Why do stories about alleged 'corruption' within the BNP surface with such monotonous regularity on the Internet? Well, there are two possible reasons:

First, that they are true, with BNP leader Nick Griffin leading a gang of about a dozen crooks who conspire relentless to rip off the party and live the life of Riley.

Second, that they are untrue, but that the powerful and fanatical interet groups, which routinely spend vast amounts of money and energy trying to halt the rise of the British National Party openly, also run covert black propaganda operations designed to hit the party's donations and so hamper its progess.

Which is more likely? To work this out we need to look at half a dozen key FACTS:

FACT 1) Nick Griffin has a Cambridge Law degree, has run rings around the best barristers that the Crown Prosecution Service have thrown at him in three free speech trials, and has demolished every Establishment 'big gun' radio and TV interviewer he has ever faced. If the man was in it for the money, he certainly wouldn't be in the BNP!

FACT 2) Land Registry records confirm that Nick's wife brought their home in Wales on a mortgage for £25,000 in the early 1990s. Obviously prices have gone up since then, but it's hardly the price of a palace.

FACT 3) When travelling on speaking tours, Mr. Griffin invariably stays at the homes of BNP members. All other political leaders use plush hotels. Who's on the gravy train and who isn't?

FACT 4) The finances and financial records of the BNP, which the Electoral Commission classifies as a 'major party', are therefore by law closely monitored not only by internal staff but also by an independent auditor who is bound by his professional code to ensure that everything is handled properly. His complete audit is in turn gone through with a fine toothed comb by officials from the Electoral Commission. The chances of money being illictly raised, spent or stolen under such a system are effectively zero. The fiances of the modern BNP are the most open and transparent of any party in the history of British nationalism.

FACT 5) Let's face it: Far from being a passport to luxury, high living and privilege, running the BNP - in a country with Islamic terror cells, endemic violence among certain immigrant communities, left-wing thugs and a Politically Correct legal system operated by a totalitarian government - is a dangerous as well as a thankless task.

FACT 6) The BNP is the only household name party in the UK which is 'in the black'. Alll the others are mired in massive debt, because running a political party's central machine is a very costly exercise.

So why do a handful of people tell lies about the BNP's finances, and a slightly bigger group constantly recycle them? There are four KEY POINTS:

POINT 1) Any head of any organisation will at times have to discipline individuals within that organisation, and to defend the interests of the organisation against rivals. Both the punished guilty and jealous rivals have clear motives for lying about the man who has put them in their place, or the successful organisation that blocks their own personal or group ambitions.

POINT 2) Liberal-left journalists and editors are always looking for ways to damage the party, and recycling black propaganda lies is an obvious way to try to scare off potential donors and members.

POINT 3) Well-financed organisations like Searchlight have been shown over and over again to run 'moles' in nationalist organisations, and to use them to spread lies and rumours intended to destablise their targets and set genuine nationalists against each other.

POINT 4) Under English law, political parties cannot sue for libel, and a libel action by an individual about whom lies have been told costs somewhere between £50,000 and half a million pounds. And who is a London (multi-racial) jury going to say it believes - Nick Griffin or some bitter old has-been or opposition 'grass'? The only people who benefit from libel actions are the lawyers, and the only people who can afford them are the mega rich. So the lies will keep coming, and the only sensible thing to do is to ignore them.

So don't do the enemy's work for them. The next time you come across tales about the BNP or its leadership, don't pass them on as gossip, delete them for the baseless lies they are. And tell whoever is spreading them to get off the back of the people who have done more than anyone else to throw a whole bag of spanners into the evil workings of multi-culturalism in Britain - the British National Party, as built and led by Nick Griffin.

David Michael: Crank Extraordinaire

Poor old Britain Forward – having to rely on “sources” such as David Michael.
Actually, in reality, this is Britain Forward’s ONLY quoted source, so even in that regard it is unusual, as all Britain Forward specialises in anonymous allegations.
In any event, some responses to David Michael’s rant are in order:

David Michael wrote on the Britain Forward blog:
“Nick Griffin has launched an attack on me in his 'Britain Backwards' blog.”

The Truth: David Michael does himself no favours here but reinforces his reputation for paranoia by stating that Nick Griffin wrote the section David Hannam, and is in fact the author of this blog. Sorry, Nick Griffin is far too busy to bother with a handful of Internet cranks. In typical fashion, Michael only sees the enemy he wants to.

David Michael wrote on the Britain Forward blog:
“You will recall that I resigned from the BNP some years ago after I was informed that a sum of Party money intended for leaflets had ended up in the telephone account of David Hannam. Nick Griffin failed to take action against Hannam, who is now BNP Deputy Treasurer. Nick has now decided to attack me for making this matter public".

The Truth: A comical presumption from the paranoid Michael again, he sees Griffin at every turn, in every corner and everywhere.

His paranoia also seems to affect his memory. David Michael resigned because due to his claustrophobia, as he refused to travel to the Annual College in 2001, and threw a massive tantrum when he resigned.

What really irked David Michael was that David Hannam opposed Michael's decision to purchase 50,000 leaflets with party money to be distributed around the city of Hull. Hannam saw that this move was well ahead of the small struggling Hull group and when he said that Hull should concentrate on targeting specific wards, Michael was not happy.

David Michael wrote on the Britain Forward blog:
“First, Nick claims that I am an 'unstable individual'. Rebuttal 1. If this is the case, why did Nick, who has known me since 1979, appoint me as organizer for Yorkshire and Humberside BNP after David Hannam suddenly resigned due to his first bout of 'personal problems'? The thrust of Britain Forward's original allegation seemed to be that Griffin surrounds himself with odd people. If I am indeed 'unstable' then the fact that Griffin appointed me to office would seem to confirm Britain Forward's case!”

The Truth: This does not really need a reply, as it speaks for itself. It is however an interesting object lesson in absurd logic.
1. If, according to Britain First, “Griffin surrounds himself with odd people” – which Michael now says is the case (see above); then
2. Michael is strange, by his own admission.
3. By the same reckoning, he claims David Hannam is a crook, but by association Michael too is a crook. Crime by association! Michael's crazy logic to the fore again.
His presumption that Nick Griffin must personally propose every single member of the BNP before allowing them in, is almost beyond the last shreds of Michael's remaining sanity.

David Michael wrote on the Britain Forward blog:
"Rebuttal 2. My record speaks for itself. I have been running a successful business in this country since 1995 and before that in South Africa since 1991. I make a profit. I have no criminal record whatsoever. I am a happily married father. I have never been involved in any scandals. I am not being treated for any mental illness. I do not smoke and I drink very little. I have written a series of articles for Sharon Ebanks' New Nationalist Party, one of which deconstructs the Griffinite position on Israel. I invite your readers to take a look at it (it's here) and consider whether it is the work of an unstable individual or simply someone who happens to disagree with Nick."

The answer is clearly the former, i.e unstable. Anyone who has had even a brief read of Michael’s resignation letter will have seen this: it ended with the words:
"Death to America!
Death to the New World Order!”
This provides a fair grasp of Michael's state of mind.
Hull members can also vouch for the manic verbal attacks from David Michael about his paranoia that anyone was laughing at him for having a Polish wife. Nobody was, but in Michael’s head they could have been!

Troy Southgate - David Michael's Former Ally Who Discovered the Truth

Troy Southgate initially accepted Michael into the cause of 'National Anarchism’ after the latter’s farcical exit from the BNP.

However, Troy Southgate himself could only stand so much of David Michael. Here is what Troy had to say about Michael when he expelled Michael:

By Troy Southgate:
The point is - and I've just read David's reply - we are simply not prepared to work with somebody who uses such abusive and patronising language towards people who share many of the same opinions.
Just look at the language he used in his most recent message, about being 'a good boy' (as though he really is occupying the moral high ground, rather than accepting that he's the very individual who initiated all this nonsense in the first place). As for the fact that he tried toexplain away this behaviour by suggesting that it was nothing more than a bad-tempered blip, that's a blatant lie. It went on far longer than one night and on more than one occasion.
And FNF did not lie, either. David called him a liar after he misinterpreted some of the comments made on David's website.
There is a vast difference between calculated deceit and simple misinterpretation. I've been involved in this game for eighteen years and have never seen anybody turn on his own kind in such a childish and unprovoked manner. Unless, of course, they are really out to create division and discord.
FNF was a fervent supporter of David's work and went out of his way to help David on many occasions. In return, David called him a 'liar' and stated explicitly that FNF was 'no comrade' of his. If this is an example of David's willingness to create an 'alliance formation' then God help us.
It's hardly surprising that FNF took him out of the webring either. Furthermore, we are not prepared to accept David's 'olive branch' so he can wipe that plastic smile off his face and shove it up his own arse for all I care. It may as well be a poisoned chalice.
And do people really believe that Michael Lujan was launching an 'attack' on David's website simply by purchasing a domain under the name of National-Anarchism? A name, remember, that we were using before anybody had even heard of David Michael.
I think David's extensive list of N-A domains speaks for itself. He is a very frightened and determined man.
Furthermore, whilst I have no evidence that David has deliberately set out to disrupt National-Anarchism, his actions resemble those of an agent-provocateur and I am banning him from this list before he causes any more trouble.
In my opinion, and that of countless others in this forum, this action is well overdue. I don't like having to do this, but his presence is having a detrimental effect and I won't risk that for anyone.
Now to deal with the ideological nature of David's 'national-anarchism'.
As many people are aware, I absolutely detest the kind of dogmatism espoused by Marxists, Trotskyists and their pseudo-anarchist bedfellows. So therefore it is not my intention to debate the precise nature of Anarchism that should be applied in National-Anarchist communities at all, but to point out the simple fact that David's seven points (all of which I happen to agree with) do not even mention Anarchism.
In other words, what makes David's 'national-anarchism' Anarchist in the first place? The answer is simple. Nothing. Contrary to what David says, it's not about 'true socialism' or 'true anarchism', it's about the absence of Anarchism altogether.
David has not evolved towards Anarchist ideas in the way that the NRF was influenced by Richard Hunt and Alternative Green, he simply fell out with his former pals in the BNP and then began calling himself a 'National-Anarchist'.
He's simply trying a different tactic.
The fact that he now admits to being 'closely involved' with the WNP - which openly supports the police and the Establishment and which many people believe is a State operation to disrupt the equally reactionary BNP - also speaks for itself.
Finally, David's remarks about us creating 'significant additional requirements' for National-Anarchism are also incorrect. There are thousands of anarchistic variants out there, but the fact that National-Anarchism came about was due to the racial separaist stance of its adherents.
We have no problem with other forms of anarchism or other decentralists, we just want to stress that National-Anarchism is an essential racialist phenomenon.
That's what makes it different. Anarchism sui generis, perhaps, but Anarchism all the same.
Regards,
TROY.”

As Troy Southgate found it, David Michael was, and still is, an extremely disturbed individual, who, if he is not mad, is astonishingly good at pretending to be.
It wasn’t long before David Michael started acting the same old crazy way as he did with the BNP, and his association with National Anarchism was just as uproarious as his relationship with the BNP ever was.

It seems that David Michael’s exits from different causes have more to do with his attitude than his beliefs!

A wonderful “source” for Britain Forward to use. First class material, very stable and reliable, ah yes.

David Michael wrote on the Britain Forward blog:
“Second, Nick claims that I 'descended into a deep depression and resigned in a mad rage when the BNP had its Annual College in 2001 because [I] did not want to travel.'
Rebuttal: Unfortunately for Nick, my letter of resignation has been circulating on the Internet for years.”

Again, Michael ignores the facts for fear something may challenge his world. As has already been explained, David Hannam was in contact with the then Treasurer John Brayshaw who confirmed no money had gone missing at all. It is a fact that Michael does not seem to appreciate.

David Michael wrote on the Britain Forward blog:
“Documentation exists to prove every word that I have said about Hannam. I have been reluctant to make it public because I detest the British press even more than I dislike Griffin. However, I want to give Griffin a clear warning. I want an end to the lies on this issue. If I don't get an end to the lies, I go to the press with the proof. Right before the next elections. Simple as that”.

And we are back to square one. Michael threatening all with more attacks by going to the press with fictitious evidence. Maybe Troy Southgate’s analysis of him being an agent provocateur wasn’t so far from the truth?

You decide.

Lies and Humdrum: Britain Forwards’ Pathetic Response

Humiliated at the drubbing that he received at the hands of this blog, the crank named “Britain Forward” has once again posted a new pack of lies, trying desperately to salvage some little bit of his smashed credibility.

While we were not going to respond any more, we could however not resist. It is such fun beating up an imbecile of Britain Forwards’ level, that it appealed to the ‘kick-him-when-he-is-down’ sense in us. So here are a few more comments:

BNP Leadership Election:
The Britain Forward lie: “The truth is that since 1999 NG has successfully tweaked our party’s constitution to reinforce his personal position and the positions of his cronies.”

The Truth: It is quite simple: contenders and the incumbent are not allowed to use party lists. As straight forward as that. They can do any other sort of campaigning they want, but the party infrastructure itself will not be used or abused by either the current leader, or a contender.

How much more simple can it be?

Obviously too complicated for Britain Forward’s addled brain.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

RWB
The Britain Forward lie: “Backward claims the farmer told the BNP to go because it was “the least economically viable for him”. In other words RWB is not the roaring success that our chairman has claimed in terms of income and numbers attending.”

The Truth: Britain Forward is not only a liar, but a very poor liar. As anyone reading that post can see (see the original below) the reference to “the least economically viable for him” was specifically made about the farmer. In other words, he took a commercial decision – other people offered him more money to use the site, and, as he is now limited as to the number of events he can hold a year, the farmer has chosen his top paying customers.

Really and truly, just when one had thought that Britain Forward had reached the bottom of the barrel, he comes up with something even more stupid. Quite incredible.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

Sadie Graham
The Britain Forward lie: “. . .Blatant Bias Corporation or some other media organisation picks up on a rising star in our party doing martial arts and sharp shooting and accuses us of preparing to take over Britain by military means. Such an accusation is ridiculous as we all know but the image will remain in people’s minds.”

The Truth: How sad. In Britain Forward’s increasingly diseased mind, Sadie’s keep-fit regime has been elevated to preparations for a coup. Really, Britain Forward, do you expect anyone to take you seriously?

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

The Britain Forward lie: “ Besides which, was Sadie’s gun and her use of it licensed?”

The Truth: “Her use of it licensed?” Ha Ha Ha Ha! Have you ever heard such nonsense?

Let’s see: how much does Britain Forward know about gun laws in Britain? Obviously nothing… do yourself a favour, Britain Forward, and find out about gun laws before you comment so foolishly.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

The Britain Forward lie: “Sadie’s martial arts skills seem not to have taught her actually to defend herself. When Sadie Graham was confronted by a drunken red thug who spat in her face, she stood there staring like a scared rabbit caught in the headlights of an approaching car.”

The Truth: Sadie was being interviewed by Sky TV at the time. So, according to Britain Forward’s logic, she should have leapt into action, karate-chopped and kicked the spitting red, all on camera, so that the media could make a feast of it ….. yes, well, now we know why Britain Forward is NOT leading the BNP, and we are thankful for that.

Oh, and yes, what an "astonishingly good point." Let's get rid of Sadie because she did not kung-fu a spitting leftie on TV . . . now, that's the type of logic we urgently require....

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

Mark Collett’s Printing Press that Never Was:
The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards says that after the 2005 general election the four high quality digital duplicators, three folding machines and power guillotine bought for £70,000 were given to the regions and no longer kept for HQ jobs. In that case why do the party’s accounts, which do not include the regions, still show the party as owning the equipment centrally at 31 December 2005? Did the auditors check that the party owned the assets shown in the balance sheet, or did NG pull the wool over their eyes?”

The Truth: First, note how Britain Forward has tried to divert attention away from the fact that his original outrageous lie – that Mark Collett was in possession of a £70,000 printing press and was always late with leaflets etc” has vanished, and now the accusation is that the duplicators (note, not a “printing press" anymore) were not reflected on the 2005 accounts.

Anyway, the simple answer is that the shifted assets are only reflected on the 2006 accounts, which, we are told, are due any day now.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

The Britain Forward lie: “And why does Backwards say the cost of the printing equipment was £70,000?”

The Truth: Because that was what the whole thing cost, peripherals included. The accounts figure of £51,671.13 did not include the peripherals associated with the duplicators.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

The Britain Forward lie: “It seems that NG used Payne’s unrepentant national socialist beliefs as an excuse to remove this able man and replace him with a dishonest little spiv, namely Dave Hannam, who was only too willing to do his poetic master’s bidding.”

The Truth: Now isn’t that an insight into the thinking which dominates Britain Forward’s thinking. Actually, that quote is so good that we think it is best left standing by itself, and readers can form their own opinions on what exactly Britain Forward’s motivations are.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

Dave Hannam
The Britain Forward lie: “On Dave Hannam’s criminal record, Backwards claims that Dave Hannam had nothing to do with Simon Sheppard’s leaflet that showed Hannam’s name and address as the originator. Dave Hannam was only 17 at the time and it is unlikely that a youth court would have sent him to prison for something he didn’t really do. Unless of course he had a long line of previous convictions.”

The Truth: The court records are open for inspection by anyone, and the facts of the case are well known. Sadly for Britain Forward, they contradict him completely.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

GWR
The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards says there was no proposal to strike off Great White Records Ltd. This is untrue but we accept that the striking off notice has now been removed from the Companies House website.”

The Truth: Aha. So, first we note that Britain Forward remains silent about the fact that he could not understand the difference between “returns” and “accounts” . . . why, we wonder? Possibly because he does not want to draw attention to the fact that he obviously knows NOTHING about how these sorts of things are run.

Secondly, as detailed in our post below, the issue of GWR’s status was simply a question of Companies House not updating its records promptly. Sad to say for Britain Forward, because he does not understand anything at all, he misinterpreted that as meaning something else . . . oh dear, wrong again.

The Britain Forward lie: “We are surprised that Backwards compares Griffin’s poetry to that of John Lennon. We would have though there were plenty of patriotic nationalist poets around without singling out this drug-crazed lefty.”

The Truth: Quite amazing that Britain Forwards misreads our original posts time and time again. Obviously poor Britain Forward’s brain has been so severely embarrassed by his exposure as a clown, that what little remained of his intellectual ability vanished in a puff of rage.

Of course, the quote in question (read the original below) was meant as an example of how leftists have used music to influence society, and had nothing to do with “other” nationalist poets.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

Welsh Assembly Reprise
The Britain Forward lie: “A couple of our Welsh supporters were outraged at being asked to finance our party’s campaign in Wales by sending their cash to a box number on the other side of England. Backwards says the appeal came under the aegis of the regional treasurer in Yorkshire. Why couldn’t a Welsh address have been used, especially seeing as the treasurer John Walker lives in Wales.”

The Truth: Oh dear, this is exactly the same “argument” as before. . . (see the original post below). As this has already been explained, readers are referred to the original post below, and we would like to apologise to them on Britain Forward’s behalf for such an idiotic repetition. At least we will not burden you with having to read it again. Those of you who have not seen it, are welcome to scroll down.

Security Department
The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards spends a lot of time evading our questions”

The Truth: Not at all. Each and every specific question was answered in detail, and in particular the ones about the security department. Anyone reading the post (below) can see this for themselves. It is however an interesting insight into Britain Forward’s thought processes that he actually thinks people cannot see this for themselves.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies, and instead resorts to personal attacks on one person’s sex life. . . real political maturity there …

The Britain Forward lie: “. . . and responds with a lie to whether Mr and Mrs Reynolds are paid for their work. Perhaps not everyone is prepared to take the word of a recidivist Liverpool gangster, but Joey Owens says that when he was in charge of security for our chairman and party he was unpaid and did the job out of a feeling of duty. He says that NG told him that when the party could afford it he would be paid.”

The Truth: And? The point is? How does that disprove -- or prove – anything.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

Overseas Funding
The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards responded to our question with a blatant lie. Everybody knows that the trips to America and to visit wealthy supporters in Germany produce substantial funding for the party.”

The Truth: Britain Forward is revealing – once again – his complete ignorance of the law, which quite specifically states that no-one not on the UK electoral roll is allowed to donate more than £200 per year. This holds for all parties.

It is therefore, legally impossible to raise significant funds for the BNP overseas, no matter what frenzied thoughts run through Britain Forward’s mind.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

The Britain Forward lie: “Just listen to the appeal for funds at the New Orleans international conference hosed (sic, we think he means 'hosted,' but, given Britain Forward’s propensity for lying, we can’t be sure) by David Duke, which NG and Kevin Scott addressed. Taking money through the back door is going to leave us with the same reputation that Blair’s Labour Party has earned.”

The Truth: As usual, Britain Forward has twisted the story completely: Actually Nick Griffin told his American audience that they could NOT give money to the BNP, and, that if they wanted to help, they should give money to Civil Liberty, an organisation which was set up to help defend BNP members persecuted for their BNP activities.

Hear Nick Griffin’s exact words here, and see how blatantly Britain Forward has lied.

Nick Griffin’s Pay
The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards says that NG’s pay is a matter of public record. Strangely it does not quote the figure but provides a link to an article in The Times which says he earns £1,800 a month.”

The Truth: And? The point was to show that it is no big secret, as Britain Forward was trying to make readers think…

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

Gadaffi
The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards tries to explain at great length why NG tried to tap Colonel Gaddafi for money but simply digs a deeper hole.”

The Truth: All the post below did was show that the belief – since rejected – that the Libyans would give money to the nationalist cause, was common in the 1980s, nothing more and nothing less. Obviously Britain Forward does not like the fact that his hero, John Tyndall, also supported Gadaffi. Too bad – those are the facts, and nothing Britain Forwards can say, will change them.

The Britain Forward lie: “What really insults the intelligence of our members is Backwards’ claim that the party did not know that the printer that produced several issues of Voice of Freedom was owned by Saudis.”

The Truth: The company’s name was Satellite Graphics, and no, there was no overt indication that a printing company based in Essex was foreign owned.

In any event, the real issue is: so what. When the ownership of the company was brought to light, the printing contract was ended, and that was that. Britain Forward’s attempts to make something else of this just reek of desperation.

The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards challenge us over our “laughable ignorance international politics”.”

The Truth: Indeed. Anyone who can say that the Saudi Arabians support Osama Bin Laden is just a fool, plain and simple.

Bin Laden is a wanted man in that country, and no amount of squirming by an obviously embarrassed Britain Forwards can get away from this hilarious display of his crushing ignorance.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

Abu Hamza
The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards tries to excuse NG sharing a platform with Abu Hamza by saying that his participation in the Radio Academy event enabled him to promote the BNP to “300 of the most powerful people in British radio”. Backwards claims NG only took part in a panel discussion. We do not criticise NG’s attendance at such an event which let him meet the editors and journalists who are so often hostile to us. He even had the opportunity to meet government ministers such as Tessa Jowell the Arts Minister.”

The Truth: Look at that: “We do not criticise NG’s attendance at such an event which let him meet the editors and journalists who are so often hostile to us.”

Now, compare that to Britain Forward’s original line of argument: “And why in 2002 did Nick Griffin share a platform in Cambridge with the Muslim terrorist cleric Abu Hamza, who is now serving a long prison sentence for inciting murder?”

Now, let’s see: does anyone notice the backwards flip-flop here? Yes, we thought so… it’s so obvious that it is just laughable. Really, Britain Forward, you are going to have to do better than that if you think you are going to convince anyone…

The Britain Forward lie: “But it was not a panel discussion. The only person on the platform other than the discussion chairman was Abu Hamza”

The Truth: Yes it was a panel discussion, and Nick Griffin had no say over who else was on the platform, as detailed below.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

Jonathan Bowden
The Britain Forward lie: “Hundreds of party members know that NG tried to warn Bowden off from speaking at meetings of proscribed organisations or sharing platform with individuals who had been proscribed or expelled from the BNP.”

The Truth: Note the sudden flip-flop with regard to Britain Forward’s original “argument” – having seen it exposed as a pack of lies (the “New Right group in London” and the “Bowden will never speak again at a BNP function” etc. etc.) Britain Forward tries to bluster over it by just not mentioning it any more, hoping that readers will be silly enough not to notice. Oh dear. We don’t think so….

The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards goes on to sidestep the question of the BNP councillors present at the meeting organised by New Right where the speakers included a Muslim extremist and a pagan. Is this lack of discipline acceptable to NG because he fears an open battle within the party?”

The Truth: Britain Forwards doesn’t get it, does he? This was not a BNP function, and there were no disciplinary steps mooted against anyone.

Note Britain Forward’s side stepping of the issue of his objections to the “pagan” when his own self proclaimed hero, David Lane, was a vehement anti-Christian pagan. Hypocrisy? You decide.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

Infiltration
The Britain Forward lie: “The fact is that South African intelligence offered Arthur Kemp a deal over the Chris Hani case and as a result he continued his intelligence gathering work for a new master in the Marxist ANC regime.”

There is of course, absolutely no evidence for this allegation whatsoever! In fact, as detailed below, the evidence shows very clearly that Arthur Kemp was spied upon, and did not spy for, anyone.

But never let the facts get in the way, hey Britain Forward? Just make up allegations, with no proof whatsoever, and hope that someone will believe it… sorry, you will have to do better than that.

And, of course, Britain Forward is at a loss to explain exactly why the ANC would consider the BNP such a priority that they would expend all their time and effort infiltrating it . . . as if somehow the BNP was the single greatest threat to the South African state! It is so silly that it is hilarious, but, of course, we have come to expect nothing of better quality from Britain Forwards.

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” has been exposed as a pack of lies…

The Britain Forward lie: “Backwards claims Arthur’s book nowhere said that Nieuwhof got a 12-year sentence. True the present internet version no longer contains this statement but it was certainly in the old printed version.”

The Truth: So, Britain Forward says the “old printed version” of Arthur Kemp’s book claimed that Lambertus Nieuwhof got a 12-year sentence.

Well, now, that is strange: The “old printed version” of Arthur Kemp’s book on the AWB was published in 1990. Here, look it up on Amazon.com and see the publication date for yourself.

Now, Lambertus Nieuwhof’s activites with the AWB – for which he was arrested, took place in 1992. See here.

Once again, Britain Forward is simply lying: Lambertus Nieuwhof was never even mentioned in the “old printed version” of Arthur Kemp’s book – because the book was published TWO YEARS BEFORE Lambertus Nieuwhof ever even did anything! Never mind him being tried for anything!

Yet another unbelievably pathetic LIE from Britain Forward.

In fact, the astonishing capacity of Britain Forward to lie endlessly, has quickly become his most prominent feature.

It is sad when someone has to lie. But it is even sadder when someone uses lies which are so easily disproved and so blatant. Britain Forward must think that the readers of this and his blog are fools . . .

Note once again how Britain Forward conveniently ignores the fact that his original “argument” (about Lambertus Nieuwhof having been a “Special Forces” solder) has been exposed as a pack of lies…

The Britain Forward lie: “Robert Bailey had what John le Carré’s spy novels called “a legend” created either by himself or by his masters. It is almost certain he did serve in the Royal Marine commandos. However although he has mentioned a number of locations where he served, our checks revealed that before coming back to Britain he was operating in Algeria, a place he never mentioned. What was he doing there?”

The Truth: Given Britain Forward’s proven propensity for outright lies (see the above one about Lambertus Nieuwhof as a good example), please tell us why on earth anyone would believe outrageous anonymous allegations like this?

Maybe the best response to this type of anonymous rubbish is to make up a smear of our own: “Our sources have revealed to us that Britain Forward is in fact being paid by Gerry Gable.”

Oh, wait, sorry, that is not so outrageous after all, in fact, it is distinctly possible! Sorry!

Who is to Blame?
The Britain Forward lie: “Last week’s by-elections showed that we are still not winning. Yes there were two or three quite good percentages including some second places”

The Truth: the BNP polled over 25% in Birmingham, and beat all other takers into second place. This confirms that the BNP’s national support base is now well into the double figures . . . a remarkable first for ANY nationalist party in British electoral history . . . yet Britain Forward still tried to tell his readers that this is somehow “poor.”

Incredible. Obviously Britain First would like the BNP to return to the days under John Tyndall when it used to get a derisory vote of 12 or 20 in a parliamentary seat. . .

Don Black
The Britain Forward lie: “The facts belie NG’s claim of not having any links with Don Black. They were photographed together at a conference in New Orleans”

Don Black appeared at the same conference and was photographed with Nick Griffin.

It is a staggering leap of logic (but not something to which Britain Forward is unaccustomed) to take that as meaning Nick Griffin can personally censor Stormfront, which is what Britain Forward’s original allegation said.

Once again, all we can say is, how pathetic.

It would actually be good to get some real questions, with actual facts. But we are obviously not going to get any of those from Britain Forward. Too bad.

“Over to you, Chris”

Britain Forward lies: “With almost Stalinist rigour Nick Griffin has deprived Chris Jackson from access to the main forums and websites that BNP members visit and respect. All that is left open to him to put forward his challenge for the BNP leadership is “equal space” in our internal members’ bulletin British Nationalist.”

The truth: Nick Griffin has merely enforced rules which were laid down in the last leadership challenge in 1999.

This means that no official party organ can be used to propagate the candidacy of any person, apart from an equal shout in the members’ bulletin.

There is however no proscription on holding meetings, addressing members via independent Web sites or campaigning in any other normal way.

In this regard, all candidates – Nick Griffin included – are subject to the same rules.

For Britain Forward to whine on about “Stalinist rigour” is just nonsense of the first degree. Any leadership challenger is free to campaign on or off the Internet, as they see fit, and there are no restrictions whatsoever, apart from the obvious one that party organs must be seen to be unbiased.

“Sad Sadie Graham”

Britain Forward lies: “As the Red White and Blue Family Festival approaches we are being asked what prompted Nick Griffin to move its location from Chris Jackson’s back yard in the north west to down Cllr Sadie Graham’s way.”

The truth: Actually, everyone knows the answer to this: the local authority placed restrictions on the farmer upon whose land the RWB was held, limiting him as to the number of events he was allowed to hold in any one year.

The farmer then advised the BNP that as a result, he had been forced to curtail the number of events, and that the RWB was one of the events which had to be removed, it being the least economically viable for him.

As a result, a new area was found, at a far cheaper rate with excellent facilities and far more centrally located.

As a matter of interest, note the irony in Britain Forward’s lie: the reference to “Chris Jackson’s backyard” as if the move was somehow being done to spite him.

The reality is that Chris Jackson has only ever attended one RWB, in 2000, held on the Welsh/Shropshire border, and has NEVER attended any other RWB, even those held “in his backyard.”

Britain Forward lies: “(Sadie Graham’s) interests in martial arts and sharpshooting might prove to be far less of an asset for the BNP’s image.”

The Truth: So keeping fit and going shooting once is damaging to the BNP’s image? Only in the demented mind of a liar like Britain Forward.

Britain Forward lies: “Those who wonder why she has gained the nickname “Sad Sadie” might reflect on the fact that whilst she is an excellent organiser she is very unsuccessful at choosing her mates.”

The Truth: The utterly despicable nature of this unwarranted attack upon Sadie Graham’s personal life is beyond contempt. It is a reflection of utterly evil nature of Britain Forward’s motives and is only a reflection upon himself, and no-one else. His slanderous ramblings are not even worth commenting upon, driven as they are by pure personal hate rather than any founding in logic or sense.

Question Time 1: Mark Collett’s printing press

The Britain Forward Lie: “Why, after the party spent £70,000 of members’ hard-earned cash on Mark Collett's printing press, are there so many complaints that he is nearly always behind with printing leaflets etc? Why does he have to pay a local print shop at commercial rates to do print jobs that he has taken on for the party?
The point of buying our own equipment was to make our printing cheaper and ensure that our literature production cannot be stopped through third parties like UAF and Searchlies putting pressure on commercial printers as has happened in the past. Why has Nick Griffin not intervened to safeguard our investment?”

The Truth: Back in early 2005, the party decided to buy 4 very high quality digital duplicators, the best at the time, three folding machines and a large professional power guillotine.

The idea was to produce all the general election material for non-target wards on these machines. The leaflets would be A4, with the inside being black and white and the outside being red and blue. Head Office would pay for the machines, the paper, the ink and for the rental of an office unit. HQ was also to pay the wages of those operating the machines who would work in shifts of 8-12 hours to keep the presses running virtually 24 hours a day.

The branches would then buy the leaflets off HQ by the thousand at an agreed rate which would be cheaper than they could get at a proper litho printer.

With this, HQ recouped recouped nearly all of the £70,000 and the printers, folders and guillotine then belonged to the party and be fully paid off.

After the elections, the machines were then refurbished for free as they were still under their warranty.

Effectively then, the BNP have 4 top quality machines, 3 folders and a guillotine in fully working order, all paid off, as well as providing cheap leaflets for the branches.

When the elections were over, the machines were then given out to the regions to help with regional and local work, and they were not kept for HQ jobs. It was an effective plan which allowed the BNP to produce cheap leaflets and invest in assets at the same time.

The printers in question are now no longer in use by Mark Collett or HQ but are now happily serving the most active regions to which they were gifted by HQ.

So, Mark Collett does not “have a £70,000 printing press” as Britain Forward so blatantly lies.

In fact, Mark does not own or operate a single printer.

Now, the question must be asked: How stupid and out of touch is Britain Forward? Obviously, very much so.

To buy and set up a litho printing press with print finishing equipment you would probably be looking at the best part of a million pounds. So the idea that the party picked up a 'printing press' for £70,000 is quite absurd.

As to the real printing jobs. The BNP does use friendly local printers who print for the party at VERY good rates.

As far as Britain Forward’s “anonymous” complaints of lateness in the delivery of leaflets: although the vast majority of print jobs run completely according to schedule, a small minority do not. It is the nature of the printing business.

Sometimes the delay is due to failure of the groups requesting the leaflet to deliver photographs or content for the leaflet, other times it is due to the fact that the printers have printing schedules which cannot be interefered with for commercial commitment reasons, and other times it is because printing using the 4 colour process and finishing is not like printing on your home inkjet -- It involves a much longer and more complex process.

This year the HQ produced 835,000 (for 193 candidates) full colour glossy election addresses for the branches, and 1.4 million leaflets for the Welsh Assembly elections. We would love for Britain Forward to name his sources and tell us all which candidates had their leaflets late?

Question Time 2. Dave Hannam

The Britain Forward Lie: “Why has Dave Hannam been promoted beyond his competence? . . . But when he came out he was soon in a position of financial responsibility.

The Truth: David Hannam is the BNP's Deputy Treasurer, responsible for handling hundreds of group accounts, every single day. He also completes the regional accounts audit, as well as the central office audit. A few years ago, the BNP treasury team consisted of four workers. It now consists of two!

This hardly indicates “incompetence” – actually the direct opposite.

The Britain Forward Lie: “Then a wealthy donor complained that the money he had given had never reached the party but Hannam used it to pay his phone bills. The donor stopped giving. Why did Nick Griffin ignored this complaint and then insult our intelligence by promoting Hannam to Deputy Treasurer?”

The Truth: This old chestnut originated with an unstable individual named David Michael.

This is the same David Michael (now a self-professed “National Anarchist” whatever that may mean) who descended into a deep depression and resigned in a mad rage when the BNP had its Annual College in 2001 because he did not want to travel.

At the time, John Brayshaw was the party treasurer, and personally investigated the claims against David Hannam.

John Brayshaw demanded of David Hannam to show him the branch accounts (where the donation had been recorded) and then also show him the branch cash. From this, it was obvious that there was nothing missing and that the allegations by David Michael were utterly fictitious.

Nonetheless, Britain Forward is quite happy to resuscitate this blatant lie, even trying to imply that David Michael no longer “donates to the BNP” because of it, when it is clear from his Web site (no longer online, but still mirrored on the Internet Archive at the link above) that he had had “(A) decisive break with 'far right' ideology.”

The Britain Forward Lie: “We thought he had been removed from all party positions after being jailed alongside the seriously deranged Simon Sheppard.”

The Truth: The actual events David Hannam's arrest and subsequent imprisonment in 2000 under the Race Relations Act are as follows:

Simon Sheppard wrote, published and distributed a leaflet, using David Hannam’s name and P.O. Box as the originating address. This was done without David knowing, and in fact, he had nothing to do with the writing or publication of this leaflet. Psychopathic Sheppard had no qualms about doing this to the then 17-year old David (yes, 17 years-old) and as a result, David was arrested and convicted.

David went to prison for a leaflet with which he had nothing to do.

Understanding this – and after expelling the real cause of the trouble, namely Sheppard, the BNP welcomed David straight back into activism upon his release.

Britain Forward is unlikely to have been as active as David has – it is much easier, it seems just to attack people over the Internet.

Question Time 3: Great White Records

The Britain Forward Lie: “The party pumped money into Great White Records…”

The Truth: The BNP has not pumped any money into Great White Records (GWR). There has only ever been one donation, from an outside individual of £4000 into GWR. This is worth stressing: this donation came from an individual donor outside the BNP, and not from the BNP itself, which has never put a penny into the operation.

This will be shown in the GWR submission of accounts to the Inland Revenue in October 2007.

So who is financing GWR? Answer: The people running it. GWR consists of a few good men, who out of their own pocket have made huge sacrifices to keep GWR going with the belief that GWR can achieve something great. The current release 'West Wind' is the clearest example of this, modern, slick and professional. The labels producer-engineer himself actually collapsed his own business and gave GWR full usage of his equipment, worth around £50,000 for the cost of £0.00!

The Britain Forward Lie: “…but now Companies House shows that the company has never filed accounts, which is against the law. It is now proposed to strike the company off, which means its money will be lost.”

The Truth: The reality is that, as a new company set up in December 2005, accounts are not necessary until October 2007 -- as is stated on Companies House Web site which contains the records for GWR.

Poor confused – or is it lying – Britain Forward is confusing ‘accounts’ with ‘Returns’ (for his information, they are two different things.)

In fact, GWR has made their annual return363 recently (which consists of updating Companies House on who are the current directors, etc, addresses changes necessary, etc.) although at time of writing, this submission had not yet been reflected on the GWR records on the Companies House Web site, and shows up as overdue. Companies House have assured GWR that this will be corrected forthwith.

There are, of course, are no proposals to 'strike off' GWR -- as can be seen on the companies house Web site, where GWR’s status is very clearly marked as ACTIVE.

Go here to the Companies House Web site, type in “Great White Records” and follow the links (two clicks), where the public records are available: right here.

The Britain Forward Lie: “Many members complain they have ordered goods and not received them. Why has Nick Griffin allowed this to happen?”

The Truth: Britain Forward is referring to the West Wind CD. As everyone who ordered that CD knows, the Mechanical Copyright Protection Society (MCPS) initially refused GWR a license to distribute the 'West Wind' album. So although the album was completed at the printers, the MCPS, in an attempt to scupper GWR, attempted to refuse them a license.

The document which the MCPS delayed in giving to GWR states that no other artists’ work was used in the CD. The printer requires this release form before they are legally allowed to hand over the completed CDs.

Although the cause of the delay with the MCPS is suspicious, it was eventually granted and the albums delivered.

Every person who pre-ordered the CD was sent a letter explaining the delay, which had nothing to do with GWR itself.

The Britain Forward Lie: “We hear from Great White Records that their latest release is songs all written by Nick Griffin. We would have thought that running a party of this size would be a full-time job. How much time is he spending writing songs instead? Is this why he is ignoring the problems?

The Truth: As all who have read anything about the West Wind album (highly recommended, get your copy here), the lyrics for the album are in fact poems that Nick Griffin has written over the last 20 years, mostly late at night. (Listen to a sample of “West Wind” here.)

Britain Forward will find pitifully few people to actually believe that 11 poems (note, not the music), written over a 20-year time period, constitute any sort of crippling work load.

Furthermore, there is no doubt that music and songs enter peoples’ subconscious far more effectively than writing or speeches, and that it is in any event a valuable investment of time and effort into using this tactic. The enemies of nationalism have done this highly effectively (John Lennon’s Imagine has done far more damage than Das Kapital to the Western psyche) and there is no reason why we should not do the same with our message.

It is just sour grapes on Britain Forward’s part that none of his heroes have been able to produce anything nearly so effective.

Question Time 4: Welsh Assembly elections appeal

The Britain Forward Lie: “One of our staunchest Welsh members wondered why the BNP website asked for donations for the Welsh Assembly elections to be sent to an English address, which made it look like we had no organisation in Wales. In fact it was the Great White Records box number, which is further cause for concern. Why was the appeal run from that address, especially seeing as John Walker lives in North Wales?”

The Truth: A silly question, with an easy answer: the appeal money came in at regional treasurer’s level, which went to the party’s deputy treasurer in Yorkshire.

No-one, except the utterly deluded Britain Forward, imagines for a second that the BNP has no organisation in Wales, given that the party’s well-known and widely advertised head office address is in Welshpool, and the fact that the party gained nearly 10 percent of the vote in north Wales. . .

Yet another bizarre no-brainer from Britain Forward.

Question Time 5: BNP Security Department

The Britain Forward Lie: “A number of members are concerned about the people working in the party’s Security Department. People are saying that having our leader surrounded by up to 30 men in Mafia type suits and dark glasses, like on the TV reports of the court case, makes the party look bad. Worse, some are saying the security department are unprofessional and incompetent.”

The Truth: Note how Britain Forward uses implied innuendo, un-quoted (and unquotable) and ‘impossible to trace’ grammatical tricks in this one.

For example, “some are saying the security department are unprofessional and incompetent.”

“Some” say? Hilarious!

Using that sort of argument, we can state that “Some say that Britain Forward is a pedophile. A number of members are concerned about the fact that Britain Forward has been seen in the company of children.”

How is that for totally unsubstantiated innuendo? And this is the type of argument to which Britain Forward actually expects a response?

This allegation, all by itself, shows very clearly that the Britain Forward blog actually serves no purpose whatsoever except to try and rake up dirt. Fortunately, Britain Forward’s attempts are so weak and blatantly transparent, that they collapse under their own incompetence and hopelessness.

The Britain Forward Lie: “How much is Martin Reynolds paid as Head of Security?”

The Truth: The simple answer is: nothing. He is not full time, and the only costs incurred are his reasonable expenses while attending public events with Nick Griffin. This in an invaluable service, as a recent physical attack on Nick Griffin in Surrey – warded off by the BNP chairman and Martin Reynolds – proved.
Sadly for Britain Forward and his lying blog, the party expenses are all detailed in the party’s annual statement of accounts to the Electoral Commission and here for individual campaigns

The Britain Forward Lie: “Did Mrs Reynolds get the job of appointments secretary to Nick Griffin (shades of John Prescott?) on merit or because she is Martin’s wife, and how much is she paid?”

The Truth: She volunteered for the position, which is unpaid. She runs her own successful business, and does not need party money.

It is a disgrace of Britain Forward and his lying blog to disparage volunteer party activists who freely give of their own time in this way – but, of course, we expect nothing less from someone prepared to stoop to such levels.

The Britain Forward Lie: “How much are others on the security team paid?”

The Truth: Zero. There is no full time security team.

Expenses are paid as and when people are used for periods excessive than what normal volunteer work demands.

Once again, all party expenditure is detailed in the party’s statement of accounts which is accessible at the Electoral Commission and here for individual campaigns

The Britain Forward Lie: “How are the people in the security department vetted?”

The Truth: Individuals apply and are subjected to an internal security vetting process, the nature of which is not for publication. Only an obvious Searchlight activist would want to know those details, or have them published on the Internet. The reader is invited to decide for themselves why Britain Forward seeks these details to be publicised.

The Britain Forward Lie: “We have heard that one of them has ideas about getting rid of Reynolds. If there is in fact a threat it could well come from within our own ranks.”

The Truth: Another implied innuendo, un-quoted (and unquotable) and ‘impossible to trace’ grammatical trick here.

Using this sort of “logic,” we could say that “We have heard that the pedophile community wishes to get rid of Britain Forward. If there is in fact a threat it could well come from within his own community’s ranks.”

See how the ridiculous line of “argumentation” works?

The Britain Forward Lie: “How many training courses are this team going on, like the very costly secure driving and anti-kidnapping courses, and what do they cost?”

The Truth: The basic driving course was for one person, who then provided the training to other members of the security team. The anti-hijack driving course cost £600. Other party officials who want those skills are given the training by the one professionally trained individual at a cost of £30 per person. In this way the cost of the original training and vehicle maintenance has been recovered in full.

Apart from the anti-hijack course, upon which Britain Forward is fixated, other members of the Security Department are in possession of the basic Security Industry Authority (SIA) qualification, which is a legal necessity for anyone wishing to work as door security. The party is thus legally obliged to have people go on these courses if it wants to ensure effective security at meetings.

These courses cost around £130 per person, payable to the private company providing the training. The certificate showing that the candidate has qualified, issued by the SIA in terms of parliamentary legislation, costs a further £190.

Ten key security officials have undergone this course, incurring a once-off legally-obligated cost of £320 per person.

Importantly, these courses include full First Aid certification as well, and as such the party provides its own legally qualified security and First Aid officers at public functions such as the annual Red White and Blue. Real value for money.

The Britain Forward Lie: “How are the course providers chosen? Some security companies work for government departments and may be hostile to the BNP.”

The Truth: The course provider was chosen by BNP security after a proper evaluation, on commercial grounds, relating to skill, previous experience and value for money.

The assertion that this means that “security companies are hostile” is just an absurd delusion and implies that the BNP has no support in the broad community – an obvious lie.

Question Time 6: Overseas funding

The Britain Forward Lie: “What political strings are attached to funding that Nick Griffin obtains from abroad?”

The Truth: The BNP is not allowed to receive funds from abroad. British electoral law states that no-one who is not on the UK electoral roll may give more than £200 per year to any party, and that this must be fully noted and reported to the Electoral Commission.

All large donations to the BNP are listed on the Web site of the Electoral Commission here.

To use Britain Forward’s unsubstantiated and made-up innuendo back on him: “What political strings are attached to the funding that Britain Forward receives for running his lying blog?”

Question Time 7: Nick Griffin’s pay

The Britain Forward Lie: “Exactly how much is Nick Griffin being paid and in what forms (wages, expenses, etc), and how many members of his family are in receipt of party funds.”

The Truth: Nick Griffin’s salary is a matter of public record as per the party’s statements to the Electoral Commission.

Britain Forward is trying to make out that this is some sort of closely guarded secret, when it is nothing of the sort. In fact, Nick Griffin’s salary has even been reported in the national press, here. (Incidentally, Nick Griffin’s salary is way below what his qualifications (MA from Cambridge) would command in the private sector.)

The Britain Forward Lie: “… how many members of his family are in receipt of party funds.”

The Truth: Nick Griffin’s mother, Jean, works full time for the party manning the main inquiry telephone line, answering mail and sending out information packs in response to these inquiries. In April 2007, Jean sent out thousands of information packs, and took uncounted hundreds, if not several thousand, telephone calls.

For this full time job, Jean is paid a paltry £200 per month.

Contrary to the rumour mongers such as Britain Forward, there are no other members of Nick Griffin’s family on any party payroll.

Question Time 8: Hypocrisy

The Britain Forward Lie: “We are prepared to forgive Nick’s visit to the murderous Colonel Gaddafi’s Libya in the company of Patrick Harrington who is now the General Secretary of Solidarity. This could be put down to the indiscretions of very young men keen to follow a revolutionary path to securing the future of our people.”

The Truth: The simple answer is that in the 1980s, Nick Griffin was most probably under the influence of a strand of thought in nationalist politics -- since then, important to note, thoroughly repudiated -- which believed that financial support could be obtained from the likes of Ghadaffi.

In fact, BNP founder John Tyndall was the foremost exponent of this line of reasoning. Tyndall devoted an entire issue of his Spearhead magazine in 1986 to this very topic, praising Gadaffi.

John Tyndall said of the Libyan leader: "Let us consider Colonel Gaddafi. He is not of course our idea of what a political leader ought to be and no doubt we would not want to have such a man governing us. But that is hardly relevant to the issue. What is much more relevant is the question of whether Gaddafi is, as suggested, a madman or a clear thinking politician with a rationally conceived policy for his people.

The mere fact that of his survival over so many years together with his achievement in improving the lot of the majority of Libyans, suggests that we should rule out the first possibility and concentrate on the second. If then, Gaddafi is a clear thinking politician with a policy, what is that policy?

All the evidence points to it being a policy of Arab nationalism and the ultimate goal of Arab unification. Gaddafi would appear to be just one of a number of Arab leaders who see themselves as commission by Allah to give a lead towards such goal. A much more enlightened policy – if we seriously want to put an end to international terrorism – would be to remove its primary cause – by eliminating the commitment to Israel and pursuing the friendship of the Arab nations." - John Tyndall, Spearhead, No. 211 May 1986

The idea that Arab nations could somehow help nationalism was therefore common in the 1980s. Everyone moves on, and Nick Griffin has long since repudiated that line of thought – but everyone except Britain Forward appears to know this.

The Britain Forward Lie: “Many people we have spoken to, who have been in nationalist politics for years, wanted us to ask why Nick Griffin in the late 1980s was praising the Iranian dictator Ayotollah (sic – your spelling is not so hot, JH) Khomeini and sucking up to the American black Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan and his British supporters.”

The Truth: Nick Griffin never “sucked up to the Iranians.” The quote which critics like to attribute to Nick Griffin in this regard was something published in the National Front News, which read as follows:

“Common interest must be turned into practical cooperation. By supporting Islam and the third Way nations such as Libya and Iran we are coming together in a common struggle for the same ends: Racial Separation and Racial Freedom.”

In fact, this was never written by Nick Griffin, but by the two individuals who edited and published NF News, Derek Holland and Michael Fishwick.

It is, therefore, simply a lie to say that Nick Griffin wrote that sentence. But quoting direct lies and presenting them as “evidence” is Britain Forward’s clear specialty.

As to the allegation that Nick Griffin “sucked up to American black Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan and his British supporters,” the truth is that Nick Griffin has never met Louis Farrakhan or any of his “British supporters” although other members of the BNP have indeed met with Black separatists in London.

Actually, the BNP has no problem in meeting with Black separatists at all – there is no reason why the BNP should not meet with anyone, especially those who oppose integration.

The Britain Forward Lie: “But why much more recently was Voice of Freedom being printed by a company in East London owned by powerful Saudis, the very country that gives political and financial support to Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden?”

The Truth: “Much more recently?” Britain Forward must be in a time warp. The “Saudi” printing company debacle actually dates from nearly two and a half years ago (March 2005).

However, not letting that tiny fact get in the way of yet another totally unsubstantiated allegation, Britain Forward’s facts, are, as usual just wrong, at best, and a lie, at worst.

Firstly, the BNP did not know that the printing company in question was owned by Saudis.

After the Saudi ownership was revealed in the press, the company received an order from their Saudi owners to stop printing the paper (not even the Saudi owners were aware prior to the newspaper report). This coincided with a decision on the part of the BNP to take the business elsewhere, and that was that.

Britain Forward’s laughable ignorance of international politics is revealed in horrible detail in this remark that Saudi Arabia gives “political and financial support to Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.”

Of course, more well-informed people than Britain Forward know that this is utter rubbish: Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are exiles from Saudi Arabia, which is a firm ally of the United States of America against Al Qaeda.

In fact, Osama Bin Laden is a wanted criminal in Saudi Arabia who would most certainly face the death penalty in that country should they ever lay their hands on him.

Saudi Arabia has been the target of a number of Al Qaeda terrorist attacks because it does not support Osama Bin Laden, and has actively sought his extradition and prosecution.

Such a woeful grasp of international politics is either the sign of a halfwit, or that of a deliberate liar. Either would fit Britain Forward’s bill.

The Britain Forward Lie: “And why in 2002 did Nick Griffin share a platform in Cambridge with the Muslim terrorist cleric Abu Hamza, who is now serving a long prison sentence for inciting murder?”

The Truth: Nick Griffin spoke at a panel discussion event organised by the Radio Academy, an independent body made up of an association of radio broadcasters.

He eagerly took part in the panel discussion because it was a golden opportunity to appear in front of, and promote, the BNP, to 300 of the most powerful people in British radio. He would not have turned down the opportunity for anything.

The Radio Acadamy’s other panelists were of their own choosing, and had nothing to do with Nick Griffin or the BNP.

Question Time 9: “Selective discipline”

The Britain Forward Lie: “Jonathan Bowden was threatened with disciplinary action by Nick Griffin for speaking at a meeting of the New Right group in London organised by Troy Southgate.”

The Truth: Unsurprisingly, Britain Forward is in total ignorance of reality, having to rely on Internet rumours for his “facts.”

Jonathan Bowden was never disciplined for this meeting, nor was there even a suggestion thereof. In fact, Troy Southgate has written an article about home schooling which has appeared in the party magazine, Identity – so there is not even an issue with Troy Southgate.

This allegation is pure fiction.

The Britain Forward Lie: “One of the speakers was a Muslim extremist and another was a raving pagan who insulted our Christian faith.”

The Truth: And what is the point here? It was, after all, not even a BNP meeting. Furthermore, as evidenced by Britain Forward’s hero worship of the anti-Christian Odinist American David Lane, it is hypocritical in the extreme of him to condemn an anti-Christian speaker in any event.

The Britain Forward Lie: “Jonathan Bowden has stood his ground against our chairman’s threats but he is unlikely to be allowed to address any more party meetings. This of course is pushing him towards the anti-Griffin camp.”

The Truth: Once again, complete nonsense.

In fact, Jonathan Bowden is, and has been, a regular speaker at BNP events, and is one of the key speakers at the forthcoming BNP Summer School. He is also a current member of the BNP’s Advisory Committee (AC).

The Britain Forward Lie: “The two questions are: Why has Nick Griffin alienated our National Cultural Officer and popular speaker?

The Truth: He has not. See above.

The Britain Forward Lie: “Has Nick Griffin had the guts to try to discipline the four councillors who were at the meeting?”

The Truth: An absurd and irrelevant question. See above.

Question Time 10: “A blind eye to infiltration?”

The Britain Forward Lie: “Arthur Kemp worked for South African intelligence under the nationalist government and may have played a part in killing the red scum agitator Chris Hani. When the blacks took over and started destroying that wonderful country, Arthur Kemp changed sides and was sent to work inside nationalist groups in Britain, Germany and the USA.”

The Truth: An old hoary lie, cranked out by well-known homosexual Marxist Searchlight spy Peter Rushton (see side bar for link).

This made-up allegation is based on the fact that Arthur Kemp was conscripted into the South African police’s uniform branch (all White males were conscripted into one or another of the ‘old’ South African military); and that he was spied upon by, and did not spy for, the then South African spy agency, the National Intelligence Service (NIS).

The latter allegation originates in the Chris Hani assassination story, which Arthur dealt with in his book on the AWB, which can be read here (which also made mention of the NIS spying on him.)

What happened was that while working as a journalist in South Africa, Arthur freelanced for a number of news agencies. One of these agencies turned out to be a front for the NIS, used specifically to spy on journalists in that country.

One story Arthur wrote for that news agency dealt with possible plans by the right wing to demonstrate in front of the rich and fabulous houses of ANC leaders and sympathisers.

All this came out during the amnesty application by the two people convicted for the assassination, Clive Derby-Lewis and Janus Walusz. The transcript of the amnesty application is online at the Web site of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and can be found in full here.

Below is the relevant extract (Mrs Derby-Lewis, wife of Clive, is speaking:

“MRS DERBY-LEWIS: (reading document) "Information corresponding to the so-called hit-list found in the flat of Walus was reported to division 052 by agent Z0066 (Jerry Pieterse who fronted as a freelance reporter) who received it from sub-source 46 (Arthur Kemp) who was not aware of his link to NIS through Pieterse, not was he a registered agent of NIS.
Pieterse was handled as a principal agent who ran his own network of sub-sources, mainly journalists or stringers for major national and international newspapers. The sub-sources communicated their newspaper type reports to Pieterse by computer."

Note the following:

1. It was quite clear that Arthur was not aware of any NIS link and was not working for the NIS. In fact, the opposite is true: he was the one being spied on;

2. The whole point of setting up a news agency front was to trick journalists into selling their writing to an otherwise legitimate company (which quite genuinely did have contracts with wire services) in order to monitor what those journalists were doing.

3. In this particular case, the front-agency in question took stories from many journalists in South Africa, including a well-known one, Professor Anton Harber, who is today the director of the Journalism and Media Studies Programme at Wits University, Johannesburg. At the time, Anton Harber was editor of the Weekly Mail and Guardian, the Guardian’s sister newspaper in Johannesburg. Anton and Arthur were just some of many journalists who were spied upon by the NIS.

Britain Forward’s “intelligence” allegation is thus a complete reversal of the facts: Arthur was spied upon, and did not spy for anyone.

But Britain Forward is never one to let the facts get in the way of an attack, as readers can clearly see.

The Britain Forward Lie: “He was reinforced by a former South African Special Forces soldier Lambertus Bep Nieuwhof who also found favour in our party becoming a branch officer and then put in charge of the BNP Forum, despite the worries of some senior members.”

The Truth: Lambertus Nieuwhof was born in 1972. The Angolan border war, during which the South African Special Forces operated, ran from 1966 to 1989. Lambertus was therefore only 17 years old when the war ended! The ANC was unbanned in February 1990, and there was no more border war.

In reality, Lambertus Nieuwhof was never conscripted, and never even served in the South African military, much less being a “Special Forces” soldier. (Not unless they recruited ten-year-olds to be mini-Rambos).

Once again, Britain Forward’s allegation is an utter lie, made worse for the fact that it is so easily disproven. It is not even a good lie.

The Britain Forward Lie: “He (Nieuwhof) is now running Solidarity’s website and is clearly privy to sensitive information.”

The Truth: Like everything else Britain Forward has to say, this is a another simple lie.

Lambertus Nieuwhof does not “run” the Solidarity Web site. His company provides the hosting, but the day-to-day running of the site is done by Solidarity officials. He has no input into “sensitive information” about the union at all.

The Britain Forward Lie: “He got off a bombing charge in South Africa with little more than a slap on the wrist and not the 12 years imprisonment that Kemp claimed he got.”

The Truth: Nowhere has Arthur ever claimed that Lambertus got “12 years imprisonment.” This is a total fabrication on Britain Forward’s part, and where it comes from, only Forward Britain’s demented brain can tell.

The Britain Forward Lie: “Bep had also done a deal to sell out his old political allies to the black Marxist South African Intelligence Service.”

The Truth: Yet another total fabrication, typical of the sort of “argument” which Britain Forward uses in his barely literate attacks.

There is absolutely no evidence, anywhere, anyhow, that Lambertus has had any contact, even peripherally, with any “intelligence service” anywhere.

This is just another appalling, unsubstantiated, unproven and un-provable attack upon a dedicated volunteer supporter who has provided money and time to the party without asking for anything in return.

Such is the level of the “logic” that Britain Forward employs. . . he makes allegations with absolutely no supporting evidence whatsoever, and then expects everyone to believe him. Psychotic is the only word to describe such a liar.

The Britain Forward Lie: “Richard Barnbrook has been attacked by our enemies over a homosexual film he made many years ago, but nobody speaks about his long membership of a left-wing Labour Party branch in South East London.”

The Truth: Richard Barnbrook’s admittedly somewhat peculiar art student-era film has been done to death, and has no relevance to anything today.

The real issue is this: Where does Britain Forward think new party members will come from? If the party is to grow, it will have to recruit people who were previously supporters of other parties … duh.

The Britain Forward Lie: “Robert Bailey claims to have been a Royal Marine commando and have links with Germany. One of our members, a former army officer, has shown us the result of his research into Bailey's background that indicates he may be working for British Military Intelligence as an infiltrator into the BNP.”

The Truth: A classic example of Forward Britain’s Searchlight-style innuendo and word-play, making allegations without providing any proof of any nature whatsoever.

If we substitute “Britain Forward” for Robert Bailey, the baseless nature of this “argument” becomes instantly apparent:

“Britain Forward claims to have been a Royal Marine commando and have links with Germany. One of our members, a former army officer, has shown us the result of his research into Britain Forward’s background that indicates he may be working for British Military Intelligence as an infiltrator into the BNP.”

How pathetic can someone be? Britain Forward has, in fact, set a new standard for pathetic-ness as far as “arguments” go.

Question Time 11. “Who is ultimately responsible?”

The Britain Forward Lie: “Some members have said that our failure to advance at this year’s elections is not the fault of our chairman but that middle management is to blame. If that is so, why is Nick Griffin not doing anything to put the right people into those posts?”

The Truth: In reality, although the party “only” gained a handful of seats, the total vote for the BNP rose dramatically. It is now estimated that the BNP polled 14% of the total vote – dramatically up from the 4.9% polled in the European elections of 2004.

John Cruddas, the most senior Labour Party BNP-hater, put it this way:

“The BNP's failure to gain seats in last week's elections masks worrying levels of support,” says deputy leadership candidate for the Labour Party, Jon Cruddas MP.

Speaking at a rally in support of better rights for immigrants and asylum seekers in Trafalgar Square today, Jon Cruddas will say that the BNP achieved very significant levels of support in some parts of the country, polling in excess of 27% of the votes cast in the wards they contested in Stoke-on-Trent and close to a quarter of the votes in Rotherham, Burnley, Sandwell and Thurrock. An extra 2,500 votes in North Wales would have seen the BNP gain a seat in the Welsh Assembly.

"The BNP stood more candidates in last week's elections than they had members just a few years ago and despite the fact they actively campaigned in only a handful of wards, they have polled consistently around 15% of the vote.

"We have to accept that something palpable is happening here."There must be no complacency. While the BNP failed to win seats this year they are on course to win seats on the Greater London Assembly and several MEPs. If they achieve this then they have broken into the mainstream," he warned.

Hardly a “failure to advance” as Britain Forward so blatantly lies. . . but then, by now, we have come to expect nothing less than lies from Britain Forward.

Britain Forward: roll up, loser, what’s next? If all this was your best shot, then Nick Griffin has nothing to worry about.

“A line in the sand”

In his first blog post, Britain Forward wrote: “One of the most damaging elements in what may appear to be a one-sided power struggle is the way the party has become a gossip mill, with on one hand Nick’s way of dealing with dissent with an almost Stalinist ruthlessness and on the other hand irresponsible members damaging us by spreading unfounded gossip.”

Unfounded gossip, indeed. In fact, Britain Forwad is one of the spreaders of the “unfounded gossip” about which he writes.

Slander, innuendo, direct misquotes, vague unsubstantiated allegations and outright lies are indiscriminately used by Britain First.

For example, in his first blog post, Britain First lied as follows:
“Stormfront threads on the Reform Group were quickly removed because of Nick’s close links to Don Black its owner.”

The Truth: There are no links between Nick Griffin and Don Black. In fact, posting on Stormfront is specifically proscripted by the BNP for its members. Obviously Britain First has engaged in some particularly outrageous (even by Stormfront standards) slander, and had his posts removed for fear or legal action.

From this he has concluded that Nick Griffin has some sort of magic power extending across the Atlantic Ocean to monitor and control the hundreds of thousands – if not millions – of inane posts on an Internet Board which has been officially proscribed by the BNP.

Only in Britain Forward’s delusional mind could such a thing even be imagined.

Britain Forward continued: “We encompass the widest possible views save only that we support the defence of our people and Britain’s white Christian traditions. We want what is best for the BNP. Who can deny the 14 words of David Lane, sadly no longer with us.”

The Truth: Note the immediate link to the most extreme version of American politics imaginable. This in itself should give every thinking BNP member cause for alarm, which is further compounded by the staggering lie which follows: the assertion that Britain First supports the defence of “Britain’s white Christian traditions” followed immediately by praise for David Lane.

As anyone who has stopped for a second to read anything about David Lane will attest, he was a radical Odinist, an anti-Christian pagan. . . yet Britain Forward claims both ‘Christian traditions’ and David Lane to be his mentors. . .

This is of course impossible – the two are mutually exclusive – and this overt ‘oversight’ is possibly the surest indicator one could hope to find that “Britain First” is merely an agent provocateur who has no real interest in seeking out facts, but merely to try and cause trouble within the BNP.

Reading this blog, Britain Backwards, will confirm this assumption beyond question.