PRO-HOMOSEXUAL LESSONS TO BE TAUGHT TO 4yr OLDS

Gay messages built into school maths lessons for children as young as FOUR

Young children are to be taught about homosexuality in their maths, geography, science and English lessons, it has emerged.

As part of a Government-backed drive to ‘celebrate the gay community’, maths problems could be introduced that involve gay characters.

In geography classes, students will be asked why homosexuals move from the countryside to cities – and words such as ‘outing’ and ‘pride’, will be used in language classes.

The lesson plans are designed to raise awareness about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual issues and, in theory, could be used for children as young as four.

They will also mean youngsters are exposed to images of same-sex couples and books such as And Tango Makes Three, which tells the story of two male penguins raising a chick, which was inspired by events at New York’s Central Park Zoo.

Meanwhile, statistics students may use census data on the number of homosexuals in England.

However critics warn that the drive is an unnecessary use of resources and distracts attention from learning, as British schools tumble down international league tables in maths, English and science. Although the lesson plans are not compulsory, they are backed by the Department for Education and will be available for schools to download from the Schools Out website.

Sue Sanders, from Schools Out, said: ‘All we are attempting to do is remind teachers that LGBT people are part of the population and you can include them in most of your lessons when you are thinking inclusively.’

David Watkins, a teacher who is involved in the scheme, said: ‘When you have a maths problem, why does it have to involve a straight family or a boyfriend and girlfriend? Why not two boys or two girls?

‘It’s not about teaching about gay sex, it is about exposing children to the idea that there are other types of people out there,’ he added.

However, Craig Whittaker, who is a Conservative MP and a member of the education select committee, said: ‘We are too far down the national comparative league tables in core subjects. Teachers should concentrate on those again.

Same sex: Geography lessons will explain why homosexuals move to cities and language classes will teach gay vocabulary (picture posed by models)

‘This is not about being homophobic, because there are other schemes around the education which support the LGBT agenda.’

John O’Connell, of campaign group the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: ‘Parents will wonder if this is a right use of funds and time, particularly when we keep hearing how tight budgets are.’

The plans are funded by a £35,000 grant from education quango the Training And Development Agency For Schools. They will be launched in February at the start of LGBT History Month.

A Department for Education spokesman added: ‘These are optional teaching materials.

‘It is for head and teacher to choose the most appropriate teaching resources to help promote equality and tolerance.’

LGBT History Month started in 2005 and has previously focused more on raising awareness of prominent figures said to be homosexual.

A list on its website includes Hadrian the Roman emperor and Michaelangelo the Renaissance painter.

------------------------------------------------

Soon Paedophilia will be taught to our Children as a way of introducing them to Sexual Deviants, Child Molesters and Sexual Perverts.

As can be seen in Wigan Councils ByoU Project -

The ByoU Project provides specialist provision for young people aged 11-25 years old who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual. It also provides support for young people who are questioning their sexuality.

The Project aims to:

• Build confidence
• Tackle isolation and self esteem
• Build networks and support
• Offer a safe meeting place

Is this part of a Propaganda exercise to brain washing our Children into accepting Queers as part of their lives ?
Why are the powers that be allowing Perversion and Sexual practices, which are not the Norm for 99% of the population, to be taught to Children at the exclusion of a REAL EDUCATION ?

MILITANT QUEERS FORCE THEIR SEXUALTY ON EVERYONE ELSE.
WHY ?

Do you want your Children to be taught that Homosexuality is NORMAL ?
Homosexuality is NOT the NORM. Man and Woman are the Norm.

RADICAL MUSLIMS CALL FOR JIHAD IN THE UK.

Straight from the horses mouth, and I quote from the video -

"WE WANT TO REMOVE THIS IDEA THAT ISLAM IS A RELIGION PEACE."
"ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION OF PEACE"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6T7eQyah4qU&feature=player_embedded#at=105

A HIJACKED PROTEST

Although I sympathise with the trades unionists protesting against the cuts to public services I still believe they are necessary and may not be even severe enough. The reason for this initially contradictory stance is that the cuts are being made in the wrong place. Low paid workers such as carers, binmen etc are being cut but the thousands of highly paid non jobs remain. Diversity officers smoking cessation officers etc could be dispensed with. These bureaucrats, box ticking and enforcing petty rules and PC rubbish are costing us dear and in fact cost us twice over, once in their own salaries and the other in the costs their useless activities impose on industry. The police nowadays do not respond to burglary and we know they are unable to act in emergencies because of health and safety legislation resulting in tragic deaths. In the snow last Winter one force advised its officers to stay inside as it was too dangerous to venture out. Health and safety are obviously important but many of the petty rules have no actual bearing on safety and could be dispensed with together with the little Hitlers who enforce them, freeing businesses from costs and lowering taxes. When I was young in our area with the local council we had a library, public toilets and we ran our own water supply and road maintenance, bins etc with most of the council workers being out "on the job" rather than sitting in offices. The officials were also not paid the obscene salaries current today. Similarly our primary school had no secretary nor a phone but still managed results better than are achieved nowadays. Our grammar school had 500 pupils with only one secretary and no teaching assistants and got good results. This overstaffing is rampant all through public services and I believe these cuts could be made WITHOUT HURTING FRONT LINE SERVICES. But then the people in charge of making these economies, the highly paid bureaucrats are not likely to cut their own or their office colleague's jobs so the useful lower paid public servants who we need and are appreciated are cut first. This enables the bosses to make a political point while keeping their cushy non productive jobs. So best of luck to the unions but I doubt whether you can do much good as they are "all in it together" the bosses that is. PS The anarchist mob who attempted to hijack the legitimate political protest and cause senseless vandalism should in my opinion have the book thrown at them. The vast majority of people hate the banks and off shore tax evaders but vandalism in our capital city is not the way to protest and defacing our monuments in Trafalgar Square is unforgivable. If they are right should I go down and break the windows in my local bank or branch of Boots just because I dont like them? Of course not. Yes rebellion can be good and effective but it must be LAWFUL, for anarchy brings chaos and usually the weakest suffer the most

LAST NIGHT'S MEETING

Last night we attended a meeting at our venue in Hindley Green organised not by me but by other patriots in order to discuss our future strategy for nationalism.
The meeting was by invitation only in order that we could have a civilised discusion of the problems we face as a party and country.


It was NOT as has been suggested an anti party meeting but an opportunity to discuss between fellow nationalists ways to further our cause.
However if the party hierarchy had heard about the meeting it would have been "proscribed" ie members would have been forbidden to attend on pain of discipliniary action.
I and my wife have received summonses to attend disciplinary hearings for attending "proscribed" meetings in the past. Of course we have no intention as free people of submitting ourselves to such kangaroo courts which are reminiscent of Stalinist Russia.

The cause of this party turmoil are twofold.

First it is no good denying that recently we have not made the electoral impression we should have done in spite of the shambles caused by the coalition government and their economocally illiterate opposition.
The Front National in France has done so much better than we and we must ask Why?

Secondly in our party too much power rests with the chairman and his sycophantic and undemocratic Advisory Council, and dissent among party members is barely tolerated and searching questions result in the questioner being suspended.

What to do about these problems were the topics for debate last night.
Most, but not all stated that we need a new leader as in spite of all the good work he has done in the past is becoming a drag on our electoral prospects.

The way forward is not at present clear but similar meetings are being held all over the country in an attempt to arrive at a consensus on future action and build contacts between like minded patriots.

Last night we had senior party members from London Kent and Yorkshire as well as from all over South Lancashire and I thank them for making the effort.
It was also good to renew old aquaintances with people we had not met for several years.
It shows their committment to our cause and country.

Our meetings are intended to be constructive and form a basis for a leaner and more effective and democratic nationalist movement.

Lest the above seems a council of despair I have to say that nothing could be further from the truth.
There is an increasing hunger for our point of view, a hunger for a believable party or vehicle in which the will of the ordinary British people can be expressed and persued.
Recently we have not been capitalising on that hunger but there is a rich seam of nationalism waiting to be tapped. It is our job to mine this seam and we are determined not to be found wanting. But now we must set the systems in motion to do it even if it requires a new management, but whatever it takes we will endeavour to do it.

Opponents of nationalism and the British people, do not be deceived by our temporary regrouping.
There will be changes and maybe different personnel at the top but we will emerge rejuvenated and ready to tap into that portion of our people who have been betrayed, have no voice and who are increasingly desparate for true representation.

In Tunisia, Egypt, Libya etc it seemed things would never change as democracy was as here suppressed but as the last weeks have shown matters can change quickly when the people are given their voice.

It is our job to provide that voice AND THAT WE WILL DO.

A STATEMENT FROM ANDREW BRONS

23rd March 2011: The Unacknowledged Complementarity That Is Destroying The British National Party

I was going to use the term ‘Unholy Alliance’ but it would have been inaccurate for two reasons:

1. both sides see their own virtue to be as untarnished as the villainy of their opponents is unalloyed.

2. to call the two sides ‘an alliance’ would be to forget that they have a hatred for the other side that they have (unfortunately) never held for our real enemies.

Nevertheless, each responds to the other’s ratcheting-up of the conflict in a manner that could easily have been choreographed and scripted. Indeed the movements and language of one side seem to come from a script that was written in 1986.

We have moved on from attack websites to what each side sees as a final confrontation. Eddy Butler or his allies are holding a series of regional meetings, to which discontented BNP members and ex-members are invited and at which their version of the ‘unvarnished truth’ about Nick Griffin and his cronies is told. People attending these meetings are filmed by the Party’s ‘security’ that sees its role as watching the Party’s members (at which it excels) rather than protecting the Party from its external enemies, at which it is less adept. The filmed members are then suspended from membership or at least some of them are – no nonsense here about the Rule of Law.

It is probable that those who take the decisions within the leadership see their suspensions as a ‘surgical strike’ at the ‘real troublemakers’. However, they do not realise that the suspension of (say) ten key popular people leads to the disaffection of perhaps two or three hundred others – most of them activists.

The suspensions in Yorkshire (the scene of the first Butler meeting) has deprived Yorkshire of its activists, apart from those connected with ‘the security’. The replication of these events in all of the Party’s other regions will see the disaffection of most of the Party’s activists throughout the country.

In 1986 a faction that held a knife edge majority on the National Front’s National Directorate used its majority to suspend and then expel the minority for the heinous offence of voting the wrong way at a Directorate meeting. They continued with their disciplinary ‘blitzkrieg’ until they had expelled or alienated nearly all the Party’s activists. The leadership of the ‘official party’ became an isolated and ignored rump. The opposition then became the leadership of a successor National Front. The ‘rump’ disappeared in a series of easily forgotten splinters.

The person who was the architect of using the disciplinary machinery as a weapon of mass destruction in 1986 re-emerged in the middle of 2010 to become a favoured adviser of our Chairman. He is rightly admired as a no-nonsense man who does not waste valuable time learning from his own mistakes.

However, before the Eddy Butler faction cheers too loudly and precipitately, there are important differences. The Political Parties, Elections & Referendums Act 2000 provides party leaderships, however small and isolated they might be (or are imagined to be), with a monopoly over the use of the Party name. Furthermore, the opposition in 1986 was a cohesive party in waiting with its own magazine and activity programme.

The Eddy Butler programme is entirely negative propaganda about the BNP leadership and has the effect of leaving people exposed to it dispirited and alienated from political activity. Some left the Party to form a micro party and some others plan to seek membership of establishment safety valve parties that will do their reputations immense and undeserved damage in the eyes of serious nationalists.

Most just hope that relentless pressure will somehow lead to Nick Griffin’s resignation. How this will be achieved is not explained. There seems to be no serious attempt to keep in contact with the disaffected who leave politics in disgust. They will probably be lost to Nationalism for ever.

There is a question about whether attending a meeting disapproved of by the leadership of a party should be a disciplinary offence. Would it be a disciplinary offence in other parties? Does it tell us anything about a party leadership that sees disapproved meeting attendance as a disciplinary offence? Would such people, when entrusted with real political power, see disapproved meeting attendance as a criminal offence?

Furthermore, if all dissent is seen as treason, any dissenters become treasonable from necessity.

It would appear that we have a leadership that believes in keeping Nick Griffin as Chairman at any price in terms of lost membership and activists. It is better to have a small party with all of the membership besotted with the present leader than a larger party with a significant number of members who view him with scepticism or hostility. Most parties have significant proportions of their membership who are definitely out of love with their leaders. To want a 100% besotted membership is to want a small and very exclusive party.

The Opposition, on the other hand, wants to get rid of Nick Griffin as Chairman at any price in terms of lost membership and activists. However, it does not have a strategy for achieving its aim.

What is my position?

The autocratic constitution was, to a large extent, inherited by Nick Griffin from his predecessor, John Tyndall. John Tyndall was not one of nature’s autocrats, despite his earlier political leanings. I worked with him easily for six years on the democratically-elected National Directorate of the National Front. However, he left the NF (unwisely in my view) because he had been outvoted on the National Directorate and (unwisely in my view) invented a constitution for his new party (the BNP) that would prevent his being ever outvoted again.

I believe that that constitution corrupts leaders in the manner of a malevolent ring of power. It endows leaders with powers that it would be impossible for leaders to wield personally. They, therefore, pass those powers onto ostensibly sycophantic but, in reality, power-hungry advisers and stand-ins. It turns a leadership cult fantasy into a leader-led-by-the-nose reality. I believe that the heart of the problem is the autocratic constitution. If the Chairman were to share power with an elected executive, the other problems would solve themselves.

Our Chairman called for the Annual Conference in December to consider various proposals for constitutional reform. It opted for a proposal from Arthur Kemp, which was supported by our Chairman. This proposal involved the Chairman sharing power with an indirectly elected Executive comprising, mainly, regional organisers elected by branch organisers. The Annual Conference called for an EGM to consider this proposal but there has been an unaccountable delay in calling the EGM or even referring to it. It is rumoured that our Chairman has been overruled by his closest advisers, who have the final say on such matters. At the Annual Conference, the current Elections Officer opposed the idea of an elected Executive. His objection was put to the vote and his objection was defeated. However, it would appear that he can also overrule the Annual Conference.

I would like to see:

1. constitutional reform as agreed by the Annual Conference

2. an amnesty for those suspended and expelled during ‘the troubles’.

3. complete financial transparency for the future with the Executive being able to examine all future transactions but a line drawn under past transactions and undoubted mismanagement.

4. an end to all damaging websites and blogs with no more dirty linen being washed in public.

Is there any prospect of a truce being agreed along these lines? It would require statesmanship, restraint, humility and, above all, a decision to put the interests of the Party above private and petty concerns.

If there is no truce, the Party will come to an ignominious end before the end of this year. If it were not then to be followed by a credible successor, the British Nation would also come to an end. There would be no second chance to save it.

Andrew Brons

THE TANKIE GAME

If I was a tankie, I'd be selling about now and buying into infantry options.

Morg
.

EHRC Must Pay British National Party’s Court Costs in Full

EHRC Must Pay British National Party’s Court Costs in Full

Nick Griffin has welcomed the ruling that the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) must pay the British National Party’s court costs in full as a “victory for freedom”.

“It is a massive victory for the British National Party and freedom and a crushing blow for the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Trevor Phillips' PC bullies,” he said.

Mr Griffin’s comments follow the High Court judgement ruling that the EHRC must pay all the costs incurred by him, Simon Darby and Tanya Lumby during their brave defence against the EHRC’s attempts to seize the Party's assets and throw the defendants into prison.

The ruling of Lord Justice Moore-Bick and Mr Justice Ramsey is a further crushing defeat for the Commission and a personal humiliation for Trevor Phillips and Simon Woolley, who at the start of proceedings boasted on TV that they were going to close the British National Party down.

"Thanks to the staunch generosity of so many of our members and supporters and the magnificent efforts of our legal team, their attack on democracy and freedom failed utterly," said Mr Griffin.

"The British National Party is still very much alive and kicking. We've built up a legal team which can go head to head with the most powerful opponents and beat them."

On being told that EHRC would be forced to pay its costs in full, Simon Darby said, "I told them they would never beat me or the British National Party, but they simply wouldn't listen. Now these people are going to pay the price for persecuting Nationalists. The question has to be asked as to whether this discredited quango will survive the next round of government cuts."

Exactly how much the EHRC will have to pay must now be assessed in a long and complicated procedure that will take some months. When we get our money back, it will make a healthy contribution to our war chest for next year's Assembly election in London, where the EHRC is/was based.

From the BNP main website