BNP Derangement Syndrome Continues

It seems that the Mail have updated their article on yesterday's attack on BNP leader Nick Griffin as he attempted to hold a press conference outside Parliament.

This entire incident has reached ridiculous proportions, for it seems the stated aim of the protesters was to 'get between Griffin and the cameras'. Instead, they've ensured that he has received front page coverage at every major news outlet for at least 24 hours.

It also seems the attack goes beyond the egging which it was initially reported as, as this picture demonstrates.

Griffin's security were pretty much described in the press as 'thugs', despite the fact they clearly saved him from a serious assault, as what was described as 'a sizeable group of armed police' simply stood by.

Despite this, the article notes:

But when the far right leader arrived to deliver his speech opposite the Houses of Parliament, he found his party's message of hate was afforded precious little respect.

Together with fellow British National Party MEP Andrew Brons, Mr Griffin tried to use yesterday's Westminster meeting to publicise his party's racist agenda.

Why would he need to publicise anything, when it seems everyone has made up their minds?
But anyway, an innocent cameraman was also hit in the face. Presumably that was acceptable, as clearly anyone standing within 20 yards of Mr Griffin has to accept they too are a target for thugs screaming the magic words of 'Nazi' and 'racist'.

This does beg a question though; if Griffin and a few other people doing their job who happen to get in the way can be pelted with eggs for the cause, and this is all a bit of a giggle at best or at worst an actual political agenda (stopped those racists spreading their hate, dude) - what degree of violence is acceptable?

Is Griffin getting a bloody nose funny? A black eye? Couple of broken ribs? A hammer through the skull, maybe?

What terrifies me is the wonderland we're walking in, where everything means the opposite. Griffin's minders are thugs for protecting him from a beating, whilst those doing the beating are angels defending freedom and democracy - despite Griffin being the only one in the crowd with any democratic legitimacy.

The people attacking him don't care why he has that democratic legitimacy - because after all, anyone who voted for him is a moron, or a racist.

If you're against the Islamisation of this country, or the importing of millions of low-IQ, criminal Third Worlders who are a net drain and useless in any society which doesn't rely on violence and extortion for its income, then you are a lunatic.

It's like Soviet Russia, where every economic failure was due to saboteurs, or as Stalin used to refer to them, 'bastards'. Of course, if one had pointed out to Stalin that his own ridiculous policies were actually the surest route to economic failure, one would have been killed.

In such a society, truth is an anathema, and success depends on stringing out the illusion. The failure of multiculturalism and mass immigration in this country isn't due to the fact it was a ridiculous, criminal notion to begin with, but because of racists, haters and fascists.

There is also a rather unseemly battle going on over the corpse of Winston Churchill, and just what those who sacrificed their lives and their youth on D-Day were fighting for.

'Be honest with me, Sarge - did you vote BNP?'

I can assure you that no soldiers that day were fighting for 'multiculturalism' or tolerance which stretches to the point of national suicide.

To suggest otherwise is a revolting perversion of history of which Goebbels himself would be proud.

Can anyone seriously imagine what Churchill might think if he were to somehow see modern day Tower Hamlets or Oldham? I can, and I can tell you this - he'd be prosecuted under hate crime laws if he voiced his thoughts.

My Great Uncle George did not take part in the D-Day landings, but he fought with the British 8th Army across the North African theatre, culminating in the Salerno landings - the Allied invasion of Italy, the forgotten second front.

He was one of the first onto the beach, part of a wave of British and Americans which took 75% + casualties.

I can tell you from experience that in many respects he despised what this country has become, not because he held any brief for Hitler or 'fascists', but because he was under the impression that he was fighting for this country and its survival as a nation.

The UAF and other Antifa thugs despise this country outside of a very narrow prism of their own creation - the perpetual and ever-lasting multicult, which has renounced its own identity, its own history and its own birthright as inherently evil.

James Delingpole at the Telegraph sums up my views pretty well on the ongoing BNP bashing:

God, I am sick to death of the BNP. I don't mean the party - they only got two seats in the Euro Elections, for heaven's sake - I mean all the rival politicians and commentators and dinner party chatterers falling over themselves to say just how utterly disgusted they are by this victory for the racist "far right."

In yesterday's Twittersphere the talk was of little else and the subtexts of every Tweet could be loosely translated thus: "See what a caring, lovely, non-racist person I am?","Do you know just how many black people are close personal friends of mine? An awful lot, let me tell you"; "I have a West Indian supermarket near me. It sells all sorts of marvellous ethnic things: smelly dried fish, ackee fruit. The proprietor is a delightful fellow and we always have a jolly chat. Did I mention he's black? Well he is and it doesn't affect our relationship one bit"; "Oh, well I live next to an Indian restaurant and I so much prefer a lovely Sag Aloo to fish and chips with their awful racist Union Jack connotations. Kinder to the environment too. And the chap who runs it has taught me to say "two Cobra beers and some spicy poppadoms" in Gujerati." etc.

Next time, what I suggest these people do is come clean and Tweet the subtext. At least then we won't to have endure their half-baked, ill-thought-out, glib, bien-pensant inanities sullying one of the most important political debates of our age.

The people who voted BNP are on the front line of this debate. They don't have the luxury of being able to nip in and out of a cornucopia of simply marvellous ethnic food shops, and thrillingly directional Grime Bhangra clubs and delightful arthouse cinemas selling wholemeal samosas and showing seasons of Iranian cinema, before retreating to their lovely safe white enclaves. It's on their doorstep, all the time, and there's no escape: for the white working classes (of the North and North East especially) multiculturalism has been a disaster.

And this isn't, pace some tedious bien-pensant commentators, about racism pure and simple. It's partly about immigration numbers - far greater than the indigenous communities are capable of absorbing without disruption. Mainly, though, it's about assimilation.

The racial tension and unrest in Britain now would not be half so great if were not for the fact that thanks to the imbecilic liberal-leftist philosophy of "multiculturalism" two generations of immigrant communities have actually been encouraged by the apparatus of state and at taxpayer's expense NOT to assimilate. In some areas of towns in the north - Bradford, for example - white people are made to feel that they don't belong any more. And these white people whose families have been there for generations are supposed to go, what, exactly? "Ah! Bless! Bah gum I don't 'alf love living in this wonderful melting pot"?

However dangerous the BNP are - not, in fact, very, I don't think - they're not nearly so dangerous as the liberal commentators who write meaningless "Thought For The Day" drivel like "Far better would have been to enjoin our principal parties to get their act together and offer a viable politics of hope to eclipse the dark underbelly of society."

Every time a politician, media commentator, or glib dinner-party-chatterer bangs on about how disgusting they find the BNP, what they are unwittingly (at least I hope it's unwittingly) doing is shutting down the debate. "Here is a topic so beyond the pale of reasonable discussion that the only proper reaction is to pass the smelling salts, bury your head in the sand, and hope it all goes away," is what they are saying.

But it won't go away. Read Mark Steyn's America Alone: the Islamisation of Europe - it's one of the pressing problems of our age. (Why the hell do you think Geert Wilders did so well in the Euro Elections? You think, what, people just liked his crazy name?). Unchecked - and almost worse - unassimilated immigration is a threat to all Western countries.

And it's not "racist" to want to discuss this issue. It doesn't automatically make you hateful or a Nazi or the next Nick Griffin. It just means that you think.

Hat tip: The Frozen North