The leadership contest is hotting upand getting nasty.
On the official website the two candidates give their 500 word statements, provoking a barrage of comments 95% of which attack Brons and praise Griffin.
This seems strange and not in keeping with what people are telling me.
I believe Griffin's attack dogs have been loosed from their not very tight leashes.
Many of the statements they make are patent lies. It is a pity that they seem incapable of civilised discussion without resorting to untruths.
Today there are two NW "hustings", one at 5 pm in Salford and one later in Liverpool.
The fact that there are two on the same day with the first being so early (and inconvenient for workers), and at such short notice demonstrates the underhand tactics of our present leader.
Who decided the times of these hustings and the short notice? The same person who dropped the proxy votes on the GMM two weeks ago. Mr Nick Griffin.
I note in his election leaflet his present jobs are MEP, Director of Publicity and editor of VoF and Party Leader.
I would not have thought he would have had time to be editor of our paper and am still puzzled why Martin Wingfield an experienced journalist has been replaced.
It is evident that he has in the poor quality nowadays of what was a well written and intersting publication.
It is as if Nick Griffin does not trust anybody to work for the party except his family and the recent sycophants who have hitched their waggon to his and thus depend on him.
All the senior members who ran the party when I joined 8 years ago have now been replaced, expelled or left in disgust, including long standing members and councillors and activists.
The ones in control now are recent members, ill suited to their positions.
So it is evident that Griffin is not a unity candidate. He has presided over a mass exodus of talent and replaced that talent with mediocrity.
He says the party is growing now but gives no actual figures. I know many who after years of work have given up on the party and many are just hanging on in order to vote for a new leader.
This fact is not shown in the moderated comments on the main website.
We need to join together and Brons is the man to do it.
Too much venom has been spouted. It is time for an amnesty for all those driven away by the high handed actions of our present leader and join together as a strong political force.
Unfortunately those now outside the party will not come back to work with us unless we have a new leader.
If Brons is elected he will only be leader for a year until a new constitution is formulated.
If Griffin wins we are stuck with him in the downward spiral for another 4 years by which time there will be no effective party left.
An often forgotten decision taken at Codnor 3 years ago at the time when we voted for yearly elections was a generous pension for Griffin paid for out of party funds of if my memory serves me right of over £20,000 per year.
I wonder if he has changed this decision like he changed the one year rule for elections?
I am sure he will have tucked away somewhere,the obligation for the party to fund a generous retirement for him.
One last thing.
He says he is campaigning for a referendum on leaving the EU.
Good, we are all in favour of that.
BUT, When is the next batch of the "Bring our Boys Home" petitions to be handed in.
The first 10,000 were handed in amid much publicity and it was stated that others would be delivered later.
Have they been delivered ?
I'll not hold my breath.
58 comments:
Very well said Lanky Patriot.
It's just unfortunate you have opened your eyes 3 years too late to save the party.
If only I could apologies to John Tyndall. He warned everyone about Griffin, but I like many didn't listen.
Tyndall wasn't perfect, but he was totally honest, a trait Griffin completely lacks.
If only I had known then what I know now, but "if onlys" mean nothing. We can't apologise to John, but we can fight to save the nation he loved by defeating Griffin.
Griffin simply isn't fit to be mentioned in the same breath as John Tyndall.
.
I attended the Liverpool Hustlings,
Andrew Brons, was asked, 5 times why he still had Butler on his payroll, he was, in politcian mode, would NOT reply, changed the subject......
He also was asked by the members if he would allow, Saide Graham,leaker of the BNP LIST, Mark Collect, Nick Cass,and the famous Eddie Butler back, in one word Yes, if Brons is elected the BNP is no more, questions were asked, and he just did not have any solid reply. Andrew is a decent man, but Butler, is his puppet master.
Dr Chris Hill, we may have a leadership challenge, as you are a UKIP member, why such interest in the BNP, perhaps, because as a Sadie fan you still have issues !
Get over it.
Lanky Patriot.
Why, if you have issues, why not just attend the North West Huslings, and voice your concerns.
We are only a small party, by your own previous comments, Nick Griffin, is human, what has gone wrong ? I cannot beleive, the change of alligence, the Wigan Party has shown.
I was unable to attend the hustings for family reasons but I would have liked to have asked why , in view of the decline in support and massive debts incurred under Griffin's leadership and the fact that he is a toxic brand in the voters eyes he did not as PROMISED resign in 2014 or is he in this for his own benefit.
I think he is.
Anonymous:
The Wigan party? What - all of it. ? You'll note that other than (earlier)stating my position and the perfectly good and reasonable grounds for it, I (amongst others) am not getting involved in all this little girl bickering.
When you take a position, GIVE YOUR REASONS - and something other than mere personal likes.
Sorry I forgot to mention, my alegience is to the party and not to any one man.
I speak for myself but most in our group can see our decline and I am sure will vote Brons.
I have seen the party go down and that is why we need a new leader.
Is Chris Hill commenting here? Why should anyone here allow a UKIP member to influence them? Be nice if he used his name so we all know he is eminently ignorable.
Why do I have the feeling that I'm going to fall out with someone today? I don't know who - but then, at the time, I wont really care who.
Dear Anonymous (03:15 hrs),
My interest in the current leadership challenge comes from my 11 years (1998-2009 inclusive) of BNP membership and activism. A once booming party brought to its knees by a power mad dictator. A dictator whom I was once a very enthusiastic supporter of. My support for Sadie Graham came not from some "issue" with her, as you put it, but from a recognition of her abilities as a senior officer of the party.
Group Development, under Sadie and Ian Dawson, became extremely effective. Of course this state of affairs was not allowed to continue and Griffin, with the help of Collett and Co, scuppered it.
I'll continue to follow the contest (if such a perverted process can be called a contest), and the fortunes of the once flourishing Wigan group.
Why shouldn't Eddy and Nick Cass be allowed to rejoin the party if they wish?
Dear Anonymous AKA Chris Hill.
I too admired Sadie Graham but when the list was leaked it was inexcusable and led to people losing their jobs.
Andrew Brons has been accused of wanting to bring her back. Completely untrue and it shows the depths the "Griffinites" will stoop.
There is no way back for Sadie Graham, nor would anybody in the party wish that.
Ian Dawson is a different matter as he had no part in what Graham and Single did and indeed won his case against Griffin. Griffin owes him £14,000 as a result of losing the case.
Dear Lanky Patriot,
Sadie Graham did not leak the membership list, her husband Matt Single did. And unless you have evidence to the opposite we must accept that he acted alone.
In mitigation both he, and more importantly his pregnant wife, had been treated disgracefully by Griffin. Sacked from their jobs, their home invaded, and Sadie's year of hard work for the party belittled by Griffin (remember her dignity when a yob spit in her face on camera!). This treatment by Griffin caused Matt to suffer a metal breakdown. Now that cannot excuse his actions, it does go some way to explaining them.
Through his treatment of good party officials (Dec 2007), Griffin was responsible for the membership leak,. Matt was simply a man with a young family who had lost his livelihood and had a breakdown. Blame hin if you must, but Saddie is a victim of Griffin's ruthlessness.
Maybe Sadie is a victim od circumstance Chris. I know she was treated less than fairly, but some things are beyond the pale even if committed by her husband.
She could never be readmitted to the party because of those actions.
To Anonymous 3:12.
Brons said he would not re admit Sadie Graham back into the party in Salford.
If he were elected it would not be up to him as leader as now.
There would be a new fair democratic constitution and a ruling council which would decide each case on its merits.
Butler is not his "puppet master" and has nothing to do with Brons's campaign.
He works for Brons and has a contract, that's all.
What has Nick cass done wrong?
Nor should she be. I got a couple of unpleasant late night/early hours phone calls after that.
Sir Henry Morgan Said:
"Nor should she be. I got a couple of unpleasant late night/early hours phone calls after that."
I say:
Yes so did many, but blame the right people, Nick Griffin & Matt Single. Guilt by association is not justice.
Anyway why would Sadie wants to return to the BNP given the state Griffin has dragged it down to? I don't think if Griffin wins (what do I mean IF!) many people will be lining up to rejoin his fan club.
Anonymous
Shove off. And she still shouldn't be let back in the party. And I don't care about others getting late night unpleasant phone calls. I got them and that's what bothers me - someone has my home details and I didn't give it 'em.
and I don't really care that much about any imaginary entitlement you may have think she has to justice. I don't, and wont, agree.
Andrew Brons said he would not re admit Sadie Graham back into the party in Salford......correct.
But he would not be drawn on Mark Collet, Nick Cass, and Eddy Butler,
and half a dozen others, he just said it was up to a elected committee, he passed the buck.
The main concern of the audiance was Butler working for him, and thus privy to sensitive info.
I was surprised to learn Arther Kemp, resigned, due to financial reasons, BNP not able to pay him a full time salery. Some, would have us believe Arther Kemp, who is a very decent Nationalist, has fallen out with Nick Griffin, yet another rumour. Sir Henry, I to had late night threating phone calls, no excuse for her and her husbands treason. As Nick Said,
He has made bad judgements, in trusting certain people, but once bitten twicw shy. Some can never be trusted again. I agree, we sometimes are not privy to all the facts.
Cygnus said...
Why shouldn't Eddy and Nick Cass be allowed to rejoin the party if they wish?
Because, they have done severe damage to the British National Party, and caused upset and strees to people who put their trust in them.
Add to the list the bloke who closed the website down, 2 days before the Election Simon Bennett,
and they have the neck to call themselves Nationalists ! Selfish, ego mad individuals.
No matter how much they oppose NG,
their actions were selfish and UNFORGIVABLE.
Bye bye Chris. Shame really, because I've never censored anyone before now. But I will automatically censor you in future. Go comment on the UKIP page if you absolutely have to comment somewhere.
You can't claim you weren't warned. Anyone with even an ounce of sense would have known I have a shitty on today.
Whose deleting comments ?
Freedom of speech ?
Morg,
Bye bye Chris.
10 July 2011 18:47,
Dr Chris Hill ( anon ) has said he is a UKIP member, he cannot accept Sadie Graham and her husband were wrong, his choice. You are correct, he has nothing constructive to say.
I am. I said so above. And I will every time I think 'anonymous' is him. He's not even in the BNP, he's part of UKIP, a rival party. Do you think that he thinks the BNP will benefit from his comments? Or perhaps you like any comment that criticises Griffin? I'm not voting for Griffin - but neither am I voting for the other MEP. Does anyone think either of them will priorise his party duties above his extremely well paid EU duties. Neither of them are fit to be BNP chairman.
BritishLady (02:18hrs) said:
"Dr Chris Hill ( anon ) has said he is a UKIP member, he cannot accept Sadie Graham and her husband were wrong........"
I say:
This was taken directly from one of my posts above:
".....caused Matt to suffer a metal breakdown. Now that cannot excuse his action..........."
Now how do you interpreter that as my not accepting Matt did anything wrong?
I told you what I was going to do Chris.You can have no valid whinges about it. If you want to continue wasting your time ... help yourself.
And this is not because you are making anti-Griffin comments - plenty of people are doing that. It's because you unnecessarily personalised it to me while I was in a shitty mood, and I'm not even supporting him. Anyone here can do that - it's fine, I'm a grown up. But you support a rival party, so why should that be fine?
Chris - whinge whinge whinge. Have you ever NOT whinged?
Do you attack Farage the uberTory on the UKIP site? How far does it get you?
Even if elected to government UKIP would not take us out of the EU. Nor will the BNP if the chairman is a MEP. That's why I wont vote for a MEP to be chairman of our party.
I don't know how many conversations I've had with you about comments and vetting them/deleting them Morg. you were all for Freedom of speech at one time. seems your our new CENSOR.
Morg it's you doing the whinging.
I take a previous comment of yours to mean that your not Anti- Nick Griffin and your not Pro-Brons ?
SK
And you read my comment immediately after my first deletion. "shame" Regardless of what you say, I'm going to keep doing it. Don't care if you or anyone else likes or dislikes it. And I will NOT vote in a MEP as party chairman. I've said why. The party started rotting when Griffin became a MEP.
It would continue the same way with the other MEP as chairman. We only have his word that it would be otherwise - he is a politician, after all.
And neither am I pro-Griffin and anti-Brons. They're both the same to me. Both MEPs. Do you expect either of them to take us out of the EU ... thus giving up their fabulous EU income?
Brons is not in it for the money - so he'd do the EU job for free would he?
And whatever is going on here (such as supporting a UKIPer who never does anything other than attack our party ... what IS going on?) at least I don't report private conversations to the world. and no - I don't like censoring anyone - but I've been a servicman and done plenty that I don't like.
I don't support any Ukipper I support the BNP.
And just because a Ukipper comments on here doesn't make his comments any less true or false than anyone elses.
If Nick Griffin dies tomorrow the BNP would still exist, if the BNP dies tomorrow so does NATIONALISM.
I know which I want to survive. if the BNP goes so do we.
I thought you were intelligent enough to at least see that.
Let the commenters comment, if their comments are hateful or incite violence then they should be deleted but not because they have a different viewpoint.
You don't know Chris Hill do you? I'll do what I think is necessary - bet you wouldn't defend him if he was attacking Brons and supporting Griffin. This is all about attacking Griffin isn't it. I'm not attacking him (though not defending him either)
but Hill IS attacking him, which you like. So whatever he says is ok by you and so he is defended solely because of that. I can only suggest you tell him you've done all you can for him and it didn't do any good, only harm.
I,m more determined than ever that I will delete anything he says.
There's only one way you can change this - exclude me from the site. I don't mind. But better I'm on the inside pissing out than on the outside pissing in.
Can I ask the question again: Is this an independent patriot blog or one with the single pro BNP agenda?
If its a blog dedicated to the cause of the British people, then it should not matter which party a poster is affiliated to, only his comments should be relevant.
This is an independent blog, and it is my blog.
I am quite prepared for anybody to post and only in the most extreme cases would I block anybody.
Stop it Morgan!
It's better to let them speak and destroy them with words, otherwise it looks as if we are Stalinists and unable to win the argument.
The only posts that should be blocked on this site are gratuitous, offensive and obscene ones.
All others are fair commwent and if we don't agree with them we can argue the points.
Bye then.
My problem with Morg came after I responded to a comment he made about Sadie Graham. He suggested that having been woken up by late night telephone calls, after the membership list leak, that that gave him the right to condemn her without further evidence showing that she was involved in that leak. I posted a satirical comment suggesting that it was unfortunate that he hadn't been so easily woken up over the three and a half years Griffin had been destroying the party.
Morg may indeed have been woken by a nuisance caller (I know I had these calls), but that must be put into perspective. Like myself, and many others, Sadie had stood up and been counted by standing for election as a BNP candidate.
So unlike Morg Sadie had already put her head above the parapet, and she had already taken far more abuse than just a few unwanted calls. I remember Sadie's dignity when, while canvassing for the party (and on camera), she was insulted and spat on by a thug. Unfortunately unlike Griffin, Sadie didn't have a full time security escort while she was in "harms way".
Morg, the comments you deleted were only aimed at you to as you were the one who was replying to them.
Don't let them get to you, I'm sure you have heard the saying "Dont let the bast*rds grind you down".
You let them wind you up and took it personal, you shouldn't.
I'm dissapointed in you deleting posts when there is no need. Use reason and argument if you need to defend your position.
"There's only one way you can change this - exclude me from the site. I don't mind. But better I'm on the inside pissing out than on the outside pissing in."
For a so called Intelligent man you should of realised you were ALREADY pi**ing in as you so delicately put it.
You were accusing others of "Whinging" when it was you doing most of the whinging...pot - kettle springs to mind.
@ Anon...
To me Sadie Graham should never be allowed back into the party regardless of what she had done previously.
With that point of view Nick Griffin should stay as chairman for what he has done previously and we should turn a blind eye to the complete mess the party is now in.
But that's just my point of view on the subject and I have nothing else to add.
I can't speak for Morg but his deletions and comments speak for themselves.
The issue of Sadie Graham is history and of no relevence to this thread.
Andrew Brons has said he would not havwe her back. End of story.
However if he is elected, the leader/Chairman would not have absolute power as he does now so it would not be his decision.
The decision would be the same as members will not forgive her.
Morgan,
I am supporting Andrew Brons although as you say he is an MEP and I agree he can not do both jobs.
BUT
He is not Griffin and would only be an interim leader until we have a new democratic constitution.
His advantage is that he is honest, doesn't really want the job but only wants to save the party.
AND HE IS WELL KNOWN, unlike any other possibl;e contender.
Morg, and Lanky Patriot, agree, Sadie Graham is old news, let it rest.
Morg is correct Dr chris Hill, is a troll, he offers no positive contribution to this site, just negitive comments, since the Blog started, he just causes discord.
Negitive anti Nationalists posts.
Which ever, a member supports, be it Andrew Brons or Nick Griffin,
please, there is no need for loyal Nationalists and Patriots, to leave
the cause.
BritishLady said:
...................................
"Morg is correct Dr chris Hill, is a troll, he offers no positive contribution to this site, just negitive comments, since the Blog started, he just causes discord."
....................................
I say:
I'm sorry but I think that's a little unfair.
Since Dec 2007 when I realised that Nick Griffin (a man I had once been the most ardent supporter of) was a conman, I have been jumping up and down waving my arms in the air trying to get people to listen. I posted numerous articles on the Lancaster blog laying out the evidence for everyone to see, and I left comments on many blogs including this one to draw people attention to what was happening. Unfortunately very few people took notice, and those who did see the truth (like Lanky Patriot) often choose to ignore it for "The better good"!
I tried to organise resistance with the "Voice of Change" group, and was vilified by Griffin's henchmen for my efforts. For the next two years I received offensive emails from Clive Jefferson, and was accused of violent behaviour in order to prevent me attending an EGM in 2008. But despite this only in 2009, when all hope of saving the party was lost, did I resign.
Don't blame the messenger.
Post a Comment