#937* - THE PERFORMING MONKEY, THE PEER & THE UKIP NEANDERTHALS

#937* - THE PERFORMING MONKEY, THE PEER & THE UKIP NEANDERTHALS

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

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

THE PERFORMING MONKEY, THE PEER & THE UKIP NEANDERTHALS!
NOT TO MENTION OUTRIGHT CRIMINALITY!!

LITTLE HAS CHANGED AMONGST THESE SCOUNDRELS!

SEE THE ADDITION OF 08-Jan-2012: below

"We did it in the European elections. 

We passed on £80,000 from one person in effect...

and that caused no difficulty at all," Lord Pearson

Hi,

You will be aware that Nigel Farage endlessly willing to lie on the media to the public, makes much of the claim that when HE found out that Ashley Mote and Tom Wise had fallen foul of the law UKIP, unlike other parties acted ruthlessly and decisively.

Minded of Farage's status:

can we assume that Farage will act in an honourable manner and on Monday morning withdraw the so called whip from Stuart Agnew who has openly admitted on tape that wittingly he has been illegally obtaining tax payer's money by deceipt to fund Peter Reeve - he CLEARLY confirmed this as illegal.

Having had the fact that David Bannerman is similarly involved in this fraud and deception which is known to be illegal:

Will Stuart Agnew & David Bannerman both be suspended as UKIP MEPs and party procedure be followed for a full disciplinary hearing?

That Peter Reeve was also involved in this criminal activity will Farage on Monday morning fire him also?

Let us see what value Farage's lies on TV are worth in dealing with the criminal money laundering carried out and the further conspiracy to criminally launder money on the part of Lord Pearson will he too be suspended pending the inevitable criminal proceedings.

That of course leaves Nigel Farage in the position where the only honourable action as not only did this all occur on his watch as leader but also clearly he was party to the crimes as committed - One assumes he will, as effective leader, have the integrity to resign pending such criminal proceedings as now seem inevitable.

Do be minded that Nigel Farage has no alternative but to suspend each man involved and resign for you will recall that he states very clearly in his little book that he said if Tom Wise was not voted out by the NEC he himself would resign and as he also proudly boasts he was standing as a witness for the prosecution in the Crown Case against Tom Wise and Lindsay Jenkins.

Nigel Farage, with his dishonesty and braggadocio, has rather painted his way into a corner - either he must resign his seat as an MEP or carry on utterly discredited in shame to preside over the party he destroyed.

Do remind me but how did the idiot Nattrass get on when with all that bluster he threatened to sue The Sunday Times for telling the truth! Interestingly although he openly states he isn't racist and is unhappy about membership of the racist, xenophobic Pan EU Political Party EFD grouping he is too shamelessly gutless to leave The EFD - even though he and Batten, Coleman & Buffton all mutter about leaving AFTER the General Election they are perfectly happy to lie to the electorate in the mean time it seems - they lack the moral fibre to stand on their own feet and are frightened of not having Farage to wipe their noses for them it seems!

With two MEPs jailed for fraud and a number of MEPs it would seem still under a cloud with OLAF who have passed the files on within the EU pending passing them to British Police they are 'still at it'.

Then we have Derek Clarke who stood up in a public meeting and openly boasted of how he defrauded the tax payers through his EU expenses and allowances - not to mention paying his Regional Organiser £800 a week despite the fact he lost his driving license as a drunk!

We now have it on the record that Peter Reeve does virtually no work for the tax payers who pay his salary laundered through the liar and cheat David Bannerman and the bullying NFU MEP Agnew who openly states he has paid enough money to buy his MEPship!

Is it any wonder that UKIP are considered little more than a ship of fools when having guaranteed a Tory donor anonimity they glibbly bandy round the name of Partick Barbour as involved with UKIP and Lord Pearson in a criminal conspiracy to defraud!

Every word of Claire Newell's film is a part of a criminal conspiracy with intent to defraud!

Tom Wise was sentenced to 2 years in prison for his criminal money laundering which amounted to about £30K with a seeming intent to continue for a further 4 years.

Here we are talking of:
The titular leader Lord Pearson
The real leader Nigel Farage MEP
The deputy leader David Bannerman MEP
Stuart Agnew MEP
Patrick Barbour
Peter Reeve

ALL to a greater or lesser extent involved in actual criminal fraudulent money laundering, criminally obtaining money by deception, conspiracy to criminally obtain money by deception, or so it would seem based on the facts as presented in The Sunday Times.

I had always warned that UKIP were being incredibly stupid in the likes of Douglas Denny, Mark Croucher, Michael McGough and other low lifes in UKIP either in their own names or fake names endlessly insulting the media and the journalists and the biggest single loss Farage would seem to have made was in his foolish weenie waggling competition with the Sunday Times when they paid him to go away - just look at the publicity he has had from the Times Group since - even his naff book got totally panned! & UKIP's spring Conference and General Election launch gained ZERO publicity beyond Farage's scrotum which is as depleted as UKIP's morality, principles, competence, integrity, vision or ability.


Is it any wonder EUkip's only backer of serious substance Stuart Wheeler finally walked away two weeks ago in some disgust - he was it seems unwilling to go on pouring his hard earned money into an unaccounted structure where many believe Farage and others have trousered £Millions; where Nattrass memorably stated:
'we can't let Tom (Wise) get done , we are all at it for F***'* sake, how do you think we fund things'

We understand the last straw for Stuart Wheeler was the endless squabbling and back stabbing within the leadership cabal and finally the utterly dishonourable behaviour towards Nikki Sinclaire in breech of even EUkip's jaded rules! But then again the rules do not apply to EUkip's own in house spiv Nigel Farage!

Read the article below and YOU decide if it was wise of EUkip to keep insulting the media in general and Daniel Foggo, myself and Junius in particular!

You may well remember Agnew even threatened to beat me up on a couple of eMails and Croucher acting seemingly as an agent for UKIP saw fit to abuse the Court process to try to bankrupt me to silence the truth, Douglas Denny endlessly lies about me and makes a fool of himself insulting Daniel Foggo, Michael McGough tries desparately to link Foggo with MI5 - I wonder in the light f facts whether they still consider such actions are wise!

This at a time when due to the unbridled dishonesty and corruption of Andrew Smith, Nigel Farage, David Lott and others they earned a Guilty verdict in the Courts that left them with an unsecured debt of £3/4 million - such that they seemingly could not pay and so rather than go bankrupt it seems they yet again appealed the clear verdict which will escalate the debt to aroind £1.2Million when they are re-established as guilty as there is absolutely no doubt they are in breech of both the letter and the spirit of the law!

On would have thought even the most stupid of individuals would, with such a problem hanging over them, TRY to keep within the frame work of the law.

There’s more than one way to hide a donor

Solvej Krause, Daniel Foggo and Claire Newell

•  

DESPITE having one of its former MEPs jailed for expenses fraud last year, the UK Independence party has benefited from the current distrust of the larger parties and is fielding its candidates in the general election on an anti-sleaze platform.
Yet its commitment to upholding political standards has now been revealed as less than perfect.

Stuart Agnew, a UKIP MEP, and Lord Pearson of Rannoch, the party’s leader, have told undercover reporters how a real donor's name could be kept secret by passing tens of thousands of pounds through intermediaries. If carried out, one or more of the suggested methods could have been illegal.

Our disclosures will embarrass UKIP and Pearson, who also told the undercover reporter that some UKIP members were “neanderthals” and described Agnew, 60, as “one of our only really sane MEPs”.

An undercover reporter approached Agnew last month, saying that her aunt wanted to make a substantial donation to UKIP while keeping her identity secret. This was, the reporter explained, because her aunt was a senior civil servant who would find it professionally embarrassing to have her name publicly linked with the party.

Agnew, who joined UKIP 11 years ago and was elected to the European parliament in 2009, was initially circumspect. Asked if the real donor’s name would have to be revealed publicly, he said: “I’m afraid if it’s significant it would have to be.” But within minutes he appeared to contradict himself.

“If she can trust you she could give you a huge sum of money and you could give it to the party,” he said.

“I will try and look into all these things though to see what can be done so there are a few options,” he added.

A few days later, Agnew rang to say that after taking advice from “experts” he had “encouraging information” and suggested a meeting.

Last Thursday he met the undercover reporter at a hotel in Colchester, Essex. Agnew began by outlining the law on giving anonymous donations. Any donation of more than £7,500 to a party headquarters, or £1,500 to a party individual or branch, must be declared to the Electoral Commission and the donor’s name given.

Although Agnew did not mention it, if a donation of more than £7,500 is made via a third party or agent, the details of the real donor must also be given to the political party so that they can be supplied to the commission, which then publishes them on its website. Making anonymous large donations by proxy is not allowed.

After summarising for the reporter the level permitted for anonymous donations, Agnew said: “Now this is where it gets a bit more complicated. She [the aunt] can give money to what’s known as an unincorporated association.”

Unincorporated associations, which do not have to file accounts, are allowed to make donations to political parties. There have long been suspicions, however, that they can be used as “filters” to pass money from donors who want to remain anonymous.

New rules state that donations totalling more than £25,000 a year from an unincorporated association will result in further scrutiny from the commission. It then demands a full list of everyone who has given to the association over the course of the previous year.

Even for donations of less than £25,000, however, the association is still required to disclose the true name of any donor who is using it as a proxy to give money.

Agnew suggested using Global Britain, which was set up in 1997 by Pearson and two other peers and now also includes fellow UKIP peer Lord Willoughby de Broke. It describes itself on its website as a “geo-political think tank” which conducts Eurosceptic research. Last May it donated £80,000 to UKIP in the run-up to the Euro elections.

Agnew said: “I’ve spoken to Nigel Farage [the UKIP MEP and former leader] and he says at the moment you can put £25,000 into Global Britain and you will remain anonymous.”

He went on: “Of course, there is an element of trust though that your aunt wants that money into UKIP. Now, as the thing is run by Malcolm Pearson and as he is the leader of UKIP, there’s a pretty good chance, isn’t there, that that money will go in the right direction.” Agnew later rang Farage in front of the reporter to recheck the possibility of giving the amount to UKIP via Global Britain.

Agnew continued to run down his list of ways of giving anonymously. He said: “Another thing she [the aunt] could do: you are her niece — she could give you £3,000 before April 5, in other words before the end of the tax year ... as a present, as a gift. You would then immediately give UKIP a donation of £3,000.” Agnew said she could then do the same next week — now in a new financial year — and in both cases avoid any tax penalties.

Adding all those methods together would allow the “aunt” to donate £38,500 anonymously, he said.

Then he raised the stakes even higher. “Your mother [sic] can make you a loan of £100,000 to buy a house ... and you would then become a donor to the party for £100,000 and your name would go up on the [commission] website.” Agnew said when the real donor died, she could state in her will that the loan was now a gift, thus writing it off. “You are seen to be the donor rather than her,” he said.

He added: “A loan can be for any amount if you are looking at a way of getting a substantial sum of money in your name. But remember, your name would then go on the website. And it would take quite an investigative journalist to try and work out [who you are].

“Nobody knows your particular status, you could have inherited money.” During the meeting Agnew also admitted that he was using taxpayers’ money to pay half the salary of an assistant — UKIP regional organiser Peter Reeve — whose amount of actual work for him was “virtually none”.

“I can tell you that Peter is paid partly by me out of my assistance allowance here partly by David [Campbell] Bannerman [another UKIP MEP]. He does very little work for us, virtually none. He is working for the party. And that’s strictly illegal.”
Salaries paid via MEPs’ assistance allowance must not fund party work. The EU’s anti-fraud watchdog Olaf has been investigating some of Agnew’s fellow MEPs over a similar matter.

The day after the meeting, Agnew spoke on the phone to the reporter a number of times. He said he had talked to Pearson about the possibility of making the donation to UKIP via Global Britain.

“He did confirm that two anonymous donations can be made. Up to £7,500 can be made directly to the party and £25,000 to Global Britain,” he said, describing the latter method as a “loophole”. “If your aunt is willing to give us £32,500 [£25,000 plus £7,500] then it can be done anonymously.”

Another undercover reporter then spoke to Pearson, who said the money given to his unincorporated association would be passed “straight on” to UKIP: “I could pass it on the same day.”

He insisted: “The Electoral Commission knows that we will be doing all this, because someone else who is a major Conservative donor also wanted similar anonymity. The main thing is that it mustn’t be a straight filter.”

Asked if he could guarantee her name would not come out, he said: “Yes, we did it in the European elections [in 2009]. We passed on £80,000 from one person in effect ... and that caused no difficulty at all.” He said he would check with the Electoral Commission and “if there was any doubt I would honestly rather go without rather than risk it”.

When confronted, Pearson said he thought unincorporated associations were allowed to pass on donations of not more than £25,000 directly. He also said he would have given the donor’s name to the commission, although he said he was “not sure” if he had passed on the name of Patrick Barbour, a former Tory donor who he said was the person who donated £80,000 to UKIP through them last year. He claimed Barbour had given Global Britain £100,000 saying he would be “happy” if most of it went to UKIP.

He explained why he thought Barbour had wanted to stay anonymous: “He’d rather the Conservative party didn’t know he was giving that sort of money, you know,” he said.

He said: “It still is my understanding that I do not think that what I said yesterday to your [undercover] reporter is wrong. I’m sorry if it is, and I’ll apologise.” Pearson said he was regularly in touch with the commission over Global Britain and donations.
Agnew said: “It’s not cut and dried and the acts are complicated. The law is often very difficult to interpret.”

Bannerman denied Reeve did no work for him and Agnew. He said Reeve worked for UKIP only “in his spare time”. Reeve agreed.

Farage said: “I said to Stuart Agnew, I can’t take this any further, that she [the aunt] would have to come and meet face to face with Lord Pearson and talk about it.”

Barbour said of his donation last year: “I am pretty sure that I left it up to [Pearson’s] discretion what it was spent on.”
In a later call he said he had not given to Global Britain in order to conceal an anonymous donation to UKIP.

A spokesman for the commission said it would take “appropriate action” if breaches of the rules had occurred.

To view the original article CLICK HERE

These are the people who if ever elected would be responsible NOT TO the Law but FOR the Law - clearly on every count they are unfit for purpose.

LITTLE HAS CHANGED AMONGST THESE SCOUNDRELS!

SEE THIS ADDITION OF 08-Jan-2012:

Sunday, 8 January 2012

UKIP and Stuart Agnew set out to deceive public over debate

UKIP's leadership is clearly incapable of telling the truth.

In recent piece (on the official UKIP website) it was declared that 'UKIP MEP and agriculture spokesman Stuart Agnew scored a resounding victory at an Oxford Union Conference debate, significantly changing the majority view held before the event. Debating the motion earlier this week, “This House believes that British Agriculture could thrive outside of the European Union,” Mr Agnew found himself pitted against Liberal Democrat MP Andrew George and Young Farmers Club Agriculture Committee Member, Mark Houlton.'

End of quote.

You will note that UKIP states that it was an 'Oxford Union Conference debate'. This was clearly a deliberate attempt on the part of UKIP and Stuart Agnew to deceive the public. Agnew actually spoke in a debate at a farmers' conference which had hired the building from the Oxford Union! See: LINK. The conference had absolutely nothing to do with the famous Oxford debating society!

Lib Dem MP Andrew George, who also spoke in the debate, somehow managed to publish the correct information on his website with a heading 'George to debate at Oxford Farming Conference'. What a great shame that Agnew and UKIP failed to follow his example and tell the truth for once!

We also note that the UKIP website fails to mention Agnew was reticent, made bungling attempts to influence the debate, and was soon sidelined by his seconder, Milly Wastie, East Midlands Regional Officer of the Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution.

Stuart Agnew is currently under investigation by OLAF for fraud. See: LINK

Posted by Junius at 13:03

TO LEAVE THE EU

What is the exit and survival plan for these United Kingdoms to maximise on the many benefits of leaving The EU. It is the DUTY of our Politicians and Snivil Cervants to ensure the continuity, liberty and right to self determination of our peoples - they have a DUTY to protect against crime and secure both our food and our border.

NONE of these DUTIES has a single British politician upheld for 40 years. They have drawn their incomes fraudulently and dishonesty.


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

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

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

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

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

I SUGGEST – since there is clearly no political party of repute, advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign, democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country.

Deny the self seeking & meaningless wanabe MEPs the Mythical Mandate for which they clamour. Diktat is imposed from The EU but Law should be made at Westminster, for our Country & our Peoples.

Leave-the-EU

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

LEAVE THE EU
to Reclaim YOUR Future
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK

Related articles

• #0726* - Comparative Styles of The Farage Party & Hannan & UKIP (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
• #0708* - An interesting reflection on UKIP! (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
• #0724* - UKIP Misses 'Fiscal Compact Draft 2' (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
• #0720* - As UKIP Looses Relevance (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
• #0668* - UKIP Exposed on A Political Forum (ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com)
• Mick McGough Helps The EU by making UKIP Loose Relevance (mike-mcgough.blogspot.com)

#123* - EUkip Before The Courts AGAIN!

#123* - EUkip Before The Courts AGAIN!

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

MORE EVIDENCE OF EUkip LEADERSHIP’S LETTING DOWN ITS TROOPS!

Hi,

You will have read the build up to this shot across EUkip's bows in the copy eMails I have published from my leadership contacts.

John West first of all queried the dishonesty and incompetence of the selection and election, he wrote with queries and complaints, expecting an honest due process since it was administered by Christopher Gill whose reputation led Mr. West to believe he could trust Gill - how wrong he was! I understand his Private & Confidential letters were widely circulated by Gill himself - I know the copies I was sent certainly were!!

Gill's behaviour was beneath contempt as was almost every aspect of the corrupt process.

Those in doubt need go no further than to read EUkip's own appointed Returning Officer's report, which I have widely circulated and will be on this blog when I get time to post it as I'm trying to post in cronological order working back AND keep up to date (sorry I'm falling behind a bit, well a lot actually!)

Mr. West has made it abundantly clear that he did not expect to get selected merely experience and a fair chance in line with what was promised in the contract that EUkip entered into and acknowledged when they accepted his money.

You will have noted that not content with a criminal breech of the Data Protection Act, which the leader condoned - even it seems forcing his Chairman to sign a dishonest pack of lies in a letter which led to John Wittacker's fortuitous resignation. I say fortuitous because it gave Farage the opportunity to parachute in his own unelected puppet bought and paid for. Nuttall quite clearly lacks competence, integrity or morality and so clearly lacks the respect of all of his NEC that he had to call the Police to restore order when he found himself chairing his first NEC!

Mr. West has asked in many ways and often for a simple apology and now it seems he is ratchetting up the pressure, as it is clear that he has no intention to knuckle under to the bullying, lies and distortions being levelled at him and his wife, by EUkip.

Nor even to the illegal kangaroo courts and contrived ambushes - EUkip is digging its way deeper and deeper, in its dishonesty and disgracefull behaviour, it is fast reaching an irredeemable situation esspecially now their corrupt 'Reichstag Fire' moment has been 'spoofed' and the manipulation of their own Constitution rumbled - it makes a 'Kristall Nacht' more difficult to orchestrate and large as they may look in their shaving mirror they are far short of a Wanasee Conference & Final Solution.

They may be that odious but they just ain't that clever!

Hence this rather weak article in the local papers but when you think that Neil Puffet was unaware of the fraud, lies, embezelling and money laundering of Tom Wise as reported in the MSM or the fact that Tom Wise had been arrested and had just had his bail extended by some 3 months, for further investigations! This chappie seems a little out of touch as his sister paper in the same building has published the story - he failed to see the humour when I asked if he read the local papers!!

To be fair his sister paper did publish the drivel about Titford & Gulleford being cleared and the rumour has it that Mr. West made mallicious and unfounded allegations against Gollom & his handler - That Mr. West is likely to be prosecuted for wasting police time is utterly untrue, in fact I have spoken to the police and I can assure you that is a lie. However, one which I note the unwise in EUkip's team have committed libelously to paper.

Perhaps the next round!

The Evening Star - Ipswich

UKIP taken to court by candidate

12 November 2008 16:17

by: Neil Puffet

AN Ipswich general election candidate is taking his own party to court following a row over the selection process for becoming a Euro MP.John West, who will stand for election for UKIP in the North Ipswich and Central Suffolk constituency in the next general election, is demanding a £500 deposit back after failing to get the nod to represent the party at the next European elections due to be held next June.

Mr West declined to reveal details of the dispute but told The Evening Star he has lodged the matter with Ipswich County Court.UKIP have around three weeks to respond and if the matter is not settled the issue could go before a judge.Mr West, who is also UKIP chairman for Ipswich and east Suffolk, said:
“I can confirm I'm taking legal action against UKIP over the MEP selection process.”A spokesman for UKIP said: “Mr West underwent the same process as the rest of the candidates.“Unfortunately on this occasion he was not successful.

“We gather he is looking for the return of his deposit and the party will look into this at a senior level as soon as it can.”

Ipswich County Court was unable to confirm if a claim has been made.The East of England constituency has a total of seven MEPs representing the area in Brussels - in 2004 two UKIP candidates were elected from the region.

It is clear that EUkip haven't a leg to stand on as their own report from their own returning officer unequivocally admits their guilt - compounding this interim payments in liue of potential damages have been made as 'doucers' to Robin Page, Lyndda Robson and no doubt others wherein EUkip are in breech of contract, as outlined in the Returning Officer's report. I gather payments so far are in the region of £250, presumably as they try to negotiate damages for breech of contract.

Astonishingly EUkip are still dishonest enough to ask people to vote for them despite the undeniable fact that they can't run their own party!

This is a party which in 15 years has failed to run ANY training - how might they fare with the education brief?

This is a party with scant regard for Constitution - how might they be if called upon to uphold our Nation's destiny?

This is a party that has let their administration & justice internall tumbrel out of control - how might they behave with the Home Secretary's department?

This is a party where a senior spokesman said:

“We gather he is looking for the return of his deposit and the party will look into this at a senior level as soon as it can.”

Yest you will have seen elsewhere on my blog copies of the correspondence in which NuttAll - Farage's bought & paid for puppet - stated that he had taken legal advice (he's doomed if that is Oxley or Zucherman as it is increasingly clear the closest they have come to Silk is oggling it in a club!) NuttAll unwisely and briefly refused to either apologise or make good the payment.

It will be interesting to see, in Court, the provenance that every participant in the selection in discussion had personally paid, had provided a CRB, had provided their electoral role number and was a resident at the time.

Is EUkip alter its technique and stop digging but now try to fill the ends in - because it looks suspiciously as if their situation is terminal! In that it is quite clearly of their own making one is forced to wonder whether it is deliberate - as a false flag operation or merely on the childish basis of 'I'm having a party & you're not coming!'

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

MAY I SUGGEST – since there is no political party of repute advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country:

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:

LEAVE THE EU

#120* - EUkip Breaks Equal Opportunities Law (01)

#120* - EUkip Breaks Equal Opportunities Law (01)

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

MORE EVIDENCE OF EUkip LEADERSHIP’S INSULTING, CRASS & CHILDISH BEHAVIOUR!

Hi,

I had details of these facts verbally, until now, but here is the confirmation for you, received from a source close to the Leadership.

Perhaps Rachel Oxley as the legal adviser to the NEC & Leadership of EUkip can let us all know her valued opinion on the details of The Equal Opportunities Act under which it is of course an offence to verbally discriminate against a person on grounds of health, disability whether physical or mental.

That A 'currently' Practicing Solicitor Michael Zucherman of Bent & Manure solicits in London and is the Party Secretary of EUkip and Douglas Denny who has been proven to be obscenely foul mouthed in correspondence, in his capacity as an NEC member, and has been proven to be a serial liar AND was debarred from his for position at one time for proven corruption and dishonesty. Both Zucherman & Denny were acting in their official capacity representing EUkip's highest authority, its NEC, at the time of their very public abuse of Mr. West - yet again brings EUkip into Disrepute.

We shall see as the saga unfolds - the competence with which these aspirant politicians handle this matter.

Based on their handling of almost every matter since Nigel Farage seized leadership in a dishonest, corrupt and particularly vile leadership election, one can almost place a bet with their only backer of claimed substance the retired bookie Alan Bown - also on their NEC - however do so quickly as he may find he has been stiched, by the dishonesty of Nigel Farage & Andrew Smith particularly, into a bill of upwards of £1,000,000 having been found guilty they may well find the current Judicial review will find that the earlier Court Judge acted in excess of his authority as nowhere in the law does it say 'PORTIONS' of money gained unlawfully could be retained by the miscreant - in this case EUkip.

It is likely Alan Bown will have some money left to settle your bet but we note Farage doesn't think he has much as he hasn't even had the common courtesy to accompany him to Court. Seemingly Farage is hunting in pastures new and has even made approaches it seems to Declan Ganley - but more of that later.

Let us see how Rachel Oxley advises EUkip how to get out of this particular hole - it is likely to be more of the same 'Keep Digging' he won't do anything!
What a dangerous and foolish assumption but clearly the woman ain't the brightest!

From: johnwest81@hotmail.com
To:
shawforddavid@hotmail.com;
alanbown@btinternet.com;
cgill36@hotmail.co.uk;
davidfabbott@btinternet.com;
dcbdcbuk@yahoo.co.uk;
del1young@yahoo.co.uk;
derekrclark@hotmail.co.uk;
douglas.denny@btopenworld.com;
eric_edmond@hotmail.com;
eric.edmond@tiscali.co.uk;
ukipse@ukip.org;
jill_seymour@btopenworld.com;
lisa.duffy2@tesco.net;
martaandreasen@auna.com;
mazuckerman@bensonmazure.co.uk;
nigel.farage@europarl.europa.eu;
ukipbootle@yahoo.co.uk;
rjoxley@lineone.net;
susan@keymerhaslam.co.uk

Subject: Michael Zuckerman & Douglas Denny

Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 15:30:37 +0100


For the attention of the Party Chairman
Copied to the NEC

Dear Mr Nuttall,

In my capacity as a Governor of the Suffolk NHS Mental Trust I am writing to inform you that I have been made aware by a fellow Eastern member that certain comments made by Michael Zuckerman and Douglas Denny are now in the public domain thanks to emails leaked from someone in UKIP’s leadership to, I presume, Greg Lance-Watkins. These comments concern both Eric Edmond and myself.

At the last NEC meeting Michael Zuckerman said that both Eric Edmond and I suffered from Tourettes. Douglas Denny has also stated in an email that we are ‘unhinged ….. with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder’. I expect you to carry out your duty as Party Chairman and demand that both Mr Zuckerman and Mr Denny apologise for their unprofessional and disgraceful conduct.
Currently, the Suffolk NHS Mental Health Trust is involved in a campaign to end the stigma attached to those who suffer with mental health problems.

You can well imagine that I am appalled that senior members of a political party can encouraged such prejudice by using mental illness as a term of abuse. Rest assured that I am not prepared to defend the indefensible if this matter is discussed at the next Trust meeting.

I regret to say that this is extremely likely as the matter is now in the public domain. I am also not prepared to defend UKIP if the press become aware of this.

Letters of apology from both Michael Zuckerman and Douglas Denny may act to keep the matter off the Trust agenda. I require an answer to this email.

Yours sincerely,
John West
Governor of the Suffolk NHS Mental Health Trust

I await developements and the responses with interest but fear that the fools in EUkip's leadership will make matters worse - as ever.

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

MAY I SUGGEST – since there is no political party of repute advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country:

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:
LEAVE THE EU

#118* - The Betrayal of the Branches, The Members & Democracy (01)

#118* - The Betrayal of the Branches, The Members & Democracy (01)

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

MORE EVIDENCE OF EUkip's LEADERS BETRAYAL OF BRANCHES, MEMBERS & DEMOCRACY?

Hi,

This meeting called by Branch Chairman Martin Harvey, who I understand unequivocally confirmed that his associate Michael McGough who stood in the farcical selection scam corruptly orchestrated by EUkip's leadership based on lies and dishonesty - Michael McGough clearly claimed in his election statement that he was the elected PPC for EUkip in Harlow which is a lie he failed both to appologise for and also to correct.

The notice of the meeting called by Martin Harvey in the Eastern Region was widely known and attended by around 25 people, I understand, however there were 21 eligible voters representing 21 different Constituencies.

The meeting was civil, well mannered, well organised and I understand well chaired

(not a bit like an NEC meeting then!)

The subject matter was I understand debated and a form of wording agreed for a clear message to EUkip's leadership and NEC.

This has subsequently been named 'The Newmarket Declaration' and I have fortunately been supplied with a copy, together with a covering note, by a friend of democracy with access to a relevant EUkip computer.

I do hope that the friends of UKIP and the intentions of the Grass Roots of the party to campaign to leave the EU are making sure that they not only delete the copy of the eMail to my associate which is forwarded to me are removed from the >SENT<>Deleted< box - this will further make it difficult for the corrupt and venal leadership, NEC and their lakeys from confirming who are my intermediaries and also which members are supplying me direct from the EU.

Just a warniong as the level of lies being spread around about me are escallating to protect the guilty one must assume - even the Foul Mouthed slut Annabelle Fuller surfaced again this evening bobbing to the surface like something unwholesome in a septic tank.

I undersatand she is likely to be hauled in for questioning for the criminal breech of The Data Protection Act - implausible as her nonsense about taxi drivers and Morocco seemed to all but Wittaker who ill advisedly signed the letter - I wonder when he is asked to sign his witness statement in his defence as the then Chairman whether he will be as happy to attest to the version of events he put his name to originally.

I digress a little.

To return to 'The Newmarket Declaration':
I append a copy below Martin Harvey's polite request to the NEC members and Farage's puppet chair - frequently to be sat upon no doubt!

Make of it what you will and when the answer comes to hand I will publish that also.

----- Original Message -----

From: MartinHarveyONR@aol.com
To: ukipbootle@yahoo.co.uk ; shawforddavid@hotmail.com ; alanbown@btinternet.com ; del1young@yahoo.co.uk ; jill_seymour@btopenworld.com ; eric.edmond@tiscali.co.uk ; eric_edmond@hotmail.com

Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 10:21 PM
Subject: UKIP 2008.

Dear Mr Nuttall, and NEC members,

Last Saturday 27th September, there was a meeting in Newmarket of UKIP Activists from the Eastern Counties, chaired by myself, Martin Harvey. I am chairman of the Broxbourne and Harlow UKIP branch.

The agenda was a positive one to do with campaigning for maximum effect at all elections. After the first two agenda items had been completed, I realised that the problems within the Party were dominating the discussion, and a vote was taken that determined that the problems be debated in order to clear the air so that usual business could continue.

The ensuing debate produced a declaration that received unanimous support from the meeting, and I set out that declaration below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Newmarket Declaration.

At a meeting of Eastern Counties Branch Chairmen representing twenty one Constituencies, Branch Officers and Members, at Newmarket on 27th September 2008,
The following points were resolved;

The Eastern Counties regional committee is constituted contrary to its own binding rules, therefore its decisions since its inception, including the MEP selection process, have been and `are unlawful.

The dissolution of the existing committee and the establishment of a new committee in accordance with UKIP rules, be effected forthwith.

That such election be overseen by an impartial independent body.

We note seriously the grave reservations of Piers Merchant, in his official capacity as official returning Officer about the conduct of the Eastern Counties Selection Proceedures.
Newmarket 27th September 2008.

Over a month later and after an NEC meeting EUkip's sordid claque in leadership have NOT responded but I do hear that there is likely to be expulsion from the party of some who signed the document!

You will appreciate that Nigel Farage & his sordid claque of low lifes orchestrated their 'Reichstag Fire' moment at the NEC on the third and are currently following the example of Adolf Hitler this event has given rise to their equivallent of an 'Enabling Act' the achievement of which has been celebrated by several of the plotters by way of 'washail' and I understand that a celebratory dinner is on the cards as the plot rolls forward.

Already there have been limited Kangaroo Courts and ambush procedures - these have been reliant on abuse of the spirit of the Constitution - one is surprised as a Jew Michael Zucherman being a Practicing Solicitor (at the moment!) has been happy and enthusiastic in his persuit of this plot in the position of Party Secretary - a position in which he is woefully in remiss of duty - it would seem his orgasmic salivations at the very scent of rising up the prospective MEP list if he can engineer the ousting of Gerard Button & Ralp Attkinson during the 'Kristall Nacht' period has overcome him.

We understand that there will be a period of flagrant abuse of the residual constitution that was so evicerated by the inept OR dishonest actions of Michael Zucherman, already the Disciplinary Committee would seem to have been disenfranchised! Next no doubt the full benefits of the 'Reichstag Fire' moment will be exploited and the Constitution itself subsumed by the new dictatorial powers of the elite!

Draw your own conclusions since YOUR morality is a matter for me - however I have no need of Polls to tell me how to act with integrity, in a moral, fair and decent way. I stand by my morality and my judgement.

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

MAY I SUGGEST – since there is no political party of repute advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country:

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:
LEAVE THE EU

#117* - The EUkip Filth & The Edmond Kangaroo Court (01)

#117* - The EUkip Filth & The Edmond Kangaroo Court (01)

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!



MORE EVIDENCE OF EUkip LEADERSHIP’S UNDERHAND CORRUPTION!

Hi,

you may well have read my earlier blog or my eMail Newsletter, in which I stated that I was in receipt, from someone closely associated with EUkip’s sordid leadership claque the text regarding their planned Kangaroo court hearing, which was to be a part of Nigel Farage’s Reichstag Fire moment – engineered it would seem to try to give a corrupt cabal amongst the leadership the excuse to seize draconian power.

Still in the rather foolish belief that amongst that which had floated to the top of the EUkip septic tank might be something of decency & morality, with some understanding of British values and Justice! – I refrained from publishing the vindictive and vile compilation trumped up against Dr. Eric Edmond by the undeniably dishonest, fraud and liar David Bannerman, no doubt in obeisance to his venal and vile master and their corrupt associates.

I now publish below the full text as shamefully drawn up by the sad failure Bannerman and endorsed by the proven corrupt NEC only one of whom spoke out in disgust at this behaviour, Drs. Abbott & Edmond having already left in disgust, disassociating themselves from the undeniably dishonest and corrupt behaviour boasted of by the sleazy drunken womaniser Nigel Farage. Farage had admitted, seemingly with no realisation of the enormity of his actions, that he had set-up and tricked one of UKIP’s most loyal and decent long term supporters Martin Hasslam, who has so consistently given generously of his money and hugely of his expertise and time (in the misguided belief that supporting this evil that is EUkip of today was, in some way, patriotic!).

It is unlikely that anyone of integrity will not see through the disgusting lack of morality in this so called ‘Submission For Disciplinary Action’, drawn up by the discredited David Bannerman as the first in a series of reprehensible kangaroo courts.

Bannerman was supported in his dishonesty by Farage’s self seeking puppet, the odious NuttAll parachuted in unelected as a ‘Puppet Chairman’, when Dr. Wittacker’s disgust at the dishonesty of the NEC finally boiled over and he quit – the last straw it seems was being forced to sign a letter claiming the foul mouthed Annabelle Fuller had resigned and the pack of implausible lies about taxi drivers and Morocco peddled to cover for her criminality!

Read on – there is a huge amount more yet to come:

STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

A SUBMISSION FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION
AGAINST DR ERIC EDMOND

Presented on request of the NEC for discussion at the
November NEC meeting

Introduction

The NEC has the power under the Party Constitution to expel or suspend a member of the NEC for 'unbecoming conduct' under Articles 7.18.4. The intention of this clause is to exclude any NEC member who behaves in such a way as consistently to disrupt the NEC and prevent it from conducting its business in a proper, efficient and orderly manner. This ongoing conduct thereby proves him or herself to be unfit to continue as an NEC member.

By offering Dr Edmond the opportunity to speak at the last NEC and by deferring discussion of the matter to a future NEC, and by providing a copy of this paper in advance to Dr Edmond, the NEC has sought to act reasonably and fairly under the Constitution.

The motion agreed at the 8th September NEC was: "That in view of the indication by Dr Edmond that he wished to have the opportunity to prepare to meet any charges against him, and in view of representations by various NEC members that they wish to have the opportunity of putting forward their own complaints against Dr Edmond, David Campbell Bannerman was invited to prepare a submission for disciplinary action against Dr Edmond under clause 7.18 of the constitution to be heard at the next NEC meeting and with proper notice of at least 7 days being given to Dr Edmond of the content of that submission.”

1. The Charge of ‘Unbecoming Conduct’ Against Dr Eric Edmond, with supporting evidence.

The majority view of the NEC is that Dr Eric Edmond has been a consistently disruptive influence on the NEC since he was elected, and that his behaviour needs to improve markedly if he is able to continue as an NEC member. The facts show a clear pattern of disruptive and abusive behaviour, and of contempt for the NEC and its members. This is clear from the evidence cited below:

1.1 Threats to go outside the NEC, and support for police action

Dr Edmond has made serious threats against the NEC. For example, he said in

an e mail of 25th July "If you persist in this I will have to seek remedies outside the NEC."

Dr Edmond supported John West's recurring attacks on UKIP, including seeming to encourage unjustified attempts to instigate police action against the party. In his e mail of 13th August he says to John West and John Whittaker "I urge him to do so as quickly as possible so the police can get on with their investigation as quickly as possible".

1.2 Aggressive personal behaviour

Even at his first NEC, on 7th April, Dr Edmond engaged in an aggressive attack on the Leader and his style of leadership. He again attacked Nigel Farage at the 14th July NEC regarding Nigel's use of the Political Committee for political decisions (despite this being made clear as its purpose in the Constitution, and owing to a need to make quick political decisions). Mr Farage explained forcefully that the reason was a lack of trust in the NEC owing to past leaks.

Dr Edmond also engaged in attacks also on Douglas Denny at 14th July NEC, calling him an "idiot", when Mr Denny objected to Edmond's slanderous remarks against Christopher Gill (see below).

In an e mail to Douglas Denny of 2nd September, Edmond rudely says. "you are raving again." This was in response to Mr Denny making reasonable comments which ended in the observation: "All I have seen so far, is a constant tirade [by Dr Edmond] against the "leadership" of UKIP and what appears to be deliberate disruption and promotion of discord in the NEC. What is your agenda ? It does not appear to me to be what you told the membership." and in an e mail of 4th September from Edmond, "your reply is rubbish". As Lisa Duffy made clear in her e mail of 28th September: "The only angry raised voice has been Dr Edmond".

1.3 Bringing the Party into disrepute, by writing to a body UKIP is
engaged in a legal dispute with, to make wild and damaging accusations

Dr Edmond has written to the Electoral Commission in the middle of a legal case against the party by that same organisation.

He wrote to Mr Franks of the Electoral Commission on 10th September saying: "I gather you are the investigating officer in charge of investigating alleged financial improprieties at UKIP with a case currently under judicial review. I was expelled from UKIP NEC on Monday. I am deeply concerned about my financial liabilities as while on the NEC party officials stone walled over answering questions on financial matters and in one case gave a completely untruthful answer.

“I copy to you my letter to the residual NEC as record of the date and content of my request for financial information as UKIP leaders usually ignore awkward but important questions. I am not sure who legally is currently chairman of UKIP Whittaker or Nuttall as the Monday meeting was improperly convened but Whittaker seemed to chairing the meeting."

He also claimed in his e mail of 10th September "I will of course also be seeking guidance from the Electoral Commission as to the propriety of all financial and other transactions made during my term of office".

It is difficult to accept that Dr Edmond has the interests of the party at stake when he acts this way. He was seeking to do major damage to the cause of UKIP. This alone is enough for a complaint to the disciplinary committee.

1.4 Slanderous Comments made against Christopher Gill at the NEC meeting of 14th July 2008

At the 14th July meeting, Eric Edmond challenged the suitability of Christopher Gill to act as Returning Officer, given that as a Tory MP "he did not even make it as a PUSy (Parliamentary Under Secretary)", the lowest grade of Minister. He did this despite the fact that Christopher Gill was not present at the meeting, and therefore not able to defend himself.

Nigel Farage said that this remark was not nice, and below the belt, as many MPs are not just in Parliament for Ministerial positions and serve their constituencies well.

Eric retorted that no, "it is due to a lack of talent".

David Campbell Bannerman commented that this remark was slanderous, and urged Dr Edmond to withdraw it. He refused to do so. Douglas Denny said it was actionable.

At the subsequent NEC of 8th September, Mr Campbell Bannerman inquired whether Dr Edmond had apologised subsequently to Christopher Gill, and Christopher confirmed no such apology had been received.

At that NEC, Dr Edmond claimed that he had not made the remarks, but many members of the NEC commented that he was wrong, and that they had a clear recollection that these remarks were made, as stated.

Whilst fair criticism is of course acceptable, this kind of unpleasant and libellous abuse in front of Christopher Gill's peer group, and without him present to defend himself, is not acceptable conduct by an NEC member.

1.5 Breaches of NEC confidentiality

Dr Edmond has broken strict NEC confidentiality rules. For example, in an e mail of 13th August to Robin Page, Dr Edmond reported: "I have expressed my
dis-satisfaction with this to our leader but he replied the NEC leaked so much he could only have people he could trust on his Political Committee." This was a discussion at an NEC meeting and was confidential to that meeting. NEC rules clearly state that breach of confidentiality can lead to instant dismissal from
the NEC.

Yet Dr Edmond also displays rather a contempt for confidentiality. In his e mail of 30th September he dismisses breaches of NEC confidentiality as "unproven" and to raise such concerns as an "allegation that smears us all". This is despite consistent evidence of leaks - as Rachel Oxley states in her e mail of 30th September, "It really is stating the obvious to say the e mail correspondence of the NEC is being passed on as we see our comments reproduced in part or in full in the e mail circulation list of Greg Lance Watkins and on Anthony Butcher's forum."

1.6 Support for a disruptive attempt by John West to sit on the NEC

Eric Edmond encouraged John West to believe he had a right to sit on
the NEC, even though there is no 'ladder' system in operation for the NEC
(leading to the next highest voted candidate taking a free place) and there was no vacancy, as confirmed by an NEC discussion and vote on 8th September. As a result John West was sitting in at the NEC meeting on 8th September and had subsequently to be asked to leave, as he had no right to be there.

Dr Edmond at the NEC denied he had encouraged West to attend, yet he supported his case at the NEC of 8th September and in his e mail of 30th August, he said: "UKIP Constitution requires 12 elected members. There are currently only 11. John West, the 5th placed person in the last NEC election therefore should be on the NEC. Can you please send him an invite to this effect ?" and in his email of 31st August he argued: "John West has a democratic mandate to fill our vacant NEC slot.. but he is democratically entitled to sit on the NEC."

This was done without the courtesy of checking the rules with the Party Secretary nor discussing the matter with the Party Chairman, and was done in an aggressive manner. This is the comment made to a former Party Secretary Douglas Denny in e mail of 1st September: "If you persist in trying to thwart the democratic process you make us the same as the EU" and another of same date where he says "it is silly for you to try and deny democratic process for Mr West and invoke it for your own ends."


Latterly, he has compounded his abusive approach by calling in an email of 20th. September for the Party Leader to be barred from the NEC owing to an OLAF inquiry, the Deputy Leader to resign, for John West to take his place, and with an attack on the Treasurer and MEP Candidate Marta Andreasen.

1.7 A recurrent attempt to undermine faith in the MEP selection process

Eric Edmond is entitled to his views and to criticise the conduct of Party business or the MEP selection process as an NEC member. However, his conduct goes way beyond a legitimate holding to account.

Eric Edmond has supported every single complainant regarding MEP selection in his e mails with enthusiasm - John West, Robin Page, Lynnda Robson, Gerard Batten, Victor Webb, Chris Hudson, Rollo Reid.

He makes grossly exaggerated claims in an e mail of 19th August that "This is the latest in a succession of allegations of improprieties in the MEP election process. We have a situation where rules and due process are being ignored at all levels of the party, emails from NEC members to those involved in running the election are not replied to, legal actions are in progress and someone who were told had resigned for an unforgivable breach of confidence is now allegedly back performing the same functions but with a murky contractual relationship with UKIP. A general state of anarchy prevails and the leadership produce no evidence to the NEC to support their actions. I support your call for to scrap the election... (and for) an emergency NEC." The vast majority of regions and candidates have been satisfied with the process, even where their ambitions have been sadly disappointed, and yet Dr Edmond seeks to stop, destroy and invalidate the entire process.

Factually, Edmond ignored the guidance regarding closing dates and did not bother to confirm this with the party before stirring the issue up outside the NEC.

In an e mail of 15th August he claims "Messrs Page & West seem to have a strong prima facie case that there were not given fair treatment in our MEP selection process and I request this be put on the NEC agenda for discussion at our Sept meeting. Page's case seems to be strong as UKIP did extend the closing date for nominations in Wales and possibly other regions as well. West's case is also strong and potentially far more damaging as it has elements of malicious intent." Never did he acknowledge that West had clearly libelled Jeffrey Titford MEP, Stuart Gulleford and the Deputy Leader in advance of his YouTube posting (and which was not at all acceptable), nor that West had even gone to the police to make these false accusations.

Even after notice of disciplinary action was given, Dr Edmond was still unquestionably supporting Mr West. In an e mail of 28th September, Edmond says, "John West has not used any foul language and addressed the NEC in mild
and moderate language." John West never "addressed" the NEC, he was merely asked why he was attending the meeting, and then asked to leave whilst this was discussed. Dr Edmond further claimed in his e mail of 29th September that a firm but polite response from Douglas Denny to continued harassment by email by West was "offensive and threatening".

This support is despite the fact that West’s malicious charges to the Essex police have been formally dismissed as having no substance whatsoever.

Then Edmond enthusiastically embraces Victor Webb's complaints. In a 20th September e mail about Victor Webb he proclaims "He seems to me to have a prima facie case for a complaint", asking the Chairman to have Mr Webb at the NEC in person, as he did with John West.

An e mail of 30th July attacks the South West process, stating that "Rollo Reid, the chairman of the nearby Christchurch branch and one of our best activists was not selected as an MEP candidate whilst Julie Harrison, Graeme Booth's niece who had only been in the party one week according to the SWCC figures was selected ! I pointed out to the SWCC at which 3 members of the selection committee were present how demoralising this decision would be for our activists. Was Mr Gill party to this decision ?".

As early as 11th June Dr Edmond was declaring in an e mail that "I heard a rumour that the £250 MEP nomination fee had been waived for some candidates. As a candidate myself I have an obvious interest. Do you know if there is any truth in this rumour?"

And at the NEC meeting on 9th June, Edmond supported the issue of the Fenland branch and Len Baynes, who had attacked the Regional Organiser for Eastern, Peter Reeve, and which they had unfairly tried to deselect as a Prospective Parliamentary Candidate.

As for the selection process, Dr Edmond raised a motion at the NEC of 14th July for the South West demanding the region has its own, independent voting system using the Electoral Reform Society, claiming people have "a lack of faith in the integrity in voting on MEP candidates". This was despite the fact no other region has requested a different voting process, and that the Returning Officer Piers Merchant is not only known to be very fair but is from the South West himself. Edmond also boasted of disrespect for the Deputy Leader from some in the South West. The motion was defeated.

Dr Edmond did attend the MEP vote count at Head Office in person and sought to test the voting system there, only to find that the device he used proved the process was robust and the results exactly the same as his.

1.8 Inconsistent and inaccurate public statements

Dr. Edmond has made a number of inaccurate statements, within the NEC and outside of it. As cited above, he insisted he did not make slanderous statements about Christopher Gill, when this was raised at the 8th September meeting, even though this was the clear recollection of the majority of NEC members.

Even after the disciplinary warning Dr Edmond has continued to make a series of inaccurate statements as to the facts whilst regularly claiming "I just tell the truth" (in his e mail of 28th September). His version of events once again is at complete odds with the recollection of the majority of the NEC, which he consistently denies. In his email of 28th September, for example, he says:
"Your statements... about what happened at the 8th Sept NEC are highly misleading and distort the truth".

Dr Edmond claimed at the 8th September NEC itself that it "was not a properly constituted meeting of the NEC" and that the new Chairman was not authorised by the NEC, even though the Party Leader had explained he had called and had agreement from a required number of NEC members before the Party Conference announcement.

Dr Edmond has also claimed several times, including to outside audiences, that he was "illegally expelled" from the NEC when he had not been. But in spite of this, in his e mails of 20 September he asks to be placed on the NEC agenda 5 items, which he is only entitled to do as an NEC member, and asking for NEC seconders.

This inconsistent position is amplified in his e mail of 28th September, where he again claims that "there is no doubt in my mind, to Delroy Young or the listeners outside that I was expelled from the NEC."

Lisa Duffy clearly records the accurate and majority view of the events in her e mail of 11th September, "Once you were back in the room John Whittaker then informed you of the motion put forward and asked you if you would like to address the meeting in response. Dr Edmond I clearly recall that you said No John I would not, I am going to leave the meeting and prepare my defence and speak to my legal team in Freshfields. At NO point were you expelled or suspended from the NEC. At this present time you remain an elected member of the NEC and your response will be heard at the next NEC meeting."

Douglas Denny recalls in his e mail of 10th September "I remember well your voluntary leaving of the NEC meeting - which I highlighted to the members of the meeting when it occurred. You were in a position to engage in the proceedings, which you refused. Despite your refusal, you are being given further reasonable time and dispensation to engage in this issue I understand."

Rachel Oxley made similar observations in an e mail of 12th September:

“The circumstance of Dr Edmonds' leaving the NEC meeting on Monday 8th September are exactly as described by Lisa Duffy, Christopher Gill and Doug Denny. It was his express wish to leave in order to obtain legal advice before giving the NEC his response... Doug Denny remarked that Dr Edmonds had left the meeting of his own volition as he felt that it should be noted. The Forum frequented by some UKIP members and former members contains a rather different version- in which the NEC behaved disgracefully in expelling him etc."

She added further comments in an 22 September e mail: "It is interesting, isn't it, that Dr Edmonds should suggest agenda items and propose motions for our next meeting despite his having personally informed at least one British Democracy Poster (Sponplague) that he is no longer on the NEC, following his alleged 'expulsion'. He appears to be wanting to have his cake and eat it too, in gaining the sympathy & kudos that his alleged shoddy treatment by the NEC will bring, whilst still wishing to dominate the agenda."

This is in contrast to claiming he was "asked to leave the NEC by Chairman John Whittaker" in an e mail of 20th September, and in a 10th September e mail declaiming "my outrageous, unjustified and illegal expulsion from the NEC".

1.9 Unreasonable demands for unrelated information

In his e mail of 10th September, Dr Edmond demands a range of documents, said to be for his legal defence as to his proposed expulsion, but which have nothing to do with the charge of 'unbecoming conduct'. They include details of the Party's financial transactions April to September 2008, issues around Alan Bown's court case constituting a further donation, and financial donations from the Ramsgate Call Centre for 2007/08. These demands he then copies to the Electoral Commission, to cause further trouble.

Proposed Motion to the NEC

In conclusion, in light of this evidence of unbecoming conduct by Dr Eric Edmond as an NEC member, the following motion is put to the next NEC on 3rd November 2008:

MOTION:

‘That in the light of Dr Eric Edmond’s unbecoming conduct as an NEC member, both during NEC meetings and through relevant e mails and other communications, that under Article 7.18.4 of the UKIP Constitution, Eric Edmond be suspended immediately as a member of the NEC, and remain suspended for the next three NEC meetings post the 3rd November NEC meeting. After that suspension period, Dr Edmond will be allowed to reapply to attend future NEC meetings, but will only be accepted back after a majority decision of the NEC and by Dr Edmond providing a suitable written undertaking to behave in a responsible and dignified manner during NEC meetings and through his other UKIP activities. Any breach of that undertaking would lead to the automatic and immediate resumption of his suspension from the NEC, through a further motion.’

I doubt readers of ANY integrity will be astonished to note not just the fundamental dishonesty of Bannerman in drawing up this rather childish and indubitably vicious attack - There is something skin crawlingly similar in the behaviour displayed by Bannerman & his supporters to William Golding's 'Lord of The Flies' but with Kafkaesque overtones of 'The Trial'.

How any honest man could accuse Dr. Eric Edmond of 'Bringing EUkip Into Disrepute' in the light of the serial shamefull behaviour of EUkip's leadership and NEC - much of which has been exposed in the media:

Drunken, Racial Abuse, Abuse of The Data Protection Act, Assault, Adultery, Consorting with Prostitutes, Fraud, Embezelling, Money Laundering, Lies, Dishonesty, Failures of Accounting, Lack of Probity, Lack of Transparency, Hypocracy etc. etc.

Then we note that in terms of 'Bringing EUkip Into Disrepute' David Bannerman himself has colluded in & profitted from corrupt elections and has for many years lied on a serial basis about his 'so called' ancestry and fraudulently and dishonestly gained his present appointment based on undeniable lies, fraud and his claimed Father's ownership of a desk!

It is astonishing that the ONLY member of the NEC to seek Justice and Honesty with the integrity to and courage to speak out was Delboy Young - It is not that I am astonished at Del's integrity and courage, it is that I am disgusted at the lack of integrity and corruption of all others who were present, who have thus heaped ordure on their own heads and indubitably 'Brought EUkip into Disrepute'.

I am particulary astonished that Christopher Gill once a Tory MP so demeaned himself and brought shame on his head after an otherwise honourable if lack lustre contribution to Justice and Democracy over many years - it would seem that even on reflection his conscience has not caused him to speak out in the face of such evil - Shame on Christopher Gill who at least should have set some example to these sordid people.

I shall be returning to this Kangaroo Court that is clearly something of a Kristall Nacht with its false flagged lies so very redollent of The Reichstag Fire used by Hitler to seize absolute control and set aside The Constitution as it is clear Farage's Brown Shirts are so pliantly doing to their eternal shame, as they selectively and out of context quote people and the Rule Book.

I shall address the shame of each and every paragraph, in the context of the eMails quoted and those who bear false witness. I shall also address the shameful behaviour one at a time of each and every individual present and participating in this revolting witch hunt.

I shall also, at my convenience, publish a recording I hold of the NEC - most likely together with other damning material in the run up to the EUropean Elections of June 2009 - to ensure that these United Kingdoms are never again represented by such shamefull people or disgusting acts.

Should you doubt these people are that evil just read my posting #116* if you read nothing else.

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

MAY I SUGGEST – since there is no political party of repute advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country:

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:

LEAVE THE EU

#116* - Gollom's Tarnished Pressssiousssss!

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

#116* - Gollom's Tarnished Pressssiousssss!


MORE EVIDENCE OF EUkip LEADERSHIP’S UNDERHAND INCOMPETENCE!

Hi,

Gollom, yet again, excels himself as he slithers around duplicitous as ever – an unpleasant and cowardly creep always ready to do something in his own interest.

He has proved in the past to have the honour and integrity of a snake and the personality of a stoat. Both untrustworthy and vicious in his self interest – willing to mislead and back stab along with the rest of that which has floated to the top of the septic tank of EUkip politics.

By the way – thanks to my source who mailed these eMails to me through a third party, after a brief conversation – How these eMails were floating around outside of Gollom & The Reeve’s Region is difficult to trace, fortunately ;-)

Anyway – make of this what you will and I will, not un-naturally, interject ;-)

It is to be hoped that this takes little clarification as on my first skim reading I was disgusted at the depths these odious people will sink to to stab each other in the back.

We MUST SOOOOOO HOPE they are never elected as their duplicity and willingness to corrupt common morality is so redollent of the methods of The National Socialist Movement of Germany – as they used witch hunts and intimidation – first interpreting their Constitution to suit their aims and seizing control of the levers of power – it was after Kristall Nacht that The Reichstag Fire was exploited, just as is the crass imitation so badly bungled by Farage’s evil claque of last Monday, is being used.

Right down to the flexing of muscles by his bully boys and the willingness of the old and the weak to fall in line.

EUkip’s own version of the horrors of the build up to war and the persecution of the honest is of course but a pathetic imitation but no less evil for all that!

Ladies and Gentlemen are you not ashamed that you stand by and permit this evil to take place under your noses and with your acquiescence?

Look closely at the tone of the eMails that follow and consider them in the context of Farage’s Reichstag Fire moment engineered with care last Monday – yet accidentally exposed by my earlier predictions and the astonishing fact that AllAboutUkip Blog posted the outcome of the NEC meeting seemingly before it commenced and The BNP had posted the details before the NEC meeting ended!

Even that early Clive Page from EUkip’s Press Office was spinning to keep up – TRYING to imply there was no connection between Farage’s corrupt dealings and the shoddy attempt to link his BNP based Reichstag Moment to the kangaroo Court dismissal of Dr. Abbott without defence or warning and Dr. Edmond who had been told that he was not allowed to defend himself, from 9 pages of trumped up drivel from the liar, cheat and fraud David Bannerman.

The old grass roots honest UKIP members must be so ashamed to be associated with such shamefull behaviour from the bully boys!

----- Original Message -----

From the unelected enforcer instructing Farage’s puppet Reeve how to distort Justice to dishonestly seize control:

Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 18:02:30 +0000
From: gensec@ukip.org
To: ukipbootle@yahoo.co.uk; reeve@ukip.org
Subject: Open letter as discussed on phone - Should that read ‘PLOTTED’?

To whom it may concern:

However it would SEEM that the victim is even yet not informed, as clearly a kangaroo court functions best when the target is surprised by the events ‘PLANNED’ for them!

On 12th August, at a Committee Meeting of the Suffolk Coastal branch, a vote was taken to expel John West from all branch activities of the Suffolk Coastal branch.

The Committee Meeting was called without warning, only members likely to acquiesce to corruption were invited (Resignations were resultant from honest men of integrity!).

The victim John West was dishonourably ambushed by the corrupt Chairman acting in collusion with the bully boy Reeve – an individual without morality, integrity or value to our Country as he has no understanding of Justice or decent values – but favoured as one of the new crooks determined to form the new Brown Shirts!

The branch had the authority to do this by way of rescinding the agreement of the branch under Article 2.3 of the Branch & Constituency Association Rules March 2008, which states that:

Even the lowest of such scum does not pore over the rules AFTER the event to find duplicitous ways to justify their dishonest and corrupt behaviour.

Party members may, on request, become a member of another branch, subject to the agreement of the receiving branch committee.

Even having acted in this despicable way they are having to dishonestly go against the spirit of their own law to justify their odious actions.

Since John West does not reside in the area covered by Suffolk Coastal branch, rescinding this agreement required the appointment of a new temporary secretary for Suffolk Coastal branch. Mrs. Larter stepped into the vacancy temporarily.

I understand John West – who clearly has more morality in his little finger than is shared by the sordid claque that have by their actions brought EUkip into disrepute – Whitmore is, for his own gain, acting with liars and cowards like George Curtis and Andrew Smith who I gather will be used as the scapegoat for Farage’s crass handling, with him, that would seem likely to cost EUkip between £500,000 and £1,000,000 by their irresponsible and dishonest behaviour.

The meeting was unlawfully constituted, without agenda or notice. The claimed interpretation of the Constitution is bunkum on ANY interpretation of decency or Justice and counter any British values of integrity.

The reason given by the branch for taking this action was that it was felt John West had breached Article 4.5 of the UKIP Constitution, which states that:

"Members shall accept the Party's constitution and rules made in accordance with this constitution and do nothing to undermine the reputation of the Party or to bring the Party into public disrepute. Nor shall they act in a manner intended to cause, or actually causing, damage to the Party's interests including by breaching confidentiality."

Thus these duplicitous bully boys show their dishonesty – he stands accused under one rule they managed to find, but is brutalised and ambushed under another – Shame on these evil people that are tying to hijack the Party.

This was in relation to public allegations that John West had made against the UKIP MEP for the Eastern Counties, which were proven to be unfounded.

This is to my certain knowledge untrue, false and a lie - as I have spoken with the Police Inspector. I also spoke with the Police Inspector regarding the breech of The Data Protection Act and also with The Data Protection Agency as a complainant. I understand from associates that Mr. West has also spoken with them in detail.

John West was not happy to accept this branch decision.

One can not be surprised that an honest man seeks to uphold honest principles in the face of corruption of any sense of due process.

Accordingly, the matter was referred to the Regional Organiser, who was present at the meeting of 12th August as a guest of the branch to discuss campaign activities.

Clearly a lie as he changed his own story twice and neither was in accord with the spin put about by Whitmore!

This referral took place under Article 7.1 of the Branch & Constituency Association Rules, March 2008, which states:

Let us hope there are enough honest members left in EUkip to see through this intimidatory twaddle.

"Instances may arise when differences within a branch threaten its proper functioning. Every effort shall be made to resolve these at the local level, either by the branch committee or at a full meeting of the branch. If this does not succeed, the dispute shall be referred to the regional organiser, acting on behalf of the Party Chairman." In upholding the branch decision, Peter Reeve was therefore acting on the Chairman's behalf.

Clearly Peter Reeve had driven some 100 miles to act as an enforcer in bullying through this duplicitous and underhand behaviour.

It is becoming clear that together with the lies and dishonesty of the leadership election, the dishonesty of the placement of Duffy & others on the NEC, the openly published Returning Officer’s report of corruption in the selection of candidates and the criminal cases being brought in the Courts by the Judicial Review, the Data Protection Agency, The Data Protection Commissioner, OLAF, The British Police and even claims in The Small Claims Courts.

John West further alleges that the branch has a duty to hold an Annual General Meeting, claiming that this currently falls due. Article 4.2.1 of the Branch & Constituency Association Rules, March 2008, states that:

"The Party's year ends on 31st December. The AGM shall normally be held between 1 January and 31 March and between 10 and 14 months after the preceding AGM."

Which clearly this abuse of the constitution has failed to take into account as we can be certain the manipulation by the Brown Shirts fails to address the period exceeding 14 months in direct contravention of the rules they seek to abuse.

Since the primary motivation in the rules for the date of the AGM is that it should take place after the end of the party's financial year, it is the view of Suffolk Coastal branch committee that it is reasonable to delay the Annual General Meeting of Suffolk Coastal branch until January 2009.

It is clearly not the view of the Suffolk Costal Branch duely elected Secretary, whose duty it is to uphold the Constitution that the dishonest bully boys are seeking to kick down, to suit their grubby interests!

As Party Chairman, I am convinced that the proper procedures have been applied by Suffolk Coastal branch. Accordingly, I have made the following decisions:

As Farage’s Puppet it is clear that as so often stated EUkip like fish is rotting from the head down – this is the man who so badly chaired the NEC meeting that the Police had to be called to restore order last Monday (3rd.)!

A shaven headed Liverpool Scally utterly out of his depth unable to control the braying of his own immature and irresponsible claque on the NEC of EUkip.

1. That Suffolk Coastal branch has acted in accordance with the UKIP Constitution and Branch & Constituency Association rules March 2008 in removing John West from his position as Branch Secretary.

If this is your opinion Nuttall clearly you are unfit for office as it is the decision of a small time nebbish, dancing for his corrupt and discredited puppet master. Your action brings The EUroSceptic Movement into disrepute and nothing but shame on EUkip.

2. That the Branch secretary of Suffolk Coastal branch is now Mrs. Larter, acting in a temporary capacity until the next AGM of Suffolk Coastal branch.

So this is the first of the provincial show trials! Shame on the sad old Larter that she accepts the position, when better men have resigned it leaves only the scum!

3. That Suffolk Coastal branch should hold its AGM in January 2009.

Are we to understand that Farage’s hapless little puppet is acting as Gaulleiter with Dictatorial authority in breech of EUkip’s Constitution and any moral concepts of natural Justice?

Yours faithfully,

Paul Nuttall (UKIP Party Chairman)

Nuttall your low life behaviour and lack of morality may be acceptable in the gutters you frequent but in the real world you have sealed your fate and branded yourself as a dishonourable Chav on the make, for ever more.

Shame on you for such underhand behaviour being used like a throw away nappy by your master.

Your actions are yet again beneath contempt as you move towards the destruction of UKIP which was the hope of many honourable men and women.

----- Original Message -----

From: PETER REEVE
To: DCB ; andrew smith ; stuart gulleford ; george curtis
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:50 PM
Subject: John West no longer Secretary of Suffolk Central.

For Info. We sent notice to the branch today upholding Suffolk Coastal committee's decision to remove John West as their branch secretary. He had since that meeting sent a letter to all members calling an AGM on 25th Nov against the wishes of the branch chairman. Will keep you up to date on this as things occur.

Well done Mr. West at least one person is acting honourably – a course of action clearly that which has floated to the top of EUkip’s septic tank has no cogniscence of – it is interesting to note that a Branch Secretary has legal responsibilities - Just imagine if EUkip had someone elected to office in June 2009 just how they would betray these United Kingdoms.

Interestingly whilst the bully boys went around intimidating people one of my contacts in head office informed me that as far as they were concerned John West was still the Secretary and being mailed as such!

Do you think the chavs are out of control? Just like the Brown Shirts on Kristall Nacht!

I have been asked to contact every suffolk coastal member by phone to confirm our action and explain why they have received the false letter from John West. (as well as asking for donations! LOL)

If you want a lie spread about seek a weak man and bribe him! One wonders if your abilities to fund the Party will be commensurate with your ability to organise the meeting in Capel St. Mary!! Who would fund EUkip other than someone trying to buy position EUkip’s accounts stink and any money will most likely have to be used to pay fines and damages!

Do be minded that as John West has still not been notified (unless he reads my blog) of their filthy underhand coniving he was acting in good faith as Secretary and after many years as a trusted member he has his own list of members accrued whilst working WITH members not for himself and money!

(Note he is still currently Chair of Ipswich North & Suffolk Central branch. - but this at least should solve the problem for Ron Whitmore and get their branch moving forward again & out leafleting) There may be wider implications to John West's actions in contacting these members as he had no right to use the database or the title. Will wait to see what fuss he makes for next step.

Be minded Reeve that unlike you Mr. West was elected you are merely a pawn in a filthy game – a prostitute to Farage & Bannerman’s dishonesty.

Pete Peter Reeve
Regional Organiser
UKIP Eastern Counties

----- Forwarded Message ----

From: Stuart Gulleford ukipeast@intamail.com
Subject: Fw: John West no longer Secretary of Suffolk Central.

It seems that at least some action has been taken!

S (Slime perchance?)

Action that will no doubt please Gollom as he slithers around hated by many and deceiving others.

Regards,
Greg L-W.
01291 – 62 65 62

MAY I SUGGEST – since there is no political party of repute advocating or campaigning for withdrawal of these United Kingdoms from the EU and restoration of our independent sovereign democracy, with Justice & the right to self determination in a free country:
Write Upon Your Ballot Paper:LEAVE THE EU