Arthur Kemp: Iran's nukes are no threat
Arthur Kemp, the BNP’s foreign affairs spokesman and chief ideologue, has said that accusations about Iran’s thermo-nuclear weapons programme come “direct from the lie-machine in Washington”.
Since the election of Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons as MEPs, the BNP have ratcheted up the volume on issues such as foreign affairs. The party used to be disinterested in foreign policy debates because it believed that such discussion had no relevance to its core voters.
Nick Griffin is desperate to shed the BNP’s image as a single issue party and would like to present to voters, now that it has political representation, that it is capable of holding its own in the political arena (hence why he spoke about Iran in his maiden speech to the European Parliament). Furthermore, BNP is attempting to mirror public concern on issues such as Afghanistan, Iraq and now Iran by debating foreign and defence policy.
In recent years there have been a number of serious concerns about the Iranian regime and its thirty year attempt to obtain nuclear technology. Mr Kemp believes that the “allegations” made against Iran are “politically motivated and totally baseless” and “nothing short of a wicked lie” amplified by the “controlled media”.
Mr Kemp, however, appears to be more concerned about Iranian immigrants than about a nuclear armed Iran. On the issue of a potentially nuclear armed theocracy, Kemp said: “As long as nations such as Iran keep their excess population from swamping Britain, we have no interest in interfering in their internal affairs”.
It would be interesting to hear what Mr Kemp has to say about the evidence against Iran and its involvement in helping to ship “Explosively Formed Penetrators” (EFPs) into Afghanistan, which have claimed the lives or nearly 40 British soldiers? Or its kidnap of 15 British servicemen in the Persian Gulf in 2007?
Nobody wants an armed conflict with Iran, diplomacy would of course be more favourable. But Mr Kemp’s attempt to use the reasonable anxiety that people have over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and to shirk away from responsibilty over the issue of a nuclear armed rogue state is negligent, deeply worrying and not in Britain’s long term national interest.
Tags: Arthur Kemp, foreign policy
“Politically motivated” and “baseless”, are they mad, this is coming from someone who has questioned the amount of Jews killed in the holocaust, anyone can see that this is politically motivated stuff.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
to add credence to this article, why not print Kemps speech and comments in totality, instead of cherrypicking a few words here and there, filling in the balance with your own analysis.
personally, if this is a true reflection of his comments, then i would strenuously disagree with Kemp, as Iran is based on extreme islamic theocracy, which is more dangerous than the threat (?) posed by Iraq under Saddam or Afganistan under the Taliban
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Assuie Al, you can read Arthur Kemp’s remarks on the BNP’s web site (click on the hyperlink in the first para – see “said”), this is our analysis of his speech.
But you are right, Iran poses a massive threat and is probably (granted) greater than Saddam’s threat in 2003.
Cheers for your constructive comments. Much appreciated.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
wasnt griffin in the pocket of Libya? Maybe now he and Kemp are in the pocket of Iran…..
dont the bnp oppose trident etc? so they want britain to drop its nuclear weapons programmes…. but dont mind aggressive and potential hostile countries to develope their’s?
bunch of fools.makes me want to start a political party, get 7% of a vote, and then earn half a mil to go hang out in Brussels and spout a load of crap!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
they are well known for their radical policies,they maybe change from week to week ,but hey they re the party of the peoples
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
OK then, what is the answer?
Invade Iran, I don’t think so.
It could well trigger WW3.
Iran has to reform itself from within, I think it was previous meddling that made Iran what it is now.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
WTF, I agree meddling in Iran has made it an unstable country. This of course dates back to the election in 1953. But it still doesn’t escape from the fact that Iran could develop nuclear weapons. You are right, no one wants WW3, but absolving responsibilty from the issue is not an answer.
Thanks for contributing to the site, may not always agree but thanks all the same.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
now if the motor industry got fair dinkum about developing an engine that wasnt reliant on oil, all of these camel shaggers would not have the money to indulge in fantasies such as developing nuclear weapons
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Sometimes doing nothing is the best option but politicians like to be seen doing something.
They tend to work in the short term but that has consequences for the long term.
The next Conservative government is probably going to have enough on its plate anyway & selling another war or intervention isn’t going to be accepted by the electorate.
But maybe there will be another 9/11 to get people on board the idea?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
AussieAl
Seen the new mini nuclear batteries?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0