Thursday, December 30, 2010

Ray Finch-UKIP

We have decided to run a regular little spotlight on Ukip's more bizarre members. We've found a failed council, parliamentary and EU election candidate called Ray Finch, and thought he would be a good place to start. OK, so Ukip have lots of failed candidates, that's not the point.

Ukip members are not very bright, and some even think that Nigel Farage and Marta Andreasen are good things. Internal opponents of Farage call those people sycophants, some call them worse. Why don't you decide? Here's what Ray Finch had to say in an interview with Bloggers4UKIP before last year's EU election:
"In my opinion MEPs can do absolutely nothing in Brussels as they are merely ciphers employed to offer a veneer of democracy to an anti-democratic regime. There is a place for Nigel to be there to make news by being interviewed using it as a backdrop and when Marta is elected she can cause trouble by getting on the financial committees because she knows where the bodies are buried but ordinary MEPs sitting there pressing voting buttons like so many Pavlov's dogs whilst getting fatter on free lunches is a waste of time, money and talent".
I bet the other Ukip MEPs love Mr Finch for likening them to Pavlov's dogs, but not as much as Mr Finch obviously loves Mr Farage and Ms Andreasen .

He can't seem to say much without mentioning his hero Nigel. Take this example:
"Winston would have come to UKIP, had a fight with Nigel over whether brandy was better than best bitter and defected back. Pre war Winston was best known for putting country before party so he was a UKIP man before his time really".
So Winston Churchill would have defected to Ukip, had an argument about alcoholic beverages with Nigel Farage, then defected back to the Tories, presumably leaving Ukip after his brief defection to put country before party as Mr Finch pointed out. We can see why Mr Finch doesn't get elected can't we?

Monday, December 20, 2010

Oldham East and Saddleworth By-Election

Paul "Roderick Spode" Nuttall
UKIP recently announced former party chairman John Whittaker would be fighting the Oldham by-election on their behalf. They have now announced their North West MEP Paul Nuttall will be standing in the by-election. Who knows maybe they are putting up two candidates. Or even more, after all nominations are open until Thursday.

They do have a habit of making themselves look foolish. When Whittaker was an MEP he stood in multiple seats in the 2005 general election, proving the contempt in which UKIP hold the electorate. Maybe now they are going for multiple candidates.

Nigel "Bertie Wooster" Farage
 The problem with Nuttall is that he lacks sincerity. He dresses like Roderick Spode as a sign of his worship of Bertie Wooster impersonator and UKIP Fuhrer Nigel Farage. Despite dressing like a country squire Nuttall actually comes from one of the rougher parts of Liverpool. Any illusion created by his Roderick Spode dress sense is soon shattered when he opens his mouth, he makes Lily Savage sound posh.

So the running comedy that is UKIP continues. Except it isn't all funny really. It's ironic that UKIP pitch in an MEP in a by-election caused by Phil Woolas being sacked for telling porkies. Let's not forget, if UKIP try to play whiter than white, that two of their MEPs have spent time at Her Majesty's Pleasure. They are Ashley Mote and Tom Wise.

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

UKIP Lose Another Court Case

From the Northern Echo, again!

A TEACHER has won a legal battle with the UK Independence Party (UKIP) over an attempt to use his former membership of the British National Party to expel him.

Judge Peter Fox ruled that UKIP and the party’s Stockton branch chairman Gordon Parkin acted unlawfully when they tried to throw out member Alan Hardy.

The High Court in Middlesbrough heard how Mr Hardy, the branch’s former press officer, was initially expelled after falling out with Mr Parkin, who stood for UKIP in the Stockton North constituency at the last general election.

In his ruling, which declared Mr Hardy’s expulsion as null and void, Judge Fox summed up the relationship between the two men.

He said Mr Hardy, from Stockton, accused Mr Parkin of being “incompetent, dishonest and self-seeking”, while Mr Parkin accused Mr Hardy of being dishonest and so disruptive that it was impossible for the branch to function.

The row came to a head when Mr Hardy asked Mr Parkin to resign as branch chairman.

An argument between the two men resulted in UKIP Stockton branch being temporarily banned from the venue it used for meetings.

In September last year, Mr Parkin wrote to Mr Hardy saying he should no longer attend branch meetings.

In January, when Mr Hardy tried to renew his membership, Judge Fox found that UKIP general secretary Jonathan Arnott contrived to exclude him from the party on the grounds that he was a former BNP member, despite party leaders being aware of his past when he joined.

Mr Hardy, from Stockton, who is teaching English as a foreign language in Saudi Arabia, last night welcomed the ruling.

He said: “This has been about accountability. Gordon Parkin, aided by the UKIP hierarchy, now knows he cannot treat those who may disagree with him like dirt.

“Indeed, in light of the outcome of this case, I think he should do the decent thing and resign his membership.”

UKIP executive chairman Steve Crowther told The Northern Echo that the party was very unhappy with the judgement and would be reviewing its position.

He said: “UKIP is a tolerant, inclusive and non-sectarian organisation and it is important to our members that those values are maintained.”

The most interesting paragraph in the article is:

In January, when Mr Hardy tried to renew his membership, Judge Fox found that UKIP general secretary Jonathan Arnott contrived to exclude him from the party on the grounds that he was a former BNP member, despite party leaders being aware of his past when he joined.

So they were happy for a former BNP member to join them. Then used his previous allegiance against him when they wanted to oust him as branch chairman. Such nice people.

Saturday, November 20, 2010

UKIP-More Stupidity

One of UKIP's major problems is the membership. They are not very bright you see. What normal people think is supidity, UKIP members think is a smart political stunt. From the Northern Echo:

THE North-East branch of euro-sceptic party UKIP has been investigated by trading standards officials after making a bogus application for cash from an EU quango.

Members of UKIP North- East created the fake Hartlepool and East Durham European Language and Culture Club to apply for a £50 grant towards a fictitious event to celebrate the European Day of Languages.

Once the scam was exposed, trading standards officials in Durham were alerted and looked into the case.

Europe Direct, an arm of the the EU’s European Commission based in Durham, which promotes European culture across the North-East, initially agreed to pay the grant in an email sent to the fictitious club in July.

UKIP claimed they had set up the bogus club to expose Europe Direct for not making the necessary checks before it agreed to hand out EU cash, and said UKIP would never have cashed the cheque had it arrived.

The UKIP sympathiser behind the stunt, who asked to remain anonymous, said: “This all started to wind up the EU – when I created a totally fictitious organisation.

“I was surprised to learn that Europe Direct North-East fell for it and decided to give us a grant.”

Europe Direct approved the grant by email, and even offered free bunting, booklets and prizes – but the ruse was exposed before it sent any money out.

The organisation had agreed to hand out 20 of the £50 grants to schools, colleges, youth and community groups to fund a European Day event next week.

Dave Pascoe, of UKIP North- East, said: “Through this hoax we have gained a modest victory over the EU machine and managed to kick the malevolent EU monster in the ankles.”

However, Dorothy Gibson, manager of Europe Direct North-East, said: “The checking and vetting procedures we have in place raised concerns about this application and guidance was sought from Durham County Council’s trading standards service.

“It is now the intention of the county council to inform the National Anti-Fraud Framework, which alerts all local authorities to incidents of this nature.”

It is understood that Durham County Council’s trading standards officials ruled there was no further action they could take because they would have difficulty proving UKIP intended to defraud Europe Direct – especially as the party claimed it would not have cashed any cheque received.

Ms Gibson said: “From a very early stage we had serious concerns about this application.”

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Nikki Sinclaire MEP

When somebody upsets UKIP's leading spiv, Nigel Farage, he gets his cronies to smear them. Nikki Sinclaire, by standing up to the extremists in UKIP who sit with homophobes, racists and extreme right wing fruitcakes in the European Parliament, has upset them. So, as they have done with just about everybody with a profile who leaves UKIP, they have tried to smear her.

One of their favourite smears against MEPs is to claim that a complaint has been made about their financial probity to OLAF, the EU anti-fraud unit. Anybody can complain to OLAF, it doesn't mean the complaint is being taken seriously. For some weeks now the far-right extremists in UKIP have claimed that Nikki Sinclaire is under investigation. The following email proves those claims to be baseless. More nasty, tasteless and immoral smears by UKIP's far-right leadership.

Dear Ms. Sinclaire,

I apologize for not having contacted you earlier.

I understand from your telephonic message to OLAF Free Phone, that you wanted to be informed whether OLAF has opened an investigation into possible irregularites you may have committed as alleged by a former assistant of yours.

I can confirm to you that OLAF has not opened an internal administrative investigation into this matter.

Yours sincerely.
Danny De Raedt
European Commission
Europe Anti-Fraud Office OLAF Unit A 1 - EU Institutions.
Office 05/58 - Phone : + 32.2.***.**.**

Friday, November 12, 2010

Action Against UKIP

Nikki Sinclaire is taking action against UKIP for discrimination. Perhaps the EFD Group is their natural home:

The UK Independence Party (Ukip) is to be taken to the High Court by the West Midlands MEP claiming it discriminated against her because she is gay.

Nikki Sinclaire is taking action over Ukip withdrawing the whip from her in the European Parliament and preventing her standing for the Commons as a candidate for the party.

She claimed that her treatment had been in breach of Ukip's constitution and was motivated by sexual orientation discrimination.

A directions hearing is to be held by the High Court. The MEP is also taking the party to an employment tribunal, with a preliminary hearing on December 28.

Ms Sinclaire was kicked out of the party after she refused to sit with the eurosceptic group Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD) which Ukip joined in the European Parliament last year.

She said she quit the EFD because it contained "extreme elements", including people with "openly homophobic opinions".

"I think that is homophobic in itself, the fact that they expected me to sit next to such people and engage with such people in the Parliament, while taking a holier-than-thou attitude to parties like the BNP (British National Party) in the UK," she said.

As well as withdrawing the whip from the MEP, Ukip's national executive committee also ended her position as the party's candidate for Meriden at the general election.

She said she still believed in the aims of Ukip, whose principal goal is to take the UK from the European Union

, and would be prepared to be one of its MEPs again if it was "more tolerant".

"It is unacceptable in the 21st century for people to be marginalised and treated in an offensive and derogatory way on the grounds of their sexuality," the MEP said.

Read More

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

UKIP Vote Back Bertie Wooster aka Nigel Farage

The man is so obviously a spiv and a conman that we can only assume 60% of UKIP members are intellectually and politically challenged. Yes Nigel "Bertie Wooster" Farage has become leader of UKIP for the second time. No tasteless jokes about the second coming please, not with his reputation.

But don't take our word for it. The following article appeared on Friday 5th November:

No doubt, in picking the Fifth of November as announcement day for yet another of its leadership elections, UKIP was once again displaying the arch “sense of humour” which it, though not the rest of us, seems unable to resist. But the Tory Right needs to understand that UKIP’s set to become an even unfunnier joke, and that this will weaken still further Euroscepticism in the UK.

It’s apt – fitting would not be the right word – that UKIP’s joker-in-chief, Nigel Farage, looks set to be declared its leader, resuming a post which, in another “only with UKIP” quirk, he meekly surrendered just a year ago, conveniently before the general election. It could also only be with UKIP that we could witness a leadership contest during which the frontrunner has proceeded with apparent inevitability to the prize and yet, at the same time, has suffered grievous, even fatal blows to his reputation. This concerns all of us who would like to see UKIP mature into at least a voice of conscience on the Right, a prospect which frankly receded in the course of Mr Farage’s last stint in the job. Sadly, however, neither “maturity” nor “conscience” serve as les mots juste when we contemplate Nigel Farage. The party’s prospects of serving as such, let alone anything more, is likely to recede still further, should the once-and-future leader return, given what we have seen and heard in recent weeks.

Mr Farage’s eagerness to treat everything as a sort of silly jape – think Boy’s Own meets The Beano, his many declarations, prior to his previous election and, tellingly, again now, that he intends to “professionalise” his party notwithstanding – has long been to UKIP’s detriment, beyond the eyes of those in the media, usually sharing no actual affinity with the party, who consider him “good value”. Now, though, light has now been shed on the bumptious ‘Nigel Farage’ figure the press likes to exploit for its own, hardly Eurosceptic, purposes. Dismally this Nigel is some distance removed from the Woosterish image he likes to cultivate.

Farage has always brushed aside as sour grapes from the disaffected claims, or revelations, about an unpleasant quality to his political leadership. Yet in this latest UKIP leadership campaign something unexpected has happened, with at least two major attacks upon Farage coming from senior UKIP figures previously regarded as essentially sympathetic to him. The first of them, Douglas Denny, is on the party’s NEC, from where he has been one of Farage’s principal apologists. No longer. Two weeks ago, he wrote on a public forum that Farage, ‘stabbed the party in the back by abrogating his responsibility to the party as Leader – by not taking the party into the general election.’ The next day, Mr Denny went even further – much further – by stating that Farage is ‘prone to temper tantrums, bullying tactics and condescension to try to belittle those who oppose him’ and that he ‘has repeatedly ignored the NEC or attempted to by-pass what he does not like’; ‘has shown he does not have a future vision for UKIP’ and ‘is much too tied-up with Brussels and his fiefdom over there’. For the icing on the cake, Denny revealed that he had made these criticisms out of the public gaze on the party’s members-only forum, but that, even though he was on the NEC, the comments had been censored there.

A week later, Farage took another barrage, this time from within that Brussels fiefdom. His second critic, Mike Nattrass, is not only a fellow UKIP MEP; he is also a former Deputy Leader of the party. In a widely circulated email, Mr Nattrass made observations about Farage that were even more damning than those of Mr Denny.

Increasingly, I am hearing the word “Spiv” used to describe him … [He’s a] control freak. He grabs all UKIP publicity to the detriment of any other UKIP spokesperson or MEP. He employs assistants with the MEP’s budgets without allowing those MEPs any say … he does not like truth or competition.

That was only the start of Nattrass’ devastating attack. Farage, he said, has ‘the morals of an alley cat’; he has been ‘caught out with both hands in the till’ after breaking a UKIP MEPs’ agreement not to employ spouses and ‘secretly’ paying his wife out of his budget; he ‘has derailed every leader since the very first’, bar one; ‘the whole Parliamentary Group in the EU is run for Nigel’s financial and public image’; he has contributed ‘next to nothing’ financially to the party (a very interesting allegation, given that Farage once famously explained away his brag that he had received over £2million in non-salary expenses and allowances by saying he had used it ‘to help promote UKIP’s message’). For good measure, Nattrass also took aim at Farage’s ‘close friend Godfrey Bloom MEP’, who, he claimed, does ‘all the hiring’ and ‘is said to be banned by four hotels for urinating in the corridors’. Such is the volume of ‘professionalization’.

Despite all this – or perhaps because of it – Nattrass concluded that he expected ‘Nigel will be elected leader as no one else is effectively allowed to stand without a spin campaign against them.’ As disturbing evidence of this, he added that he ‘found allegations of fraud were brought against me when I stood for Leadership. They melted away afterwards and had no foundation in truth, but they did the job intended’. Then, breathtakingly, Nattrass stated that, in contrast to the fake charges against himself, ‘Nigel has had a number of very real cases against him.’ Whatever the substance of these charges, in a normal, even, professional party, the would-be leader might have been expected to keep the lid of the petrol can, but as if to prove that, at the centre of any UKIP firestorm, one will find Nigel Farage, he promptly proved at least two of Nattrass’ accusations. First, in an astonishing act of petulance, by publicly falling out with fellow leadership candidate and MEP, David Campbell Bannerman, over the latter’s quite legitimate complaints about Farage’s planned appearance on Question Time in the middle of the campaign. Indeed, Mr Farage went as far as to roar at the BBC microphone helpfully put in front of him:

Mr Bannerman clearly thinks that his own ambition and his own ego matter more than the interests of the party. Frankly, I am appalled by that. I think that the act of getting hold of Question Time and saying it was all wrong and against party rules was just an act of envy.

If irony survived Kissinger’s Nobel Peace Prize, this charge, from this source, will undoubtedly have finished it off.

Could anything else go wrong for Mr Farage during this fortnight from hell? Amazingly, yes. The next leaked email came from the keyboard of one Sharon Bonici, who it transpires is a Maltese socialist with strong links to Farage (try to keep up: this is UKIP), whom he has entrusted with the setting up of his latest Brussels project, a lavishly taxpayer-funded pan-EU party. The email confirms this ambition of Farage, executed in the face of an overwhelmingly supported motion at the recent UKIP conference not to establish any such thing without the explicit approval of UKIP’s membership.

While Farage defying his members is standard-issue behaviour, what’s truly toxic for any British Eurosceptic who thinks that UKIP under Farage is worth even a protest vote is whom he has already signed up to this latest costly project. Top of the list is his alleged fixer, Godfrey Bloom. No surprise there perhaps, but go further down the list and one finds representatives from the Sweden Democrats, a party born out of the Swedish neo-nazi movement, and the extreme-right Flemish party, the Vlaams Belang, with proposed additions from Geert Wilders’ party in the Netherlands and Italy’s notorious far-right Lega Nord, with the latter of whom Farage has already closely embroiled UKIP in the group he leads (jointly with the Lega Nord itself) in the European Parliament. That group, the ludicrously styled Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD), has been the subject of much controversy within and outside UKIP over the past year, not just because of the membership of the Lega Nord, which has countless allegations of racism and paramilitary violence stacked up against it, but of various other far-right parties as well, including the Danish People’s Party, the Slovak National Party and Greece’s Popular Orthodox Rally (LAOS). The leaders of the last-named claim 9/11 was a Jewish conspiracy and were properly condemned by the US State Department in 2005 as an ‘extreme right-wing party (which) supports virulent nationalism, anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia’. They’re also into their seventh year propping up Nigel Farage’s Brussels fiefdom. For understand this, Farage’s hegemony within UKIP stems directly from the powerbase afforded to him by this EP group. In other words, if you think that Nigel Farage is wrecking British Euroscepticism, it’s the EP’s money that lets him do so. Funny that.

Disgust over the EFD’s composition caused one UKIP MEP, Nikki Sinclaire, to leave it, closely followed by Mike Nattrass, but while Farage subsequently withdrew the UKIP whip from Sinclaire in Brussels and has tried to hound her out of the party altogether, he has thus far left Nattrass’ status intact, fearful of the latter’s clout within the party, not least in terms of his generous funding.

Despite all this controversy, and despite always rubbishing the suggestion that the EFD has far-right elements, Farage now seems not to care as he desperately tries to move into open electoral alliance at pan-EU level with partners whose extremist credentials are in no doubt at all. It will be interesting indeed to see who else now slithers out from under the EU’s rock garden to join Farage’s grand project. The Bonici email suggested that one of the pan-EU party’s first campaigns would be ‘to generate 1 million signatures to be able to instigate a pan wide European referendum [sic] on Turkey. The idea is to use the million signature clause according to the Lisbon Treaty.’ By a strange coincidence, three days before this email was sent, Austria’s far-right Freedom Party organised a two-day conference in Vienna, to organise an EU-wide referendum on Turkish EU entry, using the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty regarding a million signatures.

Attending the Freedom Party’s conference were parties remarkably similar to those on the Bonici email – far-right politicians from Vlaams Belang, the Sweden Democrats, the Lega Nord, the Slovak National Party and the Danish People’s Party, the latter represented by one of the EFD’s leading MEPs, the appropriately named Morten Messerschmidt, who, amongst many controversial moments in his delightful career, said in 2006

I think we need three sets of rules of immigration. One for Europeans, who will be regulated by EU-law. One for people from the rest of the Western World, including parts of East Asia, South America, etc. And then a third set of rules for the third world, who in general do not really offer anything we can benefit from, speaking of education, labour craft and knowledge.

This is the coalition which Nigel Farage has been carefully and quietly cultivating across the Channel for many years, whilst an indifferent British press have looked the other way. One school of thought holds that Farage has been indulged deliberately, to some extent, to thwart the BNP, but with friends like these, what exactly has been the point?

UKIP can perform a valuable service to Britain: they can keep the Tory Party, if not honest on Europe, then at least rather more honest than leaders like David Cameron and John Major would prefer to have it. With Nigel Farage leading them, whatever threat UKIP poses, it won’t be an honest one.

The article appeared in Critical Reaction .

Friday, November 5, 2010

UKIP Leadership Election Result and Annabelle Fuller

If UKIP members want their party to be taken seriously then they will have voted for Tim Congdon as new party leader.

Sadly, Nigel "Bertie Wooster" Farage is likely to win the election, he usually makes sure he wins internal elections if you get my drift. And, if he does win, the word is that his 'friend' Annabelle " Madeleine Bassett" Fuller will be given a nice cushy position.

So that will be Mrs F and Ms F both on their master's payroll. How cosy.

The result will be announced via the UKIP website at 4-00pm today GMT.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Nigel Farage MEP, UKIP Leadership Candidate

Many people have known for some time that Nigel Farage has used UKIP for personal gain. Below is a devastating attack on Nigel "Bertie Wooster" Farage by fellow UKIP MEP Mike Nattrass:

Dear All,

It may be too late but after all these years I can no longer stay silent.

In the previous Leadership Election I, together with all candidates EXCEPT LORD PEARSON were rubbished by Nigel Farage on TV and elsewhere. This ensured the election of Nigel's puppet Lord Pearson and allowed Nigel to continue to be the face of the party. That is Nigel's view of the election rules and I think it is only fair and high time that his methods were exposed, USING HIS OWN RULES.

Nigel already Leads the parliamentary Group and when he is also elected Leader this will amount to total control. Increasingly I am hearing the word "Spiv" used to describe him, from people who are not members but see his image. I am concerned that the UKIP party brand will be tarnished, even holed below the water line, by his monopoly of power.

Whilst Nigel is a very good speaker, he is also a control freak. He grabs all UKIP publicity to the detriment of any other UKIP spokesperson or MEP. He employs assistants with the MEP's budgets without allowing those MEPs any say. This, despite the fact that UKIP MEPs demanded a chance to interview those who were being employed with their money. Nigel agreed, then totally ignored that promise. Consequently he has his own "group funded" team around him and all "hiring" takes place via his close friend Godfrey Bloom MEP (this person is said to be banned by 4 hotels for urinating in the corridors)

Nigel's lack of experience in good staff management and his refusal to allow MEP consultation is complimented by the morals of an Alley Cat (and I will not go there). I have always said that this does not matter, because so long as we are all in the trench together with guns pointing at the enemy all are welcome. But he shot Nikki Sinclaire in the back when she became an MEP, for no Party reason, while she was giving all the effort she could give. She was expelled as a UKIP MEP for pointing out the Group facts. He does not like truth or competition.

I have put a lot of money, time and energy into promoting UKIP in the West Midlands and I watched it wrecked at the General Election by Nigel's chosen people (Lords Pearson and Monckton) who appeared from nowhere and failed to understand our basic strategy or even comprehend from where our votes are derived. Worse, Nikki, who has vast energy at election time, was stopped from being a UKIP MEP by Nigel and has not been given a chance to defend herself or to state her case (legal matters are pending). She and I were told by Lord Pearson not to get involved in the election and not to fund the campaign. In fact you will see that we both made considerable financial contributions but our campaign was deeply damaged. Also the subsequent enquiry into the campaign, requested by the WM candidates, was "dealt with" by Monckton (who thought I was behind it) and because of this we have had resignations from very keen activists.

All this West Midlands destruction because Nigel hates Nikki and wants to rubbish me!! Do you know how much money Nigel has contributed to this to nothing.

I found allegations of fraud were brought against me when I stood for Leadership. These were in the Sunday Times. They melted away afterwards and had no foundation in truth, but they did the job intended.(My legal case against the Times is pending) Nigel has had a number of very real cases against him.. funny how that word does not get out.

My first major annoyance with Nigel's manipulations stem from the time when I was first elected in 2004 and all UKIP MEPs had a meeting to agree three very basic points. One was that we could not employ wives (other Parties did) and this was agreed. In fact my wife comes to each Parliament and does not get paid (not even travel expenses) and I said that she wanted to contribute any proper payment to the Party, but no, rules were rules and she could be paid nothing. It was then later exposed that Nigel's wife was being secretly paid out of his budget, breaking this rule. He did not seek any permission (to change his own rule) from the MEPs. He was simply "caught out" with both hands in the till. I fear that the whole Parliamentary Group in the EU is run for Nigel's financial and public image. I left that ugly group.

Nigel has derailed every leader since the very first, except peacemaker Jeffery Titford (under whom I was Party Chairman). He is therefore hated by them all (except JT). plus never to be leader Kilroy Silk who must feel that Nigel gave him a wrong prospectus.

I expect that Nigel will be elected leader as no one else is effectively allowed to stand without a spin campaign against them. I can see less MEPs in the UKIP squad when he does win.

There is a false attack on Tim Congdon from Boggers 4 UKIP, this must mean he is a real threat! Good.


Should Farage be elected for a second term as leader, it is becoming increasingly obvious that UKIP will implode. Interesting times ahead for UKIP observers.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Nigel Farage and Annabelle Fuller-Forward Together with UKIP.

It seems that Nigel Farage has a nice little job lined up for his 'friend' Annabelle Fuller if he wins the leadership of UKIP again. We've reported on Ms Fuller before here and here .

So, how will the Madeleine Bassett and Bertie Wooster of British lunatic fringe politics finally end up together? Junius on UKIP reveals all.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

UKIP Still Asleep-Nikki Sinclaire MEP Campaigns

While UKIP slumbers on, as it has for many years now, one MEP is actively campaigning for withdrawal from the EU. Nikki Sinclaire's campaign for a referendum on continued membership is gathering momentum and has the backing of serious withdrawalist politicians.

But not a single UKIP MEP, apart from Mike Nattrass who recently left UKIP's EFD group in Brussels, is supporting her. Indeed UKIP's fanatical loyalist sheep like supporters insist on smearing Ms Sinclaire, about the only thing UKIP seems to get excited about these days.

However, UKIP politicians who haven't gone native have now come out in support of Ms Sinclaire and they include leadership candidate Tim Congdon and former leader Roger Knapman.

You can read the first issue of Nikki Sinclaire's campaign newsletter here.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

UKIP Leadership Election

For years UKIP has been run by its MEPs, largely for their own purposes and, in the case of Nigel Farage, purely as a means of securing a nice income and lofty position he would never achieve in the real world. Don't forget he was a disastrous employee in the City and ran the business his daddy set up for him into the ground.

So it's good to see that one of UKIP's founders and most generous donors has come out in support of Tim Congdon's leadership bid. Following is his letter to Gerard Batten pledging his support:

Dear Gerard,

I thank you for your letter of 24th September, announcing that you have decided to stand down in the UKIP leadership election and support Tim Congdon.

Your action reflects credit on yourself.

I believe that the view expressed by yourself, and also by Tim Congdon, that the leadership of UKIP must be in the UK is correct. The MEP wing of UKIP has its own sphere of activity and can be useful as similar parties to UKIP are growing in other EU countries, but it must be incorporated into and directed by the national party in the UK.

As you know, up to 2001 the party was based either in my offices in London or in offices funded by myself when I was Party Secretary. I was also a substantial contributor to the risk-capital of UKIP to get the party started in its early years. However, after the election of UKIP MEPs in 1999, I immediately became aware that some of the new MEPs had different and unconstitutional ideas of the role of the MEPs in the party.

At this point I ceased any funding to the national party, but continued to contribute to your own and other campaigns in London and elsewhere.

If Tim Congdon is elected Leader and in accordance with the published agreement between you and him carries out 'a commitment for the party to abide by its own Constitution, with a fair and impartial application of the rules', I look forward to rejoining, and to injecting some funding into the national party. I would expect to see commitment and action by the MEPs to make substantial financial contributions to the national party.

The current political situation in the UK and the rest of the EU offers immense opportunities to UKIP with a wide field of action. However, the turnover of members and activists has been far too high over the last few years and is linked in most cases to lack of confidence in the constitutional behaviour of the party, its officers and executives. For progress to be made, this confidence must be restored.


Anthony Scholefield

Sadly we believe that UKIP has so lost credibility that it can never actually achieve anything other than bringing the cause of withdrawal into disrepute. This is largely down to Nigel Farage but also to those others, regional organisers, MEPs, party secretary and general secretary, indeed all who have greedily pounced on the EU gravy train rather than sticking by their principles.

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

UKIP's Annabelle Fuller and Nigel Farage MEP

A couple of days ago we posted about Winston McKenzie, UKIP leadership candidate but listed as supporting Farage's bid to become head honcho on Farage's website. We thought it may have been mere eccentricity on the part of Mr McKenzie, but we have been contacted by people alleging that several people listed as supporters of Mr Farage on his website hadn't consented to be listed and are not, in fact, supporting him. We are currently looking into these accusations.

However Annabelle Fuller, who we also posted about recently, is also listed as still supporting her 'friend' Mr Farage, as are two other Fullers. Dr Eric Edmond, thrown off the UKIP NEC for being independent minded, also noticed her support and wrote the following excellent piece on his blog.

I scanned the long list of Mr Farage's nominating supporters published recently on his website. It contains most of the usual suspects and sycophants and is compulsory reading for those wishing to fully understand UKIP's often bizarre actions.

At the top, and his proposer, was Malcolm Pearson the former leader proposed and heavily promoted by Mr Farage as the outstanding candidate at our previous leadership election. A bit incestuous one might think and Yes, the same Malcolm Pearson who went around the South West urging UKIP PPCs to stand down in favour of his Tory candidate friends and even went out campaigning for other parties! A man is known by the company he keeps or even his supporters and proposers.

More interesting is that near the bottom of the list of supporters along with two other Fullers the name Annabelle Fuller appears. Annabelle Fuller is a long time close friend and associate of Nigel Farage. She it was who had a laptop holding confidential videos of prospective UKIP MEP candidates media test interviews done by Clive Page. Amongst those interviews was one done by John West that was posted from Morocco on YouTube, a public access web site, with the demeaning headline, 'How not to do politics'.

When David, Del and I found out about this we raised it at the NEC. The then chairman John Whittaker contacted Ms Fuller and read out a statement he had obtained from Ms Fuller that said, 'She had left the laptop in the back of a London taxi. It had been returned to her flat 4 days later by the taxi driver who she said had obtained her address by looking in some of the computer files.'

The story was that this taxi driver or one of his associates could have flown to Morocco, posted the video on YouTube, posted the denigrating caption, flown back to London and returned the LapTop to Ms Fuller. David, Del and I refused to accept this story and demanded the NEC investigate this damaging matter further. John Whittaker stated he was not minded to do this and that Ms Fuller had anyway resigned from UKIP. I have no idea if this in fact happened but it seems Ms Fuller is now back in UKIP.

John Whittaker's name appears high up in Mr Farages list of nominating supporters.

There were several obvious holes in Ms Fuller's tale. London cabbies are required to hand in property left in their taxis to the police within 24 hours. Why was only John West's interview out of the near 100 recorded chosen to be put up on UKIP? Did the taxi men view all these UKIP supposedly confidential interviews or did they choose JW's at random? Who was this taxi man?

I switched on breakfast TV this morning to find the Information Commissioner opining on the importance of safeguarding confidential personal information. He chose the example of a LapTop with people's confidential detail left on a train as an example of unacceptable practice for which the organisation responsible could be held liable for its employees negligence. Ho, hum.

I hope UKIPers will see through Nigel Farage and his associates and vote for the Tim Congdon/Gerard Batten ticket as the only hope of UKIP developing a credible and sustainable get out of the EU campaign here in the UK and get some UKIP MPs elected..

Monday, October 4, 2010

Winston McKenzie

Interesting to see that Winston McKenzie has learnt from previous UKIP leader 'Potty' Lord Pearson.

Although attempting to become leader of UKIP he is listed on Farage's campaign website as supporting Farage's campaign for the leadership. Click here.

Wonder if he appears at leadership hustings wearing a 'Vote Nigel for Leader' rosette?

They really are the lunatic fringe!

Sunday, October 3, 2010

UKIP's Nigel Farage and Annabelle Fuller

Annabelle Fuller, long time 'friend' of UKIP MEP Nigel Farage, is reported to be back on the scene following her departure from UKIP a couple of years ago. Her departure prompted the following email from the party chairman to members of the NEC:

Dear NEC

We all regard the posting on youtube of the video of John West’s euro-candidate selection interview as unacceptable.

It has been argued that the source of this posting may have been Annabelle Fuller, who was involved in the interview and had possession of the relevant computer records.

I have received a statement from Miss Fuller in which she denies making this posting. She does, however admit to negligence, saying that she left a laptop computer containing the file in a taxi in London around 4 July. This was returned to her some 5 days later by the taxi driver who advised her that he had, in the meantime, passed it to a third party who had inspected the files in order to identify the owner.

Miss Fuller has not been working in the UKIP press office for some weeks. I understand she has now resigned from the party and from her post as press officer.

I am disinclined to take further action.

John Whittaker

The above appeared on the UKIP Bunker click here to read.

Since then John West, the wronged party, has been hounded and smeared by senior UKIP members. Although why Ms Fuller would still want to associate with UKIP, apart from her 'friendship' with Nigel Farage, we can't work out, after all here is her side of the story of her departure:

Terrified: Annabelle Fuller says she was forced to quit her UKIP role following a two-year smear campaign

A former top aide to UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage broke down in tears yesterday after revealing she had received ‘threatening’ telephone calls accusing her of being ‘a whore’.
Distraught Annabelle Fuller, 26, claimed that she was the victim of a vicious two-year smear campaign aimed at undermining Mr Farage.
Ms Fuller said the phone calls and an ‘irrevocable breakdown in working relationships with my closest colleagues’ had led her to quit as Mr Farage’s spin doctor.
She told The Mail on Sunday: ‘I have been terrified. Absolutely terrified. I’ve had years of people writing abuse about me and saying abusive things – purely because I was loyal to the leadership of the party. People tried to get at Nigel by attacking me.’
Mr Farage defended Ms Fuller yesterday, saying: ‘She is a bloody good writer and a very good press officer. She decided to move on because she got p***** off with politics. I don’t blame her.’
His defence comes after UKIP’s annual conference in Bournemouth was tarred by a feud between Mr Farage, leader since September 2006, and his critics in the party.
In his main conference speech to delegates, Mr Farage vowed to root out ‘half a dozen people who wish us ill’.
Ms Fuller joined UKIP in Brussels as a researcher in October 2004. She said she joined because she was passionately committed to its key aim of pulling the UK out of the EU.
UKIP leader Nigel Farage defended Ms Fuller, calling her a 'very good press officer'
She said it was after she moved in June 2006 to handle press inquires for Mr Farage and his party at Westminster that the abusive calls began.

On one occasion an anonymous caller phoned her at 3am and accused her of being ‘a whore’.
‘I don’t know who that was,’ she said. ‘I never reported it to the police because I was told that’s what happens in politics and these people were doing it not to get at me, but at Nigel.’
The calls continued even after she left her job at UKIP in July this year.
‘It’s like trying to stab a dead person,’ sobbed Ms Fuller. ‘I could have made a big deal about it but I have my career in front of me.’
Ms Fuller said she decided to go public because she thought the calls were part of a wider plot to undermine Mr Farage.
‘I heard they were trying to overthrow Nigel and I thought I’d let people know what they are really like,’ she said. ‘You know what respect I have for Nigel. He has been a good boss and a good friend.’

To read the original click here.

They really don't sound like very pleasant people in UKIP do they?

If you would like to read some of the delicate Ms Fuller's ramblings click here where you get ladylike pearls such as:

It really does fuck me off when I read about women who sue their employers because they get knocked up and want the world to revolve around them.

UKIP, such a lovely group of people.

Thursday, September 30, 2010

UKIP Leadership Election

Nigel Farage looks set to continue taking UKIP into a terminal nosedive. After the first hustings meeting of the latest leadership circus none of the other candidates appear capable of stopping his leadership gravy train. Oops, that should be leadership juggernaut.

Rather good picture shamelessly lifted from the excellent Junius on UKIP.

Monday, September 6, 2010

UKIP; Doing What It Does Best: Smearing.

Nikki Sinclaire stands up to Farage (pictured trying to look like 'a bit of a character') and leaves the racists and homophobes in UKIP's group in the European Parliament and she is forced out of the party. We are still unclear why Mike Nattrass MEP, who has also left their group, is still bumbling along in the party but that's another issue.

UKIP's smear operation is now into overdrive and reports are surfacing on the internet, and in a Sunday newspaper, that Miss Sinclaire is being investigated by OLAF (the EU's very own financial investigation service) and the West Midlands Police. The claims are being strenuously denied by Sinclaire.

It seems that a 'disgruntled former employee' of Miss Sinclaire's has been making the allegations. If so he should be a little circumspect as we believe there are some very serious questions that he my have to answer. But I'm sure we will all be reading about those soon.

Following is a statement issued by Miss Sinclaire:

I am told that there are claims been made and have read on Internet blogs that it is alleged by a disgruntled ex aide that I have put in a false claim for travel. In January, John Ison was responsible for my travel and related paperwork.

I have no idea whether the error was accidental or malicious as shortly after that I withdrew his access due to discrepancies I personally had identified.

I have contacted OLAF, the EU's fraud office and have arranged for a meeting to instigate a full and independent investigation as to whether I have been fraudulently set up or this is a genuine error.

One of the beauties of being independent and publishing open and transparent accounts as I do as this is obviously not a deliberate exercise in fraud on my part.

In the murky world of politics you don't get much murkier than UKIP. The problem with eccentric cults is that when the brainwashed eventually become sane again, the cult has to protect itself by demonising them.

And there are those in UKIP who still wonder why they are an electoral disaster. They probably think it's the Bilderbergers or some other shadowy group conspiring against them.

For a bit more info about 'disgruntled former employee' Mr John Ison, click here.

Sunday, July 25, 2010

UKIP Chairman Paul Nuttall MEP

Hating the European Union is one thing, hating the cash to be harvested from the European Union is another it seems:

Picture the scene. I'm driving Islington yesterday and notice in front of me a big Land Rover Discovery.

It's all black with tinted windows. Then I notice the number plate EU06 0UT.

At the next set of lights I pull up and there is none other than UKIP MEP Paul Nuttall in the driving seat.

So while Liberal Democrat Colin Eldridge wears his parliamentary ambition on his sleeves, Mr Nuttall displays his politics on his plate.

From the Liverpool Daily Post.

It seems that thousands of people are making a packet out of the EU and they are all evil according to UKIP, unless of course they hate the EU enough to want withdrawal from it, then it's OK.

Landrover Discoveries start from £34,000. Check prices here.

Mr Nuttall was a researcher in the European Parliament, for UKIP, before becoming a very well paid MEP. Before that he was a PhD student.

Nice work if you can get it!

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Mike Nattrass, UKIP MEP resigns from EFD Group

AS we heard yesterday from a very reliable source it seems that Mike Nattrass, UKIP MEP for the West Midlands has now followed the principled stand taken by his colleague, Nikki Sinclaire, and resigned from the EFD Group in the European Parliament. He is now listed as non-attached, click here.

Although there is yet to be an official statement it seems that this is a further blow to the extreme right wing neo-fascist, racist and homophobic group in the Parliament led by Nigel Farage, UKIP's former leader and still leader in all but name.

As Farage and his cronies hounded Nikki Sinclaire out of UKIP for standing by her principles, so Nattrass's departure from UKIP now looks inevitable.

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

UKIP's Nigel Farage

No sooner is EFD President Farage off his sick bed than he faces a huge crisis on top of all the others. Couldn't happen to a nicer chap.

What that is will be revealed tomorrow, and it's priceless.

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

UKIP in the Supreme Court and Tom Wise

UKIP are in court today as covered by Junius on UKIP:

The case concerns illegal donations made by Alan Bown to UKIP between Dec 2004 and Jan 2006. The donations were illegal because Bown was not on the electoral register.

ELCOM warned UKIP on 67 separate occasions that the donations were illegal. UKIP’s leadership ignored EVERY warning and continued to take Bown’s money.

As if that isn't bad enough for UKIP Tom Wise is soon to be released from prison and is planning to expose the truth about his conviction, and certain things within UKIP. Wise is the former UKIP MEP jailed last year for fraud after his expenses and allowances were investigated by the EU authorities. He was never disciplined by UKIP and the only reason he is no longer a member is because he let his membership lapse last year. Here is an interesting article from EU Politics News:

Shamed former MEP Tom Wise plans to "point the finger" at those he says were culpable in his fall from grace when he leaves prison.

According to a well-placed source he will "pull no punches" in a book he plans to write when he is released from prison later this month.

Wise is expected to be released from jail on 29 June having served just six months of a two-year sentence for fiddling his parliamentary expenses.

The 62-year-old, a former UK Independence Party MEP, was jailed in November 2009 for false accounting and money laundering.

At his trial, the court was told he spent parliamentary money on cars and wine.

Wise, a former policeman, is currently working as a trustee and prison carpenter at Ford Open Prison in the south of England.

He has also been working with young inmates who have drink and drug problems.

According to a close friend, the former deputy will start work on a book when he is released outlining details of his downfall.

"It will pull no punches and he will not hesitate to point the finger at those who were culpable in what has happened to him," he said.

Wise has been allowed out of prison to spend time at this home with his family in Leighton Buzzard.

The source said Wise had been "bowled over" by the response from his former constituents to his imprisonment.

"People have been coming up to him in the street saying how much they are pleased to see him.

"He says the worst part of it all is that, even when he comes out of jail, he will not be able to visit his grandchildren who live in Luxembourg due to the terms of his release."

News of his release, however, has not met with universal approval.

Ukip MEP Gerard Batten said, "I regarded Tom Wise as a friend. He consistently maintained his innocence to me up until a week before his trial, at which point he changed his plea to guilty.

"He could have saved himself and UKIP a great deal of trouble by admitting his guilt at the beginning. If he had anything to say about his colleagues he could and should have said it at his trial.

"If a book ever appears, I shall not be buying it."

These are extraordinarily interesting times for UKIP watchers.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

UKIP's Other Loony Lord-Lord Monckton

UKIP seems to be attracting the loonier members of the House of Lords. Their chief climate change denier is 'Lord' Monckton. Following is a very interesting presentation about this very strange character. Lord Pearson would appear to have a rival for the title Loony-in-Chief.

In 1987 he made the following remarks in an American magazine article:

.... there is only one way to stop AIDS. That is to screen the entire population regularly and to quarantine all carriers of the disease for life. Every member of the population should be blood-tested every month ... all those found to be infected with the virus, even if only as carriers, should be isolated compulsorily, immediately, and permanently.

Aren't UKIP so very enlightened and tolerant?!

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

UKIP Liverpool Branch Chairman and Pornography

You may remember that Mr Ager, the UKIP Liverpool Chairman, had to stand down over his pornographic cinematic activity. To read again click here.

More disturbing evidence has come to light and we suggest you read about him on the Citizen Freepress click here.

We warn you, it makes very disturbing reading.

Monday, May 17, 2010

More on UKIP and the BNP

The following is a highly informative article by Symon Hill.

Turning on my radio on Saturday, I heard ranting right-wing rhetoric and a demand for a freeze on immigration. I could easily have mistaken the speaker for a member of the British National Party (BNP). But it turned out to be a report on the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), which came second in last year’s European elections and hopes to gain seats at Westminster.

So what’s the difference between the BNP and UKIP? The BNP is described as far-right, racist, fascist. It’s regarded as beyond the pale and many politicians refuse to share platforms with its members.

UKIP is seen as basically mainstream. It may be regarded as firmly right-wing and perhaps a bit wacky, but its members are not treated as pariahs. UKIP representatives regularly appear on BBC Question Time without demonstrations or record viewing figures.

As I considered this, I knew that my dislike for both parties might have led me to overestimate the similarities between them. So I decided to compare their policies. And I found that I had in fact underestimated their similarities. On most issues, the policies of UKIP and the BNP are largely indistinguishable.

Race and immigration

UKIP want “an immediate five-year freeze on immigration for permanent settlement”. They say that “any future immigration should not exceed 50,000 per annum”. The BNP want to “stop all new immigration except for exceptional cases”. Both parties would reject asylum-seekers who had passed a “safe” country on their way to the UK. To aid this, they would both withdraw from the UN Convention on Refugees.

Until very recently the BNP spoke of ending “non-white immigration”. This seems to have been re-worded, perhaps partly because Polish immigrants are mostly white, but also as part of their feeble attempts to appear less racist.

To be fair to UKIP, I must admit that they have never displayed the same concern with skin colour that has obsessed the BNP. They say they believe in “civic nationalism, which is open and inclusive” rather than the “ethnic nationalism of extremist parties”.

Nonetheless, UKIP insist that “a significant proportion of immigrants and their descendents in Britain are neither assimilating nor integrating into British society”. They say that “UKIP opposes multiculturalism and political correctness, and promotes uniculturalism - aiming to create a single British culture embracing all races and religions”.

Despite their reference to all religions, UKIP wish to ban the niqab (Muslim full face veil) in certain private buildings as well as in public. Their position is more extreme than the BNP, who want a public ban only.

Most people affected by this severe restriction are likely to have a different skin colour to the average UKIP candidate, but I admit that UKIP does not show the same blatant racism as the BNP, who refuse to admit that any non-white person is “ethnically British”.

These different approaches to race should not be dismissed; they could make a considerable difference if either party gains power. There is no prospect that either will form a government after this general election, but a serious possibility that they may gain one or two seats. Given the likelihood of a hung Parliament or a government with a small majority, those seats could be significant. And would it make any difference whether they were held by UKIP or the BNP?

Shoulder to shoulder

Consider education. UKIP wants schools to “teach about Britain's contribution to the world, such as British inventions, promoting democracy and the rule of law and the role of Britain in fighting slavery and Nazism”. The BNP believes that schools should “instil in our young people knowledge of and pride in the history, cultures and heritage of the native peoples of Britain”. Neither party suggests that there might be anything negative in Britain’s history.

What about the environment? UKIP describe themselves as “the first party to take a sceptical stance on man-made global warming claims”. This is odd, because the BNP “firmly rejects the ‘climate change’ dogma”.

Both parties would repeal the Human Rights Act. UKIP promise “forthright law and order policies” from “a government with the will to punish”. The BNP also “seeks a return to traditional standards of law enforcement”. But they almost sound more moderate than UKIP when they add that this would be “combined with social reform directed at addressing the root causes of criminal behaviour”. On the other hand, the BNP back capital and corporal punishment, whereas UKIP would restrict themselves to introducing “boot camps for young offenders”.

Both favour “workfare”, obliging people to work for benefits. However, economics seems to be one of the few areas in which they significantly differ. I found the old difference between the statist far-right (as seen in traditional fascist regimes) and the free-market far-right. Whereas the BNP call for re-nationalisation of key industries, UKIP clearly want to help the richest members of society, promising to scrap the top tax rate and all inheritance tax.

On military and defence issues, they share the same militaristic outlook, but differ on specific policies. At their spring conference last weekend, UKIP prioritised their demand for a 40 per cent increase in military spending. The BNP want to reintroduce “national service” (with a civilian option). But unlike UKIP, they would withdraw from Afghanistan and NATO. It seems that UKIP is far more pro-US.

Voters in Bexhill and Battle have heard that the BNP candidate in their constituency will be Neil Jackson – who previously stood for UKIP. As BNP candidate, he will campaign for “an immediate end to Britain’s involvement in unnecessary foreign wars”. It seems this is one of the few differences he could find with UKIP.

Two sides of the same coin

So why do we persist in treating UKIP as much more acceptable than the BNP? I’m not asking for UKIP members to be demonised, nor am I suggesting that the BNP should be treated more gently. But those of us who detest what the BNP stands for need to remember that far-right views are promoted well outside the BNP’s own membership – in UKIP, on the right of the Tory Party, in the pages of the Daily Mail.

When the BNP’s Nick Griffin was invited onto BBC Question Time, I wrote that the politicians who sat next to him would face a monster of their own creation. Their failure to speak up for immigration or to promote a vision of a different society has fuelled the far-right’s electoral success. On the programme, Jack Straw encouraged voters to support a “mainstream party”, implying that the differences between “mainstream” parties are trivial. Indeed, the only point at which the three mainstream politicians really argued with each other was when they competed to appear the most strongly anti-immigration – bizarrely dancing to Griffin’s tune.

This is no way to beat the far-right. We need to tackle the issues head on, not resort to demonising one far-right group while being relaxed about another. If the BNP and UKIP both manage to gain an MP this year, don’t expect to see many occasions on which they do not vote the same way.

To see the article on the Ekklesia website click here.

UKIP and the BNP

Much has been made recently of UKIP's membership of the EFD Group in Brussels. The EFD is a group of far-right homophobes and holocaust deniers that no self-respecting political party should associate with. But is UKIP a self-respecting political party? Not judging by the photograph (right) of Nigel Farage with Tony 'The Bomber' Lecomber and Mark Deavin.

Every time UKIP takes a step forward it declares war on itself, and takes two steps back. Nigel Farage has always been there, like the love child of Arthur Daley and Peter Mandelson after a threesome with Niccolo Machiavelli. An interesting article followed UKIP's first three MEPs being elected in 1999.

Since that triumph, however, UKIP has been falling to pieces with startling speed. The national executive recently passed a motion of no confidence in its leader, Michael Holmes. He then staged a counter-coup at the party's annual conference in Solihull two weeks ago, which led to the sacking of the entire executive and the closure of the London HQ.

These shenanigans have been observed with great interest by Nick Griffin and the BNP. Until 1997, under the leadership of Dr Alan Sked, UKIP's membership form included a clause stressing that racists were not allowed to join. Soon after Sked's departure, however, the clause mysteriously disappeared. The new leaders, Michael Holmes and Nigel Farage - who are now both MEPs - also set out to "combine our protest" with other anti-Euro campaigners. In his UKIP election leaflet this year, Holmes paid tribute to "citizens' patriotic protest groups" such as Save Our Sterling - presumably unaware that Save Our Sterling was run by the BNP.

How very bizarre. Then, in 2010, Nikki Sinclaire finds herself in hot water, and attacked on national televeision by Nigel Farage MEP, for leaving UKIP's alliance in the EU parliament with the far-right EFD Group. But there's more.

Then came the most disturbing titbit of all: a blurred photo, taken in the summer of 1997, showing Nigel Farage of UKIP chatting to two men. One was Tony "the bomber" Lecomber, the other was Mark Deavin, head of research for the BNP, who had briefly infiltrated UKIP but was expelled in May 1997 after his true affiliations were discovered.

Deavin, who edited Mindbenders, an "expose" of Jews in the media, is also the author of The Grand Plan: The Origins of Non-White Immigration, in which he argues that "the mass immigration of non-Europeans into every White country on earth" had been engineered by "a homogeneous transatlantic political and financial elite to destroy the national identities and create a raceless new world order." Homogeneous, eh? Allow Deavin to explain: "These concerns were Jewish in origin... the promotion of World Government can also be seen to be in line with traditional Jewish messianic thinking."

When the photo was sent anonymously to the UKIP a few months ago, Farage expressed bafflement. While admitting that "I briefly met Mr Deavin at his request on June 17 1997, and had lunch with him in a restaurant," he insisted that "I have no recollection of ever meeting or speaking to Mr Lecomber in my life... I can only surmise that Mr Lecomber was planted outside the restaurant or that the photograph has been doctored."

Mr Farage, for a seemingly astute politician, does seem to be in the habit of bumping into far-right politicians, and wining and dining them. But under every smooth operator, especially in British politics it seems, is a particularly nasty and unpleasant character. So the article continues.

Whatever the explanation, the fact that Farage met Deavin after the BNP man's expulsion was enough to alarm some UKIP members - especially as Farage, who earns his living as a City commodity-broker, is a man who often used words such as "nigger" and "nig-nog" in the pub after committee meetings. A month after the lunch, by an odd coincidence, Deavin wrote an article in the far-right journal Spearhead which discussed the possibility of closer relations between the BNP and UKIP.

But here's an even stranger coincidence. Shortly before the 1997 general election, Mark Deavin spoke freely of his plans to undercover researchers from Searchlight magazine and The Cook Report, who had posed as emissaries from Jean-Marie Le Pen's Front National. One necessary step, he said, was to get rid of the BNP leader John Tyndall ("who is actually an obstacle") and replace him with Deavin's chum Nick Griffin. This would leave one other obstacle. "If Blair becomes prime minister," Deavin predicted, "the BNP will be the official opposition in the inner cities, in working-class areas. The UKIP will be the opposition in the shires, the county areas, the middle-class opposition. That party is a serious opposition to us in middle England, but, if we had the resources, we could tear it to pieces."

A further question that needs answering is why UKIP/EFD's rather strange press officer, Mark Croucher, still works for these people. After all it is Mark Croucher who claims to run UKIP's members past Searchlight, the anti-fascist organisation, to ensure no BNP infiltration. But does he?

Why not read the whole article, including the bits about Nick Griffin of the BNP? Please follow this link.

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Sunday, May 9, 2010

Paranoia in the UKIP Bunker

The British Democracy Forum is the home to many of UKIP's more fanatical lunatics, many of the contributors believed to be senior members of the party.

They are now busy pondering whether or not the plane crash on polling day was actually an assassination attempt on their real leader, Nigel Farage MEP. Some lunatic has posted the following and it has prompted serious debate raising further questions about the sanity of UKIP members.

I have been sent this:

Subject: Fw: Fwd: Farage crash - sabotage is strongly indicated
Date: Friday, 7 May, 2010, 22:34

I don't know the original source of the following report (it was passed to me from a usually reliable source), but if true this is very serious:


At this stage of the investigation sabotage is strongly indicated.
Media reports that the banner got wrapped around the empennage are
clearly false - the banner can be seen from obverhead shots lying
undamaged, several hundred feet from the aircarft.

There is no sign of external pre-accident damage to the empennage (or
for that matter to the banner)

The accident happened at about 0756 local time, as the aircraft had
successfully picked up the banner, on its 5th attempt. The incident
was sudden, consistent with the parting of a control cable to the
rudder or elevators. The operator, Sky Banners Ltd, is experienced and
reputable and has a good safety record.

There are no grounds to query either the competence or integrity of the
pilot or operator.

The aircraft, a PZL-104 Wilga 35A, G-BWDF, c/n 21950955, is designed
for towing (originally gliders) and has an excellent safety record.
Nearly 1,000 have been made since 1968.

The police treated it as a crime scene and have not ruled out sabotage,
because AAIB found a severed control cable in the wreckage.

It is possible Eurobaromoeter conducted a secret poll in Buckingham -
it would be useful to know who was conducting local polls. Of course
there would be concern in Brussels and Berlin at someone as eloquent
and well-informed as Nigel being elected. The decision to
assassinate the Foreign Minister of Sweden was taken on the basis of a
Eurobarometer poll.

At this stage it is probable sabotage, probable method part-severing of
a control cable to the rudder or elevators. The aircraft was left
unguarded overnight.

To see the original click here. It is worth a look if you want a good laugh.

Saturday, May 8, 2010

UKIP Civil War

As UKIP face meltdown and oblivion we have decided to cover their demise. The message below is very interesting:

An open Letter to Lord Pearson and the UKIP leadership

In the aftermath of another disappointing set of election results the leadership must make some crucial decisions, and involve the party membership in the decision making process. The failure of the party leadership to listen to rank and file members is culpable. UKIP must decide if it’s a party only interested in gaining seats in Europe or if it has ambitions to be a mainstream political party, dedicated to governing in Westminster. The concept that gaining seats in the EU would raise the party’s profile in the UK election is no more than a myth as results demonstrates.

If UKIP has a genuine desire to gain seats at Westminster, then we must get away from the concept that UKIP is a grass roots party and join the real political world by understanding what is required to gain seats in parliament, that means UKIP must become a professional mainstream political part. That requires a change in party structure, policies, funding and targeting seats; it requires a change of attitude towards the whole concept of where UKIP stands today, UKIP can no longer be led by mavericks wearing a Tory rosette on one lapel and a UKIP rosette on the other. It can no longer wash its dirty linen in public; it can no longer consider coming fourth a success story or keep using lack of publicity as an excuse for failure. UKIP must take action to bring in professional fundraisers, professional PR consultants and professional leadership.

The results from this election confirm that in order to gain seats any candidate requires both funds and a large team on the ground for months not weeks before an election, the next GE will s in all probability be held within the next 18 months, so planning must start now.

UKIP must understand that it currently lacks the funding and activists to contest the 400 plus seats that were contested at the current election, putting up paper candidates is not the way forward. UKIP should be looking at targeting between 50 and 75 seats selecting these candidates using a professional approach not the “who ‘s willing to stand’ approach each candidate to be approved by the NEC based on their ability to win the seat. Once selected the candidates must be support financially and by a strong election tem at constituency level.

The importance of gaining seats on local councils cannot be underestimated, nor should the importance of local issues when campaigning for parliament. Local council elections are scheduled in many regions for next May (Possible coinciding with a fresh GE) again UKIP must start planning now by selecting candidates, holding local surgeries and general becoming active at community level. None of this will happen on its own, it requires coordination at national, region and local level.

Another weakness within UKIP is the lack of local branches, difficult to remedy but an essential task for regional organisers to tackle.

Finally we come to the crux of the issue, why did we perform badly in the current GE, Even allowing that UKIP increased its share of the vote nationally, in the majority of seats where both a BNP candidate and UKIP candidate stood in the same constituency, the BNP candidate gained more votes. A thorough analysis of all the results is required and quickly to answer some vital question as to which of the UKIP policies appealed to the voters and which failed to impress.

There is also an urgent requirement for UKIP to appoint spokespersons on a wide range of issues that are bound to arise from the hung parliament, on a professional basis we can no longer leave this task to Nigel and Lord Pearson, UKIP requires a much wider range of people promoting UKIP policies in a professional and concise way and making more media appearances in the process, trotting out Lord Pearson or Nigel every time the media require a sound bite from UKIP has a negative effect and quickly becomes stale.

Philip Wray
Posted by United Kingdom Independence Party at 09:24

From Bloggers 4 UKIP, click here to go to original.

Welcome to Everything About UKIP

The coming months will be very interesting for UK Independence Party watchers. Having crashed, pardon the pun, in the general election they are likely to be in court in June, June 7th has been mentioned, in a fight for survival with the Electoral Commission over dodgy donations.

We look forward to keeping you informed.