So Sinn Fein have voted to recognise and co-operate with the police in Northern Ireland - just after MI5 built a lovely new HQ there.
Perhaps Martin McGuiness's handler swung the deal after getting a smart new office!
Now won't it be interesting to see how Republicans on the ground react...
Seems the pro-abortion, gay-rights and feminist lobby aka Sinn Fein have got what they wanted: plush offices in Stormont from which to wave their flags of equality for the "irishmen" just of the planes from Nigeria!
What bizarre times we live in...
No doubt the drug-dealers and gangsters in Northern Ireland - in both 'communities' - can now fully co-operate with the police. That is if they're not already run by Special Branch!
For the embarassment of Mr. Adams et al tonight on the RTE1 tv channel is a documentary in the Hidden History series all about two films made by Goebbels promoting/defending the IRA.
Might be worth a watch...
Tuesday, 30 January 2007
Friday, 26 January 2007
We've been told our prisons are over-full.
The Home Office has "reminded" judges that only dangerous criminals are to be jailed - in a move designed to apply political pressure on the judiciary (yes, the days of a free judiciary are almost over: witness the political "legal" decision taken to justify the invasion of Iraq and the dropping of the investigations into Saudi Arabian corruption).
News reports (from Devon and Wales) of paedophiles not being jailed, but released on bail, have flashed around the world to our eternal shame.
So what is the answer?
Is the penal system failing?
Certainly at the moment there are a number of issues which should concern us:
1. Criminality is endemic and often the police turn a blind-eye to lawbreaking (e.g drug-taking) or simply do not bother investigating (e.g. burglaries and car theft).
2. Jails act as training camps for criminals in which they mix with worse criminals, often pick up or renew drug habits, and get treated like holidaymakers - with TVs, Playstations etc. - and very little prospect of coming out of jail as better citizens.
3. Serious criminals are housed in such conditions at our expense whilst funds are not available to help house and heat the elderly.
So what is the answer? Build more jails?
Sad to say, as with so much currently wrong with our society, the problem goes a lot deeper.
It can be traced back to a number of long-term events and effects over the years, just a few of which are:
1. The break-up of the family and family morals. How many criminals come from broken homes? How can children grow up to know right from wrong when their parents are setting a bad example and morality is a word dismissed as the slogan abused by lecherous and hypocritical Tories?
2. The destruction of Christianity and the seperation of Church and state. Gone are the days when men like Edward the Confessor and Alfred the Great set an example of defence of the realm, coupled with alms-giving to the poor and institutions for their aid. Now there is no body - neither Church nor King - to stop the modern-day ironmasters, rent-rackers, coin-clippers, usurers and land-enclosing merchant-class. The "law" is whatever that class - embodied in the City of London and the Palace of Westminster - decides it is, with its creeping liberal and capitalist agenda which means worse laws and degradations are suffered decade by decade.
And where is Elizabeth Regina? The so-called 'Defender of the Faith'? Does she decry these laws which allow all that is immoral, unjust and obscene? How can the Head of the Church of England allow such things -- not even counting the gay-vicars and other abominations which should have this husk of a monarch brought to book? Henry IV must be doing somersaults in his grave!
3. Mass coloured immigration. This has brought about - and deliberately so for, aside from the usual Capitalist trick of denying the working man a just wage, it was thus designed - the destruction of local communities and the over-riding cohesiveness of shared values, morals, customs and identity.
Gone are the days when our women felt safe late at night. Gone are the days when doors were left open. Gone are the days when neighbours were of the same kind.
Look at any major city or town, there are very few real communities left. They have been broken up deliberatley by influx after influx of millions of non-European, non-White and non-Christian immigrants. MILLIONS!
And even where these communities still exist, primarily in the Celtic fringe and outlaying parts of England; where the communities haven't been ripped apart by unemployment, drugs, single-parent families and lawlessness, now the government is insisting on shipping out more non-European, non-White and non-Christian immigrants (called asylum seekers) in its policy of dispersal.
Our 'masters' are so keen to forcibly spread their accursed policy of multi-racism, of destroying peaceful communities that they are busing these people to the furthest reaches of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Even in Southern Ireland, that is the Irish Republic, mass immigration has been ushered in to destroy a land that was exclusively Irish and homogenious until very recently.
These evil influences are the result of Capitalism. Our rulers are from the merchant class who want to make money and own and control us at any cost. This is the class that kept our forefathers in penury and servitude down pits, in factories - or forced them to seek exile via cramped and disease-ridden ships.
For a long time now that merchant class has been increasingly internationalist. They were bad enough when they wore the garb of "nationalism" -- as our forefathers died early to run the machinery of their Empire -- but they are a damn site worse now! This internationalist body has no loyalty to faith, family or nation. Profits are their God.
Let the proles be emersed in drugs: someone is making huge profits out of it.
Let the workers lose jobs and wages through mass immigration: someone is making huge profits out of it.
Let the family dwindle as parents are forced out to work or break-up: someone is making huge profits out of it.
Let the country lose even its Christian character, which in turn allows all manner of degeneracy such as homosexuality and abortion: someone is making huge profits out of it.
And so we come to today. Where a society faces a crime endemic. Where families don't even bother reporting criminal acts to the police because it won't achieve anything. Where drug-takers are told they won't face arrest, but speak out on race or neglect to wear your seatbelt whilst driving and you will be arrested!
The police cannot cope. That is why they turn a blind-eye to graffiti, to drugs, to small-scale theft.
The prisons are overflowing. They would need to build thousands more if those engaged in criminal acts were really arrested and treated with the full measure of the law as it exists today.
So what can the answer be?
Here are some proposals:
1. A return to capital punishment for extreme cases. Justice aside, why should we spend millions of pounds housing proven murderers and paedophiles? A crack down would certainly - in the case of the latter category - stop these people spreading their networks.
2. A mix of removing comforts from prisoners, whilst providing much better re-education facilities. For example, a large number of released prisoners still cannot read and write adequetly.
3. Those who commit small-scale robberies and criminal damage (e.g. stealing a car) should be made to repay the victims in full, if necessary with the sale of their belongings, home, or with an automatic deduction from their wage of a suitably hurtful amount. If they cannot afford to repay the victim then they will be forced to carry out public works, with their wage (or a suitably hurtful percentage of it) going directly to the victim.
4. Those who carry out nuisance crimes and suchlike on an ongoing basis should be forced to suffer the humility of the stocks - suitably overseen and controlled to prevent anything other than humiliation being done to him/her. Real humiliation and discomfort will stop the local nuisance.
5. Foreignors who commit crimes (over a certain level - i.e. not for doing 34mph in a 30mph zone!) should be expelled immediately and banned from re-entry (with a request that their home nation deal with them as a criminal) wherever they from, be it France, Australia, America -- wherever.
6. Of course with the destruction of usury debt, there could also be a very real investment in educational structures, hopefully pushing more children to be suitably educated in the basics, and also trained to have a trade-for-life.
7. With a campaign to bolster support for the family including financial rewards for those who choose to marry, and for mums who stay at home to help bring up their children, and for mums who have more children. Those who sacrifice for the good of the family, community and nation should get the rewards -- not the single mums who knowingly get pregnant in their teens to get a council house!
8. The effort to recreate our communities, principally by having homogenous communities, plus local community initiatives, local investment, local community policing (by and for the local community) -- plus the total annihilation of drugs locally and nationally would bring down crime levels overnight.
These steps would, I believe, help stop the seemingly endless cycle of crowded prisons, prisons as places where criminals become drug addicts and/or worse criminals, and the wilful ignorance of drugs and low-level (but nuisance and distressing) criminality etc.
Of course I have only scratched the surface. The problems we suffer were created by means and events which could have a whole book written about them not least the de-population and enclosure of our rural landscape and the increasing control of the country by financiers and the like. The answers we need could likewise have a whole book written about them, exploring the answers, setting out the nitty gritty, the maths, and the hope they would give to a people who have seen their country, their community and very often their families ripped apart by what could be simply labelled as 'the modern world.'
But don't be fooled dear reader. Such a nomenclature seems to dictate that this is the way it should be, we have to "move with the times" etc...
Not at all!
Why shouldn't advances in medicine not be coupled with advances in community adhesion?
Why shouldn't advances in communications be coupled with advances in family life?
Wasn't it GK Chesterton who once rebuked some moron who said 'you can't turn the clock back' by saying that the gentleman in question 'clearly knew nothing about clocks'?
Prisons as they exist today are a symptom of our decaying society. They offer no answers to those betrayed by this system. They offer no answers to the victims of crime. They increasingly offer no real form of justice - certainly no sense of recompense or rehabilitation.
If we are to find peace in our families, in our communities and in the nations that make up these isles then we must have real justice coupled with social justice.
Such answers are 'revolutionary' because they seek a way which is beyond the confines of Capitalist greed, beyond the sheer nonsense of the EU and its humanist laws, and beyond the confines of the present-day justice system which unsuccessfully tries to control/limit the by-products of an increasingly anti-Christian and anti-family regime - like the boy with his finger in the dyke whilst the cracks widen the pressure builds.
Time to think afresh!
Saturday, 20 January 2007
Thursday, 18 January 2007
This is the 5 x 3 foot flag of St Edmund of Suffolk, the saxon Patron Saint of England.
The town of Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk gets its name because the Saint is buried there.
St Edmund held a special place in the hearts of the Saxon people of England.
Reserve your flag with FC now. These are likely to be limited availability.
As traitors on both sides seek to hand England over to the forces of Red Atheism, Talmudic Zionism, multi-faith gibberish, McDonalds Coca Cola consumerism, and/or a meaningless vacuous humanism - patriots should raise the banner of St Edmund and remember the graves of their forefathers, those who would fight and die to defend Faith, Family and Nation.
Wednesday, 17 January 2007
And so life goes on.
The FC website and shop is up and running. The webmaster skype'd from Casa Skorzeny in Paraguay to say that additions are being made to the site - so bear with him. He's not been the same since Nuremburg.
Anyone with experience of oscommerce software can help by getting in touch: email@example.com -- just for occassional queries/help.
Meanwhile Tony Blair acts like a great Caesar and not a rat about to leave a sinking ship.
Criminality, drug-taking et al look set to be legalised [they did it with abortion and homosexuality] -- surely the next step up from the wholesale brushing aside of house and car burglary and pot-smoking by our forces of law n order.
At the same time our Big Brother state says it needs even more powers, and Blair wants the police, NHS and every bureaucrat to share all info on us!
Give us more powers scream the Freemasons - sorry, police chiefs... whilst they fail to use laws that already exist to stop drug-taking, burglary, obscenities in public etc. etc.
And in the only Big Brother that Sun readers seem to care about, some petty squabble and bitchiness has been translated as 'racism' by morons with too much time on their hands. Reported by the BBC as 'news' the few hundred complaints mushroomed to tens of thousands...
And Blair spoke out against racism. Brown spoke out against racism. Racism was condemned in the House of Commons. Channel 4 execs rubbed their hands and watched the viewing figures rise.
And in the real world drug-taking continued. Burglary continued. Homosexuality continued. Abortion continued.
None of which seemed to bother Blair or Brown. The great christian [stop laughing] leaders of the Labour Party!
I just finished reading Hilaire Belloc's Survivals and New Arrivals. In the section on the "modern mind" he saw the threat approaching.
He addressed Sun readers, Big Brother watchers, the mindless morons with their rap music... he spoke out about imbeciles who harp on about 'democracy' without knowing what it is, or seeing oligarchy for what it is.
And all that in 1929.
What would he make of Blair's Britain in 2007?
Saturday, 6 January 2007
Next week is going to be exciting!
Yes, the kids are going back to school! But not only... for next week the FC website and FC online shop is back!
Word from Tikrit is that the website will be going live midweek.
So please do spread the word. Let readers of nationalist online forums know! The FC site is a-comin'.
Ranting Ron will be seen proclaiming the truth via his sandwich board in various towns and cities on his whistle-stop tour of the land, starting tomorrow in St Albans [do take along your autograph books] where he will be shouting incoherantly at passers-by whilst shaking his fist.
So ready your pcs and watch this space...
The FC site is coming back!
Be ready troops! Make sure sufficient foaming ales and pork pies are ready for a celebratory midweek feast of suitable proportions.
Friday, 5 January 2007
Word has reached us from the caves of Bora Bora that the FC webmaster is almost ready to go live with the new site at www.politicalsoldier.net
The site will include a shop with a cart facility enabling supporters to, once again, peruse our large and varied stock of goods, which will include a huge number of new items from many new ranges including resin figures, metal figures, flags, keyrings, distributist books, badges, patches, CDs, letter openers, DVDs, CD Roms, lighters - and lots more!
So watch this space for announcements, or make sure you get the FC e-zine. We'll let you know when there's more news.
The news that our armed services are quite often forced to live in squalor should come as no surprise.
Before I continue let me say that this has nothing to do with the war in Iraq, Afghanistan or any other 'theatre' that the British Army, RAF or Navy is involved in.
We can agree or disagree with the various wars; we can agree or disagree with the idea of men and women offering to fight for a government and system that is not just off the rails, but is increasingly just plain evil; but when men and women of our nationality put their lives on the line, we should at least have the decency to house them properly.
This news is a mere reflection of the treatment of the firemen a little while back when men and women who risk their lives - in less contentious, but equally as dangerous circumstances - were given a pitiful wage rise whilst being asked to accept cuts in services that would risk lives: both theirs and the publics at large.
All too often we see the politicians - who aren't afraid to give themselves large wages rises, superb expenses packages, cut-price food and drink at Westminster, plush new offices etc. etc. - treating the people who are called on to risk their very lives as chattels, as if being a politician [often lying, swindling and treacherous] demanded better reward than being someone who puts their life on the line, often at the behest of those self-same politicians!
Tony Blair sends them off to illegal wars in which they can and do die. But never mind if their families live in squalor, in rat-infested housing, because Blair has numerous properties [his own and state-supplied] where he can live in opulence. And whilst financiers and bankers in the City of London get Christmas bonuses of millions of pounds – because they “take risks” – the soldiers who take the real risks, doing the dirty work at the coal face, the work that Blair, Bush and the other Neo Cons won’t send their own kids out to do, get treated so badly!
It's as if it isn't enough to send them off to fight wars for Israel and Big Business, a government about to waste multi-millions on Trident's replacement can't even put them and/or their families in standard accomodation [whilst finding the money to house asylum seekers].
And imagine the uproar if the inferior housing, which we’ve seen on the news reports, were lived in by Asians or Afro-Caribbeans in our multi-cult mess of a land? They would riot!
As one wife living in rotten conditions said today on the radio, they’d be housed better if they left their husbands – because single mums get better housing from the council!
Such is life in Blair’s Bolshevik Britain… where we’re all equal, but some are more equal then others!
Come on now Labour Party members, altogether now:
Four legs good, two legs bad…
Tuesday, 2 January 2007
Someone wrote into FC by e-mail today asking 'why are we so anti-BNP?' after the FC e-zine alluded to a prominant BNP supporter who has a Chinese boyfriend.
It made me think. Are we anti-BNP?
We're not seen as anti-National Front, though we have ideological differences with the NF and have criticised it in the past when, for example, it allowed the homosexual and MI5-plant Peter Marriner [at the time comrade-in-arms of Martin Webster] to hold a post which gave him access to members details and young boys [which by his own account on TV, his MI5 handler asked him to bugger in order to get 'pillow talk' on the NF].
We're not seen as anti-British Movement, though we have ideological differences with the BM, not being National Socialist. But we know where they stand, and they know where we stand, and their is an affinity, a friendship, an understanding. We cannot criticise them for what they are and what they do - because they make no pretensions otherwise.
And so on... We have our differences with groups as disparate as the NF, BM, and Third Way, perhaps ironically as their liberal centrism first enunciated in the early 90s is close to the line increasingly taken today by the BNP.
Yet none of them would really say we are 'anti' them...
So are we anti-BNP?
Well, given that many BNP members, activists and even organisers read and enjoy FC magazine [and e-zine] and have no difficulties supporting FC and agreeing with us, it can't be feasible that we are anti-BNP, otherwise these people would in turn be anti-FC.
We have also been critical of some of those anti-BNP forces who really are anti-BNP to an extreme, to the extent of repeating verbatim the lies and half-truths of anti-fascists when they relate to certain BNP organisers [including genuine nationalists!].
However, that does not mean that as a media outlet we should remain quiet when we see something happening before our eyes that we heartily disagree with. Furthermore, from our interaction with BNP members at all levels it seems that they rely on us to speak out because there is no 'democratic' [sheesh] means for them to do so 'within' the party -- leastways without recriminations, vilification and/or expulsion in a regime of control freakery, nepotism and cronyism that would have Teflon Tony Blair turning green with envy – but neither do they want to turn to the Searchlight operatives and C18 linked group whose sole existence seems to be to fuss about what the BNP is dong.
And so, it should be perfectly logical that one may agree with the general direction of a party [perceived or otherwise], or the founding aims of a party - or anything between the two - without remaining silent when wrong is done.
Or should we all remain robots?
Certainly those committing the ills, whether for the best or the worst reasons, do not remain quiet when they perceive others to be doing wrong.
They have attacked those who side with the Lebanese or the Palestinians.
They have attacked those who stay without the BNP - perhaps those with ideological or other differences.
They have also attacked those 'dinosaurs' who stay within the BNP – perhaps those with ideological or other differences [it seems they can't win!].
They have attacked those in other parties who betray party lines [anti-socialist Blair, modernist Tory Cameron] whilst demanding all to stay silent at their command when they allow colossal u-turns to take place within the BNP.
Lately they have attacked Iran for wanting nuclear power [not so Israel who already have nuclear WEAPONS] even lying to the effect that Iran threatened to 'nuke' Israel when the threat was the other way around, and the BNP leader decried the Iranian president - who has confronted Israel perhaps as no other world leader has done, whilst remaining measured and intelligent in his correspondence and speeches [for those who bother to read them and not Sun or Daily Mail editorials!] - as simply 'mad.'
Perhaps the cherry on the cake is the denouncement of revisionists as being beyond the pale and persona non grata for the BNP. This particular chutzpah is gross coming from a party led by the former editor of The Rune who walked out of the National Front over the Jewish issue... but then the rewards to be gained explain all.
The movement of the BNP mirrors that of Vlaams Belang in Flanders and the Front National in France.
We shouldn't be surprised, for both these are powerful electoral machines.
The movement is that of organisations becoming increasingly post-Nationalist. Not surprising as the BNP leadership lauded that traitor and renegade Fini [of Aleanza Nazionale in Italy] as the perfect ideal and example to follow when they fought to gain the leadership from John Tyndall.
Fini could give lessons in dressing betrayal as success, for he has excelled at both.
Why, for example, take a strong line against homosexuals when they vote?
Homosexuals are knowingly allowed in positions of influence in the BNP as anyone of any worth in South London BNP will tell you. The leadership may say otherwise, possibly not these days, but that is a fact.
Jews are openly sought as candidates, as was proven in Essex BNP, and there is certainly no block on Freemasons joining 'the cause' - indeed one of the organisers of the first Red, White and Blue festival belonged to 'the Craft.'
So is anyone who opposes homosexuality, Jewish influence and/or Freemasonry being anti-BNP? Is anyone who reads revisionist web sites or subscribes to their journals and worldview anti-BNP?
According to a recent BNP diatribe, they DO NOT WANT revisionists anywhere near the BNP, let alone inside it!
So is it OK for the BNP to be against those of us who are revisionist?
So is it OK for the BNP to be against those of us who are against Freemasonry?
So is it OK for the BNP to be against those of us who are against organised Jewry?
So is it OK for the BNP to be against those of us who are against homosexuality?
So is it OK for the BNP to openly attack other nationalists - including an election leaflet attacking the National Front and showing BM members, put out in Lancashire using Mr. Griffin's own personal PO Box?
And as the BNP seeks to maximise its votes by not offending all the above, what of us who oppose abortion?
Some leadership sycophants - whilst seeking to play up their 'pro-Christian' credentials whilst opposing Islam have slated FC as being some sort of 'Christian Taliban' for daring to have.... Christian beliefs.
One wonders what the [non-Taliban perhaps?] Christian front-groups make of the BNP's tolerance of homosexuality, of abortion... but that's another issue.
So when the BNP opposes so many groups of people who dare to hold ideological principles [sneeringly dismissed as 'purists'] any of us who fall into those categories should not squeak anything back in protest?
As the BNP now openly allows members of mixed-race and members with mixed-race or non-White 'partners' [sorry for the pc language but we might assume that some may be married, some not and some just partners in buggery] those of us opposed to race-mixing will be [probably already have been] condemned as dinosaurs!
We'll all be painted as neo-nazis... like some Sunday Mirror editorial we'll all be dismissed as Ku Klux Klan cranks for daring to believe that one's nationality should, in part, be judged by race.
Now we are all aware that cranks do exist [both within and without the BNP], and one man's crank is another man's visionary. In a world increasingly devoid of stability [i.e. without knowledge of traditions and history going back over 50, never mind 500 or even 1000 years] we know that in this kingdom of the blind the one-eyed man is king.
That is how the Blairs and Camerons of this world manage to fool most of the people most of the time.
Media image is all. Subservience to the City [i.e. Finance], to Zionism, to other lobbies such as the increasingly powerful homosexual one, become the measure of success.
Winning over Rupert Murdoch becomes far more important in winning elections than direct contact with the electorate. And there are many others, lesser would-be Murdochs who can help mould a party's image in the public domain...
Thus Third Way's patriotic non-offensive centrism of 1990 has come full circle to be embraced by the BNP. And why not! It makes perfect sense!
In a world devoid of ideology, the programme devoid of ideology will bring more success.
In a world governed by the media, the programme deemed 'less offensive' will bring more success.
In a world in which Capitalism, Zionism and Homosexual lobbies are the real powers behind the throne, the programme that tips its hat to all three will bring more success.
Of course all will be achieved in a typical two steps forward, one step back to keep members on board - that is until they are replaced by more subservient and wealthy ones and the 'old guard' can be forced out as unwanted cranks, nazis, revisionists and dinosaurs...
Thus it is that at various stages the BNP leader has sworn to others that he is a Welsh nationalist, a revisionist [and that revisionism was the most important thing!], a third positionist, a British nationalist, a national socialist, a white racialist... until the technicolour coat was replaced by much more moderate guise - no doubt the suit and tie so promoted by the media as some kind of new image.
For many within the BNP, the changes in policy until recent years were understandable as mere frontage, a facade to be fed to the media – remember softly softly catchee monkey as enunciated in the pages of Spearhead and The Patriot by Messers Griffin and Lecomber?
With a nod and a wink it was a case of we're all still racial nationalists, revisionists etc... but we have to dress it up in more acceptable clothing to gain more votes. And the concessions lead to more concessions, which lead to yet more, which become u-turns...
But elections are a cruel mistress. They are controlled by a media, which can do so much damage. Plus the vote is given equally to Jew and gentile, black and white, homosexual and heterosexual...
So an electioneering machine will soon discover there are certain ways to maximise votes, and the concessions and u-turns increase...
And that is why the BNP mirrors the VB and FN. The VB boasts of its huge Jewish vote in Antwerp as it concentrates solely on attacking Islam. The FN embraces and promotes black 'French' patriots whose first allegiance is to the French motherland.
As nationalists do we think a party is more important than its programme? Should we be hoping for a BNP, which can get a large block Jewish vote in London? Or a BNP which promotes black 'British' patriots whose first allegiance is to the British motherland?
You might laugh, but the BNP's anti-Islam mania is mirroring the VB's which the Jews find so attractive, and the BNP already tried the Black British line in Cumbria - which backfired.
Would conservatives mind if their party promoted socialism? Would it matter if it won them votes in the inner cities, Wales and Scotland? That would be a success after all.
We have seen Blair promote Private Finance Initiatives [PFI] in the NHS in a direct contradiction to Socialism; and his involvement in an illegal war in direct contradiction to pacifism; and his involvement in replacing Trident in a deal designed solely to make big business multi billions.
All have helped make Blair a world leader - celebrated in the right-wing/Zionist media: a success in some ways...
What does the BNP make of these betrayals? Does it stay quiet in a respectful and courteous manner? Does it quietly dismiss those who oppose them as ne'erdowells who fail to realise what realpolitik is all about? Does it politely applaud moves designed to placate the REAL powers-that-be and thus ensure a peaceful hold on power?
Or does it - shock, horror - denounce such miserable behaviour? Does it state it is a betrayal of Labour's core membership and of Labour's founding fathers? Does it scoff at such wanton disregard of the party's once sincerely held principles?
What do you think?
As someone who opposed the invasion of Afghanistan when the BNP were supporting it;
As someone who supported the Lebanese as BNP officials backed Israel;
As someone who opposes homosexuality whilst the BNP allows them as officials and representatives;
As someone who opposes Freemasonry whilst the BNP states no ban on people belonging to that secret society -- as it does on Combat 18 members [I wonder which of the two has done more damage to our nation];
As someone who opposes Organised Jewry and Zionism whilst the BNP courts the former and supports the latter;
As someone who opposes race-mixing whilst the BNP - at best! - turns a blind eye to it in its own ranks;
As someone who approves of revisionism as a concept, open study of history in practice and freedom for historians to debate - from the Inquisition, to Confederate prison camps, to Auschwitz - whilst the BNP attacks revisionists...
Should I support the BNP?
The BNP has stated that it does not want or need my support!
I and those like me have been dismissed in turn as nazis, cranks, purists, Taliban-esque dinosaurs in that same monosyllabic style in which Israel's main enemy is dismissed as 'mad' by the new, modern BNP.
Far from being anti-BNP -- it seems that as someone who opposes Zionism, homosexuality; Freemasonry; race-mixing; 'exterminationist' history closed to debate -- that the BNP is increasingly against me, and many others who consider
And please do consider that I have NOT touched upon the myriad accusations of monetary and other skullduggery within the BNP as enunciated quite clearly by those who have held high official office within the BNP throughout the last 6 years and know much more about it than I ever would. Many of their accounts have been published previously.
I have also made no direct mention of the dropping of repatriation as a policy and the gradual creep of open acceptance of coloureds here en masse: So a party which sought to 'softly softly' bring more people to racialism has instead been made into a multi-racial party whose sole platform seems to be an anti-Islamic stance topped up with a national Capitalist [don't export jobs] and Wesminster-rule policy.
No I have merely sought to answer a very brief question poised today - i.e. why FC is 'anti BNP'.
We do not oppose the BNP as an organisation. It is an electoral machine. We are not.
We do not oppose BNP members, activists or organisers, many of whom read and support FC.
It seems rather, that the current BNP leadership, and those close to it are taking positions that are diametrically opposed to racial nationalism.
We should ask why the BNP is so against us!
Someone once said would we rather oppose the BNP and see the globalists have a free-run or give our support to the BNP?
Well, we in turn should ask why we should support a quasi Zionist electoral machine that states it does not want or need our support?
Furthermore, we have to ask if supporting the BNP as it currently exists and given the direction it is travelling, will stop the globalists?
Those who founded the Labour Movement at the beginning of the 20th Century thought [leaving aside the shortcomings or errors of socilaism] they would help the workingman and overthrow the Capitalists.
The Labour Party are now part of Capitalism. They bow to the same elites. They start the same wars. The Animal Farm process is complete, the latter stage having taken less than 10 years if one takes Blair's victory in 97 as the starting point.
The BNP in its 'new' guise has existed for around 6 years. It has already changed in the ways enunciated above. It is already on talking terms with the likes of arch Neo-Con apologist David Aaronovitch [remember the BNP 'tanker' which we were told would take time to turn around... not that long it seems], Rod Liddle and countless other media columnists ever-so-keen to promote this new changed BNP!
The sign that its Zionist apologetics is no fop to an enemy media was the relationship exposed between the BNP leader and Barbara Amiel, the arch-Zionist whose husband used to own the Telegraph group.
Amiel has more Zionist fingers in more Zionist pies than you can imagine. She is the female equivalent of Henry Kissinger. She KNOWS powerful people.
That she is phoning the BNP leader direct speaks of some kind of agreement, probably more of an understanding than anything so formal.
Thus the idea that the biggest betrayals in recent nationalist history – the support of Israel, the condemnation of revisionists, amongst others – are accidents or have occurred organically can be dismissed by thinking nationalists or intelligent people of any or no ideology.
If called upon to do what Barbara Amiel wants me to do - i.e. support an organisation doing what the Zionists want it to do, I would rather respectfully decline.
I CAN - and do - support those who speak out against coloured immigration [yes, it's RACE not SPACE], just as I can support those who speak out against homosexuality, abortion, EU membership, usury/capitalism, socialism, and whatever else I in conscience support for the good of my nation [whether they are parties or one issue groups].
I have in the past gone to BNP meetings and given into the collection [those denouncing FC have probably never done likewise!], just as I have supported pro-family groups, small publishers etc. etc.
However, those who believe that we all have a duty to sycophantically follow the BNP leadership as it betrays principles and overturns nationalism on vital issues are just plain wrong.
For if we do not speak out when they seek to betray - who will? And who will stop the Barbara Amiels of this world from buying up groups like the BNP – I have NOT said and do NOT say financially, but there are various ways to win influence and change policy - so that things will never change for the better?
If I support a pro-life group that suddenly says that abortion before 20 weeks gestation is fine, then I not only have the right to decry that group, and withdraw my support, it is my DUTY to do so.
It is an act of true charity because my role then is to get that pro-life group back into a pro-life line. Otherwise the pro-life group will get a victory which is no victory, for selfish men will still push their wives to kill their child, and children will still be ripped apart so that couples may go on winter ski holidays or have two cars.
Charity is not suffering error because it might achieve something that is not the publicly stated aims. Charity is speaking up for those you care about, for those you see doing wrong and caring enough to state it; openly and honestly [not in whispering campaigns as seems the rule in most political parties] that the greater Crusade may not suffer.
The soldiers of inter-war Germany felt betrayed by those back home who surrendered. They said the war was lost at home, and not at the front.
There is no point in fighting a war when the Generals have already given up, sold out or are playing footsy with the enemy; which is not to say that we should suffer the Lord Kitchener style over-the-top headlong charges into the hail of the enemy's machine guns or media brick-bats.
But in seeking an intelligent thought-provoking nationalism and sensible electoral machine, we should not have to remain quiet when gross errors of judgement are made.
If the BNP wishes to stifle debate and controversy over the more questionable parts of its platform it can - and does! - do so internally to its hearts content.
It cannot do so externally without contradicting one its own alleged banner statements: Freedom.
For what is freedom if we have no freedom to question or to debate? - ask the revisionists!
p.s. As an afterthought may I just say that I have no problem with the BNP quoting the Koran and seeking to expose its adherants, in part because of the bad effect of their presence in the UK: but why should I or others be condemned for doing the same to the Talmud and seeking to expose its adherants, in part because of the bad effect of their presence in the UK?
Why is one acceptable to the quasi-Kosher BNP and not the other? Whoops! I just answered my own question - no need to e-mail in your answer Ms Amiel...
p.p.s. For those sad enough to care what we had for Christmas food, I had – or rather Santa had - a pork pie and a beer on Christmas Eve [Rudolf had a carrot and some milk]. We had toast on Christmas morning [made by me, i tried not to burn it], we had turkey with roasties etc. for dinner [made by Mrs FC], and on Christmas night we had nibbles, beer, pop, whiskey and cold turkey, roasties etc. to varying degrees! Mmmmm. Very middle class!