Sunday, September 06, 2009

Adapt Or Die: British National Party Chairman Nick Griffin Explains Why The BNP Must Consider Accepting Non-Whites As Party Members

British National Party Chairman Nick Griffin, who also serves as an MEP (Member European Parliament), is preparing his party for the very real possibility that they must accept non-whites as party members in the very near future.

According to a September 3rd Guardian article, the Commission for Equality and Human Rights (CEHR) is taking the BNP to court over its constitution, which states that only Indigenous Caucasian and defined ethnic groups emanating from that race are allowed to join. In the wake of that action, the BNP first insisted it would fight the case. But Griffin, speaking after a September 2nd hearing at the Central London county court was adjourned for seven weeks, appears to be re-considering, saying that the party should now change its membership rules.

"It is now crystal clear to all concerned that we simply do not have a choice but to change our membership policy," said Griffin. "Adapt or die is the only decision left to make, for failure to adapt would lead either to our being bled white through the courts or crushed by new criminal laws." Griffin said the party would hold a series of debates over the coming weeks to discuss the matter and then stage a mass meeting for members where they would require a two-thirds majority to rewrite the constitution.

At the September 2nd hearing, Judge Paul Collins ruled the BNP had 21 days to serve its evidence, with a further 14 days for the claimants to respond before the next one-day hearing, scheduled for October 15th. But regardless of what the court decides in October, Griffin believes the forthcoming Equality Bill will, in any case, ban any political party from discriminating on grounds of ethnicity. In the following YouTube video, BNP Deputy Leader Simon Darby interviews Griffin, who explains the situation in greater detail:



On the BNP website, Griffin further explains the financial situation. His full statement is included. He states that it could take as much as £1.0 million to fight the ruling all the way to the House of Lords. Arrayed against the BNP is a state-funded bureaucracy which can call upon as many as 70 lawyers and a budget of up to £70.0 million. Griffin believes the disparity is so great that the BNP could not even hope to compete, never mind actually win. So instead, he proposes to take one large step backward now so that the BNP can continue to take many smaller steps forward in the future. Rather than raising up to £1.0 million merely for litigation, the BNP would raise money to grow the party by spreading its message, recruiting new members, and identifying and running candidates in various elections. Another BNP figure, Lee Barnes, discusses how to soften the impact of this decision as much as possible on his blog.

Reaction: A rather mixed reaction on Northwest Nationalists, which is pro-White but anti-Griffin. One person accuses Griffin of wanting to bring in wogs in order to increase dues revenue. Also a mixed reaction on Stormfront, although the majority understand the BNP's dilemma and support the organization.

While I wish it wasn't necessary for the BNP to take this step, I understand why they are contemplating it. Since the BNP has over 100 elected officials, it is a proven positive force in British politics. British patriots have no effective electoral alternative to the BNP at this time, so its survival is imperative, and it must adapt to survive. I wish Mr. Griffin and the rank-and-file well. But if the BNP does go ahead and admit non-whites to membership, what they must then look out for are attempts by notorious antifa groups such as Lancaster UAF, Searchlight, and Hope Not Hate to recruit non-whites and deliberately steer them into two or three local BNP organizations so that they'll become a majority and sever those local organizations from the national BNP. Anti-racists will stoop to any tactics to disenfranchise the white community.

7 comments:

LARS said...

HERE WE GO AGAIN!
First, let us be clear, neither America nor britain were ever 100% white. That would be impossible.

Secondly, we actually do need some immigration. Limited immigration like we had from 1924 to 1964 worked amazingly well.

Thirdly, the army that George washington used to attack Cornwallis at yorktown was 75% non-white. So, we can use limited non-whites.

Fourth, Nick griffin is the elected leader of BNP. He is NOT a nazi nor a white supremacist. For ner do wells in America a nation that cannot even organize one white movement unless it is run by criminals or convicts to complain about BNP and Nick griffin is like the two morons on those tailgating commercials trying to actually coach a real game.

Fifth, the new race laws in Britain will force BNP and all political organizations that accept public funding to be allow membership from all races.

Nick griffin plainly explained this rule. That is what he said, we will either ADAPT or we will DIE!

As he also said which was not reported is that BNP just won a Court ruling that they don't have to accept non-whites until a proper court trial.

This report is very premature and does not explain the facts clearly.

The american whhite nationalists, or NAZIS, still live in a paranoid world of delusion where white people wiull live without contact with other races. The truth is that that world never existed and never will.

Make no mistake, we will ADAPT. We will improvise and we will turn their strengths into their weaknesses.

For a further explanation of the comments please visit the OFFICIAL BNP website. It will be worth the time spent there to see the truth and also to get a view of the model we need in America.

LARS said...

I SUGGEST EVERYONE GO IMMEDIATELY TO THE BNP WEBSITE AND SEE FORSELVES HOW A 100 YR OLD CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND GRAVEYARD ARE BEING BULLDOZED TO MAKE ROOM FOR A MOSQUE!
http://bnp.org.uk/2009/09/genocide-how-islamic-colonisation-destroys-your-heritage/

ALL OF THIS APOLLONIAN DOUBLE SPEAK IS CONFUSING THE ISSUE. THE BNP IS THE ONLY VOICE AGAINST THIS IN BRITAIN!

THIS IS THE COMING APOCOLYPSE TO AMERICA! WAKE UP!

ordinary said...

Crosstar is appealing for Griffin to stand his ground.
nationalist.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=436

LARS said...

LARS said...
BREAKING NEWS...john conyers to investigate hal turner...

The strange saga of an alleged FBI-paid instigator
By Diane Bukowski

Feds charge webcaster for threats against White officials, not former Black congresswoman

Hal Turner at National Socialist Movement event, 2006
(FinalCall.com) - Controversial New Jersey webcaster Hal Turner was a paid FBI provocateur when he called on his audience to lynch former U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney of Georgia while she was still in office in 2006, his attorney told an AP reporter Aug. 18.

U.S. attorneys in Illinois and New Jersey have charged Mr. Turner with threatening to kill government officials, including three White U.S. Seventh Circuit Court judges and two state legislators in Connecticut, after he ended his alleged undercover term with the FBI.

“Interesting that charges stem from his comments against Connecticut lawmakers and Illinois judges, but not from the threats against me, a sitting member of Congress at the time,” Ms. McKinney told her supporters in an email. “To whom can I, or anyone else turn, when the government, itself, is the instigator?”

On his website in 2006, Mr. Turner called on his listeners to lynch Ms. McKinney.

“Cynthia McKinney is a violent, Black, racist b--ch,” Mr. Turner said in one post. . . . . ‘Given the prevalence of Black crime in America, would it serve the public good to LYNCH Congresswoman McKinney within the next few weeks, while she's on the campaign trail, so as to send an unmistakable message to other Blacks: White people are tired of your bull----, behave or die.”

In a second post, Mr. Turner asked, “I wonder how she would look swinging on the end of a rope? . . . I bet such a lynching would . . . send a powerful message to every uppity n----- in the country— ‘even the most powerful n-----s can get lynched!”

Mr. Turner published Ms. McKinney's office address on his website, as he did in the case of the Illinois judges. Atty. Michael Orozco, whose firm has represented Mr. Turner for five years, told the AP that the FBI trained Mr. Turner in the use of such threats to cause the arrests of right-wingers during his time as an agent provocateur, from 2002-07.


Cynthia McKinney
Ms. McKinney said her staffer John Judge reported the threat to New Jersey Homeland Security and the FBI but was told only, “We know all about Mr. Turner.” No charges were brought.

In an affidavit charging Mr. Turner for the threats against the Seventh Circuit judges, Chicago FBI Special Agent John Marsh said, “FBI agents searched the archived history of the website turnerradionetwork.blogspot.com.” He cited threats against Indiana Circuit Court judges and others, but not the threats against Ms. McKinney. That website and another run by Mr. Turner have since been shutdown,

Rep. McKinney ran for president on the Green Party slate in 2008, after serving six terms as Georgia's first Black congresswoman.

She is now a national and international activist.

Derek Grigsby, chair of the Detroit, Michigan chapter of the Green Party, said, “We wholeheartedly condemn the FBI's behavior in instigating the threats against our presidential candidate. We call for the Obama administration to investigate Turner's threats against Congresswoman McKinney and prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law.”

Mr. Grigsby added, “It goes to show that the FBI is and always has been part of a campaign to create a racist and divisive climate in the U.S. in order to maintain the system.”

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chair of the House Judiciary Committee, said that he had not yet heard of the threats to lynch Ms. McKinney, but would call her immediately. The office of U.S. Attorney Eric Holder had not returned a call asking whether they planned to open an investigation into the threats before Final Call press time.

Harry L. Hughes III said...

". . .accept non-whites as party members in the very near future."

This sound disturbing and unpleasant to most of us. Unfortunately, this may be a necessary evil and a means to an end. Utmost caution should be exercised to keep the "anti's" under control.

Anonymous said...

Seems that Martin Luther refused to recant and that started the Protestant Reformation. If we're going to have a Nationalist Reformation (and it's high time), we don't need sellouts or "recanters." Nick Griffin needs to shape up or ship out. Nobody is indispensable. If Griffin insists on giving in, he needs to be replaced by somebody who has some backbone. The swifter the better. Euro Parliament be damned. There must always be an England. And, an America, too.

LARS said...

OUTRAGEOUS-NEWSWEEK DECLARES WAR ON WHITE PEOPLE

Newsweek’s War on White People: “It’s horrifying to imagine kids being proud to be white.”
CofCC.org News Team

Newsweek just launched an all out war on the mental well-being of white children in their September issue. The article is titled “See Baby Discriminate.” The article demands, with religious fanaticism, that white children be made to shun all knowledge of racial differences and taught to feel guilty. Newsweek actually printed “It’s horrifying to imagine kids being proud to be white.” The Newsweek article actually states that white children should be made to feel guilty to “knock down their glorified view of white people,” while black children should be built up with “ethnic pride.” White parents, and only white parents, are called on to go to great lengths to brainwash their own children starting at age 3.


However, amidst the extremist statements by Newsweek, some real bombshells about racial realities are admitted

Here are some highlights:

“Kids as young as 6 months judge based on skin color.” – Newsweek
White parents, who welcome multiculturalism and embrace diversity, are terrified to talk to their own children about race for fear of what their own children might say.
75% of non-white parents talk to their children about race, compared to only 25% of white parents.
White children 5 to 7 attending racially diverse schools universally had a better opinion of their own race than other races.
Whites are called on to begin intense multi-cultural indoctrination using videos and parental discussions at age 3, so as not to miss the right “developmental window.”
White children should be made to feel guilty for alleged wrongdoings by their race, to increase positive attitudes towards blacks.
Black children need to be coached on “ethnic pride” to pump them up and make them more likely to succeed in life.
553 scientists signed a 2007 Supreme Court school amicus brief supporting school desegregation. However, the brief used many qualifiers and only said that desegregation “may” improve black performance. There was no real confidence in desegregation on the part of the scientists.
Diverse schools do not lead to more cross-race relationships. In fact the opposite is true. The more diverse a school, the more students self-segregate by race.
White children prefer a white Santa Claus and black children prefer a black Santa Claus.
See Article.

What you will see strikingly absent in Newsweek’s whitey hating diatribe of making white children feel guilty and making black children feel proud, is the fact that black children actually have higher self-esteem already than white children. In fact the people with the lowest self-esteem tend to be Orientals.

American Sociological Association (Source)

Past research indicates that black adolescents consistently have higher self-esteem than white students. Other research demonstrates that self-esteem has positive effects on academic achievement. However, black students have lower academic achievement than white students while concurrently exhibiting higher self-esteem.