Grab it while it's warmish...

No more News of the World? Read this instead!

As expected, the leadership challenge in the BNP has thrown all sides into something akin to chaos. The British Democracy Forum is awash with pro-Griffin sock puppets, most of them sounding remarkably similar to dumbass Patsy Harrington, the liar who runs Solidarity, the BNP's fake union that was created solely to keep Harrington off the dole.

In response to the many smears coming from the Griffin camp, the challenger Andrew Brons has complained to the leadership election officer Geoff Dickens, a Griffin loyalist. Quite why Brons expects Dickens to play fair is beyond me, but that's bizarre BNP-style democracy for you.

Now a new player has entered the field, who has allegedly sent a printed magazine out to all the current BNP members who are eligible to vote in the leadership election. The magazine is entitled 'A Report on the Mismanagement of the BNP' and can be read online here or is available in PDF form, should you care to download it and have a peruse, here. Brons and his minions deny that it is anything to do with them.

The magazine is a mish-mash of facts and hearsay, with a couple of obvious mistakes thrown in to confuse anyone who is attempting to track down the creator(s). Its interest for us is that it repeats many of the accusations that every anti-fascist has been making for years - that Griffin is a lying crook, that he surrounds himself with deviants, thugs and other lying crooks and that the BNP is near-bankrupt to a degree that, if it were a company, its directors would be jailed for trading while insolvent. There is, unsurprisingly, much talk of missing money.

You've read most of it before, but it's a bit of a laugh to look through and as you read it, reflect that Porky Griffin will be apoplectic with fury at the content while serial liar Patsy Harrington will be threatening to sue everyone in the universe - his usual behaviour when cornered.

Whodunnit? Possibly Paul Golding and James Dowson, former Griffin allies. That's only a guess though and if you have a better one, feel free to post it in the comments section. :-)

And Now: The Made–Up News...

The Police have decided against charging John Prescott with threatening to kill Labour Party Leader Harriet Harman and Chief Fundraiser Jonathan Mendelson in the run – up to May's General Election.

Citing “lack of evidence”, even though a tape allegedly exists of Lord Prescott saying “I am going to kill you, Mr Mendelson, you bugger – and then I will kill Mrs Harman all to death. Aye. That I will.”, the CPS have issued a statement that the recording is inadmissable, given that it contains only clumsily edited excerpts of a longer tape intended for a listening audience of the particularly gullible, and not grown - ups who look at evidence for a living.

In other news, opponents of Leadership Contender David Miliband have released a video recording of the MP for South Shields supposedly discussing his intention to spend the night in a brothel. The recording, in which Chief Whip Nick Brown is heard repeatedly saying “So, you're going to visit this brothel, are you, David Miliband MP? You want to do all rude things with ladies with no blouses on and that, in the brothel, Mr Miliband? Do you?”, has been widely condemned as a transparent and insanely childish attempt at entrapment designed to wreck Miliband's chances in the upcoming contest.

Mrs Harman has already courted controversy by changing the Party's Constitution to demand that all who stand against her for the Leadership must first obtain the nominations of 20% of Labour Party Members of at least two year's standing; an estimated 20,000 signatures. A series of suspensions from the Party of influential Miliband Supporters have led to accusations of dictatorship and gerrymandering against the controversial Party Leader.

The further, disastrous attempt of Mrs Harman to garner headlines in May's election campaign by featuring the image of a Pukka Pie in the corner of an election webcast, and then attempting to deflect the inevitable legal action by blaming it on former Director of Election Communications Peter Mandelson has also led to accusations of Leadership incompetence.

Controversy has grown also about the state of the Labour Party's finances. Following their failure to submit annual accounts, yet again, to scrutiny by the Electoral Commission, rumours persist of financial irregularity on a massive scale, criminal mismanagement and Party Staff at Victoria Street going unpaid: The clear inference being that the Labour Party are insolvent and verging on bankruptcy.

Mrs Harman is currently on holiday, and unavailable for comment...

Do you see what I did there?

As the above fantasy illustrates, if even a fraction of the goings – on we've heard from the BNP over the last few months had happened to a REAL political party (take your pick which one), the Papers would be reporting little else. It would be getting wall to wall TV coverage and writer Peter Morgan would, even now, be rushing out a riveting screenplay based on the events to be filmed starring Michael Sheen (giving an uncanny impersonation of Harriet Harman).

The BNP Fora (benefit of a classical education, I'm afraid...) are currently buzzing with impassioned pleas to their Members to keep details of the infighting away from those outside the Party, on the basis that it's no – one's business but their own.

On the other hand, the BNP are forever banging on about how they are a “Legitimate and Respectable” political party. Indeed, they've taken to describing themselves, as “Britain's Fifth Largest Party” (mind you; after the Lib Dem's there's a pretty massive drop – off down to UKIP, and a further steep falling away to the Nazzers...).

Well, if you're going to be a Real Political Party and not, say, just a bunch of thugs, oddballs and disenfranchised racists, you have to expect to ACT like one. And there's no use in moaning about all the nasty people out there (i.e: Us and Just About Everyone Else in the Anglophone World With an Internet Connection) chuckling like contented babies when you bring disaster after preventable disaster upon yourselves.

When all of this is over and done with, there may still be a BNP and there may not. But whatever survives, under whatever leadership, they have left behind a catalogue of such breathtakingly crackbrained behaviour and the record of so many acts of idiocy, ineptitude and barely – concealed criminality that we will have ammunition, come Election Times, for years to come.

Butler threatens legal action over BNP election rules

Eddy Butler, who is challenging Nick Griffin for the British National Party leadership, has threatened legal action over Griffin’s unconstitutional election regulations announced earlier today.

Pointing out that Griffin does not have the power to change the section of the party constitution that governs elections to the chairmanship, he writes on his blog: “Today the current Chairman has seen fit to make up a whole raft of new rules. Some are not harmful, but some are a deliberate and blatant attempt to frustrate the democratic process within the Party. He is already a loser – a bad loser who is trying to save his skin by changing the rules.”

Maintaining his blog is itself one of the actions a leadership challenger is forbidden under the made-up rules but not under the party constitution.

Butler believes that a “spoiler” candidate will be put forward to ensure that no one can obtain the required signatures of 20% of the 4,200 people who have two years’ continuous membership of the party.

Pledging to ignore the new rules, Butler adds: “Mr Griffin is intent on steering his campaign on a deliberate collision course.

“If he attempts to frustrate the democratic process as laid out under the constitution then he will be legally challenged.”

Supporters have already offered to help Butler fund such legal action, which is likely to deepen the splits in the BNP. Whether the party, believed already to be insolvent, can afford more legal costs to fight a case is uncertain.

For an explanation of the BNP’s unconstitutional election rules, see http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/news/article/1674/BNP-election-process-gerrymandered-to-exclude-challenger.

Hope not Hate

BNP election process gerrymandered to exclude challenger

Clive Jefferson with BNP ballerina Simone Clark

The British National Party has announced rules that will make it near impossible for Eddy Butler to challenge Nick Griffin for the party leadership.

The party’s “elections department”, otherwise known as Clive Jefferson, the rapidly promoted North West regional organiser and part-time member of Griffin’s European constituency staff, has outlined “leadership contest regulations”, which it claims are based on the party’s constitution.

Claiming that the party and individual candidates must be “protected from any attempt to use dishonesty and faction-building to advance one candidate at the expense of another”, the statement continues: “There is a clear dividing line between passionately held opinion and legitimate criticism on the one hand, and character assassination and dishonesty on the other. For the sake of the party, and the ability of the members to make a properly informed choice, everyone must stay on the right side of that line – and understand that a free and fair election can be secured only if anyone who crosses the line thereby loses his or her right to be involved.”

Where the line lies and who is to determine what comments fall on the wrong side of it are not explained, leaving an open door for Jefferson, at the bidding of Griffin and his consigliere Jim Dowson, to exclude Butler.

Turning to the nomination process, the statement, as widely expected, outlaws the use of the unofficial forms on which Butler is collecting signatures. Instead official, individually numbered forms will be sent by post to “all members eligible to nominate and vote in a leadership election”.

Members wishing to nominate anyone must sign the form and have their signature witnessed. This is a transparent attempt to make the process a bit harder for members who might be isolated from other members and might not want to tell potential witnesses among their friends, neighbours and relations that they are members of the racist party.

Those forms must be returned to the party’s so far unnamed “official scrutineer” to be received in the short period from 20 July to 10 August. Ridiculously, a member has to post the form personally “except in the event of sickness or infirmity”, in which case “they may ask their witness to post it for them”.

How the “official scrutineer” will know who posted the form is unclear, leaving yet another means for Jefferson to exclude nominations. And of course any attempt by Butler’s supporters to collect up forms and bring them to the official opening of envelopes, to ensure they are not somehow lost by the BNP’s “scrutineer”, is not permitted.

Although the BNP constitution does not provide for it, because in the event of there being no valid nominations for another candidate the incumbent automatically carries on, the form will also include a box for members to indicate that they wish Griffin to continue as leader. No doubt Griffin will ensure that there are more forms with that box ticked than nominations for Butler.

As widely expected after the closure of the two main anti-Butler attack blogs over the weekend, the regulations deny candidates the right to campaign other than by limited officially sanctioned methods. “Candidates and their supporters shall not produce, maintain, advertise or otherwise utilise, whether for promotion, criticism or report, any official or unofficial campaigning website or social networking facility (Face book, Twitter, etc).”

Candidates are also not allowed to give media interviews or raise money for their campaign.

The rules apply “with immediate effect”. The announcement was posted on the BNP website at 12.26 on 14 July. At the time of writing just over two hours later, Butler’s blog and website, both of which appeal for donations, were still in place, making it possible for Griffin immediately to institute disciplinary action against Butler and to exclude him from the nomination process.

The announcement declares that the basic guideline for the election under version 12.2 of the party constitution is: “A free, fully democratic election process which is fair to all potential candidates, from start to finish, and which protects the British National Party from attempt [sic] to abuse the process”.

The sentence appears in quotes in the announcement, giving the impression that it is taken from the constitution, but in fact it appears nowhere in that document. The rules for the nomination process and the ban on unofficial campaigning are likewise not sanctioned by the constitution, leaving the party open to legal action by Butler if he is thereby prevented from standing against Griffin.

Hope not Hate

BNP official sacked by Nick Griffin challenges him for leadership

Nick Griffin is facing a leadership challenge after the British National Party’s disastrous general election performance.

Eddy Butler, who until recently was a senior official in the far-right BNP, announced his candidacy yesterday and began to seek nominations from members. He accused Mr Griffin of an “authoritarian leadership style” that “inhibits new ideas and stifles debate”.

Mr Butler wrote on his blog: “Funding has dried up. Our financial liabilities are mounting. Inquiries to the party from the public have plummeted. Our electoral progress has all but halted. Our activist base has lost its enthusiasm.

“After 11 long years Nick has accumulated a massive amount of baggage which makes him less popular with the public than the party.”

Mr Griffin announced last month that he would step down in 2013 to concentrate on his European Parliament re-election campaign. The decision was widely seen as an attempt to avoid an immediate challenge, amid growing internal criticism about the party’s performance in the election.

The BNP failed to win any parliamentary seats, notably the key target seat of Barking, East London, where Mr Griffin was relegated to third place and trailed Margaret Hodge, the Labour MP, by 18,000 votes. The party also lost all but two of its council seats across the country.

Mr Butler said: “We do not have the luxury of waiting for several years before the current chairman feels it is time to leave. In bringing the party forward Nick has become more of a public liability than an asset.”

Mr Butler, prominent in nationalist politics since the 1980s, was the BNP’s campaign co-ordinator until March, when he was dismissed by Mr Griffin. For a leadership election to take place he must be nominated by 20 per cent of those who have been members of the party for two years. If he succeeds, the campaign will take place over the summer and a postal ballot held in October.

Mr Griffin will try to persuade members that he is the best person for the leadership because of his national recognition. This week The Times reported that he had been invited to a garden party at Buckingham Palace, owing to his position as an MEP.

A contest would be a bitter one. A website purporting to “expose” Mr Butler has already been formed by Mr Griffin’s supporters. Mr Griffin saw off a challenge in 2007 and also faced a plot by dissidents to overthrow him during the recent election campaign.

The BNP has been plagued by internal turmoil. Members have questioned why Mr Griffin performed so badly given the party’s increased media exposure after the European Parliament breakthrough last year and an appearance on the BBC’s Question Time.

The party did not respond to inquiries from The Times.

The Times

Spot the arse, the Jefferson/Aitken touch and the missing courtroom

Spot the arse - yes, Dicky's in there somewhere

Dear old Dicky. How many times since he was ignominously thrown out of office on May 6th have we realised how much we missed the hilarious antics of former Barking and Dagenham councillor, Dicky Barnbrook, the bumbling, piss-headed clown of the far-right?

Well, none actually, because while he may give us the odd laugh by acting the fool, he's still an incoherent, racist, right-wing loon who shouldn't be allowed to infect our democracy with his lies and venom.

Not satisfied with having been thrashed once, he's decided to come back for another hammering, standing in his old seat of Goresbrook, following the resignation of lollipop lady Louise Couling, who was actually ineligible to stand because she worked for the local authority while a candidate. Quite why pornmeister Dicky thinks the electorate will change their minds a mere four weeks after booting him out, God alone knows, particularly after he ended up in fourth place, but Dicky always was delusional, especially after an extended liquid lunch.

Perhaps Dicky might like to stop gloating over Ms Couling's resignation long enough to give a thought to the current investigation that is taking place over the illegal use of addresses within the local authority area for candidates who in fact lived outside and were therefore ineligible to stand - including Jeffrey Marshall, the BNP’s central London organiser, Eddy Butler, a key organiser of the party’s local campaign, and Chris Roberts, a paid aide to the BNP’s London Assembly member Dicky Barnbrook. Yes, that one.

Meanwhile, the havoc in the BNP continues, with escalating calls for the dismissal of Jim Dowson, the man who seems to own both Nick Griffin and the party, and rather louder calls for Griffin to go or at least allow a proper leadership challenge, and incidentally the opportunity for members to have a quick peek at the accounts whenever they choose.

Griffin's response has been entirely as expected - instant claims of Searchlight spies in the ranks, the setting-up of attack sites to slag off those who threaten his position and suspension letters winging their way all over the country like the fallout from a sudden explosion in a confetti factory.

He is also ably served by his new hit-man, the muscle-brained Clive Jefferson/Aitken (there's some doubt about his real name), the newish national organiser who, even though he was standing for Parliament, didn't have the balls to take part in a live chat interview for fear that news of his highly unsavoury past would leak out.

The suspension letters that have been sent out are as stupid as the writer and have about as much sense of legality about them, too.

'Membership Suspended With Immediate Effect

Your membership of the British National Party had been suspended, pending an investigation into an alleged serious breach of the BNP Code of Conduct.

While suspended you may not take part in any Party event, attend meetings or send circulars that give the impression that you hold any position in the Party.

You will be informed of the outcome of the investigation in due course.'

No reason for the suspension? And don't you love that last line? Good ol' British justice, eh? Absolute bloody rubbish and any court would treat any termination as a result of such an investigation as illegal without any qualms at all. You'd think even the puny legal brains of Porky Griffin (third-rate degree in jurisprudence) and Lunatic Lee Barnes (no real legal qualification at all) could do better than that. But I may be being unfair. Perhaps the letters were actually written by Jefferson/Aitken, in which case, well done, Clive - you can almost write coherent English!

While on the subject of National Organisers, Eddy Butler (the one before Jefferson/Aitken), has decided to spill the beans on a lot of background activity in the BNP. He's busily positioning himself as a challenger to Griffin (though surely he doesn't seriously believe Griffin will allow it) and has been quietly stirring things over on his blog.

I don't believe half the things even ex-BNP people come out with but in this case I'll make an exception because it seems so, well, so Griffin-like. Here, according to Butler, is what happened on a recent trip to court.

'I decided that I would also go to court to observe the [EHRC] proceedings. I was told it was to start at 10.30 am at the High Court in the Strand. I made my own way there and found Nick and various people from his security team waiting in the main entrance hall of this impressive building. It was 10.10 am so I asked what court number we would be in. Nick replied that he was not sure as the case wasn’t listed. I asked whether he was certain we were in the right court as all cases are listed. He said yes, of course we were. I checked the listings and we weren’t there. I asked if he had checked with the information desk, he said that wasn’t necessary as our barrister would be there at any minute as he was just parking up. Soon after the barrister rang to ask where we were. We were in the wrong court. The court we should have attended was the Central London County Court, about four miles away across the busiest streets in the country and we were already five minutes late. We piled into various vehicles and eventually got to the right court over 45 minutes late. Our embarrassment was compounded by the fact that Croydon activist Bob Gertner had privately made his own way to the correct building on his own initiative.'

And these idiots want to run the country...

Christmas chaos hits BNP (again) as Chris Jackson and Mike Easter resign

As one of our readers commented the other day, Christmas seems to be a difficult time for the BNP. It was pointed out that 2007 saw the end of the then high-flying career of Sadie Graham and many others, while 2008 saw the chaos that followed the release of the full BNP membership list.

This year seemed to be following the same pattern, though in a less focused way, with the sudden resignation of Alby Walker as leader of the BNP group at Stoke Council, Dicky Barnbrook's embarrassingly poor apology for being a liar, the laughably appalling accounts (which earned the party a £1100 slap on the wrist for tardiness) and a threat of future legal action from the Electoral Commission, plus a swathe of dreadful by-election results.

Now however, things seem to be coming to a head with the resignations of former contender for the BNP leadership (in a rigged election that he couldn't possibly win) Chris Jackson (pictured), his former campaign manager Mike Easter and someone named Kev Bryan, who was apparently the Rossendale Branch Organiser. The resignations are announced in an open letter posted on the mostly defunct jackson4leader site:

'Disbandment of reform Group

What is the point of the BNP if you admit foreigners?

Sadly we have come to the conclusion that the BNP is breaking up and there is no practicable likelihood of it recovering.

In our opinion the root cause of the failure is the Constitution of the Party. The Constitution, that is the Party Rules, makes the Party Leader a dictator. The current leader rather than reforming the Constitution toward that of a normal English association has (probably illegally) made alterations to the Constitution making his removal virtually impossible.

The Party is now a nationalist party in name only and has abandoned many of the fundamental principles on which it was founded.

A further major problem is that of money. Under the Constitution, all money is controlled by the Party Leader. The Party Leader appoints the Party Treasurer and Party Auditor. The Leader has carte blanche to dispose of the funds as he pleases.

This has never been a satisfactory situation, and now that the Party is alleged to be turning over a million pounds a year, is nothing short of a scandal. There have been four different Treasurers this year and the 2008 accounts are way overdue. The Party has been fined by the Electoral Commission for late publication of accounts. This is a re-run of last year when the accounts were also late and when published were endorsed by the Auditor as unsatisfactory.

A separate, but related, issue is the Trafalgar Club. This Club raises money directly to support the Party Leader. No accounts for this club have ever been published and they have not been appended to the Party accounts, as clearly they should be.

We recommend that no further money be sent to ‘Head Office’.

Whilst the BNP has been going downhill, the National Front has reformed itself and now is led by a group of reliable people and has the Constitution of a normal democratic association. Consequently, we believe that BNP members should transfer to the National Front.

Mike Easter
Chris Jackson
Kevin Bryan'

Regular readers will no doubt remember Jackson's failed leadership challenge back in the summer of 2007. Although resoundingly beaten, the results were not quite what Nick Griffin apparently expected, with Griffin himself receiving a mandate from only 39% of the party membership. Were I Jackson, I would regard that outcome as something of a success in itself - it showing the lack of confidence in Griffin that truly exists even in the BNP. However, rather than follow-up the one successful aspect of his challenge, Jackson chose to keep his head down and say nothing very much for the next two years.

So why resign now? The main reasons are made pretty clear in the letter above - the action by the Equality and Human Rights Commission to force the BNP to open its membership to non-whites and the financial shenanigans of the party leadership, though we suspect the former is the real reason and the latter is just a handy and always-relevant sideswipe at the morally-impaired Griffin.

It was pretty clear from the moment the EHRC began its action, that there would be repercussions from the hardcore racists in the BNP - one of whom is obviously Chris Jackson. There is though a lot of support for Jackson's views within the party and as Searchlight pointed out during his leadership bid, his campaign was backed by some heavy-hitters: five founder-members, two advisory council members, three councillors, eight branch organisers and 20 election candidates came out openly in his support.

There are mixed immediate reactions to the resignations, though I don't doubt we can expect a LOT more. Griffin-loyalists are, naturally, critical of this trio's announcement and stated intention to join the National Front. One surprisingly witty nazi on Stormfront said;

'The NF may have a name, although like a cheap can of Polish beans, they have a fancy label but the product inside is cheap and of little nutritional value.'

The response was less witty, though rather more cogent;

'Ever since June, which was supposed to have been the BNP's moment of greatest triumph, its members and supporters have been simply walking away. Last month, Andrew Brons spoke at a long-planned meeting in Bridlington which attracted fewer than thirty people, even though BNP members had travelled from as far away as Scarborough, Hull and Leeds to attend. If even a MEP and nationalist of AB's calibre can't draw the crowds anymore something is seriously wrong.'

Over at the North West Nationalist blog, the statements were a little more terse;

'The root cause is traitor Griffin !'
'Fingers in the till anyone?'
'Only surprised it took CJ as long as it did to pack it in.'

The NWN forum was a little more informative;

'I rather think that there will be a bit of a deluge over to the National Front here in the North West.'
'Croydon BNP branch has crossed to the NF, and a large group in Southampton joining next week Strong rumours of Stoke BNP and councillors from other branches crossing over to the NF.'
'I do know that both Burnley BNP & Halifax BNP are quite close to Chris Jackson'
'We must leave crook Griffin with the rubbish personnel.'

Like everyone else, I do enjoy a good disaster movie over Christmas - and the BNP generally provides the best. It's a bit late this year but what the hell - I suspect this one will be a biggie and just as much fun to watch as all the others.

Compliments of the season to all our readers and happy viewing. :-)

Nick Griffin fends off challengers and gains severance package in stage-managed EGM

 

Welcome to the BNP's family fun weekend

• Challengers must get 5% of long-term membership to endorse them
• Severance package of approx £30,000 could bankrupt BNP instantly

Amid cries that the Extraordinary General Meeting at the BNP's Red, White and Blue was 'a sham and stage-managed' there is jubilation in the Griffin camp following the startling acceptance of, in particular, two proposals.

The first was the ludicrous attempt to stop leadership challenges being made annually by changing the rules so that they could only be made every four years. Clearly this was never a serious proposal and was never expected to get through but an even more outrageous proposal did win and that was to limit challengers to those who could gain endorsement from 5% of the membership.

Whether this means members who have had unbroken membership of the party for two years or five years has not yet been made clear (though two year membership sounds most likely - there's not that many who have been in the party for five years apart from Griffin himself). Colin Auty's recent leadership challenge failed because he was unable to find one hundred two-year members to support him. If this two-year membership rule is still the case, the numbers are difficult though manageable. The BNP has a notoriously high turnover of members, only retaining an estimated 10% of the membership permanently (or until they're thrown out on some pretext or other) which, taking the BNP's claimed 10,000 members at face-value (though the true figure is unlikely to be anywhere near that), leaves a pool of 1,000 from which the challenger would have to find 50 signatories. If you don't think this is bizarre, consider this: just a dozen nomination signatures could get you elected on to a local authority.

Fifty signatures would be difficult enough but if the pool turns out to be the entire membership, any challenger would be expected to obtain 500 signatures, a next to impossible objective especially when one considers that the party refuses to release the membership list to any challenger (using a dodgy and possibly illegal interpretation of the Data Protection Act for its purpose) and that the challenger gets no opportunity to present his/her case to the membership as a whole as part of the challenge campaign.

Assuming the two-year rule is to be the one used, it's apparent that the membership doesn't trust Griffin in the least. A poster from a member of the BNP via the NWN blog says;

'If anyone thinks that the HQ will release confidential membership details which are both accurate and up to date to a would be challenger think again. They will supply a dummy set of records and then protest when the 200 or so names are submitted because a handful are (deliberatley) false.'

This appalling and anti-democratic change to the BNP has its internal opponents seething. As one of the dissidents said in another comment on the North West Nationalist blog;

'...let's just suppose for the minute that any potential challenger knows 500 people without having access to the lists. Can he/she be sure of their membership status? Or that, having achieved the impossible and collected 500 signatures, the membership will not suddenly have leapt to 15,000 in the meantime? Failing a successful legal challenge, there is now no way that Griffin can be removed from the leadership of the BNP - fact!'

That this farce was completely stage-managed is obvious. Just a few days ago, the party happened to mention that it intended to publish membership figures every July (which will be interesting to compare with the official numbers reported to the Electoral Commission each year). Then there is the fact that Griffin's four-year proposal was spoken against by his long-acknowledged supporters - Richard Barnbrook, Arthur Kemp, the vile Mark Collett, Eddie Butler and co, none of whom would say anything against Griffin or his machinations even if you held a knife to their throats because they all rely on his continuing patronage for their survival and their wage packets - some of the latter very considerable.

The second proposal that those inside the party don't really seem to have realised the potential impact of yet, is the agreement to give Nick Griffin and subsequent party leaders a severance package. I'm sure we can all name the severance package we'd like to give Griffin but in this case, as usual with King Nick, this one is all about money. It's worth remembering though before we get into this, that the BNP states in its accounts that none of its employees has a pension. Part of Dave Hannam's statement in the accounts says;

'Because of the size of the party and the number of staff the party does not have a pension scheme, but this position is under continual review.'

It would be untenable for the party to give Nick Griffin a pension but not to give one to the rest of its employees, so instead of a pension, Griffin has wangled himself a 'severance package', meaning a payout rumoured to be as much as £30,000 if and when the membership of the party comes to its senses and boots the pig farmer out on his ear.

A payment of this magnitude will - and Griffin will certainly know this - bankrupt the party instantly. At any given moment, the BNP is operating on a financial knife-edge and a slip of any kind will damage it irreversibly. As a for instance, we reported here just a few days ago that the party had to accept a CASH donation of £5000 to subsidise the Red, White and Blue. Without that, there was less than £5000 in the bank and the party would have had to go into the red or borrow money, assuming that the latter is possible.

Despite the propaganda that's being thrown around to the contrary, numbers were well down this year - 2600 over the weekend, compared to last year's claimed 4000. Seats, marquees, generators, toilets and the rides were all cash on delivery, which would mean a lot of the £5000 will be gone already, and the temporary bouncers that were taken on for the weekend for £50 cash in hand a day each plus food and petrol would have knocked a sizeable dent in any money that was left. Even the children's rides weren't as popular this year - which is a laugh for us because they also made a large loss last year - meaning another few hundred pounds was poured away so the BNP could have its annual ego-massage and Griffin could make sure he got what he wanted to secure his future. Naturally, the party will have made a bomb out of letting tent space to the members and selling them ASDA-burgers for £2 a go - only to see that money disappear into the usual black hole.

For a party so financially rocky, the idea that it has been committed to a sudden payout of £30,000 at the whim of its mercurial leader, is startling and, even more worrying for the membership, this decision comes just a short while after the party has suffered numerous exposes about the treasury and what it gets up to and in particular, what Griffin is getting up to on the quiet. While he and the loathsome Mark Collett both seem to be making a fortune, the party's finances seem to be chugging inexorably downhill.

If Griffin suddenly decides he's had enough, the BNP is dead.

We'll leave this (for the moment) with a quote from a current member of the BNP (though not for long by the sound of it):

'I'm cutting up my membership card and sending the pieces to Griffin telling him he can stick his dictatorial regime up his vast backside.'

So there.

Dismal results for BNP

A British National Party candidate won just 37 votes in a by-election in Redbridge, east London. Anthony Young, a retired solicitor, came last out of four candidates, with 1.4%, in Cranbrook ward in the south of the borough, which borders onto Barking and Dagenham, where the BNP has 12 councillors.

In the days before the election on 10 July, Redbridge and Epping Forest Together distributed a leaflet to most of the ward telling voters the truth about the BNP and urging them to use their vote to “keep extremists out of Redbridge”. The leaflet received praise from the three main parties, who all mounted active campaigns.

BNP support in Cranbrook was so low that the party had great difficulty finding ten people to sign the nomination form. From the addresses it was clear the BNP had gone down three neighbouring streets knocking on doors of registered electors with English-sounding names. We have so far not been able to investigate an allegation that three of them thought they were signing a petition rather than a nomination form.

The BNP did little better in two other by-elections on 10 July. In Wigan West, where the BNP was hoping to increase its share of the vote from the 14.5% polled in May, Christopher Hilton’s 200 votes gave him only 9.4% and fourth place. In Dalton ward, Kirklees, a borough where in May 2007 the BNP had three councillors, Jonathan Wright managed only 4.5% with 157 votes, coming fourth out of six candidates. Again the BNP had hoped to improve on Wright’s 460 votes in May, which gave him 10.7%.

The BNP now has only one councillor in Kirklees after David Exley lost his seat in May and Colin Auty announced this week that he was leaving the BNP and will sit as an independent. Auty, who failed to collect enough signatures last month to challenge Nick Griffin for the BNP leadership, says he will resign his council seat next month, causing a by-election.

Auty's resignation from the BNP leaves the party with only 54 councillors nationally.

Stop the BNP

Cllr stands down from 'undemocratic' BNP

A British National Party councillor in West Yorkshire has quit the party after failing to oust party leader Nick Griffin.

Councillor Colin Auty, who has represented Dewsbury East on Kirklees Council since 2006, says he will continue as an independent councillor for another month and then give up the seat. Coun Auty, who quit the far-right party yesterday, said he had become disillusioned with the BNP during his failed leadership bid. He describes himself as a "moderate" and said the party machine had rallied against him.

"One official described me as a joke candidate. It might sound funny coming from a BNP, but I believe in democracy. The process was certainly not democratic."

In the past he has criticised the party's image, saying voters were turned off when they saw Griffin's bodyguards wearing "shades and leather gloves".

Coun Auty failed to get the 100 signatures he needed to mount a challenge to Griffin. His decision to resign his seat, which will prompt a by-election, also stemmed from the way people in Kirklees have treated him.

"I can't get involved in projects because of my BNP badge. I get shot down by the establishment. I have met some nice people but they can't afford to be seen standing by my side."

He added that his wife had had a "rough time" for being married to a BNP councillor.

"It's not nice to live in fear. My wife is fed up with it."

He said he may consider standing as an independent candidate in the near future.

Yorkshire Post

Colin Auty's BNP leadership challenge collapses after two months of inertia

Nick Griffin (left) and Colin Auty

Almost two months to the day after announcing that he was to challenge Nick Griffin for the leadership of the British National Party, Colin Auty, councillor for Dewsbury East on Kirklees Council, has finally had to admit defeat after he failed to obtain the required amount of signatures that would enable him to go ahead while conforming with the bizarre rules of the BNP.

Auty, a councillor since 2006, was formerly one of Nick Griffin's blue-eyed boys, particularly after he irritated the Muslim MP for Dewsbury Shahid Malik by singing a song outside his contituency office claiming that the Dewsbury district, mainly populated by the Asian community, was rife with drug dealers and paedophiles. Though he was reported to the Standards Board for England, the Board eventually cleared him, leaving him free to continue singing his rubbish and playing with the ghastly Red Claire, a band that includes the repulsive Bradford BNP councillor Paul Cromie.

Up to this time, Auty had provided much of the 'music' that was sold by the dire Great White Records (GWR), though his popularity with the Griffinites in the BNP was about to be tested when he gave his clear backing to the dissident side in the December 2007 rebellion. Indeed, he was one of more than sixty party members to add his name to a blog set up by a group using the name The Real BNP, which was simply a front for Sadie Graham, Steve Blake, Kenny Smith et al.

Auty announced that he would be challenging Griffin for the leadership of the party on May 2nd and was almost instantly attacked by the lunatic excuse for a legal advisor to the BNP, Lee Barnes. Describing Auty as, among other things, a 'puupet' (a word that has no meaning in any language and apparently only exists inside Barnes' very odd head), Barnes stated in a letter to the membership that the Auty challenge was 'illegal' under party rules and that anyone who supported it would be 'tried for conspiracy and treason'.

That the BNP was desperate to fend off this challenge using any means possible was made clear by this threatening statement in Barnes' letter:

'Anyone who has already signed or is thinking of signing or intending to sign the nomination forms for Colin Autty will be suspended from Party membership pending an internal dispclinary tribunal where members will be tried for conspiracy and treason as per the Constitutition Section 6. (3) Section 7 – failure to use the correct channels to express concerns, 8 - spreading false and malicious rumours about Party officials and members, and behaviour likely to bring the Party into disrepute. Those found guilty of conspiracy and treason will be expelled from the Party and proscibred for life.'

Proscibred?

This appalling missive was followed a week later by another, this time sent out to those the party considered to be activists (branch fundholders, chairs, organisers and so on) from Eddy Butler, the party's National Elections Officer, who described Auty in no uncertain terms as a 'joke candidate' and a 'no-hoper', warning that if the challenge went ahead;

'There will be pressure, perhaps unstoppable pressure, to change the rules so that leadership challenges can only take place every four years.'

By the end of May, it was clear that the Auty campaign was in trouble. Some of the rebels had been expelled while others were backing down under pressure and returning to the fold. Discussion of the challenge was banned on the BNP's own forum and Stormfront, the forum for the many nazis in the BNP's ranks, was awash with anti-Auty propaganda - much of it instigated by a character calling himself 'Walk towards the light' (Lee Barnes).

Auty was denied a platform of any kind at any branch. Even his singing engagements were cancelled (though that might just have been because his songs are crap and he sounds like a cross between Tiny Tim and George Formby). He was even denied access to the membership to campaign for his signatures on the dubious grounds that to allow him access to the list would be a breach of the Data Protection Act, which didn't seem to stop the anti-Auty letters from Barnes and Butler going out.

Since the end of May, virtually nothing much has happened on the three pro-Auty sites except for the odd post that served no purpose - until a week and a half ago, that is, when Auty obviously realised that his campaign was doomed unless he spoke out. This he did, with a vengeance, branding Nick Griffin as ruthless and desperate, and as a crook and a liar. We wouldn't disagree with any of those epithets.

In a spectacular post, which should really have kicked off his campaign for it to have succeeded, Auty ripped into Griffin, referring to his 'shady and downright deceitful dealings', his habit of 'concocting lies about [his enemies] concerning financial irregularities' and how the rest of the Advisory Council (the BNP's toothless ruling body) would 'very often sit in silence through fear of becoming the next victim'.

Auty made it clear that money is Griffin's only driving factor, that 'the books are always cooked' and ended by referring to Griffin as a 'totalitarian'.

Too little, too late.

Late last night, Roger Robertson, Auty's campaign manager, laid it on the line.

'I regret to inform those members and supporters of the BNP that, this evening, 30th June, after consultation with Colin, we have acknowledged that there will not be a challenge to Nick Griffin's leadership in 2008.

It is extremely disappointing that the challenge fell short by just a few signatures; a major factor being that many members have failed to renew their 2008 subscriptions plus the fact that the churn rate of the membership precludes many who do not have the requisite 2 years qualification to become a voting member.

Colin was the ideal candidate to lead our Party out of the wilderness after 9 years of stultifying slow growth under the present Chairman.

I will not here dilate upon the reasons for the challenge to Nick Griffin's leadership. This will come next week after my 'tribunal' on 6th July when I become an ex-member of the BNP.

Suffice it to say that both Colin and myself wish to thank most sincerely those nearly 90 people who had the courage to put their names to Colin's nomination.

We may well have lost the first skirmish but the battle for a democratic BNP is far from over.

Roger Robertson

Ed - The names of those who did sign will not be disclosed to Griffin or any of his stooges, as we do not want to see another internal bloodbath of dedicated nationalists.

Colin Auty has the nomination forms and they will be staying with Colin - he will not put them to the sword of the hierarchy. This is a sad day for internal democracy - how can we convince the public that we are committed to democratic elections when internally the current leadership seem allergic to them?'

No great surprises there but a couple of things pop up out of the letter as being of rather more than passing interest, the main one being the comment regarding the fact that 'many members have failed to renew their 2008 subscriptions'.

This fits in with what we and other anti-fascist groups are being told is the case - that the BNP is haemorrhaging members far faster than it can sign them up, something that might explain the increasing number and increasingly desperate tone of the begging letters that are constantly sent out to a weary membership. I spoke to a former member by phone last night who informed me that he and his partner had received no less than FOUR in the past few days. As he says, no joke when you're only just managing to survive yourself.

The other remarkable comment in this letter is the reason the Auty team will refuse to hand over the nomination forms. As Robertson puts it, 'we do not want to see another internal bloodbath of dedicated nationalists...[Auty] will not put them to the sword of the hierarchy'. Fear, it seems, is a major factor in the modern British National Party - a party that continually (and laughably) claims to be the most democratic party that exists.

We shall watch Colin Auty's continuing career in the BNP and as a BNP councillor with great interest, though not, we suspect, for long.

Auty leadership campaign in rapid decline

Making a bid for the leadership of the British National Party is no easy matter. An ordinary member is required to have five years uninterrupted membership, has to obtain one hundred signatures from supporters (as opposed to a present officer who only needs ten signatures), is banned (or at least discouraged) from attending meetings to proselytize for him/her self and faces a barrage of criticism, accusation and misinformation, while the current leader Nick Griffin attends all the meetings he can and lays the propaganda on with a trowel himself and via his minions.

Not altogether surprising then, that the Colin Auty leadership challenge is in trouble. The major purge of members that took place after last year's leadership challenge is clearly making the membership wary of signing for Auty - a tacit admission that they are unhappy with the current leader. There have also been strong hints that if this challenge goes ahead, Nick Griffin will make it his business (with the help of an impotent and pointless Advisory Council) to change the system so that a challenge can only be made once every four or five years - a rumour that horrifies the dissidents within the party who have managed to persuade Auty to make the challenge in a doubtless vain attempt to see the former rebels reinstated and a few of the older members returning to the fold.

Although the result of the challenge last year was lauded as a mandate for Nick Griffin to continue his role as party dictator, it was clear that only 39% of the party membership had voted for him. Spin that as you will, 39% does not make a mandate. Nevertheless, Griffin's leadership was made more secure, and despite continually mediocre election results (just ten new councillors at the recent elections as opposed to the BNP predictions of forty) and with conditions as near-perfect as the BNP could hope, his position remains internally unassailable.

And unassailable it will remain, if Griffin and his acolytes have anything to do with it. Since rumours of Auty's challenge have emerged, the dirty tricks department of the BNP has been on overtime. Lee Barnes, the party's insane legal beagle, dashed out a letter to the membership as soon as the news became public, attacking Auty as being a 'puupet' for the machinations of the December rebel's group (or Voice of Change, as they call themselves). Certainly, they have openly given their backing to Auty though, as time passes, rumours of fragmentation reach us. Indeed, it was announced only yesterday that Steve Blake, one of the key rebels, has decided not to support Auty's challenge after all. Others, it seems, are following his example. Chris Beverly, former Griffin blue-eyed boy, has also backed off following pressure from above.

Barnes' letter was swiftly followed by another, this time from the party's National Elections Officer, Eddy Butler. Butler, like Barnes, made no bones about his contempt for the challenger:

'But the backers of this ridiculous bid should reconsider their aimless tactic. People should refuse to sign the nomination papers. It is a distraction and a waste of time and effort and it will end up almost certainly with the constitution changed in a way that destroys the important Right of the possibility of a yearly election. Standing a no-hoper is stupid, mindless and fatally undermines our Constitution. It is a pitiful and moronic – a bankrupt tactic by people who can only be described as having gone giddy to the extent that they are now without the imagination to think how they can raise issues in a legitimate way.

This election, if it goes ahead, should be carried out in the most rapid manner possible with zero publicity allowed for the joke candidate...'

We're told that the party has banned ALL discussion on the Auty challenge on its own forum, thus stifling the possibility of dissent and avoiding giving Auty the opportunity of presenting the reasons for his opposition to Griffin. Stormfront, the playground of the many nazis within the BNP, has been awash with anti-Auty propaganda - much of it instigated by a character calling himself 'Walk towards the light' (Lee Barnes), and other far-right forums are being flooded with anti-Auty propaganda.

Rumour also reaches us that branches have been warned via regional organisers that Auty is not to be allowed a platform under any circumstances. Apart from stopping him speaking on his own behalf (while Nick Griffin zooms up and down the country attending meetings with his entourage at the expense of the membership) this is putting a severe dent in Auty's musical career, such as it is. Auty, the BNP's answer to Keith Richards, was apparently booked to play his rubbishy songs at several branches over the coming few weeks. These have now, we're told, put him on hold. Whether this is because he is challenging Griffin or simply because he's crap, we don't know.

Insults aside, it has been reported that when Auty loses (as he certainly will if the challenge goes ahead) he will be kicked out of the party, as will his supporters. His campaign manager, Roger Robertson, the BNP's former South-East Regional Organiser, has already been told that he faces a disciplinary tribunal on July 6th.

Furthermore, there is another aspect of this leadership challenge that needs to be watched. Griffin has let slip that he is sick of being challenged - using the pretext that it interferes with election planning and electioneering - and that he intends to begin the process to have challenges limited to four or five-yearly as soon as humanly possible. Even less democracy in the BNP - that least democratic of political parties.

Auty's career is in decline and will end with his failure to become party leader. Like Chris Jackson last year, Auty will, if the challenge is allowed to go ahead and he manages to get enough signatures, only have three weeks to campaign. But to whom will he campaign? Griffin, we are told, is refusing to allow Auty access to the membership list on the dubious grounds that such access would breach the Data Protection Act. This effectively kills Auty's ability to reach out to the members who might possibly give him their vote if they know of his existence. A devious and surprisingly clever move by Griffin though the Data Protection Act doesn't seem to have stopped the Barnes and Butler letters being sent out to the entire membership. Interesting how rules can be bent, isn't it.

There is one further complication for Auty that will do him no good at all; the rumour that Chris Jackson intends to stand again. If this is true, the opposition to Griffin will have two people on which to pin their single vote, thus ensuring that neither of them get any respectable numbers in the ballot. This second attempt by Jackson will do nothing for anyone except Nick Griffin, and it has become clear that Jackson is generally regarded as a stalking horse, used last year to flush out the malcontents within the party so that they could be entertainingly purged and used this year to split the vote, thus ensuring Auty's failure, and to prop up Griffin's position in the party.

Open support for Auty is, to say the least, sparse. Just twenty-three members appear on his site under the banner 'We're proudly (and openly) backing the challenge!'. Of these, seven are suspended members, one has had his membership renewal rejected, two are about to be kicked out and Auty's position is itself looking increasingly precarious. If Griffin has his way, this leadership challenge will collapse before it properly gets started. Even if he doesn't, Auty will lose and Griffin will get the security of four or five-yearly terms in office. Either way, Auty's career with the British National Party is over because he had, in Eddy Butler's curious phrase, the 'temerity' to wish to stand for the leadership of the BNP.

Butler attacks 'joke' leadership challenger

A copy of an email from Eddy Butler, the BNP's National Elections Officer, has been forwarded to us as an example of all that is undemocratic within the British National Party

It refers to the coming leadership challenge from Colin Auty, BNP councillor for Dewsbury East since 2006. Auty announced his challenge immediately after the recent elections, and is receiving growing support in the party for his call for openness, accountability and a more democratic internal structure to the party, despite a barrage of verbal attacks on him from the existing hierarchy on both the BNP's own forum and the Stormfront nazi forum, where many of the BNP's officers hang out.

Despite what is said in public, the news we get from inside the party indicates that the officers (and Nick Griffin himself) are none too pleased with the election results of a fortnight ago. They expected to get a lot more than an additional ten councillors (pushing the current total up to fifty-three) and had also hoped for three Assembly seats, ending up with just the one presently occupied by the embarrassing and frequently incoherent Richard Barnbrook. Given that this poor result reflects badly on the leadership of the party, such as it is, the last thing Griffin needs at the moment is a leadership challenge. He is, we are told, already putting himself about in London, to ensure that BNP activists are aware that HE is the chairman of the party, and not Barnbrook. Bless him, he must be feeling vulnerable.

Butler appears to be writing to the BNP's election team - the people at Head Office and the various organisers dotted around the country (though as the party refuses to make its internal structure clear, it's impossible to know if the team also includes local chairpersons, fundholders, et al). Nevertheless, whatever Butler sends to organisers will eventually filter its way down the BNP food chain to the more active membership - though unofficially, thus ensuring that he is not tainted by the criticism that was aimed at Lee Barnes, the 'Director' of the BNP's Legal Department and all-round freak, who was seen to be sharing his opinions rather too freely for a supposedly unbiased officer of the party.

Even so, Butler's email is uncompromising in his contempt for a) the challenger Colin Auty, and b) democracy. Curious really, as Butler makes the point in his email that the right of members to challenge the leadership is 'a declaration of our Parties openness and commitment to democracy' then goes on to spoil it by stating that the party expects anyone who has the 'temerity' to challenge the leadership only if they seriously consider they have the possibility of winning and they are able to perform the duties expected of them as leader should they do so.

Very interesting use of the word 'temerity' there. For those who don't know, 'temerity' means audacity, nerve, cheek, effrontery (or, as we Jews sometimes say, chutzpah). Quite why a challenger should be accused of audacity for challenging is beyond me, though as Nick Griffin's leadership is generally treated as some kind of divine right held by the pig farmer from Welshpool, that might explain it.

The point of Butler's email seems to be to attempt to persuade the more influential members not to sign Auty's nomination papers because he is a 'joke candidate' and a 'no-hoper' and that his frivolous challenge may give the Griffinites within the party enough ammunition to limit possible challenges in future. Thus he says;

'There will be pressure, perhaps unstoppable pressure, to change the rules so that leadership challenges can only take place every four years.'

Whether we take this to mean that he is trying to put off potentially hopeless challengers to avoid Griffin becoming even more entrenched than he already is or is just attempting to divert support from Auty is debatable, though we generally lean to the former. It's pretty well known that Butler doesn't want Griffin around forever and perhaps this really is an attempt, by subverting the BNP's peculiar internal version of democracy, to bring a more substantial and overt democracy to the party in future. However, we would welcome your views. Here is the emai from Butler - let us know what you think of it.

From: Edward. Butler.
To: ###
Sent: ###
Subject: Statement on the so-called Leadership challenge

Anyone in the Party who has more than five years continuous membership has the Right to stand for the leadership of the Party. The only limit to the exercising of this Right is that in the case of officers ten nomination signatures of members of two years standing must be obtained and for non officers a hundred signatures are required. This is to ensure that frivolous candidates do not stand.

As I said this is a Right that members have. And it is an important Right – it is a declaration of our Parties openness and commitment to democracy. However with Rights come responsibilities and duties. A Right without a duty is an abomination in any society. It is a recipe for chaos. Indeed in our modern society it is the incessant claiming of Rights by groups that shown no sense of duty or responsibility that is one of the key components of the undermining of the civic order of our country.

So in the instance of standing for leadership of the Party, the Party as a whole should expect anyone who has the temerity to wish to stand for leadership only to uphold their Right to do so after that person had carefully weighed their duty to the cause and the Party and their fellow members. We as members should expect that a candidate would only put themselves forward if they were of sufficient stature and ability to potentially be able to lead the Party if they were to win. Otherwise why would someone wish to challenge for the leadership? It is a duty of other members not to sign the nomination papers of any potential candidate unless they seriously think that that person is a viable and serious leadership contender. That is the whole point of the requirement for signatories.

A leadership challenge is not an excuse to air grievances. It is not there for disgruntled people to act out their personal bitterness about things – no matter how ‘justified’ they may think their grievances are. It is an abuse of the process to misuse it in that way. It is an abuse of their Constitutional Right.

And that is precisely what we are seeing this year. We are seeing a candidate pushed forward by people who themselves admit, has absolutely no chance of winning, and admit would never be up to the job of chairman anyway and they admit that the sole reason they are doing it is to air their own personal grievances. In other words their sole aim is to raise issues which have already been fully aired and which could be raised at a variety of different forums such as the Summer School (where there is always a session for all participants where they can bring up matters they are unhappy about) or the Annual Conference.

What is the likely outcome of this leadership challenge? The challengers (there may in fact be two!) will be comprehensively defeated. The leadership challenge process as it currently stands in the Constitution will be brought into disrepute. There will be pressure, perhaps unstoppable pressure, to change the rules so that leadership challenges can only take place every four years.

I would not normally comment on a leadership election. It should normally be up to the membership to make their own minds up without non-participants trying to influence the process.

But the backers of this ridiculous bid should reconsider their aimless tactic. People should refuse to sign the nomination papers. It is a distraction and a waste of time and effort and it will end up almost certainly with the constitution changed in a way that destroys the important Right of the possibility of a yearly election. Standing a no-hoper is stupid, mindless and fatally undermines our Constitution. It is a pitiful and moronic – a bankrupt tactic by people who can only be described as having gone giddy to the extent that they are now without the imagination to think how they can raise issues in a legitimate way.

This election, if it goes ahead, should be carried out in the most rapid manner possible with zero publicity allowed for the joke candidate (who may in lother circumstances be described as a decent and 'nice' bloke etc) and the least disruption to our continued efforts. That is the best way to minimise the harmful effects.

Eddy Butler
National Elections Officer

The BNP dissidents grind into action...

The dissidents who have resigned or been sacked from their positions within the BNP have finally started to discuss where they go from here. None too soon really because, as several people have commented on the dissident blog Enough is Enough, the momentum was clearly slowing despite Nick Griffin himself giving the rebels all the help he could by posting his increasingly-lunatic ramblings on the BNP's website and throwing unfounded and unlikely accusations at all and sundry.

One surprise immediately shows itself on reading the report of the planning meeting the group had last weekend, and that is that they do not appear to be responsible for the new Alas Smith and Graham blog - a much more aggressive anti-Griffin site than Enough is Enough - or at least the EiE mob aren't owning up to Alas at the moment.

Griffin ought to be worried about a couple of the planned actions the group are planning to undertake, particularly this one;

'Every single individual expelled in recent weeks is determined to have their own membership reinstated through formal grievance procedures, acknowledging that this may involve costly legal action.'

Readers may recall that the founder of the BNP John Tyndall ended up taking the court route to gain his reinstatement to the membership following his expulsion by Nick Griffin. The resulting case and win cost the party thousands.

If the rebel's plans are enacted quickly enough, they could spell disaster for the BNP - in fact, they could lead to bankruptcy for the party, which has been on the edge of the financial precipice for a number of years, thanks largely to the enormous wage bill (which far exceeds the campaigning budget) and the party's habit of subsidising the business interests of the two jesters in King Nick's court, Mark Collett (£70,000 for invisible printing equipment a few years back) and Dave Hannam (£50,000 for setting up the disastrous Great White Records just a couple of years ago).

The new name for the group - intended to be an internal organisation acting within the BNP - is to be Voice of Change, though whether any positive change will come of its inception is debatable when we take a look at the most fundamental changes it hopes to make.

The first action is to get all the eight expelled members back in place as, at the very least, ordinary party members. Frankly we don't see this ever happening. Manufactured or not, the party will state that Graham, Smith, Blake et al brought the party into disrepute by starting up the EiE blog to attack fellow members, and that they have the evidence to 'prove' that the rebel leadership hacked into email accounts of other members for their own nefarious purposes. The veracity of the accusation is irrelevant - if this ever gets to open court, the media will have a field day and what little credibility the BNP has will collapse under the weight of the multiple accusations and counter-accusations.

'...the extraordinary sequence of events of the past few months can only lead a rational observer to conclude that Mr. Griffin is now unfit for that position. The internal management of the Party has been revealed to be fundamentally flawed and repeated calls for change have been ignored by the leader. Thus the only possible course of action to save the Party and secure a future for our people is to launch a leadership challenge.'

Nick Griffin has manipulated the challenge process so successfully that it is now virtually impossible to challenge him for the leadership of the party and, even if one was made, the conditions are set by Griffin solely to his advantage. Last year's ludicrous attempt at a challenge by the North West's Chris Jackson showed what a farce the whole process is and how, using the party's rules, deliberately and cynically doomed to failure.

Though the rebels state clearly that, in their opinion, Nick Griffin is, after 'the extraordinary sequence of events of the past few months' unfit for the position of party leader, they seem to be carefully avoiding the fact that they have been ignoring his activities since they themselves were placed in positions of trust within the party. Membership money has clearly been siphoned off for years, immorality (Martin Reynolds' threesomes, Hannam and Collett's Blackpool diversion etc) has been rife, incompetence has become something of an art within the party and mismanagement, witch hunts, unconstitutional expulsions and a leadership that has become a tyranny all appear to have only become apparent to Graham and co in the past few months. Unlikely, to say the least.

We, in common with all anti-fascists, are only too pleased to see the dissident group regaining momentum as its increasing activity is bound to stir up more trouble for Griffin and his acolytes in the party but we refuse to believe that Graham and her gang are suddenly taking the moral high ground in any way. Rather, they are exploiting a situation that they can barely control for their own ends; in effect, regaining the initiative - though whether it'll take them as far as they want is doubtful. Whether this ultimately matters as the current fractures in the party open wider is open to debate - after all, the fascist BNP is the fascist BNP whether it's run by a Graham-led cabal or Griffin and his current band of thieves, liars and perverts.

One thing is sure. Griffin will have to take decisive action very swiftly indeed. One wonders what form that action will take as his desperation to hold his personal feifdom grows. We've already seen a barrage of lies and fake evidence posted up on the BNP's website and informants leaking fake information to the police that they 'believed' there was a firearm at Graham's home, prompting a raid on the home she shares with her partner Matt Single. We can expect a good deal more of this nonsense - and perhaps a lot worse - as the battle for control of the BNP hots up.

The BNP purge continues: Griffin to discipline/expel Mike Easter?

In a move that is so full of irony that the BNP had better check it for rust, news is emerging that Mike Easter, election agent to leadership-challenger Chris Jackson, is to be disciplined for late submission of the challenger's election expenses to the party treasurer.

One would expect a party that is a couple of months late with its own accounts submission to the Electoral Commission to have had more sense that to make itself a target for ridicule in this way but Nick Griffin is presumably so anxious to punish those who assisted the challenger that he is prepared to ignore the laughs to get his revenge.

Regular readers will no doubt recall his description of Chris Jackson's supporters as cranks, Hollywood Nazis, congenital losers, thieves and vermin - and all this in a single blog post - despite the fact that they included five founder-members, two advisory council members, three councillors, eight branch organisers and 20 election candidates. Not a great deal of respect there then.

The response from other 'nationalists' is predictably angry though as usual the nazi Stormfront forum (run by Griffin's friend, ex-Klansman Don Black and ably assisted by the forum's pro-Griffin UK moderators) is keeping a lid on any discussion by disabling the accounts of anyone who shows any sign of having a go at the BNP leader under any pretext. A couple of other sites are displaying their anger though, one of them with this classic comment posted to it;

'...this comes from a party of THEIVING BASTARDS and INEBRIATE LOSERS who can't even get their accounts IN ON TIME. WHERE ARE THE BNP ACCOUNTS AND WHY ARE BNP MEMBERS SUCH A BUNCH OF BRAIN-DEAD IDIOTS? WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY SCARED OF, EH? Surely they cannot be scared of the one eyed wonder of a sheep farmer and his pervert security chief?'

along with the omnipresent Sharon Ebanks, a former supporter of Griffin, sticking it to him thus;

'Do you think it ok to allow a jumped up twat with a 3rd rate degree and an insecurity complex larger than Snowdonia national park to just go around chopping people willy nilly? When you cease kissing Griffins arse you'll be next. The very idea that such a man even dreams of running this country makes me want to take up shooting practice.'

One angry contributor asks the same two questions that many others have asked;

'What I can't get my head around is why the BNP election process (that's to say the terms imposed by Griffin, etc) weren't challenged legally. It still can be. Likewise all the trumped up expulsions.'

These are reasonable questions though the first one is really only answerable by Mike Easter himself and the challenger Chris Jackson. When Nick Griffin dictated the terms of the election, it was suggested that a legal challenge to the terms was likely. Sadly this never materialised (though it certainly should have). To have completely ignored the ludicrous restrictions placed on campaigning was tantamount to agreeing to lose, and lose Jackson subsequently did.

The second part of the question is far more dangerous to Griffin - that those expelled from the party could legally question their expulsions. This is not only true but has happened a couple of times before, following Griffin's repeated expulsions of the late founder of the British National Party John Tyndall for being a 'disruptive influence'. Tyndall was reinstated by the courts, the embarrassment caused to Griffin was profound and it cost the party a small fortune, also having the distinct advantage of showing Nick Griffin up as the pompous buffoon that he is.

Of course, disciplinary action isn't necessarily the same thing as expulsion and it may be that Easter will just take what's coming and carry on doing whatever he does but judging by Griffin's words above, he's determined to force all of his opposition out of the party by using any means that are available to him. Simon Smith and Jonathan Bowden have already been forced out, Easter's turn has come and we confidentally expect Jackson-supporter Richard Edmonds (another one to have been expelled then reinstated) to be in the firing line before long. One only wonders how long it will take for Griffin to expel all 337 party members who supported Chris Jackson.

Legal challenge to make BNP leadership election democratic?

Rumour has it that Chris Jackson, the challenger for Nick Griffin's leadership of the British National Party and the party's former North-West regional organiser, is about to make a legal challenge against the election rules as set by Griffin himself. These rules, though played down by the Griffin camp as standard, are intended to make it almost impossible for any challenger to win.

Since the modern BNP was formed back in 1982 there has been just one leadership challenge, when Nick Griffin took over from the party's founder John Tyndall after a campaign of lies and distortion in 1999. Tyndall was far from being an angel but Griffin knew how to manipulate the truth far better than he and, with the help of many of his friends who had moved with him from the old National Front, he was able to oust Tyndall and take the party off in a new direction.

Sadly, the direction Griffin chose was as far from democracy as could be imagined, with Griffin ruling the party as a dictator. This is clear from the contortions that the BNP is going through to ensure that Jackson is denied a voice during the pre-election period.

Griffin laid out the rules in a list that appeared on the main BNP website:

'Each candidate shall send via email an official statement not exceeding 200 words, together with a photograph of himself, to the editor of the British Nationalist BNP members’ bulletin, Kenny Smith (administration@bnp.org.uk), by noon on Thursday 5th July at the latest.

Additionally, each candidate shall send via email to Mr. Smith a longer and complimentary official statement not exceeding 800 words which will be published with the photographs side-by-side on a section of the main BNP website which will be open to members only with a URL which will be published in the July issue of British Nationalist [which we would appreciate taking a look at, if someone would like to let us know where it is]. The candidates’ statements and photographs will then appear in the July issue of British Nationalist, which will be sent to all members.

A single sheet ballot paper, designed to be as proof against forgery as is reasonably possible, will be mailed out together with July’s British Nationalist bulletin. The statements for the website will be published simultaneously online by our web editor Steve Blake on Wednesday 11th July.

Ballot papers must be returned by post to PO Box 87, Ossett, Wakefield, WF5 8WN to arrive by Thursday 26th July at the latest. All ballots received before that date will be safely stored unopened. The opening of the ballot papers will commence at 3pm that afternoon. You will be notified of precise directions in good time in due course. Each candidate and agent may attend and may bring an additional two telling agents with them should they so wish.

The whole proceedings will be under the control of the Returning Officer, party manager Nick Cass. The opening and counting of the papers will be carried out by four currently paid up members of the party, two nominated by each candidate. Any spoilt or unclear ballots will be adjudicated upon by the standard method used in UK elections, with the decision of the Returning Officer being final. The result will be announced immediately after the count and the winner will be the leader of the party from that moment.

From now until the close of polls, both candidates and their supporters are at liberty to appear and speak at any party meetings to which they are invited by local officials, and to organise campaign meetings of their own. In order to avoid giving an unfair advantage to the incumbent, or encouraging the illicit collection of membership data, neither candidate nor their agents or supporters shall distribute any information, in any form, by post, phone or email, except in response to a direct request from an individual member for information for him or herself.'

So Chris Jackson has around three weeks to prepare and present his manifesto, travel to speak to all of the numerous BNP branches in the country (at his own expense) to state his case, is not allowed to send a mailout to all party members or even telephone party members who may be sympathetic to his challenge but need the personal touch to clinch the deal and has no chance of checking the returned ballot papers as they come in and are 'safely stored' by Griffin's old chum Nick Cass.

One wonders how easy it would be for the Griffin team to pack a few thousand envelopes with Griffin votes and put them in the post. Not too difficult, I'd imagine. Quick, someone call the United Nations.

Apart from being the incumbent, Griffin has another few advantages. He has plenty of money and no doubt will be zooming all over the place kissing babies and shaking hands wherever he is invited to do so. Also, while denying Jackson the opportunity of getting his message out to the members, he has an excellent and continuing opportunity in the form of the nazi Stormfront forum. In spite of being proscribed to BNP members, Stormfront is packed with them and has shown a very clear bias over the last couple of months since news of the challenge became known by closing any anti-Griffin/pro-Jackson threads and, over the past couple of weeks at least, closing any thread that dared to highlight or discuss the epidemic of corruption at the top of the BNP.

Jackson frankly doesn't stand much of a chance though a legal challenge to the Griffin-dictated election rules might push a lot of votes his way. Even so, we would expect Griffin to win fairly resoundingly. The BNP membership is conservative by nature and dramatic change is not something it generally wishes to see, still less participate in. Nevertheless, we may be surpised. A membership sick to death of the numerous get rich quick schemes that inevitably go wrong, a membership that remembers that not a single seat was gained in May's council elections or a membership that has realised that the party hasn't had a single by-election win for years might actually get it together to vote for change and let's face it, if he's not kicked out, Griffin will stay leader of the BNP until he considers he has enough money to retire on or he manages to bankrupt the party.

Statement from BNP leadership challenger and supporters

Though doomed to failure due to Nick Griffin's habit of surrounding himself with yes-men and hangers-on (like the worryingly stupid Mark Collett), the much talked about leadership challenge from Chris Jackson does seem to be quietly gaining pace. Far from fading speedily into the background, which is what most commentators expected when the challenge became common knowledge, Jackson appears to have garnered the support of some big names, among them BNP founder members Richard Edmonds and Mike Easter.

Jackson's statement is unequivocal, as can be seen below:

'A proper Party structure and Constitution.'

This challenge to NG’s leadership is made as a start to the process in which the Party gets a recognisable normal Constitution for a corporate body under English law. As a talking point, the current leader has, and the founder leader had, enormous talent in some directions and, it seems, none in others. This has meant the Party has not been developed in a balanced manner.

Currently, the Party is effectively run as a dictatorship. There are no ‘checks and balances’. NG appoints all Party officials and consequently, many are ‘yes’ men. Opinions, other than those of NG, lead to dismissal from Party positions and even dismissal from the Party. Over the years NG has held widely varying political views. This means, in our opinion, that his political judgement is very poor. He has made some serious errors in his appointment of personnel, most particularly the appointment of the unstable character, Tony Lecomber, as his chief regulating officer. Further it should be noted that NG has had a poor history concerning money. No prudent organisation would allow someone with his history to be responsible for Party funds.

In our view, the Party must have a proper structure. It must have a number of the key officials directly elected by the members, in particular, the offices of Vice Chairman and Party Treasurer must be directly elected. The Party Chairman would be bound to discuss and agree with the majority of the other elected officials, matters of policy and discipline.

The Party must adopt a set of basic principles; for example, the Party is a party of the whole United Kingdom. It is not just a party of England, or any other part of the United Kingdom. Again, only the original peoples of the United Kingdom would be eligible for membership of the BNP and eventually citizenship of the UK. (An exception would be for people currently living in the UK of closely related European stock.) No Asians, Africans and so on, including half-castes could be members, or expect to live permanently in the UK. It would be understood that all foreigners would be sent back to their homelands, however gently.

The Party would make an effort to unite genuine nationalists into one party. NG is unable to do this. He is an ex-chairman of the National Front and is now persona non-grata in that direction. Similarly, he is unacceptable to the Freedom Party and the BPP. He is also the ex-leader of the International Third Position.

[snip...]

I pledge myself to see the reform of the Party on the above lines.

Chris Jackson: Challenger
Richard Edmonds: Proposer and BNP founder member
Mike Easter: Seconder and BNP founder member

Surprisingly, the statement is pretty explicit. The reference to the party being run as a dictatorship is frequently mentioned - but generally under the safety blanket of a pseudonym on the Stormfront nazi forum (one wonders why a bunch of nazis see anything wrong in a dictatorship, but there you go). What the party tends to keep to itself though, is Griffin's appalling judgement when it comes to selecting personnel (Tony Lecomber, Mark Collett, Lee Barnes, Warren Bennett, Martin Reynolds et al) and Griffin's doubtful (!) history when it comes to financial matters.

This challenge might also prove to be galvanic to the lost or bewildered hardcore of the party and/or older members, as Jackson promises to haul it back a lot closer to its more extreme roots. A very clear part of the statement reads;

'...only the original peoples of the United Kingdom would be eligible for membership of the BNP and eventually citizenship of the UK. (An exception would be for people currently living in the UK of closely related European stock.) No Asians, Africans and so on, including half-castes could be members, or expect to live permanently in the UK. It would be understood that all foreigners would be sent back to their homelands, however gently.'

So the party would see a clear end to the so-called 'modernisation', where Griffin has allowed a token Jew and a half-Turk not only to join but to become councillors, and would be barred to all but whites - which surely must be a breach of some law or other. Not that the modernisation has ever been regarded as anything except a con-trick by anyone with an ounce of sense.

That final sentence bears re-reading too; 'It would be understood that all foreigners would be sent back to their homelands, however gently.' Forced repatriation appears to be back on the agenda then.

If this is not Jackson's genuine statement, we'll assume it's Tony Lecomber up to his misinformation tricks again but if this really is Chris Jackson's statement of intent, it looks like the BNP is set for interesting times in the near future. The party has always been at internal war between the old hardcore and the new(ish)modernisers (who are much the same as the hardcore but believe the public have to be conned into seeing the BNP as more moderate than in the past), and this statement should polarise some opinions nicely.

We will watch developments with a great deal of interest...