Race War-The New Class War

The left love to divide and rule, or maybe that should read; the left have to divide and rule. They create hatred and animosity where it needn't exist so they can rush in and defend those 'under attack'. Just look how many decades they've been claiming the Tories are going to privatise the NHS, and the gullible believe it and become convinced the Tories will let poor people die if they form a government. Lies, lies and more lies.

But the old class warfare doesn't wash these days. Most people laugh if they hear an old school class warrior banging on about 'the workers' and 'comrades', and quite rightly too, it's a joke. The poor these days smoke, drive, have decent accommodation and a huge TV on the living room wall. Of course some people have less than others, that's life. But nobody in the UK today is starving to death, going to school in bare feet or living in squalor with inhabitable accomodation and cockroaches. So the left have had to create an alternative to class war. Race war.

The left, through political correctness, has created a climate whereby people daren't make a comment, no matter how harmless, about somebody of another race without the cry of racism going up. This week it's been race warrior Rio Ferdinand banging on about racism. It seems he and his brother were subjects of unpleasant chants this week from England fans, not surprising as they are obnoxious prats, but the claim is that there were 'racist undertones'. So "Rio Ferdinand, you know what you are" followed by a song about putting him on a bonfire is racist? Obviously not, to the sane, but many on the race obsessed left aren't sane. United fans have sung similar about City fans and Scousers for years. Is that racist too?

It's always a shame to see loony extremists using race for their own ends, be that the BNP on the nationalist far-left or the more internationalist left-wingers. Left, pardon the pun, to our own devices I reckon people of most races just rub along nicely together. As ever it is politicos and obsessives who cause the problems and resentment.

Of course we must remember that poor old Rio Ferdinand has faced such vile racism in this country that he only earns about £200,000 a week. Makes apartheid South Africa look cushy doesn't it?

Small Parties and the Alternative Vote

It's interesting to see the politicos lining up for the Alternative Vote (AV) referendum next month. Some weeks ago I was convinced that I would vote for AV, but have since decided against. It strikes me as a complete botch job that corrupts the result. If no one candidate gets at least 50% you just reshuffle the pack until one does. That doesn't mean that a candidate has the support of 50% of the electorate, otherwise he would have got 50% first time, it means that a certain percentage disliked him a bit less than they did other candidates.

Those who support AV claim that candidates would work harder as they need to get 50% of the vote. Why? Why would they work harder than they would to come first in First Past The Post (FPTP) elections?

Those who support AV claim it would end tactical voting. How? Surely it will increase tactical voting as you now have the chance to study the candidates and work out the best way to use your numerous votes not only to support your chosen candidate, but to vote in the best way to keep others you dislike out.

The 'Yes' arguments just don't stack up. We have a system whereby MPs are elected to represent a specific constituency, as long as we have that sytem FPTP is the logical sytem for electing MPs.  The alternative, logically, is some form of Proportional Representation, not a botch job like AV.

It is interesting that smaller parties are lining up to support AV, that always makes me suspicious. Are they merely supporting AV because they see it as a leg up to Westminster because they can't garner the support needed under FPTP? UKIP and the BNP both have representatives in the European Parliament, elected under a form of PR, but fail dismally in Westminster and local elections when FPTP is the system.

One of the arguments in support of our current sytem is that it is difficult for extremists to get a foothold in Westminster, whereas under PR there is a high likelihood that extremist parties could garner enough votes to gain representation in Westminster as the BNP have in the European Parliament. The party that bucked that trend is the Green Party who have MEPs and had Caroline Lucas elected in the general election. In my view that is no reason to support one system rather than another. It is not democratic to use a system to keep out parties of which you disapprove, instead defeat them with argument and debate.

I know PR often leads to weak government, very often coalition government but don't necessarily think that is a bad thing. A Dutch friend of mine dislikes PR because he feels that by the time parties have negotiated, compromised, bartered and horse traded to cobble a government together, even fewer people get what they actually voted for than they do under FPTP. Maybe so.

What I do know, from experience, is that under any system, smaller parties need to get real if they want to make a serious impact. In my view the public are desperately looking for alternatives to the big three, probably the big two when the Lib Dems are wiped out in the local elections and the next general election, but few of the smaller parties offer a credible alternative, they are either seen as single issue parties are obsessively idealogical.

I would put UKIP in the category of single issue, the European Union. No matter how hard they try they are perceived as irrelevant when people vote in elections other than EU elections, when they gain a good number of protest votes under PR. Likewise the BNP, who only seem to appeal on the issue of immigration at best, at worst they appeal to people with very dangerous views.

The Green Party are seen as nut munching, sandal wearing obsessives convinced that breaking wind will kill the planet. Seen as largely single issue they are also seen as too idealogical for most people. I would put the Libertarian Party in that category too. Maybe both would be better working to influence others rather than tying to get votes from a public that is not ready, and probably never will be, for what they regard as idealogical extremists. And I say that as a supporter, although no longe a member, of the Libertarian Party.

In my experience too many smaller parties attract swivel eyed loons. People who are convinced that anybody wo disagrees them is working for shady organisations working to take control of the world, or are agents working for the evil state. I've even been accused of being part of a conspiracy myself when I've questioned the conspiracy of the New World Order. In recent years I've been accused of being part of Common Purpose and even a Freemason, even though I'm a practising Roman Catholic. I have been told by numerous people, in very earnest tones, that the EU is a Catholic conspiracy. When pressed they can only cite the EU flag as evidence, it vaguely resembles the halo of stars around the head of Our Lady apparently. Well then, it must be a Papist plot!!

So, if smaller parties think tinkering with the electoral system is going to boost their represenation, I think they are mistaken. They need to put their own houses in order first.

Communism, Fascism, Racism I Smell a Rat

Independents, Independence And Alliances

There seems to be a growing feeling that politics is full of nutters, which attracts people of an independent persuasion to try and make a difference. This is a good thing in my view but too many of the people who find politicians of the mainstream to be nutters, and want to displace them, are even bigger nutters themselves.

Many such nutters were formally members of mainstream parties, but were found to be a little too eccentric and scared the voters. Others became tired of the slimy self-seekers in the mainstream parties and got out, seeking something politically purer. Some are so obsessive about a single issue that they got out to start a single issue party/pressure group. Others, so full of ego and vanity and a generous dose of insanity, were convinced that they had been stopped from becoming Prime Minister after two years activity because internal opponents, or security service operatives or both, had been conspiring against them, so they hopped it.

There are also a goodly proportion who are not nutters at all. They are extremely genuine, able and honest and only left the mainstream parties because those parties changed. They changed to such an extent that they had to leave in order to start or join a party that they actually believed in again, or to fight as independents. It is virtually impossible for a few capable, honest, hardworking party members to fight and defeat the huge professional forces of the major parties. If you doubt that look how the professional Labour party castrated the Labour movement.

The forthcoming general election is likely to see a record number of independent candidates and smaller, newer parties. Sadly, I also suspect that they will face meltdown as people desperately vote to get Labour out or to keep the Tories out. The media is virtually a closed shop, protecting the position of the big three while putting up a seemingly impenetrable barrier around the smaller parties and independents. Unless you are a political and media whore like Martin Bell of course.

Part of the problem for smaller parties is the single issue tag. It's one thing for the Greens, UKIP and the BNP to win seats in the EU elections, that is the election where hardened Tories and Labourites kick their parties in the pants, it's another for them to win seats in Westminster. I would put my house on none of those three winning a solitary seat on May 6th. The main reason being the Green Party is seen as nutty environmentalists, UKIP is seen as obsessively Eurosceptic and the BNP are seen as dangerous racists. They appeal to far too narrow an interest group and people in general elections vote on a range of issues, education, health, law and order and many more.

So the small groups, parties and independents then realise that breaking the monopoly of the three tired old parties is not easy. Up pops 'the alliance'. So our independents and small parties pretty soon realise that to achieve anything they need to go down a road that inevitably makes them bigger, forces them to work with lots of other people and effectively sets them off towards becoming political parties. But that's another argument.

What set me off in this train of thought was a recent chat with a friend about a new alliance that had been formed to act as an umbrella for independents in the May 6th election. So I've had a look around and below is a list of current alliances that I have been able to identify. There is even an alliance including New Veritas! Although New Veritas looks identical to the loonytunes outfit that split from UKIP, complete with boasts about being founded by Kilroy Silk. Or should that be by 'New Kilroy Silk'?

So, here is my list of alliances fighting the general election with candidates, some sticking to the party names others sing the name of the alliance:

Alliance for Democracy

Independent Leave-the-EU Alliance

Independent Network

There is also a huge array of alliances, networks and other pressure groups trying to get candidates to speak out on a whole range of issues but I'm not going into them all.

So if you don't have the good fortune to have a Libertarian Party candidate to vote for, a quick look at some of the alliances above might be helpful. Or at least some of them will give you a good giggle!

Glasgow By-Election

I've just seen the news about the Glasgow by-election, and it doesn't make encouraging reading. A turnout of around 32% is disastrous and makes me worry for the future of our democracy, or more to the point, wonder if the populace of the UK care about our democracy.

At a time when there are illegal wars to protest about, a recession to protest about and record youth unemployment, the people of Glasgow still voted for the party that has been wrecking Britain since 1997. We are living in an ever more invasive and oppressive police state, but still the people of Glasgow voted for the pig in a red rosette.

Furthermore the BNP gained over 4%, only just failing to save their deposit. Previously the BNP have been dismissed in Scotland as a fringe English party, not any more, they gave the Tories in Glasgow a good run for their money. But what it does show is that the BNP's brand of socialism, with a heavy spoonful of racism, is much more a threat to Labour than the Tories.

I have felt for a long time that the general election is not as cut and dry as people think, it is not a foregone conclusion that Dave will win with a landslide. If I were a Labour MP with a small majority in a constituency such as Morecambe and Lunesdale, my constituency, I would be very worried. My guess is that the Tories will reclaim the seat because of the number of Labour supporters who will defect to the BNP. UKIP are hardly likely to dent the Tory vote enough to do real damage so hey presto, the BNP let the Tories in.

I think that scenario will occur up and down Britain but will only produce a small Tory majority. However, it will be a Tory majority and Dave will have Nick Griffin and the BNP to thank for getting him into Downing Street.

Nick Griffin and Question Time-The Last Word

It's all getting very tedious now, almost as tedious as the aftermath of that Paris car crash, or was it murder?

There seems to be a puke inducing holier-than-thou, self-righteousness fest as the politically correct try to outdo each other in their disgust at Griffin's appearance on Question Time.

All sense of proportion has been lost. Shirley Williams, David Owen and Bill Rodgers couldn't 'break the mould' so I would bet my life that the BNP are not about to take over from New Labour, next year or ever.

The only thing the politically correct misfits are doing is making themselves look very, very silly and dangerously obsessive. I have decided never to mention him, or his appearance on this blog again, please kick me if I do.

The Sunday Times today has the most balanced coverage, I can recommend it then suggest you move on. I particularly liked this AA Gill article.

More on Nick Griffin and the BNP

Below is a link to a review of Nick Griffin's statements on BBC Question Time. If anybody was foolish enough to be seduced by Griffin's appearance please read this and reconsider. His 'peaceful' KKK comment may have been obviously stupid, the piece below shows how most of everything else he said was stupid. Thanks to Helen on Twitter.

FactCheck: Nick Griffin on Question Time

Nick Griffin on Question Time

So what was the point of Nick Griffin being invited on to QT? Was it to prove that human beings, certainly those in the studio audience and on the panel, still enjoy a good old fashioned freak show? All they had to do was bring Griffin into the studio on a lead and shout "roll up, roll up" and we would have been straight back to the Victorian days of prodding the freak.

The BBC have now pissed off those loveable 'red-fascists' for inviting him on, and proceeded to piss the rest of the country off by allowing bullying and the dropping of all pretence of intellectual rigour. It was pretty sickening to watch in some ways.They had the chance to politically rip the BNP apart, but chose to use the tactics of the school playgound. What a sad state our democracy is in when you see Chris Huhne and Baroness Warsi unable to defeat Griffin by reasoned political argument, not the sharpest knives in the draw, I hope.

It's also been interesting seeing how the opponents of the BNP appear to be even worse in their views on free speech and democracy than the 'fascists'. These are the people who attack 'white imperialists' and use 'indigenous' people in North America and the Antipodes to attack us but then attack Griffin for referring to the 'indigenous' British population, a point made by Griffin. I don't agree with either position, they are virtually the same, but Griffin is condemned, the 'liberals' are not. Personally I look forward to a libertarian future where there are no immigration controls, but suspect that is some way away.

Again the so-called 'liberals' constantly whine about slavery and blame the likes of you and me, to the extent that ludicrous apologies are demanded from us today. But when Griffin pointed out that Jack Straw's father hid under the stairs in 1939, whereas Griffin's father fought the Germans, he was condemned for visiting the sins of the father on the son. Another example of crass hypocrisy.

I'm not going to be forced onto the bandwagon of stating that I dislike the BNP, you only have to read this blog to know my position, but I see no difference between the red-fascists of Unite Against Fascism, and the likes of Peter Hain, and the BNP.

The loser last night was the BBC. Question Time has been shown, yet again, to be a vacuous sham, fit only for the smug pseudo-intellectuals of Islington having little relevance outside the politically correct chattering classes. There was a great chance to rip Griffin apart, but they just called him names. If you still have any illusions about the impartiality of QT please watch the clip below.

Just to put some perspective, and to inject a note of realism into the hype of the last few days, the BNP got 6% in the EU elections and gained 2 seats under a system of proportional representation. They would just about save their deposits with 6% in a parliamentary election under our first past the post system. Food for thought there for the Liberal Democrats and others.

And finally:

Geert Wilders-Triumph for Freedom

I would have had more sympathy for the UK government's actions in trying to stop Geert Wilders entering the country if it had been on the grounds of that dodgy hairstyle, but banning him because he doesn't like Islam was illiberal and totalitarian. Look at the number of people in this country now, be they ethnic British, of Asian descent or others, who seem to despise our Western culture but have the freedom to come and go as they please and, more importantly to say what they please.

The problem is that the word 'hatred' is used to attack anybody who dislikes or opposes an idea or, God forbid,a fundmantal tenet of political correctness. To 'hate' now is a sin tantamount to 'racism' or 'homophobia'. But did we not hate the Nazis (Germans) in the last World War and wasn't that good? Did we not hate communism in the cold war which was good? Although the freedoms we preserved by that hatred are now being obliterated by Labour, and soon to be further obliterated when the New Tories take power, an instinct for survival involves hatred of enemies, perceived or otherwise.

Wilders' sin seems to be equating Islam, or the Koran, with terrorism. A simplistic argument that I would seriously question. I would question it as I question anybody who claims that Irish people were terrorists in the '70s and '80s, or that Catholics were terrorists in that period. There were some Catholics who were terrorists, some Irishmen who were terrorists, some Irish Catholics who were terrorists, but thankfully a small minority. I believe that to be the case with Muslims and that Wilder's argument is fundamentally flawed.

Having said that I would like to decide for myself if Wilders' argument is so fundamentally flawed or whether the politicains and media are just painting him as a hate figure. I would like the freedom to actually make up my own mind, after all, politicians are the first to decry the objectivity of the media when it suits them, so why should I blindly accept what they say? I think I'm grown up enough to hear Wildes and make my own mind up, I don't need'protecting'.

A further problem I have with the government's suppression of free speech in the Wilders' case is Afghanistan. We are fighting a war where, pretend otherwise if you will, but a form of Islam is driving the main forces attacking our soldiers. The reaction of militant Islamic groups in this country shows that a sizeable element of British Muslims support the extremists and hate the West. So we can fight an unjust war in Afghanistan, killing Muslims every day and our soldiers being killed, but the government tried to ban a Dutch politician, who articulates opposition to Islam, from entering the country.

Finally, the BBC could go for a real double whammy. Get Wilders on Question Time next week when Nick Griffin of the BNP is on. That would be fun.

TUC-Trade Union Censorship

It seems that the dinosaurs of the trade union movement are still roaming parts of the earth, trying to tell you and me who we should be allowed to listen to on BBC Question Time.

Yes you've guessed it, Gerry Morrissey, of the TV technicians' union Bectu is urging his members to boycott and pull the plug on the BNP leader Nick Griffin's appearance on the current affairs show on 22 October.

General secretary Gerry Morrissey said: "We believe there should be no media coverage of the BNP and I have raised this issue with the director general, Mark Thompson.

"He said they have been invited on to the programme because they have won elections, but we strongly disagree.

"We will be arranging a demonstration and lobby outside the Question Time studios and we will be working with anti-fascist groups to ensure there is a significant turn out."

We all know that those 'anti-fascist groups' largely consist of people just as bad, thoroughly unpleasant and anti-freedom and democracy as the BNP. We need no pious lectures from those idiots about democracy, disagree with them and you're more than likely to get a brick in your face. Two sides of the same coin in my opinion.

When I don't vote BNP I want it to be because I have heard the arguments and used reason. I don't want to not vote BNP because some fascist/anti-fascist trade union zombie has had a word in the shell-like of Mark Thompson, and put another nail in the coffin of free speech and liberty.

BNP Question Time

Labour seem to have gone into hyper totalitarian mode over the BNP leader apparently being approved by the BBC to appear on QT. They advocate free speech as long as they approve of what's beng said, as do many so called 'liberals' these days. Surprisingly the Lib Dems have said they would not boycott if Griffin appeared. Labour seem set to boycott.

Free speech actually means free speech. If you hate what somebody stands for then argue against them and win the argument, which you will if you are in the right. I want the right not to vote BNP because I know all about them and choose not to, not because they are banned. Free speech, as long as I approve of what you say, is actually censorship.

Having said that the MEPs from UKIP, Labour, Tory and Lib Dems in the North West, all refused to share a platform with Griffin after the count in June, stomping off the platform throwing hissy fits. Perhaps I should have headed this piece 'Hypocrites'.

Attacking Freedom

Here is an excellent article by Gerald Warner in today's Telegraph Online.

He savages the hypocrisy of the Equality and Human Rights Commission in starting action against the BNP, for seemingly barring non-whites from membership, while saying nothing about the National Black Police Association who, it seems, now claim that the 'black' in their title is not ethnic or racial. Yes, I know.

Personally I prefer to know exactly what an organisation stands for so that, as with the BNP, I can avoid them like the plague. But I do believe that they should have the right to expess their views, no matter how odious.

What Warner says isn't necessarily hugely controversial to those of us who believe in free speech, but the momentous thing is that it has been published in the Telegraph. Perhaps, just maybe, possibly the tide is very slowly starting to turn, who knows?


While we're at it, I look forward to the day when the 400 employees of the EHRC are all made redundant, now that would be progress.

Nuremberg Trials or the European Parliament?

I only had the misfortune to visit the European 'parliament' a couple of times. But one thing always struck me, how so many MEPs, sat looking bloody miserable with their headphones on, looked like defendants at war crime trials.

See what I mean?

MPs In Denial-Or Just Lying!

Our MPs seem unable to accept the truth or, perhaps more accurately the bloody obvious. Even during the campaign to elect a new speaker Margaret Beckett was making excuses for MPs involved in the expenses scandal. In typical socialist mode she was trying to make the MPs out to be the victims, remember her performance on Question Time?

Now Jon Cruddas is claiming that it is our first past the post voting system that is allowing extremists like the BNP to be elected. In an interview with the Fabian Society he said:

"I always used to think that first past the post choked off the space for extremism, I now think it creates it."

Actually Jon, the BNP were elected under a system of proportional representation, largely because people are sick of the mess the three old parties have made of this country. I know somebody who voted BNP because he thinks the country is overcrowded but is sick of traditional politicians branding anybody who questions immigration 'racist'. He was also sick of traditional politicians telling him not to vote BNP rather than telling him what they have to offer.

So our intellectul pygmies and moral bankrupts in Westminster blame the system for the expenses scandal and now for the BNP getting two MEPs elected. Guess what pygmies? I blame you. It's time the three old parties, and most of our overweening state, were flushed down the toilet and we started all over again.

Church And Police State

'Anonymous' left a comment on my earlier post (Police State) about a man being thrown out of Blackburn Cathedral for 'looking like a BNP member'.

It is so appalling, and I can't get the links to work in 'Comments', that I have put a link below to the press article:

Link to Lancashire Evening Telegraph article.

Thank you for that 'Anonymous'.

Making The BNP Look Reasonable

The worrying thing at the moment is the kind of democracy we will have, if any, in say 10 or 15 years time. Let's face it, New Labour have made a hellishly effective start at dismantling it already.

The European Union seems to think that ever falling turnouts at European elections shows that the people of Europe are quite content with 'the project'. Anti-EU parties have been castrated by being sucked into the 'parliament' as if anything can be attained from within. As Marshal Petain found in France, that doesn't work.

The anti-democratic nature of the EU has also succeeded in castrating our own parliament, with at least 70% of laws coming from Brussels. That has left our MPs nothing to do but 'flip' houses, clean out their moats and hunt down the most expensive TV home cinema they can find to bung on their expenses. Our system has never been so despised or our politicians more loathed than they are at present.

Then up pop the BNP. The reason they do so well seems to be because they don't need a great deal of money for campaigning, their opponents, from the nutty 'Unite Against Fascism' to holier than thou Dave Cameron, do their job perfectly well for them. I wonder how many people would have voted BNP on June 4th if they hadn't read so much hysterical nonsense about them in the mainstream media, from the mouths of mainstream politicians?

To top it all Harriet Harperson is now talking about introducing a law making it illegal for the BNP to only accept membership applications from white people. I wonder if that will also apply to the Association of Black Police Officers? If they do make it illegal I can't imagine thousands of black people rushing to join. Pesonally, as well as not agreeing with their national socialist policies, I would never want to join a party that denies membership to black people any more than I would want to join the Orange Order.

To keep things in perspective the BNP gained fewer votes in these Euro elections than they did in 2004. Let's defeat them, and Labour and the other misfits, by being a bit more grown up. When I've heard Griffin interviewed he pretty soon cracks under intensive questioning and makes a fool of himself. That's the way to beat them, by further chipping away at freedom and democracy the establishment play into the hands of people like Nick Griffin.

Following is an excellent article from The Times Online

When Nick Griffin was pelted with eggs outside Parliament this week, the protest divided public opinion over whether it was a legitimate expression of anger or a foolhardy stunt that handed unwarranted publicity to the British National Party.

It has also widened a rift in the anti-fascist movement over how to combat the rise of the far-right party.

United Against Fascism (UAF) is planning a series of physical demonstrations over the coming months based on Tuesday’s confrontation, which forced Mr Griffin, the BNP leader and newly elected MEP, to abandon his victory press conference. The approach has frustrated seasoned anti-BNP campaigners, who believe that the stunt allowed Mr Griffin to portray himself as a martyr.

There were violent tussles between the protesters and supporters of Mr Griffin and Andrew Brons, who won the BNP’s second European seat in Yorkshire and the Humber region, and police are investigating two allegations of common assault.

BNP leader pelted with eggs at Parliament
UAF, which was set up five years ago as an umbrella organisation for anti-racism groups and trade unions, says that it will picket Mr Griffin wherever he goes. It accepts that there is potential for further violence but insists that the action is necessary to combat the BNP.

Searchlight, a separate organisation that has campaigned against the BNP and its predecessors since the 1960s, is cautious about such protests and says that a more “constructive” approach is needed. Searchlight initially joined UAF when it was created but broke away following policy differences. This week it launched a widespread digital media initiative called Not In My Name. The organisation is being advised by Blue State Digital, the internet strategy firm responsible for President Obama’s winning US campaign, and plans a variety of online initiatives to raise awareness and funds.

This weekend an appeal video featuring various celebrities will be posted online to urge the public to donate. More than 84,500 people have already signed up to its database, making it bigger than those of any of the mainstream political parties.

The Royal British Legion yesterday accused Mr Griffin of trying to politicise “one of the nation’s most beloved symbols” after he repeatedly wore a red poppy during the European election campaign. The charity is demanding that Mr Griffin stop wearing the poppy, after private appeals to his “sense of honour” were ignored.

In an open letter to The Guardian, the charity wrote: “True valour deserves respect regardless of a person’s ethnic origin . . . Stop it, Mr Griffin.”

Campaigners are also organising a petition to take to the European Parliament next month, saying that while the BNP has won seats, it does not represent Britain. The number of signatures had exceeded 56,000 by Wednesday, only two days after it was begun.

Campaigners aim to surpass 132,094, signatures — the number of votes that Mr Griffin attracted in the North West region.

Searchlight is hoping to raise enough money to wage its biggest campaign against the BNP, from advertisements on buses to leaflets aimed at areas where voters are BNP-friendly.

Nick Lowles, the campaign coordinator, said it was a positive way to express discontent. “We need to harness people’s anger in a constructive way, rather than throwing eggs at the BNP,” he said.

However, Anindya Bhattacharyya, a spokesman for UAF, claimed that the strategy was not adequate to defeat the BNP. “If fascists simply organised on the internet then it would be fine. But they foment their race hatred on to the streets. That’s where we have to stand up to them,” he said.

UAF is planning an emergency national conference in Manchester on July 18 and aims to picket events such as the BNP’s annual rally in August.

Mr Bhattacharyya defended the tactics displayed on Tuesday. He said: “I think the far greater danger is that he [Mr Griffin] becomes legitimised.”

Harrogate College is under pressure to justify its decision to employ Mr Brons as a politics lecturer. Mr Brons, 61, a former chairman of the National Front, has worked at the college since 1970. He confirmed to The Times that there was a “tentative agreement” for him to return in September but said that now he was an MEP he would not take up the offer. In 1984 the then principal of the college was a character witness in court for Mr Brons. He was convicted of behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace after he was arrested while selling National Front newspapers.

Nazi Scum!

So, those paragons of virtue and democracy 'Unite Against Fascism' decide that you and I shouldn't be allowed to hear the words of Nick Griffin because he's 'Nazi scum'.

Well I'm more than capable of hearing a politician speak and deciding for myself whether or not he deserves my vote, which I did last Thursday and didn't choose to vote for a bunch of extremists.

What angers me more than a couple of nutters getting elected in a meaningless election, is vermin like the UAF deciding who I should or should not listen to.

It seems to me that BNP and UAF are two sides of the same coin.

Actually, at least the BNP put themselves, and their arguments, up before the British electorate.

BNP,Sackcloth And Ashes

Here, in the Telegraph, is Alistair Darling self-flagellating about the BNP winning two seats in the European parliament, with a bit of grovelling from David Cameron towards the end.

A sense of proportion might not go astray here. They won two seats having received fewer votes than they did in the 2004 Euro elections.

I spoke to somebody I know last week who voted BNP, he did it because so many national figures were obsessively telling people not to. His reasoning was: "If this shower of dodgy MPs and ministers keep telling me not to do it, with their track record of thieving and lying, then I will do it just to teach them a lesson". He will no more vote for them in a serious election than I would.

The vote for smaller parties dropped and,let's face it, UKIP have done nothing in serious elections since their success in 2004. So I am hardly bracing myself for Griffin to be the next Prime Minister.

Rather than mainstream politicians blaming the electorate, or even the BNP, they need to take a good, long, hard look at themselves and, for once in their extremely well paid and cushy careers, actually take responsibility.

Labour Party Disaster?

What a strange election.

Yes Labour's share of the vote dropped by 7% and they lost 5 MEPs. But the Conservative vote only went up 1.2%, and they gained only 1 MEP. Scotland is yet to declare but it looks like the SNP will gain at Labour's expense.

I am most concerned that the smaller parties failed to make a proper breakthrough. Yes UKIP gained 1 MEP (vote up 0.5%) and the BNP, sadly, gained 2 (vote up 2.5%), but a low turnout has to be a huge advantage to smaller parties whose hardcore vote will turn out come hell or high water. Apart from UKIP and the BNP the smaller parties, although increasing their vote slightly, didn't make any significant breakthroughs with the Greens only retaining their 2 seats. Here is a full national breakdown.

So yes a terrible night for Labour and Gordon Brown but did the Tories really take full advantage? I would say no. Labour did poorly in 2004, admittedly not as badly as this, but went on to win a general election in 2005. In EU elections people know there is little point so will protest vote knowing that there is little at stake. It looks to me like the next general election could produce a tiny Conservative majority or, more likely, a hung parliament. Sadly there seems little hope of a smaller party breaking through yet.

Full BBC election results.

English Democrats

It's the last day of campaigning in the fake European election. I had intended to abstain but couldn't bring myself to do it when the postal ballot papers arrived, even for a fake election it seemed wrong not to vote somehow.

So I've looked at all the parties and decided to vote for a party that I least ideologically opposed. So out went the BNP and The Green Party. Next went No2EU and Scargill's bunch of 1970s throwbacks aka the Socialist Labour Party. Next came Libertas, too pro-EU as are the big three, so they were out.I didn't know what any individual member of The Jury Team believed, it's a shambles, so they were out.

I whittled it down to UKIP, the English Democrats and the Christian Party. Sadly I think UKIP now sets the cause of EU withdrawal back and has become just another vehicle to get people on the gravy train, hence their campaign strapline of 'lend us your vote for the European election', implying they are not bothered about Westminster from where withdrawal, if it ever does, will come.

I admire the Christian Party but couldn't bring myself to vote for a religious party. So I ended up voting for the English Democrats. At least they have a full programme and their policy of equality for England isn't based on hatred of another group, as the SNP and Plaid Cymru are on hatred of the English.

But, more importantly they are highly unlikely to win. So I exercised my democratic right, but without helping give somebody a leg up onto the gravy train, at least not directly.

However, come the general election I look forward to voting, and campaigning for, the Libertarian Party.