Nick Griffin answers UKIP's questions

I just received this in my email:

Subject: David Noakes of UKIP asks questions about the BNP & Nick Griffin answers

This exchange brokered via a go between makes for interesting reading. Well worth a few moments of your time.

For by reading this you might begin to realise that what the media and Westminster politicians have been telling you is far from being the truth.

David Noakes wrote:

If the BNP would:

1. Denounce the Nazi's, the EU, and the Soviet Union as one and
the same threat,
2. Assure us that the legacy controlled by
John Tyndall and left by Lady Birchwood, who was a Nazi and
therefore pro-EU, has been spent or is too small to have
influence,
3. Confirm that no party funding comes from the EU,
Nazi sympathisers or other dubious organisations,
4. Show that the controlling party posts have been filled by fair elections
of the membership,
5. Confirm that the BNP stands for true
democracy, the English and British people, with particular
concern for the poor and disadvantaged,

Then I would view the BNP as electable.

David Noakes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To which the Chairman of the BNP responded:

1) We have often denounced Nazism, Communism and the EU, though
never, I admit, in the same breath. But Mr. Noakes should ponder
on the fact that our own pronouncements don't necessarily count
for much, since even if we did as he recommends (and we may well)
the media and our opponents would ensure that our stance received
no publicity;

2) I think this is actually a reference to Lady Jane Birdwood, who
never left any money to Tyndall, and was anti-EU for all that she
was rabidly anti-semitic. The only relatively big money Tyndall
had was from a
supporter in the north east of England, and not one penny ever
came to the BNP from the moment he lost the leadership election.
By dying intestate
Tyndall deliberately left it to his family. So there never was any
'Nazi gold' to influence the BNP, and most certainly not since I
ook over in 1999;

3) We have never received, do not receive and would not accept
funding from the EU - except for whatever would be due to MEPs
post-2009 (a large proportion of which will be channelled to party
funds);

4) I was elected leader by a large majority of the party
membership voting in a free, fair, secret ballot of all paid up
members, in which nearly 90% of them participated. It only takes a
member of five years or more to declare his or her candidacy, and
for that person to be supported by five
other paid up members, to trigger an automatic leadership
election. So despite the fact that all other positions are filled
by nominated by the elected leader, I would submit that our system
is more genuine
democratic and open than that of any other party. We are,
furthermore, in the process of passing policy-making and
endorsement over to a system where such things would be decided by
conference vote by Voting Members (a status automatically open to
all ordinary members on display of simple
and unbiased evidence of genuine commitment);

5. Confirmed - see our manifesto and statement of principles. I am
pleased to see Mr. Noakes' concern for the poor and disadvantaged,
because the common image of UKIPers tends to be somewhat
reactionary and pro-globalist,
and hence implicitly in favour of the exploitation or at best
neglect of this section of our nation.

As for electability, we have far more elected first-past-the-post
councillors than UKIP, so are clearly already electable. And even
UKIP's MEPs are there in part because the 'threat' of a BNP
breakthrough pushed Labour, Tory and BBC spin-masters into 'talking up' UKIP in order
to act as an unwitting safety valve