum of £3,290 a year to £9,000 per year.

In effect, this means that three quarters of students will be faced with a tripling of their education bill, with the middle classes being hardest hit, as always. In terms of subsidies and other calculations, middle class students will see their university fees rise by as much as six times the current levels.

The British National Party remains committed to the principle of the abolition of university fees.

It is nothing short of treason for the ConDem regime and its Labour Party Tweedle Dee clone to support illegal and immoral foreign wars at the expense of educating British youth.

The BNP does not endorse the violence shown at the demonstrations, but shares in the anger of students at the vicious betrayal of this nation’s interests by the criminal gangsters currently occupying the Houses of Parliament.

The time has come to make the demand “Fund Education, not War” heard loud and clear across this land.

* The education budget cuts are also a fraction of the £12 billion “foreign aid” budget, which ironically includes subsidies to educational systems in China and India.

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.

The problem of tolerance A letter from Amerika

The Problem of Tolerance

Dec , 2010

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

When we have individual fears, we wish the world went easier on us.
When confronted with authority, we want to find some kind of rule that means it cannot get to us, or at least that we make it really hard.
Around 1789, we started banding together and overthrowing authority. Their rule: form a hierarchy to achieve an abstract goal. Our rule: all people are equal, and people are the goal, so destroy authority.
We trashed culture, religion, aristocracy, then even the idea of government itself. Surely now we are free.
But there’s a problem. The more we smash authority and enforce tolerance, the more disorder spreads.
It turns out that not everyone is nice. Our thought progression:

1. The rich are bad. The rich are the bad.
2. The bad are the rich. The rich are the only bad.
3. We remove the rich; therefore, we’ve removed the bad.
4. Oh wait, the bad exists among We The People, too.

We have rich people and governments as a way of distinguishing leaders. If enough people bought your product, it must be good and you must be smart. If enough people voted for you, you must be doing something that’s right.
Alternatively, we could just pick our best people to rule, and we’d have to con them into it because they and only they will view it as the most serious and hardest job on earth, but that’s another topic for another day.
But instead, we’re focused on defending ourselves against The System. As individuals, we want rules that ensure we are beyond its reach. We want to weaken it however we can. It is beyond us that others will abuse these same freedoms and in the ensuing chaos, produce a worse form of social system.
There are many ways this phenomenon manifests:

• Crime. We pad our courts with rules, laws, appeals, technicalities and other means to protect us if we’re unjustly accused, which happens very rarely. What happens all the time however is career criminals, pedophiles and scammers exploiting these rules.
• Screening. First airplanes, now maybe trains and buses: we will experience the radar scan and pat-down. This means that every single person undergoes a humiliating procedure and thousands of hours are wasted, instead of doing what smarter groups do: find those likely to commit the crime and pull them out. But we can’t do that; it’s not humanistic, or fair, or equal. Human rights must trump logic, because we as individuals fear being on the wrong side of authority.
• Schools. Your child gets a terrible education in public school because (a) the course work is dumbed down so no one feels left out and (b) the school refuses to kick out troublemakers, violent kids, and special education cases who cannot “mainstream” with an ordinary class and always require more attention, yet will never use that education. We all suffer so the few unproductive ones have rights.
• Customer service. At your favorite stores, people do dumb things all the time, and some are understandable. Sometimes, the bottle of apple juice just slips out of the fingers and breaks. Other times, it’s people moving slowly, scamming the customer service returns, vandalizing packages (including the odious habit of leaving frozen goods in random aisles when they decide they no longer want to buy them) and obstructing aisles. The few again ruin the experience for the many.

Our modern world is addicted to this human rights view of reality because all of our political systems are based on it. After all, if you were oppressed and the kings were bad news, you need to have reached a Utopian state after you killed those kings. But we haven’t. So the denial spreads, and we insist further on the human rights of all people, especially to sabotage the rest of us with their selfish and delusional behavior.