#0761* - A Summary of some aspects of the John ISON farce!
.
Please Be Sure To .
. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
To Spread The Facts World Wide
.
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!
.
A Summary of some aspects of the John ISON farce!
As published on http://john-ison.blogspot.com earlier this morning!!
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
A Summary of some aspects of the John ISON farce!
Hi,
it is interesting to note the obvious
disgust at John Ison's behaviour and revulsion at the unprofessional
behaviour of UKIP leadership in their anti homosexual and vindictive
treatment of Nikki Sinclaire, on a UKIP controlled Forum!
It is all but impossible for UKIP to
claim it is not anti homosexual and now especially with the addition of
the supporter of Tom Wise!
Roger Helmer defedtee from the Tories
because he could not get his own way when he stepped down as an MEP, he
who set out to try to have the deffinition of where his house was, in
order to try to claim even more expenses as an MEP!
Roger Helmer recently stated his opinion
that homosexuality was a treatable mental illness - surely the world
left that view behind in the 1960s, when we campaigned for the
decriminalisation of homosexual acts between consenting adults. I should
imagine The Tories are glad to see the back of this idiotic man with
his arcane views and his plastic EUroScepticism as he milks the system
for all it is worth TO HIM!
Trusted Member
Originally Posted by
Arthur Fonzarelli
Depending on which side of the Miss
Sinclaire/Mr Ison 'conflict' one finds oneself on, one could feel that
the other is only interested in smearing them.
One could, or one could try to think beyond the purely superficial.
In January 2010, UKIP's NEC unwisely allowed itself to be dragged into
what was basically a personal spat between two MEPs, Sinclaire and
Farage.
The correct course would have been to tell Nigel Farage that the NEC had
no constitutional power to compel MEPs to join a particular group
(which it hadn't), and that any complaint about Nikki Sinclaire leaving
the EFD should be submitted through the party's disciplinary channel.
That would have forced Farage to demonstrate exactly how Sinclaire had
breached UKIP's rules (if she had), provided an opportunity for
mediation, and ensured that if necessary the matter be decided in the
proper way by the discipline committee (from which NEC members are
barred).
Instead of which, the chairman of the NEC foolishly issued a statement Statement from UKIP chairman - UK Independence Party
on behalf of the committee, announcing that Sinclaire would not be
permitted to stand for UKIP at future elections on the grounds of her
having left the EP group, and having "failed to declare other relevant
issues to the interview panel when she was selected as a UKIP candidate"
(which she denied). If Sinclaire chose to challenge this legally, as
past experience suggested she might, any breach of normal disciplinary
procedure or evidence of her having been treated less favourably than
others in similar situations, would obviously disadvantage UKIP hugely.
Within a matter of months, first Mike Nattrass then Trevor Colman
followed her out of the EFD, yet no action was taken against them by the
NEC and, unlike Sinclaire, both are still accepted as UKIP MEPs and
listed as such on the party website.
Now we see that the article linked by Alex McKee at #9 raises the
possibility that the second of the accusations levelled at Sinclaire -
that of failing to declare relevant issues to a candidate selection
panel - may also have applied to John Ison.
Ison stood as UKIP candidate in Redditch in 2005 and Solihull in 2010,
being bound by the party constitution on both occasions to make "a
written application and shall make full disclosure of any fact,
political or personal, that may have a bearing on their suitability for
selection as a candidate". In 2010 the application form stated: "I am
not aware of any circumstances from my past that might cause
embarrassment to the party were it to be revealed".
Did Ison fail to declare that he had been banned by court order from
seeing his children, and lie by signing the form anyway? If so, now
that the story is known through circulation on the internet, the NEC
will be guilty of victimizing Nikki Sinclaire if it doesn't ban Ison
from standing in all future elections just as it has banned her.
If he did declare it and was allowed to stand despite this, the party
and all its future candidates will be at risk from resulting bad
publicity, but why would a party that goes to the length of demanding
CRB checks on its candidates precisely in order to screen out potential
problems, regard a court order protecting five-year-olds from their own
father as not having a bearing on his suitability as a candidate?
-
Originally Posted by
Barboo
One could, or one could try to think beyond the purely superficial.....
And indeed you do, Barboo. A quite stunning post, extraordinarily well-informed and astute.
The questions it raises, which I asked myself on being informed of the
archive article on the court case only recently, are for members of the
party. Which is why I did not ask them publicly.
What a mess.
-
Trusted Member
Originally Posted by
Barboo
Did Ison fail to declare that he had been banned by court order from seeing his children, and lie by signing the form anyway?
I've no idea what Ison has or has not declared but he was pre-UKIP
a notable public campaigner for fathers rights. How have you come to
the apparent conclusion that his own circumstances were not already in
the public domain?
-
Trusted Member
Originally Posted by
Steve Morson
And indeed you do, Barboo. A quite stunning post, extraordinarily well-informed and astute.
Thank you, Steve!
-
Trusted Member
Originally Posted by
Independent UKIP
I've no idea what Ison has or has not declared
but he was pre-UKIP a notable public campaigner for fathers rights. How
have you come to the apparent conclusion that his own circumstances were
not already in the public domain?
I haven't come to any conclusion on the matter and that is not the
point. UKIP's constitution does not put responsibility onto candidate
selection panels for acquainting themselves with applicants' personal
circumstances from what is in the public domain. It states
categorically that candidates shall make full disclosure.
If John Ison did not do so then natural justice demands that he should
be treated the same as Nikki Sinclaire in what the NEC claims was a
similar circumstance (failure to disclose, which she denies), and banned
as she was from standing in future elections. Not to ban Ison would be
a second example of Sinclaire being treated more harshly than others,
the first being that action was taken against her for leaving the EFD
but not against Nattrass and Colman.
-
Uber Member
It is very simple really Nigel doesn't concern himself with rule
books, as I've had experience of, by his selfish standards there is one
rule for him and his mates and another for his foes.
You may be interested to note YET AGAIN
that the false accusation of failure to disclose made against Nikki
Sinclaire was an unprofessional pack of lies from UKIP Leadership and
pure discrimination.
Nikki Sinclaire was madse technically
bankrupt (ie based on the claim of one man who served p0apers at an
address at which she clearly did not live as she washelping UKIP set up
their head office in Birmingham!).
The details were IMMEDIATELY reported by
Nikki Sinclaire to The Returning Officer in the election, in which she
stood. She also informed Michael Zucherman The UKIP Part Secretary at
the time.
I also published the full details at the
time as they were a matter of public record, as is the fact that John
Ison was not found guilty in a Court Case of assault on his wife who
left him for another woman but WAS deemed unfit to have access to his
children, presumably his volatile temper or underhand behaviour were
deemed a risk to children.
As to bankruptcy being ostensibly a
cause of the UKIP Leadership's unprofessional and partisan behaviour the
Guilty Judgement against Nigel Farage, Godfrey Bloom and UKIP inCourt
would seem to indicate otherwise as would the official caution from the
EU Parliament aganst Godfrey Bloom for his anti homosexual bullying.
It is interesting to note that John
Ison's vindictive and malicious behaviour against Nikki Sinclaire and
his various thefts and seeming 'construction' of so called evidence, in
collusion with others (including the proven corrupt Christopher Gill
see: CLICK HERE) may all be a vindictive attack based on John Ison's seemingly very 'challenged' sexuality and unhappy marriage!
Nikki Sinclaire's treatment at the hands
of UKIP's partyisan and unprofessional leadership can not be on the
grounds of her historic bankruptcy reported at the time, despite the
clamourings of Nigel Farage's sewer rat Mark Croucher who we KNOW
colluded in what seems clearly to be efforts to set Nikki Sinclaire up
to curry favour with Nigel Farage!
I say it can not be based on the
irrefutable fact that Niel Hamilton the formerly disgraced Tory MP was
courted by Farage and joined UKIP some 5 years ago and is now, we
understand, promised a leading seat as a contender for election to
public office once more and as is also a matter of record he was
bankrupt and was recently boasting of it on national TV.
Perhaps Niall Warry was correct that in the corrupt world of UKIP:
It is very simple really Nigel doesn't concern himself with rule
books, as I've had experience of, by his selfish standards there is one
rule for him and his mates and another for his foes.
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
Please Be Sure To .. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
. .
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
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) .
to Reclaim YOUR Future
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 01594 - 528 337
Please Be Sure To .. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
