Ukip-vs-EUkip

We aim to inform YOU & provide an archive re: Ukip to TRY to make it fit for purpose

Archive for May 29th, 2009

#505* – FARAGE IN BETRAYAL MODE? JUST A TIP!

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 29/05/2009


#505* – FARAGE IN BETRAYAL MODE? JUST A TIP!

Hi,

I rarely get involved in tittle tattle but I hear much of the significance of TWITTER – though as I have never believed myself to be at anyone’s beck and call and have never used a mobile phone – I am the last to judge its significance.

However having read many of the comments mailed to me on ‘e’Mail that have been lifted off of Twitter – I find it so aptly named as clearly it is for Twits.

The obscenity of much of the language and the childish idiocy of what passes for messages tells me all I need to know to confirm the wisdom of avoidance. Then I hear people discussing which Twits are well known as large users and I realise I am well off without it.

Who would want a conversation in bad shorthand and childish abreviations with Stephen Fry, Jonathan Ross or their ilk – who would want the flow of foul language from annabell Fuller or the filth of Gawain Towler?

No all in all one is so much better off without it and I understand there are a mere 6,000,000 of these clearly challenged individuals Twit enough to Twitter world wide!

That said I get quite a lot of link ins like the one below.

I make no claim as to its veracity as I would not know a pearl of wisdom from dog poo on Twitter.

I leave it to my readers to draw their own conclusion from the ‘e’Mail sent me on which I have removed the sender.

Greg

Here is a lead for you, which supports your labeling UKIP’s leaders as EUKIP.

Please take as your article – not mine!

You are doing a great job in difficult circumstances. I am just disgusted with Farage.

Q: Why did Farage help a Europhile Lib Dem MP Sandra Gidley with information on an MEPs expenses?

The party of the MEP are not mentioned in the conversations below but what on earth is he up to collaborating with the most europhile party at Westminster?

quote:

Chris Hatch to Sandra Gidley

“@SandraGidley Nigel Farage almost strikes me as the sort of person that would make you want a shower after a meeting with him #QT”

http://tinyurl.com/n5k7bz

in reply Sandra Gidley stated

“@ChrisHatch He’s nicer in real life – very helpful in telling me about abuse of a certain MEPs expenses!”

http://tinyurl.com/oejxde

Make of it what you will.

Posted in EUkip; UKIP; Farage; Sandra Gidley; Chris Hatch; Abuse; | Leave a Comment »

#504* – A VOTE for EUkip IS A WASTED VOTE

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 29/05/2009


#504* – A VOTE for EUkip IS A WASTED VOTE

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership
& NEC is what gives the remaining 10%
a bad name!

A VOTE for EUkip OR TheBNP IS A BETRAYAL OF BRITAIN – A WASTED VOTE!

Hi,

so The Telegraph has spotted the tip of an iceberg rather late in the day – don’t forget the lookout on The Titanic spotted the Iceberg but rather too late.

Better some truth published by The Telegraph than none at all as they have been obsessed with circulation as they dribbled out the penny ante fiddles at Westminster when if they had really had some good investigative Journalists they would have done the investigation in The EU where are laws are made and where the laws handed down by The NWO Global Governance are finessed, bodies like U.N.E.C.E., W.H.O., U.N.E.S.C.O., etc.

The Telegraph has the resources to tell people the truth but for 21 days they have failed in their duty in the run up to the election of our Government on the 4th. June – they have failed whilst they tittle tattle. Now all of a sudden they realise the damage they have done with their irresponsible failure to tell the truth and they realise their greedy grub for circulation has pushed the electorate into the arms of extremists.

Whether the extreme Racism and anti Judaism of The BNP
or
The vile self serving lurch backwards, away from Democracy, to Authoritarian, Centralised Self Serving Wingless Bullies in Blazers – where no gutter is too vile, if it leads to self enrichment without principle – The EUkip.
or
The New Cult Religion of Fear with the domineering extremists of the quasi Communist Green Party where to fly in a plane is as much a crime as to knife a stranger in the street!!! Mad or what!

That these dishonest and unpleasant people are in the ascendancy is not from their efforts but from the irresponsible self serving muck raking of The Telegraph as they stir the **** in the little backwater of Westminster, without explaining THESE ARE ALLOWANCES – Well actually PAY RISES because Politicians of ALL Parties have colluded in the scam – A scam that merely shows OUR servants were too gutless to tell us they had granted themselves a pay rise in 1971 and TOOK it in ALLOWANCES.

The Telegraph claims a vote for EUkip is a wasted vote – I do not agree a vote for EUkip or The BNP is to vote for Evil – a mallicious act of anti Patriotism, a betrayal of all Britain stood for.

Why a vote for Ukip is a wasted vote
Telegraph View:
The voters are in a mood to punish MPs from all the main parties

Telegraph View

Last Updated:
8:35PM BST 29 May 2009

On Thursday, the British public goes to the polls. One thing is for sure: voters are in a mood to punish MPs from all the main parties for their venality, arrogance and, in some cases, dishonesty. Inconveniently, however, these are not Westminster elections. The candidates are standing for the European Parliament or local councils. Their expense claims are not yet a major issue and, in theory, the scandals uncovered by this newspaper have only limited bearing on the elections.

But let us be realistic. The European Union and local government will not be uppermost in many people’s minds as they reach for the pencil in the polling booth. For staring out at them will be the names of the main political parties to which greedy MPs belong. After weeks of eye-popping revelations about a system of expenses which was disgracefully lax, even when it was not being abused, how can we expect voters not to react in some way?

But we do not live in normal times. The executive and legislature of the United Kingdom are effectively paralysed by revelations of shabby behaviour, on a scale that has shocked all but the most diehard cynics. The European and local elections offer an opportunity for a protest vote, a vote that expresses disgust at the moral collapse of an entire political class. But there is only one meaningful protest that the electorate can register at the polls, and that is one that helps force the Government to call a general election in the near future. And that excludes voting Ukip.

The recent history of Ukip raises serious questions about its competence, to put it mildly. The fiasco of Robert Kilroy-Silk’s involvement with the party was just one of many bouts of vicious infighting. It has sought to make capital out of the expenses scandal, but is itself no stranger to financial controversy. One of its MEPs, Ashley Mote, was expelled from the party and later jailed for benefit fraud. (He hopes to appeal the verdict.) Another MEP, Tom Wise, is facing prosecution for alleged false accounting and money laundering relating to his EU expenses. He denies the charges. Meanwhile, one of its most distinguished former supporters, the economist Tim Congdon, has left Ukip, claiming that it has been “captured by the European institutions” and neglects its British Eurosceptic supporters. More worryingly, as this newspaper reported last weekend, it has “become a haven for elements of the far Right”. In David Cameron’s phrase, it attracts “fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists”.

If a vote for Ukip is extremely foolish, a vote for the BNP is something much worse. We argued the other day that this clownish outfit is not as dangerous as it would like us to think; nor should its political programme be taken very seriously, as it is crude and self-contradictory. Yet broadcasters, including the BBC, are suddenly giving BNP spokesmen more airtime than can be justified by the party’s current low levels of support. It would be disastrous if the media’s disproportionate focus on this intolerant, fascist sect, riven by ludicrous factional disputes, actually persuaded large numbers of voters that it was a valid alternative to the main parties on June 4.

The point to stress is not that the BNP is likely to become a significant force in British politics, but that voting for it is wrong. As Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali argues on these pages today, the party’s message is anti-Christian. Indeed, it is incompatible with any philosophy based on respect for human dignity. The received wisdom is that working-class former Labour voters will be especially susceptible to the BNP. If that is true, then they should think again. The BNP is not a neo-Nazi party, but it has historic links with Nazi sympathisers. White working-class voters should remember that their grandparents fought against, and some were killed by, a Nazi regime that, like the BNP, demonised immigrants. A vote for the racist far-Right next Thursday will dishonour their memory.

This week’s contests are among the most complex in living memory, in that polls for assemblies outside Westminster are likely to serve as the vehicle for a public disgust at Westminster politicians that cuts across party boundaries. They are no substitute for what the country desperately needs, which is the opportunity to elect a new national parliament. With every passing day, the prospect of a long delay becomes more outrageous, as MPs announce their intention to “stand down” at the general election, enabling them to collect fat pay-offs not available if they were to resign their seats immediately. Until then, some of these politicians are so discredited that their constituents are effectively left without representation at Westminster.

We have called before, and will keep on calling, for a general election this year. Meanwhile, we must make the best use of those elections we do have.

To view the original article CLICK HERE

TO LEAVE THE EU

What is the exit and survival plan for these United Kingdoms to maximise on the many benefits of leaving The EU. It is the DUTY of our Politicians and Snivil Cervants to ensure the continuity, liberty and right to self determination of our peoples they have a DUTY to protect against crime and secure both our food and our border.
NONE of these DUTIES has a single British politician upheld for 40 years. They have drawn their incomes fraudulently and dishonesty.

Politicians are failing to tell the truth, but so are almost all wanabe Politicians, the MSM and Snivil Cervants.

The fact is that even if EVERY British MEP wanted change in The EU it would achieve NOTHING.
Every single British Politician, of EVERY Party, elected since before we joined the EUropean Common Market, has promised to change The EU’s CAP – In 40 Years they have achieved absolutely NOTHING!

To try to put a value on OUR Freedom is as futile as floccipaucinihilipilification and as odious as the metissage of our societies, as we rummage in the ashes of our ancestors dreams, sacrifices and achievements, the flotsam of our hopes and the jetsam of our lives, consider the Country and Anglosphere which we leave our children and the future, with shame!

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

PLEASE POST THIS TAG AS FOLLOWS:ON YOUR eMAILS & BLOGS, FORUM POSTINGS & MAILINGS – GET THE MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE IT IS OUR BEST HOPE AS WHOEVER IS APPOINTED WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE AS PROVED!

I SUGGEST – since there is clearly no political party of repute, advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign, democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country. Deny the self seeking & meaningless wanabe MEPs the Mythical Mandate for which they clamour. Diktat is imposed from The EU but Law should be made at Westminster, for our Country & our Peoples.

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:

LEAVE THE EU

Posted in EUkip; UKIP; Betrayal; | Leave a Comment »

#503* – John PETLEY on EUkip’s DEMISE

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 29/05/2009


#503* – John PETLEY on EUkip’s DEMISE

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership
& NEC is what gives the remaining 10%
a bad name!

John PETLEY ex-EUkip INSIDER on EUkip’s DEMISE!

The failure of UKIP:
By: John Petley EUkip Researcher
(all 7 parts)

This essay by John Petley was first delivered at Swindon, where it was recorded – although I had access to the recording I never got around to transcribing it once listened to.

At the time John Petley promised me a hard copy by post but ended up reneging on his promise, sadly, or more people would have started learning the truth sooner. Unfortunately it seems to some extent Petley seems almost to have wanted to suppress the truth.

Eventually John sent a hard copy to John West and about 3 weeks ago after confirmation that it was in the public domain (albeit very limited) John West forwarded a copy to me. I decided to hold back on publishing it until I had given a copy to Junius and we discussed the idea that first Junius would post it on little Anthony Butcher’s Forum – as it carries so little material above the gutter comments of the liars and rascals desparately peddling EUkip as something other than a total betrayal of its members.

I have read much that is on the Forum and astonishingly I can not remember a single sensible report of an actual achievement of EUkip of any value – not a single solitary effort to show how Britain could leave The EU, with absolutely no adult thought of what is their exit and survival strategy for Britain – just endless vile attacks on those who do not worship the genius of EUkip.

Anyway now that Junius has put all 7 parts of John Petley’s Essay on the Forum I have posted on my blog and Junius aims to post it on the Junius blog later on.

I was amused to see that Croucher with the aid it seems of Searchlight and open access to EUkip’s servers claims that Piers Merchant is Junius – today some twit is convinced it is Niall Warry, these can be added to it being me, David Bannerman, Gary Cartwright, someone working for Trevor Colman, John Petley, Bruce Lawson, Tom Wise, an OLAF Official, Adrian Meldrew, 10 Downing Street, Cameron’s Office, The EU, MI5, Gerard Batten (someone in his office), even John West has been accused by the odious Peter Cole in an attempt to smear him! – to name but a few!

A measure of the stupidity of EUkip’s leadership and supporters is that they believe Croucher, lies, spin and serial dishonesty not withstanding – So it must be Piers Merchant and he has conned everyone into believing that Junius’ source has dried up – Yeah Really! Denny and the foolish folk on The Forum haven’t had the smarts to look at their diaries have they! There is absolutely no doubt that my sources have changed since election fever broke out – don’t forget that there is less gossip and leaks from the bars of Brussels at the moment.

However if one story comes right there will be a feature article on Bloom, if another comes right there is planned a double page spread in a red top. Then of course there is ongoing publicity with Brian Flynn and George Pascoe Watson and Croucher has done immense damage to EUkip by re-emerging as it has damaged what credibility Clive Page had managed to build with Journalists and I know of two positive stories that were destroyed by Croucher’s re-emergence.

I’d like to thank all who are disgusted at the corruption of EUkip and the lies of Farage and his claque that have so damaged EUroRealism, that they have supplied either myself directly or unwittingly supplied Junius with material that we have been able to bring to public attention.

You will all, assuming you are ethical and have fundamental morality, be disgusted at the thought that the filth that EUkip has become may actually be rewarded for having destroyed the aims and ideals of UKIP for their own greed and self agrandisement.

Again I repeat that @ of some £15,000,000 trousered by EUkip MEPs they have brought less information and oposition to the vile EU to the attention of the British public than has a 30p. copy of The Sun!

An analysis of UKIP’s failures by John Petley, ex-UKIP researcher

What has gone wrong? A number of things, and binding many of them together is a common thread – the failings of the current party leader, Nigel Farage.

The Farage problem – a personal perspective on a flawed personality

Many past and present UKIPpers started off initially impressed with Nigel Farage. My personal route from awe to disgust of the man is in a sense unique, but in other ways typical of what so many past and present UKIPpers have gone through. The first UKIP speaker I heard was Jeffrey Titford, at a Democracy Movement meeting in St. Leonards, East Sussex. He seemed to be talking sense, and I was reasonably impressed.

On mentioning this to members of the local branch, the response from I received was, “Wait until you’ve heard Nigel Farage.”

I was able to hear him a few months later in nearby Bexhill, and found his direct, hard-hitting style quite exciting and refreshing – a contrast from most politicians in the three established parties. When criticism of Roger Knapman began to surface following the triumphs in the 2004 European Parliamentary elections, I picked up the feeling that many members at the time wanted to replace him not with Kilroy but with Nigel, feeling that a dynamic young leader would restore the momentum that we seemed to be losing.

I would never have supported the removal of Roger. I felt that he was underestimated by the membership. (and having subsequently got to know him through working in Brussels, I believe this assessment was correct.) However, looking to when his term of office was to end, I would then have supported Nigel for leader. He seemed the rising star – the obvious heir apparent.

Amidst all the adulation, the first criticism I first heard of Nigel was at a UKIP SE activists’ meeting from a member of a branch from Kent, who said he had a big ego. Until this point, the only negative thing I had heard about him was that he had not denied visiting a brothel in (I think) Athens. My contact with him had been quite limited before starting in Brussels. He had struck me as “rather a lad” who liked his booze and fags, but I knew that I should not expect a politician necessarily to adhere to my Christian standards. I was looking forward to getting to know him better when I started my new job in Brussels, and felt rather in awe of him.

Within a couple of months, my view of him had begun to change. There were several reason for this.

Firstly, when he came to be the guest speaker at the annual dinner of my local UKIP Branch, Bexhill and Battle, his speech was disappointing. It was all about himself, and was a regurgitation of anecdotes I had heard before.

Secondly, there were further rumours of his sexual impropriety, including that he was having an affair with Annabelle Fuller, one of my colleagues in Brussels at the time, who subsequently achieved such notoriety in the UKIP press office. More serious was the fact that cronyism rather than competence seemed to be what counted. Brussels was very much Nigel’s empire, as he had been there as an MEP since 1999, was head of the UKIP delegation and co-president of the Ind Dem group.

He had considerable say in who joined the staff, and what their roles were to be. The then head of research, Adrian Muldrew, was complaining repeatedly about the low quality of work produced by two of the staff – one being Annabelle Fuller and the other Steve Reed, his current office assistant of whom more anon.

David Lott, Chief of Staff and very much Nigel’s man, refused to take any action, and actually turned against Adrian. This seemed very odd. as I had been taken on ostensibly as part of a move to “professionalise” the party.

At this time, I first heard about the questions being asked about the South East region accounts. Another colleague of mine told me that he would never give any money to a general UKIP appeal because he had no confidence where the money would end up.

Although shocked by all this, I took the Biblical attitude of not wanting to believe an accusation unless there were two or three witnesses, I didn’t have to wait long for further evidence. A chance conversation with UKIP’s previous Head of Staff (i.e. before David Lott), confirmed the essence of what I had been hearing, and added that Nigel had been a factor in every major UKIP bust-up since the departure of Alan Sked.

The failure of UKIP Part 2

By the summer recess of 2006, a mere seven months since coming out to Brussels, I was now firmly of the opinion that Nigel Farage was a liability to the party. I had met some of the other notorious Farage cronies like John Moran, and was not impressed. I also heard from a colleague about a conversation between Farage and Gerard Batten shortly before the Bromley by-election.

It transpired that Farage had discussed a deal whereby if the Tories selected the Eurosceptic but not withdrawalist MEP Syed Kamall as their candidate, UKIP would not put up a candidate. On hearing of this, Gerard was incensed and said, “If you don’t stand, I will.” As it happened, the Tories chose Bob Neill, and with Gerard being the ultra-loyalist that he is, he chose not to leak this out. Nigel then announced at a big UKIP meeting the following weekend about how excited he was at being able to contest another by-election. Most people cheered. I was livid.

I did not vote for him as party leader, but for a while it seemed that I would have to swallow my misgivings, as in the first few months of the Farage leadership, the party acquired two Lords, then the economist Tim Congdon and several other significant Eurosceptics. A year later, I was to discover that this new sense of hope in the party was not matched by the opinion polls. UKIP slumped to below 1%, and the start of the slump coincided with Farage’s election as leader.

I had heard of Farage’s habitual lying, but had first hand evidence of it when NEC member David Abbott’s two inadvertant $100 donations to a BNP support group in America was blown up in the national media in March 2007 simply because of David’s criticism of Nigel’s leadership. Before standing for the NEC, David came quite clean about this donation, which he had made before realising who the organisation represented.

He did not want to stand for office if it would compromise him. Being so insignificant a sum, a one-off and inadvertent, Nigel and others said it was not a problem. However, when David began to start opposing Nigel on the NEC, Nigel deliberately leaked this out to he press and made it out that David had been seriously involved with the BNP. When I challenged Nigel, saying that either he or Mark Croucher were ill-advised to have done this, his reply was “Neither I nor Croucher contacted the Press.”

The Press had also spoken to a person I know (whose identity I should keep confidential) who has held senior office in the party about the David Abbott business, and this person told me that when the reporter concerned rang up, he said, “I’ve just been speaking to Mark Croucher.”

Perhaps I should add that this exchange occurred when Nigel summoned me into his office and questioned me about my friendship with Adrian Muldrew. Adrian was by now absolutely persona non grata with Nigel, but a few months earlier, Adrian had kindly offered me a home for a couple of weeks when there had been a temporary delay in moving into new accommodation in Brussels. I had left Adrian’s house quite a while before my interview with Nigel, but what business was it of his anyway?

Being summoned into Nigel’s office was by now an ordeal which I dreaded. I had to summon up my best acting skills and always stared him straight in the eye. He often shuffled his legs up and down under the table – a sure sign that he wasn’t comfortable either. Some times, it was nothing to worry about, and he was usually pleased with he research I did for him.

However, once he came into my office and ranted at me because I had contacted Mike Nattrass (whose assistant I was for a while) about a dubious amendment to a piece of Parliamentary legislation put forward at Committee stage by Jens-Peter Bonde, Ind Dem Co-president, in the name of the group.

Adrian had spotted this and said that UKIP MEP’s couldn’t support it, as it was giving more power to the EU (I can’t remember the exact details beyond this) I thought I had better tell Mike, and Mike must have contacted Nigel, who then stormed in and said, “But we always vote against this in Plenary.” I guess Nigel knew I wasn’t happy with UKIP MEP’s being in Ind Dem.

The failure of UKIP Part 3

It was not just over Ind Dem that I disagreed with Nigel’s policy. He spoke at Hastings in November 2005 and said something on the lines of, “Well, UKIP isn’t getting much exposure because the EU isn’t in the news much now, but just wait – it’ll be back on the agenda.”

He was proved right with a vengeance when the failed Constitution metamorphosised into the Lisbon Treaty, but he singularly missed the opportunity to put UKIP at the head of the campaign to oppose it. It was always going to be a tough battle to stop the treaty, but it would have put the party back in the consciousness of the electorate. Instead, it was left to an ordinary Party member to launch the “Parish Polls” initiative.

On the day of the mass lobby of the House of Commons, Farage was in Brussels. This missed opportunity, for which he must take the blame, must represent UKIP’s biggest political mistake in its entire history.

I had the task for the last year of answering difficult e-mails sent to Head Office in Newton Abbot. I always took the party line, even if I was personally uncomfortable with it, such as over Nigel’s defiance of the Parliament’s smoking ban and support for pro-smoking groups.

Only once, when I was forwarded a query about Derek Clark signing Ind Dem’s “Bucharest declaration” on UKIP’s behalf with its support for subsidiarity and CAP reform did I deviate from this rule, and simply passed it to Ind Dem enthusiast Gawain Towler to answer. I felt this e-mail was a poisoned chalice. If I took the party line, not only would it sit uneasily with my conscience, but it could be held against me if at a later date (as I hoped) UKIP would renounce Ind Dem.

However, if I had said what I felt – that I agreed with the e-mail, that the signing was a mistake and that UKIP’s MEP’s should not be in Ind Dem – Nigel would have gone ballistic if he had found out. Fortunately, Gawain never followed up my reasons for passing this e-mail on, so I lived to fight another day.

Nonetheless, By the summer of 2007, I felt that I was living on borrowed time. In many ways, I am amazed I lasted so long. I ensured that no-one was around when I rang any known opponents of Farage in the UK, and he never knew just who I knew. I always kept my office door closed, and fortunately, the enthusiasm of Farage and his cronies to go off most evenings drinking in O’Farrell’s (the Irish pub very near to the Parliament building) meant I had some privacy.

By this time, staff and MEP’s were split down the middle. Farage supporters, notably Gawain and the odious Aurelie Laloux (Jeffrey Titford’s assistant) held the senior positions among the staff. When Aurelie went off for maternity leave, things improved somewhat, but her return signalled the start of three awful months.

The atmosphere in the office from February 2008 to my departure in April gave me an inkling of what it must have been like to live in the Soviet Union – You were always watching your back and every pair of footsteps outside the office door made you feel uneasy. So bizarre that fellow-withdrawalists should be the cause of such a poisonous atmosphere. I have to say that in over two years working in Brussels, I had no animosity from the “nasty” EU. UKIP staff were treated fairly.

My dismissal shows the utterly devious nature of Farage. He was not directly involved, but his fingerprints are all over it. It all began on Monday 7th April after the “Stop the Treaty” conference in Bristol which I went to. When I got back to Brussels, I tried to access my parliamentary e-mail account, but was unable to do so.

I entered the password about 10 times, but was repeatedly blocked. I know that I did not type in my password incorrectly. Having worked in IT before going into research, I knew hacking when I saw it. The hacker had, fortunately, failed to guess my password, but had locked me out. I spoke to Oumar Dombouya, the man delegated to manage IT affairs for Ind Dem. He re-set my password and set a monitoring facility on my account, as Adrian had had a similar problem, and suspected hacking.

On Thursday afternoon (10th April), Graham Booth came into my office with a print-out of the names, subjects and dates of the e-mails I had sent in recent weeks. He asked me to print out the contents of four of these. After he had left the office, I looked at a couple of these e-mails, and as I was doing so, the access to my e-mail account suddenly went down. When I eventually was able to bring up the initial screen and try to sign on, once again, I was locked out, just as I had been the previous Monday.

I subsequently discovered that it is within the rules to print out the list (although not the content) of the e-mails sent by EP staff without asking them. However, I did not know this at the time, and refused to take Booth ‘s word that this was the case or provide him with the content of these e-mails until I could establish the facts. In view of my suspicions about someone trying to tamper with my e-mails, I think this was quite reasonable.

However, his response to my refusal my saying that in his eyes, this amounted to a “lack of trust” in me, This was the catch-all phrase that can be used to dismiss staff if you don’t like them but can’t find any good reason for so doing. I had always got on fairly well with Graham until then, and I know Nigel set him up, because he expressed a very negative opinion of one person to whom these e-mails were sent (a branch chairman in the South East) and when I contacted this individual, he said that he had never had any dealings with Graham. Only Nigel could have singled out this e-mail.

Oumar was very helpful initially to my attempts to find out who had been hacking into my account. He traced it to a UK-registered machine (no surprise!) but could not go any further because of intimidation by members of the Ind Dem secretariat. He subsequently kept his distance from me, simply out of fear.

My dismissal was e-mailed to me on Thursday 24th April. This was a Strasbourg plenary, and I was teleworking at the time. Quite honestly, it was a relief not to have to go back to Brussels. It amazed me to hear that Graham Booth had been going round the South West telling people that I (along with Adrian Muldrew and Gary Cartwright) were MI5 spies! Meanwhile, Steve Harris, (UKIP’s SE regional organiser) again no doubt mouthing Nigel’s words, has been telling people in the South East that my dismissal was because I was hacking into other people’s e-mails!

The failure of UKIP Part 4

My desire to see Nigel removed as leader is not a case of sour grapes because he sacked me. He sacked me because I already held this opinion, and I am not very good at hiding my feelings. I remember having a conversation with Roger Knapman outside his office, and said something about, “the days when we had a decent leader.” At that moment, Nigel came up the corridor. He can’t fail to have heard what I said.

Only in one way has my opinion changed since my dismissal. I believed right up to early November that if Nigel could be removed as leader, UKIP would have a future. The November NEC meeting was a watershed.

It is clear firstly that removing Nigel Farage as leader is going to be very difficult.

Secondly, that even if it could be done, it would not be enough – his cabal have to go too, and as names like Zuckerman are unknown to many members, it would be hard to press the case against them. Farage’s dealings with me bear the marks of a tyrant.

He brings out the worst of those that get close to him – Graham Booth’s behaviour over my dismissal illustrates this perfectly. At the same time, he tries to destroy anyone who opposes him. The party is now in the grip of man who I can only describe as evil.

The poison emanating from him has so ruined the party that it is not a case of merely removing him as leader – his political career must be ended in June 2009. If the only way of doing this is to take UKIP down with him, so be it. The withdrawalist cause needs a more honourable spokesman and a better party to fight its cause.

Farage more than anyone else is responsible for giving UKIP such a poor image that it has become a bit of a joke. I now no longer have any pride at being a member, but rather embarrassment. My UKIP car sticker has been removed a long time ago now. As we move on to look at the other aspects of why UKIP has failed, his name will come up again and again. His personal failings, which I have described above, are coupled with exceedingly poor political judgement and a disastrous policy in Brussels.

Playing on innocence

Many of those who joined UKIP, myself included, were new to politics. We could see that being in the EU was not in Britain’s best interests, but did not necessarily combine this piece of wisdom with political discernment. I would guess I am not alone in admitting that at one point, I believed two things I now regard as erroneous – firstly that anything in print that says something bad about the EU must be correct, and secondly that anyone opposed to Britain’s membership of the EU must be a good chap. I will address the first of these mistakes later on. It is the second I want to concentrate on at this point.

Nigel’s shrewdness has enabled him to carve out his power base in the party. His youth and eloquence have made him a hero with many party members. Steve Harris once told a meeting at which I was present of a phone call were someone asked him, “When is that young man going to become Prime Minister?” I have no reason to doubt that Steve was telling the truth. It epitomises how Nigel has played on the innocence of many party members.

They have not had sufficient experience to spot when his leadership has been poor. He would not have dared depict the dressing up in chicken costumes of three members of staff in Strasbourg on the front of Independence unless he was sure that his adoring fans would think it was a wonderful gesture rather than the appalling schoolboy buffoonery that the rest of the world viewed it as.

He has been able to gain total control over UKIP’s media. “You don’t work for the party, you work for me,” he told one employee in the Press Office. That admirable quality of trust which is a feature of so many UKIP members has enabled him to turn the Independence into a very one-sided view of things. Our dear. loyal members are not aware of the control he has carved out for himself. He has marshalled party opinion behind him by equating opposition to himself with “attempts to destroy the party.”

From now on, sadly, this will be the case, and those of us who have come out publicly against him are likely to face all manner of vitriol not just from the Faragistas, but from well-meaning members who have been denied the chance to hear both sides of the argument. The suppression of dissent is not healthy in a political party. It leads to “yes men” ending up in senior positions – a sure recipe for disaster.

The failure of UKIP Part 5

The Brussels disaster.

One blogger recently mocked UKIP by saying how ridiculously inflated the role of an MEP had become in the party. Other parties don’t send out their first XI to Brussels, but being an MEP gives you almost god-like status among some sections of the membership of UKIP.

The big point of disagreement I would have with this statement is that UKIP has most definitely NOT sent out its First XI to Brussels. Nigel was unable to stop London choosing the hard-working and honest Gerard Batten for the No. 1 spot, nor to stop Roger Knapman being elected in the South West. However, his objective of ensuring that he ended up with a team of which he would be the star was, to a degree, successful. The result has been an unmitigated disaster.

I have referred to the innocence of many party members. The idea that the MEP lists were manipulated would never have crossed most of our minds back in 2004. Nigel had to be careful because he had already built up a structure in which the party’s MEP’s would operate, and better to have someone unsuitable but who would not ask questions rather than a competent individual who, besides challenging Nigel’s pre-eminence, might ask too many questions, especially on financial matters.

In the five years from 1999 to 2004, he had made the acquaintance of people like Jens-Peter Bonde – a past master at making money out of Euroscepticism. The Ind Dem Group, like its precursor EDD, is a fairly loose coalition of assorted Eurosceptics from both the left and right of the political spectrum who have joined together purely for the financial benefit of being in a group.

UKIP are the only withdrawalists in this group – a fact that has raised eyebrows on several occasions when I have mentioned this to party members. Ind Dem has encouraged a culture of financial secrecy, and Farage has bought into this. His reluctance to be open about his financial matters has brought the party into disrepute, and already the Lib Dems are attacking UKIP on the doorsteps saying they have “gone native.” Financial issues are likely to be an increasing embarrassment to UKIP in the run-up to June 2009.

It is not just the financial issues that have contributed to the disaster of UKIP’s MEPs in Brussels – there have been all too many instances of poor, ill-prepared speeches. Graham Booth’s setting himself up as an authority on climate change on the strength of an “O” level in astronomy has been an embarrassment. I have written speeches for some MEP’s and have seen them mutilated and spoilt by the MEP in question. Sometimes, it has been an embarrassment to listen to them in the Plenaries.

There have been exceptions, notably Roger Knapman, who ensures his speeches are well-written, and Gerard Batten, who always writes his own speeches after careful research. Sadly, however, Godfrey Bloom’s infamous speech in 2004 about women cleaning behind fridges has set an all-too-common precedent.

The press have been all too ready to pounce on bad behaviour by UKIP’s MEP’s. Tom Wise was unfortunate to be duped by an undercover reporter on the subject of MEP’s allowamnces. Nigel was lucky that the occasion when he was so drunk in a bar Strasbourg that he had to be carried out did not receive more coverage than it did.

Besides the MEP’s, the staff have not always delivered the goods. All too many of Gawain Towler’s press releases have been bad to the point of embarrassment. I was asked once to write a press release. Gawain’s editing of it included replacing one word with another meaning the exact opposite! While I cannot prove this, I would suspect that some 90% of press releases would have gone straight into the editors’ wastepaper bins.

On another occasion, at a meeting of a think tank in Brussels where the guest speaker was Dan Mitchell, a senior fellow of the Heritage Foundation, an American think tank Gawain turned up seriously drunk. He introduced me to this man (I had yet to fall out of favour at this time) but I was acutely embarrassed. Gawain has also admitted to me that he has smoked over 100 joints!

Aurelie Laloux is another disaster. She was taken on by UKIP in the 1999-2004 Parliament because of her excellent linguistic skills, as only in 2004 was English placed alongside French in official Parliamentary communications. Her political judgement is less acute, and had led to some very bizarre voting lists being produced which UKIP’s enemies like Labour MEP Richard Corbett have been delighted to publish.

When there was a debate on the Lisbon Treaty at Strasbourg in early 2008, the Green group (or was it the Communists?) proposed a “rejection amendment” – i.e. that the treaty should be rejected. Aurelie’s voting list, prepared for UKIP’s MEP’s, did not have us supporting this amendment. She has also been responsible for choosing which debates UKIP’s MEP’s will speak in. Her choice has been quite bizarre at times, giving the speechwriters (such as myself) the challenge of preparing speeches offering very little opportunity for the MEP to make any telling point, as the debate may have been on something quite obscure – such as updating EU air traffic agreements with countries in North Africa to include the new member states.

As for Nigel’s assistant Steve Reed, he deserves a chapter to himself. We will look at him under the heading, “Professionalising the Party?” His voting lists can be a bit bizarre, and unlike Aurelie, he cannot plead the excuse that he is not working in his mother tongue.

The philosophy is that UKIP must vote against and speak against everything. What happens when the EU proposes something that will actually command widespread popular support, such as the forced reduction in mobile phone roaming charges? Credit where credit is due from the strongly Eurosceptic former DUP MEP Jim Allister, who said, “It makes a pleasant change to welcome a piece of EU legislation.

The enforced reduction in mobile roaming charges is good for consumers across Europe.” However UKIP had to find something negative, such as the fact that the main beneficiaries would be people like MEP’s themsleves who make many international calls on mobile phones. While it is true that the mandate for UKIP’s MEP’s mandate is never to vote in favour of any EU regulation, if there is likely to be strong popular support for individual moves, it is surely better to abstain, or at least keep quiet, and keep the powder dry for the really serious issues.

I have not mentioned the corruption aspects and the ongoing investigations by OLAF – the EU Anti-fraud watchdog – into Ind Dem (including some UKIP MEP’s and staff), but this has done nothing to help the party, and what may come out, paricularly regarding Nigel and David Lott, could be quite embarrassing. However, one must not pre-judge.

Few UKIP MEP’s have availed themselves of the opportunity to used the Brussels staff for serious research. Gerard Batten is an honourable exception, with the excellent How much does the EU cost Britain? Booklets, which are updated each year. Apart from this, only Tom Wise, whose assistant Gary Cartwright produced the fisheries booklet, and Roger Knapman, have this far shown any interest in this important area. For seven MEP’s therefore, an excellent opportunity has gone begging.

Hard though it is to say it. the UKIP team, both MEP’s and staff, convey the image of a bungling bunch of amateurs. There are some honourable exceptions, and I have tried to highlight these. I would strongly refute any suggestion that UKIP’s disaster in Brussels has been because “they knw we don’t like the EU.” Yes, it is true that the Parliament’s president shows more leniency to pro-EU MEP’s than to UKIP when their speeches overrun.

This apart, I would say that the disaster has been self-inflicted and would have been avoidable with a better calibre of both MEP’s and staff. Perhaps the best illustration of the disaster UKIP has turned into is the infamous “Chicken Costume” incident in Strasbourg earlier this year. I can vouch for this being Nigel’s idea.

When the three staff members (Gawain Towler, Paul Nuttall and Ralph Atkinson) were escorted from the area near the Hemicycle by the security staff, it led to a very heated but almost surreal press conference, firstly with Gawain (still in his costume minus the chicken head!) and then Nigel, complaining bitterly to the media that the reason we were being treated unfairly in not being allowed to parade around in these outfits was because we opposed the Lisbon Treaty.

What noinsense! No wonder the rest of the European Parliament saw UKIP as a bit of a joke.At least no MEP had dressed up, although only because Gary Cartwright and I had been able to work on the wife of one MEP to persuade her husband not to be a chicken – he had originally volunteered for this ridiculous stunt!

The failure of UKIP Part 6

An unconvincing domestic agenda.

UKIP has always professed to be a fully-fledged political party. It has produced manifestos which range over a number of domestic issues besides withdrawal from the EU and areas with strong EU links, such as immigration. However, right up to and beyond the 2005 General Election, in spite of the manifesto produced for that occasion, UKIP was perceived not only by the public but by many members as essentially a single-issue party.

My experience standing for the party in Lewes at that time was fairly typical – I could articulate the issues relating to the EU pretty well, but put me into a debate where the focus was a domestic issue like education and I was out of my depth. I had read the manifesto, but it really wasn’t much help.

In early 2006, when David Bannerman became chairman, things began to change on this front. He launched the “Five Right Things to do” initiative that took UKIP into new territory such as education, law and order and tax. Yes, as mentioned, we had touched on these and other areas in earlier manifestos, but not in the sort of depth now being proposed.

It is perhaps hard for me to be objective here, as I did much of the donkey work for the education policy. David Lott said that it was “the best policy document that UKIP had ever produced.” It put UKIP in touch with education pressure groups such as the excellent “Campaign for Real Education” and in fact led to the retired probation officer and author David Fraser if not joining the party certainly becoming more sympathetic to it – a real first for us. Until now, people had only ever joined UKIP over EU-related issues.

A few months later, John Whittaker’s Flat Tax policy was launched at a fringe meeting during the 2006 Tory Party conference in Bournemouth. This again gave us links and credence with groups like the Taxpayers’ Alliance, who were represented at the launch.

However, these initiatives do not seem to have turned UKIP in the public eye from a single-issue party. It is impossible to verify the rumour that the domestic agenda, based on traditional right-of-centre Conservatism, is really an attempt to push the Tories in that direction rather than to claim the ground for UKIP in its own right. The party, in other words, is simply a Tory pressure group.

This rumour has done the rounds for a couple of years. It is hard to prove, especially as the centre-right agenda is, in fact a good one. The problem is that UKIP hasn’t been able to take ownership of this ground. Its dabbling in domestic politics has not been convincing. Part of the problem is having a leader with no ability to speak convincingly and informedly on domestic issues.

He has little interest in the minutiae of domestic policy. Unfortunately, delegating this job to Bannerman has led to a complete muddle, with no subsequent policy launch having the profile of the Flat Tax announcement.

Bannerman’s competence is questionable.

His chairmanship of the Bow Group is one of few features about his life not in dispute. How someone with this supposed breadth of policy experience, particularly in the field of transport can propose electrifying a line which was closed 39 years ago beats me! I can vouch for the fact that this proposal was included in the first draft of the UKIP transport policy document.

These policy initiatives have failed to change either the public perception of UKIP nor the thinking of some party members. Two years on from my struggles in Lewes, I was seconded to help out with the Sedgefield by-election, and for all my enthusiasm to ensure our candidate was well briefed on domestic policies, he just kept going back to the EU all the time.

If UKIP still exists in 2010 and puts up candidates for the General Election, it will be just the same. If the candidates are not comfortable with a broader agenda, how can the electorate be convinced that UKIP is more than just a single-issue party? My sad conclusion is that it is too late for the party ever to make the breakthrough into domestic politics.

The failure of UKIP Part 7

Professionalisng the Party?

The second catchphrase in early 2006 alongside “Five Right Things to do” was “Professionalisng the Party.” I came out to Brussels quite humbled at the thought of being part of this process, seeing as I was a newcomer to political research. Three years on, I cannot seriously believe that Nigel ever had any intention of making UKIP a professional party.

We need to go back to Brussels to see how shallow of the talk of “professionalism” is. Nigel’s office assistant out there is Steve (or Andrew) Reed – an individual whom I bear no personal grudge towards, but whose competence is highly dubious, to say the least.

Steve is a conspiracy theorist of the most eccentric type. He also writes the most grotesque English and has a serious drink problem. The net result is this letter, sent out from Nigel’s office in response to correspondence from a member of the public about the situation in Zimbabwe two years ago:-

Zimbabwe is certainly a country under siege from the “international community”, whose neo-colonial policies in Africa are thinly disguised as “humanitarian intervention” in conflicts, which it may well have instigated, just as they were in Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan.

So embarrassing was this letter, which also stated that the EU was worse than Zimbabwe, that extracts from it appeared in the Independent newspaper, and was the reason why a hastily-cobbled together “UKIP Statement on Zimbabwe” suddenly appeared on the party’s website. Yet Steve lived to fight another day and to produce this response to a letter which simply asked the MEP’s to support a written declaration on the setting-up of a Europe-wide register of missing children, following the McCanns’ visit to the European Parliament:-.

European coöperation, furthermore, is rather hindered, than helped, by the centralised bureaucracies of the EU, which, by abolishing national frontiers, have made EU-territory a playground for all types of crime, and which, in general, are rather intent on extending their powers than on governing wisely and well. This is only to be expected of an organisation, which lacks all democratic accountability…Indeed, the only way the huge, multilingual territories of the EU can be governed is by means of a repressive police-state, where every identity, asset and movement is monitored.

Steve’s briefing documents for the MEP’s display a similar lack of professionalsim. Instead of stickingto a simple summary of proposed legislation, he likes to have a rant about the EU. That’s not the job of an assistant. Gerard Batten has expressed extreme frustarion over this, but Steve remains in the Farage assistant office!

Gawain Towler’s incompetence has laready been mentioned. He has a background in the press, and appears to be widely connected but the quality of his work leaves much to be deisred.

Turning to the UK, the bigggest failing has been the total lack of any program to train party activists. UKIP contains many enthusiastic and committed members who have never been involved in politics before. They have joined because they have read or heard something that has convinced them that Britain should leave the EU.

Now while there are good sound reasons for supporting Britain’s withdrawal, there are also all manner of crackpot conspiracy theories doing the rounds, and some party members have regurgitated these in all innocence, believing that anyone saying bad things about the EU must be telling the truth. A professional party should have been providing education at all levels to ensure that party members are gven the tools to separate fact from fiction. The total failure to do this has contributed to the image problem the party faces – Cameron’s comments about “fruitcakes and loonies” has sometimes been closer to the mark than we would like.

The result of this lack of professionalsim is that the party has failed to advance among a key sector of the population. A good few people, possibly some 1/3 of the voting population, have a visceral dislike of the EU and have been easily won over to a withdrawalist position. They may not necessarily be UKIP voters, but they would agree with the overall stance of the party. There are also another significant group, my estimate being a further 1/3 of all voters, who have misgivings about the EU, but are not yet in the withdrawalist camp.

Maybe they have been conned by the propaganda of the three established parties, or perhaps they are still weighing up the arguments. As a generality, these will be serious thinkers. Such people are not going to be convinced by conspiracy theory claptrap or gimmicky, silly cartoons. Focus groups have painted a picture of UKIP as a negative party, and I would venture that some who voiced this opinion include representatives of this “middle third” that UKIP should be addressing. It will require a positive approach to win these people over, which UKIP has this far failed to make. Sadly, UKIP’s failure to advance among this important section of the electorate has set back the cause of independence by several years.

NEC problems and other structural failings.

The NEC is meant to represent the membership. It has been reduced to rubber-stamping Nigel’s decisions. Whether those on the NEC have been fairly voted into office is another matter – Lisa Duffy, a fairly unknown figure until her elevation to the NEC, apparently received more votes in the 2008 NEC election than Nigel received in the party leadership election two years ago! Naturally, she has taken the Farage line.

Since 2004, the story of the NEC is a procession of well-intentioned members either resigning or being forced out. It is claimed that some NEC members disagree in private with some of the things that Nigel does. All well and good, but they seem to vote with him, and have failed to support Delroy Young, Dr David Abbott and Dr Eric Edmond who have had the bravery to express their misgivings openly.

Another serious structural failing is the inability of the party to remove the leader. In the days of Kilroy’s membership, the rules were tightened up in this area. The net result is that any initiative to remove Nigel has fallen foul of the sheer logistics required to call an egm.

At the core of the party is a culture of cronyism and secrecy. The biggest challenge to date has come over the selection of candidates for the 2009 European Parliamentary elections. The South West wanted the Electoral Commission to handle the selection from start to finish, but this was rejected. The result has been a series of unanswered questions and threatened court action – especially in the Eastern Region whereby Robin Page and John West never appeared on the list and the Farage favourite Bannerman ended up in pole position.

The removal of Gregg Beaman from the No. 1 spot in the North West was also shrouded in controversy. Marta Andreasen’s candidacy is highly controversial, as only under EU laws is a citizen of another country eligible to stand. One candidate in the South East region sent a delegate to the count, who saw a good number of ballot papers with votes for Farage and Andreasen only.

In a straw poll of my local branch committee, not one person said they had voted in this way. It all looks very suspicious, and the official response to these gripes of, “Well, be thankful you’re not a Tory. Their existing MEP’s automatically get the top slots” is just not acceptable. It epitomises the fact that the membership have very little power in the party. The Political Committee is appointed, not chosen. Our current chairman was appointed without the NEC being previously consulted. The control of all the official media outlets, including the Independence newsletter, means that real debate is not possible.

When the Lechlade Group think-tank was set up, Nigel told the then party General Secretary Geoffrey Kingscott that his first task was to get it closed down. He was initially no more supportive of the widely reported “Parish Poll” campaign, that was set up by an ordinary UKIP member in Dorset.

Thanks to the innocence of many party members noted above, UKIP – the party that professes to believe in “bottoms-up” democracy and whose members sing the praises of Switzerland’s political system – has become the most top-down party in British politics. Not satified with the level of control he has achieved, Farage wants to bring in a rule change that will facilitate still further the purging of dissidents, yet it will be sold to the membership as a good thing, or else couched in such obscure language that most of them won’t understand the nuances of the wording. Sadly, the art of spin is practised to as a great a degree by the leadership on the membership as by New Labour on the British Public. The sad thing is that a good few of the membership are not aware of it even now.

Financial problems

The last subject to be considered is the timebomb of financial scandal ticking away. Some pretty damning data about the Ashford Call Centre has been in the Public domain for a number of years. Activists have pressed for answers and have been fobbed off time after time.

The Alan Bown Donation problem is another potential pitfall. If the appeal by the Electoral Commission against the initial judgement in UKIP’s favour is successful, Mr Bown could shell out an equivalent sum to the amount confiscated to keep the party afloat, but it is not going to help the party’s standing.

Even small issues suggest that there is something fishy in how money is handled. Why can members not renew their membership by Direct Debit? So simple, so what is the problem?

Another odd issue is how UKIP seems to find so much money for big by-elections, especially if Nigel or one of his close associates is the candidate. Money seemed no object in Bromley, 2006 or Sedgefield 2007. What is notable here is how expensive each UKIP vote seems to be. With the different parties’ expenses and votes available on various websites, analysis of UKIP’s performance against other small parties, notably comparing UKIP with the BNP in the Henley by-election, shows that they gain fair more votes per £100 spent than UKIP. UKIP spent £17.056 and received 843 votes. The BNP spent £4,744.06, less that 1/3 of UKIP’s budget, but polled 1,243 votes – over 40% more than UKIP.

Lack of confidence in the integrity of the party’s finances will have the obvious knock-on effect in reduced donations, both from rich party members and from sympathetic organisations. Nigel is a past-master at drumming up enthusiasm among ordinary party members. No doubt, many of the genuine older members unaware of the issues discussed here will send in their £10’s and £20’s to help the party fight the elections next June, but it would be a matter of great surprise if the amount raised, especially in the South East, comes anywhere near the figure for 2004.

The end of the road

Sleaze, incompetence, poor political judgement, purges of dissidents, a “loony” image, allegations of vote rigging and financial problems – not a healthy situation for a small political party stuck in the doldrums. The few months between now and June 2009 are highly likely to see the publication of a few scandals involving Farage. His venomous attitude has created many enemies, and those enemies are unlikely to stay silent. Even if the rants of Greg Lance-Watkins cannot all be taken seriously, if only 10% of his allegations are true, that could pose the party serious problems in the run-up to what should have been an even greater triumph than June 2004.

It really is now too much to expect the party to be turned round. Even removing Farage as leader will not solve it. His cronies hold all the positions of power, and there isn’t the time to winkle them all out. Sadly, for all the undoubted good UKIP has achieved, it is time for it to be dismembered. The wound is too deep. The poison has spread too widely. In 2004, UKIP had a great chance to advance the argument for British withdrawal from the EU. With the right approach, the argument could have been won irrevocably by now. Independence is so noble an objective, and there is so much to support this assertion.

So UKIP has had its chance and blown it. We are left with only one option – to start again, learning from UKIP’s successes but. more importantly, its failures.

TO LEAVE THE EU

What is the exit and survival plan for these United Kingdoms to maximise on the many benefits of leaving The EU. It is the DUTY of our Politicians and Snivil Cervants to ensure the continuity, liberty and right to self determination of our peoples they have a DUTY to protect against crime and secure both our food and our border.
NONE of these DUTIES has a single British politician upheld for 40 years. They have drawn their incomes fraudulently and dishonesty.

Politicians are failing to tell the truth, but so are almost all wanabe Politicians, the MSM and Snivil Cervants.

The fact is that even if EVERY British MEP wanted change in The EU it would achieve NOTHING.
Every single British Politician, of EVERY Party, elected since before we joined the EUropean Common Market, has promised to change The EU’s CAP – In 40 Years they have achieved absolutely NOTHING!

To try to put a value on OUR Freedom is as futile as floccipaucinihilipilification and as odious as the metissage of our societies, as we rummage in the ashes of our ancestors dreams, sacrifices and achievements, the flotsam of our hopes and the jetsam of our lives, consider the Country and Anglosphere which we leave our children and the future, with shame!

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

PLEASE POST THIS TAG AS FOLLOWS:ON YOUR eMAILS & BLOGS, FORUM POSTINGS & MAILINGS – GET THE MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE IT IS OUR BEST HOPE AS WHOEVER IS APPOINTED WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE AS PROVED!

I SUGGEST – since there is clearly no political party of repute, advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign, democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country. Deny the self seeking & meaningless wanabe MEPs the Mythical Mandate for which they clamour. Diktat is imposed from The EU but Law should be made at Westminster, for our Country & our Peoples.

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:

LEAVE THE EU

Posted in EUkip; UKIP; The Sun; John Petley; Junius; | 1 Comment »

#502* – WILL THE TRUTH of EUkip REACH THE PUBLIC?

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 29/05/2009

#502* – WILL THE TRUTH of EUkip REACH THE PUBLIC?

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Will UKIP be exposed before June 4th?

Well, who said a ‘week is a long time in politics’?

Two weeks ago, UKIP looked as if it was heading downwards to retaining 3 or 4 MEP seats. Last week as a direct result of the MPs expenses scandal (not because of anything UKIP has done) it looked as if 15 or more UKIP MEPs would be elected.

This week, because of Mr Farage’s arrogance and willingness to boast about his expenses, it is quite possible that even the 3 or 4 seats may be in jeopardy.

We have the Sun, Mirror, Guardian starting to reveal what fellow UKIP members already knew. UKIP MEPs had gone native and many were taking advantage of the lax expenses regime. What has proved revealing however, is UKIP MEPs votes against increased transparency and declaration of expenses. We wonder why?

Much now depends on the media. It may still strike UKIP lightly for fear of a BNP upsurge, but decent journalists (yes there are some) cannot allow someone as hypocritical as Mr Farage to get away with condemning greedy MPs when he himself has claimed some £2million (as reported in the media).

The next few days will prove crucial.

To view the Original of This Article
at ‘Political Gossip UK’ CLICK HERE

Posted in EUkip; UKIP; Publicity; | Leave a Comment »

#501* – LUCKY EUkip’s 13 REASONS NOT TO VOTE

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 29/05/2009

#501* – LUCKY EUkip’s 13 REASONS NOT TO VOTE
Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership
& NEC is what gives the remaining 10%
a bad name!

LUCKY EUkip’s 13 REASONS NOT TO VOTE for EUkip, from JUNIUS & MORE!

Craig Mackinlay, ex Vice Chairman UKIP, on internal UKIP elections:
“I will not be associated professionally or personally with what has become a perverted and shambolic process. Threats from the Party Chairman . . . merely add to the stink that now surrounds this election.”

John Petley, ex UKIP researcher:
“It really is now too much to expect the party to be turned round. Even removing Farage as leader will not solve it. His cronies hold all the positions of power, and there isn’t the time to winkle them all out. Sadly, for all the undoubted good UKIP has achieved, it is time for it to be dismembered. The wound is too deep. The poison has spread too widely. In 2004, UKIP had a great chance to advance the argument for British withdrawal from the EU. With the right approach, the argument could have been won irrevocably by now. Independence is so noble an objective, and there is so much to support this assertion.

So UKIP has had its chance and blown it. We are left with only one option – to start again, learning from UKIP’s successes but more importantly, its failures.”

Gregg Beaman, ex North West Regional Organiser and former MEP candidate:
“As far as Farage is concerned I knew when I met him, during the Preston by-election in 2000, that he was the personification of vanity and ego with little behind that wafer thin facade. I have seen his childish temper tantrums when he doesn’t get his own way, when I was on the NEC and later when I was on the Elections Committee. I have seen him bully people and have stood up to him when he has tried to bully me. He must be one of the coarsest most vulgar individuals I have ever come across. The proposed changes to the party constitution are a result of the complete lack of principle of the current leader and chairman and, it must be said, the lack of courage shown by certain members on the Party’s NEC.”

Dr Eric Edmond, ex NEC member and former MEP candidate:
“He (Farage) has packed the NEC with his unelected nominees Andreasen, Nuttall and Arnott etc clearly to push through yet more undemocratic practices and consolidate his personal hold on the party. “

John West, ex UKIP Branch Chairman and PPC:
” When I first joined UKIP I actually believed that UKIP was sincere in its endeavour to extricate Britain from the European Union! I must now confess that I was conned along with thousands of other trusting members. UKIP`s MEPs are now part of the problem. Thanks to their love of the good life they have forgotten about why they were elected and who they are supposed to represent. “

Alison West, ex UKIP Branch Chairman and PPC:
” After four years of loyalty to the UK Independence Party, which I truly believed once showed such promise, I have come to the conclusion that its credibility and integrity have been destroyed by the corruption, egotism, greed, immaturity, irresponsibility and lack of discipline that has spread through the leadership. “

Richard North, ex UKIP Chief Researcher, writing of Farage:
“He cannot tolerate anyone in the party who he feels is or might be in a position to challenge him. He prefers to surround himself with incompetents and deadbeats. Anyone who emerges who might show an independent streak, he ruthlessly eliminates, to ensure that they cannot be seen as competition.”

And again:
“(Farage) . . . spends the bulk of his time manoeuvring and scheming to keep himself in the dominant position, while presenting to the world his “boyish charm.”

Bryan Smalley, Party Secretary for two years, wrote of Farage:
“He is dishonest and frequently makes untrue statements.”

Anthony Scholefield, Party Secretary for three years stated:
“A disturbing feature is that Mark Croucher, UKIP Press Officer, shows UKIP members’ details to Communists and Socialist Workers via Searchlight and Unite Against Fascism. Croucher reports to Farage.”

Anthony Butcher, ex NEC member:
“UKIP is now a hindrance to the anti-EU movement.”

David Abbott, ex NEC member and committed Christian:
“Our leader issues an edict that MEP’s wives must not be on the MEP’s payroll. Then he is caught paying his own wife.”

And again:
“These new revelations were on top of all his (ie Farage) more obvious defects including total amorality, bullying, adultery, and drunkenness, vengefulness and lying.”

Roger Knapman, ex Party Leader and MEP:
“UKIP MEP’s met and agreed a statement of practice – first that we would not go on ‘junkets’ to other countries and secondly that we would not employ our wives. This was to prevent us getting dragged into the comfortable EU world that leads to ‘going native’. I am now very worried that this agreement is being ignored and that the attractions of the European Parliament as a career may beckon to some; where the delights of plush new office suites, Brussels titles and internal parliament or IndDem Group politics are more attractive than our original purpose.”

Robin Page, BBC Presenter:
“The party created to fight centralised government, sleaze and corruption has become a mirror image of the body it professes to loathe.”

To view Junius’ Original List CLICK HERE

There are so many many more.

CONSIDER:

The 13 most likely candidates to be EUkip MEPs

The 13 most senior members of the leadership team.

The 13 longest serving NEC members.

The 13 best known staff.

The achievements of EUkip in the last 13 years.

The achievements of EUkip in the last 13 months.

The way EUkip has responded to the last 13 critics.

The last 13 different claims of Bannerman to his identity.

The last 13 dishonest lies of Farage in public.

The last 13 items of EUkip in the press.

EUkip’s 13 MEPs since 2004.

The last 13 Postings & Utterances in public by:
01 Paul Nuttall
02 Mark Croucher
03 Mick McGough
04 Douglas Denny
05 George Curtis
06 Mick Nattrass
07 Annabell Fuller
08 Christopher Gill
09 Michael Zucherman
10 Derek Clark
11 Stuart Gulleford
12 David Bannerman
13 Peter Reeve

I would have included Nigel Farage but that would not be based on his comments, as appart from his lies his performance is only damaging because he seized the leadership in such a destructive manner.

TO LEAVE THE EU

What is the exit and survival plan for these United Kingdoms to maximise on the many benefits of leaving The EU. It is the DUTY of our Politicians and Snivil Cervants to ensure the continuity, liberty and right to self determination of our peoples they have a DUTY to protect against crime and secure both our food and our border.
NONE of these DUTIES has a single British politician upheld for 40 years. They have drawn their incomes fraudulently and dishonesty.

Politicians are failing to tell the truth, but so are almost all wanabe Politicians, the MSM and Snivil Cervants.

The fact is that even if EVERY British MEP wanted change in The EU it would achieve NOTHING.
Every single British Politician, of EVERY Party, elected since before we joined the EUropean Common Market, has promised to change The EU’s CAP – In 40 Years they have achieved absolutely NOTHING!

To try to put a value on OUR Freedom is as futile as floccipaucinihilipilification and as odious as the metissage of our societies, as we rummage in the ashes of our ancestors dreams, sacrifices and achievements, the flotsam of our hopes and the jetsam of our lives, consider the Country and Anglosphere which we leave our children and the future, with shame!

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

PLEASE POST THIS TAG AS FOLLOWS:ON YOUR eMAILS & BLOGS, FORUM POSTINGS & MAILINGS – GET THE MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE IT IS OUR BEST HOPE AS WHOEVER IS APPOINTED WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE AS PROVED!

I SUGGEST – since there is clearly no political party of repute, advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign, democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country. Deny the self seeking & meaningless wanabe MEPs the Mythical Mandate for which they clamour. Diktat is imposed from The EU but Law should be made at Westminster, for our Country & our Peoples.

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:

LEAVE THE EU

Posted in EUkip; UKIP; Junius; Reasons NOT To Vote. | Leave a Comment »

#500* – OPEN EUROPE CONFIRMS MY BLOG #485*

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 29/05/2009

#500* – OPEN EUROPE CONFIRMS MY BLOG #485*
THE CARTOON IS COURTESY OF THE SUN NEWSPAPER, WHO ARE PROVING MOST HELPFULL.
FORTUNATELY THE SUN LIKE ALMOST ALL PROFESSIONALS ARE GENEROUS
REGARDING COPYRIGHT MATERIAL WITH NON PROFIT BLOGS.
Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership
& NEC is what gives the remaining 10%
a bad name!

OPEN EUROPE CONFIRMS MY BLOG #485* IN TERMS OF ALLOWANCES FOR MEPs!

Hi,

You may find the details of Blog #485* of interest as it gives more details of EUkip – CLICK HERE

MEPs and their expenses – the facts

Over the weekend Open Europe published a new ‘league table’ of all 785 MEPs, ranking them on 20 different criteria, including how they voted on proposals to increase transparency and reduce the waste of taxpayers’ money, attendance, whether they opt into the controversial second pension fund, and whether they voted to respect the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

There are some interesting findings. While the UK, for instance, fares comparatively well among its counterparts in Europe – coming fourth out of 25 – many British MEPs, while talking a good game at home about EU reform, in fact leave a lot to be desired on closer inspection of their behaviour in Brussels (and Strasbourg).

Par exemple:

– In April 2009, a majority of British MEPs (60%) voted to keep details about their own expenses secret, as well as voting against financial disciplinary measures for MEPs found guilty of misuse of funds, and voting to keep secret demands to pay back money. Only 24% of all British members voted to make expenses public.

– Only 13 out of 78 British MEPs voted in favour of a symbolic proposal calling for governments to respect the outcome of the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty -before the referendum had even taken place.

– In 2005, 11 Labour MEPs voted in favour of a proposal to allow the deficit in MEPs’ highly controversial, and possibly illegal, second pension scheme to be plugged with taxpayers’ money. They also voted against attempts to oblige MEPs to contribute funds from their own pockets, as opposed to from their allowances, as is currently the case.

– Extraordinarily, in 2008 three Conservative British MEPS voted in favour of spending €290 million of taxpayers’ money on subsidies to tobacco farmers – despite the fact that the EU simultaneously spends millions on anti-smoking campaigns, such as the €74 million campaign named “Help: for a life without tobacco”.

– 30 British MEPs voted in favour of signing off the European Parliament’s own accounts for 2006, despite serious concerns raised by the European Court of Auditors over allowances for MEPs’ assistants. The auditors noted that only around 27% of the expenditure was adequately accounted for in 2006. Despite this, the European Parliament voted to clear the accounts.

You can also read our key findings from other MEPs CLICK HERE.

In the midst of the currenty public outcry over MPs’ expenses, the ranking’s findings on MEPs’ expenses are particularly interesting.

Because also over the weekend, Gordon Brown told the FT that he would force Labour MEPs to publish receipts for all their expenses in future. This is a big move – as currently, ludicrously, MEPs are not required by the European Parliament to produce any receipts for their spending of public money. The move goes further than that offered by any other British party.

BUT – if they are serious about this idea, then why on earth is it missing from their manifesto for the European elections on 4 June? The manifesto was unveiled just 2 weeks ago – right in the middle of the expenses scandal unfolding at Westminster – so there can be no excuses that they didn’t know this was going to be a big issue.

If Labour means business about keeping an publishing all receipts – which we sincerely hope they do, as this would send a powerful message to the EP and would put all 200 odd parties in the EP under pressure to do the same or change the rules – then Labour should change its manifesto immediately to reflect the new commitment. They have more than a week before the elections, so it’s not too late.

Voters need to something to be able to hold them to (not that it worked with their manifesto commitment to a referendum on the EU Treaty, mind). Because our study shows that in 2005, three Labour MEPs voted against obliging MEPs to produce receipts for their travel expenses.

After all, as the front page of the Sun newspaper repeated this morning, Open Europe has found that the expenses we’re referring to are no small matter – amounting to an enormous £363,000 a year per MEP. This is on top of the basic salary of £83,282 (representing a huge pay rise for UK MEPs from June onwards) £41,573 in ‘transition payments’ when they leave office, and pension rights of up to £30,000 for a single five-year term.

The expenses break down as follows:

£36,778 in ‘subsistance allowances’ (£259 a day for 142 days of the year)

£5,885 in language and IT courses

£87,407 in travel expenses (the EP’s budget for 2009 puts aside €77,988,000 for ‘ordinary travel expenses’, which works out at €99,347 for every MEP)

£3,756 in ‘additional annual travel allowance’

£183,776 in staff allowances, and

£45,648 in office expenses (£3,804 a month)

Unbelievable.

In June, there will be a slight change to the rules, which will mean that MEPs will be required to produce receipts for their travel expenses for the first time – however, offsetting that, is a new, explicit reference to ‘business class’ for flights even within the EU – raising the barrier instead of lowering it.

To view the original of this article CLICK HERE

TO LEAVE THE EU

What is the exit and survival plan for these United Kingdoms to maximise on the many benefits of leaving The EU. It is the DUTY of our Politicians and Snivil Cervants to ensure the continuity, liberty and right to self determination of our peoples they have a DUTY to protect against crime and secure both our food and our border.
NONE of these DUTIES has a single British politician upheld for 40 years. They have drawn their incomes fraudulently and dishonesty.

Politicians are failing to tell the truth, but so are almost all wanabe Politicians, the MSM and Snivil Cervants.

The fact is that even if EVERY British MEP wanted change in The EU it would achieve NOTHING.
Every single British Politician, of EVERY Party, elected since before we joined the EUropean Common Market, has promised to change The EU’s CAP – In 40 Years they have achieved absolutely NOTHING!

To try to put a value on OUR Freedom is as futile as floccipaucinihilipilification and as odious as the metissage of our societies, as we rummage in the ashes of our ancestors dreams, sacrifices and achievements, the flotsam of our hopes and the jetsam of our lives, consider the Country and Anglosphere which we leave our children and the future, with shame!

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

PLEASE POST THIS TAG AS FOLLOWS:ON YOUR eMAILS & BLOGS, FORUM POSTINGS & MAILINGS – GET THE MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE IT IS OUR BEST HOPE AS WHOEVER IS APPOINTED WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE AS PROVED!

I SUGGEST – since there is clearly no political party of repute, advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign, democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country. Deny the self seeking & meaningless wanabe MEPs the Mythical Mandate for which they clamour. Diktat is imposed from The EU but Law should be made at Westminster, for our Country & our Peoples.

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:

LEAVE THE EU

Posted in EUkip; UKIP; Open EUrope; Expenses; Allowances; | Leave a Comment »

#499* – 7 Times Nightly, IN THE TIMES – No Ice!

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 29/05/2009

#499* – 7 Times Nightly, IN THE TIMES – No Ice!

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership
& NEC is what gives the remaining 10%
a bad name!

7 Times Nightly In The News of the World, IN THE TIMES – No Ice but £30,000 For His Wife!!

Nigel Farage, the UKIP leader, pays his wife Kirsten up to £30,000 to work as his secretary.

Having promised prior to his election that he would NOT employ family members and having instructed EUkip MEPs NOT to employ their family!

It is interesting to note that when he was exposed for his lies and hypocracy his Political Agent and his Regional Organiser had no idea she was being employed and they run his UK office! To this day no one knows why she is paid or what she does that could be worth anything like this amount. Any Mum will tell you there is little you can do or have the energy to do with a ‘crawler’ & a ‘toddler’ + two teenagers on the horizon!

AND a largely absent husband!

He boasted last week that he had received a “vast sum” in expenses and allowances since becoming an MEP in 1999.

How very true – far more than he ever made as a barrow boy in the city!

“I don’t know what the total amount is but — oh lor — it must be pushing £2 million,” he added.

Not only does he not know the amount but as he admitted to The Sun he hasn’t a clue how he spent this tax payer’s money – Also it does look as if he wildly under estimated the amount which would seem to be nearer £5,000,000

Critics claim that even if there is no suggestion of wrongdoing the employment of relatives reinforces the public perception of the European Parliament as a “gravy train”.

Especially when like EUkip you have promised both the electorate and your members that you would not do so! I note Robert Kilroy Silk employs his wife Jan.

Other EUkip MEPs would also seem to but have declined to confess to their dishonesty.

No wonder they voted against MEPs declaring their expenses!

Mats Persson, research director of Open Europe said: “It is not acceptable for any MEP to continue employing members of their family.”

Well actually what does he mean? I undersatand if you already have the family on the payrol when the new pay rises come in on June 8th. with the new intake you can continue to employ family and perverts can employ their partners!

He added: “You have to ask why more than a third of British MEPs are employing their own relatives.”

He might have to – I think most people can work that out pretty quickly!

Several British MEPs have been embroiled in scandal over their expenses and allowances.

Out of 12 EUkip MEPs:
1 went to prison.
1 quit and employs his wife
1 is on Court Bail with his researcher.
1 hypocrite traffiked Polish Labour for personal gain.
1 employs his wife
4 are under investigation by OLAF & or The Police

Tom Wise, an independent MEP for East of England, was charged last month with his researcher with false accounting and money laundering.

A situation known about for years yet EUkip took no effective action and Farage, Trevor Colman and ALL the other MEPs colluded in the crime after the event by orchestrating cover-ups.

The former UKIP politician is accused of pretending his own bank account was actually that of Lindsay Jenkins. From November 2004 until October 2005, he is alleged to have channelled £39,100 into his own account, from which he paid Ms Jenkins £13,555. They have pleaded not guilty.

They are due to surrender to bail on 08-Jun-2009 at Westminster Magistrates Court in Horseferry Road for ‘allocation’. They are I gather pleading guilty despite the facts which seems unwise as that will put them before a Jury I understand. Honest folk are unlikely to take kindly to politicians caught on the make and the take!

I note Jaqui Smith is apearing before the same bench on 26-June-2009!

Ashley Mote, 73, who represents South East England as an independent, was found guilty of falsely claiming benefits of more than £65,000 and given a nine-month jail sentence in 2007. The former UKIP representantive has since been given permission to appeal against his conviction.

This incident took place before he was elected – long before!

We do not know which other EUkip MEPs employ their family and as has already been stated they have voted against a transparency Bill!!

To view the full article in The Times CLICK HERE

Posted in EUkip; UKIP; wives; Farage; Scams; Allowances; Expenses; | Leave a Comment »

#498* – UKIP’s OPPORTUNITY LOST – MASSIVELY

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 29/05/2009

#498* – UKIP’s OPPORTUNITY LOST – MASSIVELY

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership
& NEC is what gives the remaining 10%
a bad name!

UKIP’s OPPORTUNITY LOST – MASSIVELY MISJUDGED & SQUANDERED!

Hi,

To actually understand the massive damage done to these United Kingdoms and the EUroSceptic Movement by UKIP in their failure to maintain their standards and let the party slide into ‘going native’ as EUkip without competent leadership – all one needs to do is watch the video below to realise the stupidity and failure of judgement and the rank dishonesty of the Party.

UKIP let its members and supporters down and betrayed their values, aims and vision.

There is absolutely no doubt Nigel Farage was and still is an excellent front man, a valuable assett, a competent spokesman but the utter debacle that is EUkip of today shows beyond any doubt that he lacks even the slightest traces of Officer Quality and has no understanding of morality or ethics as he repeatedly lies – for instance that EUkip has rapidly responded and removed miscreants when they have been exposed – THIS IS A LIE – he took virtually no effective action against Tom Wise and in fact colluded in cover-ups, Wise left EUkip when he was good and ready in March this year when he declined to renew his annual membership.

But to see how plausibly he is able to lie just watch his performance on Sky TV in the face of hostile interviewing by the ill mannered news reader Dermot Murnaghan who confused interuption, aggresion and a poor grasp of his brief for a competent investigative interview.

Had he properly briefed himself he would have been able to ask questions he understood! He would also have exposed the lies from Farage.

Yes Farage’s handling of the interview was excellent were he a spokesman or a press officer but he showed absolutely no skill as a leader and nil expertise in terms of gravitas.

If ONLY UKIP had held its ground and put Nigel Farage forward as their spokesman, controlled and managed by a competent leader who could take on all those duties he has proved so staggeringly inept at.

Watch the video – Farage’s performance is excellent as a spokesman but his taking the risks of lies could place him in a position AS LEADER of destroying EUkip if Just Once he was exposed by a competent journalist of callibre with a sound brief.

The massive risk is that when that happens and one day it surely will – that will be the end of the Party as he has absolutely no fall back position!

Leadership is an attribute an individual has or has not and it is clear in the way in which Farage has so damaged UKIP that he lacks the attribute in every way and as a result he has created many implacable enemies.

A good leader acts with integrity and in amicable debate works to take all wings of his party along with him gaining converts – it is only the petty, the weak, the insecure and the challenged who lie to gain status and invent problems to cure – we have all watched Farage’s idiotic behaviour where he lets his little head do his thinking whilst befuddling his big head!

We have all watched in horror or disgust as he has driven out many of the good, the competent and the able because they showed him as lack lustre – we have watched him parachute in his muppets and puppets and engineer his Reichstag Fire moment with lies and duplicity claiming infiltration as a method to dishonestly remove people who requested honesty and transparency for the members who elected them.

It is for this very reason that although immense good luck has boosted his prospects from abject failure to a respectable return NOT due to his efforts or the achievements of EUkip under his so called leadership but irony of ironies an utterly contemptible claque of dishonest and corrupt people on the make and the take will be the beneficiaries of the penny ante fiddles of MPs at Westminster.

Consider just for a moment how Farage locked the news reader chap to the £2,000,000 and that being a mere £200,000 a year – consider how shoddy Murnaughan’s brief was! If You or I had interviewed Farage we would have known that £200,000 was merely his office and staff allowances and made no consideration of his £183,000 travel allowance etc. (to take rough figures) nor his allowances as leader of a group in the EU and other perks as chairman of the pro EU Ind.Dem.Group.

You can check these figures out if you CLICK HERE or at Open EUrope LINK

A well briefed interviewer would have known that his large office in his Constituency, which he claimed, is in fact David Samuel Camps on about £30K & Steve Harris on about £40K the office itself is supplied and declared as a donation – whether part or all of Steve or David’s income is paid by a benefactor or from Ind.Dem.Group finances I do not know. As for Party travel the NEC voted Farage £20K as I recall.

Even now, as victory is being counted on, the knives are being sharpened for the expected battle for leadership between David Bannerman, who will base his claim on a pack of lies and much exageration, and Nuttall who intends to base his claim on being Farage’s CHOSEN!!! Supporters are already being solicited and prosmised rewards and jokeying for position is almost in the open.

Is it any wonder why liars and filth like McGough, Croucher, Gulleyslime, Denny and their ilk are raising their profiles in the hopes of crumbs and slops from the troughs – aware that £2,000,000 quoted by Farage is but a fraction of what can actually be perloined.

TO LEAVE THE EU

What is the exit and survival plan for these United Kingdoms to maximise on the many benefits of leaving The EU. It is the DUTY of our Politicians and Snivil Cervants to ensure the continuity, liberty and right to self determination of our peoples they have a DUTY to protect against crime and secure both our food and our border.
NONE of these DUTIES has a single British politician upheld for 40 years. They have drawn their incomes fraudulently and dishonesty.

Politicians are failing to tell the truth, but so are almost all wanabe Politicians, the MSM and Snivil Cervants.

The fact is that even if EVERY British MEP wanted change in The EU it would achieve NOTHING.
Every single British Politician, of EVERY Party, elected since before we joined the EUropean Common Market, has promised to change The EU’s CAP – In 40 Years they have achieved absolutely NOTHING!

To try to put a value on OUR Freedom is as futile as floccipaucinihilipilification and as odious as the metissage of our societies, as we rummage in the ashes of our ancestors dreams, sacrifices and achievements, the flotsam of our hopes and the jetsam of our lives, consider the Country and Anglosphere which we leave our children and the future, with shame!

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

PLEASE POST THIS TAG AS FOLLOWS:ON YOUR eMAILS & BLOGS, FORUM POSTINGS & MAILINGS – GET THE MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE IT IS OUR BEST HOPE AS WHOEVER IS APPOINTED WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE AS PROVED!

I SUGGEST – since there is clearly no political party of repute, advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign, democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country. Deny the self seeking & meaningless wanabe MEPs the Mythical Mandate for which they clamour. Diktat is imposed from The EU but Law should be made at Westminster, for our Country & our Peoples.

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:

LEAVE THE EU

Posted in EUkip; UKIP; Sky; Farage; Lies; Corruption; Leadership; | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: