#659* – DISHONESTY REGARDING ‘DEFENCE FUND’
Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!
The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership, their anti UKIP claque & the NEC is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!
DISHONESTY REGARDING THE ‘PRIVATE DEFENCE FUND’ & DELIBERATE MISREPRESENTATION BY MARK CROUCHER!
EDIT AT 13.00hrs. on day of posting.
I could not resist a wry smile! Foolishly I have misread a detail in an ‘e’Mail address and furthermore so have many others!
Eric Edmond is correct – I did NOT use the correct ‘e’Mail for him. Here was I and presumably everyone else puzzling over the detail and convinced he was sending ‘e’Mails from the address given – he was not!
I and all the rest were checking the address and overlooking the end part in a form of electronic blindness, to which several well known detail ferrets had also succumbed! The address I had quoted was spot on correct in that which was ‘human’ it was the tail electronic item that was different .com vs .co.uk
Interestingly this in no way alters the main point of the thread which was that Eric Edmond spoke with myself, John West & Niall Warry regarding the fund. Further he has clearly been aware of the fund and has shown his awareness of said fund by joining in conversation on the Forum and directly.
That he implied in various items that I had deliberately lied and that he did not know of the fund was clearly an untruth. That he failed to point out wherein the error lay as he had personally dictated his ‘e’Mail to me on the phone and I subsequently ‘e’Mailed him and he had seen the details on the forum and most probably elsewhere seems absolutely certain.
IF Eric Edmond has been deliberately obfuscating by implying that I was not telling the truth and that others weren’t it was incredibly stupid of him as clearly he had impugned the integrity of others who had clearly not been at fault.
I have received – via the wrong address 😉 an ‘e’Mail which has been forwarded to me from Eric Edmond which reads as follows in Blue and I comment therein in Black:
From: EDE [mailto:email@example.com] The address I used was .co.uk which was an error.
Sent: 15 October 2009 09:25
To: firstname.lastname@example.org; Andrew PARSONS
Cc: Niall WARRY UW CLUB; John WEST; ‘Geoffrey COLLIER’; Paul WESSON [Aardvark]; Petrina Holdsworth;
Subject: Re: Re; LEGAL CLARIFICATION – FW: Kite Telegraph Article
I have no record of ever receiving any such email from Watkins.
The ‘e’Mails in question at the end of this blog were NOT ‘e’Mails I sent but ‘e’Mails I received from Eric Edmond.
I keep all my emails. The email address Croucher quotes from the Watkins blog is a .co.uk email.
Correct – the ‘e’Mail address originally transcribed in good faith by me over the phone. This issue would seem to hinge on the fact that Eric Edmond chose not to explain the error.
I have never agreed to act as custodian for any funds of any sort for any cause, ever.
You were however quite clearly aware that you had been nominated and had not declined. The first anyone has heard that you wish to decline is long after the matter has concluded. That you take this stance in hindsight is more than strange, particularly as you have clearly and undeniably discussed your role in the ‘fund’ asking what should you do if you receive money when it was agreed that you would pass it straight on to Niall Warry.
It was also made clear that the aim of the ‘buffer’ was that donors and recipients could be separated thus no donor would have lien over a recipient nor recipient gratitude to a donor. That some may not have understood such niceties of integrity may well be the case. But there was never any doubt that you were aware and a willing if inactive participant.
I have never received any moneys from anyone.
A life of pennuary? Clearly you meant in respect of this fund and hardly surprising as I used the wrong address 😉 I am surprised that you did not point it out sooner!
Any donations I have ever made to anyone are from my own money.
IF any such donation was to any individual related to the fund it would be a tad implausible that it was not in relation to the item in discussion on the Forum in a thread you contributed to and since several people are aware that you discussed the fund with them in relation to yourself not until much later claiming to not know about it!
I regret the error of .co.uk but I am surprised that you NEVER pointed this out to me or anyone else to my knowledge clearly there was no witting intent to mislead on my part. Neither did I show that you had been guilty of factual inaccuracies until you quite clearly tried to imply that I had in some way lied about your involvement.
You knew and you were involved.
HONEST INTENT TO CLARIFY
A Copy of this has been sent to Eric Edmond Eric Edmond email@example.com the address he asked me to use and from which he mailed me – I can not be certain it will reach him as he has claimed not to know of its existence therefore I have posted this in full on my blog to ensure it is available to him. Would anyone who has an ‘e’Mail address he admits to using please be so good as to forward this letter to him.
In forwarding this to you I have removed the two attachments that Dr. Eric Edmond sent with the document.
I clearly show in the forwarded ‘e’Mail from him that the address he denies in his libellous attempt to smear me was indeed an address he used.
May I add that I am aware that neither John West nor Niall Warry, nor I for that matter, wish to deliberately expose Eric Edmond, however he has had conversations with both John West and Niall Warry, regarding the fund and of course myself.
One recipient has confirmed to me that perceived the payment sent to him directly by Eric Edmond to be a payment resultant from the fund, I understand.
Eric Edmond has had numerous conversations with me regarding the fund and other matters – I am not aware that Eric Edmond has EVER breeched any confidence in conversations with me, nor have I ever asked him to. I allude to these conversations only because they are a matter of record, should the matter come to Court as his number is clearly shown on my telephone bills as I presume is my number on his.
Dr. Eric Edmond subsequent to occasions on which he has discussed the fund has NEVER contacted me in any format to inform me he was no longer able to participate – no such formal resignation has ever been received by either Niall Warry nor John West they assure me.
Further on reading the thread in question I have absolutely no reason to question the comments of Geoffrey Collier within the thread.
Clearly due to the dishonesty of many of those who seek to smear me I deliberately did not nor did I advocate that I should handle any of the monies concerned and due to her legal status Petrina Holdsworth (Mrs. P. Voelcker) notified me immediately that she would be unable to participate – a fact which I ensured was published to the original distribution list of my suggestion.
I can confirm that monies were collected and monies were paid to recipients – as was the original suggestion. NONE who have contributed nor any recipient has had cause to question any of the process or its integrity other than Eric Edmond who rather long after the event has issued misleading
Since it is clear that the entire thread seems merely to be a figment of Mark Croucher’s tortured desire to smear folk and there is absolutely no foundation to the thread other than attempts, it seems, of Mark Croucvher to use a childish practice of entrapment based on selective quotation – a morally reprehensible practice at best and corrupt in any doctrine may I suggest that the entire thread is deleted.
Please be advised that I only make this known as Eric Edmond has seen fit to imply I have in some way failed to tell the truth.
Shall we by all means take the route that Eric Edmond has not lied on all counts but has rather had a failing of memory leading to factual inexactitudes on relevant matters and an apology to me on the Forum clearly stating that he has absolutely no reason to believe that either Niall Warry have ever acted in a dishonest or dishonourable way, would be all that is required as far as I am concerned
I have not, nor would I ever wittingly lie about anyone or anything.
The sum, the total and any constituent part of the monies, how processed, from whom received, how much and how disbursed is NOT a matter that is or will be put in the public domain.
I solicited money, with the request that individuals of integrity who wished to see EUkip cleaned up would mail the money to 3 individuals based on my belief that it provided a reasonable spread of characters who I considered reliable and trustworthy.
Firstly may I apologise as one transpired to be unreliable and untrustworthy, though I had selected him as he had been selected by UKIP members as an NEC representative and also as EUkip had selected him as an MEP candidate. Even if he is playing fast and loose with HIS word interpretation that he is implicating me and thus impugnes my integrity I consider him to be unreliable, untrustworthy and dishonourable though let us put that down to failings of memory rather than deliberate dishonesty.
Petrina Holdsworth (Mrs. P. Voelcker) stood down.
The fund collected certain monies and the recipient(s) received certain monies – the amounts, sources and recipients are a private matter and will remain so. It would be a breech of trust for the recipients, donors or others directly involved to publish any of the information. The monies were handled in accord with my initial advocacy to the satisfaction of ALL parties involved save Edmond who would seem to have selective amnesia – I am unaware of ANY payment that was sent to him that has not reached the recipients to the satisfaction of any donor. You will note all donors were requested to ‘e’Mail the collection points to discuss their method of donation.
That payments WERE made by executive(s) of EUkip to recipients as a result of my ‘e’Mail is one reason why NO NAMES OR AMOUNTS will be made public. Further the details of amounts and Recipients will NOT be made public as it could cause embarrassment.
NO FURTHER INFORMATION WILL BE FORTHCOMING ON THIS MATTER
from any informed individual as it is a private and confidential matter.
ANY donor is welcome to notify of ANY disquiet they may have but it would be a breech of trust were they to publish their position or donation as those were the terms of the agreement they entered.
Should ANYONE have ANY evidence of wrong doing may I advise them to contact me as I accept ultimate responsibility having suggested the fund at the outset. IF you are not entirely happy that I have resolved your query I suggest you take the appropriate legal action – May I advise you that it is unlikely that you have ANY claim were you neither a provable donor or provable recipient as all individual payments were less than tax declarable gifts.
I consider that further questioning on this entirely private matter of anyone by anyone other than a donor or recipient, conducted privately or through legal channels constitutes Harassment in the strict terms of the Law.
As an aside and my apologies for conflating two issues but they do overlap:
I am reliably advised that to allude to any spent conviction is an Offence, this includes such phrases as ‘he has spent convictions but I can not name them’ even ‘he has spent convictions’. I would appreciate it if the entirety of threads that lead to any construction whereby I am identified as having any conviction be removed from the Forum, including where two or more listings/posts can be linked together to imply I have ANY convictions extant or past.
I am unaware of ANY convictions of ANY criminal nature even including speeding or parking tickets that are in any way legally extant during the last 20 years!
I would also appreciate it if a public warning was made to Feel Martinis, Croucher, McGough, Denny, Mahonney who I believe hides behind the name ‘stathan’ that should they or any other member ever again allude to convictions they had best be in a position to provide publicly available provenance which is extant and that allusion to ANY offence that is spent under the 1974 Act is included and should they ever do so again they will be removed and banned for life both in their name or any sock puppet.
Clearly I have no interest in taking legal action against the list, its owner or the various pond life who seek to dishonesty or unlawfully smear me or other individuals – this of course is not an indication that I will be minded thus at some time in the future.
I believe it would not be unreasonable to ask that the warning be published within a matter of a few days and the clean up & removal offending posts be made within 21 days.
Perhaps you could advise the plumber from the valleys that his insulting but utterly ignorant comment about firearms speaks volumes of his lack of knowledge. It is not remotely unusual in areas of vulnerability, for ladies particularly, to carry firearms with very short barrels and low charge doctored rounds that fall into the category ‘DumDum’, usually a 38 calibre. Stopping power at short range being the only consideration in self defence.
For close protection I have always favoured a 45 pistol modified with a very short barrel and mercury filled soft nose rounds (a ‘magnum’ as in the comics has no meaning or use without a long barrel as all it means is a very fast and very inaccurate shot – the speed of travel be in consequence of the explosive power of the grain load). For open bush a NATO standard 7.62 rifle or rimless Heckler & Koch machine action takes some beating and clearly the shorter barrelled H&K SMGs on single or multiple shot are best in urban areas. Sniper rifles are clearly ONLY of use for the job requiring meticulous zroing and having very long barrels and accuracy up to almost 2 miles.
I must admit I know little of plumbing, beyond plumbing my own home and some years ago basic plumbing of staff housing for about 25 staff!
By what would seem to be a process effectively of ‘Entrapment’ Mark Christopher Croucher is currently dishonourably endeavouring to ‘Extort’ money from me by use of fear and intimidation of threat of Court Action for what is effectively an ‘Innocent Infringement’ in any moral terms of images of nil Commercial value or at best in accord with library equivalents readily available @ $56.25 for multiple usage.
I am not claiming he does not have the Copyright and would obviously have removed them if he had offered that option but he immediately issued dubious and unlawfull punative damages when it is clear in the Copyright Act that the purpose of the act is NOT to punish the innocent infringement but to protect the ownership of the copyright.
I understand the same dishonourable action was brought against Mr. Griffin &/or The BNP
If the case procedes to Court it is likely that it could be seen as a spiteful and vexatious claim as I accept the infringement but there is apparent ‘entrapment’ and attempted ‘extortion’ this could lead to any and all costs being awarded against Croucher and open the possibility – particularly in the case of The BNP of a subsequent claim by them of Malicious Damages and I understand that MEPs are entitled to charge legal costs to the tax payers!
The Case I am defending is due to be heard by Cardiff Courts on 27-January-2009
That Geoffrey Collier had heard of this date from a third party is no surprise to me as I have made no secret of it and you may recal Croucher was making public his glee regarding Courts and his intent to use his winnings to fund an unprincipled extremist pro EU organisation, to which he had in the past communicated names and details of UKIP members – namely SpotLight.
Mark Croucher has from time to time also published legal documents to which he has gained access whilst in the confidence and or employ of The EU in terms of payment.
A measure of the style and veracity of Mark Christopher Croucher is that, seemingly for gain, he accessed UKIP server data and claimed, erroneously, that a man terminally ill with cancer who had been a long term, senior and loyal employee of UKIP even at one time holding the position of CEO had dishonourably and dishonestly provided information to the blogger Junius – this claim was made by Croucher without any hard evidence or factual provenance and even repeated after it had been publicly announced that Piers Merchant was in the terminal stages of multi site metastatic cancer. I have every reason to believe based upon Mark Croucher’s track record over many years that this was done in the deliberate knowledge that Piers Merchant was not physically able to defend himself against what was a quite apparently false accusation. Douglas Denny and others in UKIP colluded in this vile behaviour by failing to renounce it.
Shortly after Mark Croucher had accessed the data base of UKIP I received a copy of said data base and I have every reason to believe that this was deliberately supplied to me as a result of Mark Croucher’s claims as ‘false evidence’. I had never met Piers Merchant until the late stages of his cancer when he deliberately visited Chepstow and we had dinner together where the main topic of conversation was of cancer, alternative treatments, diagnoses etc. This was a man who was shortly to die and to whom UKIP was of staggeringly low priority! Under the circumstances I found him to be urbane honourable and good company and having spoken with his wife and being aware of her notably high powered job it was clear that she also was of the same ilk.
I have absolutely no reason to believe that Piers Merchant was EVER in breech of trust in any political manner whilst serving UKIP over many years. I have every reason to believe that Mark Croucher is dishonest, corrupt, untrustworthy and dishonourable with a vile and vindictive nature – I have every reason to believe that Mark Croucher is not trustworthy with information or data, I have every reason to believe the widespread rumours that he has been involved in breeches of trust and implied blackmail whilst in the employ of the tax payer as a result of UKIP’s political activities.
I know beyond any doubt that Mark Croucher has deliberately and wittingly lied to the media about myself and others of which I have clear and irrefutable proof.
I incline to believe, based on my personal experiences and the sources of the information, that Croucher enjoyed two cheques at his termination the one I am informed was for approximately £30,000 and the other was £20,000. That Croucher was complaining, shortly before his departure from UKIP that he was broke and shortly before that he was living in near distressed circumstances in a small house with irreparable wood rot and motor parts stored in the garden, he then suddenly obtained not one but two public houses of some substance. These he traded until, presumably due to his ineptitude, they failed and he was forced to surrender the license and premises.
It is understood that his benefactor was Nigel Farage and it has been openly discussed by many, amongst whom are past MEPs, members of the NEC and others who have informed me and others that the payments were when David Lott advised Nigel Farage to pay off Croucher and get rid of him or otherwise Farage would never break loose of his claims to have VERY sensitive recordings involving Annabelle Fuller.
That Annabelle Fuller left EUkip is common knowledge and that John Wittaker as Chairman told Nigel Farage to fire her or he, John Wittaker, would ‘go public’. Annabelle Fuller was effectively fired for putting a confidential training and assessment video of John West on the internet, in a deliberate attempt to belittle him and avoid facing various legitimate complaints over the rigging of the selection of MEPs which was a disgrace EUkip wished to hide.
It is believed that Fuller would not have taken this action without the approval of Nigel Farage and this would seem to have been substantiated by the implausible alibi trumped up and published by Wittaker who then resigned. That Farage was in collusion became even more clear when he endorsed a pack of lies provided to the media including Farage’s pall at The Daily Mail, involving Fuller.
I understand that Farage endeavoured to have Fuller employed by The Tax Payers Alliance but they wisely declined. Fuller was subsequently employed for a short period by The British Legion as Press Officer but this employ was terminated we understand when a Branch Chairman known to me was supplied with a large amount of evidence of her behaviour and the final straw for The Legion was her blog when she described Gordon Brown at an event laying a wreath at The Cenotaph as a c***. I do understand that she may well be working in s ome capacity for Farage’s chums at The Tax Payers Alliance!!!
It would seem that Annabelle Fuller is to EUkip and Farage what Jonah is to shipping! We understand that together with the factual data on CaterpillarsAndButterflies and Junius the relationship between Fuller and Farage was material in a £1,200,000 potential donor to UKIP withdrawing his offer when he read her vile blog at More To Life Than Shoes!
[to Reply: Greg@GlanceBack.Demon.co.UK other addresses are auto spam filtered]
for my contact details, blogs & views
We must work together to liberate these United Kingdoms from the undemocratic, corrupt, centralised, unaccountable and allien EUropean Union, which has been so damaging to Britain both in cost and destruction of our values, industry, commerce, governance, defence, British Justice, Commonwealth, borders & the Anglosphere.
From: Eric Edmond [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: 02 June 2009 11:41
To: Greg Lance Watkins
Subject: Fw: Kite Telegraph Article
I should add the other figure in the pic with La Marta is one [REDACTED by G.L-W.] long term Faragista whose main function is to spy for NF. I gave him the bum’s rush at the UKIP conference in Sept 08. More than he deserved
—– Original Message —–
From: Eric Edmond (***)
To: Greg Lance Watkins
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 10:45 AM
Subject: Kite Telegraph Article
Thx for you comments on my blog. I have put URL on blog but Sunday Article is slightly differen so I attach scanned version.
(***) the original as received shows the same address as the ‘e’Mail above including the underscore – this does not show as a copy on Blogger but a copy has been supplied to:
Andrew Parsons; eric edmund; Niall WARRY UW CLUB; John WEST; Geoffrey COLLIER; Paul WESSON [Aardvark]; Petrina Holdsworth; & others.
I have supplied these details to Andrew Parsons and Paul Wesson as I understand them to be ‘Officials’ of The British Democracy Forum’ formerly ‘UKIP Forum’ and they have consistently proved honourable and men of their word in the past and are known to me.
I have deliberately NOT mailed the information to Anthony Butcher who I believe owns the list or the company which owns the list and Brendan Padmore who masquerades as BA Ware who is an official of the Forum as I have good and publicised reasons that show them to be dishonest, corrupt, duplicitous, untrustworthy and dishonourable.
Anyone wishing to discuss this matter is welcome to phone me and my phone number is readily available at: CLICK HERE
I am only too happy to speak with anyone who provides me with their verrifiable name, land line phone number which can be verrified against caller display and IF I request, their street address verifiable against the Electoral roll. I am fortunate that I have absolutely nothing to hide and always strive to provide the truth where possible with factual back up from other sources and therefore willingly provide my full and propper name, my street address, gender, status, ‘e’Mail address, web sites and phone number.
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 thus leave our children and the future, with shame!
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 at EVERY election:
LEAVE THE EU
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK