AN EXCITING WEEK END?

HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE

The great day has arrived, the one we have all been waiting for. The Annual BNP Conference starts today. It will of course be the best ever (it always is). This time owing to the Party being "the most rapidly growing party in the country" members are invited to bring guests.

This is a new approach and I presume on account of a much bigger venue found, or perhaps the bargain price of £25 for two days. Previously attendance was strictly limited to voting members so the new rules are an indication of the massive growth in membership from over 14,000 to perhaps 7,000 (well you can grow down). It will certainly be a full house like the picture above which was taken at the "Ideas" conference last weekend.

One thing that puzzles me in recent pictures on the official site is that few photos are taken of the audience, most of them being of the "Top table". Arthur Kemp always advised against this method of recording meetings, saying it was better to illustrate the enthusiastic throngs at these meetings.

There have been pictures of meetings and events such as The Trafalgar Dinner which illustrated two tables, nicely laid out but no photo of the venue crowded with guests enjoying their meal. There was I admit a picture of the visit to Walsingham Abbey by members of the club but for propaganda purposes it would have been better to have given a visual impression of the large numbers attending this fest. Or maybe there were not so many attendees. No that can't be true in a "rapidly growing party" or can it. In future I would ask the compilers of reports on the main web site to include ALL those attending meetings and functions so that people can rejoice in the rapid progress the Party is making.

The picture of the meeting at the top shows how it should be done although those present there were it seems subsidized by George Soros and Searchlight and thus traitors. That is possibly the reason that the admission fee was £2 rather than £15, but it's nice to have a billionaire at the back of you.

I await news of the "exciting new initiatives" from the "best ever" meeting this week end.

A LETTER FROM LANKYPAPODOPOLIS.

Let me introduce myself. My name is Lankypapodopolis and as you can gather by my name I am a Greek citizen.
I am in employment and have a good job and income I get from private business.
It is great here. I do not have to pay much in the way of taxation as my friend is the tax inspector and for a small fee he neglects to send me any tax demands.
This is a great situation for me as the EU is pumping billions of Euros into the economy to stop mu country from defaulting.
We all know it will but I am putting all my money abroad and in gold before this happens so that when it does I will be OK.

I know my friend Lanky Schmitt of Germany does not like paying his taxes to pay me but that is the price of Germany being in the Euro and it helps him as his exports are cheaper and he can sell more of his cars and machinery.
I hope he continues to do this so I can transfer more money out of the system but Mr Schmitt is getting a bit fed up.
He may make more money from his machine exports but he loses most of it by giving it to me.

Any sensible person can see that this situation can not carry on for ever but the politicians are keen for it to continue and while they strive to prevent the inevitable collapse I will continue to convert the paper money they have given me into property and gold.

Government workers here in Greece are getting restive over their reduced job prospects and wages imposed by the EU and there is civil strife in the streets but I am well off and as long as the politicians cling to the EU delusion I am happy,even though I know it is not just. I know that billions of Euros have been withdrawn from the banks here and taken abroad, to safeguard their money.

I note that tonight that in Britain Cameron has had a rebellion from his more honest MPs on his renaging of his pre election promises. He wants still to be part of the shambles although thew people of Britain do not want it, but when did politicians in what is supposedly a democratic country actually do what the people want.
Cameron and his cronies are more interested in the banks and his wealthy friends just as our government is. They are all the same and people such as I benefit.

Any sensible person realises that this system of creating money out of thin air only benefits the rich and moneylenders. Those who have money convert this imaginary vehicle of exchange into solid assets, and I am one of those. My yacht is worth hundreds of thousands of Euros, and I have a stash of gold.

Politicians have no inkling of the real world, the differences in countries and seek a unified Europe as a prelude to a global economy run of course by them.
They do not realise differnet countries have different geography, resources and cultures and seek to blend these into an amorphous mix under their control.
The peoples of the European countries do not like it but to the politicians with their grand delusions of world government they are ignored.

Cameron said tonight that if your neighbours house was on fire you would help him. Of course you would but that would not mean staying in the house with him and burning to death. You would stay outside and help the fire brigade.
He is an idiot or more likely has another agenda.

Well they are not getting my money.
I will keep taking the EU largesse until it runs out and possibly my Italian friends will do the same.
When this Eurofarce eventually does collapse I will be OK but the poor of the rest of Europe will face financial hardship.

I did not make these stupid rules and am not resposible for them . My motive as a wealthy Greek is to protect myself as I am sure all other wealthy Europeans are doing.

The poor will suffer but that fact is the responsibility of the politicians and the unelected bureaucrats of Brussels.

Democracy originated in my country so perhaps it will by defaulting in its debts it will bring the undemocratic house of cards which is the EU down and thus contribute to a new era of freedom after the inevitable hardship of all ordinary Europeans.

It will be worth it for the poor and I am protected as my assets are out of the reach of the government.

MORE ON THE "IDEAS" CONFERENCE

Having had more time to digest the BNP ideas meeting and time to gather my thoughts and analyse the tone and atmosphere of the meeting I realise the difference between this meeting and other BNP meetings I have attended.

First the participants (not audience) were not all Party members.
There was no omnipotent hierarchy dominating the meeting.

Of course there was a "top table" including Andrew Brons but the meeting was chaired fairly and of course competently by Arthur Kemp.
There was the chance of all present, members and nonmembers but all nationalists to have their say as how to best progress the cause.

Arthur Kemp stated at the beginning that we should not dwell too much on the past but that our purpose was to find a way to promote the cause in the future. Many different ideas were considered from starting a new party to joining a new party.
All were agreed that the need to unite the nationalist cause, but how? What is the best way?
All present were allowed to have their input and in the end the consensus was that a new party was unviable.
It was agreed that the BNP had a toxic reputation but that was largely owing to the malign influence of Nick Griffin and his cohorts, but that cleansed of him and these others a new clean party, untainted by them could emerge.

The BNP in its present form it was agreed was finished with a decreasing membership and questions to be answered regarding financial and other aspects of its management due to be answered in court.
So what was decided?

A new party it was considered was a non starter and bound to fall into oblivion as will the many new micro nationalist parties which have sprung up in the last year.

The consensus of the meeting was that we should have a parallel group with no name ( to avoid proscription) ready to take over when the inevitable demise of the present BNP occurs.

Contacts should be made with existing BNP members as well as those formerly with us to join this NATIONALIST grouping in readiness to take over when the time comes.

Of course this puts more work on to Andrew Brons but with others in the room the burden on him can be lessened.
Andrew was reluctant to take on any extra work. He was there because of his belief in our country and people, not his pocket, which makes him unique among politicians.

And finally, the attendees were self selected from the best of our nationalist bretheren.
All they wished for was UNITY, and that was evident at the meeting.

So whatever happens to the dieing corpse of the present BNP there will with the help of those at the meeting a new CLEAN vehicle to take the cause of Nationalism, patriotism and our country forward.

WE SAW QUALITY YESTERDAY

HAS NICK GRIFFIN LOST HIS MARBLES?

A few years a good friend of ours, a shop proprieter became increasingly unconcerned when my wife went to purchase from her. Afterwards my wife said she was not going there again although she had been a longtime friend.
On another occasion a man I knew who ran an off licence held up another similar shop, a man who knew him. He was of course arrested as his victim knew him. We all thought it strange at the time.

The two above I am using as illustrations of what can go wrong with people's minds.
They were later diagnosed as suffering from brain tumours, which had altered their personalities from those we liked into another alien frame of mind.

I believe Nick Griffin is suffering from some cerebral disturbance.
Last year I thought he was God until he began to renage on his promises and "fix" motions at party meetings to ensure his long term control of OUR party in an undemocratic way by schemes such as proxy votes.

Now it seems anybody with whom he disagrees is a traitor. No free speech or opinions there then.

Today we went to the "BNP Ideas" in Leicester, a very civilised meeting with eloquent patriotic speakers who tolerated differnt opinions. No black garbed "security" were in attendance and we met many old friends.
Some had left the party, some had been thrown out or sacked for asking questions (Griffinite democracy) and many remained but were in dispair at the failing fortunes of the party in which we sought our national salvation and which claims rapid growth, in spite of losing two thirds of its membership.

At the meeting I was informed that Griffin had "tweeted"(I don't go on it) that the attendees were all in the pay of George Soros or Searchlight spies.

What planet is this man on? These people were those who had worked with and supported him and were not meeting to destroy Nationalism.
We met to save Nationalism from the destruction visited upon our creed by the present hierarchy.
We can see the fall in support in electoral results and local activism. If Griffin can not see this he has lost his mind.

I DO believe there are moles in the party, but they are not to be found in those ejected as they would not be very good moles.

They are to be found in those AT THE TOP of the party and not those present at the WELL ATTENDED meeting.

Anyone who wished could speak from the floor, and different views were respectfully heard.
We differed in certain aspects of the best way forward but we were united in our desire to save our country and culture.

We know that and agreed that Nick Griffin is an impediment. He is an electoral liability.
How do I know? The electors tell me and have told others at the meeting.
If he had any decency he would resign in the interests of the cause, if indeed he believes in it.

But we know he won't.

He shows obvious signs of paranoia. He thinks people are against him. Many are, so why does he not just go and leave the nationalist field to flourish without his baggage. He seems to be determined to stay whatever. Like Gadaffi he believes all nationalists love him.

Or perhaps he has a brain malfunction.

If he believes those at our meeting today are in the pay of George Soros he is certainly wrong in the head.

CASHLESS SOCIETY ?

Now they want to take your cash off you.

If they have control of your money electronically how easy is it for THEM to stop you accessing YOUR MONEY or PAYING BILLS etc?

And what if you belong to a political party that the LIB/LAB/CON party don't like?

Your money could soon dissappear, access blocked, payments taken out unauthorised, instant fines.

They want to control OUR FINANCES.



Do you trust THEM ?

WILL THE LIBYANS RETURN?

The news that Gadaffi has been overthrown partly by Libya's own people but mainly because of the assistance of NATO and especially Britain and France opens up a new era.

The reason for Cameron's and Sarkozy's assistants in overthrowing the tyrant are as yet unclear but the attitude of the two countries to Libya seems to have reversed in the last two years.
They knew he was a tyrant but still dealt with and were friendly to him before.

Were they waiting for an uprising to depose him? It looks like it. But why?
Why were our forces deployed in Libya and not in the other dictatorial countries of the Middle East? After all they are all run by tyrant regimes.
What about Syria? Their government has killed thousands and continues to kill every day.
Is Syria too strong or has too little oil or too close to Israel? We are not told the reason for this differing policy. I know Hague has said a few strong words to them. That'll frighten Assad.

The barbaric treatment of Gadaffi showed what a rabble we have supported and what we face if these people ever are in a position of power in Britain.
Even in Nazi Germany the perpetrators of atrocities were given a fair trial before their end.
That is the difference between barbarism and Western standards.

This treatment of a tyrant will have unfortunate side effects.
Assad will not wish for the same fate in Syria and will fight harder to preserve his life and regime. What has he to lose? only the lives of the Syrian people.
And there are the dictatorships of Arabia, Yemen and Saudi to name but two. Why not them ?
Do we fear the loss of their oil? The leaders of these countries will also fear the same fate as Gadaffi and will fight harder to preserve themselves.

It seems freedom is very important but not as important as financial motives.
There is far more to this squalid intervention than democracy as there is little hope of it in any muslim country. They don't want it in any case.

Much as I deprecate the actions of those complicit in the final demise of Gadaffi I am glad he is no more.
It will solve two problems at the same time.
The new democratic Libya will attract all those of that nation who are at present here as refugees. They will relish the opportunity of returning to their own country and to help to rebuild it.
Their departure will ease the pressure on housing here.
If enough return it will obviate the need as expressed by Tessa Jowell for people such as myself and my wife who selfishly live in three bedroom houses since our children fled the nest.

We are told we should move to a one bedroom apartment to ease the housing shortage and make room for those with large families (usually muslims).

I know this might seem a bit selfish but I don't want to move. Yes we have two spare bedrooms now but we have made this house our home.
We have put our stamp on it and want to end our days, however selfish that might seem.

The return of the Libyans will help to solve this crisis.
If that is not enough the house (mansion) occupied by champagne socialist Tony Blair I believe has great potential to be broken up into large apartments to provide suitable accommodation for Somalian "refugees" up to the standards they expect.

Meanwhile we will remain in our more humble abode safe in the knowledge that a mass exodus of Libian patriots is about to occur.

OR IS IT?

Courts need not be bound by Europe, says top judge

British courts do not need to be bound by European human rights rulings, the country’s most senior judge said yesterday.

"

Lord Judge, the Lord Chief Justice, said the UK need only “take account” of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights but not necessarily follow it.

His comments will be seized upon by David Cameron who is furious with a series of rulings by the Strasbourg court imposed on the UK.

The Prime Minister is resisting a demand from Europe to give some prisoners a vote after the court ruled the current blanket ban is unlawful but is under increasing pressure to abide by it.

The domestic courts had all agreed with Government policy but the human rights challenge won in Europe.

Giving evidence to the Lords Constitutional Committee, Lord Judge was asked whether Strasbourg “always wins”.

He said: “I would like to suggest that maybe Strasbourg shouldn’t win and doesn’t need to win.”

“I think for Strasbourg I think there is yet a debate to happen, it will have to happen in the Supreme Court, about what we really do mean in the Human rights Act, what parliament means in the Human Rights Act, when it said that the courts in this country must take account of the decisions of European Court of Human Rights.

“I myself think it is at least arguable that having taken account of the decision of the court in Strasbourg our courts are not bound by them. Give them due weight in most cases obviously, we would follow them but not, I think, necessarily.”

The Human Rights Act, which the last Labour Government passed, enshrined the European Convention of Human Rights in to British law.

Lord Phillips, the President of the Supreme Court, told the peers that Strasbourg can cause “serious problems” when it rules against the UK courts.

But he said that as long as the Human Rights Act existed Strasbourg would win.

The Government has been given a further stay by Europe on its demand to impose prisoner voting pending the outcome of a similar case involving Italy.

Mr Cameron has suggested replacing the Human Rights Act with a British Bill of Rights.

He also plans to use the UK’s presidency of the Council of Europe from next month to lead a radical shake – up of the European human rights court.

However, he was warned last month by his own commission examining a Bill of Rights that radical reform of the court would not prevent it again overruling Parliament on issues such as allowing prisoners to vote.

In other issues, Lord Judge warned ministers that their open criticism of decisions of the courts that they do not like is “damaging”.

The relationship between parliament and judiciary was strained earlier this year in a row over the growing use of injunctions and claims that the courts were effectively creating a law of privacy by stealth.

Asked about a public perception of antagonism between parliament and the judiciary, he said: “It would help if Government ministers did not cheer when they agree with a judicial decision or boo when they disagree.

“That is, I think, very undesirable and I think it is damaging. If we got rid of that I think it would be much easier.”"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8836487/Courts-need-not-be-bound-by-Europe-says-top-judge.html