What is Griffin’s problem?
By Julian Graeme
Every time a party or group expresses an opinion, the Griffin sycophants start to wail and moan about ‘fascist extremists’ attempting to denigrate the BNP.
This is not the case, however, as many of the members of these smaller groups have never changed their nationalist views; it is the leadership of the BNP that has shifted the goalposts further and further toward a more liberal multicultural policy.
It is painfully obvious that the BNP hierarchy is seeking to collect the Asian vote, the black vote, the jewish vote and anyone else whom they can, with utter aloofness to the wishes of the silent majority within the party.
Did I say silent?
Naturally, they have to be, on pain of suspension or expulsion!
I personally know many good dedicated nationalists who have left the party either through expulsion for speaking out or through resignation after being frustrated at every end and turn trying to halt the forward self-destructive march towards moderation and ultimately stagnation!
One must ask why Griffin is turning his back on his once committed nationalist creed. Has he had a change of heart?
Has he been influenced by those closest to him? Or does he see himself as the great statesman walking in the shadow of Gladstone?
How did he behave when he was in the National Front?
There were no signs of moderation then; in fact he was a leading opponent of Webster.
In 1983 he, along with Joe Pearce resigned due to Webster’s dictatorial attitude when he was the National Activities Organiser.
They both rejoined, however, a month later after Webster’s removal from this position.
Throughout Griffin’s stay in the NF, he was not noted for his liberal tendencies and although he would probably not admit it now, he was an enthusiastic devotee of Skrewdriver, the punk rock band.
After quitting the NF in 1989, he grew to prominence after joining the BNP. During his early BNP days, he published the Rune magazine and was prosecuted for its racialist content.
He once described a former MP, Alex Carlile, QC, who had reported The Rune to the police, as "this bloody jew, whose only claim is that his grandparents died in the Holocaust."
Griffin challenged the leadership of John Tyndall, saying that he led the party like a dictator. However, under his new constitution, Griffin is solely responsible for the legal and financial aspects of the party together with all disciplinary matters.
The long-standing feud between Griffin and Webster has never abated. Webster has stated on numerous occasions that he and Griffin were lovers. Although Griffin has always denied the accusation, he has never arraigned him for it.
Where then, does this leave Griffin?
Why has he decided to adopt the benevolent moderate role?
Most probably because there is more money in being a (sic) respectable middle-of the-road politician than a racial nationalist of the old school.
He may be right because for all my years in nationalist politics, I’ve never made a single penny out of it!