Dear Sirs,
I very much hope that this letter is unnecessary; however the fact that none of us presently know this for sure has meant that I felt it had to be written.
Unfortunately, because one of UKIP’s prospective Leadership candidates felt it necessary to wash UKIP linen in public, backed up by others in various ways, it is now widely known that there is open warfare in UKIP once again.
It is bad enough that a Leadership candidate as well as her supporters including an elected UKIP MEP and a UKIP Councilor have been publicly smeared as neo-Nazi and far right (whatever that means) – slurs which have been gleefully seized upon by MSM – almost as bad, to my mind, is the uncertainty being allowed to fester in the minds of both the public and members surrounding the eligibility of Candidates standing in the Leadership contest.
Thanks to the unwelcome exposure in the MSM, this Leadership election UKIP is under scrutiny as never before. I gather from Mr. McWhirter on UKIP Daily that candidates are to be subject to a scrutiny panel, but because of the actions of some who decided that publicity was the way to tarnish a particular candidate, in the minds of the public such ‘scrutiny’ is now completely discredited, as you can see for yourselves on social media.
I am sure that members of every Political Party routinely have to defend that Party and its Leaders against accusations of corrupt practice, and in the case of Parties who have been in power there is probably an inevitable truth in such accusations. UKIP’s strength was that it was different. We were proud of being different – as Nigel famously said, controlling UKIP was like herding cats, and we were proud of that! It showed that members of UKIP were independent thinkers, and did not pander to MSM groupthink. We could not be corrupted.
However, I am extremely disappointed that I now have to regularly defend UKIP on Twitter from comments that UKIP is now corrupted and no different from any other Political Party. ‘Keep the Faith’ is the slogan I have come up with to counter the many daily accusations that this Leadership election will not be fair and open, and that not all candidates will be allowed to stand because one has been smeared by others as ‘a one trick pony’ (before her manifesto was launched) as well as ‘divisive’. Anne Marie has not descended to the gutter politics that have been used against her personally more than once, by one or other Leadership candidate whose words and insinuations, I contend, are what have led to this widely held perception of division and open warfare. And that you, the Powers That Be, intend to block Anne Marie from standing because of this. The so called ‘scrutiny panel’ is simply seen by commenters as a way of passing the buck.
Our Party, UKIP, is under the microscope as never before. Like it or not, Anne Marie is known and respected by many who have been able to hear her speeches thanks to social media. From the reformer Imam Tawhidi, in Australia. to University lecturer Gad Saad in Canada. If she is barred from standing for the Leadership of UKIP, the Party she is known to have stuck by through thick and thin, then our Party will rightly deserve the contempt it will receive from all who admire Anne Marie Waters all over the world. It will finally be game over for UKIP which will be completely discredited in the eyes of the public, this time, fatally.
I take no pleasure in having to say any of this. You may be well aware of what is being said about UKIP, including about those that run the Party. You may, hopefully, have already taken most of the steps needed to get rid of these perceptions for good.
All I ask is that ALL the candidates, including those I consider have smeared me and many other supporters of Anne Marie be allowed to stand in the forthcoming Leadership Election, so that UKIP members can make their own free and independent choices as to who they wish to elect. I would ask you both to make that completely clear as soon as possible, so that all doubts about the openness and fairness of this election, and about those that are currently running UKIP, can be laid to rest, once and for all. And whoever is elected UKIP Leader will be able to lead secure in the knowledge that no one will have anything to complain about, and we can all move forward together.
Whoever wins, this can be the beginning of a great new chapter for UKIP, with Direct Democracy taking us to new and exciting places – truly a Party of the people and for all the people of Britain. It’s up to you.
Yours
Deirdre Trotman
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y3fo3sPSQ8
Without Anne Marie Waters as our new leader,believe me UKIP is finished.How bloody dare the failures that still control UKIP,spout their vile and untrue retoric against someone so Brave and Courageous as the wonderful Anne Marie.If UKIP cannot be truly Radical,then it serves no purpose,and does not deserve to exist.I hate what has happened to my country,and I hate what has happened to my beloved Party,I wish I could turn the clock back,but I can’t.For many years I have written and spoken on the Radio,about the greatest threat that we now face, and that is the
Islamification of Britain.I have lost count of the times in the past when I have been called a racist,or while I was still speaking,noticed that my phone line had gone quiet,
yes I had been cut off again.Today in Britain Sharia May,has allowed over 100 Sharia
Courts to operate.On just about every street corner of our Towns and Cities we have a Mosque or Madrassar,nothing more than terrorist training camps.After the recent terrorist attacks prove,the Islamists hate us,and seek and celebrate our death and destruction.They have no sense of reason,or respect for Human Life,they only believe in Jihad,do not be fooled by their moderates.Until we start to address the Muslim Question,everything else is totally meaningless.The Muslim Appeasers who were complicit with that damn Halal leaflet at Nutall’s disasterous defeat at Stoke are
still in control of UKIP,so I ask like minded activists now,to join me in attacking them at every available opportunity,I for one no longer want to be led by the failures who have held UKIP to be nothing more than hostages of the Muslim Vote,the absurd reality is that these people just don’t vote UKIP,did they vote UKIP in Stoke,of course they didn’t,I rest my case.Check out my link,I think Anne Marie is wonderful,don’t you.
Thank you,Geoff.Elliott,UKIP RCT Branch.Pontypridd
Dear team,
In case anyone wants to know what the TLA “RCT” means…… Rhondda Cynon Taf.
Regards, Toby, 01932-873557
Hi Geoff, in case to are too busy to look back to your last comment, there are messages of love and best wishes there to you and your wife from me and Panmelia. Mine repeated here, love and prayers to you both. xx
Everyone in UKIP must make the effort to understand Islam.
Understand what “abrogation” means, regarding the Koran.
Understand what “taqiyya” means.
Listen to Douglas Murray, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Robert Spencer.
Watch this short video, it describes Islam succinctly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgsrnmzxEUY&t=190s
Read chapter 9 of the Koran.
Only those who have done all of these things should feel qualified to sit in judgement of Anne Marie Waters regarding her eligibility to be leader. Those who are ignorant cannot make a sound decision. I believe that AMW knows what she is talking about. She understands the enormity of the threat.
I doubt Jonathan Arnott has done all these things.
Here he is, claiming Anne Marie does not understand the “religion”!
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/ukip-mep-jonathan-arnott-signals-13296205
Arnott: “My view is that it’s absolutely right for Ukip to take a strong line against terrorism and radical Islamic extremism, the ideology of ISIS. What I believe is fundamentally wrong is to portray all Muslims and all strains of Islam in the same way.”
With the exception of the Ahmadi sect, mainstream Islam believes in abrogation. This means that the more recent intolerant and violent verses supercede the more tolerant earlier verses.
I see no evidence that Arnott has understood this key point. Without understanding the principle of abrogation you cannot hope to understand the Koran.
If he would discuss particular aspects of Sharia, rather than using terms such as “far right” he might have more credibility. What is his opinion of “Halala” for example? According to the BBC investigation the going rate for this “service” is £2500. Does Arnott think it is “far right” to be concerned about this barbarity?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39480846
It is entirely consistent with the Koran:
http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nora/html/2-230.html
Guido Fawkes has confirmed what I have been saying. The party hierarchy will not let Anne Marie stand. The only question is what grounds they decide to use. Is she not “in good standing” because of the NEC decision to stop her standing as a Parliamentary candidate? Or is she in breach of the constitution by attacking Islam? Or maybe even both!
The NEC have to vote on the matter, but seeing as how they have already banned AMW once, the prospects are not looking good. Does anyone know how the NEC is placed, I heard a comment that AMW has 4 votes, she needs seven to be safe. Any chance?
Our party has become like all other autocracies, the members are being told what they can think. The only way to resolve this is to let Anne Marie stand and allow the members, who are the backbone of the party decide. This is too important to be left to the NEC who do not represent the membership., ( I know they are elected but they are divorced from the grassroots. They do not even have contact details on the web site). The party has been asked to reform the NEC many times and has failed.
It seems the end of UKIP is in sight. Its not what AMW says that is the problem it seems to be the company she keeps. In the eyes of some that is a cardinal sin. She is a far sighted woman who understands Islam better than most and hence her motivation.
Having said that she has pretty good ideas about a British Constitution, education and other areas. She is no one trick pony and has more imagination than the other so far declared candidates.
I agree but could have saved a few words, only two being necessary for Oakden and Crowther; a polite alternative is “resign”.
Whilst those two have any influence in UKIP I will not join; I’m sure others share my view.
Of course AMW should be allowed to stand otherwise a major
part of being a UKIP member is pointless, this ongoing
domestic niggling is damaging the party as much as the
hate / smear campaign.
The tail wagging the dog is much of the problem and the membership must be given a great deal more say in all issues.
I think there’s a serious argument for Paul Oakden standing down from UKIP’s Chairmanship. The party has been been an administrative mess since he took over the position, & Head Office seems to have disappeared off the radar in meaningful increasingly also. He’s also made announcements to the press which have clearly indicated to me that he’s out of his depth in this role. He maybe a talented man – & I’ve seen him handle himself quite well in the odd television interview with the B.B.C., & he may have a future in UKIP in some capacity, but it shouldn’t marshaling it from that key strategic post.
Deirdre, excellent letter, I fully concur.
Bill Etheridge: ref your comments about Anne Marie, come on Sir you can do better than this !
David Kurten: you chucking your hat into the Leadership contest is a welcome inclusion. You speak much calm sense. I hope to see you in action at the Question Time meeting in London arranged by the London Chairman Freddy Vachha on the evening of Tuesday 18th July.
All: Do not worry about Paul Oakden and Steve Crowther doing the right thing, I for one have every confidence that they will see to it that the “right thing” is done. But an un-ambiguous statement to that effect wouldn’t go amiss I feel.
Jeff Wyatt
I am hoping so too, Jeff, which is why I urge everyone to keep the faith. But all this is not doing UKIP’s credibility any good meantime.
A side issue to the point of my article, but Bill’s articles do give license, although only one has felt it necessary to tweet it, that Anne Marie supporters like myself should join the BNP, and Hitler began like that!! I couldn’t care less, but his bio would indicate he is a UKIP supporter – robust argument is one thing, but all Kippers should be better than that.
What a can of worms May’s disastrous decision to go to the country has caused. Labour is still in disarray – if the idiot May had resisted the temptation AND waited for the boundary change I suspect they really would have torn themselves apart BUT – they fought a good campaign, especially on social media, whereas UKIP f-ed up as badly as the Tories and here we go again tearing ourselves apart, The blue b-s must be rubbing their hands with glee. She did it, May finished off UKIP. Well no she won’t have done, we’ll have written our own death warrant if we keep on airing our internecine battles in the public eye. So far 2 wannabee leaders have torn into Anne Marie Waters on Twitter. Quite simply they have shown they are not leadership material,the division they have sown -IN THE PUBLIC EYE- should count against them when their application is vetted, so much for vetoing Anne Marie. I most emphatically do not want us to become the ‘anti Islam party’ but you know what folks – I am a democrat. I want to hear what Anne Marie has to say about how she will lead UKIP on economic policy, protecting the Greenbelt, revitalising agriculture, getting the propaganda out of school curricula (David Kurten is good on that) and most of all introducing the reforms and improvements in our public image, outreach and campaigning that will ensure UKIP is not dead in the water by 2018. Only then can I judge if she has the right qualities to lead us.
Dear Purple,
You say “I most emphatically do not want us to become the ‘anti Islam party’”.
You may be too late.
Do you agree with pages 34-38 of the UKIP 2017 manifesto?
http://www.ukip.org/manifesto2017
BTW I don’t think AMW has proposed anything that is NOT mentioned in pages 34-38.
You have to wonder why some people are so critical of AMW. She seems a good candidate. Just as brave as Nigel in fact.
Regards, Toby, 01932-873557
I had to defend the barely defensible Toby, or would have done if anyone had bothered to ask at hustings. People were far more interested in managing Brexit to benefit the economy and the social care gaffes made by May’s team. As a libertarian I would not have proposed banning the black crow c**p in public, however many other countries chose to. I would however ensure anyone in charge of a public, or private space – airports, banks, schools, shopping centres, who wished to ban face coverings would not face stupid charges if they included burqas & niqabs. In reality I suspect it will happen for security reasons sooner or later. The FGM thing was our ‘dementia tax’ Do you think that medical inspection has not already been discussed in safeguarding circles – may I enlighten you, it has. We really should not have gone into such fine detail in a manifesto.As for the rest of the integration programme – common sense & as a feminist I will back banning Sharia Law every time. My point is the emphasis and that is why I believe AMW should be able to stand and present her plan and be interrogated on it. Post Brexit I believe we must be a grown up party, not a one issue pressure group.’IT’S THE ECONOMY STUPID’ as I know you well know Toby
I do think, PPmouth, that there is an overwhelming desire in the country for an anti-Islam party – Islam is Islam, it is not anti-Muslim to ask that Islam in Britain be an Islam that adapts to the British way of doing things. If Muslims want to live by Islamic Law (Sharia) there are increasingly countries where they can go to do that. But if they want the advantages of our Western values and way of life, then it must be on our terms.
You say you are anti Sharia, but Sharia IS Islam, and its the refusal of almost everyone to address this uncomfortable fact that makes for a confused argument that can be used against anyone who addresses this by Muslims who are the voice of their faith. All the ‘oh but Islam isn’t …’ I’m afraid it is. The burka, halal, and also FGM, while not being solely a problem within Islam is still one of the problems. Then there’s the child brides and multiple marriages, honor killings and apostasy law. it’s all in the laws of Islam, the Laws apparently passed down by Allah through Mohammed his messenger, detailed in the Koran, Hadith and Sira. There is, or can be a reformed Islam, I believe, but that’s not the one taught by most Imams – and the fact that Imam Tawhidi has to ask for security before he can address how it can be reformed means it isn’t happening, anywhere.
As Toby said here the other day, we should all inform ourselves in detail about Islam – if anyone wants to I would suggest Dr Bill Warner on Utube is a very good place to begin. He has spent thirty years on the subject. We can benefit from his extensive knowledge.
But one thing is for certain, you cannot be anti-Sharia and not anti Islam, I’m afraid. That doesn’t mean being anti Muslim, it means helping those Muslims who wish to escape the restrictive often violent Sharia and live life in the West, choosing the non-violent parts of the Koran to live by, as we do the Bible, or even to choose apostasy. But that is not what is happening currently.
Dear Dee,
A tiny point…
You said “Toby said here the other day, we should all inform ourselves”.
Hugo said that, IIRC.
Regards, Toby, 01932-873557
Sorry, humble apologies to all concerned! xx
More double standards were exhibited when Steven Woolfe’s papers were reported to have been submitted 15 minutes or so late thus his bid to stand as a leadership candidate was not accepted… yet in the second leadership contest last year the dead line for return of voting papers was extended by 2 days.
Does everyone recall how furious we were that Cameron was fudging things last summer, in the run up to the referendum..The deadline for new voters to register was extended by some 18 hours following reports of a computer crash in the final 30 minutes before the original deadline.
I do not support AMW and unlike most on this site I consider her approach to be divisive. I’ll probably leave if she wins. HOWEVER, she must be allowed to stand, it’s the only way members can judge and influence which way the grassroots party wants to move forward. Should she be prevented from participating we will have no way of knowing what the majority want or how big is the gap between what is described by some as the left and right wing of UKIP.
The divisions in our country are already there and need to be discussed. If they continue to be ignored then our country is lost.
It is more the case that there is already a divide in opinion among UKIP members. AMWs candidature is bringing that divide into the open. The nation has been divided over issues like immigration all my voting life. The Tories have always been divided over EU membership and it looks like that is going to continue unresolved.
AMW standing for leadership will ensure we have the necessary debate. Find out if there are policies that all can agree on and a leader that can unite the party.
It reeks of double standards by the people running UKIP that they can warn John Rees-Evans about his future behaviour for making mild criticism of the other leadership candidates (in the last election) but, this time, take no action whatsoever against a leadership contender and MEP who describes any members, who might have the temerity to vote for Anne Marie Waters, as “neo-fascist entryists” and Nazis.
I doubt, Deirdre, that you will receive any response to your open letter, certainly on here, as I cannot recall Crowther or Oakden ever making any contribution to UKIP Daily. Let’s hope I’m wrong.
Technically, nobody is a leadership contender yet, and we don’t know what processes may be going regarding Bill E…?
Rob, you may be missing the point!
In my opinion it would be nice to hear an apology to all he may have offended from Bill Etheridge, but what happened to playing a straight bat? I have had so many thank-yous and comments, most favorable in that all most members want is exactly what I asked for – maybe you didn’t quite get the gist of my last paragraph.
Icini’s comment is spot on!
We might also ask why the long overdue “rebrand” of UKIP is being conducted behind closed doors.
In a recent email, Steve Crowther said this rebrand or relaunch was to answer the question “what is UKIP for?”. Work done on this so far has been shared with the NEC, who are sworn to secrecy, and the results will be presented to the Membership, and the new UKIP leader, as a fait accompli at conference in September.
Should not the Membership have some say in answering the question “what is UKIP for”?
It appears at the moment that UKIP is “for” recreating the worst, top-down, arrogant, anti-democratic practices better left to the EU.
The last leadership election was a sham. A procession, with no debate or criticism allowed. In that context, I will be pleasantly amazed if some pretext is not found on which to bar AMW from running. After she has paid her £5k, of course.
If AMW isn’t allowed to run, my Membership of 4 years will be immediately cancelled. Because if UKIP are adopting the bullying smear and sneer tactics of our Leftist opponents, there can be no possible answer to the question “what is UKIP for?” that I could ever support.
Quite so Gary.
Too many of the old guard are economic Tories, think they can treat the membership with impunity, and have absolutrely no idea of leadership.
Gary, mine too will be cancelled, not out of pique, but because of the reasons outlined above. I wonder if Messrs Crowther and Oakden realize how serious the situation is, with regard to the good standing of UKIP in the public mind – I thought an interim leader, though elected by (some of) the NEC but not by members, was simply there to steady the ship until the new Leader is chosen. Are they going beyond their remit? Have they an endorsement for anything?
Fully within remit, Dee: ?
7.11 … Such Interim Leader shall have all the powers of the Party Leader under this Constitution as if he had been elected to that post.
But surely, Rob, such things as re-branding should be for a new Leader to put to the members? Has it been put to members? I haven’t had anything.
I would expect rebranding to be presented at conference, as it will.
Dear Rob,
Are you saying that the new branding will be presented as a final decision …. or as an option for consideration?
Do you agree that the new leader needs to have an input into the new branding (if any)?
BTW: Constitution: “2.1 …The registered name of the Party under the PPERA shall be the UK Independence Party (UKIP)… .”
So perhaps nobody can change the party name except the members.
Regards, Toby, 01932-873557
Exactly right Gary. I’ve already left but I’ve come to believe that nowadays UKIP stands for the Unelected Kept In Power party…..
Well said, Dee.
The scrutiny organisation (if it is true there is one) merely produces a report on its research. It is still for the NEC to vote, to accept or reject the report. After Nuttall’s fantasy CV it could be prudent to vet candidates more thoroughly. I know members suspect the real motivation may be just to dig dirt on Anne Marie – they may be right – but I wouldn’t worry too much about that. She has support on the NEC and more than the clique would wish.
Far more significant, and serious, is resort yet again to airing dirty laundry in public which began with Etheridge’s disgraceful article. I suspect they have in fact increased support for Anne Marie by painting her as the anti-establishment candidate. That’s fine by me.
What is not fine is the calamitously bad political judgement underlying their attempt to deal with Anne Marie. It is worrying to be in a party still led by a clueless cabal that are motivated only by self-interest and pursue it in a thuggish unsophisticated way.
I was pleased to see that Stuart Agnew has accepted to be her deputy. Rumours of a deal with Whittle were fake news.
Thank you, Stout. I too am delighted that Stuart Agnew has accepted. I only really came to know of him from a posted video on here, and then his speech at AMW’s launch. He seems to be a good egg.
Pro-Ms. Waters’ leadership campaign letter of support thinly disguised as something else’; silly overstatement being displayed throughout as well.
Not impressed.
Ajax: after your silly description of David Kurten and even sillier provision of a link to a Carry On film in an attempt to prove your point, it ill behoves you to accuse someone else of ‘silly overstatement’. Plus, your comments were unnecessarily offensive personal remarks which rather disqualifies you from criticism of someone else’s perfectly acceptable content, style and tone.
Thank you, Panmelia – I think he missed the point.
Dear Deirdre,
Good letter.
In addition, any rebranding should be delayed, so that the new leader can lead.
Regards, Toby, 01932-873557