Having recently read the posts made by Bob FM, Mark Croucher, Douglas Denny, Michael McGough and others on the British Democracy Forum.
Having read the statements and letters issued by UKIP's Chairman Paul Nuttall.
Having listened to comments made by Nigel Farage and some of his MEP colleagues, a pattern is developing which is becoming quite clear.
They are preparing their 'GRAND EXCUSE' for next year's failure in the EU Elections. Having clearly failed to date as leader, and having based his entire strategy on success at the EU elections (we recall Nigel making it very clear at the time of his disasterous Local Election results that it was only the EU elections which were important to UKIP) it is perhaps, at last dawning upon him and others, that UKIP will fail miserably in June. (Frankly, not something my colleagues and I particularly savour, but feel is inevitable under the current leadership team).
So, what better excuse than to 'prepare' for his failure than to accuse claimed 'anti-Farage' members of being BNP 'plants or infiltrators'. The words BNP seem to 'roll off' the tongues of these UKIP 'senior cohorts' more readily and frequently than it does from Nick Griffin himself!
The hypothesis which we are putting forward based on evidence to date, is that Nigel's Contingency Plan is to invent a BNP infiltrators plot to blame for his inevitable electoral failure. Using his 'invented plot' he intends to clear out members, to suit his aims, culminating in a 'Night of the Long Knives' eary next year. UKIP can then be portrayed as 'rising from the ashes' as a Phoenix under its saviour - Nigel Farage.
Nigel Farage, we believe that members won't be so easily duped.
Accusing honest men with integrity, like Dr Eric Edmond, of supporting the BNP (you will note his anger at the dishonesty of this claim shown on his own blog - http://ukiptruth.blogspot.com) makes the foolishness of this strategy increasingly apparent.
Of course no-one wants BNP types in their Party, but to use BNP style methods to accuse innocent members, is dishonest and dishonourable, seemingly showing the depth to which the UKIP Leadership are prepared to sink.
We hope they sink no lower. SHAME ON YOU!
PG UK Team
Showing posts with label Douglas Denny. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Douglas Denny. Show all posts
Monday, December 1, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Former UKIP Party Secretary and NEC Member believes British Democracy Forum has been infilitrated by MI5
Shown below is correspondence from a former UKIP Party Secretary and current NEC member - Mr Douglas Denny - to Anthony Butcher of the British Democracy Forum stating that 'the Forum' has a 'high probability' of being infiltrated (or even controlled)by MI5.
Really Mr Denny? Well 'as a scientist' (though we thought you were an optician), perhaps you should study a little closer the posts made on the Democracy Forum. Most appear to be childish name calling and petty arguements (of late at least) or a means by which 'Leadership supporters' can criticise and hurl abuse at 'Leadership detractors' - in fact we at Political Blogspot UK have noticed you to have been one of the main culprits.
Why on earth MI5 would be remotely interested in 'infiltrating' what has become 'a children's playground for name calling' is beyond us. Perhaps Mr Denny MI5 has also infiltrated 'Slumberland Beds' - afterall 'pillow talk' can be most revealing.
With people like this in charge of UKIP is it surprising the Party is making so little progress?
Tony.
It appears you think it fanciful for me to be suspicious of your website possibly (note the caveat) being a set-up of MI5, or linked in some way.
I will send you separately at the end of my text an article about Julia Pirie, which will indicate (as a typical example) of why that is entirely possible, or to put another way - not completely implausible.
I am a scientist and I know that nothing is certain (except for humans death and taxes). Everything therefore can only have a probability value given to it. Even some of the most fundamental things known in physics end up as probability values only - when we know enough about them. The whole of quantum mechanics is about probabilities for example.
I can tell you that the probability of there being a file in MI5 headquarters Millbank on you, and me, and everyone who appears on your forum is almost 1.0 (100%).
That MI5 takes a very keen interest in political individuals and parties is well known - and that means everyone, even those in government (although there is not supposed to be surveillance of MPs - there is no doubt discrete investigation all the time). This country is good at it and has been doing it for centuries.
I used to have a friend who was ex-MI5 who spent a lot of his time going around the country keeping people who were in the Communist party under surveillance. Some of those people are now in the present Labour government.
If you think MI5 does NOT keep a close eye on the BNP, or UKIP or the Greens or any other political organisation especially small parties you are naive. MI5 has been recruiting hundreds of new people in the last couple of years just to be able to monitor the Muslim threat alone within the UK. There was an announcement in the newspapers recently from the head of national security in governement that there are something like 10,000 Muslin suspects in Britain currently under surveillance. How do you think they keep an eye on these people?
In the case of your forum.....
Let us make a few hypothetical extrapolations just for the fun of it to test the credibility some of these hypotheses, and ask is it likely; just credible?; just possible? or just plain unlikely.
Suppose I was an MI5 controller in the political section, UK; and I wanted to keep tabs on UKIP activists. How best to do it?
First and foremost one needs membership lists. (NO problem - lots of ways to obtain them). Having obtained them, second, how to keep and eye on the attitudes of activists?
.... well you could set-up a website now we are into modern information technology, specifically dealing with UKIP issues - and monitor it for the activity. Anyone who says "I believe it is time to blow up parliament" - Bingo! you have someone to look more carefully at don't you?
Now GLW used to do this kind of work for MI5 in the 'old' days before the internet - How?
By putting adverts into magazines like 'Combat Magazine' with offers for weapons and suchlike. Then all he had to do was filter the results and put any suspicious characters under surveillance. Simple. Standard fishing exercise. They no doubt do that now with Muslin organisations/publications/internet activity.
Now what is the probability your site is like this? What is the possibility it was set-up deliberately to do this? - that will have a prob. value.
What about the possibility of being approached later for information feed to MI5? (personal information and real-time current logging data etc).. higher probability again than first. This is normal procedure, for example: All of the large newspapers have links through specific journalists with the newspaper monitoring its content.
What about being part of some external network other than MI5 for political surveillance? - another prob. value.... higher than most of the above.
What is the probability it is just a simple wenbsite set-up by a computer buff after leaving UNi to make a bob or two ..higher probability yet again than any above......
....... but that does not eliminate any of the above!
Now do you think I am so daft as to not consider these things? Particularly in view of the sustained anti-UKIP stance of this site over some years, with little pro-UKIP encouragement from the site owner?
What do I think the probability values are? ... not telling.
And THEN there is infiltration ....... a much bigger ball game altogether with a new set of parameters to consider....
If you think I am fantasising, read this obituary from the Telegraph recently (29 the Oct):-
(sent separately):
or here is a link:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obit...lia-Pirie.html
Regards,
Douglas.
Really Mr Denny? Well 'as a scientist' (though we thought you were an optician), perhaps you should study a little closer the posts made on the Democracy Forum. Most appear to be childish name calling and petty arguements (of late at least) or a means by which 'Leadership supporters' can criticise and hurl abuse at 'Leadership detractors' - in fact we at Political Blogspot UK have noticed you to have been one of the main culprits.
Why on earth MI5 would be remotely interested in 'infiltrating' what has become 'a children's playground for name calling' is beyond us. Perhaps Mr Denny MI5 has also infiltrated 'Slumberland Beds' - afterall 'pillow talk' can be most revealing.
With people like this in charge of UKIP is it surprising the Party is making so little progress?
Tony.
It appears you think it fanciful for me to be suspicious of your website possibly (note the caveat) being a set-up of MI5, or linked in some way.
I will send you separately at the end of my text an article about Julia Pirie, which will indicate (as a typical example) of why that is entirely possible, or to put another way - not completely implausible.
I am a scientist and I know that nothing is certain (except for humans death and taxes). Everything therefore can only have a probability value given to it. Even some of the most fundamental things known in physics end up as probability values only - when we know enough about them. The whole of quantum mechanics is about probabilities for example.
I can tell you that the probability of there being a file in MI5 headquarters Millbank on you, and me, and everyone who appears on your forum is almost 1.0 (100%).
That MI5 takes a very keen interest in political individuals and parties is well known - and that means everyone, even those in government (although there is not supposed to be surveillance of MPs - there is no doubt discrete investigation all the time). This country is good at it and has been doing it for centuries.
I used to have a friend who was ex-MI5 who spent a lot of his time going around the country keeping people who were in the Communist party under surveillance. Some of those people are now in the present Labour government.
If you think MI5 does NOT keep a close eye on the BNP, or UKIP or the Greens or any other political organisation especially small parties you are naive. MI5 has been recruiting hundreds of new people in the last couple of years just to be able to monitor the Muslim threat alone within the UK. There was an announcement in the newspapers recently from the head of national security in governement that there are something like 10,000 Muslin suspects in Britain currently under surveillance. How do you think they keep an eye on these people?
In the case of your forum.....
Let us make a few hypothetical extrapolations just for the fun of it to test the credibility some of these hypotheses, and ask is it likely; just credible?; just possible? or just plain unlikely.
Suppose I was an MI5 controller in the political section, UK; and I wanted to keep tabs on UKIP activists. How best to do it?
First and foremost one needs membership lists. (NO problem - lots of ways to obtain them). Having obtained them, second, how to keep and eye on the attitudes of activists?
.... well you could set-up a website now we are into modern information technology, specifically dealing with UKIP issues - and monitor it for the activity. Anyone who says "I believe it is time to blow up parliament" - Bingo! you have someone to look more carefully at don't you?
Now GLW used to do this kind of work for MI5 in the 'old' days before the internet - How?
By putting adverts into magazines like 'Combat Magazine' with offers for weapons and suchlike. Then all he had to do was filter the results and put any suspicious characters under surveillance. Simple. Standard fishing exercise. They no doubt do that now with Muslin organisations/publications/internet activity.
Now what is the probability your site is like this? What is the possibility it was set-up deliberately to do this? - that will have a prob. value.
What about the possibility of being approached later for information feed to MI5? (personal information and real-time current logging data etc).. higher probability again than first. This is normal procedure, for example: All of the large newspapers have links through specific journalists with the newspaper monitoring its content.
What about being part of some external network other than MI5 for political surveillance? - another prob. value.... higher than most of the above.
What is the probability it is just a simple wenbsite set-up by a computer buff after leaving UNi to make a bob or two ..higher probability yet again than any above......
....... but that does not eliminate any of the above!
Now do you think I am so daft as to not consider these things? Particularly in view of the sustained anti-UKIP stance of this site over some years, with little pro-UKIP encouragement from the site owner?
What do I think the probability values are? ... not telling.
And THEN there is infiltration ....... a much bigger ball game altogether with a new set of parameters to consider....
If you think I am fantasising, read this obituary from the Telegraph recently (29 the Oct):-
(sent separately):
or here is a link:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obit...lia-Pirie.html
Regards,
Douglas.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Why are so many UKIP British Democracy Forum Members so nasty to one another?
Yesterday, we had a discussion at our offices to try and understand why certain members of the British Democracy Forum are so nasty to each other - especially those members of UKIP.
We researched many postings and found the main culprits to be, Mark Croucher, Bob FM, Michael McGough, Douglas Denny and Junius. On searching the archives further back, other names such as 'Devil's Kitchen', Chad Noble, Bellatrix etc also appear.
We find this most curious. Rather than debate the issues, these individuals appear (to us at least) to continuously attack those who oppose the UKIP leadership or questions their actions.
Loyalty guys is fair enough and should be applauded, but there really is no substitute for sound argument and debate.
We suggest, that if it is truly your intention to have UKIP treated seriously as a 'grown up' political party, then cut the abuse, and debate rationally.
We researched many postings and found the main culprits to be, Mark Croucher, Bob FM, Michael McGough, Douglas Denny and Junius. On searching the archives further back, other names such as 'Devil's Kitchen', Chad Noble, Bellatrix etc also appear.
We find this most curious. Rather than debate the issues, these individuals appear (to us at least) to continuously attack those who oppose the UKIP leadership or questions their actions.
Loyalty guys is fair enough and should be applauded, but there really is no substitute for sound argument and debate.
We suggest, that if it is truly your intention to have UKIP treated seriously as a 'grown up' political party, then cut the abuse, and debate rationally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
