Vortex

Spencer is also busy on there as well.

Wowbanger TIP

Cherry picked remarks? How many times have you opined that the holocaust never happened or that Adolf will "live forever" or that asylum seekers are cockroaches? Whether said in private or public if they represent the persons views where they said them is irrelevant. But this is the problem with the BNP, they think it's OK to be a Nazi so long as you don't say it in public.

As for UKIPers joining the BNP, if they are happy to jump into bed with Collett and his fans and are aware of the facts good luck to them. If they are happy to be used as cannon fodder by a leadership who are both incompetent and fascists then who am I to tell them not to?

To Griffin modernization means presenting what he thinks is an acceptable front not changing attitudes. Being a Nazi is bad, being a lying Nazi is even worse.

Wowbanger TIP

I'll put the case against Griffin where ever I think it will do the most good. Which is defined by reaching the widest relevant audience.

Vortex

Yet the real neo-nazis are the ones who are totally against him for "selling out" and "watering down policies". If he was a "nazi" you would think they'd be happy as Larry to be in a party led by him.

Your hostility is bordering on an obsession, why don't you channel your energies into something constructive?

Wowbanger TIP

As I have said repeatedly Griffin almost certainly harbors all sorts of unpleasant beliefs, but he can't publicly say them, or denounce them for that matter. Moreover why would he simply to attract the support of the Nutzi's whose friendship is more to be feared than their enmity.

However for those who can read between the lines and observe his behavior the conclusions are obvious.

An obsession? Maybe, however every time I see BNP supporters putting forward misleading information I feel obliged to counter balance it.

Something more constructive? What could be more constructive?

Vortex

[quote=Wowbanger TIP;521873]As I have said repeatedly Griffin almost certainly harbors all sorts of unpleasant beliefs, but he can't publicly say them, or denounce them for that matter. Moreover why would he simply to attract the support of the Nutzi's whose friendship is more to be feared than their enmity.
QUOTE]

I have heard him denounce them on several occasions, including in personal conversation with me. His determination to move the BNP away from extremism and the hardline rhetoric and behaviour of these people is in my view genuine. However the casual reader will have heard two sides of an insight into Nick Griffin's character, from your goodself and me. Shall we leave it at that and let them decide?

Wowbanger TIP

[quote=Vortex;521965]Can you provide a on-line reference?

here's Griffin in Burnley 2006

"We bang on about Islam. Why? Because to the ordinary public out there it's the thing they can understand. It's the thing the newspaper editors sell newspapers with. If we were to attack some other ethnic group — some people say we should attack the Jews ... But ... we've got to get to power. And if that was an issue we chose to bang on about when the press don't talk about it ... the public would just think we were barking mad. They'd just think oh, you're attacking Jews just because you want to attack Jews. You're attacking this group of powerful Zionists just because you want to take poor Manny Cohen the tailor and shove him in a gas chamber. That's what the public would think. It wouldn't get us anywhere other than stepping backwards. It would lock us in a little box; the public would think "extremist crank lunatics, nothing to do with me." And we wouldn't get power."

Quote on wiki BNP entry.

Note he doesn't argue that anti semitism is wrong merely that it is not expedient.

We can leave it there for this thread if you like. However I will continue to offer an alternative interpretation to the one advanced by BNP supporters on this forum for as long as I can be bothered. Or alternatively until someone can convince me that Griffin isn't as I portray him, and can prove that to the people. Like for instance if he sacked Collett and made an unambiguous statement in print condemning fascism and fascists (particularly his American chums) in unambiguous terms and making it clear that they have absolutely no place in the BNP or Britain. He might help his cause if he insisted that a independent investigation of the Parties affairs was held.

That's not a great deal to ask is it? Thats only common sense really isn't it?