Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!
LITTLE BERTTIE HITT THROWS HIS TOYS OUT OF HIS PRAM WHEN CAUGHT OUT!
Hi,
an interesting letter has surfaced from Bert Hitt that throws much light on Our Article on this blog - interestingly a letter we have already published on this blog from Gollom shows that Bert Hitt is more than a little short of the truth - well lets be fair - Gulleford has supplied us with a letter from his office which indicates Ian Smith and little Berttie were not at the meeting for the reasons they pretend to!
From: Bert Hitt40 Raven Close
Mildenhall
Bury St Edmunds
Suffolk
IP28 7LF
25th. November 2008
To: Mr D. Hudson
Newmarket,
Suffolk
CB8 0BS
Dear Dave
As myself and (George Hayes are Mildenhal Parish Councillors we have been heavily ,
involved on behalf of the public, opposing our Parish Council with our Registration Application of the Jubilee Field (Recreation Ground.), to prevent a car park being built on it to enable Sainsburys to build a Supermarket in Mildenhall. Naturally our registration under the Commons Act 2006 has been opposed by the Parish Council and Sainsburys, this has incurred us a considerable amount of hours preparing our case replying to opposition statements for what looks like a public hearing.
Isn't this what Parish Councillors do? I'm not sure why he is complaining - surely EUkip warned him he might have to do a few hours of work if he was one of the very few EUkip chappies elected.
Sorry I am clearly missing something.
Sorry I am clearly missing something.
As EUkip councillors this has raised our personal profile considerably with the local electorate through a lot of publicity in the papers, Cllr Ian Smith has achieved the same on Lakenheath Parish Council, but we are fed up with the in house differences becoming negative publicity and destroying the good things we do and loosing the support we need in the ballot box
Then surely perhaps you should as such clearly important people do something to clean up the dishonesty in EUkip and YOUR region in particular. May I suggest you learn the facts not just the untrue spin.
Start by reading the Returning Officer's 9 page OFFICIAL report on the corruption, particularly in the Eastern Region the full text can be found here
Start by reading the Returning Officer's 9 page OFFICIAL report on the corruption, particularly in the Eastern Region the full text can be found here
The last straw was reading the article in the East Anglian Daily Times on l7th July 2008 headed "UKIP man is quizzed in finance investigation" against Jeffrey Titford and Stuart Gulleford having been triggered by a fellow UKIP member John West who had failed to be-selected as an MEP for EUkip.
I agree totally - that EUkip faiiled to respond to correct the issue when it was passed on by John West to the relevant officer in EUkip who did absolutely NOTHING to rectify the corruption left John West in the embarrassing position that either he acquitted his Civic Duty (something that you as a Councillor would I presume uphold) or colluded in a crime after the event which is a criminal action!
What would YOU have done - especially as a responsible EUkip member and an elected Councillor - before we hear more criticism your answer would be appreciated. Would you have acted honestly or in a criminal manner?
Your grubby little inuendo that John West acted BECAUSE he was not selected is a lie - I have details of correspondence back to October LAST YEAR showing he was taking actions to clean up EUkip.
Further you will be aware that Titford & the ghastly Gulleford were using EUkip money to directly corrupt the selection process back in February this year.
May I suggest you check your facts in future like a good little parish councillor as it besmirches your civic office to bear false witness.
I like others felt this was a deplorably damaging act by going to the police in the first place with an alleged claim with no proof causing it to become public knowledge. I understand the police have found nothing illegal and have since dropped the case.
You may well 'understand' the police have found nothing illegal and you may 'understand' they have since dropped the cases - the difference is I KNOW you are wrong and I wonder who fed you the 'understanding', if you tried to keep up with the facts rather than publish the spin - you would have read the FACTS on this blog.
It appears to me that little Johnny West had ambitious desires beyond his ability and throws the toys out of his pram when he doesn't get what he wants, clearly he had very little qualifications to offer compared to the others, he appears to have a strong willed wife beside him when he needs to drive his car to his part-time job if he has one.
Well little Berttie Werttie Hittie Wittie rather than try to belittle an honest man who has done something that took courage I do not have any reason to believe you might have let us see if you are man enough to make an open and public apology for your underhand behaviour.
Let us consider that John West has the great good fortune of a strong willed and competent wife - is it jealousy that you have a dull meatball as a wife that leads you to insult another man's wife, or are you like the lead candidate in the region unable/unfit to drive AND without a wife.
What are the great qualifications YOU have to offer that you are just a footling little parish councillor! What qualifications has the liar, fraud and cheat Bannerman to offer as an unmarried serial failure in the Tory party without social graces or confidence a dull speaker who can't even get a job without telling lies about his utterly irrelevant ancestry. A little chappie who hasn't had a proper job for years and lives in a little flat in Acton between two railway lines. A man who has sold out ALL his principles and has taken The EU's 30 pieces of silver as an employee!
Perhaps we should consider Michael McGough's qualifications since he lied to his associates and was happy to cheat his friends to gain prefferment in the selection process and hustings.
Would you rather consider Andrew Smith whose total lack of professionalism as an accountant and irresponsibility has landed EUkip with a Guilty verdict in the Courts and still might, subject to Judicial Review coast EUkip between £1/2 & 1 Million.
Or the qualifications of the bullying buffoon Stuart Agnew who considers the position is his by right as he has effectively bought it.
Let us see if you are man enough to apologise for your outrageous and gratuitous misrepresentation of John West.
Be minded that John West out of loyalty to UKIP and his principles not only organised two conferences for the party despite attempts of the dishonest like Gulleford & Titford to sabotage them!! He also was willing to put up his and his wife's money to gain experience and raise his profile for The General Election by hopefully getting a foot on the selection ladder.
He did not expect to be cheated and was happy to lose fairly, but with little Berttie Werttie corrupting the elections with other cheats and with EUkip willing to sponsor criminality being an honest man he stood little chance.
Would you rather consider Andrew Smith whose total lack of professionalism as an accountant and irresponsibility has landed EUkip with a Guilty verdict in the Courts and still might, subject to Judicial Review coast EUkip between £1/2 & 1 Million.
Or the qualifications of the bullying buffoon Stuart Agnew who considers the position is his by right as he has effectively bought it.
Let us see if you are man enough to apologise for your outrageous and gratuitous misrepresentation of John West.
Be minded that John West out of loyalty to UKIP and his principles not only organised two conferences for the party despite attempts of the dishonest like Gulleford & Titford to sabotage them!! He also was willing to put up his and his wife's money to gain experience and raise his profile for The General Election by hopefully getting a foot on the selection ladder.
He did not expect to be cheated and was happy to lose fairly, but with little Berttie Werttie corrupting the elections with other cheats and with EUkip willing to sponsor criminality being an honest man he stood little chance.
As chairman of the West Suffolk Branch on which I am supposed to be secretary, none of us have heard much from you this year with no meetings - its up to the chairman to arrange them not the secretary.
As an elected member of a team you would seem to have abrogated on your duty in that team and now, rather late in the day, seek to pass the blame to your elected colleague. As a councillor even if only of some footling parish council you will be aware such offices are a matter of teamwork - what did YOU do to inculcate meetings? Also you may not have noticed having clearly never done anything serious or responsible in life and clearly nothing honest - it is the norm that The Chairman & Secretary agree the detail and the Secretary effects the functionary duty of organisation.
Recently you phoned me to tell me about a group of chairmen of branches had got together and formed this Nemarket Declaration Group to challenge the judgement of the Selection Committee, I immediately asked you if this had anything to do with John West, if so, I was opposed to it. 'The impression I got was that you are one of the ringleaders and had voted on behalf of the branch without calling a meeting which upset Ian and George when I told them.
Oh so you prejudged the meeting with what you now show to have been a total lack of factual knowledge - then rather than meet with your Chairman you set out to ferment trouble behind his back - is this YOUR normal standard of integrity and loyalty?
At your invitation, myself and Ian attended the meeting of your group at the Palomino PH in Newmarket on 27th. October 08, Martin Harvey was in the chair with 20 present, a leaflet of various emails was passed around relating to the issue, we listened for about 20 minutes before Ian asked a couple of reasonable questions, but from the answers and previous
You will of course remeber that I have already warned you that I have a letter from the ghastly Gollom that would seem to give the lie to this claim.
May I point out that having already decided, before coming, that you were opposed and having admitted you orchestrated opposition with no knowledge of the facts you woul of course, as Ian Smith's second, claim the pre-rehearsed plan was 'reasonable'
May I point out that having already decided, before coming, that you were opposed and having admitted you orchestrated opposition with no knowledge of the facts you woul of course, as Ian Smith's second, claim the pre-rehearsed plan was 'reasonable'
comments from the assembled gable of trouble causers our opinions were unchanged and we got up to leave expressing our views that John West's actions had damaged the party, despite pleading with us to stay by you and others we left.
So you did scuttle off like rats with your tails between your legs having failed to appraise yourselves of the facts - no doubt Gollom was pleased.
A couple of days later I received a copy of Greg Lance-Watkins website relating to this meeting which as far as I understand was not there, he claimed we were plants which was totally untrue and went on with a load of verbal diarrhoea of name calling claiming we scuttled out like rats with our tails between our legs - utter rubbish.
Which part of my blog did you have a problem understanding? What substantive aspect oif my Blog did you disagree with? What facts do you have to support your accusations?
He further went on claiming Ian's response on leaving gave the impression he was an expert on MI5 and supported by me as being lack lustre and hapless ,
Is it your contention, against all the evidence, that Ian Smith did NOT claim that I was MI5 and state this is how they operate, making something of a pratt of himself, talking about a subject he knows nothing of save titbits of hear say and what he has read in comics.
Do you feel it was unfair to describe your performance as lacklustre and hapless - if so on what grounds would you claim it was bravura since you convinced abolutely no one and clearly learned little or even nothing?
it can only be assume the ill informed imbecile was himself, l must assume you agree with this rubbish, but which one of 2 fed it to Watkins ?
On what you base you insults one wonders since fact, the truth and yourself seem to be strangers. by what license do you seek to demean my name Berttie old Twit?
We felt this group of yours has gone too far in defending a bad looser when clearly there are no grounds for redress against the Selection Committee, the effects of which have ripped UKIP apart in East Anglia and its culprits must be removed from the party, unfortunately little Johnny West who is dangerous, has little to loose in court apart from his own unfilled ambitions.
So it is your contentionlittle Berttie that EUkip should be the sort of party which stands back and tries to kick an honest man of principle whilst supporting liars, frauds, cheats and nere do wells - May I once again admoonish you to try to get a grip of the facts and read The Returning Officer's Report for a starter.
You will note that of the well over 175 postings in this CaterpillarsAndButterflies series there is not a single solitary one which is sufficiently inaccurate that EUkip believe that they can demand I correct it - such that being dishonest cowards they act in an underhand manner and threaten the weak and those without morality or understandings of ethics to prevent publication of the truth as with the weak and cowardly Anthony Butcher who seemingly will do anything to assist Farage and his corrupt associates - much, it seems, as would you little Berttie.
You will note that of the well over 175 postings in this CaterpillarsAndButterflies series there is not a single solitary one which is sufficiently inaccurate that EUkip believe that they can demand I correct it - such that being dishonest cowards they act in an underhand manner and threaten the weak and those without morality or understandings of ethics to prevent publication of the truth as with the weak and cowardly Anthony Butcher who seemingly will do anything to assist Farage and his corrupt associates - much, it seems, as would you little Berttie.
I therefore feel I can no longer work with you and wish to resign from the West Suffolk Branch and as Secretary, also as a 5yr membership with 4 yrs to run I am reconsidering my future support for the party if positive action is not immediately taken against these infighting trouble causers, - life is difficult enough without it. I can assure you other members of the branch share the same opinion.
You may well have heard that a major part of the exposure of corruption and dishonesty in EUkip is that a few honest folk are trying to clean up EUkip to restore UKIP to its members, rid of the rotten head that is the leadership and NEC. The aim is to either make UKIP electable once more, fit for men and women of integrity to support without prostituting their principles and morality or to ensure that NO ONE from EUkip is elected EVER again.
If it is your determinance to continue to support corruption and the lies of EUkip then may I suggest your resignation might well be an intelligent act towards cleaning up EUkip.
If it is your determinance to continue to support corruption and the lies of EUkip then may I suggest your resignation might well be an intelligent act towards cleaning up EUkip.
Yours sincerely
Bert Hitt.
c.c Jeffrey TitfordlStuart Gulleford.
c.c Peter Reeve
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
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
Posts
