Rajinder Singh has been sympathetic towards Britain's far-right party for much of the past decade even though he currently remains barred from becoming a member because of the colour of his skin.

But last weekend the BNP's leadership took their first steps towards dropping its membership ban on non-whites after the Human Rights Commission threatened the party with legal action. The move will be put to a vote of members soon.

Martin Wingfield, the BNP's communications and campaigns officer, has already put forward the case for Mr Singh's membership, telling members on its website: "I say adapt and survive and give the brave and loyal Rajinder Singh the honour of becoming the first ethnic minority member of the BNP."

A BNP spokesman said last night: "He is perhaps the kind of immigrant you want if you are going to have them." Mr Singh, a former teacher from Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, says he would be "honoured" to become a card-carrying member of the BNP.

Mr Singh and another Sikh from Slough who goes by the pseudonym Ammo Singh have previously co-operated with the BNP and have been used by the party's leadership to try to woo Asian supporters, particularly Hindus and Sikhs living in areas where tensions with Muslims run high. The party has had little success, however, with all mainstream Sikh and Hindu groups widely condemning the BNP.

But Rajinder Singh and Ammo Singh – who keeps his identity secret but is thought to be an accountant in his late thirties – have answered Mr Griffin's call, thanks to the BNP's staunchly anti-Islamic rhetoric since September 11.

Mainstream Sikh groups said they were appalled. Dr Indarjit Singh, director of the Network of Sikh Organisations, said: "Sikhism stresses equality for all human beings. Therefore Sikhs who are true to their faith, will having nothing whatsoever to do with any party that favours any one section of the community."

Independent, 20 November 2009

"It is simply incredible to those that know him and his work to imagine he could be involved in the promotion or incitement of any kind of violence. It is particularly shocking that, having influenced so many, young and old, male and female, to live as law-abiding, trustworthy citizens, he is now being accused of actions which he has so openly opposed for so long. He has always gone out of his way to foster good relations with the local police in order to work together as a community and this makes his arrest all the more disgraceful and unacceptable."

ENGAGE, 19 November 2009

Tatchell writes plaintively that "the turn out in Hyde Park will probably be quite small" – which, based on previous experience, is a realistic prediction. The explanation is that anyone with a shred of political judgement baulks at stirring up Islamophobia in co-operation with a bunch of sectarian nutters like the WPI. For Tatchell, however, the problem is that leftists and liberals "get squeamish when it comes to challenging human rights abuses committed in the name of Islam".

The WPI appeals to its supporters to "Show your opposition to Sharia law and all religious-based tribunals in Britain, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and elsewhere" (emphasis added), and Tatchell himself claims that he and other supporters of Saturday's demonstration "reject all religious laws and courts, including those inspired by Judaist and Christian fundamentalism". Why, then, do Tatchell and the WPI concentrate exclusively on attacking Islamic religious tribunals? We never hear a peep from them about the Beth Din courts that operate within the Orthodox Jewish community, even though their rules on divorce are considerably more discriminatory against women than those of Sharia tribunals.

The reason of course is that Tatchell is less interested in women's rights than in generating some publicity for himself by stoking the fires of anti-Muslim bigotry.

The uncle of the victim, who has asked not to be named, said his family would be disappointed with the sentences. He added: "This was an horrific attack so it is disappointing that the perpetrators have escaped custodial sentences. It sends the wrong message that if you launch a racist attack, you won't be jailed."

The victim had gone to the park with her three young sisters, aged between five and 11 and her sister in law, who was with her 18 month old baby. The pair took the younger children to play on the baby swings, but they were confronted by one of the 16 year old girls and Kirsty Leigh Hood, 19, who began verbally abusing them, including a chant of "BNP".

The 16-year-old boy and the other girl later approached the victim and her sister in law and also became confrontational. When the boy mumbled something at the victim, she told him to speak English, to which he responded "I'm more British than you". The boy then suggested to one of the girls that she should pull the victim's headscarf off, and it was at this point that the girl punched the victim in the face, which such force that the pendant from her bracelet became embedded in her eye.

Rochdale Observer, 187 November 2009