Friday, 30 April 2010
An interview with an American Distributist who has been at the centre of a "communist/socialist" smear, orchestrated by Neo Cons dressed up as Christians, and a "neo-Nazi" smear storm, orchestrated by the SPLC, ADL and others of a Communist and Masonic nature which cost him his job.
So, according to the enemies of truth this unassuming man who has merely (re)published books, he is a rabid anti-Semite, extreme right-wing neo-Nazi, whilst at the same time being an extreme left-wing socialist and/or communist. It seems the enemies of civilisation want it both ways.
'Twas ever thus:
John Sharpe Interview
Thursday, 29 April 2010
So Gordon Brown was found out as a hypocrite yesterday with the fuss around 'Bigotgate' in Rochdale.
Didn't I say he was a hypocrite when he made a public speech about the sanctity of life to the Royal College of Nurses despite his vicious abortion policy?
At least more people now know he's a hypocrite.
Now just all the other party leaders to expose!
Wednesday, 28 April 2010
One of the sprogs saw this gem on the BNP website yesterday.
It had us all in guffaws of laughter.
What a shame that, in reality, a good message was ruined by the addition of a freedom fighter in the bottom right.
Remember Guns for the Afghan rebels when the Angelic Upstarts still had the cajones to criticise the fickle Hammer & Sickle before turning ultra red?
Those were the days when groups like the NF supported the Mujahadeen and their struggle against Communism to take back Afghanistan for the Afghans.
With the BNP sending out mixed messages (wanting to be uber-Neo Con on Islam, but taking an anti-war line) it is a shame that a perfectly good anti-immigration poster with a serious message is blighted by a Neo Con addition (albeit one that had us giggling).
Besides which, the queue could easily be one of "black Britons" queueing for kebabs and we all know, after Saturday's Newsnight BNP interview, these second generation coloureds (who are out-breeding us Whites) are now British whilst not being ethnically British. Zoiks.
Monday, 26 April 2010
I just watched Gordon Brown give a speech to the Royal College of Nurses (RCN) albeit in the background as I pottered away (as is my proclivity).
Gordon Brown said that every life is precious and that if everything they had done and all the money they had invested had saved just one life it would have been worth it, whereas in reality they had save millions.
Does he not know that his laws, his government and the system he supports have seen millions of innocent children murdered in the womb?
He has been personally responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands of innocents.
These are children who would grow to enjoy Christmases, to see their nephews and nieces graduate and all the other life-scenes that Gordon painted the scene for in his speech.
Gordon has been responsible for the murder of children who would grow to be tax-payers, who would become angelic nurses, policemen, soldiers, surgeons, taxi drivers, council workers, mums and dads -- in fact by killing so many children he has destroyed the future of whole families.
Of course this is the same mass murderer who says we "need" immigration... because he can't see he is murdering millions of our people, and he can't be bothered to educate the children for the skills we need.
None of these things occur in a vacuum.
None of the main parties and few if any of the serious fringe parties are Pro-Life. Least of all Gordon 'every life is precious' Brown.
If you are going to vote, speak to the candidates and find out which is Pro-Life and make it known that you will only vote for those who will end the mass murder of the innocents.
If a "patriotic" candidate is standing in your area, make sure they know you will vote for them, if they are Pro-Life.
Put the pressure the vote-grubbers. If they want your vote they will have to work for it.
But if you live in Gordon Brown's constituency, don't bother asking him. Despite all his grandiose talk of saving lives so they can see another Christmas, he believes in the culture of death, of abortion mills and of mass murder of the ultimate innocents.
As some coloured chappies once said: don't believe the hype.
Saturday, 24 April 2010
Seems there may be action taken at the BNP's usage of an image in their (early online version of their TV) election broadcast.
The BNP's response was that the image was used as a "joke" over the term 'hate'.
Still, we at FC think it a bit rich and questionable to use the image of the drunken war criminal Winston Churchill who gave the order to firestorm the Red Cross open ciry of Dresden when the war was already all but won.
Surely there can be no excuse for such offensive use of an image in order to garner votes - even if it is just a "joke."
Thank God some people don't hide "for fear of the Jews."
Apr 21, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Traditional French Catholics disrupt Rabbi's sermon at Notre Dame
This is some of the best news I have heard in many months. At last, Christians are standing up to bear witness to the invasion, subversion and infiltration of their churches by Christ-hating, Bible-falsifying occultists known as rabbis, who presume to lecture the people of Jesus Christ on how to behave according to the sly deceptions of the pagan Babylonian Talmud and the occult abomination of the Zohar.
Last Sunday ("Passion Sunday" of Lent, March 21), a contingent of young traditional French Catholics went to the famous medieval Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris, France, where Cardinal Andre Vingt-Trois had arranged for Rabbi Rivon Krygier to give the sermon. When the rabbi attempted to commit this sacrilege, these brave souls arose in one body and with one voice, recited the Apostle's Creed and the rosary aloud in the Cathedral.
As a result, the rabbi was forced to retreat to the sacristy (in the back of the cathedral) as the officials of Notre Dame ordered an organ to begin playing to drown out the voices of the traditional Catholics. The French Catholic television station KTO immediately cut off its live transmission as the protest began.
At last, Catholics are living their faith as the Church Militants, instead of imagining that God only desires that they pray, read and talk!
At last, they are offering a witness concerning the number one mortal enemy of Jesus Christ in 2010 A.D. -- as in 33 A.D.!
To everyone of those French Catholics and their leaders who offered this witness at Notre Dame, I say, may Almighty God richly bless you, and may He stiffen your faith and resolve to continue to defend Jesus Christ against the modern heirs of the Pharisees, who perpetually seek to extirpate His Gospel through infiltration, dilution, misdirection and the replacement of Calvary with Auschwitz.
Americans, rise up for Jesus Christ and do likewise!
Paris rabbi upbeat after cathedral lecture upset
March 23, 2010 PARIS (Reuters)
A Paris rabbi has voiced his confidence in Catholic-Jewish dialogue after young Catholic traditionalists briefly upset an unprecedented lecture he gave at the French capital's Notre Dame Cathedral. Rabbi Rivon Krygier had to leave the cathedral's main hall and deliver his lecture from a side room on Sunday after several dozen traditionalists began loudly praying a rosary after Paris Cardinal Andre Vingt-Trois introduced him. The traditionalists, who reject the improvement in relations between the two faiths decided at the 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council, said the prayers were meant as "amends for the outrage" of letting a Jewish cleric speak in the famous cathedral.
"They'll say they succeeded in banishing the rabbi to the sacristy," the rabbi told the Catholic daily La Croix on Tuesday March 23, "but the Christians active in dialogue seem much more determined to continue on this path." He said he had "full confidence in this dialogue and in the people leading it, especially in France." In his lecture, Krygier said that interreligious dialogue helped "expose the vanity of always wanting to trump the other" and display "each tradition's irreplaceable treasure."
The unusual cathedral protest came at a time of growing tension between the mainstream French Church and a small minority of traditionalists who reject the Council's reforms. Pope Benedict boosted the traditionalists' hopes last year when he readmitted to the Church four ultra-traditionalist bishops excommunicated since 1988. This caused an embarrassing uproar when one turned out to be a Holocaust denier.
The French branch of this group, the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), hailed the Notre Dame protest and said: "The Paris cathedral is neither a synagogue nor a Masonic temple."
Rabbi Krygier received a warm round of applause from people attending his lecture, which he delivered over Notre Dame's public address system from a side room.
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
A Tragicomedy in a Few Acts and Many, Many Scenes
On Friday, 16 April 2010, Pope Benedict XVI 83rd birthday, the trial against Bishop Richard Williamson of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) took place at the Local Court Regensburg, Germany. All in all roughly forty journalists arrived as well as twenty-odd supporters of Williamson, who had to make do being seated in the back row of the absolutely packed court room. Amongst the supporters were Lady Michèle Renouf, Günter Deckert and Ursula Haverbeck, as well as many other well known faces. Sadly, there were no members, followers or supporters of the SSPX present that could be identified as such.
After the usual security checks, which for a change were handled in a rather civilised manner, the trial started at 09.00 a.m. sharp. The dramatis personæ were: Judge Karin Frahm, a fairly pretty blonde, twenty-nine years of age (!); Senior State Prosecutor Edgar Zach, a grey-haired gentleman probably in his late fifties; and Defence Counsel Matthias Loßmann, a bloke possibly in his mid-forties whose air and appearance were eerily reminiscent of a gravedigger. The minor parts were played by an all-female cast: a stenographer, an interpreter for English, and another for Swedish. Her Honour was seated in front of a strange yellowish backdrop, the kind familiar from modern Wagner productions. Seating and legroom were satisfactory, the acoustics excellent.
The proceedings began with an explanation by Herr Loßmann that Williamson would not be appearing since the SSPX had forbidden him from doing so. Next it was recorded that not one of the three Swedish witnesses had turned up, and that they had neither excused themselves nor given any reason for their absence. Herr Zach then began reading out the indictment. The contents were comprised of the usual stuff familiar to all: Williamson has denied and belittled the Holocaust, has done so aware of the fact that such heresy is a grievous violation of modern dogma, has furthermore committed this heinous act intentionally in a manner suited to disturb the public peace, and must therefore be dealt with accordingly. To his credit it must be said that Herr Zach was calm, collected, read the indictment without any aggressive or hateful undertone, and made a generally polite impression.
In the scene that followed, Herr Loßmann gave a fairly detailed account of what had transpired and how the various events had come about. The judge asked many a probing question, of which a few were simply superfluous. Some questions Herr Loßmann was unable to answer, but a great deal of these gaps were filled in later during an exciting scene in which Loßmann's witness, and lawyer for the SSPX, Maximilian Krah - a smarmy Nick Griffin effigy - took the stand. All in all Herr Loßmann left a rather dubious impression: his account was repetitive, unstructured, and his idiom sloppy and unbefitting of his role.
Here now a summary of a few lesser scenes, in no particular order: The court ordered a viewing of the infamous final five minutes of an originally hour long interview, the very five minutes that got Bishop Williamson into this mess. Then the matter of the absent witnesses was taken up again: two documents were read out, one by the legal department of the Swedish television station SVT1 which stated that they would not help the court due to lack of trust in the German legal system, and the other by the Swedish Ministry of Justice, who wrote that they would not be rendering the court mutual judicial assistance since freedom of speech is guaranteed in Sweden but not so in Germany. Furthermore, an article from a Swedish magazine, which had no real bearing on the case, was translated off the cuff fluently into high quality German - that was really cool. Plus, a segment of a German television programme showing the interviewer of Williamson (Name: Ali Fagan; Status: absent witness) make the comment that he would gladly stand as a witness in a German court of law, etc., etc. Another delightful scene starred the interpreter for English. Asked by Judge Frahm whether she could translate a letter extemporaneously or whether she needed time to prepare, this lady requested and was granted "five minutes", whereupon she ambled over to her Swedish speaking colleague, chatted with her for fifteen minutes, went back to her seat and translated the text in one go. It was surreal. - All these and the following scenes were interrupted by "five minute recesses" that were fifteen minutes long each. The trial lacked any real coherence, haphazardly jumping from one matter to the next, not even the many "five minute recesses" being synchronised to the action on stage. The only thing that kept everything together, were the endless, totally superfluous repetitions. It was weird.
A real highlight was the act in which Herr Krah, whom we first encountered two paragraphs ago, was called as a witness for the defence. As lawyer for the SSPX, Herr Krah had a great deal of knowledge as to what had transpired having witnessed the events unfurl himself. Of this he gave an informative account. In answer to the judge's questions, he drew a detailed picture of Williamson's standard of living, describing not only his home but also which tube to take in order to get there! He then told of Williamson's position within the fraternity, that the bishop wields little or no power in the SSPX, and that Richard Williamson is considered and considers himself "an eccentric Englishman". Herr Krah went on to speak of the Bishop's personality, characterising him as refined, polite, erudite, well-spoken, and an excellent teacher. He then informed the court that if the bishop questions the Holocaust then only because he is utterly convinced that his opinion represents the truth. The bishop, so he said, is absolutely bound to truthfulness and would never lie. As such Williamson is certainly convinced of what he had stated in that interview. The problem, according to Herr Krah, is that Williamson's ability to perceive the truth is seriously impaired ("ein nachhaltig gestörtes Erkenntnisvermö
Let us now turn to the final act of this tragicomedy. In the first scene Herr Zach gave his closing arguments. He stated that Bishop Williamson had known exactly what he was saying, knew full well that this is against the law in Germany, was counting on the fact that this interview would be made public, and that the bishop had by these means hoped to spread his twisted views on the Holocaust. Considering the fact that Williamson had done this intentionally, a fair sentence would be a fine of 12.000 Euros (i.e. 10.500 GBP or 16.000 USD).
Now it was time for the summation of the defence. Herr Loßmann proceeded to recapitulate the entire story as it had slowly unravelled before our eyes through a profusion of irrelevant repetitions, tedious tangents, and futile five-minute recesses. In short: On occasion of the ordination of a Swedish deacon who had converted from Protestantism not merely to Catholicism, but to one of its most traditional branches (which caused a stir in Sweden), a Swedish camera crew went to Zaitzkofen, near Regensburg, and asked the ordaining bishop, Richard Williamson, for an interview which he granted them. They spoke about religious matters for over fifty minutes, and then, once they had gained the bishop's trust, suddenly asked him about a comment he had made about the Holocaust twenty years ago in Canada. The interviewer, Ali Fagan, described this question as "a shot from the hip", and the evidence clearly showed that the interviewer had deliberately set a trap for the bishop. After Williamson had answered the question in depth, he pointed out to the interviewer that such comments are illegal in Germany and asked him not to publicise them. The Swedish television station STV1 then approached the leading German news magazine Der Spiegel with this story, which the Spiegel proceeded to publish three days before the interview was to be aired on Swedish television. As soon as the SSPX had gotten wind of this they had their lawyer, Herr Krah, get in touch with Williamson, the latter asking that the interview not be broadcast, something that was realistically not going to happen, and insisting that this interview not be made available over the internet. When Matthias Krah contacted Bishop Williamson, he was immediately aware of the gravity of the situation saying something along the lines of "typical journalists, you can't trust them." STV1 nonetheless made the final five minutes of the interview available on their website, from where it was downloaded onto YouTube and went viral. By itself this was all fairly inconsequential, for who had ever heard of the SSPX, or Bishop Richard Williamson for that matter? Unfortunately, however, this was exactly the moment the Vatican welcomed the SSPX back into the fold of the Church, and to the viciously anti-ecclesiastical
The court took a thirty minute recess, during which Her Honour decided on the verdict, the grounds for which were eight pages long. The court reconvened at 03.00 p.m. for the final scene, and Judge Frahm read out the verdict: guilty, fine: 10.000 Euros, i.e. 9.000 GBP or 13.500 USD. She gave the following reasons for the verdict: Williamson had denied the Holocaust, and though he may be convinced that it had not taken place, this is irrelevant since history has shown the Holocaust to have taken place, and furthermore even the highest courts have knowledge of this subject. Richard Williamson was also aware of the fact that his opinion would reach the public, but had nonetheless continued to express it. His crime was therefore a deliberate action. The fact that the interview had gone viral on YouTube was ignored since this was certainly not the bishop's fault and went against his express wish. However, §130 Penal Code stipulates that incitement of the People (Volksverhetzung) is only given if the crime is perpetrated publicly and is suited to disturb the public peace. But: nowhere does it say that the public must be a German public! By having the interview broadcast in Sweden, millions of Swedes could see it. These then could feasibly contact their friends and relatives in Germany and thus endanger the German public peace. Therefore, the bishop is to be found guilty and fined 10.000 Euros. - And that's the end of that.
Finally, it must be said that this trial was of no value to the struggle for freedom whatsoever, since the defence counsel defended neither his client nor truth but merely the SSPX. Then, the idea of having a twenty-nine year old female judge is, considering that judges ought to be male and at least forty years of age, a total joke, a joke topped only by the ridiculous (if talmudically exquisite) argumentation of the lady. At the end of the day, this trial showed us what happens when the System is left to itself, without anybody struggling against it. And as Michèle Renouf pointed out: "by reducing the fine they reduced the bishop."
A colleague sent this to me:
Hilarious phone-in with Nick Griffin on BBC R5 19 4 2010 9.05-9.30
The presenter Nicky Campbell with true BBC bias trailed the phone-in at
8.30 with "Next we have dancing dogs followed by the leader of the BNP,
The leader of what we must now call the British Multicultural Party
since their abject surrender without a fight to the forces of political
correctness, a man who is better named Nick Give-in than Griffin, gave
a truly bizarre performance. One moment he portrayed the BNP as being
hand ultra pc, welcoming black and Asian members and saying how "valid"
gay relationships were, the next he was saying he could not abide gay
men kissing in public and Islam was incompatible with British society
but Muslims were fine. (Yes, amazingly that is what he said).
Is Griffin the full ticket or ever so slightly mad?
Saturday, 10 April 2010
BNP official Mark Collett questioned over alleged
threat to kill Nick Griffin
Police arrest publicity director accused by BNP
leadership of plotting 'palace coup'
Adam Gabbatt and Matthew Taylor
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 4 April 2010 13.52 BST
Nick Griffin and Mark Collett after winning a
court case in 2006. Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images
The BNP has been thrown into turmoil weeks ahead
of the general election after a senior party
member was arrested for allegedly threatening to kill Nick Griffin.
Key party officials have been summoned to a
meeting tomorrow to discuss "urgent
organisational matters" after Griffin and
colleagues made statements to police resulting in
the BNP's publicity director, Mark Collett, being detained on Thursday.
Collett, 29, had been due to contest Labour MP
David Blunkett's Sheffield Brightside seat in the
election but has been stripped of his position
within the party which accused him of conspiring
to launch a "palace coup" against Griffin.
The BNP alerted members to the crisis on
Wednesday. In a message to party organisers, the
party said its internal security team had been
investigating "alleged financial irregularities"
relating to leaflets and publications, the
"leaking on to the internet of sensitive party
information" and "feeding lies to certain
anti-BNP blog sites" for several months.
"As a result of this investigation, a very
serious matter has been uncovered," the memo
said. "Earlier this week, the police were made
aware of very serious allegations potentially
affecting the personal safety of party chairman
Nick Griffin MEP and senior
management/fundraising consultant James Dowson.
Formal statements have now been made to the
police, including by Mr Griffin."
The message said it had been necessary to act
immediately "to ensure the safety of those at risk".
The timing of the row is a further blow to the
BNP as it looks to build on success in last
year's European elections by winning its first
seat in the House of Commons. Last month the
party's membership policy was ruled to be
discriminatory, despite the BNP having removed a
whites-only clause in February.
The BNP said it was unable to provide further
details of the alleged threat to Griffin - who is
standing against Labour's Margaret Hodge in
Barking and Dagenham - and Dowson for fear of
prejudicing legal proceedings.
The memo continued: "Since political, as opposed
to allegedly criminal, conspiracies are not
illegal, we are able to say that Mark Collett was
conspiring with a small clique of other party
officials to launch a 'palace coup' against our
twice democratically elected party leader, Nick
Griffin, and that in order to create the
artificial climate of disillusionment necessary
for this to stand any chance of success, lies and
unfounded rumours have been spread, and were
planned to be spread much further."
Officers asked Collett to attend a Humberside
police station last week. A spokeswoman said: "A
29-year-old man was arrested on Thursday on
suspicion of making threats to kill. He was
interviewed by detectives at Humberside police
and he has been released on bail pending further
inquiries. The investigation was initiated as a
result of a complaint by the member of the BNP."
BNP regional organisers and key officials have
been asked to attend an "urgent briefing meeting"
tomorrow to discuss the events of the last few
days and the party's future plans.
A spokesman for the anti-fascist organisation
Searchlight said rows over finance, particularly
Griffin's European expenses, had led to the
conflict. Griffin and Andrew Brons were elected
to European parliament in June 2009 but have been
criticised in recent weeks for failing to publish
details of their spending.
"Nick Griffin is constantly claiming he is the
leader of a moderate, non-violent organisation,"
the Searchlight spokesman said. "It is difficult
to see how he can square that assertion with his
statement to the police that his own head of
publicity has been plotting to kill him."
The Guardian attempted to contact senior figures
within the British National party, but none were available for comment.