Sverige idag

Nyhetssida för ansvarsfulla svenskar.

Skillnader och likheter mellan EDL och BNP

Posted by sverigeidag på februari 23, 2012

A number of people have asked why we have recently made a point of co-operating with English Defence League members when contact with that organisation was previously discouraged. Nick Griffin MEP explains the position.

Not long after it first emerged, the English Defence League was proscribed by the British National Party. While we had sympathy with a large part of the EDL´s message, several things concerned us greatly.

First, we felt it all too possible that the media would exploit the EDL´s boisterous activities in order to smear us by association.

Second, looking at the way in which the police were permitting activities which would previously have been stamped on from the start, we concluded that it could well be being used by the State to create a ´honeytrap´ for sincere but unwary patriots.

Third, we recognised the behind the scenes links between sections of the EDL´s national leadership and a neo-con/extreme Zionist clique in Canada and the USA.

The EDL’s very effective internet presence, sophisticated personalised clothing operation and the supply of coaches that were critical to getting it off the ground, were all financed not out of the pockets of its overwhelmingly working class grass-roots, but by a tight-knit group of wealthy businessmen. Such people don’t ‘invest’ in something like the English Defence League by accident.

As this statement is prepared, the National Chairman of the EDL’s ‘political wing’ is on a speaking tour of North America. On Monday, for example, he addressed the Canadian Zionist Congress at their headquarters in Toronto.

While we recognise the right of all peoples to a homeland, and the various advantages of the Jewish people being secure in their own, we were very concerned at what appeared to be efforts to use the EDL to manipulate popular opinion in Britain in favour of our country´s involvement in neo-con foreign adventures that are nothing to do us and not in our national interest.

We have Jewish members, probably more than the EDL, but we don’t make a song and dance of it. A minority of our non-Jewish members are pro-Zionist, many are firmly anti-Zionist. The majority takes the Nationalist position that what happens in the Middle East is none of our business. We are against anyone trying to involve Britain and to waste blood or treasure on behalf of either side.

Israeli flags have no more place on street demonstrations in Britain than Palestinian ones. That kind of thing only helps to further radicalise young Muslims and to add to their hostility to all things British.

All the above factors played a role in our early decision to proscribe the English Defence League and its offshoots. In recent months, however, we have reassessed the situation in the light of subsequent developments.

On the first point, after several major media ´plugs´ for, and several major smears against, the EDL, the fact is that it has carved out a loose mass following among a whole new generation of young working and middle class Brits. Scores of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of them have developed a basic political and ethnic awareness thanks to the existence and activities of the EDL and its Scottish and Welsh sub-sections.

Whatever the ultimate aims of those behind it, when the history of the indigenous fight back in these islands comes to be written, the organisation will be recorded as having played a significant role.

With the EDL nationally now riven by factionalism and dissent, however, there is a serious risk that this following, influence and energy will go to waste. If the EDL recovers its cohesion, all well and good, we´ll be pleased to see that good work continuing. But if it doesn´t, we cannot afford to turn our backs on this reservoir of new awareness among the young generation.

On the second point – the obvious interest of sections of the State in the operation –  our analysis is now widely recognised among the EDL´s intelligent and increasingly sophisticated ´middle management` as having been well-founded – which automatically reduces the danger. Quite simply, a honeytrap is only any use if potential targets don´t see the danger.

Further, the police launched an outrageous mass arrest of EDL members at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day, as a blatantly obvious way of placating the Muslim community following the ban on Muslims Against Crusades. This event showed clearly why the State had allowed the EDL to take off: They wanted a plausible opportunity to say to Muslims ”look at this, we´re not just picking on Muslim extremists, we´ve roughed up that nasty English Defence League as well.”

We came out very firmly against that totally uncalled for police attack on the EDL at the Cenotaph, but at least the incident made it totally clear what the Powers That Be were thinking about when they first let the EDL run. Once something is understood in this way, initial fears about who is playing what game and why quickly dissipate.

On the third point – the EDL leadership’s links with and promotion by Zionists – the issue is still there. Indeed, the recent link-up between the official EDL, the well-connected and pro-Zionist businessman Paul Weston and a clique of ex-BNP back-stabbers led by the man who took our website down just before the last General Election, all makes us even more wary of the motivation of some of those involved at the top.

Equally, however, there has clearly been a massive shift within the English Defence League´s regional and local organisation, and rank-and-file, to an understanding of, and opposition to, the danger of being used as pawns in a neo-con game.

The problem is not the English Defence League, still less its huge pool of loosely affiliated support, but a handful of people at the top and behind the scenes. Most important of all, those people no longer command the respect or support of many of those nominally beneath them. So here too, there is a serious risk that, if the EDL continues to fragment, its remarkable achievement as a social networking/mobile phone/grass-roots word of mouth organisation could simply break up and vanish.

This would be a tragedy, because the threat of Islamisation that made the EDL both timely and necessary is still there. Islam-based evils, such as paedophile grooming and racist attacks on young indigenous lads on the edges of their growing ghettoes, are increasing. Betrayal of our people, civilisation, Christian heritage and democratic freedoms, by a cowardly dhimmified elite, continues. These things have to be resisted by more than just fighting elections.

On top of all that, the pressure on the EDL´s leadership by its rank and file has over the last few months (particularly during the August riots) forced them to adopt a position that has significantly advanced from their early civic nationalism.

Taken as a whole, and whatever the organisation says, it is now in spirit essentially the ethno-nationalist creation that its name always implied. Of course, that doesn´t mean that it´s hostile to integrated Sikhs or West Indians, but nor are we.

Yes, it has a few gay members Big deal, so has the British National Party. The EDL leadership have played the PC card by flaunting this fact with ridiculous talk of a ´Gay Division´. We prefer to leave it in the closet, because private sexuality that someone was born with is something that is not the business of either a political party or the State. Whichever one prefers, it is obviously a million miles from the Islamist desire to persecute homosexuals and throw them off tall buildings or stone them to death.

To sum up: Despite major differences between us and them at both organisational and ideological levels, the British National Party – and the Cause as a whole – has more to gain than lose by giving its members a free hand in approaching and working with sensible members of the English Defence League.

Most of all, the Islamist presence that threatens the very survival of our civilisation and the freedom of our people provides us with an example from which all of us must learn: Whatever their many differences of opinion and rivalries, when the chips are down, the Muslims always unite and make common cause against the Unbelievers.

While ‘Tommy Robinson’ tries to curry favour with the editors of the Zionist-backed gutter press by declaring the British National Party to be ‘unwelcome’, ‘racist’, etc, etc, Muslim organisations, aiming to take power in Britain, stand shoulder to shoulder and make common cause against a divided opposition.

This needs to stop – and fast! The brave young men standing in defence of their community against grooming and anti-English violence in Heywood this weekend are showing that our people can and will rise up against the evils wrought by the political elite and the Islamist predator they have let loose in our land.

They need and deserve a powerful and united nationalist movement to stand with them. We believe that our move to make it easier for grass-roots nationalists to work together will be an important step to bringing that powerful and united movement one step closer.

Artikeln finns att läsa här.

3 svar to “Skillnader och likheter mellan EDL och BNP”

  1. svenskasvensson said

    Ni får vila och samla kraft, och komma igång sen igen Mvh Svensson 🙂

  2. Tråkigt. Går ofta in på din blogg. Du/ni har mycket att säga.

  3. Lasse said

    Det har ni gjort er förtjänta av. Synd att Axpixlat inte vill länka vare sig er eller Fria Tider till sin sajt, men vi vet ju varför.


Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in: Logo

Du kommenterar med ditt Logga ut /  Ändra )


Du kommenterar med ditt Google-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )


Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )


Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Ansluter till %s

%d bloggare gillar detta: