Sunday, 16 December 2007

Wretched and Rebellious

Nick Griffin’s latest posting on the website does nothing to enhance his reputation for telling the truth. While the GLA elections are indeed a massive opportunity for the BNP, his attempts to describe the circumstances surrounding the last seven days smack of utter desperation.
To suggest that ‘far-left’ embedded assets have emerged to cause this crisis, when all people have tried to do is awaken you to real and dangerous problems within, is playing a very dangerous political game. It seems that the bigger the crisis, the bigger the smear that has to be told to get yourself out of it. Nonetheless, there is no better response to this than to tell the truth.

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

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

The suggestion that ‘the little clique’ wanted to remove power from the leader, the members who elect the leader and the voting members is nothing more than a lie designed to get those said people on board by deceptively suggesting that all of you as Chairman, the Voting Members, and the members in general are all being undermined together. Chris Beverley was voted to be the Councillors Representative at the latest annual Conference, by existing Councillors. This would have given him a place on the AC, which comes with that position. At the latest North West Regional Council meeting (not the stage managed hatchet job last week) Chris Jackson was given overwhelming backing by the North West Officials (just two voted against him) to be the North West Regional Organiser. However you have not honoured this and you have instead installed yourself as the North West RO. Both Chris Beverley and Chris Jackson can’t exactly be described as Mark Collett fans, yet they are both excellent Organisers and dedicated Nationalists. To suggest that these two people, democratically elected by their peers meant filling the AC with people to undermine you is ludicrous. How then do you explain the fact that Ian Dawson turned down the role of Yorkshire Organiser (and thus a place on the AC) when according to your theory, Ian, as another Collett non-fan, would surely have jumped at the chance to be back on the AC?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

51 comments:

lawyer said...

Lee Barnes (who happens to have a law degree but no professional legal qualification) has no idea what he's talking about. The theft of Sadie's personal computer was burglary, of that there can be no doubt. To prove burglary it has to be shown that they entered the house without the consent of the owner (which they clearly did) and that they stole property belonging to someone else (which Griffin has now admitted). Therefore, those involved are guilty of conspiracy to commit burglary, an offence which carries up to 14 years in prison.

Sadie Supporter said...

Quote:
We understand the ‘road show’ was in Leicestershire yesterday afternoon – the outcome of the meeting for Sadie to remain as a normal member was far from satisfactory.

I hope she hasn't accepted this offer. Collett has to go there's no other option.

Anonymous said...

About time someone is standing up for Angela Clarke!

Anonymous said...

Has Nick indulged in Islam because he is acting like the new prophet.

No one else is allowed to question his decisions, which over the last few days have been verging on the side of lunacy.

Keeping Collet is lunacy

Anonymous said...

what sickens me is "THE BUFFONS RAPED SADIES HOME" if you have ever been burgaled you home is never the same again,to think these idiots did what they did and live with a conscious mind is sickening and swear words are beyond these filthy scum.people keep saying the media are keeping quiet but believe me they are building a case.i have today resigned on the fact is that we are supposed to be the "party of free speech" but if goons come sitting outside my home then that gets personnal for the sake of my wife and children.

Brucie said...

It is remarkable but I have spoken to many BNP members are still unaware of this business.
It is only the computer users who know about it, although the news is spreading.
It is important that the general membership gets to know of the terrible treatment Sadie has received -you can help by telling friends and family in the BNP.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

About time someone is standing up for Angela Clarke!

Here here
Angela was a credit to the party.

However Collett spread his vile poison Keighley way and now Keighley BNP is a shadow of its former self

Anonymous said...

Various officals in the East Mids (myself included) were phoned by Maurice Collett (the father of Mark - who is actually a nice enough guy considering Collett Jnr is pure scum) and told a load of nonsense.
The outcome of the meeting was not satisfactory and to the best of my knowledge Sadie is not satisfied at all either.
Mark Collett must go, depsite the fake niceness he displayed yesterday, nothing else will save the BNP.

Anonymous said...

What i saw on Lee barnes' post about Hannam and Collett and the two teenage girls is extraordinary.

"Yes, my lord, I speak for the defence, my two clients cant be at fault because the doorman and bar staff at the nightclub let them in and served then drinks! So there is no crime there my lord".

Does this prat really have a law degree or did he buy it from some online shop based in Panama?

a man from brum said...

No compromise. There has to be radical reform at the top of the party. We can’t go back to the status quo. We must stand our ground and force Griffin to act to bring BNP into the modern world and become a party which will widen its appeal and support base. We have to see off the neanderthals . We have to rid ourselves of the nutzis. We have the chance at last. Please don’t blow it now.

Anti-gag said...

I’m afraid this article contains a mistake that I would now like to put straight.

I was present at the North West regional meeting, which voted for Chris Jackson to be nominated as the new NW regional organiser. Everyone who was at that meeting knows that I spoke out against that motion very strongly indeed, and at first mine was the only hand put up against the motion.

Later on Clive Jefferson; (one of the members of Nick’s security team, that on Wednesday persuaded me to toe the party line during the current problems), changed his vote and rejected the motion. It is however true that that meeting did indeed vote, by a large majority, to put Chris Jackson forward as NW organiser. I didn’t like that, but in a democratic party you have to accept the decision of the majority.

From
Chris Hill
(Lancaster)

Leicestershire member said...

As this issue could have serious implications long- term, ALL MEMBERS should of been invited to hear what both camps said at Leicestershire.

The question is who went to the meeting at Leicester. Was it a meeting behind closed doors, if so that is wrong as we are a meant to be members party.

I know for one as a member in Leicestershire, and one for years I wasn't aware of any meeting taking place in Leicester.

Too much of our party's business is now done behind doors. Many of the so-called Advisory Council members were never voted onto that body via ballots. Including the likes of Collett, Darby and Kemp.


To be blunt it is the old hands that have given the BNP a bad image. And US who have tryed to remove this image and time and time again having to defend what these people have done in years gone by.

The party needs to move forward and the likes of Griffin, Wingfield, Bean, Darby et al have to now need to train people who are younger to take over the reigns it is the natural way forward.

Anonymous said...

I really hope Sadie does see through the lies that came out of Colletts mouth, Griffin is such a good actor do NOT fall for his tears and his sorrys.

They both tried it with Angela but she was wise enough to see through them, Griffin also tried to buy Angela with an all expenses holiday abroad till the storm blew over which she refused.

Mark Wain said...

Taken from Melton's blog:

On Saturday 15th December Cllr James North the Melton and Rutland organiser. Alongside Keith Addison the Melton and Rutland fund holder and Matthew Sleath the YBNP contact for the area attending the Leicestershire branch meeting along with Sadie Graham, Nina Brown, Matt Single, Mark Collett, Dave Hannam, John Walker and the party chairman Nick Griffin.
The main purpose of this meeting outlined by the Leicester organiser Geoff Dickens was to see reconciliation between both sides and hopefully the meeting took a step in that direction! A motion was put forward by our local organiser Cllr James North, to have Sadie’s membership reinstated into the party. This motion was seconded by Mark Collet and passes by the whole membership.
This motion put forward did not include any conditions as reported elsewhere but several requests were made after the motion was passed they included the removal of the enough is enough Blog within a week and the return of Sadie’s computer.
This hopefully can be a turning point in this week’s chaos. United we stand, Divided we fall. For all people involved in this, we ask to take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Listen to each other and most importantly compromise. We can overcome this and be a better party for it


So just out of interest, what has changed? Because to be fair, I REALLY can't see it?!

Anonymous said...

lawyer said...
'Therefore, those involved are guilty of conspiracy to commit burglary, an offence which carries up to 14 years in prison'.

I wonder how those BNP security members who entered Sadie's home feel knowing that Griffin has placed them in a position where they are looking at a prison sentence?

Anonymous said...

At a time when we are trying hard to place ourselves as a Christian-focused party with a strong belief in fundamental Christian family values how odd it is that Nick is tolerating the presence of Arthur Kemp at the very heart of this cabal.

The Christian Council of Britain was the first serious Christian nationalist venture to be launched in 2006 , getting itself well established. Then Nick Griffin was interviewed on Texas based DayStar TV in October, the second largest Christian broadcaster on the planet attracting 5m live viewers every day. Some 40m Britons tick the "Christian" box on census returns and other forms - an electorate just waiting for a family values party such as the BNP to make itself present. It is an electorate we need to chase and while many of us members are agnostics or aetheists we cannot dismiss the contributions that Christianity has made to our culture and our society for the past 1500 years.

Arthur is (as of Friday 14th) the new head of the Party's Internet operation

Arthur is no ally of Christianity and while the thorough research for his book "March of the Titans - A history of the white race", cannot be faulted in the most part, some of our new Christian supporters may be a bit offended by Arthur's conclusion that Christianity is a blood thirsty religion and the "youngest religion".

http://www.white-history.com/hwr17.htm

"So it was that Christianity came to be the dominant religion of Europe - the first religion to convert by mass murder.

The original White religion had never tried to convert followers upon pain of death, and had never waged a war in its name - and as such it was psychologically unprepared to do battle with a Middle Eastern religion which engendered a genocidal fanaticism amongst its followers.

Once the Christians had run out of pagans to kill, they turned upon themselves in a violent and bloody fratricidal conflict which saw the Church split and the various protagonists kill each other in a crazed blood lust.

Fully one third of the entire White race was killed in a series of major Christian Wars in Europe - these events are dealt with in a later chapter, along with the effect of Christianity upon the development of science, history, art and social life."

Associating Christianity with pre-Christian cults such as Mithraism is a great way to lose the goodwill of Christian supporters.

http://www.white-history.com/hwr17a.htm

Is this a deliberate attempt at political suicide or does Kemp have his own agenda?

Dundeecol said...

I joined the BNP because I couldn't stand seeing what was happening in Britain. My first ever BNP experiance was in Halifax. After that day I immediately joined up. I have since been involved in the general election campaign, helping out as much as I could as well as attending the count at the SECC. I have also stood as a candidate at the Scottish parliamentary elections (Mid Scotland & Fife).

I saw first hand the unfair treatment of both Nick and Mark by the CPS. It now seems that Nick is prepared to do exactly to his own people that which was done to him.

I truly regret that I have cancelled all regular donations to the party (Scottish heritage) and neither my Fiance, any of my family or I will be renewing our memberships until this is sorted out.

Colin Cox
Dundee

Albion1983 said...

The question is who went to the meeting at Leicester. Was it a meeting behind closed doors, if so that is wrong as we are a meant to be members party.

I know for one as a member in Leicestershire, and one for years I wasn't aware of any meeting taking place in Leicester.


If you didn't know that Leicestershire's branch meeting was taking place then you are not a member in Leicestershire.

Did you receive a Leicestershire branch bulletin? They were sent out to all paid up members and stated quite clearly the date and RV of the meeting.

tonydj said...

Chris Hill is right to correct the minor error regarding the meeting which selected Chris Jackson.

As for the recent North West meeting, this was filmed by the BNPTV and I would like to see it broadcast so we can make up our own mind.

David Jones

Anonymous said...

If you are thinking of renewing your BNP membership, rather than cash or cheque, use the BNP's new credit card machine! Why use a credit card? If the Griffin decides to take your money then cancel your membership, then you can contact your credit card company and get it "charged back" for breach of contract. That is your legal right, however, I am not sure you can do it if the transaction is only £30?

Anonymous said...

The Leicestershire meeting was the usual bi-monthly affair, open to all. If you receive the bulletin, you would know. At the time of going to press, NG was not listed as a speaker but that was some weeks back.

nina said...

Leicestershire memember, yesterday's was a Leicester Branch meeting chaired by Geoff Dickens. It was open for anyone to attend and certainly wasnt held behind closed doors at all.

East Birmingham BNP said...

We have to be very careful at this point. Griffin is clearly trying to break the rebellion. He will try to draw key figures back into his camp, he is looking for a weak link. He believes that defections will demoralise his opponents.

His next move will be to try and make this into an debate about his leadership. He knows that if it comes to an election his army of armchair members, who have never been to so much as a meeting, will give him victory. He also knows that an element of those now supporting Sadie will not "go nuclear" and dispense with his services. Although he will be hoping that such a contest does not take place.

He has not adopted this strategy as yet because any leadership contest will quantify the damage this episode has caused. It also runs the risk that a significant vote against him might leave his position untenable.

However for all his attempts to downplay this "minor incident" he is clearly getting desperate. He ran a massive risk yesterday in facing Sadie with Collett. His and Darby’s attempts to aggressively ignore this issue on the BNP site is becoming laughable. Particularly to those aware of the frenetic campaign of the Griffin cultists. Time is not on his side.

This rebellion is potentially one defection away from victory and one from defeat. Griffin is particularly vulnerable to the defection of his GLA candidates. He is prepared to tolerate the evisceration of the activist base because he thinks that the future of the BNP is a pressure group using the GLA seats in order to generate air time for Griffin, sorry the BNP. Indeed he would be more than happy to see the troublesome up-start councillors gone and their activists with them. So long as he has enough paper members to finance the operation. Obviously if his GLA candidates defect he has nowhere to go.

Sadie should now explicitly state her minimum demands. The expulsion of Collett and Co, dropping the charges against her, an apology from Griffin. That's enough that Griffin will never concede but little enough that most of the rebel members can support it all the way.

Personally I can no longer ignore Collett and I have lost all faith in and respect for Griffin. I will not be supporting the Party in any form while he is still chairman. There is no point anyway, Griffin has so tarnished his own name and so divided the Party that real progress under his leadership is impossible.

Spencer (East Birmingham)

Anonymous said...

I can't get into the BNP Forum so I presume I'm banned but no one told me. Is that the way it works?

Former Glasgow official said...

Anonymous said...

What i saw on Lee barnes' post about Hannam and Collett and the two teenage girls is extraordinary.

"Yes, my lord, I speak for the defence, my two clients cant be at fault because the doorman and bar staff at the nightclub let them in and served then drinks! So there is no crime there my lord".

Does this prat really have a law degree or did he buy it from some online shop based in Panama?

Can you believe the scumbag is now prepared to join the BNP to support Griffin and Collett. The BNP Loyalists argued at AC meetings for years that this guy should not be head of the BNP's legal team because he refused to join the party and was therefore unaccountable to the membership or covered by the constitution. Griffin defended Barnes like he does Collett.

Just like this Collett/Hannam affair the good people like Kenny and Sadie are getting punished for standing up at the highest levels within the party and speaking out in defence of the membership and the party.

Griffin fears the fact that they are pure nationalists driven by the love of our people and the desire to see them free again and not money, status and ego like Collett.

Collett’s cockroach said...

I’ve just read a comment by Chris hill above in which he say’s

(one of the members of Nick’s security team, that on Wednesday persuaded me to toe the party line during the current problems)

Now it seems to me that he is admitting he was lent on to take Griffins side by a group of Griffin’s goons. If this is true, and it does seem to be, he can’t be much of a man. If this is the standard of Griffin's support then he really is in trouble.

Leicestershire member said...

Yes I'm a paid up member in Leicestershire. As far as I'm aware all members.

At the previous meeting everyone was told that groups in Leicestershire, but outside of the main Leicester branch would be informed when the next meeting would be.

In light of recent events everyone in Charnwood, Melton and Northwest Leicestershire should of been notified.

wotan said...

Is there anyway we (The BNP) can sort this out as this is the first time in nearly 30 years that we've been on a breakthrough. I know things have to be sorted but not so publicly. I dont know the ins and outs of everything but I do like Nick and Kenny and think that they both do an excelent job in representing the British people. I'm gutted

tonydj said...

We seem to be discussing a lot of OPINION, so lets look at one single FACT from last Wednesday's North West meeting. (12th December).

We were told by the Chairman Mr Griffin that Mark Collett often subsidises the Party from his own Credit Card to the sum of £5000.

I asked whether these contributions were reported to the Electoral Commission. We were told that they were not. It was not necessary sinnce the company doing the printing of the liturature was Mark's company.

This is wrong. The Electoral commission require that the money be reported as a donation. However, a check on the EC's website shows no record of a donation, or loan, from ANY Collett. Such a loan or donation is perfectly legal.

THEREFORE:- one of three things has occured.

1) There has never been a donation of the size reported by Mr Griffin.

2) Such a donation has not been reported through wilful defiance of the law, or

3) Such a donation has not been made through ignorance and / or stupidity and / or laziness.

I await a response

Anonymous said...

As for the recent North West meeting, this was filmed by the BNPTV and I would like to see it broadcast so we can make up our own mind.

David Jones

David please don't be fooled by footage of the meeting on BNPTV. What was said at the meeting and what is shown on BNPTV will be a different story. It will have been very carefully edited before release.

Anonymous said...

@ Mark

"So just out of interest, what has changed? Because to be fair, I REALLY can't see it?!"

I agree, I've seen insults bandied about, good members called reds, and accused of working with the left, in a mythical palace coup, I've even heard talk about returning someones personal property, that shouldn't have been taken in the first place, but no mention of the issues that this was about.

As others have said a large number of people have gone out on a limb to support this effort to rid the party of the gross liabilities that are MC, and DH, and until that's even on the agenda then I don't see how any concessions can be made anywhere.

To take down this blog, and to deny a voice to those people, in return for nothing, would be a serious mistake.

I'm sorry, I know there are people involved in this who are pro-Griffin, and others are anti-Griffin, but which ever side of that particular divide anyone belongs to it has to be agreed that at present NG is in no position to issue demands, or to expect things from other people.

He could have ended this days ago, but he's made no attempt to end it, he's just insulted people, helped blow it out of proportion, and taint the entire party.

In that respect I can see why many who started this supporting him, but wanting MC and DH gone, are now turning on him.

He's undermining his own position, he's making himself look weak, and incompetent, and I'd appeal to him to stop and think about that fact.

There are solutions, valid solutions, ways that Griffin, and the party, can regain some level of credibility, but those solutions require the dismissal of MC and DH, nothing short of that is acceptable.

To a degree Nick painted himself into a corner with his silly, and derisory cabinet reshuffle. He needs to be aware that another such blunder could put him in a position where there is no comeback.

He needs to think carefully about this, because, to quote someone else, "Confucius say, olive branch only held out till arm gets tired."

The sands of time are ticking down, and Griffin has to realize that he's the one who needs to find a solution, because we're the side that's been reasonable, and have had the olive branch held out to him since day one.

I've watched a few arms drop since then, and I imagine more will be dropping on a daily basis.

Nick would be a fool to stall, or to play games much longer, and though, if he chose that route, he would survive, his credibility and standing would be lost for life.

I can understand that he doesn't want to give in to 'demands' through fear of looking weak, but there are other options, he can always have MC and DH fall on their swords, and spin it with a line of "reluctantly excepting their resignations" therefore separating himself from the act, and being able to say he didn't concede to demands.

There are other ways too, but one thing is certain, stubbornly doing nothing, except insulting members, and splitting the party, is not one of them.

Come on Nick, if you're half the politician you claim to be you can sort this out!

Anonymous said...

Collett’s cockroach doesn’t know the half of it, Hill was asked to leave the NW meeting last Wednesday after asking question that Griffin didn’t like. He was clearly not on Griffin’s side then. I don’t know what happened after that as I was still in the room, but I guess they got to him outside because he does seem to have changed sides all of a sudden.

Bill Henderson said...

tonydj said...

We seem to be discussing a lot of OPINION, so lets look at one single FACT from last Wednesday's North West meeting. (12th December).

We were told by the Chairman Mr Griffin that Mark Collett often subsidises the Party from his own Credit Card to the sum of £5000.


There are a couple of points here.

Firstly I really think that Collett's subsidy is more in the nature of a loan

Secondly, he must have one big salary or profitable company to be able to chuck in the odd 5K from time to time

Bill Henderson said...

The BNP finances would appear to be somewhat in disarry.

I wonder what is going to happen when no audited financial statements for the 2006 fiscal year have been produced by December 31, 2007

And even more interesting might be the reaction of the Electoral Coimmission when the already tardy legal report isn't filed by the end of this year.

Forseti said...

Tonydj, what exactly are you saying? If Collett uses his credit card on behalf of the BNP and later gets reimbursed, that is not a reportable donation. If Collett's printing company is doing BNP printing without charging, that is a reportable notional donation but I cannot see how that would involve Collett's credit card. Maybe I'm dense but I would appreciate your clarification.

Anonymous said...

I am no longer interested in what others who have been expelled from the BNP want, I know their love for the cause may see them go back without their aims being meet, such is life.
I have said it before and I say it again.
MC has to go, all those resigned or expelled have to come back.
At the very least.
It will still leave us with the problem of our "illustrious leader" and what to do.
But that it seems is up to him and his reactions.

martyn said...

"Secondly, he must have one big salary or profitable company to be able to chuck in the odd 5K from time to time"
his only salary comes from the bnp that shows all the money/donations we pay ,collett is making a mint.
i,ve been told he is the biggest earner in the whole party.

Banned from the forum said...

Anonymous said...

I can't get into the BNP Forum so I presume I'm banned but no one told me. Is that the way it works?

Well Lee Barnes is back as a moderator along with Dave Shapcott who refused to sign a Form 3 to do the job previously to protect members and quit the job instead. Looks like those who think they are a law unto themselves are being given free reign by Griffin.

Yorkie said...

Collett's £5k is more than Sadie, Ian, Kenny and Nicholla made combined a month. How the feck does a full-time BNP employee manage to have £5k and live the lifestyle he does while the rest of them are constantly on the breadline?

tonydj said...

Dear Forseti and others

I reported what we were told at the meeting. It was filmed from 20.35hrs to past 2315 hrs so any version placed on the web will be compared in length to these figures so we will be able to see the degree of editing etc.

Donations, nominal donations and loans ARE reportable to the EC. As described by The Chairman what happened was legal. BUT I find no record of a donation or loan on the EC web site.

Therefore either the donation or loan was NOT made, OR not reported OR the EC are in error.

Let BNPTV broadcast the FULL 3 hours OR make the FULL film available and show me a liar .

This does not come easy to me, I dearly wish it was not happening, but we are honest to ourselves or we are nothing.

stgeorge said...

Both sides in this claim to hard done by, try this for size. Each write an acurate statement of events, Nick and Sadie, and send copies to all members and let them decide who was right or wrong. I wonder which party would turn this idea down.

Sir Henry Morgan said...

Everyone

I'm the person who usually posts comments as Sir HM - which, as anyone who knows me knows, is my lazy shorthand for Sir Henry Morgan.

There is an imposter posting as me. I believe it may be the same imposter who's impersonating Green Arrow.

My own fault I suppose for being lazy.

From now on, I will comment in the full name of Sir Henry Morgan. Clicking on my name will take you back to my blogger profile which carries links to my two blogs - Reconquista and Sir Henry Morgan.

If a name is created carrying a link anywhere else, then it is not me. The proper me will always take you to the profile with my two blogs.

We now have to be wary of any name used on these and other comment threads because someone out there is impersonating whenever possible.

These are attempts to stir up trouble. On the Lancaster BNP blog a little earlier, the fake Green Arrow posted a comment suggesting that Antgag out to keep his mouth shut or it might get filled. That comment has now been removed.

So people - if someone you thought you knew posts a comment that offends you, or is uncharacteristic in any way, don't fly off the handle - check it out.

All comments by me from now on, anywhere on the web, will be the full Sir Henry Morgan, carrying the profile and blog links. Anything else is someone else.

That'll teach me for getting lazy this past few months.

Anonymous said...

please don't post!

just wanted to say that Barnes' latest blogs seem VERY damaging, and I'm concerned that support for you all will drop if Griffin and Co can make a good case that you intercepted emails and cooked the books. at the same time, Collett and co are absolutely killing any chance we have of winning our county back, and you did what you had to do (if Barnes is right). I'm just worried this whole thing is going to destroy everything. good luck!

Forseti said...

Tonydj said: "Donations, nominal donations and loans ARE reportable to the EC. As described by The Chairman what happened was legal. BUT I find no record of a donation or loan on the EC web site.

"Therefore either the donation or loan was NOT made, OR not reported OR the EC are in error."

Repayable loans are not donations and do not have to be reported to the Electoral Commission as loans. Any loans outstanding at 31 December should be included as creditors on the BNP's balance sheet but the accounts do not have to disclose the identity of the creditor. I expect creditors to be a very large figure on the balance sheet at 31 December 2006 as the extent of the party's insolvency may be one of the reasons for the delay in these accounts.

Bourne Patriot said...

At the end of Martin Wingfield’s pontification over the situation, and the blaming in advance any failure in the GLA elections on those that instigated this essential rebellion…

[Wingfield Said]
“Just remember that anyone who holds the best interests of British Nationalism above all other concerns - personal or political - would never engage in activity which might damage the only vehicle capable of delivering salvation to the British people.”

How right you are Martin, look at who secretly sent his heavies to the houses of dedicated activists, who, despite many attempts to highlight the damage Collett and crew were causing, had been faced with a brick wall, and robbed them. Then proceeded to wash the dirty linen on the website as if it justified burglary. Airing other illegally obtained material such as bugged telephone calls, and private emails. Have a good long look at your statement and apply it to Griffin. All this in a desperate first attempt to justify the disgraceful actions taken.

Had he the real interests of the country and nationalism at heart he would have dealt with the issue a long time ago, before real nationalists had to take such a difficult position. I suspect your job may well be downsized shortly as the number of organisers and fund holders resigning increases, the subscriptions to your rag diminish. The more the party tries to ignore this, the more damage is being done.

The BNP can actually come out of this stronger than ever, and can win in the GLA, but it requires the expulsion of 3 of your compatriots. Shed them, and the majority of those who have resigned on principle will return, stronger than before and ready to fight the good fight and win. Leave the cancer within your party, and they will not. While the trust your membership had will not return immediately, and neither should it following such disgraceful behaviour, the drive of these individuals is strong, and the will to push the nationalist agenda forward is paramount to them, either with or without the BNP.

There is not one criticism of the current management on any of the articles comments boards on the BNP website and many have been barred from the BNP forum for exercising their right to free speech. I would suggest that a few have been posted, but the fact you have very few comments in support of your article, and this blog attracts tens if not hundreds for each post suggests that your support is dwindling, and that come January, when the memberships stop coming in, and the paper sales diminish, your desperation will show itself ever more vehemently.

Just remember, nobody in this disagrees with the BNP manifesto, and the aims of the party. But if every time we have our name mentioned it’s surrounded by “racist”, “Nazi” or associated with “holocaust denial” we will never be strong. If all you want is “Yes” men and women, then your endeavours will fail. Is that really what you want Mr Wingfield?

tonydj said...

Forseti said:- "Repayable loans are not donations and do not have to be reported to the Electoral Commission as loans."

The Electoral Commission say:-

Loans

Loans and other credit arrangements, including credit facilities and the provision of
security or a guarantee on behalf of a regulated donee must also be reported. The
same thresholds and rules about aggregation apply to reporting of loans as to
donations.
Regulated donees must provide the name, address and other relevant details of the
lender or guarantor. Details of the value, terms and conditions of the loan must also
be reported.
Regulated donees must also report on any changes to the terms and conditions of
existing loans. The changes must be reported as they occur."

Anonymous said...

tonydj is clearly correct.

If loans were not reportable then the major parties would be able to get away with keeping huge interest free loans secret; or almost as bad huge loans (even with interest repayable) that they would never be able to obtain in a normal commerccial manner.

Anonymous said...

I have just cancelled my subs to the TC. I hope that Sadie and all the other good people who are fighting on behalf of a decent, moderate BNP win. If Mr Collett stays, then I will resign my membership permanently.

Daisy May said...

Having been a nationalist for over 50 years. I was a member in the NF in the early 80s when it was wrecked by a few of its its own members, most of those wreckers now live in America, !!

History certainly has a way of repeating itself. I note the farmer who allows the RBW to be held on his land will cancel if Collette and Hanan are not demoted or kicked out , and by looking at the amount of key members on this site who agree with him I believe for the sake of our party that Nick Griffin must demote those two people.

A General will lose the war without the full support of his fellow officers and troops, this must not be allowed to happen due to a couple of apparently disliked and arrogant and immature lieutenants, Yes for the sake of the BNP they must be demoted and reduced to the ranks I’m sure there will be plenty of other important work they can do.

So come on Nick do your job because time and personal friendships is no longer a choice! put it to the entire membership to vote on , should Hanan and Collette go, or should Graham and Smith stay, the answer to this dilemma is simple, put it to a vote by the rank and file membership,

That way no individual person is put in the dock, or guilty of plotting treason. I believe that is the only option you have to save the party from a severe setback.

Nick Barefoot,

valentine grey said...

The BNP has a dynamic and life of its own, it is outgrowing its founders. New blood, new energy,new ideas, bound by a Patriotic Nationalist formula of morality, self belief and unity what is happening now are the birth pangs of a democratic BNP a natural evolutionary progressive development.

Peter said...

Bourne Patriot said...
I suspect your job (the editor of Voice of Freedom - Martin Wingfield's) may well be downsized shortly as the number of organisers and fund holders resigning increases, the subscriptions to your rag diminish.

Whilst I am disappointed that Martin has apparently taken sides with Nick in this dispute, I cannot agree that VoF is 'is a rag'. I think it is an excellant journal and very professionally edited by Martin. I hope that he will be able to continue in that role whatever the final outcome of this campaign.

Peter Phillips
(crawley & Horsham Branch)