Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old June 13th, 2004 #1
Scotland88
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking BNP leader in Sweden

After a busy round of media interviews (including two ITV news slots and a late-night appearance on BBC Radio Five Live) late on Thursday night and early Friday morning, BNP Chairman Nick Griffin made a lightning visit to Sweden as guest of that country's National Democrats party (Nationaldemokraterna).

The main purpose of the visit was for the BNP leader to speak at an open air campaign meeting on Saturday morning in Södertälje, 20miles from the capital Stockholm, in order to secure extra publicity for the final stages of the ND's European election campaign, with voting taking place on the Sunday. This objective was achieved, and time was also set aside for productive top level discussions about future co-operation between radical nationalist electioning parties across Europe.




The election campaign has not only given them a national profile, but has already generated around 10,000 enquiries - a huge number from a population made up of just seven million Swedes and one million immigrants. Travelling with Nick as guests of the National Democrats were his wife, Jackie, and two members of the BNP's security team.


http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/2004_june/news_june30.htm
 
Old June 13th, 2004 #2
Librarian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Closer than you think
Posts: 1,385
Default

Why Sweden? Did someone tell him that they have money?
 
Old June 13th, 2004 #3
heaven above
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

No, old Nick always goes abroad when a serious election is on. Normally he swans off to the USA.
 
Old June 14th, 2004 #4
Kurt
Junior Member
 
Kurt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Why Sweden? Did someone tell him that they have money?


Great. Maybe he can convince them to take in more Indians and Jews. I mean, why should England keep them all to themselves?
 
Old June 15th, 2004 #5
Mithras
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You armchair-activists and your anti-BNP messages are getting very tiring. This is exactly why you don't allow rejects in the movement. You are acting like little children. Go back to SF where you belong, where you can sit on your ass all day and whine about the smallest little things.
 
Old June 15th, 2004 #6
Fredrik Haerne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Well, little things aside, it's a pity the BNP don't know more about the ND, who are lead by a true psychopath who makes sure his "party" will always remain only a tiny sect. They have existed for three years now, which is probably longer than they will remain on the scene, and good riddance.

I hear the UK Independence Party is anti-immigration, which has made its founder, who is no longer a member, join the establishment in calling it a "racist" party. I hope they can grow stronger, then. With twelve of the 75 British seats in the EU parliament they have gained that all-important credibility in the voters' eyes.

Last edited by Fredrik Haerne; June 15th, 2004 at 03:29 PM.
 
Old June 16th, 2004 #7
Scotland88
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrik Haerne
I hear the UK Independence Party is anti-immigration,
You hear wrong!!

They are simply an anti EU party, they have no policy against asylum seekers
 
Old June 16th, 2004 #8
Fredrik Haerne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotland88
You hear wrong!!
Do I?

Yet another reason for the UKIP surge: it has finally adopted a robust policy on immigration. The UKIP manifesto says Britain is “bursting at the seams.” It goes on: “We cannot sustain this increase, which compares with a city the size of Cambridge coming into Britain every six months”. . One of the party’s candidates in the South East, Ashley Mote, has written an excellent book on immigration, called Overcrowded Britain, and his influence is clearly felt in this new-found policy.

But, significantly, immigration reform carried in the teeth of some ferocious opposition from within the party. Roger Knapman said recently on this subject: “There’s a climate laid down by a Hampstead liberal establishment which has been accepted as the norm, and any view other than this is somehow a bit quirky or rightwing or extremist” (Nicholas Watt, Guardian, 2 June 2004). This view is still extant within his own party, even at senior levels.
. . .
The reality is that that the BNP, and also UKIP, exist because the major parties have failed to address the genuine concerns of many thousands of people up and down the country—about immigration and also about the abolition of their political expression, the British nation-state.


I'm sorry, but I know of the habit among nationalist parties to claim that their rivals in the same country are not nationalist, but anti-nationalist. The splinter group the National Democrats says the same thing about the Swedish Democrats in Sweden, and since I know all SD members are motivated by a desire to throw out the immigrants and destroy the EU, but merely choose to soften their language in comparison with the ND, I suspect the same scenario is true on the British scene.
 
Old June 16th, 2004 #9
Mithras
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrik Haerne
Well, little things aside, it's a pity the BNP don't know more about the ND, who are lead by a true psychopath who makes sure his "party" will always remain only a tiny sect. They have existed for three years now, which is probably longer than they will remain on the scene, and good riddance..
I don't know much about the ND, but what makes a "true psychopath"?

Are the SD any better?

Quote:
I hear the UK Independence Party is anti-immigration, which has made its founder, who is no longer a member, join the establishment in calling it a "racist" party. I hope they can grow stronger, then. With twelve of the 75 British seats in the EU parliament they have gained that all-important credibility in the voters' eyes
THE UKIP are ultra-capitalists, so you probably would like them. Though I wouldn't call them anti-immigrant. None of their members, whether voted in or not, have achieved anything, but as dead-weight. That's why the media are promoting them, because they're not a threat to the establishment.
 
Old June 16th, 2004 #10
Fredrik Haerne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Seriously, I'm not using the word psychopath lightly here. The guy's name is Tor Paulsson, and although his wife's father is the official party leader, Paulsson is recognized by all as the real strongman as his father-in-law is easily pushed around. He lies without blinking: he has expressed admiration for the Left's Big Lie technique and said nationalists should do the same, which he does all the time, particularly about the SD and about the own party's strength. And if people don't show up to meetings and demonstrations he calls them and yells at them; he is even better at yelling at people in person. He is also good at flattering people, but eventually they can tell he is only doing that in order to use them.

So people come and go in the party, and it never grows much; Tor Paulsson always claimed they would grow stronger than the SD, the party they undermined before being thrown out, in a matter of a few years, but people seem to understand now that won't be happening. The only ones who stay in the party for a longer time are those who still admire Tor Paulsson like fanatics; the ND is nothing more than the Tor Paulsson Fan Club. So mainly it's a club for young men with a taste for beer and brawl.

The SD is approximately seven times larger in terms of membership and votes, and has a presence almost everywhere except in the northernmost parts of Sweden; the ND is strong in Stockholm but has little presence in the rest of the country. Neither the SD nor the ND name the Jew. The SD was founded in 1988, and it took more than a decade for it to stabilize, as nationalists are an individualistic bunch. Its language is softer than that of the ND, and it has dropped some of its more hardcore stances such as advocating the death penalty, wanting to throw out all asylum seekers come to Sweden after 1970, and making it illegal to adopt non-European babies; this caused the skinheads and such to claim the party was betraying its roots, and so they left. The ND, however, also softens its language to some degree, so basically it's just a matter of degrees.

In short, the SD is the party a middle-aged couple with children would be comfortable joining, whereas the ND is the party a skinhead would be comfortable joining. When the ND says "Throw out the scum and the traitors!" the SD says "We need to make repatriation of refugees possible."
 
Old June 16th, 2004 #11
Fredrik Haerne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tor Paulsson used to be a door-to-door salesman of vacuum cleaners; nowadays he doesn't look for a new job, but just lives off his wife and the party. He was the head of one of the phalanges in the Swedish Democrats; his crowd was strongest in Stockholm, and had about one third of the seats in the SD's board of directors. In conflicts with the phalange centered in the south of the country they would usually win over most of the unaffiliated directors, but they still did not have their own majority, so they set out to undermine the board and create a "party within the party."

They made plans to spread rumors about board members in order to blacken their names, and carefully planned who should start what rumor and when. They would also harrass board members in various ways; for example, they arranged it so that a woman would send letters in a desperate tone to one board member in order the "destabilize" him.

All this they carefully wrote down in protocols from their secret meetings, but the other board members got hold of those protocols -- written in Tor Paulsson's handwriting, so it was an open and shut case. Also, to their astonishment the other board members found out the ND bunch had registered a new party name (the National Democrats) as a plan B option, in case they wouldn't be able to take control of the SD.

The SD called for an extra meeting with the general assembly, which usually only gathers once a year to elect the board of directors and so on. It was clear the ND crowd would lose the votes and be expelled, since they were in the minority, perhaps one third of the assembly. However, they wanted to fill the room with their followers, in order to intimidate the assembly, and so the SD board of directors decided that only assembly members would be allowed to be present. The ND followers then tried to force their way in by force, but eventually failed. Then they were expelled.

The ND harrassed one board member in particular after that, even going so far as to stalk him for a time, but I won't go into that in detail. Anyway, the ND vowed to crush the SD and take its place, which has been the main focus of its activities ever since.

This last election is an interesting case. In Swedish elections you take a slip of paper with your party's name on it, place it in an envelope and put it in the ballot box. You can also get a slip at a post office and send it in ahead of election day. ND members have stolen a great deal of SD slips from post offices, and been caught doing it in at least one case. True to form the party leadership then wrote on its homepage that it is the SD that has stolen ND slips from the post offices.

The ND also sent out internal emails encouraging members to contact the internet company Passagen, which provides free space for homepages, and urge them to close down local SD websites, calling them "racist" and "for commercial use". This they succeeded in, but some members sent the internal email to SD members. (In some places, local SD and ND members are still friendly with each other. Often these are people who used to work side by side before the ND leaders were expelled in 2001.)

On election day ND members went on a campaign in Stockholm, stealing SD slips from the election offices all over town; perhaps 50 percent of the election offices were reached. Naturally communists were out on the same campaign, but where these strike they steal both ND and SD slips, so it is easy to tell when it is a communist or an ND member who has been there.

No doubt the ND's earlier lie about SD members stealing their slips from post offices was a way to anger its own members, preparing them for the theft campaign on election day. And then, unbelievably, Tor Paulsson writes on their homepage that it is the SD that has gone on a theft campaign against the ND! This is the Big Lie technique that Paulsson is so fond of.

However, all SD and ND activists with any connection to the affected areas know the truth, which is how I know of it. And not all ND activists are happy to be part of such illegal activities; but on the other hand, they have been so conditioned to hate the SD that it is a difficult step for them to switch sides, although some have started to do so; a former member of the board of directors in the ND, for one.

Since the ND are so few (even though Paulsson et all write on their homepage that it is the SD that has almost no activists) they have a hard time placing slips in all the election offices, and so need to explain to their sympathizers why there are no slips available. To claim that they are big enough to accomplish the task, but that the SD has then stolen the slips, is a convenient excuse.


As for the election result, the Swedish Democrats got 1.13 percent of the votes, an increase from the EU election of 1998 when they got 0.3 percent. It would probably have been more had not many voters instead opted to place their votes with the newly formed June List, a gathering of EU critics who have been prominent members of both left and right parties, and who received enormous media coverage before the election and so gathered 14.48 percent of the votes. The ND got 0.29 percent.

The SD got 1.4 percent of the votes in the last Riksdag election, and so now has more than one percent of the votes in both the Riksdag and EU elections; this is good, since if you get more than one percent of the votes you get your money back for the cost of producing slips, and for the next two elections the election offices have to make the slips available to the voters, and make sure there are slips available throughout the day. Naturally, this means a lot to a small party, and combined with its growing membership cadre this makes it entirely possible that the SD enters the Riksdag in 2006, giving the people nationalist representation once again.

Last edited by Fredrik Haerne; June 16th, 2004 at 01:22 PM.
 
Old June 16th, 2004 #12
Antiochus Epiphanes
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
 
Antiochus Epiphanes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrik Haerne
Seriously, I'm not using the word psychopath lightly here. The guy's name is Tor Paulsson, and although his wife's father is the official party leader, Paulsson is recognized by all as the real strongman as his father-in-law is easily pushed around. He lies without blinking: he has expressed admiration for the Left's Big Lie technique and said nationalists should do the same, which he does all the time, particularly about the SD and about the own party's strength. And if people don't show up to meetings and demonstrations he calls them and yells at them; he is even better at yelling at people in person. He is also good at flattering people, but eventually they can tell he is only doing that in order to use them.........."
wait a fucking second-- this guy sounds like bill clinton. in the US he would be a very successful politician! Lying is an art dammit! In the US that is why all politicians come from the profession of the paid liar, lawyers!
 
Old June 18th, 2004 #13
Mithras
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

If what you say is true then it is another classic divide and conquer disaster that is tearing apart the nationalists. In one way this is good insofar as the internal party is considered, that the emotionally unstable members are cleared away. But in the sense of the voters all this does is wreak havok. In preventing this from occurring, Nationalists should to be more regional. They should be happy just working on taking over their own small region and having power as a regional director, rather than become greedy and seek to run the whole national party.
 
Old June 18th, 2004 #14
Mithras
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The ND claim on their site that

Quote:
The National Democrats are not a political party only but also harbors the ambition of being a movement of general education. Many of today's problems are rooted in the fact that people are being obstructed from acquiring important knowledge, examples being how a healthy and wholesome life may be lived, or why society is what it is.
We would revive Swedish traditions and absorb the wisdom of generations past, the better to see what insight it could impart to us in our modern society. Knowledge is the key to freedom, since knowledge imparts the will to act. The goal of the National Democrats is to lend a political face to the nationalist movement in Sweden. The nationalist movement, with all its shapers of public opinion and associations of interest has ramifications throughout all parts of society.
And further

Quote:
The National Democrats endeavor to further their own political program but do not maintain the objective of offering competition to other nationalist groups. Neither is it our objective to mainstream nationalist ideology.
On the contrary, we would work for an exchange of knowledge and experience, as well as offer a forum for discussion that may expand our horizons and create an accord between different nationalist groups.
However, the SD claim that

Quote:
We are nationalist democrats and dissociate ourselves from all forms of totalitarianism and racism. Our party have declared that we consider the UN universal declaration on human rights as fundamental for our politics.
And also,

Quote:
We nationalists are all in the same boat, and should accordingly support one another as much as possible.
Not exactly. The UN is the enemy of European Nationalism. I don't support any "UN declaration" and surely not make such a fundamental of my politics. What a stupid thing to write. I wonder if they actually believe this?
 
Old June 18th, 2004 #15
Fredrik Haerne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yes, it is true.

You judge a nationalist party by its website? That has to be the most flawed way ever of getting to know a party.

Bruno Mégret broke with Le-Pen and formed his own party, in another of those endless splits that are tearing nationalists apart. It followed the exact same pattern: after some time of brawling and writing boastful declarations, a party decides that it needs to act more mature and soften its words in order to get votes from the lemmings. Someone in the party, who wants to rule on his own, accuses this of being treason to the Ideals and forms his own party, which of course is destined to enjoy an inevitable victory some day because its Thoughts are so Pure.

After that, both Le-Pen and Mégret have brought the other to court accusing him of making "racist" remarks.

Incidentally, psychopath Tor Paulsson has told his own activists on at least one occasion to "not talk to those people, they are racists!" in public, pointing at SD members. He also shouted to the SDers that "I will crush you!" on the same day. Any wonder why mature people leave the ND after some time?

So when a nationalist party says it isn't racist, you should know better than to place any weight to it. The laws in Sweden ban "racism" in a number of ways, and to claim the party isn't "racist" is a way to get around that. Besides, the anti-White definition of racism, that a racist is a demon from hell who hates everybody, doesn't fit any of us, does it?

Now, the UN declaration: there was a nutty pro-Semite in the SD, who was expelled last December. On the annual assembly meeting nine months earlier he put forward a motion that the SD should declare itself "loyal to the UN declaration of human rights." What SD members said then was that this was a hell of a stupid motion, for now if they voted no the media could use it against them, saying "The SD rejects the human rights declaration!" So enough people decided that they had to vote yes. But in practical terms it meant nothing, as the party politics remain just the same. Probably on some assembly meeting in the future someone will come up with an eloquent enough way of stating why the Declaration stuff should be stripped from the party program, and so it will be gone.


But of course, to most nationalists watching a country's politics from afar, it is just much more pure and feels much better to side with the party that proclaims the most uncompromising, radical, violent and undemocratic views, since that's what is the most cool. Hell, I'm radical and undemocratic too. Maybe I should support the National Socialist Front in Sweden, and pray for them to fulfill their Destiny and establish a dictatorship. They only have about fifty permanent members, but why should I let reality stand in the way of my dreams?

By this rule I should be an enemy of the Confederation too. After all, they were democrats, and they didn't have any anti-Semitic policies. Good that those compromising weaklings were destroyed, so a true WN party can take their place.

Still waiting for that true WN party to take over the South ... any day now....

Last edited by Fredrik Haerne; June 18th, 2004 at 11:58 AM.
 
Old June 18th, 2004 #16
Mithras
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

First of all, don't put words in my mouth. I don't play that game.

The SD describing their own party still display how pro-UN they are. Anything that legitimizes the UN which is anti-Europe in so many ways is foolishly promoting the wrong ideas. Why even support any "UN declaration" then when clearly the UN is the enemyy of nationalism? Since when is the UN pro-human rights? They want to rob people of their property, their right to free speech, freedom of association, and right to tradition. All nationalist parties must expose the UN for what it is. Supporting it is surrendering not "maturing."

After the UN voted to not recognize genocide of whites in zimbabwe they should be the last ones to be associated with human rights. How dare any nationalist support, much less make "fundamental" anything the UN says or does?

Last edited by Mithras; June 18th, 2004 at 12:37 PM.
 
Old June 18th, 2004 #17
Fredrik Haerne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithras
First of all, don't put words in my mouth. I don't play that game.
Okay, sure.

Now you're getting all carried away about that UN stuff. I already described the story behind that, and from that you should be able to tell it was no big deal. Does it have any practical meaning whatsoever? No. Now, declarations about the EU, that has more practical meaning behind it. And the SD opposes the EU just like all sensible nationalists. And they also oppose the UN-romanticism so common in the West. But it's not like demanding a withdrawal from the UN is the most important thing Sweden needs right now: heck, Putin and Hussein have never withdrawn from the UN either.

Highly dangerous if we would allow tactical rhetoric to make us denounce a party as a traitor and join the True Faith Splinter Party of the Week. There were splinter parties in the nineties as well, didn't last long any of them. This one has perhaps four hundred members and a psychotic leader who makes sure all normal people leaves the party, so instead of accountants you have skinheads and instead of competence you have street fights.... Way to make Swedish retired folks and couples with children vote for you. A party that treats their votes with contempt just because they aren't muscle-bound youths is a party that needs to go.

No, I suggest, as always, a two-pronged approach. A country should have one party or other organization that tells the truth about the Jews -- which of course will make them small as a peanut, but no matter. Then the country should have one party that is anti-immigrant but does not name the Jew, and which therefore can grow to throw out the darklings and protect free speech. That is good for the Jew-naming party as well; as a comparison, it is a hell of a lot easier for a communist party to gain followers in a socialist country like Sweden than in a conservative one.

What we have now in Sweden is the NSF filling the role of being the small organization that carries on the truth about the Jew, and the SD that fills the role of making Swedes think in nationalist terms again and protecting free speech. That's all a softer nationalist party needs to do, everything else is optional. The UN or not, hell, doesn't matter. Right-wing or left-wing economics, hell, doesn't matter. The SD is socialist in its economic policies, and still I hope the party will grow, because I know how to compromise. The only thing that is important right now is to throw out the dark races.

Last edited by Fredrik Haerne; June 18th, 2004 at 12:54 PM.
 
Old June 18th, 2004 #18
Antiochus Epiphanes
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
 
Antiochus Epiphanes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrik Haerne
Okay, sure.

Now you're getting all carried away about that UN stuff. I already described the story behind that, and from that you should be able to tell it was no big deal. Does it have any practical meaning whatsoever? No. Now, declarations about the EU, that has more practical meaning behind it. And the SD opposes the EU just like all sensible nationalists. And they also oppose the UN-romanticism so common in the West. But it's not like demanding a withdrawal from the UN is the most important thing Sweden needs right now: heck, Putin and Hussein have never withdrawn from the UN either.

Highly dangerous if we would allow tactical rhetoric to make us denounce a party as a traitor and join the True Faith Splinter Party of the Week. There were splinter parties in the nineties as well, didn't last long any of them. This one has perhaps four hundred members and a psychotic leader who makes sure all normal people leaves the party, so instead of accountants you have skinheads and instead of competence you have street fights.... Way to make Swedish retired folks and couples with children vote for you. A party that treats their votes with contempt just because they aren't muscle-bound youths is a party that needs to go.

No, I suggest, as always, a two-pronged approach. A country should have one party or other organization that tells the truth about the Jews -- which of course will make them small as a peanut, but no matter. Then the country should have one party that is anti-immigrant but does not name the Jew, and which therefore can grow to throw out the darklings and protect free speech. That is good for the Jew-naming party as well; as a comparison, it is a hell of a lot easier for a communist party to gain followers in a socialist country like Sweden than in a conservative one.

What we have now in Sweden is the NSF filling the role of being the small organization that carries on the truth about the Jew, and the SD that fills the role of making Swedes think in nationalist terms again and protecting free speech. That's all a softer nationalist party needs to do, everything else is optional. The UN or not, hell, doesn't matter. Right-wing or left-wing economics, hell, doesn't matter. The SD is socialist in its economic policies, and still I hope the party will grow, because I know how to compromise. The only thing that is important right now is to throw out the dark races.
I am taking two paragraphs from this excellent post and starting a new thread at politics. fred obviously gets electoral strategy and 90% of the scribblers in the socalled movement do not. my old threads on this topic went nowhere but we'll see if a few months has made any difference.
 
Old June 18th, 2004 #19
Mithras
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You are freaking out. If the SD are so great then why do you have to write pages on why I should support them, just because I criticized their bit about the UN??? So little confidence in your party. If only you and the SD were saying the RIGHT things.
 
Old June 18th, 2004 #20
Fredrik Haerne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithras
You are freaking out. If the SD are so great then why do you have to write pages on why I should support them, just because I criticized their bit about the UN???
Eh? *L* That sounds funny. You are really trying to tell me that because I write a few sentences (no, not pages, sorry) about something, that makes the thing suspect? Yeah, right. Then given the quantity of posts about White Nationalism in this forum, shouldn't White Nationalism in itself be suspect?

Heck, every cause on the face of the earth should be suspect by that logic!

No, you'll have to do better than that. "My" party? What makes you think it's mine, anyway?

I am guessing here, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm guessing you have some emotional investment in this. Probably you have met some ND members, or you have at least chatted with them online, and that makes it difficult for you to listen to criticism about the party.

Emotional investment I say, because you sure don't bring up any facts here, and don't address the things I have brought up either.

Quote:
If only you and the SD were saying the RIGHT things.
Yes, that's the attitude of the true armchair warrior: "We must never hide our beliefs!" Right?

Well guess what, the ND doesn't name the Jew either. So obviously they agree with me that you can't tell the voters everything you believe. Now are you going to attack the ND for that, or was your complaint about gradualism just a convenient way to get at me?
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17 PM.
Page generated in 1.49959 seconds.