I have just read Michael Barnbrook's statement, in which he is urging BNP members with nominating rights to sign the nomination papers for Eddy Butler, regardless of whether they support him or not. 

By doing so, Michael believes that you are showing that you support the right for people to stand in a leadership challenge.

Now I am not too sure about that kind of logic.  It is obvious to all, that all members have a right to stand in a leadership challenge but surely that does not mean that those who oppose a possible challenger should be required to sign their nomination papers in order to show they support that right.

A challenger either does or does not have the support of enough members with voting rights to stand.  If Michael is saying that everybody should sign the nomination papers of candidates then what is the point of having nomination papers in the first place? 

Now before I give my thoughts on Michael's statement.  First a little bit about Michael Barnbrook BNP.  Michael is known to all in the BNP as the Sleazebuster, after his phenomenal work in bringing corrupt politicians to justice.  Of course the Establishment Press were not going to report the fact that it was a BNP activist who was bringing down all the corrupt politicians and it was down to sites like this and the BNP site to let the world know just what part Michael had played in all this.

Although Michael has only been a BNP member for a few short years he has worked incredibly hard for our cause and has stood in five elections whilst still finding time to bring down the former Speaker of the House of Commons, Michael Martin and I for one am grateful for that.

I first wrote about Michael on the 19th of May of 2009 when I published a potted biography of him and also a letter that he sent me in regards to a request asking him for some of the other names of people he had brought to justice. 

I then wrote about Michael again in January of this year when it was revealed that Michael had been responsible for bringing another corrupt politician to justice.

And then the last time I wrote about Michael was when I published some correspondence that had come into my possession detailing a list of people Michael had been in touch with the Metropolitan Police over and the police response.

All the above was published highlighting the good work that Michael was doing and continues to do for the British People and whose actions reflected favourably on the British National Party of which he is a member.

So it is fairly clear from the above that this site is a big fan of Michael and supports him in the work he does in trying to get the truth about the corruption of those in Parliament out to the people and I hope that he continues with this good work.

Now about Michael's statement.  Well I have already said that I believe his logic is flawed with regards to signing the nomination papers but there are also some serious issues raised in his statement that need answering.

In the statement in which Michael starts of by confessing his respect and admiration for the courage of the chairman of the BNP, Nick Griffin MEP, Michael goes on to say that comments made (some on this site) that Butler had sabotaged the BNP election claim were false in his opinion were "absolute rubbish".

Now the key words here are in his "opinion".  In my "opinion", that is supported by articles like this, I believe that Butler did sabotage the BNP general election campaign, just as he sabotaged the Red, White and Blue and closed down the BNP Forum(Butler admits to this).  So there are two opinions that are diametrically opposed.  One of us is wrong and one of us is right. You must decide for yourselves.

Now I also find the piece in the statement in which Michael complains he did not receive enough recognition from the party for his work or that in his opinion, the BNP did not mention his achievements enough and that he considered himself to be of "no apparent importance" a bit strange. Do I detect a bit of an ego trip here? 

Now this site knows how much Michael values self promotion but Michael also knows that despite the BNP site publishing his name and his achievements on many occasions, that the Establishment media would never pick up the stories as they would result in large numbers of extra supporters and voters for the BNP.  It is not the BNP's fault that the BBC did not blast the name Michael Barnbrook around the world and give him the publicity he wished for.  Of course I am unable to provide the links to the articles about Michael on the BNP site, as ironically, another of Eddy Butlers supporters, Simon Bennett destroyed them.

Michael is also angry that people are contacting him about the leadership challenge asking him not to endorse Butler.  Well a lot of people are even more angrier at the fact that Butler allowed a probably stolen email list to send out his begging letter for nominations. 

Now the other thing that worries me - and this is disturbing in a former police officer - is the way that he accepts "rumours" as facts, when he says that members are being refused access to meetings and being intimidated and says this is giving him cause for concern. As Michael says himself, they are just "rumours".  Where are the facts?

No Michael you are wrong on this one.  I also find it strange that you can find time to condemn the leadership of the party, whilst refusing to condemn the smear sites attacking it, people like Bennett  who has endangered the lives of my family as well as betraying the party and people like Butler for his actions during the general election and his shameful behaviour in Brussels.  I must confess that your shining armour is now looking a little tarnished to me and I am truly sorry about that.  Please put the shine back and condemn those sites and the individuals I have named.