New Right

It’s been a big few weeks for far right meetings. Just under a fortnight ago the crème de la crème of British fascists met in Preston to once more pick over the bones of their unlamented fallen Fuhrer John Tyndall, the founder of the modern BNP who died in 2005.

This weekend as many as 200 dissenters within the BNP, led by renegade MEP Andrew Brons, are meeting in the Midlands to discuss whether there is any future in the BNP. Rather like at the Tyndall meeting, these people will be more united in what they oppose (namely BNP leader Nick Griffin) than anything else. According to Griffin, this evening, this meeting will see the launch of a new nationalist party - which we are supposed to be behind!

Meanwhile, not to be outdone, Griffin’s “mainstream” BNP are also gearing up for their forthcoming meeting/conference/wake, which is likely to attract a pitifully small turnout.

Finally, a coalition of some of the finest Jew hating conspiracy theorists around are having a meeting of their own. And, in time honoured far right tradition, they are having a factional split of their own. The “New Right” is a quasi-intellectual political group formed by the former National Front activist Troy Southgate and unites various strands of far right thinking into a bi-monthly talking shop.

Having split into two warring factions, they’re aptly enough holding their next meeting in a London pub on the 5th November. The who’s who of the group makes for interesting reading. One faction is led by a professed “National Anarchist” and the other by a man who until recently boasted of working for Military Intelligence.

The New Right

The New Right is a quasi-intellectual political group formed by the former National Front activist Troy Southgate. Helping him to organise New Right is Jonathan Bowden.

The group was formed to unite various strands of far right thinking into a regular talking shop where “Intellectual” extremists from all over the world could meet and talk over their poisonous ideas.

United under the banner of The New Right, Holocaust deniers, anti Semites and racists young and old gather on a bi monthly basis to swap their ideas in one of London’s many back street public houses.

New Right organisers

Troy Southgate
A self-described “National Anarchist”, Southgate is a former Political Soldier and a prolific biographer of obscure political figures. A onetime adherent of the “radical” leadership surrounding Nick Griffin, Southgate moved out of the NF in the very early 90’s with the “Political Soldiers” before falling foul of the chief exponent of radical catholic fascism, Derek Holland.
Before discovering “National Anarchism”, Southgate led the "English Nationalist Movement" and the "National Revolutionary Faction" both of which dissolved and which he ran prior to the New Right. He is the vocalist in the band H.E.R.R and plays in numerous “Neo Folk” bands.

Jonathan Bowden
The BNP’s former "cultural" officer, Bowden is the chairman of “The New Right”. Initially a member of the Conservative party, Bowden was involved with “The Monday Club” and “The Revolutionary Conservative Caucus” two far right Conservative pressure groups in the 1990's where he made the acquainance of solicitor Adrian Davies.
He has previously been deputy chair of “The Western Goals Institute” an anti communist and anti immigrant group based on the US group of the same name.
He fancies himself as both an artist and a playwright, though few others share his passion for his own work.

Key supporters

Kieren Trent
Trent is often seen at New Right meetings. Has been involved with a host of far right groups including the National Front and British Movement and more recently, the BNP.
Trent once set up his own tiny group “The English National Resistance” whose main objective seemed to involve fly posting and graffiti. Took part in vicious assault on Asian youths with Matt Tait and ex London BNP organiser Bob Bailey during the 2010 election campaign in Barking.
Was photographed delivering English Democrat campaign material with Chris Beverley and Matt Tait earlier this year, has also attempted to ingratiate himself with dissident Irish Republican groups.


Matthew Tait
A regular face at New Right meetings, Tait is the former Maidenhead BNP organiser. Once seen as a potential “high flyer” within the BNP, Tait attended and spoke at the far-right American Renaissance conference in North Virginia in 2010, as well as a German Neo Nazi demo in Dortmund in the same year.
Another regular and failed candidate, Tait joined Kieren Trent and ex London BNP organiser Bob Bailey in the assault on a group of Asian youths during the 2010 elections in Barking & Dagenham.


Richard Edmonds
Ageing Holocaust denier and nazi, Edmonds recently switched from the BNP back to the National Front and in the process finally turned his back on the party he helped form with his mentor John Tyndall.
A convicted thug and vicious racist, Edmonds announced his intention to stand against BNP Leader Nick Griffin for the BNP's leadership earlier this year, but stood aside to allow Andrew Brons to challenge instead. He is closely linked to several German holocaust deniers and regularly attends hardline nazi gatherings across the continent.


Pete Rushton
Another Holocaust denier, Rushton has also travelled the world spreading hatred and Anti-semitism. Has been in just about every tiny and insignificant fascist grouping in this country, never staying long however. He began his political life in the British National Party, before being expelled by Nick Griffin for allegedly being a Searchlight spy. He is currently deputy editor of Mark Cotterill's magazine Heritage and Destiny and recently helped organise the John Tyndall memorial meeting in Preston. He is regularly in the company of Michele Renouf, both here and abroad.

Some of the speakers at past New Right events

Norman Lowell
Maltese Anglophile and Anti-Semite Norman Lowell is the leader of the minuscule Maltese party “Imperium Europa”. Lowell Describes Adolf Hitler as his hero and has labelled the holocaust as “The Holy Hoax” and has also praised Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
In 2008 Lowell was convicted of racial hatred and insulting the Maltese president for which he received a two year suspended sentence.




Dr Tomislav Sunic
A former Croatian diplomat and professor in the US, Sunic is a director of “The American Third Position” a far right white nationalist political party.
Sunic has shared platforms with a number of Holocaust deniers. In 2003 he spoke alongside convicted terrorist Horst Mahler who is currently serving a 12 year prison sentence in Germany for Holocaust denial, at a conference sponsored by Germany’s Neo Nazi party the NPD. Sunic is a regular speaker on the far-right scene in this country.



Adrian Davies
Former member of the Tory-right, Davies has flirted with the extreme far-right in this country since the 1980’s. In the 1990’s he joined up with some BNP rebels to form a new party after they walked out during one of that party’s earlier financial traumas. A barrister by trade, Cambridge educated Davies has registered a new political party in what would appear to be a premature move to align with Andrew Brons’s rebels.




Michele Renouf
Former model and actress, Australian born Renouf is a staunch defender of a number of well known Holocaust deniers including David Irving, Robert Faurisson, Richard Williamson, Germar Rudolf, Ernst Zündel and countryman Fredrick Töben. Efraim Zuroff, of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Jerusalem told “The Australian” newspaper: "This woman is especially dangerous... she can put a pretty face on a very ugly movement."
Renouf has previously described Judaism as a "repugnant and hate-filled religion”. She attended a “Holocaust denial” conference hosted by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad entitled “Holocaust Review: A Global Vision” in Tehran in December 2006. Others at the conference included former KKK leader David Duke.


Martin Webster
The last living link to the leadership of the National Front of the 1970’s. Webster has remained on the sidelines of the far-right in this country since being forced out of the NF back in 1983. A vicious racist and Anti-Semite, Webster gave a series of interviews in 1999 claiming that he once had an intimate relationship with a young Nick Griffin, when the future BNP leader was in the National Front.




Jeremy Bedford-Turner
One of the most interesting people to have been involved in the New Right is Jeremy Bedford-Turner, or Jez as he is known within the far right. He has boasted of being a serving soldier in the Royal Signal Corp, which, according to the Army’s website are “leaders in information technology and communications” and “provide the Army with communications throughout the world.”

Despite his self-pro-claimed intelligence links, which includes speaking Pashtun and allegedly being a translator for Military Intelligence, Jez has been a leading member of the New Right network for several years, organising meetings and speakers. He is also a leading figure in the Friends of Oswald Mosley group.

He is a member of an Army club in Pall Mall and regularly takes his fascist friends there after New Right meetings. Bedford-Turner was pushed out of New Right during the summer after Troy Southgate claimed that he was a security risk. Of course this is nonsense as Southgate had known of Jez’s army links for several years. Indeed, Bedford-Turner was questioned by police during a British People’s Party meeting in Paddington in July 2008 and later claimed that he was subsequently questioned by Military Police as a result. Rather, Southgate appears to have become jealous of Bedford-Turner’s growing prominence within the group and simply used his army links as an excuse.

Cast adrift, Bedford-Turner has now launched IONA, taking the name of a National Front affiliated group of the 1980s which was run by Richard Lawson. The first IONA meeting was held in August and was addressed by Jonathon Bowden, Dr Alexander Jacob and Prof Andrew Fraser. His next meeting was a month later was billed to be addressed by Bowden and Lady Michele Renoulf.

Bedford-Turner has also formed a close relationship with the Holocaust Denier, Bishop Richard Williamson.

After being denounced for his links with Military Intelligence Bedford-Turner recently claimed that he left the Army in August. Questions remain. If he is genuinely a right wing extremist then why did the British Army allow him to remain in post? If he was working for his employers then why did so many of Britain’s far right fascist leaders did not question his involvement earlier given that he has been boasting about his job since he first got involved?

Thanks to Nick Lowles at HOPE not Hate

Web racists challenge convictions

Sheppard (left) and Whittle were jailed after a failed bid to seek asylum in the US

Two men have started appeals against the UK's first convictions for inciting racial hatred via a foreign website

Simon Sheppard, 51, was sentenced to four years and 10 months, and Stephen Whittle, 42, to two years and four months at Leeds Crown Court in July.

Sheppard, from Selby, North Yorks, and Whittle, of Preston, Lancs, controlled US websites featuring racist material. Sheppard's counsel Adrian Davies told the Appeal Court on Thursday the sites were "entirely lawful" in the US. He said that there was no evidence that anyone in England and Wales - except for the police officer in the case - had ever seen any of them.

Referring to the jailed UK extremist Muslim cleric Mr Davies said: "Despite this, Mr Sheppard has been sentenced to a longer term of imprisonment than Abu Hamza," he told the court. "These are matters which, in my submission, ought to attract the closest and most careful scrutiny of the court of the supposed legal basis of these convictions."

During their first trial in 2008, Sheppard and Whittle had skipped bail and fled to California, where they sought asylum claiming they were being persecuted for their right-wing views. However, they were subsequently deported back to the UK.

The investigation began when a complaint about a leaflet called "Tales of the Holohoax" was reported to the police in 2004 after it was pushed through the door of a Blackpool synagogue. It was traced back to a post office box in Hull registered to Sheppard. Police later found published material including grotesque images of murdered Jews alongside cartoons and articles ridiculing ethnic groups.

The pair were charged under the Public Order Act with publishing racially inflammatory material, distributing racially inflammatory material and possessing racially inflammatory material with a view to distribution. Sheppard, of Brook Street, Selby, was found guilty of 16 offences and Whittle, of Avenham Lane, Preston, was found guilty of five. Sentencing, Judge Rodney Grant said that he had rarely seen material which was so abusive and insulting.

At the Court of Appeal on Thursday, Mr Davies said that the Act did not contemplate a situation where publication was in an electronic form but only in "hard copy" form. And publication did not result merely when a website was set up but only when someone actually looked at it.

The hearing continues.

BBC

Race hate case pair appeal

Two men who fled to the United States after being found guilty of publishing race-hate articles on the Internet have launched appeals against their convictions.

Simon Sheppard, of Brook Street in Selby, and Stephen Whittle skipped bail and headed across the Atlantic in July after a jury at Leeds Crown Court convicted them of a series of race-related offences. The pair claimed political asylum, and have been held in a California prison for two months while US officials set a date for their immigration hearing.

Leeds Crown Court has since received papers from the pair's legal teams, applying for leave to appeal against their convictions.

Barrister Adrian Davies, who represented Sheppard during the trial, said the case would probably be heard at London's Court of Appeal if the pair are allowed to challenge the jury's verdicts.

Sheppard, 51, and Whittle, 42, were given bail by a judge on July 11, despite the jury having already returned guilty verdicts on some of the charges. They were due to return to court three days later while jurors deliberated over further charges, but failed to show up. It's believed the pair travelled from the UK to Ireland by ferry before taking a direct flight to Los Angeles. The pair claimed political asylum and were detained at Los Angeles Airport by the US Immigration Naturalisation Service.

Their case has been followed by extremist websites, and supporters have begun sending donations.

Sheppard was found guilty of 11 counts of publishing racially inflammatory written material. He's due to return to Leeds Crown Court on December 8. Whittle, of Avenham Lane in Preston, was convicted of five counts of publishing racially inflammatory written material.

Selby Times

Implied threats and fear of failure - Nick Griffin loses his nerve over High Court action

Regular readers will know that ten days ago we reported that the December rebels (Sadie Graham, Kenny Smith and co) had received a letter from Nick Griffin suggesting that the ongoing case in the High Court should be dropped. Here's what we said:

'The December rebels who Griffin was taking through the High Court have received letters this week from the pig farmer himself, asking that the case be dropped because 'it's your homes at risk' and 'it's in the best interests of' party unity and so on, apparently forgetting that it was he himself who brought the case.'

This was immediately questioned by the near-dead Lancaster and Morecambe BNP group's idiotic former organiser Chris Hill who, via the recent leadership-challenger Colin Auty's support blog, Challenge for Leadership, said,

'I may in fact be wrong about the Grifin/Collett gang having officially dropped the case against Sadie & Co. I read a report about a retraction letter being received they the defendants elsewhere on the web (the Lancaster UAF blog), but I've not seen any reports from reliable sources as yet. UAF may well be jumping the gun in reporting the inevitable, but that's UAF for you as about as reliable as Griffin on a bad day.'

We're a good deal more reliable than Nick Griffin - even on a good day when all he does is stay at home and admire his new sauna and jacuzzi while counting his pigs - and to nobody's surprise at all, it turns out that we were telling the truth and those who denied this were telling, forgive me, porkies. Oh, and Chris, in case you hadn't noticed, we changed our name to Lancaster Unity nearly six months ago.

The letter from Griffin to the rebels is reprinted below.

'Dated 8th July 2008

Dear XXXXXXXXXX

Further to our earlier correspondence in connection with proposed disciplinary proceedings, I am writing to you and your colleagues in this matter in an attempt to bring it to an early - and as far as is possible - relatively painless conclusion for all concerned.

In response to my letter of 8th April, several of your group requested that the BNP's internal disciplinary proceedings and connected unfair dismissal hearings. should be stayed pending the outcome of the court case Griffin v Smith & Others. I accepted this as a sensible proposal for all concerned for the time being.

The delay does not, however, alter the fact that our present course will see us back in court, with both sides incurring further very considerable expense. My informed opinion is that you and your colleagues will lose the case, but that Mr. Davies does not mind this in the slightest because his avowed aim is to try and bleed the BNP financially. He knows that the looming problem of negative equity for many home-owners is sufficiently large that, while the end result is likely to be your collective bankruptcy and loss of several homes, we will be unable to recover any significant part of our costs.

I trust that you will already have learnt from the failure of the desperate "Scottish gambit" in which he encouraged you to set so much store that Mr. Davies gungo-ho tendencies do not always work out in the best interests of his clients (as Steve Edwards, Jay Lee, the Roberts Brothers and Tess Culnane have already discovered to their cost).

Especially now that time has elapsed to allow water to flow under various bridges, I ask you individually and collectively, to give very careful consideration to an agreement to end the action on the basis of each side bearing their own costs and going their separate ways. The sums involved at present are, as we all know only too well, steep without being ruinous. It is surely sensible to bring matters to an end while this is the case?

As you know, the BNP has already through the action secured its assets and the privacy of its members (although my solicitor informs me that he is still waiting for the affidavit on these matters from you in accordance with the Judge's directions). While it would have been far better had it been possible to have done so without the expense incurred so far, we have at last achieved what we needed to do, so we have little other than an expensive moral victory to gain by pursuing the matter further if you and your colleagues will agree to end this and any other possible actions. Please note that there can be no question of leaving an opening through which Mr. Davies can continue to use you people as pawns in his own longstanding personal campaign to bring down those who have achieved political success way beyond anything he has been able to manage in his various forays into either "extreme" or "moderate" nationalism.

All concerned have lives to lead and better things to do than enrich lawyers or waste court time. I hope to hear that we can agree on that at least, in which a settlement along the lines outlined above would surely be the only sensible option.'

That the BNP is in dire financial straits is indisputable. Griffin is desperately trying to raise funds to pay for the usual staggeringly-high legal costs that he has already incurred by this pointless action (suggestions of £30,000 have been made by various people who should know) before he and the other officers of the party become personally liable. The fact that he is panicking and floundering around like a landed fish is obvious from this letter.

As usual with Griffin, his preferred mode of defence is attack, though more by implication than clear statement. His criticism of the rebel's barrister Adrian Davies' 'gung-ho tendencies' is a classic ploy, hopefully undermining the rebel's relationship with their counsel, as is the appalling suggestion that Davies is more interested in destroying the BNP than he is in protecting his client's interests - a suggestion that sounds awfully like libel to me but Nick Griffin probably knows more about the law than I do, having a third-rate degree in jurisprudence, the theory and philosophy of law, [yawn, sorry] and having access to one of the sharpest legal brains in the country, Lee Barnes [sarcasm].

The phrase 'the BNP has already through the action secured its assets and the privacy of its members' is an odd one when you consider that the assets (presumably laptops and so on) were grabbed by BNP security long before the court case after illegally gaining access to Graham and co's homes, but we can safely assume that the 'privacy of its members' refers to the court ordering the rebels to stop using the out of date membership lists in their possession. Thirty thousand quid seems an awful lot of money to throw away on getting something virtually worthless from a bunch of people who have done next to nothing to harm the party and who are generally acknowledged to be politically impotent.

Even though asking for, and clearly desperate for, a truce, Griffin still feels the need to ensure that Davies is out of the battle.

'Please note that there can be no question of leaving an opening through which Mr. Davies can continue to use you people as pawns in his own longstanding personal campaign to bring down those who have achieved political success way beyond anything he has been able to manage in his various forays into either "extreme" or "moderate" nationalism.'

Do I detect some nervousness from Griffin? Just a single letter and a number of attacks on Adrian Davies intended to damage client confidence. One wonders if Griffin's legal advisors are aware of this letter and its content. I showed it to a friend of mine who is in the final stages of training to be a barrister and his response was that if one of his clients had written to the opposition in the same terms, he would have no hesitation in dumping the client and immediately beginning what he described as a 'vigorous' process to get paid before the client committed another such faux pas that led straight into the High Court for a libel action.

Of course, there is another possibility. That the rumours are true and that Griffin's legal advisors have told him he gets nothing more out of them until they are paid for the work they have already carried out. As the party is near-bankrupt, paying counsel is impossible at this stage and the thought of having to face the rebels in court with only the help of Lee Barnes must be giving Griffin nightmares. But now Nick Griffin has put himself in a position where he not only has to extract £30,000 from a party that hardly has two pennies to rub together, he has also left himself open to an attack from Adrian Davies which he will find next to impossible to defend himself against.

The former problem might be solved if the cash from the BNP's Red, White and Blue piss-up in August makes enough and is immediately diverted to pay the debt, which might explain the recent statement from the party that the RWB is to be a cash-only event with no advance ticket sales. This could well not work as we hear from a number of trusted sources that there is very little interest in the RWB this year and, naturally, a lot of people are put off from going because of the national demo that's planned, the inevitably heavy police presence and the ban on selling booze.

Adrian Davies though, might well turn out to be the most serious of Griffin's problems. Despite his disparaging comments, Davies is an able barrister with a good deal of experience. Griffin could well find him the Nemesis that he has repeatedly been avoiding for the past few years. In the past, Griffin has always chosen to attack those who cannot fight back - this time he may well have attacked someone who is not only willing, but able to fight back, and who has teeth that are a good deal sharper than his own. We look forward to it.

The Griffin opposition speaks out...

There are two very interesting posts on fascist blogs at the moment, both of which are well worth taking a good look at. The first is on the North-West Nationalist site and was written by Adrian Davies, the second is on the dissident Enough is Enough blog.

Now is the winter of our discontent

As I write these words, it seems increasingly likely that Nick Griffin’s paranoia and unbridled lust for power (I said power, though it seems that he will also have his Gaveston!) are leading to the disintegration of his party.

If that does not happen in the next few weeks, and “the Leader” (as he likes to describe himself, capitalised as in the original German) somehow retains control of a few square miles of rubble strewn wilderness around the Welshpool bunker into 2008, it will happen in the next few months. The financial time bombs ticking away under the bunker are going to detonate soon, and that will be the end. That, however, is not my principal theme for to-day, though I must touch upon it. My good friend E. N. Ronn will be writing in depth about the saga of the BNP accounts shortly, so watch this space!

The immediate crisis has been precipitated by the latest purge of senior members who complained about the indecent influence of Mad King Nick’s (yes, I know that Gerry Gable thought of that title first, but why should the devil have all the best tunes?) current favourite, Mark “Young, Nazi and Proud” Collett, and asked awkward questions about the incompetence of the BNP treasurer John Walker and his deputy, ex-convict Dave Hannam, who are now well over five months late in filing the party’s 2006 accounts.

The real problem is not however the vain juvenile Collett, nor the criminal Hannam, nor the incompetent Walker, nor even the appalling Nick Griffin himself. In part it is the authoritarian constitution bequeathed to Griffin by John Tyndall, which allows Griffin to indulge his whims and caprices at will, and the culture of secrecy in which the members are treated like mushrooms by “the Leader” and his kitchen cabinet, who are not fit to run a whelk stall, let alone an organisation with an income of £672,246 in 2005, the last year for which it troubled to file accounts (not to mention an expenditure of £766,958!). In part however the problem is also the poverty of expectations in the movement, and the easy tolerance of sleaze and criminality by people who should know better, conniving at the arbitrary misuse of power and gross financial malpractice, while prating on about how they will save our country from a corrupt establishment. May heaven preserve England from such “saviours”!

At present, the stated position of the BNP dissidents is that they do not desire a new party, and seek reform from within. I can well understand their feelings. They have given years of their lives to build up the BNP, they have to deal with a membership that has a sentimental attachment to the name, while precedents from the National Party in 1976 to the Freedom Party in 2001 show how hard a task it is to build something new, as I know from personal experience.

The dissidents face two big problems if they persist in that course. The first is that under section 5 of the BNP’s constitution, “General Members’ Meetings may only be called by the National Chairman or by the Advisory Council in accordance with Section 5 of this Constitution”. Somehow I cannot imagine Nick Griffin or the leading light on his rump Advisory Council, his insinuating deputy, Simon Darby (an interesting if unattractive chimaera created by mingling the DNA of Grima Wormtongue, Martin Bormann and the Man who was Thursday in a government laboratory at Porton Down) agreeing to an EGM!

Secondly, the BNP is almost certainly bankrupt. I have said that the state of its accounts is not my principal theme, but I must outline the most glaring features to explain why I have come to that conclusion.

As the BNP’s auditors, Silvers, said in their report annexed to the 2005 accounts (more recent accounts are notoriously not available):

“ . . . for the last two years the party has incurred a deficit . . . the Balance Sheet is now in deficit, there is an element of doubt as to its ability to continue as a going concern. There are however funds available within the ‘Regional Accounting Unit’ . . . to rectify the situation.”

Indeed there were. Note 5 to the Regional Accounting Unit’s accounts for2006 (which, unlike the Central Accounting Unit’s, have been filed with the Electoral Commission), prepared by Dave Hannam (who is on the out for the time being) reads:

“At the end of the year, the party owed the regional accounting unit £21,854, and this was repaid by 26th January 2007.”

Put into plain English, head office dipped into branch funds to the tune of £21,854 to pay 2005's bills, then repaid that amount out of 2006's income. A problem with this tactic is that in the next year, you run out of money even sooner. Such practices are redolent of trading while insolvent. I wonder how much has been borrowed from branch funds to meet this year’s deficit? Is that why the 2006 accounts have not been filed?

When, shortly before his resignation from the BNP’s Advisory Council earlier this year, Jonathan Bowden asked Nick Griffin what economies he proposed to make to reduce the carried forward deficit, the answer came back “none”. The deficit would be funded by growth.

The BNP grew rapidly in the early years of this decade. >From a total of some 1,200 when Nick Griffin was elected chairman in 1999, membership rose to 6,008 or 6,502

(it is not clear which: both figures appear at different pages of the 2005 accounts!) in 2005. In passing, while Nick Griffin likes to claim the credit for such growth, it is largely the result of external factors, namely the leftward drift of the Tory party, the failure of UKIP to rebrand itself as a broadly based party of the populist right, and the reaction to massive immigration.

Since audited accounts are not available for any date after 31st December 2005, it is impossible to say what the current membership might be, but after disappointing results in the May 2007 local elections, it seems unlikely that growth will plug the gap.

Put bluntly, the BNP has operated much like a Ponzi scheme for many years, but now the new money is not coming in to pay the accumulated debts. Soon the music will have to stop.

Interesting though I as a lawyer might find the question how far incoming members of the committee of management of an unincorporated association are liable for debts contracted by their predecessors, I somehow doubt that there will be a rush of volunteers to defend a test case brought by disgruntled creditors! Yet that would be the likely position of anyone taking over the leadership of the BNP from Nick Griffin.

It appears therefore to follow that at some point in the not too distant future (though possibly not for so long as Griffin and Walker can avoid filing accounts for 2006) the stark reality of insolvency will compel even the reluctant to consider a fresh start (and even leave them with no practical alternative).

Significant advantages can be obtained from such a scenario, which now seems much more likely than a week ago. Not only will Nick be left to pay the debts that he contracted, as is only fair and right, but also the problematic baggage that the BNP carries can be jettisoned. Never again will sensible patriots have to answer awkward questions about the role in their party of Lecomber or Collett.

Certain measures will have to be taken. The first will be to form a broadly based committee to run a new party till elections to its governing body take place. It would seem sensible to allow six to nine months before holding elections, to build up the membership, and allow a meaningful vote for a representative committee.

The second will be to agree a platform for the party that is neither so bland as to fail to put clear red, white and blue water between us and, say, UKIP or the Cornerstone group of Tory M.P.s, while not being so radical as to lead us into the political wilderness so beloved of purists, fantasists and fanatics of the left and right.

A draft constitution would have to be put to the members at the first general members’ meeting. Such a constitution should provide for the holding once a year of a general

meeting of the members, who alone should have the power to amend the constitution and the statement of aims, and to appoint the members of internal disciplinary tribunals, so that the chairman or governing body cannot pack them. The constitution should also require the officers to lay accounts, prepared by the treasurer, and passed by a registered external auditor before the members in general meeting for approval.

Rid of the albatross legacy of “Young, Nazi and Proud”, “the Secret Agent” etc. ad infinitum et ad nauseam, and committed to a sensible tactical doctrine of building up from the grassroots by engagement in local elections, not fantasies about getting onto the Brussels gravy train, such a party will quickly occupy the large electoral space created by the leftward drift of PC Dave’s Tories, and the abject failure of UKIP to capitalise on the long lost opportunities of 2004.

Now is the time for all true patriots to take a principled yet practical stand. Adherence to the embattled Welshpool clique is not only immoral, it is now also impolitic. Continued support for Griffin amidst accounting scandals and raids by illegal goon squads on the homes of democratically elected councillors equates to moral leprosy, and political suicide.

Over the coming weeks and months, we shall see who does the right thing, who does the wrong thing, and who sits on the fence to see which side will prevail. What will you do?

Wretched and rebellious

Nick Griffin’s latest posting on the website does nothing to enhance his reputation for telling the truth. While the GLA elections are indeed a massive opportunity for the BNP, his attempts to describe the circumstances surrounding the last seven days smack of utter desperation.

To suggest that ‘far-left’ embedded assets have emerged to cause this crisis, when all people have tried to do is awaken you to real and dangerous problems within, is playing a very dangerous political game. It seems that the bigger the crisis, the bigger the smear that has to be told to get yourself out of it. Nonetheless, there is no better response to this than to tell the truth.

In conjunction with the above, some serious questions need to be asked:

• Why has Mark Collett been able to cause trouble wherever he has gone, while you have taken his side on every instance which has led to the sacking or smearing of hard working and well respected Nationalists?
• Why has Dave Hannam been allowed to keep his job for such a long time despite clearly not being up to it, and despite serious reservations from many Party officials?
• Why was the expulsion and treatment of Sadie Graham and Kenny Smith broadcast on the website for 10,000 visitors a day to read that the BNP illegally records people’s conversations and enters their homes by deception while stealing personal property?
• Why are extracts from that personal property then added to that website, in full view of the public at large?
• Why are you now going round the country accusing others of being state assets, when you know full well that those you are accusing have literally given years of honest hard graft to the Cause?

Your revelation about a ‘palace coup’ is nothing more than an inept and incorrect justification for you to rid the Party of those people who have criticised Mark Collett. People before have criticised Mark, and those people are now gone, yet not without being smeared by you as either a ‘red’ or having stolen money. The larger the degree to which Mark dislikes the said people, the larger the smear used against them.

The suggestion that ‘the little clique’ wanted to remove power from the leader, the members who elect the leader and the voting members is nothing more than a lie designed to get those said people on board by deceptively suggesting that all of you as Chairman, the Voting Members, and the members in general are all being undermined together. Chris Beverley was voted to be the Councillors Representative at the latest annual Conference, by existing Councillors. This would have given him a place on the AC, which comes with that position. At the latest North West Regional Council meeting (not the stage managed hatchet job last week) Chris Jackson was given overwhelming backing by the North West Officials (no-one voted against him) to be the North West Regional Organiser. However you have not honoured this and you have instead installed yourself as the North West RO. Both Chris Beverley and Chris Jackson can’t exactly be described as Mark Collett fans, yet they are both excellent Organisers and dedicated Nationalists. To suggest that these two people, democratically elected by their peers meant filling the AC with people to undermine you is ludicrous. How then do you explain the fact that Ian Dawson turned down the role of Yorkshire Organiser (and thus a place on the AC) when according to your theory, Ian, as another Collett non-fan, would surely have jumped at the chance to be back on the AC?

Greed? Insecurity? Juvenile arrogance? A secret extremist agenda? Knowing that their own failings are about to catch up with them? A more perfect description of Mark Collett surely does not exist.

A ‘very productive meeting in the North West’? Where three well respected and hard working long term Nationalists, who were also Regional Officials, resigned? Where you had the room to yourself to show off your undoubted skills as a politician and political debater without your scandalous and desperate claims to be properly challenged?

Glasgow – there was no unanimous vote at all, the Organiser and the Fund-Holder have resigned in protest at your handling of a situation that would never have developed had you lanced the Mark Collett boil on the numerous occasions presented to you over the years. No doubt your ‘one side of the story only’ road show will enable you to win over more people who ‘can’t see the wood for the trees’, yet the truth always comes out and you reap what you sow.

Your tale of badgering phone calls is astounding! It is you and your various lieutenants that have been making calls, spreading lies and badgering officials not to resign in protest. To do the deed and then falsely accuse others of doing it is about as low as it gets. When you’re in a hole……

Which activists were turned away from the smart and friendly pub venue (the first pub you went to after being aquitted at Leeds Crown Court) used for the openly advertised social meeting in Bradford? The thirty plus people in the meeting did not include wretched women, in fact there were no wretched women in the pub at all. Those present were men and women who pay their membership fees so that you and your ‘advisers’ can lie about them to 10,000 visitors a day on the BNP website.

Angela Clarke was in the pub at the time, though not as it happens in the ‘rebel meeting room’. The suggestion that Angela is a wretched woman shows the utter hatred you have for anyone who dares to ask the wrong questions about Mark Collett. Angela was an exceptionally brave BNP councillor who literally fought on the front line in the town of Keighley. She endured more than anyone yet you gave such little support. When you sent Mark Collett in to protect her (the sheer irony of it all) all she received was a computer filled with perverse pornography to which when questioned about it, Collett’s reply was “so f***ing what, it is for my own personal viewing”. The fall out that followed was once again handled with the same trusted method – that of smearing Angela and defending Mark Collett.

Mark Collett, while now given the title of ‘Head of Graphic Design’, was never more than this anyway. Martin Wingfield design and produces Voice of Freedom (and does a fantastic job), John Bean is the editor for Identity (and does a fantastic job) – Mark Collett only ever did the layout and pictures. Steve Blake was in charge of the website (and did a fantastic job even though he was never taken on full time and had to fit it around a non-BNP job). You wrote the information for the national leaflets; Mark Collett only did the graphic design for those leaflets. The only Publicity that Mark Collett has ever been head of is ‘Bad Publicity’. Despite the change of title, Mark will be doing exactly as before and more, now that he has been given the role as editor of the British Nationalist bulletin.

We understand the ‘road show’ was in Leicestershire yesterday afternoon – the outcome of the meeting for Sadie to remain as a normal member was far from satisfactory. She has not only lost her job and her income in the run up to Christmas while pregnant, her personal possessions have not been returned (including her personal computer) despite you accepting at the meeting that the BNP computer you thought you had taken is still in Sadie’s possession. Therefore you have been trawling through Sadie’s private computer given to her by her father, when you knew full well that this was the case. You have thus broken the law of the land by the dissemination of (whether true or amended for your own agenda) Sadie’s personal information. You are in boiling hot water and you damn well know it.

Meetings in the New Year won’t be about listening to the BNP answers; they will be about listening to your answers. Yet Nick, this is the British National Party, not the Nick Griffin Party.

You make so many predictions and cover so many angles, that whatever is to happen you can link it in with past predictions to suit your immediate requirements. Great politician, great political speaker and debater, yet that alone will not take us to the finish line.