Sim-O

You might possibly have seen this in todays’ Times…

THE BBC has provoked controversy by giving the British National party a platform for the first time on Question Time, its top current affairs programme.

This development, I think, is inevitable. Now that the BNP has gone and got itself a couple of elected representatives to a higher office than a local government position I don’t see how the BBC can refuse to have either Fat Nick or Andrew Brons it’s flagship political discussion programme without being accused of taking sides, of being political.

Forget what the BNP actually stands for for a minute and just compare them to UKIP in terms of their representation.

UKIP only has MEPs’. They do not have an elected representative in the House of Commons. UKIP appear on Question Time. The BNP only have MEPs’. They do not have anyone in the House, either. They will now appear on Question Time, but just like UKIP, only occassionally.

“They got across a threshold that has given them national representation and that fact will be reflected in the level of coverage they will be given,” said Ric Bailey, the BBC’s chief adviser on politics. “This is not a policy about the BNP. It’s a policy about impartiality.”

Whether we like it or not, the BBC cannot do ‘No Platform’.

I know, I know. It’s the News of the World and the News of the World does have it’s own parking place at the Old Bailey car park.

Wouldn’t it be nice, though? To have see John Coombes and Dick Hamilton refute the claim…

A 12-year-old girl there with her dad (we are protecting her identity) held a golly called Winston over the fire as Coombes “charged” him with “mugging, rape, drug dealing”.

He sneered: “Right Winston, you’re about to get cooked. Anything else to say?

“Says he ain’t a drug dealer. He thinks he’s not black. He’s charged with being black. Now get on there.”

Skinhead Hamilton chipped in: “If he jumps off he’s innocent.” Coombes went on: “He’s guilty, guilty as charged.

“Let’s get a real one – in the town we’ll find one or two. They’ll also be guilty of the heinous crimes I charged him with – may God forgive your horrible soul.” Coombes repeated the charges then added: “He may have appeared innocent to you lot but I’m sure he done lots of things wrong.”

or for Andrew Brons to deny ever saying…

I’m less concerned about the presence of mosques than the presence of the people that use them. Being worried about the presence of a particular mosque is almost like looking at a disease like smallpox and saying it’s a problem with spots.

It would make a fantastic spectacle. These fuckers trying to deny their racist, fascist roots and all their rhetorical acrobatics to try and show how they’ve changed.

They won’t though. Because they can’t. Because underneath their carefully chosen words, they are exactly what we see them as. Racist, fascist cunts.

[screen capture including 91 comments is here. I doubt the page will change, but you never know]

Lancaster Unity has shown why the BNP, unlike every other well known political party, has a closed party conference.

If I was presented with the following as a policy propsal, I wouldn’t want anyone else to know either…

Teenage mothers – the problem and the solution

Any amount of sexual health education is not going to reduce Britain’s high teen pregnancy rates, whilst the ‘rewards’ for becoming an unmarried teen mother remain so [relatively] attractive. The cycle of girls getting pregnant by man A, then being allocated a council flat & welfare benefits, then getting pregnant by man B, and being allocated a bigger council flat & more benefits, then getting pregnant by man C, and being allocated a council house & yet more benefits has got to STOP. It leads to all sorts of social problems, resulting from mothers who are not mature enough to parent effectively, and end up raising dysfunctional families in poverty. It also costs tax payers a lot of money, to fund these ‘alternative’ lifestyles.

Furthermore, people who have been on housing waiting lists for several years, and who conduct themselves in a responsible manner, find themselves being ‘queue-jumped’ by these feckless members of society.

So, I suggest that there be no council flats and no welfare benefits available to unmarried mothers under the age of 21. Instead they will be placed in ‘mother & baby homes’. Here they will receive academic education as well as parenting classes, plus courses covering all aspects of their social development. The homes will be run by ‘matron’ type figures. The homes should not be ‘institution’ like, but at the same time there will be rules which must be adhered to; such as a curfew of approx 9pm, a dress code which states skirts must come to at least the knees & no cleavage to be on show. Failure to comply with the homes’ rules will result in the mother being sent to prison, and the baby being taken in to care.

This is not a short-term remedy, but a long-term solution. Eventually I believe the implementation of this policy will result in a vast decrease in teenage girls becoming pregnant – as the consequences will be positively unattractive. Of course, teenage pregnancies will never be completely eradicated, and the homes will allow for the girls who do still become teen mothers to learn how to be good parents, whilst not being fast-tracked to the top of the housing queue.

If an 18-20 year old pregnant woman is married [marriage should not be an option available to 16/17 year olds, even with parental consent] and her husband has a job, then she will be exempt from going in to one of the homes.

*If* you need to have what’s wrong with it explaining, go have a squint at the Lancaster Unity post.

… as the saying goes. It doesn’t apply here though.

The question over at the BNP site is “Who are the minorities?”. And guess who are the minorities…

Over and over again, British people — and Europeans generally — are told that they must “accommodate the minorities” in their countries. Yet the worldwide reality is that European-origin people are the true global minority, and, using the liberal logic which demands special rights for minorities, it is Europeans who should receive the special perks.

Yes. The poor old white man is the true minority. The white man might not be a minority in their own country so the BNP are making the battle global. Suddenly, the Nationalists are worried about other countries. If the white man clubs together, then and only then, and even then only in absolute numbers does he become an endangered species.

[There are several reports mentioned in the BNPs’ pamphlet of shit and it’s late so if someone else wants to look into how good/reliable they are, go for it..]

Consider the following: The world’s population is forecast to hit 7 billion in 2011, the vast majority of its growth coming in ‘developing’ and, in many cases, the poorest nations, according to the latest World Population Data Sheet issued by the Population Reference Bureau in America.

Some 97 percent of global growth over the next 40 years will happen in Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, said the report

And there is a lot of talk of birthrates, quoting various population increases in various countries and suchlike, all of which may be accurate, but just as likely not. But then there’s also stuff like…

A United Nations population survey in 2007 predicted the 21st century disappearance of western man.

By 2050, a fourth of all the people of Eastern Europe will have vanished. Ukraine will lose one-third of its population. Russia, 150 million at the breakup of the Soviet Union, 142 million today, will be down to 108 million.

Ah, ‘Western Man’. That’s what the racists are worried about, aren’t they? So, in the next 91 years, there will be no true white man, eh? Why are they quoting Eastern Europeans in the decline of western man? Aren’t they one of the groups of people coming over here, taking ‘our’ jobs and taking ‘our’ benefits whilst shagging ‘our’ women?
Here’s the first solid bit of bullshit numbering. Either the BNP are adding their own numbers or the report they got it from was written by an uninformed twat because didn’t the Soviet Union break up twenty years ago? Any recent self-respecting, legitimate report wouldn’t count anything to do with the Soviet Union. The USSR is history already. Oh, and where do all these people in the Ukraine get lost? In the sodding permafrost?

The UN statistics, however, show the populations of Northern, Western and Southern Europe stabilising or falling only slightly.

That’s just not good enough, is it? Come on. It’s your duty to your race to fuck more!

It is time, therefore, that liberals stopped talking about ‘minorities’ as if European people were somehow the dominating majority. European-origin people across the world are the true minority, and as such deserve extra special treatment in their home nations.

Ok. Taking their figures, the dodgy groupings and double accounting, at face value, so what? Aren’t they supposedly ‘Nationalists’? Isn’t the clue in the name? What do these Nationalists care about other countries? Don’t they have an isolationist twang to their policies? All of a sudden, the go-it-aloners are worried about other nations ‘indigenous people’.

[added during a read through: When liberals (and that could be anyone when the BNP say it) talk about minorities, they talk about the minority ethnic groupings of that country. In South Africa the minority is the white bloke. In European countries, European descended people are the majority. FFS.]

I just spotted too, ‘European-origin people’ don’t just deserve an equal crack at the whip, not even special treatment, but extra special treatment. What do they want? A fucking house given to them? They want immigrants that come here to work (until they can send them packing), but want extra special treatment themselves. Sounds like aparthied would be just up their street.

Here come the big guns of the arguement: The United Nations stuff…

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted by General Assembly Resolution 61/295 on 13 September 2007, states very clearly that:

Oh, go on. Lets see what you make of this. I’m going to quote everything they do and then deal with it in one go at the end…

“Article 3
Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
Article 4
Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.
Article 6
Every indigenous individual has the right to a nationality.
Article 8
1. Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.
2. States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:
(a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
(c) Any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;
(d) Any form of forced assimilation or integration;
(e) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.
Article 33
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own identity or membership in accordance with their customs and traditions. This does not impair the right of indigenous individuals to obtain citizenship of the States in which they live.
2. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine the structures and to select the membership of their institutions in accordance with their own procedures.”

Indigenous people do have all those rights. They are meant, primarily, where a land has been occupied, colonised or conquered. A good example of this are the Aboriginal people of Austrialia. Foreign people came and conquered the land and for fuck knows how long denied them full rights, equal rights in their own land.
I challenge anyone to give me an example of where one of the UN articles quoted above are being violated with regard to the ‘indigenous’ population of Great Britian.

Those UN articles apply to individual countries, territories, irrespective of what is happening in other countries. The Republic of Ireland could have a majority population of Easter Islanders and it wouldn’t matter to the rights of anybody in the UK at all.

I would imagine ‘Western Man’ is already a minority. Think about it. There’s a fuck load of people spread over this earth and western Europe and North America is a small part of it. If the fascist nationalists are having to club together with unnatural bedfellows to become the put-upon victims, the rest of their arguments disappear like sand through their fingers

Up until 1.23am 17 August 2009 this URL http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1206618/Extremist-banned-entering-UK-BNP-festival.html took you to this story [click to enlarge]….

After that time it now looks like this [again, click to enlarge]…

The pictures are the same but the words have been changed. In fact, the words have been changed so much you could say it is a completely different article.

And as such, the comments below the first draft were irrelevant to the second and so could be removed. At least I think that’s the reason. Couldn’t be anything to do with the invasion of racist fucks in the comments, could it?

The UAF protest at the RWB Festival yesterday was largely peaceful, but did not achieve as much as was hoped for.

I was part of a group of around 200-300 protesters who blocked one of the nearby roads from around 10am to 2.30pm, when we heard that all other road blocks had been broken, and faced with four police horses, dogs, and a body of around 50 to 60 police, we rejoined the official body of protesters.

The protest was generally good-natured. At several points during the day, the police tried to disperse us, informing us of some random section that had been invoked that made our gathering illegal, but we formed ranks and linked arms, and in the end each time the police looked as though they were about to use force, they decided not too. The police were forced to block the road themselves with two police vans parked across it, as Nazi’s trying to attend the festival were stuck in a large traffic jam and started to get out of their cars to confront us.

We were informed that other road blocks had been held for a while, but eventually the Nazi’s managed to get to their festival, though in lower numbers than the BNP hoped for.

The protest I was with was peaceful but resolute. The police were mainly locals, and at no point changed into riot gear, a far cry from the G20 protests, where the thugs of the Met’s Territorial Support Group couldn’t wait to get tooled up. This would have undoubtedly lead to some  serious conflict, especially in a confined country lane.  The policing was far more sensible on this occasion, though we still have to remember that they were there primarily to try and ensure the festival of hate continued undisturbed.

I challenged a number of them on why they were protecting the Nazi’s. In the main there were few denials that the BNP were Nazi’s, but the usual theme of freedom of speech came through, combined with the traditional ‘I’m just doing my job’.  One officer said to me (in reference to our protest) that his grandfather who fought in the war would be appalled, which was a strange thing to say. I pointed out that his grandfather, and in fact the many millions who died in the war against the Nazi’s, would be appalled by the fact that the Nazi’s are now being protected by the police, and granted democratic status by our governments, who are paralysed in the face of the new family friendly approach of the BNP.

Whilst we did not achieve the shutdown that we hoped for, the protest was uplifting and partially successful. The particular blockade I was with was made up of a large mixture of young, old, black and white. We were prepared to struggle alongside each other, though individually few if any there were at all inclined to violence. This is in contrast to the BNP, whose strength is rooted in violent, thuggish and cowardly attacks on individuals, rather than any collective action. We can take strength from this as a movement. We are not the same as them – there is a huge difference between their racial violence and the type of direct but non-violent force that we used.

There is also great potential to shut this festival down. Given a bit more planning, and double the number of protesters, we could have held the key road points. We must make sure we a successful next time, as it unfortunately seems likely there will be a next time.

I have been informed about a piece on the news last night, I will post the link once I find it. Apparently one of the ‘fun’ games at the festival was to put two characters dressed as Obama and Bin Laden in the stocks and throw things at them!

Some good news via LancasterUAF…

A white supremacist friend of Nick Griffin, the British National Party leader, was banned from entering Britain yesterday as he headed to speak at the BNP’s Red White and Blue festival this weekend.

Preston Wiginton, one of the world’s most active nazis and antisemites, was refused entry by immigration officers at Heathrow airport under laws to keep out “undesirables”. He was to have been the star overseas guest at the BNP’s tenth RWB festival, which opens today in Derbyshire.

It was Wiginton, 44, who organised Griffin’s anti-Islam tour of three US universities at the end of October 2007. As well as financing the trip, Wiginton appealed to users of the Stormfront nazi internet forum to donate money to Griffin while he was in America.

The BNP’s Red White and Blue Festival takes place this weekend, with several thousand expected to both attend and protest at it. The planned protest, called by UAF, has received a degree of hostility from the press and police to date. The police are getting in some pre-emptive strikes, with echoes of the G20 operation,  preparing the country for a brave defence of the Red White and Blue festival against those violent anti-fascist thugs. Not them again, the collective country asks, they are always up to no good – there’s bound to be some trouble if they are involved. Alongside them, the BNP are on the charm offensive, trying to convince us all that this is effectively a village fete, and all they want is to be left alone to enjoy themselves. After all, aren’t they a legitimate political party?

The general arguments that are made against the UAF protests can be broadly grouped into the following themes.

Firstly, we have the argument about free speech. The BNP are a) entitled to free speech, and b) aren’t the anti fascists being fascist for denying this free speech? Following on from this, the UAF are then shown to be ‘just as bad as the BNP’.

Secondly, there is the presentation of the festival as some sort of casual, lawful celebration, with attendees going for no other reason than to have fun, which they should be lawfully allowed to do without harassment. The quote from Simon Darby, deputy leader of the BNP, on the Guardian web site says it all: ‘”It’s not in our interests to cause trouble. We’re up there with our wives, girlfriends and children. We just want to have a good time, but these protesters want to latch trouble on to us.” Clearly, we are led to believe that this is just a family event, with fun and games in the sun. The police are treating this at face value, with the local spokesperson saying of their operation “The people attending Red, White and Blue have a right to do so in peace and safety but we also realise that people have the right to protest in a lawful and peaceful way.”.

Thirdly, we have the view that the protesters are also violent, and that this amounts to some sort of contradiction – you can’t resort to violence and call yourselves anti-fascist. The methods of the UAF are questioned and compared to the BNP’s thugs. There are other ways of trying to stop the BNP, which must be done without confrontation.

Lastly, some argue that we should all just ignore it. The election results clearly show that the BNP’s vote has not increased in absolute terms, but that the rest of the country has become disillusioned with politics, and with no alternatives to the 3 mainstream parties simply didn’t vote. The BNP will never get in, as the vast majority of the country do not support them. By making a fuss of their festival, we are giving them publicity and national coverage.

This is not an exhaustive list, but a brief survey of the ideas emanating from the mainstream media. What is striking is that in almost all the coverage, the fundamental issue of the racist and fascist roots of the BNP is never discussed. We have somehow moved on from this argument – the terms of debate have changed. Whether this is a sign of the gaining legitimacy of the BNP, or merely lazy sensationalist reporting, the fact of the matter is that  UAF finds itself in the unusual position of having to defend themselves for organising a protest against a party that the majority of people would probably accept are racist, and in general oppose.

So how do we address the 4 themes outlined above?  Extremist parties such as the BNP have often used the free speech argument to gain a platform for their ideas, though free speech is the last thing that would be on their minds if they ever got into power. Did Hitler stand up for the principles of free speech when he was in power? Are we to make the mistakes of the past and allow the racists to use free speech and democracy with the aim of destroying it?

We also have to ask ourselves what we even think free speech is. Is it being able to say whatever we want? How do the people that are the victims of the racial hatred that is spread by the BNP feel about free speech?  As with many things that we label as ‘free’ we generally consider within the framework of not causing harm to anyone else. Freedom to do whatever you want does not include things like attacking or murdering other people, and in the same vein, freedom to say what you want has limits too, such as inciting violence against people based on the colour of their skin or ethnicity. If this is too fascist for you, then clearly you have lost faith in the ability of society to set some basic rules for itself.  I would be interested to see if anyone was prepared to defend a festival celebrating pedophilia on the grounds of ‘free speech’, so why do we consider it in a racist context?

The BNP’s characterisation of this event as a peaceful festival has been given an astronomical amount of spin. As noted in previous posts, there is mountains of evidence, including their own manifesto, that the BNP is a racist party, with it’s philosophy based on white supremacist theories,  links to many violent far right groups, participation of many of it’s leading members in earlier racist organisations and struggles, and the previous convictions that some members, such as their leader, have had for racial crimes. Amongst the tombola stalls and coconut shys will be speeches and talks pushing the white is right message, and the aims of hounding out of the country of all those who are non white.  This festival is not about peace and tolerance, it is about hatred and violence. The police know all this too, which makes it even more astounding that they are preparing to defend it.

How do we deal with the violence question? There is undoubtedly a violent element within the UAF, but this is limited to a minority. Without dismissing this, the contrast is with the BNP, whose entire immigration policy is based on violence, something that the vast majority of the BNP membership buys into, and is one of the central unifying themes within the party itself. Arguing that the UAF are as fascist as the BNP is comparing a coalition who are trying to stop the BNP spreading their doctrine of hate with a party whose logical conclusion is the holocaust! This is not just misguided, it is wrong.

The argument as to whether to use violence or not is a fair enough question. Most people there will not use violence.  Force, maybe, but violence, no. We are not going there to beat them up, we are just going there to stop the festival happening. The press will of course get their usual shock pictures, but as with the G20 protest, there will be one day of tutting at the protesters, before the truth seeps out over the following weeks. Those that claim that using violence against the BNP is wrong of course reserve the right to support violence elsewhere – the general populations of Iraq and Afghanistan are far more deserving of our violence than the BNP! I don’t have an unequivocal view on the violence question, but the threat posed by the BNP, the vile messages that they are trying to spread means that the possibility of violence from a minority is no reason to stop the protest.

So should we just ignore it all? Not at all. The recent election victory has lead to an increase in racial attacks and racist demonstrations, as the BNP and it’s thugs gain confidence. We  have the historical example of the rise of Hitler, and the deaths of millions. ‘It will never happen here’, they say. Well, I bet they never thought anything like that would happen in Germany either. But it did, and it was not a sudden event, it was a process that took place over a number of years, with Hitler building a party and using the democratic machinery of the state to spread his doctrine. We need to learn from the past, and instead of sitting back and ignoring it, make sure that history does not repeat itself.

We need to fight the BNP every step of the way. Nothing is set in stone, we make our own history, and we need to collectively make sure that our history is one that is not dominated by the the racist, fascist BNP.

Iain ‘Fail’ Dale fails to understand the problem…

Are we really saying that a BNP supporter is incapable of doing his job as a police officer? If an officer displays any degree of racial discrimination during the course of carrying out his duties, then I would be the first to say that disciplinary action should be taken, but a blanket ban is wrong, and in itself discriminatory. Should we also fire any police officer who supports any political party, or just those ones we don’t happen to approve of?

Is it wrong to discriminate against people that discriminate? Do Labour, the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats want the removal of people from the country depending on their colour?

The BNP Constitution, Section 1, sub-section 2, part b…

The British National Party stands for the preservation of the national and ethnic character of the British people and is wholly opposed to any form of racial integration between British and non-European peoples. It is therefore committed to stemming and reversing the tide of non-white immigrationand to restoring, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, the overwhelmingly white makeup of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948.

That statement in the BNPs’ constitution isn’t just about declaring their dislike for a certain section of society, it is a declaration to ethnically cleanse anyone that the BNP decides do not belong.

Membership of the BNP isn’t like the church where there are differing opinions on particular areas of thought. For example. Some members of the Church of England don’t give a monkeys’ about homosexuality and some think it’s abhorrent.
Every member of the BNP has read (or should’ve done) and agrees with it. Every member of the BNP thinks that non-white European people shouldn’t be here, have no right to be here, is taking something away from the white people.

What do you think ‘negotiation’ and ‘consent’ mean? BNP member have been arrested for ‘negotiating’ with non-white citizens.
At the moment the BNP are not able to get rid of people by legal changes, but if they did, what do you think that would involve? Forced deportations, removing civil liberties, there will be probably be organisations that are deniable to help ‘persuade’ people to leave.

The BNP aren’t fucking about.

Having said that, and much more could be said, if someone believes that much that someone, who’s family have lived in this country, 3 generations or so born here, no connections to anywhere else, works, pays taxes etc, does not belong just because of the colour of that persons skin, why would they help them? Any occasion that requires someone to call the police is a bad situation. A bad situation could help someone decide to leave. The BNP member is committed to getting non-white people to leave.

There are several arguements that go with this, mostly ‘whatabouteries’. The two most common appear in The Fail Dales post and comments. These are religion and the National Black Police Association.

Well, the religion one, as explained earlier using what could be said is a parallel situation, does not have a definative, stated viewpoint, policy, or objective with regards to homosexuality. Some strands of religion accept it, some don’t. Some are still deciding. It may be the case that religion and being a police officer are incompatible, but that is a different discussion. The two things, religion and being a copper, and BNP membership and being a police officer, are separate issues. One does not dictate the result of the other.

With NBPA, it states on the front page of their website…

Membership of the NBPA is open to all in policing on application.

There is no bar to membership based on colour.

The NBPA is also not trying to deny anybody anything. They are not calling for the removal of white police officers or the denial of employment rights from a certain section of the force.

The BNP want to solve the problem of ‘British workers for British people’, racial discrimination, and social housing problems by removing sections of British citizenry. Not just recent immigrants or asylum seekers but also people that know nothing else. People that don’t just feel British but are British.

Ooh, I nearly forgot. Another arguement is that the BNP is a legal political party so why not? Well, the BNP is a racist organisation pushing racist idea and policies. This means that the question shouldn’t be ‘should police officers be allowed to join the BNP’ but ‘should the BNP be legal’?

One of Dales’ commentors has hit the nail on the head…

The truth is that supporting the BNP is itself a racist act: it makes a person guilty of contributing to a climate of racism and prejudice in this country, which is harmful to racial and ethnic minorities. That is true whether or not the person considers him/herself to be a racist. We ought to be upfront about this fact, and more willing to openly condemn supporters of the BNP. Saying that supporting the BNP is a mere ‘protest’ gives the party, and its supporters, a veneer of legitimacy that they just doesn’t deserve. If someone supports the BNP, in any capacity, they are complicit in racism. They have contributed to making life that little bit harder for racial and ethnic groups in Britain, and that is something of which they should be ashamed.

I went swimming in the turgid mess of the BNP site last night but dropped my mojo and couldn’t get it together to get some coherent thoughts down. Oh well. Shit happens.

I still can’t get it sorted but my mind keeps returning to this post (links to BNP site, but don’t worry, thay ain’t getting no juice). It’s small things but hey, so fucking what?

The author is Titvs Advxas. Why would someone wanting to defend his country from the cohorts of foreigners invading his country to rape and pilage it via it’s benefit system and at the same time take all the jobs, and women too choose to give himself a foreign name?

Titvs Advxas. If not a real Roman name, it’s at least one that has been made up in the old Latin style, complete with ‘v’ used as in place of ‘u’. Someone who has taken a name from a country that invaded Britain to take control of us and prop up it’s mother empire so the invaders didn’t have to work so hard wants to save us from other foreigners that want to use us to prop up their mother countries so they don’t have to work so hard.
Did the irony not stand out a little there?

I also found it a little odd that a member of the BNP would admit to liking Star Trek. It is, apparently a ‘brainwashing distraction’ and it’s premise is something the BNP and their ilk despise…

In the Star Trek universe, humans developed faster-than-light space travel (“warp drive”) following a nuclear war and a post-apocalyptic period in the mid-21st century. According to this universe’s timeline, the first warp flight occurred on 5 April 2063. This technological feat attracted the attention of the Vulcans, an advanced alien race, who then made first contact with Earth. Aided by the scientific and philosophical teachings of the Vulcans, humans largely overcame many Earth-bound frailties and vices by the middle of the 22nd century, creating a quasi-utopian society in which exploration and knowledge replaced material wealth as the human civilization’s central pursuit. Humans then united with other sentient species of the galaxy, including the Vulcans, to form the United Federation of Planets.

After a nuclear war, man, through his pooled efferts presumably, achieve light speed travel. Some foreigners come and say hello and change the native society forever, making them forget their history then join a big union with other planets. It’s everything, apart from the light speed bit, that the BNP are fighting against. Open borders, people treated as equals and being part of another bigger union with rules handed down from above. It is (real) socialism and the EU and writ large and Titvs is just bursting for the DVD box set. Might be prudent to expect a call from the BNP enforcers, Mr Advxas

Titvs starts the post rambling on about Neil Armstrong, then Star Trek just to try and make a link from the anniversary of the moon landings, which his post missed by over a week, to Fat Nicks’ ‘victory’ speech…

Nick Griffin’s victory speech, his now famous Dam-busters analogy, in view of that impending 40th anniversary, could equally have drawn references to Neil Armstrong’s words.

“One small step for (two) men, One giant leap for British-kind”

So. Commandeering a famous line from an event that has and is uniting the world (well ok, not quit uniting, but getting some good co-operation between countries) and twisting it via a commie utopian sci-fi to fit their own isolationist, racist agenda.

Nice work Mr BNP.