The cut and thrust of debate

The following is a recent exchange of views, on the BNP sub-section of the British Democracy Forum, between a supporter of Nick Griffin, posting as Alpha666 (666 is "the mark of the Beast" in the Book of Revelations) and Dr Andrew Emerson, posting as Simon de Montfort. 

A666:  Nick Griffin is the only choice for the leadership of the BNP.

SdM:  False. There are two candidates.

A666:  Andrew Brons is not leadership material; he is being manipulated by the wreckers such as Butler and his bunch of traitors.

SdM:  Andrew is a former Chairman of the National Front, at a time when it had more members than the BNP has now. Andrew is his own man, unlike Griffin, who is the puppet of sinister, anti-party elements.

A666:  Nick has done more to make this party a household name than anyone else in nationalism and he can still create publicity for the party whenever he chooses.

SdM:  Up to a point, yes, but he does not deserve all of the credit for this by any means. The activists and candidates built the party with their hard work. Much of the publicity Griffin has created has damaged the party.

A666:  His performance on Question time has been ridiculed by the likes of Arthur Kemp and Andrew Brons yet neither one of them could have done a better job under the circumstances.

SdM:  Nonsense. Andrew would have performed much better than Griffin, which is why Griffin would not allow him to go on.

A666:  Nick has been criticised by Kemp and Brons for getting himself banned from Buckingham Palace yet the party could never have paid for the publicity we received from that stunt.

SdM:  Again, negative publicity and there is such a thing. Griffin has shown his judgement to be woefully inadequate.

A666:  Andrew Brons has twice attended the palace in a bid to become part of the establishment, the only trouble is no-one even realised he had been; it may have benefited Andrew but it certainly did not help the party in any way.

SdM:  Griffin's jealousy meant that the BNP web site censored news of the party's success, since it had been achieved by Andrew.

A666:  Nick is devoted to the party; Andrew would not even agree to sign the candidate’s contract as was the wishes of the membership.

SdM:  The so-called candidate's contract is legally null and void: unenforceable and not worth the paper it is written on. It's a typically half-baked Griffin stunt, designed to impress the inexperienced and less intelligent amongst the membership.

A666:  All in all, the only choice is Nick Griffin if we want the party to survive.

SdM:  If one wants the BNP to do more than merely exist, in a persistent vegetative state, Andrew Brons is the better bet.