Both the OHRP and Eventfinda have justified the denial of Human Rights to the members of the National Front with the smear that we are Nazi’s and a gang.
The smearing of the National Front is typical anti-White discrimination, and we detail some of the smears that have been aimed against us by your organisations below
The New Zealand National Front has long been labeled with cliches such as “neo-nazis”, “race haters”, “white supremacists,” “criminals,” etc. They are the kinds of cliches that are also applied to the Nationalist Right worldwide, indicating that the smears have a common source and a common purpose. These smears moreover are the same whether stated by the Left, or by the globalist, corporate-controlled news media, indicating a common source and the historic alliance between Leftism and Big Money against Nationalism.
Here is a short list of the main smears you have used against us.
The National Front is a “gang”. This is a comment that is on an online New Zealand encyclopaedia. The entry for the National Front on Te Ara: the Encyclopedia of New Zealand, under the heading “Gangs”, states:
“The group formed in the late 1970s, based on the British National Front. In 2010 it described itself as a political party, although it was difficult to deduce what its policies were, other than homophobia, racism and patriotic nationalism”. (http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/photograph/28245/national-front)
The entry is written by Dr. Greg Newbold and Rāwiri Taonui. Dr. Newbold, an expert on gangs, should know better. Moreover nothing about the brief description is accurate. The NZNF was formed in the late 1960s by an Ashburton schoolteacher, Brian Thompson, and Mrs. Kay Hopper of Auckland, an organiser of the New Zealand branch of the League of Empire Loyalists. Why the NZNF’s policies are allegedly “difficult to deduce” is itself difficult to deduce, as the NZNF has always had a statement of policy.
Moreover, the NZNF does not have the structure of a “gang”, does not demand unlawful initiations or initiate violence on those who wish to leave; does not deal in drugs, theft, or other criminal actions, or encourage its members to acts of violence although violence.
The NF organisers always inform the police of whatever public actions are to be undertaken, and expect the police to keep order and allow peaceful protest to proceed. NF relations with the police have generally been cordial.
The NF has stood for local and national office. It has the toughest law and order policy of any party in New Zealand. What gang would advocate the death penalty for serious criminal offences?
The NZNF is involved in violence, especially against immigrant communities. This is often alleged in particular by the extreme Left, itself involved in violence. It is part of an old myth. A recent example is that of a brief You Tube presentation by anarchist Val Morse, who poses as a “peace activist” but has been involved with some of the worst violence in New Zealand politics. Amusingly, pacifist Morse was implicated as one of the Leftists at a Maori terrorist training camp in the Ureweras. In a recent commentary on the NF’s annual Flag Day in Wellington in 2014, Val Morse claims that the NF has been involved with Jewish grave desecrations and violence against the Somali community. Both allegations go back to 2004. The incidents were used as excuses for anarchists and Trotskyite-communists to mobilise hundreds of “useful idiots” to riot against the 2004 NF rally. One of the anarchist organisers, Sam Buchanan, now a Kapiti community board member, later claimed that political violence is justified and gave as a laudable example the lunatic “Black Blocs” in Europe, noted for their use of molotov cocktails.
There is no evidence or reason to believe that the NF was involved in the Jewish grave vandalism, and there is no cause for stating that the NF would encourage or condone anyone in such acts. While having no advantage to the NF, the vandalism has often been used as innuendo.
On the other hand, soon after, when the NF held its first annual Flag Day in October 2004, heavily outnumbered, they were attacked by an anarchist-led mob, who threw bottles, injuring a policeman. They Left later claimed that the bottles had been thrown by the NF from a supposed cache hidden at the University law school. However, that location was the one designated by the police at which to assemble at the conclusion of the rally, not the NF. (The Left is generally inept in their lies and the media not much better).
Furthermore, NF activities are usually only reported if confrontation is involved. Most NF activities are peaceful however, and whenever confrontation has occurred it has without exception been caused by the Left. Jonathan Milne, a leading NZ journalist, once stated to a former NF member that an NF activity would not get reported unless there was violence.
The NZNF believes in “white supremacy.” White supremacy implies rule over other races. The NZNF is a racial-nationalist or ethno-nationalist movement, and therefore is based on self-determination. Ruling others necessitates the presence of foreign elements, whether as slaves, servants or cheap labour. Inevitably this use of foreign labour undermines the dominant society, whether in ancient Egypt with its Nubian slaves, the African and Asian subjects of the old European empires, continuing to demand migrant status as former colonial subjects; or as cheap Third World labour used by capitalists who have no loyalty to anything beyond money.
The Left claims to also to defend “ethnic” self-determination, but does not recognise that principle for White ethnics, such as the Afrikaners, who have suffered most of their history fighting imperialism and big business. Furthermore, the Left has betrayed the White working class by perversely claiming that White workers have benefited from colonialism. But the Left has no real answer to this system, which requires first of all taking away the power of the global exploiters to run the banking systems of the world. Without liberation from the money barons who exploit all races and nations, nothing else can be achieved.
Before the workers movements were taken over by Marxoids, liberals and career seekers, trades unions resisted coolie immigration. This resistance resulted in the White Australia Policy being the main plank of the Labour Party; White workers’ demonstrations in San Francisco and Canada against Asian immigration; and the revolt of the White miners on the Rand and their declaration of a White Workers’ Republic, put down violently by the State in the interests of Jewish mine owners. That is the true heritage of the Labour movement, and one that the NZNF upholds; not the Labour Party, the Communists or the Anarchists.
The NZNF is a “Nazi” organisation. This relates also to the allegation of “white supremacy”. Nazism, or more properly German National Socialism, was a German response to the condition in Europe at that time and place. While it is claimed that the NF and others are reviving Nazism for the present day, or “neo-Nazism,” there is not a historical or ideological link. While each nation has its own form of nationalism distinct to its traditions, that of the NZNF derives from the British settler heritage, and that of Dutch, Scandinavian, Polish, and others who formed the basis of NZ nationhood before being hijacked and wrecked by traitors and profiteers. White New Zealanders are an amalgam of diverse European ethnics. German National Socialism rejected Slavs as part of the European community, and sought to impose Germany upon the rest of Europe, putting its own interests before the wider interests of Europe. This reached the point of supporting reactionary regimes in Hungary and Romania rather than backing the radical nationalists movements there and elsewhere, and rejecting the Russians as “inferior”, millions of whom would have fought for Germany and a genuine new order in Europe.
Moreover, the NZNF’s nationalist ideology does not require overseas examples. Our greatest statesmen, in particular Richard John Seddon, the great social reformer William Pember Reeves, et al vigorously opposed the importation of coolie Asian labour, as did workers, farmers (who organised the White New Zealand Society) and returned servicemen, whose journals often deplored Asian immigration. The Left and their allies in big business and the news media besmirch our forefathers when they claim that NF policies are “nazi”, “simplistic”, “bigoted”, etc., because they are the values upon which New Zealand was founded, and are needed again to maintain our identity.
Furthermore, the National Front council will take disciplinary action against any National Front member using the organisation to promote Nazism.
By intellectuals I certainly don’t mean the conformist race traitors that University’s excrete in huge numbers. I am referring to real thinkers. Here is some magnificent writing from a master of logic (now deceased), for those that want some intellectual stimulation.
What Is ‘Liberalism’?
by Revilo P. Oliver (pictured)
An excerpt from Dr. Oliver’s book America’s Decline: The Education of a Conservative(Londinium Press, London, 1981)
“LIBERALISM” IS A succedaneous religion that was devised late in the Eighteenth Century and it originally included a vague deism. Like the Christianity from which it sprang, it split into various sects and heresies, such as Jacobinism, Fourierism, Owenism, Fabian Socialism, Marxism, and the like. The doctrine of the “Liberal” cults is essentially Christianity divested of its belief in supernatural beings, but retaining its social superstitions, which were originally derived from, and necessarily depend on, the supposed wishes of a god. This “Liberalism,” the residue of Christianity, is, despite the fervor with which its votaries hold their faith, merely a logical absurdity, a series of deductions from a premise that has been denied.
The dependence of the “Liberal” cults on a blind and irrational faith was long obscured or concealed by their professed esteem for objective science, which they used as a polemic weapon against orthodox Christianity, much as the Protestants took up the Copernican restoration of heliocentric astronomy as a weapon against the Catholics, who had imprudently decided that the earth could be stopped from revolving about the sun in defiance of Holy Writ by burning intelligent men at the stake or torturing them until they recanted. Pious Protestants would naturally have preferred a cozy little earth, such as their god described in their holy book, but they saw the advantage of appealing to our racial respect for observed reality to enlist support, while simultaneously stigmatizing their rivals as ignorant obscurantists and ridiculous ranters.
The votaries of “Liberalism” would have much preferred to have the various human species specially created to form one race endowed with the fictitious qualities dear to “Liberal” fancy, but the cultists saw the advantage of endorsing the findings of geology and biology, including the evolution of species, in their polemics against orthodox Christianity to show the absurdity of the Jewish version of the Sumerian creation-myth. The hypocrisy of the professed devotion to scientific knowledge was made unmistakable when the “Liberals” began their frantic and often hysterical efforts to suppress scientific knowledge about genetics and the obviously innate differences between the different human species and between the individuals of any given species. At present, the “Liberals” are limited to shrieking and spitting when they are confronted with inconvenient facts, but no one who has heard them in action can have failed to notice how exasperated they are by the limitations that have thus far prevented them from burning wicked biologists and other rational men at the stake.
It is unnecessary to dilate on the superstitions of “Liberalism.” They are obvious in the cult’s holy words. “Liberals” are forever chattering about “all mankind,” a term which does have a specific meaning, as do parallel terms in biology, such as “all marsupials” or “all species of the genus Canis,” but the fanatics give to the term a mystic and special meaning, derived from the Zoroastrian myth of “all mankind” and its counterpart in Stoic speculation, but absurd when used by persons who deny the existence of Ahuru Mazda or a comparable deity who could be supposed to have imposed a transcendental unity on the manifest diversity of the various human species. “Liberals” rant about “human rights” with the fervor of an evangelist who appeals to what Moses purportedly said, but a moment’s thought suffices to show that, in the absence of a god who might be presumed to have decreed such rights, the only rights are those which the citizens of a stable society, by agreement or by a long usage that has acquired the force of law, bestow on themselves; and while the citizens may show kindness to aliens, slaves, and horses, these beings can have no rights. Furthermore, in societies that have been so subjugated by conquest or the artful manipulation of masses that individuals no longer have constitutional rights that are not subject to revocation by violence or in the name of “social welfare,” there are no rights, strictly speaking, and therefore no citizens — only masses existing in the state of indiscriminate equality of which “Liberals” dream and, of course, a state of de facto slavery, which their masters may deem it expedient, as in the United States at present, to make relatively light until the animals are broken to the yoke.
“Liberals” babble bout “One World,” which is to be a “universal democracy” and is “inevitable,” and they thus describe it in the very terms in which the notion was formulated, two thousand years ago, by Philo Judaeus, when he cleverly gave a Stoic coloring to the old Jewish dream of a globe in which all the lower races would obey the masters whom Yahweh, by covenant, appointed to rule over them. And the “Liberal” cults, having rejected the Christian doctrine of “original sin,” have even reverted to the most pernicious aspect of Christianity, which common sense had held in check in Europe until the Eighteenth Century; and they openly exhibit the morbid Christian fascination with whatever is lowly, proletarian, inferior, irrational, debased, deformed, and degenerate. This maudlin preoccupation with biological refuse, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as ‘underprivileged [!],’ would make sense, if it had been decreed by a god who perversely chose to become incarnate among the most pestiferous of human races and to select his disciples from among the illiterate dregs of even that peuplade, but since the “Liberals” claim to have rejected belief in such a divinity, their superstition is exposed as having no basis other than their own resentment of their betters and their professional interest in exploiting the gullibility of their compatriots.
In the Eighteenth Century, Christians whose thinking was cerebral rather than glandular, perceived that their faith was incompatible with observed reality and reluctantly abandoned it. A comparable development is taking place in the waning faith of “Liberalism,” and we may be sure that, despite the cult’s appeal to masses that yearn for an effortless and mindless existence on the animal level, and despite the prolonged use of public schools to deform the minds of all children with “Liberal” myths, the cult would have disappeared, but for the massive support given it today, as to the Christian cults in the ancient world, by the Jews, who have, for more than two thousand years, battened on the venality, credulity, and vices of the races they despise.
There is one crucial fact that we must not overlook, if we are to see the political situation as it is, rather than in the anamorphosis of some ‘ideology,’ i.e., propaganda-line, whether “Liberal” or “conservative.” The real fulcrum of power in our society is neither the votaries of an ideological sect nor the Jews, clear-sighted and shrewd as they are, but the intelligent members of our own race whose one principle is an unmitigated and ruthless egotism, an implacable determination to satisfy their own ambitions and lusts at whatever cost to their race, their nation, and even their own progeny. And with them we must reckon the bureaucrats, men who, however much or little they may think about the predictable consequences of the policies they carry out, are governed by a corporate determination to sink their probosces ever deeper into the body politic from which they draw their nourishment. Neither of these groups can be regarded as being “Liberal” or as having any other political attitude from conviction. The first are guarded by the lucidity of their minds, and the second by their collective interests, from adhesion to any ideology or other superstition.
Bureaucracies contain, of course, ambitious men who are climbing upward. One thinks of the bureaucrats who, shortly before the “Battle of the Bulge” in the last days of 1944, were openly distressed “lest a premature victory in Europe compromise our social gains at home,” meaning, of course, that they were afraid that peace might break out before they had climbed another rung on their way to real power. After the defeat of Japan, one of them, a major in the ever-growing battalions of chair-borne troops, too precious to be distressed by such nasty things as fighting battles, frankly lamented his hard luck: if only the war had lasted another three months, and a suitable number of Americans been killed, he would have been promoted to colonel and would also have a “command” that would have qualified him as the foremost expert in his field and thus assured his prosperity after the evil day on which he would have to face the hardships of peace. This attitude may not be admirable, but it is quite common and a political force of the first magnitude, which it would be childish to ignore. It is not, of course, peculiar to the United States. When the National Socialists came to power in Germany, they had many enthusiastic adherents of the same type, who, after the defeat of their nation, did not have to be tortured to become witnesses to the “evils of Nazism” and endorse any lie desired by the brutal conquerors. The attitude, furthermore, though especially prevalent in our demoralized age, is not peculiar to it. One thinks of the Popes who are reported to have told their intimates, “How much profit this fable of Christ has brought us!” And the same realistic appraisal of the main chance was doubtless present in many ecclesiastics who did not reach the top or did not have so much confidence in the discretion of their immediate associates.
Unmitigated egotism, which is necessarily a prime factor on all the higher levels of society in a “democracy,” is a political force with which one cannot cope directly; one can only attack the masks that are worn in public. It is, however, an obstacle that can be circumvented and one which could become an asset. The only strategic consideration here is represented by the truism, “nothing succeeds like success” — a crude statement, which you may find elaborated with elegance and sagacity in the Or culo manual of the great Jesuit, Baltasar Gracián. Our formidable enemies today will become our enthusiastic allies tomorrow, if it appears that we are likely to succeed. I speak, of course, only of members of our race, but the most competent and acute “Liberals,” who today declaim most eloquently about the “underprivileged” and “world peace,” could become tomorrow the most eloquent champions of the hierarchical principle (with which they secretly agree) and a guerre l’outrance against our enemies, if their calculations of the probable future were changed. And, as the Jews well know, the great humanitarian, whose soul shudders today at the very thought of insufficient veneration of the Jews, could become tomorrow grateful to the Jews only for the wonderful idea about gas chambers that was incorporated in the hoax about the “six million,” and he would probably find a real personal satisfaction in putting the idea into practice at last. As Gracián says, the prudent man will ascertain where power really lies, in order to use those who have it and to spurn those who have it not.
If one wishes to talk about principles or even long-range objectives to the representatives of this extremely powerful political force, one should wear motley and cap with bells; the only arguments that will be cogent to them are of the kind that always taught the Reverend Bishop Talleyrand precisely when it would be profitable to kick his less nimble associates in the teeth. Some historians claim, and it may be true, that Talleyrand had principles. If so, he never let them interfere with his conduct. He was a man of great talent and perspicacity, and he always found the right moment and right way to join the winning side in time for it to boost him yet higher. When age at last forced his retirement, he was equally adroit in conciliating impressionable historians by simulating regret for the methods by which he had attained eminence. He is one of the comparatively few perfect models for brilliant and pragmatic young men today.
Many of my conservative readers will find this fact disagreeable or even depressing, but I trust they will not dream of resuscitating an etiolated religion, and will not count too heavily on the spiritual effects of a possible restoration of racial self-respect and sanity. If the fact is unpleasant per se, it is also the basis for some cautious optimism, since it leaves open the possibility that movement on behalf of our race, if it ever seems likely to succeed, could quickly become an avalanche. In certain circumstances — not likely, perhaps, but possible — the despised “racist” of today could be astounded by the discovery that an overwhelming majority of the bureaucracy and of the White men in power above it had always been with him in heart. The sudden conversions will not necessarily be hypocritical, for it is quite likely that there is now such a majority which, ceteris paribus, would prefer to belong to a virile race rather than a dying one. But remember the proviso, ceteris paribus: no personal sacrifices, no risks.
The tally from last nights riot after the policeman who shot a Black youth was found innocent - about a dozen burned buildings and some burnt cars. The day before the riots some liberals bragged about not boarding up their stores as they had faith in the community. Apparently, their stores were smashed and the stores belonging to armed rednecks were untouched.
Green Party leader worried about Chinese supremacy in New Zealand
Last week, New Zealand hosted a visit from the Chinese President, Xi Jinping who said New Zealand and China could see $30 billion in two-way trade by 2020.
The Green Party’s Dr Norman said President Xi’s government was directly involved in the imprisonment and torture of human rights activists, and it was important to speak out about such cases, as China’s influence increased worldwide.
Chinese take over meat business
China’s Lianhua Trading Group has gone to majority control of Invercargill meat processor, Prime Range Meats.
Death to Christians, this is the Diversity we are bringing to NZ
The long, drawn-out persecution and oppression of Pakistani Christian mother of five, Asia Bibi, sentenced to die under Pakistani Blasphemy Laws is just business as usual for Pakistan. But the November 4, 2014 torture and burning to death of a young Christian couple near Lahore has been called “the worst religiously-motivated hate crime in Pakistan’s history.” Accused of “desecrating the Koran,” the couple was held in a room next to the brick kiln where they were bonded laborers while the local mosques worked up the usual suspects, some accounts say 2,000, some say as many as 4,000. The Muslim mob dragged the couple outside, beat them, broke their legs so they could not get away, and threw them — still alive — into the kiln’s furnace.
Britain resisting White Genocide at last
The British anti-immigration party, UKIP, easily won its second seat in Parliament on Friday ” a victory that will heighten disquiet in Prime Minister David Cameron’s Conservative Party as it prepares for next year’s election.
Former NZ MP’s whose loyalty appears to be with China rather than NZ
Bank of China gets NZ registration. Fellow state-owned Chinese banks Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) and China Construction Bank (CCB) have also both been registered within the last year. Former National MPs Ruth Richardson and Chris Tremain are both listed as directors of the new bank, alongside Dongyi Hua, Shanjun Hu, Mang Li and Lei Wang. The pair join ex-National Party leader Don Brash and former Prime Minister Dame Jenny Shipley, who chair ICBC New Zealand and CCB New Zealand respectively.
Spark (this is telecom rebranded) could become dangerous to our sovereignty
Spark New Zealand has got closer to Chinese telecommunications vendor Huawei Technologies in an expanded deal to accelerate the roll-out of mobile services and upgrade the local carrier’s XT network.
The two companies last week signed a memorandum of understanding, witnessed by Prime Minister John Key and Chinese Premier Xi Jinping in Auckland, which will let Huawei tailor technologies for Spark, using the Chinese firm’s mammoth spend on research and development.
In the US, Huawei has been challenged due to concerns of United States security officials that Huawei-made telecommunications equipment is designed to allow unauthorized access by the Chinese government and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.
Youth of Nauru are worried about immigrants
There are claims that Nauru refugees are facing death threats. This follows the distribution of a letter issuing threats against the refugees. The letter, attributed to a group called the Youth of the Republic of Nauru, speaks of the refugees taking jobs, having relationships with local women and threatening the culture of a conservative country.
A White cop shot an unarmed Black in Ferguson, resulting in protests and rioting. Cops in Ferguson are now victims of death threats and violence from the Black protesters. It now looks like the cop who shot the Black might have been fighting for his life. Blacks are calling for blood, but in this video the policeman points out the protesters don’t care about the thousands of Blacks that are shot by their own people.
As shown in an earlier NF post, recently pro-White Nick Griffin confronted the European Leaders with their complicity in White Genocide. Mr. Griffin named the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan as the smoking gun showing the Genocidal foundation the European Union was founded on. Here is a video of Jean-Marie Le Pen making the same point in 2008. This video is currently doing the rounds on pro-White sites as it is highly applicable to the state of present day Europe, there is an accompanying surge of awareness of the Kalergi plan.
The National Front has sent the following email to Devoy, our Race Relations Commissioner
Dear Ms. Devoy, we bring your attention to the following;
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 1948, defines genocide as “any of a number of acts committed with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnic, RACIAL or religious group: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; DELIBERATELY INFLICTING ON THE GROUP CONDITIONS OF LIFE calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”
As race relations commissioner you have been promoting MASSIVE non-White Immigration, and Assimilation/Integration & Diversity programs.
All these “conditions” lead to WHITE GENOCIDE!
China has taken steps to force immigrate and assimilate themselves into Tibet.
This has routinely been labeled Genocide by the UN and “Anti-racist” groups.
There are many similarities between Tibetan Genocide and the Genocide you are forcing on White New Zealanders.
The National Front demands that you stop promoting your anti-White Genocidal policies.
Riot police moved in last week to prevent residents of a neighborhood on Rome’s outskirts from attacking refugees living at a holding center in the latest incident of anti-immigrant tensions rocking Italy.
Banks Not To Be Trusted
The G20 nations met in Brisbane, Australia to conclude a week of Asian festivities that began in Beijing for the developed countries and major economies. The biggest deal the G20 made was the announcement of new banking rules that are expected to send shock waves to anyone holding a checking, savings, or money market account in a financial institution.
The G20 implemented a new policy that makes bank deposits on par with paper investments, subjecting account holders to declines that one might experience from holding a stock or other security when the next financial banking crisis occurs. Additionally, all member nations of the G20 will immediately submit and pass legislation that will fulfill this program, creating a new paradigm where banks no longer recognize your deposits as money, but as liabilities and securitized capital owned and controlled by the bank or institution.
“Diversity” is White Genocide, Sweden is dying
Caliphate In Europe: Sweden Cedes Control Of Muslim Area
Political Correctness: The perils of multiculturalism and open borders have reached critical mass in Sweden. There are Muslim enclaves where postal, fire and other essential services — even police officers themselves –require police protection.
A police report released last month identifies 55 of these “no-go zones” in Sweden. These zones are similar to others that have popped up in Europe in recent years. They formed as large Muslim populations emigrating to politically correct and tolerant European states refuse to assimilate and set up virtual states within a state where the authorities fear to tread.
Soeren Kern of the Hudson Institute has documented the proliferation of these zones. They are de facto Muslim micro-states under Shariah law that reject Western values, society and legal systems. In these districts non-Muslims are expected to conform to the dictates of fundamentalist Islam or face violent consequences.
The police report that there are now vehicle checkpoints operated by Muslim gangs on the borders of these zones. Instead of confrontation, Swedish authorities occasionally send special “dialogue officers” in a sort of Muslim outreach program.
“The views expressed by Commenters and Guest Writers on this Blog and Website may not reflect the views of the NZ National Front – however we stand for freedom of speech and the inalienable rights of New Zealanders to hold and express their opinions. People have a clear choice whether or not to view this Website and the Comments Blog – the NZ National Front respectfully suggests that people exercise that choice without judgement… particularly if the views held and expressed may cause offence to any person or persons. We consider this fair warning and disclaimer”