Nelson Mandela

Posted in Factual information on July 27, 2008 by redandwhitestripes

Nelson Mandela is a terrorist. He supported anti-government guerilla tactics for years. The ANC were famous for “necking” the idea of setting a tire around someone’s neck, dousing it with fuel and setting it alight.

Mandela also encouraged bombings, including the Church Street Massacre.

On a personal level, Mandela also inadvertently pushed me to join the BNP. The BNP website carried an article about a statue of Mandela to be erected in London. I emailed the council in complaint and they responded telling me “The statue is designed to celebrate diversity”.

That’s when I realised the BNP were telling the truth and Britain has gone way too far down the liberal line.

Apartheid was evil and should have been resisted to the the max peacefully, but fighting evil with evil does not make good.
A man who encouraged brutal murder was being celebrated with statues and fundraising concerts and nobody bats an eyelid. A legal political party that complains is hounded and harassed. It makes me sick. (singing “kill the whites”)


True Fascism: The Iraq War

Posted in Factual information, fascism, Hysteria and lies on July 26, 2008 by redandwhitestripes

There is a political party in our mist that supports Fascism. The leaders of the group have a plan – we might even call it a conspiracy – to inflict terror, ethnic cleansing, murder and dictatorship upon The World. This is not hysteria, embellished storytelling or any of the political mind games I discussed recently, this whole campaign is documented, recorded and reported.

It is the Iraqi war as waged by The Labour Party.

Make no mistake, Blair and Brown knew what the deal was from the first day their US comrade George W Bush took office.

  • Bush and his security team purposely fabricated evidence for Iraq’s WMD’s. Their main witness, codename “curveball” was a fraud. What’s more, the White House knew he was a fraud and ignored this fact.
  • Meanwhile, Cheney meet with Big Oil executives to discuss a plan for invading Iraq.
  • While he was doing this, Bush Jr orchestrated a media whitewash that was so vast, most people still don’t realise how extensive it was. Conferences were filled with planted questions, FOX and the other channels were fed with falsified information and dissenters were harassed and intimidated.
  • The US State Department drew up a document that planned to smash OPEC by declaring state ownership (as in, owned by the US puppet government) of Iraq’s oil, the same document also explained how Iraq assets would be sold off to international companies and copyright backpayments would be slapped on all media.
  • UN weapons inspectors confirmed the WMD’s were not there, but Bush and co. continued to shout and scream about “nuclear weapons” and “terrorism” at every opportunity.
  • The James Baker 3 institute drew up their own, pro-OPEC plan for Iraq that also included ownership of the oil (for purposes of withholding it this time) and sale of Iraq assets.
  • Paul Wolfwitz appeared on US national TV and told his countrymen that Iraq could pay for its own renovation. He stated that Iraq could pump “six million barrels a day” to pay for itself.
  • After the invasion began, Bush employed a team to plan his victory speech in meticulous detail. It had to be that way, since he was never a great pilot and faces very strong accusations that he ducked service during his time in the Air Force.
  • And when it all started to go wrong, it was undoubtedly due to military blunders such as de-Baathification and lack of communication between coalition forces. US and UK generals repeatedly told their leaders they simply did not have enough troops, but the requests were ignored.
  • But the US had its own squabble between the State Department and JB3I. Ahmed Chalibi – the neocon’s  choice for PM – was arrested on suspicion of espionage. The JBI team got their man in his place. Meanwhile general Jay Garner was withdrawn from the field. His crime? Ordering an election before the oil had been secured.
  • And of course, the insurgency and murder continues.

Blair and Brown knew all this. Blair gave the approval for our boys to go and die over these lies. Brown signed off a budget of billions to pay for it. The total cost currently stands at over seven billion pounds.

Iraq has the potential to be the second biggest oil producer in OPEC. Yet is has a fraction of its wells dug in comparison to Saudi Arabia. Today, just as has been done so many times in its short history, Iraq has been conquered not to bring liberty to its people but to suppress its oil production.

Again, this is not hysteria or a conspiracy theory. This is a documented, citible, provable fact.

Let me ask you, which political party has caused more misery, hatred, horror, murder, Facism, rape of liberty and religious genocide in modern UK history?

The answer is none.

Innocent people continue to die over a war that was based on lies and nothing more. FOX News recently run a story concerning the rock/rap/metal group ‘Rage Against The Machine’ and their observations on the crimes of GWB. FOX quoted lead singer Zack as saying “[George Bush] should be shot” and portrayed Zack as a crackpot.

Actually Zack’s full quote was:

“A good friend of ours [Noam Chomsky] once said that if the same laws were applied to U.S. presidents as were applied to the Nazis after World War II […] every single one of them, every last rich white one of them from Truman on, would have been hung to death and shot—and this current administration is no exception. They should be hung, and tried, and shot. As any war criminal should be.”

And this is true. GWB is guilty and therefore Blair and Brown are aides to a massive crime against humanity. That is not an exaggeration. Moreover, they have fed you and lies as they took our tax money to spend on their war. They spat in the face of democracy and insulted the intelligence of each and every citizen who objected to a war that never had a democratic mandate in the first place.

In the time it has taken you to read this, it is likely that another innocent person has died in Iraq.What has happened in Iraq is a travesty and if you care about it, then you can at least ensure Labour get the message. Vote them out.

But don’t vote them out for a weak, sell out party that would have done exactly the same thing, vote them out for a party that said all along that it was wrong to be involved. Vote for the BNP.


“Armed Madhouse” by Greg Palast
The State Department and JBI plans for Iraq and the scheme to withold the oil, the Wolfowitz quote.

“Fiasco: The American military asdventure in Iraq” by Thomas E. Ricks
The military blunders, Jay Garner and government properganda.

“The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of Truth from 9/11 to Katrina” Frank Rich
The shocking extent of the White House’s media manipulation
The cost of the war to the UK taxpayer.

Frogs in pots and Islam in the UK

Posted in Factual information with tags on July 20, 2008 by redandwhitestripes

One of the hardest concepts that I try to explain to my students is the “frog in a boiling pot” concept. It’s not the actual analogy that is difficult : if you place a frog in a pot of water on a stove and suddenly turn the heat full blast, the frog will jump out. If you turn the temperature up slowly in minuscule fractions, the rise will be so slow that by the time the frog realises what is happening, he’s being served up in some French restaurant.

No, the hard part is actually getting students to understand how this concept can be, and certainly is, used in so many parts of Sociology. The theory is also known as “creeping normalcy” and another example might be cutting down trees on an island. Do it in one fell swoop and you’ll create havoc, do it a few trees per day, you’ll encounter far less resistance.

And this creeping normalcy is hitting us in the UK right now. what’s more, those who are aware of it and raise it as an issue are demonised and screamed down. But that does not change the fact: Britain is becoming increasingly Muslim.

Now of course the usual counter argument here is: “It’s only three percent of UK residents who are Muslim” , which is true. But let’s look at some trends.

The exact number and growth of UK Muslims is hard to track due to the fact that, previously, the UK census did not ask about religion, now it is an optional question. However the most recent ‘official’ figure seems to be around one point six million, though that is most likely higher now. Quite an increase from 10,000 before 1925, no? The number of Mosques has increased proportionately from four in 1960 to 618 (source).

But what is the evidence that this trend will increase? There are two absolutely crucial factors. First, one third of the Muslim population is under sixteen. This means that with the Islamic culture of multiple marriages for men, a population boom can be expected to come. Secondly, the Muslim birthrate – though not always as high as reported – is still far higher than the native birth rate which is dropping alarmingly. Muhammad is now the second most popular name for baby boys born in the UK.

The facts do not lie in this case. Don’t take my word for it, have a look at the data provided by a Princeton professor.

Now, if you are a multicultralist then you are probably jumping for joy at this news. But the rise of UK Islam should be a cause for concern. The two cultures involved here are considerably different, which is why – asides from the obvious – we have problems with arranged marriages, incest, support for stoning and beating and many, many more. And don’t tell us it’s a tiny minority that support terror, it may be a minority but it isn’t tiny.

Whether you are a multicultralist, a civic nationalist or an ethnic nationalist, Muslim, Christian or Atheist, immigrant, migrant or native, the fact is that these trends will certainly present social problems and challenges. We must deal with them peacefully but we must deal with them. While those raising objections are screamed down as being “racists” (read: ‘spawn of the devil’ in PC Britain) and “hate mongers” , etc. the problem will simply escalate.

As we ponder this problem I have another modicum of thought – why do we not see this kind of problem developing in Muslim nations? The answer is that foreigners in these nations are welcomed and tolerated as long as they accept local customs, rules and cultures. Most importantly, the identity of these nations is never threatened by catastrophic increases that threaten to irreversibly change the makeup of the nation and the culture and history that comes with it.

“You can hide from reality but you cannot hide from the consequences of hiding from reality”.

Elementary Mathematics

Posted in Factual information with tags on July 20, 2008 by redandwhitestripes

Now there’s a very good reason why I’m not a Mathematics teacher (though I did well in Maths at school), but I’d like to offer a few basic guidelines for dealing with people who, perhaps, have been reading this book.

If a party has a massive increase in net votes in an election (regardless of seats won) , that party’s support has increased. In a truly democratic (i.e. proportional representation system) government, it could mean a large increase in seats.

If a party’s number of council seats has increased from zero to fifty six in fifteen years, with an (obvious)  overall trend of growth during that period, it is growing.

If a party contest four seats that were not theirs anyway – and did not win any of the seats – it is not a decrease. It is simply a failure to gain any of those four seats. If the Tories did not win all the seats either, it doesn’t mean their (almost guaranteed) forthcoming general election victory must be doomed!

That’s the basics of it. The growth of the BNP has not been – as one BNP exec described it – the “mushroom cloud” success of the likes of the Referendum or UKIP Party. It has been slow, steady and sure. When people state otherwise, you can borrow the above lesson.

Political mind games

Posted in Factual information, Hysteria and lies with tags on July 14, 2008 by redandwhitestripes

Politicians have always been experts not just at outright lies, but also at clever mind games such as push polling , straw man arguments , weasel words ( want some examples?) and the politics of fear. It’s important to be aware of these methods as awareness and understanding of how they work is the best way to defend against them.

However, one method that works particularly well – a method related to the politics of fear – is very simple: opinion presented as fact (OPAF).

OPAF is rampant in politics. Often the claims can be subtle or malicious enough to seem true, and a favourite trick is to use exaggerated or embellished evidence that seems to corroborate the claim. In other cases however, the accusation or observation is simply based on strong dislike or even hatred.

It ever ceases to amaze me that people take some outrageous claims for granted.

Let’s take one random example of a ridiculous claim.

“The XYZ party is a party of drunk drivers”.

The chances are such an OPAF is being stated because of one or two news items about members of the XYZ party being arrested for DUI. However, with liberal media being what it is and psychological elements such as the belief confirmation bias , people often lose perspective of quantity. They can begin to truly believe that the actions of two people can represent the actions of two thousand people.

The antidote is simple – ask for genuine evidence that the majority or even a significant portion of the party have been caught DUI. When such evidence cannot be presented, ask why somebody is stereotyping a whole party for the actions of a tiny fraction. In short, simply point out the truth – the accuser is using OPAF.

So how can we take a moral high ground and rise above OPAF? Simple, use citeable, credible evidence whenever making factual claims. Of course, not everything on the net is reliable evidence for use in a debate. However, the wealth of information is such that a credible source relating to almost any topic can be found if the user looks hard enough. Government sources (despite their obvious vested agenda) , the Election Commission web site , broadsheets or Berliners such as The Times or The Telegraph (though again, there is an NUJ vested interest) and scholarly papers are just some examples of credible sources that can be used. Credible sources such as these add value and respectability well over OPAF to any educated person.

Of course many other sites – such as my own here – are not neutral. But some non-neutral sites can offer useful links or at least present logical arguments against OPAF. A cognisant person should be able to detect the difference and discriminate accordingly.

Don’t forget to cite your sources. At the very least, a mention of the web site (not just a link, but an actual sentence stating the site’s name and source) should be used when copying chunks of text or any other situation where the writer could even risk being seen as using plagarism or simply when sources are likely to be scrutinised or queried. For citing academic works such as books, use one of these styles.

Again, a simple link with no description is not enough and would be considered very poor taste.

Using such evidence should help you wade through the murky swamps of politics, but take heart!  At least we have a swamp to wade in. Less than half The World’s nations live in a democracy and fewer still have a democracy as mature as ours. For all its many faults, the UK political system remains one of the best.

Why the Swastika appeals by Nick Griffin

Posted in Uncategorized on July 13, 2008 by redandwhitestripes

This is an old Griffin article from the old BNP site. I strongly recommend a read for anyone who thinks we are Nazis, wants to be a Nazi or even just join the NF.

Leep it active!

Posted in Uncategorized on July 11, 2008 by redandwhitestripes

The Internet is a revolution, not just for general information and communication but also for small businesses of all varieties. Small companies, small bands and small political parties can now become popular overnight just by having a website. In times past, bigger businesses always had the upper hand because they could afford mass advertising. Now, anyone can access a mass market simply by kicking off a small campaign with a gig, rally or product launch with the appropriate web site address flashed around for all to see.

The BNP is no exception. Our growth has been surpassed only by the popularity of our web site which is, by far, the most popular political web site in the UK (see our ‘Alexa’ ranking on the bottom of our homepage) . And it has been matched by some impressive online activism in many shapes and forms from blogging to Facebook groups. But I just want to send a note of caution here – Internet activism alone is not enough.

I’s an easy trap to get in to because Internet support seems so easy. In the same way that people forward junk email to their friends warning about a virus that never existed and Facebook users send “lil green patch” to their buddies (does anyone really believe that sending rubbish to their friends on Facebook will help fight global warming?) , so it is easy for a BNP supporter to get online, type “vote BNP” and feel they have done their bit.

Internet activism is a very, very useful and important tool (especially for someone like me who lives overseas) but to make a real difference, it needs to be followed up by further action.

So, on behalf of all the admin, I’d like to ask every BNP supporter who has found our group here (and any supporter of any party who cares about democracy and making a small difference) to please, please, please try and take all of the following steps:

1) Join your party.

BNP followers can do so here or by getting in touch with me. Preferably get in touch with your local organiser, too.

2) Spread the word.

Not by spamming the forum of your favourite football team or on a Saturday night binge, but with the right people at the right time. In the case of the BNP, a good target group would be old school Labour voters who now feel betrayed. It’s important not to be too pushy as this can be counterproductive.

Some people still believe in the old stereotype of the BNP as a bunch of yobs, so it’s a good idea to make light conversation explaining the BNP is now  progressive party of decent, honest people from all walks of British life.

I suggest also making clear that people are not signing their life away. Be relaxed about it all, make them well aware it’s simply a case of “Come along to a meeting and see what you think” or  “Have a read of ‘Identity’ and get back to me if you want” , etc. Even in Thailand, I have managed to produce a couple of converts amongst my expat colleagues.

3) Read up.

Knowledge is power and for anyone interested in politics, I strongly recommend learning more about how the system works.

Why is learning important in activism? Simple, once you know how the system works, it’s easier to find ways to help. For example, my BNP colleague Chris was involved in volunteer work on the night of the GLA elections and was lucky enough to meet Richard Barnbrook on the night he got elected. It’s unlikely he would have done that if he had no knowledge of the election process.

For anyone looking to study the basics of the UK political system, I recommend “British Politics in Focus” by Roy Bentley . Don’t be put off by the hefty size and weight of the book, it’s aimed at A – Level students and as such it is detailed enough to give a firm grounding in the subject but simple enough that anyone can understand it.

So these are my three ideas that I would plead with any BNP supporter to follow up. If anyone has any more suggestions or ideas, please let me know.

Have a good weekend!