[Andy]

The minority preferential treatment organization run by black man Trevor Wanker Phillips is still hoping to silence the voice of white British resistance to mass immigration.

Living by the policy of remove their political voice and everything is OK, Wanker Phillips after getting the BNP to change its membership criteria is now trying to close it down through the law of 'indirect discrimination'.

This basically is where a black man and a white man have the same opportunity but the black man by being a minority is actually receiveing less preferential treatment?

So a black man can join the BNP but because BNP policies are aimed at discrimination against the white British the black man wont receive the same treatment.

So what about all the preferential treatment of the black organizations?

Wanker Phillips ought to swing from a lampost along with Gordon Brown and David Cameron.

All are leading the assault on the Englisc culture and nation.



The BNP's new membership rules "indirectly" discriminate against black and Asian people, the UK equalities watchdog has told a court hearing.

The BNP has voted to admit non-white members but still requires them to sign up to its principles, the Central London County Court was told.

A judge will rule on Friday whether the new rules contravene race laws.

The BNP, which voted on the new rules last month, denies its planned new constitution is discriminatory.

Party members backed changes to its constitution to allow "non-indigenous Britons" to join, after the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) took legal action.

'Disadvantage'

The court heard that prospective members had to sign up to principles including a duty to oppose the promotion of any form of "integration or assimilation" that impacted on the "indigenous British", and a requirement to support the "maintenance and existence of the unity and integrity of the indigenous British".

Robin Allen, QC, representing the EHRC, said: "That is something which we would submit is indirectly discriminatory.

"They will put persons who do not fall into the indigenous British category at a disadvantage."

He argued the principles could be interpreted to oppose mixed marriages and could force people to deny their own identity.

Mr Allen said: "We simply say from the commission's point of view we are statutorily obliged to encourage diversity and recognise diversity as part of the British state in its widest sense.

"We're indifferent as to the expression of views as long as they are lawful. It's the condition of access that we take exception to."

'Welcome'

The new, 12th, version of the BNP constitution states that members have to agree to two party officials - one male and one female - visiting their home for up to two hours, the court heard.

Mr Allen said this could be used to enable potential members to be intimidated, although there was no evidence it had been used in that way.

But Gwynn Price Rowlands, for the BNP, told the court there were "significant numbers" of members who were mixed race or in mixed marriages, along with "several" Jewish members.

He said: "They (the BNP) make it clear that they would welcome more applications from ethnic minorities."

Mr Rowlands told the court he "could not understand" how a black or Asian person supporting the concept of British nationalism could be discriminatory.

He added that the BNP was "simply putting their principles forward and allowing any ethnic minority member to join and support and espouse those principles".

Judge Paul Collins said he would issue his judgement on the issue on Friday.
The malicious court case against the British National Party over its membership rules has been postponed for final judgement to Friday after the presiding judge threw out two thirds of the Equalities and Human Rights Commissions’ case today.

“The EHRC’s argument was in two sections,” said BNP leader Nick Griffin MEP.

“The first was that the new constitution was not in force because the BNP had not followed the correct procedures in setting it up.

“The judge has decisively rejected that and ruled that the BNP’s new constitution is valid and has been constituted in a correct and legal manner,” Mr Griffin said.

“The only remaining part upon which the judge still has to decide is the EHRC’s allegation that the BNP’s new constitution constitutes a form of indirect discrimination. He will give his opinion at 10:30 on Friday morning.”

Mr Griffin said the EHRC’s argument was based on an attempt to use the word “policies” in the Act to mean to refer to aims and objectives of any party or group, rather than about application and recruitment policies.

“The EHRC of course claims otherwise, but it is patently obvious this is what they are trying to do,” he said.

“If their argument was followed through, it would open up a can of worms which would be absolutely absurd.

“It would mean, for example, that a party which stood for abortion on demand could be accused of discriminating against Catholics, or vegetarian parties could be accused of discriminating against meat eaters,” Mr Griffin said.

“This would set a terrible precedent and we would hope that the judge would not go down this road.

“It is a very promising sign that judge has already seen fit to strike down most of the EHRC’s pathetic arguments over procedural issues. We would hope that this consistency and logic is followed through on Friday.”

Mr Griffin added that the BNP’s new constitution has empowered him to make any changes if so ordered by the court without having to go through an extended procedure once again.

“As a result, I intend to end this waste of time, money and blatant political persecution one way or another on Friday,” Mr Griffin concluded.

Does the Wanker Phillips really think that denying the English a say in protecting their identiy, culture and nation will make multi culturism suddenly work?
Does he think that a black man leading a black organization attacking a white organization is going to make the white community consider him defending the British equally or will they think him destroying their rights in preference of black rights.

When those members and voters of the BNP have no voice in politics and no party with whome to speak for them does this wanker think that we will just step aside while mass immigration and erosion of our culture continues.

Wanker Phillips

[Vixous Vixen]

Years ago I had alot of respect for TP as a journalist, I found him fair,balanced & concise. I dont know when he chaged but this new robot in place is a clown with power, a dangerous combination. Hes become as militant as old Red Ken and his left wing policies. As Ive said before I cant use names for anyone its just not me, Im not made that way. I cant see colour or creed ( except the nazi in the vatican) but I do have a problem with my heritage being drowned in positive discrimination. Im English and proud of it and yet Im constantly being told by ~TP and his cronies to be ashamed of it and everyone else should look down on me as Im a lower life form. Every man woman and child on this earth is created equally, and no one is better than me & Im no better than them & I wont have some jumped up former Journo tell me that they are. The positive discrimination laws are wiping everything I know from the map and replacing it with crap legislation that frankly is absurd and makes little sense. Im in an even bigger dilemma because who do I vote for in May, everything in my being screams no to the BNP and I will not vote for Larry Curly or Moe so who has my voice !!

[Andy]

Vixous Vixen, on 10 March 2010 - 11:01 PM, said:

Years ago I had alot of respect for TP as a journalist, I found him fair,balanced & concise. I dont know when he chaged but this new robot in place is a clown with power, a dangerous combination. Hes become as militant as old Red Ken and his left wing policies. As Ive said before I cant use names for anyone its just not me, Im not made that way. I cant see colour or creed ( except the nazi in the vatican) but I do have a problem with my heritage being drowned in positive discrimination. Im English and proud of it and yet Im constantly being told by ~TP and his cronies to be ashamed of it and everyone else should look down on me as Im a lower life form. Every man woman and child on this earth is created equally, and no one is better than me & Im no better than them & I wont have some jumped up former Journo tell me that they are. The positive discrimination laws are wiping everything I know from the map and replacing it with crap legislation that frankly is absurd and makes little sense. Im in an even bigger dilemma because who do I vote for in May, everything in my being screams no to the BNP and I will not vote for Larry Curly or Moe so who has my voice !!

Awkward isnt it. I have dozens of asian friends, most know my views, one is helping me with my appeal against discrimination by my employer.

I dont have a problem with anyone because of colour or ethnicity.

Where I have a problem is with;
mass immigration,
erosion of my history and culture because i am a member of the majority racial group.
Positive discrimination for minority groups


Many on here, myself included, vote the BNP as the only voice that is speaking out for our group.

The BNP are British and in their own way still treat the English less preferentially then the Scots and Welsh.
But they are the best of a very bad bunch in my opinion.

Wodens Child wont vote for them because they are printing a book supporting the bull about the Anglo Saxons being a minority racial group who had no effect on our British DNA.
They dont appear to make the same assumption in respect to the Scotti who sailed to Norhtern Britain and became the Scots.

We are all just waiting on an ethnic English political party to take advantage of the discriminatory practices against us and begin a perty for we English.

We nearly had one a few month ago but it turned out to be a civic English party. Another let down.

Trevor Phillips wants to promote civic (Anyone is English) Englisc because that erodes our ethnic group and those black and asian English/whatevers will, when English identity is erased always have their ethnic identity to fall back upon, I am English and that is all, so when English no longer exists who am I?

[Yorkie King]

Andy, on 10 March 2010 - 10:40 PM, said:

The minority preferential treatment organization run by black man Trevor Wanker Phillips is still hoping to silence the voice of white British resistance to mass immigration.

Living by the policy of remove their political voice and everything is OK, Wanker Phillips after getting the BNP to change its membership criteria is now trying to close it down through the law of 'indirect discrimination'.

This basically is where a black man and a white man have the same opportunity but the black man by being a minority is actually receiveing less preferential treatment?

So a black man can join the BNP but because BNP policies are aimed at discrimination against the white British the black man wont receive the same treatment.

So what about all the preferential treatment of the black organizations?

Wanker Phillips ought to swing from a lampost along with Gordon Brown and David Cameron.

All are leading the assault on the Englisc culture and nation.



The BNP's new membership rules "indirectly" discriminate against black and Asian people, the UK equalities watchdog has told a court hearing.

The BNP has voted to admit non-white members but still requires them to sign up to its principles, the Central London County Court was told.

A judge will rule on Friday whether the new rules contravene race laws.

The BNP, which voted on the new rules last month, denies its planned new constitution is discriminatory.

Party members backed changes to its constitution to allow "non-indigenous Britons" to join, after the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) took legal action.

'Disadvantage'

The court heard that prospective members had to sign up to principles including a duty to oppose the promotion of any form of "integration or assimilation" that impacted on the "indigenous British", and a requirement to support the "maintenance and existence of the unity and integrity of the indigenous British".

Robin Allen, QC, representing the EHRC, said: "That is something which we would submit is indirectly discriminatory.

"They will put persons who do not fall into the indigenous British category at a disadvantage."

He argued the principles could be interpreted to oppose mixed marriages and could force people to deny their own identity.

Mr Allen said: "We simply say from the commission's point of view we are statutorily obliged to encourage diversity and recognise diversity as part of the British state in its widest sense.

"We're indifferent as to the expression of views as long as they are lawful. It's the condition of access that we take exception to."

'Welcome'

The new, 12th, version of the BNP constitution states that members have to agree to two party officials - one male and one female - visiting their home for up to two hours, the court heard.

Mr Allen said this could be used to enable potential members to be intimidated, although there was no evidence it had been used in that way.

But Gwynn Price Rowlands, for the BNP, told the court there were "significant numbers" of members who were mixed race or in mixed marriages, along with "several" Jewish members.

He said: "They (the BNP) make it clear that they would welcome more applications from ethnic minorities."

Mr Rowlands told the court he "could not understand" how a black or Asian person supporting the concept of British nationalism could be discriminatory.

He added that the BNP was "simply putting their principles forward and allowing any ethnic minority member to join and support and espouse those principles".

Judge Paul Collins said he would issue his judgement on the issue on Friday.
The malicious court case against the British National Party over its membership rules has been postponed for final judgement to Friday after the presiding judge threw out two thirds of the Equalities and Human Rights Commissions' case today.

"The EHRC's argument was in two sections," said BNP leader Nick Griffin MEP.

"The first was that the new constitution was not in force because the BNP had not followed the correct procedures in setting it up.

"The judge has decisively rejected that and ruled that the BNP's new constitution is valid and has been constituted in a correct and legal manner," Mr Griffin said.

"The only remaining part upon which the judge still has to decide is the EHRC's allegation that the BNP's new constitution constitutes a form of indirect discrimination. He will give his opinion at 10:30 on Friday morning."

Mr Griffin said the EHRC's argument was based on an attempt to use the word "policies" in the Act to mean to refer to aims and objectives of any party or group, rather than about application and recruitment policies.

"The EHRC of course claims otherwise, but it is patently obvious this is what they are trying to do," he said.

"If their argument was followed through, it would open up a can of worms which would be absolutely absurd.

"It would mean, for example, that a party which stood for abortion on demand could be accused of discriminating against Catholics, or vegetarian parties could be accused of discriminating against meat eaters," Mr Griffin said.

"This would set a terrible precedent and we would hope that the judge would not go down this road.

"It is a very promising sign that judge has already seen fit to strike down most of the EHRC's pathetic arguments over procedural issues. We would hope that this consistency and logic is followed through on Friday."

Mr Griffin added that the BNP's new constitution has empowered him to make any changes if so ordered by the court without having to go through an extended procedure once again.

"As a result, I intend to end this waste of time, money and blatant political persecution one way or another on Friday," Mr Griffin concluded.

Does the Wanker Phillips really think that denying the English a say in protecting their identiy, culture and nation will make multi culturism suddenly work?
Does he think that a black man leading a black organization attacking a white organization is going to make the white community consider him defending the British equally or will they think him destroying their rights in preference of black rights.

When those members and voters of the BNP have no voice in politics and no party with whome to speak for them does this wanker think that we will just step aside while mass immigration and erosion of our culture continues.

Wanker Phillips

Philips has sealed his fate with this idiotic attempt at closing us down,

does this Fuckwit not realise how long we have been going!

He is trying to bleed us dry and thinks that will make all his "Problems"

Go away, WRONG! We go from strength to strength as each day

passes! I have never heard the members so enthusiastic as we get

nearer to May 6th. And as you rightly say Andy, even if the party

WAS to fold, does this sub think we will all just capitulate and become

happy clappy lesbian loving dreadlock wearing yoghurt knitters?

Philips and his ilk are on the backfoot, Labour are dead in the water,

and Cameroon is using the Union Flag as his logo in some lame attempt

to confuse the floating voter! People are at last starting to see thru

the vineer of crooks and nee'r do wells like Phillips and Broon, a new

day is dawning, OUR day, our PEOPLES day, because the rest have

HAD their day!

[Steven]

BNP Press Statement: “Membership Rule” Court Case Postponed as Judge Throws Out Two Thirds of EHRC Case - From BNP Chairman Nick Griffin
The malicious court case against the British National Party over its membership rules has been postponed for final judgement to Friday after the presiding judge threw out two thirds of the Equalities and Human Rights Commissions’ case today. “The EHRC's argument was in two sections,” said BNP leader Nick Griffin MEP. “The first was that the new constitution was not in force because the BNP had not followed the correct procedures in setting it up.

“The judge has decisively rejected that and ruled that the BNP’s new constitution is valid and has been constituted in a correct and legal manner,” Mr Griffin said. “The only remaining part upon which the judge still has to decide is the EHRC’s allegation that the BNP’s new constitution constitutes a form of indirect discrimination. He will give his opinion at 10:30 on Friday morning.”

Mr Griffin said the EHRC’s argument was based on an attempt to use the word “policies” in the Act to mean to refer to aims and objectives of any party or group, rather than about application and recruitment policies.

“The EHRC of course claims otherwise, but it is patently obvious this is what they are trying to do,” he said. “If their argument was followed through, it would open up a can of worms which would be absolutely absurd. “It would mean, for example, that a party which stood for abortion on demand could be accused of discriminating against Catholics, or vegetarian parties could be accused of discriminating against meat eaters,” Mr Griffin said. “This would set a terrible precedent and we would hope that the judge would not go down this road.

“It is a very promising sign that the judge has already seen fit to strike down most of the EHRC’s pathetic arguments over procedural issues. We would hope that this consistency and logic is followed through on Friday.” Mr Griffin added that the BNP’s new constitution has empowered him to make any changes if so ordered by the court without having to go through an extended procedure once again.

“As a result, I intend to end this waste of time, money and blatant political persecution one way or another on Friday,” Mr Griffin concluded.

Steve

[Hildebeorht]

Quote

and could force people to deny their own identity.

Alright Mr. Philips, it's not like our identity is ever denied or anything .

[Alda]

I would ask Phillips if he would like salt and vinegar on that chip of his, but that would probably be too English, maybe curry sauce then?

[Andy]

Phillips is a total idiot.

Would a white woman have the same opportunity to win Miss Black Great Britain, of course not.

Therefore 'Indirect Discrimination' would occur.

A white Englisc police officer can join the Black Police Federation but the BPA is there to fight for the rights of black and minority groups as a White Englisc man he is not a minority group so would not be represented fully.

Again 'Indirect Discrimination' occurs

If Phillips tried to claim that these black organizations (Miss Black Great Britain and Black Police Federation etc) treat white Englisc equally then why do these organization exist in the first place?

Unless Phillips has evidence of racism in the Police union, Miss Great Britain, The housing federation etc etc.

[Witnere]

I am going to vote BNP, but I don't agree with everything they stand for, the biggest problem being the insistence we're all British and the nations of Great Britain are virtually only regions of the UK. I do deeply resent the EHRC harrassing a legitimately founded and democratic political party and attempting to deny it's voters an outlet. Do they think if denied a legitimate outlet we will just go away and die? This whole case could well prove another costly and embarrassing episode for the hard left. Here's hoping!

[Andy]

If we are lucky the BNP will fold and form the English Nationalist Party.

[Witnere]

Andy, on 11 March 2010 - 11:05 AM, said:

If we are lucky the BNP will fold and form the English Nationalist Party.

That would please me. Ditch the Unionist rubbish and they'd be a pretty-near perfect party for my beliefs.

[Phil]

what's happening with the EIP ? I thought they were altering their constitution to be more supportive of the Ethnic English viewpoint.

I suppose I need to go back to the EIP site and have a look don't I?

[Andy]

Phil, on 11 March 2010 - 12:48 PM, said:

what's happening with the EIP ? I thought they were altering their constitution to be more supportive of the Ethnic English viewpoint.

I suppose I need to go back to the EIP site and have a look don't I?

They are changing, for the better.

Andrew Constantine has wrote on it that its not for party leaders to defend their party on forums, which i can understand to a point.
But there is nobody going out and fighting the parties corner.

Look at what occured on our forum, we were promised an ethnic Englisc party but got 'ripped off' with a civic party.
Our suggestions were ignored.

Our concerns and accusations went unanswered and we eventually thought 'sod this'. I see bigger and better things for the BNP in the coming election and following years of deeper recession and job losses.

I want to see the BNP gain some power whilst the voice of we Englisc nationalists grow in its ranks until the BNP have to act in our favour.

The EIP had its chance I think it will follow the original EIP civic party and sink into obscurity.

[Woden's Child]

Andy, on 11 March 2010 - 12:22 AM, said:

Wodens Child wont vote for them because they are printing a book supporting the bull about the Anglo Saxons being a minority racial group who had no effect on our British DNA.
They dont appear to make the same assumption in respect to the Scotti who sailed to Norhtern Britain and became the Scots.

Exactly right, Andy. And here's why. (for sale on the BNP's Excalibur shop). This is the bollocks - and it is utter bollocks - that they believe in. They can go and fuck themselves as far as I'm concerned.




Four Flags: The Indigenous People of Britain (DNA, History and the Right to Existence of the Native Inhabitants of the British Isles.)
By Arthur Kemp
Contrary to what the liberal left Tory/Labour/Lib-Dem/UKIP-ECHR allege, the native people of the British Isles are a distinct, identifiable and homogenous indigenous people who have every right to exist and be free from invasion and domination -- like any other indigenous people on earth.

This booklet proves that the vast majority of the British people have ancestors going back to the last mini ice age more than 12,000 years ago.
Table of contents:
1. Introduction (Deals with the denial of indigenous status to the British people)
2. Indigenous People - A Definition (uses UN and other definitions)
3. Haplogroups and the Genetic Identification of Peoples (explains Y-Chromosomes, mtDNA and Autosomal DNA in detail, and how they are used in forensics and history to identify and track peoples to specific areas)
4. The Haplogroups Which Mark the Indigenous People of Britain (explains which haplogroups are indigenous to Britain)
5. A History of the Peopling of Britain (a potted history of the people who have made up Britain through settlement, i.e. Euro base population, Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes, Normans -- including figures on actual numbers of settlers and their genetic impact as measured by haplogroup)
6. Four Flags, One Nation: The right of the people of the British Isles to existence and freedom from colonisation, domination and dispossession of their lands and culture.
This booklet shows:
* Genetic evidence shows that the vast majority -- nearly 80% -- of all British people have ancestors going back to the end of the last mini ice age 12,000 years ago;
* Genetic evidence showing that the Celtic, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Viking/Danish and Norman conquests had negligible impacts upon the British people (less than 5 percent each);
* Genetic evidence showing that the Irish people have far more in common with the British than both sides of that traditional divide realise.
* The people of the British Isles have been indigenous peoples for far longer than many other nations who are already classified as "indigenous" by the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.
This booklet also shows how the indigenous people of Britain are fully protected by the United Nations Charter on Indigenous Peoples from "dispossession of their territory" through "mass population transfers" and from "forced integration and assimilation" and "destruction of their identity and culture" (all according to the United Nations.)
Even more importantly, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states that all indigenous peoples have the right to define who is part of their nation and who is not.
This is the killer booklet to destroy the final left-liberal argument against the right of Britain to be British.
Due for release early February 2010.

They even have T-shirts featuring the books' cover art!



I also notice that in their music section they have Irish folk, Scottish Folk, British folk. I sent them an E-mail, asking why isn't there an English folk music selection, suggesting that they're relabelling English folk as 'British'. Do you know the answer they gave in reply? None!

The English Independence Party are becoming a more favourable prospect by the second.

[Wombat]

A nice response with the spirit of Winston Churchill.

Quote

The British National Party’s membership line was opened for business just before 5pm today and when it closed just before 8pm, some 515 membership applications and over £14,000 had been raised, reports the party’s administrative staff.

This unprecedented rush of new applications — translating into over 170 new members per hour — seems set to continue when the membership lines reopen at 9am tomorrow morning.

The wave of support has followed the blatant political persecution of the BNP by the Labour Party-front organisation, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), which reached its climax in court today.

BNP

[Hildebeorht]

Woden, on 15 March 2010 - 11:17 AM, said:

[color="#ff0000"]* Genetic evidence showing that the Celtic, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Viking/Danish and Norman conquests had negligible impacts upon the British people (less than 5 percent each);

Earlier today I read an article by a certain Mr. Oppenheimer regarding this - and his interesting theory seems, to me, to be very unsubstancial and quite frankly ludicrous... People just love to rewrite things.

After trawling through loads 'genetic maps' (as rubbish as I think they are!) and so on, the only thing I can conclude is that we're as similar to Basques that Oppenheimer appears to love so much as we are to the Germans, French, Danish, Norwegians, Swedes and Icelanders.

It's just all so insignificant...

I think what the BNP are trying to do is put forward a strong argument against the idea that 'we're all immigrants' spouted so frequently by the left. Which in theory is a noble cause, but in practice is nothing more than dismissive of our individual national and ethnic identities. There are better ways to argue against the 'we're all immigrants' viewpoint...

[Steed]

The way I see it, and from what I understand of BNP policy, they represent the whole of Britain because it kills several birds with one stone. We're in a mess, but Wales and Scotland are in nearly as much of a mess as we. We might be distinct groups but we should be standing together to defend ourselves, and once we have succeeded we can go our separate ways again and send one another a card at Christmas . I've heard mention that the BNP actually support an English parliament. Sorry if this offends some of you, but we've got far bigger things to worry about than our membership of the UK - namely, membership of the EU and the staggering rate at which the English, Welsh and Scottish are being replaced by third world immigrants. It is not the Welsh or Scottish wanting to destroy our identity - for the most part they don't want to consider themselves English - the English Marxist traitors and immigrants do, however.

Really, I don't see what's so bad about the BNP. Let's get our priorities straight. There'll be no England left to save if we don't succeed in saving Britain first. And I suspect England will be easily reclaimed from a British Nationalist government.

[Woden's Child]

It may seem a trivial matter to some, yet the BNP don't seem to think so, as they're the ones who forever reiterate this kind of bullshit. If they think it's important to prove points about ancestry then I for one think it's important to disagree with them on the subject in the most effective way available to me. Would they backtrack on this belief of theirs if I pointed out that it'll lose them my vote? No, of course they wouldn't because it's what they believe - and if they believe it to be an important point of principle then so is mine. Others can and will vote for the BNP. If we are to vote for the BNP to bring about a positive change and it all comes to pass, then why would the voters change from the positive changes brought about by the BNP to vote for an English nationalist party, given that most English people erroneously think of themselves as British anyway? And if the BNP bugger it up should they ever gain power then how do you convince the English (and let's face it, the English are the BNP's biggest voting base because the Welsh & Scottish nationalists have their own parties) to vote again for a nationalist party?? The problem we face is that the notion of Britishness has had far too great a hold on the English psyche for far too long, therefore we have missed a trick by not forming an English nationalist party years ago. As it is we have a nationalist party that calls itself British and promotes Britishness. The words 'English' and 'England' only exist to them as mere words, the attitude being is that 'we're all British under the skin really'.

Vote for them if you wish. It's supposedly a free, democratic country so we all have the right to vote for whom we please and for whatever reason - or not vote for anyone should that be a person's choice, and for whatever reason. If the BNP win then good luck to them. I'm doubtful they'd have a candidate where I live anyway so it's all academic as far as I'm concerned. My argument is not whether anyone chooses to vote for them, but that the BNP do not entertain any notion of distinct ethnic identities beyond the use of names to differentiate between the constituent countries and their indigenous peoples. And how could they, given that they think we're all one big homogeneous melting pot of god knows who from the Ice Age onwards? I'm of the opinion that my ethnic identity started somewhere, and is the greater part of my ancestry (and no, this is nothing to do with absolute ethnic purity, which is nigh on impossible). Given the name of this forum, it's not hard to see where I think those ethnic beginnings lie. The BNP would disagree.

I'm well aware that there are people on this forum who don't agree with my not wanting to vote for the BNP for the reasons I give, and that they think there are far greater and more important things to consider. To me personally (and I emphasise personally) there is no greater thing in this matter than my ethnic identity to consider. I see my identity as one thing while the BNP make it official policy to deny what I see as its ancestral beginnings - witness Nick Griffin's opinions on Question Time, where he felt it important enough to try and prove these points. If it's such a trivial matter then why does the BNP have a stance on the ancestry of the white ethnic groups of these lands? Why not just let us decide on such matters if it's not so important an issue? The BNP obviously thinks it is.

As I said, it's not my business who people vote for, and none of this is meant as a slight towards anyone who votes for the BNP. I can only point out my reasons for not doing so. There are things that matter to me that are of lesser importance to others. Again, it's all up to the individual. Vote for whom you please; it's not a problem for me. I follow my own conscience in such matters, as should others.

[Andy]

I certainly support Wodens Childs viewpoint because I agree wholeheartedly with his argument.

The BNP want to consider the English/Scottish and Welsh as all being British who divided into three main tribes in a sense similar to Yorkshire/Lancashire and Derbyshire.

Yet the BNP have a Scottish Welsh and British attitude, wheres the fucking Englisc???

Oh thats right the British means the Englisc to the British state ideology.


As for the Englisc parliament it is EVERY BIT AS IMPORTANT AS LEAVING THE EU.
An English parliament would have to work for the English because every single MP would represent the English constituancies. They would be answerable to the English voters.

They would have to answer questions such as why MORE English money is going to each Scot and Welshman then is being spent on the English?

Why our prescriptions are increasing in price yet the Scots (from this year) and the Welsh (from last year) get free prescrptions?

Why the Scots get free studant fees and our children have to take out loans

Why Scots get cancer and Alzeimer treatment refused to the English?

Only through development of Englisc identity can the English fight for English rights, at present we are fighting for British rights.....FUCK THE BRITISH identity.



Unlike Wodens Child I will vote BNP, but only as the best of a bad bunch. I see the BNP as a step in the right direction and not the final answer.

They are a long long way short of the mark of representing the English.

[Andy]

I posted this in my blog under the 'DNA and the Englisc' article. In response to the BNP 'we are all British' booklet.

Oh dear we now have the BNP using the same arguments. Taking part results and coming up with complete conclusions.

Quote

Contrary to what the liberal left Tory/Labour/Lib-Dem/UKIP-ECHR allege, the native people of the British Isles are a distinct, identifiable and homogenous indigenous people who have every right to exist and be free from invasion and domination — like any other indigenous people on earth.

Excalibur Books is proud to announce the pre-launch of a new booklet which conclusively refutes the lie that there are no indigenous British people.

Titled Four Flags: The Indigenous People of Britain (DNA, History and the Right to Existence of the Native Inhabitants of the British Isles), this booklet by Arthur Kemp draws upon the very latest DNA evidence and historical fact to show that the vast majority of the British people have ancestors going back to the last mini ice age more than 12,000 years ago.

The table of contents is as follows:

1. Introduction (Deals with the denial of indigenous status to the British people)

2. Indigenous People — A Definition (uses UN and other definitions)

3. Haplogroups and the Genetic Identification of Peoples (explains Y-Chromosomes, mtDNA and Autosomal DNA in detail, and how they are used in forensics and history to identify and track peoples to specific areas)

4. The Haplogroups Which Mark the Indigenous People of Britain (explains which haplogroups are indigenous to Britain)

5. A History of the Peopling of Britain (a potted history of the people who have made up Britain through settlement, i.e. Euro base population: Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes, Normans – including figures on actual numbers of settlers and their genetic impact as measured by haplogroup)

6. Four Flags, One Nation: The right of the people of the British Isles to existence and freedom from colonisation, domination and dispossession of their lands and culture.

This booklet shows:

* Genetic evidence shows that the vast majority — nearly 80 percent — of all British people have ancestors going back to the end of the last mini ice age 12,000 years ago;

Lets look at this DNA evidance that is presented here shall we....

Lets look at the Englisc pie chart;
Approx 55% red
Approx 10% yellow
Approx 5% blue
leaving approx 30% purple

Now lets look at the Danish (Anglo Saxon) pie chart;
Approx 50% red
Approx 10% yellow
Approx 2% blue
Approx 10% yellow
plus approx 10% green, the only colour or DNA that differs by any significant amount.


Does this then mean that the Danes who live in Denmark today are also Britons?
Well their Y Haplogroup is very similar to the Englisc more so then the Scots Welsh and Irish.
Apart from that strand of Green we are closer related to the Danes then the Scots , Welsh and Irish.
The Welsh have no Yellow or blue

What we have is a common link between the white folcs of western Europe that the BNP have latched onto.

YES we ALL have a common group af ancestors but it doesnt make us all Britons if anything we are all....Europeans related from 12,000 years ago.

Quote

this booklet by Arthur Kemp draws upon the very latest DNA evidence and historical fact to show that the vast majority of the British people have ancestors going back to the last mini ice age more than 12,000 years ago.

Our Y Haplogroup as shown is similar to the Danes so how can they decide how much of an impact the Anglo Saxons made on our DNA?

Quote

Genetic evidence showing that the Celtic, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Viking/Danish and Norman conquests had negligible impacts upon the British people (less than 5 percent each);

OK 5% but as stated the Englisc and Danish pie charts are the most alike.


DNA will be the next 'white supremicy' argument, well done the scientists, lets set up the DNA labrotories and the shower rooms next door for those without the correct DNA.





I understand where the BNP are going with this argument and it is a good angle, though one forced on them by the media and state continual attempt to undermine British identity to enable every immigrant to claim to be British because British according to the media and state is a multi cultural identity.

REMEMBER the BNP are a British party and fighting to protect INDIGINOUS British identity just as we are Englisc and trying to defend Englisc identity.

The BNP are using DNA testing to prove we have been here for 12,000 years and not since 449 (Hengist and Horsa)
SO....YES....our 12,000 year old ancestors settled the whole of western Europe.
We all are united in these ancestors.
But we have gone our seperate ways in the years between then and now.

The Anglo Saxons have had a noticible impact if their pie charts have scientific basis because it made us a DNA %age that is visibly different to the Scots and Welsh.