The BNP and why wishes must be made with care

The BNP has long maintained that it has been side-lined in the press and politics generally, that there is an intrinsic bias against them and that they are due coverage which is commensurate with their political standing.  Of course, until recently they didn’t have any political standing of any note until they managed to get a seat in the London Assembly and later in Europe.  Of course their member for the London Assembly was suspended and they were shunned by even the most right wing groups in the EU.

During the last GE in 2005 they took 192,746 votes and won NO seats.  Less than the Green party and less than UKIP neither of whom won any seats either.

Indeed, they have had a fair amount of press coverage as a result of their gains, yet as the spotlight turns on them they have been truly shown up for what they really are in full technicolour-warts-n-all vision.

The build up to the current climax really began back in August when The Equality and Human Rights Commission decided to take them to court over their membership rules which limit it’s members to being “indigenous caucasian”, or more specifically (from the BNP constitution):

The indigenous British ethnic groups deriving from the class of ‘Indigenous Caucasian’ consists of members of: i) the Anglo-Saxon folk community; ii) the Celtic Scottish folk community; iii) the Scots-Northern Irish folk community; iv) the Celtic Welsh folk community; v) the Celtic Irish folk community; vi) the Celtic Cornish folk community; vii) the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic folk community; viii) the Celtic-Norse folk community; ix) the Anglo-Saxon-Norse folk community; x) the Anglo-Saxon Indigenous European folk community; xi) members of these ethnic groups which reside either within or outside Europe but ethnically derive from them.

Sounds like the categories in some sort of analy retentive folk music festival, although I think it’s fairly clear that the aim is to exclude ethnic minorities from attempting to become members, although I can’t imagine why any ethnic minority (or anyone else for that matter) would want to join such a provocative and backward organisation.

It was a case that they recently lost and has forced them to turn to their membership to have the rules changed, although Nick Griffin asserted that it wouldn’t change the underlying principles of the party.  Effectively admitting that the party is founded on hate and no matter the outcome of any court case that that will remain true and pure … how, er, stoic of them.

If nothing else it shows them up for what they are, and in case you missed that you will be able to see them on Question Time tomorrow (Thursday, 22nd October).  This is something else that’s been rumbling on for some time as the BNP attempt to achieve something of a coup by appearing with other politicians on the popular debate programme.  There had been threats of legal action following the ruling discussed above as it may have rendered the political party ‘illegal’ due to the nature of it’s constitution, although to be honest I think that that claim was only ever tenuous at best.

It will be interesting to see which topics will be up for debate and whether or not the other guests are up to the task of taking Nick Griffin apart … I suspect they will.

One topic that I think certainly will be discussed will be Britain’s role in Afghanistan, which leads us neatly on to the armed forces and then, oh dear, the BNP’s adoption of WWII iconography in their campaign material.  Obviously there’s nothing to stop them, or any other party doing this, but the tone which they have adopted has been considered highly disrespectful to those who fought in the conflict and they have sought to make some appalling comparisons.

Again, Nick Griffin has been running his mouth off comparing the EU to Hitler’s war in Europe to impose his fascist regime.  Ironically of course it is Nick Griffin’s party that has the white supremist agenda even if they do try and wrap it in cotton wool.  It maybe isn’t surprising that some of Britain’s top military names have come out against what they see as tarnishing the name of the British armed forces:

We call on all those who seek to hijack the good name of Britain’s military for their own advantage to cease and desist.

The values of these extremists – many of whom are essentially racist – are fundamentally at odds with the values of the modern British military, such as tolerance and fairness.

Whilst the BNP was never directly mentioned it is fairly clear who it was aimed at, and Nick Griffin knew it.  Exercising his immense intellect Griffins party retorted in a statement on their site comparing the generals to Nazis war criminals:

Sir Richard and Sir Mike fall squarely into this bracket and they must not think that they will escape culpability for pursuing the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

Iraq may have been an illegal war, but to compare it with the action of the Nazi’s during WWII is ludicrous in the extreme.

So, the BNP has finally got it’s wish of greater press coverage, indeed it would be fair to describe it as a barrage which has shown the party to be a disgusting throw back and certainly not fit to represent decent people in a time when the world gets seemingly smaller and pressures greater.  BNP are political agitators of the worse kind and would happily eject people whose families have resided in the UK for generations and who, to all intents are purposes are indigenous regardless of their skin colour.