http://bfbwwiii.blogspot.com/
We BNPers may not forget sleights – but we don’t forget favours either. Thank you Phil. If you ever need the favour returning, don’t be backward about coming forward. Phil is not a party member.
A little perseverance will be required from the readers of this post. It is necessarily a very long post in order to fully demonstrate the duplicity of the opponents of the BNP. There is, as you might expect, a starring role for Peter Franzen, founder and leader of the Community Action Party; taking the co-starring role is the Wigan Evening Post/Observer/ Reporter, who all combine on the net to become ‘Wigan Today’. Lengthy as this post is, I believe that once you start reading it your interest will be grabbed to such an extent you will read it right through. I’m not one of those people who is so contemptuous of the intellectual capacity of the average Briton as to think that all you’re capable of taking in is a soundbite. I leave that sort of thing to Lord Voldemort (Mandelson) and his spinmeister cronies in his and other political parties. Contrary to the story put out by our opponents, we in the BNP are not thick knuckledraggers, and nor do we think most of you are, despite the way education has been wrecked over the past thirty years (no, it didn’t start with Labour; all they did was accelerate the decline).
http://www.wigantoday.net/wigannews
It is the role of Wigan Today that we find particularly sinister. All we in the BNP ask of the media is that they be neutral and impartial, and report only the truth, whether it be good for us, or bad for us – nothing more, but certainly nothing less. These they appear unable and/or unwilling to be. Even the BBC, famously not exactly enamoured of the BNP, has been more honest about events last Friday evening in Leigh (the infamous “Hammer Attack”) than has our local paper.
This post contains many ‘screengrabs’. These are, in effect, photographs of pages from the web, and they render events like Wigan News’ attempt at a Stalinesque airbrush from history, of the comment conversation on one of their threads over the weekend, an exercise in futility in the computer and internet age.
I personally believe ( that is, it is my opinion only and it’s possible I’m wrong – but make your own minds up. I am incidentally, a qualified but non-practising psychologist in the field of Cognitive Science) this was done to hide the fact that Peter Franzen made an utter fool of himself while his mind disintegrated in public. My own brother has a copy of my entire screengrab file; he is a practising highly experienced psychiatrist (that, in effect, is a psychologist who is also a medical doctor) – and he tells me he has genuine concerns about Franzen, and feels Franzen “demonstrated the hallmarks of someone slightly dissociated which could happen to one who is panicking somewhat”. Would Wigan Today take the same care to protect, say, the Wigan BNP organiser, or me the fund-holder and election agent, the only two BNP officers in Wigan, from the same embarrassment and public humiliation? Somehow we doubt this. Indeed, we believe they would pounce on it as an opportunity to discredit us and the BNP. And panicking? Oh yes, but it’s not just Franzen – it’s the entire political establishment and social elite. They know full well that we intend to take away from them their entire train set – their gravy train set. In private conversations even Labour MPs fear the possibility that the BNP may take five or six seats in the upcoming Euro-elections. Internal to the party we have been told not to raise our expectations and to be grateful to the voting public if we even take one. That is to preserve our morale. There is nothing worse for morale than raising it up and then dropping it again. However, I speak to the general public, the proverbial man in the street. I also read blogs and the comments in places such as the Telegraph and the Guardian. Oh boy – no wonder the elite is panicking. Five or six seats as Labour MPs fear? Not a chance. I personally predict at least eight. A vote for the BNP is no longer a wasted vote.
Anyhow, read the story of events and make your own minds up whether you want to bother buying the Wigan local papers in future. They obviously can’t be trusted to be truthful. And as for Peter Franzen – after his performance over the weekend he would be wise to retire completely from politics, if only to save himself from further humiliation and embarrassment. From the things he said he obviously thinks the people of Wigan are stupid and gullible … but does he think the BNP has no memory and wont remind Wigan people of Franzen’s opinion of them, in detail, on every necessary occasion?
The whole sequence of events started on Thursday when this appeared on the web:
http://www.labournet.net/antiracism/0903/bnp1.html
(Screengrabbed and stashed in various safe places – deletion will protect no one)
As you can see, Peter Franzen was involved from the very beginning. Indeed, it could quite easily be said that he initiated the whole sequence of events that led to the hammer attack – an attack that we in the BNP consider to be a premeditated attempt to murder a BNP member going about his lawful business. After all, it’s not often you find a claw hammer lying around in the street just about the time you spontaneously decide to hammer someone. The perp had the hammer in advance. So he had the idea in advance – premeditation. Premeditation, plus hammer blows (two off) to the head - attempted murder. Who are the knuckledraggers again?
Next day, the Friday of the attack, Wigan Today posted the following story:
http://www.wigantoday.net/wigannews/BNP-meeting-cancelled.5069761.jp
(again: screengrabbed and stashed - and distributed)
This generated something over 75 comments during that day and night. However, as regular readers of Wigan Today know, we have a phantom deleter amongst us, and today
he was on the prowl. Almost all of that first batch of comments was deleted (censored), by, one can only assume, the phantom deleter. Certainly no one believes it to have been the Wigan Today editorial staff. These were all comments made before the hammer attack, or at least before news of the attack was widely known. However, very late in the evening after I got home from the roadshow, I needed to say something about events, and having nowhere else to say it, I said it in the comments to this Wigan Today article. Here it is [comment 80].
This is the conversation in Wigan Today that the editorial team did not want you read. There was no profanity, no threats. But they did not want you to read it. Read it here and you will see why. Peter Franzen made an utter fool of himself.
And to repeat my comment No 80 (above) in easily readable form:
Difficult to recognise, from that, the standard leftard view that we are white supremacist racists and would make mixed race marriages illegal. White BNP member victim with Chinese wife; and black, claw hammer wielding, attacker
That was it for the comments on the Friday night and early hours of Saturday morning.
The following day, the Saturday immediately following the Friday hammer attack, Wigan Today ran a story on it – or at least what passes for a story:
http://www.wigantoday.net/wigannews/Hammer-attack-on-man-in.5072880.jp
I’m not sure that this version of events really ought to be dignified by description as a story, but language fails me here, so story I will have to call it. It carries no sense whatsoever of the course of events – who started it, how many attackers, how many attacked … and leaves one with a vague feeling that it was some sort of straightforward street brawl between two evenly matched gangs. Nothing, as we all now know, could be further from the truth.
A mere four unarmed members of the BNP were attacked by some thirty-plus leftard supporters of the SWP/UAF/CAP/Respect Party, armed with hammers at the minimum. Why did the police arrest only one man? There is no sense of any of this in that Wigan Today story.
And a wound to the head inflicted with a claw hammer not a serious injury? No picture of course – sounds like he just had a bump on the head. And no mention of course, that the man who carried it out was not native British. So: not native British and described by others as black, attacking a native British – white – member of the BNP, with a hammer, and yet no one has seen fit to call this what it really is: a racially aggravated attempted murder?
Then there are the claims about the reasons the venue cancelled the event – which was much more than a mere meeting. We in the BNP dispute those claims, and Dr. Mather has blogged on these matters in a couple of earlier posts, so I will not go into that here, although it is a topic we will repeatedly visit in the future. The police are intimately involved.
There was, of course, no comment facility allowed for this story. We wonder why not?
Here is the BBC version of that same story, published on that same day. Obviously the BBC made the effort to send a reporter to Leigh to dig out a few facts and independent witness accounts. And credit to the BBC (and by God you have no idea how much it pains me to say that), they published as they found. The story sounds as if it is of an entirely different event:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7943556.stm
Take special note of the following :
“Violence broke out as 30 people surrounded a BNP vehicle outside the Ellesmere Pub in St Helens Road in Leigh on Friday evening, said police.”
[ … ]
“One witness told BBC News: "They had hammers and they smacked the vehicle to pieces, smashed all the windows and tore off the bumper, completely decimated it.
"I was shocked at what I saw." “
Note use of the plural in reference to the hammers. So why only one arrest? I’m sure if I or any other BNP member were in a fracas of an evening, and were in possession of hammers or anything else that could be used as a weapon, we would all be arrested. We all know that.
So about thirty people with hammers assaulted a vehicle with four BNP members in it.
No hint of that on our local newspaper (NEWSpaper??), Wigan Today.
It is noted on various BBC-monitoring websites that the BBC is in the habit of altering stories and occasionally making them disappear if they turn out to be politically inconvenient.
Accordingly, I have this screengrabbed, stashed, and distributed too – along with all the Wigan Today stories.
Now then – this hammer attack in our borough needed discussing. However, with no comment facility permitted for the attack story on the Saturday, we gravitated to the previous story about the meeting being cancelled at Leigh (relevant links and screengrabs above).
Then came a massive – by Wigan Today standards – commenting session stretching across Saturday and Sunday and up into Sunday evening, of over 200 comments. Apart from two comments, none of these were deleted at the time – either the phantom deleter was away for the weekend, or he was as fascinated by the conversation as anyone else living locally (it wouldn’t have mattered anyway – I was screengrabbing almost comment by comment as they went up, and only missed one). Peter Franzen played a prominent, and unintentionally hilarious, part in this conversation. As he is despised by almost every other politician in Wigan from MPs to councillors and activists – including some, it must be said, from his own party - the Community Action Party – I can only assume half of Wigan echoed to the sounds of guffawing at his foolishness. The following screengrabs are extracts from the weekend conversation. Follow closely and watch the public mental disintegration of one Mr Peter Franzen as he had a couple of new holes ripped into his backside. He doesn’t have the sense God gave to the humble housebrick, and he absolutely does not have even enough of a sense of humour to recognise when he is being laughed at. Assuming he has one at all.
These are only extracts – I have all the in-between comments grabbed too. For this post – to keep it as small and neat as possible, I’ve formatted all the original comments used. My Screengrabs file contains the whole pages, as in that first screengrab posted above.
Comment 101 Franzen’s first comment:
It seems Peter hadn’t read the BBC story then. Very careless of him. And note – from his claims he seems to have been present from before the violence started, having apparently, so he claims, seen its very beginnings. This is an important reference point for later on in this account, as part of proving that not only he, but also Wigan Today are liars.
Franzen lies directly, and so simplistically that his lies could be detected by a child. However, Wigan Today lies indirectly by omission and misdirection. This, it should be noted good people, is far more dangerous to our well-being.
Here, with comment 110 is where I first entered the conversation:
This next is comment 111 by Franzen (again carelessness by me – clipping off the top). Do note an early attempt to distance himself from any repercussions. Not entirely stupid then, despite the awful transparency of this lie given that it was he who kicked the whole thing off (see first link near top of article, and the utterly fantastic version of events in comment 101) – he just think everyone else is. He must do because the lying just gets ever more fantastical as the comments progress. Consider his reckoning of being attacked with the BBC version of events. He’s in trouble and he knows it. But he obviously never listened to Healey’s dictum that when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. Oh no, not Franzen: he’s just hired a JCB. That he can think anyone could possibly believe any of this demonstrates an astounding arrogance. Man of the people Peter Franzen. And do notice the confession of cowardice: incites others to illegal action, but himself claims to have stayed out of it.
He was there before the violence started because he claims to have witnessed ‘BNP Nazi stormtroopers armed with hammers’ etc attacking a peaceful demonstration; then he didn’t arrive until after the violence had started. So which was it Peter? Surely your body can’t be as schizophrenic as your mind apparently is? Both there and not there at the same time? Schrodinger’s cat before the box is opened perhaps? Please, do explain.
Could it be Peter, that you just have a grudge against the BNP because our candidate in Golborne last year took more votes than you lost your seat to Labour by?
In comment 117 Peter Franzen is either showing the first signs of mental unravelling, or he is unable to stop the full extent of his arrogance towards, and contempt for, we mere ordinary people from coming to the fore. I am a BNP party officer, but he shows far more signs of the brutality of Nazism than anyone has ever seen coming from me, or from Dr. Mather, the other and more senior BNP party officer in Wigan. And he still can’t drop the lying.
And now Mr. Franzen is seriously losing it. He’s making very un-Franzen-like typos. Normally so careful. And what’s that dictum about holes and digging? He’s certainly getting his money’s worth out of that JCB. Only someone seriously rattled is going to bring – and do I read this right? – German Shepherd dogs into the accusation. And earlier it was SOME women and children – now apparently MOST of them were women and children. And he’s trying to change the direction of the conversation with talk of the Government. No Peter, this is about you and your lies. Hahahahah – German Shepherd dogs. Being attacked by those creatures is not something that would just slip your mind in your earlier accusations. Oh, and while we’re here – you said dogs, plural. How many were there Peter – must have been at least two eh? Or was it three, maybe four? More? A whole pack of them? Were they driving a Tiger tank by any chance? That was German too. Hah – that’s a good one Peter – German Shepherd dogs. You’re in the wrong business: maybe you ought to switch to writing fantasy fiction with an imagination like that.
Franzen’s mind disintegrating in public. How awfully embarrassing for his family.
Here’s what I said on the night – I was just struck too dumb in awe at his antics to say any more than this:
And Carter Ruck isn’t a particularly good bet these days Peter – hasn’t been the same since the ol’ man shuffled off this mortal coil a few years back. He was a Peter too. When are you popping down to London to see them? That alone will set you back a grand, and there’s no legal aid for Libel. We have our own lawyers now in the BNP – didn’t you know that? How does the CAP stand for in-house lawyers these days? Just asking like …
More typos – definitely rattled. Not quite the walkover you were expecting was it Peter? Not used to it are you. Word out of your party is that you wont tolerate anything but total submission to your word, otherwise you go off into a sulk
Ah yes TheJones – thus far. The editorial permissiveness was only because this conversation took place at the weekend when there was no editorial team present. You don’t think for one minute do you that sush superior people work at weekends? And as for the fracture: yes, it is making a creeping progress, and the Wigan Today team, by their actions on return to work Monday morning made quite clear which side of the fracture they have chosen.
That comment was the final comment of the conversation. Then the editorial team removed it. SO THAT IS THE CONVERSATION THEY DIDN’T WANT YOU – ANYONE - TO READ! Now comes the question: WHY didn’t they want you to read it? To be perfectly honest, as I’m not literally a mind-reader, I couldn’t tell you. You’ll have to make your own minds up about it. I can give no more than a few suggestions about my suspicions on the matter. First, the BNP came out well. The BNP was not shown to be Nazis/Fascists/racists/thugs etc. Regarding the usual ‘racist’ accusations – the most seriously injured BNP activist turns out to have a Chinese wife; one of the two BNP officers in Wigan turns out to have been married 24 years to an Asian woman, and has a mixed race child (well, she’s 20 now). The racist accusation isn’t looking too healthy is it – and the BNP as a party fully understands that affairs of the heart can’t be legislated against. Young men and young women fall in love with each other – how can that be legislated against? Do you claim we are racists or something? Do you dislike being shown to be lying? The BNP’s opposition showed themselves to be violent thugs. Their chief defender here, Peter Franzen, turns out to be at the very least a fantasist, at the worst a liar. Need I go on? A man who never took his psychological warfare studies past the Goebbels age, without realizing that in the present day even poorly educated Britons are now sophisticated enough to detect out and out lies of the Goebbels kind. And they have computers and internet connections.
The editorial team didn’t just censor the conversation, they removed all trace of the fact that it ever existed. That is how Stalin used to do things. He didn’t just airbrush people out of photographs – he had all trace of the fact that they had ever existed removed from official records and deleted from the past media. This is also how ‘Big Brother’ in George Orwell’s 1984 worked. Today at peace with EastAsia. An overnight change of alliances and next day we are at war with EastAsia, we have always been at war with EastAsia – and all records to the contrary expunged. That is what Wigan Today did to this conversation. They must have scored a First on Stalin studies. And for this to happen in the town Orwell is famous for his connection with, a town that is proud of that connection …
Unfortunately for them this sort of thing just doesn’t cut it in the age of the internet. There will be several people who took screengrabs of that entire conversation – just like I did. There is also, of course, the fact that the conversation, even if expunged from public viewing, is still present on the hard drives in the newspaper offices, and also on the servers. Then there is Google-Cache. Mr editor sir, have you heard of Google-Cache? Do you know what it does and how it works? I suggest you give yourself a rapid learning experience. And then there are the weblogs. People who ARE awarwe of events can report on them online; can produce the evidence that the media thinks it has expunged from the public record. We, and people like us are going to win Mr Editor. I suggest you have a rapid reappraisal of your choice of sides in the developing fracture. We in the BNP don’t expect you to take our side – we just expect you to report the truth and report it impartially. Nothing more, BUT CERTAINLY NOTHING LESS!
Who is the serious problem here – Peter Franzen and his thugs, or the media? I would say the media. Franzen and his thugs are trivial and can be handled. The media, however is a different matter. If the media doesn’t tell you then it becomes a non-story – it didn’t happen. If they don’t report on problems then those problems don’t exist. Or at least – they don’t exist in the minds of that vast majority of the public that weren’t personally involved. So, not knowing all the facts, how can people be expected to vote rationally? But that’s the whole point isn’t it Mr Editor, Mr Labour Party, you don’t want people to be in possession of all the facts so that they can arrive at a rational decision on how to cast their vote; you want them to just vote Labour out of tribal loyalty to the Labour Party as it used to be – the Labour Party I used to vote for, that I used to be a member of, that I used to be an activist for. You want the “my father always voted Labour so …” rule to last forever. Well my father always voted Labour but now I’m an activist with the BNP. Are you now going to claim that the day I resigned from the Labour Party in 1999 I suddenly became a Nazi/thug/Fascist/racist/knuckledragger etc? I resigned from the Labour party because it finally penetrated my stubborn – and you don’t know stubborn until you know either my father or me – mind that this is no longer the Labour Party. A group of entryists have penetrated it and taken it over, very cleverly retaining use of the name that so many people are tribally loyal to. Those same entryists have done the same to what once the respectable and respected (even if disliked and disagreed with) Conservative Party. The Liberal Democratic Party has always been away somewhere on a planet of their own.
With reference to my screengrabs: on Monday morning when Wigan Today expunged all trace of that conversation having ever taken place, I had a minor episode of paranoia. I had stated quite clearly that I had the entire conversation grabbed, and, the police being in on this conspiracy to do down the BNP, I half expected a visit to confiscate my computer and remove the evidence (possibly planting evidence of paedophile pictures in its place, as seems to happen to so many people these days? I even find myself feeling a little sympathy for Joe Shaw, and can’t get rid of that little niggling voice in the back of my head that says “I wonder?”. There is none, of course, but once you have your hands on someone’s computer, well …) Anyway, I distributed my entire collection of screen grabs off to various internet acquaintances nationwide, and also a copy to each of two people in Australia and Canada, with requests to further distribute nationally (to them) and internationally. The evidence is now available outside the jurisdiction of the British political/media/police etc. My copy has become irrelevant – take it and it can be acquired from elsewhere. Like I said, or at least implied, earlier – we are living in the computer and internet age – old methods of political promotion and suppression no longer work. The BNP has learned this lesson well.
Anyway, is that the end of the story regarding the Leigh incident and news and comment about it? Well, no, as it happens.
I informed earlier of, and provided a link to, the Wigan Today report of the Leigh incident, as published on Saturday morning. The expunged conversation, of course, entirely trashed that story. What did Wigan Today do? First of all, on Monday morning they expunged the conversation from the public record (they thought), and then they published this, Version 2 of the Leigh incident:
They even included a picture of Tony Ward which would indicate that their claim he was only trivially injured was either a lie, or they are taking their story from the word of someone who was an interested party. Peter Franzen perhaps? Well what do you know – there it is in Version 2 – quotes from one Mr Peter Franzen, the very man who had been shown up to be at best a fantasist, at worst an out and out liar, in the conversation that has now been conveniently expunged (they think) from the public record. Either the Wigan Today editorial team is stupid and gullible, or they think the people of Wigan are stupid and gullible. Well I for one do not think the editorial team is stupid and gullible (well, they may be gullible, but they’re not stupid), so I have to ask the people of Wigan: are you going to keep giving your money to these people by buying their products now that you’ve found out what they think of you? Just asking.
So we have a newspaper that has learned the truth about Franzen, but all it does is remove the evidence of that truth and then quotes … Franzen. Wigan Today had an unforced choice: it could be on the side of reporting the truth – which is what is expected of the media, or it could be on the side of reporting the lie. It chose the lie. Can its impartiality be ever again trusted? I have been told – though I haven’t seen it myself – that Franzen repeated his unbelievable allegations regarding stormtroopers, hammers and German Shepherd dogs in the Wigan Evening Post letters. Why is Franzen permitted to repeat his lies while the BNP is refused permission to tell the truth? They even refuse to run paid-for adverts from us.
Franzen and his boot (hammer) boys is not the problem. The media is the problem. It’s not just the BNP’s problem – it’s the problem of the entire population of Wigan and the rest of Britain. It deliberately keeps you ignorant of the facts.
We will be publishing more about this co-ordinated campaign against the BNP in coming weeks. We have reported the bare bones – just the bare bones – of the police’s part in it; now a small piece (despite the length of this article, it’s still only a small piece) of the media’s part in it. The established church in Manchester has recently announced its part in it. The established political parties have announced their part in it (“Vote for anyone but the BNP”. D. Cameron), as has the police and media. More? Do let us know. These people would be surprised at the places where we have sympathizers who provide us with information.
It appears the powers that be, in their desperate panic, have decided to implement Robert Scumbage’s Zimbabwe method of political campaigning. Use force and severe violence to intimidate the opposition; use the police to make it difficult for the opposition to operate a campaign; and use the media to suppress the truth and generally misinform the public. And rumours abound that there are plans afoot to use the British Army on the streets of Britain. All straight out of President Scumbage’s book of politics. If you the voting public let them get away with this, then you and this country are facing a very sad future as the European Zimbabwe. They are also introducing the beginnings of Scumbage’s idea of an acceptable inflation rate by the use of “Quantitative Easing” – just a Euphemism for printing vast amounts of fiat money. Is anyone comfortable with all this? Are you ready for the £1,000,000 note? And do you have the wheelbarrow you’ll need to carry enough of them to buy a loaf of bread?
Beat them and their methods: Vote BNP.
Morg
