‘Ferocious hostility’ against BF members in ‘Islamic hotspot’

‘Ferocious hostility’ against BF members in ‘Islamic hotspot’

A video posted on YouTube at the weekend by Britain First, a far-right party launched in 2011, claims that members, carrying wooden crosses, encountered ‘ferocious hostility’ when it carried out a ‘Christian Patrol’ in Bury Park in Luton – ‘an area notorious for Islamic extremists, ISIS fanatics, hate preachers and terrorists.’

The group claims in the video, which has been viewed by almost 458,000 people that:

Our activists were attacked and pelted with eggs. Verbal abuse was rife. Muslims claimed they have ‘taken over’ Luton and the UK. This is the future of Britain.

But according to this report local church leaders distanced themselves from the far-right group. BF labelled them “treacherous” and said on its website:

So-called ‘Christian leaders’ in Luton have queued up to condemn Britain First after our Christian Patrol in the Bury Park area.

These ‘Christians’ are gormless, trendy, politically correct, tree-hugging, sandal wearing hippies who only care about ‘multiculturalism’, appeasing Islam and publicising themselves.

About 20 members of the party, led by Paul Golding, above with cross, and his deputy Jayda Fransen, recorded themselves walking through what they labelled an “Islamist hotspot” on Saturday, where they handed out newspapers and confronted local Muslims in what charity Tell Mama, set up to support “victims of anti-Muslim hate”, said was an “intimidating” fashion aimed at “inflaming” tensions.

Jayda Fransen gets into a shouting match with a Muslim woman

Jayda Fransen gets into a shouting match with two Muslims

In the nine-minute YouTube clip Fransen is seen in a heated exchange with a local Muslim, telling him Britain is:

Our country, not your country, it’s a Christian country.

When the man replies that she is jealous because we are “taking over”, Jansen says:

You think you can take over a town and say ‘it’s your country, you’re taking over’… not for long, see this cross, it will prevail.

Later she confronts a Muslim woman about her hijab, telling her that she’s “been hidden because your men can’t control their urges”, something that sparks an extended confrontation that clearly upsets the woman.

As Britain First members make their way through the town an increasing crowd of Muslim men surround them, as police attempt to keep the groups separated. At first local men simply object to the march, but they become increasingly agitated as party members continue to taunt them with the line “this is our country, not yours”.

At several points local men charge Britain First activists, threaten to “fucking hit you, motherfucker” and call Fransen a “slag”. One local man also blindsides a Britain First member in an attempt to push him to the ground.

Tell Mama said Britain First’s confrontations with locals are being used by the party to “create the notion of ‘them and us’. It said “predictably” young men took “the bait” in Luton, which led to Britain First activists:

Agitating and further adding to the growing tensions.

Tell Mama compared BF’s march to those undertaken by the “Muslim Patrol” – a group of Muslim vigilantes – who harassed and attempted to shame members of the public in London’s Whitechapel and Tower Hamlets in January 2013, and were accused of homophobic attacks. Several members of the group were later arrested.

Tell Mama said after the “Muslim Patrol” was prosecuted it “made it clear that any faith-based patrol or vigilante group was contrary to the rules and criminal and civil laws of this country” and that they should not be allowed to take place.

We stated that they could possibly spark off serious unrest in areas and that action needed to be taken to send a clear message that the State would not tolerate any behaviour which intimidated citizens walking our streets.

Sadly, it is now 2016 and these inflammatory actions continue with Britain First trying to paint themselves as ‘defenders’ of Christian values, something that they are far from. They continue to walk into areas, stir up unrest and walk away leaving local communities to pick up the pieces.

It is also interesting to note in the video of their agitation, that their actions lead to a young female policewoman finding herself in the middle of groups of testosterone laden young men looking to fight. Is this really the ‘patriotism’ that our country needs – the answer is a resounding no.

At present there are two petitions against BF. One to ban them from Facebook and Twitter has 972 signatures, and another to ban them as a political party has over 10,000.

Bedfordshire police told the Huffington Post UK that officers were “immediately dispatched” after learning that Britain First were staging a march.

A spokeswoman said no arrests were made but an investigation had been launched to:

Determine whether any offences were committed during the course of Saturday’s events.

Police added that additional patrols had been conducted in Luton for “community reassurance”.

Hat tip: Peter Sykes

26 responses to “‘Ferocious hostility’ against BF members in ‘Islamic hotspot’”

  1. Broga says:

    I suppose they are the UK version of the KKK.

  2. Trevor Blake says:

    Britain First lists this as one of it’s objectives: ” Implement an American style ‘Bill of Rights’ guaranteeing freedom of speech, assembly and expression. No exceptions.” Is that what makes it a “far right” group? If so, I wish the entire world would go “far right.” Read the rest of their “far right” policies here:

    Tell Mama has such a hard time finding examples of anti-Muslim criminal activities that it invents them. They are not a credible source. See:

    But most of all take a look at the video. One side speaks, the other side strikes. One side offers information to read, the other side shoves. One side raises their voice, the other side physically attacks.

    I am an atheist and a critic of all religions. But I am not confused about which religion will meet me in debate and which religion wants me dead.

  3. AgentCormac says:

    One bunch of ignorant, aggressive, brainwashed idiots trying to provoke another bunch of ignorant, aggressive, brainwashed idiots. Let them get on with it. The world would be an infinitely better place if they somehow managed to wipe each other out and left it for the rest of us to enjoy in peace.

  4. barriejohn says:

    I don’t want to see “Christian Patrols” on our streets any more than I want to see Muslim patrols; it is not “their country”, and we seem to be drifting closer and closer in many ways to the situation that existed in pre-Nazi Germany, as others have said. Plenty about this disgusting organization here:

  5. John says:

    They are both windup merchants who,rightly, should be largely ignored.
    BF claim a massive number of on-line followers but whenever they hold public rallies about as many as turned up on this occasion – 20 at most – only ever turn up – and this was in Luton, home of Robinson and the EDL.
    As barriejohn points out, how can a maximum of 20 people talk about “their” country when no one elected them to speak on their or our behalf?
    I think we need to keep a careful eye on these people as history tells us that even a crackpot fringe outfit like this could end up wielding power in – say – a proportional representational system of elections, as happened in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. Should we support electoral reform?
    I also think we must not shrink from challenging the bogus ideas of Islam either, as – as we all know – there is no such thing as allah or an afterlife.
    A “choice” between two groups of delusional idiots is no choice at all.

  6. sailor1031 says:

    “Jayde Fransen” sounds like a good english name to me, or maybe not so much – but what do I know? I’m just a dumb canuck from eastern Ontario (the french part tabarnac))

  7. barriejohn says:

    Maybe that “Jayda Fransen” is just a made-up name:

  8. barriejohn says:

    Trevor Blake: Many of their policies are just laughable.

    Implement an American style “Bill of Rights” guaranteeing freedom of speech, assembly and expression. No exceptions. Except for Muslims!

    Make it an act of treason to implement any policy or measure, or sign any agreement, that facilitates and / or results in significant numbers of foreigners entering the sovereign territory of the United Kingdom with the aim of settling.

    And can anyone explain how you could possibly “ban” a religion – even if it could be justified?

  9. jay says:

    If the situation were reversed and it was a Muslim majority area, I’m sure they would never attempt to intimidate the Christians.

  10. L.Long says:

    The BF suggests a better name then the one they are using,
    ANd it says everything you need to know!

  11. harrynutsak says:

    I would guess they’d rather live like American religious idiots than British ones, which just goes to show you that they don’t get out much and probably are quite mouldy as a result, the slags.

  12. Trevor Blake says:

    barriejohn wrote: “can anyone explain how you could possibly “ban” a religion – even if it could be justified?”

    Ask that of the Yazidis in ISIS territory. Or read about the indigenous religions of Britain or the Americas. There’s a very simple, direct way to ban a religion. One merely has to kill nearly all the members and cow the rest into hiding. Many religions have had their go at banning all the others. Right now, Islam is the most active on that front.

  13. Michael Glass says:

    Britain First’s call to ban Islam is totally inconsistent with their call to introduce an American=style Bill of Rights, as is their call for the reintroduction of Christian assemblies in schools and their proposed ban on the word “racism” in the media.

  14. How inspiring. How nice to see that some people at least still have a spine.

  15. 1859 says:

    The BF are a bunch of KKK style ‘activists’, right-wing, xenophobic and probably believe in the ‘purity’ of the English ‘race’ – and in that sense they must also be classes as racists – just like the National Front of the seventies, the EDL of today.
    Unfortunately the religion they are confronting is full of exactly the same sort of narrow-minded bigotry that believes in its own supremacy, and unless they are kept apart blood will be spilt.

    I’m with AgentCormac on this one :’One bunch of ignorant, aggressive, brainwashed idiots trying to provoke another bunch of ignorant, aggressive, brainwashed idiots. ‘

    Though I never found the guy appealing who remembers Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech he gave in the Midlands in the sixties?

  16. John says:

    There was a TV programme, featuring the two principal actors of Golding and Fransen. Eventually, they withdrew from involvement in the programme, primarily – I believe – because the longer the programme went on, the more obvious it became just what a fringe outfit they were.
    At one point, it became obvious that Fransen had some sort of emotional baggage from the past, though she went out of her way to hide it.
    It seemed – from memory – that she may have been held in institutional care and been abused – possibly sexually – as a young girl or woman.
    I don’t honestly believe they are motivated by any kind of religious belief, christian or otherwise, and just exploit religion for their own purposes.
    Ultimately, I believe they just are a couple of anti-muslim zionist stooges.
    This is something they share with EDL’s Robinson and Pam Geller too.

  17. barriejohn says:

    Trevor Blake: You can prohibit public demonstrations of faith, but, to their credit, believers have shown time and time again – religion being the powerful force that it is – that you cannot stop people from believing in something, and that genuine persecution only serves to fan the flames of belief. In any case, in a liberal society that respects the rule of law, banning any particular system of belief would be extremely problematical, even if you wanted to – just look at the attempts to “ban” hunting and the keeping of “dangerous dogs”.

  18. Stuart H. says:

    Not a lot of time for those who want to turn parts of the UK into a satellite of the Khyber Pass, but even less time for people who claim to be British patriots but have to import all their ideas from the US (who got them from an earlier generation of UK radicals in the first place).

    And you have to laugh at the wildly inappropriate names reactionary groups give themselves.

    Britain First reminds me of the Anglican uber-conservative groups Forward in Faith and Anglican Mainstream, both of which are almost the bipolar opposite of their names. Short of moving to a trailer park and breeding with their siblings I can’t imagine what more such distinctly un-British losers could do to emulate their US role models.

  19. barriejohn says:

    John: Paul Golding makes a habit of not answering questions.

  20. AgentCormac says:


    ‘I don’t honestly believe they are motivated by any kind of religious belief, christian or otherwise, and just exploit religion for their own purposes.’

    I suspect you could say exactly the same thing about most religious leaders too. It’s all about control, power and wealth.

  21. Brian Jordan says:

    “Though I never found the guy appealing who remembers Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech he gave in the Midlands in the sixties?”
    I don’t suppose this will ever lie down, any more than the mythical banning of Christmas in favour of “Winterval” but here goes:
    “Though Powell referred to the speech as “the Birmingham speech”, it is otherwise known as the “Rivers of Blood” speech, a title derived from its allusion to a line from Virgil’s Aeneid.[1] Although the phrase “rivers of blood” does not appear in the speech, the name alludes to the line, “As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see ‘the River Tiber foaming with much blood.'”

  22. Salafrance says:

    I cut my own hair, because hair is a deeply personal, intimate, thing. If you plan on cuttin’ ma hair, y’all will have to pry my scissors from my cold, dead, hands (you commie pinko bastards, etc).

  23. Peter Sykes says:

    I may have had a bit too much of the local cyder, but what hell are you on about?!

  24. barriejohn says:

    I think that maybe Salafrance has posted his comment on the wrong thread. It would have been very funny on the previous one!

  25. Vanity Unfair says:

    The BFs have already had a run-in with the Lord Chamberlain’s Office and the Cabinet Office for their use of a royal crown on their badge.
    It’s good to see that they are so patriotic and have removed it. (Obviously those must be old stock.)
    They also upset the Advertising Standards Authority.