Mayor accuses Tories of ageism after election deselection

Mayor of Gedling Councillor Pat Blandamer has accused the Tory party of ageism after she was dropped ahead of the local elections on May 5. Winnie Agbonlahor reports

COUNCILLORS on both sides of the political spectrum agree Councillor Pat Blandamer has been doing a good job as Mayor of Gedling.


"She's been raising a lot of money for her charities," said Conservative councillor Sally Mason-Kempster.

And leader of the Labour group, John Clarke, echoed her views. "I think the mayor has been doing good work," he said.

But members of the Burton Joyce Conservative branch, have decided not to let her run as the party's candidate in Burton Joyce and Stoke Bardolph in May's local election – choosing two candidates in their forties instead.

"I don't know why they've done it," Mr Clarke said.

"But it doesn't happen very often. It's like taking the king off the throne while they're still on it."


Mrs Blandamer has also proved a popular mayor among some constituents. Doreen Leighton, 79, of Burton Joyce, said the mayor had been doing "her best for the party and the borough".

She added: "People have seemed to like her.

"I don't understand why she has been deselected.


"I don't know much about either of the new candidates.

"But I would not say Pat is too old. She's always energetic."

Mrs Blandamer, who is 72, believes she has been removed to make space for younger candidates.

"I would call that ageism," she said.


She added: "I have given many years of loyal service to the Conservative Party locally and I have been extremely proud to represent residents.


"This is a disgraceful selection process, which will embarrass the party."

"I was told that they had chosen 'the young ones' instead of myself."

Mrs Blandamer also said she had not been given the chance to appeal and had not received a valid reason why she was de-selected. "I do not believe that the constitutional rules have been followed throughout the process," she said.

Mrs Blandamer has now resigned from the party and is standing as an Independent candidate in Burton Joyce and Stoke Bardolph.


Conservative councillor Rod Kempster, 70, was interviewed to stand again as Conservative candidate in the Kingswell ward but was not chosen by the Gedling Conservative Association. The party has chosen two candidates in their thirties to stand instead.

Mr Kempster said his deselection "came as a complete shock" after almost 30 years as a councillor.

He said: "I never thought in my wildest dreams this would happen in Gedling.

"I'm heart-broken.

"The new candidates we've never even seen before. I cannot get my head round what's going off."

Councillor Wilfred Doe was interviewed as Tory candidate for the Bonington ward but was equally unsuccessful

He said he was "annoyed" at the decision but not surprised.

"I haven't got a clue why I was de-selected. No explanation was made.

"I'm 69, but that doesn't stop my head or mouth from working which is what you need to be a councillor."

He said he stood and won twice in his ward with a comfortable majority.

"I think I was deselected to bring in younger candidates," he added.

"But I think this is a risky strategy. There's a possibility these seats could be lost now.

"I'm thinking about resigning because of this."

John Parr, chairman of the Gedling Conservative Association, said the selection of candidates was carried out according to the rules.

He added: "We have got an ageing population and our future rests with younger candidates."

However, he said the selection had not been a case of "out with the old – in with the young".

"They have gone through a selection process and we have been very democratic," he added

"The ageism argument is completely unfounded. We have retained a large element of experienced, mature people and they are needed to help guide the younger candidates.


"It's a question of ability and how the selection committee wants things. It's not been down to age.

"But every business needs an injection of new blood every now and again.

"After going through the selection process, all councillors were contacted by me personally or by the chairman of their group to notify them about the decision.


"Councillor Blandamer was invited by the chairman of the Burton Joyce branch and myself to a private meeting where we might discuss everything over a cup of coffee or tea. But it was not accepted."



He also said people from a wide age group had shown a growing interest in the party, which the party needed to take notice of.

In total, four Conservative councillors have been deselected from their wards, but one is standing for a different ward.

Some of the more experienced councillors who are standing again as Tories include Councillors John Boot and Alan Bexon who are both in their seventies , and Councillor Wendy Golland who has served for 35 years.

Leaders of Notts mining union charged with theft of nearly £150,000 from charity

Former UDM president Neil Greatrex, left, and general secretary Mick Stevens

.

TWO Notts-based union leaders have been charged with the theft of nearly £150,000 from a charity for sick and elderly miners.


Neil Greatrex and Mick Stevens are accused of taking money from the Nottinghamshire Miners Home charity between June 5, 2000, and May 2006

Greatrex, 59, from Stanley, near Teversal, and Stevens, also 59, of Rufford Park, Newark, both pleaded not guilty to four charges of theft, totalling £148,628.83, at a hearing held at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court on Monday, March 28.

Greatrex, former president of the Union of Democratic Mineworkers, and Stevens, general secretary of the Notts UDM, are both trustees of the charity.

The charity’s primary purpose was to run a convalescent home at Chapel St Leonards, near Skegness, Lincolnshire.

A South Yorkshire Police spokeswoman said both men have been released on bail to appear at Nottingham Crown Court on Monday, May 16.

British Veterans Group needs your support

The British Veterans’ Group is running a campaign to purchase its own military standard, which will be carried on all parades to promote the group and the British National Party, reports Veterans’ leader Pete Molloy.


The group hopes to have the standard by this year’s Red, White and Blue festival, where a dedication will be held and the veterans can march with their standard.

The group is self-funding from its membership, and the cost of making the standard will be £820. This is where the veterans need your help to raise the necessary amount.

All donations will go into the British Veterans’ Group account within the party’s main account, and any amount of money raised above the target will remain in the veterans’ account for the purpose of the veterans. Once the full amount is raised, it will be advertised, and that will end the giving of donations.

Mr Molloy said, “My aim is to get the British Veterans’ Group to participate in the Remembrance parade in London this year. For us to achieve this, we will need our own standard.”


If you would like to see our veterans on parade in London, please make cheques or postal orders payable to ‘British National Party’, and send them to: British Veterans Group, PO Box 105, Spennymoor, County Durham, DL16 9BJ.

If you are ex-HM Forces, or still serving, and a member of the British National Party and would like to join the British Veterans’ Group, contact veterans@bnp.org.uk for further details.

Bring Our Boys Home Update: British Veterans’ Group leader Pete Molloy has received a confirmation letter (below) from the Direct Communications Unit at Downing Street regarding the receipt of the British National Party’s Bring Our Boys Home petition.

“I was about to write to the Prime Minister to chase him up on how he was dealing with our petition,” commented Mr Molloy.

“I know he is a very busy man at the moment, with his pet project of selective interference in regime change in foreign countries, but the majority of the British people want our troops home out of Afghanistan.”

Truth about the Cuts

By Maid of Kent – In the aftermath of the anti-cuts demonstration in central London and the ensuing riots caused by militant left-wing anarchists, it is imperative that the British people are told the truth behind the cynical manipulation of facts by the Lib/Lab/Con cabal who with their identical policies have caused the abysmal economic decline of our country, which has resulted in mounting anger among the British people.


In a country with rising unemployment, rising taxation and rising prices, this anger is justified, but until a political party addresses the real causes of the problems that have led to the situation that many Britons find themselves in today, we cannot hope to find and offer any solutions.


While the LibCon government cynically announce their programme of government spending cuts, which they proclaim will reduce our debt, when the truth is that the massive public sector burden will be reduced by a paltry 3% over a four-year period, the ‘opposition’ Labour party cynically condemns the ‘massive’ and ‘draconian’ cuts as an attack on the prosperity of the British nation and people.

While the British National Party has indicated many areas of government spending, like foreign aid, that can easily be cut without any detrimental effect on the British people, to address the issue comprehensively and honestly in order to produce real solutions, we have to examine the whole edifice of public sector spending, starting with the highly relevant question of why it has risen to such astounding amounts in recent years.


After decades of Lib/Lab/Con government-controlled mismanagement that have seen British industry destroyed, with the result that whole communities have lost any economic relevance and had their members thrown on to welfare subsistence for life, decades that have seen education standards fall to such abysmal levels that millions of British children have no reasonable hope of employment, and decades that have seen welfare payments overtake the basic wages of ordinary workers, we find ourselves in the situation where too many Britons rely on state benefits to live, which in itself has caused a large growth in state costs.

Aside from this staggering mismanagement of Britain by successive Lib/Lab/Con governments stretching back over decades in areas relating to jobs, welfare and education, there is one element of mismanagement which has enabled all of the others, namely mass immigration, and in particular the mass immigration of poor unskilled people from the Third World.

Apart from the real public services cost increases incurred by successive British Lib/Lab/Con governments and their mass immigration policies, whereby they import foreign workers while British workers are assigned to lives on benefits, and have even created unnecessary public sector jobs for immigrants to fill, and where they have increased demand on public services like education and the health service through the sheer numbers of immigrants allowed into Britain, there are many areas of increased public sector spending caused by mass immigration which are hidden or disguised.

Using their mass immigration ‘remedy’, successive Lib/Lab/Con governments have been able to ignore the appalling decline in education standards for British children with the knowledge that they will supplement a shortfall of reasonably educated British workers with imported replacements. That many British children will then face a life of welfare dependency is of no consequence to these politicians, even though the cost of keeping generations of Britons on welfare has added to the unaffordable costs of state spending.

In addition, we cannot ignore the tremendous and hidden cost increases in public sector spending caused by this mass immigration, which has resulted in the attendant creation of equality schemes, English-language teaching and translation services and a host of special programmes catering to the different communities now resident in Britain.

However, one of the largest single reasons behind the explosive growth in public sector spending is the effect that mass immigration has had on the cost of providing services like the NHS and welfare, and the subsequent and hidden costs of abuse of these services.

When the NHS and the Welfare State were founded, based on the Christian ethics prevalent in Britain and the population at that time, there were no real checks established on the use of these services, the understood principle being that the British people would use their moral sense of fair play and honesty to police themselves and that they would not abuse these services.

This accepted attitude towards the use of public services was taken for granted by successive British governments who, while anticipating that there would be a small section of society who would likely abuse these public-provided services, did not anticipate that the country would soon be flooded with people from different cultures who would not share our principles and attitudes towards the use of public services and that with different ethical codes and from countries where corruption is endemic, would foster a growth of use and abuse.

Since the start of mass immigration, we have seen not only a huge growth in the costs of providing public services caused by the importation of millions of extra people and a huge growth in net costs because the majority of those people are poor and unskilled so need to use those services disproportionately in relation to what they pay into the system, there has been a huge growth in the costs of those services due to corruption and abuse by people who do not practice the principles of honesty and fairness that need to be adhered to for the services to remain affordable.

With the introduction of health tourism, which alone is estimated to cost Britain £200 million every year, the fraudulent claims of residency by foreigners to access free health care and benefits, the bogus claims of so-called asylum seekers and the many benefit scams operated by foreigners – all allowed or legitimised by the Lib/Lab/Con governments – it is quite easy to see why the cost of state-provided services has risen to the current unaffordable and bankrupting levels

source: http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/after-riots-%E2%80%93-truth-about-cuts

Pub closures running at 25 per week

Urgent case for a freeze in Beer Tax in next week's Budget, says BBPA


• 13,000 jobs lost in 2010, and more at stake

• Closures worst in London and North West, but all regions hit



Pubs are closing at the rate of 25 per week, as the trade continues to face tough conditions in all parts of Britain, according to new figures released today. The British Beer & Pub Association, which commissioned the new survey, says that the Government should now abandon plans for a huge seven per cent increase in Beer Tax in the Budget next week. The BBPA says that with the right policies, the beer and pub sector, which employs almost 1 million people, could play a leading role in bringing the economy out of recession.



While the closure rate has slowed from the previous year's 40 per week, there were almost 1,300 fewer pubs in Britain by the end of 2010. With a typical pub employing around ten people, this represents a net loss of jobs of around 13,000 across the country. Pubs are closing in every part of England, as well as in Scotland and Wales. The rate of losses is highest in London and the North West, though all regions are suffering a decline (see table).



With beer still the key seller for pubs, huge rises in Beer Tax, which has gone up by 26 per cent since March 2008, are a huge drag on the sector, says the BBPA. To add to the problem, the Government plans a further, swingeing seven per cent rise in duty in the Budget, through the controversial policy of the beer duty escalator. This is set to add two per cent above inflation to the existing duty burden, which would add 3.5 pence in Beer Tax on a typical pint, with bar prices set to rise by up to ten pence a pint. Taken with the VAT increase in January, the Government is heading for the biggest ever tax hike on beer in a single year.



BBPA Chief Executive, Brigid Simmonds, comments:



"The closure of 25 pubs every week is bad news for the economy, as the sector plays such a vital role. It's also a blow for local communities, with pubs often acting as the hub of local life.



"With the right policies, this vital part of our tourism and hospitality sector could be creating new jobs, and helping to bring Britain out of recession. If we really do have a pub-friendly government as the Prime Minister says, the time to act is now - with a freeze in beer duty in the Budget.
 
source: http://www.backthepub.com/
 
Please support this campaign and lobby your local MP by following this link : http://www.backthepub.com/support-us/mp.aspx

  

'A victory for common sense': Cafe owner wins extractor fan appeal after neighbour claimed 'smell of bacon offends Muslims'

By DAILY MAIL
Last updated at 4:04 PM on 30th March 2011

• Council had ordered Beverley Akciecek to tear it down

A cafe owner who was ordered to tear down an extractor fan because the smell of bacon offended Muslims was celebrating a 'victory for commons sense' today.

Beverley Akciecek has won her appeal against the ruling by Stockport councillors.

Mrs Akciecek's neighbour's had claimed their Muslim friends were refusing to visit because they 'couldn't stand'  the odour.

And the Lib Dem-run council ruled the smell from the fan, which has been in Bev's Snack Shack for more than three years, was 'unacceptable on the grounds of residential amenity' and told her to take it down.

Relief: Cafe boss Beverley Akciecek says she is relieved after winning the appeal

But the mother-of-seven and her husband Cetin, 50, who is himself a Turkish Muslim, appealed the decision.

After a six-month legal battle, the Planning Inspectorate finally announced they had won their case.

The council will now have to pay all of Mrs Akciecek's legal costs plus their own, which include the costs of planning reports, lawyers' consultations and meetings. All will be met by the public purse.

 

She said today: 'This a victory for common sense but we shouldn't have been put through this in the first place.

'We're just relieved it's all over. I would like to thank the planning and environmental services who backed my appeal.

'We had lots of support from the Muslim community. The Muslim community were infuriated by what had happened.

'The council have got to pay our legal fees which is a great relief because we were beginning to struggle.

Hard-working: The Akcieceks took over the take-away in Cale Green, Stockport, in 2007

'It would have cost us a couple of grand to move it which we just didn't have.

'We would have had to shut down while they were doing it, which would have taken a couple of weeks and it would have been a nightmare.

'This has really taken it out of us as a family. We were like robots, we did everything we had to do but it was always there and it caused us so much stress.

'Now we can just get on with being a normal family.'

The couple took, who both work 50 hours a week, over the takeaway in Cale Green, Stockport, in 2007.

On taking charge they replaced the existing extractor fan, which had been there for six years, with a new modern one.

They claim they received no complaints about the cafe, which is open from 7.30am-2.30pm six days a week, until around eighteen months ago.

They received a letter from environmental services to say their neighbour Graham Webb-Lee had complained about the smell.

'This is disgraceful. It makes our house stink of vile cooking smells, we can't eat our breakfast in the morning. I will be speaking to my lawyer.

'The vent is 12 inches from my front door. Every morning the smell of bacon comes through and makes me physically sick.

'I have a lot of Muslim friends. They refuse to visit me any more because they can't stand the smell of bacon.'

 Graham Webb-Lee, neighbour

Mrs Akciecek said: 'I just think it's just crazy. Cetin's friends actually visit the shop, they're regular visitors, they're Muslim people, they come in a couple of times a week.

'I have Muslim people come in for cheese toasties. Cetin cooks the food himself, he cooks the bacon.

'When we go to a cafe my husband wouldn't be offended by the smell of bacon.

'His friends are not offended by it, we have three visitors who come here for a sandwich, friends of my husband, and the smell doesn't offend them at all. 

'We've never had a problem about the smell because everything is pre-cooked. We cook it in the oven so there's no foul smell.

'It's pre-cooked so the smell isn't as strong when we're frying it off.

'It's been a sandwich shop for about eight years, cooking exactly the same stuff. The lady before me did double because they were actually building new houses across the road so she was really busy. 

'They were there before me but they were also there when the lady who owns the business was here. She had five staff, you can imagine how busy that shop was and they never complained at all.'

The couple said that Environmental Services inspected their property after their the complaint and ruled the smell was not causing a problem - but their neighbour continued to complain.

The couple had never applied for planning permission as they had simply replaced an existing extractor fan with one of the same size and position, but they were informed by the council they would have to apply retrospectively as an objection had been raised.

They applied for planning permission in May last year, but the application was refused at a meeting of Stockport Area Committee on October 14.

Mr Webb-Lee had objected to the application, complaining that his Muslim friends refused to visit him because they 'can't stand the smell of bacon'.

The couple are naturally delighted with the decision to let them keep the extractor fan in place, but their neighbour Mr Webb-Lee is not happy.

He said: 'This is disgraceful. It makes our house stink of vile cooking smells, we can't eat our breakfast in the morning. I will be speaking to my lawyer.' 

He previously said: 'The vent is 12 inches from my front door. Every morning the smell of bacon comes through and makes me physically sick.

'I have a lot of Muslim friends. They refuse to visit me any more because they can't stand the smell of bacon.'

Paul Lawrence, service director for regeneration for Stockport Council said: 'We are pleased that the planning inspectorate has made a decision and that this issue has now been resolved.'

Woman forced to prove she is 'incontinent enough' for free prescription

A MAN is outraged after his elderly mother was forced to undergo a "degrading" test to see whether she was incontinent enough to continue to receive free pads on the NHS.

Blind Edith Braddow, 77, had been receiving the sanitary pads free of charge but new rules mean health staff are having to assess whether people still need them.

She was asked to take three soiled pads to her doctors to be weighed, to see if she was losing enough urine.

Ivan Braddow said he and his mother had to stand and watch as they were weighed during an incontinence test at an Ashfield Health Village, in Kirkby-in-Ashfield

Mr Braddow said his mother was told she was not incontinent enough and that, due to public sector cuts, she could no longer be supplied with new ones.

A spokesperson for Notts Community Health said: "A review of the continence service took place during 2010 and changes have been made to ensure patients receive optimum clinical care.

"The aim of the service is always to return patients to continence wherever possible. Pads are only prescribed for those patients with moderate to severe incontinence.

"All patients/clients presenting with continence issues are offered a comprehensive clinical assessment, which includes reviewing existing pads to ensure adequate absorbency and comfort to the patient, as defined by National Good Practice, followed by a clear treatment plan. This is followed up by an agreed review date.

"If any patient is unhappy with any aspect of the continence service provided by Notts Community Health we are more than happy to address individual concerns."

Source: Evening Post

Sadly this article ignored the reasons why that poor lady had to go through such humiliation. The story below highlights only a fraction of the amount wasted by the NHS.

Foreign Patients cost British taxpayers 300,000 Pounds a week 

As the NHS cuts more front-line jobs, it is revealed that foreign patients who fail to pay for their treatments are costing us more than £300,000 a week. 

Over the last two years alone, the total figure amounts to a shocking £32 million, much, if not all, of which has already been written off.

This is in stark contrast with British nationals, who have no choice but to pay for their treatments through their taxes, and, in England, also have to pay for their prescriptions from their doctors. However, if hospitals demand payment from these foreign patients, asylum seekers and health tourists, they are accused of breaching their human rights.

This news coincides with the Government's announcement of cost-cutting measures for the NHS. It has been revealed that a minimum of 4,622 front-line jobs will have to be cut by 2015.

Hospitals who have already confirmed that they will be “shedding” front-line staff include University Hospital of North Staffordshire, who are cutting 985 staff, and East Lancashire Hospitals, who are cutting 695. Sadly, not even the children's Foundation Trust at Alder Hey escapes these cuts, as they have confirmed that they are firing 109 front-line staff.

These cuts will do nothing but place remaining staff under increased pressure to work longer hours, looking after even more patients, a mix that the British National Party predicts will end in death and unnecessary suffering for thousands.

Stopping treatment for foreign-based patients who cannot or will not pay for their treatments would immediately help alleviate the need to cut these vital and precious front-line NHS roles, and will without a doubt save the lives of future patients who currently face longer waiting lists and stretched and hard-pushed NHS staff.

Source: http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/foreign-patients-cost-taxpayers-%C2%A3300000-week

Be "Ambitious in Ashfield", but dont expect to get a job in the area

"TEENAGERS from Hucknall were among 600 school pupils given an insight into the world of work through a showcase entitled ‘Ambitious In Ashfield’.

The seventh annual event at the Festival Hall, Kirkby-in-Ashfield was organised by Ashfield District Council.

It was aimed at demonstrating careers and self-employment opportunities available when students leave school.

A range of employers involved included the council itself, the Royal Air Force, the Royal Navy, the fire service, the police, supermarket chain Asda and East Midlands Airport.

Colleges were also on hand to explain vocational courses, apprenticeships and A-levels.

A ‘creative industries corner’ promoted careers in drama, dance, art, film, gaming, ceramics and photography".

source : The Hucknall Dispatch

You will notice from the list of employers that the majority are state agencies. Rather pathetically the only  major private employer noted here is  Asda, considering the employment prospects on offer here it is not surprising that Ashfield has such a problem with Youth Unemployment. Ashfield District Council must start doing more to promote the district to bring in national companies and provide financial assistance to small local companies to help them expand and provide training for potential employees. 

David Cameron pursues Labour's "Democracy Crusade", How many British lives will be lost this time?

I welcome the news today that EU leaders rebuffed Cameron's plans to create an internationally enforced no fly zone against Libya.
The Prime Minister warned Europe that  more must be done, which could include bombing Libyan air fields. This  in Cameron's words is needed to stop Gaddafi rampaging against his own people. Now I am not in support of President Gaddafi, as we all know he was a huge arms supplier to the IRA. But when Cameron states that he is rampaging against his own people,  we expect to see your average citizen armed with a placard or at the most a stone. Which was the scene in Egypt and the like recently, but in Libya the " people" are armed with anti-aircraft guns and in one picture that I have seen even a tank. Rather than this being a campaign against the Libyan people, is it  rather a campaign against a rebel group trying to usurp the leader and administration of an independent sovereign state.

The intervention against Cameron's sabre rattling was led by Labour peer Lady Ashton ( ex-CND treasurer and communist), who you may remember was in the headlines in November 2009 when Tony Blair was attempting to become President of the EU Council. When the EU resoundingly resisted Blair's intentions,  Gordon Brown had to "reluctantly" accept the British only receiving the position of  High Representative for EU foreign affairs and security policy given to Lady Ashton ( in which she was woefully under qualified).
There are probably two main reasons that she objected to her own government's proposals. The first being that Lady Ashton and the Labour Party would not want David Cameron to be portrayed as the western saviour of the Libyan people, which in light of what her aide described as " headline grabbing desperation"by Cameron, would seem to be a prime reason.
The second reason is also that as representative of the Labour government which in the last decade has had it's fair share of sabre rattling in the apparent crusade of democracy (in which it sadly Labour denied to its own people i.e referendums on the Lisbon treaty and whether Britain wanted mass colonization) she is fully aware of what catastrophic mistakes these democracy crusades are.
But even if Cameron's proposals were actually acted upon by the EU, what exactly could the EU as a military force actually do? As can be seen from the dismal effort in Afghanistan by the main EU military powers (except Britain), they are very reluctant to put their own personnel's lives at risk or to contemplate the use of their very expensive equipment. Therefore Cameron can try as much has he likes to convince the EU to agree to a no fly zone but militarily rather than morally the EU could not agree to a no fly zone or to enforce it. The EU military body can only be propelled by America, so as usual EU moralist's must wait upon the decisions of the American's as to whether they will flex their military muscle.
This also goes to show how monumentally short sighted it was and is for the ConLib regime to slaughter our armed forces in the cutbacks to fund foreign aid.

There are three options available to interventionists:-
1) Apply trade sanctions, which must also include the west banning oil imports from Libya
2) Military intervention
3) Allowing the peoples of Libya to decide their own destiny and to achieve it on their own

The sanctions against Iraq during the Saddam era proves that trade sanctions will not oust a leader, and the west can not suspend it's addiction to oil.Therefore this should not be an option, as it can only really harm the Libyan people. It also makes western crusaders look hypocritical " You are a human rights abuser and we dont like you, but we want your oil".
Military intervention is only an option if America decides it is, this will depend on how much time it will take for them to get their resources in place so they can extract oil ( their main motivation).
The only option that i can see that could be successful is to let Libya decide it's own fate. If the people truly wish to overthrow their dictator they will succeed in the end, Gaddafi could never really regain control even if the rebels are crushed. Rebel areas will never be able to effectively administered again , because without doubt there will be a protracted guerrilla campaign until he is overthrown.
This article was written to promote the opinion that the west's reaction to the Libyan crisis is not concerned with the human rights of those poor people but ultimately about gaining access to Libyan oil. The west knows that a new revolutionary government would be easier to control and manipulate than a dictorial regime, which explains why the UK has sent in diplomats with the SAS. This is to foster that manipulation at the embryonic stages of this revolutionary movement.
Another point i wish to make concerns the sheer hypocrisy of David Cameron. As many of you know Cameron is one of the founding members of the UAF, which as a militant extremist organisation uses physical violence against the BNP which is a legitimate political party. If that is not enough, the BNP also faces active state subversion of our party, be it through tax payer funded infiltrators or government quangos to destroy the party. David Cameron and the Foreign office actively condemn and indeed invade countries that use violence and state intimidation against political parties and deny the people a voice, but that is exactly what the British state is doing here now.
If in the future a nationalist rebel group sought to overthrow our repressive socialist state, would the likes of Cameron simply say yes lets allow them peacefully to overthrow our undemocratic political system? One would doubt that, as already we the BNP a legitimate political have had everything thrown at us to destroy us other than sending in the army to kill us off.
David Cameron should devote his time to repairing our failed democratic system, supposedly the envy of the world, but is in fact no better than a third world banana state.

Nick Griffin gave this statement:
‘It’s beyond madness,’ said Mr. Griffin, talking to journalists in Brussels. ‘It’s up to the Libyans to decide whether they want to be ruled by an elderly kleptomaniac sex addict or by the Islamists who will emerge as the strongest force among the rebels. But either way, regime change in Libya is not worth the bones of one single British soldier or airman.

‘For Cameron to fantasise about imposing a no-fly zone on Libya while simultaneously slashing the RAF is particularly crazy. With a ConDem closure of RAF Leuchars and Kinloss, the stark reality is that the only air force David Cameron is going to destroy is Britain’s.

‘If Cameron and his American puppet-masters do invade Libya, the British National Party will immediately launch a high-profile high-street campaign to focus popular rejection of such warmongering lunacy, and against the crippling Oil Shock fuel prices that will get even worse if the US further enrages the Arab world by openly trying to steal their oil


http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/%E2%80%98have-they-learned-nothing-afghanistan%E2%80%99