Debate Invite for Paul Golding

One of our avid readers has submitted the following article, and images.

They wish to enter into a debate with, Paul Golding, over his recent article, and ask him “Are you a hypocrite, or in the wrong party?”

The images are of Tommy Williams, and In one image we see him manning the camera and part of the BNP security team at this years, RWB. The same Tommy Williams can be seen sieg heiling in the other image,

After reading Paul Golding’s article, you will understand why our reader would like some answers.
-------------------------
-------------


“One of these same hard-liners said to me, "The media will always attack us, so our image doesn't matter." Using the scenario of war, this is the same as saying, "The enemy will always shoot at us, so it doesn't matter how much ammunition we give them!" As we can see, this argument - a favourite of the hard-liners to justify their obsession with WWII, the Jews and Adof Hitler - is completely flawed. The phrase "but it's the truth" just doesn't cut it. Such a stance takes no account of the peculiar circumstances we face. We are up against an immense media machine, which uses anything surrounding the Second World War, Nazism or Hitler to demonise and thus effectively immobilise any patriotic movement in the modern age.

Nationalists have to be very clever. We have to learn to bite our tongues and use our brains to side step tradtional Establishment attacks. We must not charge full steam ahead into well prepared media traps, giving our opponents what they want, time and time again, thus scuppering our chances of success.

The Establishment and the media absolutely love and adore these rigid, self-destructive hard-liners. Without them, the Establishment would be without the huge amount of ammunition they have traditionally weilded against patriotic movements. Not playing ball with the Establishment is really quite simple. We must completely and skilfully avoid any resemblance whatsoever to all the labels and connections given to us by the media: namely that we are 'Nazis', 'Fascists', 'racists', 'extremists', 'anti-semitic', and so on. This is not hard, since we are not these things anyway. But some people love to engage in moronic activities that give the media the ammunition they use to discredit all of us,nd the Cause. This is what the overly proud, false morons of the true "far right" don't understand: they help our nation's enemies to enslave our people, while at the same time destroying the chances of success for real and genuine nationalists. They do this by utilising demonised language and behaviour, falling easy prey to media snipers.”

Prison for BNP activist's killer

Khan stabbed his neighbour in July last year
An Asian man who killed his British National Party activist neighbour in a fight has been jailed for eight years.
Habib Khan, 50, of Stoke-on-Trent, was convicted in May of the manslaughter of 52-year-old Keith Brown who he stabbed with a kitchen knife in July 2007.
The two men had been involved in a long-running dispute over land.
Khan said living for five years next door to Mr Brown had been "hell" and his family had been subjected to "racial hostility" by his neighbours.
Stafford Crown Court was told Khan had killed Mr Brown in a fight outside their homes in Uttoxeter Road, Normacot.

The dispute started when Khan put in a planning application to build a house on his land several years before.
Mr Brown objected to it and when it was granted and work began, he "took steps to obstruct it".
I think what we've witnessed here is an outrageous betrayal of justice
Martin Coleman, BNP councillor
The court heard that in the incident last July, Khan held a knife against his neighbour "to scare him" when he saw him trying to strangle his son Azir.

A post-mortem examination found Mr Brown died from a single stab wound.
Judge Tonking said: "What became obvious as the evidence unfolded, however, is that from time to time, despite denials to the contrary, both Mr Brown and his son Ashley Barker were involved in acts of racial aggression towards members of Mr Khan's family."
He added that Khan had acted "in the honest belief that he needed to protect his son" but in doing so had killed Mr Brown.

Khan, described by a Muslim colleague as a respected, religious and helpful person, was also found guilty of wounding Mr Brown's son, Ashley Barker, during the fight.
Khan's other son, Kazir Saddique, was sentenced to a year in prison and a year on licence after admitting unlawful wounding but Azir, 24, was found not guilty of wounding.
At a news conference outside the court, Mr Brown's widow Julia said she felt justice had not been done.
She said: "At the end of the day, it should have been murder not manslaughter.
"If he did not have the intention to go out and murder he should not have taken the knife out.
"Everybody feels sorry for that family but what have we been through?"

Julia Barker states that justice has not been done
Local BNP councillor, Martin Coleman, told reporters the party would start a campaign to "expose what has gone on today in court" and said he viewed the case as "insanity and madness".
He added: "It bears no relationship with any form of justice that I understand, can understand recognise or accept.
"We've got a man who has been murdered in the street.
"Someone has ran out into the public street with a knife and murdered a man and the judge says there's literally no case to answer.
"I think what we've witnessed here is an outrageous betrayal of justice."
Khan denied murdering Mr Brown but was convicted of manslaughter on 23 May.
A spokesman for Staffordshire Police said the investigation into Mr Brown's death had been handled in a "thorough and impartial" way.
In a statement, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said the force had had repeated contact with both families during the dispute and investigated complaints made on both sides.
A spokesman said they were unable to substantiate any of the claims made about the way the families were treated by the force but one officer received advice from officials.
Khan's barrister, Simon Drew, said police investigations into the various incidents often "came to nothing" because of "generous failures by the system".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/7588105.stm

NWN: Another example of the bias in our judicial system ! The judiciary and police have once again shown themselves to be an enemy of patriotic British people.

BNP to honour ‘martyr’ with rally as Asian neighbour gets eight years for manslaughter

The British National Party has said that it will hold a rally in honour of its first claimed martyr, whose Asian killer was jailed for eight years for manslaughter yesterday.
Keith Brown, a father of eight and friend of the party leader, Nick Griffin, was stabbed to death by his neighbour Habib Khan, a Muslim community leader. A judge said that the dead white man and his skinhead son had both been involved in acts of racial aggression towards the Khan family.
The BNP said that it will hold a rally in Stoke-on-Trent on September 20 to protest about the case and Staffordshire Police’s handling of the long-running neighbours’ dispute. The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) announced that it had cleared the force of any blame.
Officers had dealt with more than 100 complaints in five years from the feuding families.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4636785.ece

Two million could be out of work by Christmas, Bank of England warns






No jobs left for school leavers
Britain is already in a recession
House prices could fall more than 30%
Workers will not be getting a pay rise


Around two million people will be unemployed by Christmas as the credit crunch bites, a key Bank of England policymaker warned yesterday.

Professor David Blanchflower said he predicts 2,000 people will lose their jobs every day over the next four months.

This would take unemployment levels to their highest since Labour came to power in 1997.


For families up and down the country, redundancy would be devastating at a time of soaring household bills.

Millions of people are barely coping with rising food, fuel and gas bills, and will be crippled if they lose their job - particularly if they are the sole breadwinner.

Young people will also be affected, with 'no jobs' for hundreds of thousands of children when they leave school, he warned.

In an interview, Professor Blanchflower, who is a member of the Bank's Monetary Policy Committee, gave a series of warnings about Britain's economic meltdown.

He says that Britain is already in a recession which is in danger of being 'very serious and long-lasting' unless urgent action is taken.

And he admits his original forecast that house prices will fall 30 per cent might be 'optimistic' and the drop could be even sharper.

And as a further blow to workers, he says those who keep their jobs will not get a pay rise, or will get one which is below inflation.

His interview, with the news agency Reuters, will worry workers up and down the country who fear that their job is no longer safe.

As one of the nine people who set interest rates every month, he is one of the most powerful economic voices in the country.

Every week, more companies admit that they have had to sack staff in a bid to cope with the economic crisis.

In the past few days, one housebuilder, Bovis, said it has cut 40 per cent of its staff and rival Taylor Wimpey has axed 900 jobs.


And to make things worse for those who lose their job, many will face an impossible struggle to get a new job because firms have 'stopped hiring'.

Professor Blanchflower, an economics lecturer at Dartmouth College in the U.S., said: 'I am expecting to see a number of something like two million by the end of the year. School leavers are coming into the jobs market and there are no jobs for them.

'People have to start to respond to the fact that we are in a recession and the danger is that we will be in a very serious and long-lasting recession unless we do something..'

'I certainly think we are in negative growth now and I expect several further quarters.'

He also launched a veiled attack on his fellow members of the Monetary Policy Committee. At the last 11 meetings, Professor Blanchflower has voted to cut interest rates. But other members, including the Bank's governor Mervyn King, have largely ignored him, and voted to cut rates on only three occasions since October.

He said: 'To sit and worry about inflation expectations and what is going to happen to those, rather than worry about the fact that the economy is going to go into a recession, seems to be misguided.'


Tory Treasury spokesman Philip Hammond said: 'This is a startling prediction from a member of the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee.

'If it turns out to be true, it will represent a meltdown in employment and yet more misery for families in the months ahead.'

There is already evidence that unemployment is starting to rise sharply as bosses are forced to cut staff to cope. The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics show 60,000 became unemployed between April and June, raising the total to 1.67million.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23546506-details/Two+million+could+be+out+of+work+by+Christmas%2C+Bank+of+England+warns/article.do

NWN: And what is Nick Griffin going to do about this ? Since Griffin conned his way to the BNP leadership, the BNP 'hibernates' till early April immediately after the RWB. Activists have been purged to allow this to happen.

Everyone is Searchlight except me; says Joe Owens !


Dear Peter,

Thanks for sending me Joe Owens' pathetic and illiterate little squib posted on the 'Stormfront UK'. Owens says he doesn't find it "strange" that you post some of my items on your blog, as he claims that we are "both 'Searchlight'." Hi-ho!

In the light of that, how does he explain his long and persistent e-mail correspondence with me, initiated by him via a text message in January 2006, and terminated by me with a "Delete/Unsubscribe" notice to him in November 2007?

During that period there were a total of 97 exchanges, nearly all instigated by him. This volume of contact with me should be sufficient indication of Owens' hypocrisy in denouncing your posting of my commentaries!

Owens wanted me to assist him with the promotion of his memoirs which were then being 'ghost-written' for him by a professional journalist working for a mainstream tabloid newspaper (I think the 'Daily Mirror', which has a long-established close liaison with 'Searchlight').

In due course this relationship with the tabloid "ghost-writer" lapsed, perhaps because the memoires were so turgid.

Owens sent me a whole chapter of the stuff.

It was nothing but a chronicle of punch-ups in the Merseyside area. That may have been the substance of the life of the Liverpool Branch of the National Front, but it was certainly not a reflection of the work of the party as a whole.

'His' text did not give one iota of the political context of the NF.

The screed served only to confirm the view of the nationalist movement beloved by 'Searchlight' and the establishment media: that the nationalist movement is merely a gang of thugs. I conveyed my opinion to Owens in those terms, and indicated that I was unable to assist him with the promotion of his memoirs. First Black Mark against me in Owens' resentment book!

Later Owens badgered me to confirm his view that the attempt made by Tony Lecomber during Christmas 2006 to recruit him as an assassin of Establishment figures was "an entrapment operation organised by the Special Branch/MI5". Why Owens wanted a statement from me confirming that view, I do not know, but I could not oblige him. I maintained to Owens that Lecomber (then Gri££in's No. 2 man) was quite sincere (if nutty and misguided) about his proposition.
I think Lecomber approached Owens because of Owens' boasting about his connections with the Liverpool criminal underworld and allegations of murder. Second Black Mark against me in Owens' resentment book!

As a PS on the Lecomber/'Murder Incorporated' affair, I should mention that Liverpool Police got to hear of Lecomber's proposition to Owen and approached Owens for a statement. Owens refused to assist with their investigation, so it lapsed.

Finally, Owens and I fell out over my interpretation of the way in which Joe Pearce, once the leader of the Young National Front and of nationalist 'radicals', not only abandoned the nationalist cause (along with his first wife and children) but also denigrated it to the media in order to gain himself a new life as "Joseph Pearce", a new wife and a well-paid career at a Roman Catholic university in Florida.

Owens disliked my article about Pearce and began forwarding me 'anonymous' critical letters about it which he claimed to have received. I do not entertain anonymous correspondence, first or second-hand, and so I terminated my contact with him. Third and final Black Mark against me in Owens' resentment book!

Hence his silly posting on 'Stormfront UK' .

Such is life.

Sincerely,

Martin Webster.

BNP Members are Evil

According to, Trudy Gold, chief executive of the London Jewish Cultural Centre.


Paul Ryan has been ordered to stay at home after allegedly impersonating Hitler while on duty.

Mr Ryan, a Police Community Support Officer working for the Safer Neighbourhoods Team in Swiss Cottage, north London, is being investigated by the Metropolitan Police after complaints about his behaviour.

The alleged incident happened last month at the unit's base in Finchley Road when Mr Ryan began goose-stepping around the office and making Nazi salutes during a conversation about Germans, police sources said.

The PCSO was previously removed from Kentish Town Safer Neighbourhoods Team for suggesting to a black colleague that there was nothing wrong in voting for the far-right British National Party, it is understood.

A spokesman for Camden police said Mr Ryan was suspended on August 5 after an allegation of misconduct at work on July 24.

He said: "The alleged incident occurred in police premises not accessible to the public. All such allegations are taken very seriously and an internal investigation has been launched.

"It would be inappropriate to comment any further at this stage."

Mark Gardener, spokesman for the Community Security Trust, a charity guarding against anti-semitism in the UK, said the Met was right to take tough action.

Mr Gardener said: "Obviously we would thank the police for their prompt action and voice extreme concern at the suitability of this police officer.

"This kind of action would cause offence, not only to Jewish people, but many others as well.

"We would be extremely concerned at any police officer making fun of Nazism."

But Trudy Gold, chief executive of the London Jewish Cultural Centre, urged caution and said that dismissing the PCSO as a racist could be political correctness gone mad.

She said: "If it was meant as humour it is probably in bad taste but is Monty Python funny? Is Mel Brooks funny when he does the dancing and singing Hitlers in The Producers?

"It comes down to the question of whether we can make fun of evil. It is a difficult area but I wouldn't want to condemn him as evil for making a Hitler salute until we know the context - if he is a card-carrying member of the BNP, for example."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2637752/Police-support-officer-suspended-for-goose-stepping-and-making-Nazi-salutes.html

The missing six million

Author: Editorial, Solidarity, 21 August, 2008

The Socialist Workers Party’s behaviour at last Saturday’s [16 August 2008] protest against the British National Party’s Red White and Blue festival was spectacularly crass. But nothing they did was odder than the text of the petition they were circulating to gather contact names.

Using Love Music Hate Racism as a party front, their petition’s second bullet point reads: “[The BNP] deny the holocaust where thousands of LGBT people, trade unionists and disabled people were slaughtered.”

No mention of the main victims of the Holocaust, the Jews.

How could such an omission be accounted for? Perhaps, it could be argued, the Jews were simply forgotten, left off the list of victims through casual error. Perhaps we should regard this as a stupid mistake, but not a malicious or politically significant one. Perhaps a young, new SWP member should take the blame.

Let us assume that a young member did write this. Don’t more experienced comrades in the SWP check political material before it is circulated? We know they do.
But let us also assume that the youngest, newest SWP member produced this material, which was then circulated, unchecked by anyone else within the SWP. Why would this hypothetical new member “forget” the Jews?

To say something has been “forgotten” is a description, not an explanation. For example, one of us might forget our office keys — a description of an event. But the explanation may well be that somewhere in our brain, perhaps semi- or sub-conciously we don’t really want to go to work.

Political people, writing political documents, make such glaring omissions for identifiable political reasons.

Our charge against the SWP is not that they hate Jews — not as individuals. Our charge is not that they are Hitlerites — of course they are not. Our charge against the SWP is that their hostility to “Zionism” (i.e. to most Jews in the world) is now so deep-running, so pernicious, so unthinking, blinkered and automatic, that such an “accident” or “mistake” is possible. By creating an organisation with such a default setting, the SWP’s leaders are building a group which will “forget” the Jewish victims of the Holocaust. Shame on you!
http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2008/08/25/missing-six-million

More power to the SWP for finally recognising those who bring misery on every country in the world, including ours. Perhaps deep down the SWP may think Hitler had a point, or perhaps they realise that the 6 million figure has purchased war and misery on a level the Jews themselves have never felt. It was only 2 weeks ago that Israel was looking to shed blood in Ossetia. One would genuinely assume that any peoples who had really suffered would never wish it upon anyone else, but we enlightened few know differently.
http://judicial-inc.biz/88georgia_tillawi.htm

Just when we thought we’d lost, and lost again…

The EGM of last weekend isn’t as bad as we first thought, well, not now we’ve had time to digest the contents of the new amendments, and once written up, they will be placed online.

Why are they not so bad we hear you mutter, well, it goes like this…

Mr Nicholas John Griffin, was insisting on an amendment that would give him the right to sit upon his increasingly prickly throne for 4 years without being challenged. But, because he lost, the fail-safe’s put in to prevent a mad ( which Griffin clearly is) leader remaining in situ come into force, and this our dear readers means that Griffin cannot be challenged once a year, but THRICE!

How on earth could he have missed this? Well, he missed it because not only was, Mr Nicholas John Griffin, to lazy to write those amendments, as he clearly thought he was going to win. He was also to damned lazy to read them, but to late now, Mr Griffin, they were voted upon and passed.

Who was this genius responsible for the following? We’d like to know, as the man is clearly a friend of the democratic process, and possibly a future BNP leader.

Challenge 1, can be done on Oct/Nov of each year if 20 paid up voting members request it at the annual AGM.

Challenge 2, can be triggered at any time by 2/3rds of the AC impeaching, Mr Griffin, for gross misconduct, and we all know he’s done plenty of that.

Challenge 3, can be done annually after local elections are out of the way and requires no more than 250 signatures, a walk in the park for any serious challenger who would have Griffin in court in the likelihood he should refuse, or tamper, with the membership list.

So, there we have it readers, REAL POLITICS, in action, and there’s certain to be plenty of that over the coming months.

BTW, we hear, Mr Griffin, is away on a sulk because he knows, and is aware of, what he thought we’d missed. Well, we all know now, and we reckon he must be feeling like a proper clown. We couldn't find an image of a stitched up kipper...

Update:

Motion 1

Advisory Council

Passed with an amendment defining what a Voting member is – namely a full member with two years continuous membership, who has attended a training event within the year, who is an activist as certified by their Regional Organiser (includes councillors, and officers) and who makes a financial contribution (exempt officers and councillors)



S.5.1. Replace "the organisers of the party's four strongest regions" with "all Regional Organisers".



S.5.2. replace "three times a year" with "four times a year"



Motion 2

Leadership Elections

Passed with amendment deleting all references to election years and 4 yearly term –and replacing 10 Voting Members and 100 members of 24 months standing as nominators to 1/5 of all members of over 24 months continuous membership with the total number of 2 year members being declared on 1st July every year.



The whole of the existing Section 4 should be replaced with:



S.4.1. Elections for the post of National Chairman shall be held every
four years, starting in 2009. Nominations shall open on 20th July in each
leadership election year and close at noon on 10th August. The election
shall be held on a 'one member, one vote' basis in a secret postal ballot
of all members paid up by 1st of July.

S.4.2. Any member of the party may become a candidate for the post of
National Chairman of the party provided that person has on or before the
close of nominations is and has been a fully paid up member of the party
for a minimum of five consecutive years, and has secured the signatures on
his or her nomination paper of ten current Voting Members and one hundred
members each with a minimum of 24 months continuous membership. Each
member can only nominate one candidate.

S.4.3. Notification of a leadership election shall be issued in the
September issue of British Nationalist, while the October issue will
include an A4 manifesto sheet from each candidate (designed and supplied
by them) and a ballot paper, and will be sent by post to all members,
including those who normally receive their bulletins electronically.

S.4.4. A prerecorded debate between the candidates shall be publicised on
BNPtv, a private page on the BNP website will give each candidate up to
six sides of A4 designed by them, the party magazine shall give each
candidate equal space to set out their ideas, and at least three hustings
meetings will be held with equal time for each candidate in different
parts of the country and be open to all paid up members from the areas in
question. In the event that unavoidable external circumstances render any
of these methods of communication impractical they may be omitted or
replaced as decided by a simple majority vote of a special meeting of the
Advisory Council.

S.4.5. The ballot papers shall be kept unopen-ed until the post has
arrived on the third Thursday of October, where all received ballots shall
be opened and counted under the supervision of two senior officials
appointed by the AC who are not candidates, together with the candidates
and up to two scrutineers each.

S.4.6. The election shall take place on a first past the post basis.

S.4.7. In any election year in which no nominations for the post of
National Chairman of the party are received in accordance with Sub-section
2 of this Section, the currently serving holder of the post will be deemed
to have received a mandate from the party to hold it for a further full
term. In any election year where a leadership challenge is entered the
currently serving National Chairman shall be deemed to be nominated
automatically should he wish to stand again.

S.4.8. In event of a General Election being called before the ballot
papers have been posted, the campaign may be suspended at the discretion
of simple majority vote of the AC, resuming the schedule immediately after
polling day.

S.4.9. If an outgoing National Chairman is a paid employee of the party
and either does not wish to remain as such or is not required as such by
the new incumbent, he shall receive severance pay in line with the
statutory requirement, plus one month for each year served up to a total
of eight years, and one week extra for each year thereafter.

S.4.10. The successful candidate in any such election will be considered
as occupying the office of National Chairman immediately on completion of
the counting of votes in that election.

Please note that the following proposed alterations are so closely
connected to the changes proposed for S.4 that it is necessary to take
them together with it as one composite motion 1.

S.5.6. The only other power of the Advisory Council shall be that it may
call a General Members' Meeting by a two-thirds majority of Advisory
Council members voting in a properly convened meeting with a quorum of
two-thirds, even if this is opposed by the National Chairman.
Alternatively the National Chairman may call such a meeting or postal
ballot at any time he deems it necessary. Should such a meeting or ballot
be called, it must be held within 40 days, and the matter which led to it
being called shall be put to the members to decide. If a two-thirds
majority of those voting should vote against the National Chairman then he
is bound to accept that decision or to resign from the leadership,
triggering a leadership election in which he may stand if he so wishes.

S.5.7. The National Chairman may also be held to account by a motion
proposed and supported in writing by twenty Voting Members and submitted
to the party's registered headquarters address not later than 14 days
before the date of the Annual Conference. This motion shall then be
debated and voted upon by all Voting Members at the conference and, if
passed by a minimum two-thirds majority, a leadership election shall be
triggered, using the procedures and time-scale laid out in this
Constitution, but with the schedule starting from 14 days after the date
of the Annual Conference. The previous National Chairman may stand in this
election is he so wishes.

S.5.10. A member of the Advisory Council shall not be removed from the
Advisory Council on the day of an Advisory Council meeting.
General Members' Meetings & Ballots

S.13.2. In the event of the National Chairman or the Advisory Council
calling a General Members' Meeting, at least 14 days' notice must be given
to all members by post with notification of the proposed motions. All
members of the party shall have the right to attend and vote, subject to
the provisions of Section 2, Sub-section 6 of this Constitution.

S.13.3. remove "not later than 28 days before the scheduled date of the
meeting" and replace "National Chairman" with "Chairman of the meeting."


Not passed - Motion 3

Postal ballot option



S.13.5. General Members' Meetings may only be called by the National
Chairman or by the Advisory Council in accordance with Section 5 of this
Constitution. All matters which may be decided by a General Members'
Meeting may also be put to the membership by postal ballot. The motions
for such a postal ballot are to be decided by a two thirds majority of the
Advisory Council or by the National Chairman and are to be sent out in the
first available British Nationalist together with a ballot paper for each
paid up member, who should have a minimum of 14 days in which to return
the ballot paper. The opening and counting of the ballots is to be
witnessed by the proposers and a minimum of two national officers, with
all members of the Advisory Council entitled to attend should they so
wish.



Not passed Motion 4

Determination of Core Policies by Voting Members

(Note: This is part of a rolling programme intended to transfer additional
key powers to the Voting Membership, and further changes in that regard
are expected in the future as the institution itself develops)



Remove Section 3.1.d.

S.13.4. Add Section 14 to list of protected Sections in S.13.4. and remove
reference to ghost ss.6.

S.14.2. Change method of notification of any changes to the Constitution
to "or publication on the party's official website."

Add S.14.3. No proposals to change any part of Section 1 of this
Constitution, or to change or adopt any major policy, are to be proposed
to either a General Members' Meeting or in a postal ballot until
previously passed by the Annual Conference of Voting Members.

Time they reinstated the good name of Kevin Hughes

Most Nationalists will have heard of the incarceration of Kevin Hughes, the former Worcestershire Organiser.

Kevin was and is a good friend of mine.

I visited him often in prison.

Now he wishes to put in the public domain information about the trial.

I asked Kevin to give a brief account of what happened the night he encountered a particular Iraqi Kurd. This is what he said :"I had been out with my friend and his partner. On leaving I was walking parallel with a chap who looked foreign and I asked him where he was from and he told me to "fuck off" and he pushed me.I pushed him back and then he hit me. I then grabbed him by the shoulders to stop him striking me again and we both tumbled to the floor.

I got up and walked away,went to the nearest telephone and called my wife to come and pick me up. When she arrived I got into the car and we drove off. At the traffic lights the door opened and a policeman put me under arrest for suspicion of assault.

The Iraqi Kurd was by his side, his shirt was still on his back and un-ripped and there were no injuries.

I was held overnight and charged with "racially aggravated Common Assault " the next day."

Kevin informs me that the company that he paid to give him the manuscripts from his trial nearly two years ago have misrepresented what happened. The company responsible for providing the manuscripts are :

Margaret Wort & Co, Edial Farm. Burntwood, Staffs.

Every Crown Court trial is recorded on tape, and there is provision for the accused to have a written transcript of the recording. Despite being told that the manuscripts would be available after six weeks, it took four and a half months for them to become available ! There may just be a suggestion of a fishy smell here bearing in mind what was related to me next.

The manuscripts bear no correspondence to the trial whatsoever. Kevin assures me they are a fallacy. The main flaw in the supposed trial accounts mention that the charge from “Racially Aggravated Common Assault” to “section 47 assault” (ABH) was at the instigation of the prosecution when it was in fact at the instigation of the judge. The upgrading of the charge occurred after the judge asserted that the Iraqi had a cut on his head and before the jury entered the courtroom AND THEREFORE BEFORE EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTION. I have no criminal law knowledge. Kevin who has looked into this has said for a judge to upgrade a charge is highly irregular and from what he has researched, actually “illegal”

Kevin Hughes was tried by Judge McEvoy at Worcester Crown Court on 25/5/06 , was convicted of racially assaulting a (twice failed) Iraqi asylum seeker and sentenced to two and a half years in prison. (Isn't it strange that the Establishment can murder hundreds of thousands of Iraqis yet present one up as a "victim" when needed !)

The trial had many questionable features to it, including:

1/ No photographic or medical evidence entered with respect of Kevin’s alleged assault on the other party. In fact the Iraqi was completely unblemished even though accusing Kevin of punching him six or seven times in the face. Kevin is an extremely powerfully built man and could seriously injure someone if he was so minded. There were doctor’s notes for Kevin who had been punched in the head BUT NONE for the other party. How could Judge McEvoy make the assertion he did about the cut ? (Does Judge McEvoy belong to the same Masonic Lodge as Lord Hutton ? :-) )

2/ Questioning of Kevin’s political beliefs, including BNP membership, whether he was a councillor and his views on immigration – with the usual inference that said membership bestows a “thug” tag on such a person. THE TRIAL MANUSCRIPTS GIVEN TO KEVIN HUGHES DO NOT CONTAIN THIS LINE OF QUESTIONING !

3/ Other than the Iraqi and Kevin Hughes there were no witnesses. Many may find this very odd and for what its worth I'm told it's a breach of Magna Carta !

Kevin Hughes persecution at the hands of Judge McEvoy and no doubt his Masonic Establishment contacts who instructed him needs to be widely known. Political interference in trials is seen to a greater extent then the Establishment would like to admit. I don’t believe there is a separation of Judicial from the Executive and Legislative parts of government as the Establishment likes us to believe.

Kevin was a political prisoner.

He had been the Worcestershire organiser for the BNP, a superb activist, including canvassing all over England for the BNP. Instrumental in getting the first BNP councillor elected in Redditch, (the constituency of a JOKE of a Home Secretary Jacqui Smith – but they’re all puppets anyway, even when they seem plausible.) The Establishment had clearly removed what they thought was a political threat to the future Home Secretary's "territory".

Posted by Simon Smith
http://nationalisttruth1.blogspot.com/2008/02/news-from-ex-political-prisoner-kevin.html

Heretical Two - latest news !

"Dear Tony,

I gather from Paul B. that he has received £815 towards the H2 fund. It would be good to get in some more: can you circulate your contacts again?

It is, as you have observed, a muchworthier cause than Irving's absurd rent!

I am especially anxious that the word should go out in Europe. This case is of seminal importance to European revisionists, whose Euros can buy many devalued Dollars cheaply."

============================================

The details for the Heretical Two bank account are as follows: All cheques etc. for the Appeal fund to be made payable to the;

Croydon Preservation Society

Lloyds Bank

Sort code 77-30-03

Account No 86187860

(Bank Address - Lloyds Bank, 49 / 53 High Street, Sutton, Surrey SM1 1DT)

All donations can be posted to, or they could be sent to the account - via
PayPal using email: paullballard@totalserve.co.uk
or
Western Union etc.

P.O. Box 301
Carshalton
Surrey
SM5 4QW

We can be contacted at either:- admin@drypool.org / paullballard@totalserve.co.uk

Police chief to join Gay Pride party

20/ 8/2008

THE new chief constable of Greater Manchester will be among 300 police officers joining in the party at the city's Pride festival this weekend.

Head of Cheshire police Peter Fahy, who will take over the top post with Greater Manchester's force later this year, will join the largest ever contingent of police officers to take part in a gay pride event when he helps celebrate the festival's 18th birthday on Saturday.

Officers and staff from 16 forces across the country will join the parade through Manchester city centre, leaving from the Museum of Science and Industry, in Castlefield, at 2pm. GMP is one of the lead sponsors of this year's Pride celebrations.

The force's parade appearance has been organised by Police with Pride which consists of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender representatives from forces across the north west.Sgt Julie Barnes-Frank, coordinator of GMP's Lesbian and Gay Staff Affiliation, said: "I am totally overwhelmed with the response we have had this year.

"It is fantastic that so many police officers and staff are taking part and it's a credit to them. Each year our presence gets bigger and bigger and this year it is true to say there's never been anything like it in the world."

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1063425__police_chief_to_join_pride_party_

And you might also want to read this;

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1057345_candidate_no1_peter_fahy

Britain in Crisis

Below is a trailer for the forthcoming movie I.O.U.S.A
We encourage you to watch it.




M&S reviews redundancy benefits
Marks & Spencer is in talks with staff representatives about changing benefits surrounding redundancy for UK workers.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7570482.stm

Trinity Mirror seeks job cuts and integration in Midlands shakeup
The Birmingham Post is switching from broadsheet to a tabloid format as part of sweeping changes to Trinity Mirror's Midlands publishing operation, which will also see 65 editorial posts axed.

In a radical overhaul of its Midlands operation, Trinity Mirror is creating two large new integrated multimedia newsrooms in Birmingham and Coventry providing editorial for five titles, including the Birmingham Post and the Coventry Telegraph.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/aug/19/trinitymirror.pressandpublishing

If the global economy is as safe as houses, then there's a crash on the way
"Data compiled by Lombard Street Research shows that the M3 'broad money' aggregates fell by almost $US50 billion in July, the biggest one-month fall since modern records began in 1959."

This might, on its own, be dismissed as Ambrose doing what he does best, hunting down headlines. But this article does not exist in a vacuum.

Unhappily, Professor Nouriel Roubini is in a glum mood even by his standards.

"The UK economy is not my brief," he writes, "but I see that hedge funds are circulating a report from the US guru Jeremy Grantham predicting a very bad end to Gordon Brown's debt experiment.

"The UK housing event is probably second only to the Japanese 1990 land bubble in the Real Estate Bubble Hall of Fame. UK house prices could easily decline 50% from the peak, and at that lower level they would still be higher than they were in 1997 as a multiple of income." That is one hell of a call.

"If prices go all the way back to trend, and history says that is extremely likely, then the UK financial system will need some serious bail-outs and the global ripples will be substantial," says Grantham.
http://business.theage.com.au/business/if-the-global-economy-is-as-safe-as-houses-then-theres-a-crash-on-the-way-20080819-3ya6.html

Indesit confirms 423 job losses
THE worst fears of hundreds of Peterborough workers became reality yesterday (August 18) when fridge maker Indesit confirmed it is to shut its city manufacturing plant.
Following a 90-day consultation, the white-goods company has announced it will end production at the factory, in Woodston, on November 28, with the loss of 423 jobs. Bosses have blamed a downturn in the market for free-standing fridges for the decision, saying the plant had become unsustainable.
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/Indesit-confirms-423-job-losses.4404796.jp

Job security fears affect more than half of IT contractors
Fears over job security are affecting more than 50 per cent of IT contractors compared with just one in 10 six months ago.

More than half of contractors said they are concerned about job security, compared with just 12 per cent in February, as redundancies increase 20 per cent across the sector. One in three IT companies are making job cuts, according to the research
http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/news/2224274/job-fears-four-times-worse-six

Warning to agriculture bosses as UK-wide redundancies loom
Agriculture bosses planning redundancies should be on 'red alert' for falling foul of employment law a leading law firm is warning following surveys revealing that widespread job losses are looming.
http://www.farminguk.com/Warning-to-agriculture-bosses-as-UK-wide-redundancies-loom8335.asp

DIY chain HOMEBASE is drawing up plans which could see hundreds of staff offered redundancy.
The retailer intends shake-ups in a third of its 302 UK stores.
Full-time staff in the affected stores will see a cut in working hours or be offered redundancy. Sun City has seen a copy of the letter which will be sent to staff at the UK’s No 2 DIY chain.

It reads: “Our store is one of a number where availability of our customer-facing colleagues does not match our trading patterns or customer demand. Also, sales performance has meant we need to review our store payroll costs.

News of the potential job losses comes days after The Sun revealed that COMET is in talks to make 100 deputy store managers redundant.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/money/city/article1574576.ece

Redundancies loom as 20:20 and Dextra businesses merge
20:20 is set to make a raft of redundancies at its UK business, as it looks to eradicate duplication in functions across its 20:20, Dextra Solutions and Caudwell Logistics divisions.

It comes after the long-awaited integration of the separate businesses. James Browning (pictured, right), the former Dextra chief, has been appointed MD of the new UK business, with 20:20 boss Trevor Price moving to the Middle East.
The company is currently building its new UK management team, using the individuals who had headed up the Dextra and 20:20 businesses.

A further rung of the sales, purchasing, marketing and finance functions are expected to be reviewed in the coming weeks.

Oldersma said: ‘In the three-year plan we’ve written, we’ve seen that the UK is flat. It is simply not growing. The organisational design had to reflect that. It had to be more relationship based, and on process.’
http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/Redundancies_loom_as_2020_and_Dextra_businesses_merge.html

Homes group announces redundancies
REDROW homes says that 30 workers from its Preston Brook offices will be transferred to other parts of the business when the office closes at the end of September.

The remainder of the 70 Preston Brook staff will be made redundant.

Linda Bright, on behalf of Redrow, said: “The housing market continues to experience an extremely challenging environment as a result of the credit squeeze.

“With no immediate prospect of a change in market conditions, like many other housebuilders we have had to make further significant reductions in employee numbers. Š

“As a consequence of this review, we announced the proposed closure of two offices in our trading update in early July and those closures have been subject to a consultation period with staff affected.
http://iccheshireonline.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100regionalnews/tm_headline=homes-group-announces-redundancies&method=full&objectid=21567619&siteid=50020-name_page.html

Dreams really can come true

Well, for £5,000 they can.

Nicholas John Griffin, yes, he who instigated legal action out of spite against the ‘Rebels’ in December last year has done something rather silly. Two weeks ago the ‘Rebels’ solicitors wrote to, Mr Griffin, about his failure to prosecute the action instigated by, Mr Griffin, in April of this year. Mr Griffin, was given two weeks to respond, and that deadline passed yesterday evening.

We can conclude two things from this

1, That Mr Griffin believes himself above all legal requests
2, That Mr Griffin hasn’t paid the bill of his own acting lawyers ’ Gilbert Davies’ and that they no longer represent him because of this.

We at NWN tend to the latter, particularly as one of the BNP’s top table has been frantically ringing around begging for donations. Clearly the RWB money has dried up already?

So, where does the £5000 and your dreams come into this?

The ‘Rebels’ need just £5000 to force, Mr Griffin, back into court, and as, Mr Griffin, and, Mr MI5on Darby, are the registered claimants on the case brought against the ‘Rebels’ in April, it is they who would have to pay, and pay they would, as costs ordered against them would make them bankrupt and incapable of leading the BNP. Forget the 5% and, Mr Griffins severance, you can now rid yourselves of them using the law.

How much is the BNP worth to you? Your dreams are just £5000 away

Donate here to get rid of, Mr Griffin, and Simon Darby, now:

http://www.voiceofchange.org.uk/donate.php

Many thanks to S.O.S for a most enlightening article

Divided, they fall

We at NWN heard that only 170 anti's bothered to show. This proves their numbers are dwindling, and when their numbers outrank the minorities they pretend to defend, we know their death is imminent.


Author: Pete Radcliff
Many hundreds of socialists and trade-unionists rallied in Codnor, Derbyshire, on 16 August, to show opposition to the fascist British National Party's "summer festival" being held on a farm near the village.

First, thanks to all comrades who came, especially those who came after recent hectic activity with Climate Camp and the Tube cleaners' solidarity action. We staged a significant demonstration to show that the BNP are not welcome in the area, that they will not go unchallenged; and it was not just an affair of outsiders parading through the streets of Codnor for a couple of hours. The activity to build the demonstration has also helped to build a local anti-BNP network.

As I reported in my speech at the closing rally, we know local residents, living near the farm, who have been subjected to serious harassment by the BNP. Our demonstration showed those residents that they are not alone.

As we had said on the website http://nobnpfestival.wordpress.com before the day, what with the use of the Public Order Act to severely limit our demonstration, it wasn’t what we ideally wanted. Also, lots of people were looking for transport being arranged to Codnor, and there was comparatively little we could point to other than what AWL members across the country had pushed for and managed to get arranged.

Hopefully the agitation for our protest may have galvanised some more activists, and provided a spur to establish active campaigns elsewhere like ours in Notts.

I thought our Notts-organised rally, held pretty continuously from 9:15 was good. A lot of local people are now involved, spoke at our open mike session, came behind the Amber Valley Stop the BNP banner that had been made.

Unite Against Fascism had been reluctant to support the demonstration at all, and when they came ot "support", they seem more concerned to pursue petty competition with, and try to elbow out, the local campaign, than actually to mobilise against the BNP.

They advertised a different assembly time - 11:00 rather than 9:00 - and when their coaches first turned up, kept their people for a while away from the rally already underway organised by Notts Stop The BNP.

In the middle of that rally - in the middle of a speech - they then marched their people away from the rally, without word or warning. Notts Stop The BNP were obliged to try to pull together the rest of the rally and follow the march, on pain of seeing the anti-fascists completely divided and many people confused.

On the march, the UAF indulged in a lot of hysterical and dishonest sloganising. They chanted, for example: "Nazi scum off our streets", often annoying and provoking local youths who may have no relationship at all with the BNP. Some people shouted back at the UAF visitors for the day: "these are our streets, not yours". Fair point, perhaps. And the BNP weren’t even on the streets, they were in a field!

At one point the local Amber Valley anti-BNP campaigners found themselves, and wanted to be, at the head of the march. They thought it would stress the fact that it wasn’t just geographic and political "outsiders". But they were incredibly brusquely and rudely pushed aside by the SWP.

The march went up to a road junction where the police stopped it, half a mile from the BNP site, and we probably didn't have the forces to push through. The UAF then negotiated with the police, without reference to the local campaigners, licence for a "delegation" of 30 people to walk down through the police line towards the BNP site.

We had SWP national secretary Martin Smith standing on the police side of the line, smirking, while marchers pushed and shoved in a vain attempt to break that line.

UAF insisted on its own rally after the march. The local Amber Valley activists didn’t like the speeches, apart from the speech which the UAF had to allow me to make.

Almost all the rally speeches were dollops of triumphalism, smug and inappropriate self-congratulation, and complacency. Mine was the only one to acknowledge that we had not been successful at what we really wanted to do, that the anti-fascist movement is not in a good state; to condemn the use of the Public Order Act. It was the only one to say that we needed greater numbers if the BNP attempt the same thing next year, and that we need a genuine local and national campaign.

Please note that we are calling a follow-on conference on Saturday 27 September at Queens Walk Community Centre, Nottingham. Please try and get people to come and come yourselves if possible.


http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2008/08/18/we-challenged-bnp-next-year-we-must-stop-them

GRIFFIN LOSES HIS 4YRS

News coming in from members is, any challenger must secure 5% of the entire memberships support to trigger a challenge.

Griffin has secured a severance package. We'll elaborate on those details soon.

The following are numbered mini reports from our many NWN posters;

1, Griffin was defeated 60/40 and at one point was seen consulting his father, Edgar Griffin.

2, He was verbally opposed by, Barnbrook, Butler, Collett, Walker, Jackson, Tyndall, Beverly, Edmunds, and Kemp.

3, Colgate who was tabled to speak, left her membership card at home, and was told by Griffin that she couldn't speak, and couldn't vote. Hannam also left his card at home.

4, The NPD were at RWB with there own stall, they were selling portraits of Hess, and declared themselves as "left wing nazis". I was shocked that Griffin allowed them there, I won't be attending RWB again.

5, It was interesting to see Griffin defeated for the first time since he took power in 1999. The members showed he was not above the party, and wasn't the party, but simply one of its officers, and that is just as it should be.

6, NWN was being blamed by Darby and Griffin for alerting the members and keeping them informed. Kemp even mentioned it on stage as "Not allowing the Internet to influence BNP members". Good work NWN

7, Martin Wingfield didn't vote, he left early.

8, It was Arthur Kemp who suggested the 5% of membership, proving the whole thing was fixed by Griffin.

9, Griffins greed in going for 4yrs means the following
1, The advisory council can whenever they wish impeach the Chairman for misconduct with 2/3rds in favour
2, At every AGM 20 voting members can demand a leadership challenge
3, The 5% ammendment thrashed out between Edmunds and Griffin could quite easily be reached when you consider that very few last 2YRS in the BNP


Keep your mini reports coming, we're not asking for thousands of words, just a brief outline of what caught your eye.

A STAB IN THE BACK:
HOW NICK GRIFFIN BETRAYED A BNP MEMBER

By Clive Potter



The path of devastation left by BNP Chairman Nick Griffin in his rise to power and his attainment of supremacy within that party has been well-documented. A significant number of BNP officials and senior members have experienced the viciousness, disloyalty and contempt from Nick Griffin and who have since either been expelled, forced to resign or have become so disillusioned that they have either refused to renew their subscriptions or have drifted into a state of apathy and non-activism within the party.

Loyalty is not just bottom-up from the grassroots. It needs to be top-down. It is a mutual contract of service and reward for effort and sacrifice made by the grassroots members in return for seeing the party successful and for its fee-paying and hard-working activists to be treated with respect and honour. Griffin has never honoured his members, whom he sees as little more than a milking-cow for their money to be siphoned off. How much of that money is actually diverted from the needs of the party is unknown but considering that the BNP is supposed to be about winning elections and “making a difference” and a party built up as a campaigning organisation it comes as a surprise to realise that less than 6% of the total income of the BNP is actually spent on campaigning.

The accounts from those who have been mistreated by Nick Griffin, both ex-and non-BNP members, are legion. Both from the time when Griffin helped to run the National Front to his time when he schemed his way into the BNP leadership, Griffin has used people as fodder. His contempt for anyone who disagrees with him or dares to challenge him is well-known.Yet for those sychophants who bow to his every wish and conspire with him to get what he wants, these individuals are kept close to his Inner Circle, some of whom are non-party members or have a history of extremism, terrorist activities or even anti-racistnationalist views. These individuals, whether incompetent or not, are used by Griffin to maintain his rule and they, like the rest of the membership, expendable if they were to clash with Griffin’s ego. Meanwhile,, although those who have something on Griffin, such as Collett and Lecomber, are able to maintain that relationship with him.

I was for several years mesmerised by the skilful, articulate and charismatic leadership of Nick Griffin. His Chairmanship seemed to bring in a modernity and reform of the BNP that I felt was necessary to make it electable. Like others, I ignored the early concerns of financial mismanagement and believed Griffin’s hype against the Edwards’ and Mike Newland’s expulsion from the party, brought about by their principled stand against what they saw was financial negligence – and worse. Like others, I was prepared to believe him for the future of the BNP, and in so doing let down principled comrades who were not prepared to put up with financial skulduggery. To the brave and principled stand of the Edwards’ and Mike Newland I salute you and offer my apologies for my failure to offer you support at that crucial time. Their experience was merely the beginning for a list of individuals who were axed or sidelined by Griffin in his pursuit of power and money within the party which he had schemed to take over.

My own experience of Nick Griffin’s unbridled thirst for power and money crystallised in July 2007 when Nick Griffin he viciously stabbed my Vice-President, Tim Hawke and myselfe (the President) of the independent trade union Solidarity) in the back, in what was a wholesale takeover by Nick Griffin on behalf of his former National Front colleague, Patrick Harrington. Harrington had recently, who had to been suspended from the union on account of union disciplinary allegations. This matter has been fully documented on this blog and elsewhere, but my first experience prior to that was when I had initiated an employment tribunal case against HM Prison Services on 14 September 2005.

This case was launched against the Prison Service as a result of that particular institution discriminating against me as a member of the white ethnic community since I was a member of a white nationalist organisation, namely the British National Party. Although the Prison Service had made its anti-white racist policy operational under a Policy Directive in 2002, that is to bar all members of white nationalist organisations from applying for employment within the Prison Service, I had chosen to seek employment with that institution.

I also felt that BNP members should not be institutionally discriminated against by a State agency who were denying white members of white nationalist political organisations the opportunity of employment. Such an injustice bore all the hallmarks of a Stalinist state. Though members of white nationalist organisations were in effect barred from employment within the Service, non-white members of Black Ethnic Minority organisations, such as the terrorist-linked Sikh Federation and the anti-white, anti-Christian and anti-Semitic Nation of Islam, remained eligible to apply for employment within the Prison Service.

Together with the unrivalled legal services of Lee Barnes I initiated a case of Indirect Racial Discrimination against HM Prison Service, a case which lasted nearly three years and saw various Hearings, including an Appeal Hearing where HM Prison Service attempted to block the case after the original Employment Tribunal in Leicester agreed that the case ought to be heard.

The Prison Service employed every legal tactic they could to prevent the case from being heard, even employing a leading QC from Cherie Blair’s Matrix Chambers to represent themselves. Prison Service.

The level of Institutionalised Racism was brought home when the final Hearing in October 2007 was suddenly cancelled for no apparent reason on the Friday afternoon before the Hearing on the following Monday.

It seemed reasonable to infer that the State had panicked and stitched us up, using the Employment Tribunal Service to cancel the original Panel who had been unbiased and drafting in a new Panel that appeared to be bent, consisting of an Asian Muslim, an Asian Sikh and a token white (obviously pathetically liberal and quisling).

The bent decision by this bent Panel was obvious after the two-day Hearing in February 2008, a Hearing that was marked only by the professional representation from Lee Barnes who ripped into the half-dozen witnesses of the Prison Service and surgically tore to shreds the legal arguments of HM Prison Service as represented by a QC and a Treasury Solicitors Legal Team. Despite this massive defence put up by the Prison Service’s legal team the fantastic hard work of Lee Barnes (who had worked extremely hard on the case and seen through several Hearings) we werewas unable to win through in the end, and my opinion is that this was almost certainly because of the bent tribunal.

Despite the evidence that we submitted to the Tribunal of two false claims that I had submitted in 2007 for employment within the HM Prison Service (as ethnic minority ‘applicants’ posing aswho were members of organisations similar to the BNP), the bent judgment was against us. This shows the bent and corrupt nature of our so-called democratic state in whichwhere it is claimed that we enjoy free speech, civil and political rights and justice. This case knocks the head off that wild claim for good. We now have a society where Institutionalised Racism exists. This racism, that is against whites and the white community, and the political representatives of the white community. It is now legally acceptable to discriminate against whites, white applicants and the white community for jobs, thus leaving whites as second-class citizens below members of foreign ethnic minorities who are given preference above white applicants.

This case is important not just for the exposure of the British State as an Institutionalised Racist State, at war with its own indigenous citizens, but also in revealing the anti-nationalist credentials of the leader of Britain’s most important nationalist political party.

In July 2006, when the case was first heard at the Employment Tribunals in Leicester, Lee Barnes’ successful challenge saw the case scrape through the tribunals and was scheduled to be listed for a full hearing. This was on the proviso that I pay a £500 deposit for the case to go ahead and a fee of £1000 costs to date for the HM Prison Service.

Lee Barnes suggested that I contact Nick Griffin as the case clearly involved the BNP as the HM Prison Service had since 2002 instigated an anti-BNP policy and it was essential to challenge this policy. It was also essential to defeat this discriminatory policy so as to ensure a political strategic goal of encouraging more professional and middle-class people to join the BNP, since if such people felt that their career and employment prospects were barred by their BNP membership the work of the BNP and of British Nationalism would be made much more difficult. Furthermore, Nick Griffin himself had challenged the anti-BNP policy of the Prison Service when it was created, and had published material about it in and had also written directly to HM Prison Service seeking information and asking questions of the policy.

The case needed £1500 to proceed. Without it my access to employment justice was barred and the challenge to this piece of anti-BNP and anti-white policy would be effectively stalled.

I subsequently wrote to Nick Griffin and on 18 July 2006 I received confirmation of my request.



Re: Employment Tribunal Case - Potter v HM Prison Service (No 1901930/2005)
Tuesday, 18 July, 2006 8:55 AM
From:
"BNP Chairman"
To:
"Clive Potter" < >
Cc:
"lj barnes" , "National Treasurer"
Dear Clive

Yes, I think this is very important. Despite the fact that we're as tight
financially this summer as ever, a Trafalgar Club cheque for £1,500 is in
the post. That, however, is all the can possibly be afforded at present and
for some time to come, and must not be taken as an indication that future
financial support will be available, though obviously I hope that, should it
prove necessary and likely to be worthwhile, we will be able to help
further.

Should you in due course be successful and in a position to recover your
costs, we would of course expect the return of this money. Should you lose,
it will be written off.

Please don't hesitate to contact me should you have any queries or concerms.
Good luck with the continued case.

Yours sincerely

Nick Griffin

PS What news on the Christian Council set-up operation?

I subsequently received a cheque from The Trafalgar Club dated 17 July 2006 via Nick Griffin. The co-signatory is unclear but could be Nick Griffin’s father, Edgar Griffin, whom we know as the figure operating the Trafalgar Club accounts.





Unfortunately, this cheque immediately bounced - although some who have had the hindsight of experience with Griffin would say that this was unsurprising.

The cheque above has been stamped “Refer to Drawer Please Represent”, whilst the image of the letter from First Direct dated 31 July clearly shows that this cheque for £1500 had bounced.






What is surprising and of great concern, however, was how the Trafalgar Club funds had suddenly been left with no money. We are fully aware that this Fund is in receipt of substantial donations and a recent TC Dinner would have swollen the funds to quite a large extent.

Where had this money disappeared to? Why were there no funds available to meet the cheque for £1500 which was not in itself a large amount but which was vital if this important legal case was to proceed?.

Only Nick Griffin and his Masonic accountant father, Edgar Griffin, can answer this question. But the fact is that with regards to my own circumstances I could no longer proceed with the case. and Lee Barnes had spent considerable time and effort in working on this case already and we had made a great political and personal investment concerning it.

By the time I received the letter from the bank I had already paid the Employment Tribunal as I obviously expected the cheque to be honoured, plus the fact that the closing date for the submission of the deposit was a tight legal deadline that had to be met.

I therefore found myself seriously out-of-pocket with a £1500 debt that I could ill-afford, let down by my very own Chairman of a political party whose values and principles I had staked my claim on.

Nick Griffin made no apology and made no compensatory action to ensure that the money would be refunded to me. I had initially waited some weeks prior to receiving the cheque from Griffin which placed huge pressures on me as I had to have the deposit/damages presented at the Tribunal within a restricted time-frame. Now I faced considerable financial problems as placed on me by the stupidity and selfishness of the very man whom I had placed my trust in and whose banner I had rallied round to support in this tribunal claim.

It was left to the usual ordinary and decent BNP member to come forward to save the day, offering me the damages as a one-off payment and payment of the £500 deposit that was agreed that I would pay off over time. Without this act of generosity by an unnamed BNP member it is clear that the claim would not have had a had chance of success.

I took this case on not merely because it was a personal claim of racial discrimination and injustice that I needed to tackle head-on, but a case that was central to the rights of BNP members who live and work in a modern liberal western democracy and their right to join a legal political party of their choice without intimidation or restriction. It was also about how a British nationalist party could determine how it operated within the legal sphere and how it could break out of the bondage that the liberal-Left State had tried to impose upon it so that it could function less effectively within a so-called democracy.

The following year, in July 2007, I was expelled from the BNP in an act of pique by Nick Griffin after I opposed his bullying and unwarranted interference in the independent nationalist trade union Solidarity, a nationalist body that I had founded on the instructions and ideas of Lee Barnes. Griffin supported his old-time comrade, Patrick Harrington (who was not even a member of the BNP but a member of a rival party, The National Liberal Party, which later helped to defeat a BNP candidate in a council by-election earlier this year), over those of his own members, Tim Hawke and myself, and purged me from the party (Tim Hawke had earlier resigned). I am still awaiting an Appeal Tribunal to hear my case on this matter. Despite this act of treachery and disloyalty from Griffin I persisted with the tribunal claim as the rights of BNP members meant more to me than the vanity and stupidity of just one bitter man. The values of democracy and free speech were imperative and the cause of white nationalism needed to be driven through by way of legal argument and example. Griffin never showed any interest or gave any kind of support to this case prior to my expulsion in any case.

It has been reported that other BNP members have similarly been placeds in dire situations by the failure of the BNP to act on its promises, or who have failed to have their money owed to them for services to the party returned. This serial failure is due to one thing and one thing only. The failure of the Chairman Nick Griffin to honour his pledges and to respect not only his members and colleagues, but also to even remotely honour his debt to them. We are not always referring to a financial debt necessarily as countless self-sacrificing BNP members whose time and loyalty have been given to the service of the BNP and for the cause of British Nationalism have repeatedly been ignored or treated with contempt or utter disloyalty by Griffin. Nick Griffin is, in essence, a serial traitor both to his own members and to the cause upon which he was elected leader to serve.

But the Griffin Problem did not end there. The case was finally heard in a two-day hearing at Leicester Tribunals Office on 25/26 February, fought by my unpaid and volunteer legal representative Lee Barnes. Lee has details of the Skeleton Argument on his blog spot dated 7 May 2008 (http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2008/05/clive-potter-case-legal-skeleton.html).

The Final Hearing was the Final Submissions and Judgment and on this occasion attended by myself only and the Treasury Solicitors Legal Team. The not unexpected judgment from the bent Panel was communicated to Lee Barnes on that same day.

As the Legal Unit Director, Lee Barnes communicated the judgment to Nick Griffin but I was not aware that he had done so. However, it was only whilst trawling through the far Left anti-BNP blog of Lancaster Unity that I noticed that someone had made a reference to me and my recently concluded tribunal case, which had remained confidential.


From the blog of Lancaster Unity
May 10, 2008
Councillor in challenge to BNP leadership

Posted by Antifascist 25 Comment (s)

Anonymous said...
Does anyone know what happened with the case that Clive Potter (ex-Solidarity, ex-BNP) took against the Prison Service for racial discrimination? Lee Barnes was curiously still representing him even though Potter has earned the hatred of both the BNP and Squalidarity leadership. What was Barnes up to and how did he get on?
10:52 AM, May 12, 2008



Anonymous said...
Lee Barnes was curiously still representing him even though Potter has earned the hatred of both the BNP and Squalidarity leadership.

What has Clive Potter done to piss off the BNP? I thought Potter was another diehard BNP fanatic trying to prove a pointless point through pointless and frivolous legal action.
11:25 AM, May 12, 2008
Anonymous said...
I think he and Barnes lost the case recently (shock,gasp!) but I haven't heard anything more.

Potter fell out with Griffin by trying to suspend Harrington from the Union. Harrington and Griffin rounded on him. Griffin and Harrington go back a long way.
4:18 PM, May 12, 2008
Anonymous said...
Current gossip says that Potter had costs of over £80,000 awarded against him. Maybe Lee B was playing doublecross for Nick G? On the other hand he could just be crap! Can't see Solidarity or the BNP running appeals!
6:55 PM, May 13, 2008


Clearly someone knew of the case and the fact that it had been heard and lost within the two-days that had elapsed between its conclusion on 9 May and the first posting above on the morning of 12 May.

We assumed that it was the work of Searchlight who we know have assisted HM Prison Service and have co-operated in “Operation Wedge”, an “anti-racist” initiative (see the article on this blog for 30 July).

However, information later materialised that shed new and disturbing light on the origins of this information. Since the information pertaining to the Tribunal case was kept quiet since it was a blow against both the BNP and me, the fact that information had somehow leaked out and had been published, albeit on a blogposting, was unwelcoming. The original posting looks contrived, almost as if it was written with a view to expecting further revelations. Indeed, the anonymous poster soon supplied the far-Left blog with the required information exposing the loss of the case whilst deriding the work of my legal representative, Lee Barnes. The fact that the poster repeatedly made reference to my role within the Solidarity trade union and my problems within that organisation made me very suspicious as to the source.

Four days after the Hearing the poster seemed to know exactly the amount of the costs that had been awarded against me in fighting this claim, £80,000. It seemed that someone had access to confidential information and since I not passed it to anyone I was concerned as to the source and how and why they would post this incriminating material on a far-Left blog.

On 14 May the following article appeared on the Northwest Nationalists blog:


Wednesday, 14 May, 2008

"Lee Barnes, does it again!


Word is just reaching us that, Lee Barnes, has cost another BNP member, now ex BNP member £80,000 with his dodgy legal advice. When will people realise this cretin is an insane wann-a-be with an Internet purchased diploma who doesn't have a clue what he's going on about.

More as we get it
Posted by Tartarus at 2:46 PM 2 comments"



Again, the information provides the identical amount of £80,000 for the costs incurred in the 3-year case as well as using it to attack Lee Barnes. I appreciate that Mr Barnes is a maverick and has upset a number of nationalists but I cannot comment on such matters. However, the fact is that his unpaid legal assistance was crucial to the case and ensured that I had a solid case that in practice fundamentally defeated the HM Prison Service’s legal team.

When I contacted Northwest Nationalists as to the source of the information on the grounds that it was essential to identify the source of this anti-nationalist poison it was discovered that Patrick Harrington was behind it!

RE: URGENT! POSTING ON NWN
Thursday, 15 May, 2008 12:16 AM
From:
"Terry Allen" <>
Add sender to Contacts
To:

Hello Clive,

tartarus got the info from harrington himself, saying that "Harrington has a big gob".

Pete



That would explain the anti-Lee Barnes bias as Harrington never hid his dislike of Lee Barnes when I worked with him on the Solidarity union, even though it was Lee Barnes himself who recommended Harrington in the first place since it was claimed that Harrington had experienced discrimination by leftist trade unions in the past. Harrington was angry that Lee Barnes had attended the first Solidarity AGM in February 2007 and had spoken out against various proposals that he had put forward. Harrington later demanded whether Barnes was actually a paid-up member of Solidarity. Later Harrington attacked him in emails pointing out that Barnes’ affiliation with the BNP had been exposed some time ago and was damaging to Solidarity. He did not want Barnes to be a member of Solidarity’s Executive either and ensured that Barnes role within the Solidarity Executive was sidelined as he was responsible for the AGM’s agenda at the time. Harrington disliked Solidarity’s close association with the BNP and said that it was the “kiss of death”. Yet in early 2007 it was Harrington himself who schemed with Griffin to ensure that he was awarded with a new laptop PC paid for by the Union’s members along with a proposal for a monthly payment of £175 that would include the commissioning of “intellectual” articles in the BNP’s publications. In July 2007 it was Harrington who hijacked the Union alongside Griffin, turning an formerly independent nationalist trade union into a BNP front organisation under the centralised control of Griffin himself.

To use the case as a sounding board to attack another nationalist who had worked tirelessly on a legal case to benefit BNP members and nationalists is disgraceful. To suggest that Barnes was somehow engaged in a deceitful game of “double cross” with Nick Griffin is disgusting and cheap and an insult against Barnes’ integrity. To use this as an excuse to publicly rubbish someone who gave a considerable amount of entirely unpaid legal expertise unpaid is the act of a jealous desperados who are themselves failures and who haves failed to attain a legal qualifications ofn their own accord.

Why Patrick Harrington chose to use this failed case as an excuse to try and expose my own loss in this legal claim and the award of costs against me, whilst at the same time denigrating another nationalist for their legal work, is beyond me. Clearly Harrington is sore regarding Solidarity and the suspension (and later expulsion) by the Solidarity Executive to discipline him back in June 2007.

More importantly, But it is the fact that the only source where Harrington could have obtained the ammunition that he used to attack Lee Barnes and myself was from Nick Griffin himself. Lee Barnes had passed the information regarding the Tribunal judgment and the awarded costs to Nick Griffin as the case involved issues relating to the BNP. It would seem that Griffin, in an act of calculated callousness and betrayal, then communicated that information to his former serving NF comrade Harrington, knowing that he would use it as Harrington is a known prolific blogger and poster on the internet.

Clearly, Griffin knew full well what he was doing. He wanted to embarrass me and to humiliate me by exposing the fact that I had lost an important tribunal case and in the process was awarded costs of some £80,000 against me. The fact that I was representing the BNP and its members (even though I was no longer a member) did not seem to enter into Griffin’s sick mind. As far as he was concerned I was “vermin” and had to have ever dared stand up against his dictatorial and bullying stance. To Griffin it was fitting that I had lost and had lost financially. He had already ensured that the case nearly failed at the beginning and saw to it that “his” money would not be used in this case that had been fought on behalf of the BNP and BNP members. The fact that I am seeking bankruptcy proceedings due to my pursuit of this case on behalf of the BNP and its members does not concern Nick Griffin in the slightest. That shows the level of contempt and political sickness within that individual.

Similarly, Griffin did not care whether his own legal advisor, Lee Barnes, was rubbished as he surely knew because Harrington had always despised Barnes.

Griffin has no friends, only enemies. He trusts no-one and uses colleagues as consumables that can be bought and disposed of when used. No-one is immune to his sociopathic tendencies and his position at the head of a political party is the most ill-fitting of places where such individuals ought to be placed.

Nick Griffin is an enemy of ordinary BNP members and of British nationalism. He simply cannot be trusted to deliver BNP members either success or values. His contempt for BNP members and for the cause of British nationalism is clear. His callous and deviously-contrived actions in attempting to sabotage an important legal case being fought on behalf of the BNP and its members is tantamount to a traitorous act. Griffin should be charged for bringing the party into disrepute, not just for these acts but for a whole host of misconduct. But the supine members of the Advisory Council were always too weak and spineless to challenge him in a united and concerted way. Now they have lost their chance.

Griffin’s misconduct in passing confidential information to a third party, knowing that that individual would use it to smear one of his very own trusted legal confidents, as well as humiliating a former member who was acting in the interests of his very own party and its members, clearly show that at the very heart of the BNP lies a great sickness. There is a cancer within the BNP and its poisonous personality is rotting the very heart and soul of the partyBNP. With the slow death of the BNP will also be the slow death of Britain as the last remaining vehicle of political and civil opposition to the EU monster and the left-Liberal Plan to destroy the foundations and principles that it was built upon.Britain in partnership with the Corporations will soon disappear.

Is that what you want to happen?

There is still time to change the BNP.

The only obstacle to change is Nick Griffin.

It is up to you and all BNP members whether you wish to continue down this road to oblivion.

RWB

Click on the above images to enlarge.

SHOWDOWN AT THE HOEDOWN !

Its official, Griffin will expel anyone in opposition to him on the day, and is drafting in extra security to silence those who may verbally oppose him. Word is flooding in to NWN that things could get very nasty as Griffin refuses to state how the EGM will be held, and votes counted.

REMEMBER, 2/3rds are required to carry the vote in his favour, and just who will be counting that show of hands?


How many voting in Griffins favour will be REAL and current paid up members?


These are all questions that need asking, and answering.

Simon Darby, will be used as the gentle opposition on the day, all of it faked, as Darby is in full agreement with Griffin becoming the dictator.


This post will remain here till Monday 18th August by request of those many concerned members, and ex members who don’t wish to trawl through a myriad of posts.


If you are worried, or concerned, ask it here, we will try our utmost to bring you the correct, and truthful answers.