CRAIG MURRAY'S CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE BNP

Now That's Real Blogging - Tim Ireland Screws The BNP!

Apparently, the BNP don't actually look like the people in their ads. They tend to smile less and they are, um, yes, more white.

But what about their policies, which seem to focus on the fact that in many parts of Britain, including London, most of the children have immigrant mothers, who are often Muslims, a fact that supports the BNP contention that Britain is "steadily being colonised by mass immigration from Muslim countries".

Britain is an alleged democracy. If the majority of the people oppose massive change in the culture and ethnicity of the country, not to mention the overcrowding consequent upon mass immigration to one of the most densely populated countries in the world, should not the government reflect this wish?

According to Craig Murray, who seems to represent the mainstream in British Politics on this issue, the answer is no.

The British people are subject to the rule of those who know better. People Like Gordon Brown advisor, Jonathon Porritt, who says the UK population must fall by 30 million. This after the Labour Party, with full complicity of Hed Teath and all the other wet Tories, vigorously promoted immigration for more than a generation.

How one wonders will they accomplish this autogenocidal goal. Aborta Yob clinics? bromide in the water? In any case, subject to such rule, is it surprising that a lot of ordinary British folk have turned to the BNP?

Craig Murray is a highly intelligent, and brilliantly accomplished young man. He should turn his attention to serious questions. When he talks of the BNP, he should address the real issue. Supposing that the BNP can be destroyed by hate speech (see next item) seems foolish in the extreme and utterly contemptible.

Destroying British nationalism with hate speech (U-Tube Vid)

If one were to fake a video so as to portray the leader of, say, the British Liberal-Democratic party or the Scottish Nationalist Party addressing a rally of pornographers or bear-baiting advocates, while digitally altering his facial features to make him appear monstrous, would this not be considered a form of hate speech to be universally condemned?

Apparently not.

Falsely portraying Nick Griffin, leader of the BNP, as addressing a Nazi rally and digitally altering his facial features to make him appear monstrous (take a look at the frame 45 s from the start, where it is obvious how the mouth has been crudely altered), seems to be entirely acceptable. How so? Because the state has adopted the propagation and promotion of hate as a key tool in managing the people.

The idea that the people are to be manipulated and managed by the state is a fundamental tenet of fascism and the antithesis of democracy. The fascist state regards the people as its wards, to be used, moulded, augmented by immigration or extirpated at will.

Home page