Though Cowards Flinch

The first thing to say about this book is that there is never a wrong time to publish critical, in depth material about one of the most – if not themost – electorally successful far right parties in the UK. On the day of writing this review, the Daily Mirror ran with a splash about the presence of a man – Chris Hopgood – who describes himself as the leader of the British arm of the Ku Klux Klan. The article goes on to quote Hopgood giving complimentary praise to Nick Griffin, the leader of the BNP, and its success on being “elected by the people of England” [sic]. It is episodes like this where one can console themselves that for every time the party tries to present itself as mainstream something reminds us of the truth (for which we should be grateful).

(Read on)

I’ve contributed to a running debate in the letter’s section of the Morning Star:

Nick Griffin has been re-elected as the party leader of the British National Party by the skin of his teeth – receiving 1,157 votes compared to his rival, fellow MEP Andrew Brons who secured 1,148.

The nine votes between the two demonstrates deep tensions within the party, which have been going on for some time.

In 2008 Matthew Single – the man who later leaked documents containing the names and addresses of BNP members – along with other dissident members of the far right party Steve Blake, Sadie Graham and Kenny Smith, attempted to challenge the leadership of Nick Griffin. The campaign fell flat, and Griffin acted, but tension was brewing in the ranks of the party, compounded by mounting financial difficulties, low support in elections – despite achieving two MEPs – and the infamous marmite incident.

Since then, the anti-Griffin contingent of the BNP have needed someone who they felt was a little more stable, had a decent support base, and was not going to go “soft” – as, for some strange reason, many on the extreme right of the far right party, seem to think Griffin is, opposed to the supposed moderate, suits instead of jackbooted Griffinites.

Andrew Brons has for some time been the candidate of choice for the anti-Griffinites. The British Resistance blog – formerly The Green Arrow – held Brons as the “unity candidate”. In a supportive blog post, they noted:

Nick Griffin must be replaced. He has totally betrayed the trust of all the party’s activists and thrown away the results of their years of hard work. Why he did this, I really do not know but have my suspicions. I could list and document a dozen pages of the lies he has told. Those still supporting him, remind me of the black people in America who despite all the evidence continued to scream out that O.J. Simpson was innocent. They are in total denial as I once was.

While the divide in the party became better known, the spat between Griffin and Brons went public. Earlier this year some BNP members in Brussels went to listen to Brons speak while uninvited, Nick Griffin sat next to his colleague to offer his concerns about Brons’ conduct, and the friends he kept – including the now suspended member Eddy Butler (video below h/t Political Scrapbook).

I asked Eddy Butler ( butlere2010@hotmail.co.uk ) - using an anonymous email address:

why didn’t you ask Solidarity [the odd trade union funded and paid for by the BNP to represent fascists in court, led by that odd chap Pat Harrington] to represent you when you’d been expelled? If you dislike them so much, their subsequent refusal to represent you could’ve acted as political capital for you in your quest against Griffin.

[To which he replied]

I did consider it for my dosmissal [sic] as a member of staff as the action against me was taken by by Adam Walker and Pat Harrington and they breached several basic codes of practice but I coluldn’t be bothered as it isn’t in my nature. I joked with them that I could have and they squirmed when I said it.

Last night, as the result came in, Nick Griffin’s Facebook page has attracted supporters wishing him well, and requesting he bring unity to the party, examples of which include:

Janek On Hiatus Łestelski: Congratulations Nick, now the real hard work starts. WE CAN DO THIS!

Thomas Matthews: Let’s take the fight 2 our pathetic weak government now and put a stop 2 all the in-fighting!!

Uther Aurelius: I hope those that voiced their support for Andrew Brons won’t be shunned from the party and this can be seen as a fresh start with all the senior members pulling together in the same direction!

Ian Dempsey: Now get your arse in gear and reunite the party Nick………..Please!

Mary White: Excellent, well done Nick, hope all those nasty plotters who conspired the smear booklet will be expelled, named and shamed ! God Bless xx

But other forums have shown just how much Griffin is loathed within the party, and how many in the BNP are getting so tired that they either want to leave, or form a new party, with Brons at the head.

In a blog post last night on the Brons-supporting BNP Ideas website, comments included:

Caractacus says: Stuff it Andrew, I cannot now work or serve under NG, so lets get going with a new party? We have most of the brains and activists on our side, the old bnp is now finished under NG and Britain NEEDS a real Nationalist Party. You had half the votes of the remaining 2 year plys members, add to those ALL those NG as expelled, driven out or those who left in dispair and with YOU as the unifier WE will be the voice of Nationalism in Britian before Christmas.

French Mike says: I agree with Caractacus. Strike now while the iron is hot. Before too long disenchanted Nationalists will never return to the fold. This is the moment of opportunity otherwise all is lost.

Jan says: Well done Mr Brons.9 votes, pity not everyone received their ballot papers, I’m certain if they had the outcome would have been you as leader.

James says: I am deeply saddened to hear that Andrew Brons has lost the leadership vote. This result means not only a loss for Andrew but also a loss for the Party and the future hopes of our children.This is not a Victory for The Party, this is not a victory for our people, nor is it a victory for reason, justice or Patriotism; this is a Victory only for Nick griffin.This result will only add to the long list of our best people who have already left the Party.

dave says: Andrew you must form a new party the BNP are going nowhere with Griffin, its not as if you would be starting from scratch,you would be taking almost all of the membership activist that voted for you and more to come later when Griffin is found out for what he is, hundreds more nationalist who have either been expelled or have left the party are just waiting to ralley to the banner.

pam says: Andrew please, please,give us a chance we need a new party supported by those that supported you.

TheBNPrenaissance says: This was a golden opportunity for the party to go forward with a professional and articulate chairman who would have done more than just smirk and squirm on a platform like Question Time. I really have to consider my support for the BNP while the current chairman is in place.

Graham Wakefield says: Well then that is the end of the BNP.

The split in the party is deep and public, and I’ll be surprised if it survives this tense public display.

You may know the name Adam Walker.

He was the man pretending to be a solider so Nick Griffin looked patriotic.

He was also the teacher struck off the General Teaching Council for religious intolerance. He taught at Houghton Kepier Sports College near Sunderland, and posted comments online describing immigrants as “savage animals”.

The man who represented him, Pat Harrington – an odd sort; a libertarian who seems to favour representing fascists, in the pay of Nick Griffin, and whom the one time election guru for the BNP Eddy Butler once approached, and was subsequently rejected, with the intention of suing the BNP after his dismissal (one rule for those who employed him, one rule for all else) -  once said, on this blog:

If you read the GTC judgement regarding Adam Walker you will see that he was talking about immigrants who raped or murdered not about immigrants in general. Hi [sic] point was that this particular group was abusing the hospitality of our country. The press have consistently sought to suggest that he was talking about all immigrants which was not the case. Doubtless you have followed press reports rather than look at original sources.

Before you reach for your small violin, remember that the man still felt it necessary to distinguish migrant from indigenous murderers and rapists, as though we should hold the two in separated types of contempt on the basis of nationality.

(If it weren’t tragic, it’d be funny, but on a stormfront forum [I'm upholding the no links to fascist websites policy, email me if you want them] they advise: “When complaining, please be articulate, polite and sensible and try and avoid stating that you are a BNP supporter.” Only few organisations have to note this).

Mr Walker, on behalf of the BNP – is undergoing a thing called “operation fightback”. They are not doing quite as well as they assume they should be in opinion polls, in local elections, and their finances are up shit creek, while the EDL walk all over their territory. Operation Fightback – much like their targeting of the South East (Basildon in particular) – is an ongoing response to their popularity slump, and it has taken off with their blogospheric comrades.

Their latest installment of operation fightback is use of social media – and it is laughable:

In a newsletter entitled Adam’s Operation Fightback, the BNP said supporters should not be afraid to use hashtags like #nationalist and #BNP when talking about news issues, and that they should “jump on trending topics and turn them into a nationalist discussion.

For an organisation who are intrinsically worried about admitting who they are, the anonymity of social media – and its hashtags – might help get matters across, but it does tell a story about them.

And on Facebook it recommended that members should post a pro-nationalist quote to inspire friends to take action.

…

he added that social media was a valuable intelligence tool for monitoring political extremism, and that comments on sites like Twitter could “help to highlight the true face of the BNP”.

…which is the face of a person labouring over ethno-nationalist quotes to their unsuspecting (weird, forgotten) friends.

But even BNP supporters have complained about Mr Walker’s net presence. Complaining about the junk content of the BNP’s Britain First mailing list, as well as the leaking of all BNP member’s personal details, one MARY BLK said:

STOP ALL JUNK…NOW! POT – KETTLE ?????

Fed up with Adams ‘OPERATION FIGHTBACK’ e-mails or KEEP THE DEAR OLD’ TRUTH TRUCK’ ROLLING appeals? Now you can change things, now you can save acres of lovely trees! Here is a template to send party HQ.

To Nicholas Griffin MEP and the legally responsible Office bearers of The British National Party
Po box 14
Welshpool, Powys
SY21 OWE
BY RECORDED DELIVERY

Dear Sirs

RE: NOTICE ISSUED UNDER S. 11, DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998

Due to the lack of basic security procedures in your administration department, (which is a statutory legal requirement) I now suffer considerable distress by having my personal details in the public domain. I am also most distressed by the party’s constant barrage upon my person of begging letters and infantile e-mails also demanding my money!

Therefore I now serve the Legal officers of the British National Party with the following instructions.
I hereby give you NOTICE that you must within seven days of receipt of this NOTICE permanently cease processing for the purposes of direct marketing all personal data held by you of which I am the data subject, and to delete the same from your records.

THE MEANING OF ‘YOU’ AND OF ‘PROCESSSING’

In this NOTICE the meaning of ‘you’ is you as the data controller and all other persons who jointly or in common with you or at your direction process personal data.
In this NOTICE the meaning of ‘processing’ is as defined in S.1. (1) of the Data Protection Act 1998 and includes using personal data for direct marketing by any means whatsoever.

THE MEANING OF ‘DIRECT MARKETING’ and ‘BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER’

In this NOTICE the meaning of ‘direct marketing’ is the communication by you by any means whatsoever of any advertising or marketing material which is directed to me.
‘By any means whatsoever’ includes but is not limited to communication by post, by telephone, by hand delivery, by text message or by email.
‘Directed to me’ means including but without limitation any or all of the following: Directed to me personally by name, directed to my domestic residence, directed to my telephone numbers, directed to my email addresses.

WHAT YOU NEED TO DO NEXT

In any event, you must within 21 days of receiving this NOTICE, give me notice in writing by post stating that you have complied and will continue to comply with this NOTICE in full, or give me your reasons for not doing so.

WARNING: Consequences of failure to comply with this NOTICE

Should you fail to comply with this notice in full, I reserve absolutely the right to obtain without further reference to you, both as individuals and as a company, a County Court or High Court Order to compel you to comply in full, together with an Order that you pay my associated legal costs.

Yours faithfully

[INSERT your name] WARNING: PS IF IT GOES WRONG YOU WILL HAVE TO PAY THEIR COSTS!
[If writing to complain about spam e-mails insert your email address]

Copyright’ THE GET STUFFED GRIFFIN &Co, CONCERNED NATIONALISTS GROUP’

I should like to say to Mr Walker that not only is he a phony fascist, but he’s barking up a lost tree. The BNP are over, and they’ve proved their inability to keep personal information safe – no amount of tweeting can stop that. Good luck with operation something-or-other…

Yesterday President Lukashenko of Belarus once again defied calls to open up his country to opposition and democracy, as he hammered down on his main opponent, former presidential candidate Andrei Sannikov, now sentenced to five years imprisonment.

Other former candidates arrested and tried after December’s mass actions, protesting against Lukashenko’s government – which has been ruling with an “iron fist” since 1994 – include Vladimir Neklyaev, Vitaly Rymashevsky, Nikolay Statkevich, Dmitry Uss.

The West, including the US – who consider the arrests to be politically motivated – look set to level even harsher sanctions against Belarus, but some political figures and commentators over the years have been reluctant to pledge criticism against “Europe’s last dictatorship”.

Putin’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said in 2005 Russia will oppose any effort by the United States to undermine Mr. Lukashenko’s government. Belarus continues to be something of a play thing for Russia – despite their condemnation of the latest wave of arrests. Though diplomacy has often been touch and go, Russia supplies Belarus with nearly all its gas, and vast amounts of Belarus’ exports are sent to Russia.

Many have since shared in Lavrov’s condemnation of the US supposedly fiddling with the country; in 2006, Jonathan Steele for the Guardian accused foreign governments of intervening in the Belarusian elections by funding the opposition movements.

He went on further:

…why is the US, with the EU in its wake, so concerned about Belarus? Is it because Belarus stands out as the only ex-Soviet country that maintains majority state ownership of the economy and gets good results? Is ideological deviance forbidden? (The IMF, while admitting Lukashenko’s economic success, calls it “ultimately unsustainable”, being based on cheap Russian energy imports and wage increases that outstrip productivity growth.) Is the problem Lukashenko’s independence, his friendliness to Russia and resistance to Nato, his abrasive, don’t-push-me-around style? As one Minsk resident put it to me, he’s a “Slavic Castro”.

Even more recently, support for the government in Belarus came from Neil Clark of the New Statesman, who said:

While other former Soviet republics rushed to embrace capitalism following the fall of the Berlin Wall, privatising their state-owned enterprises and removing subsidies to industry and agriculture, Belarus kept the old collectivist flame alive. My guidebook describes it as a country “so unspoilt by the trappings of western materialism that it’s very easy to feel a sense of having slipped into another time and dimension”. Yet even here – a country where roughly 80 per cent of the economy is nationalised and statues of Lenin still line the streets – times are changing. Pressure from the IMF and Russia and a desire to court the European Union, among other reasons, have led Belarus to embark on a major privatisation programme of its own. Ninety per cent of state-owned businesses have been earmarked for sale. Does the move mark the de facto end of Europe’s last socialist planned economy?

Recently still, it was reported that Wikileaks representative Israel Shamir met with the ‘head of the Belarussian [sic] presidential administration Uladzimri Makei on election day, promising to expose financial dealings between the Belarussian opposition and the US government.’

Shamir reported back that the December 19 elections were fair, save for the disruptions caused by the US.

But occurrences since December, and the jail sentences that are being handed out now should remind the us of the reasonable position to take with the dictatorship of Belarus. Many of the restrictions sought on the Belarusian people should only stir onlookers with anger. For example the Presidential Edict 24, introduced on November 28, 2003, ‘allows for strict control over foreign financial assistance to NGOs’ – limiting the amount of independent auditing non-governmental organisations can carry out.

Furthermore, independent trade unions are under constant threat, indeed the Belarusian Congress of Democratic Trade Unions have decided to boycott a three-party seminar on May 13, where all representatives of the government, trade unions, and experts of the International Labour Organization will congregate, on account of their loathing of the leading regime.

There is no freedom of press and most media outlets are controlled directly by the state. Cases of journalists facing prosecution for reporting out of step with the government line are a reality. A high profile example was the conviction of Alena Rawbetskaya, the editor-in-chief of the independent newspaper Birzha Informacii (Stock-exchange Information), in 2004. For defamation charges she was fined ’1.3 million rubles (approximately U.S.$630), after the paper criticized the upcoming referendum.’

The right to free protest is clearly being dismissed, as the case of December’s protests show. As Mike Harris, Public Affairs Manager of Index on Censorship, said: “Belarus is degenerating to its Soviet past, Sannikov was jailed simply for attending an opposition rally.”

The days of blaming the US for all of Belarus’ ills, and giving undue credibility to Stalinist apologists, should be beyond us. Heavier sanctions will only go so far, and it’s clear that a lot of thinking will take place over what to do about Belarus and the support it’s dictatorial regime receives from abroad. But in addition to this, voices need to be raised, especially by the Left, condemning Lukashenko and his mission to curb the basic freedoms of his country’s inhabitants.

Recently I wrote:

An anti-Semite by the name of Sheikh Ibraheem Zakzaky will be addressing an otherwise very respectable Mosque tonight in my local area of Kilburn.

He is the head of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN), the website of which has an article clearly demonstrating the extent to which he views Jews as plotters. An article on that website details a recent seminar given by a deeply dubious character Sheikh Yusuf Ali who talks about the Zionist plot against Muslims; then clearly details Zakzaky noting “the Jewish plot against Islam is manifested in Iraq as they sent Bush to capture Iraq for them”. There is of course the obligatory reference to the “protocols”.

According to his biography on the official website of the IMN:

The goal of the Islamic movement is to enlighten the Muslims as to their duties as individuals and as a community. The movement owns more than three hundred primary/secondary schools located in different places mainly in the northern part of the country. They are known by the name of Fudiyyah Schools. This is in addition to many Islamic centers and other institutions. The movement also owns the Nigeria’s most widely circulated newspaper, Al Mizan, in the Hausa language.

It also details Zakzaky’s arrests, which the site claims were “for his ideas”.

The Jerusalem Post – one of the few publications with details of Zakzaky’s visit – mentions details of the host of the conference, the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC). They say:

The IHRC is a Hezbollah and Islamic Republic supporting organization. At an anti-Israel rally in Hyde Park during the Second Lebanon War, its chair Massoud Shadjareh wore a Hezbollah flag as did research director Reza Kazim, who was seen chanting phrases like “We are all Hezbollah” and “Bomb, bomb Tel Aviv.” At a pro- Israel rally in London’s Trafalgar Square in 2008, Kazim was ejected by the police for filming within the roped off area.

According to an article written by the Middle East Strategic Information written in 2009:

• Zakzaky’s IMN is growing popular among impoverished Nigerian Muslims
• He believes Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden do not exist, acts of terrorism in the west are organised by western intelligence services, and that Tony Blair was behind the 7/7 bombings
• He claims Nigeria’s secularist leaders perform ritual sacrifices removing unborn babies from their Mother’s wombs by ripping them out
• He believes Jews are “”dastardly infidels” and draws inspiration from Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and the deceased Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin

He has been and gone now, but came almost unnoticed.

I hate to come across all Eustonite or “decent” but if Geert Wilders or Le Pen or someone dreadful like that came to our town, we’d be all over them like a rash, but with figures such as Zakzaky – who is not small beer by the way, he is the head of Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN) – we give it a miss.

Some may say that Zakzaky has never committed terror himself, which is why it is not important, but this does not disprove his threat. Some may say, in his words, he does not cause terror. This is questionable, but I’m careful not to make claims I cannot substantiate. During the conference season, the Quilliam Foundation held an event on how non-violent extremism can be just as dangerous as violent extremism. Whether directly or indirectly, Zakzaky has sounded off to the tune of racial discrimination and religious violence, and this should not be sniffed at.

Some will perhaps accuse me, and have done before, of making straw man of whom to knock down. The point here is that I’m not accusing anyone of supporting Zakzaky – though there obviously are some who do - and I’m certainly not saying that in the absence of an anti-fascist picket of him, that I should therefore deduce the anti-fascists in fact support Islamic fascists. It is not true. But I have difficulty understanding why people like Zakzaky don’t wind them up to the point of protest, whereas smaller targets like David Irving, do.

Now let me quickly qualifiy this before I get myself into trouble. Of course Irving is bad news, and has dangerous ideas, but at least he is an army of one; him and maybe some idiots in the National Front or Combat 18. His words are largely ignored by the vast amount of thinking human beings, and are taken on board by a small group of twits that if they express their counterfactual opinions, land themselves in court. Zakzaky, on the other hand, is the head of a church, has many followers and is fiercely anti-Semitic – context, here, is all.

In my quest to get more airplay on Zakzaky, I wrote to three individuals/organisations that I thought could maybe help; Peter Tatchell, Hope not Hate and Unite Against Fascism.

I requested their help in numbers to picket the arrival of Zakzaky and ask questions of the mosque why they felt it responsible to invite someone with a evident history of anti-Semitism and crime.

I saw something on him at the Jerusalem Post and some bits on Harry’s Place blog here and here, as well as a cross-post on the Spittoon website, but when I read next to nothing about him in the mainstream press I wrote to the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Jewish Chronicle – as well as tweeting Martin Bright and Stephen Pollard – Hampstead and Highgate Express and the Kilburn Times.

The only response I got from any of these places was Peter Tatchell to tell me he was ill and had no campaign funds. Tatchell in his email recommended I contact the Board of Deputies of British Jews and contact local news sources – which I had done. It is a great credit to the man for at least writing back to me and taking my email seriously; there indeed is someone who will not allow sentimentalities affect his principles, and I can’t talk highly of him for doing so.

Tatchell’s first line said it all: “I share your anger about Mosques hosting extremist clerics and preachers. It is no better than having a right wing white racist speaking.”

There is no such thing as a “decent” left. There are leftwingers and rightwingers, with some mixing in the middle, and there are hypocrites and those who allow confused politics affect principles. I do not level this charge at anyone in particular, but in the fight against fascism in all its forms, we can’t just sit on our hands, we should be pulling our fingers out.

In the end I went down to the mosque by myself, and I was ineffective and nervous about getting on the wrong side of anyone. But were I backed up with the same level of energy certain organisations reserve for other far rightwingers, we could have told a number of people what we think about foul ideas infiltrating vulnerable communities.

I am happy to inform readers of TCF that this blog has a new fan, and I must say it did come as a surprise. His name is Bob Bailey, he is a fairly high-ranking member of the British National Party.

In fact he took a shine to me in particular – though I suspect he is confusing me with Dave, as he does refer to the blog as though it has only one author. He says of my “25 things…” meme that “It makes interesting reading and importantly for Nationalists it gives an insight into the mindset of some of our more thoughtful opposition.”

Oh it made me proud to learn I was an example of the BNP’s thoughtful opposition – after I had demonstrated my early political life as an anti-fascist activist in London and the South East, I have of course crossed Mr Bailey’s path.

You can take a look yourself here: [http://www.londonpatriot.org/2010/09/21/though-cowards-flinch-analysis-of-a-marxisttrotlabour-member/] – remember no hyperlinks, a link would make me feel all dirty.

For anyone who follows the movements of the BNP in London and the South East will almost certainly have heard his name.

Some of the stories that have made the news are well worth repeating here.

The famous one was Bailey’s involvement in a fight with some youths, while canvassing in romford. This made national news, the video of which is below.

Bailey is married to a German diplomat Martina Borgfeldt (who is pictured here, and is listed as Mrs Martina Borgfeldt Assistant Attaché here). It is reported that he receives immunity “as the family member of an envoy, though this is limited by the fact that he remains a British citizen” and that though he “gives his main home as an address in Barking and Dagenham, [he] lives in embassy-funded accommodation in west London with his wife and two children.

Him and his party are reported to have used Margaret Hodge’s maiden name, Oppenheimer, on the doorstep during the election campaign in May this year, though Bailey denied this to a journalist. But, perhaps worse, Bailey on the same website as the one he talks about me on, he referred to Hodge as “Margaret (the Egyptian) Hodge”.

[http://www.londonpatriot.org/2010/03/03/independent-group-formed-to-contest-elections-in-barking-dagenham/]

This at worst is anti-Semitic, since it is well known that Hodge’s parents were refugees from Nazi-occupied Austria. At best – and it is a loose use of the word best – it is making Hodge out to be a no good foreigner, trying to take BNP memebers’ jobs in East London. Indeed, Bailey calls Hodge a foreigner in the article pictured above.

It does seem rather hypocritical to play on the maiden name of Hodge, and use this to try and prove that “Labour is a party of foreigners, bought and paid for by foreigners, to rule over the British people” as Bailey does. Particularly when his wife’s name is Martina Borgfeldt. If they really had a good case, why appeal to such cheap politics.

Another story you might remember is Bob blaming a conspiracy against “the indigenous people of this country” after he was banned from driving for 18 months.

He is quoted as saying: “Well, I spent 14 years in the Marines and spent a good part of this working with the security forces and I know how the system operates.” Obviously not well enough to know one has to keep schtum with such information, otherwise all us other donuts find out don’t we.

Perhaps you remember Bailey’s tirade against non-white Christians? This is London reported:

Bob Bailey, 44, took an “antagonistic and offensive” tone when a black pastor applied for planning permission to convert Barking offices into a church.

A meeting in Barking town hall was in uproar when Mr Bailey said: “We don’t want any more Nigerian churches in the borough.” The public gallery was packed with members of the Redeemed Christian Church of God.

He said he had visited the premises and told the planning committee meeting last July: “These people eat off the ground.” He added: “We don’t want the amount of black children.” A rival councillor called him a “racist pig”.

Or maybe you heard about Bailey confusing the BNP with B&B?

the BNP’s top man in London, [called] the BBC London newsdesk on Monday about a story he insisted the programme was running about alleged homophobia. It concerned, he said, two gay people apparently thrown out of the party. “We know you’re running it, and we want a right to reply,” he told a bemused researcher. He would not be denied. And so she checked with her colleagues, each of them more puzzled than the next, until the answer became apparent. BBC London was indeed doing a story about alleged homophobia, she explained to him, but in a B&B, not the BNP. “Oh! We made a mistake. We’re not paranoid or anything,” said Bailey. Which, in its own way, says it all.

If not, you may have heard that Bailey once said ‘white British people will be extinguished like the American Indians’ within four decades. Interesting that he focuses on the American Indians. Now that he is no longer London’s regional organiser for his party, he has time to run that campaign against the American Friends of the BNP, who are all white, and surely anti-ethno-nationalists, right?