BNP (British National Party): Ideas? Policies? Future? Jewish Subversion?

Ramifications of nuclear issues are everywhere: subjects loosely or remotely linked to the nuclear bomb myth

• BNP (British National Party): Ideas? Policies? Future? Jewish Subversion?

Postby rerevisionist » 30 Jul 2011 01:24

Jewish Subversion in Britain 2007. Added 14th Aug 2013.

From a speech in Coventry, England, by Nick Griffin. Posted Jan 28th 2013. Extracts from about 12 min 30 sec to 14 min 45 sec. As far as I know, there was no added information: amounts of money offered, names of people offering it, destination of money

“... the most important [group] by a mile was the EDL (English Defence League)/ British Freedom Party ... there was a serious, hugely-funded, systematic effort by a section of the ruling elite, the zionist neocon elite, to dominate, to simply take over nationalism, to make it their tool and encourage the white working class to fight their wars, so when the collapse comes, people will be looking the wrong direction, instead of the real culprits.

I was approached - we were offered money from the United States.

And all they wanted were two things.

They wanted us to concentrate on criticising Islam, only to focus on that.

And only one other thing-

Drop our criticism of the international banking system.

Ani I refused. And we refused. That was in about 2007 .. all hell broke loose .. the self-same people, so-called 'Tory' think tanks, Policy Exchange, Centre for Policy Studies, the self-same people organised and ran Nothing British to devastate BNP election results, with lies in the Sun [cheap Murdoch 'newspaper'] and so on...

We stood up to that we faced it down we exposed it.. we're still here. ...”
This is rather long... it's sparked by a recent rather bitter leadership battle in the BNP; it seems as good a time as any to try to predict the future.

The British National Party (BNP) - its history to date.
Can it and will it face difficult political and technical Issues?

The BNP is the only radical party in Britain - all the other parties are under the thumb of Jewish interests, mediated by paper money, big business, and trade unions. The commercial media - both local and national - dominate information, notably under Murdoch, and tell people which party to vote for. The EU itself is essentially Jewish, and is controlled by secretive groups such as 'Common Purpose' based closely on the Soviet Union model. Groups of people which aren't particularly party oriented - the legal system and police, who supposedly carry out their orders, - the academic world, the BBC, the Civil Service (in Britain the system has permanent non-political staffing) - are kept in line. They are kept in line by thugs who oppose free speech when instructed. More important, at least at present, is the entire media system, plus an entire network of pressure groups and pseudo-charities, all taxpayer-funded, and with legal teeth. There are thousands of organisations for black Africans of all types, Asians of all types, sexual oddities of all types. The largest group of such organisations however remains Jewish. There are thousands of organisations for prisoners, criminals, drug addicts, fake asylum seekers, open border advocates, free housing advocates, free health advocates, foreign aid scam advocates. There are legally-backed, and hugely costly groups, such as the CEHR, 'Commission for Equality and Human Rights', with a blackish journalist front man concealing of course white lawyers carrying out Jewish agendas. All political parties control their members - any MP or councillor raising points contrary to the Jewish-imposed agenda is vilified, attacked, or sacked. Trade Unions of every possible type from Students and Teaching and Journalism (NUJ guidelines prohibit honest reporting of the BNP) to medical aides have been corrupted .

This 'Zionist' issue is of course kept away from the general public. Many find it incredible, and will not believe anything set out in the paragraph above. And indeed it is an astonishing achievement. The ZOG domination of the USA, and historically the Jewish mass murders in the USSR, show it's a serious evil. I don't think there's been anything analogous since the days of the Catholic Church, and the previous peak of Islam, each of which had a similar international reach, with a more-or-less pliable ideology, and with its own language, publicity, education and 'intelligence' systems, and offloadable wars.

The leaders of the National Front (of the 1970s, sparked mainly by immigration issues, which were publicised by Enoch Powell), and the BNP (later), were largely aware of all this. John Tyndall's autobiography shows clear awareness of the jewish issue, as did Richard Edmonds and Nick Griffin, something of an achievement before Internet. The Fed/paper money issue has always been part of BNP policy, though it's often been tucked away.

Per contra all three big political parties in Britain are now 'led' by Jews . Most people don't realise the extent to which they are 'groomed'. To take one example, Jack Straw was elected National Union of Students' head - not because of his skill or charisma, obviously, but because there's a standing policy of 'entryism' which normal Britons cannot stand up to. Ken Livingstone is another type - the funded long-term rather unintelligent front-man, grateful for his/her position, which now dominates politics and the media in the entire white world.

British Nationalism and Britons generally are bedevilled by a lazy, comfortable belief that the Second World War showed Britons as 100% in the right and at their fighting best. In fact, it's now known that Churchill was in the pay of Jews from the late 1930s, and covered up the truth that Hitler had no intention of fighting Britain, and Churchill on a pretext began large-scale bombing of German civilians, provoking Hitler into attack, and distracting Germany from the mass murder machine in Russia. Churchill of course went on to help destroy much of Europe, and consolidated Stalin's death grip. He also bankrupted Britain, whose reserves went to the USA. British fighters had an infinitely easier time than many others caught up in that war, notably in eastern Europe. The official censorship on Eisenhower in Germany, and the Anglo-Israel War, and the fraud of the 'Holocaust' still continue today. Many of the conventional BNPers, such as John Bean, are in this mode of blithe ignorance. Many British voters believe the comforting fantasy that Britain had full moral right to declare war, and almost single-handedly beat Hitler. And of course they have not much psychological desire to question it.

However, the ageing and death of people directly influenced by the war has left younger people, despite the unrelenting propaganda, sceptical or indifferent to that war, especially as some have been involved in other subsequent wars. Then Internet came on the scene. The BNP had an Internet presence from about 2000, and in 2008 revamped and greatly improved their site with a WordPress format, allowing monitored comments which were stored on IntenseDebate. It wasn't completely professional - offline comments were difficult to download and save, and the site had over-large file sizes which made it slow-loading. At that time, Arthur Kemp was responsible for the content. A vast range of topics - the truth about immigration figures, facts about money for corrupt London immigrant groups, the truth about the 'Joint Tenancy Agreement' and free housing for illegal immigrants, postal voting frauds, fraudulent 'foreign aid' schemes, vast amounts of money secure in Europe - 200 billion estimated from Nigerians, the costs of immigrant health, facts about immigrant crimes and cover-ups even of murders and rapes, prosecution of whites on ridiculous pretexts, the promotion of child sex, facts about ritual slaughter, the 'Barcelona Declaration' of floods of Africans, selling off of public assets at corruptly low prices, 'public finance' schemes to mortgage public buildings, huge EU farming subsidy frauds - and many, many other topics - were for the first time collected together. The BNP site became very successful by political standards, with far more readers than all the other party sites put together. The standard of some emails was very high, and Kemp published 2 volumes of BNP news spanning mid-2008 to mid-2009. By mid-2009 the BNP was sufficiently popular to gain two MEP seats . (The European 'Parliament', as with the USSR, cannot initiate policy). Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons both received something like 10% of their regional votes, enough under the d'Hondt system to get them elected. Many good candidates of course were not elected. This has been so far the high point of the BNP, which also had a scattering of parish and local councillors and a London Assembly member, and a county councillor. Note that in November 2009, there was a leaked BNP membership list, somewhat out of date, on Wikileaks, clear proof that Wiki is a Jewish-controlled organisation as they never publish lists of, for example, Jewish 'Searchlight' thugs in the UK. Anyway, in the May 2010 General Election, no BNP Members of Parliament were elected, just as in previous elections - there was a large media campaign against the BNP which the 'sheeple' obeyed. Just as in previous elections, the turnout was below about 2 in 3.

It's important to realise that, unlike every other European country, the British electoral system is first-past-the-post , so there is a natural tendency for the number of parties to shrink. Proportional representation no doubt has problems, but shutting out of entire sections of voters isn't one of them. (There was a recent absurd referendum on the transferable vote, probably calculated to pretend that electoral reform is proven unpopular). The only exceptions to first-past-the-post are the assemblies in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, though not England. These have part PR elections, which last took place in May 2011, with the bar higher, at about 25%, and in which the BNP won no seats, in my view very unfortunately. The London Assembly (started 2000) has a similar system, with elections next year (2012). The 2008 London Assembly elections had widespread voting fraud, which was never investigated.

The voting system is the reason that Britain's nationalist/ patriotic/ self-interest parties can't be compared with Europe's. A more accurate comparison could be with the USA and Australia, neither of which yet has a ghost of such a party.

Since then, there has been a BNP leadership challenge by Andrew Brons to Nick Griffin, election being by members of 2+ years standing, which was won recently after a hurried campaign (July 2011) by a very narrow margin, by Nick Griffin, who regrettably represented this as a 'clear mandate'. However, election rules on such things as neutrality and video presentations weren't followed. The challenge was on a basis of widespread disaffection, with large numbers of members leaving or being ejected, with accusations of incompetence and financial mismanagement - legitimate questions having gone unanswered for long periods of time, activists unsuccessfully trying to extract information. All long-term BNPers can name impressive people who have dropped out. However, it's worth pointing out that, in comparison with the big parties, these accusations are trivial in substance.

I'll try to summarise Griffin's achievements (some more successful than others):-
*Determination to push for election victories (in contrast, many Americans simply regard the system as too corrupt)
*Terrific oratory and ability to intellectually update
*Ideology magazine
*Monthly newspaper
*Red White and Blue festival - marquees, music etc in the countryside
*BNPtv - online videos and attempts at broadcasts
*Recent online radio
*Regional and local organiser system with meetings
*Online merchandise and sales
*Leaflets with logo and messages
*Database with membership processing
*Enquiry system with information packs and follow-up meetings
*Recording label for nationalist music
*Regular AGMs with discussions
*A Dining club
*Associated with a new independent trade union, 'Solidarity' open (I think) to anyone
*Various offices and buildings
*Attempts to include e.g. farming, environmental, Christian groups
*Mailshots of informational booklets, e.g. 'Racism Cuts Both Ways'
*Legal battles - notably with the anti-white racists of the CEHR. This is difficult to judge, but my impression is that Nick and his advisors re-formed the BNP into several independent groups in a way which conformed to the CEHR's anti-white racist requirements while allowing research, established membership, and party groups to exist. This seems to have been skilfully managed. [This note added 10 Aug]

As for failures :-
*Many members agree that Nick Griffin has come unstuck as regards building the party. External pressures - thuggery, threats, legal actions, media lies, corrupt unions - must be part of this, but it may be partly a personality matter
*He hasn't built up teams with different types of expertise; possibly through reluctance to delegate, possibly because many people will not risk their incomes. At any rate, first rate people are scarce. Note that most BNP successes relied on one outside person : Kemp, the former website editor; Wingfield, the newspaper editor; Rev West, the Christian commentator; Jim Dowson, the one-time fundraiser; Jonathan Bowden, a literary-political ideas man; Mick Barnbrook, an ex-policeman whose inquiries into Parliamentary expenses started the fraud investigations; Marlene Guest who used Freedom of Information inquiries to dig up the dirt on Sheffield councillors; Dawson does BNPtv; a prima ballerina; a few music makers; an event organiser; a single leaflet designer. External information sources included Shell, a crime statistician of Dark Lake Synectics, and Sir Andrew Green 's MigrationWatch (started 2001)
*Griffin has been accused of taking up some strange ideas; I can confirm that he suggested the slogan 'If it's Brown, flush it down', accompanied by a toilet placed in public areas such as roads, as part of the campaign against the unbelievably worthless Gordon Brown.
*Note also that the BNP website information, or Griffin's own conclusions, were rarely followed through: the exceptions were their mailshots - see for example 'Racism Cuts Both Ways', available online in PDF format. Here's a detailed example: when Andrew Neather revealed the 'Labour' Party secretly decided, undemocratically, to promote mass immigration, none of the names of the promoters were researched by the BNP. The evidence was Research, Development And Statistics Occasional Paper No67 - Migration: An Economic And Social Analysis , published January 2001 by the Home Office, then run by Mr Straw, who believes himself to be a Jew. Names listed on the document were: Stephen Glover, Ceri Gott , Anaïs Loizillon, Jonathan Portes, Richard Price, Sarah Spencer, Vasanthi Srinivasan and Carole Willis, apparently acting under someone called Barbara Roche, but no attempt was made to find out more.
*Similarly when it became clear the politicans were lying on foreign aid, national debt, lawyers such as Cherie Blair making a fortune from human rights law exploitation, faked immigration and breeding numbers, paedophile sex crimes, race bias in crime - typically 20:1 black violence ratio - these things were not followed up, but existed only as email footnotes to articles.
*There's no reliable income stream - something of course always likely to be difficult
*There was no very good system for liaising with the top
*For two years Nick Griffin spent much of his time in Europe. He was unwilling or unable to delegate work on the BNP to person(s) in the UK.
*There are persistent ideological arguments, caused by the lack of critically-checked knowledge

Let's follow up this last point. I have to return to the 'Zionist' issue . It's absolutely essential to understanding. A long string of people such as Herzl, Wernher, various Rothschilds, Warburg, Lenin, Alexander Sachs and an endless list of ZOG personnel in the USA built much of the modern world, mostly of a destructive, damaging, and evil type . Jewish money influence was responsible for much of the First World War, the Depression, the whole ideology of the Second World War, vast frauds including Hiroshima and Nagasaki, what became known as the 'Holocaust', the murder of Kennedy, the Vietnam War, the 'Liberty', through to Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya. More people than ever before are aware that immigration into white countries has been forced by Jews. The EU is dominated by 'ex-communists' - code-word for Jews. 'Common Purpose' is yet another corrupting group, specifically designed for a world with local bureaucrats, a sort of updated Freemasonry. How all this is done isn't of course very clear; Prof Kevin MacDonald in the USA outlines the ideological methods, a few writers explain the paper money details, a few more look at legal matters, many others look at the control of media. (Youtube can provide easy introductions: for example watch some of MacDonald's one hour or so video interviews and talks). There's little discussion on wars , because of their bloody nature - just one example: Chomsky stated most American students thought the death toll of the American genocide in Vietnam was a few tends of thousand, rather than the truer 3 million. Military sociology is all but non-existent.

Can a party which openly debates such issues be successful? The honest answer is that it seems unlikely at the present time, but it's possible this could change rapidly. Obviously opponents will continue to pass laws, tell lies, fund pressure groups, attack serious academics, and in some cases resort to murder. On the other hand, the past shows that dramatic counter-attacks can succeed. The Reformation is the obvious example - though the numbers involved were huge, and much of Europe was devastated. The Hungarian uprising of 1956 shows that mass risings can occur, though I personally believe the Marxist emphasis on 'revolution' is generally phoney.

Straws in the wind include the small European countries, which are most vulnerable demographically . Norway has emerged as a serious opponent to Israel - boycotts against Israel, open comments that the 'Holocaust' was a fraud, recognition of Palestine, environmental responsibility - no doubt explain the recent bomb and shootings, with general fakery. Holland has a popular new party, although it's clearly funded by Jews, presumably a subgroup anxious about Muslims. Sweden is waking up. Italy has a problem with African immigration. Greece is in serious trouble. The larger countries have terrifying problems - 44% of children under 5 in Germany are reported to be third world. Immigration has been permitted to such a level in major European countries that any stress is likely to lead to chaos, possibly uncontrollable. This of course is deliberate - immigration has been designed to weaken countries. This is clear from a consideration of its correlates - the costs are all offloaded onto the white natives; crime is offloaded; health, housing, child costs, unchecked qualifications, insurance cheating are all offloaded onto whites; there are no noticeable net benefits whatever. The general educational level has gone down.

As for the BNP, a splinter party already seems to be forming, run by sentimental people with no understanding of the issues, or who want to avoid them - a pale shadow of a proper party, controlled opposition, perhaps offering careerists and mountebanks opportunities. It's clear the BNP has potential, and it must attract the attention of people who want to control it. It's likely that with discreet funding of selected people a tame BNP with a dumbed-down and tokenised union jack ideology might take shape, under a new name, doing nothing much about the present Murdoch-and-BBC trash, or about money and industry controlled secretly, or about unaccountable wars started from secret motives.

A serious party has to face facts, and sound information is needed . As long as present conditions apply, there is no chance that academics and officially funded think tanks will be honest. If there were an intellectual renaissance, so that politics and economics and military issues become serious subjects, and not their present 'correct' childish apologetics, I think there could be genuine progress. More likely it will be a minority thing. This site debates nuclear issues - obviously, if nuclear power turns out to be a fraud, or simply unworkable, any country with a policy of nuclear power will be in trouble. Nuclear weapons obviously have problems. 'Climate change', AIDS, 9/11 and other frauds are really quite alarming examples of the ease with which truth can become part of a negotiable, traded, money-making scam. And these are quite well-known. The full truth of nuclear and weapons frauds is as yet unknown. Ditto with financial frauds. And some science, such as the structure of cells in biology, is also riddled with fraud, though as yet this is not known to many.

Can the BNP help spark a serious renaissance of intellectual honesty? It's impossible to be optimistic. It would need money, or at least resources, and relentless critical and detailed inspection. I know of no website with this sort of agenda. There seems little hope that any wealthy organisations would donate toward such ends, and the legal obstacles could be enormous. So I doubt a creative spark will happen, though I like to hope so. Both ideas (necessary to steer policies) and organisation (necessary to carry them out) seem likely to remain low-powered, or, if funding materialises, to be controlled opposition, as the Labour Party became from its early years.

It's possible - this may be likeliest, in fact - that something top-down will happen . The obvious incompetence and lies from the US and EU might I suppose lead to something like coup d'etats or some media change through disgust with lies. Maybe unrest will be so great that low intensity wars will become common, and politicians and paper money shufflers will be ignored.

But it's possible that a long-term plan might be evolved . I'll try to outline what might happen, basing it on the last century and the way so-called Jews operated. It has to be understood that such a plan would presumably be more-or-less secret, with the public face being carefully hedged about by misleading and ambiguous language. I'll consider just a sampling of actual historical events of less or greater relevance, then counterpoise them with what could be ripostes, trying to allow for the different nature of states vs spread-out tribal groups. The events below took 100 years. The time-span of counter-events, if any, can only be guessed, at least by me.

*1909 world - Shipping Cartel investigation - typical attempt to examine whether competition is possible or desirable in big industries. Riposte: presumably such investigations might be carried out with less whitewash
*1913 USA - Paper money controlled by Jews - method: secret agreement then implementation by funded puppet politician Riposte: secret agreement by which such control is removed
*1914 UK - British passports introduced as a reaction to floods of Jews in London's east end
*1914-1915 Turkey - Armenian Christian genocide by Turkish Jews - method: secret clique in Turkey controlling policy - disarming the Armenians, then division into small groups with rape and murder. Riposte: removal of secret influence of Jews and other tribal cults from governments
*1917 UK - Balfour Agreement - method: secret agreement of Palestinian land with supposed guarantees in exchange for war support. Riposte: various possibilities including offer of other lands - Madagascar, Khazakstan
*1917 USA - enters WW1
*1917 Russia - USSR terror started by Jews - method: secret funding by Germans and Americanised Jews of Jewish groups nominally under Lenin. Later, transfer of Western technology using slave labour Riposte: it seems a perfectly fair exchange to fund terrorists and murderers
*1920s and 1930s Eastern Europe - code phrases invented such as 6 million, racism, Frankfurt school neologisms, class enemy, bourgeois intellectual, liquidate etc etc. Britain's PM in the 1930s invented 'right wing' as a description of Germany - Riposte: such phrases are no doubt natural to people who habitually deceive others - the use of 'extremist', 'right wing' 'neo-Nazi' 'supremacist' and more recently 'hate speech', 'undocumented' or 'irregular' 'migrant' are examples. Introduce a vocabulary which has the required effect - 'forced immigration', 'money power', 'freedom to comment' ...
*1922 UK - BBC founded - one of the first state broadcasters, radio at first. - Method: set up in effect to filter out any news not liked by any of the overlapping sets of the 'establishment', which includes secret and foreign influences. Riposte: revise and reverse some establishment groups
*1938 UK - Churchill paid to ensure war against enemies of Jews - method: obvious enough, though of course secret. Riposte: reverse the process or expose it
*1945 Europe - Last generation of whites in Europe - well known comment though rather secret. Riposte: reverse the process and return the compliment - object being the last generation of so-called Jews, the latter of course being much vaguer than whites
*1945 US - fake atomic bomb to divert money to Jewish 'science' - method: manage and control technology and science, sacking and if necessary killing objectors. Riposte: best presumably is proper verification and punishment
*1947 Indian subcontinent: Indian independence and fission into parts
*1947 USA - Truman starts CIA method: secret large organisation so there is scope for virtually any activity
*1948 Germany - faked genocide trials - method: rigged trial not following evidence, based largely on methods of Jews in USSR. Object partly a money-making fraud, partly to alter the moral balance Riposte: return the compliment, perhaps?
*1948 UK - British Nationality Act - Method: under pretence of ex-empire unity or business, permitted in theory the entire population of much of the world to move to Britain with full rights
*1951 Europe - ECSC treaty signed - Start of the EU. Method: secret negotiation fronted by an apparently economic-only steel and coal organisation. Object: to arrange a copy of the USSR in Europe. Riposte: withdraw and investigate punishments; it seems hopelessly irreformable
*1953 Australia - Rupert Murdoch starts - Method: presumably secretly funded to promote Jewish interests
*1960 World - OPEC formed (inc Venezuela)
*1963 US murder of Kennedy to instate Johnson - probably the biggest risk taken by organised Jewry in the USA to date
*1963 US Vietnam genocide in S E Asia - Jews receiving money - method: possible only through control of US media, control of both Houses, and generalised corruption. Riposte: make sure it can't happen again
*1965 US Hart-Cellar Act - Method: Jewish-promoted mass immigration policy for the USA, with the false claim it was not important. No strong objection from any Jewish sources. It seems appropriate to insist e.g. on emigration into Israel and remove assets of false claimants
*1967 Mid-East - attack on US ship in attempt to start war - method: false flag only possible with supine military. Riposte: is it possible to develop an educated military? Why do they put up with this crap?
*1976 UK - Race Relations Act - method: Jewish-drafted plan to start the process of displacing white Britons. Riposte: reverse this. Could e.g. define tribal fanaticisms as mental illness, including state removal of children in such cults. The racist violence of Jewish 'religious' books and such issues as ritual slaughter and prostitution in Israel should be emphasised. The race hate of Jews ought to have blanket coverage
*1998 UK - Human Rights Act - method: further plan by the EU to force immigration into Britain with huge financial incentives for lawyers. Riposte: remove this, with appropriate wording, such as help them benefit their ancestral lands
*2001 USA - 9/11 - Method: extraordinary false flag, needing co-operation of explosives experts, military and radar controllers, the media etc with the intention of more wars in the middle East. Riposte: no honest person could recommend such activities, but of course exposure and punishment is necessary
*2005 Europe - Barcelona Declaration - another EU secret policy to flood Europe with black African males. Riposte: flood Israel with blacks. And something must be done about the EU!
*2011 Norway - False flag - method: the faked 'single gunman' lie, plus military bomb as warning to Norway and anti-white strategy. Must have involved high-level corruption in Norway Riposte - has to be exposure. There seems no good reason not to respond with other false flags - or indeed real flags
Last edited by rerevisionist on 11 Aug 2011 22:18, edited 27 times in total.
Reason: Spellchecked at last 1 Aug 2011. Legal battle note added 10 Aug 2011.
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Re: BNP (British National Party) - Future? Ideas? Fightback?

Postby rerevisionist » 02 Aug 2011 19:52

BNP.ORG.UK - website popularity according to Alexa


There was a peak at the 2010 General Election, a plateau until the regional elections in May 2011, and a drop. (Alexa seems to keep only two years' results - there were figures for earlier years which no longer display).

BNP.ORG.UK - ranking in GB - 3,145
ENGLISH DEFENCE LEAGUE - ranking in GB - 6,078
BNPIDEAS.COM - ranking in GB - 13,082
BRITISHFREEDOM.ORG - ranling in GB - 14,327
LONDONPATRIOT.ORG - ranking in GB - 75,025
THEBCGROUP.ORG.UK - ranking in GB - 89,480
NATIONAL-FRONT.ORG.UK - ranking in GB - 97,473
VOTEENGLISH.ORG - ranking in GB - 147,443
BNPREFORM2011.CO.UK - ranking in GB - too low to register
These figures of course are all relative - actual numbers of new viewers are probably best known by the site owners
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Re: BNP (British National Party): Ideas? Policies? Future?

Postby rerevisionist » 20 Dec 2011 19:50

Christmas 2011
Something of a footnote to the year. The BNP is generally agreed to be in disarray, having lost most of its activists, and having financial and other problems. (Its recent headline said 'Happy Chrismas'). A BBC TV programme made up essentially of malcontents managed to make almost everyone look insignificant - unsurprisingly, as no serious person would appear on the BBC without careful precautions. Jim Dowson showed up in my view very badly - making milking movements with his hands to indicate his attitude to donors then, and probably now. Later, in October, BNPIdeas hosted a meeting, an mp3 audio version of which is or was online. A recent by-election, in west London, called in the legally shortest possible time, had a turnout below 30%, the 'Labour' candidate being essentially a rich female non-English accountant. This of course is discouraging to activists, and increasing numbers simply say the people aren't worth the effort. The 'EDL' has been outed as a Jewish-controlled outfit.

There's something of a battle of websites (as in the list above), none of whom have quite got their act together - their monitors prefer argument to debate, so there are endless trolls and timewasters. (As with sitcoms, the controllers, and the audiences - such as they are; as a percentage of the population the figures aren't great - seem to like friction and heat, rather than light.) Their monitors aren't very competent - recently BNPIdeas allowed 'Nick Lowles' posts through; 'TheBritishResistance' allows assorted Jewish fronts through, presumably through ignorance. Their posters still include people who list ten videos without saying what they're about, and who are quite illiterate, and who seem unable to focus on anything. There are incredibly badly-informed comments about religions. And few of them have any clue about science. ...

However there is one trend which is continuing - the Internet and the promotion of truth, to which I can see no downside at present. More people than ever are aware that BBC 'licences' can be unpaid, and that the BBC flagrantly breaches its 'charter'. Crime figures are being analysed better - for example BNPIdeas has a piece on 'Criminal Third World Invaders' costing £500 million a year, though, just like hack journalists, they don't give details on sources. There's much better analysis of such things as black deaths in police custody, revealed to be another media fraud. More people are suspicious of bombings in Afghanistan, Libya and so on, although no consistent correct interpretations have emerged. Such issues as the 'TAPI' pipeline, and the way armies are used for private purposes, are becoming more open; why should soldiers die, or live homeless on the street, so that American Jews can control assets? More people are aware that charities spend minimally and are immune from Freedom of Information probes. There is (I think) far more knowledge and scepticism of the EU than there was only a few years ago. There is more knowledge of science frauds, the notable example being Internet leaks on the 'climate change' frauds.

Part of that truth trend is an apparent decline in funded liars. This is difficult to judge - the big players, funded e.g. by Soros, may well be raking in their paper money more than ever before. But at a lower level, things may be getting squeezed. A few examples: Giuseppe de Santis (a pseudonym?) posts UK Internet articles on the falls in circulation of British 'newspapers', and gleefully reports job losses and closedowns, naturally good news to anyone honest. The Guardian , after decades of having a monopoly of BBC and gravy-train jobs, appears to be on the skids, only supported moneywise by its 50.1% share in the Trade Media Group of magazines. De Santis posted recently that during the electoral campaign in 2010, the Broadway Theatre in Barking joined the anti-BNP campaign by hosting anti-BNP plays and a concert [which] did a lot to incite young people to attack BNP members.. as a registered charity, the theatre was not [legally] allowed to take part in any political campaign.. nationalists will be delighted to know that the Broadway Theatre is set to close after the council decided to withdraw its funding. Artistic director Karena Johnson reacted angrily to the news.. . There were amused comments about her gravy train hitting the buffers. Another example I noted recently was in an obviously Jewish-controlled site called - it claims 9/11 investigators are a 'cult'! - which had a vague piece on Searchlight and someone called Nick Knowles, or Lowles, falling out over money. After many decades of expansion, this can only be positive news.

Another trend which may or may not continue is the identification of Jews with massive frauds and corruption. This is essentially a matter of scientific hypothesis testing: more people are finding pieces of the jigsaw, or trading them with others, and putting them into place. This is starting to operate in education, where lies and dumbing-down are being reliably identified; in the legal system and policing; and in the medical system.

Whether anything will happen top-down, I can't begin to say. It's unlikely any uncorrupt party would get votes in Britain at present; and Labour, in particular, is simply far too corrupt to be reformed rapidly. And voters are scared and inert. But it's not impossible that leaders of some power blocs might take action; information sources, military people, or economic blocs, including currency controllers, might in principle carry out some sort of coup. Perhaps there will be a death which might cause ripples - a Rothschild? A monarch? A behind-the-scenes type? Someone in the EU, a solidly corrupt organisation which appears vulnerable?

Happy 2012 (let's hope!)
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Return to Other Revisionisms, Hyper-Revisionisms & Off-Topic Debates

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest