Friday, 22 June 2007
1. Britain Backward alleges that I resigned from the
BNP because I didn't want to go to the annual college
because I suffer from claustraphobia. (I do not suffer
from claustraphobia and even if I did I don't see how
this would make me not wish to go to their annual
college, unless they were holding it in an elevator!)
The problem here is that the timeline is wrong. I was
unable to attend one annual college because of
business commitments and sent Hannam and Diane
Bridgeman instead. There was no unpleasantness over
this at all. Relations with Hannam and Griffin were
subsequently excellent and I SUBSEQUENTLY handed over
the position of local organizer to him. Another year
passed before I caught him with his fingers in the
till, as it were, and it was only then that the
unpleasantness started. Evidence: eyewitnesses
(probably most of Humberside and Hull and North
Lincolnshire BNP who were around at the time will
recall the local newsletter that made it very clear
that I supported the handover to Hannam. They might
also recall that Nick Griffin and Hannam jointly
addressed a meeting in Hull in which Hannam referred
to me in glowing terms).
2. Britain Backward rehashes the old story that there
was a disagreement between me and Hannam about the
purchase of 50,000 leaflets. There was no such
disagreement. First, email evidence shows that
Bridgeman and Hannam both supported the purchase and
informed me that the leaflets were being printed.
Second, a letter from a Hull printer shows that the
leaflets were indeed printed but that the printer was
complaining that he was not paid. (The letter was sent
to Chris Green who forwarded it to me.) If Hannam
disagreed with the leaflets, why did he not say so
BEFORE the leaflets were printed? He was, after all,
our local organizer at the time. The key question is
this: where was the money when the printer was
complaining about not being paid? The answer is:
Hannam's telephone account.
Sunday, 17 June 2007
When we set up Britain Forward we engaged in some long and heartfelt discussions about the danger of giving ammunition to our enemies like the bunch of trotskyist scumbags and race traitors who go by the name of Lancaster UAF, now taking pleasure in BNP members “slogging it out”. If we are “slogging it out” it’s so our party emerges stronger and more vibrant than at any time in its history, strong enough to see off red scum like UAF and Searchlies. Be warned, life is not going to get any easier for the haters of our white Christian people.
Their intelligence is so poor that they insult us by suggesting we have something to do with that half-caste vengeful clown Sharon Ebanks. No, Britain Forward consists of British nationalists who want only to build a strong and successful movement that is fit to rescue our proud country from a tide of alien immigration that, if unchecked, will lead to the Islamification of our country. To do this we must first root out the cancerous political growth within our own movement, a leader who sees our party as his personal fiefdom. Our activists have not come through the street battles of the seventies and eighties, in some cases spending time in prison for our beliefs, and experienced the start of ballot box success, to allow either red scum or our own chairman who is betraying us stand in the way of ultimate victory for the British people.
So Mr Lancaster UAF, here’s something to make you choke on your smoked salmon and gefillter fish. We started with 48, two days ago there were 57 of us and we woke up this morning to continue the battle with nearly 70 supporters. This is turning into an avalanche that will destroy the enemies within and without the British people.
Saturday, 16 June 2007
We are pleased that BNP HQ have taken up the challenge of dealing with our questions on their peculiarly named Britain Backward site but disappointed at the number of issues they have merely sidestepped or dismissed. All the matters we addressed were genuine concerns raised by our fellow members. Indeed in the last two days our small band of patriots has grown from 48 to 57.
Let’s see what Backwards have to say in more detail.
BNP constitution and the leadership challenge
Backwards says Nick Griffin is merely enforcing rules laid down in the last leadership challenge in 1999. The truth is that since 1999 NG has successfully tweaked our party’s constitution to reinforce his personal position and the positions of his cronies.
In particular a lot of changes were made at the general meeting on 11th March 2000 (soon after NG took over) especially to Section 4 which regulates leadership elections. Section 4 states that the procedures for carrying out such elections shall be determined by party HQ as the occasion arises. Therefore NG is responsible for the decision to deny access to party publications and websites to Chris Jackson, and the fact that John Tyndall might have made a similar decision in 1999 is no excuse. In fact it is rather strange that NG, who normally prefers to distances himself from JT, insists on following JT to the letter on this.
Red White and Blue
Backward claims the farmer told the BNP to go because it was “the least economically viable for him”. In other words RWB is not the roaring success that our chairman has claimed in terms of income and numbers attending.
As we well know, the reds and the left-wing media will seize any excuse to attack our party. We cannot ignore this, if we want to win elections we have to take extra care over our image. They have already accused our community safety patrols in Corsham and Calne of being “vigilantes”. Normally practising martial arts would be quite acceptable, if one ignores the fact that this is not exactly a British sport. However it is only a matter of time before the Blatant Bias Corporation or some other media organisation picks up on a rising star in our party doing martial arts and sharp shooting and accuses us of preparing to take over Britain by military means. Such an accusation is ridiculous as we all know but the image will remain in people’s minds. NG going on about the coming civil war doesn’t help in this regard.
Besides which, was Sadie’s gun and her use of it licensed? Senior BNP officer prosecuted for firearms offence wouldn’t be a great headline for us. Her playing sniper, and having her photo taken doing it, was juvenile behaviour and showed a lack of judgement that we do not expect in a national office-holder in our party.
Sadie’s martial arts skills seem not to have taught her actually to defend herself. When Sadie Graham was confronted by a drunken red thug who spat in her face, she stood there staring like a scared rabbit caught in the headlights of an approaching car.
As for Sadie’s mates, does Backwards think it acceptable for a BNP national office-holder to keep company with a psychotic drug dealer and an equally unbalanced young man who would like to oust the BNP’s head of security from his position? We believe that those who hold positions in our party have to maintain certain minimum standards in their own lives as any dirt the media can dig up will reflect badly on our party.
Mark Collett’s printing press
Backwards says that after the 2005 general election the four high quality digital duplicators, three folding machines and power guillotine bought for £70,000 were given to the regions and no longer kept for HQ jobs. In that case why do the party’s accounts, which do not include the regions, still show the party as owning the equipment centrally at 31 December 2005? Did the auditors check that the party owned the assets shown in the balance sheet, or did NG pull the wool over their eyes?
And why does Backwards say the cost of the printing equipment was £70,000? True we referred to this as the cost, as this is the figure that everyone mentions, but one of our supporters has looked closely at the party’s accounts for 2005 and has pointed out that the party only spent £51,671.13 in total on equipment during that year.
Backwards then goes on to deride our question by saying that a litho printing press would cost a million pounds not £70,000. We know that. Nobody said anything about a litho press. This is just a diversion from the real issue of late delivery of leaflets in many cases and printing charges to branches that were only slightly below commercial rates.
After Mark Collett’s childish appearance in a TV programme, some members thought he had been placed in our organisation by ZOG to destroy at least the youth wing of the party if not the entire BNP. His incompetence at printing and delivering leaflets suggests this accusation might not be wholly fanciful.
Backwards defends Dave Hannam’s appointment as deputy treasurer of our party. We say Mark Payne was a good deputy treasurer. He would have been an asset to any organisation being led and run in a financially transparent way. It seems that NG used Payne’s unrepentant national socialist beliefs as an excuse to remove this able man and replace him with a dishonest little spiv, namely Dave Hannam, who was only too willing to do his poetic master’s bidding.
One question for anyone trying to make excuses about the handling of the party’s finances is why our treasurer John Walker went with Dave Hannan to visit the home of the former party treasurer John Brayshaw and force him to shred the party’s genuine accounts. Having committed this fraudulent act Walker and Hannam did not even have the wit between them to take away the bag of shredded accounts. Some of our 57 supporters who enjoy jigsaws are trying to reconstruct these accounts and we think they will make devastating reading if one compares them to the “official” accounts.
On Dave Hannam’s criminal record, Backwards claims that Dave Hannam had nothing to do with Simon Sheppard’s leaflet that showed Hannam’s name and address as the originator. Dave Hannam was only 17 at the time and it is unlikely that a youth court would have sent him to prison for something he didn’t really do. Unless of course he had a long line of previous convictions.
Great White Records
Backwards says there was no proposal to strike off Great White Records Ltd. This is untrue but we accept that the striking off notice has now been removed from the Companies House website. We shall look closely at the GWR accounts when they are submitted to Companies House as promised in October to test the truth of Backwards’ statement that the BNP has not put money into GWR.
We are surprised that Backwards compares Griffin’s poetry to that of John Lennon. We would have though there were plenty of patriotic nationalist poets around without singling out this drug-crazed lefty.
Welsh Assembly elections appeal
A couple of our Welsh supporters were outraged at being asked to finance our party’s campaign in Wales by sending their cash to a box number on the other side of England. Backwards says the appeal came under the aegis of the regional treasurer in Yorkshire. Why couldn’t a Welsh address have been used, especially seeing as the treasurer John Walker lives in Wales.
Backwards spends a lot of time evading our questions and responds with a lie to whether Mr and Mrs Reynolds are paid for their work. Perhaps not everyone is prepared to take the word of a recidivist Liverpool gangster, but Joey Owens says that when he was in charge of security for our chairman and party he was unpaid and did the job out of a feeling of duty. He says that NG told him that when the party could afford it he would be paid.
Joey Owens goes on to claim that he was shocked and hurt when NG dumped him in favour of Warren Bennett who was paid. Bennett later fell out of favour and was replaced by Martin Reynolds, a very odd choice. Party members whom he had upset started to circulate pornographic photos of Martin, his wife and a second woman engaged in various sexual acts. A national newspaper obtained the story and made it public knowledge. It appears that two factions within our party were settling political scores. Many respectable and responsible members thought this would be the end of Reynolds’ money-making career in our ranks. Far from it, our chairman totally ignored this embarrassment and offered a job to Mrs Reynolds.
As an interesting aside, who was present in the room to take the photos of Reynolds and the two women?
Backwards responded to our question with a blatant lie. Everybody knows that the trips to America and to visit wealthy supporters in Germany produce substantial funding for the party. Just listen to the appeal for funds at the New Orleans international conference hosed by David Duke, which NG and Kevin Scott addressed. Taking money through the back door is going to leave us with the same reputation that Blair’s Labour Party has earned.
Nick Griffin’s pay
Backwards says that NG’s pay is a matter of public record. Strangely it does not quote the figure but provides a link to an article in The Times which says he earns £1,800 a month. Since when has our party encouraged us to believe everything we read in the press?
Backwards then claims his salary is way below what his qualifications would command in the private sector. Nonsense. His degree was only a 2:2 since leaving Cambridge his career has been full of financial disasters including bankruptcy. A failed scheme to sell second-hand cars brought shame on our party when the cars turned out to be Japanese and various property schemes all appear to have collapsed. Had it not been for his wealthy grandfather and party money keeping him in the style he has grown accustomed to, he would probably be unemployed and living on benefits.
Nick Griffin’s Arabian nights
Backwards tries to explain at great length why NG tried to tap Colonel Gaddafi for money but simply digs a deeper hole. Why should a true British patriot ever have set his cap in the direction of the Libyan dictator? What had Gaddafi ever done for the British people? He sent weapons to the IRA to kill British soldiers in Ulster, he had WPC Yvonne Fletcher murdered on a London street and one of his agents bombed a jumbo jet over Lockerbie in Scotland causing the deaths of hundreds of men, women and children. What is our chairman’s excuse for pursuing such a link? Blame it all on the late John Tyndall. It was not JT posing for photographs in Tripoli it was Nick Griffin.
Even at his trial in 1998 at Harrow Crown Court NG produced a white-hating black American nationalist as a witness.
Voice of Freedom
What really insults the intelligence of our members is Backwards’ claim that the party did not know that the printer that produced several issues of Voice of Freedom was owned by Saudis. Did they never look at the company’s invoices from which it was clear that it was a Saudi owned company? Did they not notice that most of the management and workforce in the company were Arabs and much of its other printing was in Arabic? Maybe our chairman would like to tell use which infirm member of our party managed to deal with these people without noticing who they were.
Backwards challenge us over our “laughable ignorance international politics”. Perhaps if our Cambridge-educated chairman kept up with international politics he would understand better the double-dealing of the Saudis over Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. And that’s not just in the American or Zionist controlled press.
Backwards tries to excuse NG sharing a platform with Abu Hamza by saying that his participation in the Radio Academy event enabled him to promote the BNP to “300 of the most powerful people in British radio”. Backwards claims NG only took part in a panel discussion. We do not criticise NG’s attendance at such an event which let him meet the editors and journalists who are so often hostile to us. He even had the opportunity to meet government ministers such as Tessa Jowell the Arts Minister.
But it was not a panel discussion. The only person on the platform other than the discussion chairman was Abu Hamza, a man known throughout the world as one of the most vocal proponents of the ideas of the world’s leading Moslem terrorist Osama bin Laden. Hamza preached hatred against Britain and its people. British nationalists demonstrated against him when he conducted Friday prayers in the street outside the mosque from which he had been banned, so extreme he was even among Moslems. By debating one to one with Abu Hamza, NG placed our party on the same level, two opposing forms of unacceptable extremism. NG also showed that he was prepared to sacrifice his political principles at the altar of self aggrandisement.
Perhaps Backwards thinks that by telling a lie often enough it becomes reality. Hundreds of party members know that NG tried to warn Bowden off from speaking at meetings of proscribed organisations or sharing platform with individuals who had been proscribed or expelled from the BNP. Having lied about Bowden Backwards goes on to sidestep the question of the BNP councillors present at the meeting organised by New Right where the speakers included a Muslim extremist and a pagan. Is this lack of discipline acceptable to NG because he fears an open battle within the party?
Backwards claim that Arthur Kemp was never an agent of either the former or the Marxist ANC government of South Africa. It is interesting how adept Kemp is at manipulating the truth to advance his fellow agent Bep Nieuwhof. Backwards claims Arthur’s book nowhere said that Nieuwhof got a 12-year sentence. True the present internet version no longer contains this statement but it was certainly in the old printed version. The fact is that South African intelligence offered Arthur Kemp a deal over the Chris Hani case and as a result he continued his intelligence gathering work for a new master in the Marxist ANC regime. He exaggerated Bep’s sentence in order to enhance Bep’s credibility.
Robert Bailey had what John le Carré’s spy novels called “a legend” created either by himself or by his masters. It is almost certain he did serve in the Royal Marine commandos. However although he has mentioned a number of locations where he served, our checks revealed that before coming back to Britain he was operating in Algeria, a place he never mentioned. What was he doing there? He is referred to as a business man: in fact he was a failed business man though he was able to make a personal donation of £3,000 to the party when he appeared on the scene.
Who is ultimately responsible?
Last week’s by-elections showed that we are still not winning. Yes there were two or three quite good percentages including some second places but British elections operate on the winner takes all principle. NG’s supporters go on about getting 14% of the vote in May, which is a fair achievement compared to a few years ago, but we got over 19% in May last year. And why compare this year’s result with the 4.9% polled in the European elections of 2004? Surely the 16% we got in the local elections that year is a more relevant comparison? One gets the impression that Backwards is selecting its figures in order to prove its point.
And among all the carefully chosen figures and quotes from one of our sworn enemies, the left-wing Labour MP Jon Cruddas, Backwards fails completely to answer our question, namely that if middle management is to blame for the failings in our party, as some supporters of NG have alleged, why has NG not ensured that the right people are in these posts.
The facts belie NG’s claim of not having any links with Don Black. They were photographed together at a conference in New Orleans organised by David Duke, a close associate of NG.
In 2004 Don Black, representing Stormfront, and John Tyndall attended a gathering of European nationalists in New Orleans to discuss white nationalism. Both of them signed the New Orleans Protocol. Although JT signed as an individual rather than as a representative of the BNP, NG has since then maintained the connection at international meetings in the USA.
Keep your questions coming. Our party will end up stronger for it.
Friday, 15 June 2007
David Michael responds to the accusations of Britain Backwards.
Dear Britain Forward
Nick Griffin has launched an attack on me in his
'Britain Backwards' blog. This seems to be a response
to material that appeared on the 'Britain Forward'
blog. I would therefore be most grateful if you would
please permit me a little space on your blog to
respond to Mr Griffin's allegations.
You will recall that I resigned from the BNP some
years ago after I was informed that a sum of Party
money intended for leaflets had ended up in the
telephone account of David Hannam. Nick Griffin failed
to take action against Hannam, who is now BNP Deputy
Treasurer. Nick has now decided to attack me for
making this matter public.
First, Nick claims that I am an 'unstable individual'.
Rebuttal 1. If this is the case, why did Nick, who has
known me since 1979, appoint me as organizer for
Yorkshire and Humberside BNP after David Hannam
suddenly resigned due to his first bout of 'personal
problems'? The thrust of Britain Forward's original
allegation seemed to be that Griffin surrounds himself
with odd people. If I am indeed 'unstable' then the
fact that Griffin appointed me to office would seem to
confirm Britain Forward's case!
Rebuttal 2. My record speaks for itself. I have been
running a successful business in this country since
1995 and before that in South Africa since 1991. I
make a profit. I have no criminal record whatsoever. I
am a happily married father. I have never been
involved in any scandals. I am not being treated for
any mental illness. I do not smoke and I drink very
little. I have written a series of articles for Sharon
Ebanks' New Nationalist Party, one of which
deconstructs the Griffinite position on Israel. I
invite your readers to take a look at it (it's here
consider whether it is the work of an unstable
individual or simply someone who happens to disagree
Second, Nick claims that I 'descended into a deep
depression and resigned in a mad rage when the BNP had
its Annual College in 2001 because [I] did not want to
Rebuttal: Unfortunately for Nick, my letter of
resignation has been circulating on the Internet for
years, ever since I passed it on to the rather dubious
Troy Southgate, who passed it on to Red Action, from
whose Web site it was taken by the Canadian
anti-racist group Nizkor. It may be found on Nizkor's
Web site to this very day
-- typos courtesy of Nizkor, who also appear to have
cut sections. It conclusively refutes Nick Griffin's
version of events and shows, despite the 'editing',
that I resigned because of David Hannam's apparent
theft of Party money as well as political differences
Third, Nick writes: 'John Brayshaw demanded of David
Hannam to show him the branch accounts (where the
donation had been recorded) and then also show him the
branch cash. From this, it was obvious that there was
nothing missing and that the allegations by David
Michael were utterly fictitious.'
Rebuttal: In my article 'Five easy lessons for British
recounted events thus:
'Finally, I telephoned Hannam. He confirmed that he
had not paid for the leaflets. He had no coherent
explanation. I told him that unless he returned the
money to the party and resigned as organizer then I
would complain to the police. I gave him a short
deadline. Hannam duly returned the loot and resigned
from the position of local organizer. I subsequently
received an email from Tony Lecomber, then BNP branch
liaison officer, thanking me for my good offices in
getting the money back.'
It will be noted that Hannam returned the moneys after
he was threatened with police action. He also resigned
as Hull organizer (he was reinstated some time later).
If Brayshaw checked the accounts AFTER the money was
returned then he will indeed have found none missing
at that point.
However, every time a cheque is cashed it leaves a
paper trail. This can be followed by the police if
necessary. Members should ask Griffin a simple
question. Do the accounts show Hannam returning a
large sum of money to the BNP? If they do, is this not
evidence that I am telling the truth? If they do not
then clearly someone has been fiddling with the
accounts. This would presumably be a matter for the
Finally, I know how much Nick Griffin and Dave Hannam
like money so I want to give them a simple chance to
make some. Nick has stated that my allegations were
'utterly fictitious'. They are also very serious. They
involve financial misconduct at the highest levels of
one of Britain's political parties. If I am indeed a
'wealthy individual', why not sue me for defamation? I
suggested this several weeks ago -- I have still not
heard a squeak.
Documentation exists to prove every word that I have
said about Hannam. I have been reluctant to make it
public because I detest the British press even more
than I dislike Griffin. However, I want to give
Griffin a clear warning. I want an end to the lies on
this issue. If I don't get an end to the lies, I go to
the press with the proof. Right before the next
elections. Simple as that.
As for Hannam, I don't much care what happens to him.
Maybe he has turned over a new leaf. Criminals
sometimes do. If BNP members want to send him their
cheques that is no concern of mine, just as it is no
concern of mine if BNP members want to purchase real
estate on Alpha Centauri.
(Dr) D E Michael
Wednesday, 13 June 2007
On 9th June Falkirk BNP and then the national party website announced that Councillors Chris and Joanna Beverley were stepping down from running the party’s Excalibur merchandise division. Over the coming month management will pass to Nicholla Ritchie of Falkirk branch and Arthur Kemp of South African State Security.
The Beverleys say they are handing over the reigns so that they can spend more of their valuable time on their duties as councillors. Of course anyone who knows anything about the financial goings-on in our party will observe that they have cut and run just when the tax and VAT authorities are sniffing around and asking whether the owners of Excalibur have paid their dues on all the income of this lucrative operation.
Like Kemp himself and Bep Nieuwhof, who Kemp brought into the party, Ritchie too has a security interest in that she worked for MTB (Scotland) Ltd, a provider of a range of private security services. We wonder if they carried out any work for state-connected operations while she was there.
Strangely the party’s announcement credits Chris Beverley with starting Excalibur. While we would not wish to detract from his success in running it for some years, we mustn’t forget Steve Belshaw’s role in getting it off the ground. Steve and his brother have been very active in our cause in the East Midlands for a long time though he seems to have dropped out of favour recently, concurrently with Sadie Graham’s rise in the region.
Elsewhere longstanding members of our party are beginning to openly question the status quo in the BNP. Amongst them is Paul Ballard, a Nationalist with a long and interesting history of political activity for our people.
Many people forget that Paul stood in the dock at Harrow Crown Court alongside Nick Griffin in 1998 when they were charged under the anti-British racist Race Relations laws. Paul pleaded guilty in the hope of getting a reduced sentence because he was worried about the effect of him going to prison on his ailing mother, who had been a steadfast political and financial supporter of nationalist causes.
The fact that he has made his move in the run-up to the leadership contest is significant because he has a very large personal following in Croydon, London’s largest party branch.
Monday, 11 June 2007
With almost Stalinist rigour Nick Griffin has deprived Chris Jackson from access to the main forums and websites that BNP members visit and respect. All that is left open to him to put forward his challenge for the BNP leadership is “equal space” in our internal members’ bulletin British Nationalist.
What has also greatly disturbed us is the sudden spinelessness of Richard Edmonds, a man widely respected for his long record of activity in our movement both at home and abroad. Although we did not agree with some of what was on the BNP Leadership Challenge blogsite, it did raise some important issues about the corruption and seediness that is so damaging our party. Edmonds lame excuse for getting the site pulled was that it was washing the party’s dirty linen in public. Come on Richard, that doesn’t really wash.
Rest assured that we at Britain Forward will remain and will make full use of the freedom offered by the internet to carry on raising those questions that we know many members want answers to from our chairman.
In the interests of doing our bit to restore balance in the BNP leadership election, we offer Chris Jackson and his supporters space on this site to publish their manifesto. We also invite questions to Chris to which we hope he will supply answers. So over to you Chris.
Saturday, 9 June 2007
We will return to both these matters. As the Red White and Blue Family Festival approaches we are being asked what prompted Nick Griffin to move its location from Chris Jackson’s back yard in the north west to down Cllr Sadie Graham’s way.
There is no disputing that Cllr Graham is a huge asset to our party. Her organisational skills are second to none, certainly far superior to those of Tony Lecomber. The way she deals with non-functioning branches or activists is a treat to behold.
Her interests in martial arts and sharpshooting might prove to be far less of an asset for the BNP’s image. Those who wonder why she has gained the nickname “Sad Sadie” might reflect on the fact that whilst she is an excellent organiser she is very unsuccessful at choosing her mates.
Some of those organising this year’s RWB are petrified at the prospect of her erstwhile Australian boyfriend turning up. Australian nationalists tell us that apart from his heavy drug dealing connections he is a manic depressive with a psychotic edge who once stabbed a fellow nationalist with a knife. We hope everyone can now breathe a sigh of relief as the international love match collapsed and Sadie’s ex-lover published a photo of her allegedly taken in Great Britain of her aiming a rifle. We just wonder who is in her telescopic sights.
Her latest friend appears to come out of a similar mould. He, too, seems seriously mentally unbalanced. Maybe Nick Griffin should have a word with her about the type of company she is keeping.
Wednesday, 6 June 2007
Collett is laughing all the way from his out of service print shop to the bank thanks to our Chairman.
Thanks to those many BNP members who have contacted us since our first post. Some are 100% behind Nick Griffin so much that they don’t even want to respond to his welcome for “a properly conducted challenge as a way of confirming his popular mandate to continue running the party along present lines, and of displaying the BNP’s unusually democratic leadership selection system to the British people as a whole”. Others support our present leader but believe debate is healthy and will only strengthen us.
When we said we had spoken to around 300 party members and have a list of questions for Nick, a few people took it to mean we have 300 questions. In fact a handful of the people we spoke to had no questions at all and were very nervous about even questioning the way the BNP is going. Most did have concerns, many shared by several members.
A fair few mentioned the moral standards of some party officers. We are concerned about the way some people’s behaviour in private has become public knowledge and is damaging the BNP’s reputation. We do not want to fuel that and condemn absolutely those who were responsible for spreading certain pictures.
There is an exceptional case which we will come back to, which a number of members mentioned to us. There has been a lot of disinformation and Chinese whispers but we believe we have an accurate account of events from the victim herself.
Here now are some of the more serious questions.
1. Mark Collett’s printing press
Why, after the party spent £70,000 of members’ hard-earned cash on Mark Collett's printing press, are there so many complaints that he is nearly always behind with printing leaflets etc?
Why does he have to pay a local print shop at commercial rates to do print jobs that he has taken on for the party?
The point of buying our own equipment was to make our printing cheaper and ensure that our literature production cannot be stopped through third parties like UAF and Searchlies putting pressure on commercial printers as has happened in the past. Why has Nick Griffin not intervened to safeguard our investment?
2. Dave Hannam
Why has Dave Hannam been promoted beyond his competence?
We thought he had been removed from all party positions after being jailed alongside the seriously deranged Simon Sheppard. But when he came out he was soon in a position of financial responsibility. Then a wealthy donor complained that the money he had given had never reached the party but Hannam used it to pay his phone bills. The donor stopped giving. Why did Nick Griffin ignored this complaint and then insult our intelligence by promoting Hannam to Deputy Treasurer?
3. Great White Records
The party pumped money into Great White Records but now Companies House shows that the company has never filed accounts, which is against the law. It is now proposed to strike the company off, which means its money will be lost. Many members complain they have ordered goods and not received them. Why has Nick Griffin allowed this to happen?
We hear from Great White Records that their latest release is songs all written by Nick Griffin. We would have thought that running a party of this size would be a full-time job. How much time is he spending writing songs instead? Is this why he is ignoring the problems?
4. Welsh Assembly elections appeal
One of our staunchest Welsh members wondered why the BNP website asked for donations for the Welsh Assembly elections to be sent to an English address, which made it look like we had no organisation in Wales. In fact it was the Great White Records box number, which is further cause for concern. Why was the appeal run from that address, especially seeing as John Walker lives in North Wales?
5. BNP Security Department
A number of members are concerned about the people working in the party’s Security Department. People are saying that having our leader surrounded by up to 30 men in Mafia type suits and dark glasses, like on the TV reports of the court case, makes the party look bad. Worse, some are saying the security department are unprofessional and incompetent.
People who have asked Nick why he needs so much security and how much it is costing the party have been told that he fears he will be murdered on the streets by a political enemy or Muslim fanatic.
A report about a bomb threat to him during a visit to Sweden appeared to be without substance but did add credence to his claimed fear of assassination plots.
How much is Martin Reynolds paid as Head of Security?
Did Mrs Reynolds get the job of appointments secretary to Nick Griffin (shades of John Prescott?) on merit or because she is Martin’s wife, and how much is she paid?
How much are others on the security team paid?
How are the people in the security department vetted? We have heard that one of them has ideas about getting rid of Reynolds. If there is in fact a threat it could well come from within our own ranks.
How many training courses are this team going on, like the very costly secure driving and anti-kidnapping courses, and what do they cost?
How are the course providers chosen? Some security companies work for government departments and may be hostile to the BNP.
6. Overseas funding
What political strings are attached to funding that Nick Griffin obtains from abroad?
7. Nick Griffin’s pay
Exactly how much is Nick Griffin being paid and in what forms (wages, expenses, etc), and how many members of his family are in receipt of party funds.
We all know that Islam is the greatest danger faced by our nation and people. Many people we have spoken to, who have been in nationalist politics for years, wanted us to ask why Nick Griffin in the late 1980s was praising the Iranian dictator Ayotollah Khomeini and sucking up to the American black Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan and his British supporters.
We are prepared to forgive Nick’s visit to the murderous Colonel Gaddafi’s Libya in the company of Patrick Harrington who is now the General Secretary of Solidarity. This could be put down to the indiscretions of very young men keen to follow a revolutionary path to securing the future of our people.
But why much more recently was Voice of Freedom being printed by a company in East London owned by powerful Saudis, the very country that gives political and financial support to Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden?
And why in 2002 did Nick Griffin share a platform in Cambridge with the Muslim terrorist cleric Abu Hamza, who is now serving a long prison sentence for inciting murder?
Is this just a case of our leader spending too much time writing songs and taking his eye off the ball or does he not really care about the well founded fears of BNP members and the British people? This type of behaviour will come back to haunt us time and time again.
9. Selective discipline
Jonathan Bowden was threatened with disciplinary action by Nick Griffin for speaking at a meeting of the New Right group in London organised by Troy Southgate. Around half the audience of more than 60 nationalists were BNP, including Councillors Julian Leppert, Rod Law, Peter Turpin and Susan Clapp and many well known party activists. One of the speakers was a Muslim extremist and another was a raving pagan who insulted our Christian faith.
Jonathan Bowden has stood his ground against our chairman’s threats but he is unlikely to be allowed to address any more party meetings. This of course is pushing him towards the anti-Griffin camp.
The two questions are:
Why has Nick Griffin alienated our National Cultural Officer and popular speaker?
Has Nick Griffin had the guts to try to discipline the four councillors who were at the meeting?
10. A blind eye to infiltration?
Our party quite rightly puts measures in place to keep red and zionist infiltrators out. However several people with a dubious background seem to have recently been promoted in the BNP to positions of influence.
Arthur Kemp worked for South African intelligence under the nationalist government and may have played a part in killing the red scum agitator Chris Hani. When the blacks took over and started destroying that wonderful country, Arthur Kemp changed sides and was sent to work inside nationalist groups in Britain, Germany and the USA. He was reinforced by a former South African Special Forces soldier Lambertus Bep Nieuwhof who also found favour in our party becoming a branch officer and then put in charge of the BNP Forum, despite the worries of some senior members. He is now running Solidarity’s website and is clearly privy to sensitive information. He got off a bombing charge in South Africa with little more than a slap on the wrist and not the 12 years imprisonment that Kemp claimed he got. Bep had also done a deal to sell out his old political allies to the black Marxist South African Intelligence Service.
Why is a man of Nick Griffin’s intelligence conveniently blind to what is happening right under his nose? There have even been suggestions that Arthur Kemp might be a future chairman of our party.
However, it is not only the foreigners in our party who seem to have a dubious past.
Richard Barnbrook has been attacked by our enemies over a homosexual film he made many years ago, but nobody speaks about his long membership of a left-wing Labour Party branch in South East London.
Robert Bailey claims to have been a Royal Marine commando and have links with Germany. One of our members, a former army officer, has shown us the result of his research into Bailey's background that indicates he may be working for British Military Intelligence as an infiltrator into the BNP.
Maybe he was not fully scrutinised by the party when he turned up and handed over his £3,000. We hope this was not to turn a blind eye.
We have only touched upon the tip of the iceberg.
11. Who is ultimately responsible?
Some members have said that our failure to advance at this year’s elections is not the fault of our chairman but that middle management is to blame. If that is so, why is Nick Griffin not doing anything to put the right people into those posts?
We invite Nick Griffin to respond to our questions and put before party members his vision for our party’s future. We want only the best for the BNP. We are not among those who are determined to replace our present leader whatever. We want our party to grow and be able to defend our people against the Islamic threat facing Britain.
However we are also prepared to listen to others who believe they could do a better job and make this forum available for their manifesto for a better leadership of the BNP.
Sunday, 3 June 2007
A line in the sand
Today the British National Party stands at a crossroads. Potentially it is the most successful organisation created in the defence of our people, but it seriously risks becoming the victim of internal strife similar to that which befell the NF, which was the most powerful nationalist organisation in Britain since the war in terms of membership numbers.
The BNP has huge support among the people. Millions of Britons understand the threat to our country posed by mass immigration, a threat far greater than we faced in two world wars and from Communism in the Cold War. Al Qaeda terrorists roam unchecked. Islam is imposing its Sharia laws on us and no-one in our dhimmi government dare oppose them. Our young people cannot get jobs, cannot afford homes because of immigrants who have priority in housing, benefits, jobs.
Yet we still only have 49 councillors. Yes it was under Nick Griffin’s leadership that we first achieved electoral success in 2002 (though we should never forget Derek Beackon’s victory in Tower Hamlets long before Griffin). But promises of over a hundred councillors this year came to naught. Why? The support was there, the activists were willing to work for it, but the leadership blew the chance.
The phrase “a line in the sand” has been much used and abused and easily drips off our tongues. Now we use it in the full knowledge that we have but a short time to restore the good name of the British National Party and ensure it acts in the best interests not only of its leader and members but of the indigenous population.
This is where we draw our line in the sand in our people's defence.
Chris Jackson after three years of threatening to do so has stated he will challenge for the leadership of our party this year. He and his Reform Group has the support of a growing number of present and past officers of the party including one of our best loved members Richard Edmonds, as well as Mike Easter, a long time financial and political stalwart of the party.
Jonathan Bowden has clashed with Nick over his right to address other nationalist audiences. One of the most damaging elements in what may appear to be a one-sided power struggle is the way the party has become a gossip mill, with on one hand Nick’s way of dealing with dissent with an almost Stalinist ruthlessness and on the other hand irresponsible members damaging us by spreading unfounded gossip.
Stories circulating include one that makes out that Edward Butler, who achieved so much for us since 1993, is being ignored by the people Nick has appointed and whose advice led to our disaster at this year’s elections.
The imposition of Richard Barnbrook as our candidate for London Mayor next year has shocked even those members who are most loyal to the leadership. The chances that looked good for us to gain at least one seat, if not more, on the Greater London Assembly in 2008 are being destroyed because Nick’s actions are failing to bring key London activists into line and ensuring the continuance of disunity in London region.
A recent very well attended meeting in South West London was used by Jackson’s supporters as a recruitment opportunity. Many of us think that Jackson is just a stalking horse for a stronger candidate being groomed to step out of the wings and take centre stage in the coming months for a challenge next year.
Britain Forward consists of 48 members with a joint membership running into hundreds of years in the cause of British Nationalism and defence of our land and its people. We include party officers, former officers, candidates, financial backers and hardworking long suffering activists who publicly and privately have helped carry us forward and now dismay at our chairman’s stewardship of the party and the antics of some of those who now stand in growing numbers to oppose him.
It is not because of cowardice that we do not sign our names to this declaration; it is common sense seeing the way in which Nick deals with criticism of his leadership and did in the past. Stormfront threads on the Reform Group were quickly removed because of Nick’s close links to Don Black its owner.
Britain Forward does not define itself by a precise strand of nationalist opinion or align ourselves to any past leader of our party. We encompass the widest possible views save only that we support the defence of our people and Britain’s white Christian traditions. We want what is best for the BNP.
Who can deny the 14 words of David Lane, sadly no longer with us. David Lane took up armed struggle on behalf of the white people of the USA, something that many might disapprove of. Our leader has double standards on this. He condemns Richard Edmonds, who has an impeccable nationalist track record going back more than 30 years, because of his loyalty and friendship to fellow nationalists in Europe, but he continues his close political relationship with a multi-millionaire who has a terrorist conviction.
If Nick wants those who have served this movement since the start to fall in behind him in any election for chairman of the party, he will need to come up quickly with answers to the questions about his own behaviour and that of our party under his stewardship. Talking to over 300 party members over the last six months we have accumulated a series of questions that we want Nick to answer before anybody decides how they are going to vote.
If you have ideas for the betterment of our party, views on how to secure a fair election for the leadership (incredibly, the way the contest is to be run will only be decided after nominations close on June 30th), more questions for our chairman or matters that you think should be brought to the attention of fellow members, you are welcome to post a comment here.
We only want what is best for the BNP and the future of white Britain.
We will resist all attempts to silence us.
Britain Forward Steering Committee