Published on Thursday, 27 September 2012 06:36 Written by Ketlan Ossowski
There's an unusually interesting article on the BNP site at the moment (yeah, I know - what a shocker) that attempts to allocate blame for the current cutbacks in welfare on, you guessed it, foreigners, this time in the form of benefit fraudsters.
Before I go on, a little statistic might be worth bearing in mind. The government's own figures state that less than 1% of benefit claims are in any way fraudulent, with that figure divided roughly equally between the triad of what used to be income support, incapacity benefit and disability living allowance.
There are really two different types of benefit fraud - the unwitting fraud, where for instance someone has failed to report a change in circumstances, and deliberate fraud, where for example someone is claiming disability benefits but works off the books as a hod carrier, if hod carriers still exist.
I know of two cases that illustrate both of these.
A single mum with two children was lucky enough to find a new partner who eventually began staying over a couple of nights each week. After a while, he was there more than he was at his own place and they started to discuss formalising their living arrangements. Meanwhile, a nosy neighbour with a bee up his arse about single mums 'scrounging' off the state took it upon himself to report the woman for cohabiting.
Next thing she knows, mum is in court being done not only for the period of time that, by stretching the facts a bit, she could have been said to have been sharing the house with her partner, but for the entire period of her claim - some six years or so, since just before the youngest was born and she and her then partner had split up. Thus the claim against her runs into tens of thousands rather than a more just and sensible few hundred.
A guy in his fifties claimed to be disabled to the point where he was incapable of walking. Indeed, according to the local rag, he could barely stand, thus he quite rightly ended up on DLA. Unfortunately for him, he entered a competition at his golf club and won a prize and this was reported. Subsequently, he was recorded playing the odd eighteen holes and striding around the golf course for hours on end. Deservedly, he was done for the whole claim which was, in his case, well over a couple of hundred thousand.
Both of these 'frauds' are part of the 1%, both were found equally guilty and thus criminalised, though my own inclination would have been a slap on the wrist and an order to pay back the several hundred for the first offender and a hefty jail term for the second.
The BNP will never use these two cases in their articles about benefit fraudsters for one simple reason - both of the protagonists are white. When on the subject of benefit fraud, grooming, paedophile gangs or child molestors, the BNP's ONLY interest is the colour of the offender.
The current hoo-ha over Megan Stammers, the 15 year-old schoolgirl who has done a runner with her 30 year-old maths teacher is a good example of BNP hypocrisy at its finest. Had her teacher been black, Muslim or blessed with a name less boringly English than Jeremy Forrest, the BNP would have been over it like a rash, claiming that he had 'groomed' her and that this was part of his nasty foreign cultural background.
Naturally, in an article about benefit fraudsters, the BNP has to press certain emotional buttons. Thus it's pensions for 'life-long British workers' that are going to be lost if these damned foreigners come over here defrauding our benefit system. But remember the 1%. Vodafone and numerous other companies avoid paying billions in tax every year by simply refusing to pay it. Other companies, like Amazon, avoid paying it by notionally basing their head offices in tax havens. Tax-dodging has become as much a part of big business as producing goods and services, yet very little fuss is made about this in, for instance, the far-right's favourite rag, the Daily Mail, because most of its pages are full of worthless shite about celebrities or even worse shite about benefit scroungers and asylum seekers.
The article on the BNP's website refers to two cases, one a Nigerian and the other from Sierra Leone, though it refers obliquely to 'the many thousands that are not deemed extreme enough to warrant reporting plus the additional many thousands that are undetected'. If they haven't been reported or they're completely undetected, they're assumptions made by the BNP to bolster its own view of immigrants automatically being criminals and to convince the idiotic membership that it knows what it's talking about rather than lying through its teeth in an attempt at credibility.
To reinforce its point, the BNP, in this single article, variously refers to immigrants as invaders, bogus, foreign invaders, uninvited and unwanted invaders, foreign predators, alien interlopers and parasitic foreigners.
The article is clearly not about benefit fraud or pensions - it's about immigrants and immigration and the BNP's irrational and probably insane hatred of anyone who isn't white. It's wholly about racism.