We are back and a brief Update re UKIP.

Well, its been almost 6 weeks since our last posting, and we wish to apologise to our readers for this delay.

Firstly, the whole team were focussed on such a major political project, we became somewhat distracted from the goings-on at UKIP. Also, fully aware that Junius and GL-W's various blogsites would be carrying up to date info, we knew that readers were not going to be 'left out in the cold'.

In summary:

The Judicial Review result has not gone well for UKIP, with the matter being referred back to the original judge to effectively amend his decision. Our lawyers advise that the logical out come, is that the whole donation from Mr Alan Bown is forfeit, and the grey area rests with the division of costs;

Both Dr Eric Edmond and Dr David Abbott have been ejected from the NEC for what, one can only assume, is as punishment for attempting to call the Leadership to Account;

Members will be asked to vote on changes to the Constitution giving almost absolute power to The Party Leader on matters which would normally be the province of 'The Disciplinary Committee';

It is believed that 'Libertas' is likely to launch in the UK in early February, with members already chosen to stand in the South East. This will seriously place Nigel Farage MEP in considerable difficulty, especially bearing in mind, it is quite possible that recently expelled ex-UKIPers may also stand against him. With UKIP's record of poor electoral results under Mr Farage's leadership, it would prove somewhat ironic, if he too were to lose his seat;

Finally, there are strong rumours afoot that the South West are going to declare 'Independence' from UKIP should Nigel Farage attempt to remove/replace Trevor Coleman MEP from the top of the European 'list'. It is common knowledge that the Leader wants to see Gawain Towler (whom many regard as Nigel's 'puppet and devoid of self-will) placed as Number One. However, certain recent revelations concerning his private affairs, may prevent this from happening.

All in all, an interesting few weeks, with political manouvers apparently taking up the time the Leadership has available and, what has now become, the laughable and discredited NEC.

More to follow, especially with regards to certain issues coming to light concerning UKIPs Leadership.

GL-W Banned From British Democracy Forum

Well, the inevitable day has arrived.

GL-W has been banned from the formerly known UKIP Forum (now called the British Democracy Forum) for allegedly reporting an accusation of assault against a Party member, having been advised by the victim that this was so.

Rather than contact the alleged victim, The Forum Moderators contacted UKIP who apparently told them there was no truth in this allegation. Seems odd to us that the Moderators did not contact the 'victim' - after all he should know, shouldn't he?

It has been apparent for some 2 weeks that the Moderators were looking for an excuse (in our opinion) to eject GL-W as many of his posts had been withdrawn or 'cut', while others who said most distasteful things about GL-W and his family were allowed to keep their posts alive, and in some cases were re-iterrated by other members.

HARDLY A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD - We Think.

We have been suspicious for some time that The BD Forum has cosied up to UKIP either out of fear or favour - we genuinely do not know which. However, one thing is certain, without GL-W the BD Forum will be a less interesting place. It's now up to Junius to keep us all fascinated.

We have just one question at this point - if the alleged victim comes up with an 'incident number' for the reported offence, will the Moderators and Anthony Butcher apologise to GL-W and allow him to return?

British Democracy Forum - Getting Out Of Hand?

OK, we at PG UK knew that the return of GL-W to the BD Forum would liven things up a little, but we never expected the level of vitriol, personal attacks and Moderators in disarray as we have witnessed the past few days.

The usual suspects (Bob FM, Michael McGough, Mark Croucher) ran true to form, but we particularly dislike the side swipes at Lee (GL-W's partner) which McGough has made on a number of occasions. SHAME ON YOU MCGOUGH - Attacking a defenceless woman not involved in this political debate - WHAT A COWARDLY BULLY YOU ARE!

We certainly doubted your motives in defending questionable accounting practices conducted by some, we also questioned you claiming to be a PPC when you weren't, but we never took you to be a Coward attacking a defenceless woman! It just goes to show the depths some of these '2 bit players' are prepared to stoop.

We are also concerned that the Moderators have not dealt with the 'unproven' accusation levied on the Forum that GL-W has a record for handling 'stolen goods'. Unless proven otherwise, this is libellous in the extreme and should not go unchallenged.

It is little wonder that GL-W has retaliated with avengance, creating yet a greater atmosphere of tension, ill-will and general chaos.

There is no doubt that GL-W's rather robust and accusatory style has proven a catalyst for 'revenge attacks' but the fault, in large measure, rests with the Moderators for allowing the matter to get to this stage, and even worse, when some of them actually get involved in the abuse themselves.

A period of calm is called for and clear rules to be laid out, within which, all contributors should comply. We want to see genuine political debate not constant name calling and unsubstantiated allegations.

So come on Mr Butcher - lay out the ground rules and stop attacks on people not involved in the process and focus your Forum on intellectual argument.

PG UK

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.

Disappointed in British Democracy Forum's Anthony Butcher

This site has been a keen follower and supporter of Anthony Butcher's British Democracy Forum until now. We are hugely disappointed at the number of threads he is closing down, claiming personal attacks ??????? Anthony, over the past 2 years, your site has been made up of nothing but personal attacks.

Our concern is that to date you have allowed personal attacks on decent members of UKIP by what some regard as the 'ruling cabal', but as soon as someone retaliates i.e. a certain GL-W, you close the thread. This is most unusual and suspicious to say the least.

Conspiracy theorists may ask whether you are a secret supporter of the UKIP Leadership, whilst pretending not to be. We at Political Gossip UK believe you should have the courage of your convictions and state whether you are or are not. Either way, an honest approach is better than an apparent duplicitous one.

Of increasing concern is one of your recent posts:


Quote:
Originally Posted by T.N.Warry
IMO Butcher's response of sticking with the status quo is lacking in imagination and seems to accept leaving corruption alone is OK for a quiet life. Well I say coruption of any kind must be fought regardless of the consequences to UKIP. Fortunately I believe the best result for UK plc is if UKIP under Nigel do very badly. This way we may just get something better developing in its place.

Even from a critic's point of view, Farage has to be allowed to stand in the EU elections as UKIP leader. This is his grand plan - to double the number of UKIP MEPs (to 18 or 24, it isn't clear). If and when UKIP fails, and perhaps ends up with just three or four MEPs, then Farage will lose all credibility as a leader and will have to step aside for someone completely fresh to take over.. and that means someone who isn't in his trusted circle... which means someone who doesn't hold any position in the leadership at the moment.We can argue on this forum forever about his faults, but political leaders stand and fall on election results.

No one expected UKIP to do well in the General Election or the local elections, but the EU elections are a completely different matter. Farage has been given far more leniency by the party than most other party leaders would ever have had, but he has one big chance to prove himself.

It is far too late for a new leader to have any chance of making an impact on the party now in time for the elections.So if you are a UKIP member I would urge you to stop plotting to oust him and let him get on with it for the moment. That doesn't mean that his leadership decisions shouldn't be criticised - that is only healthy - but attacks for the sake of attacks won't achieve anything. If you think that he is doomed to fail anyway, then don't provide him with more excuses to try to worm his way out of it afterwards.

You and a few others will probably be out of the party soon anyway, so this is probably a pointless post!

Well, we do not agree. If someone has cancer, you cut it out. If someone is robbing you, you don't just sit back and say well lets see where it ends? This is very weak Anthony and we are surprised.

GL-W allowed back on to the Democracy Forum

We are pleased to see that GL-W has been allowed to post on the British Democracy Forum after a 12+ month suspension. The poll conducted showed that 27 members supported his return as opposed to 19 against.

Rather amusingly Anthony Butcher, the Forum owner, admitted that GL-W could have posted anyway as the site had failed to block him - a technical hiccup. How kind it was of GL-W not to take advantage of this situation.

In view of the overwhelming support for GL-W one cannot help but ask the Question should he also stand for the 'UKIP Leadership' in 2010? - if so, he should get his Party membership application form in now so as to give him plenty of time to overcome any objections that may arise. After all, he would be a stark contrast to the traditional 'blazer and brogues brigaide'.

Does the Democracy Forum engender real debate?

The UK Democracy Forum - http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/ has recently been criticised for its apparent scathing attacks on the UK Independence Party.

Having looked at this well put together site, Political Gossip UK feels, that without a forum on which UKIP members and non members can debate political strategy both positively and negatively, then little progress will be made within the anti-EU camp.

We are a little disillusioned at the personal attacks both pro- and anti-leadership supporters rain down on each other, but over-all feel that being able to freely debate concerns is healthy for the political process. There are of course dangers in revealing political strategy to ones opponents but bearing in mind that this forum appears to harbour mainly anti EU supporters, we would like to believe that a spirit of some co-operation could be achieved in fighting the same cause.

There is much amusement in our offices about the latest debate as to whether to allow a certain GL-W to repost on this site again. We understand this individual to be a true anti-EU crusader who possibly damages his arguement with smatterings of abuse and name calling. The poll appears at this stage to be slightly in his favour, though this could change at any moment. What is amusing to us, is that those who argue against his being accepted, apparently belong to a political party that emphasises its belief in freedom of speech.

For what it's worth, and without any influence in this matter, we would argue to allow him back and destroy him (metaphorically that is) in debate. After-all, surely no individual can be a match for the combined efforts of the full Forum membership?

p.s. If anyone should comment on our post, no bad language please or you'll be banned :)