Err, thanks. Fascist pub lunch raises money for hospital - The Jewish Chronicle

Supporters of an extreme right-wing Hungarian party allied to the BNP have formed a group to promote its views in Britain. Around 50 people came to a north London pub on Sunday for a meeting of the Jobbik Friends of Hungary UK, set up by Hungarian expats, according to the Jobbik party’s English website. But describing the move as an “unwelcome development”, a Community Security Trust spokesman said: “We have more than enough of our own right-wing extremists, and do not need to import any more.” A statement issued by the group said that it was one of a number of international associations sympathetic to Jobbik’s aims, but not a branch of the party. Jobbik has been denounced by the anti-fascist group Nothing British as “an antisemitic, anti-Israel, pro-Hamas, gypsy-hating, conspiratorial and homophobic mob”. Earlier this year, Kristina Morvai, leader of the Jobbik faction in the European Parliament, remarked: “I would be glad if the so-called proud Hungarian Jews would go back to playing with their tiny little circumcised tails rather than vilifying me.” Jobbik and the BNP joined a new alliance of far-right factions in the European Parliament last month and BNP leader Nick Griffin addressed a Jobbik rally in Budapest last year. According to the Jobbik Friends, the Movement for a Better Hungary, as the party is known, is “a principled, conservative and radically patriotic Christian party”. It called Nothing British’s behaviour “reckless and inflammatory”. The pub meeting, Jobbik said, also raised £230 for the landlord to give to his favourite charity — Great Ormond Street Hospital. Asked whether it would accept such a donation, the hospital responded that it was obliged by the Charity Commission to accept any donation unless there were “defensible reasons” not to. “Mere dislike is not a reason,” a spokesman said. “However, our moral and ethical policy does permit us to refuse donations... were we to think that a donation would be abhorrent to significant numbers of our donors or contrary to our values and philosophy.” He added: “An individual’s private views would have to be public knowledge and so notorious as to raise the prospects of significant concern from our families, our staff and our other donors, before we could refuse them. “As for an event, we have no knowledge of any such event as you raise. “If we were to become aware of such a donation, we would investigate carefully and judge on the principles given above.”