By Joe Priestley–I don’t know where or when the term ‘Liblabcon’ came into being. Its American equivalent ‘Republicrat’ was first used about 25 years ago on Usenet in American politics newsgroups, but I found no such information about the origins of ‘Liblabcon’.
It doesn’t appear in the dictionaries on my desk or in the major on-line dictionaries, although it’s included in the online Urban Dictionary, as is Republicrat which also has an entry in Wikipedia; “…a pejorative term used by those who allege the policies of the two American parties are in practice indistinguishable.” The entry continues, “An equivalent term used in the United Kingdom is LibLabCon (with a link to a Nick Griffin article), a pejorative portmanteau referring to the three main political parties.”
The word articulates the growing perception that Britain’s three establishment political parties are fundamentally indistinguishable. It’s an idea that strikes at the heart of the status quo. The ‘difference’ is their justification; if they’re all the same what exactly is the point of Libs, Labs, and Cons?
The mass media and the mainstream political parties have a symbiotic relationship that runs on the energy produced by what they call ‘the political debate’. The politicians provide the entertainment, the media talks about it, and the liberal establishment lives happily ever after. It’s part of the process of maintaining the status quo, or rather the status of those currently running the show; the effort always is to restrict political thinking to the establishment-approved choice. The media makes a big fuss about the trivia that differentiates Lib, Lab, and Con and presents it as confirmation of choice. At the same time it avoids the fundamentals they share and thus removes them from the political process; the idea is to have us not seeing the wood for the trees.
Liblabcon is a relatively new word. My guess is it’s about ten years younger than its American cousin (if readers know more, please share), and given that a new word grows out of the need to communicate something new, the understanding it expresses must also be relatively new. Liblabcon says that the Lib, Lab, Con thing has lost its momentum, that the establishment-approved choice is no choice, and that the establishment parties have become a political class which now acts primarily in its own best interest. Liblabcon is a label for the political status quo assigned from outside the status quo, and I suppose the question is why now and not sooner? The Labour Party is over 100 years old, the Liberal and Conservative parties are going on 200 years old, yet it’s only recently that the parties have been seen as fundamentally indistinguishable. In its early days the Labour party was outside the status quo which was dominated by Liberals and Conservatives yet there doesn’t appear then to have been a need for a term like Libcon (or something expressing similar sentiments), otherwise presumably one would have evolved.
The melding of Lib, Lab, and Con began with the post WWII liberal consensus and continued to the point where now they share an almost identical world view and differ only on the minutiae. The term Liblabcon is recognition of this and a means of communicating it. Britain as it is today is a result of the Lib, Lab, and Con belief in the superiority of diversity over homogeneity and in the ‘immense benefits’ of mass third world immigration; Britain is as it is today because of the sameness of the establishment parties not because of their difference.
The survival of the ‘big three’ is a function of their ability to maintain an impression of separateness. This is what they spend much of their time doing, telling us how different they are, and the main stream media supports them in this by presenting them as feasible political choices. They don’t like to talk about what they have in common both because it threatens their viability as alternatives and because it brings to the fore their shared ambition for Britain, which they prefer to keep to themselves.
Yet it seems now that their cover is blown and everything they do to convince us of their difference convinces us of their similarity, exquisitely illustrated by David Cameron’s appeal for ‘new people to stand for the Conservatives - even if they’re not Conservatives’.
Lib, Lab, and Con have reached a conclusion. And after achieving their twin goals of the abdication of British sovereignty to a ‘higher authority’ and the transformation of Britain into a multiracial multicultural society, there’s nothing now left for them to do but look after their own interests. It’s them against the rest of us.
Even the main stream media has been forced to recognise it, which just shows how obvious it must be! Of course they haven’t yet (to my knowledge) resorted to the Liblabcon word, maybe they never will, certainly not while they’re still an arm of the establishment. Liblabcon has a sort of finality to it from which there can be no going back, and the ‘big three’ are desperately hoping the ‘difference’ can be revived. You can see it in their search to redefine themselves so as to maintain their relevance, particularly in the wake of the expenses crisis - this is what their plans to ‘modernise’ the constitution are all about.
But it’s too late for that. Everything is falling in around their heads and the Libs, Labs, and Cons are responding as Liblabcons and everyone can see it. The Westminster expenses crisis hasn’t helped. As if it wasn’t bad enough having their thieving exposed, the investigation and subsequent brouhaha has confirmed them as an arrogant political class that sees itself as above the law; Liblabcon not Lib, Lab, Con.
They fiddled across party political lines; they were all at it. And when they were caught with their fingers in the till Lib, Lab, and Con alike had the damned nerve to try to talk their way out of it. Even the course of their pathetic excuses followed the same path. First came the denial, with the evidence still on their snouts, and when that didn’t work they tried to shift the blame; ‘It wasn’t us it was the rules what done it, honest guv.’ The rules weren’t tight enough, they invited abuse. And the Liblabcon swine accepted the invitation and stuffed their faces. Burp.
One expects such logic from a burglar; that his victim was at fault for leaving the back door open, but coming from leading Lib, Lab, and Con politicians by way of mitigation for their corruption… It’s hardly contrition is it? More like panic, across the board. Now they’ve calmed down they’re all talking in ‘measured tones’ about the need for ‘more rigorous rules’ and for them to be ‘administered independently’. Tweedledee, Tweedledum; Tweedledeedum.
The rules issue is a red herring. They were devised by Liblabcons so that Liblabcons could abuse them; the problem isn’t the rules it’s the rule makers - honourable gentlemen need few rules. The rules were a result of self important politicians’ feelings of entitlement. They believed that there was insufficient recognition of the sacrifices they make and the hard graft they put in on behalf of their ungrateful constituents. But they feared the electorate’s response were they to have given themselves a pay rise so instead they came up with an elaborate set of rules that allowed for the reimbursement of their living expenses out of the public purse and at a stroke they more than doubled their take-home pay yet without drawing it to the attention of the ‘dumb electorate’.
I suppose it just goes to show how arrogant contemptuous and indeed stupid establishment politicians are that they didn’t stop to think what would happen were the cat to get out of the bag: “When any great design thou dost intend, Think on the means, the manner, and the end.” Obviously Lib, Lab, and Con alike were too focused on the opportunities that came with the scam to think about what could possibly go wrong. Wishful thinking I suppose. Speaker Martin was one of the first to see the danger. He tried to rally the troops but didn’t get the support he needed and failed in his bid to keep MP’s expenses under wrap. I wonder how many MP’s rue the day they didn’t back Martin.
And then it was too late. What we always suspected was confirmed as true; they’re all the same and they’re all on the make. They were all lining their pockets and they responded to the crisis as one. First they lied and blamed the rules and threw themselves at our feet, then they picked a scapegoat and tied Speaker Martin to a tree, and now they’re sacrificing lambs and readying more for the slaughter, not as Libs Labs and Cons but as Liblabcons.
Self interest dominates their motives: They talk of the people and of Britain yet think only of economics and profit, and they speak of ‘equality’ while diligently feathering their own nests.
It’s curious that the Telegraph, an establishment mouthpiece, should carry out such a brutal and damaging assault on a vulnerable political establishment that’s struggling with economic and social uncertainty. Did the newspaper not consider the consequences of focusing so much attention on the scam, the potential undermining of the political system, or was it motivated purely by sales and the desire to steal a march on its rivals? Yet in spite of its revelations and accusations the Telegraph is still fully supportive of the political establishment in its current form, and like the rest of the news media they see Libs, Labs, and Cons as the only legitimate political alternatives.
So of course they all stand in opposition to the BNP. Not just the Liblabcons and the mass media, but the entertainment industry too, business and trade union leaders, and church and academic leading lights. They all put aside the differences they feign for our attention and unite to oppose the BNP.
We must be doing something right.
These people are all defenders of globalism. In one way and another they all owe their positions to their public adherence to the ‘faith’ - they are liblabcons with a small ‘l’. They believe in the superiority of diversity over homogeneity and in the ‘immense benefits’ of mass third world immigration - their careers depend on it. And so they have no choice but to defend that which is becoming increasingly indefensible. Their globalism is in crisis. It hasn’t worked out as they thought it would, or rather as they said they thought it would. Instead of the utopia they promised globalism has brought us economic and social chaos - yet still they must support it.
Nothing unites the opposition quite like the BNP. Fundamentals are at stake here and the insignificance of the disagreements that define Lib, Lab, and Con is revealed as the whole gamut of liblabcons stand as one against the BNP: Globalism versus Nationalism.
The absurdly labelled Hope Not Hate campaign against the BNP is the liblabcons’ retort, and it’s supported across the board from Unison General Secretary Dave Prentice to Tory leader Dave Cameron. It attempts to put the globalists’ case and in doing so reveals their insecurity. Like the mainstream media, what it lacks in argument it makes up for in lies, intimidation, and histrionics. It is argument-less, but then the liblabcon argument was lost when the reality of multiculturalism failed to live up to the theory - which the Hope Not Hate title ironically concedes.
Hope Not Hate? Isn’t that a non sequitur? Hope’s not the antonym of hate although the suggestion here is that it is. I wonder why?
Why didn’t these lovers of multiculturalism label it the Love Not Hate campaign? That would have made more sense from their point of view wouldn’t it? Yet instead of Love Not Hate, that is ‘don’t hate the multicultural society, love it,’ the liblabcons give us Hope Not Hate. ‘Don’t hate the multicultural society, hope it…’? Hope it what?
Hope is the feeling that events will turn out for the best. That is events that haven’t yet run their course. Hope Not Hate says ‘Don’t hate the multicultural society hopethat it turns out for the best.’ What else can it say? It’s surely not saying ‘don’t hate the BNP; hope they come to appreciate the marvels of multiculturalism’.
What a curious admission for the liblabcons to make. But then it would have been utterly ridiculous for them to label their campaign Love Not Hate, even they know that. Even these idiots realise that asking us to ‘love’ this nightmare they’ve foisted on us is a step too far - has anyone ever heard any of them boast, “I helped make Britain into the marvellous multicultural society that it is today”? Thought not. They know their mass immigration scam has been a disaster, they know that we know, and the best they can come up with is to ask us to ‘hope’everything works out well.
The state of Britain today is a function of the policies implemented by Liblabcons and aided and abetted by liblabcons. And although the parliamentary expenses scam is something of a side issue it serves to illustrate the shared motivation of parliamentarians; self interest. It’s that that motivates Liblabcon and liblabcon alike. Establishment politicians, heads of industry, trade union leaders, celebrities, media mouthpieces, and church leaders are where they are because of their adherence to globalism. And their public support of globalism is an essential part of the job and necessary for them to maintain their places at the trough. So they continue to talk the talk.
The problem for them is that globalism is being seen to be a disaster for ethnic Britons, evidenced by the growth in the BNP. But there’s no going back for the liblabcons; they’re responsible for globalism in Britain, they made it possible, they need it, and they are tied to it. And so in the face of growing evidence to the contrary they must continue with their glowing reports of it.
They are hastening their own demise. Their only defence is to circle their wagons but by doing so they make it ever more obvious that they stand against the rest of us.
And so it has proved. The success of the BNP in the county council and Euro elections has been met by the universal condemnation of the Liblabcons and the liblabcons. Surely we wouldn’t want it any other way.
BY a quirk of fate, at half past two this morning we were sitting around a table at Manchester’s City Hall waiting for the result from Oldham.
The result system had broken down around an hour earlier and it was only by manual calculations that we had any idea of where we stood and whether we were still in with chance of winning that final North West seat.
We knew that the Tories had more than three times our vote, so they would take one of the final two seats. The Greens and us were neck and neck and UKIP were ready to pounce and pip us both on the line.
Everything depended on the Oldham vote, which although declared hours earlier, the figures had not been sent through to Manchester.
It was back in Oldham at the 2001 General Election that the British National Party, and Nick Griffin in particular, hit the headlines when we polled 16% in one of the town’s two parliamentary constituencies. For the next few years Oldham was a flagship town for the BNP with a string of excellent local council election results and a growing local BNP branch.
But in recent years our activity in the town had dwindled somewhat, yet it was in the hands of Oldhammers whether Nick Griffin would be elected to the European Parliament.
It was a tense wait while this final result sheet was delivered. We were 6,000 odd votes short of our 132,900 target and were desperate for at least an 8% vote. The mood around the BNP table was not optimistic.
O us of little faith.
Oldham did us proud with over 11% - a 5,435 vote, nearly 3,000 votes more than the Greens, and close enough to the UKIP vote to ensure that Nick took his seat in Brussels.
It’s ironic that it should be the votes from the people of Oldham that should take the BNP up another rung of the political ladder. Our opponents have always showcased Oldham as “the town where the British National Party were defeated.”
The reality is something quite different. Oldhammers are still very much supporters of the BNP as they proved last night.
Martin Wingfield is the editor of the British National Party’s newspaper Freedom, and there’s more on his personal blog at martinwingfield.blogspot.com.
The British voting system is wide open to fraud by pro-Labour town hall tax-eaters, and despite our repeated proposals on how to fix it and secure fair and honest elections, the toothless Establishment watchdog, the Electoral Commission, has refused to lift a finger. So once again it is left to ordinary people like us to fight and win the struggle for true democracy in Britain.
The problem comes from the fact that most polling stations are manned by just two people, invariably town hall bureaucrats who ‘work’ in parasite jobs created by the Labour government in order to provide their own people with well-paid easy lives at taxpayers’ expense.
So very often two individuals, who know each other from work and involvement in a far-left public service union, are left in total control of hundreds of ballot papers. Towards the end of the day, it is absurdly easy for such Labour crooks to check down the electoral roll for the names of people who haven’t been in to vote, and to issue themselves their votes, while no one else is in the polling station.
They simply cross these ‘ghost’ voters off on the electoral roll as if they had indeed been in to vote in person. This means that the number of votes cast tallies with the number of voters marked as having voted, and no one ever knows the fraud has even taken place.
The only danger they face of getting caught is if someone comes in to vote whose vote they have already stolen, but they deal with this simply by keeping their hands or a piece of paper over the register to block the voter’s view as they issue him or her with the unused ballot paper of someone else who hasn’t voted. Especially in a low turnout election like a European contest, it really is easy and almost foolproof.
Almost, but not quite! All it takes is for one person in any polling district to spot that someone has already used their vote and the police can be called in.
By checking with people who appear to have voted they can then easily find out whether a vote has been stolen by a member of the public coming in and claiming to be someone else (a separate but lesser problem which only exists because of the lately made up rule that voters do not need their polling cards), or whether a larger number of stolen votes have been cast, in which case the finger points very firmly at the bureaucrats running the polling station.
All British National Party members and supporters are urged to be on the lookout for this polling station fraud committed by corrupt officials casting ghost votes this Thursday.
You can do your bit to make it too risky for anyone except the most crazed Labour activist to risk simply by waiting to vote until quite late in the day (remember that polling stations close at 10 p.m. exactly, so don’t risk getting there so late that you lose your right to vote).
When you go in and tell the official who you are or hand in your polling card, stay close to the table and watch like a hawk as they find you on the list of voters and cross your name off. Make sure that it really is your name and, if by chance you have already been crossed off, take a photo on your mobile of the sheet, and of the official, and CALL THE POLICE IMMEDIATELY.
Then call your local organiser or our telephone hotline number 02070 783286. When the police come insist that they investigate the theft of your vote as the very serious piece of electoral fraud that it would be.
A few years ago the mass use of fraudulent postal votes was the main way in which corrupt local Labour and LibDem politicians especially ‘fought’ the growing public support for the BNP. That led to such a scandal that the postal votes system was tightened up (still not tight enough, but it’s a start).
In areas where our activists have been present at the opening of the postal votes (because without such a presence it is very easy for bent officials to spoil large numbers of BNP votes) the ease with which ghost votes can be cast is now the weapon of choice for Labour’s election-fixers.
It’s a scandal that dwarfs the sickening disgrace of MPs’ expenses, because the old party crooks aren’t just taking our taxes, they are stealing the democracy that generations of Britons have given their lives to secure for every British citizen. So please do your bit to fight Labour’s vote stealing — Vote Once, Vote Late!
IT’S just what the doctor ordered to soothe frayed election nerves.
An actual election result after real people had been down to their polling station and put a cross on a ballot paper and placed it in the ballot box.
In Irwell & Riverside ward for Salford City Council, British National Party candidate Gary Tumulty, secured a 17.1% vote share and in the process beat the Tories and polled more than double the number of votes given to the media-puffed UK Independence Party.
Salford City Council
Irwell & Riverside ward
21st May 2009
Salford Council
Irwell Riverside
Matt MOLD (Labour Party) 606
Steven MIDDLETON (Liberal Democrats)293 Gary TUMULTY(British National Party) 276
Chris BATES (Conservative Party)189
Rob MITCHELL (Green Party) 125
Duran O’DWYER (UK Independence Party) 123 BNP Percentage: 17.1%
May 2008: Lab 888, LibDem 337, Con 286, BNP 233.
Change in vote share since 2008:
Lab -13.3%
Lib-Dem -1.1%
Con -4.7% BNP +3.8%
UKIP (n/a)
Green (n/a)
The British National Party was the only one of the four main parties to increase its share of the vote and to also attract more actual votes, no mean feat on a turn-out of just 17.5% which was 4% down on May 2008.
It was a solid BNP performance in a ward with over 2000 students registered on the electoral role. The National Union of Students lobbied via the internet to get the student vote out to oppose the British National Party, but their efforts met with only a lukewarm response.
The result was a big blow to the Tories who not only worked hard in the ward and also had their campaign boosted by the arrival of the Party’s hugely expensive European Election address dropping on to doormats just 24 hours before the polls opened.
Martin Wingfield is the editor of Freedom, the British National Party’s monthly newspaper, and you can read his personal daily blog here.
A local activist leaflet has been produced to highlight the depth of which UKIP’s snouts are buried in the EU Trough. It can bedownloaded and distributed here >>
THE corrupt and discredited ‘Old Gang’ political parties are campaigning hard to promote the chances of the UK Independence Party at the European Election poll on June 4th.
This staggering revelation came to light in an article in the New Statesman by the respected political columnist Andrew Grice.
He wrote:
“Senior Labour and Tory figures hope privately that the main beneficiary of the anti-politics mood sweeping the country will be the UK Independence Party.
That tells us just how deep is the crisis facing mainstream politics after the disclosures that many MPs abused the system of parliamentary expenses.
Investing their hopes in an anti-European party that David Cameron once described as mostly “fruit cakes, loonies and closet racists” is code for saying they hope the British National Party will not win its first seats in the election for the European Parliament on 4 June.
The opinion polls, which show growing support for the minority parties, suggest Ukip is breathing down Labour’s neck and could push it into fourth place, and put a rejuvenated Green Party ahead of the BNP. Despite that, Tory and Labour officials fear many voters who tell pollsters they will back Ukip will put their cross next to the BNP in the polling booth. They suspect the furore over expenses will help the far-right party to win three or four seats in the European Parliament.”
You can read this article and some other interesting reports from the same magazine which are linked to from my blog here.
We again apologise to subscribers for the delay in publication of Issue No.100 of Identity magazine - originally planned for publication in March. It has been a question of priorities, with key personnel giving all their time for the BNP Euro Election campaign with its once in five years chance of a major breakthrough. On top of this our printers had a major problem which led to this centenary issue having to be reprinted (at their expense). It should now reach subscribers next week. It will contain details of the proposed change of format to a wide circulation quarterly.
I hope readers will agree that the following extracts from my “Nationalist Notebook” have not lost their relevance since they were written.
British Jobs For British Workers
The BNP belief that the so-called differences offered by the established party triumvirate is a myth has again been justified in their attitude to the recent British workers’ wildcat strikes in an attempt to protect British jobs from unfair foreign competition. The Lib-Lab-Con has unanimously warned our workforce that they must not be xenophobic and that the very concept of protectionism in relation to jobs is an evil that “plays into the hands of the BNP”. They tell us that global action is the only way out of the economic disaster facing us, yet it is globalism itself that caused it. It is globalism that has seen 250,000 Britons lose their jobs in the last three months - bringing a total in excess of 2 million unemployed - while 200,000 immigrants have come in to take most of the remaining jobs.
Like the majority of the strikers at Total’s Lindsey oil refinery, where the wildcat strikes first began, the BNP has nothing against fellow Europeans such as Italians, Portuguese or Poles, but it is through EU rules that we have seen the influx of European welders and pipefitters to take jobs that have been refused to British unemployed refinery workers with years of experience. It should be noted, however, that more than 151,000 people from outside the EU were given permission to work in Britain last year. That was a 17% increase on the 140,000 handed out during the whole of 2007. Indians were the largest recipients of work permits at almost 50,000.
The Daily Telegraph recently reported that almost all the growth in new jobs over the past seven years could be accounted for by immigrants. There were 1.34 million more people in work than in 2001 but the number of British-born workers fell by 62,000 over the same period. It also emerged in January that there were at least 170,000 more migrant workers than official figures suggest because of undercounting in the employment statistics.
Since Lindsey and the supportive wildcat strikes that took place elsewhere, including Scotland and Wales, there has been the abrupt dismissal of 800 agency workers at BMW’s Mini production plant at Cowley, and the growing resentment at Cammell Laird’s Birkenhead shipyard, where ship fitting contractor Trimline is bussing in Polish workers for work on a Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessel.
What do the established trade unions say about all this? Their response has been to conform to New Labour’s globalist doctrine. The Unite union sold the workers a pup when they got the strikers to return to work because the union had got the Total management at Lindsey to allocate 102 jobs to local British workers. The fact is that these 102 jobs were already secure and the management had expected that they would have to allocate as much as 700 jobs to locals!
The BNP, and the independent new trade union Solidarity have been very active in supporting the wildcat strikers. As Scottish Herald writer Ian MacWhirter wrote in his paper on February 2: “In the 1930s, the Jarrow Crusade marched on London to demand work; now in 2009, they will be marching to demand foreigners are sent home. The British National Party is finally in from the cold - inheritor of the great tradition of British industrial militancy.”
‘I’m Progressive - Not a Right-winger’ says Cameron
The following comment, written before Paul Golding won the Sevenoaks Council by-election, is also relevant as when it was written.
With the mounting unpopularity of Gordon Brown and the Labour party one would expect to see the Tories sweeping the council by-elections that have been held this year. Where BNP candidates have stood, notably in Sevenoaks, (a win)Newcastle-on-Tyne, Cumbria, Manchester, and Bexley it is the BNP that picked up the dissatisfied former Labour vote to propel it into second place. In fact in Bexley, where BNP’s Michael Barnbrook lost by only eight votes, he also picked up many former Conservative voters in this Tory stronghold.
The reason for this lack of enthusiasm by former Tory voters must be that they are beginning to see that there is no “clear water” between any of the major parties, who fully justify the BNP’s generic label of the Lib-Lab-Con party. Their leader, Dave hug-a-hoody Cameron, in a speech to think-tank Demos on January 21st last, made a direct pitch to Labour and Lib Dem voters and declared himself a “progressive Conservative”. He said that its four aims were a fair society, a green environment, safety for citizens and equal opportunity. Well, there is nothing wrong with any of that, but it hardly represents the key political issues of the day - although, being generous, ’safety’ could mean more attention to controlling crime. Surely, people would want to see that a party is going to give main emphasis on doing something about: the economic crisis with its growing unemployment; the problems related to mass immigration; whether or not we should try, at a minimum, to modify the effects of EU legislation which now supersedes anything from our Parliament. The BNP answer of withdrawal from the EU is, of course, the only real way out of this last problem.
Now that the ‘big beast’ Ken Clarke is back on the front bench as the shadow business secretary, it is a fair bet that the Tory party will now be more pro-EU than ever. In a speech at University of Nottingham last month he said: “Obama doesn’t want his strongest European ally led by as Right-wing nationalist, he wants them to be a key player inside Europe, and he’ll start looking at whoever is in Germany or France if we start being isolationist”.
In case you are still falling about laughing at the suggestion of Dave boy being a ‘Right-wing nationalist’, he quickly made it clear at his speech at Demos that “I’m progressive, not a Right-winger”.
IF Andrews Brons, the British National Party’s lead candidate in the Yorkshire and Humber Euro Constituency, is doing a bit of Bank Holiday shopping in Harrogate tomorrow, it might be worthwhile for him to pop into WH Smiths and pick up a street map of Strasbourg.
That’s because Strasbourg is where the European Parliament is based and that’s where Andrew will be going if the BNP vote in Sheffield last night is anything to go by.
Full result:
Sheffield Council
East Ecclesfield ward
Thursday 30th April 2009
Colin TAYLOR (Lib-Dem) 2239
Zoe SYKES (Lab) 1420 John SHELDON (BNP) 716 John HATTERSLEY (Con) 564
Mia SAFIR (Green) 107
BNP Percentage: 14.2%
May 2008: LibDem 2314, Lab 1622, BNP 677, Con 582, Gre 181.
Last year, the BNP vote share was 12.6%, so our 14.2% vote share last night was not only an improvement, but it also puts the British National Party on the road to winning a seat in Yorkshire where we need 10% of the vote.
Securing a solid base of support in the cities of Sheffield and Leeds is key to our chances of success on June 4th and that is exactly what we have done in the last two election contests we have fought in each city.
THE May issue of Freedom is out today and it’s the ideal newspaper to deliver to postal voters over the next three weeks.
“Take care of our old folk” is the front page headline above a report which says that it’s wrong for private companies to be making a profit out of providing care for people who have given a lifetime of service to this country AND paid tax and National Insurance whilst they have been working. Looking after the frail and elderly should be the responsibility of the State.
Inside there’s a double page photo spread of our candidates standing in the European Elections.
In Cumbria, we are delivering the newspaper to postal voters together with letter from Nick Griffin about his candidature for the North West region in the European Elections. There is also another A5 leaflet from the local county council candidate, introducing themselves with their photograph under the heading “Please make up your OWN mind”
The leaflet reads:
“I’m standing as your British National Party candidate in the Cumbria County Council Elections on June 4th.
You will have heard a lot about the British National Party from our opponents, but not from the Party itself, so I hope that you will read this complimentary copy of our newspaper Freedom, and make up your own mind about our policies before you cast your postal vote.
The British National Party is Britain’s fastest growing political party because it speaks up on behalf of the British people.
The Old Gang political parties seem more interested in looking after the needs of immigrants and migrant workers who have just arrived in Britain than people who have given a lifetime of service to this country, and that’s why voters are turning to us in massive numbers.
The people who put out leaflets telling you not to vote for the British National Party might call themselves a variety of different names but in reality it is just the Labour Party working under a different name.
Labour has betrayed its grass roots because it now follows the same sort of policies as the Tories. It attacks the BNP with such hatred because we are providing a political home for those traditional supporters it has abandoned.”
The April issue of Freedom is now in the reading room on this website and can be found here.
Last month saw the record broken for the number of new Freedom subscriptions taken with any four week period. The total number of subscribers to the newspaper is now at an all time high.
There more on Martin Wingfield’s popular personal blog which can be found here.
LAST night, the British National Party pulled off one of its best results of 2009 when it came from nowhere to take second place in Manchester’s Moston by-election, winning a 23.3% vote share and trouncing both the Tories and the Liberal Democrats.
The 815 vote exceeded most of our expectations and certainly puts Nick Griffin on course to becoming the British National Party’s first MEP in the North West of England. Nick needs an 8% vote share to win his seat and the small but hard-hardworking team of BNP activists in North Manchester delivered THREE TIMES that level of support.
In the early hours of this morning, BNP activists were still on ‘cloud nine’. One told the BNP website:
“We designed our strategy many months ago. We decided from the outset that the number of campaigners that we had at our disposal would be insufficient to support a full canvass of the Moston ward, so we used the same carefully-planned approach which has consistently delivered strong second places in neighbouring north Manchester wards in recent years.
“We put out four high quality leaflets and a personal letter to all postal voters. Of course, we know that a full canvassing campaign is highly effective in smaller wards with large numbers of activists available, but not in areas like north Manchester with big wards and not that many activists on hand. I think we have shown that flexibility of tactics is as important as applying a prescriptive approach to every situation and expecting it always to work.
“All the opposition parties were out in force during the campaign and last Sunday an anti-BNP group had 17 activists out in Moston distributing their poisonous lies. The size of our vote shows, once again, that this third party intervention at elections by people not campaigning for a specific candidate or party, in reality helps boost our vote by motivating our supporters to come out and make their voice heard.”
And this was the parting shot before everyone went off for a well deserved night’s sleep . . .
“The abject dismay on the faces of the Tory activists as they watched Cameron’s march on the great northern cities dissolve before their very eyes made all the (considerable) hard work worthwhile.”
The Tory vote crashed by a huge 14%, while Labour’s was down 11%. The night was a disaster too for the media-puffed Green Party which saw its vote down by 6%. Yet for the BNP there was a huge 23.3% vote share in a ward that the Party had never fought before.
Congratulations to the North Manchester election team. The Moston result provides a great Easter morale boost for BNP campaigners across the UK as the countdown to June 4th begins. In The Independent newspaper this morning the Labour Party’s Deputy Leader Harriet Harman, warns that the British National Party could be on course to win “one to three seats” in the European Parliament. Many BNP supporters this morning will be thinking . . . . “and the rest!”
MANCHESTER Council
Moston ward
Thursday 9th April 2009
Rita Tavernor (Labour) 1,353 Derek Adams (British National Party) 815
Timothy Hartley (Liberal-Democrat) 696
Phil Donohue (Conservative) 558
Karl Wardlaw (Green Party) 74 BNP Percentage 23.3%
There’s more BNP news and views on Martin Wingfield’s popular personal blog which can be found here.
TOM REDMOND, the British National Party’s candidate in the Temple Newsam by-election for Leeds City Council, took second place from Labour in a keenly contested marginal where the three main parties were all predicting victory.
The BNP’s vote share was up on last time and more than double the 10% needed to get an MEP elected for the Yorkshire and Humberside Euro Constituency.
In Skircoat ward for Calderdale Council, we fell short of this target when our vote was squeezed as the Tories held off a strong Lib-Dem challenge by just 120 votes.
There was a highly encouraging result down in Sussex where Mike Witchell polled over 13% at the first time of asking in Felpham West, just outside of Bognor Regis. Not only did Mike comfortably out-poll the UKIP candidate, he also received more than doubled the 6.5% vote share needed in the South East to get an MEP elected.
Rounding off a very satisfactory night for the British National Party, Lynn Payne polled 305 votes in Redcar. This 16% vote share would be enough to return a BNP MEP for the North East, and the result is even more commendable as it was achieved despite THREE different anti-BNP leaflets being put out by organisations not even contesting the election.
Well done to all our brave candidates.
Leeds MBC
Temple Newsam Ward
Thursday 2nd April 2009
David SCHOFIELD (Conservatives) 1785 Tom REDMOND (BNP) 1502
Danny ADILYPOUR (Labour) 1476
Ian DOWLING (Lib Dems) 1468
Christopher FOREN (Greens) 137 BNP Percentage: 23.6%
May 2008: Con 2386, Lab 2083, BNP 1560, LibDem 521, Ind 487.
Calderdale MBC
Skircoat Ward
Thursday 2nd April 2009
John HARDY (Conservative)1277
Pauline NASH (Liberal Democrat) 1259
Anne COLLINS (Labour) 274
Paul BRANNIGAN (Independent) 238 Chris GODRIDGE (British National Party) 235
Phillip CROSSLEY (Independent) 229
Viv SMITH (Green Party) 92 BNP Percentage: 6.5%
May 2008: Con 2132, LibDem 1305, Lab 308, Green 202.
Arun DC
Felpham West
Thursday 2nd April 2009
Gill MADELEY (Conservative) 630
Martin LURY (Liberal Democrat) 269 Mike WITCHELL (BNP) 167
John PHILLIPS (UKIP) 89
Michelle WHITE (Labour) 56 BNP Percentage: 13.7%
May 2007% Con 810 / 726, Ind 585, UKIP 333, LibDem 330.
Redcar/Cleveland UA
Dormanstown Ward
Thursday 2nd April 2009
Ken LUCAS (Lib-Dem) 809
Marian FAIRLEY (Lab) 667 Lynn PAYNE (BNP) 305
Brian HUGHES-MUNDY (Con) 125 BNP Percentage: 16.0%
May 2007: Lab 858 / 805 / 758, LibDem 414 / 412 / 386, Con 374.
The March issue of Freedom has now been uploaded to the newspaper’s reading room which can be found by clicking on The Voice of Freedom Newspaper button above.
The April issue of Freedom goes to the printers at the end of the week. It is the quantity ordered by BNP units of this issue which will be multiplied by five for the all-important big print-run May issue which is the European Election Special edition of Freedom.
Freedom is edited by Martin Wingfield whose popular personal daily blog can be found here.
A short speech by Maverick Tory MEP Daniel Hannan has become a widely publicised Internet hit. Hannan’s devastating demolition 0f the man that has bankrupted Britain is understandably popular, but no one should be fooled into thinking that Mr Hannan has any answers - or is even much better in the honesty stakes than Brown.
For a start, Mr Hannan and the entire Tory party support free trade - a pretty sounding phrase which hides the ugly reality of the export of millions of British jobs to China and India. Further, Mr Hannan repeats the blatant lie that Gordon Brown was “the author of the phrase BRITISH JOBS FOR BRITISH WORKERS”.
The reality, of course, is that “British Jobs For British Workers” has been a key demand and campaigning slogan of the BNP ever since it was founded in 1982.
New visitors to this website who have looked at Mr Hannan’s speech in the hope of finding a politician with the realistic answers to the “Bankers Bust” and have been disappointed, will find what they are looking for in this speech by BNP Leader, Nick Griffin:
OUR Quiet Revolution swept stealthily through North East Lincolnshire and Melton last night, securing the necessary support from voters to return British National Party MEPs to Strasbourg for both the Yorkshire and East Midlands Euro Constituencies.
Andrew Brons is the lead candidate on the BNP List for the Yorkshire & Humberside Euro-Consistency for the European Elections on June 4th and the Yarborough Ward comes into that constituency.
The British National Party’s candidate there, Stephen Fyfe, polled 17.4% of the vote, well above the 11% vote share needed across the Euro Constituency to get Andrew elected to the European Parliament.
It was the first time that the BNP have fought the ward which was held by the Lib-Dems with an increased majority. It was a very good effort from Stephen and his team in the face of some particularly hostile campaigning from our opponents.
North East Lincs Council
Yarborough Ward
26th March 2009
Peter BAILEY (Lib-Dem) 763
Kath NORTON (Con)513
Michael TAYLOR (Lab) 437 Steve FYFE (BNP) 370
Martin GRANT (Ind) 49 BNP Percentage: 17.4%
May 2008: Lib-Dem 698, Con 543, Ind 476, Lab 400, Ind 104.
Next week there will be two more local council by-elections in Yorkshire, in Leeds and Calderdale, which will provide more pointers as to how our Quiet Revolution is prgressing in the county.
The Reverend Robert West is the lead candidate on the BNP List for the East Midlands Euro-Consistency for the European Elections on June 4th which includes the Long Clawson & Stathern ward.
Here the British National Party’s Lawence Perkins was bang on the button in polling the 13% vote share that is required across the Euro Constituency to keep Robert on target for the European Parliament.
As with Yarborough, it was the first time that the BNP had fought the seat which was easily held by the Conservatives from an established Independent candidate.
East Midlands Election Officer Wayne McDermott, was more than satisfied with the result:
“This was a tough rural ward and our target had been a 10% vote share. To poll over 13% and beat Labour in the bargain is certainly a bonus,” he told the website this morning.
Melton Borough Council
Long Clawson & Stathern ward
26th March 2009
Pam Baguley (Con) 463
Lisa Jane Neale (Ind) 231 Lawrence Perkins (BNP) 120
Lin Machin (Lab) 100
BNP Percentage 13.1%
May 2007: Con 850/756, Ind 626.
Next Thursday, as well as the two contests in Yorkshire, there are also by-elections in Redcar and Felpham in Sussex.
Martin Wingfield also has a popular daily blog which can be found here.
That was the advice offered by an editorial in the Sunday Times a couple of weeks ago for dealing with the likes of Anjem Choudary and friends who abused British soldiers at their homecoming parade in Luton. The paper’s argument is that Choudary may very well be ‘unpleasant’ but unless he breaks the law he should be allowed to say what he wants. It warns that it would be a mistake to make a martyr out of him, “Far better that we deploy the weapon for which Britain is famed: humour and ridicule. He (Choudary) is, to use a well worn phrase, a sick joke and should be treated as one.”
The paper says that calls for Choudary to be silenced on the grounds of his dangerousness “miss the point.”
It continues, “The lesson of Guantanamo Bay and ‘extraordinary rendition’ is that a free society gives ammunition to the enemy if it is provoked into a breach of its own revered principles, which means fighting on the higher moral ground. The best way of ensuring that his (Choudary’s) views get no more traction is to let him air them so they can be seen for being vacuous.”
According to the Sunday Times Choudary aims “…to see the flag of Allah fly over Downing Street and a pure Islamic state with sharia law established in Britain (where) all women, Muslim or non-Muslim, would have to wear a burqa; a woman’s evidence would be subordinate to a man’s in court; drunks would be whipped in public; and adulterers would be stoned to death.”
If anyone’s missing the point it’s the Sunday Times, and deliberately too. How very convenient that it dismisses Choudary’s ideas as “vacuous” thus saving itself the trouble of having to address them and their implications. Instead it focuses on the freedom of speech aspect of the issue concluding that giving Choudary his say gives us the opportunity to ridicule him and thereby reduce him and his ideas to a joke.
Curiously the Sunday Times didn’t follow its own advice and ridicule Choudary and his thinking. It had already reached its conclusion; ‘Choudary and his ideas are a joke’ - though the process by which it got there remains a mystery. Was the editorial group in hysterics when the topic came up for discussion?
It was a pity the writer didn’t let the rest of us in on the joke. What’s so funny - has anyone any idea? And on what foundation is this piss-taking based? Precisely what is the Sunday Times encouraging us to do?
Surely ridicule of the man risks the charge of racism. And ridicule of his beliefs risks the charge of ‘Islamophobia’ not to mention the threats to personal safety. Come to think of it, wouldn’t any ridicule of Choudary and his ideas be smothered by the dictates of political correctness and the strong arm of the law? I contacted the Sunday Times asking for an example of the humour they advise, maybe a joke or two that I could pass round the pub and that would sort of snowball resulting in the exposure of Choudary and his ideas as “vacuous” - so far nothing.
And of course there was a sideswipe at the BNP in this infinitely patronising example of vacuity. But it’s no more than we’ve come to expect - especially from the so-called ‘thinking papers.’ The writer performs contortions so as to bring the BNP into the equation; the best he could do was a spurious and badly constructed parallel. He reasoned thus: Choudary is British, the BNP are British, the BNP is allowed its say, and because it’s “…views (are) no less repugnant than Mr Choudary’s,” Choudary should also be allowed his say.
Clever, eh? That way he gets to kill two birds with one stone: Choudary and the BNP. The establishment does this regularly. Somebody or other of ’significance’ will be talking about Muslim terrorism and they’ll introduce the BNP into the conversation, as if there’s some sort of equivalence between the two.
The clear intention is to damage the BNP by association, but there’s also an element in this of the establishment using the BNP as a sort of shield from behind which they feel more able to say things that Muslims may not like. It’s as if they use the BNP to balance any ‘criticism’ (actually it’s never as strong as criticism) they make of Muslim behaviour. It’s like they’re saying “…you Muslims have your baddies but we have our baddies also so don’t feel bad if we criticise your baddies because we criticise our baddies too.” It’s not their intention of course, but by allocating (albeit incorrectly) the BNP a place in the ‘we’ they legitimise the party in a backhanded sort of way. It is another unintended consequence. Everyone knows that the establishment sees the BNP as the baddie but equally everyone knows that the BNP is not the British equivalent of Muslim suicide bombers.
This editorial is a perfect illustration of the establishment’s timidity when dealing with Muslims. The writer defines Choudary’s views as “vacuous” when viewed alone yet cranks them up to “repugnant” when viewed in the same frame as the BNP. Vacuous is empty-headed tending to harmless; repugnant is distasteful tending to harmful. So which is it?
It seems to me that this was a case of having to say something but not wanting to say anything, so the Sunday Times turned it into a joke, or rather it turned Choudary into one. It’s like having someone slap you across the face and then laughing it off because you’re too afraid to respond in kind. The Sunday Times’ desire to have us laugh in the face of adversity (or should that be diversity?) is another way of avoiding the issue; the Sunday Times hopes its readers will be laughing too much to notice.
It was Choudary that said the thwarted car bombings in London and the terror attack against Scotland’s busiest airport were “completely justified.” Are you laughing yet? Hilarious isn’t it? Choudary again: “It would be easy for us to declare Jihad in Britain and each one of us could become a time-bomb waiting to go off…” Yet the Sunday Times and by extension the rest of the establishment think we shouldn’t take this too seriously.
But why not?
If it’s not serious why did the Sunday Times bother to tell us it wasn’t worth taking seriously? Clearly the establishment wants to play down the threat. The more seriously people view the likes of Choudary the greater will be the demand that the establishment does something about them. But this problem like every other that we face in society is a function of liblabcon equality thinking and Choudary et al are here because of that thinking. Therefore any solution to these problems must begin with a rejection of that logic. But the hands of the Sunday Times and the rest of the establishment are tied to that thinking; they are where they are because of their adherence to it. When it falls they fall.
So they pretend the threat doesn’t exist. “Choudary’s a joke. Islamic terrorists aren’t Islamic terrorists, they’re criminals. The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful, etc…” If the problem is defined in any other way the establishment will be compelled to act and the equality house of cards will fall. They downplay the problem and define it merely as something that a bit of old-fashioned British piss-taking will solve.
Anjem Choudary is aware of the establishment’s discomfiture and plays on it. He and his kind constantly test the boundaries. He uses tolerance against itself. He uses our fairness as a weapon against us. The Sunday Times articulates the predicament; “…a free society gives ammunition to the enemy if it is provoked into a breach of its own revered principles.”
Well yes, but… This is of course a cop-out. What happened to those ‘revered principles’ when Britain illegally bombed Iraq and Serbia? Revered principles are as much a refuge of the scoundrel as is patriotism and those that refer to them tend to want them applying specifically rather than generally.
But the real issue which the Sunday Times and the rest of the establishment do their best to cloud is Choudary’s views rather than his right to express them. What do those views mean for Britain, British society and British people? Choudary is articulating stated Muslim aims for Britain; why can’t we discuss them?
The establishment would have us believe that Choudary and his ilk represent only a minute fraction of an otherwise ‘peaceful Muslim community’ and so we need not even consider his threats. But if that’s the case why does the government spend millions pacifying those communities with grants for one thing after another? Why the need to pacify the peaceful?
On the same page in the same edition of the same newspaper editor John Witherow was worrying about the situation in Afghanistan, “I fear there will be many more years of young British soldiers putting their lives at risk.” At risk from people with the very same mindset as Choudary but living 3500 miles away - why do we need to take them more seriously than we do the likes of Choudary?
Choudary’s way of thinking is an assault on British and European tradition and belief, and it is supported by hundreds of thousands of Muslims living in Britain (and by millions across Europe). Choudary wants the imposition of sharia law in Britain and for it to apply to the whole population, and according to polls about a third of Muslims living in Britain agree with him. That’s really amusing, isn’t it? And that number will grow along with immigration and the radicalisation of Muslims in Britain which the government is spending desperate millions in order to prevent. I’ll bet your sides are splitting.
The Sunday Times makes the same mistake that all the establishment liblabcons make; they assume everyone thinks like them. Ridiculing Choudary and his ‘views’ may very well amuse Sunday Times readers, but what will Muslims in the mosque make of it? Will they be laughing too? Will they conclude also that Choudary is nothing more than a sick joke? Or will they support a fellow believer?
The Sunday Times labels Choudary vacuous, but can there be anything more empty-headed than this? The paper urges us to laugh when what’s needed is a cold and hard-headed look at the realities of Islam and their meaning for Britain, its society and its people.
BOTH Andrew Brons and the Reverend Robert West will be taking a keen interest in the two local council by-elections taking place on Thursday where there are British National Party candidates standing.
Andrew Brons is the lead candidate on the BNP list for the Yorkshire & Humberside Euro-Consistency for the European Elections on June 4th and the Yarborough Ward comes into that constituency.
It seems as though the British National Party will need around an 11% vote share across the Euro Constituency to get Andrew elected to the European Parliament so that will be our target for Thursday.
It’s the first time that the BNP have fought the ward which has been won by the Lib-Dems for the past three years.
North East Lincs Council
Yarborough Ward 26th March 2009
Peter BAILEY (Lib-Dem) Steve FYFE (BNP)
Martin GRANT (Ind)
Kath NORTON (Con)
Michael TAYLOR (Lab) May 2008: Lib-Dem 698, Con 543, Ind 476, Lab 400, Ind 104.
The Reverend Robert West is the lead candidate on the BNP list for the East Midlands Euro-Consistency for the European Elections on June 4th which includes the Long Clawson & Stathern ward.
Here the British National Party will be looking for a 13% vote share across the Euro Constituency to keep Robert on target for the European Parliament, so again that’s our target for Thursday.
As with Yarborough, it’s the first time that the BNP have fought the ward which returned two Conservative councillors when last contested back in May 2007.
Melton Borough Council
Long Clawson & Stathern ward
26th March 2009
Pam Baguley (Con)
Lin Machin (Lab)
Lisa Jane Neale (Ind) Lawrence Perkins (BNP) May 2007: Con 850/756, Ind 626
Martin Wingfield also has a daily blog which can be found here.
By John Bean, editor of Identity magazine–Our apologies to Identity subscribers for the delay in publication of the March issue - the 100th edition of the BNP magazine. This is due to key personnel (not least our Chairman !) working flat out on the all-important “Battle for Britain” campaign which after much blood, sweat and tears is approaching our target of raising sufficient funds to fight all areas in the June 4th Euro elections. Here is one of the items in the latest “Nationalist Notebook” pages which can have a bearing on the election campaign.
The BNP belief that the so-called differences offered by the established party triumvirate is a myth has again been justified in their attitude to the recent British workers’ wildcat strikes in an attempt to protect British jobs from unfair foreign competition. The Lib-Lab-Con has unanimously warned our workforce that they must not be xenophobic and that the very concept of protectionism in relation to jobs is an evil that “plays into the hands of the BNP.” They tell us that global action is the only way out of the economic disaster facing us, yet it is globalism itself that caused it. It is globalism that has seen 250,000 Britons lose their jobs in the last three months - bringing a total in excess of 2 million unemployed - while 200,000 immigrants have come in to take most of the remaining jobs.
Like the majority of the strikers at Total’s Lindsey oil refinery, where the wildcat strikes first began, the BNP has nothing against fellow Europeans such as Italians, Portuguese or Poles, but it is through EU rules that we have seen the influx of European welders and pipefitters to take jobs that have been refused to British unemployed refinery workers with years of experience. It should be noted, however, that more than 151,000 people from outside the EU were given permission to work in Britain last year. That was a 17% increase on the 140,000 handed out during the whole of 2007. Indians were the largest recipients of work permits at almost 50,000.
The Daily Telegraph recently reported that almost all the growth in new jobs over the past seven years could be accounted for by immigrants. There were 1.34 million more people in work than in 2001 but the number of British-born workers fell by 62,000 over the same period. It also emerged in January that there were at least 170,000 more migrant workers than official figures suggest because of undercounting in the employment statistics.
Since Lindsey and the supportive wildcat strikes that took place elsewhere, including Scotland and Wales, there has been the abrupt dismissal of 800 agency workers at BMW’s Mini production plant at Cowley. There is also growing resentment at Cammell Laird’s Birkenhead shipyard, where ship fitting contractor Trimline is bussing in Polish workers for work on a Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessel.
What do the established trade unions say about all this? Their response has been to conform to New Labour’s globalist doctrine. The Unite union sold the workers a pup when they got the strikers to return to work because the union had got the Total management at Lindsey to allocate 102 jobs to local British workers. The fact is that these 102 jobs were already secure and the management had expected that they would have to allocate as much as 700 jobs to locals!
The BNP and the independent new trade union Solidarity (see p.2) have been very active in supporting the wildcat strikers. As Scottish Herald writer Ian MacWhirter wrote in his paper on February 2: “In the 1930s, the Jarrow Crusade marched on London to demand work; now in 2009, they will be marching to demand foreigners are sent home. The British National Party is finally in from the cold - inheritor of the great tradition of British industrial militancy.”
THIRTY years ago Britain’s pit towns and villages were thriving communities. There was near full employment for a workforce that had the essential skills to get the nation’s energy resources out of the ground.
The miners and their families took great pride in what they did, feeling they were directly contributing to the welfare of the British people. It was a very dangerous industry but this helped to build tremendous comradeship and support for one another. Support not only at work, but also within the community.
But this fine spirit, and great worth to our country was destroyed as a result of the pit closure programme. This way of life is no longer, even though our mining towns and villages are still sitting on considerable reserves of coal.
Now there is just unemployment. There’s been very little regeneration, so for today’s school leavers there are few job prospects and an uncertain future, whereas once there would always have been a job and a livelihood to be earned.
The Tories are to blame for the destruction of Britain’s mining industry and that is something the people of this country must never forget and never forgive them for.
Margaret Thatcher knew that strong trade unions, looking after the welfare of their members, were a block on the move towards free trade and globalisation, so she took on the strongest one, the National Union of Mineworkers, determined to break it and leave the British coal industry vulnerable and ready to dismantle.
Now Britain imports coal from Eastern Europe while our miners sit idle at home on top of quantities of coal that could help to meet this country’s energy needs.
A Tory Government destroyed the pits, the communities and the values those communities stood for, and for the last 12 years a Labour Government has done nothing to breathe life back into the industry.
This a shocking betrayal. In 1997 when it came to power, Labour promised to halt the decline of the British coal industry but then did nothing of the sort - the pit closures have continued, more miners have lost their jobs and most of our coal is still being imported.
The British National Party believes that British coal has a major role to play in meeting our future energy needs and that is why we are the only political party pledged to revitalise Britain’s coal mining industry. But as well as looking to the future, we must remember the past.
Back in 2005, the British National Party launched a campaign to call for a Miners’ Memorial Day. The Labour Government had just given the Police their own Memorial Day for officers killed in the line of duty, and the BNP lobbied for a similar day of remembrance for our miners. Needless to say our efforts were ignored by the Government but the campaign continues and has gained renewed impetus in this 25th anniversary year of the Miners’ Strike.
No one knows how many men and boys have died doing their duty for their country in our coal mines. 90,000 died in mine disasters alone in the sixty years before WW1 and including coal dust related diseases such as chronic bronchitis and pneumoconiosis the total casualty figure is well over one million.
The British National Party believes there should be a special occasion when the country remembers all those miners who lost their lives miles under ground, hewing out the coal that was the vital energy source in the Britain of the nineteenth and twentieth century.
On the BNP’s Campaign for a Miners Memorial Day leaflet, the following poem by Ian Winstanley was included. Its title Britain’s Forgotten Army sums up so well our miners’ plight, both past and present.
There is a large forgotten army,
Who for their country have bled and died,
Leaving behind them wives and children,
Brothers and sisters who cried.
No bugle marks the passing of these men,
No beating drum or fusillade,
No flying colours, measured tread,
Or monuments of stone are made.
No day when flowers are strewn,
At the foot of an inscribed stone,
When men march proudly
With their comrades and memories, alone.
This forgotten army of the dead
Have served their country well.
It’s fitting that we remember them,
And their proud story tell.
Martin Wingfield also has a daily blog which can be found here.
CONGRATULATIONS are due this morning to Eddy O’Sullivan and his hard-working campaigners in Salford for a very good vote in the Pendlebury Ward by-election.
It was very much a ‘job done’ result for the local group with all their targets met.
Target One - Poll over 8%. That’s the vote share needed across the North West Euro Constituency to get the BNP’s lead candidate Nick Griffin elected to the European Parliament. Mission Accomplished!
Target Two - Poll over 12%. That’s the BNP’s Election Department baseline set to keep the Party on course for that European seat. This figure incorporates a “buffer zone” to compensate for those wards where the BNP could fall short of the required level of support. Mission Accomplished!
Eddy’s 13.5% vote share was not only an improvement on the BNP vote last time around, it was also enough for him to overtake the Lib-Dems and push them into fourth place - something which we are doing with increasing regularity in the run-up to the all important Euro vote on June 4th.
But what made this result so good for the British National Party was that it was achieved in the face of full blown campaigns from the three main parties. The ward is a Labour and Tory marginal and both parties flooded the area with full-time party workers and an array of MPs, prospective MPs, MEPs and councillors, all battling for every last vote.
This is what the Conservative agent Iain Lindley, had to say last night about the election:
“It’s really disappointing given all the effort we’ve put in.
“This time Labour have pretty much phoned every house and knocked on every door in addition to their literature delivery, and we’ve also had to fight off a spoiler Liberal Democrat campaign . . .”
The quote gives an indication as to the intensity with which the main parties fought the election, so to increase our vote and even finish ahead of one of them is no mean achievement.
Last night’s full result:
SALFORD CITY COUNCIL
Pendlebury Ward
Thursday 19th March 2009
John Ferguson (Lab) 1005
Jillian Collinson (Con) 874 Eddy O’Sullivan (BNP) 373
Paul Gregory (Lib-Dem) 368
Stuart Cremins (Ind) 49
Diana Battersby (Green) 43 BNP Percentage: 13.5%
Martin Wingfield also has a daily blog which can be found here.
AS unemployment in Britain soared past two million, the Finance Ministers of the world’s 20 biggest economies (G20), which make up 85% of the world economy between them, gathered in a plush Sussex hotel to ponder on the current crisis.
The meeting was in preparation for the summit of the leaders of the G20 countries in London in April, but anyone expecting the very people who got us all into this mess, to get us out of it, will have been disappointed by the outcome. All they could offer was just more of the same - increased global trade dictated by market forces - the very combination whose catastrophic failure is now dragging Britain into depression.
Next month, the G20 leaders will be posing for photographs and spinning the line that their Titanic isn’t sinking and that the lifeboat of protectionism isn’t needed.
It is as if they are in denial about the floundering of their global market economy. Their Titanic has hit the iceberg and is sinking fast yet they are calling for the passengers to stay calm, while they shovel on more coal to maintain their speed through the berg-infested waters.
The lifeboat of protectionism is there, ready and waiting to save us from the impending disaster, but the likes of Brown and Darling say we mustn’t use it.
They won’t allow Britain to protect our industries from cheap Third World imports which will give British manufacturers a breathing space to recover behind secure tariff walls.
They won’t allow us to protect our currency from the international speculators that have driven Sterling down to the level of the Euro.
They won’t allow us to protect of our workforce from cheap imported labour, protection which is the only way to make the slogan “British Jobs for British Workers” become a reality.
But worst of all, the Government have wasted our money bailing out incompetent bankers when they should have just nationalised the banks.
Those billions could then have been invested in our national economy. Safeguarding jobs in order to keep the nation working to provide the goods and services that the British people need.
Research by Steve Johnson.
Martin Wingfield also has a daily blog which can be found here.
VOTERS in Salford get their chance to vote for the British National Party tomorrow where local BNP organiser Eddy O’Sullivan, is standing in the Pendlebury Ward by-election.
Salford BNP contested the ward back in May 2008 and polled a very respectable 13% of the vote and Eddy and his team will be hoping to maintain that sort of level of support.
The ward is a Labour and Tory marginal and both parties have flooded the area with full-time party workers and an array of MPs, prospective MPs, MEPs and councillors all battling for every last vote.
Eddy has also worked the patch hard and the ex-serviceman says he has received a positive response on the doorstep.
As with every local council election from now until June, British National Party votes are all about percentages. The Pendlebury ward is in the North West Euro Constituency where lead BNP candidate Nick Griffin needs just over 8% of the vote to get elected to the European Parliament.
For contests like this one in Salford, the Party’s Election Department has set a target of 12% to keep on target for that European seat. This figure incorporates a “buffer zone” to compensate for those wards where the BNP could fall short of the required level of support.
Eddy, himself, has an extra incentive to pull out all the stops to maximise BNP support as he is the fourth Euro candidate on the British National Party’s list for the North West.
Every single vote cast for the BNP is vitally important, so if you are able to get to Salford tomorrow and give Eddy a hand, your help will be greatly appreciated.
SALFORD CITY COUNCIL
Pendlebury Ward
Thursday 19th March 2009
Diana Battersby (Green)
Jillian Collinson (Con)
Stuart Cremins (Ind)
John Ferguson (Lab)
Paul Gregory (Lib-Dem) Eddy O’Sullivan (BNP)
MAY 2008: Lab 975, Con 826, Lib-Dem 375, BNP 352, Ind 117.
Martin Wingfield also has a daily blog which can be found here.
By Joe Priestley–I don’t know where or when the term ‘Liblabcon’ came into being. Its American equivalent ‘Republicrat’ was first used about 25 years ago on Usenet in American politics newsgroups, but I found no such information about the origins of ‘Liblabcon’.
BY a quirk of fate, at half past two this morning we were sitting around a table at Manchester’s City Hall waiting for the result from Oldham.
The British voting system is wide open to fraud by pro-Labour town hall tax-eaters, and despite our repeated proposals on how to fix it and secure fair and honest elections, the toothless Establishment watchdog, the Electoral Commission, has refused to lift a finger. So once again it is left to ordinary people like us to fight and win the struggle for true democracy in Britain.
IT’S just what the doctor ordered to soothe frayed election nerves.
THE corrupt and discredited ‘Old Gang’ political parties are campaigning hard to promote the chances of the UK Independence Party at the European Election poll on June 4th.
We again apologise to subscribers for the delay in publication of Issue No.100 of Identity magazine - originally planned for publication in March. It has been a question of priorities, with key personnel giving all their time for the BNP Euro Election campaign with its once in five years chance of a major breakthrough. On top of this our printers had a major problem which led to this centenary issue having to be reprinted (at their expense). It should now reach subscribers next week. It will contain details of the proposed change of format to a wide circulation quarterly.
IF Andrews Brons, the British National Party’s lead candidate in the Yorkshire and Humber Euro Constituency, is doing a bit of Bank Holiday shopping in Harrogate tomorrow, it might be worthwhile for him to pop into WH Smiths and pick up a street map of Strasbourg.
THE May issue of Freedom is out today and it’s the ideal newspaper to deliver to postal voters over the next three weeks.
LAST night, the British National Party pulled off one of its best results of 2009 when it came from nowhere to take second place in Manchester’s Moston by-election, winning a 23.3% vote share and trouncing both the Tories and the Liberal Democrats.
TOM REDMOND, the British National Party’s candidate in the Temple Newsam by-election for Leeds City Council, took second place from Labour in a keenly contested marginal where the three main parties were all predicting victory.
OUR Quiet Revolution swept stealthily through North East Lincolnshire and Melton last night, securing the necessary support from voters to return British National Party MEPs to Strasbourg for both the Yorkshire and East Midlands Euro Constituencies.
That was the advice offered by an editorial in the Sunday Times a couple of weeks ago for dealing with the likes of Anjem Choudary and friends who abused British soldiers at their homecoming parade in Luton. The paper’s argument is that Choudary may very well be ‘unpleasant’ but unless he breaks the law he should be allowed to say what he wants. It warns that it would be a mistake to make a martyr out of him, “Far better that we deploy the weapon for which Britain is famed: humour and ridicule. He (Choudary) is, to use a well worn phrase, a sick joke and should be treated as one.”
BOTH Andrew Brons and the Reverend Robert West will be taking a keen interest in the two local council by-elections taking place on Thursday where there are British National Party candidates standing.
By John Bean, editor of Identity magazine–Our apologies to Identity subscribers for the delay in publication of the March issue - the 100th edition of the BNP magazine. This is due to key personnel (not least our Chairman !) working flat out on the all-important “Battle for Britain” campaign which after much blood, sweat and tears is approaching our target of raising sufficient funds to fight all areas in the June 4th Euro elections. Here is one of the items in the latest “Nationalist Notebook” pages which can have a bearing on the election campaign.
THIRTY years ago Britain’s pit towns and villages were thriving communities. There was near full employment for a workforce that had the essential skills to get the nation’s energy resources out of the ground.
CONGRATULATIONS are due this morning to Eddy O’Sullivan and his hard-working campaigners in Salford for a very good vote in the Pendlebury Ward by-election.
AS unemployment in Britain soared past two million, the Finance Ministers of the world’s 20 biggest economies (G20), which make up 85% of the world economy between them, gathered in a plush Sussex hotel to ponder on the current crisis.
VOTERS in Salford get their chance to vote for the British National Party tomorrow where local BNP organiser Eddy O’Sullivan, is standing in the Pendlebury Ward by-election.
