BNP | Battle of Barking

2 12 2010

An honest review from a commentator named Overlord of the ‘Battle of Barking‘ documentary by that recently aired on More4.  Found this in the comment section at the bottom of the drivel Benji Wilson sprouted.

I watched the battle for barking last night, and frankly it disgusted me.

The filmmaker obviously was trying to portray Hodge in the better light but honesty I think the BNP came off better.

It is true that they did come across as a bit thick and lonely, but they have genuiene grievances about what has been inflicted on this country. It seemed to me that most of the white people filmed seemed to support them. Hodge herself seemed to admit this, when she told her team to ask constituents whether they would go for BNP or Labour. If they admitted BNP, she said it was best to focus on other voters. Ignore the BNP voters.

Then the only campaigning we saw from Hodge was meeting ethnic groups either in their churches or mosques. Her grovelling in the mosque was sickening. She would talk to the odd white person on their doorstep, but the group diplomacy seemed to be reserved only for ethnics.The only time she met white people in any sort of a group was the multicultural street party in the photo above. And obviously there were lots of ethnics there too.

Some of the things she said to people about the BNP were very dodgy and bordered on lies or incitement. She told a group of Africans in church that the BNP would send every one of them home. She said something similar to a the mother and baby in the picture above. Then came a white man with an asian wife. There she did not say they would send her home but they would cause her trouble.

Then we saw groups of youths aggressively attacking the BNP with impunity. If not actually hitting them they would be shouting and swearing aggressively right in their faces. Calling them “white C###s”. Spitting at them again and again. Spitting is assault. Throwing fruit at them. A few punches were definitely thrown at the BNP too. Serious violence was only averted by the BNP constantly moving location. They were not free to stand where they chose. Much of this was in the build up to the fight that was reported in the news just before the election. That news report made out that the BNP were to blame. From the documentary it is clear that the youths were spitting at and goading them all day long.

To me the documentary showed that the establishment stoked a deliberate campaign of intimidation against the BNP. The BNP were demonized and dehumanized. Ethnic minorities were wound up with claims they would be deported, and it was made clear that the BNP were fair game for the youths. The BNP could not fight back as they would instantly be labelled thugs, and no doubt actually be arrested, unlike the youths.

The establishment media always make much of Griffin’s minders. They are used a proof of his thuggishness. However, as the documentary showed, if Griffin did not have security, he would likely be dead. And no doubt the police would miraculously have no leads on the suspects.

Some bloody democracy.

Too right, some bloody democracy.  All I saw was the State-sanctioned illegal actions of everyone BUT the BNP.  From the immigrant to the political whore named Hodge, I was sickened by the depths plunged by the Labour Party, although not surprised, and the Battle of Barking is a very appropriate title considering the amount of dirty tactics employed by the Red Machine.  From soliciting BIGGER donors to employing THIRD-PARTY GROUPS to denounce their opponents’ cause…  Labour’s campaign should be investigated by the Fruad Office.

Even worse is the official declaration (Kudos GV) of the “England doesn’t exist in the EU” malarkey.  We’re nothing but cattle, although don’t taste as good, can be milked all the same.

Another sore spot must e the Lord Nelson pub located in Brighton that will soon be opposite a Mosque due to the Somali influx, which will no doubt increase racial tension, yet do the council give a damn?  Do they fuck (source HERE).

And I wish I could leave you on a lighter note, except Brian Gerrish, the thorn in Common Purpose’s paw has loads (seen six so far) of speeches regarding that political Beast that can be found HERE.

Stay angry, one, it’s good for the heart rate, and two, it’ll keep you warm.  The more we’re nibbled at, the more difficult it will become to remain gentlemanly, and then the fireworks.  Just hope the riots wait til the summer cos I don’t fancy stepping out in this weather.

Damn, only good thing about snow is seeing the face of some of my newly arrived equatorial neighbours.  Damn, only good thing about my equatorial neighbours is their dress sense.  Come Sunday, it looks like a walking forest of bright-colored floral curtain-like wraparounds with contrasting heads poking out.  Jeez, some of ’em even smell of coconut, which is damn better than the usual BO encountered by supersized Africanoes, main reason I avoid public transport in the summer.

Advertisements




BNP | Inward Struggles

31 08 2010

The following is my own thoughts so feel free to take it with a healthy pinch of salt.

While Britain burns, the BNP decides to show everyone their dirty washing.  I won’t go into the details for I can’t even Adam and Eve the antics suggested.  All I will say on the bother is…

For all the progress made, it seems that the Leadership contest has turned into a One Man Show, members are resigning/expelled (depending on source) along with alleged scenes involving X-rated action.

The breakdown is probably due to a whole host of factors.  One could be that with the British National Party hierarchy wanting to become a Political Force, they have actually morphed into a mini-version of the opposing Main Political Parties, and what I mean by that, is never trusting their members.  Another could be those who believe they deserve more and have been overlooked, jealously is a bitch and I know that from personal experience.

I fear the only way forward for the British National Party is a complete reshape of the organisation.  And that is what it should be, an organisation, not some political pawn party available to the highest bidder.

Instead of trying to control a vast machine, organise it to be self-sufficient little cells independent of eachother.  Sure there is a chance of infiltration but so long as some form of ‘Standardisation’ is agreed, those that deviant can be looked upon as a cell instead of representing the whole body.

All forms of discriminatory behaviour should be kept to a minimum, white, black or martian, so long as the individual supports the central theme of British Nationalism, which is freedom from tyranny and a return to the checks and balances that once kept our power cartels in check.

Main reason I’ve never joined any political wing is the demand for obedience to certain individuals, be them money men or whips, thereby negating your very presence in every event.  Done with the best intentions but so easily corrupted when idols are promoted, for the message becomes secondary to the man, and whereas men are mortal, ideas can transcend mere time.

So, to my compatriots in the British National Party and also the many other Nationalist causes, yes, even the outright supremacy ones, refine the message, not the men.  This is not to say that the messengers are not important and should turn up in trrackies and trainers, but the message and not the man is more important.

Also, a little take on the current governmental quango-inspired witch trial threatened by Her Royal Majesty’s Equality and Human Rights Commission.  Considering that bankruptcy could be the result of this political persecution along with possible jail-time for the Chairman, this could provide the perfect opportunity for regrouping and catapulting the BNP into political stardom.  “How is that possible?” I hear you murmur.

Well, worse case scenario is that the EHRC wins the case outright, bankrupting the party and jailing Nick Griffin.

This means that a fresh new approach can be taken.  Nationalists then form the British Nationalist Party, a loose-fitting organisation with set principles of promoting UK Nationalist interests, such as leaving the EUSSR and an English Parliament to equalize the Home Nations to name but two.

Next, considering that locking up people for their political beliefs on the grounds of a mickey-mouse law is something the Communist Party of China are fond of, Mr Nick Griffin could become a living martyr.  Simply put, this would be a classic case of political persecution that could be appealed to the highest courts in the world, just imagine the bad publicity the British Government would receive over this.

Perhaps then there won’t be no need for a violent ANC/IRA inspired campaign of terror to ascertain Our Birthrights.





BNP | Election Broadcast

30 04 2010

Mr Nick Griffin heading the British National Party’s pitch for your vote.  The whole broadcast is worth watching yet the highlight must be when we see Mr Griffin explain Labour in simple ‘sign-language’ at 3mins 45secs.

Sheer genius.

Save the Nation and vote Nationalist.

Failing that, at least someone who wants to withdraw from the EU.





Britain | EU Stooge Parties

25 04 2010

According to Gerald Warner, the differences between the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats are superficial due to their shared enthusiasm for supranational government.

His first rant a couple of days ago was in the Telegraph citing ‘You couldn’t put a cigarette paper between these Three Stooges‘ and today it is with the following in the Scotsman.

Three-horse race to a supranational nightmare

By Gerald Warner, Scotsman.  Published Date: 25 April 2010

CHOICE is a luxury that is no longer on offer to British voters. The identical programmes of the three main political parties have effectively created a one-party state. It is the great irony of this general election that the expansion of the traditional two-horse race into a three-horse contest has brought not the slightest philosophical broadening of the electoral landscape.

It would be more accurate to say that Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats share a homogenous culture. It is possible to detect slight differences in their respective agendas – the Liberal Democrats’ dissent from the Iraq War would be one instance but these are purely tactical variations in the implementation of a common political culture that Gordon Brown once described as “the Progressive Consensus”. When the advent of David Cameron as Conservative leader absorbed even the Tory Party into that consensus, multi-party democracy became history.

This did not simply happen: it was engineered. Nor is it a British phenomenon; if anything, Britain is a latecomer to a post-democratic political system that is propagated by the European Union as well as, at global level, by the United Nations. It is a necessary precursor to world government, the ultimate objective of the Progressive Consensus. Before attempting to understand what is happening at national level, we need to recognise the bigger picture, the context in which our own helotry is being engineered.

That picture is darkly dystopian. The EU project is a distorted attempt to recreate the unity of Christendom, but in the interests of the most fanatically anti-Christian agenda of which one could conceive: that of the Frankfurt School of Marxism. Economic Marxism is now the province of historians; cultural Marxism is carrying all before it. The fall of the Berlin Wall marked only the collapse of a failed model of state socialism. The rise of the European Union signals the resurgence of cultural Marxism, untrammelled by the need for Five Year Plans and regarding plutocracy as perfectly congenial.

Let the capitalists create wealth, is the new philosophy, so long as the state, through punitive taxation, is the largest beneficiary and dictates the mores of corporations, communities and individuals. The characteristics of cultural Marxism are materialism, statism, militant atheism, sexual nihilism, cultural shallowness and the sedulously fostered illusion of popular autonomy within what is actually a totalitarian system.

Its enemies are religion, the family, authentic as distinct from synthetic communities, tradition, national identity and homogenous culture. In recent decades the forces of cultural Marxism, spearheaded by the EU, have launched a ferocious attack upon all those unsympathetic institutions, increasingly employing legal coercion.

When the baffled voter looks at the three mainstream political parties and wonders why he cannot identify with any of them, his choice has been removed by supranational forces. He is alarmed by immigration and, so widespread is that concern, the snake-oil salesmen have adopted a cosmetic pretence of responding. Dave is babbling about an unspecified “cap”, Gordon pretends immigration is diminishing and Clegg wants to amnesty illegals.

None of that comes near meeting public concern. How is it that, in a cut-throat election contest, all three parties dare to defy the electorate? By consensus is the answer: so long as nobody breaks ranks, they can laugh at the mug punters, as they have done since the cross-party consensus was first formed in 1965 to abolish the death penalty against the will of the nation.

All three parties support the futile war in Afghanistan, which the public opposes; polls now show a majority of Britons wants to leave the EU, but none of the three parties would accord the promised referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, let alone an In/Out plebiscite. Every PC “hate law” and other oppressive measure enjoys tripartite support, since it is political and social death, within the bubble inhabited by the elite, to dissent from PC dogma.

It may not be possible to hold that line indefinitely. In this election the Liberal Democrats, who epitomise the PC consensus to the point of caricature, have irrationally become the conduit of electoral protest. That mistake will not be repeated. On Friday the BNP – the party that represents the antithesis of the PC consensus – published its manifesto. Its headline policies are: an end to immigration, withdrawal from Afghanistan and Britain’s exit from the European Union. If the main parties cannot see the writing on the wall they will have only themselves to blame.

Couldn’t have written it better myself (hence the blatant reproduction here).  A nation is not a nation unless it has self-determination.  So long as we’re in the Fascist European Parliament, we will suffer the endless dictates.

Save your Nation and vote Nationalist.





BNP | Paxman v Griffin

24 04 2010

Auntie Beeb would have the world and her sister believe that Jeremy Paxman is a demigod when it comes to political interrogations.  Yet time and again we see the Establishment’s most high-profile attack dog fail to stick it to the BNP and yesterday’s effort was no different.

The video speaks for itself so I will concentrate on an ad hominem attack on Mr Paxman instead.

Paxman stood for the Communist party in school elections.

“Having stood for the Communist party in school elections, he described himself as a socialist on an (unsuccessful) application to edit the New Statesman. The person Paxman always used to remind me of was Alastair Campbell.” – Decca Aitkenhead – Guardian – 9th February 2009

Beeboids’ pay packets.

“They can be terribly grand BBC presenter types – the Paxos and Dimblebys – when quizzed about their personal lives. The salary issue, especially, they seem to think is tantamount to asking the Queen whether or not she goes to the loo. – Delimgpole – Telegraph – October 2009

The Reds’ view on Paxman.

“Paxman and Hywel Williams have composed more up-to-date studies on the  so-called Establishment or ruling elites in Britain. But neither work updated from a Marxist standpoint. More’s the pity, not least because it might explain how the authors’ sons have ended up today as twittering purveyors of ruling-class ideas and policies.” – The Communist Party – August 2009

Mediocracy leanings.

“Above all, how aware is Newsnight that, far from being anti-establishment, it is the establishment. The politicians whom it so proudly bullies are at least elected, whereas its staff are paid for by a licence fee against which British television viewers have no legal redress. Money matters a lot.

Jeremy Paxman, it is reported, earns £1 million a year, five times more than the Prime Minister. That is what the programme thinks of itself. We, who have to pay for it, may not always share that high estimation.” – Charles Moore – Telgraph – 26th January 2010

Program: “Who Do You Think You Are?”

Paxman discovers he is descended from a Roger Paxman who changed the name from ‘Packs-man’ – ‘man with a pack’ – to ‘Pax-man’ – ‘man of peace’.

Roger, to Jeremy’s consternation, went on to become mayor and a member of parliament, or a ‘charlatan politician’ as Jeremy describes him.

“I didn’t think I could go any lower, but we’re doing well so far,” he said.

Kudos to a fellow patriot for the links and additional commentary.

Extra kudos to Mr Griffin for holding his own once more.





BNP | BBC Five Live podcast with Mr Griffin

19 04 2010

A fair production from the Beeb?  Nicky Campbell interviewing BNP’s topman Nick in a civil manner?  I cannot believe it myself.

Radio5 Live phone-in podcast with Nick Griffin from the BNP

I can’t blooming believe me.  I really can’t.  One well-spoken black fellow, an angry gay-rights’ advocate, a couple of BNP members, an undecided mother-of-two and one Islamic supporter.

Love him, like him, unsure or dislike (no chance in pleading with the deluded Haters), Nick Griffin has an answer for everything.

UPDATE: Forgot the kudos to my fellow patriot for the link, due to the fact I would’ve missed it otherwise.





PR Dave | I’m Jooish

17 04 2010

Gay, black and now Jewish David Cameron, the plastic politician leading the plastic conservatives onto plastic governance.

Applying lubed-up apologies before holding his ankles for the ‘gay community’ with promises of ‘extra’ help in the fight against ‘fear of gay’ disease (homophobia).  Then rolling up his sleeves and removing his jewellery, then apologising for his families part in the trans-atlantic slave trade with more promises, this time to empower the ‘black community’ in the fight against white pride (racism).  I always thought that was the idea behind owning a gun in Southwark but yet again, I am shown my place by an Old Etonian.

Why should his sexuality, skin pigment or ancestry bother me?  It doesn’t except for one minor detail…  He is hoping to become Prime Minister of MY homeland and I would like to know which team he is batting for before I place my trust in the man.

So I am more than happy to present David’s double-standard masterpiece where he seeks the blessing of God’s Chosen people (sic) in his election bid.  Not only that, but gives us an insight in his plans for a Big World Society based on people empowerment (ie: transferring more power to the State).

Cameron: ‘I will empower UK Jews’

Justin Cohen – Thursday 15th April 2010

David Cameron this week insisted a Conservative government would do “much more to protect and empower the Jewish community” and described learning about his Jewish ancestors as one of the highlights of his year.

The Conservative leader’s comments came in a message to members of the Movement for Reform Judaism, which he used to make pledges on tackling anti-Semitism and education and to appeal for the support of community members in the upcoming election.

Cameron said: “To me, one of the biggest contributions of Judaism is its understanding of what makes a responsible society. Last summer, I gave a speech to Jewish Care where I talked about this idea. I quoted a phrase of Rabbi Hillel’s which I think captures it beautifully: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I?” That urgent, selfless moral compulsion to change the world for the better is right at the heart of the Jewish way of life. If I become Prime Minister, I want to see that idea of responsibility extend right across our society.

“A key part of that will be about building a stronger, more cohesive society – and that means doing much more to tackle the rise in anti-Semitism. I was appalled when the Community Security Trust told me that there were more anti-Semitic incidents in the first half of 2009 than in the whole of any previous year. We need big changes to root out this extremism – stopping preachers of hate from entering this country, banning those extremist groups who are already here, and doing much more to tackle radicalization in our universities.”

The man hoping to succeed Gordon Brown as prime minister also touched on a prominent theme of the party’s platform. “I want to build a bigger society,” he said: “And we can’t do that without backing faith-based organisations in the good work that they do. Take faith schools, for example. They are a really important part of our education system and often have a culture and ethos which helps to drive up standards. Through our school reform plans, there will be a real growth in new good school places, and I’m sure some of these will be in faith schools.”

Cameron also spoke of learning about his ancestors, the Levitas, as a personal highlight. He said: “I am a great admirer of the Jewish people and your extraordinary achievements. I’ve long seen your community as a shining light in our society.” Messages from Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg will be published in the Movement’s newsletter in the coming fortnight.

Spoken like a true Fabian.  Changing the world, making a bigger society and empowering every ‘approved’ group…  he really is clutching at straws, and in trying to please everyone, no wonder the Tory message is so muddled.  And by ‘ banning extremist groups’, with such a wide-meaning phrase, just who on Blighty could you be considering Mr Cameron?

And how the media would applaud such a speech addressing a NuBriton minority group.  How different would be the reaction if I used Dave’s quote but change references to Jewish folk to English and Jewish faith to Christian and have it pronounced from a Nationalist.

Griffin said: “much more to protect and empower the English community.  To me, one of the biggest contributions of Christianity is its understanding of what makes a responsible society.  Last summer, I gave a speech to the Church of England where I talked about this idea.  I quoted a phrase of Mohandas Gandhi’s which I think captures it beautifully: “A nation’s culture resides in the hearts and in the soul of its people.”  That urgent, selfless moral compulsion to change England for the better is right at the heart of the English way of life.  If I become Prime Minister, I want to see that idea of responsibility extend right across our society.

“A key part of that will be about building a stronger, more cohesive society – and that means doing much more to tackle the rise in anti-white racism. I was appalled when the Community Security Trust told me that there were more anti-white racist incidents in the first half of 2009 than in the whole of any previous year. We need big changes to root out this extremism – stopping preachers of hate from entering this country, banning those extremist groups who are already here, and doing much more to tackle radicalization in our universities.”

“I want to build a nationalist society, and we can’t do that without backing Christian-based organisations in the good work that they do.  Take faith schools, for example.  They are a really important part of our education system and often have an English culture and ethos which helps to drive up standards.  Through our school reform plans, there will be a real growth in new good school places, and I’m sure some of these will be in English based schools.”

Now what kind of reception would that have from our Establishment Political Media Complex? Rhetorical question.