This is going to be a long post, even by my standards, but I’d ask you to bear with me as the information it contains is most illuminating.

Paul Staines, who blogs under the psedonym ‘Guido Fawkes’ has recently run a series of typically snide posts about a registered charity, The Smith Institute.

The Smith Institute is a policy research organisation set up in the memory of the late John Smith MP (Reg Charity No. 1062967) with the aim of the advancement of the education of the public in the field of study and research into the economy of the United Kingdom (it’s official charity objects) and describes itself as:

The Smith Institute is an independent think tank, which has been set up to undertake research and education in issues that flow from the changing relationship between social values and economic imperatives. In recent years the Institute has centred its work on the policy implications arising from the interactions of equality, enterprise and equity.

It has close, and obvious links, to the Labour Party, as you might expect from an organisation founded in the memory of a former leader of the Labour Party. It’s charity trustees include Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale, a former foreign policy advisor to John Smith, Lord Haskel of Higher Brougton, a Labour Peer and Chairman of the Institute, Baroness Rendell of Babergh, otherwise known as the author Ruth Rendell and another Labour Peer, together with John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, and Baron Joffe, a cross-bench peer and human rights lawyer who represented Nelson Mandela at his trial in 1964.

The current interest in Conservative ranks in the activities of The Smith Institute, and its apparent links to the Labour Party, specifically to Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, is nicely reflected in the contents of the Smith Institutes’ Wikipedia page.

The Smith Institute is a think tank in the United Kingdom. It was founded in memory of the late John Smith QC MP, former Leader of the Labour Party.

A large number of the thinktank’s events and meetings are held at Number 11 Downing Street, the Chancellor’s official residence, and the organisation enjoys extremely close ties with Gordon Brown. The director of the Institute is Wilf Stevenson, one of Gordon Brown’s closest confidants (Brown was best man at his wedding). The Smith Institute is currently the subject of a second investigation by the Charity Commission, which is examining whether its political ties with Gordon Brown breach the rules governing charitable organisations. The Shadow Chief Secretary,Theresa Villiers, has also recently written to the Information Commissioner to request an inquiry into the Treasury’s refusal to clearly state the full extent of the links between Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute.

Ed Balls, now Labour MP for Normanton and former Chief Economic Advisor to Gordon Brown, was given a (paid) Senior Research Fellowship at the Institute after he left HM Treasury to stand as a Parliamentary candidate in 2004.

This also, pretty much covers the entire contents of Paul/Guido’s recent ’stories’, which, when you sift out all the usual egomaniacal grandstanding amount to allegations that The Smith Institute is ‘too close’ to Gordon Brown and, therefore may have compromised the legitimacy of its claim to charitable status; and that it may have ‘bent’ the rules, somehow, by employing Ed Balls in 2004, which may be difficult to prove as the rules, such as they are in Charity Law, are far from clear on this kind of practice.

Everything else, amounts to no more than the usual tittle-tattle, innuendo and, in places, misrepresentation of mundane happenings in a form contrived to deliberately smear the organisation and the Labour Party.

In this post, for example, he refers to the Institute as “the “non-political”, tax subsidised, “public educational charity”, the Smith Institute”, while here he takes the smear a little further by stating:

Who knows how much the Smith Institute gets in kickbacks* from the Treasury as rebates for “charitable donations” from secret donors.

Adding the footnote “*Legal, but not exactly transparent or a good example of open government.”

All that Guido is referring to here is the fact that as a registered charity, The Smith Institute is entitled to make use of the ‘Gift Aid‘ system when receiving donations from individuals, a system introduced by the Conservative government in 1990 and revised by the present government in 2000, when the previous maximum limit on donations was abolished, or a similar system that exists to cover corporate donations.

All registered charities are entitled to use the system, if they wish, and all received the same benefits:

Gift Aid allows individuals who are subject to UK income tax, to complete a simple, short declaration that they are a UK taxpayer. Any cash donations that the taxpayer makes to the charity after making a declaration are treated as being made after deduction of income tax at the basic rate (22% in 2006/7), and the charity can reclaim the basic rate income tax paid on the gift from HMRC. For a basic-rate taxpayer, this adds approximately 28% to the value of any gift made under Gift Aid. Higher-rate taxpayers can claim income tax relief, above and beyond the amount claimed directly by the charities. The rate of the relief for higher-rate taxpayers in 2006/7 is usually 18%, the difference between the basic rate (22%) and the higher rate (40%) of income tax, although recipients of savings income (taxed at 20% and 40%) and dividend income (taxed at 10% and 32.5%) can achieve higher rates of tax relief (20% and 22.5%, respectively).

The Smith Insitute is funded by donations and, as with any registered charity, is not required by law to publicly disclose the identity of its donors in its accounts. Since beign founded in 1997, its annual income has grown for £91, 050 in its first year to a peak of £503, 011, in 2004-5, before falling back slightly to £483,815 in 2005-6.

The one newspaper, thus far, to take any significant interest in Paul/Guido’s smear stories is, unsurprisingly, the Daily Telegraph, who gleefully told its readers on 25th November 2006 that:

Figures filed with the Charity Commission show that the Smith Institute took £2.2 million in income during the seven years to the end of March 2005, including more than £500,000 in the last reported year.

The possible relevance of the Telegraph’s interest in all this will become a little clearer later on in this article as will this…

Iain Dale alerted Guido to this PQ a few days ago:

Mr Keith Simpson (Con, Mid Norfolk): To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer which charities have held meetings at 11 Downing Street since December 2005.

Mr Keith Simpson (Con, Mid Norfolk): On how many occasions since December 2005 the Smith Institute has held meetings at 11 Downing Street and who attended each.

John Healey (Financial Secretary to the Treasury): I will let the Honourable Member have a reply in due course.

Which refers to this post of Iain’s on 9 January…

Of interest to Mr Guido Fawkes of this parish, from today’s Hansard (not yet published…)

Mr Keith Simpson (Con, Mid Norfolk): To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer which charities have held meetings at 11 Downing Street since December 2005.

Mr Keith Simpson (Con, Mid Norfolk): On how many occasions since December 2005 the Smith Institute has held meetings at 11 Downing Street and who attended each.

John Healey (Financial Secretary to the Treasury): I will let the Honourable Member have a reply in due course.

It is hardly rocket science to answer two simple questions like that, is it? Do I detect the sound of shredded attendance lists…? Perhaps we’ll get this answer from John Healy…

This could be entirely innocuous, after all this is something that would be interest to Paul/Guido given that he’s fronting what looks for all the world like a smear campaign against Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute.

It could also, however, be construed as what was once commonly referred to as ‘tag-team trolling’ in which two posters on a Usenet group or online forum would deliberately ‘bounce’ comments off each other in what looked, to those on the outside, like a simple conversation between two posters but which, in fact, was a carefully co-ordinated exercise is ’story-telling’ designed to avoid any one individual being ‘tagged’ for too obviously pushing a specific agenda - Tag-team trolls would usually have put their head together, privately, by email, and got their ’story’ straight before entering the newsgroup or forum and then build the story over a series of conversational posts, with each adding more detail/information in turn.

This is actually a very effective method of infilitrating and subverting a forum without getting marked as a troll, as no one participant ever throws too much information into the ring at one time to make it obvious what they’re doing.

And that, apart from a fairly poor effort to conflate his Smith Institute smears with his other pet ’story’ of the moment, the ‘loans for peerages’ investigation is Paul/Guido’s Smith Institute story in a nutshell, although there is one further example of misrepresentation that is worth noting.

In this post, Paul/Guido highlights a statement issued by Damian McBride (described as Gordon’s spinemeister) which attempts to blow off the Smith Institute ’story’ and other unsubstantiated rumours linking Brown to the loans for peerages investigation.

What is particular interesting here is the slant that Paul/Guido puts on these two posts - the one containing McBride’s statement is entitled ‘Ferret Watch: Brownites vs Blairite” while the other, posted the following day, claims that journalists were briefed is a very particular manner:

This is all a “Mandelson smear” the Sunday papers were briefed. Guido has no formal link with Mandelson, but he has been digging into “the Sith” sleaze for months. When is a smear not a smear? When it is the truth.

No actual evidence to back this last claim up, of course.

In both cases, the impression that Paul/Guido is deliberately attempting to convey is one in which the alleged ’smears’ against Brown are a result of a ‘dirty war’ within the Labour Party itself, one resulting from the apparent rivalry between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

This is, indeed, one possible explanation but not the only one.

There is another possible explanation and that is, quite simply, that there is indeed a ‘dirty war’ being waged, one in which efforts are being made to smear Gordon Brown and the Smith Institute but that the origins of this ‘war’ lies much closer ot Paul/Guido’s political ‘home’ than he cares to admit.

It is tempting to see his Smith Institute stories nothing more than another variation on his usual modus operandi of using bits of lobby gossip to jump in on breaking political news stories just before the mainstream press and then try and take the credit, but the Smith Institute material seems a little different to his usual fodder in as much as it looks for all the world as if, in this case, Paul/Guido is actually trying the make the story, rather than jump in on the back of the MSM’s ‘investigations’.

Paul, in the guise of Guido, likes to present himself as an anarchic figure; one with no overriding political alliegence or partisan agenda - just a tabloid slash ‘n burn merchant who’s in it for the fun of bringing down the politicos on all sides - and you could be forgiven for thinking that given that he does at times have the occassional ostentatious dabble in appearing to bait the Conservatives - most recently by popping up on Webcameron to ask why ‘Dave’ has dodged a question about loans to the Tory Party from near-anonymous non-trading companies.

Paul/Guido does, however, have some more substantive previous form, as his entry on Sourcewatch, nicely illustrates:

Paul Staines is a former member of the Committee for a Free Britain, a shadowy organisation which was funded by Sir James Goldsmith, Rupert Murdoch and David Hart. His self described role with the organisation was as “a foreign policy analyst”…

“Generation Ecstasy : Into the World of Techno and Rave Culture” by Simon Reynolds describes him as “a Libertarian Conservative whose day job was as assistant to rabid freemarket ideologue David Hart, one of Thatcher’s favorite advisors.” David Hart masterminded the breaking of the miner’s strike and was a favourite courtier of Thatcher. She would ask multi-millionaire Hart to make suggestions for her speeches. Staines as aides-de-camp was reputed to come up with the jokes. Hart and Staines shared a right-wing hippy libertarian outlook.

And, of course, as we all know…

Paul Staines has neither denied or confirmed that he is the author of Guido Fawkes’ Blog. The popular political gossip site won the 2005 Guardian Political Commentary Blog of the Year Award and has a large following in media and political circles. “Guido Fawkes” co-edited with Iain Dale the bestselling Little Red Book of New Labour Sleaze published in May 2006.

So, Paul/Guido has previous form as a member of an organisation funded by Goldsmith and Murdoch and, possibly, even as a gag-writer for Margaret Thatcher.

Not quite the independent operator he would like to be seen as.

So, a quick recap before we move on, and things begin to get really interesting.

Paul Staines (aka Guido Fawkes) has a histoiry, according to Sourcewatch, which connects him (perhaps only loosely) to some fairly high-ranking figures on the politicial right and has one current known associate within Conservative ranks, the party’s most high profile blogger and a co-author with Paul/Guido of the ‘Little Red Book of New Labour Sleaze’, Iain Dale.

Paul/Guido is currently running extensively on a ’story’ that is attempting to call into question the relationship between The Smith Institute and Gordon Brown, one in which he is suggesting that the Institute is no more than a Labour Party ‘front organisation’, thereby raising questions as to the Institute’s right to be registered as a charity and enjoy the benefits of charitable status, which include an exemption from payment of corporation tax in income and use of the Gift Aid system when receiving donations, which may boost its income by way of allowing tax to be reclaim on donations.

Having worked through Paul/Guido’s material, I decided that this whole business of political think-tanks operating under charitable status merited a little further investigation, and began to do a little digging.

To clarify the legal position here, registered charities are permitted, in Charity law, to engage in political activities but - and this is important - they may do so only on the basis of well-founded research and only in a non-partisan manner. Charities can ‘do’ politics but not party politics.

And, indeed, there are many non-party political policy research-based charities (i.e think-tanks) out there, ones that do a lot of very interesting and valuable work; two of the better known of these are the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the King’s Fund.

So, I decided to take a look at the charity register to see just what kind of think-tanks there are out there, at present, operating under charity law.

Before going on, I should add that all the information that follows is sourced from the public domain, using only information from the Charity Commission, Wikipedia and documents and webpages located using Google and on the website of the organisation who’s name I am about to reveal as the focus of my investigations.

There is no insider information, lobby gossip or Paul/Guido-style tittle-tattle in this article, and where doubts exists about the accuracy of information, this will be clearly indicated in the text.

Using only the word ‘Policy’ as a keyword on the Charity Register, I very quick alighted on a think-tank whose name ‘rang a bell’ and seemed eerily familiar, one by the name of…

Policy Exchange

(To some amongst B4L’s Brighton contingent, that name may see a little familiar - read on and all with be revealed…)

Policy Exchange, like the Smith Institute is registered charity, albeit one founded only in 2003.

And like the Smith Institute, it is funded by private donations and does not disclose the identity of its donors - it doesn’t have to, remember.

And like the Smith Institute, it receives sizeable sums of money from these anonymous donors in order to do its work - £568,2003 in 2004-5 out of a total of £1,542,811 received in the three years for which accounts have, so far, been submitted to the Charity Commission.

Whether it makes use of gift aid, I have not as yet ascertained… but then Paul/Guido has never produced evidence to show that the Smith Institute uses the gift aid system, either. However, as both of these charities undertake research in the field of economics, one might well that both do make use of the system, if only because it would look a bit silly if they didn’t.

And like the Smith Institute is has registered charitable objects that require it to operate as a non-party political organisation:

The purposes of the charity are: 3.1 the non-partisan advancement of education of the public in the economic social and political sciences and their effect on public policy and the policy-making process in the UK and the promotion and publication of objective research; 3.2 the pursuit of such other purposes which are exclusively charitable within the laws of England and Wales as the directors of the charity (hereinafter referred to as “the trustees”) shall determine.

And like the Smith Institute it carries out public policy research, which includes economics, in addition to work on social policy and political sciences.

And, in much the same fashion as the Smith Institute, Policy Exchange describes itself on its own website in this fashion:

Policy Exchange is an independent think tank whose mission is to develop and promote new policy ideas which will foster a free society based on strong communities, personal freedom, limited government, national self-confidence and an enterprise culture.

While the Smith Institute, as you might recall from earlier, says that is it…

…an independent think tank, which has been set up to undertake research and education in issues that flow from the changing relationship between social values and economic imperatives. In recent years the Institute has centred its work on the policy implications arising from the interactions of equality, enterprise and equity.

Their is one other area in which Policy Exchange exhibits clear similarities with The Smith Institute, and it is that which has been the focus of my inquiries.

The Smith Institute has some obvious links with the Labour Party, not least its origins, and these links are pretty quickly and easily identified…

Policy Exchange also has some obivious links to a mainstream political party (and maybe even to Paul/Guido, as you’ll shortly see); the Conservative Party. In fact one might even reasonable observe that Policy Exchange, an ‘independent think tank’ operating as a registered charity is actually a veritable rat’s nest of Conservative Party members and associates with identifable links and connections running all the way to very highest level of the party.

To begin with, we’ll look only at the staff of Policy Exchange, which actually refers to them on its website as ‘experts.

For each of the 11 current ’staff’ members I’ve provided (below) a copy of their profile from the Policy Exhange website, plus, where relevant, additional information not included in their official profile but easily identified from other sources.

POLICY EXCHANGE - THE ‘EXPERTS’

Nicholas Boles, Director/Charity Correspondent.

Nicholas Boles is the Director of Policy Exchange. He was born in 1965. He read PPE at Magdalen College, Oxford and won a Kennedy Scholarship to study for a Master’s in Public Policy at the Kennedy School, Harvard University. In 1995, Nicholas founded Longwall Holdings, a small group of manufacturing businesses supplying the DIY industry; he remains non-executive chairman of Longwall. In 1998, he was elected to Westminster City Council as a [Conservative Party] representative of the West End ward. He served as chairman of Westminster’s Housing Committee from 1999 to 2001. In early 2002, Nicholas acted as associate producer of the West End production of The Mysteries.

What the Profile Doesn’t Say:

Boles was the Conservative Party candidate for the Labour-held marginal seat of Hove for the May 2005 general election.

He has been placed on the 170-strong ‘A-List’ of Conservative candidates ahead of the next general election but has not applied for any constituency nominations and is an entrant in the primary to find the Conservative Party a candidate for the London Mayoral election.
…

James O’Shaughnessy, Head of Research.

James O’Shaughnessy is Head of Research at Policy Exchange. He read PPE at St Hugh’s College, Oxford, and after graduating taught at the Mathieson Music School, Calcutta, before returning to the UK to work in new media. He joined Conservative Central Office in 2001 where he led the education research team. He was Head of Research at public affairs agency LLM Communications before joining Policy Exchange in 2004. For Policy Exchange he co-authored More Good School Places (2005) and edited the award-winning series of reports on housing and planning reform: Unaffordable Housing (2005), Bigger Better Faster More (2005) and Better Homes, Greener Cities (2006). He is Chair of Governors at Garratt Park special school in Wandsworth.

…

Dr Oliver Marc Hartwich, Research Director

Dr Oliver Marc Hartwich is a Research Director at Policy Exchange with responsibility for economic competitiveness. He was born in 1975 and studied Business Administration and Economics at Bochum University (Germany). After graduating with a Master’s Degree, he completed a PhD in Law at the universities of Bochum and Sydney (Australia) while working as a Researcher at the Institute of Commercial Law of Bonn University (Germany). Having published his award-winning thesis with Herbert Utz Verlag (Munich) in March 2004, he moved to London to support Lord Matthew Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay [Liberal Democrat Peer] during the process of the Pensions Bill. He is the UK Representative for the German think tank the Institute for Free Enterprise. He is the co-author of Unaffordable Housing: Fables and Myths, Bigger Better Faster More, and Better Homes, Greener Cities. He joined Policy Exchange in January 2005.
…

Munira Mirza, Associate Fellow

Munira Mirza writes and broadcasts on issues related to multiculturalism, cultural identity and urban regeneration. She is an arts consultant for the London East Research Institute and is currently working on her PhD at the University of Kent. In 2005 she presented The Business of Race, a series for BBC Radio Four on race and diversity. She edited the Policy Exchange report Culture Vultures in February 2006. Munira is also part of the Manifesto Club [actually a founding member], which will launch in November 2006.

…

Nicholas Hillman, Associate Fellow

Nicholas Hillman has been a Policy Adviser on pensions at the Association of British Insurers and a Research Fellow of Policy Exchange since autumn 2003. Between 2000 and 2003, he was the Senior Research Officer to David Willetts MP. He has written on social policy for a number of organisations, including the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Age Concern, the Centre for Policy Studies, Politeia and the Bow Group.

Work with other political think tanks:

The Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) was founded by Sir Keith Joseph and Margaret Thatcher in 1974 to champion economic liberalism in Britain and has since played a global role in the dissemination of free market economics. It continues to have a vital role as the champion of the small state.

Politeia is a think tank established in November 1995 that generally supports free-market based initiatives. Its patron is the Marquess of Salisbury and its director is Dr. Sheila Lawlor. Among those on its advisory council include Professor Tim Congdon, Professor David Dilks, Dr. Oliver Letwin MP, Francis Maude MP, David Willetts MP.

The Bow Group describes itself as the oldest - and one of the most influential - centre-right Think-Tanks in Britain. The Group exists to develop policy, publish research and stimulate debate within the Conservative Party. It has no corporate view, but represents all strands of Conservative opinion.

Prominent members of the group have included, Geoffrey Howe, William Rees-Mogg, Norman St John-Stevas, Michael Howard, Norman Lamont, Peter Lilley and Christopher Bland.

…

Gavin Lockhart, Research Director

Gavin is a Research Director at Policy Exchange with responsibility for health and crime and justice research. He was born in 1979 and studied Sociology at Edinburgh University. After graduating in 2002 with a first class degree, Gavin worked as a management consultant and spent two years advising clients in UK Healthcare Industry. Gavin joined the Policy Exchange in August 2006.
…

Jesse Norman, Senior Fellow

Jesse Norman is Senior Fellow at Policy Exchange, having previously served as Executive Director. He was a director at Barclays before leaving the City to research and teach at University College London. He was educated at Oxford University and at UCL, where he holds an honorary research fellowship in philosophy. He also serves on the advisory board of the Roundhouse, an urban regeneration project for young people in London.

Jesse’s most recent book is Compassionate Conservatism: What it is. Why we need it, co-authored with Janan Ganesh, and published by Policy Exchange.

What the Profile Doesn’t Say:

In 2006, Norman was selected to be the Conservative parliamentary candidate for the new constituency of Hereford and South Herefordshire in the next UK general election.
…

Dean Godson, Research Director

Dean Godson was Chief Leader Writer of the Daily Telegraph. Prior to that he was also a feature and profile writer for the Sunday Telegraph. He is the author of Himself Alone: David Trimble and the Ordeal of Unionism (Harper Collins, 2004), widely hailed as one of the most authoritative books on the Troubles. He regularly comments on national and international affairs for The Times, Sunday Times, Prospect and The Wall Street Journal. He edited the Policy Exchange publication Replacing the Routemaster.

What the Profile Doesn’t Say:

A Dean Godson is listed as having been a Conservative Party candidate at the 1997 General Election in the constituency of Great Grimsby. He came second. Whether this is same Dean Godson is, as yet, unconfirmed.
…

Roger Gough, Research Director

Roger Gough is a Research Director of Policy Exchange. After reading PPE at Magdalen College, Oxford, he worked as an international investment analyst for fifteen years. He lived in Japan from 1988 to 1991 and later specialised in the European banking industry. At the 1997 General Election he stood as Conservative candidate for Dulwich and West Norwood. He is currently an elected member of Kent County Council, and serves as Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Supporting Independence.
…

Anna Reid, Associate Fellow

Anna Reid is the former director of the international programme at Policy Exchange.

She worked for The Economist, on the business desk and then as Kiev correspondent, from 1989 to 1995, and has written two books, Borderland: a Journey Through the History of Ukraine (Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1997) and The Shaman’s Coat: a Native History of Siberia (Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2002). She has edited many Policy Exchange publications, including Size Isn’t Everything, Lion Cubs, and Taming Terrorism. She is currently writing a history of the World War II Siege of Leningrad for Bloomsbury.

What the Profile Doesn’t Say:

Reid’s Policy Exchange biography fails to mention that she was also the Kiev correspondent for the Daily Telegraph from 1993 to 1995. This is listed in her literary biography on several websites.
…

Louisa Mitchell, Research Director

Louisa is a research director with responsibility for the environment and the financial services. She read Chinese at Cambridge University and after graduating in 1994, joined the corporate finance department at Schroders. She spent eight years working as an investment banker in Hong Kong and New York, latterly for Goldman Sachs. She then consulted for the private sector arm of the World Bank in Hong Kong and became Director of ASrIA, the Association for Sustainable and Responsible Investment in Asia. She moved to London in 2003 and joined The Whitley Fund for Nature as Director. In 2006 she spent several months writing for the Financial Times and then joined Policy Exchange.

CONCLUSIONS

Of 11 ’staff members’:

Two are currently on the Conservative Party’s ‘A-List’; Norman, who has been selected for what looks like a very winnable semi-rural constituency, and Boles, who has not sought a Parliamentary constituency as yet, but has put himself forward as a possible candidate for Mayor of London.

Two (Boles and Gough) are confirmed as having been former Conservative PPC’s with a third (Godson) awaiting confirmation.

One (Gough) is currently a Conservative local councillor and holds a senior position position is his local authority.

We also have an ex-employee from Conservative Central Office, a former senior researcher to David Willetts MP (currently Shadow Secretary of State for Education) and two former Daily Telegraph journalists.

And through Nicholas Hillman, we also have clearly identifiable connections with three high profile Conservative Party think tanks (all non-charitable) whose combined past and present ‘memberships’ read like a who’s who of the upper echelons of the Conservative Party ovet the last thirty years, taking in everyone from Keith Joseph and Margaret Thatcher to Oliver Letwin and Francis Maude.

…

But enough of the Staff Writers, what about other ‘guests’ who’ve published material through Policy Exchange?

Here we find rather more variety of political opinions, with published essays by Simon Jenkins and Martin Bright amongst the material that can be downloaded from the Policy Exchange website.

Nevertheless, the ‘guest list’ throws up a few more interesting names and associations.

POLICY EXCHANGE - A SELECTION OF GUEST AUTHORS

Matthew d’Ancona

Matthew d’Ancona (born 1968) is a British journalist. A former deputy editor of The Sunday Telegraph, he was appointed editor of The Spectator (replacing Boris Johnson) in February 2006.
…

Tim Palmer

Former leader of Dorset County Council (Conservative - confirmed by PoliticalHack in comments)
…

Glyn Gaskarth

Gaskarth is (was?) the Membership Secretary of the Conservative Think Tank ‘The Bow Group’ which describes itself as:

The Bow Group the oldest - and one of the most influential - centre-right Think-Tanks in Britain. The Group exists to develop policy, publish research and stimulate debate within the Conservative Party. It has no corporate view, but represents all strands of Conservative opinion.

James Panton

James Panton is a tutor in politics at St John’s College, Oxford and co-convenor of the Battle of Ideas. He is co-founder of the Manifesto Club and sits on the steering committee of Pro-Test, the Oxford-based group which campaigns in defence of vivisection.
…

Mark MacGregor

Former Director of Steven Norris’s campaign to be Mayor of London
…

Antonia Feuchtwanger

Antonia Feuchtwanger was a financial journalist for the Evening Standard. She worked for the Daily Telegraph as banking correspondent for five years, later contributing leaders, features and profiles. At the Independent on Sunday, she devised the Any Other Business column and acted as Deputy City Editor. Before journalism, she worked at Morgan Grenfell in capital markets and corporate finance in London and New York. She is a graduate of Cambridge University.
…

Alicia Collinson

Alicia Collinson was educated at St. Hugh’s College, Oxford, obtaining M.A. and M Phil degrees, and is a Harmsworth Scholar. She is the wife of Damian Green MP, Conservative MP for Ashford

…

I’ll leave you draw your own conclusions, but would note that amongst the ‘guests’ we have Matthew d’Ancona and Antonia Feuchtwanger, both of who have worked extensively, in the past (and at present in d’Ancona’s case) for titles in the Daily Telegraph group - the same newspaper that has taken the greatest interest in Paul/Guido’s ‘Smith Institute’ ’stories…

Much more important than Policy Exchanges ‘guest authors’, or those for whom it has hosteds event, which include:

George Osbourne MP

Michael Gove MP

William Hague MP (his first major speech as Shadow Foriegn Secretary, no less), and

Dr Irwin Stelzer (not an MP but columnist for the Sunday Times, senior fellow of the Hudson Institute and, most recently, editor of ‘Neoconservatism’. Policy Exchange hosted a breakfast event at which Stelzer reviewed US monetary policy and the outlook for the world economy, to be followed by a round-table discussion with a small group of senior policy-makers and corporate leaders. all sounds rather similar to one of the Smith Institute meetings that Paul/Guido is trying to sell as being a bit ‘dodgy’.

Much more important even that the ringing endorsement to their work to be found on their website’s home page:

“Under the brilliant guidance of Nicholas Boles, Policy Exchange has become one of the seminal influences on political debate in Britain.”

Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP

In fact more important than anything else, is the matter of the Policy Exchange’s Charity Trustees; the people who a legally in control of and responsbile for the organisation as a whole…

…and, again, the line-up turns out to be very interesting indeed.

…

POLICY EXCHANGE - THE ‘TRUSTEES’

Similar drill to before, here. I’ll be giving the names of the organisation’s trustees, past and present, with, where available, some relevant biographical detail…

Charles Moore

Charles Moore (born October 31, 1956) is a British journalist and former editor of The Daily Telegraph (1995-2003).

He was educated at Eton and Trinity College, Cambridge where he studied history and was a friend of Oliver Letwin. He has previously been editor of The Spectator (1984-90) and Sunday Telegraph (1992-95). He resigned as editor of the Daily Telegraph to spend more time writing Margaret Thatcher’s authorised biography, which will be published after her death. Moore’s first publication was a pamphlet for the Salisbury Group titled ‘The Old People of Lambeth’, published in 1982 [1]. He currently writes for two of the publications he previously edited, The Spectator and The Daily Telegraph.
…

George Robinson
Being a relatively common name, it is difficult to be certain here that I have identified the correct George Robinson, however at this time and until most substantive information emerges the most likely candidate would appear to be this one:

Alderman George Robinson MLA (born 30 May 1941) is a unionist politician in Northern Ireland.

Robinson was educated at Limavady Technical College and is a retired civil servant. He was elected to Limavady Borough Council in 1985 for the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). He was elected as the MLA for East Londonderry in 2003. Robinson was elected Mayor of Limavady Borough Council in June 2002.

He is DUP Party Spokesperson on Social Development.
…

Colin Barrow CBE (resigned 18 Jan 2005 according to last published accounts but still listed as a Trustee on the Charity Commission’s website)

Conservative Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Westminster City Council.
….

Mr Timothy Steel

No definitive information as yet

There is a Mt Timothy Steel listed on www.attheraces.com as the owner of a racehorse, Monte Alto, which is trained by Luca Cumani, but nothing to confirmthat this is the same Timothy Steel.

Ms Alice Mary Rose Thompson (or Thomson)

Information unclear – The Charity Commission gives the spelling ‘Thompson’ but in Policy Exchange’s annual accounts the spelling given in ‘Thomson’.

If the latter spelling is correct then this would appear to Alice Thomson, the great-great-granddaughter of Charles and Alice Todd, who is a British journalist writing for the Daily Telegraph, the wife of Conservative MP David Heathcote-Amory and a personal friend of David Cameron.

CORRECTION: Wrong Heathcote-Amory cited.

Alice Thomson is the wife of Daily Mail Political analyst, EDWARD Heathcote-Amory, not Conservative MP, DAVID Heathcote-Amory - whether there is a distant familial relationship between the two has not been verified, however the Heathcote-Amory family (generally) is cited as being descended from William the Conqueror.
(Thank to Abelard for the additional info on links to the Heathcote-Amory family)
…

Ms Camilla Hilary Cavendish

Columnist and Leader writer for the Times Newspaper – as featured on Webcameron.
…

Mr Iain Campbell Dale

Yes it is that Iain Dale, as this extract from an article published in the New Statesman demonstrates…

The Tories will do anything to suck up to the Scots: not only was Iain Duncan Smith born George Smith, but even the second name on his birth certificate is spelt Ian, not the Scottish-style Iain. Duncan is his third Christian name, rather than part of his surname, and mystery surrounds when Smith became Duncan Smith. Maybe he took my mother’s advice. When I was 18, she suggested that I should hyphenate my middle and surname, as it would “help me get on in life”. Iain Campbell-Dale. Would I now be Tory leader if I had taken her advice?

Iain Dale (born 15 July 1962) is an English Conservative blogger and a presenter on the internet TV station, 18 Doughty Street Talk TV, which he co-founded as a Director of Doughty Media Limited.

Dale is the author or editor of fourteen political books. He presents Planet Politics on Oneword Radio and occasionally presents Sunday Service on BBC Radio Five Live. He has written for The Guardian, The Independent and the New Statesman. In May 2006, Dale co-authored a book with blogger Guido Fawkes (aka Paul Staines) about instances of sleaze from the Labour Party since taking office in 1997.

Dale’s blog, entitled Iain Dale’s Diary, was nominated by The Guardian for the Political Blog of the Year Award

In May 2005, Dale stood in the general election as Conservative candidate for Norfolk North, losing to the Liberal Democrat candidate, Norman Lamb. Subsequently Dale acted as chief of staff to David Davis in the run-up to the 2005 Conservative Party leadership campaign. In August 2006, it was confirmed that Iain Dale had been selected for the elite Conservative ‘A-List’ of candidates to fight the next general election.
…

Mr Michael Gove

Michael Andrew Gove (born August 26, 1967, Edinburgh) is a British politician, journalist and author. He has been the Conservative MP for Surrey Heath since 2005.

Michael joined The Times in 1996 as a leader writer and has been comment editor, news editor, Saturday editor and assistant editor. He has also written a weekly column on politics and current affairs in the newspaper and contributed to the Times Literary Supplement, Prospect magazine and The Spectator. He has written a sympathetic biography of Michael Portillo MP and a critical study of the Northern Ireland peace process, The Price of Peace, for which he won the Charles Douglas-Home Prize.

Michael joined the Conservative party at university and was secretary of Aberdeen South Young Conservatives. He has helped write speeches for a variety of cabinet and shadow cabinet ministers, including Peter Lilley and Michael Howard.

Michael was previously chairman of Policy Exchange, a centre-right think tank launched in 2002. As Conservative candidate in the safe seat of Surrey Heath, he entered Parliament in the 2005 election.
…

Ms Rachel Marjorie Joan Whetstone

Rachel Whetstone was Political Secretary to former Conservative leader, Michael Howard. She is now European head of communications for search-engine company Google. (oops better keep an eye on the search engine rankings)

Together with partner Steve Hilton, she is a godparent to Ivan Cameron the eldest child of David Cameron, the current leader of the Conservative party.
…

Mr Richard John Micklethwait

[Richard] John Micklethwait, born in 1962, is editor-in-chief of The Economist magazine since March 23, 2006. Previously he was United States editor of the publication.

Micklethwait was educated at Ampleforth and Magdalen College, Oxford. He joined the Economist in 1987, previously having worked for Chase Manhattan Bank.He coined the word Cosmocrat.
…

Mr Robin Edwards

There is a Robin Edwards listed as a donor (£1250) to Michael Portillo’s campaign for leadership of the Conservative Party on 2001 in Register of MPs interests. Whether this is the same Robin Edwards is yet to be confirmed.

…

Mr Richard Briance

Richard Briance is Deputy Chairman of Hawkpoint Partners, a leading city corporate finance advisory firm.

His previous City career includes roles as Chief Executive of West Merchant Bank, Vice Chairman of UBS and Managing Director of Credit Suisse First Boston.

He is a Trustee of the London Children’s Ballet and of Policy Exchange and a Board Member of Oxford Analytica and World Golf Systems.

Data from the Electoral Commission show Briance to have made three personal donations to the Conservative Party to the total value of £12,900 since 2002
…

Mr Theodore Thomas More Agnew

Theodore Agnew was appointed as Chief Executive of Jubilee Managing Agency Limited in May 2004 having received approval from FSA and Lloyd’s. He was formerly Chief Executive of motor claims management company, Town and Country Assistance, which he set up in 1989. He sold the company in July 2002 to WNS Global Services Ltd, a leading business process outsourcing (BPO) company. Mr Agnew served until March 2004 under the WNS management committee.

…

Mr Richard Ehrman

Richard Ehrman was a government special adviser in the Employment Department and the Northern Ireland Office, during the 1980s. In the 1990s he was chief leader writer of the Daily Telegraph, and is now a consultant director of the think tank Politeia, and on the board of Policy Exchange. He also runs a commercial property company.

Ehrman is a also olumnist for right-wing online daily magazine, The First Post.
…

Adam Afriyie (resigned 9 May 2005)

Adam Afriyie (born 4 August 1965, Wimbledon, London), British politician, is a Conservative Member of Parliament for Windsor. He was elected at the 2005 general election, succeeding Michael Trend, who was forced to stand down (after mistakenly claiming Additional Costs Allowance, which covers MP’s second homes in London, in respect of expenditure incurred in relation to his main home in Windsor.)

Afriyie is the first black Conservative MP. He was educated at Addey and Stanhope School and has a degree in agricultural economics from Imperial College (Wye) of the University of London.

Afriyie was founding director of Connect Support Services, an IT services company pioneering fixed-price support. He was also Chairman of DeHavilland Information Services plc, a news and information services company, and was a regional finalist in the 2003 Ernst and Young Entrepreneur of the year awards. He was a Governor of the Museum of London, a trustee of the Museum in Docklands and a director of Policy Exchange, a centre-right policy body.

A member of the Conservative Party since 1990, Afriyie was selected as candidate for Windsor in October 2003. He was elected at the 2005 election with an increased share of the vote (49.5%) and a swing to the Conservatives of 1.2%.

In Parliament, he has been a member of the Select Committee on Science and Technology since 2005.

…

CONCLUSIONS

As with the ’staff’, Policy Exchange’s Board of Trustees has extensive connections into the Conservative Party, right to very highest levels - Rachel Whetstone was both Michael Howard’s political ‘major domo’ during his time as leader of the party and a godparent to one of David Cameron’s children.

I think that more than matches up to Paul/Guido’s insinuations about Smith Institute Director, Wilf Stephenson.

Again, we have one current Conservative MP plus a former trustee who is no also a sitting Conservative MP.

We have a former Conservative Party PPC, who also happens to be its most high profile blogger and a known associate of Paul Staines (Guido) and a leading light in 18 Doughty Street, or ‘Tory TV’ as its already being called in some circles.

We have more Conservative Party backroom staff, a Conservative councillor and yet more assorted journalists… and even more connections back to the Daily Telegraph, including a former editor who’s career spans the Daily and Sunday Telegraph and the Spectator, as well as being the official biographer of Margarent Thatcher.

In the case of the Smith Institute, one can at least point to two of its Trustees who could be considered to be non-partisan; Anglican Archbishop John Sentamu and corss-bench peer, Baron Joffe.

In the case, however, of Policy Exchange, not a single one of its Trustees can, on the information available, be clearly identified as being non-partisan or independent of the Conservative Party. The only identifiable ‘possible’ in this respect may be George Robinson, who may be a DUP politician, an therefore a natural ally of what is still, after all, the Conservative and Unionist Party.

As for the rest who cannot be definitively tied to the Conservative Party, we have one near complete unknown, one businessman and one other unknown who may have been a past donor to Michael Portillo.

As far as the Trustees go, the thing most open to question is whether one should consider that the controlling interest here lies with members of the Conservative Party or with ex-Telegraph journalists…

Paul/Guido has pointed the finger at the Smith Institute over its having employed Ed Balls (now a Labour MP) during the period leading into the 2005 General Election, at a time when he was a Labour Party candidate.

Policy Exchange director, Nicholas Boles was also a parliamentary candidate at the same general election, albeit an unsuccessful one, as were three of Policy Exchange’s Charity Trustees; Iain Dale, Michael Gove and Adam Afriyie, of whom (Gove and Afriyie) were elected.

And, as if that were not enough, a current staff writer, Jesse Norman, has already been selected as the Conservative Party PPC for the new constituency of Hereford and South Herefordshire, a key Lib Dem marginals with, under the boundaries used at the last election, a majority over the Tories of only 950 or so. A very winnable seat, I’m sure you will agree.

Let’s be clear, what I am not trying to do her is level any specific allegations of misconduct or deliberate breahes of Charity Law.

There are rule governing the involvement of Charities in political activities of which I am sure those associated with Policy Exchange are full aware, much as I would expect the same to be the case at The Smith Institute.

There is, however, more to consider here than simply whether either Policy Exchange has operated in strict adherence to the letter of the law; one of the more areas in which the Charity Commissioners act as ‘custodians’ of the public trust is in the matter of the public character of charity - and because of that, a particularly pertinant question here is not just whether Policy Exchange, or any other similar think tank, functions in a non-partisan manner consistant with the requirements of Charity Law but also whether it looks, to a reasonable observer, like a non-partisan independent policy think tank.

You’ve seen the evidence, here…

Does this organisation, Policy Exhange, actually look like a

“an independent think tank, which has been set up to undertake research and education in issues that flow from the changing relationship between social values and economic imperatives”

…or does it look, instead, like…

“a Coservative Party think tank, which has been set up to undertake research and education in issues will directyl influence, shape and contribute to Conservative Party policy and its next general election manisfesto in addition to providing a ‘hot house’ for potential future Conservative MPs”

What is the public character of this organisation and is does that character appear to be compatible with its status as a registered charity?

Well, with dues respect to Iain Dale, who is after all, a follow blogger, I have to say that the guiding principle here seems to very much on of…

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

…

Final thoughts - The Guido Fawkes Connection (???)

Let me run you quickly through a few things we DO know…

We know that Conservative MPs are actively sniffing around The Smith Institute and its rumoured connections with Gordon Brown in the hope of uncovering something that looks sleazy enough to use as political capital against him and the Labour Party.

We also know that a complaint regarding the alleged political activities of the Smith Institure has been forwarded to the Charoty Commission and in under investigation.

We know that Paul Staines (aka Guido Fawkes) has past, if possibly loose, connections to notable figures in the Conservative Party, including what were at time time, key supporters (Goldsmith, Murdoch) and with a former policy advisor and speech writer to Margaret Thatcher for whom Staines is thought to have supplied the jokes.

We know that Staines is ‘pushing’ the Smith Institute story on his blog in much the same manner as he has the ‘loans for peerages’ story and that he has, in doing do, deliberately twisted an otherwise innocuous fact - as a charity the Smith Institute has access to the gift aid system on donations - to try and create the appearance of ’sleaze’ in the financial dealings of the Institute.
We know that Staines is also a known associate of Iain Dale and co-author of a book, with Dale, about New Labour ’sleaze’.

We know that Dale is a former Conservative PPC, was Chief of Staff to David Davis during his unsuccess run for the Conservative leadership, and is, along with Tim Montogomerie at Conservative Home, the de facto front man for what one might consider the ‘unofficial’ Conservative Party expansion into the use of new media and the internet as a campaign tool, both as high profile blogger and as a founder of, and leading presenter on, 18 Doughty Street.

We now also now that Iain Dale is a founding trustee of an ‘independent’ political think tank that operates as a registered charity, has extensive and verifiable links into the highest echelons of the Conservative Party (past and present) but including the present leadership of the party and a extensive selection of members of its front-bench team, links into three major Conservative think tanks and into the mainstream media, and in particular into newspapers and magazines belonging to the most traditional of all Conservative newspaper/magazine groups, that which publishes the Daily and Sunday Telegraph and The Spectator.

And we also can see that, looked at reasonably and objectively, the links and connections that Policy Exchange has with the Conservative Party are at least, if not more extensive and marked than those that exist between the Labour Party and The Smith Institute, even allowing for the fact that the Smith Institute was founded in the memory of a former leader of the Labour Party.

And finally, we know that the first newspaper to pick up and run with the Smith Institute story - or ‘Guido’s story’ as Staines appears to like to call it - was the Daily Telegraph, who ran two full stories and a leader (with no byline to identify the author) in the space of a week…

Oh, not quite finally, because having just nipped over to Guido’s site, I’ve just noticed that amongst the advertising running at present - remember Guido’s got an ‘in’ on an online business called ‘Messagespace’ that provides advertising to several blogs, including Iain Dale’s, ConservativeHome, LabourHome, Recess Monkey and, of course, his own blog - is an advert for…

Policy Exchange

Small world, eh?

What we DO NOT know is whether and to what extent, if any, any of this list of thing s that we do know, may be directly connected - the list I’ve just provided may indicated nothing more than a long series of coincidences and be simply a list of laargely unconnected facts with no bearing whatsoever on the current efforts of either Paul Staines or Conservative MPs to dig around in the affairs of The Smith Institute in the hope of finding a bit of sleaze to pin on number 11, having seemingly failed to pin anything to with the ‘loans for peerages’ investigation on the same ‘official’ address.

What does, therefore, leave us with is a lot of unanswered questions about whether and how all this information, and these people, may be related, if it is; a few suspicions, certainly, and a growing odour of mendacity and double-standards in regards to the concerted efforts of Conservative MPs to dig up ’sleaze’ on think tank linked to the Labour Party when, all the time and the surface, one might be forgiven for concluding that what appears to one of their own think tanks may be working the exact same loopholes and grey areas in charity law, that the claim the Smith Institute has be working.

And that brings us full circle, back to Paul Staines (aka Guido Fawkes - or perhaps that should be Guido Faust) and the question of just exactly who he might actually be working for and getting his little titibits of seemingly useful gossip and rumour from?

With Paul/Guido acting for all the world like the attack dog of the Tory Party, one has to reasonable wonder quite who’s on the other end of the leash?

UPDATE: WHAT NEXT?

What to do with this information? Mmm…

Actually I have thought it through and although I could quite easily take the partisan tit for tat route through this, that of forwarding this information to the Charity Commissioners with a formal complaint asking that they conduct an inquiry into the governance, in particular, of Policy Exchange, its links to the Conservative Party, and whether this contravenes regulations on political activities by Charities, what I’m much inclined to do is take a broader view of all this and aks that the Commission carry out a detailed and thorough review of the relationship between political parties and policy think tanks that claim charitable status.

Better, I think, in the long run, to clean out the stables completely than try and do it one stall at a time.

Of course, such an inquiry would rather derail Guido’s ‘Smith Institute’ story, but then its an ill wind that blows no one any good, as they say…

Res Ipsa Loquiteur.

Unity.

It’s often said of politicians that you know when they’re is deep trouble because it then that they become the story and not the issues.

I wonder if the same can be said for a newspaper?

On Monday of this week, I posted an article on the closure of The Lagoon public house, in Tipton, a hostelry that was well known, locally, as the de facto headquarters of the local BNP, in which I noted with some curiosity that the only local newspaper to pick up on the story, the independently-owned, Wolverhampton-based, Express & Star (which has no connection whatsoever with Richard Desmond’s Express and Star group, which published the Daily Express, etc.) completely neglected to mention the pub’s BNP connection; an omission made all the more curious by the fact that its licencee, named as Jamie Lloyd in the report, is, in fact, Councillor James Lloyd, the leader of the BNP group on Sandwell Council.

Strange, thought I (and quite a few others who’ve contacted my since I ran the story).

Even without the BNP ‘angle’, the mere fact that a councillor is to appear before a licencing panel of his own Local Authority because the Police has requested the closure of a pub of which he is the licencee as a result of violent incidents involving a machete and a semi-automatic weapon is something most would consider a matter of legitimate public interest, especially as the pub, itself, in situated in the same ward that the councillor represents. And its not as if the reputation of the pub and its regular ‘clientele’ is not common knowledge locally, nor is difficult to make the connection between ‘Jamie Lloyd’ and ‘Councillor James Lloyd’ either by way of his political affiliations or by a simple search on 192.com, which shows him to be the only James Lloyd residing in Tipton.

And yet the Express and Star appear either to have been unaware of these facts at the time of publication, or simply decided they were of no relevance to local people.

A puzzle, I’m sure you’ll agree, and that became rather more puzzling on my being alerted to an interesting little exchange that’s been taking place of late on one of Stormfront’s forums…

Okay, a quick ‘who’s who’ is in order here.

‘Ontology’ is former BNP member (and briefly a Birmingham City Councillor), Sharon Ebanks, who was expelled from the BNP last year following her unsuccessful efforts to retain, in the courts, the seat she had been ‘awarded’ as a result of a miscount in last year’s council elections. As to why she was expelled from the BNP, there are conflicting accounts - Griffin alleges an assortment of ‘misconduct’, including anti-semitism; Ebanks claims that the BNP welched on a promise to cover her legal costs, despite advising her to defend the election case, and got shot of her when she complained about it and demands they cough-up.

Ebanks has since set up her own political party, which she has been actively promoting on Stormfront, much to the consternation of those forum users who are still members of the BNP - think ‘Life of Brian’ and ’splitters!’ and you’ll get the general picture.

‘White Resistance’ is one of the BNP members with whom Ebanks have been having a few ‘running battles’ of late, frictions which culminated in the posts shown in the screenshot, in which Ebanks ‘outs’ ‘White Resistance’, identifying him as the BNP’s local organiser, Steve Haddon (pictured below with Nick Griffin - Haddon is pasty-looking guy on the left) and also as being a journalist in the employ of the Express and Star newspaper - the same newspaper that some would consider to have soft-pedalled the story of the closure of The Lagoon by omitting all references to its BNP connections.

Mmm… Curioser and curiouser, as Alice might say.

As the Express and Star does not ‘byline’ its stories in either its online or print editions, there is no obvious way to confirm whether the information about Haddon’s employment given by Ebanks is correct - although ‘White Resistance’s’ response to Ebanks remarks do appear to confirm both that she has correctly identified his real world identity and that of his employer:

I keep my job because people can’t be sacked from their jobs for being a member of political parties. The E&S would be rather hypocritical if they did sack me considering its past views on this very subject. Again, nice try though.

What can one say?

Well, what one cannot say is that Haddon (if the information supplied by Ebanks is correct) has had any involvement or influence over the E&Ss coverage of the closure of The Lagoon - for all one can tell he might just as easily be assigned only to the coverage of local Sunday League football.

And, yes, he (as ‘White Resistance’) is quite correct in noting that he cannot (legally) be sacked because of his political affiliations or membership of a far right political party.

But that does not mean that the possibility that a journalist working for a local newspaper may also be a local organiser for a far-right political party with a well dopcumented history of racism and anti-semitism, is not a matter of legitimate local public interest or that such an occurance, if shown to be true, will not cause many local people to harbour serious misgivings about the Express and Star, or to consider somewhat more carefully the editoral intent behind some its stories, such as this one, which attacks a fairly routine swimming initiative as if it were the arrival of the Barbarian hordes…

A swimming session for women and children from ethnic minorities in Wolverhampton has sparked complaints from regular bath users who say it is encouraging segregation.

The weekly session, at the city’s Central Baths on Thursdays between 7pm and 8pm, has been introduced to encourage groups who would not normally get involved in swimming.

But it has come under fire as “political correctness gone beserk”, with council bosses today admitting a number of complaints had been received from members of the public.

Blinds costing around £1,000, funded by Kellogg’s Swim Active programme, have also been installed to improve privacy.The sessions replace a former aqua aerobics class. Council chiefs say they are aimed at Muslims, Sikhs and any other ethnic groups “with religious or cultural issues which would otherwise prevent them from taking part”.

Does one hour a week for people - actually women - who because of their religious/ beliefs cultural beliefs would not be able to make use of open public sessions really merit this kind of vitriol? Is this really ‘political correctness gone berserk’ or ’small-minded reporting gone berserk’?

Or is there a more subtle and consciously divisive intent on display?

Who, outside the E&S, actually knows - as the newspaper does not byline its stories we cannot even say for certain which ones Haddon may or may not have worked on, let alone whether his political views ‘colour’ his reporting - in fact, if the editor of the Express and Star is aware of Haddon’s afilliations, they may even go so far as to actively keep him off stories where his political opinions could, if (or rather when) exposed, turn out to be something of a liability to the newspaper.

One thing I have pondered carefully since receiving the information that appears to link ‘White Resistance’ with Haddon, and Haddon to the Express and Star (props to Lancaster UAF), is whether it would be unethical, on my part, to make use of this information - and as you’re reading this now, it should be obvious I’ve concluded that it isn’t.

The balance to be struck, as always, is that between legitimate public interest and individual privacy - does the right of the public to know that a local journalist has been identified as a BNP organiser in the town in which he works trump that of the individual’s right to privacy - a tough call at the best of times and one made tougher by the fact that Haddon is at best only a semi-public figure in a fairly minimal sense and only by virtue of articles published on the BNPs own website.

But then Haddon (if it is him) does work for a noticably right-wing newspaper that does, frequently, take a rather confrontational line of matters of race and ethnicity’ and the newspaper does serve an ethnically diverse area in which recent electoral gains by the BNP have caused some measure of unease amongst local minority communities, who quite naturally see the active presence of a racist political party as something of threat to the area’s otherwise pretty good track record on tolerance and diversity.

On balance, and on this occasion, the public right to know shades the argument because that right will necessarily inform local people’s perceptions of the Express and Star - Haddon’s political views could, conceivably, introduce a measure of bias into his reporting of some stories, bias that may not be corrected editorially given that the newspaper, itself, is one that expresses markedly right-wing views on many issues. Knowing this to be a possibility permits the public to adjust its perceptions of the newspaper accordingly and (hopefully) take a rather more sceptical view of its contents that they might otherwise have done had they been wholly unaware of Haddon’s background - again assuming that Ebanks’ claims are not a complete dud.

You’ll note that I’m neither calling for Haddon to be sacked due to his political affilliations, nor advocating protests outside the offices of the Express and Star - the former would be unlawful, the latter rather ill-advised and a little silly - it’s better to keep the BNP in plain sight, where you can keep an eye on them and openly challenge their pruirient views and values than drive them underground.

No, to simply be aware of the possibility that a local journalist may also be a BNP organiser is sufficient in this case, given that there are some small uncertainties as to the accuracy of the information and that there is no extant evidence to suggest that Haddon is or has been using his position as a journalist to quietly introduce BNP propaganda into its pages - and given the editorial stance of the Express and Star one has to wonder who could reasonably tell for certain if he had?
If the information supplied is correct then this is rather a matter for the Express and Star to ‘manage out’ as it sees fit and a matter in which the public interest rests simply in the knowing and not in seeing any particular action taken against the individual in question, unless concrete evidence did emerge of unethical conduct on his part.

And with that, I’ll sign off after the manner of the great Hunter Thompson.

Res Ipsa Loquiter

UPDATE: 24 Jan 2007

Lancaster UAF have kindly ‘asked the question’ of the local NUJ Chapter and received this response:

‘As regards this Haddon chap, it was raised at a meeting of Wolverhampton branch last week and all the former and current E&S members present did not
know of this guy.

Next day I checked with their reception and no one of that name could be found at the company.

It seems to be a phantom at the moment but there is the possibility that this person might be on some far-flung weekly or using an alias…’

Possibly not a journalist then, although it should be noted that the BNP does have form for using aliases on its website and public communications to conceal the identity of members; such as its press secretary Stuart Russell (real name) aka ‘Dr Phil Edwards’.

Russell/Edwards’ claim to a doctorate is, according to the excellent Disillusioned Kid, rather dubious:

As an adjunct to the above, it might be worth briefly considering the provenance of the article’s author. “Dr Phil Edwards” is in fact a pseudonym adopted by the party’s press secretary Stuart Russell. Even his doctorate is dubious, he claims to have taught quantum mechanics at the University of Nottingham, although when I directly challenged him on the issue of his qualifications he dodged the question. Make of that what you will.

And, indeed, a search for evidence to verify Russell’s claim to have taught quantum mechanics turns up absolutely nothing, not even a single citation on a published academic paper, which is the minimum one would expect to find for a theoretical physicist with a doctorate - the only Stuart Russell who does turn up in a search, and then only be citation, is a highly-regarded Professor at UCL Berkeley and a specialist in artificial intelligence, and I can be absolutely certain this in not the BNPs Stuart Russell, not least because I’m already familar with his work.

Finally, on Russell/Edwards, the plot thickens even more thanks to this transcript of a Radio 4 science programme, ‘Checkup’ from July 2005…

MYERS

Okay, let’s take another call now. And we’ll go to Grantham and Dr Stuart Russell is there, hello?

RUSSELL

Yes hello. When I was involved with the Nottingham University Psychic Research Group we used to have an orthopaedic surgeon came to give a talk on hypnosis as used in anaesthesia, I wondered if - that was Dr Ian Fletcher - I wonder if as time’s gone by whether this has actually progressed at all?

WILKINSON

I think that’s a very, very interesting area Dr Russell and it’s an area where if you’re a keen hypnotist you’re trying to push it forward a great deal all the time and that the problem, as I understand it, with hypnosis or other things perhaps like acupuncture is that not everybody is as susceptible as the next person to hypnosis or say acupuncture…

I can find no formal record of a Psychic Research Group at the University of Nottingham, although Dr Alan Gauld, a former president of the Society for Psychical Research is a retired Reader in Psychology at the School of Psychology of the University of Nottingham - but then that’s still a hell of long way from teaching quantum mechanics and suggests, at best, that Russell may have spent some time at Nottingham University as an undergraduate - at worst he may just own a few of Gauld’s books and be leeching off his academic reputation as a backstory to this own doubtful claims.

None of this answers the question as to why the E&S failed to make the BNP connection with the closure of The Lagoon or discover/disclose any of the other information that journalists working for its local rival, the Birmingham Post & Mail group, seem to have had little difficulty in uncovering.

Nor, indeed, does it shed any light on why Sharon Ebanks thought ‘Haddon’s’ (alleged) employment at the Express & Star significant enough to taunt him with it - if Haddon’s just the teaboy or a newspaper packer, then what difference does his being the local BNP organiser make?

And then there are these two comments, from a poster in Wolverhampton…

Amazing! So the only people who work for a newspaper are journalists or paperboys/girls? How do they get by without management, advertising, sales, production, distribution etc etc?

I see no mention of the term ‘journalist’ in the ‘expose’

Steve Haddon’s job has no influence on the content of the paper, hence why the witch hunt ground to halt with the ’switchboard has no listing for him and enquires to journalists on the paper have resulted in ‘never heard of him’ responses.

Comment by Pasty looking guy on the left(Just in case you got him mixed up with Nick Griffin!) 01.19.07

and

‘If it shown that the information given by Ebank is wrong, then of course I’ll post a correction’

????

Comment by Pasty looking guy on the left(Just in case you got him mixed up with Nick Griffin!) 01.24.07

And post an update, I have, as soon as I had confirmation on information from ‘GeorgeP’ also posted on the 19th.

But then, why is ‘Pasty looking guy…’ getting quite so jumpy, here, just because a question or two is being asked?

Another conundrum…

Warning – Not work-safe if your workplace has a policy on accessing offensive material and very long.

No, I’m not Steve Freedom. ‘Steve Freedom’ is the online alias used by Simon Smith, the newly elected BNP councillor for Great Bridge in Sandwell, on the white ‘nationalist’ forum ‘Stormfront’, which means that what you’re about to read are some of the comments and forum posts that Simon has been making over the last five years (he joined the forum in 2001 and has made more than 2,100 forum posts to date), comments that strip away the carefully sanitised, voter-friendly image that the BNP has been at great pains to project in recent years.

This is Simon writing in what he thinks is a safe zone, amongst people who share his prurient views and appalling values and under an alias that precludes him being easily identified. What we have here is the real Simon Smith, warts and all – it makes for very illuminating reading.

I should begin by offering some evidence that Simon really is ‘Steve Freedom’, since his first and most obvious defence against what follows is to claim ‘mistaken identity’, so to begin with, there are these two posts in which he discusses his professional standing:

Don’t worry we’ll win eventually ! 

I’m a teacher myself and so can relate to the thread you submitted about your child having to go to a mosque - there are very very few headteachers worthy of respect - they pay their mortgages and toe the party line - no one will remember their names when they are gone.

We the White Race have a hard fight ahead - but for those who have "Woken" up we have no alternative but to enage the enemy with what ever courage and resources we have at our disposal.

Consider joining the BNP or at least making some financial contribution- every little effort is not wasted, because it’s up to us, there is no one else…

And

I’m sorry silent p, there’s no known cure for swallowing a copy of the "Daily Mirror"…

I’m an ex school teacher, forced out by the religion of "liberalism", no tattoos, but since I’m supposed to be a "criminal" and I now know that JJT earns a bit, I might take up burgling since according to the proffered equation BNP = crook, I might as well act according to book…. 

The "documentary" makers purposely selected items that would put the party in a bad light… All other things being equal, I’ve got better things to do than involve myself with politics – but this is a STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL.

And, of course, Simon’s fifteen minutes of fame came when he sacked from a teaching job at a Roman Catholic school in Solihull after they discovered he was standing as a BNP candidate in European Elections, as Simon notes here on his newly set-up blog:

I was the first teacher to stand for the British National Party. For this I was sacked - because of lack of finance I can’t fight for my rights - so much for the present system of British justice ! Never to be one to steer clear of trouble: Let me be the first elected person in Britain to go on record as saying that the September 11th 2001 attacks on the USA were an inside job to justify the expansion of the American Empire. If I die in a car crash or other suspicicious circumstances you will know why !

Ignore the 9/11 rant for the moment – I’ll come back to that in a while – and concentrate on his first comment. ‘Steve Freedom’ claims, initially, to be a teacher and then later states that I’m an ex school teacher, forced out by the religion of "liberalism" while Simon Smith states that he is the first teacher to stand for the British National Party – is that a coincidence?

Of course not, but then that’s not the clincher that proves that Simon Smith and ‘Steve Freedom’ are one and the same, that can be found in this post:

It took me a long time to come to the same conclusions as most of the folks here…the interest in the subject arose because it is obviously convenient to the Nationalist cause that the "Holocaust" didn’t happen in the way orthodoxy suggests…. never the less it DIDN’T happen in the way orthodoxy suggests AND ENFORCES ! 

I spent over a year reading the info on the net and came to the conclusion that 6 million is a gross exaggeration and that there were no mass killings with Zyklon B…There were of course individual cases of deliberate brutality which must be set against the sufferings of many other people in World War II

The starving disease ridden bodies on the old black and white films were a consequences of the latter days of the war when allied bombing, amongst other things prevented food and medicine going to the concentration camps.

Take some time and come to your own conclusions

(I put together some links on my own humble website http://www.yahho.co.uk/Holocaust.html )

The key information here is to be found in that last line, the reference to my own humble website, which used the domain name www.yahho.co.uk.

Simon was the proud owner of this domain from 1999 until 2004, when it was subject to a complaint of ‘passing off’ from Yahoo, detailed here in the records of Nominet’s Dispute Resolution Service, which resulted in the domain being transferred to the ownership of Yahoo.

As Nominet’s records show (pdf), the respondent in this case was Simon Charles Smith, the same Simon Charles Smith who was recently elected as councillor from Great Bridge.

Taken together, these two pieces of information more than satisfactorily demonstrate that Simon Smith is the pseudonymous ‘Steve Freedom’ who has posted regularly on the Stormfront forum for the last five years.

So that’s who he is take care of, but that’s only part of the story. The real story here lies in looking at what some of the many comments that Simon/Steve has posted in this forum tell us about who he is and what he really believes – and that’s what this article is really all about, showing the real Simon Smith that lies behind the voter-friendly veneer imposed on him by the BNP.

All of which makes this exchange between another Stormfront member and Simon, particularly interesting:

[JOEOWENS] 

This was how we conducted Nationalism in the 80’s in Liverpool. Never was a movement using tactics like this (and you had to ) going to get anywhere. From street punch ups to provocative marches, was a recipe for disaster. 

This is why the BNP must at all cost, steer clear from anything that can resemble violence or Holocaust denial. Its not that the press wont call us Nazis (they will ) its the fact the public need a way out to justify voting for us. By carrying on with old tactics the public will be scared to support us.

[Simon]

I’d certainly agree with the notion that "holocaust denial" as you put it, should be avoided amongst Joseph and Josephine Public.. but then again anything that challenges the average attention span should be as well…One idea forming in my mind lately is think and study deeply but communicate superficially, touching on what sales people call the "hot spots"…

The internet, whilst public, imo is a different sphere of interaction. We can expect to engage the more articulate, intelligent and educated on Stormfront. Perhaps there may have been a time when old style Nationalists may have been ashamed of that; I don’t know. Immediate political success is of course important and I don’t believe that it will be affected by the occasional revisionism discussion on SF within the appropriate forum…We have to engage the next generation of Nationalist leaders through a medium such as this…

If the concern is that the forces of decadence will say "such and such " a person said "this and that" on Stormfront, I would say to that person WHAT FORUM DID YOU SAY ? A BIG worry for the enemy would be that Stormfront became even more popular than it is. I understand that SF is something like the forth or fifth largest forum in the world. As you say we are "Nazis" whatever….

Hope to meet you sometime in the flesh Joe …

[JOEOWENS] 

Hi

sorry if i gave the wrong impression regarding image.I don’t mean curb our tongue on Stormfront,but carefull promoting Nationalism to the public.After all,Stormfront is not public in the true meaning.

What i mean is,the people who say we (the bnp ) are watering our views down and selling out,don’t understand the need for this slight manoeuvre from our goals and public mindset.When they do,they will understand.

You will never convince the public six million did’nt perish untill we are in power.

Our people need to be steered back with a sensible and carefull approach,one devoid of hate.If the public hated like we do,Black and Asian ghettos would not exist.

This is now why we must tread carefull and play our enemies at their own game.If people all over the country aggree with us ( and majority do ) then why are we not in power? Its becouse they are scared and not sure were not the monsters the media say we are.Having marches and fighting and calling for eveyone to be sent back,is not going to convince them we are right.

In fact,you will see a black Britain before that.

What’s interesting here is the general level of contempt towards ordinary people that Simon displays - I’d certainly agree with the notion that "holocaust denial" as you put it, should be avoided amongst Joseph and Josephine Public.. but then again anything that challenges the average attention span should be as well – and of, course - We can expect to engage the more articulate, intelligent and educated on Stormfront – not only might the average voter be put off by talk of holocaust denial, but they wouldn’t be intelligent enough to understand this issue either, according to Simon.

All of which leads on to the question of just what kind of views Simon holds on the subject of the Holocaust? Well this should be obvious simply from this short comment:

I wrestled with this subject for a long time….I didn’t want to accept what you may could call the "WN postion on the subject" just to fit in with everybody else… 

The "Holocaust" is the biggest lie of all time….

I know where you are, so to speak..You will need to carry reading on the subect to put your mind at rest…

But if that’s not enough, try this:

The thing is Mark I thought like you about 18 months ago. I did a lot of reading on the matter and found myself substantively in agreement with the folks on the SF board…

There is a semantical (as well as a semitical !) problem with the word "Holocaust". It has to be established what it is that is being "denied". No one denies that hundreds of thousands of Jews died in WWII. It is the means and the extent of the deaths that Revisionists question.

The gas chamber story is as full of as holes as much as the alleged gas chamber roofs are not ! What finally "converted" me to the "Revisionist" camp was the expert witness in the Zundel trial who demonstrated the impossibility of cremating the number of bodies that have been alleged by the "orthodox" school.

A problem with the topic is that the "Orthodox" proponents accept the revisions that the Revisionists prove, but do so in a quite manner with an air of "we knew that all the time"…

Anyway, do some reading. My own recommendation is to go over an account of the 1988 Zundel trial. A little time consuming, but well worth it if you wish to get to the truth of the matter.

Not just Holocaust denial then, but the full ‘Jewish conspiracy’ line as well, which he continues with here:

Umbro drops its Zyklon shoe after Jewish protests

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main…numbro29 .xml

I sent this email to the Telegraph in response

"Dear Sir,

With regard to the “Zyklon” trainers article…

After doing quite a bit of reading on the "Holocaust" , I must say I don’t believe in the "Received Version" that is put out by the mainstream media. I believe we are living in a "Pre Copernican" era on this subject, and whilst it may be painful for vested interests to get to grips with this subject and call me an "Holocaust Denier", "Nazi" etc the truth will eventually stand by itself.

I believe that people who promote the "Orthodox" version of the "Holocaust" i.e. 6 million and mass executions by gas either believe in it as an article of faith or actually know they are propagating a myth whose demise would have consequences for Jewish interests.

I’m not stupid, I know that the Daily Telegraph is controlled by a Zionist lobby and I know that there is no way you would publish this letter in your newspaper. My hope is that this email may be seen by at least one truthfully minded individual before it’s consigned to the trash folder.

The six million figure is not even believed by Jewish “Holocaust” researchers. They do keep quiet on the matter so as not to dispel the myth. In fact the six million is in mathematical terms 6 times 10 to the power 6, a significant mystical Jewish number. The six million was being predicted way before 1945. It doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

The 1988 Zundel trial allowed independent execution expert Fred Leuchter to demonstrate that the crematoria at Auschwitz I and Auschwitz II could not have been used for execution purposes.

Zyklon “B” is not a fast acting gas. You are wrong. Even the article you link to refers to half an hour. The amount of Zyklon “B” used at the so-called “extermination” camps was no more or less than the other concentration camps. Cremation in 20 minutes is impossible. Germany wouldn’t be able to provide the coke for the crematoria for the number claimed.

The pictures of the emaciated corpses we see are of starvation and typhus victims and were taken in the western camps of the Reich. The tragic events occurred towards the end of the war when supplies were being cut off. British autopsies showed that none of the victims died of cyanide. In fact it was still claimed until the early sixties that gassings took place at Dachau and Belsen etc where the witness testimony (which has been debunked) was in no ways different to the witness testimony put forward at the IMT trials with respect to the eastern concentration camps….

I could go, but what’s the point ? You either believe the “received version” or you might have a slight doubt. If you have a slight doubt then research the topic…"

In referring to the ‘emaciated corpses’ Simon is, here, alluding to one of his favourite fictions about the Holocaust, which claims that the appalling state in which the Allies found inmates on liberating the concentration camps was the direct result of Allied bombing disrupting supplies to the camps and not due to the general conditions under which the inmates were kept by the Nazis.

I expect this particular e-mail to the Telegraph got the response it deserved and found its way rapidly to the spam bin, but don’t think Simon’s finished with this subject yet, here’s what he has to say on the subject of those who witnessed the Holocaust first-hand:

The so called eye witness testimony was a stumbling block for me a couple of years ago. Since maturing in my outlook as to how the world works, I realise that those who say they witness "gassings" etc and the like are: 

1/Deluded

2/Or liars including

a)Those who would extrapolate from genuine hardship experienced, to fictional "genocide"

b)Those who are paid.

3/Forced under torture to "confess"

What would be interesting is a list of the "main" witnesses (eg Gerstein, Hoess, Wiesel) who are put out on "parade", with a short debunking paragraph. This would be useful. Has anyone seen anything like this ?

…perhaps with a list of those who saw nothing, eg Red Cross, Christerpherson(? unsure of exact name - it’s something like that ?)

And, of course, it doesn’t stop there:

Originally Posted by Odins-Eye

Let me guess, did they say the predecessor to St Lawrence died in a gas chamber? It always amazed me how many thought Anne Frank died in this way. 

Not only that but the diary was a fraud…. 

[Simon]

 We’re back to media domination of the sheeple’s consciousness and of course the disproportionate representation of Jews in the media with the associated shield/sword holocaust account on which the Zionist Entity is based….

 People are waking up to the truth, but it’s a slow process. God only knows what damage is done before the educated/intelligent can trickle down the Truth about all of this to the Corrie/Footie people…

 (Am I a snob ? Too bloody right ! )

 And…

 Originally Posted by silky3

 Bloody hell! Will the Jews never let up about the holocaust?(em,no daft question)They think it gives them carte blanche for anything that they do.

 [Simon]

 Exactly and that’s why the term was coined, well after WWII…They own the media, banks and the minds of the unenlightened..

 The state of Israel has fed off the "Holocaust", a term I think was coined in the sixties…Never the less at street level , the best thing to say, and to be honest, I don’t think the "Holocaust" is an obsession with Joe Public any more than Revisionism is with Nationalists, is to just shrug the shoulders basically and say "nothing to do with us" etc…Temptation, to be severely resisted is to try and show how clever you may be on the subject..

 The predictable smear attempt is a sign that the enemy (viz globalist parties Lib/Con/Lab) are intellectually bankrupt and will do anything to stay on the gravy train…

 Actually, the first recorded use of the term ‘Holocaust’ in reference to the persecution of the Jews was made, in Latin (Holocaustum) in a letter written by Richard I, which is obviously somewhat before the 1960s, but I’ll let Simon’s ignorance of the subject pass for now and move on to this post:

 Originally Posted by lucian_lacroix

 I’ve seen too many movies of people in concentration camps, mountains of bodies being bulldozed into ditches, living skeletons walking around, etc. Yep, it happened. Maybe it will happen again.

 [Simon]

 Yes indeed. You raise a good point. The pictures are the starting point of the indoctrination process Pictures are very powerful. I first heard the Revisionist perspective over twenty years ago and dismissed it because of the pictures. Interesting how we don’t have any pictures of gentiles suffering at the hands of Jewish commissars in the Gulags isn’t it ? A few observations:

 1) Most of those unfortunate to die, died of typhus/starvation (brought about by lines of communication being cut in final months of war)

 2) It’s not possible to extrapolate from hundreds of dead bodies seen dead to say "six million" died.

 3) The extent to which "It" (The ‘Holocaust’) happened is the real question.) I believe the establishment are going for a "soft landing" with the H story. I believe they are gradually reducing the six million/gassing part of the narrative and speaking more in terms of Jewish suffering etc.

 A ‘soft-landing’ indeed, but still it goes on:

 Originally Posted by Bookworm

 It may be Inconvenient History but England rather than Germany initiated the murderous slaughter of bombing civilians thus bringing about retaliation. Chamberlain conceded that it was ‘Absolutely contrary to International law’.

 [Simon]

 I’m sure that’s true. There’s a question. How do we tell people ? How do we feed this into practical politics ?

 The laughable thing is that modern "education" has become so perverted that even the "Auschwitz" myth , according to the "mainstream" isn’t being properly promulgated. Presumably people have to read (etc) in order for them to spread this Zionist gospel around. Do we laugh or cry ? The NWO machine requires ignorance on the part of the population to succeed. When it succeeds, it finds the population has become so ignorant (because of the thrust of liberal Bolshevik education) that it can’t spread its propaganda around !!!

 Truth is forever. The only anchor we have.

 Even when faced with a valid question, Simon cannot drop the subject…

Originally Posted by Roy H.

Jesus, what does the Holocaust (or lack of it) have to do with British White Nationalism, or British Nationalism in general in 2005…

It only makes you look like someone the government can easily have a swipe at and someone the media can easily take advantage of to destroy your image and thus get you less votes…

[Simon]

Some of the points there do have merit, I am not saying they don’t however this was 60 years ago, we are in a batter for the surivial of our race against governments and corporations dedicated to multiculturalism in 2005

That’s a good question. We obviously don’t need to discuss it in non-cyberspace where we have to address more mundane issues. Despite being a public forum, the enemy, i.e. The Globalist Elite don’t go out of the way to draw attention to Stormfront because they’d score a massive home goal. I know where you’re coming from. We’re not telling the "rulers" what they don’t know already anyway. Perhaps the penny might drop one day with well meaning ANL types who whilst certainly not converted to our point of view, will certainly see how their "genuine concern" for humanity has been perverted, manipulated and channelled against an indigenous people trying to preserve their way of life.

I was half listening to a TV program about Einstein earlier. Every other sentence was about "Nazis". The commentator had been to some sort of training session where the pronunciation of the word "Nazi" was spoken in the most ominous and contemptible way possible to the human voice. The reason is obvious. In May the UAF smear leaflets with Auschwitz etc will come out. Quarter educated TV wallers will wag their fingers knowingly and say "well you know where Nationalism lead don’t you ! gas chambers/six million dead and so on"

SF, I think is educational. Who stands to gain the most and who lose the most from a truthful debate of these issues ? I rarely discuss the Holocaust in non cyberspace because I’d be wasting my breath.

The misnamed British Broadcasting Corporation has really gone to town with Auschwitz. I just can’t believe the way in which the "world" preserves these myths. As well as serving as a finger wagging sound bite against Nationalism, the Holocaust acts a foundation stone for the state of Israel. How can a country or any people exist based on a falsehood?

As might be obvious by now, Simon’s views on the Holocaust come complete with the usual ‘Global Zionist conspiracy package’ as this next run of posts illustrate:

 A valid point about the Jews.

 I think because they are so intelligent when it comes to language, inherent understanding of hierarchies and haggling/politics etc they are capable of exploiting the "Homer Simpsons" of our societies. They understand weaknesses in White folks and can manipulate them…. If Homer is stupid enough to let Mr Burns in to watch the boxing match then Homer is the one that needs to be told he is a fool. Can we blame Mr Burns ?

 We need to address our own shortcomings through education. Education that would indeed includes an analysis of the "Jewish Question". (amongst many other topics: Race, Economics, Science, IT, etc etc )

 And…

 This is a delicate area of discussion that will draw fire from the trolls on the board who will present some sort of "hardline" position to disrupt Nationalist momentum.

 I think there is an overiding sense amongst those that care and actually do things, that we walk a tightrope on these matters.

 We cannot deny Jewish Supremacism on one hand, neither can we deny those with Jewish descent in Britain (I seem to recall the figure 300,000) who are not Zionist, and perhaps most, who are not significantly detrimental to Britishness . The threat from Judaiism imho is of Zionism and not genetic swamping… Ultimately, and I may walk a lonely trail on this, I believe even Zionism is a cover for the ruling elites.

 I will venture an opinion on Pat Richardson. If you have the guts to stand for the BNP then you have the right to criticise her, otherwise STFU.

 Many perhap will look up to a certain mid twentieth century military philospher and statesman and hail him as a sort of saint - fair enough -I will not argue. He had a certain number amongst his elite who had certain ancestoral question marks over them moreso than modern day groups. This isn’t easy. Everyone who cares, understands this.

 Guess who the ‘mid twentieth century military philosopher and statesman’ might be? No, go on, have a guess? May this will help:

 Away from the seemingly (?) need to disassociate oneself from Christ or Hitler depending on whether one wishes not to regarded as a “”Jesus freak” or a “Nazi”, both men have been great influential world leaders. I grew up with the Christian faith and whilst rejecting the established church ,( not describing myself as a “Christian” other than in the general sense of performing a “Christian action" etc), the sayings of Jesus Christ are as quotable as Shakespeare ,Plato or Jefferson.

 The Internet has been a great source of knowledge about Adolph Hitler for me. I’ve read the first couple of chapters of Mein Kampf and can’t find anything I disagree with ! I think even now, White Nationalists may be apprehensive about coming to close appreciating Adolph Hitler – In my mind a very courageous and truthful man. I suppose there may be a great fear about identifying with anything Hitler said, the argument being that it could set the movement backwards – perhaps the only thing that will push the “Movement” forward in the long run is the Truth – unpalatable and uncomfortable as it maybe.

 These are some comparisons that came to mind between Jesus Christ and Adolph Hitler:

1 Both vilified by the major ruling powers of the world

2 Jesus killed by Romans because of Jewish lobby – Adolph affectively killed by Allies because of Jewish Lobby

3 Followers of Jesus persecuted after his death – Followers of Adolph persecuted after his death

4 Both drew attention to the lies of the Jews

5 Jesus threw the money changers out of the temple – Adolph threw out the Jewish bankers from Germany

6 Both were courageous men

7 Both were orators who connected with the “common folk”

8 Both came from fairly humble lower middle class families

9 Both have attracted devotees who would die for their respective causes

10 Jesus vilified by the Talmud, Adolph vilified by the (Jewish) media

11 Arguably both have attracted distorted ritualistic/fetishist behaviour from their fans that may have missed out their essential philosophy driving them (Truth/Salvation ?)

12 Neither had offspring – their legacy was who they were and what they stood for.

13 Both spoke the Truth and were willing to suffer the consequences for it

But I digress, slightly, back to the ‘Jewish conspiracy’…

Originally Posted by bombadillo

.. Maybe we overemphasise the jewish angle a bit too much: what we probably have is an emerging global financial elite in which jews have disproportionate representation.

[Simon]

I would tend to agree with that. Although, in front of disproportionate , I would put the word "very". Human nature is to get things with the least effort - Jews are good at business etc when you have unjust law and taxation etc, those with the apptitude to exploit will exploit - the BIG problem in the West is the ignorance,cowardice and laziness of White people - It’s no good blaming anyone else - Our future is in our own hands.

Originally Posted by Helsingor

Oh, and let’s not forget….

Ultimately, the goal of the Globalists is One World Government and so we should analyze things with that framework in mind.

[Simon]

Yes indeed. The reason why the "globalists"/"zionists"/illuminati/elite etc, call them what we will, are successful is that they understand lower human nature: Be it the sheeplike rush for house loans of the populace /sex manipulation of politicians/drugs/fear of a bullet etc etc etc Their rise to power has been along the least line of resistance. IMO, also ruthlessness beyond the imagination of most on this board - including the telling of the "big lie".

A real question for White Nationalist politics is :

Do we educate, or increase political influence by taking on board White ignorance ? (i.e. Playing along with the "Muslim Hijacker" paradigm.)

That last one’s a nice touch – do we educate or increase political influence by taking on board White ignorance… must remember that for next year’s election campaign.

Still, to give Simon his due, he’s no ‘Jew basher’ – look, he says so here….

You are either very naive or a globalist/Zionist shill.

If you are the former, then it’s forgivable.

To take one example quoted. The attack on the USS Liberty was clearly an Israeli "false flag" operation.

BTW I’m not a Jew basher. One of my favourite political commentators is Jewish - Henry Makow at savethemales.ca I’m prepared to learn from anyone.

Although maybe he’s not so keen on Makow after all….

Originally Posted by Call Of The Blood

He [Henry Makow] is a jew, that’s enough for me not to trust him.

[Simon]

I think that’s fair enough, but I’m beginning to wonder if their avaricious nature (along with many Whites) isn’t somehow being used by a higher political layer just as the Jews have used Blacks’ nature to achieve their more visible aims…Basically the Jews in as far as they are "Jews" may not be at the top of Mount Olympus..I do wonder….

As you might expect for all this, Simon also has some very ‘interesting views’ on the subject of race in general, and it just wouldn’t do him justice not to pick up a few of them…

An interesting article. I spent the afternoon reading this and the link given….

It seems to me from this that Jews despite their cleverness, don’t fully appreciate the ULTIMATE repercussions of their collective actions….It seems to me, and I think Macdonald is saying this, that there "isn’t a global conspiracy" per se, but a sum total of consequences from their actions. Dr Pierce would say they do what they do "because they’re Jews"

Interesting that the average Jewish IQ is similar to ours wrt spatial intelligence. They are seemingly very good articulators of pseudoscience (and world champions of hypocrisy !) as befits their high verbal IQs..

I couldn’t help thinking about their semitic cousins (The Arabs) and their evolutionary strategy, Islam….

How about this for some home baked philosophy of my own:

The Jews have a "feminine" survival strategy and the Muslims a "masculine" one…

Jewish families seem to be smaller than Muslims, perhaps emphasising the maternal care to a few rather than creating Allah’s foot soldiers

Jews have monogamy and Muslims polygamy

Jewish religion is inherited from mother. Women married to Muslims have to become Muslims…

Jewish materialism has a hoarding "feminine" quality whilst Muslims prefer to take plunder from the infidels, a “masculine” feature…

Jews like to ingratiate, a feminine quality, whilst Muslims prefer military conquest

Jews have a high verbal IQ, women are usually better linguistically than men…

Islam seeks converts by conquest i.e. whatever women your right hand takes in battle you can take (paraphrasing here something from the Koran)

How about a quickie on the subject of Edwina Currie’s affair with John Major…

I think she’s also a Red Sea Pedestrian ….

The BBC news led with the Major/Currie story and the newsreader without taking a breath went on to talk about Blunkett’s get tough policies with sex offenders…I wonder if anyone else noticed that….

But then I wouldn’t want to think that it’s only Jew that Simon has some clear opinions on…

99 times out of a 100 when talking about Negroes or people from Pakistan , I’m quite happy to speak of them as "Negroes" or "Pakistanis". For the common or garden nigger or paki I think that’s fine…. 

But for people like this, they are Niggers and Pakis with a capital N and P.

There are two women friends of mine who keep getting hassled by Blacks because they have blonde hair all the f****** time. For any Blacks reading this stick to your own bloody women, as ugly as they are !

Simon’s none to keen, it seems, on the new Archbishop of York, either…

Re: New Archbishop of York appointed

Future generations will look back on this sad episode as we look back on the burning of witches, Noah’s ark and the idea of the earth being flat.

Stop the Bus ! The Emperor has NO clothes !!!

Simon’s last comment here – the Emperor has no clothes’ was followed by a photograph of a gorilla – did I mention that he often doesn’t do subtle? Try this…

I suppose the plus points for a White woman who has half castes is that instead of locking them in their rooms when they misbehave she can have velcro ceiling attached in their bedrooms and keep them imprisoned by sticking their heads against the ceilings…

Nice, eh? But then Simon’s well known in Stormfront circles for his compassion towards his fellow man…

Tragedy girl’s dad blasts BNP

THE family of a 12-year-old girl accident victim has blasted the far-right British National Party for using details of her death in a political leaflet.

Amy Houston, a pupil at Our Lady’s and St John’s High School, in Blackburn, died in hospital last November.

She had run into the road and was hit by a car driven by a failed asylum seeker close to her home.

Angry father Paul Houston, from Accrington, said he wanted nothing to do with the leaflet, which has already been distributed across the North East of England and could soon be used in Lancashire.

But the BNP, which has seven councillors in Burnley, today insisted it had done nothing wrong and would continue to use the case to highlight its policy on asylum seekers.

Details of the case have now appeared in a copy of a BNP leaflet called Newcastle Patriot, distributed to homes it is targeting in this summer’s local council elections.

It says: "While Amy’s parents have to live their whole life coming to terms with their daughter’s death, Ibrahim will be back on the streets in as little as two months.

"Similar tragedies are increasingly common, and the situation will get worse.

"Only the BNP will stand up and so no to asylum madness."

Amy’s father Paul, of Russia Street, Accrington, says: "The last thing we want is for Amy’s memory to be used by a party with just one thing on their political agenda, stirring up racial hatred.

"This is very upsetting and makes me very angry. I did not bring up my daughter to be a racist, and I am not one either. This leaflet implies we are supporting the BNP when nothing could be further from the truth.

[Simon]

Demonstrates the power of media brainwashing to overwhelm the natural emotions that anyone should normally feel…..The need to be accepted by the wider community is the driving force…

Sad for him about his loss, but still a real lemming..

That 12 year old girl is our racial kin regardless of what her father says. She is just as much our flesh and blood as his….

He also had a bit of an interesting take on the BBC’s ‘Great Britons’ series…

I’d chuck Churchill, Diana and Lennon out straight away….

Cromwell, Hmmm, a man of conviction and guts, BUT NOT A MAN OF THE PEOPLE…

Nelson was my boyhood hero and still is (CLEVER AND BRAVE. What a target to aim for !?)

Shakespeare, the world greatest EVER wordsmith…

Creativity AND engineering are what differentiate Whites from every other races, IMO…so Brunel for me as a REPRESENTATIVE of his class of innovators. Of course Brunel was a DOER and God knows, we need people like him….

An incredible man who worked tremendously long days… A long list of achievements: Suspension bridges, tunnel under the Thames, steamships, the Great Western Railway, whose track was laid in a phenomenally short time…He made a few mistakes as well but always recovered and pressed on to the next challenge

So creativity and engineering are what differentiate ‘Whites’ from every other race… like the Incas, the Mayans, the Egyptians, the Babylonians…

Perhaps we ought to get back to more familiar territory for Simon…

Make Africa history NUKE IT.

No, we can’t do that. If that was done, how are we going to aid the whites who still live in places like Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) and South Africa take back their countries and restore them to their former status as advanced white-run countries?

Well good for them, I’m sure the ANC are quaking in their boots as we speak… and it’s worth noting that Simon’s no music fan either…

Originally Posted by Louiscorso

Just back from the love music hate racism "festival" in Trafalagr Sq (on a recon basis obviously) many thousands of young mostly white brainwashed morons sit gazing at negros on MC’s singing along to lyrics along the lines of "no place for racists in my land, we the black brothers gonna make our stand" smash the BNP etc

The slogan bedecked t shirt wearing, ginger dreadlocked middle class white halfwits who were there in vast numbers (surbiton must be empty today) were all covered in UAF stickers and SWP paraphenalia, groups of young blacks thronged the fringes of the square in a menacing fashion, I honestly do not think i have ever seen less intergration between a large group of black and white people in all my life Of couse the blacks don’t want to be associated with these idiots who soooooooooooo dearly love them, the women are hideous and the men are the very antithisis of the young black male.

I vented my anger at some of the many police on duty who duly nodded and asked me to move along and signed a few petitions in the name Heinrich Himmler (funny to see some fat disgusting white freak thanking you for your support)

A truly disgusting afternoon, it has realy stiffend my resolve to the BNP, I thought you should all know just what is happening in your capital, I am sure that i was not alone as an "intruder" anybody else there ?

[Simon]

Sounds like a scene from the "Time Machine"

White = sheep-like Eloi

Black = cannibal Moorlock creatures

Actually, it’s not just music that Simon’s not keen on – he seems to have gone off football as well…

It’s hard to say , but I want White Denmark to beat the mongrel "England" team…

Blacks and half Blacks will never be English - Hell wiill freeze over first

I made a post about "Football Nationalism" in the articles section of Stormfront..

 Football is just a drug in my opinion…….RACE is the important thing. A nation can’t measure its worth acording to its Football team’s ability - that’s nonsense…

Not tuning in to the World Cup, eh?

There are obviously more important things than football, but having five Blacks playing for England was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me… 

If you follow the England football team as an expression of "patriotism" without doing anything else , God help you…..

Football is what the gladiatorial spectacle were top the Roman world. A way of channelling feelings of pride, aggression and identity into something that wouldn’t challenge the status quo… 

It’s time to give up footie folks…"When I was a child I thought as a child " etc

It also seems that Simon’s not overly keen on his local club…

Many years ago my local team West Bromwich Albion beat Oldham 1 -0 to reach div 1, but F*** football, my team plays in the all White strip ! (and I don’t mean Leeds !)

(Soapbox time for football - Millwall petrol bombing Bham City because they didn’t gain promotion - pathetic. Football is a religion supported by people who are brainwashed idiots who should wake up and see that the real struggle is a day-to-day affair not a Saturday afternoon spectacle…)

Another thing about football Hooliganism. This ridiculous throwing punches and kicks at opposite fans…You see half a dozen hooligans throwing punches and kick at opposition fans like powder puffs – their target is still standing …Its all macho bol@8cks. Lets all grow up and join in the real fight !

I believe we should tackle (ha ha ) football fans and tell them that the colour of our strip is White….I hate professional football but the real challenge is to harness the raw energy of the supporters. As the Duke of Wellington said with regards to the British army (i.e. the Scum of the earth or similar) before Waterloo “I don’t know what they do to the enemy but my God they frighten the hell out of me”

Which also happens to be the team (WBA) I’ve supported my whole life, in fact, as a callow youth, I stood on the terraces at Oldham with my father on the day we gained promotion, to which Simon refers.

I’m proud of my team, proud of its history and its achievements – but most of all I’m proud to say that racist scumbags like Simon are definitely not welcome at the Hawthorns. There is almost nothing a true Albion supporter is more proud of than the place we hold in footballing history as the first top flight team to field three black players – English black players.

 But I digress into personal matters, let’s get back to Simon and a game of Cluedo…

 Political Cluedo:

 The White race is being murdered at Tudor mansion. Move your token round the board and find the culprit…..

 Just a thought:

 Suspects:

 The Rabbi Green

 Colonel Muhammed

 Professor Blair

 Mrs Non-White

 Mrs PeaCock

 Miss Tartlett

 Murder Weapons:

 The Lead Newspaper

 The Holocaust Sword

 The Coiled debt

 The Candlestick for Racial Equality

 Location:

 Drinks room in house of commons

 The Minds of the Brainwashed

 Bank of England

 London

 Birmingham

 Local Boozer

 I told you he didn’t do subtle – he doesn’t do psychology either…

 The reason why Blacks disproportionately don’t vote is that the frontal part of the brain associated with postponing immediate gratification is not so well developed as in other races.

 I mean having to go all the way down the street and marking cross on a piece of paper doesn’t bring sex, drugs or the latest pair of trainers.

 Judging by the turnout at the last general election, I guess that more than 40% of the population have the same problem in postponing immediate gratification.

 So that Jew and ‘Blacks’ dealt with to some extent, but what about other racial groups…

 This is why the Indian sub continent is a ****hole. the people are pathologically corrupt. Whilst the British Raj was ultimately for us a disaster, it was a time when the Indian bureaucracy functioned in a way that actually achieved things: Railways, sewage, military discipline etc etc

 These people are takers, takers and takers. Our system is by no means perfect, but these business hawk Asians have involved in an environment that makes them deadly amongst vulnerable non-corrupt Whites - and still many of our people don’t wake up.

 But not so pathologically corrupt as to suggest there’s nothing all to be learned from one of them them…

 "..Mahatma Gandhi was a racist, and his opposition to apartheid in South Africa was borne of his resentment at being treated like a "raw kaffir." This isn’t to say that the man’s efforts to secure Indian independence ought to be outweighed by his views about Africans, but it is nevertheless understandable if the descendants of those he thought "only one degree removed from the animal" aren’t at all eager to celebrate his life and works."

[SIMON]

 Despite the fact that Gandhi only made one good film. If we can put to one side the film makers requirment to make Whites look unworthy etc, it’s possible to view Gandhi as a "Nationalist", and see if "we" can learn lessons from him and the way he worked.

 Mmm… can the BNP learn from Gandhi’s methods – no, that conjures a horrible image of Nick Griffin sat under tree wearing nothing but a dhoti… yeuck. Time to move on I think, to a little confusion about Islam…

 Originally Posted by harry barnes

 I fervently hope that my White European kinsmen, and especially those in the UK, will begin now to see the necessity of following the recent Dutch example.

 Islam is a mortal threat to our people and our White children. It must be uprooted from our lands.

 Islam is a racial religion. It is alien to the White race. It must be extirpated. Soon.

 [Simon…]

 TRUE.

 And yet. You have to distinguish between:

 1) Islamification of Britain/Europe - We don’t want it. We are experiencing it because of the underlying economics that have made immigration possible.

2) Middleast Nationalists (who just happen to be Muslims in their own countries) - Iraq was said to be the most secular and welcoming to Western tourists before Gulf War I and II

3) Attempts to make it seem like (Iraqi resistance for example) are committing acts of barbarism…Well what can I say. Mossad (Israeli intelligence) has a long history of committing atrocities to cause outrage against Muslims nations. Jewish controlled USA (with some help from puppet of a puppet Britain) is causing far far more suffering than the execution of foreigners who shouldn’t be there anyway. I don’t think it useful to draw political capital from "events" in Iraq, IMHO - especially as we, unfortunately, are the "bad guys" being cannon fodder for Israel.

So, you get that don’t you? Islam is bad when it’s over here, but okay when it’s off elsewhere fighting Jews. Especially in Iraq where the entire insurgency has all been contrived by Mossad – No, still not sure? Try this…

Originally Posted by Helsingor

I’m actually a bit confused by this latest tactic.

On one hand they tell us to take on the Muslims with open arms in all it’s multicultural glory and yet produce things like 9/11, phony Mossad/CIA beheadings, Hezbollah, etc.

Do they want multiculturalism to crash and burn? It would almost seem so.

[Simon]

Good point. I think they want us to hate Muslims in the Middleast (where they challenge Israeli power) but LOVE them in the White countries (where they undermine White identity.) I notice this in Britain. I think Blair and Co are walking a tightrope on this one. Because of their number and influence in Britain, I can’t see a "British September 11th" - it would upset the multicultural applecart too much . Unfortunately, I can see the authorities framing a White Nationalist for some big crime and then using the coming British version of the Patriot Act to limit civil liberties.

I guess this is why Simon has a somewhat original take on one particular political figure…

GG is in the Red Ken mould. Part idealist, part man of courage, part idiot.

The man would surely hate us WNs. Never the less. Just because someone "hates" us - there’s no reason to "hate" him.

I HAVE A FEAR.

The basis of this fear is this. The liberals, By I which I mean the GENUINE liberals (like Galloway) will , in Britain, become aware and VOCAL regarding(globalism), amongst other things the "911 Truth" movement. I’m sorry, but if you DO NOT believe 911 was an inside job by now, then IMHO you are a lemming.

There are only two parties of principle in Britain. The BNP and the Lib Dems [Respeck](Yes I know at the highest level the LDs are part of the three headed hydra monopoly capitalist system, but lower down, there are people of principle in it)

I believe there are epoch changing events on the horizon. The nationalist cause needs to take on board much.

Galloway is being touted as a hero by many freedom-loving Americans, who surely live under the most evil White (?) Government of all time.

We have to make sure we are not outflanked by Galloway and chums

Somehow, I doubt the Lib Dems will be too keen on receiving Simon’s endorsement.

Meanwhile, Simon is somewhat more sure of where he stands on another political figure, if not on what constitutes libel…

Originally Posted by Lord Kitchener

To take the Labour government to court for crimes against the British Endemic White race.

Could we as nationalists fund the costs incurred between us all and what would the likely outcome be.

I feel its time to take positive action before it is to late.

LK

[Simon]

Eventually. But these are gutless mediocrities that in other life times would be actors and actresses. The harshest punishments should be reserved for those who pull their strings - but I’m sure God has already thought of that…

In Blair case, his strings are the cottaging with Mandy - tips of the iceberg stuff like the Dunblane massacres / paedophile links with the 100 year disclosure rule.

BLAIR IS NOTHING. When the time comes those who really rule will do what they want with him before all our voluntary hangmen come forward.

Blair has sold his soul to the Devil. His increasing uneasy appearance has the look of a man who knows Satan is on the starting blocks ready to collect on the Faustian contract he signed all those years ago. I condemn Blair not for destroying Britain, but for being a bull****ting mediocrity …

Cottaging with Mandy? Better not to ask I think…

So, does Simon have anything like a coherent view on the subject of race? Does this explain anything?

My opinion is based on the following reasoning:

Consider the three main races: Caucasians Negroes and Orientals.

I would say that as a race Negroes as a whole are more masculine, in the superficial sexual sense than Whites who are more superficially masculine than Orientals. This consideration applies to both men and women. On the rants forum I got one of the Blacks to admit Black women are more masculine than White women.

Rushton’s work on race illustrated that Negroes in their native environment evolved more so with an emphasis on male/male competition for females as opposed to the other races requirement to overcome ice age living conditions. That’s not to say White and other didn’t fight for females, because they obviously did – but this component (ie fighting other males) of evolution was less important for Whites than for Blacks (IMO).. So we get higher testosterone and crime with Blacks, thicker skulls to take all those blows fighting for females etc

For superficial White women, and lets remember, just because the average IQ for White’s is 100, that doesn’t stop there being thick Whites at 80 to 90, the primitive attraction towards Negroes for trashy White women is just that, primitive, something of a primordial echo that drowns out the increased ice age intellect “gains” (IMO a White who breeds with a Black is shovelling excrement on the graves of their ancestors)

In consideration of the “femininity ” scale, Oriental women, because of their smaller stature may be perceived by White men as being more feminine than White women. This is of course another superficial judgement.

I have heard that White female Black male breeding is far more common than White male Black female. We see it don’t we ? White male Oriental female is more common than the other way around.

For Whites to “mix” is unfair on their offspring. If a White woman gives birth to a Black’s kid and that individual is female then that female will be less feminine than her mother. I get the sense that the female semi-niglet can only ever “ape” her White mother’s feminity. On the other hand a White man who has a male offspring with an Oriental – that child will invariably be of smaller statue than if his mother had been White. I’m saying the White race is poised between the excessively masculine and excessive feminine. Lets keep it that way.

We as racially conscious Whites don’t mix not because we are so far above the animals that we couldn’t conceive of mixing. We don’t mix because we allow ourselves to be governed by our HEADS and not our HORMONES. Everyone on the forum is physiologically capable of "mixing" but we don’t because we share the dream of the destiny of the White Race.

One people, One destiny, To The Stars !

This last post presents a bit of a problem in terms of trying to put forward a coherent article about Simon’s views on life – which path do I take next? His views on women and gender, or do I follow the path of pseudoscience and his interest in matters conspiratorial.

On balance, I think gender first, we’ll leave the obvious wingnuttery to last…

I agree with the main thrust of the article…

We should EXPECT leaderships and courage from men. When it comes from women it is a bonus….

Men should bear the brunt of the criticism for an increasing effimacy that sees impressionable women take off with apes. Women are less rebellious than men and more willing to jump through the hoops..

Women leaders in the White Nationalist movement, because they are very rare are an inspiration to all and an example that males wishing to recover their "manhood" should follow….

But this is a fight where the frontline soldiers politically and otherwise, by nature’s necessity have to be men…

Most men and women are “followers” of prevailing religion and belief systems, the latter even more so….

So the whole of ‘white civilisation’ is facing collapse thanks to Graham Norton and Julian Clary – that’s it men, you’re just not butch to compete any more and the only answer is to legally recognise hitting women over the head with a club as constituting a marriage proposal – but only if you’re white…

But what kind of woman should you be looking for if you’re a self-respecting white supremacist dickhead? Fortunately Simon has the answer…

 Firstly to use the word "RACIST" - A loaded term is playing into enemy hands.

 There are two types of men. Those who will fight and those who won’t. Our cause depends on men primarily but not exclusively, in these "early" days, where the virtue of courage is necessary.

 With regard to women. There are three types:

 1) Those who won’t "fight"/support under any circumstances

 2) Those who will give genuine feminine and natural support to their Nationalist husband.

 3) Boadicea types who, with very few exceptions are better than many of the best men. These are women for whom the entire race is their child.

IMHO WN men make the mistake of looking for a Boadicea type, woman (3) when they should be looking for woman (2). Women generally have to be lead by a strong man (to be happy).

 You got that? Stay away from the butch ones… I say, stay away from the butch ones…

Men work Women weep. The good women WNs are better than the men, more guts etc etc this fight is predominately for the men – it has to be. The men have got to stop being cissies.

 Although there are some women that macho-man Simon does find a bit scary…

Always amazes me how you scum call the police then start threatening nationalists.. typically you put your women lesbian race mixer half breeds at the front at demos then let your freakish "men" at the back shouting "insults" etc..

better luck (not) this year at RWB you scum

And of course, Simon’s got a theory about all this to go with his advice…

The girls have outperformed the boys in school exams again. This has been attributed to the increasing amount of coursework in various subjects at the expense of “sudden death” exams. I believe the male/female division could be a useful lens through which to view Western society as a whole.

One of the original “Star Trek” episodes put forward an interesting notion: “Male and Female are universal constants”. The implication is that whilst men are “male” and women are “female”, it’s still possible to consider the qualities of “masculine” and “feminine” without necessarily attributing them specifically to “men” or “women”.

Masculine qualities might include bravery, honour, ”breaking the rules” etc

Feminine qualities might include compassion, empathy, ”keeping the rules” etc

Both men and women may possess “masculine” and “feminine” characteristics. The excessively masculine men might end up in prison, the excessively feminine women as cackling soap opera watchers. I suggest a balanced human being will have both masculine and feminine qualities – ideally the man will have the more masculine qualities and the woman the more feminine qualities.

I would suggest that girls “outperforming” boys stems from their “feminity” - this feminity includes “keeping to the rules, working hard etc”. A harder perspective might be that girls are more willing to “jump through the hoops” than their male counterparts. I’m thinking of that quote from George Bernard Shaw that says something like:

“The reasonable man changes himself to suit the world. The unreasonable man tries to change the world to suit himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man”

The implication is that we need “unreasonable men” in these current times and not “rule keepers” . (I’m not suggesting breaking the laws of the land)

I believe that a surge in “masculine” energy is required. The obvious implication is that men should start being “men”. Through out history there have been powerful women who have tapped into their masculine side for the good of their people, such as Boadicia, Joan of Arc, Elizabeth I – so this is not specific to “men”, but I believe the coming ethnic troubles will demand much more of men than the soft living life style we have become accustomed to within the last fifty years has conditioned us for.

Apart from exams and thinking about the world of work itself, the professions require submission to the political flavours of our current times (“Multiculturalism”, “Liberalism” etc). To not acknowledge and accept these flavours is career suicide. There is another aspect of submissiveness (femininity) that is to the detriment of working people and that is the propensity to accept unreasonable workloads for fear of angering those higher up in the organisation.

I would suggest that to the degree that women are in an organisation that organisation will abdicate its negotiating position and adopt a “beggar my neighbour” approach rather than a “collectivist” approach. A collectivist approach I suggest has a “masculine” component – Males more naturally act collectively e.g. : armies, trade unions, football hooligan gangs or political parties.

Civilization/stagnation demands submission/feminity of people but I believe we have to move the pendulum the other way towards Barbarism/creativity with more assertiveness/masculinity amongst our people, (men AND women) as a whole.

And no, finally, we get on to the general wingnuttery. You have caught flashes of this in several of Simon’s other posts, not just the usual references to the good old Jewish conspiracy thing but the odd comment that seems, well, rather more ‘spacey’ – like this one:

I believe in the coming "White Renaissance" – Space travel would be a part of that…

In case you’re wondering what this is all about, Simon seems to be rather of a fan of a particular crap Science Fiction novel which deal with White Nationalists decamping to a colony on another planet to avoid the growing tides of ‘blackness’ over whelming this planet – which as long as this is strictly one-way trip, is not so bad a concept after all.

Damn, I’m digressing again – back to Simon and three post for the price of one…

Hello Ward,

I haven’t got round to reading your book yet, but I feature it on my home page…..(creep creep )

I posted a UFO thread that has fallen off the bottom of the list.

Having looked into this subject, I really think we need to investigate the subject. I believe a White Nationalist movement might be looked back upon in the future as the battering ram of a larger "renaissance" movement incorporating non-mainstream topics such as this.

Sorry if I’m testing the patience of folks on this topic….

May I ask your opinion on this subject ?

—————————————————–

The “Disclosure Project” which is based on the notion of a UFO cover-up has some interesting features that White Nationalists can appreciate.

In no particular order:

1/ The project director describes the difficulty in getting the message out. He describes CNN and the American media as being controlled by powerful interests.

2/ The project itself has had the biggest web cast of all time but is largely ignored.

3/ “IF” there is any truth in the extraterrestrial nature of UFOs then this is A BIG story. For “Holocaust Deniers” substitute “UFO Buffs” ? (perhaps ?)

4/ Steve Greer describes the biggest challenge as getting the “masses” involved. He says that the “goons” that have been responsible for terrorising certain whistle blowers aren’t so terrifying as the indifference of the masses. He makes the interesting comment that the government bases its cover-up on the notion that people do their day jobs and haven’t anything left in them to do anything else…

My own take on White Nationalism is that it forms one aspect of a forthcoming renaissance that will draw on revisionism, genetics, communication possibilities via the net and a general increased consciousness of race. “IF” there is anything in the UFO phenomena, the long term reputation of WN would be enhanced by association with this discipline. No doubt there is the problem of credibility with WN itself that may be further stretched by association with UFO studies.

——————————————————-

Originally Posted by niveus

.. But given the age of the universe, the distance between stars and the time necessary to travel that distance then it impossible we could ever meet. …

(The site http://disclosureproject.org/)

[Simon]

Well, as I say, we don’t fully understand the laws of physics…

Most of what I’ve said, I’m sure of with regard to extraterrestrials.

Now, I’m going to speculate….When they have been seen,(discounting cranks, disinformation, one over the eight etc) they have been humanoid, (eg roswell in ‘47) rather than say like fanciful creatures off Dr Who or fifties space horror films…

As it happens I believe ET is some distant relation - a bit like Negroes…but this is just speculation. To speculate further, the distances involved might therefore, be a lot less than you might otherwise imagine them to be based on this. There is much we don’t understand…

You’ve got to love that last post - As it happens I believe ET is some distant relation - a bit like Negroes – Oh, jeez, would that not turn out to be poetic justice. Off they go into the final frontier in the Starship Lebensraum only to find out that the aliens are black and have ray guns…

As yet more evidence of Simon’s casual acquaintance with reality, try this one…

Yes. If it wasn’t for the "earthly alien" invasion of Britain, I’d be a UFO activist.

(It’s all part of the same thing really All of the things deliberately hidden from public view are aimed at "keeping control" e.g. proper discussion of racial differences, 911, JFK assassination, "holocaust" exaggerations, murder of Dr Kelly etc etc etc etc )

http://www.disclosureproject.org

The world is stranger than most people dare think or imagine.

And that, as they say is almost it… I think I’ve waded through enough shit to give a picture of the real Simon Smith – sadly, to date, there’s been no sign of his amazing dancing bear, but we live in hope – so I’ll leave you with two final comments; one from Simon’s new blog and the other showing Simon the philosopher at work…

I believe going into the 21^st Century, the real struggle for humanity is one of Spirituality versus Materialism. I don’t profess that either the BNP or myself are always right. I’m sure there are good people in other smaller parties. I reserve the right to respect good people in those parties – what ever they might think of me is irrelevant. I hope that the British National Party becomes more than a party, more than even a cultural movement. I hope it is in the Vanguard of a New Renaissance that can destroy the wicked, some would say satanic, Globalist-Materialist world order that keeps many new discoveries, inventions and knowledge undercover, ON PURPOSE in order to maintain control - we might look back on these present times as the "New Dark Ages".

And…

IMO the purist religion is equivalent to the highest philosophy. Different cultures have recognised the importance of seeing the creation as One and have articulated this in different ways: I haven’t studied Cosmotheism, other than listened to William Pierce’s Saturday broadcast which outlined his own position.

To the monotheistic religions it was the First Commandment “Thou shalt have no other God before me…”, to existentialists the importance of “the present moment” to the Hindus “the realisation of the Self”. A generic name for this might be the Law of Unity…

When the mind is clear one doesn’t need religion or rituals. The mystical “oneness” appreciation of reality isn’t so rare and is an appreciation everyone experiences every day – an example would be listening to a fine piece of music or immersed in a tightly reasoned SF post !

In order to appreciate unity or GET back to unity, due to our ignorance it might be that we need more than “The First Commandment”. Laws that multiply as a society becomes more corrupt and tries to get back to its higher state, are mirrored in the individual who must also take on more rules/regulations observances and rituals as his consciousness has also declined and seeks to return to his higher nature.

Rules and Rituals would imply organised religion. What are the elements of organized religion ? IMO and in no particular order:

1) Symbols that identify the adherents e.g. cross, star of David etc

2) “Holy” men – “druid” type characters or “Guardians” (I’m plugging Plato again here)

3) A moral code e.g. don’t steal, marry and have kids

4) A liturgy that is easily remembered and repeated every week at a gathering

Eg “I solemnly promise to uphold the principle of evolving consciousness. I acknowledge the evolutionary destiny of my race whilst not hating any other…etc etc” (don’t laugh) together with songs and poems – the retelling of Ancient Greek and Norse myths

5) Central martyr/hero figures that have served/died for the cause and have been seen as great teachers to the wise and “sons of God” to the masses.

6) A central book e.g. Bible, Koran

7) A self helping, supporting community

Just some of my thoughts…I don’t think a self-styled prophet would have much success with the above checklist if he tried to implement it. I mean, there are too may cranks, egotists and cultists out there already.

(Back to the everyday here…

Near where I live Muslims have been causing trouble. They can meet under the auspices of “Religion” and yet plot political actions. Believe it or not there is a self styled “Muslim Parliament” of Britain.

It would be BRILLIANT if the world wide White Nationalist community could move towards some consensus on a Religion that packs the same political punch as Judaism or Islam.)

Having written the above Balder, I believe I haven’t answered your question but I’ve tried to. Perhaps the rituals just have to evolve…

One last thing, I REALLY like the idea of Valhalla

So there you have it – Simon Smith, holocaust denier, racist, misogynist, BNP councillor for Great Bridge and all-round wingnut. Need I say more…