UAF's ANALYSIS AND NEW STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL APPROACH

I won the local cyber-activity award, as detailed both here and on the main BNP website. Thank you folks, that makes me feel good. Really. It might not put any bread on the table, but as it’s said: “Man does not live by bread alone”. Why do you think they give medals to soldiers?

What do I do on the Web? Well yes, of course I go to websites friendly to us where I pick up useful information; I also visit the Daily Telegraph, The BBC, The Times and the Observer/Guardian every day – and the Sunday versions. They are all sites moderately hostile to us – except the Observer/Guardian which is very hostile to us … and where I spend the most time, arguing in the comment columns (where the hard sell does not work, so though I have in the past declared my BNP membership, I don’t push it too hard, and I’m not constantly commenting. Frequently, less is more). Here I just drop the occasional little seed when I see an opportunity and a possible audience. For instance, I dropped the following little seed, in amongst a longer comment, in Catherine Bennet’s column, in Sunday’s Observer. First I extracted small bits from other people’s comments, then answered them. Note that Guardian readers are mostly of the leftie, Labour-supporting sort. Remember – you wont win any converts by talking to people already on our side – if you want to get active on-line, you have to argue with people, and in places, that are hostile to us. They are the only places where it’s even possible to win converts, or at least sow seeds of doubt. We just happen to be a bit better at it than our very own pet troll, Red, is. Thing to remember is – in places like the Guardian etc. the readers are far from stupid – before you start mixing it with them you have to get widely knowledgable on history and current affairs – and a bit of philosophy and logic helps too - and learn that with these sorts of people a rapier or stiletto is usually better than a broadsword or machete. A little dig is far better than a major rant. Don't try to convert people in one go - just try nudging them into shifting a little our way, or at least into conceding that though they disagree with us, we do at least have a valid point of view. Softly softly catchee monkey. When you decide to start mixing it on the cyber side of our campaigning – read the places you plan to get involved in for a while first, learn the way they speak and their general attitudes – then adjust your language and your arguments to the people you are mixing with – it might be seriously foul and crude in some, genteel in others – but adapt your style to the people you’re with. Remember, less is often more. There are others doing this too on our behalf, and I'm getting to recognise them (though I didn't recognise any in these comments).

@JohnRennie
" They haven't learned their lesson - they never will. That is until we have a Labour Party that has the guts to restore some of Labour's old values e.g. re-nationalise electricity, gas, water and the railways for a start. Why not? "

You might find the BNP manifesto to be of interest ... all of that is covered, along with such things as support for small family businesses, workers co-operatives, independent landOWNING (as opposed to tenanted) farmers, manufacturing ...

@MAM
"Because if one thing has been proven it is that State-management is a bad idea. It does not work."

Seems to work well for the railways in France.

@Maidmarion
"I'm ashamed to say this but I now read the site bloggers and not the articles."

Well yes, me too these days (except for the ashamed bit). But Katie is one of a very small number of exceptions; she's always worth reading. Even on the odd occasion that she writes sh1te, it's always good, well-argued, quality sh1te.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/28/hazel-blears-dont-get-it

I also visit neutral sites on a daily basis, both in the UK and abroad, mostly just to gather information and get an idea of the things concerning people outside the party. EU Referendum and Brussels Journal are daily must-reads – especially EU Referendum if it’s the EU and/or military matters that interests you. Probably the best source on the net, certainly better than the EU Parliament website, which I also visit when I feel like boring myself stupid. For other European general and anti-Islamic information I visit the Dutch site Klein Verzet and – strangely enough – the American site Gates of Vienna. To find out what Libertarians are thinking and thinking about, I visit Devils Kitchen, Old Holborn and most especially of all, the site of the chairman of the Libertarian party, the PJC Journal (a very important site to read), and for American Libertarians, the Western Rifle Shooters Association. I get my Islam info from Jihad Watch, Dhimmi Watch, Religion of Peace – and I’m quite partial to a daily read of Winds of Jihad. Conservative viewpoints are an important strand to keep up to date with – for this I read View from the Right in America, and Cranmer, here in the UK – daily, of course. Other places I visit regularly are Geert Wilders’ blog, the Army Rumour Service, Inspector Gadget. To keep up with real events in South Africa I’m a regular on SA Sucks. There are plenty of other place I visit on a fairly regular basis – too numerous to list – and when you’re reading something particularly interesting, do follow any links provided; you can find yourself in some seriously weird and wonderful places, but also pick up some incredibly interesting, sometimes vital, pieces of information. I also have an Index covering the English Language newspapers in every country of the world – occasionally visit other countries to find out what their obsession of the day is, and I regularly visit Russia and read the English version of Pravda. All good stuff, even if much of it is really dreary to read. Somebody has to do it. And last but not least, I pay special attention to the enemy – as they say, “Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer”. I visit the LabourList site (seriously, it’s junk, but we do need to know what they are doing and planning, or trying to do and trying to plan – they aren’t the brightest stars in the sky), I visit the British Antifa site – not knowing what THESE people are planning can literally cost you your life. I reasonably regularly visit Searchlight, and I visit Lancaster UAF daily. Indeed, today’s post comes from there. And here are some extracts from it – seems they are finally starting to realize that the way they’ve been opposing us hasn’t been working. Ah well, who would have thunk it? :)


There are three clear facts that need to be remembered at the outset of this article. The first is that the British National Party has won two seats in the European Parliament. This provides it with the platform, financial clout and semi-respectability from which it hopes to build future success at a local and even parliamentary level over the coming year. Secondly, their election is a game changer. Debates around no platform, access to the media and political representation will change whether we like it or not and we will need to adapt accordingly. …

… It is also important to dispel two widely (though separately) held assumptions. Firstly, this is not the protest vote against mainstream parties and useless locally elected representatives that many politicians would like us to believe. It is an increasingly hard and loyal vote …

… the almost universal dislike of even moderate Islam and the contempt and suspicion many of their voters have towards a liberal and multicultural society show how hardline much of the BNP support is and how it will take more than a more progressive economic policy to win them back fully.

More importantly, and regularly overlooked by politicians, activists and commentators alike, are issues around identity. As I have discussed before, the BNP is emerging as the voice of a forgotten working class, which increasingly feels left behind and ignored by mainstream society. As the YouGov research confirms, the majority of BNP voters feel that the Labour Party, for many their traditional political home, has moved away from them and is now dominated by a middle-class London elite who care more for Middle England and the interests of minority groups than for them.

Class politics exists but not as we once knew it. The Labour Party, in line with many other centre-left parties across western European and Scandinavia, draws the bulk of its support from the middle class, public sector workers and minority communities, especially in the big cities.

The BNP, on the other hand, is the voice of a section of the white working class, particularly in those areas of traditional industry that have experienced the greatest economic and social upheaval over the past twenty years.Most of the local authorities with the biggest BNP vote are in areas once dominated by the car, steel, coal or ceramic industries. All have gone, and those people able to leave have left. While some new jobs have replaced those lost, the work is generally lower skilled, short-term and further away from their home.

In addition to economic difficulties the identity of the areas has collapsed, leaving behind a confused, resentful and alienated minority. This is the cultural war that the BNP has cleverly exploited, particularly by tapping in to people’s paranoia that outside forces are deliberately conspiring against them and giving preferential treatment to others …

… We will go into the 2010 local elections with an emboldened and financially secure BNP and we believe the number of council wards at risk is now over 150 across the country. …

… A proper local strategy requires us to localise our campaigning. What works in one area will not work in another. Talking to principally Conservative voters requires a quite different leaflet to what would be put out in a traditionally Labour area. Localising our approach allows us to deal with local issues and also to target our message depending on what we are trying to achieve.

And mobilising the anti-BNP vote is sometimes quite different from trying to suppress the BNP vote.That is why the HOPE not hate campaign will be encouraging and supporting local groups to begin their own local anti-BNP newsletters. We hope that by starting this summer and focusing on the key wards for 2010 the newsletters will become a crucial tool to defeating the BNP at the ballot box.

To begin to undermine local BNP support we also have to build alliances within the community. Local anti-BNP groups need to be accepted and even respected. Every community has key movers and shakers and spending a bit of time cultivating relationships with these people will open new opportunities, allow our message to be widened considerably, potentially increase our activist base and give us a regular flow of information to rebut BNP myths and lies.

We also need to be cleverer in how we present our arguments. The YouGov survey shows the complete lack of respect BNP voters have towards authority – way beyond those of other parties. That means dogmatic or one dimensional arguments on anti-fascist leaflets are likely to fail.

We have to recognise that we might not always be the best messenger to get over an argument. One of the most successful leaflets we have ever produced was in Halifax where we got quotes from local doctors and pensioners to dismiss BNP claims that asylum seekers were forcing old people off GP lists and causing hospital operations to be cancelled. The strength of getting other people to speak up for us, particularly those respected by local people, is also evident from the survey. Local GPs, at 82%, came out as the most trusted professionals among BNP voters.

We also have to accept that the political landscape has shifted. Searchlight comes from a proud tradition of No Platform, a belief that fascism should not be allowed to air its politics of hate publicly. We have always opposed legitimising fascism through public debate and where fascists try to incite hatred within communities through provocative marches and actions, we have backed mobilisations against them.While I still adhere to this in principle I also believe that we have to accept a new reality. Firstly the BNP has MEPs and whether we like it or not Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons will appear more regularly on television. …

… Likewise, we also have to change our tactics on the streets. The hammer attack on a BNP activist in Leigh, Greater Manchester, in March was an unmitigated disaster. …

… what should have been a great media story, showing the strength of people power against the BNP, became three days of appallingly negative local headlines after an anti-fascist struck a BNP member in the head with a hammer.

Our response to any BNP activity is a tactical issue. Just as we always consider what is possible, so we have to think about the possible outcomes. With large chunks of local people supporting the BNP something that gives the party media sympathy is often counter-productive. In a 24-hour-communications world every small event that in the past would have gone unreported can be headline news on television, the radio and on the internet within minutes. With the BNP leaders far more politically savvy than in the past it is not difficult for them to spin a story to their advantage.

There is also a need for an honest debate about the use of rallies, marches and pickets. While one could argue that it is important continually to oppose the BNP gaining any legitimacy, such protests are increasingly ineffective and, probably more importantly, a distraction from the real work required in the communities. …

… Over the next few months our priority is to build anti-fascist groups in every community in the country. …

… Matching groups and activists in one part of country where there is no BNP threat to an area where there is one can help us raise money for local material. …

A new survey into the attitudes of BNP voters has produced some startling revelations. Unsurprisingly BNP voters are overwhelmingly opposed to immigration and asylum seekers but a sizeable number also share the BNP’s hardline attitudes …

… The study tells us that men are twice as likely to support the BNP as women, 44% of BNP voters are aged 35 to 54 and 61% are drawn from the social groups C2DE. One third of BNP voters read The Sun or the Daily Star, whereas only 13% read the Daily Mirror and those reading The Guardian and The Independent are statistically insignificant. One fifth claim to be members of trade unions or trade associations and 36% identify themselves as skilled or semi-skilled manual workers.

On one level the report tells us little new. More BNP supporters regard immigration as one of the key issues facing the country at the moment – 87% compared to 49% among all voters. Again unsurprisingly, 94% of BNP supporters believed that all further immigration should be halted. This compares with 87% of UK Independence Party voters, 68% of Conservative voters, 46% of Labour voters, 43% of Lib Dem voters and even 37% of Green voters. …

… What is more startling is the strength of the racial attitudes of many BNP voters. In a result that gives the lie to the BNP vote simply being a protest, 44% (compared to 12% of all voters) disagreed with the statement: “non-white British citizens who were born in this country are just as ‘British’ as white citizens born in this country”.

Among BNP voters 21% strongly disagreed with the statement compared to just 1% of Greens and Lib Dems and 2% of Labour and 3% of Conservative voters.

More disturbingly, 31% of BNP voters believed there was a difference in intelligence between the average black Briton and the average white Briton.

Although only 2% of BNP voters deny that six million Jews, Gypsies and others died in the Holocaust, a further 18% accept that the Holocaust occurred but believe it has been exaggerated. …

… We should be under no illusion that a long and hard struggle lies ahead.

Original complete article:

http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2009/06/way-forward.html

All party members and voters should read the whole article. All I have done here is publish extracts from it. There is an enormous amount of information in it that is useful to us in the coming years – and to everyone, not just activists. You see, our opponents have at last gotten around to doing a reasoned analysis on us. They haven’t quite got it right – indeed they are nowhere near right - but they are beginning to get a little genuine insight, and will accordingly be changing tactics, as described in the original article. As Wigan and Leigh produced more BNP votes than any other community in the NorthWest – including the cities of Liverpool and Manchester – you can all bet your bottom dollar that we, and Wigan and Leigh, will be particularly targeted.

They will be playing with the insides of our heads – but that only works on unprepared people. So prepare yourselves.

Information is vital: if you are a BNP voter or otherwise support us, but not a member or otherwise known to be voters or supporters, you can provide wonderful service to the party. The UAF (CAP, SWP, Respect, etc – with particular attention to Peter Franzen and Stephen Hall) will be holding local meetings around Wigan to build an anti-BNP local organization. ATTEND those meetings! Then pass on all information gleaned from them. They have their spies at our meetings, so there is no good reason why we shouldn’t have ours at theirs.

Charles has his contact details posted on this page. And to contact me, I can be emailed via my contact details at the bottom of this page (click on my contributor button, then on the profile page that will appear, click on the email button on the left hand side of the page). There is no good reason why you should not remain anonymous; indeed, it might be mutually advantageous if you do so.

My next post will be in two or three days, and will comprise a paragraph by paragraph fisking of the entire UAF document linked to here. So if you think this post is a long one, check out the next one. Some people try to tell me that I shouldn’t write long posts as readers very quickly lose interest. I don’t agree. That is just people internalizing our opponents’ view that BNP members and supporters are thick knuckledraggers. I have rather a higher opinion of our supporters. Make it interesting and you will read.

It will take me two or three days .

Morg
.

A GREAT MEETING IN HINDLEY GREEN

A fantastic election victory celebratory meeting was held at our new venue in Hindley Green last night when an audience of 130 attended.
After discussion and analysis of the election results awards were given for "Best Activist".

Henry Morgan won the best "Cyber Activist" award, well deserved for his successful efforts in the local press and of course on this blog where his arguments have defeated those of his opponents.

Tony Grime and Chris Boland jointly won "Best Leafletter "award for their hard work pounding the streets and "spreading the word"

Gary Ghadwick won "Best Local Activist" award for his initiative in giving the Party more prominence in Leigh and his work, with others fighting the Stalinist Wigan Metro who tried to take over "The Marsh Fields" which had been left to "The people of Leigh". Wigan Metro seemed to think that meant them. In this they were shown to be wrong.

Wigan Metro are not the people and they have no right to alter or dispose of assets left to the people.

"Best All Round Activist" was Ken Haslam who has brought many people into the Party as members in addition to leafletting and selling Voice of Freedom. The awards were followed by Leila Bentham who gave a short talk on the difference between Civic nationalism and True nationalism and showed that following the principles of the former would lead to the destruction of our people and way of life.

The main speaker was Arthur Kemp who really was at his best. People who had never been to a BNP meeting were enthralled by his eloquent description of the disasterous policies which are destroying our country, but reassured by his ideas of how our Party would redress all the wrongs inflicted on us.

His speech was followed by a question and answer session which lasted until after 11 pm, a demonstration of the interest shown in our policies.

A great occasion was made even better by the identification of the hero who protected Tony Ward from even more severe injuries at the Leigh riot by the antidemocratic thugs of the far Left. He waded in to protect Tony from his 40 assailants saying "I'll go down with you lads".

Tony had wanted to meet him and buy him a drink but as Tony was not there he was given a bottle of whisky by a member.

Total takings were £320 which will go to Party funds and two applications for membership were received.

I feel really elated at the increased support at a hastily arranged meeting, especially since the paid thugs of the uaf could only muster half as many people outside our Blackpool meeting and they could draw on people from all over the country.

Today I have had much positive feed back.

There is no doubt that the BNP is becoming ever more welcome in Leigh in spite of the efforts of the thugs.

Things are really moving fast in spite of the efforts of antidemocrats to stop us. It's difficult for me as organiser to keep up with all the enquiries we are getting. 173 new ones came in yesterday. I must try to follow them up as soon as possible, so not much time in the sun for me this next week.
ONWARD AND UPWARD!

JUST A LITTLE THOUGHT FOR MR (R)Ed AND HIS BRITISH HATING MOB!

A friend of mine who served near 25 years doing his duty to our Queen and Country would like to remind everyone that tomorrow is: THE ARMED FORCES DAY.

He would also like to hear from any British born and British hating scumbag to discuss his trials and tribulations during his service.

Please oblige by leaving a comment in the appropriate section.

FASCIST OR NOT FASCIST?

The politics of the new speaker John Bercow not so long ago seem very like those of the BNP although somewhat more draconian.

He said, when a young Tory politician that "there should be an end to New Commonwealth and Pakistani immigration, a properly financed system of voluntary repatriation, the repeal of the Race Relations act andthe abolition of the Commission for Racial Equality with particular emphasis on repatriation"

He has since moved to the Left much to the annoyance of the Tory establishment and was thus elected as Speaker because the Tories do not like him, a strange reason for chosing a high official.
His move to the Left was it is said because he married a Labour supporter and "discovered sex and the Labour Party at the same time".

So it was fine to express these views when a Tory MP which are not therefore fascist but when we hold the same views we are portrayed as fascists.
Strange double standards I think.

No wonder politicians are held in such contempt, changing their views at the slightest whim (or "love") and how far they have drifted from the views of the electorate.
They, the politicians of all the major parties are devoid of principle and the sooner these charlatan thieves are removed from power the better.

So question./
When is a view fascist? Answer when it is stated by the BNP.
When is the same view not fascist? Answer, when it is stated by a Tory.

MICRO-ANALYSIS OF EU ELECTION IN WIGAN

Here is my personal analysis of the EU election results locally to Wigan. You will not read this sort of analysis in any of the media. These are the sorts of numbers they don’t want you to see – those numbers are the ones that simply say that Labour got the most votes. And so they did, but there’s much much more to it than that. Comments welcome. I have tried to be fair and impartial to everyone who participated, and some of my fellow party members may not like my approach – but we are the honest straight-talking party aren’t we? Straight talking also means giving credit as well as criticism. Well, it does in my book. But, well, I am a BNP man so I may have shown a little bias.


European elections Wigan

..........Con ......Lab ..........LDem .....UKIP .......Green .....BNP .......Respect ....Others .....Total ....Electorate ....Turnout
2004 13,449 .33,275 ...8,138 ....10,131 ...4,214 .....7,608 ....5,740 ......6,341 .....83,730 ..234,282 ......35.7%
2009 11,354 ..17,049 ...5,903 ....11,656 ..3,842 .....7,517 .....n/a .........6,189 .....63,760 ..236,091 ......27.01%

Total electorate increased by 1,809 voters.
Turnout DROPPED by 19,970 votes

Never mind the numbers for the individual parties (which I will take a look at shortly), just that pair of numbers alone tells us that the people out there are not happy, and it’s the entire political system they aren’t happy with. Politicians – all politicians at every level – should start getting very worried about that. History from all over the world tells us that when the people lose confidence in the system itself, the pitchforks and flaming torches come out for an airing ... closely followed by ropes, decorated lamposts, and la Madame. The mob is a ravening beast and there is no reasoning with it once it forms. Human behaviour really does change in a mob, and people do things they would consider unacceptable when they are on their own. Are you a councillor or an MP? My advice is to drop the currently dominant ideology immediately and start working for popularity. That’s popularity with the BRITISH people, not immigrants, whether EU citizen or Third World immigrants. And as for the EU and the Third World themselves? They don’t matter – only the native BRITISH matter as far as your personal well-being is concerned.

You can never complain that you weren’t warned and given well-intended advice. If you find yourself unable or unwilling to act on said advice – ideology can get such a strong grip on what passes for a mind in some people – then the next best advice is to immediately resign – if you are fortunate you may get forgotten about. Please don’t think “it can’t happen here”, because it can happen anywhere. You are the people constantly telling us that all people and cultures are the same and equal, and it is only right and proper that we exist in a multicultural multiracial society … and then you unconsciously concede that this is a lie by thinking “it can’t happen here”, as if you really, deep down, know that different peoples, different cultures, are NOT the same. It’s make your minds up time – what do you really believe? Are we all the same, or are we all different? What do I believe? I believe that peoples/races and the cultures they generate (race is not a social construct; society is a racial construct – the exact opposite of Newspeakpcthink) are different, and that some are better than others (ours is one of the better ones). And different people do produce different cultures – just look around the world. Certain behaviours are constants though when circumstances combine to evoke them. Particularly mob behaviours, though mobs form a lot easier in some cultures/peoples/races than others – because cultures/peoples/races are different. The British people/culture is one where it has historically been very difficult to get a mob to form. However, history shows that mobs can form here, and such circumstances are currently combining; and the early indicators are there to see if you’ll only look. Those numbers are an early (but not the only) indicator …

BNP 2004 7,608 votes 9.09%(of turnout)
BNP 2009 7,517 votes 11.79%(of turnout)

That is a reduction in our vote of 91 votes. However, that comes out as only a drop of 1.2%, which on a 2004 base of 7,608 votes is statistically insignificant. Looked at in statistical terms, our vote this time was the same as last time. Apart from UKIP, we did better both in actual numbers terms and in percentage terms than any other party, including all the “Others” in combination. I’ll go through them all to explain what I mean.

Total turnout: The media will have it that in 2004, the turnout was 35.7%, and this time it was 27.01% - a drop of 8.69%. That is from the total electorate. But let’s look at this in a way the media is keeping very quiet about:

No of voters 2004 83,730.
No of voters 2009 63,760

That is a drop in the number of people who voted in 2004 of 19,970. In percentage terms, the number of people who were motivated to actually vote dropped by 23.9%. That is highly statistically significant. The other parties will claim that this is because it was a wholly postal vote last time, and wasn’t this time. What they wont like you being told, however, is that the percentage of all the postal votes that were returned also dropped. I was there at the postal vote opening, and ballot counting, and box sealing, every day, so I saw the numbers for myself. Quite apart from the pathetically low turnout in the first place, the turnout in those who could normally be considered motivated to vote, also dropped by nearly a highly significant quarter. Compared to that, the BNP vote being statistically, the same on both occasions, is a case of doing very well indeed. Indeed, as we got 11.79% of the vote, it’s likely that a similar percentage of that 20,000 voters who didn’t vote this time probably voted BNP last time – somewhere around 2,000 more BNP voters out there too disgusted with the whole electoral system to vote at all. Go get them back folks - they wont turn up of their own accord. That we kept our vote up despite that, and despite the campaign of vilification by the media, the church, all the other parties, the unions, and all those organizations (UAF etc) whose whole reason for being is to vilify the BNP, is a testament to the work put in by Wigan BNP this time around. Well done boys ‘n girls. And make no mistake about it: we in Wigan played a big part in the difference between sending Mr. Griffin to Brussels and not sending Mr. Griffin to Brussels.

That’s on actual turnout for all parties; how did it go for all the other parties individually? Apart from UKIP, not very well at all – to make a gross understatement.

Conservative Party:
No of voters 2004 13,449
No of voters 2009 11,354.

That is a drop of 2,195 votes, or in percentage terms, a drop of 16.3%. On a 2004 base of 13,449 votes that is a statistically very significant fall in support. I can account for most of this (later), so the Conservative Party may not actually be in too much trouble in Wigan at the next general election. So not necessarily a total disaster for them, as we will see later.

Lib/Dem Party
No of voters 2004 8,138
No of voters 2009 5,903

That is a drop of 2,235 votes, or in percentage terms, a drop of 27.5%. On a 2004 base of 8,138 votes that is a statistically highly significant fall in support. Unlike for the Tories, I’m unable to dredge up any later consolation for them, and they are in a lot of trouble at the next general election. And it gets worse for them: in 2004 they beat the BNP by 8,138 votes to 7,603 votes – 535 votes; but this time around the BNP in fourth place pushed the Lib/Dems into fifth place by 7,517 votes to 5,903 votes – 1,614 votes. We not only turned the difference around, we more than tripled that difference in doing so. The Lib/Dem humiliation must feel quite exquisite. I’m not entirely sure I would bother with the next general election if I was making the Lib/Dem decisions. Nobody likes losing deposits: especially in the process of being beaten by the BNP naziscum bootboy knuckledraggers.

Green Party
No of voters 2004 4,214
No of voters 2009 3,842

That is a drop of 372 votes, or, in percentage terms, a drop of 8.82%. On a 2004 base of 4,214 votes that is a statistically significant fall in support. The only consolation I can offer for the Greens is that it wasn’t very significant, or highly significant – but it was a significant fall all the same. This is particularly ironic in that the Green Party was the “Great White Hope” of those of our opponents whose sole reason for being was to prevent Mr. Griffin going to Brussels. If you had been reading the leftard blogs, as I have been, you’d have seen that they were pushing the Greens on the grounds that if they got enough votes then purely on the proportional basis they might prevent BNP success – and voting Green was a way of not voting for the mainstream parties … and might even lead to Green success. After all, they already had two Green MEPs from elsewhere in the country. So: abject failure all–round for them. Sorry Greenies – you know you nearly always lose when the BNP stands someone against you. Especially in the North.

Respect Party
No of voters 2004 5,740
No of voters 2009 zero – they didn’t stand a candidate.

Stephen Hall, a local man, should be ashamed of himself. He was, along with Peter Franzen, one of the instigators of what turned into the infamous hammer attack. He is also the Deputy Chairman of the Respect Party, ‘Gorgeous George’ Galloway’s vehicle for financial self-enrichment, and societal Muslim enrichment. No doubt he would say that he didn’t put up a candidate in order to maximize the Green vote. An epic fail there then Mr. Hall. You do all you can to ruin the BNP’s election chances and then do not yourself participate in said election. You and all your truly fascist scumbag fellow SWP etc. people are beneath my contempt and I will not mention you again in this article.

Others
No of voters 2004 6,341
No of voters 2009 6,189

This was a drop of 152 votes, or, in percentage terms, a drop of 2.4%. That is not a statistically significant drop in support, so essentially, like the BNP vote and despite the near-20,000 drop in voters from 2004, the same vote as achieved in 2004. It seems there will always be something a little over 6,000 people in Wigan who will vote for other than the established parties no matter who or what they may be. That is a valid political statement and thank you for making it – you did at least vote, along with those who spoiled their ballot papers (254), also making a valid political statement (“A plague on all your houses” – a perfectly valid political opinion to express, and thank you for expressing it). It constituted the combined vote for six other registered parties plus one Independent candidate. Well done sir for having the courage to stand alone. Never an easy thing to do. You didn’t get many votes, but you do have the consolation of knowing those votes were for you. And you did at least participate, unlike … oh, I wasn’t going to mention those contemptible fascist scumbags again was I. We in the BNP can respect you for that, and we do.

UKIP
No of voters 2004 10,131
No of voters 2009 11,656

This was an increase of 1,525 votes, or, in percentage terms, a rise of 15.1%. That is a highly significant rise in support. The only party in Wigan who participated in both 2004 and 2009 who achieved a rise in their vote. Well done Mr. Jones – I think the Tories made a mistake in letting you go. But that’s just my opinion, and you already knew I held that opinion. I don’t think UKIP can take any consolation from this result though, at least not in general election terms – and this is where my above-mentioned consolation for the Tory drop in support comes in. We already know that over Europe the Tories are a divided party. Most – possibly all – of the UKIP increased vote is the same people that resulted in the Tory decreased vote. They can do this at EU elections, but will return to the Tories – along with many other Tory UKIP voters at a general election. So, the BNP vote remains fairly steady across elections at all levels, but UKIP votes are for EU elections only. We regularly beat UKIP at all other levels of representation, and that pattern will return. But nevertheless, well done to the only party that increased their vote here in Wigan despite the fact that the total number of voters dropped by 19,970.

Labour
No of voters 2004 33,275
No of voters 2009 17,049

This was a drop of 16,226 votes, or, in percentage terms, a drop of 48.8%. On a 2004 base of 33,275 votes, this is an extremely highly significant drop in support. In fact, without any exaggeration it can be described as an electoral disaster. Note that word: EXTREMELY. If that was the BNP heads would roll within the local party organization. However, this is the Labour party and local groups and branches do not have the operational independence that BNP local groups and branches have; it is far more centralized so perhaps I should say that heads should roll at Labour Party headquarters. They wont though – Labour party activists and politicians are past masters at deflecting blame onto others. It’s always someone else’s fault – Americans for economic problems to individual MPs cheating on expenses for electoral problems. No matter what the problem, it's always someone else's fault.

Now get this, Labour Party: you didn’t lose all these votes (and not just here in Wigan) because of expenses cheating. That was just the icing on the cake. And it didn’t happen because of the economic problems – that was just the marzipan under the icing. You have lost support, and now will probably face a full generation out of power because you have ridden roughshod over the people of this country for 12 years. That’s assuming you don’t get a Canada-type hit and cease to exist (The Conservatives in Canada went from government to only two MPs in one election, and now no longer exist as a party) as a party because who will contribute millions to a rump of a party to enable it to pay off its debts which stand somewhere near £18,000,000? Is it just the party executive that takes personal – jointly and severally, with all the personally financially disastrous implications of that – responsibility for that debt, or is it all party members? Whatever – Labour is facing extinction. You have totally ignored the British people’s wishes – we want a halt to immigration, we want a referendum – as promised – on the European constitution (which is what the Lisbon Treaty is) as promised, we don’t want to be part of your database state, no ID cards – we are sick of being under surveillance as soon as we leave the house to go anywhere, we don’t like our journeys tracked, we don’t like being engaged in illegal wars in our name, we don’t like being held responsible for the murder in those illegal wars of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians (I use the plural – wars – because there have been at least two – everyone remembers Iraq … have we forgotten our once friend Serbia so soon?), we don’t like our phone calls and internet activity monitored, we don’t like the way the police are developing into paramilitary forces, we want to make our own laws instead of having 75% of them made by foreigners for us (Let’s have some additions in the comments) … which will rise to 100% of our laws made by foreigners when that constitution (Lisbon Treaty) comes into force. You’re (Labour) going to accuse me of lying when I say that aren’t you – like that moron MEP Corbett (unless he was just voted out and replaced by our Andrew Brons?) who publicly claims that only 9% of our laws are made by foreigners. So, just in case of that, watch this film – it’s a UKIP film, not a BNP film (I’m envious – I wish we had made it) but ALL British people should watch it. It features the President of the European Union Parliament, Hans Gert Pottering, speaking in his native language, German. THAT will be a sore point with the British people. Subtitles are in English so you can know exactly what this powerful German is saying. The sound of a German, speaking in clear and very precise German, gloating that HE is going to be making ALL BRITISH (by implication) law in future surely must rub you up the wrong way, as it does me (and I greatly admire Germany and the Germans in general). If you don’t get seriously angry, then frankly, you deserve to lose your country and I will become a hermit and let you get on with giving your country and people away to foreign dominion … which will effectively mean Islam, in the medium-to-long term. You want your daughters and granddaughters subject to the whims of Muslim males do you? Have you any knowledge of how non-Muslims are treated in Pakistan? Get some - Google is your friend.



And if anyone tries to say I’m lying about Islam, watch this:




Anyhow – a comprehensive disaster for Labour. It’s no good them saying their voters didn’t come out to vote because by definition, if they didn’t vote for you then they are not your voters. Simple as that. You have lost them and you will never get them back. We in the BNP are more likely to get them than you are, especially if they take the trouble to read our party manifesto which demonstrates that we are today in the UK the nearest thing there is to the OLD Labour party that they loved and voted in droves for (as I did, actually). Can I offer any consolation? Yes, two consolations actually: the government of this country is going to be Tory after the next general election; your consolation in that is that they wont get elected because they are loved or even thought well of – but there is a back edge to that: they will become the government because they are not you. A secondary consolation, particular to Mr. Turner, is that the long ingrained Wigan habit of voting Labour may hold for one more general election, and a very chastened Mr.Turner may very well be returned to a pretty lonely existence at Westminster after the next general election. When he was first elected at a by-election in 1999 he inherited a majority in excess of 60%; this had reduced to 56% by 2005, and I doubt he’ll do better than 40% in 2010, if that.

To Summarise in statistical terms, the voting pattern from 2004-2009:

UKIP – highly significant rise in support
BNP – vote remained the same
Others – vote remained the same
Green – significant drop in support
Tories – very significant drop in support
Lib/Dems – highly significant drop in support
Labour – extremely highly significant drop in support

So, BNPers – a short break then shoulders back to the wheel for the next round of elections, local and general, in 2010. We have to talk to people, and we have to talk to them all the time, not just at election times – how many times do activists for the other parties hear the complaint: “We only see you at election time, when you want something”. You might be amazed to discover that very often, just speaking to someone face to face and simply asking him or her to vote for us is all that it takes to secure that vote.

Morg
.

CELEBRATION IN BLACKPOOL

Got back from Blackpool yesterday, tired but elated . The event originally billed as a "Summer School" was altered to be more of a celebration. It was nice to renew acquaintances with friends from all over the country and chat about our experiences in the election.
Outside on the windswept rainy Blackpool Promenade were the "two thousand" paid (£20 each I'm told) demonstrators of Weyman's (and the other one Smith I think his name is) Hope not hate or antifa or whatever they call themselves. It must have been dispiriting for them to stand outside on a rainy day and be ignored even for 20 quid.

BUT A LAUGH FOR US INSIDE!

The reason the photo was taken was to warn members of the huge numbers who will oppose us wherever we go.
I'm shaking in my boots.

I believe there was some of the usual chants but we did not hear them as we listened to well delivered and moving speeches in the main hall.
Simon Darby (from whose blog I pinched this picture) showed his egg spattered tie.

He had paid £10.50 to have his suit cleaned which he thought was a very good deal for £1 million's worth of publicity. The thugs of the far Left never learn do they? They always shoot themselves in the foot and gain us sympathy and votes.

Nick's speech was one of his best everwhere he stated his aims as an MEP and how he would channel some of his income to North West charities and Andrew would do the same in the North East. I was particularly pleased that our group "was mentioned in dispatches" as playing a pivotal role in our victory, although again I think the Leigh hammer incident by Leftist thugs also helped.

Unfortunately there were so many cameras I was unable to film the speech but a Wigan member has much of it he says. It will be well worth watching.
Basically I think the venue is too small for our rapidly growing party's conferences, but our thanks are due to the owner of The New Kimberley Hotel for his help in the hard times. A great venue I think for local North West functions.

I can't get over Andrew Brons knowledge of the political system. No wonder he made Margaret Hodge look a fool on CHannel 4. With Nick and Andrew the politicians have more than met their match. Intellectually they will bury them.

Cllr Paul Golding gave a good account of the success of our "Operation fightback" where we have forced retractions of the lies printed in the press about us such as the Gurkhas scandle. We must all play our part in resisting lies from any quarter and using the law to hit back. More about that in another blog.

Foolishly I had promised my wife that after the election we could relax.

Not so. It was explained that we must consolidate and turn all the goodwill we have gained to good use and increase our influence further.
There will be another summer school to plan our strategy and we have picked up ideas for our area. We must strike while the iron's hot and we will.

THE DAM HAS BROKEN! Now we must sweep aside the rubbish (pictured above) and continue our progress to our goal.

ROD LIDDLE IN THE SPECTATOR MAGAZINE

Rod Liddle is no friend of the British National Party. However, he does speak the blunt brutal truth on a range of subjects. Here is his analysis of the European Union election results. I am unable to dispute very much of it at all. Some - but not much. Here is the complete text.

If anything, this result understates the support for the BNP

Rod Liddle
Wednesday 10th June 2009

Rod Liddle says that the far right party won two seats against the odds. Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons are simply colonising terrain vacated by the Westminster elite

So, why the great shock? Why the hand-wringing? It’s not as if they weren’t warned. Why all those metropolitan journos disembarking at Barnsley station on the 11.47 from King’s Cross and gingerly approaching the local Untermensch with a sort of disgusted awe: what is it about this ghastly place that resulted in 17 per cent of its benighted inhabitants voting for Hitler’s bastard offspring, the British National Party? It must be simply that they don’t like the local darkies, think that there are too many of them and, poor dumb creatures that they are, feel threatened. Not racist, as such; simply lacking an education.

But this approach to explaining the BNP — the geographical anomaly/thick northerners paradigm — is running out of fuel. Five years ago it seemed to work when the media could point to racial tension in Burnley (with its no-go areas for whites) and Oldham and Bradford; a reactive vote, spurred by dumb, inchoate anger. But not now, surely. Because it isn’t just Barnsley. It’s Coalville and Shepshed in Leicestershire, where there are comparatively few immigrants; Broxbourne in Hertfordshire, where there are close to none, and Doncaster, where the BNP scored 12 per cent.

The first act of Doncaster’s mayor was to withdraw council funding for a gay pride march — a decision which horrified the London media and political elite but which was, I suspect, supported by about 85 per cent of the British people. Why should local people fund a march by homosexuals telling everybody that they’re glad they are homosexuals? If they are that glad about it, can’t they pay for it themselves?

There’s the lesson: if you media monkeys want to find out why the BNP did so well, then forget Barnsley, Stoke and Rotherham and start probing the attitudes in Islington, Notting Hill and Westminster. It is those opinions which are anomalous, even if the three main parties cheerfully subscribe to them. An overwhelming majority of the British population wish to see an end to mass immigration. An overwhelming majority think that there are too many immigrants in Britain now. Almost 50 per cent believe that the people most discriminated against in this country are white people. The majority believes that white people are discriminated against on such things as social housing. The main parties do not believe in any of that stuff: they think it’s racist and therefore, de facto, wrong.

There are so many misconceptions about the BNP’s successes in those Euro elections that it is hard to know where to begin. But let’s start with the assertion, first advanced by the BBC’s otherwise excellent political editor Nick Robinson and subsequently cleaved to by the rest of the press, that the BNP’s success has been overstated. Thesis: the party did not improve its vote that much and it was on a low turnout, which always favours minor parties with a fanatical following. Nonsense. The BNP’s success has been hugely understated. Most of those million people who voted for the BNP on Thursday are not fanatics at all; instead they are drawn from that section of the electorate which is least likely to struggle down to the polling booth, namely the largely unskilled, low-paid working class.

Further, the BNP is a much smaller party than any of its competitors and thus much less well equipped to get its vote out. The party also had to put up with a relentless barrage of odium flung at it by the established parties, the media and the church, and was the only party which faced demonstrations from organisations dedicated solely to vilifying it. And secret collusion between the three main parties ensured that candidates were put up wherever BNP candidates were standing.

Finally, the far right in Britain is a fractious and petulant place: Nick Griffin campaigned against a backdrop of continual sniping from even more fabulously whacko right-wing opponents — some of whom set up a website called Griffinwatch dedicated to undermining his leadership. He only recently won a challenge to his leadership from people who considered him ‘too dictatorial’ (an odd complaint, you might think, from a bunch of fascists). A short while ago, the BNP was beaten in a local council election in Essex by a candidate sponsored by the National Liberal Party — which is not, as you might think, a convocation of leftish bearded mung-bean munchers, but another far-right ensemble supporting the quasi-fascist Third Position which Griffin himself once subscribed to.

Given all this, you wonder what sort of vote it might have got if the playing fields were level and the far right a little less divisive. The reason it did so well is very simple: on a range of issues it entirely reflected the views of those who voted for it — and, given that opinion poll I quoted, actually represents the views of an enormous tranche of public opinion which did not vote for it for reasons of either squeamishness or through the suspicion that underneath the smooth rhetoric the party contains a rich vein of unadulterated carpet-biting, swivel-eyed, shaven-headed madmen. Griffin may yet succeed in dispelling that suspicion, although it will take one or two more expulsions, I reckon.

Then there’s the racism business; the mantra trotted out by every mainstream politician, correspondent and pundit interviewed after the poll — that the people who voted BNP were not, of course, themselves racist. This was repeated robotically, ad nauseam, akin to a child in the back of a car forever pleading ‘are we there yet?’ The metropolitan elite is clinically obsessed with racism, almost to the exclusion of everything else. The public — black and white — is not. And yet the liberal elite cannot quite define the term ‘racist’. The answer is that the people who voted BNP are racist if your definition of racism includes people who think they are being racially discriminated against, i.e. the white working class. As opposed to my definition of racism, which is to hate someone because of the colour of his or her skin.

The BNP took votes almost exclusively from the Labour party for the straightforward reason that the Labour party does not even pretend to represent the interests of the white working class any longer, and particularly the provincial white working class. It considered its support a given, and in any case electorally insignificant. Not any more, on either count.

But still they will not address the problems. Labour — and Tory — politicians insisted, as one, that the BNP votes should not simply be dismissed by the mainstream parties, but ‘taken seriously’. But they will do nothing about it, because the ideology to which the BNP voters (and millions of others) object is an almost ineradicable constant not just in the Labour and Tory parties, but within local councils, social services departments, the police, education departments, the courts, the media and every EU institution. They could not simply stop immigration, even if they wanted to, which they don’t. They cannot change the way council housing lists are drawn up, or do anything material to improve the lives of those who feel they have had their communities taken away from them and replaced with something ‘alien’. There is nothing the major parties can do about schools where 50 per cent of the kids don’t speak English and burkas are part of the uniform. Alistair Darling was right when he blamed Labour for the rise of the BNP (much as the ideological retreat of the Conservative party has allowed Ukip to survive) — but this realisation will not change anything. Can you imagine a Labour politician refusing to fund a gay pride march, or insisting that violent street crime is a particular problem within our black community?

Nick Griffin is one of the two successful BNP MEPs — the other is a chap called Andrew Brons. I wish there were more space here to discuss Andrew’s fabulously whacko political background, because it’s good for a laugh, if nothing else. The old allies who went off to form National Socialist parties, mingled with terrorists or supported the bombing of synagogues. Economically, for example, Andrew was — perhaps still is — a Strasserite, a follower of the economic principles outlined by Gregor Strasser, Hitler’s gauleiter of lower Bavaria, and which the Fuhrer found a shade too extreme, a bit too radical.

I suppose both Brons and Griffin might reasonably argue that they cleaved to these sorts of views at about the time that Peter Mandelson was a member of the Communist Party and John Bercow was demanding Nelson Mandela be hanged. My guess, though, is that Brons, at least, has not markedly changed his views — and that’s what we now have representing us in the European parliament. The only people prepared to articulate the views of a huge swath of the British public.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/3689038/if-anything-this-result-understates-the-support-for-the-bnp.thtml

Morg
.

IF YOU COME INTO CONTACT WITH THE LAW ...

There’s a police officer in the news today, and in trouble over having done some blogging (and first class it was too). He blogged under the name of ‘Nightjack’. Here is one of the things he got into trouble over – advice for those who come into contact with the law. Read it, copy it, file it, learn it and remember it.

From Nightjack’s blog:

In these days of us increasingly having to deal with law abiding folk who have fallen foul of the “entitled poor” and those who have learned how to use us to score points and exact revenge, I thought it would be a good idea to give out a bit of general guidance for those law abiding types who find themselves under suspicion or under arrest. It works for the bad guys so make it work for you.

Complain First

Always get your complaint in first, even if it is you who started it and you who were in the wrong. If things have gone awry and you suspect the cops are going to be called, get your retaliation in first. Ring the cops right away and allege for all you are worth. If you can work a racist or homophobic slant into it so much the better.

Make a counter allegation

Regardless of the facts, never let the other side be blameless. If they beat you to the phone, ring anyway and make a counter allegation against them. Again racism or homophobia are your friends. If you are not from a visible minority ethnic culture, may I suggest that that the phrase “You gay bastard” or similar is always useful. In extremis allege sexual assault. It gives us something to bargain with when getting the other person to drop their complaint on a quid-pro-quo basis. This is particularly good where there are no independent witnesses. When it boils down to one word against another and nobody is ‘fessing up, CPS run a mile and you, my friend, are definitely on a walk out

Never explain to the Police

If the Police arrive to lock you up, say nothing. You are a decent person and you may think that reasoning with the Police will help. “If I can only explain, they will realise it is all a horrible mistake and go away”. Wrong. We do want to talk to you on tape in an interview room but that comes later. All you are doing by trying to explain is digging yourself further in. We call that stuff a significant statement and we love it. Decent folk can’t help themselves, they think that they can talk their way out. Wrong.

Admit Nothing

To do anything more than lock you up for a few hours we need to prove a case. The easiest route to that is your admission. Without it, our case may be a lot weaker, maybe not enough to charge you with. In any case, it is always worth finding out exactly how damning the evidence is before you fall on your sword. So don’t do the decent and honourable thing and admit what you have done. Don’t even deny it or try to give your side of the story. Just say nothing. No confession and CPS are on the back foot already. They forsee a trial. They fear a trial. They are looking for any excuse to send you home free.

Keep your mouth shut

Say as little as possible to us. At the custody office desk a Sergeant will ask you some questions. It is safe to answer these. For the rest of the time, say nothing.

Claim Suicidal Thoughts

A debatable one this. Claiming to be thinking about topping yourself has several benefits. If you can keep it up, it might just bump up any compensation payable later. On the other hand you may find yourself in a paper suit with someone watching your every move.

Always always always have a solicitor

Duh. No brainer this one. Unless you know 100% for sure that your mate the solicitor does criminal law and is good at it, ask for the Duty Solicitor. They certainly do criminal law and they are good at it. Then listen to what the solicitor says and do it. Their job is to get you off without the Cops or CPS laying a glove on you if at all possible. It is what they get paid for. They are free to you. There is no down side. Now decent folks think it makes them look like they have something to hide if they ask for a solicitor. Irrelevant. Going into an interview without a solicitor is like taking a walk in Tottenham with a big gold Rolex. Bad things are very likely to happen to you. I wouldn’t do it and I interview people for a living.

Actively complain about every officer and everything they do

Did they cuff you when they brought you in? Were they rude to you? Did they racially or homophobically abuse you? Didn’t get fed? Cell too cold? You are decent folk who don’t want to make a fuss but trust me, it pays to whinge and no matter how trivial and / or poorly founded your complaint there are people who will uncritically listen to you and try and prove the complaint on your behalf. Some of them are even police officers. Nothing like a complaint to muddy the waters and suggest that you are only in court because the vindictive Cops have a grudge against you. Far fetched? Wait until your solicitor spins it in court and you come over as Ghandi.

Show no respect to the legal system or anybody working in it

You think that if you are a difficult, unpleasant, sneering, unco-operative and rude things will go badly for you and you will be in more trouble. No sirree Bob. It seems that in fact the worse you are, the easier things will go for you if, horror of horrors, you do end up convicted. Remember to fake a drink problem if you haven’t developed one as a result of dealing with us already. Magistrates and Judges do seem to like the idea that you are basically good but the naughty alcohol made you do it. They treat you better. Crazy I know but true.

So there you go, basically anything you try and do because you are decent and staightforward hurts you badly. Act like an habitual, professional, lifestyle criminal and chances are you will walk away relatively unscathed. Copy the bad guys, its what they do for a living.



Good advice – especially if you get pulled for things you do in support of the party and its aims.

Morg
.

IS GARY WILKES A FASCIST?

I have always considered Gary Wilkes a decent man who had the guts to resign from the odious CAP controlled by Fuerher Peter Franzen. I thought he had the interests of the people of Ashton and Bryn at heart and was a democrat.

UNFORTUNATELY NOT. He has it seems been infected by the self serving virus of Wigan Metro as shown by the following extract from the Wigan Reporter.

He is upset at the number of people in the Wigan area voting BNP and wonders what the council can do about it. He wants a debate of "the main parties" about this election result.

I thought you were "Independent" Gary and would be therefore excluded from such a debate, or are you a secret supporter of the corrupt Labour group.
Let's have some honesty here Gary. Are you Independent or not?

He accuses the people who voted BNP of being "Fascist".
My reaction to that slander is "judge people by their actions"

As in the letter to the Chief Executive of Wigan MBC (below) the virtuous Mr Wilkes supported an objection to a sign in a garden saying "Vote BNP" and asked if the Metro could insist on its removal as it was "a hate sign".
Now I don't know whether our Gary has a poor grasp of English but there is no indication of "hate" in that sign.

Admittedly the policies of the BNP do not coincide with his views but I always thought toleration of different opinions was a hallmark of democracy and intolerance of the same indicative of Fascism.

How many complaints did you receive Gary? Possibly several from the same intolerant person.

People of our persuasion also object to Labour, Tory and CAP signs in people's gardens but we do not try to get them banned on such spurious grounds in spite of the damage those parties have done to our country.

You see Gary, we are democrats and not fascists. We are prepared to accept people have different opinions.

NOW A LITTLE LESSON GARY.

The people of the North West are getting increasingly sick of their jobs being lost, housing being taken by foreigners and being ignored by the people in power.

The high vote for the BNP in Wigan is a reflection of the disgust at the politicians who promised to look after our interests. It has little to do with the expenses scandle, that is country wide.

It is a reflection on you and your Metro colleagues and our MPs.
We like to think (and this is accepted by our party) that it is also a reflection of our local party's work in engaging with the people and countering the lies put out by the biased media.

After meeting us and talking with us people can see who the real fascists are and they certainly aint us Gary.
For all your bleating to the press the internet enables us to by pass their censorship.

WE ARE HERE TO STAY AND WE WILL GROW, and there is nothing you can do about it.

GET USED TO IT!

WILDERS' SPEECH IN DENMARK

While he was in Denmark, Geert Wilders didn’t just give the interview shown below where he said we will have to deport millions of Muslims: he also gave the following speech. This is just so you know, red, that it’s not only here in the UK that people like us are winning and people like you are losing: it’s all across the Western world. Get used to it because it isn’t going to change any time soon. Holland can expect a Freedom Party (PVV) government in the near future, and you, and we, here in Britain can expect a nationalist government in that same near future. People all over Europe have had enough of the antics of you and people like you. You might as well just lie back and enjoy it.

Wilders speech in Denmark

Let's start with a little humor from Geert Wilders's speech to the Danish Free Press Society in Copenhagen, June 14:

“I will not terribly miss Jacqui Smith, the British cabinet member that worked so hard to have me refused in the UK because of my film Fitna. It is rather ironic that her career-ending was somehow film-related, as it turned out the British taxpayer had to pay for the porn-movies her husband rented. At least, we cannot say she is a movie-hater as such. Just her taste is a little bit selective.”

The speech is good and worth reading. While it covers ground similar to his speech in Florida last month, Wilders keeps hitting harder and harder, as in his attack on the European political elite in the wake of the European Parliament elections. He says very plainly that this is a war for survival, that Islam and its ally the European elite are seeking to destroy Europe, and that we must defeat them.

Here is the speech, from the website of the Dutch Freedom Party:

Ladies and gentlemen,
Thank you, Danish Free Press Society, again for inviting me to speak to you here in Copenhagen. It is good to be back in Denmark. Thank you, my friend, Lars Hedegaard.

And last but not least, I thank the Danish border police for having allowed me into the country.

Ladies and gentlemen, last week was a tremendous week. My party, the Dutch Freedom Party, came second in the Dutch elections for the European Parliament! In many cities, including Rotterdam and The Hague, we even managed to become the largest party!

Meanwhile here in Denmark, the Danish People's Party again performed very well, which is excellent news for Denmark. I congratulate Pia Kjaesgaard and Morten Messerschmidt on their party's victory. Marvellous news!

There is more good news these days. In Europe the socialists--or social democrats, as they prefer to call themselves--lost nearly everywhere: in the Netherlands, in Belgium, in Germany, in Austria, in France, in Spain, in Italy and, perhaps best of all, in the United Kingdom. The greatest coward in Europe, the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, suffered a tremendous blow at the hands of the British electorate. Serves him right!

I will not terribly miss Jacqui Smith, the British cabinet member that worked so hard to have me refused in the UK because of my film Fitna. It is rather ironic that her career-ending was somehow film-related, as it turned out the British taxpayer had to pay for the porn-movies her husband rented. At least, we cannot say she is a movie-hater as such. Just her taste is a little bit selective.

Why is it good news that the socialists lost by such a margin?

Let me answer this myself. It's good news because socialists are the most inveterate cultural relativists in Europe. They regard the Islamic culture of backwardness and violence as equal to our Western culture of freedom, democracy and human rights. In fact, it is the socialists who are responsible for mass immigration, Islamization and general decay of our cities and societies. It are the socialists who are responsible for the fact that cities such as Rotterdam, Marseille and Malmo seem to be situated in Eurabia rather than in Europe. And they are even proud of it.

Our Western elite, whether it are politicians, journalists or judges, have lost their way completely. All sense of reality has vanished. All common sense has been thrown to the wind. They take all efforts to deny the things that take place in front of our eyes, and deny everything that is so obviously seen by everyone else.

They won't stand firm on any issue. Their cultural relativism affects absolutely everything up to the point where they no longer see the difference between good and evil, or between nonsense and logical common sense. Everything is pushed into a grey area, a foggy marsh without beginning or end. The only moral standard they still seem to apply is the question whether or not it is approved by Muslims. Everything Muslims disapprove, they disapprove too.

And so, the voters have had enough. Because they of course realise that Europe is going in the wrong direction. They know that there are enormous problems with Islam in Europe. They are well aware of the identity of those who are taking them for a ride, namely, the Shariah socialists.

As for those present here today, I'm sure everyone knows how intractable the problems with Islam are in Europe, given that Muslims are over-represented in crime rate figures as well as in social benefit statistics. Of course, this is not to say that there aren't many Muslims of good will who are decent, law-abiding citizens. But facts are facts.

According to the Dutch Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, mass immigration has to date cost the Dutch taxpayer more than one hundred billion Euros. According to the Danish national bank, every Danish Muslim immigrant costs the Danish state more than 300,000 Euros. A Swedish economist has calculated that mass immigration costs the Swedish taxpayer twenty-seven billion dollars annually. In Norway a warning has been issued to the effect that the proceeds from North Sea oil will have to be spent entirely on mass immigration, while in France official figures have been published suggesting that mass immigration is reducing growth in the French economy by two-thirds. In other words, mass immigration, demographic developments and Islamization are certainly partly causes of Europe's steadily increasing impoverishment and decay.

Ladies and gentlemen, you may know of the Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels, who recently said that Muslim integration in the West is simply impossible. Now, that is not a novel idea. A certain Frenchman said pretty much the same thing in 1959. I quote, "Those who recommend integration must be considered pea-brained even if they are scholars and scientists. Just try mixing oil and vinegar. Then shake the bottle. After a moment the two substances will separate again. Do you really believe French society could absorb ten million Muslims, who would be twenty million tomorrow and forty million the day after? In fact, my own village would no longer be Colombey-les-deux-Eglises but would rather come to be known as Colombey-les-deux-mosques."

This quote, you guessed it, is from none other than the former French President Charles de Gaulle.

Now, I do not know whether Sennels and De Gaulle were right in their conclusion that Muslims are incapable of integrating into other cultures. I think in reality we do see Muslims on individual level assimilating into our societies. But what I do know is that very many Muslims do not want to integrate.

Again, the facts don't lie: four in ten British Muslim students want Sharia law to be implemented, while one-third of British Muslim students are in favour of a worldwide caliphate. Seven out of ten Spanish Muslims consider their self a Muslim first, instead of a Spanish citizen. One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks, half of Dutch Muslims admit to 'understanding' the 9/11 attacks. Seven out of ten youth prisoners here in Copenhagen are Muslim. In 2005, 82 percent of the crimes in Copenhagen were committed by immigrants, many of them Muslim. More than half of the Danish Muslims think that it should be forbidden to criticise Islam and two out of three Danish Muslims think that free speech should be curtailed.

Some time ago an interview was held in France with the French Muslim student Mohamed Sabaoui, who said the following, and I quote:

"Your laws do not coincide with the Koran, Muslims can only be ruled by Shariah law. We will declare Roubaix an independent Muslim enclave and impose Shariah Law upon all its citizens. We will be your Trojan Horse, we will rule, Allah akbar." End of quote.

Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake: Islam has always attempted to conquer Europe. Spain fell in the 8th century, Constantinople fell in the 15th century, even Vienna and Poland were threatened, and now, in the 21st century, Islam is trying again. This time not with armies, but through the application of Al-Hijra, the Islamic doctrine of migration and demography.

Unfortunately, the Al-Hijra doctrine is very successful. For the first time in world history there are dozens of millions of Muslims living far outside the Dar al-Islam, the Islamic world. Al-Hijra may be the end of European civilization as we know it: The second Dutch city, Rotterdam, will have a non-Western majority within 3 years. Europe has now more than 50 million Muslims, it is expected that this will be doubled in just 20 years. By 2025, one third of all European children will be born to Muslim families.

As I said, many of those Muslims in Europe would like to implement Shariah Law in our judicial systems. As you know, Shariah law covers all areas of life, from religion, hygiene and dietary laws, to dress code, family and social life and from finance and politics to the unity of Islam with the state. For some crimes, horrific, barbaric punishments are prescribed, such as beheading and the chopping off of opposite limbs. In Shariah Courts no woman may become judge. Shariah Law does not recognize free speech and freedom of religion. Polygamy and killing an apostate are 'virtues', but the consumption of alcohol is a crime. This is the sick Shariah Law in a nutshell, and it is unbelievable and unacceptable that the cultural relativists allow Shariah banks, Shariah mortgages, Shariah schools and unofficial--and in Britain even official--Shariah tribunals in Europe.

Ladies and gentlemen, these are of course shocking facts, figures and statements. However, they are not particularly surprising to anybody who has some knowledge of the Koran and knows who Muhammad was.

In this connection, ladies and gentlemen, allow me to very briefly discuss the essence of Islam, and let me come straight to the point: Islam is not so much a religion as, first and foremost, an ideology; to be precise, like communism and fascism, a political, totalitarian ideology, with worldwide aspirations.

Of course, there are many moderate Muslims. However, there is no such a thing as a moderate Islam. Islam's heart lies in the Koran. The Koran is an evil book that calls for violence, murder, terrorism, war and submission. The Koran describes Jews as monkeys and pigs. The Koran calls upon Muslims to kill the Kaffirs, the non-Muslims.

The problem is that the injunctions in the Koran are not restricted to time or place. Rather, they apply to all Muslims, in any period. Another problem is that Muslims also regard the Koran as the word of Allah. Which means that the Koran is immune from criticism.

Apart from the Koran, there is also the life of Muhammad, who fought in dozens of wars and was in the habit of decapitating Jews with his own sword. The problem here is that, to Muslims, Muhammad is 'the perfect man', whose life is the model to follow.

This is why Jihadists slaughtered innocent people in Washington, New York, Madrid, Amsterdam, London and Mumbai.

Now is clear why Winston Churchill, in his book 'The second world war', for which he received the Nobel Prize in Literature, compared the Koran to Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf'. Now is clear why the famous Swiss theologian, Karl Barth, in 1936 said, and I quote, "It is impossible to understand national socialism unless we see it in fact as a new Islam, its myth as a new Allah, and Hitler as this new Allah's prophet." Now is clear why Heinrich Himmler was an admirer of Islam. And now is clear why President Obama, who last week, in Cairo, said that Islam has a tradition of tolerance, should be sent back to school.

Just like communism, fascism and nazism, Islam is a threat to everything we stand for. It is a threat to democracy, to the constitutional state, to equality for men and women, to freedom and civilisation. Wherever you look in the world, the more Islam you see, the less freedom you see. Islam is a threat to the Europe of Bach and Michelangelo, Shakespeare and Socrates, Voltaire and Galileo.

Ladies and gentlemen, there is one Western country that has been forced to fight for its values since the very first day of its existence: Israel the canary in the coal mine. Let me say a few words about that wonderful country.

Like Bosnia, Kosovo, Nigeria, Sudan, the Caucasus, Kashmir, southern Thailand, Western China and the south of the Philippines, Israel is situated exactly on the dividing line between Dar al-Islam, the Islamic world, and Dar al-Harb, the non-Islamic world. It is no coincidence that it is precisely this dividing line where blood is flowing. All those conflicts concern the Jihad, Jihad in the spirit of the barbarian Muhammad.

Islam forces Israel to fight. The so called 'Middle East conflict' is not at all a conflict about land. It is not about some inches of land in Gaza, Judea or Samaria. It is a conflict about ideologies, it is a battle between freedom and Islam, a battle between good and evil, to Islam the whole of Israel is occupied territory. To Islam Tel Aviv and Haifa are settlements too.

Israel is the only democracy in the entire Middle-East. Israel is an oasis of enlightment, whereas the rest of the Middle-East is covered by the black veil of the night. This is no coincidence, in 1939 Winston Churchill said about the Jews in what is now called Israel: "They have made the desert bloom."

Ladies and gentlemen, I am very much in favour of a two-state solution. One Jewish state called Israel including Judea and Samaria and one Palestinian state called Jordan.

Ladies and gentlemen, wherever Islam and cultural relativism, advocated by Shariah-socialists, come together, freedom of expression is threatened. In Europe in particular, freedom of expression is at risk. As you may know, I am being prosecuted in the Netherlands for expressing my opinion, while being banned from the United Kingdom for the same reason. But, of course, this whole matter is not only about me. There is an ongoing Jihad against free speech in the whole of Europe. In Austria, for example, a lady politician was prosecuted for having spoken the truth about Muhammad. The truth, mind you! We have also had the Danish cartoon crisis; not to mention the threats and/or killing of people as Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Pim Fortuyn, Theo van Gogh, Oriana Fallaci and my brave friend Wafa Sultan. In the Netherlands a cartoonist was arrested by no fewer than ten policemen for having made some drawings! I could go on, but I won't because it would make you sick.

Ladies and gentlemen, I strongly suggest that we should defend freedom of speech, with all our strength. Free speech is the most important of all our many civil rights. Free speech is the cornerstone of our modern free societies. Without free speech there is no democracy, no freedom. It is our obligation to defend free speech. It is our obligation to preserve the heritage of the British Magna Charta and the French Declaration of the rights of Man. It is our obligation to defend the American Bill of rights and the Universal Declaration of Human rights.

Human rights protect the freedom of individuals but they do not protect ideologies. I propose two things:

I propose a boycott of the UN Human rights Council. Annually this Council adopts resolutions that attempt to kill free speech and the concept of human rights. Let there be no mistake about it, the UN Human rights Council is a threat to free speech in the West.

I propose to repeal all hate speech laws in Europe. These laws enable radical Muslims to silence those critical of Islam. Free speech should be extended instead of restricted in Europe. We should consider laws comparable to the American First Amendment.

Unfortunately, however, if we really wish to combat the Islamization of Europe effectively, we will have to do more than guard or extend freedom of speech. In this regard it is my firm conviction that we will have to take the following measures:

First, we will have to end all forms of cultural relativism. For this purpose we will need an amendment to our constitutions stating that our European cultural foundation is Judeo-Christian and Humanistic in nature. To the cultural relativists, the Shariah-socialists, I would proudly say, "Our Western culture is superior to Islamic culture." Or to quote Wafa Sultan when she compared the Western culture with Islam: "It's not a clash of civilizations, it's a clash between barbarity and reason." I fully agree with her.

Second, we will have to stop mass immigration from Muslim countries and promote voluntary repatriation.

Third, we will have to expel criminal foreigners and, following denaturalisation, criminals with dual nationality. I have a clear message to all mulsims in our societies: if you subscribe to our laws, values and constitution you are very welcome to stay and we will even help you to assimilate. But if you cross the red line and commit crimes, start thinking and acting like jihad or sharia we will expel you the same out of our countries.

Fourth, we will have to close down all Islamic schools for they are fascist institutions, to prevent any further indoctrination of young children with an ideology of violence and hatred.

Fifth, we will have to close down all radical, and forbid the construction of any new, mosques; there is enough Islam in Europe. Besides that, as long as Christians in Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Indonesia are treated in the scandalous ways they currently are, and as long as no permission is given for churches to be built or bibles to be sold in, for example, Saudi Arabia, there should be a mosque building-stop in the West.

Sixth, last but not least, we will have to get rid of all those cowardly so-called leaders. We enjoy the privilege of living in a democracy. Let's use that privilege by replacing cowards with heroes. Let's have fewer Chamberlains and more Churchills. Lets elect real leaders.

In short, ladies and gentlemen, my main message of today is that we have to start fighting back.

No defence, but offence. We have to fight back and demonstrate that millions of people are sick and tired of it all and refuse to take any more. We must make it clear that millions of freedom-loving people are saying 'enough is enough'.

Ladies and gentlemen, Europe is at the crossroads once again. We either choose the road to darkness or the road to freedom.

My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. My generation does not own this freedom, we are merely its custodians. We cannot strike a deal with Mullahs and imams. We cannot surrender and give up our liberties, we simply do not have the right to do so.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are in the winning mood! Cultural relativists and Shariah-socialists are losing, freedom loving people are winning. Things are changing for the better.

Ladies and gentlemen, and I leave you with this: We will never give in, we will never give up, we will never surrender, we have to win, and we will win!

Thank you very much.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/

And here’s another item from the same page:

Griffin interview on BBC
Two days ago, a commenter from England pointed out that Nick Griffin told a BBC radio interviewer the morning after his election to the European Parliament that he didn’t want to talk about race and immigration but other issues. The impression was created that as soon as Griffin had won a political seat, he began “going mainstream.” I listened to the interview last evening and I disagree. Griffin didn’t run away from immigration and race at all. The interviewer was essentially mugging him for seven or eight minutes on the race issue and Griffin kept coming back with excellent responses. It’s clear that he has a thought-out, coherent position on these matters and that every attempt to smear and discredit him only gives him an opportunity to display it. The fact that Griffin gets tired of being called a racist, and that he does have other concerns besides immigration, hardly represents the sell-out of which the commenter was accusing him.

Morg
.