Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Hounding Of The BNP - by The Media Establishment - Concerned London Patriot
#1
Hounding Of The BNP - by The Media Establishment - Concerned London Patriot
Hounding Of The BNP - by The Media Establishment
by Concerned London Patriot


On Thursday 15th July 2004 the BBC aired a television documentary about an undercover investigation into a branch of the British National Party (BNP), the UKs leading anti-immigration and patriotic political party. The programme was tentatively entitled 'Secret Agent' and it charted two journalists 6 month infiltration of the party with the obvious objective of 'digging up dirt' on its members. Naturally any dirt found could be presented in a way to delegitimise the party, and ultimately British nationalism itself. Andy Sykes, the paid infiltrator, was shown interviewing several BNP members, one of whom confessed to assaulting an Asian man during race riots that have disturbed his region, and another who admitted putting dog excrement through a door of an Asian family. Both of these men were prospective BNP candidates for a local council election, and were personally recruited by Sykes in his guise as a party organiser. Sykes found these angry unstable individuals after a tip off from Searchlight, a proclaimed anti-fascist group run by Gerry Gable, a former member of the UK Communist Party.

A co-reporter named Jason Gwynne asked an aggrieved BNP member (who suffered a previous firebomb attack on his car) what he thought about placing a bomb in a skip outside a Bradford mosque, primed and timed to detonate when the congregation departed. The BNP, as a result, are investigating whether legal action can be taken against the reporter for inciting terrorism. Sykes interviewed other members who duly abided by party policy and the law, though these members were not given spotlight during the programme. A scene was also shown of the party chairman Nick Griffin giving a private speech to a small audience in which he condemned the Islamic religion, calling it a "vicious wicked faith".

On the same night after the programme was aired, a visibly strained Nick Griffin appeared on BBC Newsnight to comment on the program and defend his remarks caught on film. Mr Griffin unabashedly apologised for the undisciplined behavior of the angry working class men who admitted the offences. But he also logically argued those men had been drinking beer when questioned, and furthermore the program didn't explore the background of the race riots which provoked their actions. A substantial number of whites were injured in the Burnley and Oldham racial incidents, and it is understandable that any BNP supporters who were coincidentally there at the time were fired up in the frenzy, if not acting in self-defence. The Newsnight interview eventually moved on to Mr Griffins comments about Islam. It is here that the BBCs hypocrisy really becomes apparent. The interviewer interrogated Mr Griffin as if he should be ashamed about expressing his revulsion of Islam in plain language at a small private gathering! Mr Griffin, unlike most career politicians in the main parties, stood his ground on the subject by reiterating Islam is an expansionist religion, and that the Koran states it may spread by the sword. The BBC appears to have no concept of freedom of speech, and would have the public believe that condemning Islam as wicked vicious faith is a form of extreme bigotry. Not only is such a vilification of free speech a clear exaggeration, it is blatantly hypocritical. Why is it that the BBC have downplayed the genocide of hundreds of whites by blacks in Zimbabwe and South Africa, without any TV documentaries highlighting these evils? The answer to any perceptive observer is that such coverage would not serve the BBCs liberal anti-white agenda. That is, the notion that only whites commit racial attacks, and that whites must not subscribe to identity politics. It is undeniably true that millions of Muslims do practice their religion peacefully, but Mr Griffin could have added in his defence that numerous terrorist attacks throughout the world have been justified in the name of Islam by their perpetrators than any other religion. That is a lengthy topic in itself which opens up a can of worms that doesn't simply encompass religion, but also includes the geopolitical reasons why Islamic fundamentalism grew hostile to the west in the latter half of the 20th century.

For many years the BBC has been a respected bastion of journalistic integrity around the world. It has been traditionally perceived as being objective and impartial on the topics it reports. The exception to this general rule is its coverage and spin on social issues relating to race and immigration. Like most other Anglophone mainstream media outlets, it inevitably takes a left-wing stance on the subject. Immigration is portrayed as universally beneficial; the supposed economic benefits of it are extolled, avoiding scrutiny of the long term social/cultural implications to the receiving population. On race, where interracial conflicts are concerned, only crimes committed by whites against ethnic minorities are usually publicized. The racially motivated murder of white teenager Gavin Hopley in Oldham, England in 2002 by a gang of Asians was virtually ignored by the BBC and national press. Go to the BBC home page and do a search on "Gavin Hopley" with the BBC News option ticked. Only 1 page is retrieved, and that particular article was published almost 2 years after his death. Doing the same search on Stephen Lawrence, a black teenager murdered by whites in Eltham, London in 1993 returns a staggering 524 article links on 53 pages at last count. So, for all its objectivity, the BBC establishment are aware of the impressions their reporting will have on the public. We hear much about the media being "controlled" nowadays on free expression web sites. This reference is mainly an alternative coded phrase for its anti-white bias, or tendency to bypass concerns that people of European descent have on racial issues.

On Friday morning Barclays Bank joined the attack on the British National Party by announcing it intends to freeze the party's bank accounts on the basis of 'reputation'. This in part was a knee jerk reaction from a national newspaper threatening to reveal BNPs accounts with Barclays. This is another dubious excuse from a major institution, as most people don't know or even care where BNP party funds are held.

If stuffy politicians and trendy media types who say the BNP shouldn't be allowed to exist because it has a few bad apples in it applied the same principle to other parties then there wouldn't be much of a political landscape to speak of. Both the Labour and Conservative parties have been dogged by political scandals for years, such as sexual affairs, improper financial dealings, and perjury to name a few. It is human nature that any party will include members who cannot control their behavior at all times. Of all parties, the BNP has been held to a higher standard of conduct in the eyes of the media and police. Nick Griffin himself is well aware of how his opponents would welcome the the party's demise by exposing a major scandal, or stereotyping it as a group of unreasonable racialists. It's tragically ironic how the major parties can tolerate the unwarranted invasion of Iraq, with the loss of thousands of lives, yet vilify a party that simply wants to preserve the racial and cultural cohesion of the UK.

The most disturbing aspect of the BBC assault on the BNP, and Barclays subsequent plan to freeze its accounts, is how virulently opposed the media establishment are to a party that stands up for the interests of the British people. The main reason the BNP has rapidly grown in recent years is due to the utter failure of past Labour and Conservative governments to halt the flow of prospective asylum seekers and immigrants into the country. Then there is the issue of the deterioration of kinship and community life in British society, and the demoralizing effects of political correctness in education and social policy. If for whatever reason the BNP was banished from politics, likely via the back door tactic of denying it a bank account, then it would be a sad day for democracy. In a true democracy the electorate decides the fortunes of a political party. In todays climate, it seems corrupt media outfits and stupid politicians want to deny patriots a political platform, so they can sweep the problems of immigration and racial unease under the carpet. The worse aspect is they don't mind resorting to devious and dishonorable methods of achieving these ends.

Addendum

17 Jan 2005 - BNP Web site attacker caught

14 Dec 2004 - BNP Chairman Nick Griffin arrested


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)