ConDem Welfare Reform Plan Ignores Underlying Cause of the Problem

The ConDem regime’s “plan” to reform the obviously broken welfare system ignores globalisation as the underlying cause of UK unemployment and even more insanely tries to “incentivise” people to work when the system pays them more not to.

Tory Work and Pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith announced the “reform” plans by claiming that unemployment is a result of the system, rather than the broader economic disaster which he and his colleagues have created.

Part of Mr Smith’s plan is to “incentivise” the unemployed to get back to work by ensuring that they will get at least 25 pence in the pound more if they start working.

However, as David Green, director of Civitas pointed out, this is “likely to be very costly without achieving its intended effects. Work should be a personal and civic obligation, not something we will only do if we are incentivised by the Government,” Dr Green said.

As long as a system remains in place whereby the unemployed can earn as much, or in some cases, even more, on welfare than they can do by working, the core problem in the system will never be addressed.

Furthermore, the real reason for unemployment lies in the destruction of the British economy and manufacturing base.

This policy has been followed consistently from the time of Margaret Thatcher right through the years of Labour rule and is still enthusiastically endorsed by today’s ConDem regime.

This belief, underlined by David Cameron’s speech this week in India telling young people in search of opportunities to “go east,” argues that Britain does not need its own manufacturing base as globalisation can provide all heavy industry needs.

All that Britain has to do, this twisted ideology says, is become a “service industry economy” where somehow British people can survive by giving each other backrubs for ever more while buying cheap consumer goods made in China.

Until Britain’s economy is restored to a sound basis where our manufacturing, mining and industries have been rescued from the ravages of globalisation, the unemployment situation will never be remedied.

On the contrary, if globalisation is left to run rampant, the end result will be total global economic collapse.

This will occur once the ‘service economies’ inevitably become bankrupt and disposable income dries up, leaving the West unable to continue buying the cheap Far Eastern consumables.

Only once the problem of globalisation and the destruction of the British economy is addressed, can much-needed real welfare reform be implemented.

It is no good punishing those who genuinely cannot get work because of the destroyed economy, and no amount of fake ConDem “incentivising” can create jobs where there are none.

However, once work opportunities which pay a decent living wage actually do exist, the welfare system must be overhauled to prevent scroungers from abusing the well-meant charity of the rest of society.

To this end, the British National Party has argued that the only true reform of the welfare system should be the implementation of a “workfare not welfare” system.

According to the BNP’s 2010 election manifesto, such as system would work as follows: “Originally, benefits were meant to be the state’s obligation to support those who genuinely were not in a position to support themselves. This guiding principle must always remain the guiding light for a just and humane system — and it is the core of the British National Party’s welfare policy.

Decades of Labour and Tory socialist state-induced welfare dependency has utterly distorted this noble ideal. Well-meaning welfare programmes have been exploited, distorted and twisted to become nothing more than a free handout to scroungers, foreign and local.

This has in turn created a welfare dependency culture which has led to in excess of six million people living in homes where no one has a job and where benefits are a way of life.

Not only does this cost the taxpayer in excess of £13 billion per year, but it also has a hugely damaging effect upon the psychology of a nation which once led the world in productivity and technological innovation and which gave birth to the Industrial Revolution. This dire situation must be reversed — urgently.

The BNP proposed to reverse these decades of disastrous Labour and Tory social engineering programmes through a sensible policy of workfare, not welfare.

The principle is simple: those who receive community support incur obligations as well. People who genuinely want to work must be provided with the opportunity to do so in return for training which will put them back into proper full-time employment.

In return for financial support and training for a new career, the benefit recipient must complete a certain number of hours of work per week. Properly implemented, this policy will undermine the benefit dependency culture and bring masses of unemployed back into the formal employment sector.

Ultimately there must be only one category of welfare recipient: those who genuinely deserve or have earned it. The scrounger entitlement mentality must be discarded. Those who can work but refuse to do so, must face the consequences of their actions.

To this extent, we shall require that those who have been out of work for over 18 months participate in local work schemes in return for their taxpayer-funded benefits.

The success of the “workfare not welfare” policy has been proven: these programmes already exist in Australia, America and even in India. Britain has to get back to work: and workfare provides the only path through which this aim will be achieved.”

Sat, 31/07/2010 - 14:06 | BNP News

British Taxpayers Lumped with £43 billion Bill to Save the Euro

Britain’s share of the €440 billion EU European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) euro rescue fund will be of the order of £43 billion, it has emerged.

The EFSF’s rescue fund for the single-currency region is now operational after Italy's parliament approved the programme yesterday.

The plan allows EU member states to issue guarantees for any debt raised by the EFSF, which is then lent to governments having difficulty borrowing on the markets themselves.

The rescue plan was formulated after the Greek crisis threatened to collapse the entire euro-zone after that nation’s government defaulted on its national debt repayments.

The EFSF was agreed by the 27 member states of the European Union on 9 May 2010, aiming specifically at “preserving financial stability in Europe by providing financial assistance to eurozone states in difficulty,” according to its founding documents.

The EFSF will sell bonds, notes or other debt instruments on the market and use the money raised to make loans up to a maximum of €440 billion to euro area member states in need.

The bonds will be backed by guarantees given by the euro area member states on a pro rata basis, in accordance with their share in the paid-up capital of the European Central Bank.

In terms of this ratio, Britain’s contribution is likely to be in the region of £43 billion — even though this country is not even a eurozone member.

The EFSF agreement was signed after the general election and was signed by the former chancellor Alistair Darling while the Conservative Party and Liberal Democrats were still in coalition negotiations.

The ConDem’s commitment to the EU, which totally negates the Tory’s election promise to “roll back” the EU’s powers, means that the agreement to pay for the EFSF will still be in force no matter what.

Meanwhile at home, British government departments have been ordered to make spending cuts of up to 25 percent.

The latest casuality will likely be some 60,000 Scots who face redundancy from the public sector as spending cuts bite.

Once again, the ruling elite has put the interests of other nations before those of Britain and the British people.

Britain to be biggest country in Europe by 2050

Europe's population will fall in the next 40 years, but Britain's population will swell by 15 million to hit 77 million Photo: PA

Britain will see its population swell from today's 62.2 million to 77 million, an increase of 24 per cent.

This will make it bigger than France, projected to be 70 million and Germany, which is predicted to have 71.5 million citizens.

The forecasts come form the Population Reference Bureau, a US body which supplies data to governments and institutions around the world.

The predictions suggest that Britain will see its population increase over the next 40 years at a far faster rate than nearly every other Europeancountry. The extra 15 million equates to the combined populations of Glasgow, Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds and Liverpool being added to the total national population over the next two generations.

Britain's population has started to climb sharply in recent years. Last year the Office for National Statistics indicated that mothers had more children than at any time since 1973.

Immigrant mothers accounted for more than half of the increase in births, but the fertility rate among British-born women also rose sharply.

The Population Reference Bureau predicts that France's population, in contrast, will increase at half the rate, adding 7 million to its 63 million. While Germany will actually see its population fall sharply from 81.6 million to 71.5 million because of a lack of immigration, and a far lower birth rate than that in Britain. It already has the second oldest population in the world after Japan, with one in five of all Germans over the age of 65.

Europe, in total, will see its population dip from 739 million to 720 million, because of its low birth rate.

The world's population will increase inexorably, swelling from 6.89 billion to 9.49 billion. India will be responsible for a significant part of this increase, becoming the largest country in the world by overtaking China.

The country, which hit 1 billion just a decade ago and now has a population of 1.19 billion, is expected to hit 1.75 billion, adding the equivalent of the entire population of the European Union in a mere 40 years.

China's population will increase, but relatively modestly, moving from 1.34 billion to 1.48 billion
.

Open Letter Posted and an Invitation To Eddy Butler to make a stand on the accusations

OPEN LETTER TO EDDY BUTLERNATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS OFFICER Cllr PAUL GOLDING Dear Fellow Party Officer, I was reluctant to send this email, but the truth is I have beenslandered to such a degree that I feel that I have no choice. I have uncovered an outrageous lie against me and wish to openly challenge the person responsible to withdraw their claim – butfirst, the background to this nonsense needs to be explained. Firstly I must make clear that I am in no way supportive of Eddy Butler in his bid for the BNP leadership. This is no secret. Ifeel he completely lacks the charisma, the oratory, the intellect,the management skill, the vision, the flair and the dynamismneeded to be a leader of a party, and also feel that, based onprevious experience of working side by side with him that he isegotistical, negative, rude ‘control freak’. That is mypersonal opinion based on my experience of him. Shortly after the European Elections last year, myself, andindeed, practically everyone with eyes to see, noticed that EddyButler and Mark Collett were suddenly enjoying a cosyrelationship that baffled everyone, particularly given MarkCollett’s well-known ‘hard-line’ Nazi position and Eddy Butler’slong-standing position as a ‘liberal’ by normal nationaliststandards. When Mark Collett was caught, not for the first time, trying todefraud the party of tens of thousands of pounds by using dodgyprinters for large election print jobs, and after Mr Butler wasgiven an official warning for his antics and behaviour whilstorganising a trip to the EU (this is the now infamous incidentwhere, following a night of heavy drinking, including a tripto a brothel, he was still so drunk the next morning that he kepta whole coach load of activists waiting for an hour), severalother senior officials became aware of a growing chorus ofplotting and scheming by Mark Collett and Eddy Butler. My observation during the period between the Euro Elections andthe end of 2009 was that Mr Butler was expanding his position asNational Organiser literally, he was acting as the ‘directorgeneral’ of the party, trying to control everything in sight andinterfering in everyone else’s remits and responsibilities (eventhough he had little ‘real life’ experience and had never beenmore than a low level civil servant all of his working life,strangely never ‘exposed’ by Searchlight). I feel that whether he intended it or not, Mr Butler didn’t takehis position as national elections officer seriously any longerand preferred to strut around as National Organiser trying tohave a say in all manner of party operations that weren’t hisbusiness and evidently had not the faintest idea of what he wastalking about. Practically every staff member will testify tothis. The party, in my opinion, suffered because of this, inby-election after by-election in 2009, and I find it a bit richthat Mr Butler should now claim we need a ‘full-time’ electionsofficer when he himself shunned the opportunity. My experience of Eddy Butler was that he was/is a ‘control freak’.He alone was a senior officer and everyone else is a mere minion.He has a “I’m more senior than you ,so piss off” attitude –everyone who knows him can attest to this. For example, one of myremits within the party is fundraising. When the General Electionroadshow meetings were in full swing, Mr Butler decided it was agood idea to hold his Eastern Region meeting in the same place,same venue, hence same crowd, within 1 week, of the Londonroadshow meeting. I advised him that, from a fundraising pointof view, this was not a good idea. Eddy’s response was to ring me up screaming abuse at me, orderingme NEVER to ‘interfere’ in ‘his’ region again. This outrageousoutburst of abuse against a well-meaning fellow party comradeshocked me, and others, and I had no choice but to tell him torefrain from using language like that towards me again. The mainbone of contention in this debacle was ego, I have no doubt aboutthis, as can be gauged from his reply to my email protesting athis arrogance and rudeness: “I do not require advice on holdingmeetings - the best place they should be, the attendees and soforth from anyone - from top to bottom in this Party or associatedwith this Party. I am probably the most successful ‘meetingorganiser in the history of the movement – not just the Party.”He continued: “I hope my shouting on this rare occasion will notput you off giving useful or even useless advice and ideas in thefuture.” What made me chuckle is that despite his arrogant and rudeoutburst against me he went on to change his meeting completelyaround and implement the changes I proposed in any case,confirming that I was right all along. I have spoken to many,many people nationwide with similar experiences of Eddy Butler,and it seems to be an established pattern of behaviour. The behind-the-scenes agitation of Butler and Collett culminatedin Mr Collett and Butler trying to recruit National TreasurerDavid Hannam into a post-General Election Advisory Council ambushof Chairman Nick Griffin. Their despicable and underhanded planwas to falsely accuse Mr Griffin of financial wrong-doing, andwhen the Chairman turned to David Hannam for a rebuttal, he wouldremain silent, and by his silence he would condemn an innocentman as a thief, can you imagine such wickedness? Thus the planwas to force our democratically elected and totally innocentleader to step down by means of lies and a stab in the back. I also understand, because I have heard it with my own ears, thatMr Butler is telling everyone a false and nonsensical version ofwhat happened regarding him and Mark Collett. How do I know thetruth? Because I have heard the Mark Collett recording for myselfand I am disgusted and shocked by the antics of Mr Collett andButler. I am not the only one, the pre-General Election meeting of nearlyone hundred key officials was offered the chance to hear therecording, and decided (for legal reasons) to delegate a smallgroup chosen from their ranks by them to listen to key sectionsof it. This was done and Cllr. Michael Simpkins, a former RAFPoliceman, told the meeting that they were satisfied that therecording was genuine, contained the material outlined, andprovided prima facie evidence of several serious criminaloffences including, threats to kill, theft, fraud, conspiracyand false accounting. (Indeed an ongoing police investigationis still underway regarding some extremely serious criminalallegations). I also applaud Nick Griffin’s decision, however advantageous itwould be otherwise to him personally, not to publish or releasethe Mark Collett recording, as this would hand the media a hugeweapon to use against us (and Mr Butler knows this). If he did,there would be a media storm against us like we have never seenbefore, it could finish us, and to be honest Butler and Collettaren’t worth it! (remember Jim Dowson’s wife Anne had amiscarriage when informed by the police that a plot to stab herhusband at their home in Spain was explained to her). Nick Griffin could finish Eddy Butler tomorrow and prove toeveryone that he is a liar by releasing the Collett recording,but he refuses to because the greater interests of the party takehigher priority. When Eddy and Mark Collett’s plan was uncovered via therecording, Eddy Butler was offered the chance to resign withdignity, and he did in front of witnesses. He wasn’t sacked, heresigned because he had no other option. As part of the deal forhis resignation, he was to hand back a USB memory stick that hestole from Jim Dowson way back last JULY. Several Eastern Regionofficers can verify that Eddy did indeed hand back the memorystick that he stole as part of this deal. Ask yourself: what kindof man steals from someone’s home/office whilst a guest in hishouse? Eddy Butler was also offered the chance of a European researchjob working for Nick Griffin after the election as part of thesame face-saving package (scandal only helps our enemies), butwhen the time came, he reneged on the whole deal, exploiting thefact that Nick had taken him at his word when he agreed toresign, so that he has since blagged several more months wagesfrom our financially hard-pressed party (the fact that we areshort of funds is no secret nor a surprise, given the fact thatEddy Butler supporters are telling everyone not to give money inan attempt to cause a crisis for which he can then pose as the‘saviour’ and the bold Eddy still demands his £40.000 per year +expenses from us). Threats of legal action are his ‘blackmailweapons’ and his barrister mate Adrian Davies. Like so many other decent nationalists, I am horrified by EddyButler’s actions since he initiated his leadership ‘campaign’.He has preached the need to clean up the BNP’s ‘image’ – thisdespite his main ally being Naziboy and notorious crank, MarkCollett. Eddy’s other supporters include various other ‘hard-linewannabe cranks’ like mixed race Sharon Ebanks. I am also horrified by his alliance with Simon Bennett, thetraitor who destroyed the BNP website during the election, whenwe had record number of hits, shut down the media enquiriessystem when I was handling over 100 media enquiries a day, andcrashed our internal email server, bringing our enquiries andcommunications circulation to a grinding halt. Simon Bennett ISEddy Butler’s webmaster, despite his frequent and rather pathetictactical denials. Simon Bennett has recently been cooperatingwith the Daily Mirror and UAF to spread anti-BNP lies. He hasrecently destroyed Richard Barnbrook’s website and directedRichards’s traffic to a pro-Butler site! How disgusting is that? I am also shocked by Eddy Butler’s waffle regarding partyfinances and ‘transparency’. I have heard a recording of EddyButler stating that he has no proof of any wrong doing (this hasbeen repeated on his own website), and that the accusations ofwrong doing are in fact “a red herring”. This was played at ameeting of Essex BNP officers recently and the cynicism ofButler’s attempt to destroy Nick Griffin’s reputation withunfounded lies raised a few eye brows. You must also be made aware of Eddy Butler’s continuing agitationagainst the party’s fundraising success. Eddy Butler is saying itis terrible that we have contracted the services of a fundraisingprofessional who has raised our donations income from a paltry£150,000 in 2007 to a whopping £1.6 million last year. He issaying that his fees are too much, even though they are belowthe industry average and all sorts of valuable extra servicesare included in the contract for free. Well, my personal opinionis that Mr Butler is saying these things for purely tacticalreasons as he needs to batten onto fresh gripes that he discoversaround the country to gain fresh support. When a griper from the South West started whinging aboutfundraising and Jim Dowson in mid-2009 Mr Butler took a verydifferent line. In fact read the following email to garner MrButler’s true feelings about Jim Dowson and fundraising: From: eddymbutler@hotmail.comTo: peterclucas@hotmail.comCC:midwest@bnp.org.ukSubject: RE:Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 22:07:05 +0000 None of our appeals come out of thin air - all are run andconceived by people - people who do it for a living and have tobe paid. That is what happends when people do things for a living,in th real world. Your pathetic criticism at a time when theParty is fighting for its survival does you no credit. If youcould find any normal charity (for example) that paid 92.5% ofits collections directly to the cause to which the funds weredonated then it would be truely remarkable. If you have a problemwith this then you have no place in this Party. If I see anyfutrrther round robins of this nature coming from you disciplinaryaction will follow immediately.Eddy ButlerNational Organiser I would like to highlight the sentence, “Your pathetic criticismat a time when the Party is fighting for its survival does you nocredit.” Perhaps you should heed your own words Mr Butler. Alsothe sentence, “If you have a problem with this [fundraising] thenyou have no place in this Party.” What a 100% turn around by MrButler! He is criticising fundraising at a time when funds arelow due to the usual post-election exhaustion (and in part due tohis deliberate undermining of confidence and morale) and doeshimself, in his own words, no credit. Most disturbing to me is Mr Butler’s seemingly abundant supportfrom elements outside the BNP – elements that would like nothingbetter than a large, professional and consolidated BNP trashedand split up for their own benefit. For example, Mr Butler hastrumpeted the support of Jonathan Bowden, who is NOT a BNP member.Mr Bowden has been chastised several times over the last year forexclaiming that he is a ‘fascist’ at BNP meetings, and alsoannouncing his support for the Klu Klux Klan. He attends BNPmeetings with a cranky Viking rune around his neck, and his ownpersonal website is full of the most weird modern art you willever see, including a ‘painting’ of a woman putting her handsdown her knickers! Do we really want our party handed over tosuch outside crackpots, just because they are old friends of MrButler? Sensible people must also be alarmed at the open and blatantsupport Mr Butler is receiving on the websites of Searchlight,Hope Not Hate and Unite against Fascism (UAF). These websites arerolling out a non-stop and ferocious conveyor belt of hate andlies against Nick Griffin, Jim Dowson, their families and otherhard-working and positive officials. Yet they are full of praisefor Mr Butler, repeating his empty campaign promises word forword. You don't have to be Einstein to look at this and seeexactly what’s going on? Many people who remember these leftwing organisations similarlybacking the list-leak traitors two years ago now look with suspicion on the far-left’s blatant support for Butler. Couplethis with his seemingly effortless ability to survive with littleincome and we have to question what is going on. How is EddyButler, who has two families and refused to work for the BNP forany less than £40,000 per year plus expenses, able to pay hisbills, buy new suits, travel the country and live worry-free andfinance this very lavish campaign of lies? It’s just not possible,is it? Also, as a dedicated nationalist and British patriot, I ambemused by the coalition of fringe types Mr Butler has gatheredaround himself. From militant homosexuals to outright Nazis, fromHolocaust deniers to a new Chinese member who wants the BNP tobecome multicultural, and so on. For example, Mr Butler has beentelling anyone who will listen, that the thief Mark Collett’sex-girlfriend Shelley Rose is a ‘plant’ and a ‘wrong un’…now hehas put her face on his website! Shelley Rose has embarrassedthe party with her anti-Jewish remarks and is known as anextreme Nazi who has been chastised for attending National FrontMarches and Blood & Honours gigs. Likewise, Richard Edmonds wasgoing to be kicked off the Advisory Council several months agofor attending the release from prison of the world’s mostprominent Holocaust Denier. Then there is Mr Butler’s close links to the Membership ListLeakers. I was handed Mr Butler’s old party phone by an EasternRegion official a short while ago, and I asked a techy friend ofmine to re-import his contacts list from the cache memory, whichhe did. To my surprise Mr Butler had the numbers of Sadie Graham,Kenny Smith and the internet crackpot and Butler supporter SharonEbanks on his contacts list. Then I am told by a reliable Scottish friend of mine that when MrButler visited Scotland recently he actually visited Kenny Smith,one of the Sadie Graham traitors (now ask yourself: why wasn’tany pictures of this Scottish trip put up on his blog? Hmmm.) Nowhis promises on his blog that former members will ‘rejoin’ makesperfect sense. I have been told by many officials, especially in the EasternRegion, that support for Mr Butler is melting away as hisalliance with Nazis, homosexuals, transvestites (Tony Ward) andoutsiders, together with his tacit support from Searchlight andCo, becomes too much to stomach. These outrages coupled with hisown recent admission that he has no proof to back up any of hisfinancial claims is waking people up to his campaign of lies. Faced with his sinking ship, he is playing the “I’m beingstitched up card” to gather sympathy, not support. Take, forexample, his recent big hoo ha about the suspensions of severalofficials in Liverpool and the South East. After Sadie Graham andCo leaked the BNP membership list and caused untold suffering forBNP members and supporters, isn’t it right that we protect ourmembership lists from abuse? There exists a law called the Data Protection Act and it obligesus to certain rules and regulations, such as one that states thatsensitive personal confidential data must ONLY be handled bylegally registered party officers. In the South East, theofficial Richard Trower handed a BNP membership list to twopeople who were NOT legally registered officers of the party.This abuse of the rules resulted in complaints from BNP membersas to why their personal details were being handed around likeconfetti at a wedding. Richard Trower and the two others were suspended – after severalwarnings - for abusing what should have been a confidential BNPmembership list. It is hard enough for us to recruit new membersbecause of the list leaks, so we must act strongly against thosewho leak membership lists to people who are not party officials. Likewise in Liverpool, I myself started receiving complaints fromthe PUBLIC as to why their personal details were circulatingamongst those who are not legal officers of the party. When thetime comes and the Information Commissioner asks us why thishappened, we could only escape by saying: “A former official kepthold of his membership list, and used it for non-party purposes.As a consequence, he has been suspended.” Nothing less than thatwould get us off the hook. Again, bugger all to do with supportfor a leadership candidate, just compliance with the DataProtection Act and a desire to keep our membership lists safe andsecure. Anyone who passes a BNP membership list to non-party officerswill be suspended regardless of who they support. Any formerofficials who abuse BNP membership lists for non-party use willbe suspended. If these rules don’t exist and are not enforced,then anarchy will reign and our membership lists will leak outon a regular basis, destroying any credibility to recruit thatwe have. Back to the main purpose of this open letter. I have uncovered ablatant lie about me and feel that I have the right to defendmyself. It is not the first time Mr Butler has attempted todegrade my reputation: he has accused me on many occasions ofrunning the blog Eddy Butler Exposed, something which iscompletely untrue. In any case, Mr Butler has, despite spendingyears attempting to close down BNP blogs and forums around thecountry, set up several blogs and websites of his own (designedand maintained by the traitor Simon Bennett) all spouting hislies and empty promises – it seems when one, just ONE, blog inopposition to his campaign crops up it is a terrible event. It has come to my attention that Eddy Butler has been circulatinga vicious and outrageous lie against me. I received a phone calla short while ago from the long-standing and well-respectedBexley Organiser Mike Jones, who asked me if I had drawn £20,000in expenses in the last 6 months. How I would ever get away withdrawing £3,300 in expenses per month is anyone’s guess! After my laughter at such a ludicrous claim subsided, I repliedthat it was completely untrue and enquired where this nonsensehad come from. Mr Jones replied that he had a call from MichaelBarnbrook who told Mr Jones that he had been told all this byEddy Butler. Mr Jones has confirmed that he is willing to swear to all ofthis, if necessary in a court of law or a party tribunal. MikeJones and Michael Barnbrook are good friends and I have no reasonto disbelieve that any of this is untrue. I doubt very much thatMichael Barnbrook would lie to his good friend Mike Jones, and Ihave no reason to believe that Mike Jones would lie to me. Bothare honourable men and long-standing BNP activists, and MikeJones in particular has been a member for 13 years. If all this is true, then Mr Butler is a disgrace and I demandthat he openly withdraws this allegation against me and publishesa retraction on his website/blog. If, on the other hand, he nowdenies making it, then he should make it crystal clear that herecognises that, whoever was responsible for the allegation, itis totally untrue. I am sorry to have to send this to all Eastern and London regionofficials, but I am incensed by Mr Butler’s lies against me andwant people to know the truth, or at least a different side tothese events for a change. I have been asked by the Eastern Region RO Paul Morris to clearthe air and show everyone in the Eastern Region the dreadedrecording that Mr Butler is making such a huff about. To behonest, I am sick and tired of all this nonsense. I work hardfor the BNP and am perhaps the most active senior member apartfrom the Chairman. I get up in the morning and graft until I goto bed, every bloody day. I have clocked up tens of thousands ofmiles darting around the country. I am a serious and dedicatednationalist through and through. I am not an Eton educated guybut I am no mug, and I am honest. I make no secret of the factthat I am deeply disappointed in Mr Butler for what he has doneand is continuing to do. I am 28 and I have freely chosen thepath of unremitting, relentless service to our cause and ourparty because I want, more than anything, a future for my littlebaby daughter. Make of me what you will. So if you want to listen to the recording of Eddy Butler inquestion then click on the following link. Make of it what youwill. I don’t care to be honest. It is not my recording to startwith, I downloaded it from you-tube. But if you want to listento it then here you are:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xu2ux_yJOrM Cllr Paul GoldingNational Communications Officer PS: Just in case you were wondering if you will be lumbered withMark Collett once again if Eddy Butler succeeds, Eddy Butlerspent a large chunk of his speech in Leeds recently defendingMark Collett and heaping praise on him, much to the disgust ofthe local people. If you wish to reply send an email to communications@bnp.org.uk PO Box 297, Bexleyheath, DA7 9FG



My Reply I Simple


I have just read the letter from Cllr Paul Golding, FIVE (5) Times to make myself clear on my next actions - I am from the Nuneaton and Bedworth Branch in the Midlands and I Would Like to speak to Eddy Butler and If he wants support then he must answer to the open letter. I seriously don't partake in dirty tricks, smear or any under hand activity's but I do strive for the truth. If he is innocent or guilty he must be held accountable to this letter and personally I will challenge him. If he has Nothing to hide he will come, be filmed and i will repost said video for all to see. So far I have come up with 22 questions and i will come up with more, so if Eddy does accept the invite then he will recieve no prep, his answers hesitations, smiles, frowns etc will all be on record. I pride myself on being an expert judge of people in general and I can spot lies from miles away so I welcome the the 10 yard approach. I am going to copy this to myblog and will then Invite Eddy to Nuneaton and Bedworth.

When the going gets tough - The tough and Honest Stand Strong!!
I personally will stand strong to my convictions and urge you all to do the same.

Kevin Moore - Bloody Proud - BNP
Nuneaton, Bedworth and North Warwickshire
(2 parle seats)

Former MI5 Chief Confirms that BNP Is Right: Iraq War Increased Terrorism

The British National Party’s anti-war stance with regard to Iraq and Afghanistan and its insistence that these conflicts exacerbate terrorism in Britain has been confirmed as correct by the former head of MI5.

Speaking before the Iraq Inquiry yesterday, Baroness Eliza Manningham-Buller told the world that invading Iraq and Afghanistan had increased the terror threat in Britain.

The BNP has said all along that the two primary causes of Islamist terrorism in Britain and the rest of the Western world are mass immigration and biased foreign policy in the Middle East.

Mass immigration has allowed millions of Muslims to enter Britain, Europe and even now the United States of America where they are now proceeding with their 1,300 year-old invasion of the West.

This time, however, the invasion is not being carried out by armies, sword and cannons as of old, but by immigration and “invasion via the womb.”

The second cause of terrorism is, the BNP has argued, the illegal and immoral wars which the Labour-Tory axis of lies has plunged Britain into.

These wars, the BNP has said, have served to incite Islamists in Britain and to provide them with ideal recruiting propaganda amongst the Muslim population in the West.

The Labour-Tory liars have always denied this to be the case and have instead insisted that the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan (and their planned attack on Iran) is to “prevent terrorism” at home.

Baronness Eliza has however confirmed that the wars had served to radicalised a generation of young Muslims in Britain which had “substantially increased” the risk of a terrorist atrocity on UK soil.

“Our involvement in Iraq radicalised, for want of a better word, a whole generation of young people . . . who saw our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as being an attack on Islam,” she told the inquiry.

“Arguably, we gave Osama Bin Laden his Iraqi jihad. What Iraq did was produce a fresh impetus to people prepared to engage in terrorism.”

She went on to link the Iraq war directly to terrorist attacks on trains in London.

“The war featured in the video wills that we retrieved on various occasions after various plots where terrorists who had expected to be dead explained why they had done what they did,” she said.

She also revealed that MI5 had been forced to ask ministers to double its budget to cope with the dramatic increase in the number of Islamist terror plots it had to monitor following the invasion of Iraq.

“We were pretty well swamped — that's possibly an exaggeration — but we were very overburdened with intelligence on a broad scale that was pretty well more than we could cope with in terms of plots, leads to plots and things that we needed to pursue,” she said.

It was also revealed that Baroness Eliza has specifically warned that the allegation that Iraq was in possession of, or was going to use, WMDs, was almost non-existent.

Despite this information from the head of British intelligence, the lying Blair regime, fully supported by the Tories, announced to the world in the “Iraq dossier” that Saddam Hussein possessed WMDs.

Recommended reading: Londonistan: How Britain Is Creating a Terror State Within

By Melanie Phillips. The Times bestseller, now with a new chapter. For years, Britain pretended to be tough on terrorism, while invading two countries.

But when it was hit by the 7/7 suicide bombers, the secret was out. Having looked the other way since 1989, Britain has become the hub for Islamist terror throughout Europe and beyond.

In Londonistan, Melanie Phlilips reveals herself as that typical breed of journalist who can identify the problem in great detail, but is obvious in her inability to address the cause of the problem, namely Third World immigration.

This flaw aside, Londonistan gives a revealing insight into the Islamist threat facing Britain -- and the establishment’s refusal to deal with it. Paperback, 336 pages. Click here to order online.

Nick Griffin’s Palace Invite Refusal An Attack on Democracy

The politically motivated refusal to allow British National Party leader Nick Griffin MEP to attend a tea party at Buckingham Palace is an attack on democracy, the media, freedom of speech and one million British patriots.

This was the reaction of Mr Griffin to the news that officials had informed him at the last minute that he was being barred from the party for allegedly making “political capital” out of the visit by granting media interviews.

“The reason is invented nonsense,” Mr Griffin said. “Nowhere in the book of rules given to all attendees does it say anything about not giving media interviews and of course countless people have done precisely that in the past.

“This decision is an attack on the media and their right to report on important events of the day.

“It is an attack on the right of every person in Britain to get the news of current events reported by the media, and it is an attack on the one million plus patriots who voted for the BNP,” Mr Griffin said.

“The move has obviously been made under pressure from the ConDem regime who are desperate for any reason to bar the BNP,” Mr Griffin said.

The BNP leader dismissed as nonsense the claim that he had tried to make political capital out of the invitation.

“The media would of course be interested in an invitation to a BNP MEP to attend a party at Buckingham Palace.

“To use that natural media interest as an excuse to withdraw the invitation is a disgusting disregard for democracy in Britain,” he said.

“The ruling elite must realise that blatant attempts at gagging the BNP always backfires and we will emerge from these situations and their double standards stronger than ever,” Mr Griffin said.

If you can help the British Resistance fend off the increasingly desperate but dangerous establishment attacks on the party then click on the button below to send a small gift:

> Click Here to Make a Donation

Richard Barnbrook Leadership Challenge and PIRACY

I usually copy and paste all news but not today. Richard has put himself up as a leadership candidate for the BNP. However after accepting him as a friend on facebook i have kept an eye on what he is doing as i think he he will be a strong contender in this leadership battle.

He had a website www.richardbarnbrook.com

So why not click on it and see where it takes you - I call this PIRACY and a deleberate attempt to try to thwart his challenge. So now i am sticking my neak out and i will if he will have me support Richards campaign.

ConDems Raise VAT to Pay EU and Foreign Aid

Credit where it is due - Andrew Moffatt has produced this and I urge you to read all of the blog.

The Truth of mismanagement

By Andrew Moffatt, BNP Economics Department -- The chief beneficiaries and causes behind the 2.5 percent VAT increase announced yesterday are the foreign aid budget and the EU.

Andrew Moffatt“The inequitable tax rise, designed to raise £13 billion from hard-pressed consumers, was deliberately omitted in the Conservative Party’s s manifesto pledge two months ago and it was opposed by the Lib-Dems during the election.

In other words, at a time of unparalleled austerity in the wake of Labour’s gross mismanagement of the economy, the Conservative Party has once again subordinated the British electorate to overseas interests.

VAT is inequitable because the poorest are hit the hardest. Thus, those who do not pay income tax are clobbered with VAT on their essential spending. In particular, the elderly are victims.

The elderly have already suffered a second harsh winter of global cooling which inflicted a toll of some 40,000 fatalities in the past year alone.

Whereas the Government should have focused on assisting the most deserving and vulnerable in the UK, it has instead seen fit to increase its donations to developing countries such as India, which is sufficiently wealthy to finance its own space programme.

Meanwhile, the EU is absorbing £15 billion per annum in British taxpayers’ subsidies, with our net payments due to rise by some £2 billion this year.

A recent paper by the Taxpayers’ Alliance estimated that the total cost to the UK of the EU, which included its regulatory burden, at £2,000 per man, woman and child, per annum.

The extent of Britain’s subservience to the EU may be discovered on page 3 of the HM Budget forecast, which merits special mention:

The Economic and Fiscal Strategy Report and the Financial Statement and Budget Report contains the Government’s assessment of the medium-term economic and budgetary position. They set out the Government’s tax and spending plans, including those for public investment, in the context of its overall approach to social, economic and environmental objectives. After approval for the purposes of Section 5 the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993, these reports will form the basis of submissions to the European Commission under Article 99 (ex Article 103)and Article 104(ex Article 104c) of the Treaty establishing the European Community.

In other words, undisclosed to the public, the British Government’s budgetary programme is subject to the requirements and approval of the unelected Commissioners of an alien potentate — the European Union.

Another casualty of the VAT hike will be the motorist, who will pay an additional 2.5% on fuel when the tax rise takes effect in January 2011. This comes on top of recent rises, caused by the collapse in the value of Sterling against the US Dollar, in which oil is priced.

Finally, middle class families will be thumped by the withdrawal and restriction of benefits and credits to those on middle incomes.

We have long warned the middle classes that the Conservative Party is fundamentally disloyal to its core supporters.

Government Debt

The forecast for public borrowing for 2010/11 is £149 billion, or 10.1 percent of GDP. Despite the measures undertaken by the ConDem government in yesterday’s budget, the nation’s net debt is estimated to sit at 70 percent of GDP by 2013/14.

This compares with less than 40% some five years ago.

In our recent budget manifesto and during the 2010 election, the British National Party identified a number of key areas where taxpayers’ monies were unnecessarily employed and where significant savings could be made.

Our desire was to re-deploy these funds in more worthy areas and to reduce public borrowing, which crowds out private endeavour and investment. Amongst them, we specified the following:

1. Climate Change: £18 billion per annum, mainly via disguised levies in energy bills.

2 The multicultural society: £13 billion per annum.

3 The EU: £15 billion per annum.

4 Overseas Aid: £9 billion per annum.

5 The unnecessary Afghan War: £3-5 billion per annum.

6 £10 billion of spending cuts on wasteful bureaucracy.

The amount of unnecessary expenditure within these above categories amounts to some £70 billion per annum.

By contrast, the Emergency Budget, just unveiled, has identified £40 billion of cuts and tax rises over the life of the current Parliament.

In conjunction with the cuts already identified by the previous administration, this suggests a fiscal squeeze of some £96 billion by June 2015, assuming the Government lasts this long.

Let us therefore assume that the current Chancellor has already identified £10 billion per annum in wasteful expenditure in his calculations.

His total saving over the duration of office is a little under £20 billion per annum of the £96 billion earmarked throughout the term.

This contrasts with our savings of some £350 billion. With the exception of elements within point 6 above, however, none of these commitments we have identified will be touched.

That is because the politically-correct ConDem administration is as committed to globalisation, international governance and the extirpation of the nation state as Labour was, before it.

Such undeclared ambitions do not come cheaply.

Credit Where It Is Due

We would not wish to be curmudgeonly in our justified condemnation of the politically-correct George Osborne and his Lib-Dem side-kicks.

We applaud the re-establishment of the link between the state pension and earnings, although this falls well below the level of £150 per week which we advocated reaching by the end of the current parliamentary term in 2015.

Similarly, we applaud the rise of the basic rate threshold to £7475 before income tax is paid. We would like to see this raised further: low tax thresholds penalise the low paid, undermine the incentive to work and create needless bureaucracy in the form of the complicated tax credits system.

In our manifesto, we argued for a basic threshold of £12000 for all, which would require some re-balancing of the rates at which tax is paid.

We concur with many of the areas currently targeted for spending cuts.

That includes the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), which have absorbed over £20bn in taxpayers’ funds since 1999. Unbelievably, these self-serving bodies have earmarked 62 percent of their funds towards the public sector, not including over £3m to the trades unions.

In their place, we would have used the savings to reduce by four pence the small business rate of tax, thus promoting creativity, employment and expansion amongst small companies.

Ominously, we note that the Government is merely to replace the RDAs with another body, which suggests any changes will be merely cosmetic.

The ConDem coalition will not abolish the regions and the attendant infrastructure, because these are decreed by the EU.

In consequence we suspect the new bodies in place of the RDAs, announced by the Government, will amount to no more than an exercise of smoke and mirrors; simply, the Conservatives cannot be trusted.

We agree with the Government’s plan to support the regions in terms of infrastructure spending and employment incentives for business. It is clear, however, that this manoeuvre is designed to buy votes in those areas where the Conservatives remain despised and hold minor representation.

Omissions

Departmental spending cuts will not be identified until 20th October.

The NHS has been excluded and yet, as we have previously reflected, the Strategic Health Authorities absorb £4bn in taxpayers’ funds when, instead of funding this overgrown bureaucracy, the monies could be better spent on front-line health care.

The Government has also failed to scrap entirely the plans to levy a higher rate of National Insurance Contributions on employees, a veritable tax on jobs, when it takes effect in 2011.

The Government has failed to increase the budget for science and technology. Despite our historical prowess in both, our country has long fallen markedly behind our competitors.

Science and technology fuel the inventions and industry of tomorrow and, therefore, the wealth and economic base of future generations.

The Banking Sector

The Government’s austerity package is due not merely to Labour’s gross mismanagement of the economy and the priority to fund the EU and the overseas aid budget.

It is also due to the distasteful excesses in parts of the banking industry. Such financial debauchery was caused by speculators and ‘wide boys’ who risked the monies of others’ to attract colossal bonuses.

This type of practice was described by the Chairman of the FSA as ‘economically useless.’

The cost of such reckless financial speculation, encouraged by the bonus culture, will be paid for with limited growth and economic stagnation.

It will also be paid for by unemployment.

We highlighted several areas in our recent manifesto to address these issues. We note with dismay that a reform of the banking sector has been kicked into the long grass by means of an ‘enquiry.’

In the meantime, in this budget, no measures were taken to curb the bonus culture, which employs the money of others in the interest of speculation designed to reap massive bonuses.

The gung-ho attitude of bankers has been a cause for economic instability and it needs to be addressed.

Public Sector Pay Restraint v the Private Sector

The Government has earmarked the public sector for pay restraint, doubtless with a view to placing it more on a par with the reality which appertains within the private sector.

Certainly, the cold wind of austerity has been lapping around the private sector since the banking crisis developed more than two years ago.

One area, more or less untouched, however, has been the absence of pay restraint amongst the directors of many public companies. When shareholders experience reduced dividends; when earnings per share fall; when companies announce wage reductions; then clearly it is unreasonable that a significant number of company directors and chief executive officers should continue to reap bonuses at the expense of their employees and shareholders.

Good leaders set an example. Too many directors are now recipients of massive bonuses for doing what they are hired to do by their shareholders. A recent CEO of Shell cast serious misgivings on the bonus culture.

We do not question the worth of good managers. But we do draw attention to the current directors’ pay round, which has become a mirror image of the trades unions pay round in the late ‘70s.

We do not yet have an answer to this but we believe the solution lies in better corporate governance and the ability of ordinary shareholders to vote, specifically, on the remuneration of the directors hired to manage the company’s fortunes.

Presently, matters have moved out of hand at a number of companies, where directors are paid an eye-watering multiple of over a hundred times the rate of the average remuneration of the ordinary employee.

Spending Cuts, Tax Rises, Borrowing and the Economy

The Government has yet to identify exactly how cuts will be applied but the intention is for the relevant state departments to cut expenditure by 25 percent.

This will create a wave of redundancies and a severe decline to front line services.

By next Spring, we predict there will be severe hardship and a sharp fall in spending across the economy as VAT rises take effect.

In the wake of the global debt crisis, similar fiscal restraint amongst the G20 will create an additional diminution in money supply and a reduction in demand.

In these circumstances, we believe the Government’s forecasts of 2.3% growth for 2011 to be woefully unrealistic and unattainable. Indeed, there is a real chance of renewed slump.

Repairing the Economy

In essence, there are three means to address the global debt crisis, the leading cause of the current economic malaise:

1. Inflate the money supply and reduce the real value of debt.

2. Repay the debt.

3. Grow the economy and reduce the burden of debt.

Usually, these means are combined in some measure or other. We do not approve of inflation because it penalises savings and thrift.

In our manifesto, however, we set out our plans to reinvigorate the British economy.

Our intentions remain unaltered. Amongst them, our pledge to secede from the European Union will remove a constraint upon our economy which has raised the general tax burden and applied an unprecedented burden of regulation upon industry and commerce.

Our undertaking to introduce selective tariffs on the imports from developing countries will create an economic boom for years into the future as the economy adapts to produce what it presently imports.

Allied measures intended to reinvigorate British manufacturing, science and technology will ensure that Britain is returned to its historical lead in these fields.

By contrast, the ideals of globalisation advocated by the present administration and its predecessors will result in the continued pillaging of British manufacturing and, ultimately, an environment where we produce nothing.