Total Visits

Friday 25 January 2013

SUNDAY TIMES RETRACTS EXTREMIST SLUR AGAINST ENGLISH DEMOCRATS

 


SUNDAY TIMES RETRACTS EXTREMIST SLUR AGAINST ENGLISH DEMOCRATS

On Sunday, 20th January 2013 the Sunday Times published in its corrections and clarifications column on page 24 as follows:-
"A story on the election of police and crime commissioners (Party plodders turn police vote into a flop, November 11, 2012) wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. The English Democrats are a nationalist party campaigning, among other things, for an English parliament.”

And on its website it also published a correction as follows:-
“An earlier version of this article wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. It is a nationalist party."

These corrections followed on from a complaint to the Sunday Times and thereafter to the Press Complaints Commission. The correspondence is set out below. The results do show that proper, reasoned complaining and challenging of media inaccuracy can produce worthwhile results.

Here is the correspondence:-
From: RobinTilbrook@aol.com
To: john.witherow@sunday-times.co.uk, james.harding@thetimes.co.uk, home.news@thetimes.co.uk
BCC: johnhayterengdem@aol.com
Sent: 11/11/2012 19:18:25 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Your offences - Section 61 of the Police and Crime Commissioner Elections Order

Dear Sir
We act for Mr Steven Uncles, Mr David Allen, Mr Stephen Goldspink, Mr Paul Rimmer and Mr Robin Tilbrook who are the English Democrats' candidates for the Police Commissioner elections in Kent, South Yorkshire, Cambridgeshire, Merseyside and Essex respectively.

As you may be aware, pursuant to Section 61 of the Police and Crime Commissioner Elections Order 2012, you are “guilty of an illegal practice” if during this election and for the purpose of affecting the election of any candidate as Police and Crime Commissioner you make or publish any false statement of fact in relation to the candidates personal character or conduct.

Contrary to Section 61 this Sunday the Sunday Times has on page 11 published an Article by James Gillespie and Georgia Graham headed " Party plodders turn police vote into a flop" in which you have published the following statement about the above candidates:- "The figures show that 134 of the candidates are representatives of the political parties - among them five from the extremist right-wing English Democrats".It is a false statement of fact that the English Democrats are "extremist right-wing".

You have also gratuitously made disobliging and disingenuous partisan remarks about their candidacies.

In the circumstances we write to request a full right of reply for our clients to be published in an issue of your daily paper before Thursday's election.

Please confirm your agreement to the above within the next 48 hours failing which we shall advise our clients on whether to proceed by way of criminal prosecutions or to seek a High Court Injunction against you.

Yours faithfully

Tilbrook’s




In a message dated 13/11/2012 15:02:56 GMT Standard Time, pia.sarma@newsint.co.uk writes:
Dear Mr Tilbrook,

Your email to the Editor of The Sunday Times which published the article you refer to, has been passed to me for response.

The Sunday Times and The Times are entirely separate publications with separate editors. A request for a right of reply arising from one publication cannot be considered by a separate publication. For that reason your request for a right of reply in the daily paper is not something which can be met in any event.

I do intend to respond to you in full but as this has only just been brought to my attention, I will do so by the end of tomorrow.

Yours sincerely,
Pia Sarma.



---------------------------------------
Editorial Legal Director
Legal Department- 4th floor
Times Newspapers Limited




From: RobinTilbrook@aol.com
To: pia.sarma@newsint.co.uk
Sent: 14/11/2012 01:02:40 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Your offences - Section 61 of the Police and Crime Commissioner Elections...

Dear Ms Sarma
Thank you but please note they are the same ownership and the same email address

Robin Tilbrook




From: donna.boultwood@newsint.co.uk
To: robintilbrook@aol.com
CC: pia.sarma@newsint.co.uk
Sent: 15/11/2012 16:45:50 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Times Newspapers Limited

Dear Mr Tilbrook

Please see the attached letter sent on behalf of Pia Sarma.

Yours sincerely, Donna Boultwood
P.A. TNL Legal Department
Times Newspapers Limited


Letter from Times Newspapers Limited dated 15th November 2012

Dear Tilbrook

Re: “Party plodders turn police vote into a flop”, The Sunday Times, November 11

Thank you for your letter to the Editors of The Sunday Times and The Times, concerning the above article.

You appear to ask for a right to reply on the basis that publication of the Article was an offence under section 61 of the Police and Crime Commissioner Elections Order 2012.

The statutory instrument creates an offence if anyone makes or publishes any false statement of fact in relation to an election candidate’s personal character or conduct before or during an election and which was for the purpose of affecting the election of that candidate. If the maker of the statement can show that he has reasonable grounds for believing the statement to be true, there is no offence.

I do not agree that the offence has been made out. Firstly, describing the English Democrats as “extremist right-wing” was not necessarily a statement of fact. A statement about the political leanings of candidates is often a matter of opinion. Even if the statement were found to be fact, it is not one which related to any of the candidates personal character or conduct, as is required for an offence to be made out, but rather to political or public role in the party. A Court would also be required to take into account freedom of expression and Article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights in examining the value judgment of the statement. Where any statement does not substantially relate to personal conduct, it may be inconsistent with Article 10 for the Court to find that s.61 would apply, as a recent case held.

It also would not be shown that the statement was made for the purpose of affecting the election of any candidates. Indeed, had that been the intention, each of the candidates would have been named to draw the attention of any potential voter. The article points out that the expected turn-out was anticipated to be disappointingly low, which highlights the need for any article whose purpose was to affect election to be quite specific about its intention in order to capture a potential voter. Finally, the defence of reasonable belief in the truth of the statement may be made out. In summary, the elements of the offence were not met.

As I stated in my email to you, The Times does not carry letters or comment by way of right of reply in relation to articles published in The Sunday Times. However, if you wish to submit a letter to be considered for publication in The Sunday Times, please send it to letters@sunday-times.co.uk, copied to me.

Yours sincerely


Pia Sarma
Editorial Legal Director



Letter 6th December 2012
Press Complaints Commission
Halton House
20/23 Holborn
London
EC1N 2JD


Dear Sir

Re: Sunday Times Article 11th November 2012 by James Gillespie and Georgai Graham: “Party plodders turn police vote into a flop”

This article wrongly asserts that the English Democrats are “Extremist Right-wing”. This comment is inaccurate and untrue. The significance of this unjustified attack taking place in the midst of elections for Police Commissioners makes this matter one of importance.

Immediately this article came to my attention, on the 11th November, I requested the right of reply to this spurious allegation. The response is inadequate and it is obvious that the offending comment is put as a statement of fact not opinion (within the usual meaning given both by the law of defamation and of common sense).

"Extremist right-wing" connotes fascism, racism, Nazism, white supremacy etc., and infers that the English Democrats candidates share those views. It thus clearly relates to our candidates' personal character or conduct. In the context of the article, its timing, and the absence of defamatory comments about any other candidates an inference can be drawn of the improper purpose of affecting the election of our candidates.

This may actually have mattered given that we were not far off getting our candidate elected in South Yorkshire.

I respectfully suggest that the Times would be hard pressed to support any defence of reasonable belief in the truth of the statement. There is no suggestion anywhere that we are a racist party, nor indeed have they made any effort to find out what we do stand for.

No effort was made to speak to anyone from the English Democrats about this allegation either prior to making it or indeed at all.

Not only do James Gillespie’s and Georgia Graham’s professional standards appear to be very sloppy, but also, I would respectfully submit, they breach the Press Complaints Commissions Editor’s Code by failing to maintain the “highest professional standards”. The comments are frankly inaccurate and misleading and no correction has been published.

Rather than accurately reporting the Sunday Times seems to have stooped to smear and innuendo against the English Democrats.

It may also be that the smear derives from an anti-English discriminatory attitude within the Sunday Times and also of these two journalists both of whom bear Scottish surnames.

In the circumstances I wish formally, and on behalf of myself and the other candidates so smeared and the English Democrats, to complain against the Sunday Times.

Yours faithfully

R C W Tilbrook
Chairman

In a message dated 12/12/2012 15:56:57 GMT Standard Time, simon.yip@pcc.org.uk writes:
Dear Mr Tilbrook

Thank you for your email.

Before we can assess your complaint fully, it would be helpful if you could indicate which Clause or Clauses of the Code of Practice you believe have been breached.

We would be very grateful to receive this information within the next ten days.

A copy of the Code of Practice which all newspapers and magazines who subscribe adhere to, can be accessed using this web link: http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/practice.html

Do not hesitate to contact us if you need further advice. When you write to us, please quote our reference number on this email.

Yours sincerely


Sent on behalf of Simon Yip
Complaints Coordinator
Press Complaints Commission


From: RobinTilbrook@aol.com
To: simon.yip@pcc.org.uk
Sent: 26/12/2012 15:59:05 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Press Complaints Commission - Our reference 125459

Dear Mr Yip,
Thank you for your email. I am sorry not to have responded sooner.
I had used the key phrases from clauses 1,2 and 12 deliberately as these the ones called into play here.
I attach the text of my complaint again for ease of reference.
Yours sincerely

Robin Tilbrook,




In a message dated 03/01/2013 10:09:02 GMT Standard Time, elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk writes:

Our reference: 125459


Dear Mr Tilbrook

Thank you for your recent correspondence.

I will be dealing with your complaint against The Sunday Times before it goes to the Commission for a decision under the terms of the Editors’ Code, and I will keep you informed of the progress of our investigation into this matter.

A copy of your correspondence has been sent to the publication and I will write to you again once I have received its response.

In the meantime, do not hesitate to contact me if you have any concerns or questions.

Yours sincerely



Elizabeth Cobbe
Complaints Officer

Press Complaints Commission




From: RobinTilbrook@aol.com
To: elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk
Sent: 03/01/2013 10:10:21 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: PCC REF 125459

Thank you
Robin Tilbrook





In a message dated 08/01/2013 11:23:00 GMT Standard Time, elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk writes:
Dear Mr Tilbrook,

I write further to my email of 3 January.

I have now received a response from The Sunday Times, which I have forwarded below.

As you will see, the newspaper has offered to publish the following correction in its Corrections and Clarifications column:

"A story on the election of police and crime commissioners (Party plodders turn police vote into a flop, November 11, 2012) wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. It is a nationalist party."

I would be grateful for your thoughts on this proposal, and in particular whether you would be satisfied that this course of action would resolve the complaint to your satisfaction. As you may be aware, an additional benefit of resolving your complaint is that a summary of it – with a wording agreed by you – will be published prominently on the Commission’s website. This will act, importantly, as a public record of your concerns and the remedial action subsequently taken.

I look forward to hearing from you in due course, preferably in the next seven days.


With kind regards



Elizabeth Cobbe
From: Tyrer, Bob
Sent: 08 January 2013 10:21
To: Elizabeth Cobbe
Subject: Re: New complaint - 125692 Tilbrook

Dear Elizabeth,

Thank you for forwarding this complaint to me.

I have researched the English Democrats' website and activities, and I agree that there is no evidence of political extremism in the normally accepted use of the word - implying violence. I would therefore be happy to resolve this complaint with an entry on these lines in our Corrections and Clarifications column: "A story on the election of police and crime commissioners (Party plodders turn police vote into a flop, November 11, 2012) wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. It is a nationalist party."

With best wishes,

Bob
Bob Tyrer
Executive Editor





From: RobinTilbrook@aol.com
To: elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk
Sent: 08/01/2013 12:54:50 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: PCC complaint 125692 Tilbrook

Dear Miss Cobbe

Thank you for your email. The suggested wording goes some way towards satisfying me. I suggest that the second short sentence should read:- "In fact the English Democrats are the main English Nationalist Party and are campaigning for an English Parliament"

Yours sincerely

Robin Tilbrook
Chairman,
The English Democrats






In a message dated 08/01/2013 15:37:11 GMT Standard Time, elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk writes:
Dear Mr Tilbrook,

Thank you for your earlier email.

As you will see from the below response from the newspaper, it has made a final offer to publish the following wording:

"A story on the election of police and crime commissioners (Party plodders turn police vote into a flop, November 11, 2012) wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. The English Democrats are a nationalist party campaigning, among other things, for an English parliament."

It has organised for the removal of the word “extremist” from the article which appears on the website of the newspaper and to publish the following footnote to the article:

“An earlier version of this article wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. It is a nationalist party."

I look forward to hearing from you as to whether you would like to resolve the complaint on the basis of these steps.


With kind regards



Elizabeth Cobbe



From: Tyrer, Bob
Sent: 08 January 2013 15:24
To: Elizabeth Cobbe
Subject: Re: PCC complaint 125692 Tilbrook

Dear Elizabeth,

Thanks for your reply.

I would be willing to compromise with this wording: "A story on the election of police and crime commissioners (Party plodders turn police vote into a flop, November 11, 2012) wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. The English Democrats are a nationalist party campaigning, among other things, for an English parliament."

That is my final offer on the wording. I also agree to remove the word "extremist" from the online article - in fact, I've already asked for it to be removed, as a gesture of good faith - and I would add the footnote you suggest: “An earlier version of this article wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. It is a nationalist party."

With best wishes,

Bob

Bob Tyrer
Executive Editor




From: RobinTilbrook@aol.com
To: elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk
Sent: 14/01/2013 12:02:31 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: PCC complaint 125459 Tilbrook

Dear Ms Cobbe

Re: Sunday Times Article - PCC Complaint 125459|

Before final agreement I would like to see a proof of the proposed agreed wording to be published showing its position, size and prominence. Also I would like to see such a proof in relation to the on-line article.

Yours sincerely

Robin Tilbrook
Chairman,
The English Democrats,




From: elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk
To: robintilbrook@aol.com
Sent: 16/01/2013 10:04:57 GMT Standard Time
Subj: PCC REF 125459

Dear Mr Tilbrook,

Thank you for your email of 14 January.

The newspaper has said that the page on which the corrections and clarifications are published doesn’t go to press until the Saturday night before publication, so providing a proof would not be practical. It has, however, made an assurance that it will appear in the Corrections and Clarifications column. I have attached to this email a pdf of how the column appears on the page from last week’s newspaper. The correction online would appear as a footnote to the article.

The PCC does not require the newspaper to provide a proof of how any statement negotiated by the PCC would appear; it does, however, require the newspaper to confirm prominence. The newspaper has now done this. I would be grateful if you could confirm whether you would like me to ask the newspaper to proceed with publication.

With kind regards


Elizabeth

Elizabeth Cobbe
Complaints Officer
Press Complaints Commission




From: RobinTilbrook@aol.com
To: elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk
Sent: 17/01/2013 10:12:31 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: PCC REF 125459

Dear Miss Cobbe

Thank you for your email and clarification. In that case we will accept what has been agreed. Thank you for your help.

Yours sincerely

Robin Tilbrook
Chairman,
The English Democrats,




From: elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk
To: RobinTilbrook@aol.com
Sent: 17/01/2013 14:22:22 GMT Standard Time
Subj: PCC REF 125459

Dear Mr Tilbrook,

Thank you for your earlier email.

The agreed footnote has now been added to the online article and the agreed wording will be published in the corrections and clarifications column in this week’s edition of the newspaper.

With kind regards

Elizabeth Cobbe





From: elizabeth.cobbe@pcc.org.uk
To: robintilbrook@aol.com
Sent: 22/01/2013 11:40:17 GMT Standard Time
Subj: PCC REF 125459


Our reference: 125459


Dear Mr Tilbrook

Now that your complaint has been resolved, a short summary of it will soon be available on the Commission’s web site. Unless we hear to the contrary within 7 days, we will assume that you are happy with the summary and are content for the information to be released publicly. This email has also been copied to the publication, which also has 7 days in which to comment on the wording.

The proposed wording, subject to formal approval by the Commission and any comments from the parties, is as follows:

The Sunday Times

Mr Robin Tilbrook, Chairman of the English Democrats Party, complained to the Press Complaints Commission that the newspaper had breached the terms of Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice. The complainant said that the article incorrectly described the English Democrats as “extremist right-wing”. There was no evidence that the party was “extremist” or that its politics could be described as “far right”.

The complaint was resolved when the PCC negotiated the publication of the following statement in the newspaper:

"A story on the election of police and crime commissioners (Party plodders turn police vote into a flop, November 11, 2012) wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. The English Democrats are a nationalist party campaigning, among other things, for an English parliament."

The newspaper also appended the following statement to the online article:

“An earlier version of this article wrongly referred to the English Democrats as an 'extremist' party. It is a nationalist party." (Cl 1)

If you are dissatisfied with the way in which your complaint has been handled you should write within one month to the Independent Reviewer, whose details can be accessed using this web link:http://www.pcc.org.uk/about/whoswho/independentreview.html

With best wishes



Elizabeth Cobbe
Complaints Officer
Press Complaints Commission



Email sent 25.1.2013


Dear Ms Cobbe

Thank you for your email of the 22nd. I had in fact written to the Press Complaints Commission that the newspaper had breached the terms of Clauses 1, 2 and 12.

I would be grateful if you could make this amendment.

Yours sincerely


R C W Tilbrook

27 comments:

  1. In the eyes of the globalists nationalists are extremists. The BBC described Anders Breivik as ultra-nationalist, implying that he was just a bit further to the right than most nationalists (except those of Scotland and Northern Ireland) whom it would dismiss as extreme.

    And Evan Davies described Europe as post-nationalist i.e. implying that it is wonderful that all that extremist nonsense is now history. Geert Wilders is first and foremost a nationalist. He wants an independent, democratic Holland out of the euro and out of the EU. And yet this is the man that the Labour government tried to bar from entering this country.
    Presumably because he doesn't want an islamic Holland. But the anti-internationalism was probably anathema also to the international socialist, Marxist New Labour.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you will find he is first and foremost a zionist.

      Delete
    2. Were you talking about Geert Wilders. He is a Roman Catholic but he is pro-Israel, presumably as he sees it as a bastion against islamification worldwide.

      Delete
  2. Well done to the internationalists, the bankers and industrialists bent on creating a one world plutocracy, the Marxists bent on creating a one world Marxist state and the other globalizers and globalists. Today we have received the news that we are about to enter a triple dip recession and possibly lose our triple a credit rating which will affect the pound. So it is all three's, personally I thought it was all about three sixes, the mark of the beast. They have all ruined our country; but they have ruined most other white countries as well. As for three a's I thought that was the new batteries they need to insert in their brains to try and make them work.

    There was an excellent letter in our local paper explaining the state of the country in the 1960s mostly economically but in other respects also; independent, nationalist and as yet unaffected by mass immigration. This letter was in reply to one penned by one of the liberal democrat euro mps who had said we had lost our role back then and needed what would become the EU. If you were to read the reply you would weep at how we have been used, abused and conned. And don't believe slippery Dave's promise of a referendum after he wins the election - sadly I think the sheeple will vote for another term of Marxist New Labour so that they can finish off the indigenous working class for good. Dave tried to pull the same trick before the last election and we never got the referendum. And as some wise chap said, why wait, why can't we have it now? As for renegociation, we have been doing that since 1973 with no improvement. All three main parties are Bilderberger stooges pledged to one world government so nothing will change. They will rig the referendum in any case, as they did last time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The response to Cameron's promised referendum was a switch of 4% from Ukip to the Tories, That shows how soft the support for Ukip is. Farage's reaction has been to change tactics and to go after the English Democrats natural constituency - the northern working class, and away from Ukip's traditional supporters, the southern "blue rinse" brigade. His new strategy is doomed to failure.

      Delete
    2. I think this switch just shows how easily conned these stupid people are to believe anything that slippery Dave promises them. As for UKIP taking votes away from Labour, I think this might be what they did in Rotheram and on tv the other night they said that this is something that is becoming more and more commone. After all, finally the pin a red rosette Labour supporters might be getting the message that none of the three main parties really gives a monkey's about them and would quite happily replace them with foreigners as long as they vote for them. This is especially true of New Labour.

      Delete
  3. Well done with this complaint.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well done Robin.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I find continual references to "Global Marxism" and such, somewhat tiresome. The concern raised by the blog entry above, is the ease with which newspapers and others can use expessions such as "Nazi", "Fascist", "Far-Right", and "Extremist" to label parties such as ours without bothering to do any research as to whether such labels are appropriate; and to do so with impunity.
    The chap from the P.C.C. did bother, but only on receipt of a complaint, and discovered, (surprise, surprise!) that, with regard to the English Democrats, these slurs are wholly inappropriate.
    So thankfully, in the case of the Sunday Times, a retraction (albeit a begrudging one,) was secured. But this was after the damage had been done.
    A national newspaper described our candidate in the (fairly) recent Salford by-election as being from the "far-right" English Democrats. (Did that influence the result? We shall never know!)
    We have read in this blog that there can be no redress for a slandered or libelled political party. That needs to change.
    Clive,
    Weston-super-Mare.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry if you find references to global Marxism tiresome but when Pravda describes Obama as communist i.e. Marxist then what else are we meant to think? Surely the Russians of all people who had Marxism imposed on them in 1917 should recognise a Marxist if they see one. And if what has happened seems to accord with the aims set out by the Frankfurt School in 1928 is this merely a coincidence? And if David Milliband's father was a Marxist theorist who is buried next to Karl Marx then should we give his sons the benefit of the doubt when they have been brought up in a household steepend in Marxism? If not Marxist do you just prefer the term left-wing?

      Delete
    2. Just not sure what relevance this has to the subject-matter at hand.
      Clive.

      Delete
    3. But Marxism, like its twin International Capitalism, is a global conspiracy against nations and nationalism. The English hating media are unlikely to stop slurring the English Democrats with terms like Fascist, Nazi, Far-Right and Extremist if people drop "tiresome" references to Global Marxism and Inernational Capitalism, as Clive would like. Don't self censor in the face of politically correct bullying.

      Delete
    4. It seems the politically correct fascist thought police now want Leicester City Council to apologise for taking out adverts in 1972 advising Uganda Asians not to go to Leceister.

      Delete
    5. Sorry, I just can't take any more!! Funnily enough I referred to Leicester City Council's 1972 action the other day when I was told that the British government is proposing advertising in the press in Bulgaria and Romania asking their people not to come to Britain at the end of this year. Perhaps they will say it's not all it's cracked up to be you know. Try telling that to the Roma who like Fagin and his boys will be honing their pickpocketing skills in anticipation and attending evening classes in begging.

      Basically, as I have said before, I do not hate those who have flooded into the promised lands of Western Europe in the last 50 plus years; who can blame them one the traiterous political and business elite flung open the front door. The thing that annoys me is the attitude like that of those Uganda Asians who overburned Leicester City Council, which completely ignores or treats with contempt the feelings of the indigenous population whom they are forcing to flee areas where their families might have lived for hundreds if not over a thousand years.

      To put it crudely, the whole process is less like immigration than like the opening day of the New Year Sales with them all rushing in to grab whatever they can. But then England now is like a rotting corpse compared to its former self with not only immigrants but indigenous greed merchants and politicians picking at her entrails.

      By the way, no wonder Keith Vaz always has that arrogant smirk on his face. He once said he intended making Leicester an Asian colony. I am sure they will dig up some octagenarian who was on the Council in 1972 and get him to go and grovel at Keithie's feet. Yes, Enoch, you were right on the whip hand business.

      Delete
    6. To the "twins" of international Marxism and international Capitalism as forces seeking to destroy the nations can be added Islamism.

      Delete
    7. There are those who believe that, just as the third world has been brought to Europe and North America to bring them down, Islam is being used in a similar fashion and is their most virulent weapon. Look how Red Ken and Gorgeous George Galloway are sucking up to them.

      It is certainly being used to this end on the Continent and in Scandinavia by the Left and now, thanks to Teddy Kennedy opening the door wide in 1965 is making great inroads in the USA. A mystery is that the majority of Jews vote Democrat there, even though the Democrats with their muslim president are behind islamification and the muslims are driving Jews out of large areas in Europe. They are the new anti-semites. Methinks the Jews believe they can somehow ride out the storm and will be top dogs once multiculturalism has done for whites.

      Have just discovered you need Spanish to get a job in the USA now as 25% of the population, just a proportion of the Hispanics, refuse to speak English.

      Delete
  6. The leftist media are always going to stigmatise as 'extreme' 'Nazi' 'fascist' etc, those nationalist parties such as the BNP and BDP who exhibit a 'right' wing and reactionary sentiment to some of their policies and ideas.

    The mainstream media in western countries does though appear to have more difficulty and be less able to stigmatise the nationalist parties such as the French 'Front National' which emphasise those nationalist policies which the general public see as 'left' wing and populist in principle.
    The anti-capitalist Front National (which gained almost 20% of the vote in the French general election) supports many policies which the general public would automatically identify as being 'left' wing ideas. The Front National emphasises its support for such policies as the 'protectionism' of French manufacturing, nationalisation of utilities, public transport, health etc, support of the welfare state, concurs with international consensus that climate change is man made, support of green initiatives, etc. In this way the Front National can openly say that it speaks up for the French people and their interests and the media is not able to denounce them as 'extremist' 'racist' etc. so surely this is the direction forward in order for nationalist parties in Britain to progress.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From what I have read of the policies of the BNP a lot of them seem to be Old Labour and much like those of the Front National and yet it does not stop them being dismissed as right wing or extremist. The BNP are far from getting the support that Marine Le Pen has with a media as hostile as that in France.

      A letter in the local paper touching on the Bilderbergers suggested people look them up on the web. Ignoring the official Wikipedia definition I came across a book on them by Daniel Estulin. Reading the description I would say we might as well all pack up shop and go home. I thought that the North American Union was an idea in my head but it seems moves are well advanced to bring it about and presumably merge it with the EU as a further step towards world government. The only thing to cheer us is that the engineered financial crisis is, according to Estulin, turning into a house of cards caught in a draft and they are losing control of the world with the prospect of the house of cards collapsing. If only. Read elsewhere that Obama's campaign was financed by Goldman-Sachs. But enough of these conspiracy theories!!

      Delete
    2. The BNP and the Front National's policies are very similar but I feel that the BNP's somewhat reactionary appearance particularly with regard to its own website output e.g. constant muslim/islam bashing, etc. means the media have no problems in making the 'extremist' tag of the BNP stick.
      Whilst the 'far right', 'extremist' etc slurs will inevitably continue to come from the faux left liberal biased media establishment,, those moderate, non reactionary parties such as the English Democrats and the Front National will be able to defend themselves against these tags and the public will see past the slurs in any case.

      Strange how it is seemingly unimaginable that the biased media would ever describe the Scottish National Party (SNP) as 'far right', 'extremist' etc. Oh no sorry,, I forgot lol,,, a faux left 'social democratic', internationalist, pro-EU, pro globalisation supporting nationalist party would never be subject to such a slur.

      Delete
  7. Russia Today has just carried a piece about the British government's attempts to stem the immigrant tide in respect of Russia and Bulgaria by placing "It's not such a great place" adverts in the papers in those countries.

    It pointed out that when the Labour government opened the doors to Poland it ended up with 600,000 rather than the expected 15,000 New Labour promised so that Polish is now our second language. I think New Labour knew exactly what they were doing personally, all part of their rainbow diversification process so that all European countries end up like South Africa.

    RT also pointed out that we have a housing crisis, a hospitals crisis and a schools crisis and showed pictures of large numbers of New Britons. Unfortunately, the optimum population of this country is 30m not 80m and I think you have left it a bit late chaps. In connection with the burning body in Blackpool, comments on yahoo, apart from pointing to a possible exotic extraction for the purpetrators, included one from somebody who presumably has fled South Africa. He said that England today is like the crime-ridden ghettoes of his native Cape Town. So don't come here, our politicians of the last 60 years have turned it into a third world dump. As for France, time is running out, they will have an African and Muslim majority by 2050 and Marine Le Pen has talked of anti-white racism, not sure if that is reactionary or not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course,, it is not reactionary for Marine Le Pen to talk of anti-white racism, she is making a statement of fact.
      Although I have reservations about some of the Front National's policies such as them being pro big government, wanting more government spending to counter austerity and their pro welfare state stance, I think that they are heading in the right direction with the majority of their policies with the key thing being that they are seen by the public as moderate and not extreme.

      Ironic, how the Russians can see the negative consequences of the globalist ideas which originate from their own country but western countries are continuing to proceed towards the destruction of their own civilisation.

      Delete
    2. Their own country but not their own people.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous stated that: "Marine Le Pen has talked of anti-white racism, not sure if that is reactionary or not."

      I earlier said that this was a statement of fact, which it may (or may not) be but on reflection I think it probably would be better for Marine Le Pen to steer clear of such loaded statements.

      I wonder if the PCC has made the amendment yet, that the Sunday Times had breached the terms of Clauses 1, 2 and 12,??

      Delete
    4. Here I go again with the Zagorsk Prophecy of 1911 made at the monastery of that name near Moscow. It foresaw the coming of Marxism and its spread across the world. It said that Marxism was a spirit from hell which had nothing to do with the Russian people and would be imposed on them. Given the choice the peasantry would probably have still opted for the little father of all the Russias that was the Tsar.

      From all I have read, the Revolution of 1917 was not the Russian Revolution but the Revolution imposed on Russia just as the same Revolution that brought down the Tsar and ultimately the Kaiser is the Revolution which has almost succeeded in destroying Europeans and their Christian Civilisation.

      But the prophecy, which predicted Germany being divided in two as a result of the Nazi backlash against communism and the collapse of America - now imminent - also stated that Russia would save the world from Marxism and rechristianise the world. Some say they may do this in conjunction with China where Christianity is expanding rapidly. China as Russia now regards itself as being post-Marxist.

      We now hear from America that one of its states - Tennessee I think - has agreed that the wearing of hidden weapons in churches can be allowed. We have to ask why this should be deemed necessary? Could it be that with a muslim president who is encouraging the islamification of America also, WASPs fear that they might be the victims of those who are massacring Christians throughout North Africa, Pakistan and elsewhere. Islam is Marxism's great weapon in the battle against the Christian West. We face the chilling prospect of terrorist attacks on churches in North America and a subsequent shoot-out.

      Delete
    5. Obama a muslim? bullshit.

      Delete
  8. Vladimir Bukovsky, 70, is one of the most famous ex-political prisoners of the former Soviet Union. He spent a total of twelve years of internment, including prisons, labour camps and psychiatric hospitals, before being ejected and swapped for the Chilean prisoner Luis Corvalan in 1976. Since then he has lived in Cambridge, and took British citizenship.

    Mr. Bukovsky, at least since 2000 you have been saying that the European Union is the exact copy of the Soviet Union. Aspects in common highlighted by you include the new Europe’s structure itself: a union of republics with a socialist structure, run by a handful of unelected people who make typical Bolshevik promises — equality, fairness and justice — and do not recognize nations, but only citizens of a new people, with “European” instead of “Soviet”. In common, in addition, the two unions have the typical corruption of a socialist republic, a corruption organized from the top, aggressiveness towards the outside and even gulags inside. Many years later, are the events proving you right?

    You forgot the similarity in the way they started. How was the USSR created? Of course, by military force, but also by forcing the republics to join through financial threat, making them economically fearful. So there we are.

    But we are still at the beginning, at the first stage. The ultimate goal of all unions that have been built so far does not end with the submission to the control of Brussels, but it goes further. The target is the building of a single state, under one world government, with a single law, a single pension…


    ReplyDelete
  9. I think the jury is out on that one. He was financed through Harvard Law School by the Saudis. He was brought up a muslim in Indonesia by his father. Islam does not allow for apostasy. I don't think it is bullshit but it is a possibility but not one he would be open about, no more than being open about not being born in America.

    ReplyDelete