Clear Conscience

Heres a song i wrote a while back and just found again.



Clear Conscience


I miss the old days

When the world seemed just fine

Yes I miss the old days

Not watching my back all the time

Not prejudged by my views

Believing what I was told on the News

But now I know



Ones I thought I loved

Avoiding me

I try to show the light

But they wont see

Places I liked to go

They don’t want to know me at all

I know I’m right



A social outcast?

Some racist scum?

You look at me like

What have I done?

You look at me

So high and mighty

I’ll tell you now

Ill keep on fighting



Your lies no more

Work with me

I know theres a way

We can be free

I’m not gonna take this

Shit no more

I know I’m right

I know for sure



You can try your games

On me my friend

I wont give up

I’ll fight till the end

Yor crap doesn’t fill

Me with fear

At the end of the day

My conscience is clear....



At least i can say

My conscience is clear



I still miss the old days

But I’ll never turn back

My conscience is clear now

Can you say that?



Joey Smith 27/3/2008

Old story - same warning.

A few years ago, during the ‘December rebellion’ I tried to stay impartial, as to get a clear view of the situation, and as I had friends on both sides. In fact it may surprise SOME people that I am STILL friends with Colin Auty.

Nothing to do with what he or I politically believe, but the fact that we actually get on with each other.

Anyway one thing that stood out during the conflict to me was that they (the said rebels) posted a video of Mark Collett getting threatened by some Nutzis, and clearly in distress. Now whether you disagree with someone, or if you don’t even like them, showing a video like that in a public place not only made me cringe but destroyed any respectability to their cause.

I am glad it did.

Whilst surfing the net I came across this old article.


Membership List Leak – A Response


It is unfortunate that a response has to be made regarding the disgusting accusations emanating from the lie filled mouth of Nick Griffin, yet in order to set the record straight we feel that a response is indeed necessary.

Firstly we would like to point out that the publication of the BNP membership list is a treacherous act which will have repercussions for the entire Party and nationalism in general. Whoever has done this should be utterly ashamed of their spiteful actions. Whatever the reasons for the publication of the list, ordinary BNP members should not have to suffer because of the crass incompetence, flawed personality and arrogance of the Party Leader.

The BNP website carries an “urgent update” from the BNP leader, Nick Griffin. This update blatantly accuses those involved in the December 2007 dispute, which had its source concern expressed by several leading Party members and senior officials over the disgraceful protection by the Chairman of two individuals who had brought and continue to bring the Party into disrepute and heap embarrassment through their incompetence, immaturity and selfish behaviour. Griffin, a man who like so many contemptible politicians can be detected lying when his mouth open’s hardly conceals his ill-founded and thoroughly false suspicions that Kenny Smith, the previous Head of Administration, of being responsible for the publication. This is a disgrace and a downright lie. None of the six people involved in the April 2007 court case want to see the BNP suffer at all. Moreover, they certainly do not want to see the thoroughly decent members and activists suffer at the hands of filthy communist scum. Seeing Nick Griffin get his deserved comeuppance is one thing, harming the Party is completely different. Neither Kenny Smith, nor any of the other co-defendants who Griffin and Darby took to court leaked/published the database.

Nick Griffin has clearly landed himself in very hot water by alleging that the publication of the list proves ‘Contempt of Court’. He says that the web host’s legal department has been contacted by the BNP and that the BNP are liaising with their solicitors about how to use this against the six defendants in the ongoing court action.
We would dearly like to see the BNP find out who did this and we would like to see them brought to book. When the real culprit is found we will be expecting a full public apology from Griffin, with damages for the smearing of our names.

In reality, the publication of the membership lists simply shows the contempt in which Griffin holds the BNP membership. By allowing gross inefficiencies in BNP departments (which was the main reason behind the December crisis whereby sickened national officials could not take any more incompetence from two departments and were sacked for speaking out) Griffin is to blame. The fact that up to a dozen (possibly more?) people may have, or have had a full database is bad enough when the database is the BNP’s prize asset. However, the real problem is that Nick Griffin has such a terrible record for falling out with senior BNP officials who criticise him in any way that the list of his enemies is seemingly endless. Because of the way in which Griffin treats those who have given their all for the BNP, he creates a rod for his own back in that some people (in this case misguidedly) may do things which damage the BNP in an attempt to attack Griffin himself.

Further, the rather arrogant way in which the BNP web team and Griffin himself dismiss the membership leak as ‘a publicity bonus’ is truly shocking when you consider that many members and activists with a sensitive job have now been exposed to violent communist bully boys and their backers at Searchlight and UAF. We have already had calls from people who have had such threatening calls and our sympathies go out to them. For Griffin to brush this off, and to wrongly claim that ‘former employees’ were to blame is beneath contempt. Griffin has once again shown just how little he really thinks of the everyday BNP member.

We suggest that the Party Chairman:

1.) Immediately apologises to the six court defendants (who have never been found guilty of anything despite the malicious Griffin/Darby prosecution) and to Kenny Smith in particular.

2.) Actually contacts Dyfed-Powys Police rather than just pretending so, in order to start the ball rolling as to who did actually leak the list.

3.) Actually contacts the web host’s legal department and gets them to shut down the offending websites.

4.) Starts to act in the interests of the members and not operate once more in a zone of self-survival which leads to utter contempt for the feelings of the average BNP member.

Just a little food for thought on how close we nearly came to bowing to the wishes of these people. Let’s make sure we’re not naive enough to let it happen again.

Multiculturalism and Mouthwash

Analogies can be a useful tool, as they enable one to get a point across using a comparison to something mutual and universal. I have been using this one analogy for some time now, and it has always been well received.

When I talk about mouthwash I am referring to the Dentyl brand, that’s the one that is made up of two separate colours (see picture). I am sure that most of you are familiar with this brand, and how it works.

When you look at places such as my hometown of Dewsbury and the demographics of where various groups settle, you can draw a similarity to the mouthwash. Sounds silly, doesn’t it? Well hear me out. The mouthwash is made up of two different colours, for example blue and red.

At this point I would like to make clear that I am not using this to compare skin colour, but as an example of how different cultures fail to integrate with each other.

Anyway the two colours sit alongside each other, never mixing and sitting with no reaction. Then you shake the bottles and a reaction occurs. The liquid turns a purple colour (in this case) and there is a lot of activity inside the bottle. Eventually the activity dies down as the two colours return to their original state.

Dewsbury is like this. When the government “opened the doors” to immigration in the seventies the assumption was that the newcomers would embrace our culture and be glad to be part of it. They would set up next door to Mr and Mrs Jones and everything would be hunky dory. Unfortunately it rarely happened like that. Forced integration upset people on both sides. British people were upset that they did not get a say in this, whilst the new immigrants were upset at the suggestion of adhering to new rules and norms. Sooner or later this leads to conflict.

Just like the reaction in the mouthwash when you try to force the two chemicals to mix, people came to blows, whether verbally or in some cases physically.

Now most people do not like trouble, so in order to avoid conflict people on both sides sloped back amongst their own kind, some for fear of the unknown, some to avoid conflict, but most just to feel safe. Years later these groups of people have stood their ground amongst their own and areas have become “one culture only” areas.

In Dewsbury, although local politicians and community leaders deny it, the general consensus is that places such as Chickenley are “white only” areas, whilst the Saville Town district is a mainly Asian area that many people describe as a “white no-go area”.

http://www.thepressnews.co.uk/NewsDetails.asp?id=3922

http://www.thepressnews.co.uk/NewsDetails.asp?id=3929


I use Dewsbury as an example, as it is my hometown, but there are reports this is happening all over Britain when forced multiculturalism takes place.

So to sum up my analogy, when forced to mix there is a big reaction which results in a more hostile separation than before, both in the chemical world of mouthwash, and in little towns such as Dewsbury.

By being the only party acknowledging there are divisions, we can start to work forward in addressing the problem and doing something about it, for the sake of everyone involved.

Me at the Red, White and Blue 2009

Copy of an email I have just sent

Dear Mr Pinder.

It was with great regret that I read the comments you made regarding the British National Party in your recent column within The Press. “...we had the perfect answer to the fatuous and barely literate arguments of the BNP. We were honoured, for the first time, to welcome four Gurkha veterans”

My first thoughts upon reading this were that you probably had a problem with the British National Party because Nick Griffin legally got elected as an MEP by the PUBLIC, as a pose to yourself. Then I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you are just misinformed. Let me clear things up for you.

As I am sure you are well aware by now I am not “barely literate” as you describe, and neither are these arguments. I feel this is both very juvenile and ill researched. Mr Griffin himself is a Cambridge graduate and we have various other academics within our party, including teachers, doctors etc.

Now secondly the argument that we would somehow be dismayed at the welcoming of Gurkha veterans (who fought alongside us), into a remembrance parade, is just laughable. We have stated an various occasions that we have no problems with anyone who wishes to settle here, apart from the obvious (not enough houses, jobs and room on the roads), so long as they agree to abide by our laws, and contribute to the wellbeing of our society. In fact I have shared a stage with Nick Griffin whilst honouring ALL our war heroes.

Maybe you got your information from an article in the Sun newspaper, which they later had to apologise for, as it was a complete fabrication.

It may surprise you to know that our proposed voluntary repatriation scheme differs none to the one already in place.

We find it disgusting that our veterans fought against Hitler’s idea of a European super state, only for our politicians to sign away what we fought for, years later. We (the BNP) are still fighting this fight.

Anyway to end I will link you to a song from one of the artists at Great White Records (the BNP’s own record label).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwC3X_jVaEU

I think a full and frank apology should settle this matter.

I look forward to your reply.

Joe Barber
Aka Joey Smith, BNP singer, songwriter and activist.

The Three Types of Anti-Fascist

First of all I hate the phrase “Anti-Fascist”. This is a contradiction as what they practice, through limiting our freedom of speech, is directly the equivalent to the modern day definition of “fascist”. I could discuss the origins of the word “fascism” but that’s for another day! I prefer to refer to them as “under informed sheep”.

I’m sure many of you will have come across “the great unwashed” as, in jest, we refer to them. They were probably trying to prevent you entering a meeting of some sort held by a perfectly legal, democratic party. Or maybe they were bravely giving you a phone call, off a withheld number, and hanging up before you even have a chance to reply to the insult. They could have been “trolling” a forum or article on the internet, to give the false impression that they have a lot more support than they actually have.

Either way I hope you will agree with me that most of this is based on cowardice. In fact I remember a certain head of BNP security telling me that the only time they get charged upon, is when the police were there, and even then they charge straight towards the police, as they know the police are limited to the amount of force they can use. Mind you, would you really fancy the job of taking on Martin Reynolds? I know I wouldn’t!

When we actually dissect (not literally) the likes of the UAF, searchlight and other “anti-fascist” movements, I find that they are set into three very distinctive groups. “Midgets, transvestites and the rest are weirdoes?” I hear you cry. Well joking aside, I believe it runs deeper.

At the top are the people in charge, the likes of David Cameron, Gordon Brown, other politicians and top trade unionists. These people do not really care about the message of perceived unity and harmony the UAF pretends it follows. All they care about are consolidating their public positions. As the British National Party is the only British party that believes in aiming for TRUE meritocracy, and the abolishment of the ruling elite, they support any movement that will stop this, as they frantically try to claw on to the elevated positions they hold. Unfortunately this is at the expense of democracy (and of course all the hard working union members, who mostly are unaware where the money they pay in goes).

Next down the line are the true degenerates. These are people that are so insecure with themselves that they choose to believe in communist ideology, as this brings everybody else down to their level. Rather than choose self improvement, it is easy enough to pass the blame on the world around you, and take it out on those you see as superior to yourself. Because of the promotion of meritocracy within nationalism, they see this as a threat that they will have to foot the blame for their own status in society.

The third group, mainly students I believe, are the majority. These are people who just misunderstand nationalism and I believe they cannot be blamed for it. After all, if all the lies told about the BNP were true, I myself would be alongside them. But we know they are not. Up until the last five years, the British National Party have been something of a myth to most people, with no general media coverage, and no means, apart from the odd leaflet, to really get our message across. This has lead to a lifetime of indoctrination against us. On top of that the horrible stories they make up about us, laughable to anyone in the know, could be convincing to younger minds. They genuinely believe that we are a holocaust denying, Hilter worshiping group of thugs.

The challenge here is convincing them that we are not. This has become easier since the growth of the internet as they can now view our side of the argument, and even liaise and debate with supporters through social networking. Sites such as YouTube also help us get our message through with multimedia videos dispelling the myths about us.

The bottom line is that we should not hold this against the majority; instead we should seek to disprove and discredit the first two categories of people. Once accomplished the majority should cease to protest, realising the flaws in their arguments, and in the best case even join our growing ranks.

I know we are still a long way from this but already we are starting to gain some ground. More and more, younger people are approaching us, and instead of blatantly shouting abuse, they are asking genuine questions.

I really believe people are starting to wake up and smell the coffee, and this will prove to be the undoing for the far left.

The UAF and two of their finest.

Should the BNP endulge the media?

So you get a phone call from some journalist wanting an interview. You agree to participate because after all you know that what you are saying is right, and surely your beliefs are strong enough to counter any arguments that are thrown against you.

Then the interview gets published.

Oh dear, they have heavily edited it and placed you in a really bad light! All of a sudden the friendly, bubbly journalist, who convinced you they were a nationalist supporter/voter/sympathiser, has turned on you completely. Does not sound fair, does it?
Well that’s the way it is I’m afraid. The challenge we face is how to get our points across without leaving room for the reporter to edit and twist. After all, the reporter is looking to sensationalise the story in a bid to earn his/her crust. And because the majority of media outlets (the papers, television channels etc) are run by the ruling elite, the only way for a journalist to sell a story on the BNP, is if it depicts the party and its members in a negative light. In fact it is part of the NUJ guidelines to report on us in a negative light (see here http://bnp.org.uk/2008/03/the-media-reporting-on-the-bnp/ )

So what to do about this? Firstly we could just refuse to do any sort of interviews whatsoever, as it nearly always will be a hatchet job. The problem with this is it then suggests that we have things to hide. We could insist that we get full editing rights before we give the interview. This again suggests we want to hide something, and completely goes against our core values of freedom of speech. My personal favourite is that only selected people speak to the media. The positive aspect of this is that there is little risk the interviewee will make huge blunders, as they are fully trained by the BNP press team, and any negativity can be honestly truly blamed on the biased editing of the reporter/editor. The problem with this method is that it is always the same people and again gives off the impression that all other members are incapable of holding their own. Also sometimes it is good to get varying angles on the same point.

Remember however hard we try the press will always find some radical halfwit who claims to be “a normal BNP member” sat in front of his swastika, burning his gollywog!

However things may be starting to look better. The general public’s faith in the trustworthiness of the media has been dwindling for some years now. More and more people are reading between the lines, and drawing their own, more accurate conclusions. Look at the media response to Nick Griffin’s appearance on question time, compared to the public response. Whilst the general media attitude was that Nick “crashed and burned”, the majority of the public who watched decided that it WAS a hatchet job, despite the mass media telling them different.

So to close, my advice if you are approached for an interview. If you really feel capable go for it, but remember it’s not just your reputation that is on the line, it’s the reputation of all your nationalist brothers as well. Can you handle that responsibility?