Friday, May 07, 2010

BNP loses all 12 seats in Barking and Dagenham council

BNP leader Nick Griffin lost out in the Barking parliamentary seat
The British National Party (BNP) has lost all 12 of its seats on east London's Barking and Dagenham Council.

Labour gained 19 wards and now has control of all 51 council seats. The party also took control of Enfield and Harrow councils from the Conservatives.

Elsewhere, the Liberal Democrats have held Sutton while the Tories have held Hammersmith and Fulham, Kensington and Chelsea and Hillingdon Councils.

More than 6,000 candidates contested 1,861 seats in 32 boroughs.

The BNP's loss in Barking in the local elections mirrored its defeat in the parliamentary elections where Labour minister Margaret Hodge saw off a challenge by BNP leader Nick Griffin, winning by a majority of more than 16,000.

Mayoral elections

Mr Griffin came in third place, with 6,620 votes, after the Conservatives. The Labour Party has been in control of Barking and Dagenham Council since 1964.
NWN: Surely Mr.Griffin will now do the decent thing ?


Anonymous said...

Oi Griffin ! Go, and go now !

Anonymous said...

Griffin, Dowson, Golding and Kemp. The game is up and its time for you to move on.

It's time to...


Anonymous said...

Still a chance that Julian Leppert is elected in Redbridge.

Anonymous said...

He must go,if theres ever proof in the pudding then this it ? he has forced out good organisers and activists and replaced them with inbeciles over the past few years resulting in us loosing a shit load of candidates and not gaining any.From five years ago rather than advance the party has gone backwards,if griffin was a company director he would have been out on his arse first thing this morning ! GO GRIFFIN THE DAMAGE IS DONE !

Anonymous said...

BNP Website....WTF???????

Anonymous said...

I wonder what the next begging letter will be about.

Anonymous said...

I can't believe it we have lost every council seat in the country that we were defending and have gained nothing, absolutely bloody nothing. How much has this campaign cost us? The website being down must be a bonus to Gri££in, it gives him a great excuse not to mention the complete election disaster.

Anonymous said...

Two stupid statements put out by Gri££in on Green Arrow's blog, because he can't operate his own website. Spin or what?

A letter from the Front

A message from Nick Griffin

Anonymous said...

The Yids at Searchlight have just posted this video of Griffin at the council count today.

Nemesis said...

This coffee has been sitting here on the table for some 5 years and yet very few of the BNP Sheeple, those who give their undying loyalty, hard-earned money and unstinting but misplaced loyalty to Gri££in, seem to be smelling it??

Do these people have a sense of smell?

Do they wear some form of colander round their necks stuffed with spices and other strongly scented ingredients to keep the 'alien' coffee smell away from them?

Do these people ACTUALLY have a sense of smell at all?

Come on members of the British National Party...








Nemesis said...

It looks as if Gri££in is blaming the loss of Barking and Dagenham, the jewel in the BNP crown, on a "high turn-out".

What's wrong with democracy and voter participation Mr Gri££in?

Afraid of democracy and the popular will?

Gri££in has been forced to issue a somewhat grovelling if over-inflated justification for this disaster on the pro-Gri££in and sycophantic Green Arrow blog, the one run by a pathetic and blithering idiot.

Gri££in said, "External attacks disguised as internal friction will be a common feature as our political enemies spin their web of lies and deceit designed to prevent us from reaching our true potential. Our enemies' weapons will be disharmony, conflict, misinformation and never-ending legal warfare.

They will not succeed, but we all must remain ever vigilant. If someone tells you a piece of 'shocking' internal gossip which clearly is aimed at undermining the people now working to propel the party forward, then you need to treat such lies with the contempt they deserve. Don't believe, let alone pass on, any such disinformation without telling the target about the allegation and hearing the truth. Our enemies have huge resources at their disposal and will exploit the slightest chink in our armour to inject their poison amongst us."

So there you have it, straight form Mr Gobshite himself.

He's getting ready with the knives and planning an attack to pre-empt any kind of opposition or criticism.

According to the lies that issue from Gri££in HQ it is all the fault of State agents/Reds/ Marxist conspiracy/ Media/Wrong 'uns/Discontents/Hollywood Nazis/Searchlight Agents blah blah blah.

It's never HIS fault is it?

But ANYONE who dares to step out of line, who disagrees with him, who questions the status quo is branded immediately one of the above and is disciplined or attacked by his scum and the moronic Sheeple of his sychophantic followers.

It looks as if Gri££in is now battening down the hatches and preparing for a long siege in the Bunker as he realises that his members are begining to slowly wake up from their state of unconsciousness and are very angry at being used and abused and led down a blind alley.

All those who dare to criticise the Dear Leader will find themselves the target of Gri££in's ire and attack dogs.

Now is the time to stick together and operate as one.

He may be able to isolate individuals but if groups and branches stick together and communicate effectively, withholding money from the centre, we can starve him out and force the Failed Dictator out - for good.

Nemesis said...

Reminds me, all this BNP defeat and the failure of the man at the top, of the late Malcom Mclaren, the artist and musical genius behind the punk group, the Sex Pistols.

In the film 'The Great Rock and Roll Swindle' Mclaren said (to the British public),

"Ever felt like you've been cheated?"

Well, I know how the BNP membership must feel.

Anonymous said...

I haven't been on the web since returning from a count.

I was hoping that Nick Griffin would have resigned by now.

I am not going to do this again unless I have faith in the party leadership.

Nick Griffin has all but destroyed the BNP.

Anonymous said...

Why, oh why, has Griffin got an Hitler hairstyle ?

Just look at that pic FFS.

Anonymous said...

Why did Griffin allow an aged 84 year old transvestite to stand in Bury North for the BNP ?

Talk about scraping the barrel.

The 'sweet one' has appeared on TV programmes like Coach Trip and Sherlock Holmes.

Anonymous said...

2010 Result
Bury North Con gain from Lab
David Nuttall (Con) 18070 40% +3%
Maryam Khan (Lab) 15827 35% -7%
Richard Baum (LD) 7645 17% +2%
John Maude (BNP) 1825 4% 0%
Stephen Evans (UKIP) 1282 3% +2%
Bill Brison (Ind) 181 <1% <1%
Graeme Lambert (PP) 131 <1% <1%
Majority 2243 5% 0%
Turnout: 67% (+5%)

Guess which one is 'the sweet one' ?

We call him 'sweetie John' !

Anonymous said...

i think its time the men in white coats came for darby,quote :

As for us, well our position certainly isn't as bad as UKIP's and it could be argued that although a little tattered and torn, we are nowhere near as badly mauled as the others.

Anonymous said...

Whilst you slept.

Anonymous said...

Griffin's policy has been a failure.

Removing anyone with ability in order simply to secure his position as leader means the party is a one man band.

As such, the only way to advance is to get a high profile result, such as beating Margaret Hodge in Barking.

However, he also decided to contest as many seats as possible, thereby stretching resouces and making it inevitable that 'an 84 year old transvestite' would be one of the candidates.

Either you concentrate on the high profile result, or you contest as many seats as possible.

If you contest as many seats as possible, you absolutely must encourage people with ability to join and stay in the party.

Griffin's policy is contradictory.

He knows he can only advance with a high profile result, but he also knows the party members expect more than just Griffin's ego being inflated.

However, let's not get too depressed as the voting figures are not all bad.

Bill Jax

Anonymous said...

The following figures are rounded off for simplicity and to prevent too many decimal points. There may be some minor errors due to transcription mistakes, but they are generally accurate.

Compare this general election with previous efforts:

From 1992 to 2005, the BNP usually increased 1)the number of seats contested and always increased 2)the total and 3)average vote.

Even in 2010, all three have increased: seats contested, total vote, average vote.

1992: total votes 7,500+, average per contest 587.

1997: total votes 36,000, average 628.

2001: total votes 47,000+, average 1428.

2005: total votes 192,000+, average 1647

2010: total votes 550,000+, average 1667.

2010 produces a tiny 1.2% increase in the average vote. Hence the media crowing about the BNP failure.

However, if the BNP had been just a little bit selective, contesting 150 or 200 seats, then all three factors would have increased substantially, just as in the past.

In 2005, the BNP contested 117 seats, while in 2010 they contested over 300.

Best 117 seats in 2010:
Total vote: 290,000+
Average: 2,513
Increase: 52.5%

In 2010, there were 144 seats where the BNP got more than 1,647 votes, the average achieved in 2005in 117 seats.

Best 144 seats:
Total vote: 340,000+
average: 2,366
Increase: 44%.

Best 200 seats:
Total vote: 420,000+
Average: 2,115
Increase: 28.5%.

Of course it was impossible to predict which 144 or 150 or 200 seats would produce the best results.

However, these figures show that with a small amount of selective jugdement, the BNP could have both increased the number of seats, the total vote and the average vote per seat in this election, as it has done in the past.

The tiny increase in the average vote in 2010 of 1.2% is the result of overreach.

The underlying trend upwards continues.

The English Democrats got nearly 65,000 votes. I do not know what the NF got, maybe 5,000 - 10,000.

If these are counted as 'nationalist' votes, then the total 'nationalist' vote was over 600,000.

The BNP got just over 900,000 votes in the last Euro elections.

This is well below the 900,000+ votes gained in the last Euro election, but those elections favour small parties while general elections favour the 2 largest parties. Further, in the Euro election the total electorate had the chance to vote BNP, while in this general election only just over half the electorate had that chance.

Whether these figures show success or not, when compared to the opportunity that existed in 2010 is up to the reader.

Bill Jax

Anonymous said...

Given the amount of voting fraud carried on by ethnics, this result is not too surprising!

Anonymous said...

BNP Appeal Monday...

Will l send £1000, £5000, or £10,000?

Will l fuck?

Anonymous said...

It's 1979 all over again, losing so many elected councillors is a disaster, two in Burnley, two in Epping, two in Stoke, 14 in London, Chris Beverley in Morley, and God knows who else. I think Burnley is our best area now, we still have two borough councillors and a county councillor or is it still Stoke? London has none now, the Jewess is the lone councillor in Epping.

Anonymous said...

I would say a lot of these seats were lost due to voting fraud ! im not one for big brother ID cards etc but im all for scrapping postal voting and polling cards and introducing finger print voting at the ballot box.

Anonymous said...

No, it is not 1979 all over again.

Compare 1970-1979 with 1997-2010.

In 1970-79, the average vote achieved by the NF in all the constuencies it contested FELL.

Although the NF increased its vote in a constituency when it contested it a second or third time, the overall average fell because it contested more and more constituencies.

The BNP however increased its overall average vote despite also increasing the number of constituencies it contested.

In 1997-2010, the average vote achieved by the BNP in all the constituencies ROSE.

This is a huge difference.

In 1979, the NF total vote in 200 constituencies was just under 200,000.

The BNP got that in 2005 in just 117 constituencies.

In 2010, the BNP total vote was above 550,000.

The total nationalist vote was over 600,000.

This is three times what the NF achieved.

Look at the 3 factors:
1) number of seats/constituencies contested,
2) total vote achieved,
3) average vote per contest.

The NF in 1970-79 only increased 1) and 2).

The BNP in 1997-2010 increased ALL THREE.

The 1.2% increase in the average vote in 2010 was caused only by overreach.

In the best 250 seats, the BNP achieved a total vote of 480,000+ and an average of 1,937.

In the best 300 seats, the BNP got 530,000+ votes, an average of 1,772 per seat.

Only the last 38 constituencies brought the overall average right down to just above the 2005 overall average.

So, with just a bit of selective judgement, to weed out the obvious no hopers, the BNP increased all three factors it has done consistently since 1997.

Is this due to Griffin's wonderfully talented leadership?

Or is it due to the devotion of the long suffering 'poor bloody infantry' membership despite Griffin's leadership?

Bill Jax

Anonymous said...

Voting fraud can be the only possible reason for such a massive swing I believe.

Tina Wingfield beats both the ukip and english dems vote put together and many Salford wards faired well, which makes a refreshing change to spoiling ballot papers for lack of candidates.

The bnp website going down will cause harm though, to their hard work and at such an important and critical time.

Anonymous said...


boltonboy said...

In the local elections the BNP was defending 30 seats on Thursday - and managed to hold on to just two (Bradford and Colne). The other 28 were all lost. No new seats were gained.

The long-suffering membership deserve answers!

Anonymous said...

He was elected. If someone wants to stand against him why don't they? Last time he got an overwhelming endorsement. Who do you back as a replacement?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
He was elected. If someone wants to stand against him why don't they? Last time he got an overwhelming endorsement. Who do you back as a replacement?

9 May 2010 16:22


You mean like the Chris Jackson attempts to challenge the Leadership ?

Griffin refused CJ the right to campaign in any way.

Refused him the members list so that he had trouble finding the number of BNP members required.

Griffin made the rules up as he went along. He is a crook in every way !

Would you compete against someone who made up the rules of the game as he went along ?

Anonymous said...

All that sucking up to the Jews hasn't worked!

"BNP faces new legal threat amid new racism claims over redrafted constitution
Nick Griffin could be in in contempt of court for allegedly breaching court order to amend party rules

The British National party faces the prospect of renewed legal action from the government's equalities watchdog over allegations that it has failed to remove potentially racist clauses from it's new constitution

They're taking a real risk of being found in contempt of court. This is particularly the case for Griffin, given this role he has in changing the constitution."

said Paul Epstein QC"

Anonymous said...

Bill Jax in reality is Chris Mentallyhill.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous says..."Bill Jax is... MentallyHill".

What is your point?

Is it 'MentallyHill' to add up all the results and compare them to the past?

Or are you just disappointed that the BNP did not do even worse?

I may have made some mistakes in the numbers, but they generally correct.

If I have got the numbers substantially wrong, then please point that out and I would be happy to be corrected.

Bill Jax

Anonymous said...

Well I know that UKIP is going to see a massive rise in membership numbers in Scotland, as BNP members want rid of that shit bag Gary Raikes. His man management skills are nowt, and he's only hanging on because he thinks, he will be number one candidate for the Scottish Elections. Glasgow members are refusing to work for the Scottish elections, because they refuse to run the risk of Raikes being elected, and damaging the BNP forever in Scotland. We will maybe get one chance and we need the best person to lead the BNP and hopefully be elected.

That person is not Raikes. He has done his best but we need better.

Anonymous said...

Still nothing on the BNP site. Griffin has had enough time to lick his many wounds so there must still be trouble at mill, my heart bleeds for him, what fuck up he is.

Anonymous said...

This statement has just ben put out by Eddy Butler - and it's real, not a spoof - there is a veiled criticism of Griffin in it.
"Dear Colleague

We are in troubled times and many members are feeling disillusioned. I know some of you are thinking of quitting. This would be a fatal mistake. In times such as these it is essential that all members stay at their post. If the Party experiences a set-back it is vital that we face up to it and move on to achieve greater success in the future. It would be a tragic waste we any member to feel they had to quit, still worse if anyone felt they should set up or join a rival organisation.

I will not insult your intelligence by claiming that we just had a good election. In most places (with the notable exception of Barking) our Parliamentary election results improved marginally but at the same time we lost over half of our ‘proper’ council seats (that is excluding Town, Parish and Community councillors who however valuable they might be to us are not counted towards totals for

After five years work, the simple truth is that we must do much better than marginally increase our vote since the last General Election. When faced by such a set-back it is vital that we re-group, re-evaluate and re-new. Doing nothing or at best tinkering with things around the edges is not an option. We have too few years in which to secure our country‘s and our people’s future. The stakes are too high.

It is essential that the Party goes ahead united. There must be:

· Financial transparency – so we can see how much money comes in and where it goes.

· Financial competence – so that are accounts are available and presented in an orderly and clear manner

· Administrative competence – so the best staff are able to work efficiency and without fear of offending others in the hierarchy and where proper documentation and legal employment processes are followed.

· Political competence – so that we are not being forced into costly and unnecessary legal battles all the time, so that leaflets are produced on time and so that internal bulletins are delivered on time.

· We must have our resources channelled into worthwhile avenues - to support electioneering and the work of our elected officials.

· We must have a leadership which is a bonus and a credit to our Party in the eyes of the public and not a downward drag on our vote.

· We need a modern public image that befits a Party that wishes to take power.

We must move out of stagnant waters and make another leap forward. The times are right – our policies are pretty much right. We must join together to build a new future for the Party. Pretty much everyone in the Party agrees with this. So please everyone stick in there and help build a new future.

Eddy Butler"

Anonymous said...

The latest analysis shows that the BNP denied Labour victory in 13 seats, by taking just enough votes off Labour in these 13 seats to let Lib/Cons in instead. If the BNP didn't exist, Labour would have at least 13 more seats right now. This is a cause for celebration!

The reds want you to focus on doom and gloom, when really you should be focusing on the positive.
Hoping that the BNP would get an MP this year was completely unrealistic as the swing that would have been needed was too huge.

The Greens only got an MP because they came a close 2nd in 2005 and only needed an 8% swing to get in. The BNP achieved this kind of swing in some seats, but starting from further back. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Anonymous said...


Miliband and Hilary

In April 2010, David Miliband met Barack Obama.

If the UK general election has been rigged, then perhaps we will end up with the following in the UK cabinet:

Prime Minister: David Miliband (Blair appears to choose his successor - David Miliband.)

Foreign Secretary: Peter Mandelson (RICH GUYS RIPPING PEOPLE OFF?)

Chancellor of the Exchequer: Vince Cable (The new terror / THE CLASSIC MAN OF THE PEOPLE HAS CONNECTIONS TO THE SPOOKS)

A Liberal Democrat - Labour alliance could be run by Peter Mandelson, David and Ed Miliband, Jack straw, Vince Cable, and Chris Huhne all of whom reportedly have Jewish roots.

Of course, there is no guarantee that Miliband will become leader of the Labour party. (David Miliband is favourite to be next Labour leader - LeftWatch )

And there is no guarantee that the Liberal Democrats will do a deal with Labour.

The Guardian tells us how a Labour- Liberal Democrat coalition deal might work :

"Nicol Stephen, the former Lib Dem leader in Scotland, has said that about a third of Lib Dems would say they'd rather do anything than do a deal with the Conservatives. A similar proportion would feel the same way about getting into bed with Labour, and the final third would rather do a deal with neither...

"Labour's 258 seats combined with the Lib Dems' 57 would give them a total of 315 in the Commons – eight seats short of an outright majority of 323.

"The three (Irish) SDLP MPs would normally be expected to vote with Labour and the Northern Irish Alliance party MP, Naomi Long, would also be expected to vote with the Lib Dems. It is believed Lab-Lib would then turn next to Caroline Lucas, the Greens' first MP, and then Plaid Cymru's three MPs."

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know where to meet for the 'British Alliance' march to Parliment on the 22nd May?
Hope everyone is going

Anonymous said...

Simon Bennett says.

I am backing Eddy Butler to over throw Nick Griffin.

Anonymous said...

How did Butler put out his statement?

To the press?

Or to the membership via the membership list?

If he has the membership list, or another viable way to contact most of if not all the members, then he has a means to mount a creible leadership campaign, something that Griffin denied Jackson.

Anonymous said...

British Election Was a “Fiasco That Would Shame the Third World” Says International Observer
Tue, 11/05/2010.

The British election was one of the “most shambolic, incompetent and fraudulent elections Britain has ever witnessed,” according to international observer and Oxford historian Mark Almond.

Mr Almond, who is also Visiting Professor of International Relations at Bilkent University, Ankara, has said in a newspaper article that “ingenious fraudsters” from the “minority communities” have committed massive registration fraud.

Mr Almond’s comments have confirmed the British National Party’s allegations of massive ethnic gerrymandering in east London, where dozens of voters with ethnic names were found to be registered at addresses in key wards.

The huge ethnic “turnout” in the election played a critical role in the election result.

According to Mr Almond, “New Labour turned voter registration into a free-for-all. Coupled with unfettered immigration, keeping accurate electoral records was thus reduced to little more than guesswork.

“Ingenious fraudsters — usually in minority communities — were soon competing to see who could squeeze the most imaginary voters into one property.

“Worse still, Blair also opened up postal voting to anyone who requested it, making the scope for fraud even greater,” Mr Almond wrote.

He added that during the course of his work as an official observer in more than a hundred polls across the old Communist bloc, “I have witnessed more incompetence and corruption than I care to remember.

“Yet this week's British election has shocked even seasoned monitors like me. As one friend from Azerbaijan remarked archly to me yesterday, 'At least in my country, we have managed chaos’.

“What he meant was that while many corrupt governments around the world actively fiddle elections, in Britain we have witnessed fiasco rather than state-sponsored fraud.

“These are abuses of process one might expect in a banana republic, not in the land that gave us the Mother of all Parliaments,” he continued.

“In many other nations I have visited, an election as incompetently managed as Thursday's would result in riots in the street. In Britain, we just seem to shrug our shoulders.

“That is an insult to all those who have fought through the years to preserve a democracy we could once be proud of,” he concluded.

Anonymous said...

"Simon Bennett says.

I am backing Eddy Butler to over throw Nick Griffin."


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

In 2005 Hodge got 13,800 on a 50% turnout, while the BNP got 4,900. And in the most relevant election since, the London Assembly of 2008, in those wards that make up the Barking constituency, the BNP only got around 6000. At this election while the BNP vote increased from 4,900 to 6,600 (a massive increase) Hodge nearly doubled her vote to 24,600! Paddy Power had Hodge at 1/6 back in November 2009; by early April Ladbrokes had Labour at 1/8 and BNP at 5-1. The odds were very much against a BNP win.

Heroes of London Bridge including banker who lost his life confronting jihadis with a skateboard and nurse who died running towards dange...