Biting the Hand That Has Fed Them

ISN’T it strange how those immigrants who have become influential within particular fields of our society appear to have a chip on their shoulder.

You would have thought that they would be satisfied to have risen to the top of their trade and done so well in spite of the rampant racism and insurmountable anti-immigrant bias that they tell us infects our society from top to bottom.

Take Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur for example. He’s a Ugandan Muslim immigrant who owes everything to Britain -– his education, his career and his current elevated status. Yet he is not a happy bunny and is suing his employers, the Metropolitan Police, for everything he can get, claiming that inherent racism within the Force has stopped him getting even higher up the promotional ladder.

His self-preening performance at the press conference in central London at which he launched his obscene claim was reminiscent of Yasmin Alibhai-Brown at her very worst. She is another Ugandan Muslim immigrant who has made a career as a ‘social commentator’ with The Independent and BBC by savaging the hand that feeds her and denouncing white British people as workshy, ignorant and, of course, “racist”.

But neither of them can hold a light to the great chieftain of ethnic arrogance himself –- Trevor Phillips, the supremo of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission. Before he joined the Gravy Train, Phillips claimed to be a socialist, although by sending his own children to private schools, he somewhat undermined these credentials. Now Trevor is of Guyanese parents and that country today is a cauldron of racial and religious strife, as various ethnic groups battle for supremacy, and is far from an advertisement for the joys of multiculturalism. Rather than trying to suppress the indigenous White folk of our islands, you would have thought a radical campaigner likes Phillips would have relished the challenge of promoting equality and human rights in his country of ethnic origin.

But, of course, we mustn’t blame the likes of Phillips, Ghaffur and Alibhai-Brown for this almost studied hostility towards the country and the people that have allowed them, albeit in many cases reluctantly, to make Britain their home. Their ungrateful attitude is the fault of the liberal intelligentsia and an orchestrated campaign of brainwashing by the media that everything about immigrants is “vibrant” and wonderful and that the boring old British people should be so grateful that these people have chosen to come and live amongst us.

The ethnic minorities and their cultures have been put on a pedestal by successive Labour and Conservative Governments which haven’t allowed a single word of criticism to be said against them. (I was banged up in Pentonville for three months in 1985 for voicing such criticism.)

Even when immigrants were rioting, burning down our inner cities and hacking to death with machetes PC Keith Blakelock, it wasn’t their fault — it was apparently ours — that of British society for not giving them all the opportunities they were entitled to.

The liberal agenda and a fawning media have made Trevor Phillips, Tarique Ghaffur and Yasmin Alibhai-Brown the monsters they are today. Without that help and if they’d been on a level playing field, they wouldn’t have risen through the ranks and wouldn’t have any influence.

The blame, as always, lies with Britain’s politicians of the last fifty years who have betrayed the interests of the British people. They have made us second class citizens in our own country who have to take it on the chin without comment when bullied and denounced by those whom seem to be our new masters.

Read Martin Wingfield’s blog here.

Muslims Object to Christian Prayer Meeting in Oxford Church

In yet another sign of the increasing Islamification of Britain, a Muslim pressure group in Oxford has demanded — and received — an apology from a Christian prayer group which organised a “Call to Prayer” meeting in St. Aldate’s Church (illustration) in that city centre.

The Muslim Education Centre of Oxford (Meco) accused Witney-based Christian “Open Doors UK” of preaching “evangelical propaganda”, despite that organisation holding an indoor meeting in a Christian Church, and not forcing anyone to attend.

Pathetically, Open Doors UK immediately apologised and insisted the prayer meeting had been taken out of context, although it “regretted” any offence that had been caused. On the contrary, a spokesman for the Christian group said the meeting’s aim “was to reduce fear of Islam.”

Meco chairman Dr Taj Hargey said he was “shocked by their theological self-righteousness. They assume the self-appointed task to ‘pray for Muslims’. They also say that each year there are incredible stories about how God answers these prayers, revealing Himself to Muslims around the world, and bringing many to faith in Jesus.”

He added: “Not only was this evangelical activity ill-conceived and insensitive, it was grossly insulting and inflammatory to Oxford’s Muslim inhabitants. At Meco our aim is to bring people of all faiths together, not divide them further. Things like this only serve to break people apart.”

A joint statement from Open Doors UK and St Aldate’s Church said: “Open Doors and St Aldate’s very much regret that offence has been taken by Meco at an event designed to encourage church-going Christians to engage positively with Muslims. Hundreds of Christians responded to an invitation that had been sent to churches to a series of meetings held in a church aimed at ‘reducing fear of Islam, increasing love for Muslims’. Thus we would emphasise that it was not a meeting targeted at Muslims. Before the event we emphasised that we were not denigrating Islam or criticising Muslim beliefs. At the same time we do believe that having discovered God’s love in Jesus and made a choice to become Christians ourselves, everyone has the right to explore religious faiths and make decisions based on their exploration.”

Incredibly, Dr Hargey said that “while Meco had been offended, it would not hold a grudge.”

Is this what Britain has become? A country where Christians are now browbeaten and criticised for holding prayer meetings in Christian Churches? Where Muslims can demand ‘apologies’ from Christians simply for practising their religion?

Every day, Sharia law draws nearer for Britain. One day, if this immigration invasion is left unchecked, the new Muslim rulers of this country will outlaw other religions, as is the case in Saudi Arabia and many other countries they rule.

There is only one party which will halt, and reverse this demographic invasion: the British National Party.

Manchester – Policing Without Pride

On Saturday 23rd August, Manchester witnessed the largest ever gathering of gay police officers during the annual ‘gay pride’ march in the city centre. Officers appeared in public wearing sweatshirts adorned with the slogan ‘Police with Pride’. Regrettably, this bizarre spectacle was just another depressing milestone in the humiliating decline of Greater Manchester police from a once proud force, into little more than a showcase for politically-correct exhibitionism.

The BNP firmly believes that the state should not concern itself with what consenting adults, ‘gay’ or ‘straight’, do in the privacy of their own homes. Equally, state institutions such as the police or prison services should not demean themselves by encouraging their officers to flaunt their private predilections in a public parade. A police officer might be homosexual, but surely he or she should be obliged to present a dignified and smart public persona? Police officers would never be allowed to participate in a ‘white pride’ parade, so why should they be officially encouraged to take part in ‘Gay Pride’?

Unfortunately for Greater Manchester Police (GMP), the ‘Police with Pride’ spectacle coincided with the release of a report showing that GMP missed 13 of its 17 targets between April and June 2008. Burglary, drugs offences and serious violent crime were among the categories where GMP’s results were deemed ‘unacceptable. Greater Manchester Police Authority has also expressed ’serious concerns’ about the force’s performance.

Of course, most ordinary GMP police officers continue to serve their community conscientiously and impartially, just as they have always done. Indeed their ranks have included a fair number of outright heroes, such as DC Stephen Oake, who fell in the line of duty while trying to arrest a Muslim terrorist and was justly awarded a posthumous George Cross. Nonetheless, these fine rank-and-file officers have been increasingly let down by a cadre of senior commanders whose dedication to advancing their politically-correct careers seems to exceed their dedication to upholding law and order.

These senior officers notoriously included the late Chief Constable Todd, whose unexplained death on Mount Snowdon — assumed to be suicide — generated national publicity. Todd was popular with his officers, but the sordid press revelations which accompanied his death cast doubt on his fitness to be a police officer at all, let alone Chief Constable of Britain’s second largest force.

Towards the end of Todd’s tenure as Chief Constable, Greater Manchester Police seemed to lose interest in ordinary policing, in favour of politically-motivated repression. The force adopted an increasingly anti-white stance, and pursued their policy of institutional discrimination against the BNP with an almost missionary zeal.

For example, in May 2007, with massive publicity, GMP launched a prolonged investigation into ludicrous allegations that off-duty police officers had been seen drinking with ‘BNP supporters’ outside a city centre pub on St George’s day. Predictably, the investigation failed to make any headway, but not before vast sums of taxpayers’ money had been wasted. (1)

Greater Manchester Police commanders seem to have a particular problem with Mancunians who dare to celebrate St George’s day. On St George’s day 2008, senior officers saw fit to authorise the baton-charging of exuberant St George’s day revellers in the city centre. The contrast with GMP’s kid glove treatment of overt criminality during Eid celebrations in the Rusholme district of the city has been widely noted.

Senator McCarthy himself would have been proud of Greater Manchester Police’s political witch-hunts. During the local election campaign of 2008, the Manchester Evening News ran a series of stories, seemingly sourced from Greater Manchester Police, describing GMP’s efforts to hound out officers suspected of harbouring political sympathy for the BNP. One officer who supposedly wore a union flag badge was ‘investigated’. Another officer who disclosed that he had purchased a copy of Voice of Freedom for research purposes was disciplined and transferred. The human right of free expression and free access to lawful newspapers obviously ceased to exist a long time ago in GMP! (2)

Most seriously of all, in the city of Manchester itself, Greater Manchester Police attempted to intervene directly in an election campaign. In the district of Blackley, where the BNP always commands more than a quarter of the vote, a senior police officer was quoted in a local newspaper warning about the BNP “latching onto” racism. This unprecedented intervention in party politics was made just three weeks before the local elections. (3)

BNP activists in Manchester suspect that the governing politburo of Greater Manchester Police might be very dismayed indeed if they grasped the true extent of BNP support among GMP officers in general, and sergeants and inspectors in particular. After all, it is these brave officers who deal day and night with the dreadful consequences of Manchester’s failed multicultural experiment, even as they are undermined and betrayed by their own senior commanders.

With Todd’s death, the people of Greater Manchester dared to hope for a return to traditional policing priorities, and a renewed commitment to upholding law and order. Sadly, it seems as if residents’ hopes have now been dashed. Todd’s replacement as the new Chief Constable of Greater Manchester is Peter Fahy, formerly Chief Constable of Cheshire and chair of the Association of Chief Police Officers’ so-called “Race & Diversity” unit.

Fahy’s main contribution to the national policing debate seems to be his call for overt discrimination against white police officers to be legalised. Fahy is reported to have said, “Clearly, if we are going to be held to account on particular targets based on representation, the only way we can meet that is through affirmative action … to take into account somebody’s ethnic background.” (4)

With all this in mind, it is no surprise that few Mancunians feel any sense of pride in their police, ‘gay’ or otherwise.

Labour Minister Repeats Disgusting Accusation That Whites Are Responsible for Islamic Terrorism in Britain

Labour Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has repeated the disgustingly untrue allegation, first claimed by the so-called ‘intelligence’ service MI5, that Whites are to blame for Islamic terrorism in Britain.

A letter from Smith to Gordon Brown, leaked to the Daily Mail, contains the allegation that an economic downturn will “increase support for racism”  and that this “presents a threat as there is evidence that grievances based on experiencing racism is one of the factors that can lead to people becoming terrorists.”

In other words, if whites react badly to any of the following:

- car bombs in London’s city centre;

- bus bombs;

- London Underground bombs;

- mosques being built in every town and city;

- the Muslim religion being forced on white kids at school;

- anti-white ‘affirmative action’ government-sponsored programmes;

- countless anti-white racist attacks which have seen hundreds of innocents murdered;

- the supplantment of the the white British people by hordes of invaders;

then it is the whites’ fault that Muslims become terrorists, according to Smith and her MI5 genii.

Well, we beg to disagree.  We believe that there are two primary causes of terrorism in Britain:

1. Mass Third World immigration which has seen millions of people enter this country who do not seek to become British, but to convert this country into another Iran;

2. Biased British foreign policy in the Middle East which has caused this country, along with America and some other European nations, to become the scapegoats for all that is wrong in the Middle East.

The only solution to tackling the question of terrorism in Britain is, therefore, to halt and reverse Third World immigration, and to employ an unbiased foreign policy which puts British interests first.

We, and increasing numbers of the British public, reject with contempt the allegation that whites are responsible for all the world’s problems.

*Important to note was the Tory response to Smith’s letter. Damian Green, the Tory immigration spokesman, said: “This rips the veil off the complacent comments we have been getting from Home Office ministers about how their performance is improving. It is clear that in almost all areas of the Home Office things are going to get worse.”

Readers will note how Green avoids mentioning the main allegation — that whites are somehow responsible for driving Muslims towards terrorism, and also avoids the whole issue of what is to be done to solve the problem.

Given that the Tories were, and still are, enthusiastic supporters of the illegal war in Iraq (one of the primary drivers for terrorism in Europe), it is not surprising that they shy away from addressing any real issue.

Were you thinking that the Tories would be any better? Think again. The BNP is the only party with clear cut solutions to the mess created by years of Tory and Labour misrule.

Tory, Labour, and EU Bully Boys Gang up on Russia for Protecting Its Own

Tories, Labour and the EU Gestapo have decided to gang up and try and impose sanctions on Russia — which has committed the dastardly crime of protecting its own citizens.

Tweedledum Tory leader David Cameron has called for EU leaders meeting today to impose ‘tough sanctions’ on Russia for intervening in the conflict in Georgia to protect its citizens.

In this he has been echoed by TweedleDee Labour leader Gordon Brown who said that: “In the light of Russian actions, the EU should review — root and branch — our relationship with Russia, whose unilateral action in recognising the independence of Georgia’s two breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia was dangerous and unacceptable.”

The western media has whipped up condemnation of Russia for intervening militarily in Georgia following the outbreak of fighting between Ossetian separatists and the Georgian state. The rest of the EU has blindly followed suit, without once giving consideration to the facts, which are as follows:

- South Ossetia, which is 80% Russian, broke away from Georgia in the 1991-1992 war. In a 2006 South Ossetian independence referendum, held by the secessionist government, full independence was supported by 99% of the voters.

- Restoring South Ossetia and Abkhazia (a region with a similar separatist movement) to Georgian control has been a goal of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili.

- The current crisis escalated in August when intense fighting began between Georgian troops and the forces of South Ossetia. On 2 August, large numbers of South Ossetians started to flee into Russia, and

- Russian ambassador Yuri Popov warned that Russia would intervene if conflict erupted.

- On 7 August, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili vowed to restore control by force over what he called the ‘criminal regime’ in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

- During the night and early morning of 8 August, Georgia launched a military offensive to surround and capture the capital of separatist Republic of South Ossetia, Tskhinvali, thus breaking the terms of the 1992 ceasefire and crossing into the security zone established therein.

- Ten Russian peacekeepers were killed during the attack. The heavy shelling, which included Georgian rockets being fired into South Ossetia left parts of the capital city in ruins.

- Russia then finally responded in what they called the “defence of South Ossetians against a genocide by Georgian forces,” saying that some 2,000 Russian citizens had been killed in the shelling of Tskhinvali by the Georgian army.

- At Russia’s request, the United Nations Security Council held consultations on 7 August at 11pm, followed by an open meeting at 1.15am, on 8 August, with Georgia attending. During consultations, Council members discussed a press statement that called for an end to hostilities. They were unable, however, to come to a consensus.

- In the morning, Georgia announced that it had surrounded the city and captured eight South Ossetian villages. An independent Georgian TV station announced that Georgian military took control of the capital city.

- In the face of UN inaction, the murder of thousands of its citizens and the blatant aggression by the Georgian army, the Russians finally intervened, sending troops into South Ossetia.

- A second front was opened by the military of the Georgia’s separatist Republic of Abkhazia in the Kodori Valley, the only region of Abkhazia that was, before the war began, still in effective control of Georgian loyalists.

- On August 11, Russia ruled out peace talks with Georgia until the latter withdrew from South Ossetia and signed a legally binding pact renouncing the use of force against South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

- On August 12, happy that Russian forces had secured the safety of their citizens, that country’s President ordered an end to military operations in Georgia. Later the same day, the Russian president Medvedev approved a six-point peace plan brokered by President-in-Office of the European Union, Nicolas Sarkozy, in Moscow; both sides were to sign it by the 17th.

- On 23 August, Russia declared the withdrawal of its forces to lines it asserted fulfilled the six points: into Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and the ’security corridor’ around South Ossetia. The bulk of its forces left Georgian soil altogether.

Now, the EU, Brown and Cameron wish to impose sanctions on Russia, when the facts clearly show that all it was doing was protecting its own citizens.

A parallel might be the EU declaring sanctions on Britain for protecting its citizens in the Falklands War!

BNP foreign policy is very clear: We have no direct interest in the Ossetian claim to independence, and should not involve ourselves in the internal affairs of other nations where our interests are not affected.

Has the Law Lords System Passed Its Shelf Life?

Has the time come for the system of Law Lords to be disbanded? This is the question being asked in legal circles after the Law Lords ruled that attempts to control immigration was an illegal violation of human rights.

Making a ruling on the 2004 Immigration Act, and particularly the provision dealing with attempts to curb the number of fake marriages to gain entry to Britain, the Law Lords have ruled that the issue of fake marriages to gain entrance was not the problem and insisted the only issue was the “right to marry.”

They clearly erred in claiming it interfered with the 2004 Act (even though the Act did not stop anyone entitled to live here from getting married in the UK).

In other words, the Law Lords were emphatic that the only relevant question was whether the policy “violated the respondents’ right to marry” — and immigration issues had no bearing upon this.

This ignores the fact that rejected asylum-seekers, for example, may become British residents if they marry an EU citizen — but not if the marriage is a ’sham’ under the Act.

To ensure that marriages were genuine, the Immigration Act required that people whose only claim to legal residence was through their spouse should present themselves to the Home Office. Officials would then decide whether or not to issue a “certificate of approval” for their marriage: no certificate of approval, no right to stay in Britain.

The provision was a response to a very specific problem. Council registrars, who conduct civil marriage ceremonies and issue civil marriage certificates, were reporting large numbers of marriages where the parties did not even speak the same language. They appeared to be taking place purely to let one party claim UK residence.

The police also uncovered ’sham marriage rackets’: EU citizens living in Britain would be offered about £2,000 to marry a man or a woman, usually from a Third World country, who wanted to live here but who was not, under the rules, entitled to.

The organiser of the racket would charge the would-be immigrant £5,000 for fixing up a sham marriage, and pocket the difference — some criminals made themselves millionaires in that way.

The 2004 Act cut the number of sham marriages by at least half. “We got almost no cases in the three years after that Act came into force,” said Mark Rimmer, supervisor of civil marriages in Brent, North London. “Before it, at least one in five marriages — about 250 marriages a year — was obviously bogus.” Brent’s experience was reproduced in councils across Britain.

This country will have a population of more than 70 million in 20 years, according to the projections recently published. Immigration, and the much higher birth rate of many immigrants, will account for most of the growth.

It is little wonder then, that many concerned British people are thinking that the House of Lords is coming near the end of its lifetime.

* Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, or Law Lords, are appointed under the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 to the House of Lords in order to exercise its judicial functions, which include acting as the highest court of appeal for most domestic matters.

Slavery Lessons the Anti-White Establishment Will Not Teach Our Children

In the anti-white mania which has gripped modern Britain, the Atlantic Slave Trade is to be given wide prominence in schools from this term onwards — but the million Europeans who were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 will be ignored.

The untold story of the million whites enslaved by non-whites is covered in a new book by Robert Davis, professor of history at Ohio State University. He developed a unique methodology to calculate the number of white Christians who were enslaved along Africa’s Barbary Coast, arriving at much higher slave population estimates than any previous studies had found.

Most other accounts of slavery along the Barbary coast didn’t try to estimate the number of slaves, or only looked at the number of slaves in particular cities, Davis said.

Most previously estimated slave counts have thus tended to be in the thousands, or at most in the tens of thousands. Davis, by contrast, has calculated that between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced to work in North Africa from the 16th to 18th centuries.

Davis’s new estimates appear in the book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan).

“Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who travelled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland.”

“Much of what has been written gives the impression that there were not many slaves and minimizes the impact that slavery had on Europe,” Davis said. “Most accounts only look at slavery in one place, or only for a short period of time. But when you take a broader, longer view, the massive scope of this slavery and its powerful impact become clear.”

Davis said it is useful to compare this Mediterranean slavery to the Atlantic slave trade that brought black Africans to the Americas. Over the course of four centuries, the Atlantic slave trade was much larger — about 10 to 12 million black Africans were brought to the Americas.

But from 1500 to 1650, when trans-Atlantic slaving was still in its infancy, more white Christian slaves were probably taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas, according to Davis.

“One of the things that both the public and many scholars have tended to take as given is that slavery was always racial in nature — that only blacks have been slaves. But that is not true,” Davis said. “We cannot think of slavery as something that only white people did to black people.”

During the time period Davis studied, it was religion and ethnicity, as much as race, that determined who became slaves.

Pirates (called corsairs) from cities along the Barbary Coast in north Africa — cities such as Tunis and Algiers — would raid ships in the Mediterranean and Atlantic, as well as seaside villages to capture men, women and children.

The impact of these attacks was devastating — France, England, and Spain each lost thousands of ships, and long stretches of the Spanish and Italian coasts were almost completely abandoned by their inhabitants.

Although hundreds of thousands of Christian slaves were taken from Mediterranean countries, Davis noted, the effects of Muslim slave raids was felt much further away: it appears, for example, that through most of the 17th century the English lost at least 400 sailors a year to the slavers.

Even Americans were not immune. For example, one American slave reported that 130 other American seamen had been enslaved by the Algerians in the Mediterranean and Atlantic between 1785 and 1793.

Davis said the vast scope of slavery in North Africa has been ignored and minimized, in large part because it is on no one’s agenda to discuss what happened. “The enslavement of Europeans doesn’t fit the general theme of European world conquest and colonialism that is central to scholarship on the early modern era,” he said.

 Many of the countries that were victims of slavery, such as France and Spain, would later conquer and colonize the areas of North Africa where their citizens were once held as slaves. Maybe because of this history, Western scholars have thought of the Europeans primarily as “evil colonialists” and not as the victims they sometimes were, Davis said.

Davis said another reason that Mediterranean slavery has been ignored or minimized has been that there have not been good estimates of the total number of people enslaved. People of that time — both Europeans and the Barbary Coast slave owners — did not keep detailed, trustworthy records of the number of slaves. In contrast, there are extensive records that document the number of Africans brought to the Americas as slaves.

So Davis developed a new methodology to come up with reasonable estimates of the number of slaves along the Barbary Coast. Davis found the best records available indicating how many slaves were at a particular location at a single time. He then estimated how many new slaves it would take to replace slaves as they died, escaped or were ransomed.

“The only way I could come up with hard numbers is to turn the whole problem upside down — figure out how many slaves they would have to capture to maintain a certain level,” he said. “It is not the best way to make population estimates, but it is the only way with the limited records available.”

Putting together such sources of attrition as deaths, escapes, ransomings, and conversions, Davis calculated that about one-fourth of slaves had to be replaced each year to keep the slave population stable, as it apparently was between 1580 and 1680. That meant about 8,500 new slaves had to be captured each year. Overall, this suggests nearly a million slaves would have been taken captive during this period.

Using the same methodology, Davis has estimated as many as 475,000 additional slaves were taken in the previous and following centuries. The result is that between 1530 and 1780 there were almost certainly 1 million and quite possibly as many as 1.25 million white, European Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast.

Davis said his research into the treatment of these slaves suggests that, for most of them, their lives were every bit as difficult as that of slaves in America. “As far as daily living conditions, the Mediterranean slaves certainly didn’t have it better,” he said.

While African slaves did grueling labor on sugar and cotton plantations in the Americas, European Christian slaves were often worked just as hard and as lethally — in quarries, heavy construction, and above all rowing the corsair galleys themselves.

Davis said his findings suggest that this invisible slavery of European Christians deserves more attention from scholars.

“We have lost the sense of how large enslavement could loom for those who lived around the Mediterranean and the threat they were under,” he said. “Slaves were still slaves, whether they were black or white, and whether they suffered in America or North Africa.”

Mission Statement

The British National Party exists to secure a future for the indigenous peoples of these islands in the North Atlantic which have been our homeland for millennia.

We use the term indigenous to describe the people whose ancestors were the earliest settlers here after the last great Ice Age and who have been complemented by the historic migrations from mainland Europe.

The migrations of the Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Danes, Norse and closely related kindred peoples have been, over the past few thousand years, instrumental in defining the character of our family of nations.

While we recognise the United Kingdom as a political entity, the BNP does not arrogantly seek to impose one set of Westminster dominated decisions across these nations. We embrace and cherish the native cultural diversity within the British Isles and wish to extend the concept of democracy to the lowest possible level, where those that are affected by a decision are the ones who influence and make the decision.

Political battle

The struggle to secure our future is being waged on many fronts. The need for political power is crucial to bring about our goals. Without effective political representation the majority of Britons, who are deeply concerned about the future, have no voice in the chambers where decisions are made. Increasingly numbers of voters are expressing apathy and discontent with the endless incompetence, lies, false promises and sleaze coming from the three parties that make up the Old Gang. The BNP will contest and win elections at council, parliamentary, Assembly or European level in order to achieve political power to bring about the changes needed.

Torch bearers of culture

The rich legacy of tradition, legend, myth and very real wealth of landscape and man-made structures are our island’s richest treasures. The men and women of the British National Party are motivated by love and admiration of the outpouring of culture, art, literature and the pattern of living through the ages that has left its mark on our very landscape. We value the folkways and customs which have been passed down through countless generations. We enthuse with pride at the marvels of architecture and engineering that have been completed on these islands since the construction of the great megaliths 7,000 years ago.

Liberties

Above and beyond our activities in the political world, we daily work with our people in their homes and communities addressing the fundamental issues of civil liberties and reverse discrimination. Increasingly our people are facing denial of service provision, failure to secure business contracts as well as poor job prospects as reverse discrimination excludes our people from the school room, workplace and boardroom. A key role of the British National Party is to provide legal advice and support to victims of repression and those denied their fundamental civil rights.

Policies & Manifesto

British National Party Policies.

Download our 2007 Mini Manifesto here.

IMMIGRATION — time to say ENOUGH!

On current demographic trends, we, the native British people, will be an ethnic minority in our own country within sixty years.

To ensure that this does not happen, and that the British people retain their homeland and identity, we call for an immediate halt to all further immigration, the immediate deportation of criminal and illegal immigrants, and the introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin assisted by generous financial incentives both for individuals and for the countries in question.

We will abolish the ‘positive discrimination’ schemes that have made white Britons second-class citizens. We will also clamp down on the flood of ‘asylum seekers’, all of whom are either bogus or can find refuge much nearer their home countries.

EUROPE — back to British independence!

We are opposed to the Single European Currency, and support the overwhelming majority of the British people in their desire to keep the Pound and our traditional weights and measures. At the same time, we are for the best possible relationship with our European neighbours and believe that the nations of Europe should be free to trade and cooperate whenever it is mutually beneficial, though without being forced into a political and economic straitjacket – political unification. Accordingly, we stand for British withdrawal from the European Union. In place of the EU, we intend to aim towards greater national self-sufficiency, and to work to restore Britain’s family and trading ties with Australia, Canada and New Zealand, and to trade with the rest of the world as it suits us. Following our withdrawal from the EU, the BNP will use the £43 million per day net contribution Britain at present makes to the European Union to fund many far more useful projects at home.

LAW AND ORDER — crack down on crime!

The BNP will crack down on crime and restore public safety and confidence. We will free the police and courts from the politically correct straitjacket that is stopping them from doing their job properly. The liberal fixation with the ‘rights’ of criminals must be replaced by concern for the rights of victims, and the right of innocent people not to become victims. We support the re-introduction of corporal punishment for petty criminals and vandals, and the restoration of capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute, as by DNA evidence or being caught red-handed.

ECONOMY — British workers first!

Globalisation, with its export of jobs to the Third World, is bringing ruin and unemployment to British industries and the communities that depend on them. Accordingly, the BNP calls for the selective exclusion of foreign-made goods from British markets and the reduction of foreign imports. We will ensure that our manufactured goods are, wherever possible, produced in British factories, employing British workers. When this is done, unemployment in this country will be brought to an end, and secure, well-paid employment will flourish, at last getting our people back to work and ending the waste and injustice of having more than 4 million people in a hidden army of the unemployed concealed by Labour’s statistical fiddles. We further believe that British industry, commerce, land and other economic and natural assets belong in the final analysis to the British nation and people. To that end we will restore our economy and land to British ownership. We also call for preference in the job market to be given to native Britons. We will take active steps to break up the socially, economically and politically damaging monopolies now being established by the supermarket giants. Finally we will seek to give British workers a stake in the success and prosperity of the enterprises whose profits their labour creates by encouraging worker shareholder and co-operative schemes

EDUCATION — discipline, standards, achievement!

We are against the ‘trendy’ teaching methods that have made Britain one of the most poorly educated nations in Europe. We will end the practice of politically correct indoctrination in all its guises and we will restore discipline in the classroom, give authority back to teachers and put far greater emphasis on training young people in the industrial and technological skills necessary in the modern world. We will also seek to instill in our young people knowledge of and pride in the history, cultures and heritage of the native peoples of Britain.

AGRICULTURE — quality before quantity!

We see a strong, healthy agriculture sector as vital to the country. Britain’s farming industry will be encouraged to produce a much greater part of the nation’s need in food products. Priority will be switched from quantity to quality, as we move from competing in a global economy to maximum self-sufficiency for Britain. We will ensure a major shift to healthier and more sustainable organic farming. We are pledged to ensure the restoration of Britain’s once great fishing industry with the reimposition of the former exclusion zones around our coast.

HEALTH — first-class healthcare for all!

We are wholly committed to a free, fully funded National Health Service for all British citizens. We will revitalise the Health Service by boosting staff and bed numbers, slashing unnecessary bureaucracy and by addressing the root cause of low recruitment and retention — low pay. We will see to it that no money is given in foreign aid while our own hospitals are short of beds and the staff to run them. More emphasis must be placed on healthy living with greater understanding of sickness prevention through physical exercise, a healthier environment and improved diets.

TRANSPORT — time to invest!

Increased investment is needed in Britain’s public transport system to bring it up to the highest standards in the world. The fiasco of rail privatisation with different companies running services and track leading to higher fares and lower safety also needs to be resolved. Congestion of our towns and cities must be eased by the provision of greater incentives to use rail and bus transport instead of private cars. The first step is to end the crime and squalor that puts so many people off public transport. Motorists must not be made the scapegoats for government failure. Fuel tax should be cut, motorway speed limits raised, and hidden speed cameras should be banned. Far more must be done to encourage the development and use of cleaner fuels.

ENVIRONMENT — a cleaner, greener future!

Our ideal for Britain is that of a clean, beautiful country, free of pollution in all its forms. We will enforce standards to curb those practices, whether by business or the individual, which cause environmental damage. “The polluter pays to clean up the mess” must become a fact of life, not an electioneering slogan. In towns we would work to replace the brutalist modernism of 1960s-style-architecture with a blend of traditional local styles and materials and ensure that developments take place on a more human scale.

FOREIGN AID — time to spend our money on our own people!

We reject the idea that Britain must forever be obliged to subsidise the incompetence and corruption of Third World states by supplying them with financial aid. We will link foreign aid with our voluntary resettlement policy, whereby those nations taking significant numbers of people back to their homelands will need cash to help absorb those returning. The billions of pounds saved every year by this policy will also be reallocated to vital services in Britain.

PENSIONERS — pensioners before asylum seekers!

The conditions in which many of Britain’s old people are forced to live are a national disgrace. We are pledged to ensure that all our old folk are able to live in comfortable homes, and will restore the earnings link with pensions. Elderly people who have paid a lifetime of taxes and reared families should not have to sell their homes to pay for care.

NORTHERN IRELAND — an end to sectarianism!

Britain has shamefully allowed the terrorists in Northern Ireland to come close to winning when the IRA could have been destroyed years ago. Government weakness has led to hundreds of deaths and given those same terrorists a share in government. We would end all attempts to force the people of Northern Ireland to accept foreign interference in their affairs and deal with terrorism — from whatever side — once and for all. No one with links to a terrorist organisation that refuses to lay down its arms should be allowed to enter government. We would abolish state-supported segregation in education. In the long run, we wish to end the conflict in Ireland by welcoming Eire as well as Ulster as equal partners in a federation of the nations of the British Isles.

DEFENCE — no more cuts!

Successive cuts in defence spending have left Britain’s armed forces perilously weak. We will boost Britain’s armed forces to ensure that they are able to deal with any emergency, and defend our homeland and our independence. We will bring our troops back from Germany and withdraw from NATO, since recent political developments make both commitments obsolete. We will close all foreign military bases on British soil, and refuse to risk British lives in meddling ‘peace-keeping’ missions in parts of the world where no British interests are at stake — a position of armed neutrality. We will also restore national service for our young with the option of civil or military service.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS — Britain’s interests first!

Britain’s foreign relations should be determined by the protection of our own national interest and not by our like or dislike of other nations’ internal politics. We would have no quarrel with any nation that does not threaten British interests. We will maintain an independent foreign policy of our own, and not a spineless subservience to the USA, the ‘international community’, or any other country.

DEMOCRACY — letting the people decide!

The British people invented modern Parliamentary democracy. Yet in recent years the British people have been denied their democratic rights. On issue after issue, the views of the majority of British people have been ignored and overridden by a Politically Correct ‘elite’ which thinks it knows best. On immigration, on Capital Punishment, on the surrender of British sovereignty to the EU and in numerous other areas, democracy has been absent as Labour, Tories and Lib-Dems conspire in election after election to offer the British people no real choice on such vital issues. The BNP exists to give the British people that choice, and thus to restore and defend the basic democratic rights we have all been denied. We favour more democracy, not less, not just at national but at regional and local level.

Power should be devolved to the lowest level possible so that local communities can make decisions which affect them. We will remove legal curbs on freedom of speech imposed by successive Governments over the last 40 years. We will implement a Bill of Rights guaranteeing fundamental freedoms to the British people. We will ensure that ordinary British people have real democratic power over their own lives and that Government, local and national, is truly accountable to the people who elect it.

What Do I Get for Joining the British National Party?

What do I get for joining the British National Party?

BNP members not only get the satisfaction of knowing that they are contributing directly to the vital work of building the Party, but you will also receive a plastic credit card style membership card and our monthly membership bulletin British Nationalist.

Membership runs for 12 calendar months from the issuing of your card.

Paid up members are also entitled to attend all meetings, to hold offices within the BNP and to put themselves forward to be candidates in local and national elections. After two years you also become eligible to apply to become a Voting Member.

VMs are members who have earned the right to attend events such as our Annual Conference and help form BNP policies by debate and voting.

We as a party are passionately committed both to democracy and the belief that rights are earned by fulfilling duties. This is why power and influence in the BNP have to be earned by sustained activism, financial support and commitment to politic education.

To join as a member or to renew, you can either send in the form in the online inquiry pack, join online or pay by credit card over our payments hotline below.

Gold Members enjoy the same rights and status as ordinary members, but in recognition of their generosity in contributing double the normal membership fee, they receive a BNP Gold Badge for the year in which the majority of their membership falls. Gold Members rightly wear their special badges with pride as everyone else can see at a glance their ‘extra mile’ commitment to helping to fund the BNP’s continued progress.

JOIN ONLINE:

Standard Membership - £30 per annum

Gold Membership - £60 per annum

Family Membership (husband / wife) - £40 per annum.

You can also include other members of your household such as any son or daughter under the age of 24, elderly parents, or in-laws that live with you, under 16s who cannot legally join the party but who can join the YBNP Supporter’s Club.

Discounted Membership for OAPs, Students and the Unemployed - £15

Overseas Adult Membership - £55 per annum

Please note:

These overseas rates apply if remittance is in Pounds Sterling. If remittance is in any other currency, an additional charge of £4.50 is required with cheques and money orders and £2.50 with banknotes. Membership is for a full 12 months of the calendar year - e.g. sign up in March and your membership is valid until March 31st the following year.

JOINING BY POST:

UK residents - Click here for printable membership form

Overseas residents - Click here for printable membership form

Please make cheques payable to British National Party. You should receive your membership card(s) within 3-4 weeks. Please allow 3-4 weeks before contacting us.

Membership enquiries:

Membership Department
PO Box 107
Wigton
Cumbria
CA7 0YA

Telephone: 0871 050 0236

Next Page »