Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito

Wednesday, 17 August 2011

Strafford must be put out of service

Mr Hogarth paints an insalubrious picture, but an all too accurate one I'm afraid.  Is non-member and open multiculturalist Pat Harrington playing Strafford to Mr Griffin's Charles I?  That would make Mr Brons John Pym and his supporters the patriots.  If the life-blood of any political party is not simply money as such, but rather the quality and number of its elected representatives, candidates, activists and members, then the phrase "this man of blood" might well be regarded as descriptive of the current chairman of the British National Party.

Notwithstanding this, however, in the words of another great Englishman, Oliver Cromwell, “We look for no compulsion but that of light and reason.”

Is the Chairman Going Insane?

Some Parallels with King Charles I

Posted by admin, on 17 August, 2011, to Andrew Brons' BNP Ideas web site // 3 Comments

By Hogarth.

The purpose of this website is to encourage articles and policies from sensible contributors, with a view to discussing and improving the condition of our country. Positive and constructive debate should always be welcomed.

Another purpose is to provide constructive criticism in terms of the manner in which the party is directed. This is especially important at this crucial juncture for nationalism. We wish to keep nationalists aboard and avoid their alienation.

That we have reached a juncture cannot be doubted. In the past two years, the party has been heavily on the retreat. It has lost its credibility.

We have lost councillor after councillor, either through defection or by failure to obtain re-election. The national elections’ officer has presided over one failure after another.

Moreover, we have lost most of our activists, some of whom have defected to rival parties. We have experienced the collapse of units, branches and entire regions. We have overseen the collapse of our vote in our own strongholds. We have witnessed one incompetent appointment after another, including retards, dimwits and the semi-criminal class. Leading officials have been involved in brawls.

Members have also discovered the accumulation of vast debts and financial incompetence on a Himalayan scale.

More recently, we have experienced a leadership election in which one side panicked, broke its own rules and issued offensive and mendacious bulletins and illicit communications from unfit Regional Organisers. A margin of merely nine votes swung the contest.

In essence, the current Chairman is without a mandate. He can only run the party with the support of the wing of the party that backed his opponent. In those circumstances, it would then be possible to reach a degree of unity and shared purpose. Unfortunately, this possibility appears unlikely.

This site has made its requirements known on several occasions. In particular, it has requested the removal of the non party member, multiracialist and political adversary who runs much of the party and advises the Chairman. His removal would be met with applause by both wings of the party.

The Chairman’s failure to remove him denotes a close relationship between the two and, seemingly, a determination to keep the party split and accentuate the division.

The most recent example of poor judgement, which has caused members to question the Chairman’s sanity, was his ill-advised public statement on the recent riots, which few intelligent nationalists could possibly have supported. This video was advertised in a members’ bulletin and carried over the official party website.

Using a teleprompter, the Chairman read his statement. In it he employed swear words, such as “flies round shit” and “the little bastards”. He spoke of judicial punishments which would entail handcuffing culprits to lamp posts for 48 hours.

He also boasted of the party’s ‘black members’, which suggested he sought the advice of the party’s political rival, multiracialist and non member.

What sane leader would produce a video for the party’s members, leave alone for public consumption, which embraced wild and intemperate statements of the flavour provided above?

Could it be that his general advice is almost wholly dependent upon retards, tattoed no-necks, knuckle-draggers and cranks, because everyone with any sense or expertise has departed or been excluded?

Could it be that the Chairman has simply gone off his rocker?

It seems his condition has deteriorated after the appalling manner in which he conducted himself a year ago during the invitation to attend the Queen’s Garden Party. What a fool he made of himself. What a figure of fun he has become to many, who need merely point at him to deprecate nationalism.

No wonder much of the public support many of our policies but consider the party to be beyond the bounds. That this is so is in large measure due to many of the crazed, deranged, impulsive, imprudent and unhinged utterances of the Chairman.

That he was re-elected to office is because his team broke the election rules.

In the next month or so, we shall also discover the extent to which he and his team misrepresented the affairs of the party to the membership during the election contest.

This website has already documented the failure of the party, yet again, to submit its accounts on time to the Electoral Commission. Similarly, it has documented some of the bills outstanding, including one to HM Customs and Revenue. Fortunately for the Chairman, these facts were revealed after the election, but only just.

The Chairman may have won the election with a wafer thin majority of nine votes, after his team employed illicit tactics, but his position is becoming increasingly untenable. Indeed, the party’s financial position depends upon numerous pending Court hearings.

The Chairman has also failed to call a meeting of the NEC under the new Constitution adopted at the recent Extraordinary Meeting. Perhaps, rather like King Charles 1, who thought he could rule without Parliament, the Chairman believes he can rule the party without its governing body. The King eventually had to recall Parliament to raise taxes. The Chairman might have to depend upon the NEC and his opposing wing in the party to raise funds.

Whether or not he is off his rocker, he might remember that through sheer incompetence and intransigence, the King eventually lost his head.

Let us all hope the Chairman does not bring the party any lower in the public conscience and into any further gross disrepute. After all, some people are already saying he has lost his head.

3 Responses to " Is the Chairman Going Insane? Some Parallels with King Charles I "

Geoff Crompton says:

August 17, 2011 at 9:02 am

I don’t believe the Chairman has become mentally ill, his behaviour is not totally irrational. His behaviour seems quite calculating and extremely defensive of himself and his immediate entourage. His appointment of Pat Harrington is also indicative of the fact that Mr. Harrington has his total trust, which is extremely worrying for all true Nationalists. The Chairman is hanging on to power by his fingertips and is bringing our party into disrepute and the quiet mockery of our Marxist enemies. He is also now blatantly damaging our parties image and credibility, which leads us to wonder whether he has been doing this intentionally for some time now. His behaviour on the BBC’s “Question Time” was cringe-worthy and embarrassing to say the least, even given the circumstances. If the Chairman cared enough about the party and put the interests of British Nationalism above his own he would have been honest about the parties financial crises and stepped aside for a better man with better judgement to repair what’s left and urgently rebuild the parties trust and its activist base. I am convinced that blind loyalty by mostly non-active members saw him re-elected by this tiny margin. He has no mandate to lead the party, especially now the lies he told to the members are being exposed. I can only pose one question to myself and anyone who will listen now. That is; Is Nick Griffin intentionally trying to destroy the BNP? If he is not, he certainly is doing a marvellous impression of a man who is.


Jerry Owen says:

August 17, 2011 at 9:18 am

Thankyou for this article.

I was absolutely shocked to hear him swear the way he did. we all no doubt share his anger but certain things you keep to yourself. By and large the British public are mild people hence the continued election of mainstream parties with little vote for the radical parties.

This language will frighten many people and compound already held opinions that we are just a bit ‘too much’ ( which when you ask people what they mean they don’t actually know!).

I know that in the part of the SE region where I am the party is in non existence, from having squads of leafletters and table top volunteers at every need, to not even meetings now.

I am a life member and as such I was promised free publications of Identity and Freedom. Needless to say I have never received a single publication. Clearly this life membership was for a quick cash injection to the ‘party’ with an offer that was never to be that is dishonest. They have broken their pledge to me, how can I pledge myself to the party at present? and if I can’t support my party at the present why should any member of the public vote for us?


mercia says:

August 17, 2011 at 9:31 am

In my opinion the problems within the BNP began with the appearance upon the scene of Harrington. I understand that there is no love lost between him and Griffin, yet Griffin employs both Harrington and Harrington’s wife (none of which are members), at members’ expense (£50,000 per annum?). So what is going on?

To paraphrase Sherlock Holmes – when you eliminate the impossible whatever remains – however improbable – must be the truth.

Does Harrington have something big and bad on Griffin – is that the answer?

As for “powersharing” with Brons – that simply is not going to happen. How can it – “powersharing” implies making the financial records of the party available – about the very last thing Griffin can afford to do.

Maybe – just maybe – Harrington’s apparent hold over Griffin and Griffin’s reluctance to power share and make the party’s financial records visible, are linked?

No comments:

Post a Comment