Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito

Wednesday, 10 April 2013

Patria censored - for doing too well


9:28 AM on 09/04/2013

What happened to you representing the racist BNP Dr Andrew Emerson?? When you got outed as a member, you said this:

“I’m a political animal. I intend to continue as a political activist for the BNP and hope to represent them in further elections so I’m entirely happy with it”

Now off that bandwagon are we? Jumping onto a contentious topic like housing to exploit for your racist views?

If we had a decreasing population, how would we pay for the pensions of those coming up to retirement? Hopefully like you in a few years? So everything is down to immigration is it? No population increase due to anything else other than immigration? Even the Daily Mail says it’s only 55% of growth in population and that is highly centred in London, so we’d still need more houses regardless. But that’s not part of your very important agenda.

I do hope no-one falls for your trick of being anti-development (which fits in very nicely with the Chichester Observer – what with it never leaving the front page), when in fact you are a former/current BNP member who has some very very dodgy views.

Dr Emerson replies

This is not about me but about saving our city from the desecration that the Council has planned for it.

However, since you have chosen to distract attention from the issue in question by personalizing the debate, I shall say this: I never made any secret about my membership of the BNP (I stood as a candidate for them in the 2005 general election within a few months of joining the party) and so I was never “outed” as a BNP member.

The protection of our natural environment is not a bandwagon as far as I am concerned, but rather an abiding concern. I opposed building on greenfield sites when I was in the BNP and before that when I was with the Labour Party. I have always had the courage of my convictions and put country before party. If more politicians had the backbone necessary to do the same then the country would not be in the mess that it is in.

Do you imagine that immigrants do not also grow old and claim a pension from the state? If the population declined then the number of elderly people would also decline, as would the number of the unemployed.

As for that fount of wisdom the Daily Mail, they acknowledge that more than half of the increase in population between 2001 and 2011 is a direct result of immigration and that most of the rest is also (indirectly) a result of it because of the very high birthrate of certain groups of immigrants who share the same religion.

The remainder of the increased demand for housing is attributable to successive Lib-Lab-Con governments’ anti-marriage and anti-family policies resulting in an increase in one-adult households.

Your definition of “dodgy views” seems to be any which you find yourself unable to rebut. Ad hominem attacks on me are no substitute for the rational argument which you evidently lack. You have my sympathy.


The foregoing reply was posted by me on Tuesday afternoon, 9 April. It stayed up for a few hours before both it and all of my earlier comments on the Chichester Observer’s web site were deleted by the paper’s staff. I can’t think why. Unless they were too good.

As the candidate of a patriotic party, I have been debarred from posting further comments on the newspaper’s web site.

However, the comments by jambon and others impugning me were, naturally, left up by the Observer.

Thursday, 28 February 2013

British Patriotic League founded

Britannica and Patria have jointly agreed to form an alliance of patriotic and unionist parties, to be called the British Patriotic League.

The aim of the League is to promote co-operation and goodwill between parties that uphold the union of the United Kingdom and embrace traditional British culture and values, both within the United Kingdom and overseas.

The League invites applications for affiliation (for which no fee is payable) from genuine patriotic, unionist and nationalist parties.

Charlie Baillie


Ian Johnson


Thursday, 31 January 2013

With malice toward none

Speaking in a purely personal capacity, I should like to put on record my good wishes to each and every nationalist party, even "inappropriate" ones, whose leadership contains Holocaust deniers (and/or former Holocaust deniers), for example.

Such deluded individuals are more to be pitied than scorned. "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34). They are entitled to exercise their right of free speech, regardless of the damage they do (or have done) to the nationalist cause. At least, they are so entitled under English, Scottish and Northern Irish law. The law of some of our so-called European partners is a horse of a different colour.

Not that the general public pays much attention to people who deny the Holocaust. They tend to be more focused upon their own present and future than upon the rapidly receding past. Nevertheless, there surely can be few who, upon mature reflection, would feel confident in electing someone whose finger might one day hover over the nuclear red button, if they knew that individual had once publicly denied the Holocaust.

The crucial question is: can one trust the judgement of such a person in other, more important, matters?

Four legs good, two legs bad!

Fake concern: The scab union leaflet

Rather a good leaflet by Solidarity. Credit where credit is due. Mind you, the piggy in the picture is a pretty fair representation of the great majority of MEPs, of every party.

There is something about the European 'parliament' that panders to the venality of politicians.

I know what it is! Everything about it.

Tuesday, 29 January 2013

Curiouser and curiouser

Dr Andrew Emerson is an English mental health nurse and nationalist politician. He demands "equal treatment for the ethnic majority".[1]

A quondam member of the BNP, Emerson was expelled for publicly censuring its leadership, whereupon he helped to found a new party, named Patria (Latin for "Homeland").[2]

Officially, Patria is "neither left nor right, but patriotic";[3] variations of this tagline are common among nationalist parties — the English Democrats, for example, have used the slogan "not left, not right, just English!"[4]

In its manifesto Patria promises to end immigration by "ethnic aliens" and to withdraw from the EU without a prior referendum. Patria pledges to deport "foreign criminals, illegal immigrants and failed and bogus asylum seekers" and inter alia, to repeal the Race Relations Act, 1965, the Human Rights Act, 1998, the Climate Change Act, 2008 and the Equality Act, 2010, as well as to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights. Patria also promises the banning of halal and kosher slaughter and a halt to the commissioning of new mosques, as well as the restoration of the death penalty for murder and treason.[5]

The Patria website features a number of articles by Emerson, containing his curious ramblings about "the liberation of our people from the yoke of alien oppression".[6] Emerson also runs a personal blog with a number of interesting posts, such as copypaste of a lengthy article from American Renaissance about the "Jewish agenda"[7] and a Telegraph article about prehistoric Britain given the new title "The pre-eminent genius of the White race".[8]

"Racism is a made up word. It’s code for anti-white, anti-English", says Emerson. "The people who accuse us of being racist can’t explain what they mean by the word."[2]

Emerson's argument appears to be that the words racism and racist are nothing more than stigmatizing labels to be attached to an opponent's views or behaviour, but never one's own. The function of the labelling, of course, being an appeal to emotion rather than to reason: name-calling as a substitute for rational debate.


Wednesday, 16 January 2013

Social engineering at its most pernicious

Mass immigration of ethnic aliens from the Third World and Eastern Europe depresses the wages and working conditions of our own English people. And this betrayal of our people has been deliberately engineered by the political Establishment. It has not happened by accident.

Protest against it, by organizing politically, as Patria has and the ‘mainstream’ media, who sell more newspapers by publicizing the immigration scandal, will refer to you as “far right”.

Opposition to the colonization of our country, by destitute hordes of ethnic aliens from the three corners of the world, is not a left-right issue at all, since immigration reached its highest point at more than half a million annually under the current coalition government and both they and UKIP are committed to continuing the race-replacement of our people.

No, it is an issue which transcends the conventional left-right political divide. It is the most fundamental question of all: what kind of future does our people have if we lose our homeland, our patria?

English Britons are now in the minority in our capital city, London, in Slough, in Luton and in Leicester. Demographic projections tell us that we will be a minority in Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester by the end of this decade, if current trends continue.

Our children are in a minority in more than 1,600 schools throughout England and the number of mosques in Britain approaches 2,000. If our people are institutionally discriminated against now, as they are, in every walk of life, in education, in housing, in the courts and in opportunities for jobs, training and promotion, what will it be like for our children and grandchildren? What future do they have to look forward to?

The situation is grave. There is no denying it. But it is not hopeless. If only those of our compatriots who see the problem and are sufficiently concerned, decide to act, by joining or supporting a genuinely patriotic party like Patria, whose leadership is of proven character and untainted by the corruption and cronyism of the past, our homeland, our children’s birthright, may yet be saved.

Patria is as yet only small but it is growing fast and it has a big heart. We eschew petty internecine sniping, which historically has been the bane of nationalism, for the counterproductive self-indulgence it is and offer the hand of friendship to every other nationalist party, without exception.

Every party of British nationalism has more in common with every other British nationalist party, than with any non-nationalist party. And the gravity of the situation facing our people demands that anyone with pretension to genuine leadership validate the pretension, by helping to form the alliance of patriotic parties which is required if any patriotic party is to flourish. It should be no consolation to any patriot that although their own party failed, so too did every other nationalist party. On the contrary, it should not matter which patriotic party succeeds, provided at least one does.

The task is a monumental one, but it is achievable. Our forefathers faced challenges as great, or even greater and proved their mettle by overcoming them, together, like the band of brothers they were.

We can, we must, do no less today.

From the web site of Patria (www.patria-uk.org), the party of nationalist patriots

Monday, 31 December 2012

A Nationalist Concordat for 2013

As we come to the end of an eventful 2012 and face a possibly even more eventful 2013, it behooves us all, as patriots, to take stock politically and to look back, in order to see what lessons may be learnt from the year that is ending, for the year that is about to begin.
I would suggest that each of the patriotic parties, excluding UKIP, which remains a pariah for every principled patriot (because of its blackballing of former members of nationalist parties, as well as its support for mass non-white immigration) should agree not to stand candidates against one another in elections.
In view of the fact that at the last local elections the BNP fielded fewer than 150 candidates throughout the entire country and all of its nationalist (again excluding UKIP) rival parties collectively fielded even fewer candidates than did the BNP, it seems most likely that there will be many more seats and more authorities, without a single nationalist candidate, than there will be with one.
Under such circumstances, it makes no sense whatsoever for nationalist candidates of different parties to stand against one another.
Indeed, rather than stand against another nationalist candidate it would be preferable to withdraw from a particular contest and allow the other party's candidate a clear run.
We need all of the nationalist parties to do their bit, however inadequately, until such time as circumstances permit a coalescence of all (or almost all) remaining nationalist forces.

It's a Wonderful Anti-White Christmas