UERSS: The Council of Europe requires of the United Kingdom the dissolution of the B.N.P.!

Translation of:
http://www.nationspresse.info/?p=79540 by Babelfish: http://babelfish.yahoo.com/

According to an official report published on March 2, 2010 by the European commission against racism and intolerance (sic), the Council of Europe requires of the United Kingdom the dissolution of British National Party (BNP).

It is about an obvious illustration of the totalitarianism europeist whose political persecutions are connected more and more with those into force in the late USSR. Servile servants of the New americanized World Order, the euro-mondialistes stateless people are likely to use all the possible subterfuges in order to destroy the Resistant ones attached to the State-Nations and the enracinées identities. The United Kingdom: Towards a dissolution of BNP on order of the euro-mondialistes?

According to a public report/ratio distributed in the afternoon of March 2, 2010 by the European commission against racism and intolerance (ECRI), the Council of Europe requires of the United Kingdom a dissolution of British National Party (BNP). Under the terms of a terminology worn down into force in the dispensaries be-saying antiracists, the United Kingdom is summoned “to take measures to cure the exploitation of racism in policy”.

This Commission europeist rests on one of its recommendations of general policy stipulating that “the law must envisage the possibility of dissolving organizations which promote racism”. It is about a news and scandalous totalitarian interference of a body europeist in the interior matters of a sovereign nation. The ECRI is composed members named in each of the 47 countries of the Council of Europe which includes islamo-preserving Turkey.

For the euro-mondialistes stateless people of Brussels, any political opposition with the massive immigration-Islamization of the Third world must be banished and reduced with silence, initially in the United Kingdom then in each nation member of the EU of the 27. Once again, national preference (British jobs for British workers) legitimates it is scandalously amalgamated with an alleged racism. The vocabulary, the semantics and the rhetoric of be-saying antiracists europeists are skewed, canted and trapped. The aggressive ethno-communautarism and the virulent Islamism, which progress daily and gangrènent the British company, do not seem to worry the pharisees funkers and friqués of this Commission liberticide. Adversary relentless of all the forms of sovereignty and rooting, the European Union (EU) is only one footboard towards the New World Order.

Why this eagerness against National British Party? For several years, BNP has recorded a growing popularity at the time of local and/or partial polls (communes, districts and counties). Nations Presse Information devoted some articles to the remarkable electoral performances of BNP in rural areas relatively saved by the pangs of the immigration-Islamization of the Third world, in the old industrial bastions disaster victims by the ceaseless delocalizations, the structural unemployment and an inescapable economic turning into a desert and finally in the large urban metropolises devastated by the aggressive ethno-communutarism and virulent Islamism.

At the time of the organized municipal elections of London on May 1, 2008, the list of BNP taken along by dynamics Richard Barnbrook crosses the fateful threshold of 5% (5,33% and 130.714 votes) what enabled him to take down thanks to the poll proportional one of the eleven municipal seats of the London metropolis (Great London Assembly). The comfortable election of Richard Barnbrook caused a true electric shock within the British politico-media Establishment.

The elections comtales and European were organized on Thursday June 4, 2009. At the time of the poll comtal, BNP gained for the first time three seats. Sharon Wilkinson was elected with 1.155 votes in at one time industrial district of Padiham & Burnley West (county of Lancashire, the North-West). Graham Partner was elected with 1.039 votes in the district of the old mining bastion of Coalville (county of Leicestershire, the Midlands of the East). At the time of a first candidature, Deirdre Gates was elected with 783 votes in the semi-rural district of South Oxhey bordering on Large London (county of Hertfordshire, Is).

Although BNP took down only the sixth place at the time of the European poll, it obtained for the first time two eurodéputés (6,26% and 943.598 votes). With 8% (132.194 votes), the owner of BNP Nick Griffin became one of the eight eurodéputés of the North-West. With 9,80% (120.139 votes), the reprocessed academic Andrew Brons became one of the six eurodéputés of Yorkshire & Humberside. In spite of the heinous and nauseous campaigns of be-saying antifacists, the election of two eurodéputés of BNP was a formidable snook vis-a-vis the British politicians of the System and with the eurocrats stateless people of Brussels. Using 10% their monthly allowances, Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons reflect in place of the funds intended to support various valid causes in their respective euro-districts. The serene and increasing dediabolisation of BNP near many British voters of the North-West and Yorkshire & Humberside undoubtedly frightens the totalitarian europeists, worthy heirs to the most coercive political regimes of the XXe century.

The concrete initiative of six eurodéputés French and Hungarian supported the birth at the end of October 2009 of the Alliance of the European National movements (AMNE) from which the statutes aim at protecting “Europe from the religious imperialism, political, economic and financial”. Although they did not obtain any seat in the European Parliament, the Swedish National-Democrats, Belgian Front National and Fiamma Tricolore (Italy) take part in the AMNE and express their determination to fight against “the euro-mondialisme and the decline”.

Whereas BNP integrated this alliance intended to defend the concept of State-Nations vis-a-vis the road roller of the mondialism stateless person, the FPÖ (Austria) as well as Spanish representatives (MSR) and Portuguese could join it soon. Nations Presse Information evoked at the time of three articles this saving initiative which strongly irritated the lobbies europeists and atlanto-mondialists (1, 2,3). The official site of BNP wrote even a long article devoted to with the genesis of the AMNE.


COMMENTS:

Comment by CharlesM on March 3, 2010 @ 19:36
The Council of Europe is worst organizations mondialists, fortunately it does not have any real capacity.!! they are nevertheless the European nations (extended to others) which pay the members of them grassement to vote with length of year of motions of this kind. It is necessary to dissolve this thing worse than UNO!

Comment by L' Eaglet on March 3, 2010 @ 19:57
it is all the EU who should be dissolved, earliest will be best, for our Public Safety! to see the analysis of Vladimir Bukovsky:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bM2Ql3wOGcU
It is eloquent!

Comment by Pierre on March 3, 2010 @ 20:09
Exactly this thing should be dissolved there. That takes the way of it. See the article Why Greece will leave the Euro; There is not any doubt that Greece will leave the euro shortly. The solutions which could make it possible to maintain it there all are excluded. The first would be that Europe guarantees the Greek debt of State which thus would become a debt of all Europe. The payment of the euro does not allow it and that for obvious reasons: the precedent would be unacceptable. Greece did not ask for Europe the permission of make deficits, quite to the contrary, it made a part in its back of it. If each country could thus draw from the accounts - cheques on the European unit, one would go quickly to generalized laxism. And besides even if this dealt with were possible, the German opinion would not allow it knowing that at the end, it is L `Germany which should pay. See the continuation it is instructive:
http://www.marianne2.fr/Pourquoi-la-Grece-sortira-de-l-Euro_a189634.html?com

Comment by fredx on March 3, 2010 @ 21:14
Supports total at BNP, today BNP, tomorrow the FN?

Comment by JCL31 on March 3, 2010 @ 22:23
@fredx Exactly, if the regional elections are used as clamp in Front National to climb towards the presidential ones, it will occur the same thing. If it were the case, I think that we would have the support of the population because it will become aware in its majority of the organized treason of which it is victim.

Read More

How 'out of touch' can the Tories get?

The Conservatives are so out of touch with the electorate.

Take this example:

"The Conservative Party in United Kingdom has endorsed a Ugandan, Mr Richard Ssemitego, to contest on the party’s ticket in the Eastbury councillorship race in Barking and Dagenham.

Mr Ssemitego’s candidature was announced last week at Bangladeshi Women Association Community Hall in Barking at a function attended by London Mayor, Mr Boris Johnson.

“The most frequent question I am being asked on my campaign trail is about immigration. English people are tired of emigrants in their country and they demand my party’s policy about immigration and yet I am one of them, it is a bit tricky to answer,” he told Daily Monitor on telephone from London yesterday.

Tight race
Mr Ssemitego,35 will tussle it out with the incumbent McDermott James Edward of the Labour Party, Mr Jeffrey Steed of the British National Party, Ms Challis Dianne Patricia, of the Liberal Democrat Party and Mr Mcllroy Ashley of the UK Independent Party.

In the 2006 elections, Mr McDermott garnered 965 votes in a race that attracted 11 contenders. Mr Ssemitego is currently a Project Manager with Residential Redrich Community Housing Limited in Ilford.

He was a campaigning manager for Vice President Prof. Gilbert Bukenya in Masuliita town in the 2006 Parliamentary elections.

Elections are slated for May 6 in all London Borough and local authorities. Fifty one councillors form Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council."

see the original article here:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/-/688334/866386/-/wilkoq/-/

So it seems the Tory  “Action Plan for Candidate Selection in Safe Seats” is operating at full steam, I wouldnt call Barking and Dagenham a safe seat now.

Read More

Action Plan for Candidate Selection in Safe Seats

Conservatives plans to trick its grassroots activists into accepting ethnic candidates

The Conservative Party leadership has deliberately “tricked” — using that word — its grassroots activists into accepting ethnic candidates as part of a plan to force the Tories to mongrelise into a party dominated by Third World immigrants, a leaked strategy paper has revealed.

Entitled “Action Plan for Candidate Selection in Safe Seats,” the six page document was drawn up in secret by Tory schools spokesman Michael Gove, one of David Cameron’s inner circle, and Dean Godson, a director of the Policy Exchange think tank.

The document says that “stealth” will have to be used to bring in ethnic candidates and stressing the importance of keeping “quiet” over the plans to actively discriminate against white males.

“Like a conjuror, we’ll get more applause if the audience cannot see exactly how the trick is performed,” the shocking document says.

The paper calls for white males to be put to the bottom of any candidate list despite openly admitting that there is no merit-related justification for the vicious anti-white racism.

“Most of the talented candidates on the list are white and male,” the paper says.

“The principal reason such people get selected for safe seats is because they tend to be the best on offer.”

The paper goes on to detail how the grassroots Tories are going to be tricked.

“The party has little direct leverage over associations, consisting of volunteers who guard their local autonomy jealously and value their ability to choose future MPs. Nevertheless not only can objections be overcome, they MUST be overcome,” the paper says, putting the word ‘must’ in capital letters.

“The clever approach is to maintain the illusion that a good cross-section of approved candidates is being offered.

“There are several reasons why the Party should not publicly proclaim the new methodology.

“The more that the profusion of women, black, Asian or gay candidates appears to be the result of spontaneous open-mindedness on the part of grassroots activists the greater will be the accolades.

“Most Tories loathe political correctness and positive discrimination. If one tries to be ‘in your face’ about the fact that positive discrimination is taking place activists are much more likely to rebel; a version of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’, is called for.

“Yet another factor that should persuade us to do our good work by stealth is the fact our opponents don’t believe we have got a cat in hell’s chance of passing their test [for the selection of candidates]. It would be counterproductive to tip them off.”

Read More

Even the aliens are confused!

Read More

Labour's 'secret plan' to lure migrants

The release of a previously unseen document suggested that Labour’s migration policy over the past decade had been aimed not just at meeting the country’s economic needs, but also the Government’s “social objectives”.

The paper said migration would “enhance economic growth” and made clear that trying to halt or reverse it could be “economically damaging”. But it also stated that immigration had general “benefits” and that a new policy framework was needed to “maximise” the contribution of migration to the Government’s wider social aims.

The Government has always denied that social engineering played a part in its migration policy.
However, the paper, which was written in 2000 at a time when immigration began to increase dramatically, said controls were contrary to its policy objectives and could lead to “social exclusion”.

Last night, the Conservatives demanded an independent inquiry into the issue. It was alleged that the document showed that Labour had overseen a deliberate open-door ­policy on immigration to boost multi-culturalism.

Voting trends indicate that migrants and their descendants are much more likely to vote Labour.
The existence of the draft policy paper, which was drawn up by a Cabinet Office think tank and a Home Office research unit, was disclosed last year by Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

He alleged at the time that the sharp increase in immigration over the past 10 years was partly due to a “driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multi-cultural”.

However, the full document was made public only yesterday following a Freedom of Information request by Migrationwatch, a pressure group. A version of the paper was published in 2001, but most of the references to “social objectives” had been removed. In the executive summary alone, six out of eight uses of the phrase were deleted.

Labour has overseen an unprecedented rise in immigration, which has led to a rise of about three million in the UK population since 1997. Until recently, it accused opponents who called for tougher controls of playing the “race card”. Labour was forced to change its rhetoric amid concerns that the economic and social reality of immigration had alienated voters in its heartlands.

Gordon Brown pledged to secure “British jobs for British workers” as the recession led to a rise in unemployment and, just four months ago, he was accused of a U-turn when he insisted that it was “not racist” to discuss the issue.

The document released yesterday suggested that Labour originally pursued a different direction. It was published under the title “Migration: an economic and social analysis” but the removal of significant extracts suggested that officials or ministers were nervous over references to “social objectives”.

The original paper called for the need of a new framework for thinking about migration policy but the concluding phrase — “if we are to maximise the contribution of migration to the Government’s economic and social objectives” — was edited out.

Another deleted phrase suggested that it was “correct that the Government has both economic and social objectives for migration policy”.
Sir Andrew Green, the chairman of Migrationwatch, said the document showed that Mr Neather, who claimed ministers wanted to radically change the country and “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”, had been correct in his account of Labour’s immigration policy.

“Labour had a political agenda which they sought to conceal for initiating mass immigration to Britain,“ he said. “Why else would they be so anxious to remove any mention of social aspects?
“Only now that their working-class supporters are deserting them in droves have they started to talk about restricting immigration.”

Damian Green, the shadow immigration minister, accused the Government of having a secret policy. “This shows that Labour’s open-door immigration policy was deliberate, and ministers should apologise,” he said. “This makes it all the more important that there is a proper independent inquiry in the origins of this policy and whether ministers have been deceiving people.”

Jack Straw, who was home secretary when the paper was drawn up, has adamantly denied any secret plot and insisted that he had been tough on immigration.
Phil Woolas, the Immigration Minister, said the policy changes introduced in the 1997-2001 Parliament toughened immigration rules.

“The reports confirm there is no evidence to back the idea there was an open-door policy,” he said. “The Government was criticised at the time for tightening the policy.”
Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, will announce today moves to make it harder to earn citizenship.

Original article published by telegraph.co.uk

Read More