TO ALL CANDIDATES.
If you would like leaflets to do a leafleting session in your Ward please contact Charles. We have Voice of Freedom, Policy Leaflets, Local Leaflets, Euro Leaflets, DVDs.
It would not hurt to put out in your intended wards a few of these leaflets to promote your Candidacy and to remind the Voters of Wigan that they do have a choice and a chance to save their country.
Also, if anyone who is not a candidate but would like to help do a few leafleting sessions please do not hesitate to Contact Charles on 07779 321542.
Leaflets, DVDs and Voice of Freedom will be available.
Thanks,
TONY.
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
Monday, 26 April 2010
THE HUSTINGS
The election process hots up.
I've had the leaflets for the Labour Tory and Independent candidates for Makerfield.
The Labour candidate Yvonne Fovargue, a good old Wigan name that is endorsed by "Wiganer" our illustrious retiring "local" MP.
Now that's a surprise. Who would have thought it?
Her leaflet says she went to university and has worked most of her life in the charity sector.
So no proper job then in spite of her education.
She says she will always be Makerfield's representitive in Westminster. So she has a job for life, parachuted in by the Labour hierarchy.
Not if we can help it. I bet she had never heard of Makerfield six months ago.
The Tory candidate Itrat Ali, (another local name) but much more pleasant and seemingly a nicer person than Ms Fovargue, has also been chosen to show Camerons "diverse" credentials and has been imposed in a test to see if she is good enough for preferrment.
I suppose if she does not get in as she won't she could be made a baroness like the gobby Baroness Warsi who also rose without trace to the Lords.
Her leaflet shows her at various places round the Makerfield constituency (presumably she had a sat nav to find her way about) spouting the usual vacuous Tory plattitudes.
Anyhow last night there was a "hustings" at Hindley Parish Church and these two were joined by my brother's namesake John Mather whose leaflet seems more like a job application, although as a physics graduate he is obviously more intelligent than the other two, and his unemployed status is a mystery.
A notable absence on the invites list was our candidate for Makerfield Ken Haslam who has lived and worked in the area for over 65 years.
I am told that a hustings should legally invite all contestants and although the churches are against our Christian party it is a moot point whether they were breaking the law.
Not to be deterred 4 of our members sat in the audience and when the vicar was asked by Mr Haslam if all men were equal before God why was he denied a platform.
Of course the vicar, more used to preaching to his diminishing flock without being challenged was somewhat discomfited. There was shock in the audience when Ken announced his party allegience.
He asked Ms (I presume she is a Ms, she's Labour) why she had been parachuted into an erstwhile safe Labour seat in spite of knowing nothing about the area. This of course was an unwelcome question which she could not answer.
Mrs Ali (she will be Mrs she's a Tory) was asked the same question. The racist rejoinder was easily countered when it was pointed out that she had been brought up in Yorkshire and that was why the question was posed.
With Ken were another 3 stalwarts, our secretary Tony Farrell, Morgan and Barry Longstaff
Tony asked about their attitude to abortion and stated that we would not need immigration if more British childeren were born.
The trouble with the electoral system is that the major parties USE US in their struggle for dominance.
The local people get no choice. It is imposed on them.
After the meeting Mr Haslam went to shake hands with those on the panel in the usual civilised way of our party.
Mrs Ali was very friendly as was the vicar and Mr Mather.
However Ms Fovargue or whatever her name is refused even this show of politeness when people of different opinions can debate in a civilised way. SO NOT MUCH CHARITY THERE THEN.
She will go a long way in the Labour Party and if they ever get power again will fit in nicely with the other Labour harridan cabinet ministers.
LET'S HOPE IT NEVER HAPPENS!
Labour really is the "Nasty Party" or is it that they just attract nasty women?
I've had the leaflets for the Labour Tory and Independent candidates for Makerfield.
The Labour candidate Yvonne Fovargue, a good old Wigan name that is endorsed by "Wiganer" our illustrious retiring "local" MP.
Now that's a surprise. Who would have thought it?
Her leaflet says she went to university and has worked most of her life in the charity sector.
So no proper job then in spite of her education.
She says she will always be Makerfield's representitive in Westminster. So she has a job for life, parachuted in by the Labour hierarchy.
Not if we can help it. I bet she had never heard of Makerfield six months ago.
The Tory candidate Itrat Ali, (another local name) but much more pleasant and seemingly a nicer person than Ms Fovargue, has also been chosen to show Camerons "diverse" credentials and has been imposed in a test to see if she is good enough for preferrment.
I suppose if she does not get in as she won't she could be made a baroness like the gobby Baroness Warsi who also rose without trace to the Lords.
Her leaflet shows her at various places round the Makerfield constituency (presumably she had a sat nav to find her way about) spouting the usual vacuous Tory plattitudes.
Anyhow last night there was a "hustings" at Hindley Parish Church and these two were joined by my brother's namesake John Mather whose leaflet seems more like a job application, although as a physics graduate he is obviously more intelligent than the other two, and his unemployed status is a mystery.
A notable absence on the invites list was our candidate for Makerfield Ken Haslam who has lived and worked in the area for over 65 years.
I am told that a hustings should legally invite all contestants and although the churches are against our Christian party it is a moot point whether they were breaking the law.
Not to be deterred 4 of our members sat in the audience and when the vicar was asked by Mr Haslam if all men were equal before God why was he denied a platform.
Of course the vicar, more used to preaching to his diminishing flock without being challenged was somewhat discomfited. There was shock in the audience when Ken announced his party allegience.
He asked Ms (I presume she is a Ms, she's Labour) why she had been parachuted into an erstwhile safe Labour seat in spite of knowing nothing about the area. This of course was an unwelcome question which she could not answer.
Mrs Ali (she will be Mrs she's a Tory) was asked the same question. The racist rejoinder was easily countered when it was pointed out that she had been brought up in Yorkshire and that was why the question was posed.
With Ken were another 3 stalwarts, our secretary Tony Farrell, Morgan and Barry Longstaff
Tony asked about their attitude to abortion and stated that we would not need immigration if more British childeren were born.
The trouble with the electoral system is that the major parties USE US in their struggle for dominance.
The local people get no choice. It is imposed on them.
After the meeting Mr Haslam went to shake hands with those on the panel in the usual civilised way of our party.
Mrs Ali was very friendly as was the vicar and Mr Mather.
However Ms Fovargue or whatever her name is refused even this show of politeness when people of different opinions can debate in a civilised way. SO NOT MUCH CHARITY THERE THEN.
She will go a long way in the Labour Party and if they ever get power again will fit in nicely with the other Labour harridan cabinet ministers.
LET'S HOPE IT NEVER HAPPENS!
Labour really is the "Nasty Party" or is it that they just attract nasty women?
Three Horse Nightmare
Three-horse race to a supranational nightmare
By Gerald Warner, Scotsman. Published Date: 25 April 2010
CHOICE is a luxury that is no longer on offer to British voters. The identical programmes of the three main political parties have effectively created a one-party state. It is the great irony of this general election that the expansion of the traditional two-horse race into a three-horse contest has brought not the slightest philosophical broadening of the electoral landscape.
It would be more accurate to say that Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats share a homogenous culture. It is possible to detect slight differences in their respective agendas – the Liberal Democrats’ dissent from the Iraq War would be one instance but these are purely tactical variations in the implementation of a common political culture that Gordon Brown once described as “the Progressive Consensus”. When the advent of David Cameron as Conservative leader absorbed even the Tory Party into that consensus, multi-party democracy became history.
This did not simply happen: it was engineered. Nor is it a British phenomenon; if anything, Britain is a latecomer to a post-democratic political system that is propagated by the European Union as well as, at global level, by the United Nations. It is a necessary precursor to world government, the ultimate objective of the Progressive Consensus. Before attempting to understand what is happening at national level, we need to recognise the bigger picture, the context in which our own helotry is being engineered.
That picture is darkly dystopian. The EU project is a distorted attempt to recreate the unity of Christendom, but in the interests of the most fanatically anti-Christian agenda of which one could conceive: that of the Frankfurt School of Marxism. Economic Marxism is now the province of historians; cultural Marxism is carrying all before it. The fall of the Berlin Wall marked only the collapse of a failed model of state socialism. The rise of the European Union signals the resurgence of cultural Marxism, untrammelled by the need for Five Year Plans and regarding plutocracy as perfectly congenial.
Let the capitalists create wealth, is the new philosophy, so long as the state, through punitive taxation, is the largest beneficiary and dictates the mores of corporations, communities and individuals. The characteristics of cultural Marxism are materialism, statism, militant atheism, sexual nihilism, cultural shallowness and the sedulously fostered illusion of popular autonomy within what is actually a totalitarian system.
Its enemies are religion, the family, authentic as distinct from synthetic communities, tradition, national identity and homogenous culture. In recent decades the forces of cultural Marxism, spearheaded by the EU, have launched a ferocious attack upon all those unsympathetic institutions, increasingly employing legal coercion.
When the baffled voter looks at the three mainstream political parties and wonders why he cannot identify with any of them, his choice has been removed by supranational forces. He is alarmed by immigration and, so widespread is that concern, the snake-oil salesmen have adopted a cosmetic pretence of responding. Dave is babbling about an unspecified “cap”, Gordon pretends immigration is diminishing and Clegg wants to amnesty illegals.
None of that comes near meeting public concern. How is it that, in a cut-throat election contest, all three parties dare to defy the electorate? By consensus is the answer: so long as nobody breaks ranks, they can laugh at the mug punters, as they have done since the cross-party consensus was first formed in 1965 to abolish the death penalty against the will of the nation.
All three parties support the futile war in Afghanistan, which the public opposes; polls now show a majority of Britons wants to leave the EU, but none of the three parties would accord the promised referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, let alone an In/Out plebiscite. Every PC “hate law” and other oppressive measure enjoys tripartite support, since it is political and social death, within the bubble inhabited by the elite, to dissent from PC dogma.
It may not be possible to hold that line indefinitely. In this election the Liberal Democrats, who epitomise the PC consensus to the point of caricature, have irrationally become the conduit of electoral protest. That mistake will not be repeated. On Friday the BNP – the party that represents the antithesis of the PC consensus – published its manifesto. Its headline policies are: an end to immigration, withdrawal from Afghanistan and Britain’s exit from the European Union. If the main parties cannot see the writing on the wall they will have only themselves to blame.
Morg
.
By Gerald Warner, Scotsman. Published Date: 25 April 2010
CHOICE is a luxury that is no longer on offer to British voters. The identical programmes of the three main political parties have effectively created a one-party state. It is the great irony of this general election that the expansion of the traditional two-horse race into a three-horse contest has brought not the slightest philosophical broadening of the electoral landscape.
It would be more accurate to say that Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats share a homogenous culture. It is possible to detect slight differences in their respective agendas – the Liberal Democrats’ dissent from the Iraq War would be one instance but these are purely tactical variations in the implementation of a common political culture that Gordon Brown once described as “the Progressive Consensus”. When the advent of David Cameron as Conservative leader absorbed even the Tory Party into that consensus, multi-party democracy became history.
This did not simply happen: it was engineered. Nor is it a British phenomenon; if anything, Britain is a latecomer to a post-democratic political system that is propagated by the European Union as well as, at global level, by the United Nations. It is a necessary precursor to world government, the ultimate objective of the Progressive Consensus. Before attempting to understand what is happening at national level, we need to recognise the bigger picture, the context in which our own helotry is being engineered.
That picture is darkly dystopian. The EU project is a distorted attempt to recreate the unity of Christendom, but in the interests of the most fanatically anti-Christian agenda of which one could conceive: that of the Frankfurt School of Marxism. Economic Marxism is now the province of historians; cultural Marxism is carrying all before it. The fall of the Berlin Wall marked only the collapse of a failed model of state socialism. The rise of the European Union signals the resurgence of cultural Marxism, untrammelled by the need for Five Year Plans and regarding plutocracy as perfectly congenial.
Let the capitalists create wealth, is the new philosophy, so long as the state, through punitive taxation, is the largest beneficiary and dictates the mores of corporations, communities and individuals. The characteristics of cultural Marxism are materialism, statism, militant atheism, sexual nihilism, cultural shallowness and the sedulously fostered illusion of popular autonomy within what is actually a totalitarian system.
Its enemies are religion, the family, authentic as distinct from synthetic communities, tradition, national identity and homogenous culture. In recent decades the forces of cultural Marxism, spearheaded by the EU, have launched a ferocious attack upon all those unsympathetic institutions, increasingly employing legal coercion.
When the baffled voter looks at the three mainstream political parties and wonders why he cannot identify with any of them, his choice has been removed by supranational forces. He is alarmed by immigration and, so widespread is that concern, the snake-oil salesmen have adopted a cosmetic pretence of responding. Dave is babbling about an unspecified “cap”, Gordon pretends immigration is diminishing and Clegg wants to amnesty illegals.
None of that comes near meeting public concern. How is it that, in a cut-throat election contest, all three parties dare to defy the electorate? By consensus is the answer: so long as nobody breaks ranks, they can laugh at the mug punters, as they have done since the cross-party consensus was first formed in 1965 to abolish the death penalty against the will of the nation.
All three parties support the futile war in Afghanistan, which the public opposes; polls now show a majority of Britons wants to leave the EU, but none of the three parties would accord the promised referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, let alone an In/Out plebiscite. Every PC “hate law” and other oppressive measure enjoys tripartite support, since it is political and social death, within the bubble inhabited by the elite, to dissent from PC dogma.
It may not be possible to hold that line indefinitely. In this election the Liberal Democrats, who epitomise the PC consensus to the point of caricature, have irrationally become the conduit of electoral protest. That mistake will not be repeated. On Friday the BNP – the party that represents the antithesis of the PC consensus – published its manifesto. Its headline policies are: an end to immigration, withdrawal from Afghanistan and Britain’s exit from the European Union. If the main parties cannot see the writing on the wall they will have only themselves to blame.
Morg
.
Sunday, 25 April 2010
THE ANTI CHRISTIAN FOREIGN OFFICE
The scurrilous attack on the Catholic Church by some idiot in the Foreign office shows clearly the anti Christian mentality of the other parties. They would not dare to attack a muslim leader. There would be riots, so why the difference in attitude.
It is because our traditions and heritage have been built on Christianity and thus must be mocked in the interests of "diversity" and "vibrance".
They even wanted the Pope to apologise for the Spanish Armada.
What's that hisorical event to do with the present Pope.
Now I am not a Catholic, indeed am a lapsed Anglican but am incensed at this insult.
Yesterday I was at a wedding, actually in a Catholic church, and it was a beautiful service and even though not a Catholic I FELT AT HOME.
I do not think I would have had the same feeling in a mosque at a muslim wedding as that faith is ALIEN to our land.
The "junior officials" have been "repremanded" BIG DEAL.
If they had been found out to have been a member of the BNP or insulted Mohammed they would have been instantly sacked, and that is what should happen to these anti Christian fools.
It is only a pity that theCof E clergy can not see the insidious danger that is threatening our culture. But then they seem to change their beliefs like the weather to be inclusive.
RUBBISH If you have a faith you stick by it. That is why your churches are empty.
YOU STAND FOR NOTHING.
The BNP does. IT STANDS FOR CHRISTIANITY.
It is because our traditions and heritage have been built on Christianity and thus must be mocked in the interests of "diversity" and "vibrance".
They even wanted the Pope to apologise for the Spanish Armada.
What's that hisorical event to do with the present Pope.
Now I am not a Catholic, indeed am a lapsed Anglican but am incensed at this insult.
Yesterday I was at a wedding, actually in a Catholic church, and it was a beautiful service and even though not a Catholic I FELT AT HOME.
I do not think I would have had the same feeling in a mosque at a muslim wedding as that faith is ALIEN to our land.
The "junior officials" have been "repremanded" BIG DEAL.
If they had been found out to have been a member of the BNP or insulted Mohammed they would have been instantly sacked, and that is what should happen to these anti Christian fools.
It is only a pity that theCof E clergy can not see the insidious danger that is threatening our culture. But then they seem to change their beliefs like the weather to be inclusive.
RUBBISH If you have a faith you stick by it. That is why your churches are empty.
YOU STAND FOR NOTHING.
The BNP does. IT STANDS FOR CHRISTIANITY.
Saturday, 24 April 2010
NICK GRIFFIN NEWSNIGHT INTERVIEW
Well, Poxman is making quite clear his attitude towards us in particular and the indigenous British in general, by his body language and tone of voice:
Hat tip Bertie Bert. Thank you for the link.
Morg
.
Hat tip Bertie Bert. Thank you for the link.
Morg
.
VOTE SMALL, THINK BIG
I may not agree with his personal choice of who he's going to vote for, but I find it impossible to disagree with the overall message.
Morg
.
Morg
.
ANTI CHRISTIAN "CHRISTIANS"
Locally there have been or are to be several "hustings" in church properties where the various political parties can give their views.
However alone among the parties the BNP has not been invited, indeed some of these "Christian" leaders have published a letter in the local press asking people to vote against the BNP.
This shows firstly a contempt for democracy, and I hope an ignorance of what our party stands for.
We are THE ONLY party which endorses Christianity and wishes to preserve the predominantly Christian society which has served us so well for centuries.
Churches are empty, largely as a result of these misguided fools, and are increasingly being turned into mosques, seemingly without these so called "Christian" priests complaining.
Also Christians in muslim lands are increasingly persecuted and even killed.
At the present rate of colonisation of our country by muslims within 30 years ALL our churches could be turned into mosques, their Christian interiors desecrated and ancient graveyards bulldozed into car parks so that the new occupants can practice their religion, a religion alien to this land.
Senior muslims have stated that their aim is to take over Britain.
These so called "Christian"vicars and priests would be better employed encouraging people to vote BNP to avoid this scenario. They are either too unworldly or thick to realise the threat from islam.
Our forebears fought two world wars to save us from invasion by alien cultures but these idiots seem complicit in the destruction of all our heroes died for.
We as a party will keep going in spite of these priests. We have the determination they lack.
our motto? ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS.
They would do well to learn and follow that hymn.
However alone among the parties the BNP has not been invited, indeed some of these "Christian" leaders have published a letter in the local press asking people to vote against the BNP.
This shows firstly a contempt for democracy, and I hope an ignorance of what our party stands for.
We are THE ONLY party which endorses Christianity and wishes to preserve the predominantly Christian society which has served us so well for centuries.
Churches are empty, largely as a result of these misguided fools, and are increasingly being turned into mosques, seemingly without these so called "Christian" priests complaining.
Also Christians in muslim lands are increasingly persecuted and even killed.
At the present rate of colonisation of our country by muslims within 30 years ALL our churches could be turned into mosques, their Christian interiors desecrated and ancient graveyards bulldozed into car parks so that the new occupants can practice their religion, a religion alien to this land.
Senior muslims have stated that their aim is to take over Britain.
These so called "Christian"vicars and priests would be better employed encouraging people to vote BNP to avoid this scenario. They are either too unworldly or thick to realise the threat from islam.
Our forebears fought two world wars to save us from invasion by alien cultures but these idiots seem complicit in the destruction of all our heroes died for.
We as a party will keep going in spite of these priests. We have the determination they lack.
our motto? ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS.
They would do well to learn and follow that hymn.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)