Transcript of The IoS' interview with Nick Griffin
Sunday 14 June 2009
So why are people throwing eggs at you?
(Laughs) Obviously it's the immigration, race perception thereof, at one level and also quite simply the people throwing eggs, the UAF organisation is based on the Communist party, that's a core part of it, the Searchlight organisation which is at the centre of it is based on a little group of hard line Stalinists who've never really changed their views so there's an ideological opposition and racism is merely an excuse, or alleged racism is merely an excuse. And then additionally the whole operation is to an extent financed by the Labour party in many areas with tax-payers' money.
A journalist infiltrated your party and you also had the membership list get out. What did you think of that and did it not damage you personally in the party?
Umm, it certainly caused a lot of our people concern, problems, several job losses or people threatened with job losses, whereas, the BBC have done the same thing you know, in the past so I would say it's unfair and it's wrong and it's certainly on the edge of at least morality if not legality for people to be doing that. Cobain and the Guardian (in Griffin's opinion) clearly broke the data protection act but law in this country is for the rich primarily and enforcement of the law is for people with whom the authorities agree so it's very difficult to do anything about it, you know, well nigh impossible but I haven't got a particular problem with that. The BBC's operation was worse, the secret agent, because what they presented as the BNP branch in Bradford with the assorted crackpots and bigots and people talking about shoving things through Asian letterboxes and all the rest of it, that was not the British National Party because the branch really by their own admission had been captured by someone who was working for Searchlight, Andy Sykes and he'd spent the previous two years getting rid of decent people and keeping cranks and crackpots who any other branch would have seen coming and got rid of but it's presented as if that's the BNP and here's a problem for the liberal establishment and for journalists and so on because they're doing this to stop us but to do that in a place like Bradford is I would say extremely irresponsible because, we're going to get a lot of votes in Bradford, we have councils in Bradford and that picture of the British Nation al Party tells particularly young Muslim lads that large numbers of their neighbours hate them, want to do them and their sisters harm and all the rest of it and it helps to radicalise them, it's a very, very dangerous thing. You know the last riot in Bradford cost over £20 million and it's not really recommended, people would be far, far better to...
But you're not seriously attributing the last riot in Bradford to...
Oh no, the last riot in Bradford was before then but the last riot in Bradford was because one neo-Nazi crackpot came along and did Zieg Heil salutes at an anti Nazi league demonstration just before they turned into the UAF which was called to protest, ostensibly to protest against the BNP and a proposed National Front march in fact but in fact because the Anti-Nazi League was always a front group, a recruiting operation for the Socialist Workers Party and the Socialist Workers Party were...
Again do you...?
No it's a fact.
Any evidence for that?
Yeah, absolutely so just Google it and look it up in it. Yes the Anti-Nazi League was set up by the Socialist Workers Party and yes it was to oppose the National front but also it's to, and all the other left wing groups say it, that the moment you got involved in that, the aim was to suck people into the SWP, which is a political party and a family business essentially. So they were happy to have confrontation, they're ideology is about confrontation with the capitalist state in order to radicalise working class and ethnic minorities and other minority groups in order to build a coalition that will have the revolution, which normally is Wolfie Smith crackpottery that doesn't do any harm at all but when it's done in Bradford and they tell hundreds upon hundred of young Muslim lads that the Fascists are going to march through their area and burn down their house and assault their sisters it could lead to millions of pounds worth of damage and the risk of people being killed and that's where the sections of the media are risking again takings by hyping up the BNP and the BNP's alleged racism and by making these people think that we want to do them harm and all the rest of it, it destabilises society.
Previous members, presumably the people you called neo-Nazi crackpots, have been unequivocal that the BNP is a racist party: they see no problem with that, racism and patriotism side by side, not a problem. Is the BNP a racist party now?
No. It has some racists in it...
It had or it has?
No, I'm saying it has, just as does the Labour party, Lib Dem councillors in Midland and Northern cities who say terrible things to our councillors off the record about what they think of particularly Muslims but sometimes black people as well, things that actually, you know, shock and concern our people but it's genuine, there's a huge amount of racism actually in certain sections of society and there's no party which doesn't have some racists.
Your website says that the BNP is not racist, that it's a party that believes in England for the English. Does it still want to return Britain to pre-1948?
That is not something that will ever happen, it's where absolutely ideally, in the ideal world that never happens we'd like to be, I suppose just as the labour party for a long time had the Clause 4 and so on, everyone knew it was never going to happen but it colours what the party does in practical terms because the changes to our society since 1948 were done without any public consultation of the public whatsoever and with no democratic mandate.
Oh now hang on, people voted for...
No democratic mandate at all.
... the Government of the day
No, no no they didn't because they... in recent years the Commission for Racial Equality has formalised what was previously an informal thing that they've, in several recent elections, taken a compact declaration to all the main parties that hey sign in advance of the election, saying that they will not make race and immigration an issue in the campaign. And the same thing was done, with the sole exception of Maggie Thatcher who didn't actually particularly make it an election campaign, her 'swamp' speech was made in 1978 well before the election and The Sun was primarily, was used just to get it into people's heads and then she didn't actually make promises or pledges during the election, it was a piece of Conservative trickery but with that exception it's never really been an issue and the British public have never really been given a clear opportunity to vote for one party which says yes and one party which says no. It's a political elite project which sections of the Conservative party didn't subscribe to until part way through Maggie Thatcher's era but now, certainly under Cameron, the whole political elite is signed up to the same thing which is a self-evident given, which is that multi-culturalism is a good thing, that diversity is a great thing and anyone who opposes it is some kind of crazed fanatic who wants to murder lots of people just because they're a different colour.
Can you understand why people would think that the BNP was a racist party?
And that you're a racist when you say that you want people who are here, black and other non-white people basically, because the problem's not with second generation Polish or Irish people...
No but the problem is with the current influx of Poles as well, so it's certainly not about skin colour.
Is it not?
No it's not, it's about culture.
But surely a second or third generation Pole could join the BNP?
But a second or third generation black British person could not join your party so is it not about skin colour then?
No, it's not about skin colour.
Well, there's a kind of problem there isn't there?
It's a bout ethnicity and assimilibilty (sic) and it's primarily, there are problems here, there are all sorts of problems involved with race relations and immigration in Britain. The problem is fundamentally caused by the political elite, not just because they've done it but also in having done it, the injustice that's done to the indigenous people of these islands is so grotesque that you cannot make a stand against it really with half measures. Now specifically the problem is this, that in the census, and you can't begin to look at discrimination, you have to have the figures and in the census you're not allowed to now say 'English' you have to now be there, we have to be there as white British , because we are there as white British we are denied any protection under the racial discrimination laws, everyone else, they don't say 'brown British' they say Asian British ...
...or black British?
They say black British but then that's Afro-Caribbean and so on and everyone has their slot but we're not allowed to put down English and the phrase, the catch all white British gives us no protection under the race relations laws. You have 12,000 charities in this country, in fact over 12,000 charities for different ethnic groups and that's fine but you're not allowed one for the English. Now if the situation was that all these different ethnic groups were at the bottom of the heap with massive amounts of discrimination against them, you could say that's fair enough to level the playing field.
Some people would argue that they are
Positive discrimination runs through, almost as a mantra through almost the whole of British society. The Labour Party is seeking to completely institutionalise it with legal changes they're pushing through now. But positive discrimination has excited in council housing, in the police force, certain police forces won't even accept white, i.e. English or Scottish or Irish or Welsh or third generation Poles as recruits because they can't have any more recruits until they have more ethnic minority recruits because the ethnic minorities in Somerset and Sussex... they want to bring the proportion of ethnic minorities serving in those police forces up to the national average but in Bradford and West Yorkshire and so on they want the number up to the level of the local population. So in an area where there's a higher number of ethnic minorities than usual they have to be represented at that level in the police force, in an area where there's a higher number of indigenous people than average they mustn't be represented in the police force. That is discrimination. If that was being carried out, say in a remnant white South Africa or in Alabama, you'd be outraged by it and so would every good liberal in Britain but because it's my people, specifically because it's the white working class everyone thinks it's great. And it's a huge injustice and it's a core part of our job to put that right.
The majority of people in this country just don't believe what you say, they don't believe...
Yup, the majority of people don't believe what I say, primarily because this grotesque injustice is not reported by a political and a media class who, if it was happening to anyone other than the people it was happening to would be very exercised about it indeed. And it would be day after day, month after month in the newspapers, people would know. I'll give you an example: the Guardian more, I think the Independent did it as well in... if memory serves me right, it's in the stuff on our website about racism. If memory serves me right it was 2007 the Guardian ran a story about racist murder in Britain and it had pictures of the racist murder victims and the names of racist murder victims, since the publication of the McPherson report in the late 1990s up until that point and they had something like 42 people and they had, our analysis is a few people that genuinely didn't belong on it in any case but by being fairly generous with allowing people on there and so on, there was one white victim and that was Kriss Donald, and they even spelt his name wrong, now can you imagine if they'd spelt Stephen Lawrence wrong?
It's a pretty hard name to spell wrong
Well yes indeed, well Kriss spelt it 'K R I S S' but it was spelt wrong and he was the only one, now we applied the same criteria as the, I think it's the Institute for Race Relations had applied in terms of murder by a member of another ethnic group but we knocked out car accidents and things like that and we applied stricter criteria just, than they applied and by doing so we came up with more white victims of racist murder than the other way around and yet these people are the invisible victims and yet we're accused of racism for bringing this point up. The political elite and the voting class don't know these things so of course they're not going to be exercised by anti-indigenous racism because they don't know it exists but I can assure you that a key part of the reason why we got the vote we did, despite the demonisation level is that in significant parts of Britain you've got a working class or a lower middle class native population who have personally experience or who's family have experienced some degree of racism either from local councils or from the police or from the local media or from certain members of ethnic minorities and they are at they're wits end that no-one will talk about it, if they take it to the police the police say, 'well what's wring with you? Are you a racist? Did you encourage it and so on' and so amongst those people there is a very clear understanding of the fact that there is a very large problem with anti-majority racism in this country.
You have no problem personally with me?
None at all.
So why do you want me out?
Large scale multi cultural, multi racial societies are clearly seen to be fundamentally unstable. They only work when there's come repressive force to keep them in place. When the force is removed you get something like the former Yugoslavia or Rwanda. All the real horrors of human society are based when two tribes go to war.
You're not seriously predicting race wars in the UK?
In 2007 rear admiral parry, spokesman for the MoD's blue skies think tank, extraordinarily unmemorable name but if you Google him, the Sunday times did report it. The MoD, according to the times, now whether it was sensationalist or not I don't know but the times doesn't normally sensationalise on a huge scale, not like the tabloids, Guardian likewise ran it and their prediction was that the combination of mass immigration – it's not a number of people like yourself, it's huge numbers, in fact it said there's now 100 diasporas so these aren't people who've assimilated to our society or are here in significant numbers so they have a cultural identity and so on, which I approve of, I don't want everyone to mix in a merge and be exactly the same as us – very boring. They say 100 diasporas, this is people who are in here in such a number and such an ethnic difference they're a separate nation within here – in quite a few cases hostile to each other: Kurds and Iraqis and so on and this is being replicated all over western Europe and this combination of massive level of immigration and particularly radical Islam as a specific flashpoint, it will bring out unless the politicians change things – this is MoD saying this, not me - it will create a collapse of western civilisation across Europe on a scale not seen since the collapse of the roman empire. This is not Enoch Powell through a glass darkly, this is British MoD. And a chap, who was chief of the general staff at the time, he was asked by the times do you stand by this, is he right, and his comment was we're not saying it's going to happen, for which the liberals presumably breathe a sigh of relief, only that it will happen unless politicians change direction. So I'm not saying five to seven years, that's crazy stuff, I can't see how on earth they got that. I would say in 30 years it's inevitable that Europe will face a decision which is absolutely unavoidable between whether Europe will continue on the lines it is, which is founded on Christianity on the identities, including ethnic identities, and if you must the colour of European peoples and on the secular and democratic traditions that grew out of our Christianity and our way of doing things a choice between that and becoming an Islamic caliphate. There's no question about it, the government figures show it.
What is your problem with Islam?
My problem with Islam is I've got three daughters for a start. And Islam regards women as two thirds of a man. A black man should understand that problem: you don't want to be regarded as two thirds of a man quite rightly, and in the southern states you were. My daughters would be regarded as two thirds of a man in an Islamic state – not good.
No that's a part of it. I would have a problem if Jim there, who's a fanatical Christian protestant fundamentalist type and if we had a big fundamentalist Christian bloc – catholic protestant whatever, which wanted to impose a theocracy on this country I'd have a problem with that. I believe that Christianity is the fundamental of our culture, our freedom and our way of doing things. I believe it needs to preserved and I oppose the way in which the liberal elite takes every possible opportunity to do it down and to shut it out. But if there was a group which wanted to impose a theocracy and do away with separation of church and state which is part of the foundation of the constitution and the way of doing things which has made this country such a wonderful place, despite its many failings and so on and a place to which, presumably, your parents wanted to come, it's based on that, that separation of church and state. So if there were a bunch of Christians who wanted to do away with it I'd oppose them. It there are, they'd have no chance of gaining power because no-one else would go along with it whereas the Islamic population in this country is growing – by immigration, birth rate and by conversion, and my key problem with Islam – I've got no problem with Islam in the middle east, I don't think we should be there trying to make them westernised, that's not our job, it's not our right. My problem with Islam is that I've read the Koran, time and time again, very, very carefully. And I've studied it enough to know that when Tony Blair after 9/11 and 7/7 quoted bits from the Koran he's quoting the surahs which were written first when Mohamed was in a very weak position and the Medinan surahs which were written after this override the previous ones. All the nice cuddly fluffy bits are overridden. If you're a proper Muslim following the traditional hardline Islam which now dominates the world through the unfortunate fact that the hard line version, Wahabism, based in Saudi Arabia, happen to sitting on a sea of oil, the combination of Wahabi money and particularly in Britain the Deobandi influence – the Indian, Pakistani version of the Wahabis – we've got particularly in this country the most extreme form of Islam. It's not really extreme it's just the proper form it's the unrefined basic form and it reads the Koran correctly as a manual for conquering other people's countries. My problem is I don't think a civil war's a very good thing, and nor is submission to a creed like that. I don't have a problem with Muslims personally or anyone personally.
Why do you want to give me £50k to leave?
Because this country is the most overcrowded in Europe. To some extent I would agree with the greens that its proper carrying capacity is about 30m. Particularly with the peak oil problem – which is the real problem that politicians should be addressing and not climate change which is either nothing to do with us or nothing we can do anything about or which won't strike for another 100 years anyway – the real problem is peak oil and the implications of running out of oil for a civilisation which is built on easily available oil and the benefits it brings that this country should not have the population it has and what's more we need the most stable, homogenous population possible because anything less than that once you subject a society to the stresses of the economic impact of the crisis which is very rapidly approaching people instead of pulling together tend to fall apart. There's other levels to this. We believe human diversity is a good thing. Just as in the animal kingdom, it's a good thing. At present there are 5,000 different ethnic groups in the world, according to ethnographers. The same ethnographers say that by the end of the century there'll be 800 left, which is a catastrophic wipeout of human diversity, which will make the world a poorer place because belonging to your ethnic group is most people's way of having their identity their humanity. You can't belong to the whole world, you belong to a group which is partly defined by being other to other people's. There's no, there can be hostility there but not necessarily. It's not just a matter for the English or white people or whatever it's a matter for every people on this planet to develop an antidote to the homogenising pressure of globalisation. Otherwise you don't stop at 800 you go down to 600. In the end you go down to one. A global population which is the same, no history no roots, no identity.
People might think that was a good thing?
Some people might think that's a good thing but surely not the people who say "isn't it wonderful this diversity that we've had. Isn't it great all these different groups it makes the place so colourful interesting. If that's the case then fair enough. "
But if you throw those people out?
We're not in fact talking about turfing everybody out. We're talking about encouraging some to go. And it would benefit those countries in any case. There's another level here. The whole political elite and most journalists, not you so far, say wouldn't the health service collapse without these people. And you've got Nelson Mandela saying for god's sake stop stealing nurses from southern Africa. It would help those countries. And again, when the political elites say to the people around here, we're going to take your taxes and were going to throw £7bn in the next year or so is going to be our foreign aid budget because we have to help the third world. OK fair enough. And one of things is if we don't help the third world become stable then more will come here because there's social pressure and environmental degradation and all the rest of it. If those countries are a mess they come here, you don't want that so please pay them to go away, that's effectively what they tell the unfortunate British taxpayer. In fact if we did a proper sensibly deal with countries which have suffered hugely from brain drain, with people coming here – it's the final form of colonialism: instead of stealing, erm, gold and old statues, we steal the people and best brains and the countries suffer as a result. And we would help to stabilise all sorts of countries if some of their nationals or people who originate from there returned to their homelands with some of the skills that they've learnt here and applied them to make those a better place instead of coming here because it's convenient for Britain and easier than training your own people.
My homeland is here. I was born here.
This is where it's your choice. Trevor MacDonald is obviously happy here and presumably will die here. But one of his sons resettled himself back in the west indies. According to Bernie Grant, Labour MP who died a few years ago, he reckoned 40 per cent of constituents would be go back to West Indies and be happy there if there was a financial incentive, if they had their air fare paid and if they were guaranteed their pension and so on.
It's not just first generation. There's a significant number now look at the stats, more West Indians heading that way then heading this way now and there's grandparents taking their grandchildren back because they're appalled at the thought of them growing as black kids, especially black boys, in London where you've got a combination of an education system where discipline has virtually collapsed with a gangster, gun rap "culture" which believes kids who when they're 12 and 13 are lovely lads by time they're 15 they're wannabe hoods who walk around doing this sort of business and so on (gun shaped hand signal), 18 months later they get themselves shot or stabbed. There's plenty of West Indians that agree with us completely in certain policy things such as proper discipline in schools and so on but would be delighted if they could get their grandkids out of London's inner cities and back to the West Indies because they think they'd have a better life, in fact they might live. But if they're happy here and want to stay here then I think that as long as we had proper discipline in schools and the police force is allowed to clip 15 year olds around the ear when they're misbehaving without being accused of violence brutality or racism then we wouldn't particularly have a problem.
So you think the simple answer to immigration is send away those who want to go and the ones who stay accept discipline in schools and a clip round the ear from the police?
That would go a very way to dealing with the problem of black and black on black crime which comes as a result of this undisciplined, respect, gansta culture.
Lots of people in London's east end who were NF and would be BNP now have grandchildren from different backgrounds, Asian, Chinese. You have BNP members who have children by... the ballet dancer?
Yes, Simone Clarke. Sure, sure.
Isn't this a reality, don't you have to face it?
We have faced it. One of the reasons that some of people who were the old hard core of the BNP, who are either absolutely out of it and are very hostile or are still in it and miserable and on the fringes, one of the reasons that they detest me and the BNP as it goes now is that we've got Simone Clarke in the party. To them it's a monstrous thing and she shouldn't even be accepted. So, we've changed a great deal. You say do I understand why people think we're racist of course I do, because the media focus on the most extreme interpretation of the most difficult parts of where we have to stand without talking about how things have changed or the broader picture which is someone like Simone Clarke or there's a chap up in Cumbria who we had a near rebellion from the people who in the end went off in the schism of a couple of years ago over the fact that his daughter had married a Zimbabwean and he said I love my grandchildren, you know they're part black, doesn't make any difference to me. And we had a near rebellion because Margaret Winfield put this our newspaper Freedom and said yeah this is what the BNP actually is, we have no problem with this, which I would have thought the media would like to pick up because then people with mixed race grandchildren wouldn't think 'oh if the BNP come and leaflet round here they might beat up my grandkids'. It would surely be sensible for everybody to understand that really we're saying we haven't got a problem. In particular what I would say because of where we stand in terms of this idea of maintaining human, cultural and ethnic diversity, I personally think it's an unfortunate thing. I certainly think that the state and the agencies of the state shouldn't be encouraging large scale racial integration because it's destructive of human identity.
The state can't encourage people to have mixed race children!
Oh they do. That's the whole point. No state has the right either to encourage or to discourage people, let alone take action against people who meet someone else, fall in love and have children. It's not the job of the state or a political party. And any political party or state with that much power, has too much power. It would be a menace. But if you look at anything put out by any government agency, if you look at what's put out by the BBC, which is in the end part of the British political establishment, there's a constant huge pressure for the deliberate disintegration of all sorts of different ethnic identities in all sorts of ways but particularly by race mixing which I don't think is a good thing because it's destructive of everybody. It's not just my cultural identity it's your cultural identity. I'd expect you to want to have grandchildren who are like your grandparents and like you.
I want to have grandchildren who are happy and health and intelligent.
Everybody wants that. But large numbers – it's a big concern I know amongst west Indians – you've heard about the phrase whiting out, I assume. Well, I absolutely understand that, I sympathise with that. They don't want to be whited out. I don't think the English should be browned out either. You can't say that I'm a racist and I'm going to mass murder people or whatever, and there's plenty of media saying that, because I don't want my people browned out. Because I also accept and sympathise with the desire of west Indians not to be whited out. There's no racism here: it's a different way of looking at the world.
Hang on a second you can't just describe it as a different way of looking at the world? How would you feel if I moved in next door?
Nervous laugh. There is no house next door. In simple terms, if you moved in next door it wouldn't bother me in the slightest. But I wouldn't want, the only that would concern me, is if I was living in an area where there was a lot of houses, particularly if those houses were relatively cheap and so on, one family doesn't make any difference at all but, erm, where does it stop.
So if I moved next door and my brother the other side, then that would trouble you?
Well then, that would concern me because, historically, in the 1970s I spent a lot of time in the old east end with the old community, and it was a wonderful place: poor, rough and ready but extraordinarily hospitable and really good people with an identity of their own, most of those people, some of them are still there, and according to that book, the new east end by Katy Gavron, there's an enormous amount of really bitter hostility in the old white east end towards mass immigration they don't even vote for us. They're so alienated by the process they simply don't bother. That old east end's gone, that very traditional working class culture and an ethnic identity, you see the same thing in Preston we used to have xxx walks and so on. In a way that if that was done to any other ethnic group at the very least the liberal elite would be saying this is a terrible shame. In fact they'd be wanting to stop it. But because again it's white working class culture, they don't recognise it, they don't accept it they don't give a damn, they think, in fact, it's a good thing that it's gone.
A few individuals, yes of course they don't cause a problem but there's a point when a few individuals utterly transform an area and destroy a community, which the Labour party did very effectively by instead of renovating old houses or redeveloping in a similar way, flattening and putting into tower blocks, that's one way they destroyed the old east end, but also by bringing in so many different peoples that they totally swamp the existing people. It is about destroying communities. It's created enormous resentment and it's a great wrong.
What would you do, if one of your daughters?
Aghh, that one: everyone asks that one!
I think I have more reason to ask: what would you do if one of your daughters came home with I don't know an afro Caribbean like me, an African, Muslim, a non-white person and said: 'Dad this is it'?
I would be as disappointed as I know many Sikhs, Hindus and black people would be and I'd talk to them both about it, try and put them off. But in the end that's their business. Children grow up and do their own thing. I wouldn't go as far as say someone from the orthodox Jewish community could well do, which is to hold a funeral, a symbolic funeral for them. But I would ask you to again, unless you're going to condemn the former chief rabbi Jonathan Sacks for writing a book: Will our Grandchildren be Jewish, then don't call me a racist, or some kind of wicked bigot, for saying I would be very disappointed.
You've changed the look of BNP more respectable, less thuggish. You have some MEPs, councillors, Barnbrook. But with each day that passes, generation growing up now are multicultural. They live in a much more colour blind way than when I was growing up.
Colour is now much less of it. Colour is being replaced by culture. The thing is there's no correlation between BNP vote and the Sikh or Hindu population. There's a negative correlation with settled, particularly west Indian communities, in that the whites who didn't like it have moved to Somerset or the Costa del sol. They ones who stayed there are happy because of football and music and the fact that west Indians have a self image and tend to behave as fairly solid decent happy people apart from the problem of youth crime and there's plenty of little white scrotes running around as well, everybody knows it. But the huge correlation with our vote and our vote is only the tip of the iceberg, lots of people feel it I can assure you of that, the huge correlation is between Muslim populations and support for us. And that is the section of the ethnic community which apart from the eastern Europeans who are here for specific economic reasons which are now reversing to an extent anyway, that's the population which is increasing; that's the population with whom everyone has a problem.
When you say everyone, you mean from your organisation? I don't have a particular problem with Muslims.
The Sikhs, most definitely do, Hindus, large numbers of Christian black people do. And this is fault line when the Mod is talking about this horrific shambles of a future. That's the fault line. The fault line isn't colour –Powell got that wrong. The fault line is between Islam and the rest. We've said that in terms of how much money do we offer and so on, we would look at the people who are the least assimilable and I know there's a clash and a tension between where I stand between in an ideological and idealistic sense not believing we should assimilate and on the other hand if people are going to be there it's important that they do assimilate otherwise we have trouble. And there is illogicality there and the two things rub up against each other. It's a matter for debate and working out and muddling along, as is the British tendency in most things political.
We've said we in our expanded resettlement programme, and this is radical about this it already exists, the laws the rules and the funding have been in place since 1972 and the home office spent about a hundred thousand quid couple of years ago last time we looked on helping a couple of people who said 'I wanna go back'. If you send off to the home office for it they will send you literally a photocopy of a typewritten document from 1972 and it's an amazing thing, shows you what they actually think of that. We'd throw a lot more money at that, it wouldn't be a change in the law. And we've said that in deciding who do we really want to encourage to go then in other words pay them most to leave, then it's the people who are potentially the biggest problem in our society and that indeed is a large Islamic bloc.
If people are here while, hopefully, preserving their own cultural and ethic identities within our society, but still being part of our society, then that's OK.
So I can stay then?
Yes, because your people, people like you, basically have adapted – we're not that different to start with in any case – you're part of our society and don't rub up against it. Whereas the Muslim population, obviously there's large numbers who have integrated and so on, especially heritage Muslims, they don't particularly identify with or stick by everything Islamic. But one of the problems with the Islamic population is it has not, it resolutely hasn't amended its birth rate to be like ours. The Sikhs have, the Hindus have.
Surely economics mean what you're saying is wrong? In this country it costs a lot of money to have children.
Sikhs and Hindus have amended to the British norm, the Muslims have not.
There is a benefit of having lost of kids in British society because you get larger state handouts with lots of kids and if you're working on the black and if you have a community which is very tight knit and happens to be in a line of business economically – obviously it's a grotesque generalisation – which deals in cash, takeaways and taxis.
Not every Muslim in the country works in takeaways and taxis?
But in the Burnleys and the Blackburns significant numbers of them do. You see less of it in London. The Muslim population in London, very significantly lots of them came from cities. If you go to the northern cities of England, they didn't they came straight from some of the poorest peasant farming, and I don't use the word peasant in a pejorative sense at all. But from the poorest peasant farming parts where there's the least regard for education, the least regard for the rights of women and a bigger thing about having a large family. On top of that you only have to look at the jihadist and the semi jihadist web sites to see that they regard... Islam will conquer Europe. It won't do it through guns it will just do it through having lots of children.
Surely you don't believe that, that's nonsense isn't it?
Nope. There's an utter gulf of comprehension between us isn't there.
Isn't your basic problem, that the vast majority of people in this country are either highly antipathetic towards you and feel angry, or they're apathetic towards you? Isn't your problem that the vast majority of people in this country either ignore you or just think that you're a bunch of crazy people?
Your perception of a vast number thinking we're a bunch of dangerous crazies is coloured by the fact that your... a significant minority, from the number of comments, black looks or what our workers call screamers – people who come out of the house 'oi you fucking racist bastard – which used to be quite high you couldn't go down the street without a screamer, now it's so unusual it goes around the party grapevine that people in Wakefield had a screamer last night. The number of people who regard us with hostility and so on, your view is coloured by the fact that your work colleagues, the social circles you mix in and so on I would guess are from, it's a self reinforcing groupthink thing tend to be but the rest of the population, I've got a problem, everyone who wants to do something in politics has gone a problem that the rest of the population are not interested in politics or big long term issues: it's a problem for me, everybody.
I grew up in the east end, drank in pubs among people who supported the NF. There's not much like that now?
That's because of white flight. People have moved off to Clacton, Somerset. A hundred thousand Londoners left London every year for last 15 or so years. Front National has the same thing in Paris. It's a disaster for us not just electorally, it's the organisation effect because the moment someone with a bit of get up and go, the sort of person that any organisation wants, the moment that person decides this is wrong, this has gone too far, I'll do something about it, I know I'll join the BNP, they'll also put the house on the market or put in for a council exchange and go to Somerset. It makes it difficult. Your seeing the parts of Britain where people are comfortable with the old Britain being destroyed, obliterated. There's large parts where people aren't comfortable with that. I think there's a happy medium to be found. All people of politics, of ideas, go to extremes – I don't mean in terms of trouble or violence – shall we say, to the logical conclusions. And there's probably a happy medium to be found between the logical conclusions of obliterating Britain in the way which the metropolitan elites and the political class does want do. It's not just about immigration it's turning us into a province of Europe, it's globalisation, it's all sorts of things.
But isn't there an irony there: You sit there as an MEP elect?
Yes, there's an irony. Nothing more. Very necessary to have Euro realist MEPs. Not a good idea to have fox in charge of hen coop. Most of MEPs from main parties and so Europhile they probably won't see threats from incipient superstate to our national identity sovereignty, national identity and so on. So you need people who are sceptical to say no this is not in Britain's interests. This is something the British people never consented to.
You can't stop multiculturalism
If we'd been sat in café anywhere from East Berlin to the Urals in 1988 anyone who was of the mindset of Pravda, Izvestia and so on, and - with respect whose livelihood depended on it - would have said "you can't stop communism". Inevitability is the chief weapon of totalitarianism and we do live in a totalitarian society.
This is not a totalitarian society
It is a totalitarian society.
How is it a totalitarian society?
Anyone who has my kind of views who have almost every newspaper saying, it's good he got egged and you have politicians saying 'it's a shame he got egged, but he asked for this'.
Can you see why some people listening to what you've been saying to me would say you're like King Canute trying to hold back the tide?
You may well be right. I can have a more comfortable life, not necessarily such an interesting one, if I went along with the flow and said yes it's inevitable. But I believe, you put yourself in my position, if you believe what I believe do you think well we should give up or and things which you genuinely believe are wrong and dangerous to human happiness, not just to my people but to all people, things that are wrong I should just pass by on the other side of the road and let it happen. Why on earth should I do that.
So yeah we may not win. I don't believe we have a god given right to win or come to power in this country: It's not even likely. And in fact, as Powell said, all political careers end in failure. But an attempt to do something do anything in politics or in life, even if it doesn't succeed in its own way, it can achieve, through its opponents having to co-opt sections of it, the more successful we become the more opponents will have to co-opt.
Where does all this come from?
I don't hate or have any problem with black people other than I hope very much that they remain black people. Other than I hope their children will look as black as they are and as different and as interesting. And where it doesn't happen: it's not my business. No I haven't got a problem, so where does it come from? I don't really know.
- 1 Strictly Come Dancing 2014: Gregg Wallace joins line-up as final celebrities revealed
- 2 Notting Hill Carnival: Woman shares selfie after being ‘punched in face for telling man to stop groping her’
- 3 Keira Knightley topless: Usually conservative actress does own take on #Freethenipple campaign for Interview Magazine
- 4 Oil tanker with $100 million cargo goes missing off Texas coast
- 5 George Galloway left with severe bruising after attack in Notting Hill by man 'shouting about the Holocaust'
YouTube video posted by Isis militants shows 'execution of 250 Syrian soldiers'
Keira Knightley topless: Usually conservative actress does own take on #Freethenipple campaign for Interview Magazine
Oil tanker with $100 million cargo goes missing off Texas coast
George Galloway left with severe bruising after attack in Notting Hill by man 'shouting about the Holocaust'
Brother and sister, Christopher Buckner and Timothy Savoy, arrested for 'committing incest after watching 'The Notebook''
Robin Williams Emmys tribute led by Billy Crystal criticised for including 'racist' joke about Muslim woman
The Rotherham child abuse scandal is a tale of apologists, misogyny and double standards
Scottish independence TV debate: Pumped-up Alex Salmond bounces back in bruising second round against Alistair Darling
What do immigrants really think of Britain? Polish immigrant's Reddit post goes viral
Do you realise just how foolish the UK looks?
Ukip Douglas Carswell defection: Tory MP jumps ship to join Nigel Farage
- < Previous
- Next >
Highly Competitive Salary: Austen Lloyd: HAMPSHIRE MARKET TOWN - A highly attr...
£35000 per annum: Harrington Starr: Network Engineer (CCNP, CCNA, Linux, OSPF,...
Highly Attractive Package: Austen Lloyd: A VERY HIGH QUALITY FIRM A high qual...
£50000 per annum: Harrington Starr: DevOps Engineer (Systems Administration, L...