"Our position is that 'good fences make good neighbours' … we want to defuse the 'Clash of Civilisations'." This is the core message that comes across in an interview that Nick Griffin has just supplied to a Turkish news agency. The interview in full is an important and carefully considered statement of the British National Party's attitude to Islam and the Muslim world.
It is especially important that our supporters know what the Party really believes in this regard, because every day brings new signs of how unwise the British Establishment is to interfere in places such as Egypt, Libya, Syria and Iran. Every such intervention further destabilises the Middle East and advances the brutal, medieval version of Islam that is so heavily promoted by Saudi Arabia.
As Mr. Griffin makes very clear, the British National Party believes in minding Britain's business, not interfering in other people’s countries - and making sure that they don't interfere in ours. It is hoped that reports in Turkey of this interview will help encourage the growing nationalist sentiment in the country which - just like our party - opposes Turkish entry into the European Union.
"Support for Turkey's entry is dropping steadily, especially on the back of the Euro crisis," explains Mr. Griffin. "That is why I took the time to give such a detailed and considered response. These people aren't our enemies, they are just different - and they don't belong here any more than we would belong in Istanbul."
1. In the light of the Breivik case, how do you feel about it? Do you feel any responsibility in this case? How do you think other Islamophobic organisations see this?
NG: Breivik had been a member of a pro-Zionist party and espoused extreme Zionist views. His position is not shared by the British National Party. We maintain a position of strict neutrality in the conflict in the Middle East, which we regard as being none of our business.
We do not share or accept the Islamophobic and pro-Zionist view that it is historically necessary or unavoidable for there to be a 'Clash of Civilisations' between the Western and Islamic worlds. That position is based on the premise that not only Muslims living in the West, but also Muslim states and populations in the Middle East, should be compelled to accept Western values.
Our position is that 'good fences make good neighbours' and we are as opposed to Western interference in Dar el Islam (the Zone of Submission) as we are to Muslim colonisation within our part of Dar el Harb (the Zone of War). Unlike the US military-industrial complex and the Zionist/Islamist fanatics (mirror images of each other in some ways), we do not want to be involved in Zones of War anywhere in the world.
We are not Islamophobic; we merely recognise the deep-rooted historical and cultural differences between Islam and other civilisations including our own. I think perhaps that the modern nation founded by Kemal Ataturk will understand this point better than most. We note in particular the fundamental incompatibility between a democracy resting on the twin foundations of Christian free-will and Science on the one hand and the Wahhabist/Salafist/Deobandi strains of Islam that are increasingly influential among Muslim communities in Europe.
2. It is known that Breivik has many links and ties to Islamophobic organisations in Britain. Considering that the “Magna Carta” was drafted in the UK, what is your view on this?
NG: Breivik claimed links to organisations in Britain, but how much store can be set on the word of a narcissist fantasist and madman? He certainly was not linked to any organisation that is in any way representative of either current public opinion or any significant strand of political thought within the British tradition from any time from Magna Carta until the present day.
There is a view - naturally linked to the 9/11 conspiracy movement - that Breivik was in some way influenced or even controlled by a neo-con/globalist tendency which seeks to encourage hostility between the West and Islam in order to: a) seize Middle Eastern oil reserves; b) leave Israel as the only possible stable partner in the region for the USA; c) eliminate Islamic banking as a possible rival to the existing international financial system; and, d) distract attention from the failure of the international banking system and the wholesale looting and destruction of the middle classes and national assets of the nations of the West.
That, however, is only conjecture and it is not a view for which we have seen anything other than circumstantial evidence.
3. It is alleged that Breivik is not alone and was a member of an organization called Knights Templar. And he stated that another 80 units in Europe are ready to make similar attacks. Is it a beginning of an operation against Muslims?
NG: Such claims must be considered in the light of my reply to Question 2. If there is an 'operation against Muslims', it does not come from, nor serve the interests of, genuine nationalist organisations within Europe.
4. Everybody was shocked when it became known that the attack was committed by a Norwegian. Are you also surprised and shocked when it is revealed that it was by a European? Did you accuse El-Kaide or similar groups when you first heard the attack, as most people did?
NG: When news of the attacks first emerged, especially the bombing, we did tend to assume that it was an Islamist attack on similar lines to the bombings of Madrid and London, especially in view of Norway's involvement in the provocative and unjustifiable US-led occupation of Afghanistan.
5. Will this result in more similar attacks in the future, which is a major concern for Muslims? Also, will you strive to extinguish hatred towards Muslims?
NG: We seek to mobilise peaceful and political opposition to the Western liberal-capitalist elite's undemocratic and enforced policies of mass immigration and multi-culturalism. We constantly reiterate the fact that the people to blame for the problems so many ordinary people face as a result of those policies are not the immigrants but the political and business class who have brought them to our country and done so much to turn the indigenous population into second class citizens.
Additionally, unnecessary tensions are caused by the neo-Marxist Political Correctness of the liberal elite, which prevents an effective response to the problems caused by criminal and extremist elements within immigrant communities in general and the Muslim one in particular. This tends to lead to resentment and suspicion being directed against those entire communities, even though many of their law-abiding members are just as opposed to, and victimised by, the activities of the criminal minority as anybody else.
To give an example directly related to Turks living in Britain, during the riots in London during August, the pathetically weak response of the police to the challenge of overwhelmingly black gangs of looters led to vigilante action by groups of Turkish business owners to protect their livelihoods and families. Already strained relations between the Turkish and black communities were thereby made worse by the failure of the police to deal effectively with the criminal minority among young blacks.
If we are allowed to mobilise politically on such issues, if the democratic process is respected and upheld, then many tensions can be defused. If, on the other hand, the liberal elite seeks to suppress political dissent, then it is all too likely that the resulting frustrations will lead to the ignorant scapegoating of innocent members of ethnic minorities.
6. If the BNP forms a government, what will await the Muslim demographic? Will they be extradited? Will they be treated equally?
NG: Full protection of the law of the land, and the requirement to comply with it. A complete halt to mass immigration from any source. An immediate ban on the public expressions of political Islamism, such as the wearing of the burqa. Rigorous police action and relentless educational publicity against crimes such as honour killing, heroin dealing and sexual grooming of vulnerable children, all of which at present besmirch the reputation of law abiding Muslims on account of the weak response of the authorities.
In the longer run, financial packages for voluntary resettlement in lands of ethnic origin and a sensible, informed, rational debate about how to defuse the 'Clash of Civilisations' by phased and agreed withdrawal from the spheres of influence of our respective homelands.
7. What is your Party’s “end-game”? What kind of Europe do you want? Fortress European and Christian, for instance?
NG: While we stand for the traditional British separation of Church and State, we recognise that our core values and identity are based on Christianity and that this must remain the case. It's not a matter of 'Fortress' Anywhere, we believe that rampant globalism in all its many guises (from the international banking system to the free movement of labour) is destructive of the local particularisms which form the very basis of our identity and hence humanity.
All the nations of the world need to develop an immunity to the culturally and ethnically genocidal melting pot 'vision' on offer from Hollywood, the global corporate elite and their left-wing Useful Idiots. It may be disguised as 'love' and 'tolerance', but it's really about profit and greed. As with all indigenous peoples, the people of Britain have an absolute right to retain their identity and to be themselves.
This isn't something we only claim for ourselves; this is a worldwide right and a global challenge. If I were to go on holiday to Turkey (if Turkey would have me!), I want to visit a Turkish Turkey, run by Turks for Turks and along lines with which Turks are comfortable and secure. I don't want to see Turkey sucked into the atomised, identity-wrecking, liberal-capitalist black hole that is the increasingly Americanised United States of Europe.
Returning directly to the question of Europe. I think that European nations should co-operate on certain 'big issue' policies such as overall defence against immigration, our relationship with China and massively expensive futurist projects such as nuclear fusion and space exploration. But I don't want a bunch of unelected French bureaucrats of German bankers telling me how to run my country, and I don't want to tell the Greeks or Estonians how to run theirs. We should all be sovereign nations, masters in our own houses.
8. Considering recent economic crisis, how do you see the future of the EU? Should the UK withdraw from EU membership?
NG: The EU has the future which its conspiratorial founders always envisaged for it: Ever closer Union in an undemocratic Soviet-lite tyranny. But such an end is so unnatural that the EU Project can only ever be completed and then held together through deceit, manipulation and repression.
The current Euro crisis was foreseen right from the beginning by the Europhiles. They knew that a Single Currency cannot work without a single economic and political government. Thus they saw and see the current turmoil as a 'beneficial crisis', since it will provide the excuse to bring on the thing they really wanted from the start - complete fiscal and political union.
Of course, the trouble when Utopian cranks like that manage to push themselves into positions of power is that the masses of 'ordinary', real people get caught up in and hurt by their attempts to build Heaven on Earth. The Utopian who wishes well is one of the most dangerous creatures on God's Earth, and the sooner Britain withdraws from this latest example of Utopian lunacy, the better.
9. The rights and pledges of Christians in Turkey are protected by Europe, whilst politicians, such as yourself, breach the rights of Muslims. Contradictory much?
NG: I suspect that if large numbers of Christians suddenly started to swamp Turkish cities, and were allowed by the Turkish government to establish 'Christian law' zones, to insist on teaching not only their own but also their Turkish neighbours' children that their ways were superior to those of Islam and traditional Turkish values, and if any Turk who expressed concern about the colonisation of Turkey was threatened with imprisonment and violent assault by pro-regime gangs, then ordinary, decent Turks would make their views known rather quicker and more effectively than Europeans have so far.
And, while I would urge them to blame the guilty politicians rather than the Christian immigrants, I would be the first to applaud them for standing up for their own identity and their children’s birthright.
10. What is your Party's stance on the tensions in the middle-east? The Arab Spring? Israeli-Turkish relations? Syrian government should step aside? Palestine should be recognized as a state?
NG: See my answers 1-4. As for the Arab Spring, it is clear that some of the grievances that fuelled the unrest were genuine ones based on tribal or generational fault-lines. As a democrat I understand the wishes of others to live under democracy. As an opponent of corruption I understand people losing patience with corrupt kleptocracies.
But the 'Arab Spring' was not the spontaneous result of such issues suddenly coming to the foreground. It was cynically financed and promoted by 'Western' globalist forces with Wall Street and US/UK government money.
It didn't start in the Arab street, it began with the neo-con drive to remake the Middle East in the perceived interest of the United States and Israel. It is a creature of sinister characters from the world of international finance such as George Soros and his ill-named National Endowment for Democracy. It has got far more to do with Zionist and Christian fundamentalist millennialism, and with CIA concerns about Peak Oil and future energy supplies than it has to do with 'freedom.'
Worse still, it could yet go terribly wrong, for even if the new regimes do try to walk the tightrope between democracy and Islam, there is no guarantee that future economic problems and the disappointment of unrealistically high expectations will not turn them from being prototype George Washingtons into being latter-day Kerenskys - being replaced not be Bolsheviks but by the Salafists who share so many undesirable similarities with the followers of Lenin who so brutalised Russia.
Relations between Turkey and Israel are a matter for Turkey and Israel and are nothing to do with Britain.
The government of Syria should not allow itself to be forced out of office by sinister external forces or by Islamist rebels. If the ruling Alawite majority are displaced by Sunni radicals then Syria will disintegrate into a failed state, the presently respected Christian minority will be brutalized and a Lebanese-style civil war will create misery for ordinary Syrians.
As a matter of principle, we believe that all peoples have a right to a homeland of their own, which leads us to believe that a two-state solution would have been the ideal one in Palestine. But the relentless spread of Zionist settlements has now made it effectively unworkable. How the Jews and Palestinians get themselves out of the resulting mess is also a matter for them. They would be more likely to come to an agreement if both sides were not supported and encouraged in their intransigence by outside influences with their own ideological, millennial and geo-political agendas.
11. Do you find Erdogan’s government - the AK Party - successful in domestic and foreign politics?
NG: From what little I know, AKP has so far been very successful in walking the tightrope between modernity and Islam. As an opponent of Turkey's entry into the EU, I am pleased with the way in which the government, while using the prospect of EU negotiations as a political weapon at election times to play down its Islamism, has once in power shown very little enthusiasm to push for early entry.
At the same time, Turkey's genuine economic progress and growing interest in the Turkic republics to the East suggests to me the possibility of a future healthy relationship between a strong, confident and regionally powerful Turkey, and her European neighbours to the West.
Turkey should be proud to be Turkey and to remain independent. That's much better than being an unwelcome (unlike liberal Western politicians, I believe in telling the truth!) and uneasy intrusion into an anti-traditionalist and anti-national Europe. I think that the success of the Erdogan government has decreased the risk of Turkey ending up as an indigestible lump in the stomach of the liberal-leftist federal Europe.
So good luck to a free, prosperous Turkish Turkey, and best wishes to the many Turks (then students) to whom I enjoyed teaching English back in the early nineties.