#0597* - A VERDICT TODAY? UKIP ONTO A LOSER IN COURT YET AGAIN
Please Be Sure To
.
.
Re-TWEET my Twitterings
.
.Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
&
Clean EUkip up NOW make UKIP electable!
The corruption of EUkip’s leadership,
their anti UKIP claque in POWER & the NEC
is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!
.
.
~We may have A VERDICT TODAY?
I believe yet again UKIP are ONTO A LOSER IN COURT!
They are happy to duck dive lie and defame to use members' money to dishonestly renege on their moral duty to pay their bills with integrity!
I wonder if they would be so free with legal costs if it came out of their pockets but as was recently published by a UKIP MEP £140,000 of legal costs is not considered significant - well it wouldn't be it is from other peoples pockets!
I believe yet again UKIP are ONTO A LOSER IN COURT!
They are happy to duck dive lie and defame to use members' money to dishonestly renege on their moral duty to pay their bills with integrity!
I wonder if they would be so free with legal costs if it came out of their pockets but as was recently published by a UKIP MEP £140,000 of legal costs is not considered significant - well it wouldn't be it is from other peoples pockets!
VERDICT ADDED
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
I gather we may well see a verdict to my posting made a week or so ago which I have posted as a repeat below to remind you.
The case came to Court yesterday so we may well have a verdict later today:
Hi,
so yet again UKIP will be in Court squandering members' money or has some gullible fool put up the £30 - £40 - £50,000 it will take to yet again learn their lesson!
Time and again UKIP finds itself in Court and rarely it seems do they win - each time costing members money and almost without fail garnering bad publicity.
Many will have heard how UKIP set out to harass me and not only did they lose their case but they have failed to honour their debt resultant which runs to something over £12.1/2K - UKIP lack even the integrity to settle that moral debt and have utterly ignored the British Courts whom they clearly hold in contempt having on various occasions sheltered behind The EUropean Courts and employment in EUrope to seek to duck their responsibilities or hide their fundamental corruption.
This time rather than honour the Court Judgement and pay compensation of £750 reinstating a member who they had accepted in full knowledge of his background and fully approved by Nigel Farage - now we see them gambling with other peoples' money when they KNOW that their costs will far exceed the £750 the Court ordered them to pay.
UKIP whether it wins, draws or loses will be 10s of £1,000s of pounds out of pocket.
It may be worth their while reading Marta Andreasen's call for removal of Farage as leader once again and in detail!
Is this how UKIP sees itself acting were it ever to gain power in any context of consequence not merely Mare for a village in Cambridgeshire!
VERDICT ADDED
As Expected The Appeal Courts found against UKIP & Upheld the Guilty Verdict.
Subject: UKIP APPEAL
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 13:54:34 +0100
Well, UKIP's barrister - fine man that he is - argued and argued yesterday in Court 74, Court of Appeal...unsuccessfully. It's now official: those within UKIP who are so inclined cannot do what they like; they are bound by the law like the rest of us.
How could a qualified barrister suggest his client takes such a case when from the facts in the public domain UKIP was clearly guilty AND surely the fact that they had already been found guilty was more than something of an indication and the fact they had to lodge acceptance of the full costs of both parties even if they had by some miracle won would have made a very hollow reversal which The Courts most clearly indicated was unlikely.
Nigel Farage turned up,
Could it possibly be that he had employed a salaried member of staff in the role or is she posiibly to be paid for her 'services' via her so called PR Agency and self publicist skills!
accompanied by a lady of, shall I say, ample bosom, who I took to be some form of assistant.
He disappeared before the proceedings commenced, without having even acknowledged me.
She, however, remained and I saw her and Parkin, who was also there, cosying up to one another behind me in the court room. There was also a short, very fat, grey-beared man hovering around the place, clearly as part of the opposing side's team. Does anyone recognise the description?
This could easily be a description of Mick McGough who is omni present licking any boots that may enhance his inadequacy he is ever willing to lie, cheat and dissemble in his own interest or it seems that of his owners.
However it seems more likely to have been Michael Greaves who pretends to some legal experience in the distant past - Though the last record I can find would seem to indicate he was fired as Councel some 10 or more years ago, for abrogation of his duties and professional responsibilities.
Anyway, that's it in a nutshell. Where they are planning on going from hereon is anyone's guess. Oh, I almost forgot, when the barrister, the wheelchair-bound Mr Engelman (Trinity Chambers),
See his URL CLICK HERE
was asked about the costs he quoted a figure of £16,000 in total. Somehow I find myself doubting that...
It does sound unlikely however it may well have meant his own fees.
One can only consider UKIP Leadership in their stupidity as having been ill advised to act so irresponsibly but perhaps the motivation was more influence from Nigel Farage's point of vie by the interests of his assistant than by any measure of common sense or responsible adult behaviour!
. .
Hi,
I gather we may well see a verdict to my posting made a week or so ago which I have posted as a repeat below to remind you.
The case came to Court yesterday so we may well have a verdict later today:
#0588* - UKIP ONTO A LOSER IN COURT YET AGAIN
#0588* - UKIP ONTO A LOSER IN COURT YET AGAIN
.
Win, Draw or Lose The Members Will Again Be The Losers!
Just as UKIP's failure to honour the British Courts and their verdict to pay me the £12.1/2K has done nothing but show them for the dishonest, corrupt incompetents that they are!
.
.Just as UKIP's failure to honour the British Courts and their verdict to pay me the £12.1/2K has done nothing but show them for the dishonest, corrupt incompetents that they are!
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
Hi,
so yet again UKIP will be in Court squandering members' money or has some gullible fool put up the £30 - £40 - £50,000 it will take to yet again learn their lesson!
Time and again UKIP finds itself in Court and rarely it seems do they win - each time costing members money and almost without fail garnering bad publicity.
Many will have heard how UKIP set out to harass me and not only did they lose their case but they have failed to honour their debt resultant which runs to something over £12.1/2K - UKIP lack even the integrity to settle that moral debt and have utterly ignored the British Courts whom they clearly hold in contempt having on various occasions sheltered behind The EUropean Courts and employment in EUrope to seek to duck their responsibilities or hide their fundamental corruption.
This time rather than honour the Court Judgement and pay compensation of £750 reinstating a member who they had accepted in full knowledge of his background and fully approved by Nigel Farage - now we see them gambling with other peoples' money when they KNOW that their costs will far exceed the £750 the Court ordered them to pay.
UKIP whether it wins, draws or loses will be 10s of £1,000s of pounds out of pocket.
It may be worth their while reading Marta Andreasen's call for removal of Farage as leader once again and in detail!
How can such folly backing a sure financial loser be of ANY merit to Farage or UKIP or least of all its members and credibility.Subject: GENERAL NEWS
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 12:18:20 +0100
Hello everyone,
I'm sure most, if not all of you know, that I obtained judgment in the High Court last year against not only the local chairman of the political party of which I am a member, but also the party itself.
The defendant's did not like that and appealed. The appeal is to be heard next week in the Court of Appeal in London. As at the original hearing, I shall be representing myself. And, as a condition of the appeal, the other side will not be able to claim costs against me even if they win - and I'll see to it they don't! They also have a new barrister on the job; it appears the original one left his chambers for pastures new some time after the hearing last September. I can't understand why. Perhaps losing against a layman was more than his professional constitution could bear. But that's his problem. Anyway it'll be yours truly up before the 'big beaks' next week!
I've been on something of a weight loss/fitness programme these past six weeks. I've lost a total of 16 lbs, which I suppose is fairly good going. Over the last few weeks, however, this has plateau'd to a loss of 1 lb per week, which I came to find discouraging, especially after all the effort it takes. It reached the point where, on Saturday night just gone - I weigh myself each Saturday morning - I resolved to give it up as a bad job and go back to being a fat slob again.
The next morning I woke up and, having drunk my first coffee of the day, went off to buy a copy of the last edition of the News of the World. Now I haven't bought a copy of that newspaper for YEARS, but as it was the last opportunity to do so I thought I'd see what it had to offer.
I had a good look through it. The glossy supplement didn't have much of interest to men, apart from a lovely picture of the luminously beautiful Thandie Newton near the front. There was the obligatory crossword near the end and on the opposite page were the star forecasts for the week. Now my star sign is Leo, so I had a look at what the resident clairvoyant had to say. It was this (and you can check on it):
"YOU HAVE THE WILLPOWER TO START, OR RESTART, A FITNESS PLAN AND ENSURE IT WORKS"
Mystic Meg saves the day.
BYE FOR NOW
ALAN
Is this how UKIP sees itself acting were it ever to gain power in any context of consequence not merely Mare for a village in Cambridgeshire!
VERDICT ADDED
As Expected The Appeal Courts found against UKIP & Upheld the Guilty Verdict.
Subject: UKIP APPEAL
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 13:54:34 +0100
So let us consider:
Hello everyone,
Well, UKIP's barrister - fine man that he is - argued and argued yesterday in Court 74, Court of Appeal...unsuccessfully. It's now official: those within UKIP who are so inclined cannot do what they like; they are bound by the law like the rest of us.
Nigel Farage turned up, accompanied by a lady of, shall I say, ample bosom, who I took to be some form of assistant. He disappeared before the proceedings commenced, without having even acknowledged me. She, however, remained and I saw her and Parkin, who was also there, cosying up to one another behind me in the court room. There was also a short, very fat, grey-beared man hovering around the place, clearly as part of the opposing side's team. Does anyone recognise the description?
Anyway, that's it in a nutshell. Where they are planning on going from hereon is anyone's guess. Oh, I almost forgot, when the barrister, the wheelchair-bound Mr Engelman (Trinity Chambers), was asked about the costs he quoted a figure of £16,000 in total. Somehow I find myself doubting that...
ALL GOOD WISHES
ALAN HARDY
Well, UKIP's barrister - fine man that he is - argued and argued yesterday in Court 74, Court of Appeal...unsuccessfully. It's now official: those within UKIP who are so inclined cannot do what they like; they are bound by the law like the rest of us.
How could a qualified barrister suggest his client takes such a case when from the facts in the public domain UKIP was clearly guilty AND surely the fact that they had already been found guilty was more than something of an indication and the fact they had to lodge acceptance of the full costs of both parties even if they had by some miracle won would have made a very hollow reversal which The Courts most clearly indicated was unlikely.
Nigel Farage turned up,
One has to wonder why Nigel Farage would turn up to such a minor case where any kind of victory would save UKIP £750 yet cost them very many £1,000s.
One could be forgiven for wondering if his escort and a weekend away was the motivation!
accompanied by a lady of, shall I say, ample bosom, who I took to be some form of assistant.
He disappeared before the proceedings commenced, without having even acknowledged me.
Hardly surprising as he must have had the intelligence to realise UKIP were unlikely to win and even if they did it would cost the membership fees of at least 1,000 members and most probably nearer 2,000 members - hardly a sound investment by a competent leader!
Little wonder that he slunk off to await the verdict beyond public view - I would speculate he was more than adequately filled in later in the day by his assistant.She, however, remained and I saw her and Parkin, who was also there, cosying up to one another behind me in the court room. There was also a short, very fat, grey-beared man hovering around the place, clearly as part of the opposing side's team. Does anyone recognise the description?
This could easily be a description of Mick McGough who is omni present licking any boots that may enhance his inadequacy he is ever willing to lie, cheat and dissemble in his own interest or it seems that of his owners.
However it seems more likely to have been Michael Greaves who pretends to some legal experience in the distant past - Though the last record I can find would seem to indicate he was fired as Councel some 10 or more years ago, for abrogation of his duties and professional responsibilities.
Anyway, that's it in a nutshell. Where they are planning on going from hereon is anyone's guess. Oh, I almost forgot, when the barrister, the wheelchair-bound Mr Engelman (Trinity Chambers),
See his URL CLICK HERE
was asked about the costs he quoted a figure of £16,000 in total. Somehow I find myself doubting that...
It does sound unlikely however it may well have meant his own fees.
One can only consider UKIP Leadership in their stupidity as having been ill advised to act so irresponsibly but perhaps the motivation was more influence from Nigel Farage's point of vie by the interests of his assistant than by any measure of common sense or responsible adult behaviour!
. .
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
~UN-PROFESSIONAL RESPONSES DEMEAN UKIP!
Alan Hardy's comments serve him ill but he is merely a member!
It does seem when Steve Crowther, Steve Allison or any of the other buffoons speaks out they damage the party credibility!!
Alan Hardy's comments serve him ill but he is merely a member!
It does seem when Steve Crowther, Steve Allison or any of the other buffoons speaks out they damage the party credibility!!
.
Hi,
one has to wonder whose 'e'Mails are the more damaging to the cause they 'claim' to espouse.
I would submit that Steve Allisons are the more consequential as they are so clearly anti UKIP's best interests.
So let us see what they have to say for themselves:
Firstly I would contend that Alan Hardy's comments were far from wise when he stated:
Perhaps Farage would have served the party better had he read the original judgement which I have posted in full - see The Right Sidebar & click on Alan Hardy etc.
You will note the judgement draws attention to the fact that The BNP issue was clearly no more than a fig leaf etc.
To seek to uphold the fundamentals of basic law is now branded by some of UKIP's enemies as being 'anti UKIP'.
Surely no one would deny UKIP the right to enact into their Constitution, Rules or Manifesto the resolution to prevent past members of The BNP from joining UKIP, on some grounds or other but clearly not on the grounds of Racism, anti Judaism, anti homosexuality or opposition to immigrants as UKIP's parners in The EU The EFD are not only pro EU membership but have advocated killing Immigrants from North Africa, are avowedly Racist espousing segregation on public transport etc., anti Homosexual advocating dressing them as rabbits and shooting them and include Holocaust Deniers.
That UKIP welcomes membership of such a group yet seeks to ban ex members of The BNP from joining makes their claimed ruling look a little foolish and more a petty rivalry than a point of principle sadly.
That UKIP has a track record of involvement with The BNP members and before them The National Front is indisputable. It is also worth reminding people of UKIP's own extremist past with the vetting of members by the criminal Gerry Gable via the equally dishonest Mark Croucher and false accusations of membership and association with The BNP.
That Alan Hardy sent his 'e'Mail makes it look as if he is fronting efforts at bringing in BNP members which I doubt he would be so foolish as to espouse but we may well find his 'e'Mail is little more than a venting of his anger at the dishonesty of UKIP as he has, I am given to understand, written confirmation from Nigel Farage that he had informed UKIP of his past membership of The BNP and Farage accepted him as a UKIP member specifically.
I still contend Alan Hardy's 'e'Mail was unwise whether he wishes to drift out of UKIP seeing them as a spent force or continue his active membership. He has also undermined his own credibility should he be serious in his bluster about further legal action.
I would contend Alan Hardy has harmed his own position but done little harm to UKIP save in costs, which are a mere bagatelle relative to the £Millions Farage has personally made from his position in UKIP.
Let us see if you think Steve Allison's comments are any more professional or are they effectively anti UKIP in the manner that they damage the party and its credibility since he speaks as an executive of the party, unlike Alan Hardy who is merely an ex member of The BNP who is in dispute with UKIP over his membership status!
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011
From: steve.allison107@btinternet.com
To: steve.allison107@btinternet.com
Subject:
Clearly no one is likely to take UKIP seriously as a part of the law making process when it is so clearly in abuse of the law itself and something of a vexatious litigant!
Those who actively seek to support UKIP seek to clean-up the party not provide costly cover for its dishonest executive!
Thereby no precedent will be set and the Trojan Horse can stand at the side of the road to the castle until it is shown to be of no use in smuggling the troops of the claimed enemy into the camp.
Were it I seeking to serve UKIP I would not be wasting members' money nor undermining UKIP's credibility but as a long term supporter I would be considering the long term and to that end I would call an immediate NEC meeting. I would enact a rule empowering a sub committee of people seen as honest and of probity from within UKIP which would by deffinition preclude members of The NEC and leadership claque and I would empower them to review every member, starting from the top and reserve the right to refund the membership of any member who fulfilled certaimn criteria in terms of past memberships and Criminal Records.
One would have to take care as to how this was worded as it could well preclude individuals like Derek clark, Nigel Farage, Jeffrey Titford, Graham Booth and the like from membership as they have all fallen foul of the law I understand and have had to repay monies they fraudulently obtained or dishonestly used. I understand we are yet to hear the outcome of the case against Stuart Agnew and that against David Bannerman though I gather Mike Nattrass has withdrawn his claim against The Sunday Times and they are to publish an update that subsequent to their earlier article OLAF have decided to take no further action against Mike Nattrass.
In the matter of cleaning up UKIP the party would be well served were it to put before the committee as constituted such individuals as Annabelle Fuller, Mick McGough, Douglas Denny, Andrew Smith, Hugh Williams and others who through their fantasies and dishonesty have corrupted UKIP and demeaned its reputation as a credible political force.
I wonder what the anti UKIP bloggers that Steve Allison seems to follow will make of dealing with the truth and on what leg they would seek to stand if UKIP were cleaned-up and presented a credible professional stance with vision, strategy, tactics a plan - training and a structure that would make them presentable to the informed electorate and encourage activists to rejoin with probity and transparency.
Until that time UKIP defames itself daily on its own controlled blogs such that one wonders what an anti UKIP blog would find to write about - though Steve Alison has made a pretty fair fist of showing us by example.
As a supporter I am all too well aware that unless UKIP makes these moves towards professionalising they are increasingly a part of the problem when it comes to leaving The EU and have no place in the solution.
For more details regarding this particular case do CLICK HERE
. .
Hi,
one has to wonder whose 'e'Mails are the more damaging to the cause they 'claim' to espouse.
I would submit that Steve Allisons are the more consequential as they are so clearly anti UKIP's best interests.
So let us see what they have to say for themselves:
Firstly I would contend that Alan Hardy's comments were far from wise when he stated:
| Subject: | UKIP'S APPEAL |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 22 Jul 2011 14:23:22 +0100 |
| From: | alan hardy |
| To: | Gordon Parkin |
Clearly one can empathise with Alan Hardy and just as Nigel Farage must have realised he had exposed UKIP to a hiding for nothing and a bill in the region of £30-50K. That Farage left hurriedly from The Appeal Courts in The Strand it ill becomes Alan Hardy to crow over so obvious a victory.Dear Sirs,
Courtesy of the Court of Appeal: those within UKIP who feel so inclined CANNOT do as they please, they are bound by the law as are the rest of society. And I may add that UKIP faces further legal action unless the decision not to allow former members of the BNP to stand as candidates for the party, as well as for internal posts, is reversed. Indeed I would like to see written evidence that it even exists.
Take note all of you, especially Mr. Farage.
ALAN HARDY
successful litigant.
Perhaps Farage would have served the party better had he read the original judgement which I have posted in full - see The Right Sidebar & click on Alan Hardy etc.
You will note the judgement draws attention to the fact that The BNP issue was clearly no more than a fig leaf etc.
To seek to uphold the fundamentals of basic law is now branded by some of UKIP's enemies as being 'anti UKIP'.
Surely no one would deny UKIP the right to enact into their Constitution, Rules or Manifesto the resolution to prevent past members of The BNP from joining UKIP, on some grounds or other but clearly not on the grounds of Racism, anti Judaism, anti homosexuality or opposition to immigrants as UKIP's parners in The EU The EFD are not only pro EU membership but have advocated killing Immigrants from North Africa, are avowedly Racist espousing segregation on public transport etc., anti Homosexual advocating dressing them as rabbits and shooting them and include Holocaust Deniers.
That UKIP welcomes membership of such a group yet seeks to ban ex members of The BNP from joining makes their claimed ruling look a little foolish and more a petty rivalry than a point of principle sadly.
That UKIP has a track record of involvement with The BNP members and before them The National Front is indisputable. It is also worth reminding people of UKIP's own extremist past with the vetting of members by the criminal Gerry Gable via the equally dishonest Mark Croucher and false accusations of membership and association with The BNP.
That Alan Hardy sent his 'e'Mail makes it look as if he is fronting efforts at bringing in BNP members which I doubt he would be so foolish as to espouse but we may well find his 'e'Mail is little more than a venting of his anger at the dishonesty of UKIP as he has, I am given to understand, written confirmation from Nigel Farage that he had informed UKIP of his past membership of The BNP and Farage accepted him as a UKIP member specifically.
I still contend Alan Hardy's 'e'Mail was unwise whether he wishes to drift out of UKIP seeing them as a spent force or continue his active membership. He has also undermined his own credibility should he be serious in his bluster about further legal action.
I would contend Alan Hardy has harmed his own position but done little harm to UKIP save in costs, which are a mere bagatelle relative to the £Millions Farage has personally made from his position in UKIP.
Let us see if you think Steve Allison's comments are any more professional or are they effectively anti UKIP in the manner that they damage the party and its credibility since he speaks as an executive of the party, unlike Alan Hardy who is merely an ex member of The BNP who is in dispute with UKIP over his membership status!
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011
From: steve.allison107@btinternet.com
To: steve.allison107@btinternet.com
Subject:
Let us consider this in some detail:You may have heard that UKIP lost its appeal in court today against the re-admittance to membership of a Mr.Alan Hardy. This is being spun by certain anti-UKIP Blogs and Websites as a defeat for UKIP and touted an example of how Nigel has been wasting UKIP's money on personal legal vendettas.
I do not think anyone who knows me would accuse me of being a Nigel Sycophant or someone who believes Nigel can do no wrong, However, in this case I am definitely 100% behind Nigel. Alan Hardy is a former member of the BNP and his case is AT THE MOMENT limited to him. However, I believe that he is being used as a Trojan Horse to force UKIP to accept BNP Members into out ranks and worse. I copy below an e-mail that Hardy sent after the Appeal Court Ruling.
UKIP has to fight this man to the bitter end! We have all worked too hard to destroy the myth that UKIP and the BNP are in any way alike, we must keep out the BNP, this is a fight we cannot afford to lose.
Steve Allison
You may have heard that UKIP lost its appeal in court today against the re-admittance to membership of a Mr.Alan Hardy.The Court's ruled that Alan Hardy could not be barred from the party on the grounds given in the light of the facts - may I suggest that those who have UKIP's long term wellbeing at heart and genuinely support UKIP take the trouble to read the judgement and it becomes clear why The Courts not only found in favour of Alan Hardy but that the original judgement was upheld by The Appeal Courts in The Strand.
This is being spun by certain anti-UKIP Blogs and Websites as a defeat for UKIP and touted an example of how Nigel has been wasting UKIP's money on personal legal vendettas.How else could any honest individual see this? I can not speak for anti UKIP blogs as i rarely read them and then only by accident - sadly the blogs UKIP controls do more than enough damage to UKIP!
Clearly no one is likely to take UKIP seriously as a part of the law making process when it is so clearly in abuse of the law itself and something of a vexatious litigant!
Those who actively seek to support UKIP seek to clean-up the party not provide costly cover for its dishonest executive!
Perhaps you could show where Steve Allison has intentionally spoken out to clean-up UKIP and make it electable other than in his personal interest!
I do not think anyone who knows me would accuse me of being a Nigel Sycophant or someone who believes Nigel can do no wrong,
However, in this case I am definitely 100% behind Nigel.Steve Allison pretends to balance yet promptly defends Nigel Farage's ineptitude thereby showing a clear lack of judgement on his own part.
Alan Hardy is a former member of the BNP and his case is AT THE MOMENT limited to him.Indeed it is and also to the irrefutable fact that UKIP leadership was aware of his past BNP affiliations and actively promoted or at least condoned his membership granting him not only membership of UKIP but as I recall a branch membership status!
However, I believe that he is being used as a Trojan Horse to force UKIP to accept BNP Members into out ranks and worse.Were that the case do not forget it was Nigel Farage who threw open the gates of Troy and on precedent alone made the entry of The Trojan Horse possible to mix our poets it may be apposite to some to see the engineer hoist on his own petard but I as a supporter of UKIP over many years would like Laocoön caution as so aptly did Virgil with his notable line "Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes"
I copy below an e-mail that Hardy sent after the Appeal Court Ruling.As per the mailing I received previously and have posted above.
A wise General selects his ground and also his time for battle where an inept fool charges in and looses as have UKIP - Indeed the end will be bitter. You may yet find that in making much of this issue UKIP may yet throw open the gates and stand bereft of clothing for a battle - however aware of the ineptitude of Alan Hardy's message were it I seeking the well being of UKIP I would act with good grace and grant his membership as the Courts have legally shown in HIS CASE there were no legal grounds used in his removal.
UKIP has to fight this man to the bitter end!
Thereby no precedent will be set and the Trojan Horse can stand at the side of the road to the castle until it is shown to be of no use in smuggling the troops of the claimed enemy into the camp.
We have all worked too hard to destroy the myth that UKIP and the BNP are in any way alike, we must keep out the BNP, this is a fight we cannot afford to lose.This of course is no more than self serving spin and clearly twaddle when you consider UKIP's fellowship with ex NF members and the use it has made of ex BNP members - that it is clearly twaddle is shown by UKIP's associates in The EU - merely BNP with funny accents!!
Steve Allison
One would have to take care as to how this was worded as it could well preclude individuals like Derek clark, Nigel Farage, Jeffrey Titford, Graham Booth and the like from membership as they have all fallen foul of the law I understand and have had to repay monies they fraudulently obtained or dishonestly used. I understand we are yet to hear the outcome of the case against Stuart Agnew and that against David Bannerman though I gather Mike Nattrass has withdrawn his claim against The Sunday Times and they are to publish an update that subsequent to their earlier article OLAF have decided to take no further action against Mike Nattrass.
In the matter of cleaning up UKIP the party would be well served were it to put before the committee as constituted such individuals as Annabelle Fuller, Mick McGough, Douglas Denny, Andrew Smith, Hugh Williams and others who through their fantasies and dishonesty have corrupted UKIP and demeaned its reputation as a credible political force.
I wonder what the anti UKIP bloggers that Steve Allison seems to follow will make of dealing with the truth and on what leg they would seek to stand if UKIP were cleaned-up and presented a credible professional stance with vision, strategy, tactics a plan - training and a structure that would make them presentable to the informed electorate and encourage activists to rejoin with probity and transparency.
Until that time UKIP defames itself daily on its own controlled blogs such that one wonders what an anti UKIP blog would find to write about - though Steve Alison has made a pretty fair fist of showing us by example.
As a supporter I am all too well aware that unless UKIP makes these moves towards professionalising they are increasingly a part of the problem when it comes to leaving The EU and have no place in the solution.
For more details regarding this particular case do CLICK HERE
. .
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
&
Work With THE MIDNIGHT GROUP to
Reclaim YOUR Future
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Write Upon Your Ballot Paper at EVERY election:
(IF You Have No INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance Candidate) .
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 01291 - 62 65 62
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.Blogspot.com
General Stuff: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.blogspot.com
TWITTER: Greg_LW
General Stuff: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.blogspot.com
TWITTER: Greg_LW
Please Be Sure To
..
Re-TWEET my Twitterings
.
.Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
&
Related articles
- #0588* - Ukip Onto a Loser in Court Yet Again (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
- #0594* - UKIP WATCH Steve ALLISON Pull The Wings Off of its NEC (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
- #0569* - UKIP Seems NOT to Understand Professionalism! (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
- 06-Jun-2011 - UKIP Apology Makes EFD Membership Repugnant for Honourable Supporters of UKIP (efd-eu.blogspot.com)
- #0583* - Is UKIP Leadership or The BBC The Most 'Homophobic'? (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
- #0532* - UKIP Could Have Achieved So VERY Much (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
- #0579* - Nigel Farage Presents Well IF ONLY UKIP had leadership & structure! (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
- INDEX of CONTENT - UKIP-vs-EUkip The First Year (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Due to Spam & the offensive comments of many seeking to support UKIP corruption in a cloak of anonymity full moderation applies. This blog is designed to bring to light the actions of UKIP's leadership and their claque and show they are unfit for purpose on almost every discernible count.
The blog is based on supported facts, accurate quotes, substantiated details and as shon my opinion and that of others quoted!
By all means comment in your own name it will probably be published if you avoid foul and abusive language!