Thursday, June 21, 2007


Snippets.............


The rumours about Griffin buying property in Croatia are surfacing again. We heard this one just over 12 months ago. We were hoping Nick would 'do one' !


Griffin has refused to give BNP leadership challenger CHRIS JACKSON the membership lists so that Chris can gain his 100 signatures more easily. This has caused some inconvenience within the Jackson camp. This has been circumvented due to CJ's popularity, but it leaves a bad taste if Griffin wants a fair election fight.


Keith Axon has still not had his tribunal for posting on STORMFRONT UK ! How long has this issue been dragging on ? We know of quite a number of BNP members who post regularly on SFUK, so why are they not similarly placed on a disciplinary charge ?


What the hell is going on with the BNP Trade Union Solidarity ? Seems like it's same old, same old.


Once again, we never get any true info from the top of the BNP.


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

"What is going on with Solidarity?"

Founders of organisations can usually dominate the organisation because only they had the inspiration and energy to get things going and most people are content to follow. It is quite natural for founders to believe they have a right to lead their organisations for life, whatever the size and form of those organisations.

Members of the BNP will be familiar with John Tyndall's attitude as an example.

But what happens when you found an organisation among able and energetic people? The founders quickly face competition for the top job.

This is when the purpose of the founders is revealed. Can any member stand to be elected to the executive council? Or only the founders and their friends?

If the latter, then Solidarity should be more acurately called the 'give Patrick Harrington a job' scheme.

He can only hang on and should only be allowed to hang on if he demonstrates competence.

But...very often with small organisations, such as the local amateur dramatic society, the founders do not stick to proper procedure, because they fear that they cannot get their own way.

Then come the accounts. Whether you are running ICI or the Parish Sweet Pea Growing Society, if you take money from the public you are bound by company law and MUST obey it. But the founders do not, either because they do not know the law or because they choose to ignore it, thinking they are too small to bother.

The smaller the society or organisation, the more careful you must be with accounts. Every last penny must be accounted for. Such things as 'sundries' must be detailed and not used to hide waste or worse.

Accounts must be clear and easy for everyone to understand.

All we know about what is going on in Solidarity is what has been published on the BNP website.

The fact that such a small, nascent organisation has any problem with its accounts should tell us everything.

This is depressing, but we must face up to the truth.

How is it possible for two accountants to disagree on the accounts, when the accounts should be complete, clear and simple?

Either

the accounts are not complete, clear and simple

Or

the accountants have not been appointed for their accounting ability but for some other reason that has caused a clash.

WHY...
1) are the accounts not complete, clear and simple with such a small organisation and therefore with very few items to be accounted for?

2) is it that the 2 accountants are not completely independent and disassociated from Solidarity or the BNP?

If the accounts were complete, clear and simple and if the accountants were selected only for their accounting ability and were independent and disassociated, then it is just not possible for them to disagree.

Will two mathematicians disagree that the sum of 2+2 is 4?

So...what is the real purpose of Solidarity?

To give Griffin's friend a job?
To make and take money from the public?
Or to develop and deliver genuinely useful trade union services?

How you run an organisation often reveals your purpose.

PICTURED: American-Israeli teenager, 19, arrested for making hoax bomb threats against Jewish community centers in the US The unnamed te...