English Democrat Party and SEARCHLIGHT

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear fellow NC Members

It is with regret that I tender my resignation from The English Democrats.

I can no longer see the party making the breakthrough that the country needs whilst certain people continue to drag our reputation in to the gutter and the Chairman is unwilling or unable to stop this from happening.

Many of our members in London have worked hard to rebuild the party from the ashes of the last General Election, and any advances we are making are being offset by the constant need for damage limitation because of the stream of ill thought out rhetoric on blog and Facebook sites.

It is also a source of worry that the elite at the top of the party seem to see it as their own tool that they can do as they like with without thought of the damage they do to our reputation and in some cases in flagrant violation of National Council decisions.

I will list some of my reasons for leaving below, and leave you to make up your own minds –


Sinn Fein – The email from Steve Uncles is constantly regurgitated and is not only distasteful but used by the opponents of our party to put off a section of the electorate that should be part of our natural vote.
The party put out a statement, but this was watered down from the original to the version that surfaced. More importantly, not only has Steve Uncles not apologised for a lack judgement over sending the email (Which could have killed the whole thing stone dead), he keeps revisiting it on his ‘English Passport’ site, including a statement that modern English Nationalism is not compatible with Irish unionism. It is not our remit, as an English party, to keep revisiting the issues of Northern Ireland, and is causing an image problem that is completely unnecessary.
He has also put up a petition on the Government website asking for people to sign a petition to get Northern Ireland kicked out of the UK – This is traceable back to him, and as a party member reflects badly on the movement.
It has also been noted by myself that whenever this subject is brought up with Robin Tilbrook, he gets annoyed about ‘disloyalty’ regarding the leaking of the email rather than the contents of the email itself.

Eddy Butler – It was agreed at the last NC meeting that Eddy Butler would have to come before the Council to have his membership ratified due to his former high profile membership of the National Front and the BNP. This is consistent with article 3.2 (e) of the party constitution.
On 10th September, one of my members in London was emailed by Robin Tilbrook to say -

Yes we are on the up. We also have the man who was the driving force behind the BNP's period of electoral success coming over to us. I mean Eddy Butler.

I asked to see this email to make sure there was no misunderstanding, as those of you at the last NC will know that this is in complete contravention of the agreed course of action over his membership. Indeed, Eddy Butler is only getting a hearing because Robin threatened to resign if we did not listen to his reasons for wanting to join.

Since then, Eddy Butler has posted items on his Facebook page that are in contradiction of our party manifesto, and has made numerous calls to people on his blog site to come across to the EDP as it is their ‘new home’. You can view how much he rates his new ‘home’ from his blog site, link attached Eddy Butler

All about the BNP, nothing to do with the EDP.

I also have the screen capture from Steve Uncle’s Facebook site that is doing the rounds to say that he has been working with Eddy Butler for the last 2 years to wreck the BNP, and that UKIP are next – Whilst I find this probably to be the delusional ranting of the ‘Political Brain’ from Dartford, this is again in the public domain and does us no good.

It is also noted that Eddy Butler had run several ‘teasers’ about which party he was going to go to, and then announced it on his blog site 48 hours after Andrew Brons had lost the BNP leadership challenge to Nick Griffin. His own blog states that his first choice would be to reform the BNP, but after that going to a party with a ‘similar’ manifesto that is ripe for change would be the No 2 option rather than forming a new party.

I will give you some links to make up your own minds

Eddy Butler: THE FUTURE

Eddy Butler: HEADLESS CHICKENS


Steve Uncle’s Removal from the NC – Within 2 weeks of his ‘resignation’ (Which was only tendered by the chairman when 12 out of 12 voted through a no confidence motion), Steve Uncles was on the BBC as a ‘spokesman’ for the party. Robin advised me that this was because he was the only person in the area available to do the job.
Neither London Chairman Roger Cooper or myself, as Vice-Chairman, were called and told that there was a need to get someone down there. Indeed, Frank Roseman lives in Westminster but was not contacted by the Chairman, despite being a far better public speaker than Steve Uncles. Constantly using a discredited member who has an awful internet footprint as a ‘spokesman’ is not, in my opinion, what the NC wanted when he was removed from his position, and paints us in a bad light.

The South East Area Elections – We were advised at the last NC that Sean Varnham had not sent in his statement to go out with the ballot forms for the SE area election. This was incorrect.

It also needs to be noted that Sean was not sent the full party list for Sussex until well after the ballot papers had gone out, and even then they had no telephone numbers or email addresses for him to contact and canvass for his candidacy. Steve Uncles, as a former SE area chairman, had all this information and therefore an unfair advantage (Although he still threw his toys out of the pram about me sending out an email to Kent and Surrey in support of Sean, despite those areas coming under the purview of London during the GLA campaign).

It is also of interest to note that the closing date for voting was 9th September, and the date of the count was changed to the AGM after the votes were in– Where are the ballot papers between these times? They are being sent to the Norwich PO Box number, so what methods are in place to stop gerrymandering? I believe very few, as Steve Uncles has posted on his blog site that irrespective of the vote ‘I will be back on the NC after the AGM’.

A Dog serving two masters – It is to be noted with regards to the previous posting about Eddy Butler that he is still in the paid employ of the MEP for Yorkshire, Andrew Brons, yet wishes to join the EDP.
Chris Beverly, our new Leeds Chairman and recently appointed Facebook admin, is also on the payroll of the EU as an assistant to Andrew Brons. Whilst I have not met Mr Beverley, and I understand from Mike Cassidy that he is a decent guy, what happens when the Euro elections come around and he has to choose between party and job? He has not resigned from his post as he needs to make a living – Yet he will make that living by OPPOSING the EDP in the next Euro Elections. Such a conflict of interest would not be allowed in any company, it is the equivalent to a Barclays Bank manager working for Lloyds as a paid advisor and with access to company confidential documents. You are either an English patriot or a BNP employee, there is no middle ground on this one.


Contact with UKIP – Robin advised us at an NC meeting last year that he had been offered the Deputy Leadership of UKIP during the negotiations regarding the Alliance for Democracy if he stood down all the EDP candidates at the 2010 General Election. He advised us that he declined, and that UKIP had stood candidates against ours when they had seen our list of candidates as a spoiler tactic.
We were told that UKIP are completely untrustworthy, and a motion was passed that no further meetings should be had with their party without it being run past the NC first.
Robin then announced at the last NC that he and Derek Hilling had met with UKIP in July to discuss possible mergers. This was done without the knowledge or permission of the NC, in breach of a previous motion which was brought about by Robin’s revelations. It would appear that NC motions, even when brought about by the chairman, have no validity when applied to him.

Steve Uncles – Need I say more? Removed from the NC, he still attacks party members on line with impunity and brings the movement in to disrepute. In the last month he has made attacks upon Stephen Morris, Michael Cassidy, Derek Hilling and myself on his blog site (In contravention of the Communications policy document that has been ratified by the NC). He has also referred to a suicide victim as a ‘fascist’ and had launched numerous tirades about UKIP under the logo ‘U-Tit’. He constantly brings the party in to disrepute, and despite the attempts of the NC can do what he likes with the protection of the chairman.
Indeed, I had a row with Robin by email last night because I posted a joke about Steve’s personality being used as a contraceptive on my personal Facebook page, and got read the riot act – Yet Uncles can constantly slander all and sundry without the slightest hint of being reigned in on public blogs and websites. Hypocrisy and double standards.


Searchlight – Robin has admitted to me that he talks with Nick Lowles, and I had a row with him a while ago where he took what Lowles had said about members of the EDL as gossip and had spread them (Notably that senior members are Irish Republicans and are standing behind the flag of St George to line their own pockets – I have met these people and know them to be concerned about the state of OUR country, not another). He was then surprised in midweek that Lowles posted a tissue of lies about our candidate for the upcoming Barnsley election being an ex-BNP officer, when it is in fact Kevin Riddiough who is standing. When I pointed this out to Robin, he advised me that he was ‘disappointed’ as Lowles was supposed to run any story about the EDP past him first. What kind of judgement does this show? He would rather converse with and trust a Marxist agitator ahead of his own members who have met and spoken with members of numerous street groups.


I now await the usual flurry of on line activity from the Dartford Warbler about me being a ‘quitter’, ‘deranged’ or a ‘Brit-Nat plant’ – This is par for the course, and neither myself or our country has time to spend on this childish vindictiveness when our way of life is at stake.

I would like to thank the decent members of the EDP (Of whom there are many) for standing with me over the last 18 months and trying to sort out our local areas and some of our national issues. There are many decent and hardworking members of the party who deserve better from some of those at the top who remind me of a sketch from The Life of Brian (Judean People’s Front, anybody?)

Special thanks go to Stephen Morris, Mark Lancaster, Martin Butler and Sean Varnham who have been a sounding board for ideas and campaigns, and a special mention should go to Ben Weald and Roger Cooper in London who are a credit to the movement.

No doubt with your new BNP recruits you will achieve limited successes before realising that there is a glass ceiling that can only be broken by engaging with all of the decent members of our society – But then, I have come to believe that there are those at the top level who would be happy with 5% of the vote, a couple of MEP’s to keep the money coming in and bragging rights about being leaders of the ‘biggest English Nationalist Party’ at their respective gentlemen’s clubs. Enjoy it before our country and our way of life goes down the pan – In the meantime I will be with like minded patriots from all parties trying to bring up the issues and making a difference both locally and on the streets of London.


Best Regards

Cliff Dixon

NWN: Looks like the EDP are running a 'behind the scenes' operation. The above is a resignation letter from one of the top EDP Officials who seemed to know quite a lot. No doubt the above information in the letter is to create confusion and de-commission any would- be nationalist movement taking shape. Eddy Butler is a rather strange 'nationalist' anyway, but we at NWN would like to know what Butler has to say on all this. There are one or two others who have defected, that might want to know what the hell sort of 'sting' has occurred here.

No doubt more will be revealed about the above in the very near future.

Eddy Butler, joke BNP Official, attacks democratic challenge in BNP

Statement On The So-called Leadership Challenge


Anyone in the Party who has more than five years continuous membership has the Right to stand for the leadership of the Party. The only limit to the exercising of this Right is that in the case of officers ten nomination signatures of members of two years standing must be obtained and for non officers a hundred signatures are required. This is to ensure that frivolous candidates do not stand.

As I said this is a Right that members have. And it is an important Right – it is a declaration of our Parties openness and commitment to democracy. However with Rights come responsibilities and duties. A Right without a duty is an abomination in any society. It is a recipe for chaos. Indeed in our modern society it is the incessant claiming of Rights by groups that shown no sense of duty or responsibility that is one of the key components of the undermining of the civic order of our country.

So in the instance of standing for leadership of the Party, the Party as a whole should expect anyone who has the temerity to wish to stand for leadership only to uphold their Right to do so after that person had carefully weighed their duty to the cause and the Party and their fellow members. We as members should expect that a candidate would only put themselves forward if they were of sufficient stature and ability to potentially be able to lead the Party if they were to win. Otherwise why would someone wish to challenge for the leadership? It is a duty of other members not to sign the nomination papers of any potential candidate unless they seriously think that that person is a viable and serious leadership contender. That is the whole point of the requirement for signatories.

A leadership challenge is not an excuse to air grievances. It is not there for disgruntled people to act out their personal bitterness about things – no matter how ‘justified’ they may think their grievances are. It is an abuse of the process to misuse it in that way. It is an abuse of their Constitutional Right.

And that is precisely what we are seeing this year. We are seeing a candidate pushed forward by people who themselves admit, has absolutely no chance of winning, and admit would never be up to the job of chairman anyway and they admit that the sole reason they are doing it is to air their own personal grievances. In other words their sole aim is to raise issues which have already been fully aired and which could be raised at a variety of different forums such as the Summer School (where there is always a session for all participants where they can bring up matters they are unhappy about) or the Annual Conference.

What is the likely outcome of this leadership challenge? The challengers (there may in fact be two!) will be comprehensively defeated. The leadership challenge process as it currently stands in the Constitution will be brought into disrepute. There will be pressure, perhaps unstoppable pressure, to change the rules so that leadership challenges can only take place every four years.

I would not normally comment on a leadership election. It should normally be up to the membership to make their own minds up without non-participants trying to influence the process.

But the backers of this ridiculous bid should reconsider their aimless tactic. People should refuse to sign the nomination papers. It is a distraction and a waste of time and effort and it will end up almost certainly with the constitution changed in a way that destroys the important Right of the possibility of a yearly election. Standing a no-hoper is stupid, mindless and fatally undermines our Constitution. It is a pitiful and moronic – a bankrupt tactic by people who can only be described as having gone giddy to the extent that they are now without the imagination to think how they can raise issues in a legitimate way.

This election, if it goes ahead, should be carried out in the most rapid manner possible with zero publicity allowed for the joke candidate (who may in lother circumstances be described as a decent and 'nice' bloke etc) and the least disruption to our continued efforts. That is the best way to minimise the harmful effects.

Eddy Butler

National Elections Officer

Eastern Regional Organiser

NWN: And this character is the BNP's national elections officer !

Tony Lecomber - the grass !

Joe,

Thank you for your e-mail headed "Lecomber Grass".

Most people believe that Tony Lecomber runs the "Searchlightexposed.com" web site.

Despite his expulsion from the BNP, Lecomber still acts as Griffin's message-carrier and propagandist.

It is also widely believed that it is because of this work that Lecomber continues to be paid cash-in-hand gratuities by Griffin (from BNP funds) even though he has been expelled from the party.

You might be interested in the two e-mails (the second is by way of being a P.S. to the first) which I have received recently from one of M'Learned Friends.

I have been told by other contacts that Griffin is now anxious to expel Eddy Butler from the BNP, even though he is the BNP's elections expert.

It seems that after Butler was attacked outside Loughton Tube Station by Lecomber (who tried to disguise himself with a mask which Butler pulled off in the tussle).

Butler was only persuaded not to go to the Police by Griffin promising to expel Lecomber and to categorise him as a "Proscribed Person" via the BNP Organisers Bulletin.

Butler submitted to Griffin the terms of that Proscription Notice.

In the event, while Lecomber was expelled, Griffin tore up Butler's Proscription Notice.

Instead, Griffin issued a very mild statement saying that even though Lecomber was now no longer a member of the party, he is "a genuine nationalist" and so was NOT a Proscribed Person. Griffin added that BNP members were therefore free to associate with Lecomber on a social/private basis.

Butler erupted at this and had a blazing row with Griffin so intense that Griffin is seeking a way of expelling him.

As I see it, the same people who are patronising and protecting Griffin (right-wing Zionists and media Neo-Cons first and foremost, but also, I think, the Police and the Whitehall 'Establishment') do the same for Lecomber.

John Tyndall was of the view that Lecomber was "turned" by the Special Branch during his last jailing. As you will see below, my contact reports that many believe Lecomber got a very light jail sentence after beating-up a Jewish teacher at a Tube station.

He already had one previous conviction for bomb-making and would normally have gone down for quite a long time.

Recruiting political people serving or facing long stretches is a long-established Special Branch method for adding to their army of informants.Sometimes these people end up becoming full-time salaried snouts who get a handsome monthly retainer, plus expenses, plus -- if they have been on the job for a decade or more -- a four figure gratuity when they come to the end of their informing career. All such payments are tax free.

This is what happened in the case of Peter Marriner, the long-term informant for the West Midlands Police Special Branch., who was featured on the "True Spies" TV series of a couple of years ago.The film-makers did a bad job (deliberately?) of obscuring Marriner's identity.

Marriner not only spied on right wing groups but also, when that scene was quiet, spied on the far Left from within the Labour Party in his capacity as a Labour Party constituency agent in Birmingham (a fact not mentioned in the programme).

The Police and other elements of the Whitehall 'Establishment' such as the Home Office like the direction Griffin has taken the BNP.

They like:

(1) No more marches and demonstrations and public meetings which attract the attention of the Red 'Rentamob' and which "provoke" riots which could spark of major racial conflagrations, with which the Police could not cope and which would require the Army being deployed in support of the civil power.

(2) Acceptance of the the multi-racial society. Griffin declared on the BBC Radio 4 'Today' programme that "repatriation would be unfeasible and inhumane". (This is another potential burden lifted from the shoulders of the Police. At the moment, even individual illegal immigrants can avoid being compulsorily repatriated by throwing a tantrum in the airport!) In the same interview Griffin accepted inter-racial breeding by saying that Britain can take "a little salt in the soup".

(3) As a consequence of the fundamental ideology shift set out above in (2) Griffin has directed the focus of the BNP membership away from opposing ALL immigration and rejecting the concept of a multi-racial society, towards an anti-Muslim campaign, which newcomers to nationalism and the more stupid among the BNP membership confuse with a principled and logical racial-nationalist position.

These people never ask: If Zionist-Jewry is entitled to insist that Israel be "a homeland for the Jews", why cannot the indigenous British demand that the British Isles be "a homeland for the British"?

The British 'Establishment' is committed to the American / Israeli / Neo-Con project which has inflamed Muslim opinion world-wide provoking Muslims in the UK and elsewhere to resort to terrorism.

Zionist-Jewry and the Neo-Cons happily exploit this situation (helped by Griffin and the BNP) by seeking to demonstrate to the Gentile 'lumpen' that "the West", in fighting side-by-side with "brave little Israel" against the "terrorist Muslims", is engaging in the age-old "Clash of Civilisations".

The horrendous terrorism, genocide and ethnic cleansing by which the state of Israel was created and by which it is sustained to this very day is all ignored, of course.

This is the screaming injustice ignored by "the West" for decades which has impelled outraged frantic Muslims down the terrorism path.

Have you read Griffin's outpouring expounding the Zionist line on the "Clash of Civilisations" posted on the BNP web site a year or so ago?

It could have been drafted by Melanie Phillips or Danny Finkelstein.

I have it on file, if you would like to see a copy?

Israel and "the West" are the good guys in the white hats, while the Muslims are the bad guys in the black hats.

Is this what used to be referred to as "simple patriotism"?

I am copying this e-mail to a few entities in my Contacts List who share an interest in these issues.

Sincerely,

Martin.

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

From: [snip]To: Martin Webster Date: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 10:21 PM

Subject: From one of my covert sources . . .

Griffin seems to be getting rid of his old Executive Committee, and forming a new invisible one, incorporating;Arthur Kemp; Tony Lecomber; Patrick Harrington; Simon Darby; Lee Barnes.

This inner circle is nothing to do with the EC, but the real people that Griffin shares ideas with.

As the EC can get rid of the Party Chairman by a two thirds majority if they wish, rumour has it that Griffin is moving to abolish the EC.

Doc Russell had a heated argument with Arthur Kemp about Tony Lecomber. Kemp told him he was a useless fat old fucker who should just go away.

This was the real reason for his departure, and not because of Doc's first wife being Polish.The general feeling amongst the (ever growing) anti-Griffin crowd, is that Griffin wishes to use the European elections to put all the party's resources into fighting the best seat.

Griffin hopes to get elected, whereby he'll be on £250,000 a year tax free + expenses + pension. After five years, he would then be in a position to switch parties if he so wished (ahem), and then possibly retain his seat for another five years. Chaiow for now,

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

From: [snip]To: Martin Webster Date: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 10:36 PM

Subject: ps.It's an interesting thought that of those on this list, Arthur Kemp has been named by Gaye Darby-Lewis (wife of jailed South African patriot Clive Darby-Lewis) as a South African police spy, Simon Darby (who lives a comfortable middle class life style without visible means of support, and claims to be in business while working virtually full time for the BNP) is probably a career MI5 agent, while the late John Tyndall suspected that Tony Lecomber had been "turned" by the British state during his second spell in gaol (when he received a remarkably light sentence for attacking a Jewish school teacher). Lee Barnes is completely insane, while Patrick Harrington is nominally the leader of another political party (the Third Way)!====================================-----Original Message

-----From: joe owens To: resistance Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 3:00 PM

Subject: Lecomber Grass

Strange how Lecomber never made any newspaper headlines or TV documentaries?

Joe Owens

http://www.searchlightexposed.com/fable08.htm

News from the nuthouse ?

Dear Reader

My name is Simon Deacon. I am a Parish Councillor for Markyate in Dacorum District Council in Hertfordshire. I am a former member of the National Front. That once great party has now turned into an anti-Semitic and Nazi organisation. It has given up on Parliamentary elections and the membership is down to 200 members.

http://www.bnp.org.uk/news_detail.php?newsId=1694

NWN: The picture of Eddy Butler above, and the statement slightly above are from the BNP under leader Nick Griffin. Can anyone make any sense out of Griffin's BNP ? Has Butler changed his views, or has Griffin changed his views. In our view Butler hasn't, but Griffin has , since the above pic was taken in January 2001 : BNP's IDENTITY magazine; Page 12.

Why is the BNP still soft on Tony Lecomber ?

NWN: We have received the below e-mail off Joe Owens, most of the first part we have seen before. However, Joe has added some other info and quite rightly he asks why BNP leader Nick Griffin treated BNP founder the late John Tyndall so badly. Just what has Lecomber got on Nick Griffin ?



The real reason Griffin proscribed me.


From the desk of Joe Owens.

For immediate release.

04-04-06.

Setting the record straight.



Around two weeks before Christmas 2005, I received a card from Tony Lecomber.
I found this rather odd, as I had never received one from him at any time in the past.
I thought little of it, putting it down to simple courtesy and friendship. The message written on the card was a general seasonal greeting with a footnote that he would be visiting me sometime between X-mas and the New Year. This too struck me as strange – I had no contact with Lecomber for at least the previous eighteen months. In reply to his Christmas card I e-mailed him my mobile and land line numbers the following day.

Still confused as to why Lecomber would want to travel to Liverpool from London to see me over the festive period, I e-mailed him again stating-
“If you’re on a fishing expedition on Griffin’s behalf you shouldn’t bother.”
He responded by saying -
“This is nothing to do with the BNP, or Griffin, it’s a personal matter regarding me”.

Several days later, I received a phone call from Lecomber. He said, weather permitting, he would be down – he was also visiting someone in east Yorkshire.
It was not until after New Year that I received another e-mail from Lecomber saying he would be visiting me on the 9th or 12th of January 2006.

He finally showed up on the 12th January, we met around 12.00 noon at the Showcase cinema on the East Lancs. Road, Liverpool. Nearby there is a Pizza Hut which I often visit. The restaurant was quiet as we sat down and ordered drinks whilst perusing the menu. We ordered, and as we waited for our food to arrive, I asked Tony Lecomber the purpose of his visit.
He looked around us before saying to me –
“It’s now too late to stop immigration. In London 42% of births were from recent immigrant women, and this statistic doesn’t include births from the home grown ones.”
“Tell me something I don’t know.”
“What we need is direct action.”
“What do you mean by ‘direct action’?”
“Targeting members of the establishment who are aiding and abetting the coloured invasion of this country…”
“What does ‘targeting’ mean?”
“Killing them.”
“How is that going to stop immigration?
“It would deter other people from filling their jobs.”
“That’s rubbish! The IRA never deterred establishment figures by murdering others. Take Airey Neave for example. Which establishment figures are you referring to?”
“The likes of Greg Dyke.”

My alarm bells were now well and truly ringing. My brain raced as I tried to figure out what this man was up to. I then pressed him further on the issue of how these people were to be killed -
“A lot of intelligence would have to be gathered on those we plan to target, and cars with false number plates would have to be acquired.”

I told him I wanted no part of his mad-cap scheme and remarked that anyone embarking on such a venture would last no longer than the Brazilian shot by the police on the London tube.
We finished our meal and left the restaurant.
On leaving I reiterated that I wanted no part in his crazy scheme, to which he responded – “If you change your mind give me a call…”

After we had parted company, I immediately rang Mark Collett and told him the gist of the conversation I’d just had with Lecomber. He, like I, was deeply shocked. I also rang Stevie Cartwright, from Glasgow; he said he would call Warren Bennett, head of BNP security, to inform him about this serious threat to the party.

Warren Bennett and, I believe, Scott McLean, informed Nick Griffin of the situation. I then received a phone call from Nick Griffin, and briefly outlined to him the conversation I’d had with Lecomber. We decided to meet up on Saturday 14th January, at Chester services on the M56 motorway, to discuss this serious turn of events.

I met Nick that afternoon and recounted, almost word for word, the conversation I had had with Lecomber. To my amazement Nick claimed Lecomber was suffering from diabetes, said diabetics were prone to mood swings, and that –
“This could explain Lecomber apparently taking leave of his senses.”
After I had stopped laughing, I replied –
“Well, it must have been a long mood swing. I got the x-mas card two weeks before Christmas and had the conversation on the 12th January with Lecomber!”
Nick was forced to concede that I was right.

We spoke for some time, going over every possible scenario to explain Lecomber’s strange behaviour. We both agreed that the man was up to no good, in fact, Nick then said –
“This now explains why Searchlight have always known our exact membership numbers. Lecomber will be confronted at the forthcoming court case demo, in Leeds.” Lecomber did turn up at the Leeds demo – accompanied by his wife and children. This was something he had never done before, bringing his family with him. Some astute observers believed this was an attempt to ensure his personal safety.

I was also in regular contact with Stevie Cartwright and he informed me, as Nick Griffin did, that Lecomber would resign, fall upon his own sword. I have retained the original text message from Griffin saying –
“Tony told to resign, or fall on own sword, now let me get on with my court case.”
Before I go any further, neither Nick Griffin nor anyone else in the BNP have refuted one word I have said concerning this episode. All they have done is release a statement saying that Lecomber had approached a non-member and said words that could be “misconstrued and bring the Party into disrepute.”

How in the world I could misconstrue someone asking me to kill people is beyond me, I know exactly what Lecomber said and what he meant – as does he.

After several weeks had gone by I was led to believe that Lecomber was still working for the BNP. I e-mailed Griffin and asked him if this was the case? To which he replied – “Tony is now passing his job over to another senior member, which will take some time. Losing Tony, a good strategist, electioneer, activist etc, is a great loss to the BNP – now leave the poor man alone.”

Leave the poor man alone? The same poor man who tried to solicit me to murder people? I found this response from Griffin very strange indeed… Instead of using the full weight of a BNP tribunal to bring Lecomber to book and kick him out the party, Griffin was more concerned about Lecomber’s feelings. To this day Lecomber is actively working for the BNP in a salaried position.

Sadie Graham may have ostensibly taken over Lecomber’s old job but that is just window dressing by Griffin. Why was John Tyndall expelled immediately from the BNP just for criticising Griffin, yet Lecomber who advocates murder can nonchalantly carry on his duties in the BNP? The excuse that he is clearing his desk, and passing over his job, is just a load of bull!!!

I now challenge Lecomber and Griffin to refute one word I have written here. In point of fact, I even offered to pay for Lecomber to undergo a polygraph test if he denied what I was saying. To date Nick Griffin has not taken up my offer.

It would be pointless to go on, and on about this matter. However, the reader might like to ask himself a few questions –

· Why has Lecomber been treated with kid gloves and the whole matter brushed under the carpet by the BNP leadership?
· Why has Lecomber not received a visit from the police, as they are aware of his conspiracy/solicitation to murder?
· Why has a deafening media silence greeted what one would have expected to be a heaven-sent opportunity to smear the BNP?


I will tell you who has received a visit from the police – ME! I was not the one soliciting murder. I told the police I had no comment to make. It still strikes me as strange that I should be the one being paid a visit by Special Branch…

Whatever Lecomber’s motives were I do not know? I could speculate, but prefer just giving the facts, as I know them.

Joe Owens

The above statement was released on the internet to let fellow nationalists know exactly what was said during my meeting with Lecomber. Incidentally, he has not been expelled or proscribed and still attends BNP functions.

I believe Tony Lecomber is a Searchlight (and/or MI5) agent. He had been sent to embroil me in acts of violence in the run-up to BNP chairman Nick Griffin and Mark Collett's trial on race charges.

What the actual plan would have finally been is a matter for speculation. Had I been foolish enough to go along with Lecomber’s scheme, it could only have landed me in prison – or dead! It would also have had a seriously detrimental effect on the forthcoming trial of Griffin and Collett. The media hysteria alone would have been enough to send Griffin and Collett to jail.

This, I believe, was the main aim and objective. I was only a pawn in the grand strategy of some very sinister forces... It has long been suspected in nationalist circles that Tony Lecomber is an agent of the state. The question mark over him arose in the light of his (ridiculously short) sentence of three years on explosives charges. Lecomber’s intent and planning – as well as his political learning’s – could easily have seen him potted off with a life sentence. Why would the enemies of nationalism give a sentence of three years to a man planning to bomb and murder (because that’s what bombs do, kill people) when they had him bang to rights? It just does not add up.

It was when it was announced to fellow nationalists that I intended to feature this episode in my book that I was proscribed (19th April 2006) by Nick Griffin.

Now this is very strange considering that I announced on Stormfront that I intended to write a book on 28.7.2004, and no one called for me to be proscribed. On the contrary, Nick Griffin placed a posting on Stormfront via Odin’s Eye (Sharon Ebanks) wishing me good luck with my book! These sentiments were repeated in a number of e-mails Griffin sent me around this time.

He did not proscribe me when I donated £1000 towards his (Griffin's) Euro election campaign, and £1000 towards the London Assembly elections. Nor when I bought Oldham BNP a £2000 digital duplicator, and gave the party a video-editing system and computer worth nearly £3000 for only £500. In addition I bought the paintball guns (used at the annual Red, White & Blue festival) for £400. In addition, I paid for their gassing and re-balling every year.

There is a long list of services I performed for the BNP, and for Nick Griffin personally. To proscribe me in such a way – and for such a reason – exposes him as both ungrateful and selfish.

Why Nick Griffin is protecting Tony Lecomber, I do not know. I couldn't even begin to speculate. What I do know is that Lecomber is an enemy of nationalism – and probably in the pay of Searchlight magazine/MI5. Griffin and the BNP do themselves no favours by protecting Lecomber – the matter is something that will come back to haunt them.

As this book went to print Tony Lecomber was the focus of the BNP Organisers Bulletin-April 2007. It stated therein -

'Reminder
Tony Lecomber, while a long-term, devoted and very valuable key official in the BNP and a genuine nationalist, is no longer an official or member of the party. Internal party business should therefore not be discussed with him and he should not be invited to attend party activities. Please note that this is not a proscription aimed at personal contact and friendship. Tony is a victim of his own past and the BNP’s past follies. We recognise his sterling work for the cause in the past, and his selflessness in stepping away in order to avoid compromising the future (Nick Griffin)'

Now the reason Lecomber featured in the Organisers Bulletin was that he had, in late March 2007, attacked party activist, and BNP official, Eddy Butler. Mr Butler had, on finishing work one night, returned to his car. Suddenly a man jumped out of the darkness, wearing a white balaclava - his eyes and mouth blackened beneath it. He launched an attack on Butler. Eddy, being no pushover, fought back and in a fierce struggle managed to drag the balaclava off the attacker's head. This action revealed the assailant to be the one and only Tony Lecomber!

Butler was understandably unhappy about this, and reported the matter to Nick Griffin. This was exactly what I had done the previous year. Griffin was left in a very awkward position - this was the second time, in just over twelve months, that Lecomber had committed serious criminal acts. Faced with the likelihood of the matter entering the public realm, Griffin had to act. Eddy Butler suggested Lecomber be proscribed, at long last driven from the party. In fact, Butler had written Lecomber’s notice of proscription, only to be over-ruled by Griffin, who proceeded to write the notice himself.

As you can see, it is far from a proscription and actually throws bouquets at Lecomber. Now when I was proscribed (just for writing this book?) I was never applauded for the donations I'd given, party work I'd undertaken. Similarly, neither was John Tyndall. JT was proscribed just for publishing an opinion in Spearhead magazine that Griffin and Lecomber did not like...

Why wasn't Lecomber expelled/proscribed when he solicited me to kill cabinet ministers on Jan 12th 2006? He now goes and attacks a leading party official - supposedly, because he felt that Eddy Butler was freezing him out of the BNP. Yet he still does not get proscribed...truly bizarre - or is it?

At the very least Lecomber quite clearly has some massive hold over Griffin. My surmise is still some kind of financial skulduggery. A disclosure of such a nature could mean - depending on the scale of depredations -

a) Possibly jail for Griffin,

b) Being disbarred from MEP candidature.

It is difficult to conclude other than that Nick Griffin is a criminal, using his Chairmanship of the BNP for his own ends. For what possible reason would any political leader keep such a man as Lecomber close to him other than partnership in crime? I believe the BNP is a career move for Griffin who, in his own words, plans to pass the party reins over and retire at fifty-five. The fact he believes he can get away with whatever he wants in the party in the meantime sums up his contempt for the membership.

Sadly, the little cabal around him consist of criminals, deviants and very weak people whom he can easily control. Most of them, who have access to party money, are on the take like him. If I'm wrong then can someone please give me an explanation of why Lecomber is treated with kid gloves?

Eddy Butler and Tony Lecomber have punch-up ?

Last Thursday evening (8th March) in Debden, while returning to his car,Eddy Butler was attacked by a man wearing a white motorcycle hood.

The attacker hit Eddy several times with his fists, shoving him against the car door so hard the door was dented, and then Eddy Butler was knocked to the ground.

On the ground Eddy fought back using a bunch of keys as a weapon and was able to repeatedly hit the attacker’s head. Eventually Eddy managed to get on top of the attacker and gave him a good thrashing with his fists and was eventually able to pull off his attacker’s disguise.

What surprised Eddy was the identity of the attacker, whose face was blackened where it showed through the white hood. The attacker was none other than Tony Lecomber.

By now Tony was pleaded for mercy. Feeling sorry for him Eddy told Tony to go home. Rather surprised the following day Eddy Butler received a phone call from Tony requesting that they meet up for a quiet talk. At any rate, Butler met Lecomber who bought him a drink.

After a while, however, Tony got a bit hysterical and told Eddy he could have killed him if he had had an iron bar. He further claimed that he Butler had taken away his family from him, meaning, of course, the BNP.

It appears that Lecomber really thinks it was Eddy Butler who was responsible for his demise. Little does he know it was actually Nick Griffin who had him eased out of the party without arousing too many suspicions.

Caution was called for since Tony has a lot of embarrassing details about Nick that could be quite damaging.

NWN: This is posted 'anonymously' from a well known nationalist on their direction.

BNP leadership challenge ?

These rumours and talk will just not go away. There is still the odd comment on boards like Stormfront UK, about possible challenges to that despot, and 'sell-out', Nick Griffin.

I, for one, rue the day I helped him get elected !

This site will support any challenge in the BNP that supports the BNP policies BEFORE Griffin.

We have heard that the names Jonathan Bowden and Eddy Butler are 'popping-up'.

'Heaven bloody forbid' these two clowns get the leadership of the BNP.

It will be compulsory wearing of cumerbunds and dickie bows, at BNP meetings, and cocktail gowns for the Ladies, if they get in.

I cannot see that happening in the real heartlands of racial nationalism such as Halifax, Bradford, Burnley or Oldham..


* For info about Eddy Butler, it was my fault this 'record breaking' boring speaker came from my area (Stockport) when I was the NF North West Regional Organiser.

Butler supports blacks in the UK. That's enough for me to know Butler.

The radical right might have the best speakers, but we also have the most boring too. I name Eddy Butler and Andrew Brons. Brons is honest though !

The publication in 1999 of a book called 'Standard bearers' by "The Bloomsbury Forum" (in fact, Adrian Davies, leader of the Freedom Party, of which little is heard).

While the book included studies of British patriots who qualify for inclusion in a symposium sub-titled "British Roots of the Right", it was rendered ludicrous by the inclusion of a contribution from one Eddy Butler headed "Disraeli: the Triumph of Style".

The inclusion of that item was as obvious an act of oleaginous ingratiation as Disraeli's notorious flattery of Queen Victoria (performed for the greater glory of the Rothschilds). As to Butler's "style" this -- apart from his platform orations, which put one in mind of a mumbling corpse -- was to ditch Davies and the FP when offered the chance to become the BNP's "election supremo".



NWN: The above was written by Martin Webster. I can concur that Eddy Butler's speeches would send a Saint to his death, they are so boring. However, Webster does indicate one of a number of reactionary tory groups who are vying to control the BNP. The CDA being one of them.They seem to think that all nationalists are dim. Once again they think that they are the Von Papens of the World. Reactionary tories should enter our den with extreme reluctance.

BNP Leadership challenge imminent ?

There seems to be an avalanche of talk about a leadership challenge within the nationalist community. We sincerely hope there is, and that 'we' true nationalists have a candidate. Any candidate that applies the BNP's written Constitution has our support.

Party members must be white European ethnic.

I helped Nick Griffin get elected in 1999. That is one of the biggest mistakes of my life !

Some names that are being mooted are;

Simon Darby - met him and don't support him, he will follow the Griffin trend

Doc Edwards or Russell or whatever other name he uses. That overcoat plus his drinking are a downside. Met him at Oldham, he was canned when he gave his speech !

Jonathan Bowdon - Never met this guy , but have watched his trail through all the 'reactionary Tory fringe' groups. At least one friend has described Bowden as a pompous windbag.

Bowdon and Eddy Butler and one or two others have been the planners behind the BNP's lurches away from nationalism and towards being a new tory 'gingergroup'. They have their own back room meetings to discuss 'THEIR' policies and decisions, away from the BNP rank and file.

So I hope that none of these 'wasters' are in contention. We need someone from the Re-form Group to stand for leadership.

Though it must be said, you will have to 'prize Griffin out of his job' with a bloody crowbar. He is like the Establishment politicians, they never resign over any gaffe or worse that they commit.