Richard Barnbrook Sacked

We all wondered which way Little Dicky would swing in the leadership election after the rumours that he was seen in deep discussions with Eddy Butler about a leadership challenge after the BNP got wiped out in Barking and Dagenham.

This evening a statement appeared on his website announcing that he had been sacked. The statement is as long and as boring as one of his speeches but it's worth a read towards the end.

On Feb 24th 2003, Lawrence Rustem left Hackney after graduating, to move to Barking and Dagenham, at the request of the then National Organiser.

Prior to Lawrence coming into Barking and Dagenham as an activist, no direct indication was given by either electoral results or statistics that the Borough had shown any cogent evidence that the Party had succeeded, or in any way or entertained a strong leaning to the BNP. However, there had been some indication in the 90s of an inclination to nationalism in the Borough, (that relates back to the then leader of the Party standing for the Dagenham Parliamentary election in the mid 90s). So I may very well be contradicting myself here, in saying that nationalism had been evident to some extent in Barking and Dagenham, but still, there had been no direct core vote or evident demand by the electorate for the BNP to set up in Barking and Dagenham. (It may have been seen as a possible sleeping voter).

In early summer of 2004 a by-election was called in Valence ward. The then National Organiser and the Elections Officer felt it might be a good idea to put together a strong election campaign. This applied to what we know today as a partially full campaign of 3 sweeps with one re-knock and also, with limited resources, an attempted whipping-in. This by-election, where Lawrence Rustem stood, achieved a staggering unprecedented result in east London of 36.5%.

In the autumn, another by-election was called in Goresbrook ward, where, building on the result of the previous by-election in Valence, we had a stronger contingency of activists, 5 or 6 people a day, morning and evening, coming from across the whole London and some neighbouring counties. They were enthused about what I would describe now in hindsight, as a victory with the 36.5% result, there having been no significant former track record. This by-election had Dan Kelly elected to Council with 52%, with us getting over half of the postal votes.

A month later, there was a further by-election in Village ward, where the Party would have expected again a large turn-out of activists following the full campaign in Goresbrook of 3 sweeps, 2 re-knocks and a full whipping-in, with ‘vote BNP’ posters in every 50th house. Alas, the manpower was exhausted, or other issues prevailed. Lawrence Rustem stood again as at the time he was the only fully active activist living in the Borough. The result was that we came second as in Valence, but this time securing an increased majority of 38.5%. Consequently our membership in Barking and Dagenham went through the roof, from having 20 odd members to over 100 in the period of just one year.

At that point, I was sacked as Lewisham and Bromley Organiser where we had had a decent success with Barry Roberts as Parliamentary candidate in 2001 with over 1000 votes, and then recalled to take charge of the development of Barking and Dagenham.

Prior to the General Election of 2005, I guided Dan Kelly through the workings of being a sole BNP councillor on Barking and Dagenham Council and then with a hand-picked team of 5 we worked towards the general election in the Barking and Dagenham constituency with sufficient, nevertheless limited resources, and a weekly turnout of 20-30 activists. I stood as the Parliamentary candidate for Barking. We ran a discreet non-attack campaign against Labour per se, focussing rather on the corruption of politicians and attained 19% of the vote in Barking, losing to the Tories who came second and only 24 votes ahead of me in third place. (Let’s say if I had been my own agent, the Party would have come second). In fact, 19% was the highest vote ever to date achieved by the BNP for a Parliamentary seat.

Dan Kelly, due to ill-health and personal issues, stood down as a councillor after the general election and we lost the vote to Labour with the results being reversed back in Labour’s favour, but we still managed to take second place as we also did in Becontree ward. At this point, Labour had not reckoned or consolidated its resources to put up a proper defence against us, while at the same time, nationally we in Barking and Dagenham had returned the highest results for the Party in 2004 and 2005, both at the Parliamentary, and the Council by-elections.

What was quite clear both then and when looking back now, is that the group of 4 people plus myself had worked out a SIMPLE, BASIC approach to having some success in local government elections in 2006. Only the outgoing National Organiser had the hindsight to see that Barking and Dagenham could and would give a strong representation to the BNP over and above the redundant history of the NF. The then National Elections Officer made a clear statement that Barking and Dagenham at best would be lucky to get 5 council members elected. It was due to the tenacity and foresight of the Chairman, Lawrence Rustem, 3 other key activists who had moved into the Borough and myself, that there would be, if resources were given us, a momentous victory in our favour. We had recognised one simple thing: that resources for a full borough election would be limited, consequently we would not be able to canvass any significant campaign. We had recognised the demographic change and more importantly, we had recognised the significance of street work relating to such issues as graffiti and the aesthetic appearance of the Borough and worked at what can only be described now as a high-profile presumed presentation as being councillors in waiting, while at the same time doing surveys (asking people what it was they wanted from their councillors and what changes they needed to see in the Borough for them to feel safe and content).So with little resources, we walked hundreds of miles in the guise of councillors though not as yet elected.

On the day of the elections for the Council of Barking and Dagenham 2006, Jon Cruddas, Labour MP for Dagenham made a comment after only 50 minutes into the count that we would get all 13 councillors elected. The result was that 12 were elected and of these, 11 took first and second place out of the winning councillors in each of the 7 wards but one, with Labour trailing third and in some cases, several hundred votes behind us.

All of those elected had never been councillors before and half of them were only paper candidates. In the entire 4 years, not one of our councillors either crossed the floor or resigned, even though we were constantly attacked, both politically and personally. Again, our Branch membership doubled during the year 2006.

This was a phenomenon. What was more flabbergasting, is that Cruddas said a few months later that if we had fielded a full slate we would have taken the council. In saying this, it should not be overlooked that 4 months prior to the local elections of 2006, remembering that the Branch had only been set up properly when I was brought in in 2005, that we had to work from a blank slate. We had asked Head Office to put in some extra resources in order to get more candidates. At this stage Robert Bailey had moved from South Yorkshire to London as a novice and with his ability we achieved 22 candidates, albeit 9 of these were eventually withdrawn.

The statistics of activism in the 2004 by-elections, using weekend turnout as a measuring guide, was an attendance of between 15 and 30 people. Compare this to the 2006 council elections weekend turnout which was between 60 and 80. However, just 4 months after the victory in B and D, I was sacked both as the London Organiser and the Barking and Dagenham Branch Organiser.

2007 could be seen as a dead year in Barking and Dagenham’s growth, with only one by-election that was mismanaged and outside my control and the then National Organiser being removed through internal strife and battles. We came third which was unprecedented in Barking and Dagenham. Comments were made by officials as it simply being a ‘casualty of war.’

2008 and the GLA and Mayoral elections: As the Leader of the Opposition on Barking and Dagenham Council, it was felt that I would possibly be, due to my direct street activities and my having a high profile both locally and nationwide, the best candidate for the Mayor of London and number one BNP candidate on the GLA top-up London-wide list. The resources given to us were significantly larger than in 2006. Due to a centralised campaign for London, during a March weekend, we had 230 people on the streets which was quite staggering, enabling us that weekend alone, to cover the whole of Barking and Dagenham, Havering and one third of Redbridge. The closest approaching this previously was in March 2006 when we had 160 people out. During the GLA campaign, we put out 670 000 nationally designed leaflets with a further 400 000 second drop localised leaflets, relating to issues specifically addressing the concerns of the individual communities of all the boroughs of London.

Most of us who were involved with the Mayoral/GLA elections of 2008 will be aware it all went digital, and corrugated plastic ballot boxes were used for the first time. Both the local, regional and national press expressed concerns about the ballot boxes being broken or interfered with. Why do I mention this? I left the Excell Complex in Becton, one of the super-counting facilities, to return back to the GLA roughly 3 hours before the announcement of the result. I spoke to an officer of London Elects and asked him, ‘At this moment in time, could you give me a voting percentage for the BNP’s London-wide top up candidates?’. 15 minutes later he came back and said that we were at between 7.4-7.6%. I then asked him if, from his expertise and knowledge from having done 2 previous elections for London Elects, with3 hours remaining, where he thought that we, the BNP, should level out on the top-up system. The reply was, ‘7%, 7.1%.’ It turned out we got only 5.4%. Isn’t that really quite surprising, especially when the Lib-Dems had 5 GLA members whittled down to 3, and the Greens who already had 2 members, with all the parties talking ‘green, green, green’ they still had 2 seats?

In 2009 we had by-elections across London (outside Barking and Dagenham) where the BNP made no significant gains. Why? Because activities had been decentralised.

2010 General Elections and Local Elections for Barking and Dagenham: It had been agreed more than a year before that I would be the candidate for the Barking Parliamentary constituency and more than likely, Bob Bailey would be the candidate for the Dagenham constituency, now known as Dagenham and Rainham. We felt that it would be possible for us, just, to take Barking from Margaret Hodge, with a stronger possibility of taking control of the council. At the end of 2009 it was becoming apparent that I would be removed as the Barking candidate, with the idea of parachuting in an officer from HQ. This was spelt out definitively in the early months of 2010, at which point I made it clear that if I was not to stand then it should be the Chairman, whom I did finally endorse.

It was my decision not to field a full slate of 52 candidates in the council elections, but 34 candidates, spread strategically across the 17 wards. The purpose for this is that we would be able to split the Labour and the independent vote allowing us to pick up maximum seats. That was the intent, though by now you know that we gained nothing and held nothing. Was this down to fraud, or to a new-style Labour campaign? We only saw the tip of their iceberg and we could not compete with the extent of and the ferocity of the attack they launched at us, from unions, schools, churches and voluntary groups, Hope not Hate and Searchlight and the possible tens if not hundred thousand pounds they threw into the battle to unseat us. Furthermore, information from the independents indicated that coach loads of people appeared to have been bussed in from outside the Borough to vote.

Evidence of fraud was found and passed on to Scotland Yard. We are awaiting their response. However, we did not have the manpower to do a full search of all 17 wards to discover just what level of electoral fraud may have taken place.

Unfortunately, during the latter months of the election campaign, it was clear that a leadership challenge would be imminent. What pressure was put on activists along with the decentralisation of London activists, I cannot tell. All that can be said is that we lost our core vote, with Labour managing to attain an extra 2000 votes per candidate on top of their 2006 results.

With assistance from the BNP legal team we discovered that a Labour candidate elected in Goresbrook was in fact disqualified at the point of nomination. Within the 21 days allotted for lodging an electoral petition, we worked round the clock to have her disqualified and at the 11th hour she resigned her position and a by-election was called in my ward of Goresbrook.

The by-election was to be held on July 8th. Our intent was that of having below the radar low profile canvassing campaign, using the previous month’s canvass returns of Goresbroook, and the results from the marked register. However, at this point the leadership challenge was moving into its full fury, consequently, activists across the nation were split, especially here in London, resulting in a pitiful turnout. Some may say this was due to the fact of my not taking sides in the leadership challenge, where I had showed an early indication of possible support for Eddy Butler, so much so that I had considered as standing as his running-mate. However, after a meeting in West London, I discovered the full extent of the contempt they held for me- because of my dyslexia and fancying a drink now and then. (Who is the pin-up for the BNP? Winston Churchill- who just happened to be a dyslexic, and, as we all know, he liked his drink, far more than I do!). I then decided not to support any campaign but to sit out. So, amidst all this turmoil, Eddy Butler started the election campaign for Goresbrook. In the first 2 weeks of a 5 week campaign, we had dribs and drabs of people turning up. I take my hat off to Richard Edmond’s support and others’, but it was too few too late. I then made the conscious decision to take the support of the new National Elections Officer, and the good folk of the north west, north east and the south west to come and shore up the campaign. We managed 3 sweeps of the 5 but no re-knocks. On the day of the election, up until 9.30 pm we barely managed to whip in the yeses and possibles. If I had got the 1400 votes that that I got in May election we would have taken the seat back. The turnout dropped from 70% to 24%. It was an uphill task, Labour once again bringing out through negative telephone canvassing, their minority voters. We lost.

What will become of Barking and Dagenham in the future is hard to tell. The electorate are all good folk but they have chosen their medicine and now they will have to swallow the bitter pill of Labour’s 100% council control. At what cost to the Party was the Goresbrook by-election lost?

As for myself, I will endeavour to assist where and how I can as a member of the GLA, the good people of the Borough. We have to learn from our mistakes and those of the headstrong egos of our party, how not to make similar mistakes. As for this leadership challenge, I hope it is resolved swiftly and in both good spirit and nature.

Yesterday, 14th July, I was sacked as the Barking and Dagenham Branch Organiser.

Those who have an interest in what I have achieved over the last 5 years and my membership of 11 years, WATCH THIS SPACE…

BNP Paedophile: 'Every parents' worst nightmare' locked up

A paedophile who allowed teenagers to use his home to drink and take drugs has been jailed for a sexual relationship with an underage girl.

Darren Francis, aged 37, was branded "every parents' worst nightmare" after becoming infatuated with a problem teenager. Despite being regularly warned off by police and the girl's father, he allowed her to stay at his flat and they soon began having sex.

John Lloyd-Jones, prosecuting at Northampton Crown Court, said she was aged 13 at the time, when Francis was in his mid-thirties, therefore 20 years older. He said: "He had known her since she was 11 so was well aware of her age. She was something of a troubled soul and her parents were finding it very difficult to control her.

"In late 2007, she began absconding and would go to his flat where there was a supply of a drink and drugs, mainly cannabis although she mentioned there was also cocaine. The defendant would take them as well in the company of these teenagers.

"He made a concerted effort to come between her and her parents and he simply became what we would say is every parents' worst nightmare. In effect, from the age of 13 she fell under his spell, going round to his flat on a virtual daily basis and often she would not come home and if she did, she was under the influence of drink and drugs.

"In summer 2009, she came to her senses and ended matters but he could not cope with the rejection and began harassing her."

The girl, who cannot be named, then revealed how she had consented to sex with Francis, although she was legally unable to do so as she was underage.

Judge Charles Wide QC, who jailed him for four years and three months, said: "This is not a case of typical exploitation of a young girl as it seems there was some genuine affection from the girl concerned, although it was a wildly, wildly inappropriate relationship.

"The law treats this as a very serious case. I deal with you on the basis you did not supply drugs to her. I make that emphatically clear," he added.

Francis, of Balfour Road, Kingsthorpe, had been due to face a trial but pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual activity with a child as well as assaulting her when she rejected his advances last year.

The right wing activist and BNP member was jailed in 2005 for repeated harassment of former Labour MP for Northampton North Sally Keeble. As well as harassment convictions, Francis has served prison sentences for assault, burglary, affray and robbery.

Northampton Chronicle

Say hello to the BNP Crusaders!

Ever since I signed up on the British National Party website to harangue someone linking to the blog, I've had the pleasure of irregularly having all the latest missives from the Fuhrer himself, Nick Griffin, arrive in my inbox. The vast majority of these are increasingly desperate pleas for funds as they presumably start to dwindle in the bank account, while the rest generally fulminate against the current political situation in typically hyperbolic, incendiary, borderline racist rhetoric, where only the BNP can save Britain from its current path. Here's the opening paragraphs of the most recent example:

As predicted, the only outcome of the election is that one set of self-serving crooks has replaced another, and our country continues its decline and disintegration. It is time we reflected on the terrible future that awaits our country, our children and grand-children.

If the politicians and the media have their way, our country will be totally overrun by the masses of the Third-World, we will be ruled from Brussels, we will be a despised, second-class minority in our own homeland.

Is that the future you want for your children? Will you regret it when it is too late and you wished you would have joined the British Resistance when you had the chance?

Granted, Griffin would never refer to "the masses of the Third-World" in interviews or to anyone other than party members, as that might just suggest that despite all his protests to the contrary, he and his party really are still racist. Still, given the BNP's showing at both the general and local elections in May, losing every single one of the seats they were defending on the council in Barking, a performance so awful Griffin had to promise to step down as leader by 2013, even though the number of votes the BNP received vastly increased on the 2005 election, you would expect them to be in desperate mode.

No wonder then they've decided at this inauspicious moment to relaunch the Young BNP, not to be confused obviously with a group with a somewhat similar name which was fairly massive in the 30s and 40s in a certain foreign nation. Perhaps because of the connotations with that other youth organisation, as well as journalists infiltrating the grouping and finding them being taught how to make Dutch arrows as well as partaking in lessons in shooting, the group has been renamed and is now aimed at the slightly older 18 to 30 market. For those imagining this might be an exercise in encouraging the master race to procreate in a Club 18-30 style, you'll probably be disappointed. No, it seems the most exciting antics the BNP Crusaders, as they will be known from now on, involve themselves in is that old hardy perennial, fancy dress, of naturally, the war-time variety.

Aren't they gorgeous?

The entire ethos of the group seems to be based around having good, wholesome, clean fun. Griffin introduces them as such:

The BNP Crusaders is a group of 18-30 year old BNP activists. We prove that there is more to the British National Party than just politics, with social gatherings arranged all year round. From trips to theme parks to just simple get togethers and nights out, the Crusaders do it all.

From trips to theme parks to simple get togethers and nights out! The whole spectrum of youth interaction covered! There is of course more to the BNP than just politics; it isn't just a party, it's a way of life.

It doesn't help that Griffin comes across as the slightly creepy uncle in his introduction to the Crusaders, nor that his description of the Crusaders' leader, Joey Smith, is cringe-inducing:

The leader of the BNP Crusaders is BNP activist and super-star Joey Smith (pictured right). "The BNP Crusaders is a great idea and I look forward to working with my new team, and meeting lots of new members and activists. We have already had a few outings and I look forward to seeing you all on future ones."

Thankfully, super-star Joey is quite the dish, not too dissimilar to heart-throb Robert Pattinson. In fact, they both share another similarity, Pattinson portraying the oppressed minority of vampires in the wider community in the Twilight films, while Smith is from the heavily discriminated against and ignored young white male demographic.

As if you couldn't have guessed, the choice of Crusaders is meant as a "homage to our ancestors from the middle ages who saved Christian Europe from the onslaught of Islam", which shows the BNP's usual level of historical literacy. Quite what they're crusading against in our modern times however is unclear, and the group's Facebook page doesn't give many further details, except for some more lovely pictures of the group on past jaunts, including this especially delightful one of Griffin with two young supporters, clearly ecstatic to meet their idol (and isn't that a glass of bubbly in his paunchy hand, Griffin the champagne national socialist?). One of the messages left on their wall does however give something of an insight:

Barrie Neale what a grand idea to allow the youth of todday be aware of the truth about what used to be england!!-proud of producing quality goods(not cheap asian rubbish)-and not infected by the cancer of the MOSLEM -evil!!-and i am not even a christian-but a tolerant man -i had to leave this country becauase of this-to FRANCE THE...Y WOULD JUST DEPORT THEM HERE !!-it has just gone to far!!-

Presumably Barrie is happy in France, untouched as it is by the cancer of MOSLEM evil.

With almost unabashed racism back in fashion on the front pages of the Daily Star and Daily Express, it could be a good time for those on the far-right to try and create youth groups with some real influence, highly organised and dedicated to the cause. Thankfully, the BNP Crusaders isn't it, and frankly the likes of the Bullingdon are almost certainly more dangerous. They'd also be more likely to be the ones goose-stepping down the high street, sieg heiling their hearts out. To suggest that the Crusaders are just ever so slightly lame would be probably paying them a compliment; any wetter and they'd be drowning. Compared to the English Defence League, a genuinely dangerous organisation with the potential to incite riots, with links to hooligan firms and which is far more attractive to those with actual radical views, giving the opportunity to potentially fight with those they so actively loathe, the choice between the two couldn't be any plainer. Got to laugh though, haven't you?

Obsolete (but well worth a visit)

Michaela Mackenzie: Employment Tribunal Statement

We don't usually put articles from members of the Far Right verbatim on here, they are usually deconstructed and we add our comments to an article but sometimes they do the work for us and come out with a corker that puts the boot in better than we could.

This is one of those articles:-

At long last, and after a gruelling year of delay, avoidance, non-cooperation and obfuscation from Nick Griffin, the day of my employment tribunal for unfair dismissal finally arrived, although not without a last desperate, oily attempt to extricate himself , however temporarily.

Six days before we were to appear in the Bristol Tribunal Court, Griffin requested an adjournment on the grounds that he had recently undergone a minor throat operation on 28th May and had been issued with a doctor’s certificate until 12th June. Unfortunately this wasn’t quite long enough to carry him past the scheduled tribunal dates of 15/16/17 June, so he pleaded that he ‘fully expected’ to be issued with a further sick note. He also claimed that he had been advised not to go out in public ‘for fear of infection’. Unhappily for him, he had held a party the previous weekend and had also been dumb enough to allow himself to be filmed by BNPtv at a meeting in Stroud on Wednesday 9th for all to see. The judge refused his request for adjournment.

Undaunted, Griffin made a second plea 2 days later, still citing that he mustn’t go out in public ‘for fear of infection’. Somehow, this didn’t seem to tally with his jolly tweet that preparations for the Trafalgar Club dinner were in full swing, an event to be held in a tent in his garden, drinks at 7, dinner at 8. This was followed by a BNPtv video of him surrounded by TC members who looked pretty hacked off that he’d been so lacking in foresight as to plan the event on the very night of England’s first World Cup match. Not surprisingly, the judge denied his second request, having been acquainted of his multiple public appearances whilst claiming that he was in ‘isolation’. Thus, when Griffin took the stand, Bible in hand and swore to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, the judges knew he had already lied to them.

It was obvious from the outset that Griffin really didn’t want this tribunal to go ahead. He wasted the entire first morning of the hearing in sending his very expensive barrister scuttling back and forth like an errand boy to make a series of derisory settlement offers, which were rejected out of hand.

The hearing then began on the judge’s insistence at 1.30pm with an immediate admission from Griffin’s barrister that I had, without question, been unfairly dismissed, procedurally. In layman’s terms, Griffin was admitting that he had not followed the correct procedures under employment law but that he still felt I’d ‘asked for it’. He then spent 3 hours on the stand venomously spouting the most ridiculous lies about me. Fortunately, my solicitor (I couldn’t afford a barrister since unlike Mr. Griffin I’m paying my own legal costs) had her wits about her and gave Griffin a very hard time indeed. This is the advantage of hiring an employment law specialist rather than the conveyancing specialist who had ‘prepared’ Griffin’s case.

On being questioned about the role of Adlorries, Griffin told the court that it had been set up specifically so that the party could transact business since mainstream banks and other suppliers would have nothing to do with the party. My solicitor then suggested that it must have been set up sometime after November 2007 since that was the date on Dowson’s contract. ‘Yes’ said Griffin. ‘Strange’ says my solicitor, ‘..because according to Companies House, Adlorries was registered in October 2004, a full 3 years before Dowson’s involvement with the party.’ Griffin’s face reddened, having been caught out fibbing.

He was also cross examined by the judge who really screwed him into the ground, consistently asking ‘Where is your evidence, Mr. Griffin?’ ‘When did this happen, Mr. Griffin?’, ‘Was this minuted, Mr. Griffin?’, ‘Who exactly told you this, Mr. Griffin?’ to which Griffin replied, ‘I don’t exactly recall’, ‘It must have been sometime in March or April, or even June’, ‘I heard it on the grapevine, the rumour mill, Jim Dowson must have told me’.

Nick Griffin couldn’t give a truthful or even credible answer to anything he was asked because he knew nothing other than the poison Dowson had poured into his ears and had not a single shred of evidence to support anything he said. Unfortunately for Griffin, the gospel according to the Rev. Jim Dowson doesn’t constitute evidence in a court of law. The more he was browbeaten the more vicious he became. At one point I actually thought he might leap across the courtroom to attack me, so frustrated was he. But then, given the sycophantic deference which Griffin has come to expect from his worshippers, I think it came as a devastating shock to him that the judge was totally indifferent to his ‘status’ and treated him as he would any other common or garden respondent being sued.

It should be a matter of interest to members that during the course of his cross examination about the anti abortion database sent to the Stroud office, Griffin said, in defence of Dowson, ‘Jim can hardly work a computer’ and only moments later, ‘Jim is a technical cretin’.

I almost laughed out loud at this description of the man Griffin has consistently touted as our ‘industry expert’ and whose ‘knowledge and skill’ has ‘transformed the party’.
One wonders whether he’d have been quite so uncomplimentary if Dowson had been present in court on that first day. This much is clear, however. Griffin has been lying to the members all along about Dowson’s ‘abilities’. I knew this. Donna and Lee Hancock knew this. Dowson knew we knew this, and it’s no doubt part of the reason he had to get rid of us.

One of the silliest allegations Griffin made was that, while I was very efficient when working from home, managing an office had proved beyond my capabilities. In front of the judges was my witness statement outlining that for 15 years I had managed 25 staff as a senior manager of a well known national publishing company. I think the judges had worked out for themselves that, had I been an incompetent manager, I would not have lasted 15 years in a highly professional and competitive organisation. In addition to this, I had submitted samples of over 60 e.mails from party members and staff attesting to my efficiency. One from Jim Dowson described me as a ‘true professional’ and another from Nick Griffin read, ‘I have the highest regard for your loyalty, work rate and administrative competence which is why you got the thankless task of bringing us firmly within the law on this issue (contracts) in the first place’.

It is incongruous, is it not, that Griffin then sacked me precisely for trying to keep the party within the law? Of course, keeping within the law is inconvenient for some people, as we’ve seen time and time again, at a crippling cost to members.

So ended the first day at 4.30pm. As we were about to leave I got the biggest surprise of the day. Griffin’s beleaguered barrister hastened along to say that Mr. Griffin would like to offer me full reinstatement to my job. At this point I knew that he was a very, very worried man. I thanked his barrister for the offer but asked him to tell Mr. Griffin that, following the lies and vitriol I had just heard directed at me in court, I was at a loss to understand why he would want to re-appoint such a compete incompetent onto his staff, and to forgive me if I was somewhat cynical of his motives.

Day two of the tribunal began with a ‘without prejudice’ doubling of the settlement offer made the previous day. This was politely declined. A further increased offer was made and again declined. It was, by then, obvious that Griffin was desperate to avoid Dowson having to take the stand that day, and even more desperate that neither I nor my witnesses should take the stand. He had read all our witness statements and didn’t want us to be heard, particularly as the press had now turned up. Another increased offer was made PLUS reinstatement to work part time from home. By now I was convinced that Griffin had a real problem in understanding why I wouldn’t want to come back and work for him. Despite assurances from Pat Harrington of Solidarity that Griffin genuinely wanted me back as my skills had been sorely missed, I’m afraid that I’m just not stupid enough or vain enough to fall for the blarney.

A further offer ensued with the admission that I had been unfairly dismissed both procedurally AND substantively. In other words they now admitted that I had not ‘asked for it’. I was also assured that the party would provide me with a ‘glowing reference’. My answer was that any reference from the party would be as valuable in finding a job as a reference from Osama bin Laden. Griffin’s brief was barely able to suppress his laughter.

Griffin’s barrister then approached my solicitor just 2 minutes before the tribunal was due to re-convene and told her that Mr. Griffin wanted to know what I would be prepared to settle for, to name my price. My solicitor was doubtful that they would accept what I asked for but I told her that it was a risk I was prepared to take and that if they refused then we would simply walk back into the court and have our say openly.

Griffin then made the only sensible decision of his life and completely caved in.

I was required to sign an undertaking that I would not ‘publish the terms of the settlement’ and I am prepared to abide by that, but I also insisted that the salacious lies written about me by the author of the misnamed BNP ‘Truth’ Chronicles , be removed immediately otherwise a libel suit would follow. By the time I reached home, all reference to me had been deleted. If members feel they have a right to know what Griffin’s folly and lack of judgement have cost them, I suggest, since he was the party’s representative in court and the person responsible for my dismissal, that they ask him directly.

What serious and responsible members now have to consider is whether a man who makes so many ill judged and rash decisions before considering all the possible consequences, is fit to be their leader or deserves their support. Donations have all but dried up due to the now endemic mistrust of Dowson and Griffin and their lack of financial transparency, and the party is on the brink of bankruptcy. It is very possible that the punitive damages awarded to Unilever for Griffin’s monumentally stupid use of their Marmite logo, will see the party fold.

If anything has become clear to me over the past year, it is that Griffin genuinely believes he is untouchable and above the law – in effect, a dictator.

No man can become a dictator of his own accord. Dictators are created by sychophants who have neither the will nor intelligence to exercise any independent discrimination or moral judgement upon the object of their idolatry, and by craven cowards who cave in to threats and intimidation. Dictators are very skilled at manipulating people, preying on their fears and emotions. One only has to listen to Griffin’s ‘passionate’ speeches or to read Dowson’s melodramatic appeal letters, to know that this is precisely what they are doing in order to prompt you to part with your hard earned cash. And it’s your hard earned cash that is being profligately wasted in defending the party against the expensive consequences of Griffin’s wanton spite and stupidity.

One wonders whether Mr. Griffin would exercise more reason and moderation were he obliged to fund his incessant court costs from his own wallet?

Griffinite members of the party must bear responsibility for what he has become. He is a monster of their own creation. For years they have fawned upon him, bloated his ego out of all proportion to reality, encouraged him to believe he can do no wrong and that he isn’t subject to the laws, restrictions and codes of morality that determine decent conduct for the rest of us mere mortals.

In this respect they do a great disservice to the nationalist cause by continuing to empower a tin pot dictator who will ultimately betray them, as he has betrayed so many good people. That is Griffin’s tragedy. As true nationalists, it is also ours.

I would wish to make it known that I did not proceed against Nick Griffin for monetary gain. I did so to strike back on behalf of all the good nationalists he has betrayed, sacked, suspended, expelled and ill used over many, many years. I did it to deter him from ever again wantonly depriving honest nationalists of their livelihoods and wrecking their lives in the process. I hope, for their sakes, that I’ve succeeded.

July 14th 2010

As a postscript to this statement, I am now able to inform you all that Mr. Nick Griffin MEP, who gave a signed undertaking in court in front of three tribunal judges, his own barrister, my solicitor, two of my witnesses and a journalist, to pay the agreed settlement by 14th July, has reneged on his word. Further legal proceedings against him, and other party officers, to recover the amount of the settlement have now begun.

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 boss earns £162,000 a year

The Rabid anti-abortion campaigner Jim Dowson

Rabid right-winger Jim Dowson is getting paid a staggering £162,000 by the BNP, we can reveal.

That’s £20,000 more than Prime Minister David Cameron gets paid to run the country!

The shock revelations have angered many BNP members and workers – not least because some party staff on mainland Britain have not been paid amid claims the party is in financial meltdown.

Scottish firebrand Dowson has been BNP leader Nick Griffin’s right-hand man, as well as party money-man, for the past few years now.

Dowson has been a rabid anti-abortion campaigner in the past and his list of criminal convictions include breach of the peace in 1986, possession of a weapon and breach of the peace in 1991 and criminal damage in 1992.

He hit the headlines last year when this paper revealed he was the man behind the BNP’s secret Belfast nerve centre which is situated in Dundonald.

Gangsters

From that base the far right party raise cash through membership recruitment and donations.

The office is almost exclusively run by members of Dowson’s and Griffin’s family including his daughter Jenny Matthys.

The BNP is in turmoil ever since their disastrous performance in the recent General and council elections which saw them wiped out.

But anti-fascist magazine Searchlight have uncovered a bitter feud which is threatening the future of the party itself.

Searchlight correspondent Matthew Collins says: “He gets paid more than the PM for advising a bunch of gangsters. It’s like something out of the Godfather.”

The revelations about Dowson’s inflated wages have come from a senior member of the party’s national advisory council.

Richard Edmonds, who helped found the BNP alongside John Tyndall long before Griffin joined the party, has come out in support of Eddy Butler, who is currently challenging Griffin for the leadership.

Writing on Butler’s blog on 8 July, Edmonds says a leadership challenge is a chance for members to raise matters of major importance for the party and the issue he wants to raise is the employment of “an outside businessman, Mr Jim Dowson, who acts as a ‘consultant’ to our Party at a salary of just under £2,000 per week”.

He goes on to explain that as well as receiving £7,500 a month as a “consultancy fee”, Dowson is also paid £72,000 a year for “managing a part of the internal administration” of the BNP. That comes to £162,000 a year, or £3,115 a week, an amount Edmonds describes as a “scandal”.

Edmonds, who is very influential in the BNP especially among the more hardline members, states that Dowson gave him these figures himself.

The fees paid to Dowson will stick in the craw of party staff on mainland Britain who were not paid in June according to Butler, who says the party is “insolvent” as a result of Griffin “deliberately, avoidably and recklessly” involving it in a series of legal cases.

The financial difficulties do not extend to the Belfast BNP call centre, which is run by Dowson.

The staff there received their June pay as usual, which is perhaps not surprising as they are mostly members of Dowson’s and Griffin’s families, including Griffin’s eldest daughter Jennifer.

Dowson is furious with stories which have appeared in this paper about him.

Last year he claimed in a TV interview that he hated the BNP’s politics. And he has complained to the Press Complaints Commission because we said he was a life member.

BNP Jim told the PCC in a letter on indignation: “They also allege that I am a BNP life member when I have never been a member of the party ever in my life!”

Failed

But a video passed to us shows Jim praising the racist party and urging people to join up.

And we’ve since discovered that Jim may not have paid his membership to the BNP – because according to sources he owns it!

During the seven minute video, which was taken during a fundraising event in Blackburn, Lancashire two months ago, Dowson repeatedly uses the phrases ‘we’ and ‘us’ when talking about the BNP.

The party hoped to get four MP’s elected to Westminster but failed to get a single one.

They had boasted about taking control of Barking and Dagenham council but were wiped out 51-0 by Labour.

Dowson and his Belfast operation was blamed by BNP members on the internet who said a series of cock-ups by Dowson were the cause of their election humiliation.

Click here for original article

Hope not Hate

EDL updates

'Tommy Robinson' goes into hiding

The English Defence League has been forced to issue a statement to its supporters denying rumours that its leader has vanished.

"Tommy Robinson is still our leader he has not gone into hiding and has not left us," the statement reads. "Just because you don't see Tommy posting on facebook all the time does not mean he is not busy."

Of course, the EDL is telling porkies again. Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, has gone to ground following his expose as a former BNP member who has served prison time for a violent assault on an off-duty police officer.

Despite some initial bravado after his true identity emerged, Yaxley-Lennon is now a little bit nervous. He was initially named as Stephen Yaxley and he obviously hoped that this was enough to keep his fascist past and criminal conviction hidden. However, it wasn't long before Searchlight researchers discovered his full name and his past unravelled. Since then Yaxley-Lennon is trembling.

His disappearance isn't the only problem affecting the EDL. There is growing disquiet over decision-making and poor communication between the un-elected leadership and the activists.

The EDL statement gives an upbeat message about regional reorganisation and a forthcoming policy and activity document but the truth is different. Divisions are beginning to emerge and rivals are circling.

Nick Lowles at HOPE not hate


English Defence League is urged to scrap plans for a "costly" demonstration in Dudley on July 17

A controversial anti-Muslim group has refused to scrap plans for another demonstration in Dudley that could cost the borough £150,000. Traders in the town centre could also be hit hard by the rally staged by the English Defence League on July 17.

Council leaders have branded the demo ‘pointless’ as plans by Dudley Muslim Association for a new mosque in Hall Street had now been jettisoned. The Association is now seeking to extend its building in Castle Hill following discussions with council officers.

Coun Anne Millward, Conservative group leader and leader of the council, said: “The EDL’s unnecessary visits, which often result in major disruption, violence and public disorder, cost the taxpayer and local communities thousands of pounds. When they visited in April it also caused a significant loss of trade to local businesses. We are opposed to this proposed event and call on the organisers to cancel this pointless waste of taxpayers’ money.”

Labour group leader Coun David Sparks said: “This demonstration should be banned. The fact that Dudley has not got the power to stop it going ahead reinforces my view that the law should be changed so the Government can step in and stop this madness.”

Council bosses promised to work closely with the police to reassure and support local communities and businesses before and after the protest, which police have decided will take place on Stafford Street car park.

EDL spokesman Steve Simmons said: “The council says the new mosque has been sidelined but until there’s a definite written result, we’ll just carry on.”

Charles Hanmer, chairman of traders’ group Dudley Town Centre Partnership, said some shops could close during the demonstration. “We don’t want the EDL and we haven’t invited them to Dudley,” he said.

Birmingham Mail

Blundering Jefferson is a Butler asset

Nick Griffin's characteristically underhanded attempts to forestall a challenge to his leadership suffered another blow at the weekend when BNP "sleazebuster" Michael Barnbrook (the man who single-handedly exposed the parliamentary expenses scandal, according to himself) declared in favour of Butler and his attempt to force a leadership election.

With founding members Richard Edmonds and Valerie Tyndall (widow of previous BNP leader John Tyndall) also supporting Butler and the challenge, it is clear that support for Butler (or, at least, for change at the top) is cross-factional and gaining in momentum.

The Griffin camp is deeply worried that Eddy Butler appears to be capable of gaining the 20% voting member nominations he needs and is looking afresh at the self-defeating tactics so far deployed to halt Butler. This may be part of the reason the disgraceful Eddy Butler Exposed and BNP Truth Chronicles websites have been suspended (but not, we note, taken down).

The online equivalent of the infantile factional tactics employed by Griffin in his unending internal National Front disputes of the 1980s were backfiring badly on the BNP leader, and were taken seriously only by fully paid up idiots of the Paul Morris stamp. The majority of those who pass for "moderate" in the BNP were appalled by the existence of the websites, which probably did as much to shake the scales from the eyes of many in regard to Nick Griffin's probity and state of mind as anything said by Eddy Butler.

Suspending two counter-productive websites only when what had been blindingly obvious to everybody else finally blinded Griffin and his shrinking band of supporters is unlikely to be the end of the Griffinite dirty tricks campaign. If anything there will be a stepping-up of the all out effort to prevent the Butler challenge coming to fruition.

The favoured course at the moment seems to be the invention of a clearly unconstitutional "official" nominations process that will be entirely in the hands of Griffin henchman, bully and state education failure Clive Jefferson. Jefferson instructs that he will issue nomination forms (Butler, operating within the terms of the BNP constitution, is issuing his own), which must be returned to the central party.

This is a naked attempt to intimidate the membership at a one-to-one level. Any individual signing and returning an "official" nomination paper is directly telling Griffin and his agents that he or she does not support Griffin (polite fictions to the contrary notwithstanding). The obvious suspicion must be that those returning individual nomination papers will be "worked on", smeared, find their lives within and beyond the BNP suddenly made difficult, and, of course, there is every chance of the nominations being "lost in the post".

To circumvent this, Eddy Butler insists that his supporters use only his nominations form, to be returned to him, presumably so that a thorough witnessed auditing can be performed prior to submission - but of course, this will only work if Griffin accepts the legitimacy of the "unofficial" forms. If he does not, and reneges on a constitution that is largely his own self-serving handiwork, then an acrimonious, costly, damaging and highly public court case beckons.

Michael Barnbrook (no relation to Richard) appears to be miffed that the BNP has not accorded him the fame of which he believes himself deserving as "the individual responsible for starting the Parliamentary Expenses Scandal". In an egocentric statement posted on Eddy Butler's BNP Leadership Challenge 2010 website, Barnbrook expends rather more words whining about his lack of recognition and its supposedly deleterious effect on the BNP vote than he does in explaining his vague reasons for supporting Butler. Perhaps if Nick had tickled his ego more often..?

Barnbrook claims that he has been "inundated with telephone calls" asking him not to sign Eddy Butler’s nomination form, and repeats the widespread rumours of challenge supporters being refused admission to meetings - "rumours" that have been established to be facts.

Newly appointed party number three Clive Jefferson is conducting the Griffinite defence with all the delicacy of a crazed elephant wearing badly fitting hob-nailed boots in a room full of mice. By many accounts a man whose boundless ego dwarfs a barely detectable intellect, there may be some truth in the rumour that Jefferson possesses any brain matter at all only as a handy method of preventing his skull from caving in. His heavy-handed blundering approach to the BNP's volunteers (the ones who pay his wages), especially across the north-west, has been unnecessarily divisive.

Jefferson's typically blunt warning that he will sack any north-western BNP official who helps facilitate the gathering of nominations for Butler's challenge is inept and short-sighted, since it will force officials to keep their own counsel and disguise the extent of Butler's support in the region. The authoritarian language and contemptuous tone used cannot fail to produce a negative reaction - the poor bloody infantry in any organisation have an aversion to being treated and spoken to as if they were dogs, especially when the person barking out the orders and issuing the threats is already widely disliked, can be seen to have been promoted far beyond his abilities, and in comparison to themselves is a relative newcomer (one with a questionable past, at that).

If Eddy Butler ever wanted for a good recruiting sergeant he could not have wished for better than the lumpen Jefferson, whose hate for Butler is all too obviously personal and which clouds what little judgement he has.

But Nick Griffin has been so good as to provide Butler with several recruiting sergeants. The two suspended websites were arguably the most efficient in this respect, closely followed by the hysterical outpourings of meddler Paul Morris, and lately the blatant interference of serial failure Patrick Harrington, terrified that a Butler win will be the end of his fake Solidarity "union", forcing him to rely on the state handouts he has been drawing for some years.

Recently we pointed out that in setting such a high aiming point as the 20% voting member nominations qualification (and other dissuasive little fixes), Nick Griffin was ensuring that a challenger must be better connected and network far harder and more professionally than any real or putative challenger of the past, and that such a challenger would be deadly serious for being left no other choice but to be deadly serious in the campaign to raise those 20% nominations.

Griffin is now reaping the rewards of his own overweening hubris, and deservedly so. He shiftily made the constitutional changes he believed would make him leader for life (without protest from Eddy Butler, it must be said), but lacked the foresight to consider the consequences.

If - and it is a more than usually conjectural if - Eddy Butler obtains his 20%, or something close to it, Griffin's authority over large swathes of what remains of the BNP membership will be finished. Should the challenge go ahead Butler should be able to rely on at least twice, and almost certainly greater than that proportion of votes in the election proper. Butler can do it, just.

In the event that Butler does depose Griffin there arises the question of what happens next? The party's income has fallen to a trickle; currently it is broke, almost certainly insolvent, and cannot even afford to pay its own staff. Come October, when Butler would assume the leadership, the BNP will be in an even more wretched financial condition, exacerbated by a shrinking membership and teased by a querulous and vengeful Griffin. Butler and his team will be left asking themselves if the game really was worth the candle.

There is also the question of how Griffin and the BNP will be teased apart; on a Butler-supporting forum a poster points out that Griffin and the BNP are like Siamese twins, and that an operation to separate them may prove fatal to both.

We can but hope.

English Defence League's planned march on mosque is 'pointless'

The English Defence League's summer of protests to target Muslim communities is to continue with a demonstration against a "super mosque", even though the development is no longer going ahead.

The far-right group will return to Dudley next Saturday to demonstrate against the abandoned mosque and community centre project. The council has branded the protest "pointless" and a "waste of taxpayers' money" as police will be required to ensure safety.

A plea from the council for the organisation to cancel the demonstration came as an EDL protester appeared in court today for putting a pig's head on the wall of Dudley central mosque.

Anne Millward, leader of the council, said: "The EDL's unnecessary visits, which often result in major disruption, violence and public disorder, cost the taxpayer and local communities thousands of pounds.

"We are opposed to this proposed event and call on the organisers to cancel this pointless waste of taxpayers' money."

But a promotional video by the Bristol division of the EDL said: "The Dudley Muslim Association is determined to force this mosque on the people of Dudley … The EDL will keep coming back until it is scrapped."

The previous protest against the mosque cost the council over £150,000, damaged local business revenue and resulted in 12 people being arrested.

A council spokesman said: "Council bosses have made it clear that outside extremists can make no contribution to local decisions and reminded the EDL that the plans for a mosque on Hall Street are not currently being pursued.

"The EDL has opposed the former proposal for a mosque but the council has reiterated the fact that the authority and the Dudley Muslim Association have agreed to pursue an alternative site, making the EDL's visit pointless."

Margot James, the MP for Stourbridge, near Dudley, wrote to the Home Office asking that police powers be extended to enable them to ban all forms of protest on the grounds of public order when they have a case to do so. She says she is keen to maintain freedom of expression but "a loophole that allows the EDL to call their activity a rally not a march, so as to escape a potential ban, should be closed".

The league has demonstrated in Newcastle and Bradford but cancelled a planned protest in Tower Hamlets, London, after one of its leaders, Tommy Robinson, told the East London Advertiser it would be a "suicide mission".

An EDF protester, Kevin Smith, has been given a suspended eight-week prison sentence for putting a pig's head on the wall of Dudley central mosque in the Castle Hill area of the town on 29 May.

Police believe Smith, 52, of Brierley Hill, was on his way to the Newcastle demonstration when the act took place.He was arrested on 2 June and has been found guilty of religiously aggravated intentional harassment at Dudley magistrates court. Muslims regard pigs as unclean.

Smith was sentenced to eight weeks in prison, suspended for 12 months, and among the conditions imposed was an order that he stay out of the Castle Hill area.

Muslims account for about 2.5% of the population of Dudley. The council says it is exploring the possibility of developing the existing Dudley central mosque as an alternative to the scrappped Hall Street scheme.

Unite Against Fascism has pledged to hold a counter-demonstration next Saturday after protesting against the EDL in April by holding a multi-faith celebration.


The Guardian

BNP staff not paid while ‘consultant’ pockets over £3,000 a week

Jim Dowson, the fundraising consultant brought in by Nick Griffin, the British National Party leader, is paid £162,000 a year for his services, according to a senior member of the party’s national advisory council.

Richard Edmonds, who helped found the BNP alongside John Tyndall long before Griffin joined the party, has come out in support of Eddy Butler, who is currently challenging Griffin for the leadership.

Writing on Butler’s blog on 8 July, Edmonds says a leadership challenge is a chance for members to raise matters of major importance for the party and the issue he wants to raise is the employment of “an outside businessman, Mr Jim Dowson, who acts as a ‘consultant’ to our Party at a salary of just under £2,000 per week”.

He goes on to explain that as well as receiving £7,500 a month as a “consultancy fee”, Dowson is also paid £72,000 a year for “managing a party of the internal administration” of the BNP. That comes to £162,000 a year, or £3,115 a week, an amount Edmonds describes as a “scandal”.

Edmonds, who is very influential in the BNP especially among the more hardline members, states that Dowson gave him these figures himself. That makes them more reliable than the statement on the BNP website at the end of May that Dowson’s Midas Consultancy had been paid a total of £165,000 since the end of 2007, a period of over two and a half years.

The fees paid to Dowson, an extremist anti-abortion campaigner with several criminal convictions, will stick in the craw of party staff on mainland Britain who were not paid in June according to Butler, who says the party is “insolvent” as a result of Griffin “deliberately, avoidably and recklessly” involving it in a series of legal cases.

The financial difficulties do not extend to the Belfast BNP call centre, which is run by Dowson. The staff there received their June pay as usual, which is perhaps not surprising as they are mostly members of Dowson’s and Griffin’s families, including Griffin’s eldest daughter Jennifer.

Meanwhile Griffin and his sidekick Clive Jefferson, the BNP’s national elections officer, continue to try to thwart Butler’s challenge by expelling his supporters from the party. Writing on the website set up by Simon Bennett, the BNP’s former webmaster, Colin Poulter, the party’s former Eastbourne organiser, says that an expulsion notice emailed to him on 28 June included the accusation that he was: “Working to collect signatures for a challenge against the Chairman whilst disqualified from all party association.”

Poulter, who joined the BNP in October 2008 and claims a long list of achievements in organising the party in Eastbourne, says: “So what of the deadly accusation that I am collecting signatures, SO WHAT, is this another pathetic attempt to intimidate people away from nominating or voting for Eddy Butler, or any other candidate, against Nick Griffin in the leadership contest?”

Elsewhere Alistair Barbour, who briefly served on the staff of Griffin’s European Parliament constituency office last year, has shed light on why he left so abruptly. After joining the BNP and achieving rapid promotion to Carlisle organiser and then North West secretary, he “started to see them for what they really are.

“When I got on Griffins staff I walked away in disgust,” Barbour writes. “Yes they are all they say they are. But there also as corrupt as mainstream politicians, in fact there worse. Main stream politician fleece the tax payer. BNP Ltd fleece there own as well. They use propaganda to the outside world via the website. But most importantly they use propaganda to there own supporters and members. Distorting facts and figures and hiding behind a veil of secrecy and lies. Propaganda is the largest tool they have. One other famous party in history relied heavily on propaganda I’m sure you all know who I mean.”

Griffin continues to revel in his highly paid position as an MEP. His latest act is to nominate the “brave Dutch MEP Geert Wilders” for the Sakharov prize for freedom of thought.

The award, in honour of the Soviet dissident scientist Andrei Sakharov, is meant to honour people who fight for human rights and freedom, not a rabid Islamophobe whose mission in life is to incite division and hate.

Sonia Gable at HOPE not hate

Barnbrook bombs in Goresbrook

Barking and Dagenham finally and firmly closed the door on Richard Barnbrook and the BNP yesterday when voters in the borough's Goresbrook ward decisively rejected the racist party in a hard-fought by-election brought about by Barnbrook's objection that May winner Louise Couling had been ineligible to stand, being a lollipop lady employed by the council.

Couling, the Labour Party candidate, had the pleasure of beating Barnbrook all over again, and improved her own vote by 2.5%. The BNP threw everything it had at Goresbrook, the party's bigwigs, including Griffin, out in force last Sunday.

Griffin's presence may have been a mixed blessing for Barnbrook, since he insists on operating from within a cocoon of BNP security goons too moronic to realise that throwing menacing stares at members of the public going about their business in their own streets on a pleasant summer's day is apt to be a vote losing strategy.

The result (taken from Vote UK):

Lab 881 (46.6%)
BNP 642 (34.0%)
LibD 136 (7.2%)
Con 108 (5.7%)
Ind 63 (3.3%)
UKIP 50 (2.6%)
Ind 11 (0.6%)

In May the BNP vote fell from a 2006 high of 42.4% to 26.7%, but even without the big party squeeze brought about when local elections are fought alongside general elections Barnbrook recovered only 7.3% - good news, as many observers had believed the BNP might re-take the seat or come a close second.

The fact that the vote improved by 7.3% over the May result will doubtless be used by the beleaguered BNP leadership to add some much needeed gloss to Barnbrook's performance, and to save face following the sidelining of Barnbrook's election agent Eddy Butler in favour of enthusiastic mobile phone cameraman Clive Jefferson.

As Jefferson has been in charge of the BNP's election efforts for some weeks now, as well as taking responsibility for the Goresbrook result he might like to explain the disasters which occurred in the two other by-elections fought by the BNP on Thursday.

These were:

Chadwell (Redbridge LBC)

Lab 800 (31.5%)
Con 580 (22.9%)
LibD 576 (22.7%)
Grn 413 (16.3%)
BNP 115 (4.5%) Julian Leppert
UKIP 54 (2.1%)

May 2010 - failed to nominate.

May 2006 result:

LibD 1305 (37.60%)
Con 835 (24.08%)
Lab 706 (20.34%)
BNP 624 (17.98%)

and

Cockerton West (Darlington UA)

Lab 388 (45.12%)
LibD 347 (40.35%)
Con 84 (9.77%)
BNP 41 (4.77%) Paul Thompson, ex-jailbird

May 2007 result:

Lab 492 (40.02%) averaged
Con 308 (25.03%)
LibD 263 (21.37%)
BNP 167 (13.57%)

These results will demoralise an already badly demoralised BNP membership, and we somehow doubt that Nick Griffin's distraction tactics in the Euro Parliament (where he has nominated Dutch MEP Geert Wilders for the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought) are going to cut much ice.