Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Stoat

If you look at my past posts you will see that I have been saying that the Govt in England has been ignoring arranged marriages, parts of sharia law for some time

the left wonders why the BNP are getting more and more votes
the BNP are a right wing party who have been formed as of late and they are getting more and more votes

the left have tried to ban this party even though this party is legal, they have said that they are a racist bunch and some are I admit that

but to them they say if they are racist for loving theior country then so be it

In their party they have indians who are hindu, they have kews too

they believe that England needs to stop immigration and a crack down needs to happen on muslims who are trying to change the country

anyway like I said islam appeasement has been going on for some time

but ssscchh

don’t tell the left as muslims are always peaceful and just want to paray and be left alone

ARF


4 posted on 04/04/2008 6:22:29 PM PDT by manc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: manc

also why hasn’t the police been pressing charges for bigamy

last I knew in England my old coiuntry is thatt is is unlawful to have more than one wife

Actually if you get me the phone number or the police station who dealt with this I would like to geive them a call and ask them why are they not pressing charges


10 posted on 04/04/2008 6:25:35 PM PDT by manc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: manc
the left wonders why the BNP are getting more and more votes
the BNP are a right wing party who have been formed as of late and they are getting more and more votes

the left have tried to ban this party even though this party is legal, they have said that they are a racist bunch and some are I admit that

but to them they say if they are racist for loving theior country then so be it

From the BNP's official web page:

iii. Do you believe that blacks or other races are inferior?

No, we have never claimed any such thing. We simply believe that the different races are different, just as men and women are different, and as such they cannot be directly compared.

iv. If you believe that the races are different then you are racists.

Not at all. The definition of a racist is someone who hates people of other races. We do not hate anybody. Anyone who says the BNP is racist is either misinformed or a liar.

v. Why don’t you let blacks and Asians into the BNP?

For the same reason the Girl Guides don’t allow boys to join. Does that mean they are sexist? Does it mean they hate boys? Of course not, it’s just that their aim is to cater for the interests of girls, and similarly the BNP isn’t racist, but our purpose is to cater for the interests of the indigenous British population. The indigenous population of Britain is now the only group which is facing systematic, legalised and institutionalised discrimination, harassment and oppression. That’s precisely why the British people need the BNP - because we are the one and only organisation that has their interests at heart. There are hundreds of organisations exclusively for blacks or Asians, but only one organisation for the indigenous population - the BNP.

The British National Party News The Truth About the BNP!

84 posted on 04/04/2008 9:16:54 PM PDT by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2012: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: manc

“the left wonders why the BNP are getting more and more votes
the BNP are a right wing party who have been formed as of late and they are getting more and more votes
the left have tried to ban this party even though this party is legal, they have said that they are a racist bunch and some are I admit that
but to them they say if they are racist for loving theior country then so be it”

I will be so bold as to predict that parties such as the BNP are the only hope that white/formerly-Christian Europeans have left.

EVERY other party will appease and accomodate the growing Muslim threat until those countries topple to the rule of Islam. EVERY ONE.

As infuriating as it seems (considering the greatest progress in the West in values, principles and culture has come from the English-speaking peoples of the world) the British - despite their relatively small numbers of Islamics, vis-a-vis that of, say, the French - seem to be rushing headlong towards self-destruction of their culture and their nation. And this time around, there may not appear a giant of Churchillian rhetoric and resolve through whom the British can cast off their Chamberlain-like obsession of falling headlong in advance of the Muslim onslaught, and thus save themselves.

The nations of Western Europe in general, and Great Britain in particular, are rapidly approaching that point at which the only political parties that demonstrate a desire to protect their borders, culture, and ethnic makeup and heritage are those whose primary themes are nationalistic, exlusive, and all-but-undeniably racist. It gives us pause to face this gritty, unpalatable reality, but one of the tenets of conservatism is that reality should be recognized for what it is and accepted, regardless.

If we are willing to accept that, the next logical questions to ask are: If the actions such nationalistic, exculsionary and racialist governments choose to take in order to preserve their nations and cultures to the exclusion of the non-western peoples and cultures become extreme, is it acceptable and desirable for them to be taken, or not? Is it permissible to save a culture from extinction at all costs, or is it not?

So far, few Europeans (or perhaps even few of us here, even in this very forum) have confronted those issues head-on. And they ARE issues that will have to be faced - if not now, before too many more years have passed.

What constitutes acceptable behavior, when confronted with a struggle that is existential to its roots?

I will answer the question I just posed above. If an individual is attacked physically, by an attacker using deadly force, it is a given (at least amongst most in this forum, I presume) that the person has a right to fight back for his or her life using any and all possible means in order to protect their own life.

By any and by all possible means.
Does such a right of self-defense extend to an entire nation, an entire culture?
I believe it does.

This becomes the existential question before Western Europe, and Britain. You have within your midst, in growing numbers, a culture which is determined to destroy your own and the values you hold most dear, to the point of submission and even death. They will use any and all possible means and methods to achieve their victory, and they will not give up until they HAVE achieved it.

What will you do to stop them, and where will the “lines of engagement” be drawn? Particulary when your enemy does not draw such lines?

- John
Note to the British, and to Western Europe: you have but two choices:
1. Boxcars, or,
2. Burqhas


94 posted on 04/06/2008 12:52:49 PM PDT by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson