Tories: Sold Out to 'Gay' Extremists, the Corrupt EU and Big Business

Oh... and mad nutter queers. 

Tories after the local elections: "we will listen."

William Hague today: "nothing changes."

So what's the truth?

Oh the Tories will say they are changing immigration - but they can't because of the EU, asylum and 'ooman rights.

They say they will get tough on prisoners: but they can't, same reasons.

They will promise some vague referendum on the EU: but they won't deliver - as before.

So there will be no change.

UKIP are picking up Old Tory and Old Labour votes. Yet the Tories could do a few simple things to appeal to both (kind of):

• Drop "gay" marriage. It's a waste of time and money. Only appeals to the New left, extreme socialists and 0.1% of the population that are homosexual (and even some of them don't want it).
• Promise a referendum next year, and say they'll vote against it. With the Eurozone in freefall this is hardly revolutionary.
• Stop employing public schoolboys and defending the rights of utility big business to charge what they want when people are borrowing money to buy food. That smacks of the "nasty party" image.

Stop gay marriage, EU referendum (next year) and helping the people in hard times -- not that difficult really, and I even think such things would appeal to the "middle ground" the Tories seem to love.

But none of this will happen as the Tories are sold out to a minority of extreme queers, the corrupt EU juggernaut , and the mega-rich who are screwing the rest of us.

So the Tories deserve to die the death of a thousand cuts: slow and painful. They won't be missed as they have conserved nothing except injustice, sexual immorality and greed.

If the cap fits... in Barnsley

How sad that a party (once thought to be ideological) that has betrayed its supporters, lied to try and achieve electoral success and been found to be willing to jettison core beliefs at the first opportunity (some say on the back of financial and parliamentary placement), slumped so badly in the Barnsley by-election.

Surely a lesson for us all.

Betray your grass roots for power, cash or whatever: and they won't forgive you.

UKIP Beat the BNP in Oldham East By-Election

UKIP have beaten the BNP in yesterday's Oldham East by-election.

Right: Even a Labour scandal involving "Muslim death threats" and a recent spate of Asian 'grooming' gangs raping primarily White girls couldn't raise the BNP vote.

A few issues arise:

1. This used to be BNP heartland. Didn't the BNP leader himself stand here before? He certainly talked of fighting this by-election, but withdrew.

2. Some say the UKIP aren't nationalist. True. But by the same criteria the BNP aren't nationalist. Both are pro-black, allow queer members etc. Both are anti-EU and talk of 'getting tough' on immigration. The BNP have moved onto UKIP territory not vice-versa.

3. Ipso facto, NG's boring drone of being "the only show in town" and the historically true observation that UKIP never did well outside the Euros looks like it could be dead in the water.

Left: Full colour leaflets, years of campaigning, a household name, and an endorsement from local MEP Nick Griffin - none of this helped the BNP vote. They seem to have run out of steam.

Lazarus Griffin will live to fight another day, the mail-outs and fund-raisers will continue (they have to in this ponzi scheme). But is this another nail in the coffin for the BNP?

Debbie Abrahams Lab 14,718
Elwyn Watkins LD 11,160
Kashif Ali Con 4,481
Paul Nuttall UKIP 2,029
Derek Adams BNP 1,560
Peter Allen Green 530
The Flying Brick Loony 145
Stephen Morris Eng Dem 144
Loz Kaye Pirate 96
David Bishop Bus-Pass Elvis 67
TURNOUT 48pc

The Election: BNP Failures and Civil War?

A number of overseas comrades have emailed and phoned to ask how the BNP did in Thursday's elections, so for their good and anyone else who doesn't have access to the relevant media, here's a round-up:

The BNP did not get any MPs.

The constituency which they poured resources into (Barking) lost percentage of votes from last year. Some are blaming the fact that Nick Griffin parachuted himself into the area, ostracising the local factor and galvanising the Labour campaign, led by Margaret "I see no Labour paedophile ring" Hodge.

Even worse all 12 of the BNP councillors in Barking were wiped out, leaving them with no local councillors (from being the official opposition).

In the constituency next door, local man Michael Barnbrook increased the BNP percentage! Many say he should have been allowed to stand in Barking.

The day before the election the BNP website was taken down by its webmaster and an anti-Nick Griffin message put up. Full details are on the North West Nationalist and Griffin Watch blogs. Just before the election the BNP leadership allegedly tried to "steal" the webmasters work from the site in an effort to 'oust' him.

This was also tied into a childish attempt to blame the webmaster for a copyright infringement with Unilever/Marmite in the BNP's online election broadcast. The webmaster put out a statement about all this, which can be read online at the blogs mentioned.

As of today the site is still 'down,' albeit the webmaster allowed the BNP to replace it with a bog standard page "for the good of the party."

So aside from failing in both the local and national elections, it seems that the BNP is internally in uproar -- with the BNP boss already sending out missives against would-be internal dissent -- and the timing of this, centred around the website fracas (which seems to be based on money, again!), seems to be one of the BNP leadership's own making.

In the shadow of this the "unreconstructed" National Front won some good votes across the country, often of the volume achieved in similar seats by UKIP and the BNP.

We live in interesting times.

Bigotgate, Hypocrite Gordon Brown - Part 94

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!

Gordon Brown Tells RCN of Precious Nature of Life

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.

Hypocrite.

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.

Uproar at Offensive Use of Image in BNP's Broadcast

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."

Many Twitter Users are in Israel and America: Not Iran

News reaches our ears that much of the "Twitter" content -- so beloved of the BBC! -- coming from protesters and the opposition in Iran is actually coming from America and Israel.

No wonder the Yankee Zionist regime asked Twitter not to close down for work/upgrades.

Despite pre-election polls showing the "opposition" would lose the election, the BBC still insists on belittling the majority who support the Iranian government.

It's pet reporter and MI6 stooge, John Simpson, insists on calling mass demonstrations in favour of the government as "bussed in" to Central Tehran. No mention of who's backing the opposition (we've had Kissinger and a CFR nodding dog on Newnight).

Gordon Brown asks that Iran should show the election was fair.

Are our elections fair? Masonic mass media primes people on a clutch of Masonic parties.

When the dust settles no doubt we will hear who has been pulling the strings behind the people desperate for power in Iran, to the extent they will ignore an election result.

Then we might see that it wasn't just "Twitter" that had links to Israel and America.

How We Can Teach Iran a Lesson or Two on Elections

What a rum state of affairs in Iran!

What are we, the oh-so advanced "democrats" in the West to make of all this?

That Iranians are free to vote? Yet the Zionists will say they can only vote for Islamicists under a controlled media; unlike us who can only vote for Zionists and Masons... under a controlled media.

That Iranians are free to demonstrate? Yet the Zionists will say they can only do so under the eye of a police machinery which has already killed one person; unlike us who live in a police state, increasingly cannot demonstrate, and - as with the G20 protests - even innocent bystanders are killed!

Of course all this is in the background of an Iran that wishes to have nuclear power... unlike us, who seek to have... erm... nuclear power.

But then Iran is in the pockets of anti-Israeli mad man, unlike us... who are... erm... in the pockets of pro-Israeli mad men.

of course, lest we forget, the illegal UN-resolution bustin' state with the only illegally held nukes in the Mid East (a state which refuses to sign non-proliferation treaties or allow in UN inspectors) already threatens to bomb peaceful power installations...

Think.

For yourself.

Meanwhile those who might rant and rave, especially the Zionists, of an "unfair election" we shouldn't have such short memories as to overlook the postal elections of our own recent history which a judge said would shame a Third World banana republic.

Nor indeed of the hanging and swinging chads that ushered in a Zionist marionette into the White House and which also resulted in rioting on the streets of America (to be followed by an election in which one Masonic Skull & Bones society member (aka "Bonesman") stood against a fellow Bonesman.

Ah!

Aren't we so high and mighty, we "democrats?"

Minor Party County Council Election Results 2009

As of this moment it seems:

BNP: Three County Council seats (with claim of up to 5 Euro seats).
English Democrats: Won Vote for Mayor of Doncaster. No news on County Council seats.
Greens: 12 County Council seats (now on 123 seats).
UKIP: Eight County Council seats (plus claim for Euro Election triumph and beat BNP/Greens at head-to-head votes)
Mebyon Kernow: No update on their site, but they seem to have won 3 seats.

Any news on Socialist or similar parties' candidates welcome in feedback section.


Here's the blurb from the "minor parties sites."



BNP:

The British National Party stands to take at least one European parliamentary seat and has a chance of taking another three, according to a detailed analysis of the local election results across the country.

The BNP’s statistical analysis department has taken all of the available local election results from each region, and combined them to generate an average BNP vote across each region. These figures then provide a basis upon which European parliamentary results can be estimated. (European parliamentary seats are apportioned according to a complicated highest averages system known as the d’Hondt method, which is dependent on the total number of votes a party receives and the number of seats already allocated to that party in the election.)

The analysis of the local election results on Thursday are subject to a number of important caveats as far as the BNP is concerned.

- Firstly, in many regions, elections took place in local authorities which were not traditional BNP territory. For example, the BNP fought seats in the South East which had never been contested before, while in the West Midlands, there were no elections in BNP strongholds such as Stoke. For this reason, the local authority election results will be skewed, but they are the only figures currently available upon which any estimates can be made.

- Secondly, party political choice at local level may not be representative of party choice at national level. There is a strong train of thought which suggests that turnout for the BNP at Euro level is lower than at local level. Conversely, there is an equally strong argument that people who have voted BNP at local level are likely to already feel strongly enough about politics to carry this allegiance through to Euro level. On the current figures, it is impossible to tell which of the two scenarios will play out. Either of them, in any event, do not affect the fact that the BNP has an excellent chance of taking at least one seat in the North West.

- Thirdly, the final Euro tally will be affected by the size of the turnout for the UKIP party. Talked up by the media, it is highly possible that large numbers of people who have voted Tory at local level would have given their Euro vote to UKIP. This will see a substantial UKIP vote, which may affect the ability of the BNP to take seats under the d’Hondt system, even if its vote increases as per the figures below.

With these important caveats in mind, here follows the average local election result for the BNP. The possibility of a win or loss is calculated upon the minimum percentages required for the BNP to place on that region’s list of elected MEPs.

- South West region: Average BNP vote: 6.8 percent. Result: No Euro BNP seat.

- South East region: Average BNP vote: 7.4 percent. Result: BNP vote just below the threshold, therefore no Euro BNP seat. (This result can be affected by the fact that the BNP only fought local elections in many areas which had either never seen a BNP candidate before, or which had no record of previous large BNP votes.)

- London region: Only one local election contested by BNP, vote was 17.5 percent. Impossible to make prediction, therefore must presume no Euro BNP seat.

- East of England (Eastern) region: Average BNP vote: 9.8 percent. Result: BNP vote just below the threshold, therefore no Euro BNP seat.

- East Midlands region: Average BNP vote: 14.3 percent. Result: One possible Euro BNP seat.

- West Midlands region: Average BNP vote: 12.6 percent. Result: One possible Euro BNP seat. (This result could be boosted by the fact that the best BNP-supporting areas in the West Midlands - Stoke, Sandwell, Dudley and others - did not have local elections on Thursday, meaning that large numbers of BNP voters are not reflected in this average figure.)

- Yorkshire & Humberside region: Average BNP vote: 10.3 percent. Result: One possible Euro BNP seat. (This result could be boosted by the fact that the best BNP-supporting areas in Yorkshire - Leeds and others - did not have local elections on Thursday, meaning that large numbers of BNP votes are not reflected in this average figure.)

- North East region: Only two mayoral elections held, average BNP percentage in those two contests was 6 percent. Impossible to calculate on those figures, therefore no Euro BNP seat.

- North West region: Average BNP vote: 13.1 percent. Result: One BNP Euro seat, and possibly two.

It therefore seems likely that that BNP will take at least one European parliamentary seat in the elections. If the local results hold true on the Euro level, it could be more.

In either event, the BNP has now established itself as a national presence, and has become firmly embedded throughout the country as a household name. Membership has increased dramatically during the campaign, and the party is now better placed than ever before to carry on the struggle for the survival of our nation.

English Democrats:

3:15 TODAY: Doncaster elect the country's first English Democrats mayor.

Labour and Tory candidates eliminated after first round.

Davies wins after second round count.
Peter Davies 25,344 - Mick Maye 24,990

The Doncaster free press reported that:

As a true Englishman, Davies celebrated his victory with a pint of foaming nut-brown ale....

Party chair Robin Tilbrook congratulated Peter on his spectacular triumph.

"Peter has done fantastically well, he's fought a great campaign on the issues that really matter.

This is not only a great result for the people of Doncaster - it's a great result for the people of England, too! Peter is now truly the Boris Johnson of the north."

Greens:

In yesterday's county elections the Green Party continued to make steady progress.

The party made its breakthrough onto four county councils - Cambridgeshire (1 seat), Devon (1), Gloucestershire (1) and Suffolk (2).

In Norfolk the Greens held 2 seats and gained 5.

In Lancashire the party successfully defended 1 seat and gained a second. Lancaster Greens also held a city council seat in a by-election, and continue to hold 12 seats on the city council.

Unfortunately the Greens had effectively lost 4 seats before the campaign began, due to council reorganisation and boundary changes (in Eastern and North East regions). The only unexpected loss was 3 out of the 5 Green Party seats on Oxfordshire County Council.

Greens gain most at Labour and LibDem expense

The Green Party ended the campaign with 123 councillors on 42 councils, up from 119 on 41.

Of the Green Party's gains, 7 were from Labour, 2 from the LibDems and 1 from the Conservatives. This too continues a familiar pattern.

The party's steady progress in the 2009 elections was reflected in recruitment, with an 8.5% growth in membership during the six weeks of the campaign.

Greens look forward to the general election

The single most encouraging result was in Norfolk, where the Greens won more votes than any other party not only in the Norwich South parliamentary constituency, but also throughout the Norwich City Council area. This bodes well for the target constituency of Norwich South, which will be contested by Adrian Ramsay, the Green Party's deputy leader and currently leader of the opposition on Norwich City Council.

And in Lancashire, in the Lancaster and Fleetwood target constituency the Greens outpolled everyone except the Conservatives.

UKIP:

UKIP have triumphed in the local elections taking a total of EIGHT seats on Staffordshire, Nottinghamshire, Norfolk and Suffolk county councils and Newcastle-Under-Lyme district council.

The Party has picked up four council seats on Staffordshire County Council as Labour were decimated, losing 29 of their 32 councillors.

The UKIP winners were Derrick Huckfield (Bradwell & Porhill), David Nixon (Cross Heath & Silverdale), Geoff Locke (Kidsgrove & Talke) and Steve Povey (Leek South).

In Nottinghamshire, Labour again got a pasting losing 22 of their 35 seats and UKIP were among the beneficiaries as Rev Tom Irvine won Hucknall. And in Norfolk, Rex Parkinson-Hare took the Yarmouth Nelson and Southdown ward with 779 votes, beating Labour on 702 and the Conservatives on 551. Again, Labour was crushed, losing 19 of their 22 seats on the council.

On Suffolk County Council, UKIP's Bill Mountford will take up his seat on behalf of the residents of Lowewstoft South.

Meanwhile, in the by-election for Newcastle-Under-Lyne, UKIP's David Woolley is the new representative for Wolstanton.

A handful of results from the 594 seats contested by UKIP are still to come in but 57 of the party's candidates, so far, won more than 25% of their seat's total vote. Overall, UKIP took a total of around 350,000 votes at the council elections.

In the 480 seats where both UKIP and Labour contested elections, UKIP took more than 80,000 votes than Labour. And the party also beat the BNP and the Green Party in the majority of seats where they were head-to-head.

The average UKIP vote share in seats where a party candidate stood was almost 16%.

Link:

BBC Web Update (seems a bit wrong on some counts???)

UKIP Poll 17%! Labour Almost in 3rd Place in Euro Elections

UKIP JOINT 2ND IN LATEST EURO POLL

UKIP are in second place, on 17% for the Euro elections, according to a Mail on Sunday poll today.


If more people vote for UKIP in the Euro elections Gordon Brown's party could be pushed into THIRD place!!!

OK, UKIP are a right-wing kosher party - but so are all the other parties outside of the pro-EU Greens/Socialists and some Lib Dems.

Pushing UKIP into second place (and Labour into third) may give us all the opportunity to:

1. Get shot of Brown. This will help put Westminster into even more turmoil and who knows what could result at every level of politics, benefiting "small" parties and local community activists.
2. Agitate for withdrawal from the EU, on a serious "Irish" style footing (not mere populist gesturing).
3. Further argue that people are losing faith with party politics, allowing more of us to agitate for a non-party system, recallable delegates with a fixed wage, guilds and similar anti-party bodies.

If the 5% (or 4% according to a Sun poll) of people voting BNP (at which level they won't get an MEP but merely split the anti-EU vote) switch to UKIP they could even be breathing down the necks of the Tories!

Many will moan that we say vote for a Kosher Right-Wing Multi-Culti corrupt party like UKIP, but there is so little difference between them and the BNP that this is purely a case of voting for who will do the most damage to the Westminster Regime as it stands, and its subservient role to the endemically corrupt Brussels regime.

After all, that outcome could be more seismatic and system-changing than putting in a possible couple of BNP MEPs who would, in all honesty, change nothing about Westminster or the way in which this country is run.

Are we for trying to bring about real change or getting a few people on a gravy train?

Moreover since UKIP employed the EU whistleblower Marta Andreasen to be its national treasurer (and EU candidate), it's clear that UKIP means to clean up its books and send a shockwave into Brussels by sending back the woman the EU Commission feared more than any other.

That's certainly more reassuring than the BNP employing Simon Darby as their national treasurer (following a revolving door scenario of treasurers) given the bizarre allegations that surround his time in the National Democrats and the BNP!

Right: EU whistleblower Marta Andreasen, UKIP EU candidate - set to take the fight back to the corrupt EU Commission.

As such it is now debatable that nationalists should vote tactically (whilst holding their noses in most cases):

• UKIP in the Euros.
• NF/BNP and similar in the locals.

Links:
UKIP on 17%
UKIP Employs EU Whistleblower
UKIP on 15% a few days ago

When Can Councillors Be Censured? A Tale of Two Smiths

Let me show you how democracy works, dear reader.

Let us look at two similar situations and how "the system" deals with them.

The first is the Black Country's Nationalist independent councillor Simon Smith.

He stated that electoral swindling in the UK was a predominantly Asian affair. Er... which it is. The result: he was suspended for 3 months by the authorities.

So what do we see in the latest issue of Private Eye (#1217)?

A Labour Party councillor and official in Barking & Dagenham (Liam Smith, deputy leader, for 'tis he) called the mother of a Tory councillor a "fat f###ing dyke."

So how was this treated by the authorities? The Crown Prosecution Service said "...the word 'dyke' was not used in a homophobic way" and the council's standards committee also made excuses for Smith, presumably then it is not offensive or hateful to call someone "f###ing fat".

By the same standards it would, for the CPS, be OK presumably to call an African a "f###ing paki" or an Asian a "f###ing nigger" on the grounds that neither would belong to the epithet snarled at them. Of course not - but this exposes the double standards we're dealing with.

This is the same council, of course, that saw a Labour member call the BNP's councillor Richard Barnbrook a "poof."

Right: Like so many quangos and public bodies, from the CPS to the National Lottery, the "Council Watchdog" the SB takes a very bi-partisan approach to dealing with those loyal to the system, compared to those who rock the boat.

So it seems that stating the obvious (haven't all the Tory and Labour election cons with postal voting etc. been Asian?) can get you suspended for three months, but hurling abuse at people (who we have to assume aren't homosexual) sees you given the all clear.

Erm... as long as you are a system politician of course!

How reassuring to people like Stephen Green (of Christian Voice) who was arrested for handing out (sober and serious) Christian leaflets at a homosexual rally to hear that those who hurl abuse at others don't get arrested just because... well, just because those offended aren't, um, pooftahs.

So what are we to deduce?

• That stating the truth is no defence in council chambers if it offends the multi-culti commissars whereas being abusive and offensive is fine.
• That handing out Biblical leaflets is an arrestable offence whereas calling someone a "fat f###ing dyke" isn't.

Welcome to Politically Correct Britain: where Labour Party officials can say what they want, but the rest of us face censure and arrest for "offending" queers and immigrants.

Oh... unless they offend a certain people, which Ken Livingstone knows all about!

That's democracy folks!


Link:
Simon Smith on his 3 month ban

Labour Battered in Glasgow East By-Election by SNP

Gordon Brown says he's on the side of hard-working families, after getting [another] bloody nose, this time at the hands of the socialist Scottish National Party in East Glasgow.

Right: The SNP logo. Labour is being hit from all sides as the (real) establishment jettisons Blair's 'third way' for whatever will replace it.

If Gordon is indeed the saviour of the working class, why the hell doesn't he reduce or even just cap the tax on petrol and diesel to allow people to travel to and for work without getting crucified by the exchequer?

Capping the tax isn't revolutionary - he'd still get more in tax revenue than he did this time last year.

The problem is that Gordon and the politicians don't want to set a precedent.

They so love putting up taxes (remember when VAT was 15%?) and rarely lower them.

They love filling their own coffers with billions so when they waste the occasional million here and there it doesn't really matter. After all, it's only a small percentage and it's someone else's money anyway.

I've told Gordon before how he can wipe out taxes and become a real saviour of the people, but he's in the pockets of the bankers like all the Masonic politicians.

if Gordon is on the side of the people then i'll wear a hat made of mash potato for a month!


Link:
Disaster in Glasgow for Labour

Harrington Backs Coloured Candidate that Beats the BNP

Why should Harrington's "NLP" back a coloured black independent candidate in Dagenham - who then goes on to beat the BNP candidate?

Right: This gent isn't the candidate in question, but is he picking the substance that the NLP took in order to back a non-European in a Dagenham by-election?

The article below is written, we believe, by an ex-BNP official who is seeking to expose the creeping liberalisation of the BNP as well as the out-and-out cronyism of the "most Zionist" party.

FC readers will remember that the BNP leader backed the leader of Third Way/NLP, one Patrick Harrington, over his own BNP officials and activists in the Solidarity debacle.

It's interesting to know that this backing is paid back in kind by supporting a non-White candidate standing against the BNP!

Has the BNP leadership annoyed another (ex) ally?

With friends like these...


Link:
Black independent candidate gets Harrington's backing

Colin Auty BNP Challenger Interviewed

BNP Leadership Challenge Blog

The official Blog of the BNP Leadership Challenger.

Link:

BNP Councilor's Election Challenge Blog

BNP Leadership Election Challenge Hopeful

Interesting news of another challenge to the BNP leadership, which means not all are convinced by the current BNP direction.

Despite more watering down, officially becoming multi-cultural and transmogrifying into the "most Zionist" party of them all, the BNP has still fallen from its 2004 high.

Will Olmert... sorry, I mean Griffin survive - probably. Will the election be very interesting - most certainly!


Links:
BNP Councillor Announces Leadership Challenge
BNP Councillors Local Authority Page

I Can Save Gordon Brown & New Labour!

Warning

If you're standing, take a seat.

If you're eating or drinking, put down your vitals.

If you are of a temperament prone to anger, leave the room.

If you have a weak constitution have the nurse standing ready.

I think I can save Gordon Brown. I think I can keep New Labour in office.

Yes! It's true. They haven't phoned me yet... but let me explain how I can do this and I'm sure Ed Balls, his wife Ms Yvette Cooper or one of the Milliband brothers will be on the phone by sunset.

I've told my nan to keep off the phone just in case they're trying to get through later. And I've set up the motion alarm system around the phone to keep all the sprogs away from it (not for any special reason that, I do it anyway to keep the bills low... 'a penny saved' etc.)

So after this preamble I'd better explain my plan and my reasoning.

On so many news and political programmes since Thursday night Gordon Brown has said he's going to start listening. What was he doing up until now? Ruling via arrogance?

Equally as aired via the Electronic Talmud was one Tessa Jowell. I guess as Minister for London she had to answer the media queries over Boris Johnston's election for Mayor (did every candidate have to have an ability to crush all notions of fidelity and sexual self-control?).

She mirrored the comments of her boss and said the people were "hurting."

10 years of New Labour rule. 10 years of (variant) Socialism. 10 years of tax and spend. 10 years of New Deal, Minimum Wage, Tax Credits... and yet still we are hurting!

Why?

Well despite forking out oodles of cash on initiatives to help the poor, the cost of living has risen so much these could even be said to be negated in the last year or so. With mortgages fast rising too, people are starting to feel let down.

Part of this equation is the first part of New Labours Mantra "Tax and Spend."

It's all very well spending (with cronies and big business creaming off their own profits naturally!) but it's the tax part that hurts.

If only there were some way to NOT Tax and STILL Spend.

It's surely not possible! Harriet Harman earlier today said that people wanted the money being spent on schools, the NHS, Tax Credits (etc.) and so they had to realise that if these outgoings were to be continued (for the betterment of "all") then the people would have to continue paying taxes.

That's all very well, but tell that to any family whose wage-income has fallen in real terms, whose mortgage has risen, whose fuel and heating bills have risen, whose food bills have risen, whose Council Tax has risen, who has more chance of being fined for traffic violations, and who still (after umpteen years) face nuisance "low level" criminality - that they should be paying so many forms of taxation (hidden and unhidden).

To give just one example, Americans would find it hard to believe that we poor sods in the Colonial Power pay over £1.20 for a litre of diesel.

That's just 1 litre! To get the price of 1 gallon use the rough figure of four and a half litres (that's not exact, just me using comprehensive school maths). That gives us a rough figure of £5.40 for a gallon of diesel.

Answer me this. If Americans were paying $10.80 for a gallon of diesel fuel for their cars do you think they would accept that? Or would they strike, riot, or carry out civil disobedience?

Yes, our regular readers from California to Maine will be gobsmacked. Add to that the fact that circa 60% of what we pay goes straight to HM Treasury (that's the government's coffers) by way of VAT and fuel taxes. Yet still the government plans (they may well drop it after their total drubbing on Thursday) to add another 2p in tax to fuel in October.

What a bunch of wimps we all are to sit and take this BS from people who went to expensive private schools, who fiddle their expenses, who employ their family and friends, and who leave office to sinecures in oil, banking, arms and other multinationals and big businesses.

What do we do in protest? Vote for another bunch of treacherous, spoilt, Masonic-Zionist hirelings in the hope that anything will change. Fat Chance!

But let me return to my idea of how I can save Gordon Brown's current career (before he - officially - moves onto the books of Rothschilds or Goldman Sachs).

It's quite simple really, and certainly anyone who claims to understand economics and politics should follow my thesis quite easily.

Gordon: STOP borrowing money from the banks. STOP paying back the billions in loan interest every year. START issuing the government's own money (instead of borrowing or taxing it into your coffers) and soon you will have no national debt.

No national debt means more money to spend from much reduced taxes. The NHS and schools will benefit. The tax-payer will hail you as their saviour.

Of course you, Gordon, will have to break your subservience to the banks - but what have they ever done for you? They created the "credit crunch" via their usurious greed. They put their own greed and self-interest before that of the nation of the government as the recent fiasco has proved.

Who do you serve Gordon (the "Socialist"): the people or the banks?

Who do you put first Gordon? The nation or a relative handful of self-serving, greedy, Masonic money-grubbers in the City of London who have fed off a debt bubble that is bursting right now?

Just imagine Gordon! You can pump money into schemes to benefit the Common Good. You can keep funding the NHS and schools. You can pay for more bobbies on the beat. You can help local councils get out of debt to the banks and so lower their taxes too.

You will be hailed as the hero of the people for decades if not all of history!

A latter day Robin Hood beating the largest robbers of all time to help the poor.

Of course the vested interests will attack you because they will lose multi-billions. The newspapers, the banks, the media-pundits hired by big business... all these will bay for your blood.

But again I ask: who do you serve Gordon - the people, or financiers? Voters or media moguls?

You could even use some of the money raised to start national construction schemes to pay-off some of the businesses and keep them happy... it wouldn't really matter in the big scheme of things.

If you think it can't be done, read The Guernsey Experiment.

The government of Guernsey faced the problem of a population over-taxed, a population fast emigrating, crumbling infrastructure, huge debts to the banks. Sound familiar?

So their solution was not to increase taxes. Their solution wasn't to borrow more money and so increase their debts.

Their solution was to issue their own currency, free of debt, and use it to pay for public works, use the income to reduce taxes, and even use the money to pay off their debts (though I would argue that there was no more moral duty to do so than to pay every last installment to a door-stepping loan shark!)

If the government of Guernsey could do it - can't the government of Westminster?

When we have only recently repaid the Napoleonic Wars debts and only just repaid the debts incurred to the American government alone from WW2, we have to ask why our successive governments feel the need to be eternally in debt to a handful of super-rich (no, obscenely rich is more apt) financial institutions?

Again, I have to ask who Gordon serves? Or whom does he wish to serve? The people? Or the banks?

I can ask the same question of all the other parties too... yet if none of them are willing to grasp the nettle and face up to the banking elite -- then none of them can ever claim to have the best interests of our people at heart.

Anything else is empty gesturing.

Anything else will not prevent another "credit crunch" or financial crisis.

Anything else will not stop the incessant rise in taxes.

Anything else will eventually see public expenditure curtailed.

Anything else will be a total and utter betrayal of the working people of these islands.

So, Gordon - or one of your minions - feel free to give me a bell today. I shall be standing by to rescue your government and secure the next general election for you as the voters and (ex!?) tax-payers hail you as their saviour.

When you cut the taxes from fuel duty the haulage industry alone will pay for your retirement villa (I hear the Dalmatian Coast in Croatia is particularly charming).

So come on Gordon!

Just think... you will outshine Tony Blair! He had rewards from the warmongers, the Neo Cons, the bankers, the industrialists. You will get the rewards of a relieved people!

You will even light the beacon of hope for other governments across Europe and the world to free their people from taxation and usury-debt insecurity.

Gordon! Your destiny, your legacy and your party's future is in your hands.

I have a good supply of pork pies and a couple of cold beers lined-up, so I won't be going far for the rest of the day. I'll be in ear shot of the phone.

The rest is down to you...


Link:
Buy The Guernsey Experiment by O & J Grubiak

Vote Pink?

How wonderfully "inclusive" the London mayoral election is.

The Lib Dem candidate is a homosexual.
The Labour candidate is a pro-homosexual red.
When asked if he had "sex with a man" the Tory candidate answered "not yet."

Seems all tremble with fear in the face of the Pink Mafia and the potential label of "hater."

And goodness knows where the other candidates stand... or what they are!

"Gay" Slur Cost Election

In the article below, Richard Barnbrook - the BNP organiser in Barking & Dagenham - admits that a "media slur" re. an 'art film' he once made cost him an election last year.

This being the case - why does the BNP allow known homosexuals to stand?

It makes no sense, and a growing number of people on Stormfront (the only forum these days where one can gauge any kind of feedback from the BNP grass roots) are clear that liberalisation and "modernism" on race, homosexuality, Israel etc. cost the BNP, just as a more liberal approach cost Le Pen - whereas when he took the correct line (Christian, anti-Israel, Pro-Life, anti-immigration etc.) he made it through to the final round of the presidential elections!

Lessons need to be learnt.

If people see a patriot party is just an 'anti-Muslim' pressure group, why vote for it and not any other party that makes noises about 'Islamic Extremism'?

People need to hear that nationalists are against immigration, are for the family, are against the banks, are against homosexuality etc. etc. and as a fact - not as empty sloganeering.

They get enough of that from Blair & Co.

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/article/...