As we slide into the General Election, the serial calumny artists are all setting out their stalls and beseeching us to beware of voting BNP: either because Nick Clegg, the wimpish limp-wristed apology for a politician tells us a vote for BNP is a vote of hate: or, in the case of the odious Zanulab charlatan Phil Woolas, who masquerades as what can risibly be called “Immigration Minister” informs us, BNP “Wants election violence!”.

Woolas stated that the Metropolitan Police and the hugely inefficient CPS were “Preparing for a surge in public order offences”: wouldn’t have anything to do with the unwashed spotty Rent-A-Crowd known as the UAF now would it, Phil?

He then went on to wax lyrical on precisely what Zanulab were doing about solving the problems of and caused by immigration: and stated that this would, after the economy, be the “Second most important issue between the main political parties”.

Forgive me if I yawn: Phil, you, you understand, aint top on my recruitment list for stable hands and horse minders!

This is the party it has to be remembered, which covertly instituted a hidden social engineering experiment by allowing huge unfettered immigration in order to break the political right for all time! As was revealed, last year, by one Mr Andrew Neather, one of the faceless civil service wonders involved in the plan’s architecture.

Trouble is, this “Plan” if it can be thus dignified – abortion is more apposite – has created massive socio-economic problems in its wake.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

This is the crowd that allowed London to be peopled by those of which over 30% were not actually born in Britain!

This is the party, which have enacted bill after bill to make sure we, the indigenous population are now legally, in far too many instances, second class citizens in the country of our birth and our parents and grandparent’s birth!

Woolas thereafter whittered on informing us all of the wonderful things Zanulab were going to do when elected to sort out the problem; yawn again, forgive me. The problems, of course, in the main caused by Woolas and his idiot chums since some fools elected them to power back in 1997!

Since when, it must be remembered, they have driven the nation into effective bankruptcy, handed out to tend of billions with no conditions to the very same bankers which caused the core problems in the first place and now saddled each and every one of us, man, woman and child, with debts so large, most people cannot even place the decimal point in the right place!

They have destroyed British nationality, run roughshod over each and every ancient institution and heritage, tried to ban us from freedom of speech, yet now dare to suggest we hand them once again the keys of state in order to perpetrate yet more outrages on the modicum which remains!

Now, the eponymous Lord Protector of Do Gooding and Bleeding Heart conscience, the effete Nick Clegg, denies Britain is a “Broken Society”: well, Nick Clegg MP Come on Down! From your Ivory Tower!

“Hate,” says Clegg, “won’t build a single house: won’t create a single job for your children; won’t open a single A & E department: isn’t going to solve a single crime!”

He went on, “This is one of the most important things we have learned as one of the most successful anti-BNP parties. They are pedlars of hate and we have learned they are also utterly, utterly useless!”

Well, Nick, so who’s good then? Your party, the Lib-Dems? A ragtag group of  ideologues ranging from silly fusty women who knit their own macro-biological pasta to dreamy theoreticians such as Vince Cable?

Or Zanulab? Don’t me laugh please: I just ate a good lunch!

Or Call Me Dave and his Bullingdon Boys: who, let’s not forget were the party of Thatcher and Porky Lawson, who once again, boomed up the economy, short-term which led to the economic crash of 1989/90: and prior to this, did precisely the same in 1971-1972: except the architects of this fiasco were Heath and Barber.

And what is worse, sat on their fat behinds whilst the immigration problem gather momentum and created the very social destruction we suffer from today.

They Still Don’t Get It

As they all fight for votes it is easy and convenient to denigrate BNP and indeed, any other political party they fear will be inevitable gainers come June.

Selling the old concept of BNP comprising only Neanderthal knuckle-dragging tattooed skinheads, bereft of intellect and knowledge and intent only on perpetuating mayhem in the cause of who knows what, is a neat get out and escape from reality.

Helloooo! Woolas! Helloooo Clegg!

The actual reality is simple: the vast majority of voters are disconnected, disenfranchised and discarded as non-entities from, of and by the political system: we are only important in terms of taxes and paying for the damned charade!

Well, newsflash! We’ve had enough!

We have watched powerless as our proud heritage has been destroyed: our economic base dismembered; our laws, hardly won since 1066, cast aside by weasels such as Jack the Lad Straw, with nary a bleat from Tory and Lib-Dem benches.

No doubt many 18 and 20 year olds, whose education is a result of yet more of Zanulab’s 13 years of social engineering and an almost complete failure to properly equip youngsters for work (Knowing the difference between a Transsexual, a Transvestite and a Lesbian and what Divali is all about may well be fun, but isn’t much use when seeking gainful employ!), will escape from their celeb-infested miasma for long enough to cast their vote for all the wrong reasons come June and it is this which such as Woolas rely on. Who knows.

Increasing numbers of articulate, reasonably astute adult and mature voters will support BNP since no other party is obviously interested in breaking up the Status Quo: they simply wish to continue as before, arguing the while in the Commons, like badly behaved little boys in a primary school playground.

No one with much of an intellect believes BNP could or would win power: what we do believe is BNP will gain influence and thus compel change: and provide a wake-up call to the main political hegemony: and by so doing, will force accountability, consideration of the majority of electors and their views, wishes and desires and a complete halt to unfettered governments driving social change simply because they happen to think it’s a good idea!

What is rewarding, is to see just how often mainstream politicians are now making their incomprehensible anti-BNP statements: they are clearly on the run!

Charles Hinchcliffe

February 2010

Share

Readers will recall that we recently reported on Michael Barnbrook’s complaint to the Metropolitan Police and standards commisioner  about Jacqui Smith MP and also his complaint to Kent Police in regard to comments made by a Labour party activist to the Independent newspaper following the Swanley by-election.

Michael has been in touch to keep us updated:

With reference to my complaint to the Tonbridge Race Hate Unit regarding the alleged comments in the Independent by a Labour activist by the name of Lesley Dyball.

Constable Nova O’Leary from the unit telephoned me on 16th March, 2009, to inform me that she has spoken to Ms Dyball about her alleged comments that BNP supporters chanted “blacks out” after the result was declared.

According to Constable O’Leary, although Ms Dyball did make a complaint of a racist incident having taken place, at no stage did she mention or implicate the British National Party as having been involved in the incident.

It appears therefore, that in addition to the photograph that appeared in the same article that attracted over one thousand complaints to the Press Complaints Commission, Ms Dyball is alleging that she has been misquoted by Jerome Taylor, the journalist who wrote the article.

I intend to make a further complaint to the Press Complaints Commission alleging that the sole intention of the article appears to be no more than an attempt to demonise the British National Party, a legitimate political party.

With reference to my complaint against Jacqui Smith, MP, regarding her claims for additional Costs Allowance.

I have received a letter from the office of the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, dated 10th March, 2009, informing me that the matter has been referred to Chief Superintendent Nigel Mawer of the Economic and Specialist Crime Unit at New Scotland Yard for a suitable response to be sent to me regarding the contents of my letter to him on 5th March, 2009.

I have also received a response from Mr John Lyon, the Parliamentary commissioner for Standards, regarding my third letter to him on 5th March, 2009.

He acknowledges the comments made by me in that letter and will take note of them during the course of his investigation.

I will keep you updated as and when I receive further letters.

Kindest regards,

Michael Barnbrook,

Spokesman on Policing and Crime matters.

We’d like to thanks Michael for this update and for his continued excellent work.

Share

Michael Barnbrook, the BNP Parliamentary Sleazebuster has had a second complaint against the Home Secretary, the Rt Hon Jacqui Smith, MP, turned down by Mr John Lyon, CB, Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, on the basis that he has not supplied sufficient evidence to warrant at least a preliminary investigation into his allegation that she may have abused the rules relating to additional costs allowance.

He has, however, written to Mr Lyon for the third time, requesting that the matter be referred to the Metropolitan Police for an assessment of possible criminal wrongdoing by Ms Smith.

This request is based on the fact that a complaint accepted by Mr Lyon from a close neighbour of Ms Smith, a Mr Taplin, that she only stayed at her sister’s house a couple of nights a week and is therefore not entitled to nominate it as her main home, intimates that, if true, Ms Smith may have committed a criminal offence under the Theft Act, of obtaining money by deception.

This is due to the fact that by nominating her sister’s house as her main home, when in fact it wasn’t, she has knowingly obtained many of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money through the additional costs allowance that she was not entitled to claim.

Such an allegation can only be dealt with by the police.

The Parliamentary Commissioner has a duty therefore, where there is any suggestion of criminal wrongdoing by a Member of Parliament, to seek permission from the Committee on Standards and Privileges to suspend his inquiry and refer the matter to the Metropolitan Police for a full and independent investigation.

The authority to do this is contained in the eighth report of the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges, 2007/8, headed ‘The complaints System and the Criminal Law.

Michael has also sent a copy of the letter to Sir Paul Stephenson, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, for his attention.

All three letters to the Parliamentary Commissioner and the letter to the Commissioner of Police can be viewed here.

The eighth report of the Committee on Standards and Privileges, 2007/8, is viewable on the website of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.

Anyone who considers that the allegation against Ms Smith is so serious, that in the interest of all concerned, including Ms Smith, the House of Commons and the general public, that it is seen to be investigated by the proper authority and therefore referred to the Metropolitan Police, should address those concerns in writing (not E mail) to Mr John Lyon, Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, House of Commons, London, SW1 0AA and Sir Paul Stephenson, Commissioner, Metropolitan Police, New Scotland Yard, Broadway, London, SW1H 0BG

You can see Michael’s original letters here.

Here are Michael’s latest letters:

Third Letter to Sir John Lyon

Letter to Paul Stephenson

Share

Gaza demonstrations

Question No: 247 / 2009

Richard Barnbrook
Does the Mayor have any comments to make concerning the recent Gaza demonstrations in London in which officers from the Metropolitan Police were allowed to be assaulted, abused and humiliated?

Answer from the Mayor:
There have been a number of demonstrations in central London recently on the conflict between Israel and the Gaza Strip over Palestine, the vast majority of which have been peaceful.

The right to lawful protest is important and something the Police will always facilitate, however, there have been a few incidents relating to the above demonstrations where a small minority of protestors have acted violently towards MPS officers. This is completely unacceptable and many suspects have already been arrested and charged, as is usual practice. Steps are being taken by the MPS to seek to identify the remaining suspects and take the necessary action.
*

Predicted increasing crime levels
Question No: 248 / 2009

Richard Barnbrook
Can the Mayor confirm that he believes that the 25 extra police officers provided for in his recent budget submission will be sufficient in the light of predicted increasing crime levels?
Answer from the Mayor:
The 2009-12 budget proposals do reflect a net increase of 25 officers although the impact varies across the Service in line with current priorities.

There has been significant investment in police numbers and the increase of 7,282 (28%) officers since 2000 means that next year the MPS is budgeting for 33,283 officers, which will be the highest in the Service’s history.

The Service has robust systems in place to identify emerging trends and is closely monitoring the impact of the recession on crime profiles. The Service will continue to use its resources effectively to meet the new challenges and build on its performance in reducing crime.
*

Anti-terrorism
Question No: 249 / 2009

Richard Barnbrook
Does the Mayor believe that the proposals for an estimated total expenditure of £350 million on “anti-terrorism” in London (2009-2010) indicate that it is a stable, multicultural city?
Answer from the Mayor:
I do not think it possible to draw any conclusions about the stability or multicultural nature of a city, from the size of a city’s budget to counter acts of terrorism – which can, of course, occur anywhere in the world and depends on many factors.
*
Tax freeze
Question No: 250 / 2009

Richard Barnbrook
With the current economic climate the announced council tax freeze will be welcome change for Londoners. With this in mind can the Mayor please indicate to Londoners where they can find the extra cash to pay for the high rent increases that have been announced by some London boroughs. Can the Mayor also confirm what influence the Mayor has over local councils to negotiate a fairer deal for residents.

Answer from the Mayor:
I am delighted that the freeze on the GLA’s share of council tax could be a help to Londoners at this difficult time.

Council rent increases are determined by local authorities within the parameters set by central government and I do not have any direct responsibility in this area.
*
Obscene language
Question No: 251 / 2009

Richard Barnbrook
With being Mayor of London comes great responsibility. The public expect a Mayor to be an upstanding member of the community who will act as a role model to old and young alike; the Mayor of London should be capable of coping with any given situation with dignity. With this in mind can the Mayor confirm that in the future he will deal with all people in a professional way and not use obscene language like he did in a phone conversation to Keith Vaz MP? Can the Mayor confirm that this is not a sign of him falling apart under pressure?

Answer from the Mayor:
This was a private conversation.

Share

Yet another serving police officer is taking the Metropolitan Police to tribunal after failing to receive promotion.

Derrick Quarm, who has been a PC for 11 years and is based in Lambeth claims his attempts to become a trainee detective have been knocked back more than 8 times.

This story follows on from many recent high profile claims of racism in the Met preventing the advancement of minorities.

We of course know that there is institutional racism whithin many police forces, but not against minorities but white indigenous Britons, with many forces not even accepting applications from white males whilst they build up their ethnic and female quotas.

Of course these minorities who claim discrimination couldn’t possibly be turned down for promotion because they are just not suitable or good enough could they? But least they have the “racist” (by the definitions they use against us) National Black Police Association.

Where do the white officers who are turned down for promotion because they don’t fit into the ethnic quotas go for help?

Share

Despite their own figures showing that black youths are responsible for a massively disproportionate amount of knife crime in London the Metropolitan Police “Service” appear to be targeting an anti-knife campaign in the wrong direction.

The web site droptheweapons.org
set up by the Met, whilst using black actors for their anti gun crime videos obviously felt that to show the truth about knife crime would be just too much.

Three anti-knife videos all use white youths as the main characters, completely going against the evidence of official figures which should have seen something like 2 out of the 3 videos using a black youth as the main perpetrator.

Do the Met think that videos of white kids carrying knives will prevent black kids from doing so? I doubt it, in fact such is the power of the media that black kids are now MORE likely to carry knives because they need to defend themselves from all those evil white kids they saw in the Met’s videos carrying knives!

Share