10-Apr-2011 - IF AGNEW, McWILLIAMS & McGOUGH Advocate A Sell Out:

10-Apr-2011 - IF AGNEW, McWILLIAMS & McGOUGH Advocate A Sell Out:

Hi,

IF AGNEW, McWILLIAMS & McGOUGH Advocate A Sell Out then let us face it that should be enough for decent folk to know that a Yes vote makes no sense for Britain!

Let us look at the claimed reasons for a yes vote which they put forward:

By Stuart Agnew MEP, Steph McWilliam of the South West Region
and NEC Member Mick McGough

        Stuart AGNEW MEP

Steph McWILLIAMS

.

Mick McGOUGH 

This vote is about three vital opportunities for our Party. First, this vote is about the Party being able to pay for a wide range of activities in the UK using, effectively, UK Taxpayer’s money returned to us by the EU.

Clearly larger parties will have a hugely larger amount. More tax payers' money squandered on useless politicians - take the moral high ground and Vote NO.

Secondly, this vote will provide the Party with the services of a Think Tank which will enable us, for the very first time, to match our opponents in strategy and policy-formation. If we are to be a serious contender in British politics, this is a vital strength we must add.

A Think Tank requires individual capable of political thought - every time UKIP has had anyone of this ilk it has permitted its leader to fire them and replace them with a fully funded sycophant!

Thirdly, this vote is about denying our enemies approximately £1,300,000 in funding which will otherwise be divided up between them.

Slightly less than the cost of ONE MEP - if UKIP MEPs had danated a percentage of their salary to the party this sum would be dwarfed.

Above all, this vote is about building upon our successes from 2009 to today to displace the Liberal Democrats and win the European Elections in 2014.

UKIP has had no success - it has merely dishonestly capitalised on the lack of factual knowledge of the electorate relative to expenses and the promotion of The BNP by Farage & Croucher.

UKIP has lost its ONLY MEPs with any integrity.

Vote “NO” if you want UKIP to languish on the fringe of politics.

Vote NO and concentrate on Clening Up UKIP to make it electable - rid of liars, low lifes and cheats like McGough, Agnew, Bloom, Nuttall, Bannerman, Clark, Andreasen etc.

Vote “YES” for progress in our noble cause.

There is absolutely nothing 'Noble' about UKIP's self serving garbage that forms its leadership and its parasites.

The scheme involves UKIP joining a European political party based on the existing Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group

But they are unprincipled trash - anti Jewish, anti homosexual, racist, xenophobic and pro EU membership and revisionism. EVER UKIP MEP of any morality has resigned because of these filth!

and creating a professional Think Tank to enable us

With the permission of UKIP's utterly corrupt co-campaigners in the gutter of EU politics.

- for the first time - to produce policy papers explaining our messages.

Richard North waas producing those on a regular basis as was Heather Cunningham but UKIP leadership were too stupid to understand the value - so they fired them!

Starting from our current, comfortable set of working relationships with our prospective allies, we are advised that the ANNUAL allocation of funds would be:

But NO ONE would want to be associated with filth like that EVEN for money!

For the political party € 850,000 (£733,000 approx) and;
For the Think Tank € 500,000 (£431,000 approx)

That gives €1,350,000 (£1,164,000 approx.) gross per year.

PEANUTS relative to the amount UKIP leadership could contribute and a fraction of the cash they could raise if anyone respected or trusted them.

Deducting administration and salaries leaves about € 600,000 (£518,000 approx) for the political party and €350,000 (£219,000 approx) for the Think Tank.

UKIP Hugely over pays mediocre trash and for rational salaries could tripple the staff for research - Not ONE UKIP staff member is worth the money they are paid and these idiots want to squander more!.

UKIP might expect, with the size of its delegation, to get approximately half that sum every year. This would mean that, EVERY YEAR, we would have the benefit of the sum of up to € 475,000 (£400,000 approximately) from the political party and the Foundation.  To put this in perspective, the 2010 general election cost us some £350,000.  We currently have nothing like that at our disposal.

Due to profligacy, fraud, failures of accounting and seemingly amounts running into at least 7 figures that have seemingly been nicked. Farage alone boasts he has made £2Million over and above his salary and expenses!

He has been paying his wife £30K for years and now he pays a so called Tory based PR agency to rig internal elections for him whilst seemingly funding one of his mistresses a foul mouthed woman of proven low morality and gutter morays - with clearly little ability and corrupt - paid from Party funds or at very least funds available to the party!

By the end of this Parliament we will have had access to more than £1 million. This is a sum which we scarcely dream of raising by conventional methods.

RUBBISH this is a fraction of the money that has gone missing due to corrupt internal accounting.

What makes anyone think this new money wouldn't be stolen too?

The grant is used to meet expenditure linked to the objectives set out in the European  party’s political programme, such as:

Meetings, conferences
Publications, studies, advertisements
Administrative, personnel, travel costs
Campaign costs connected to European elections.

This is just jumping through The EU's hoops to get The EU bribes - how does this differ from prostitution?

For example, we might use it to produce a flyer for the UK’s young female voters on the effects of the recent European Court of Justice decision which will drive up their insurance premiums – in the name of equality!

IF OF COURSE the partners in this scam don't wish to see it spent altering imigration from Afriica to Southern Italy to pay for train tickets for them to relocate to Britain.

SCARILY JUST AS POSSIBLE (though just as unlikely as UKIP producing a well thought out and designed leaflet!).

Given its direct connection to EU Law, we can pay for it under the publications heading.

WITH CLEARANCE from The EU AND partners in the Group!

As part of EFD we already have to conform to similar rules about what we can do and how. It has not caused a problem - and it will not cause a problem if we take this grant.

This is not true.

There is no accounting for the £76,000 per MEP currently obtained under the 400 Budget. Further there is no accounting for the 6000 Travel Budget - is the money designated but not used by UKIP MEPs used as bribes to buy members of the EFD Group?

We cannot use the grant to meet expenditure such as:

DO READ THE RULES! GoTo CLICK HERE & then CLICK the first picture.

Campaign costs for referenda1
Non-European elections
Funding national parties, candidates
Debts and debt service charges.

Much may be made of the exclusion of “direct or indirect funding”. But when 2014 comes along, we can use a big chunk of our share for the campaign costs of that year’s European Elections quite legitimately.

WITH the permission of one's partners!
Do also bear in mind the fact that the leading parties will receive far more so all it means is that the cost of politics increases and UKIP will be absolutely no better off - whereas if they refused to please The EU they could make huge issue of how the public were not being allowed to vote democratically on a level playing field!

The EU itself makes that clear.

Do YOU really believe that the EU EVER makes anything clear? How very naiive!

In other years imagine what we could do with our grant to campaign on issues such as the European Arrest Warrant, European Court of Human Rights’ judgments or how the EU and the Treaties undermine our immigration policy.

Just think UKIP might even have thought of campaigning to Leave-The-EU!!

Right now we simply do not have the money.

The intelligence, the integrity or the ability!

Given that at least 75% of our laws are now made in Brussels, almost every subject that UKIP campaigns upon is affected by EU legislation.

One wonders how these clowns could have reached such a profound insight without a Think Tank!

That means that we can direct this money to help us in the UK.

Might that include publishing an exit and survival strategy that they have lacked the ability to produce in 18 years despite the many £Millions that have gone amiss!

Indeed it is probable that 90% of the funds can be so utilised.

IF UKIP's partners don't want the money spent on ammending the fisheries policy to benefit Mediteranean fishermen - maybe if the bribes are adequate they can also help fund Austria's maritime policies!

On top of that we will have the Think Tank (Foundation).

Already a percentage of what support UKIP could give is being squandered on support of GM Foods, and other NFU policies. As for intelligence surely no one can take seriously any advice on research from a slime like Mick McGough who lied to and cheated his associates and Party members with his lies about being PPC for Harlow CLICK HERE

We would be able to match the likes of Open Europe and the Tories in producing high quality research and policy proposals.

Don't be daft - they have both ability and experience - They also seem able to fund Think Tanks when clearly UKIP can't even think let alone directionally!

We can  produce strategic material to set the agenda for political debate in the UK instead of always being the party which has to react to others’ ideas.

Hardly likely as UKIP under its present leadership is scared to death of intelligence and relies on bullying and abuse as a management style, not to mention distortion and lies!

We can use Think Tank funding to give professional presentations to the press.

Anyone can do that with just the simplest of ability and wise use of software and IT. All at virtually no cost.
IF UKIP is too incompetent for the huge amount squandered on the parasites it gathers in its Press Office & PR it could hire a professional.

In short, a Think Tank will help UKIP to punch above its weight and mix it with the Old Parties at an entirely new level.

RUBBISH you on the one hand explain how the professional politicians are streets ahead then you add money in liberal tranches to those same politicians and miraculously you expect UKIP to develope a brain!!
Get Real!

If we are to match our ambitions to become the third party of British politics and winners in 2014, this is a vital step to attain the professionalism so roundly endorsed by our membership in the 2010 leadership election.

Is there a reason you have chosen to fail and merely remain the third party?

All this does require a small amount of matched funding: as little as 10% of the amount. And initially we only have to raise a share proportionate to our size – and of that only a small  proportion has to be found up front. The rest can be found as individual projects are brought forward.  We can achieve that.

How come there is no record of consistent donation to the party by its MEPs other than for their own personal re-election and even then some like Farage NEVER make donations, as the record shows!

If conditions or the Regulations change unfavourably, we can leave at any time, just as one can leave an alliance or a coalition.

They are unfavourable!

There are no signs of UKIP disassociating from the scum in The EFD

There is, in addition, another side to these grants. Our €1,350,000 (£1,170,000 approx) comes from a finite pot. Presently 10 parties take money from that pot. If we become number 11, then the other ten parties lose, on average, €135,000 (£117,000 approx).

So UKIP's insignificant gain would not significantly harm the larger parties!

So, there are benefits to UKIP which at one and the same moment harm our enemies: a double-whammy with our enemies in the middle!

Doesn't this denote the weakness of the argument in favour of prostituting UKIP to obliging The EU?

Just as the Salvation Army used to go around pubs and sell their publications with the slogan “Take the Devil’s money to do God’s work!”, so might we take what is after all UK Taxpayer’s money and use it to bring us victory in our noble cause. Would you rather that YOUR money is used to fund our enemies’ campaigns or to fund UKIP’s?

Even ignoring the moral issue of obliging the EU and jumping through their hoops -

Consider the wisdom of providing ones enemies with £20 to buy weapons in return for being given £2.50.
The sum one receives relative to ones' enemies is so paultry in relationship that it is better to hold the moral high ground and sabotage the scheme.

If you think that this money might just come in a bit handy to help destroy Federalism and Integration, vote ‘YES’!

Voting YES I believe I have clearly shown aids The EU to advance its corrupt aims at the expense of these United Kingdoms whilst some completely idiotic numpties can be duped into assisting The EU with a Yes vote!

The ‘NO’ campaign alleges that the UKIP brand would be diluted. This is nonsense.

You fail totally to make an argument let alone a convincing OR valid argument. Giving other parties £20 and UKIP £2.50 by definition dilutes UKIP's efficacy - the only answer is to block the EU's scam and seize the moral high ground.

The Conservatives are part of a European Political Party. Which is better known in the UK: ‘The Conservative Party’ or ‘The Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists’?

Stop 100 people in the street and not more than 5 would be able to tell you this, possibly even less.

Indeed has anyone ever heard of ‘The Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists’? Of course not, because the Tories still fight under their own name and their brand is not diluted in any way.

You make my point for me yet you seek to grant legitimacy to Pan EU Political Parties supplanting National Parties in international Groups - DO READ THE RULES!

The ‘NO’ campaign claims taking part in a European Political Party is ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’.

It undeniably is as it requires subsuming ones' National Party and asspirations to a Pan EU Party. Do WAKE-UP!

But surely to do so is no more ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ than taking part in European Elections or, once elected, taking your seat and being an MEP.

Don't be daft - there is absolutely no similarity and giving bufoons like you money to run a think tank shows the danger of this new EU Scam.

Every month our MEPs receive substantial sums. Are they thereby taking the ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ Shilling? No! The money for the party is no more ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ than the money paid to MEPs.

This is a falsehood and clearly it is a calculated risk - though equally clearly most UKIP MEPs have gone totally Native and even Farage has castigated MEPs like Derek Clark for doing no work in their constituencies - naturally he fears the liar and dishonest Marta Andreasen and has not commented on her disinterest in her constituency, wherever she may consider that to be, Barcelona?

And, remember, using this money, they are daily carrying the fight to the very heart of the EU in Brussels and Strasbourg.

Which in 18 years has been shown to be a complete waste of time as The EU Parliament is a complete irrelevance and only of use, as Nikki Sinclaire uses it, to provide sound bites to address in the British Media - That her hard work has spread across the media of the rest of The EU is a measure of her efficacy!

Stuart Agnew's ONLY National coverage has been for his corruption, dishonesty and fraud!

The ‘NO’ campaign says that “accepting its money is corrupt”. So is the ‘NO’ campaign saying that our MEPs and their staff are corrupt?

Well? Answer that for yourself and you will soon realise why UKIP has NEVER achieved anything of value in The UK - They are not trusted because of their widely publicised corruption - whether theft by Agnew, Fraud by Clark, Agnew, Bannerman, self enrichment and infantile behaviour of Farage, the lies of Andreassen, Agnew, Bannerman, Agnew, Batten, the collusion in corruption by each and every UKIP MEP CLICK HERE

There is absolutely no way that it can be denied, on numerous counts, that UKIP MEPs and staff are corrupt - one even went to prison for fraud, so far, despite strenuous protection by his associates who colluded in his criminality and Farage even p[rofitted from it. Consider the undeniable dishonesty of Annabelle Fuller bringing UKIP into disrepute and the contempt for British Courts and dishonourable behaviour of Mark Croucher acting with UKIP's support CLICK HERE

Of course not.

We all have different standards, I appreciate, however clearly yours are shown to be beneath contempt.

That they make this allegation merely demonstrates the absurdity of their argument.

I will happily debate your lies, dishonesty, corruption and misrepresentation on ANY public platform which I can attend.

As we see below, some time ago, after proper debate, the Party took the pragmatic decision to fight and take up seats in the European Parliament. It did so notwithstanding the ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ nature of the institution.
Who now says this was the wrong decision?

Many still consider it was a mistake and the glee with which MEPs and their parasites leap onto the gravy train and seem to do NOTHING of value towards Leave-The-EU but much to further their election chances would incline to display this fact!

May I remind the author that at the UKIP Party Conference there was a very clear debate against joining Pan EU Political Parties - Yet just like the EU those who hope for self enrichment seek to overturn the Party Members' Decision to seek a different result.

And some claim UKIP MEPs have not adopted the morays of The EU!

No one, for the simple reason that it provides the noble cause we all serve with an enormous platform to fight the enemies of British Independence

Is this a management decision to LIE and deny the unequivocal rejection of the concept by Members?

- a platform which the gerrymandered Westminster electoral system denies us.

Do look up 'gerrymander' rather than display your complete political ignorance when relative to this issue!

Taking what some called the ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ Shilling has boosted our cause exponentially.

It CAN be argued that it has prostituted the integrity hence we have filth like Mick McGough, Stuart Agnew and their ilk telling lies to try to promote a Yes Vote and the sell out of UKIP.

The ‘NO’ campaign alleges UKIP will have to pay tax to HMRC on this money. They are wrong. The only tax that a European Political Party will have to pay is VAT.

So the Party will have to pay tax on the income - Surely even political ignorami like Mick McGough and Stuart Agnew realise that VAT stands for Value Added TAX - which is a tax of £2 in every £10!

A TAX Dummy!

The ‘NO’ campaign contends that this money may not be used for UK political activity.

Read the rules - this is still a matter of debate!

This too is nonsense.

Please quote the exact authorisation that this money may be freely used to influence domestic politics - even WITH permission from UKIP's pro EU associates!

As we have seen much of our grant may properly and legally be directed at our target audience.

We have also noted that much of it can be paid into off shore accounts and that UKIP can not be trusted to produce transparent open accounts with even the slightest semblance of probity.

You may be astonished to know that UKIP MEPs are so unaccountable and UKIP NEC are so ill informed that when Mike Nattrass MEP in a forthright rejection of the manner in which UKIP was led and managed there were NEC members who disn't even realise Nigel Farage was paying his wife despite his promise to UKIP, the members and the electorate that never would he or any elected UKIP official pay a family member.

YES THEY ARE THAT STUPID!

Moreover, does anyone imagine that the Tories take all their money (the best part of €2,000,000 or £1,750,000 approx) and spend it all in Brussels? Only the utterly naive would credit such an idea.

The vagiaries of other Parties are NOT the issue the issue is how clearly it has been proven that UKIP is not to be trusted and its MEPs and staff are as a generalisation reasonably denounced as corrupt, dishonest and untrustworthy.

The contention of the ‘NO’ campaign that we must concentrate on the UK media to the exclusion of Brussels is, once again, deeply misguided.

No wonder you can give no example why! Clearly IF UKIP sees itself as a withdrawalist party its ONLY relevant audience is Britain and its ONLY place of power to achieve withdrawal is the British electorate.

The ‘NO’ campaign asserts that a European Political Party might endorse integration. Hardly, as we would have a major part in drawing up the party’s political programme. Are we likely to endorse a programme encouraging integration?

EXACTLY what HAS happened. Wee Willy Dartmouth has advocated additional laws to be implemented by The EU.

Clark advocated GREATER subsidiarity of Britain to The EU and also co-operation with The EU to strengthen the control of its committees over the vassal states.

Marta Andreassen has openly advocated Reform rather than withdrawal.

UKIP's election leader even advocated voting for The Tories.
Stuart Agnew advocates policies for The NFU.

I believe my point is clearly made!

The absurdity of the question demonstrates just how weak are the ‘NO’ campaign’s arguments.

Better that the NO campaign weaklly put their facts than stridently lie like the Yes Campaign fronted by liars.

It is suggested that a European Political Party would somehow lead to the end of national political parties.

Do read the rules in conjunction with the EU Constitution Lisbon Treaty.

Ask yourself this: is the Conservative Party likely to abolish itself and campaign in UK elections as ‘The Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists’?

YES - Do not forget Edward Heath later admitted that he had LIED to deliberately mislead the electorate.

A moment’s thought reveals that this too is absurd. 

Are YOU capable of a moment's thought? Almost every point made for a Yes vote has been a complete misrepresentation.

The Tories would be committing political suicide.

What bunkum if they believe they will hold a controlling role in a major Pan EU Political Party - They would see this as an advance in their political ambitions as they are, as a party, pro EU membership.

We may think the Tories stupid, but they are not that stupid.

Is it not YOU being 'stupid' that you lack the political comprehension to understand guile rather than your own coarse dishonesty?

The Regulations make it clear we can use this money to campaign for European Elections.

WITH your partners' permission and in accordance with EU constraints - Do read the rules!

In 2014 we aim to come first.

Yet a mere few paragraphs earlier the aim was to come third or was that only in the more important UK Political genre?

How are we to fund that ambition?

Particularly if as part of voting Yes we are giving our enemies more money than we get proportionately - That would clearly exacerbate the problem to no gain.

Will access to several hundred thousand Euros help or hinder us?

Hinder if it is beset with regulation and if in gaining that sum we morally grant the 3 main parties who are ALL pro EU £1Million each!
Do try joined up thinking!

As to raising money, the EU’s rules on donations are, compared to the UK’s, short, simple and elastic.

UKIP found UK rules eleastic and were found guilty in Court of being on the fiddle! Aided largely by Farage and Andrew Smith - Mick McGough's sponsor!!

You may recal Andrew Smith was exposed as treasurer issuing an internal 'e'Mail which I published advocating corruption and dishonesty with the intent to deceive the Electoral Commission - a matter about which, without ANY credibility Mick McGough has repeatedly lied and misrepresented as we see in the Yes Campaign's dishonest presentation for personal gain.

Thus we shall be able to receive donations from expatriates and others who are otherwise prohibited in the UK.

Indeed - watch out Rob McWhirtter, they will be tracking you down in Switzerland! 

UKIP has already laundered corrupt donations from foreign donors as The Sunday Times exposed, using Global Britain a scam set up by Michael Pearson.

This will provide a new, untapped resource.

Rubbish - as a resource it is easily circumvented within the framework of electoral law it is just that UKIP has consistently been too stupid to act within the law!

And, remember that UKIP will be one of the big beasts in this party and so will be able to call the shots.

RUBBISH - UKIP currently has a mere 10 out of the 29 MEPs with 2 more likely to leave after the election and possibly as many as 6 wishing to leave to position themselves for re-election by the end of November.

Already we know that Bannerman is making further overtures to the Tories as has Andreassen in the past and it seems likely the dim wit Wee Willy temper tantrum will also jump ship. Then since John Bufton's aims and values are those of UKIP members rather than the corrupt EFD and Farage it seems likely he will have the integrity to leave.

I doubt Batten will have the integrity as he lacks both integrity and moral conviction and I would guess that those outside of The EFD whether calling themselves UKIP or not would rather he did not join them as he is both untrustworthy and of very little merit or competence.

Rather Ruritainian as Big Beasts go - More The Mouse That Roared!

Finally, are we about to compromise our principles, as the “NO” campaign suggest?

Did they 'suggest' that - Irather thought they stated it unequivocally and again may I remind those of you on the make and the take that at The UKIP Conference the Membership soundly rejected the idea of joining a Pan EU Political Party.

Again, No!

Just how thick are you - surely you can not believe your own lies?

The Regulation says that a European Political Party must subscribe to the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law.

Run that past me again!
You are quoting The EU as your founding principles - personally I trust virtually NOTHING that has emanated from The EU in the last 60 years.

UKIP might be said to support these principles more honestly and more comprehensively than any other party in the UK or, indeed the EU itself.

It is sad that there are so many proven liars, cheats and scoundrells seeking self aggrandisement and self enrichment as part of the leadership of UKIP and it parasites that climb all over the party like maggots in betrayal of principles seeking rewards!

This issue is the third substantive battle within UKIP between the purists and the pragmatists. Taking the money is the pragmatic option. It has prevailed twice before - and if the party is to succeed, then the pragmatists need to win again.

Pragmatists? Every time one eneters into a deal that prostitutes the party the party is demeaned.

Just look at how the party has collapsed in terms of informed activists, replacing much of the party with chavs, fools and the self seeking - unable after 18 years to field sufficient candidates to earn an electoral broadcast!

The pragmatism has led to making the party a laughing stock - would the purists act like fools and dress up as chickens? Would they field a schoolgirl unselected by due process as candidate for Mayor in a Major City? Would pragmatism back a series of failed publicans? Would pragmatism bring the party into disrepute in the Courts?

Yes twice before the pond life and filth have demeaned UKIP and yet again they seek self enrichment at the expense of the Party and principles -That is not pragmatism, that is prostitution.

In 1994 there was furious debate about the proposal to fight seats for the EU Parliament elections but not to take them up. Then in 1998 we agreed to take our seats if elected.

Since UKIP has effectively rendered itself irrelevant - Do you have a point?

One of those who left the party in disagreement over these very issues was Gerard Batten. Now an MEP, Gerard is a valued colleague, using his position (and money from the EU’s taxpayers) to fight - hard and effectively - for this great cause.

The man is a twerp of no value to the party as shown by his vote in The Mayoral Election and the near total collapse of his constituency. A man with no understanding of morality or Justice - show boating on Phillipino Catholic Politics of anti Islamism - his sole claim to achievem,ent being a brief re-write of the Government Pink Book on occasions to show the costs of EU membership - which The Pink Book shows without the re-write and used to be produced by Harry Randall on EUroRealist and SilentMajority within 2 days of The Government publishing The Pink Book!

How many of UKIP’s members would seriously oppose those decisions now?

As well over 30.000 have left in that period it is not hard to argue that the outcome suited the rump and dross of UKIP that remained.

The next step was to form part of a Group.

Which was catastrophic as the first group was led by the willey old Piers Bonde and it was through him that Farage would seem to have learned many of the tricks of corruption and dishonesty it seems.

Many saw it as a betrayal. Now, not only has it helped financially but it boosts speaking time and thus our profile: would UKIP and Nigel Farage have any hope of such exposure if he was not a Group leader?

Provably untrue and the EFD bears no resemblance. Farage is now linked irrevocably to the racism, anti Judaism, violence, dishonesty, corruption, anti homosexuality and pro EU stance of the majority of the group he runs and has duplicitousy subsumed UKIP into in direct contravention of the wishes of the members and it seems without the knowledge of some of the dim wits and fruit cakes on the NEC.

We know that the Parliamentary authorities try every legal trick in the book to censor and silence Nigel. 

Rubbish - cite a single example to substantiate such a silly claim.

Being in a Group means they can no longer freeze him out at key moments.

He manages to do this himself with the inanity of many of his comments - a performing monkey without the control of an Organ Grinder is a liability.

Do read the column inches in the press and the near total lack of National coverage of UKIP of any gravitas - because none is earned!

Above all, the formation of an opposition Group was exactly what the Europhiles and our enemies didn’t want us to do.

That UKIP has made itself look fools and behaved like fools and conjoined with the gutter sweepings of EU politics can surely not, in the most tortured and deluded mind, be construed as of benefit to these United Kingdoms.

That equally applies to creating a new political party in the Parliament.  It is exactly the step our enemies do NOT want us to take - which is why we MUST take it.

You are beyond ANY doubt your own worst enemies.

Would supporters of UKIP have so much ammunition in their efforts to clean-up the Party to TRY to make it electable as a Party that honourable men and women would vote for if informed - It is the very style of leadership and parasites l;ike yourselves that provide the amjmunition and drive true UKIP supporters and Patriots to exposing your corruption, dishonesty and outright lies - so clearly made for self enrichment.

Winston Churchill said in a speech in April 1941:“Give us the tools and we will finish the job”

It is well known that it is a bad workman that endlessly blames his tools.

UKIP Leadership and its maggots can find any number of excuses for their failure but are clearly unwilling to
CLEAN-UP THE PARTY to MAKE IT ELECTABLE

That clarion call might have been crafted with this issue, this Party and this moment in history in mind.

Wordy and pretentious cr@p - which book did which illiterate find this in!

This vote is about giving the Party the tools to finish the job.

It is clearly NOT the Tools at Fault but the corrupt leadership.

1 As a result of a vote in committee in March 2011, it is very likely that the restriction on using grants for referenda will be totally abolished. This is particularly relevant to any referendum held under the proposed European Union Bill 2011 currently going through Parliament. If a sovereignty referendum is called, all three of the old parties will in future be able to use this money to campaign for a “YES” vote. If we do not take this money we will be severely at a disadvantage in such a referendum. If we join up, however, we can use their funds to fight for a “No Transfer” vote.

My Word YOU have Gone Native - YOU can not be real quoting EU woffle as justification for your foolish claims.

YOU imply that EU committees have some relevance in the law making process - SINCE WHEN!

.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

#08 Middle Street, Chepstow, NP16 5ET, Monmouthshire, United Kingdoms.

tel: 01291 - 62 65 62

of: Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com

on: http://GregLanceWatkins.Blogspot.com