The British Nationalist

Essential reading:

What is actually in the serum being injected into you and your children on the pretence of being a Swine Flu vaccine? : -

1. A/New Caledonia/20/99 (H1N1)

[Virus strain / Country, city or state the virus was cultured from / the number of hosts it was cultured from (pig, monkey, sheep or human / The year it was cultured / (H1N1) are your protein subtypes.
See the list below...

NOTE: They don’t call it “pig” it is called porcine pancreatic hydrolysate of casein

Question: Why are PER.C6 cells (human retina cells) in vaccine? Can anyone answer this question?

LIST OF VACCINE FILLERS:
Officially administered by design with every vaccine provided to the public.
This data is available via: mercola.com

IN ADDITION TO THE VIRAL AND BACTERIAL RNA/DNA THAT IS PART OF THE VACCINES, here are the extra 'fillers'.

Aluminum hydroxide
Aluminum phosphate
Ammonium sulfate
Amphotericin B
ANIMAL TISSUES: pig blood, horse blood, rabbit brain,
Dog kidney, monkey kidney, chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg
Calf (bovine) serum
Betapropiolactone
Fetal bovine serum
Formaldehyde
Formalin
Gelatin
Glycerol
Human diploid cells (originating from aborted human babies)
Hydrolized gelatin
Monosodium glutamate (MSG)
Neomycin
Neomycin sulfate
Phenol red indicator
Phenoxyethanol (car antifreeze)
Potassium diphosphate
Potassium monophosphate
Polymyxin B
Polysorbate 20
Polysorbate 80
Porcine (pig) pancreatic hydrolysate of casein
Residual MRC5 proteins
Sorbitol
Sucrose
Thimerosal (mercury)
Tri(n)butylphosphate,
VERO cells, a continuous line of monkey kidney cells
Washed sheep red blood cells

These additives are given without public knowledge or consent.

Merck, a pharmaceutical giant in the US produces the vast majority of vaccine supplies & are protected from prosecution by Federal Statutes imposed under the former Bush administration. The same situation now exists in Europe, too.

Analysis of vaccine fillers:

1.) ALUMINUM (two variants) - now absolutely & directly linked to Alzheimer’s Disease, this is universally recognised, but it's still in there, why?

2.) AMMONIUM SULFATE - an inorganic chemical compound used a fertilizer and “protein purifier”; known to cause kidney & liver damage, gastrointestinal dysfunctions

3.) AMPHOTERICIN B - an “antifungal disinfectant”, damages the urinary tract, bowels, heart functions.

4.) RE-CYCLED ANIMAL TISSUE (multiple) - the building blocks of Bovine spongiform encephalopathy or it's common name, 'Mad Cow Disease'.

5.) FORMALDEHYDE - used as “a preservative & disinfectant”, known to cause cancer, chronic bronchitis, eye irritation when exposed to the body’s immune system. It's used to embalm dead bodies in the morgue.

6.) MSG - A 'taste enhancer', why is that in there? it's now known to cause cancer in humans.

7.) PHENOL - a highly toxic disinfectant dye, attributed to liver, kidney, heart & respiratory damage. Adolf Hitlers Eugenics chemical of choice;

About Phenol and it's use in WW2:........."Injections of phenol have occasionally been used as a means of rapid execution. In particular, phenol was used as a means of extermination by the Nazis before and during the Second World War. Originally used by the Nazis in the 1930s as part of its euthanasia program, phenol, cheap and easy to make and quickly effective, became the injectable toxin of choice through the last days of the War. Although Zyklon-B pellets, invented by Gerhard Lenz were used in the gas chambers to exterminate large groups of people, the Nazis learned that extermination of smaller groups was more economical via injection of each victim one at a time with phenol instead. Phenol injections were given to thousands of people in concentration camps, especially at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Approximately one gram is enough to cause death. "......

8.) PHENOXYETHANOL (CAR ANTIFREEZE) - proven to have extreme neurotoxic side effects

9.) THYMEROSAL (MERCURY) - This additive alone was the catalyst for another recent Class Action Lawsuit organized by mothers of children born with Autism & the many related behavioral disorders associated with it. Autism is now occurring at levels never seen before in history, 1 in 67. The average used to 1 in 20,000.

Have you ever wondered why so many Children are developing Autism & ADHD? Parents very nearly hit the mark with the MMR vaccine and scared the establishment, but the truth is, it's the mercury [renamed to THYMEROSAL to hide it] which causes Autism and ADHD, not the Viral or Bacterial content of the MMR vaccine.
Thymerosal is an ingredient in nearly all vaccines.

Have you ever wondered why Alzheimers used to be the exception in old age, and is now the norm? Then you should simply look at the rates of vaccination with Aluminium derivative ingredients, and the escalation of Alzheimers for the direct link.

Do you believe that ‘VACCINATION’ wiped out Measles, like the Government tell you it did?
It’s a lie, you can read as many articles as you wish, but here’s a graph to show you the reality – [http://www.informedparent.co.uk/Portals/2/images/graphMeasles.gif]

Now you understand what is being injected into you. Now you can refuse.

Thanks to B.K. for this information.

Well, needless to say Nick Griffin’s appearance on Question Time could have gone a lot better.

It cannot be said that the bullying manner of the other panellists coupled with the carefully chosen, hostile audience was unexpected. Never has there been such an episode of QT. Never has any other panellist been ganged up on with such hatred and vehemence. To be clear, I wholly commend Mr Griffin for his efforts given the way in which the circumstances were stacked against him, though let’s for a moment evaluate his performance as a whole.

Mr Griffin seemed to be placing far too much emphasis on attempting to play the nice, polite chap, the reasonable guy. Let’s make it clear now; there is no room for these characteristics in the world of politics, particularly at a time when the Nation is looking for strength in a leader and Griffin showed himself to appear weaker than even Mr Brown!

Admittedly this was largely due to constant interruption on the side of both the panellists and the audience (with, of course, no help from the host) as well as attempts made by Dimbleby and Straw alike to entrap Mr Griffin when it came to the issue regarding an explanation into his previous thoughts concerning matters such as the holocaust; matters which Straw and Dimbleby know are sensitive areas whereby speaking of them, if misinterpreted, could result in prosecution thanks to oppressive laws against freedom of speech put forward by the cretinous elite within the European Union.

However, Mr Griffin missed an excellent opportunity to explain exactly this, instead stumbling over his words and at times coming across rather incoherent.

One point I must touch upon is the way in which Mr Griffin handled Bonnie Greer’s condescending and, quite franky, rude attitude towards the latter part of the show.

Greer was heard to mock Mr Griffin’s 2.2 Cambridge degree moments before making a wholly invalid point regarding her fantasy of a multicultural Roman Britain, as if  by doing so her argument would gain more credibility. Now, Nick Griffin’s overly strained attempt at laughing this off could be seen as little more than pandering to an ethnic.
Heaven forbid he should sharply and concisely put her in her place in the same manner he shot down Jack Straw after his rant about colour/racism being a key part of BNP ideology, whereby Nick quite succinctly put it as, “Skin colour’s irrelevant, Jack.”

Ideally he should’ve begun to differentiate between race and ethnicity in an attempt to educate those who may not be aware of the fact that the British National Party is ideologically ethno-Nationalist, not racialist, though never mind.

Mr Griffin did manage to successfully expose the panel’s utter disregard for the existence of the English ethnic group, though as aforementioned, more effort should have been placed on defining ethnicity in comparison to race or civic British identity.

On the whole it was a poor performance from all sides (albeit one amusing positive is that Ms Warsi at times seemed more keen to attack Labour minister Jack Straw than Mr Griffin), though the panel failed in adequately countering any points Mr Griffin put forward (when able) even if Mr Griffin, in turn, was unable to successfully do the same.

By Jersey Royal

Following the recent clash of protests between the English Defence League (EDL) and Unite “Against” Fascism (UAF) there have been calls for more restrictive laws when it comes to protests which may be deemed provocative.

It is said that Saturday’s protest in Manchester could cost the city as much as £800,000 after police were required to lock down Piccadilly Gardens and prevent any violence between the two groups.

The Town Hall and Police Cheifs subsequently plan to ask the Home Secretary, Alan Johnson, to “ban protests where violence is expected”.

This lends support  to the notion that the EDL is a State run organisation with the sole purpose of causing friction and allowing for the excuse to further curb our civil liberties in the name of combating violence.

The way in which the BNP is often wrongly associated with the EDL in the media encourages the subliminal conditioning of the notion that the Party is affiliated with violent street clashes.  Despite members of the British National Party generally steering clear of any outside organisation, Leftists are commonly seen carrying placards suggesting they are protesting against the Party as opposed to the EDL, knowing of the likelihood of these signs being shown on National television or newspapers.

It is advisable that anyone sympathetic with the English Defence League’s cause do not bow to the provocation of the insidious far-Left or Muslim gangs and remain calm and peaceful during any demonstration.

By Jersey Royal

Against New and Blue Labour

After the recent Conservative Party Conference whereby Shadow Chancellor George Osborne vowed to freeze pay, increase the retirement age to 66, refused to abolish Labour’s 50% tax-rate for the wealthy as well as axing tax credits for families earning above £50,000; one has to ask, which party is this?

Cameron’s CONservatives are a far cry from the Tory party of yesteryear.

Which honest to God right winger would dream of backing such high tax rates in support of the welfare state, or what is effectively a redistribution of wealth when it comes to tax credit, not to mention a pro-immigration stance (irrespective of whether it is points based) at a time when Britain is on its knees with almost 3 million unemployed?

It would appear David Cameron and his ilk would feel more at home with the Labour Party.

One also has wonder over the likelihood of the Conservatives winning the next General Election. Unpopular as the Labour Party may seem at the moment, the Tories would have to win over the North East and overturn 117 seats nationwide in order to take power; all this with un-conservative and highly unappealing proposals means it is likely Britain could be facing a further four years of Labour tyranny, Blue or otherwise…

In this case, the Tories are barely the lesser of two evils. The UK’s democratic first-past-the-post system works in favour of either of the two parties and, whilst a vote for a minority party may seem like a vote for hope, the current circumstances are such that this kind of vote will hold little to no influence.

Action at the voting booth should be replaced by direct action on all levels. The Irish people were given the right to vote on the Lisbon treaty and upon an “unsatisfactory” two-fingered salute at the charter were yet again made to vote until they adhered to the wants of the powers that be.

The British were given no such “privilege”. We the people have had no real say in the matter despite a recent YouGov poll showing the majority of the population oppose the treaty.

It is clear the ballot is no good. The only alternative is to show our disapproval is via protest and civil disobedience.

It worked with the Poll Tax riots. The legislation was repealed. It can work again. The state can and will be pressured by the people to amend unsatisfactory proposals. We have no choice at the ballot box, but we do have a say in how we live. It is our RIGHT.

We are under no obligation to follow unjust law.

By Jersey Royal

You may have noticed the majority of these people are the student/Unite Against Fashion (sorry, “Fascism”) type, or perhaps members of the Socialist Workers Party and other such Leftist and/or hippy-like organisations.
But do these people actually know what this man stood for?
1. Hatred. Che wanted to see ‘Hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine’. He considered Americans to be ‘hyenas … fit only for extermination’.
2. Mass murder. Che wanted to launch a nuclear attack on New York City. He desired ‘atomic extermination’ of the ‘hyenas’ (read civilians) who lived there and in November 1962 he boasted to The London Daily Worker of the nuclear weapons, ‘We would have used them against the very heart of the US, including New York City’. Even Che’s sympathetic interviewer from the Daily Worker considered him to be ‘crackers from the way he went on about the missiles’. It’s only thanks to the intervention of Nikita Khrushchev that Che’s plans came to nothing.
3. Terrorism. With the nuclear attack plans shelved, Che instead attempted to launch a terrorist campaign in New York City. Had it have worked, Macy’s, Gimbels, Bloomingdales, and Manhattan’s Grand Central Terminal would have been hit with a dozen incendiary devices and 500 kilos of TNT. To give some perspective, the 2004 Madrid train bombings used 100 kilos of TNT and killed and maimed almost 2,000 people.
4. Sacrificing the people of Cuba. At the First Latin American Youth Congress in July 1959, Che proudly claimed: ‘These people [of Cuba] you see today tell you that even if they should disappear from the face of the earth because an atomic war is unleashed in their names … they would feel completely happy and fulfilled’.
5. Executions without trial. Che delighted in ordering and carrying out executions and considered the need to present a legal case and to give the accused the right to defend him or herself to be ‘archaic bourgeois details’. ‘I don’t need proof to execute a man, I only need proof that it’s necessary to execute him!’, Che declared in 1959.
6. Persecution of gay men. In Che’s Cuba, ‘effeminate behaviour’ became a crime and gay men were consigned to forced labour camps with the words ‘Work Will Make Men Out of You’ posted over the entry gates.
7. Totalitarianism. Che demanded that ‘individualism must disappear!’ Perhaps his greatest support for this principle is found in his relationship with the USSR. Indeed, according to KGB official Alexander Alexiev, ‘Che was practically the architect of the Soviet-Cuban relationship’.

Where is the logic?

The Difference Between Left and Right Wing and Where British Parties Stand – An Introduction

For too long there has been confusion between Left and Right wing in British politics.

In economic terms, those on the Right hand of the political spectrum tend to favour low taxation, privitisation and a free market to encourage competition in business so to become more efficient and provide a better service.

Conversely, those on the Left tend to prefer a strong hold over the economy and suggest nationlisation and a tightly controlled market is the way forward.
Those on the far Left favour income redistribution, high taxation and a welfare state to eliminate the social economic class system and promote “equality”.

The British National Party (much like the Green Party), by some of these definition, are economically Left wing.
Their policies regarding health, transport, housing, protectionism and globalisation fall strongly on the Left side of the political spectrum and may explain why they receive so much support in traditional Labour strongholds.

Parties such as UKIP on the other hand profess their support for a freer market and the scrapping of Inheritance Tax, though both UKIP and the BNP stress the importance of reforming the current welfare system so that it acts as a safety net as opposed to the hammock it has become.

The Labour Party after Blair and Brown’s reform (although still economically Socialist in the vaguest of terms) do not hold the same views towards privitisation as Old Labour did.
Tony Blair, though forced to re-nationalise Railtrack, was intent on privitising the London Underground and Royal Mail. This is a far cry from Old Labour policy and has undoubtedly lost the Party a crucial following.

Socially, those on the Right hold conservative values such as an authoritarian attitude to crime, often supporting corporal and capital punishment, are against immigration, asylum seeking and multiculturalism and emphasise the value of National identity and tradition, insisting that social change should be organic rather than manufactured.

Contrarily, the Left argue for tolerance towards (read ‘preferance towards’) minorities, hold liberal attitudes on law and order emphasising the importance of reform as opposed to punishment and imply the state is justified in intervening to create social change.

By this definition the BNP is certainly on the Right hand of the political spectrum when it comes down to their policies on immigration, asylum, law and order, the military and school discipline.
In this sense it is easy to see the parallels between todays British National Party and yesterdays Conservative Party with the likes of Enoch Powell possibly springing to mind.

Today’s Tories under David Cameron could be said to be more ‘Blue Labour’ than Conservative.
Cameron has made massive reforms within the Conservative Party, defeating the New Right and traditional Conservatives in order to implement policies worthy of battling the Labour Party for the Centre ground.

Cameronites supported the idea that significant minorities within Britain were excluded from mainstream society due to economic deprivation and social discrimination.
The advocacy of grammar schools was abandoned, instead taking on board the Labour policy of creating different types of secondary schools that would be available to all irrespective of background.
The traditional Conservative hardline stance on law and order was softened, for example by proposing measures to combat youth crime by lessening the amount of custodial sentences given.

It can safely be said that Labour and Conservatives to lean firmly more towards the centre in comparison to their original standpoints.

It is difficult to accutely differentiate between Left and Right especially when it comes down to Party alignment where it is almost impossible to find one that lands squarely on one side with all its policies.
As earlier exemplified, the British National Party harbours policies that fall both on the Left and Right side of the political spectrum and is thus wrongly described as “far-Right” by the media.

It is therefore better to avoid using these terms to describe a party altogether, rather only to label significant policies as either Left or Right.

It has emerged that Muslim civil servant, Azad Ali, has been suspended over justifying the murder of British soldiers in Iraq.

Ali quoted a militant Islamist on his personal blog, stating there was ‘much truth’ in the following: “If I saw an American or British man wearing a soldier’s uniform inside Iraq I would kill him because that is my obligation. If I found the same soldier in Jordan I wouldn’t touch him. In Iraq he is a fighter and an occupier, here he is not. I respect this as the main instruction in my religion for jihad.”

One would think that being a servant of Britain he would be primarily concerned with the lives of British soldiers.

Azad Ali also sits on the Metropolitan Police’s Strategic Stop & Search Committee.
He has never disguised his politics. In fact he has been making unambiguously extremist statements about his hardline stance on Islamic attitudes to various issues on his blog and radio show for many years.

The civil servant has also spoken out against the ‘Zionist terrorist state of Israel’, inferring that the American and British governments have ‘helped build’ this ‘killing machine’.

He pours scorn on the British Government’s call for a ceasefire and mocks official representatives of moderate British ‘Muslims’ (his quotation marks) who support them.

Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar stated Jewish children are ‘legitimate targets’.

This remark was condemned by David Miliband who was subsequently blasted on Ali’s blog where he wrote “Blaming Hamas does not wash any more… you can stop peddling the Zionist lie about Mahmoud Zahar!”

It is clear where Mr Ali’s allegiances lie, and that is most certainly not with Britain.

This man is in a position of power within our Government, as are many others such as Shahid Malik, Labour MP for Dewsbury, who can be seen here insinuating a wish to one day see an all-Muslim Parliament.

They have wormed their way into the centre of our Nation. They have the authority to influence decisions made that affect us, the people.
Britain is being taken down bit by bit from the inside. There are calls for more ethnic representation in Parliament in the name of equality, but if we are truly equal then surely these positions should be awarded meritocratically.

There have been many illustrations of the disrespect “our” Muslims have for the British government, yet they have their foot firmly in the door and are increasingly opening it wider and wider.

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again: Islam is incompatible with the British way of life.

Who would you want working on your behalf?

In one of today’s Daily Mail articles columnist Harry Phibbs shockingly attempts to use any excuse to defame the BNP.

Writing about the ‘Broken Housing System’ he manages to incorporate some all too familiar anti-BNP buzzwords – it wouldn’t be unreasonable to guess that journalists get paid extra for that – into a topic unrelated to “neo-Nazi[sm]“, stating thus:

“Certainly the current housing allocation system has promoted resentment. Decent people have held their noses and voted for the BNP. Perhaps they are not aware when the BNP canvassers appear on the doorstep wearing suits that they are masquerading as a political party but are in reality a bunch of neo-Nazi thugs.”

We can quite safely summarise from this rubbish that Harry Phibbs has never encountered BNP activists, especially the large number of BNP Second World War veterans that actually fought against the Nazis.

Little do people realise that such a constant barrage of unjustified abuse directed towards the BNP can be more harmful than first thought and this article exemplifies just how.

It refers to the way the media try to de-humanise the BNP, and by doing so allow action which otherwise would be considered unacceptable to become morally and socially acceptable, such as the abhorrent attack on Tony Ward whereby the BNP activist was struck by a claw hammer wielded by a UAF minion of David Cameron et al.

Such an attack, had it been the other way around, would have been vehemently condemned. Yet as it was a member of the “evil and subhuman BNP” who was injured people seem to find this acceptable, with many expressing their joy over social networking sites.

Ask yourselves this: have you met a BNP member/supporter? If so, are they remotely like how the media describes them?
The chances are your answer will be a profound ‘no’.

We cannot allow outrageous lies like this to pass through the net without dragging the offending nonsense to the Press Complaints Commission (PCC). Every time we haul a smear before the PCC, it becomes increasingly hard for that smear to be re-published, as the PCC system warns editors in advance that the smear in question has been contested officially.

So we are calling on all our supporters to take just a few minutes to fill out the PCC online complaints form in order to put a stop to such vile, defamatory and dangerous abuse:

CLICK HERE TO VIEW OUR READY-TO-GO PCC COMPLAINTS GUIDE

Click here to view the article in question and posts your thoughts in the Comments section.

The sickening wave of racist violence directed at the newly arrived Romanian Gypsy migrants in Belfast has drawn universal condemnation from all quarters, including the British National Party.

The BNP wishes to state publicly that it considers the mindless violence in Ulster as reprehensible and futile, and wishes to make it crystal clear to all that we have nothing whatsoever to do with the ongoing attacks against the Romanians, regardless of the claims of various political and media commentators.

The BNP demands that the police in Belfast arrest the criminals behind these attacks and bring them to justice. We also wish to make it clear that the BNP has not been involved with the troubles in any capacity whatsoever. Always on the look out to smear the BNP in any way possible, the media has been desperately trying to incriminate the Party in this wave of violence – but we state categorically that this false claim is nothing but the pathetic lies of the liberal-left media.

Blaming the BNP is also attractive to media liars and head-in-the-sand politicians who refuse to address the genuine problems caused in working class communities by irresponsible mass immigration.

But the truth of the matter is that as long as “multiculturalism” and uncontrolled mass immigration continues to be official policy, we will continue to see inter-communal violence and bloodshed like recently in Belfast. The race riots on the British mainland and the Belfast attacks are, unfortunately, the tip of the multicultural iceberg.

To the brainwashed liberal-left multiracial fanatics of the media and the main parties any failings in the so-called “multiracial society” must be the work of racist bigots – hence their attempts to blame the BNP.

We call on the establishment politicians to carefully consider their policies on immigration, social affairs and politically correct policing which are undermining the stability of parts of Belfast and Ulster which can ill afford these added strains, when taking into account the history of that region.

Ulster has suffered greatly over the years, and to see sectarianism replaced by racism would not only be a tragedy but would be the fault of politicians and community leaders who refuse to see the truth.

A grieving son visited a Cathedral in Blackburn to pay respects to his mother only to be escorted off the premises due to being mistaken for a BNP member.

The 43 year old shaven headed and tattooed Phillip Cadwallader (pictured) was approached by Police who subsequently searched his rucksack only to find a running kit.

As the Cathedral offered an apology, Mr Cadwallader said: ‘I am very angry and disgusted at the way the cathedral staff treated me. It was a pretty harsh judgement to make of me.’

The Cathedral was holding a Radio 4 broadcast that morning on the topic of Jewish concentration camp victim, Anne Frank.

Due to mass media smears about the BNP being linked to holocaust denial, it was suspected that Mr Cadwallader, because of his appearance, was there to disrupt the broadcast.

Since when did being a member of the BNP, a legitimate political party, make one automatically guilty of thought crimes?

The police were willing to treat this man as if he were guilty of a crime not even committed based purely on his appearance.

As one observer commented, ‘Just think what they would do if they had your DNA on a database, and decided to profile someone or a section of the community with that? They are clearly setting a precedent.’

For those of you still doubtful of whether we are living in a Police State, open your eyes.