Regular readers will know of the Common Mans inability to read Mr Lance Watkins blog with a straight face, and this mornings offerings were the best yet.
Mr Lance Watkins, whose experience of the judicial system is normally to hear guilty verdicts against him on such diverse charges as receiving stolen goods and firearms offences, was commenting on John Wests attempts to 'hold UKIP to account'.
In Mr Lance Watkins words Mr West had " irrefutable documentary provenance displaying the guilt of EUkip and have numerous sworn affidavits and letters of support for the Judge/Courts makes the case all the more compelling....numerous witnesses both of fact and precedent makes their case even more compelling and that they have Party Officers, Celebrity and MEPs on their side leaves EUkip and the petty vindictive behaviour of the corrupt and insecure, childish and very foolish little Farage look like the clown he is "
So how did the district judge view this doomsday for UKIP? His words say it far more eloquently than the Common Man could.
District Judge Bazley White described Mr Wests case as 'an abuse of the small claims process and a waste of the courts time' and described UKIP as 'having no case to answer'. He also rubbished the idea of sending the matter for judicial review and dismissed the case out of hand.
The Common Man wonders if Mr Lance Watkins (who always apologises for any factual errors) will now apologise for suggesting that UKIP had done anything wrong, and agree with the District Judge who said in exonerating UKIP of any wrongdoing that Mr West was 'petty, vindictive and misguided..... making numerous allegations which have no legal basis and which abuse the process of the courts'.
The Common Man understands that Mr Lance Watkins own court date is fast approaching when he will answer yet more dishonesty charges in relation to theft of copyright. Is the Common Man alone in finding it strange that Mr Lance Watkins fails to mention the legal actions he is facing for dishonesty charges like this?
Tuesday, 17 February 2009
Sunday, 15 February 2009
3rd time unlucky for Mr Haslam
The Common Man was the first to break news of Mr Haslams meeting with BNP leader Nick Griffin http://allaboutukip.blogspot.com/2009/02/disturbing-news-about-martin-haslam.html
Thus the Common Man is hugely amused to see Junius and convicted receiver Mr Lance Watkins doing their best to wriggle their way out of having someone they have used as a principled man caught inviting activists to a meeting with Mr Griffin.
The Common Man is hugely amused to see their amateur attempts at spin now that they have been wrong footed. Do any readers really believe that this news would have appeared on either of their blogs had it not first been revealed here? Mr Lance Watkins already knew about the meeting long before it came to the Common Mans attention, as did Mr Edmonds, and emails between several in the anti UKIP brigade make this more than clear.
The Common Man will make this clear. Mr Haslam was involved in organising the West Sussex meeting along with BNP emissary Buster Mottram. He knew who would be present, but invited a number of senior UKIP activists knowing they would be addressed by the BNP leader. He deliberately concealed who would be present to ensure that they attended. Do not believe the lies that he innocently invited one person!
To conceal this, Mr Lance Watkins and Junius have returned to the subject of the Independent journalist who called Mr Haslam. The truth is different. Mr Haslam attempted to speak to a number of journalists and repeatedly bombarded the Independent with requests for a meeting. Mr Haslam was trying to peddle the story that during the UKIP conference in Bournemouth there would be a serious attempt to remove Mr Farage as UKIP leader. This meeting would have been lead by Mr Abbott and Mr Edmonds with whom Mr Haslam was acting in concert.
Fortunately the Independent had more sense than to believe this and the story rebounded on Mr Haslam as seen. The Common Man asks that readers ask themselves this. How unlucky would an innocent Mr Haslam have to be to be set up by the party leader, to have accidentally invited the BNP leaders personal emissary Mr Mottram to the NEC and then to have been innocently invited to a meeting at which the BNP leader was a guest speaker?
Thus the Common Man is hugely amused to see Junius and convicted receiver Mr Lance Watkins doing their best to wriggle their way out of having someone they have used as a principled man caught inviting activists to a meeting with Mr Griffin.
The Common Man is hugely amused to see their amateur attempts at spin now that they have been wrong footed. Do any readers really believe that this news would have appeared on either of their blogs had it not first been revealed here? Mr Lance Watkins already knew about the meeting long before it came to the Common Mans attention, as did Mr Edmonds, and emails between several in the anti UKIP brigade make this more than clear.
The Common Man will make this clear. Mr Haslam was involved in organising the West Sussex meeting along with BNP emissary Buster Mottram. He knew who would be present, but invited a number of senior UKIP activists knowing they would be addressed by the BNP leader. He deliberately concealed who would be present to ensure that they attended. Do not believe the lies that he innocently invited one person!
To conceal this, Mr Lance Watkins and Junius have returned to the subject of the Independent journalist who called Mr Haslam. The truth is different. Mr Haslam attempted to speak to a number of journalists and repeatedly bombarded the Independent with requests for a meeting. Mr Haslam was trying to peddle the story that during the UKIP conference in Bournemouth there would be a serious attempt to remove Mr Farage as UKIP leader. This meeting would have been lead by Mr Abbott and Mr Edmonds with whom Mr Haslam was acting in concert.
Fortunately the Independent had more sense than to believe this and the story rebounded on Mr Haslam as seen. The Common Man asks that readers ask themselves this. How unlucky would an innocent Mr Haslam have to be to be set up by the party leader, to have accidentally invited the BNP leaders personal emissary Mr Mottram to the NEC and then to have been innocently invited to a meeting at which the BNP leader was a guest speaker?
Saturday, 14 February 2009
More lies from Junius
The Common Man was amused to see the lies put forward by the aptly named Junius (from Marcus Junius Brutus, the well known backstabber who was driven by ambition and not principle) on the Democracy Forum.
In his latest batch of postings, he accuses UKIP leader Nigel Farage MEP of failing to back Lord Pearsons invitation to controversial Dutch politician Geert Wilders.
The truth is that Lord Pearson was involved in a cross-bench move to highlight the freedom of speech issue involved, and did not want UKIP political involvement as that would dilute the message and make it party political. Both Mr Farage and UKIPs London MEP Gerard Batten accepted that this was so, and stayed in the background.
Subsequent developments in the story have proved this was the correct approach to take and perhaps it is this which has stirred Junius to dip his pen in poison and attempt to muddy the issue with his lies?
In his latest batch of postings, he accuses UKIP leader Nigel Farage MEP of failing to back Lord Pearsons invitation to controversial Dutch politician Geert Wilders.
The truth is that Lord Pearson was involved in a cross-bench move to highlight the freedom of speech issue involved, and did not want UKIP political involvement as that would dilute the message and make it party political. Both Mr Farage and UKIPs London MEP Gerard Batten accepted that this was so, and stayed in the background.
Subsequent developments in the story have proved this was the correct approach to take and perhaps it is this which has stirred Junius to dip his pen in poison and attempt to muddy the issue with his lies?
Thursday, 12 February 2009
Wests to display integrity and resign over breach of rules?
It was interesting (although rather tedious) to read the latest overly long rant about the Suffolk Coastal branch from the Wests, this one signed by Mrs Alison West.
It was truly fascinating to read
"John was re-elected as Branch Secretary and also as Treasurer. I was elected as Chairman. "
Unfortunately, this is contrary to party standing orders and the rules for branches which specifically state that husband and wife members can not occupy the position of Treasurer and either Chairman or Secretary simultaneously. This is to prevent the type of breach of trust where a husband and wife conspire, for example, to misuse branch funds in sending untrue, unauthorised and libellous letters to local members in pursuit of a personal vendetta.
The current position of the Suffolk Coastal branch is that its committee is improperly constituted. As Mr and Mrs West are so keen on the letter of the law I await their resignations in the interests of natural justice and decency and the surrender of all branch documents to the last legally elected chairman, Mr Whitmore. As legal Chairman, I am sure he would be justified in excluding Mr and Mrs West from standing in the next election of officers, as they have demonstrated that they are ignorant of the rules necessary to conduct a branch in proper order.
Should they not resign, what value can be placed on their statements that they are campaigners for truth, openness and honesty if they feel they are able to disregard party standing orders when it suits them? Imagine people connected with upstanding people like convicted receiver and BNP activist Mr Lance Watkins being guilty of blatant hypocrisy!
It was truly fascinating to read
"John was re-elected as Branch Secretary and also as Treasurer. I was elected as Chairman. "
Unfortunately, this is contrary to party standing orders and the rules for branches which specifically state that husband and wife members can not occupy the position of Treasurer and either Chairman or Secretary simultaneously. This is to prevent the type of breach of trust where a husband and wife conspire, for example, to misuse branch funds in sending untrue, unauthorised and libellous letters to local members in pursuit of a personal vendetta.
The current position of the Suffolk Coastal branch is that its committee is improperly constituted. As Mr and Mrs West are so keen on the letter of the law I await their resignations in the interests of natural justice and decency and the surrender of all branch documents to the last legally elected chairman, Mr Whitmore. As legal Chairman, I am sure he would be justified in excluding Mr and Mrs West from standing in the next election of officers, as they have demonstrated that they are ignorant of the rules necessary to conduct a branch in proper order.
Should they not resign, what value can be placed on their statements that they are campaigners for truth, openness and honesty if they feel they are able to disregard party standing orders when it suits them? Imagine people connected with upstanding people like convicted receiver and BNP activist Mr Lance Watkins being guilty of blatant hypocrisy!
Wednesday, 11 February 2009
Gawain Towler and Mr Lance Watkins fascination with his genitalia
The Common Man is hugely amused by Mr Lance Watkins apparent fascination with Mr Towlers genitalia which he displays by posting a picture which he claims shows Mr Towlers todger at the slightest excuse.
Leaving to one side questions of whether this, along with Mr Lance Watkins raging homophobia, is a beard for his repressed homosexuality, the Common Man has to break some bad news.
Mr Towlers todger is - and how shall we put this delicately - slightly more semitic in appearance than the penis picture about which Mr Lance Watkins clearly has a voyeuristic fetish. The Common Man understands it is a fetish which is shared by many in the senior ranks of the BNP.
The Common Man understands that Mr Towler would cheerfully drop his trousers to prove that like all artists his wife uses models. Just not in arms reach of Mr Lance Watkins.
Leaving to one side questions of whether this, along with Mr Lance Watkins raging homophobia, is a beard for his repressed homosexuality, the Common Man has to break some bad news.
Mr Towlers todger is - and how shall we put this delicately - slightly more semitic in appearance than the penis picture about which Mr Lance Watkins clearly has a voyeuristic fetish. The Common Man understands it is a fetish which is shared by many in the senior ranks of the BNP.
The Common Man understands that Mr Towler would cheerfully drop his trousers to prove that like all artists his wife uses models. Just not in arms reach of Mr Lance Watkins.
Sunday, 8 February 2009
Mathematically challenged Dr Edmonds massages UKRAL attendance
Steam enthusiasts barely noticed the untumultuous tea party sized meeting which had gathered to show support for international superstar Robin Page and exchange reasons on why UKIP would be successful if only they were in charge.
Addressing himself to the rows of adulating empty chairs, Mr Page explained at some length how UKIPs leadership had to recognise his fame or face the consequences. "Rules aren't made for people as important and famous as I am", boomed Mr Page before blaming the first two people to spring to mind and invoking the doctrine of Pagal Infallibility.
The burning controversy of the day has proved to be over the mathematical ability of former economist Dr Edmonds. Initially posting attendance on his blog as 45, within hours it had grown to 63, and all this hours after the conference had ended and everybody had gone home.
It can be reported with confidence that 37 was a fair figure, if the organisers and speakers were counted. As there were 13 speakers on the posted programme, non economists can work out the true attendance of 24 non-speakers less the organisers, or about 20. Some of those seemed to have a plentiful supply of BNP leaflets.
Questions have been asked as to the difference in these figures, and the answer is that while Dr Edmonds counted 45, Peter Cole, Tom Wise MEPs (that model of honest accounting) assistant counted 63.
We have a few simple tips for Mr Cole and Dr Edmonds. When counting attendees, the ones in shirts with the name of the venue on, the people on the food side of the counter and people pointing at exhibits and carrying cameras do not count. When people leave, you can not count them again when they come back in. Stewards and speakers are not part of the audience, they are the organisers.
Particularly interesting given the numerical challenges faced by Mr Cole and Dr Edmonds were the calls for the need for complete honesty and transparency in politics. Almost every speaker to the venue which was packed to the point of emptiness agreed that you could not trust people who manipulated the truth.
Addressing himself to the rows of adulating empty chairs, Mr Page explained at some length how UKIPs leadership had to recognise his fame or face the consequences. "Rules aren't made for people as important and famous as I am", boomed Mr Page before blaming the first two people to spring to mind and invoking the doctrine of Pagal Infallibility.
The burning controversy of the day has proved to be over the mathematical ability of former economist Dr Edmonds. Initially posting attendance on his blog as 45, within hours it had grown to 63, and all this hours after the conference had ended and everybody had gone home.
It can be reported with confidence that 37 was a fair figure, if the organisers and speakers were counted. As there were 13 speakers on the posted programme, non economists can work out the true attendance of 24 non-speakers less the organisers, or about 20. Some of those seemed to have a plentiful supply of BNP leaflets.
Questions have been asked as to the difference in these figures, and the answer is that while Dr Edmonds counted 45, Peter Cole, Tom Wise MEPs (that model of honest accounting) assistant counted 63.
We have a few simple tips for Mr Cole and Dr Edmonds. When counting attendees, the ones in shirts with the name of the venue on, the people on the food side of the counter and people pointing at exhibits and carrying cameras do not count. When people leave, you can not count them again when they come back in. Stewards and speakers are not part of the audience, they are the organisers.
Particularly interesting given the numerical challenges faced by Mr Cole and Dr Edmonds were the calls for the need for complete honesty and transparency in politics. Almost every speaker to the venue which was packed to the point of emptiness agreed that you could not trust people who manipulated the truth.
UKRAL and exagerrated attendance
The Common Man is prepared for the amusing claims of attendance at the UKRAL Swindon meeting yesterday, and is interested to compare them with the head count made by independent sources. A mass meeting it certainly wasn't!
The Common Man is unsurprised that the BNP were there trying to recruit members at its inaugural meeting, and is certain that with a BNP associate on the speakers list in the person of Mr Haslam their cause was greatly helped. With BNP supporter and self confessed anti-semite Mr Lance Watkins helping publicise the meeting Mr Griffins chums had plenty of advance warning.
The Common Man is unsurprised that the BNP were there trying to recruit members at its inaugural meeting, and is certain that with a BNP associate on the speakers list in the person of Mr Haslam their cause was greatly helped. With BNP supporter and self confessed anti-semite Mr Lance Watkins helping publicise the meeting Mr Griffins chums had plenty of advance warning.
Mr Lance Watkins stretches the truth beyond credibility
The Common Man is amused to see Mr Lance Watkins stretching the truth beyond all credibility in his attempt to defend Mr Haslams meeting with BNP Leader Nick Griffin.
According to Mr Lance Watkins:
Version 1; Mr Haslam went to no meeting attended by Mr Griffin
Version 2; Mr Haslam attended a meeting organised by Mr Griffins personal emissary to UKIP Buster Mottram but Mr Griffin was not present
Version 3; Mr Haslam innocently attended a meeting at which Mr Griffin was present, but had not invited anyone to attend
Version 4; Mr Haslam attended a meeting at which Mr Griffin was present, and had innocently invited one person along
The Common Man still awaits the truth which is
Version 173; Mr Haslam and Mr Mottram organised a meeting for Mr Griffin to meet UKIP activists and recruit them to the BNP
The Common Man is aware that Mr Lance Watkins as a personal friend of Mr Griffin has an interest in concealing the circumstances of the meeting because they were so similar to his own attempts to get an audience of UKIP activists before Mr Griffin. Regular readers will remember how anti-semitic Mr Lance Watkins invited a number of UKIP activists for a weekend at the Huntsman in 2002 without telling them that he had also invited Mr Griffin. The Common Man can only assume that after so much exposure to apartheid it is only natural for Mr Lance Watkins to find common ground with such people.
According to Mr Lance Watkins:
Version 1; Mr Haslam went to no meeting attended by Mr Griffin
Version 2; Mr Haslam attended a meeting organised by Mr Griffins personal emissary to UKIP Buster Mottram but Mr Griffin was not present
Version 3; Mr Haslam innocently attended a meeting at which Mr Griffin was present, but had not invited anyone to attend
Version 4; Mr Haslam attended a meeting at which Mr Griffin was present, and had innocently invited one person along
The Common Man still awaits the truth which is
Version 173; Mr Haslam and Mr Mottram organised a meeting for Mr Griffin to meet UKIP activists and recruit them to the BNP
The Common Man is aware that Mr Lance Watkins as a personal friend of Mr Griffin has an interest in concealing the circumstances of the meeting because they were so similar to his own attempts to get an audience of UKIP activists before Mr Griffin. Regular readers will remember how anti-semitic Mr Lance Watkins invited a number of UKIP activists for a weekend at the Huntsman in 2002 without telling them that he had also invited Mr Griffin. The Common Man can only assume that after so much exposure to apartheid it is only natural for Mr Lance Watkins to find common ground with such people.
Saturday, 7 February 2009
To make it simple for Mr Edmonds
The Common Man feels the need to make it simple for Mr Edmonds who despite his claimed qualifications seems unable to understand plain English.
His list of signatories includes two people with clear and proven links to the BNP and its leader Mr Griffin in the persons of Mr Haslam and Mr Abbott. How many times do people have to accidentally meet Mr Griffin before Mr Edmonds realises he is being taken for a ride? Once would suffice for most people, but not he. Why Mr Abbott has met Mr Griffin so many times that he cant remember them all which must be why his story changes so often. The first time was at a meeting of white supremecists in the US.
His signatory list also includes several people who Mr Butcher has been telling people are about to join Libertas as candidates.
Mr Edmonds dishonest letter is not a group of UKIP members telling people to vote against a constitutional amendment. It is a group of 2 BNP associates and 5 Libertas party potential candidates stirring up trouble for UKIP before they jump ship. Could it be revenge because Libertas can not be called Libertas in the UK as UKIP owns its name? Is Libertas already happy to use BNP supporters and donors to try and damage its electoral opposition?
Mr Edmonds will this afternoon be sharing a platform with one BNP supporter, Mr Haslam. This should tell everyone everything they need to know about the UK Renewal Association Ltd as Mr Edmonds was well aware of the meeting Mr Haslam organised for Mr Griffin to speak to UKIP members in West Sussex. Why not ask him, but don't expect the truth.
The Common Man is amused that Mr Edmonds threatens libel action against this blog and condemns the anonymity of its authors but has no complaint about Junius who he uses to spread his own lies.
The Common Man can give every assurance to readers of this blog that its contents are true and factual as has been proven many times. The Common Man can also see the transparent hypocrisy of Mr Edmonds who condemns truthful blogs because they expose his self seeking nature and supports those fronts for the BNP which help him reach his goal regardless of the truth.
Ambition is a terrible thing Mr Edmonds most particularly when it is greater than an individuals ability. Why did you leave the Bank of England again? The Common Mans sources suggest your version may not have been entirely truthful.
His list of signatories includes two people with clear and proven links to the BNP and its leader Mr Griffin in the persons of Mr Haslam and Mr Abbott. How many times do people have to accidentally meet Mr Griffin before Mr Edmonds realises he is being taken for a ride? Once would suffice for most people, but not he. Why Mr Abbott has met Mr Griffin so many times that he cant remember them all which must be why his story changes so often. The first time was at a meeting of white supremecists in the US.
His signatory list also includes several people who Mr Butcher has been telling people are about to join Libertas as candidates.
Mr Edmonds dishonest letter is not a group of UKIP members telling people to vote against a constitutional amendment. It is a group of 2 BNP associates and 5 Libertas party potential candidates stirring up trouble for UKIP before they jump ship. Could it be revenge because Libertas can not be called Libertas in the UK as UKIP owns its name? Is Libertas already happy to use BNP supporters and donors to try and damage its electoral opposition?
Mr Edmonds will this afternoon be sharing a platform with one BNP supporter, Mr Haslam. This should tell everyone everything they need to know about the UK Renewal Association Ltd as Mr Edmonds was well aware of the meeting Mr Haslam organised for Mr Griffin to speak to UKIP members in West Sussex. Why not ask him, but don't expect the truth.
The Common Man is amused that Mr Edmonds threatens libel action against this blog and condemns the anonymity of its authors but has no complaint about Junius who he uses to spread his own lies.
The Common Man can give every assurance to readers of this blog that its contents are true and factual as has been proven many times. The Common Man can also see the transparent hypocrisy of Mr Edmonds who condemns truthful blogs because they expose his self seeking nature and supports those fronts for the BNP which help him reach his goal regardless of the truth.
Ambition is a terrible thing Mr Edmonds most particularly when it is greater than an individuals ability. Why did you leave the Bank of England again? The Common Mans sources suggest your version may not have been entirely truthful.
Mr Lance Watkins to lose his (black) shirt
The Common Man has been busy digging around to find more details of the court case against Mr Lance Watkins, convicted thief and proven liar that he is.
It turns out via an exchange on the Democracy Forum that Mr Lance Watkins is being sued by Mr Croucher for his use of copyrighted images on his libellous blog. The Common Man understands that the British National Party are also being sued for a similar copyright infringement.
The Common Man understands that both Mr Lance Watkins and Mr Griffin were given the opportunity to remove the images from their websites and pay a license fee up to the date Mr Croucher became aware they were there. They were also informed that if they did not do so, the charge for the use of the images would rise from the normal license charge for unauthorised use, 3 x the NUJ rate, to £ 75 per day per image per use, and that failure to remove the images would imply tacit consent to this charge.
It is understood that the BNPs outstanding amount is now up to around £4500 while Mr Lance Watkins amount is around £ 14000.
The Common Mans friends in the legal profession suggest that their failure to remove the images when copyright was claimed leaves them wide open to this increased charge. The offer was made, and the contined use of the photographs implied acceptance thus forming a contract. The Common Man also understands that Mr Croucher may have the backing of his union in bringing this action.
It turns out via an exchange on the Democracy Forum that Mr Lance Watkins is being sued by Mr Croucher for his use of copyrighted images on his libellous blog. The Common Man understands that the British National Party are also being sued for a similar copyright infringement.
The Common Man understands that both Mr Lance Watkins and Mr Griffin were given the opportunity to remove the images from their websites and pay a license fee up to the date Mr Croucher became aware they were there. They were also informed that if they did not do so, the charge for the use of the images would rise from the normal license charge for unauthorised use, 3 x the NUJ rate, to £ 75 per day per image per use, and that failure to remove the images would imply tacit consent to this charge.
It is understood that the BNPs outstanding amount is now up to around £4500 while Mr Lance Watkins amount is around £ 14000.
The Common Mans friends in the legal profession suggest that their failure to remove the images when copyright was claimed leaves them wide open to this increased charge. The offer was made, and the contined use of the photographs implied acceptance thus forming a contract. The Common Man also understands that Mr Croucher may have the backing of his union in bringing this action.
Friday, 6 February 2009
Disaster in Brussels lecture by Pharisee
The Common Man notices with much amusement that John Petley is giving a speech at the snappily named UK Renewal Association Ltd meeting tomorrow titled Disaster in Brussels.
Is the Common Man alone in thinking the speech must be autobiographical? After all, Mr Petley is the man who boasted to friends in the Tory party by email about passing on deliberately misleading research to UKIP MEPs while employed by the Inddem group. When given a position of considerable trust and responsibility he chose to betray that trust in an attempt to cause political embarassment to those who gave him his position.
The Common Man wishes the UKRAL good luck with such recruits to their cause as they will most certainly need it. Anyone who would betray their responsibilities once would clearly have no problem in betraying them twice.
The Common Man also understands that Mr Petley belongs to that rabid wing of fundamentalist christianity so beloved of many on UKIPs lunatic fringe. It is fortunate then that the biblical commandment to not bear false witness included (as any fule no) a special derogation for those who work against UKIPs leadership. It doesnt? The Common Man can only assume that Mr Petleys talk will be as hypocritical as the actions of any biblical Pharisee.
Is the Common Man alone in thinking the speech must be autobiographical? After all, Mr Petley is the man who boasted to friends in the Tory party by email about passing on deliberately misleading research to UKIP MEPs while employed by the Inddem group. When given a position of considerable trust and responsibility he chose to betray that trust in an attempt to cause political embarassment to those who gave him his position.
The Common Man wishes the UKRAL good luck with such recruits to their cause as they will most certainly need it. Anyone who would betray their responsibilities once would clearly have no problem in betraying them twice.
The Common Man also understands that Mr Petley belongs to that rabid wing of fundamentalist christianity so beloved of many on UKIPs lunatic fringe. It is fortunate then that the biblical commandment to not bear false witness included (as any fule no) a special derogation for those who work against UKIPs leadership. It doesnt? The Common Man can only assume that Mr Petleys talk will be as hypocritical as the actions of any biblical Pharisee.
The excuses keep on coming
The Common Man was hugely amused to read the latest drivel from the keyboard of convicted thief and proven liar Mr Lance Watkins.
Mr Haslams meeting was apparently not organised by Mr Haslam! What a surprise that will be to those he invited! Mr Haslam did not know that BNP leader Nick Griffin was going to be there! He was set up! And this was at a meeting where Buster Mottram, Mr Griffins personal emissary to UKIP, was speaking.
Compare this to the case of Mr Abbott, who innocently went along to a Trafalgar Club dinner after donating money to the BNP and being personally invited by the former AFBNP organiser, and guess who was there? Nick Griffin! No, really! He really didn't know!
The Common Man has been asked for proof that Mr Edmonds was aware of this. That is difficult to give without exposing sources, so the Common Man can only say that you know a man by his friends, and if his friends keep on accidentally bumping into Mr Griffin.....
The coincidences just keep on coming, and the Common Man laughs harder and harder. How stupid does Mr Lance Watkins think his readers are?
Mr Haslams meeting was apparently not organised by Mr Haslam! What a surprise that will be to those he invited! Mr Haslam did not know that BNP leader Nick Griffin was going to be there! He was set up! And this was at a meeting where Buster Mottram, Mr Griffins personal emissary to UKIP, was speaking.
Compare this to the case of Mr Abbott, who innocently went along to a Trafalgar Club dinner after donating money to the BNP and being personally invited by the former AFBNP organiser, and guess who was there? Nick Griffin! No, really! He really didn't know!
The Common Man has been asked for proof that Mr Edmonds was aware of this. That is difficult to give without exposing sources, so the Common Man can only say that you know a man by his friends, and if his friends keep on accidentally bumping into Mr Griffin.....
The coincidences just keep on coming, and the Common Man laughs harder and harder. How stupid does Mr Lance Watkins think his readers are?
Thursday, 5 February 2009
Disturbing news about Martin Haslam & Nick Griffin
Disturbing news reaches the Common Man about further contacts between Mr Haslam and the BNP.
In December of last year, Mr Haslam invited a number of people to a meeting at a location in West Sussex.
After the recriminations following Mr Haslams ejection from the NEC, those present were more than a little surprised to discover that the first speaker was one Buster Mottram. This was nothing compared to the stunned silence when the second speaker was introduced, for it was none other than one Mr N Griffin, BNP leader.
The Common Man has long known that Mr Haslam was not what he claimed, but where does that leave Mr Haslam's supporters, and what did they know about this? Was Mr Edmonds aware of this meeting when he launched his defence of his cosignatories? The answer is a resounding yes.
In December of last year, Mr Haslam invited a number of people to a meeting at a location in West Sussex.
After the recriminations following Mr Haslams ejection from the NEC, those present were more than a little surprised to discover that the first speaker was one Buster Mottram. This was nothing compared to the stunned silence when the second speaker was introduced, for it was none other than one Mr N Griffin, BNP leader.
The Common Man has long known that Mr Haslam was not what he claimed, but where does that leave Mr Haslam's supporters, and what did they know about this? Was Mr Edmonds aware of this meeting when he launched his defence of his cosignatories? The answer is a resounding yes.
Mr Lance-Watkins being sued?
The Common Man understands that Mr Lance Watkins will shortly have his day in court as news breaks that a former UKIP staffer is sueing him for copyright infringements.
Paperwork was apparently submitted on the 17th January to a County Court claiming damages and costs after Mr Lance Watkins used copyrighted images on his blog and then ignored warning letters by failing to remove them.
The Common Man is still trying to discover who the plaintiff is and what court will hear the case. What is clear is that the amount claimed is substantial and could well bankrupt Mr Lance Watkins, a discharged bankrupt and convicted thief, again. As most of the images in question were apparently scanned from Independence News, the Common Man can only assume that the plaintiff is either a past editor or contributor to UKIPs inhouse newsletter. Most likely candidates are John Harvey, Mark Croucher or Adrian Lithgow.
Stay tuned for further updates.
Paperwork was apparently submitted on the 17th January to a County Court claiming damages and costs after Mr Lance Watkins used copyrighted images on his blog and then ignored warning letters by failing to remove them.
The Common Man is still trying to discover who the plaintiff is and what court will hear the case. What is clear is that the amount claimed is substantial and could well bankrupt Mr Lance Watkins, a discharged bankrupt and convicted thief, again. As most of the images in question were apparently scanned from Independence News, the Common Man can only assume that the plaintiff is either a past editor or contributor to UKIPs inhouse newsletter. Most likely candidates are John Harvey, Mark Croucher or Adrian Lithgow.
Stay tuned for further updates.
Butcher, Holdsworth-Voelcker and crocodile tears
The Common Man is hugely amused to see former UKIP Chairwoman Petrina Holdsworth-Voelcker praising the abilities of Democracy Forum owner Anthony Butcher. How things change over time, as the Common Man understands that as chairwoman she spent a considerable amount of time attempting to sideline Mr Butcher during his time on the NEC.
Apparently Ms Holdsworth and then UKIP leader Roger Knapman were in agreement that Mr Butcher should be given a job which was impossible to do. This would then give UKIP an opportunity to fire Mr Butcher very publicly for failing to fulfil an appointed task - not mentioning that the task was designed to be impossible. The Common Man understands that a number of senior staffers within UKIP argued against this approach, preferring instead to bring Mr Butcher 'onside'. The Common Man is aware that such an argument was bound to be defeated as Mr Butcher, a close friend of Lib Dem Bromley candidate Ben Abbotts, was parachuted into UKIP after the 2004 elections by a Liberal Democrat party desperate to undermine UKIP following their drubbing at UKIPs hands.
In the end, the question made no difference as Mr Butcher made no pretence of even trying to act as UKIPs national policy coordinator as that would have conflicted with his instructions from Lib Dem HQ. Instead he directed his energies into the Forum, and excellent tool for publishing BNP propaganda about UKIP.
The Common Man is unsurprised to hear that he is now off to the pro-EU Libertas party. From a Lib Dem point of view, they are a much more serious threat to their core vote than UKIP as many Europhile Lib Dems agree that serious reform of the EU is needed. Unfortunately, Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg disagrees so an agent is needed in place to ensure that the threat from Libertas is minimalised. Meanwhile, the Democracy Forum remains in place to smear anyone who supports UKIP publicly. Clearly the Lib Dems are determined to get their moneys worth from Mr Butcher and are splitting their egg between several baskets.
Apparently Ms Holdsworth and then UKIP leader Roger Knapman were in agreement that Mr Butcher should be given a job which was impossible to do. This would then give UKIP an opportunity to fire Mr Butcher very publicly for failing to fulfil an appointed task - not mentioning that the task was designed to be impossible. The Common Man understands that a number of senior staffers within UKIP argued against this approach, preferring instead to bring Mr Butcher 'onside'. The Common Man is aware that such an argument was bound to be defeated as Mr Butcher, a close friend of Lib Dem Bromley candidate Ben Abbotts, was parachuted into UKIP after the 2004 elections by a Liberal Democrat party desperate to undermine UKIP following their drubbing at UKIPs hands.
In the end, the question made no difference as Mr Butcher made no pretence of even trying to act as UKIPs national policy coordinator as that would have conflicted with his instructions from Lib Dem HQ. Instead he directed his energies into the Forum, and excellent tool for publishing BNP propaganda about UKIP.
The Common Man is unsurprised to hear that he is now off to the pro-EU Libertas party. From a Lib Dem point of view, they are a much more serious threat to their core vote than UKIP as many Europhile Lib Dems agree that serious reform of the EU is needed. Unfortunately, Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg disagrees so an agent is needed in place to ensure that the threat from Libertas is minimalised. Meanwhile, the Democracy Forum remains in place to smear anyone who supports UKIP publicly. Clearly the Lib Dems are determined to get their moneys worth from Mr Butcher and are splitting their egg between several baskets.
Edmonds to defect to Libertas?
The Common Man is hearing rumours of a planned defection to Libertas by expelled former UKIP NEC member Eric 'the liar' Edmonds.
With his links to BNP infiltrators and his online lies about having a reputation worth saving, the Common Man can only wish Mr Edmonds and Libertas 'good luck'. It is understood that a public announcement will be made only when Declan Ganley and his pro-EU consorts in Libertas have decided whether the questions about Mr Edmonds complicity in the Haslam/Mottram BNP plot can really be explained away by Mr Edmonds lies.
It is understood that his only hope now lies with the tape recordings of the NEC meeting that convicted thief, serial liar and BNP plant Mr Lance-Watkins claims to have. As most will be aware, if these really cleared Mr Edmonds of complicity, they would be all over the internet by now. Unfortunately, Mr Edmonds made so much noise in support of Mr Haslam and Mr Mottram that even heavy editing can't hide his clear support.
If Mr Ganley decides to accept Mr Edmonds, readers should listen to the gossip surrounding the new party to learn of Mr Edmonds ultimate fate. The Common Man is certain that he will be sidelined in very short order when familiarity breeds contempt for Mr Edmonds lies.
With his links to BNP infiltrators and his online lies about having a reputation worth saving, the Common Man can only wish Mr Edmonds and Libertas 'good luck'. It is understood that a public announcement will be made only when Declan Ganley and his pro-EU consorts in Libertas have decided whether the questions about Mr Edmonds complicity in the Haslam/Mottram BNP plot can really be explained away by Mr Edmonds lies.
It is understood that his only hope now lies with the tape recordings of the NEC meeting that convicted thief, serial liar and BNP plant Mr Lance-Watkins claims to have. As most will be aware, if these really cleared Mr Edmonds of complicity, they would be all over the internet by now. Unfortunately, Mr Edmonds made so much noise in support of Mr Haslam and Mr Mottram that even heavy editing can't hide his clear support.
If Mr Ganley decides to accept Mr Edmonds, readers should listen to the gossip surrounding the new party to learn of Mr Edmonds ultimate fate. The Common Man is certain that he will be sidelined in very short order when familiarity breeds contempt for Mr Edmonds lies.
"I don't tell lies", lies Edmonds
The Common Man has emerged from his enforced hibernation into the Walter Mitty world of Eric Edmonds.
Desperate to hide his complicity in the attempt to get rid of UKIP leader Nigel Farage, he now resorts to telling outright lies. On his blog, he states
'The statement from the Common Man blog that "Mr Young voted in favour of the expulsion of both Mr Abbott and Mr Edmonds." is a lie.'
Except that it isn't, and Mr Young unquestionably voted in favour of the expulsion of both Mr Abbott and Mr Edmonds. No-one has ever questioned the results of the votes which were published on the internet by UKIP, and the 11-0 vote in favour of his expulsion is a clear indication that Mr Young thought that he should go.
Is that enough for Mr Edmonds? No. He then suggests that every single signatory to the letter he was a cosignatory to is completely clear of BNP links. As the Common Mans many regular readers know, a good chortle is always welcome, and Mr Edmonds rarely fails to disappoint. Mr Haslam was a prime mover in the proposal of an electoral pact between UKIP and the BNP, while Mr Abbott was a donor to the BNP and has changed his story so many times he probably cant remember what the truth is. He started by saying he'd given money to AFBNP organiser Mr Cotterill as a 'fellow ex-pat in need', and then (when he realised that the donation was a matter of public record and had been caught out in a lie) said that Mr Cotterill had mislead him over the donation. He then changed his story again and again and again and the Common Man understands that the current fairy tale is two donations to the AFBNP and a further two payments to Mr Cotterill, but that is subject to change in the event of future revelations. Quite how much he gave at the BNP Trafalgar Club fundraising dinner he attended is a matter of speculation.
So when Mr Edmonds says "If you have evidence to support your outrageous accusation that I, or any of the other signatories, have BNP links then you are honour bound to publish it." what he really means is apart from AFBNP donation records and his own personal complicity in a BNP attempt to remove UKIPs leadership.
The end result is that those things which Mr Edmonds claims to be lies are actually true. And as 'any fule no', defending a reputation requires a reputation worth defending in the first place.
Why did you leave the Bank of England again, Mr Edmonds?
Desperate to hide his complicity in the attempt to get rid of UKIP leader Nigel Farage, he now resorts to telling outright lies. On his blog, he states
'The statement from the Common Man blog that "Mr Young voted in favour of the expulsion of both Mr Abbott and Mr Edmonds." is a lie.'
Except that it isn't, and Mr Young unquestionably voted in favour of the expulsion of both Mr Abbott and Mr Edmonds. No-one has ever questioned the results of the votes which were published on the internet by UKIP, and the 11-0 vote in favour of his expulsion is a clear indication that Mr Young thought that he should go.
Is that enough for Mr Edmonds? No. He then suggests that every single signatory to the letter he was a cosignatory to is completely clear of BNP links. As the Common Mans many regular readers know, a good chortle is always welcome, and Mr Edmonds rarely fails to disappoint. Mr Haslam was a prime mover in the proposal of an electoral pact between UKIP and the BNP, while Mr Abbott was a donor to the BNP and has changed his story so many times he probably cant remember what the truth is. He started by saying he'd given money to AFBNP organiser Mr Cotterill as a 'fellow ex-pat in need', and then (when he realised that the donation was a matter of public record and had been caught out in a lie) said that Mr Cotterill had mislead him over the donation. He then changed his story again and again and again and the Common Man understands that the current fairy tale is two donations to the AFBNP and a further two payments to Mr Cotterill, but that is subject to change in the event of future revelations. Quite how much he gave at the BNP Trafalgar Club fundraising dinner he attended is a matter of speculation.
So when Mr Edmonds says "If you have evidence to support your outrageous accusation that I, or any of the other signatories, have BNP links then you are honour bound to publish it." what he really means is apart from AFBNP donation records and his own personal complicity in a BNP attempt to remove UKIPs leadership.
The end result is that those things which Mr Edmonds claims to be lies are actually true. And as 'any fule no', defending a reputation requires a reputation worth defending in the first place.
Why did you leave the Bank of England again, Mr Edmonds?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)