November elections signal death of BNP

November 2012 was a unique month in British electoral history, with six parliamentary by-elections taking place.  Just a few years ago these would have been seen as ideal opportunities for the BNP – then seen as a growing nationalist party – to make significant progress.  In those days the political establishment was genuinely afraid of the BNP, whereas today Nick Griffin’s party is dismissed with contempt as a bad political joke.

The corrupt cronyism of Nick Griffin has crippled the many good nationalists who hopelessly strive within the BNP, which is why every day more of those good nationalists leave that party.

Thankfully there is now a credible alternative: the new British Democratic Party, which is being constructed at a series of regional meetings in advance of a formal launch next year.

The BNP’s November election disasters provided ample proof that a new party is an urgent necessity. In the Northamptonshire constituency of Corby, the BNP vote fell from 2,525 (4.7%) in 2010 to 614 (1.7%) at the by-election.  In Manchester Central the party polled fewer votes across the entire constituency – 492 – than they had once managed in just one of the constituency’s eight wards.  In Middlesbrough, where the BNP saved their deposit in 2010 with 1,954 votes (5.8%), the by-election vote collapsed to 328 (1.9%).  While even in Rotherham, a former BNP stronghold where the campaign started in ideal circumstances due to the resignation of a discredited Labour MP and a local Asian ‘grooming’ scandal, BNP stalwart Marlene Guest saw her vote fall from 3,906 in 2010 to 1,804 at the by-election.

After a clear verdict from the voters, the death of the BNP is confirmed. Time to make a new start with Andrew Brons MEP and the British Democratic Party.

(A fuller analysis of the autumn’s by-elections appears in issue 52 of Heritage and Destiny, which is now available.)

 

By-election test in Oldham

On January 13th 2011 the ruling Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition will face its first serious electoral test in the Oldham East & Saddleworth by-election.

While Prime Minister David Cameron, his Deputy Nick Clegg, and newly elected Ed Miliband, leader of the opposition Labour Party, are seen by the mainstream media as locked in a three-way gladiatorial contest, Oldham East & Saddleworth may be even more interesting as the final chapter in the history of the BNP, and a turning point in nationalist politics.

The circumstances of the by-election indicate the special status of Oldham as the frontline of England’s racial divisions. At the General Election on May 5th last year most political pundits expected Labour’s Phil Woolas to lose to the Liberal Democrats. Woolas was the hapless immigration minister in Gordon Brown’s government, and had repeatedly faced public humiliation, first over his government’s failure to control illegal immigration and abuse of the asylum process, and latterly after the much hyped dispute over the immigration status of Gurkha veterans.

Ever since Tony Blair’s illegal war of aggression against Iraq in 2003, Labour had lost significant numbers of Muslim votes to the Liberal Democrats. This contributed to a sensational defeat at the Brent East by-election in September 2003 and heavy losses at local council elections. At the 2005 general election Muslim groups explicitly targetted certain pro-war and pro-Israel Labour MPs, notably Lorna Fitzsimons in Rochdale, who lost her seat to Liberal Democrat Paul Rowen on a 7.7% swing.

Rochdale councillor Elwyn Watkins was then selected to take on Woolas in the neighbouring Oldham East & Saddleworth constituency, and the Muslim Public Affairs Committee saw Woolas as the next pro-war, pro-Israel target. Woolas responded vigorously with a highly personalised anti-Watkins campaign, labelling the Liberal Democrats as the allies of Islamist extremists.

The result was a narrow and unexpected Labour victory by 103 votes. Paradoxically Woolas had benefited both from his anti-Islamist leaflets rallying White Oldhamers, and from a nationwide swing back to Labour among some Muslim voters, who did not hold Gordon Brown and his ministers personally to blame for the disgraceful Iraq policy to anything like the extent they had blamed Blair.

Elwyn Watkins wasn’t prepared to accept this defeat and petitioned an election court, claiming that Woolas had lied about him in Labour’s leaflets and breached the Representation of the People Act. The election court agreed, ousting Woolas in the first judgment of its kind since the election of Irish Home Rule MP Richard Hazelton was overturned in 1911.

So Oldham was faced by a multiple paradox: a Labour MP was ousted for fighting a deceptive and quasi-“racist” campaign and the Liberal Democrats forced a re-run of the poll in circumstances which had been transformed since last May. Having fought the general election with a radical appeal to protest voters, and pitching particularly for the support of Muslims (with the most anti-Zionist stance of any mainstream party) and students (with a solemn pledge to abolish university tuition fees), the Liberal Democrat candidate Elwyn Watkins is now the standard bearer for a party which is in government as part of a coalition with the Conservatives – Europe’s most pro-Zionist government – and proposing not to abolish but to treble tuition fees!

And what of the nationalist challenge in Oldham, which had once grabbed the attention of the world’s press? Check back later for Part Two of this article…

Statement by EFP Chairman Mark Cotterill on the May 6th Elections

Against the background of the General election in which very minimal coverage was afforded by the media to the smaller political parties, one consequence was electoral outcomes for the SNP, Plaid Cymru, UKIP, and even the Lib Dems which were significantly less than indicated by prior opinion polls.

The small nationalist parties – including the BNP – all did badly, the English Democrats and National Front did very badly (in almost all the seats they contested).

However, I want to thank all our excellent candidates and everyone who helped with all the hard work that went into our campaign.

We have succeeded in moving our Party forward in a number of new areas – notably Stoke, Wigan and Pendle – and although we have yet to make the full breakthrough, I am now confident that it will come. We are a very new Party, still less than seven years old, but each time we make ourselves known to a voter we are leaving them with our ideas which are often a “slow burn” but, given time, more and more people are seeing the justice of our Cause, of England’s Cause!

It is always going to be a struggle to get fair coverage from the media and so standing in elections is by far the most effective way of getting our message out. Although we only had seven local election candidates standing – six up on last year! – and polled generally disappointing votes we have shown again in this election (as we always have) that we are England’s number one racial-nationalist party.

Finally, given the outcome of the General election, we were proved right not to take part in the inconclusive “Round One”, a campaign in which the media and party leaders avoided most of the key issues. However, we need to start preparing now for “Round Two”, which, I suspect will be within the next year but which could be much sooner!

If the British liberal-left/Zionist Establishment fails to deliver policies that benefit England, after all the hype of this election, our turn may yet come.

Yours sincerely,

Mark Cotterill

Chairman – England First Party

.
.
.
.

Labour’s secret plan to lure immigrants was borderline treason – and plain stupid

Was this author was too scared to accuse the Cultural Marxists running New Labour of outright treason? The info obtained by Migration Watch in their Freedom of Information request proves, not just treason, but attempted genocide of whites within the British Isles. Racial nationalists have been vindicated.

Telegraph Blogs, 10 Feb 2010: Incredible. I am stunned. Back in October Andrew Neather, a former Labour party speechwriter, let the cat out the bag when he said that the Government had encouraged immigration “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity”. But while Neather quickly backtracked, documents now released under the Freedom of Information Act suggest that he was telling the truth. Rather than being the result only of incompetence or a short-term economic measure to reduce inflation, Labour’s policy of runaway immigration was a deliberate and cynical attempt to change the face of British society.

The document released yesterday suggested that Labour originally pursued a different direction. It was published under the title “Migration: an economic and social analysis” but the removal of significant extracts suggested that officials or ministers were nervous over references to “social objectives”.

The original paper called for the need of a new framework for thinking about migration policy but the concluding phrase — “if we are to maximise the contribution of migration to the Government’s economic and social objectives” — was edited out.

Link to full article [external site]

Labour’s ‘secret plan’ to lure migrants

 The Government has been accused of pursuing a secret policy of encouraging mass immigration for its own political ends. (Voting trends indicate that migrants and their descendants are much more likely to vote Labour.)

 DAILY TELEGRAPH, 9 Feb 2010: The release of a previously unseen document suggested that Labour’s migration policy over the past decade had been aimed not just at meeting the country’s economic needs, but also the Government’s “social objectives”.

The paper said migration would “enhance economic growth” and made clear that trying to halt or reverse it could be “economically damaging”. But it also stated that immigration had general “benefits” and that a new policy framework was needed to “maximise” the contribution of migration to the Government’s wider social aims.

The Government has always denied that social engineering played a part in its migration policy.

However, the paper, which was written in 2000 at a time when immigration began to increase dramatically, said controls were contrary to its policy objectives and could lead to “social exclusion”.

Link to full article [external site]

Journalists launch campaign to challenge BNP in run-up to election

If ever you needed proof of media bias (oh, and how Amnesty International doesn’t do what it’s constitution states it exists to do, namely: “to protect people wherever justice, fairness, freedom and truth are denied.”)…

Lefty Journalists’ organisation, 9 Feb 2010: Campaigning journalists and media workers are to launch EXPOSE, a campaign aimed at “revealing the undemocratic and racist nature” of the British National Party.

The new campaign will tackle the BNP’s “attempts to construct a respectable public image” and support media workers who refuse to work on uncritical programmes or material [emphasis added], the group announced today.

EXPOSE aims to brief reporters and news editors to help them challenge the BNP’s statements and spokespersons in the run-up to the UK election, the campaigners said.

A launch rally at the Amnesty UK headquarters in London on 23 February…

http://www.journalism.co.uk/2/articles/537506.php? (Copy/paste link for full article, external site)

HERITAGE & DESTINY magazine: Issue 39 now available!

Issue 39 of Heritage and Destiny is now available!

The new January-March 2010 issue of Heritage and Destiny magazine is now out and hitting the streets of Britain!

Issue 39 includes:

• 40 Years of the National Front (part 9). By Peter Rushton
• No Surrender? The National Front in Ulster. A history of the NF in Ulster from 1967 onwards. By Peter Rushton
• Europe’s Human Rights Hypocrisy in Focus at Frankfurt Demo. An article looking at the lack of human rights for German Patriots. By A.T. Richie
• USA 2010 – The End of White America? An interesting article on the upcoming 2010 Census in the USA. By James Schneider
• Where’s That Quid? – E.N.Ronn reports on the latest BNP accounts
• On Normans in the Colonies. An article on some of the great Norman-Americans. By John de Nugent
• Death of Jurgen Rieger spotlights ‘democratic’ tyranny: An Obituary to German nationalist Jurgen Rieger. By Peter Rushton
• BNP defections complicate election build-up. A preview of the coming British general election. By Peter Rushton

• Plus two book reviews and one movie review:

• Churchill: The Greatest Briton Unmasked: by Nigel Knight. Reviewed by Ronald Rickcord
• Alan Clark: The Biography – by Ion Trewin. Reviewed by Michael Walker
• Katyn – Andrzej. Reviewed by A.T. Richie

• And two pages of Readers’ Letters, two pages of Movement News (by Peter Rushton) and a lively editorial on the English World Cup team, past and present.

For a sample copy just send £4.00 – or take out a six-issue subscription for only £20.00. Make cheques/postal orders payable to Heritage and Destiny, and send to – 40 Birkett Drive, Preston, Lancashire, PR2 6HE (please do not send payments to the old London PO Box address as this is no longer in use) – or buy online with PayPal at the England First Party Shop.

The Politics Factor: Simon Cowell unveils plan to launch election debate show

As David Cameron calls Simon Cowell is “‘very talented”, we’re going to be treated to a reality TV-style General Election 2010. It was only a matter of time…

DAILY MAIL, 15 Dec 2009: He already maintains a tight stranglehold on the UK’s record industry and his talent shows dominate TV schedules across the globe.

But now Simon Cowell has admitted that he wants to apply his unique brand of interactive TV glamour to the world of politics.

In an interview with Kirsty Wark on the BBC’s Newsnight last night, the multi-millionaire unveiled his plan for a series of ‘five or six’ prime time TV shows to be screened in the run-up to the General Election.

Read full article [external link]