Latest from UKIP Daily

Dr Tomasz Slivnik: Open Letter to Members

Dear Friends,

We are about to vote in a critically important leadership election. There is a real choice of candidates with very different views on offer. If the right candidate wins, I firmly believe UKIP’s future can again be very bright. If the wrong candidate wins, not only is UKIP finished, so is any possibility that an honest Brexit will happen. So is any chance of any real opposition to the social democratic consensus in the UK, for a very long time. So is any hope for the cause of liberty in the United Kingdom, and, in light of the importance of the UK, so is the cause of liberty across the Western World and indeed the world over.

For years, UKIP was dismissed as a single issue party, although we never were. We were dismissed as racists, fruitcakes and loonies, although we never were. We were always a party of ordinary decent people who merely wanted to free themselves and their fellow men of the oppressive rule by a predatory socialist elite and return to the days of individual liberty, small government, rule of (limited and sensible) law and a world driven by honest dealings and entrepreneurship by private individuals, unhindered by oppressive regulation and taxation. Getting out of the European Union was merely a necessary first step towards achieving this goal; without it, the United Kingdom would forever remain enslaved by the Euro-Soviet.

We believed in the control of the UK’s borders being returned to the UK, and to a level playing field, so that Canadians, Americans, Australians and other nationals of countries with close historical links to the United Kingdom are not discriminated against in favour of citizens of European Union member states, many of which historically were (and in my view, many of which remain) enemies of the United Kingdom. But we never were racists or bigots. If I thought we were, I never would have joined the party.

Just as the public realized the truth and our electoral support peaked at 27%, under the misguided direction of Patrick O’Flynn, Suzanne Evans etc. the party started to change into precisely what we had been accused of being but never were. Our support dropped to 13%. Then, under the catastrophically misguided manifesto of religious bigotry driven by our Deputy Leader Peter Whittle, our support plummeted to below 2%.

The public demand for a sane, libertarian, small government, alternative to the social democratic consensus of LibLabCon (and add to that the Greens, SNP, Plaid Cymru and virtually all the other major and minor parties) is at an all time high. Yet, faced with this open goal – all we needed to do was stick to our traditional values – our professional footballers at the time preferred to run with the ball and score an own goal instead.

With turnout in general elections at historical lows, the biggest voting block is still those who do not vote. Those people had given up, came out of their hiding places to vote for us when we offered a libertarian agenda, and went straight back home to not voting when we betrayed them.

If UKIP is to survive, it is essential that the next leader elected is a libertarian and someone who is more interested in doing the right thing than their own vanity.

If UKIP can achieve this, UKIP will thrive.

Now a few words about some of the candidates.

When Anne Marie Waters‘ candidacy was legally challenged, I vocally supported her right to stand – if she meets the criteria for membership of the party (which in my view, she doesn’t, but our wise Party Chairman disagrees), she is entitled to stand. We cannot manipulate our election rules and cheat to ensure the candidate we want to win is elected, or the candidate we don’t want to win is improperly excluded. Nevertheless, it is my firm hope that Anne Marie Waters is defeated by the intellectual arguments of the other, much better, in my opinion, candidates.

Her election would mean the end of the party. Members would leave, donors would leave, elected representatives would leave, our major creditors would pull the plug, our voters would leave. Membership would be replaced by former members of the EDL and the BNP, UKIP would become EDL/BNP in all but name, and our electoral support would never exceed the <2% we achieved when we pursued the integration agenda during the last general election. That is, assuming our major creditors (i.e. our major donors) would not call in their loans on day one and put us in administration – which I believe would be the case.

No self-respecting businessman could remain associated with the party if AMW were to be leader. I know I could not. What I find most striking about AMW is that she has been able to whip some traditionally very sensible members into an anti-Muslim frenzy. Sensible people – who are entirely aware of the danger of jihadi invasion and want to take a tough line against it – are accused of being politically correct, pandering to the left and of being Muslim appeasers. I have personally been accused of all the above. By sane people. Extraordinary.

It is no use explaining that the real cause of the problem is the corruption of the public sector institutions in the United Kingdom by the KGB agents of influence, placed there during the Cold War, to work for a foreign power and destroy the UK from within, who, and whose disciples still remain there and continue to pervert the law and its application with socialism. 1400 rapes in Rotherham would never have happened if the socialist-corrupted police and child protection services had done their jobs and started making some arrests when the first 14 rapes had taken place, instead of covering them up and colluding with the criminals.

This is not the fault of Muslims, it is a home grown problem – it is a problem of socialism, which a socialist candidate like AMW will never solve. Yes, jihadi invaders are a threat to the national security of the United Kingdom, but they wouldn’t be a threat if the public sector was not corrupted; they are merely taking advantage of the opportunity so created. There is no use explaining that the need for a tough response does not justify turning the majority of Muslims who are law-abiding into second class citizens by virtue of their religion. I deal with CEOs of world leading technology companies who are Turkish and private equity investors from the Arab world on a daily basis. They have PhDs and are polite and decent people. To be able to whip up sensible people into such a frenzy, AMW must be a very dangerous and capable demagogue.

If Anne Marie Waters is the Quick Death candidate, Peter Whittle is the Slow Death candidate. While standing on essentially the same platform as AMW, he is perhaps not quite beyond the pale in the same way as far as our donors are concerned, but under his leadership, the Party would continue to linger on <2% where he personally has pushed us to.

In my opinion, he not only should not be standing at all, but should have joined Paul Nuttall and resigned when he was proven to be the architect of the electoral disaster which was our last general election. Whittle is also the only candidate who has promised to keep Paul Oakden on as Party Chairman and with him the rest of the clique, and the influence of Steve Crowther, which the Party most urgently needs ridding of. This alone should be reason enough not to vote for him.

So long as neither of those two candidates is elected, the party will, in my opinion, survive. I will remain a member of the party and support whichever leader is elected, as long as it’s not one of those two. But if we are looking for a leader who has the chance of making the party thrive – which I think we should be – I believe the short list comes down to two candidates.

Those two options in my view are Jane Collins and her UKIP United team and Henry Bolton. Here I will say that I spent much of this leadership campaign (and other campaigns before it) encouraging all the libertarian candidates to join forces, to put forward a single libertarian ticket so that a libertarian candidate can win and UKIP can forge ahead into a bright future. I urged the candidates to set aside their personal vanity and their personal ambitions, to stop thinking only of themselves being leader, and to form a strong team which can win.

Initially, I was persuading Bill Etheridge and David Coburn to so work together, and then also Ben Walker. Bill then withdrew from the race and endorsed John Rees-Evans, which I was surprised and disappointed by because I had hoped for a more comprehensive deal involving all the libertarian candidates. I was hoping Jane’s team and Henry Bolton would also join forces.

It is very important, in my view, that the next Leader is not only a libertarian, but is someone who can put together a team, appoint the team members to the right positions, and successfully manage this team. Nigel – the greatest hero of our movement, a magnificent orator, someone I admire greatly, a person who can carry the public with his honest and decent message, in my opinion had one failing, and it is this failing which in my view stopped the party from continuing to grow when it did. And that failing, in my opinion, was that while he was a great solo performer, he was never strong at building a team around him and then working with that team. All the people who have done the party such harm were initially Nigel’s proteges. If UKIP is to go from strength to strength, we need a leader who has proven to be able to build a team, to manage a team, to listen to his or her team and to be a team player. Also someone who is willing to set personal ambition and vanity aside for the good of the party and our cause.

I know that Jane Collins was prepared, when forming her team, to not be the top of the ticket, as have all the other members of her team who have stood aside for her, despite the fact that I know many of them really wanted to be leader, and many of them had the potential to be leader. This demonstration that Jane and her team are in it for the cause, and not for themselves, and because they seem to have demonstrated a better ability for team play, is what has persuaded me that they are the right team to be given the chance to lead our party.

Although I wish any other leader, if they get elected (other than the two which I have made clear are beyond the pale for me), the best of luck with their job and I will offer them whatever support I can give them, I nevertheless believe that we the libertarians should unite behind one ticket so that that ticket can win and the party can survive and I believe this ticket is Jane which is why I will vote for her and why I am endorsing her and I hope that some of what I have had to say may persuade you to do the same.

Warmest regards, Tomaž


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

199 Comments on Dr Tomasz Slivnik: Open Letter to Members

  1. My weltanschauung hasn’t changed since I was about 5, by which time it was formed.

    Though I didn’t know the words for those things, I’d consigned “god” to the same container into which I’d respectfully and regretfully deposited Santa the year before. And I was, back then, a cat-loving, anti-authoritarian libertarian, dismissive of left-wing/socialist/communist ideas since they couldn’t possibly work without a massive alteration to basic human nature. I’d concluded that politicians were, by and large, fools, rogues, or both, and that most people were sheep who were too lazy to think.

    Having not experienced such a thing myself, I am therefore very curious about others who experience sea-changes to or in their world view.

    Less curious if this was in respect of their faith; the questioning child down whose throat religion was forced is not unlikely to question and then rebel in later life. Dr Isaac Asimov wrote, “Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived”. I respect the rights of the religiously-inclined to believe – exactly as strongly as they respect my right not to so do.

    On the evidence, it is accurate to describe Anne Marie Waters, an atheist/humanist, as having been a SOCIALIST ACTIVIST – some would add militant/radical lefty too.

    Pro-trades union activity is but one example. I remember the tyranny and blackmail of secondary picketing. I can’t forget the loathing I faced, decades ago, from a few socialists simply for being a successful entrepreneur. That I was, to their certain knowledge, both honest and generous did not exonerate me in their eyes. That my taxes funded their lifestyle did not count for a brass farthing. It was my privilege to pay for their indolent lifestyle and their brood.

    Now, Anne’s manifesto – whoever wrote it – says the opposite about her present views.

    Has it been adequately explained what brought about her epiphany, and when? Could someone direct me to it?

    I get on well with Anne Marie. As readers of UKIPDaily may know, I spent 36+ hours non-stop ensuring that an NEC vote would have kept AMW on the ballot paper, whatever Mr Citizen’s Advice Bureau lawyer may have threatened.

    And for the avoidance of doubt – on the basis of considerable knowledge, I definitely do NOT consider AMW the worst of the 6 serious contenders*.


    * serious = omitting Asteroidal Aidan Powlesland, bless.

  2. @ Tomaz Slivnik
    FYI, selective quotes from a much longer piece are not ‘proof’ of anything.
    Names such as ‘racist’ and ‘bigot’ are easy to throw around, aren’t they? So are words such as ‘misogynist’, but your unapologetically crude reference to a woman’s body, and an apparent hostility to UKIP’s policy to protect little girls from FGM certainly led me to infer that you are one.
    In my reply to you, I did not accuse you of a lie, but careless inaccuracy, which you certainly displayed. Read what you wrote carefully.
    Note: Questions are not accusations.
    If you wish, report me to the party for supporting Tommy Robinson, and for anything else I’ve written that you don’t approve of. It might, though, look like petty revenge on me for not being favourably impressed by your article.

    • Freddy, you make a compelling case, and with grace and good humour to boot.

      In all honesty, I don’t know AMW’s actual “deep down” beliefs about anything other than islam and I can’t say I’ve spent much time agonising over them. Her manifesto, for me, merely ticks the boxes for others.

      She has my vote because of her single-minded strength and courage in tackling the biggest threat to our way of life. If she can raise awareness and build support for her stance on THAT subject, I really wouldn’t care if she hasn’t even read her manifesto.

      AMW will attract massive support, giving us, once again, influence without MPs. Millions of young girls and animals would have reason to be very grateful indeed.

      • Sorry – pushed the wrong reply button. As you might have guessed, this was in response to Freddy’s comment which was immediately above Panmelia’s when I carelessly hit send.

  3. This comment is addressed to Grummy and Donald Duck, neither of whom had a ‘Reply’ button on the posts that appear on 10/9/17 between 3.02pm and 9.06pm. I dare say that everyone is sick of this Tomaz Slivnik thread by now and have moved on to other articles. However, I want to say thank you to Grummy for his support, and sorry to Donald Duck for getting caught in the cross-fire when Tomaz was in a very foul mood indeed. He clearly doesn’t like it if people don’t agree with him, or criticise his opinions and language. Perhaps it will be a while before he ventures an article again.

    • You richly deserve support, so you are very welcome.

      It’s hard to move on from this thread as it offers a captivating, almost horrifying, illustration of Tomas as a one-man slow-motion car crash!

      Almost with every comment now, another layer of veneer appears to fall. To suggest reporting you for retweeting Tommy Robinson is the most pathetic threat I’ve heard since days in the playground. If Tommy has good ideas, or draws attention (as he so frequently does) to newsworthy nuggets of information, must we turn away our eyes lest we be thought “those sorts of people”?

      I had never heard of Tomaz before reading his article and his many arrogant follow-up comments. I think I have learned many things about him, among them that he stands as a libertarian midget within our ranks.

      And Tomaz, before you scream waaycist and run to your UKIP elders, I have no idea of your physical size.

      There have been some terrific comments in this thread and I have learned much from my UKIP colleagues, several of whom appear to be targets for Tomaz-rage. I’m happy to stand with them.

      • Use your head. Panmelia has not only publicly admitted (or rather, proudly bragged) that she is breaching the Party’s social media policy (as described by the relevant section of the Party Rulebook) and insisted she had the right to do so, she has also revealed that AMW is doing the same – something I had not been aware of. I have checked this and it is indeed true. There is no need for anyone to report this. This is a public UKIP-related forum which is regularly read by Crowther, Oakden, NEC members, and occasionally contributed to by (some of) them. Panmelia has herself provided sufficient evidence to accuse herself and AMW and to prove both accusations. It would be totally appropriate for any number of individuals – including the Party Leader, Party Chairman, Party Secretary, General Secretary, Regional Chairman or Regional Organiser, if any of them has read any of this, to use their powers under Article J.3.4 of the Party Rulebook or for the Party Chairman to take disciplinary action, and this time, this would be completely justified and within the rules. The individuals in question would have no one to blame but themselves for any disciplinary consequences (well AMW would probably have Panmelia partly to blame for ratting on her).

    • Panmelia,

      Thanks for your support and please know I fully support you too. This person is behaving just like some in the far left by immediately becoming nasty when he obviously feels he is losing the debate, or does not even want to enter into a reasonable debate. So, he resorts to insults, accusations and even threats, quite honestly he is below contempt, and not worth bothering with really. This is a shame because we have some great debates on this site and personally I have learnt such a lot from others by interacting with them, but he has managed to drag the whole tone down into the gutter IMO.

      My only conclusion I am left with is that when he resigned from the NEC, there most have been an audible sigh of relief to see the back of him, and I have to say at this present time I would feel the same if he was never to comment on here again. But this is an open site to all, so if he does, I will be totally ignoring anything he has to say, as I have no desire to interact with such a nasty and ignorant individual.

  4. CarrieOnCamping // September 10, 2017 at 9:36 pm //

    Oh dear me! Another anti-AMW/JRE mouthpiece! Sorry, but Bolton shot his bolt when he critised the inclusion of AMW. He should have just focussed on what HE would do as leader. So should all the others. UKIP was ALWAYS the radical party, never the sit-on-the-fence party, why are people wanting it to change? UKIPs radical stance made people sit up and take notice. They TALKED about UKIP, for good or bad. Are they talking about it now? UKIP is better as a political pressure group, it will never be elected into power as a political party. Our pressure made the Referendum happen. Our pressure has made sucessive governments change their minds. In Parliament we would be ineffective. If the Islamification continues apace in Britain and other countries, there will BE no other issues to talk about, because that will not be allowed! Do you not understand that? Facebook has just closed down a group that I was on – Freedom of Speech anyone? THAT is now happening in Britain! Do you not WANT UKIP to be able to say what it wants? Do you want another appeaser party?

    • UKIP has always been a proudly and honestly (you may say radically) libertarian party. Not a radical party for the sake of being radical. It is not a radical single issue rent-a-mob. Muslim bashing has never been the domain of UKIP, it was always the domain of EDL and BNP. The most important single objective is still Brexit, and pursuing any other single issue harms that objective. Yes, I do understand but I disagree, there is no need to ask and imply I don’t. No, I don’t want to be ruled by sharia. Yes, I do want to robustly deal with terrorists and rapist. No, I don’t want to treat all Muslims as second class citizens. No, that does not make me an “appeaser”.

  5. There are a number of comments in this thread concerning that most foul of practices: Female Genital Mutilation. In the hope that it might be addressed more robustly than is currently the case, it’s encouraging to note that in June this year the Sentencing Council issued new guidelines for discussion regarding the punishments for the offence (amongst others) of “Failing to protect a girl from the risk of FGM”. Let’s hope that there is now effective progress on this matter because the paper suggests that parents (or carers) of such girls will be held responsible for the girl’s injuries. There can be no mistake here: FGM is an offence of Grievous Bodily Harm with intent. This is an offence that the law regards as the most serious of offences against the person after, of course, manslaughter and murder. It usually carries a long custodial sentence and FGM will fall into this category. Another ‘fashionable’ example of GBH with intent would be acid throwing to the face. The issuing of such guidelines is an interesting development. How can it be determined that the offence has taken place? “The primary object of an efficient Police is the prevention of crime; the next that of detection and punishment of offenders if crime is committed”. This was recognised by the first Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Richard Mayne, and still holds good today, so it is the job of the Police to detect offences but in the case of FGM how are they to do that? As there has never been a successful prosecution for the offence in the UK, it might seem that detection of this particular crime does not rate highly on their list of objectives – but apparently ‘name-calling’ on social media is. The only way for this offence to be detected as far as I can see is by a medic during examination (they are reluctant to report it as they regard it as ‘snitching’)or by instituting a programme to examine girls who are at risk of this offence i.e. those from muslim families. Would this be feasible – maybe one examination when aged say 9 and another age 16 (prior to adulthood)? Such a proposal will surely act as a deterrent to some degree. Should enquiries be made of our local PCCs and Chief Constables as to how seriously they intend to treat this problem in light of this new report and what their detection methods might be?

    • Roger,

      This seems a very sensible approach to his horrible crime and how to help prevent it.

    • Roger, thank you for this new information about sentencing guidelines. The terrible irony, of course, is that every government over the last 32 years is guilty of “Failing to protect hundreds of thousands of girls from the risk of FGM.” Their neglect is worthy of prison time.
      The most important aim is to prevent it happening in the first place and it should be made clear that all ethnic minority girls at risk will be put on an ‘At Risk’ register from birth with regular checks from a health visitor at home, and later at school. There is no need for the children to know what is being looked for. It has to be made clear to the parents and community that evidence of FGM will result in immediate arrest, trials, fines and prison. The child will be taken into care and the family might be deported.

      Only by creating a dedicated task force of health and police professionals whose mission is to stamp out the criminal practice of FGM on girls who are under the protection of British law, will it be ended and civilisation restored to the UK.
      Of course, there will be howls from ‘offended’ minorities and foolish Leftard cultural relativists who care more for PC than little girls’ health, well being, and human rights; but who cares what such morally perverted half-wits have to say? Women’s lives, health and happiness are at stake.

  6. Everything seems to be about the money these days. I remember back to 1990 when I was in London working on Auditing a group and was shocked to discover around 50% of land in London was owned by the Kuwait Royal Family! So they probably own 100% now! So thats why they have so much power over here – London has become dependent on their money!

    • Clive,

      I think the Arabs may have bought us lock, sock and barrel (oil that is).

      • And what do you suggest, that we confiscate the property of all the Arabs in Britain? Ban them from buying stuff? Slaughter them?

      • DD – it’s in the 1995 Barcelona Declaration, which we signed up to. The original document is fairly bland, but sub-committees then cemented the actual detail – Europe and U.K. was given away, with promises that Muslim practices wouldn’t be hindered, or spoken against, and education would be ‘adjusted’. If you research you can find it.

        • Dee,

          Thanks Dee I have already looked it up and read it, so it is a ‘done deal’ it would seem.

        • To coin the phrase
          “Not a lot of people know that”
          Certainly that means me, and I guess another 98.5% of the population.
          Wouldn`t it be more honest of our politicians, particularly the last Home Secretary when replying to questions on the legality of Muslim practices: to preface her/his/zit remarks with the words “I am obliged to make any ruling or comment under the rulings of the 1995 Barcelona Declaration, which do not allow me to “hinder” or “speak against” Muslim practices”
          It sounds to me as though somebody should be calling (LOUDLY) for the government to rescind/abrogate this agreement.

  7. Dear Dr Tomasz, part of any election process is that it is fair an unbiased. The only possible reason you have spent such a long time drafting your letter, is that you seem to be focused on disrupting that democratic process. The facts in relation to Muslims speak for themselves, prior to “Syrian refugees” we never ever had child grooming, beheadings of UK citizens and soldiers. I presume you live and work in London and have never ventured into a UK Prison, a UK court room, or one of the 40+ councils that now have to pray to Allah before they commence their business. If UKIPs financial backers are only willing to fund candidates who support this kind of caveman behaviour, then its says a lot for their own morals and scruples and their intentions to manipulate the democratic process. Whilst it is true that extremism of any kind cannot be tolerated, the pendulum of the British “inclusiveness” to all races has been irrevocably damaged by the behaviour of a “religion of peace” that has clearly now demonstrated that it cannot control its own young men and believes that women are worthless and should be used as nothing more than baby factories no matter if they are children. Any rational man would have imagined that child rape, and be-headings were so embarrassing to a religion that the Mufti’s (leaders) of that religion would have stopped such behaviour by dealing with the perpetrators themselves. Instead there have been various recordings of speeches of hate against all non Muslims, to incite the extinction of any non-believers. Due to a history of USA and European errors and bad judgment, the Arabs have ended up in a position of vast wealth, and this is what is funding the expansion of this “religion” across Europe. Our existing politicians and businesses are beneficiaries of that wealth which is guiding their actions and inactions. It is short term thinking as it will eventually result in the continual rise of child rapes and be-headings of UK citizens – then those leaders and their own families will be at the receiving end of some of these mass executions. Maybe at that moment of death, they will finally come to realize that all that money, and those possessions that they coveted so much during their lives – actually counts for nothing. They may discover on the “otherside” that their life was actually a test of their morals and scruples to see if they could be bought and sold.

    • Clive,

      This is so true it is beyond scary.

    • Your pack of Goebbelsian lies and long rant against a manufactured straw man is unworthy of a reply. No candidate has even remotely suggested that they supported child grooming, beheadings etc. nor have I and you know well that none of us support such things. You are slandering us and spreading lies, deliberately and for the purpose of doing what you accuse me of doing, which is disrupting the democratic process – with lies. I have published an article containing facts and truths, as well as my honestly held opinions. Others have done the same. This is a normal part of a democratic process. Lying and smearing as you do is not.

  8. TO:- Tomaz Slivnik // your post September 9, 2017 at 7:08 pm

    Initially, seeing your attack on AMW and then with little bits here and there which made me think there are some aspects of islam you dont seem aware of, most related to the muslims acting nice and muslim friends/friendly muslims, muslims with qualifications etc, that you seemed unaware of the islamic/muslim practice of deception (various styles of warfare lying).

    Please bear in mind I did not/do not know of you or of your standing or involvement with UKIP but after seeing your post which I copy below, I went and did some research to find out if in fact you were a muslim doing a very common thing with them, disguise ploy, hiding being muslim to spead deception missinformation etc.

    The text:-

    Islam is neither communism nor Marxism. You can argue that many or most or all Islamic-majority countries are authoritarian, but it is a very different sort of authoritarianism to communism/Marxism, and nothing like as malevolent. Sharia is merely rather cruel to those who do not follow its prescriptions. Communism is lawless, frenzied, psychopathic, sadistic and wanton murder and oppression with no rhyme or reason other than a raw thirst for power. Communism murdered over 100 million people in the 20th century alone. All Islamic states throughout the entire history of Islam have not come even close.

    Point 1 you try to make out communism is far more malevolent than islam. – BLATANTLY UNTRUE.

    Point 2 you say sharia is ‘merely rather cruel” to those who do not follow its proscriptions”, then say “Communism is lawless.

    You thus imply islam has laws, in fact it does, sharia which causes all the things in islam, to muslims and against muslims and against non muslims that you ascribe to communism, “frenzied, psychopathic, sadistic and wanton murder and oppression with no rhyme or reason other than a raw thirst for power”.

    point 3 you said “Communism murdered over 100 million people in the 20th century alone. All Islamic states throughout the entire history of Islam have not come even close”.

    THE MOST BLATANT UNTRUTH OF ALL! – Yes communism has murdered millions, to say far more than islam!

    During its initial advances over what was then mosty the christian middle east, and into india, africa etc its estimated that muslims MURDERED around 275 MILLION!

    That was just in the initial stages, after muhamad died within some hundreds of years or so!

    It is now estimated total deaths to be around 4 to 5 hudred million.

    That is just the deaths, millions put into slavery (islam ran the black slave trade, indeed still does but they also ran a white slave trade which they prefer indeed its only a matter of some hundreds of years ago that they raided cornwall and took slaves), millions raped, abused, stolen from and every other depravity the evil islamist mindset takes pleasure in doing when contraints are off and islams law is supreme.

    • Martin: I, a founder member, am happy to confirm that I served with Tomaž on the UKIP NEC ?

    • Martin, an excellent post. I realized when Tomaz posted that, he was misunderstanding the nature of the threat in some ways, because Communists will help Islam into power, and then be ousted – I think that was what happened in Iran?

      • @ Martin and Dee
        An excellent post indeed from Martin, exploding the nonsense written by Slivnik.
        I understand that Tomaz Slivnik had a bit of a reputation on here as a rebel against the NEC, and enjoyed the admiration of those who were disillusioned with the UKIP hierarchy. This latest article and his somewhat aggressive replies to comments, reveals a quite different persona from the reasonable one formerly projected. The fact that he supports Jane Collins speaks volumes.

        Perhaps Slivnik should take the advice offered to John Bickley when he persisted in plying his huge spade to the hole in the ground he had already dug for himself: stop digging!
        Over and out on this thread.

        • Panmelia, you are the person who, when Stephen Lawrence was brutally murdered, said this: “I’m sure his mother still grieves for him but … She risks … boring us all to tears. … The image of Stephen Lawrence has been promoted to sainthood”. You follow and regularly retweet Tommy Robinson on Twitter. You are – not what the liberal elite call a “racist” – but a real racist and a bigot. Despite this, I reply to your contributions in a civil manner, but I believe your latest obnoxious comment warrants pointing this out and the fact that nobody much cares what you think, I certainly don’t.

          • @ Slivnik
            Ah, you care enough to write this riposte because I have bruised your ego. Yet you did not bother to address my criticism of your obscene remark “putting their hands up their daughters’ genitals’ in a much earlier post. You are – not what the liberal elite call a ‘sexist pig’ – but a real woman-hater, a misogynist. And a racist, too, because you clearly don’t care what happens to girls of other races whose elders see fit to chop off parts of their bodies against all precepts of humanity, morality and the human right for one’s body to be sacrosanct.
            You are also, shall we say, ‘economical with the truth’. When Stephen Lawrence was brutally murdered in April 1993, I did not say or write anything, but privately deplored a senseless murder. By April 2013, I had witnessed the following: the undermining of the police by the McPherson Report and the tarring of our whole nation with baseless ‘institutional racism’ claims; the liberal elite’s use of Stephen’s death as a guilt-stick with which to beat the whole nation and close down any discussion of immigration and race-related issues; the elevation of Mrs Lawrence to the House of Lords as a Labour Baroness; and her collusion with the political elite to hold church memorial services at the 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th anniversaries of her son’s death, with PMs and other elite virtue-signallers praying in front of Stephen’s picture as if he were a saint. It was the 20th anniversary exploitation of Stephen’s death by the government as a useful political tool (Cameron & Co bowing their heads) that I couldn’t stand it any longer and posted a comment to that effect on the official, private UKIP Members Only Forum in April 2013, with other contributors agreeing with me. How you have linked my pen name with my real name, which I used in those days, is interesting. Were you the UKIP mole who leaked my and other members’ privacy-protected posts to the Daily Mail in January 2014? Did you got a nice pay-off?
            Any tweets of Tommy Robinson have been retweeted by me from Anne-Marie’s Twitter page, but so what? Tommy is an English hero I am proud to support. Are you bigoted against him?

          • I care a lot about what Panmelia thinks, since I have seen almost nothing but common sense and rational argument from her.

            Now, Tomaz, does that make you think I’m a racist bigot, a member of the BNP, or some other sort of extremist infiltrator? I see through you and your hypocrisy, but that doesn’t make me the problem does it?

            Jane Collins. Don’t make me laugh!

          • 1) Tommy Robinson is a (former) leader of EDL, which is a proscribed organization. Your (re)tweets of his tweets are a serious disciplinary breach of the party rules J.3.5 and J.3.8.

            2) I provided the evidence which proves you are a racist (your brutal and callous comments about Stephen Lawrence’s mother). The evidence that you are a bigot is here for all to see (also a disciplinary breach of Article 2.4 of the Party Constitution, in fact one which disqualifies you from membership). You have no basis for accusing me of being a woman-hater or a misogynist, and I am not one. My female colleagues (including Jane Collins whom I have endorsed for Leader) in UKIP who know me know this full well. Nor am I a racist for which accusation you also have no basis and it is untrue and well known to be untrue.

            3) Your accusations that I lie are untrue and are a gratuitous insult which demonstrate only your own boorishness.

            4) Inspecting young Muslim girls’ genitals was not my idea; it was a proposal by some of our Leadership candidates. I talked about it only to deplore it.

            5) Your accusations that I leaked any information and suggestions I have received a payment from the Daily Mail are not only loony but are in fact libelous.

          • Tomaz,

            With your obsession with the KGB are you also some sort of spy? You seem to have gone out of your way to find things out about people, whether true or not. I suggest you are not the sort of person you portray that you are, and furthermore, turn nasty when cornered, not a very likable trait in an individual I would say.

          • “What a complete twit you are” “you are just plain stupid” “are you also some sort of spy?” “you are not the sort of person you portray that you are” “not a very likable trait” “the answer is not that difficult to see if you just look for it” “your reaction is a bit over the top” “Tomaz may be a bit gullible” “He won’t last long … will he?” “Tomaz is an ‘academic’, I think that may say it all.” “the donors … are not very good businessmen are they?” “Dr. Slivnik are showing they are a part of the problem” “‘UKIP United’ sounds bloody pathetic” to quote you, Donald Duck. And you have provided no evidence for any of these (quite false) statements. I had said nothing nasty about you. So who’s nasty?

            Is this what you call cornering me? Because I have not felt cornered at all. I thought cornering someone meant proving their position to be ridiculous with calm and reasoned argument – none of which I have seen – and not hurling insults and abuse at them unprovoked and ad infinitum and declaring yourself a winner.

            I think I am naturally quite mild mannered in my disposition, but if you continue to hurl obnoxious insults at me, I do know how to give back with both barrels eventually, mostly also calmly but with evidence that you’re not going to like. It’s up to you. Play nice and others will play nice, be mean long enough and you may not like the eventual response.

      • You may well be right that the left will aid the Islamification of Europe and will then be ousted themselves, but perhaps you’re the one who doesn’t understand the threat. During the Cold War, the KGB installed agents of influence in all public sector institutions in the West. These people were, in the language of Yuri Bezmenov, “demoralized” (you will need to watch the interview with him on YouTube if you want an explanation of what the KGB meant by this). This means that they were genuine enthusiastic supporters of the Soviet regime – blind to all the evidence of the misery communism was causing the world over, and to its failures. They hated their host countries, their cultures and their traditional values and they worked for the foreign power. They were not overt saboteurs, or they would have got caught. Instead, they deliberately performed their jobs poorly with plausible excusability as incompetence (by the way who in the current top brass of UKIP does that remind you of). A jihadi invasion is a godsend to these people and their mission. This was a CIA sabotage tactic too, you can read about it in their declassified “Simple Sabotage Field Manual”. These people were KGB’s useful idiots. They were also the first on the KGB kill list, should the Soviet Union ever have taken over. Bezmenov explains it all. Their brainwashing and the design of this infiltration network never was about grabbing power for themselves, it was for the destruction of their host countries to enable the Soviets to take power in the long run – and the Soviets were very patient. Of course the Soviet Union has long ago disintegrated and the KGB as such no longer exists in the same form but what do you think happened to these people, and their intellectual proteges? And who do you think today controls organizations like the Common Purpose, the BBC, the MSM, the Labour Party etc.?

        • Tomaz,

          I am afraid I had to laugh at what you have to say here, you describe yourself as “quite mild mannered” and accuse me of hurling obnoxious insults at you, may I remind you that it was you who covertly accused me of not being a member but instead belonging to the EDL, BNP etc, which I assured you and others is absolutely not true.

          It was you who used the comment “putting their hands up young girls genitals” not me, which is crude beyond belief. However, you should have also noted that in answer to one of your comments further down in this thread, I actually thought you were making valid and sensible points and I agreed with you.

          I don’t understand your comments about “playing nice and you are about to let me have it with both barrels, and coming back with evidence I am not going to like”, but anyway I think I will just let that go as being a bit childish.

          I think possibly you and I either need to start again or just admit we are never going to agree and ignore each other, it is up to you.

          I will admit I have lost my temper with you not only for the things you have said about me and to me, but more for the way you have treated one of our most appreciated commentators Panmelia. I don’t always agree with everything she says but she is entitled to say it IMO on this site and I think you will find many others agree with me. But issuing insults and threats because we do not agree with one another is not the way forward, I hope you would agree with that. So I feel the only way forward is to apologise to each other for words that have called offence and move on, as I said earlier it is up to you now. I am sure like me you feel you could do without this hassle, as I am still trying to decide who to vote for in the leadership campaign.

  9. If AMW were to be elected then I would join UKIP. It is unlikely that I would join if another were to be elected.

    I’m sure that many people are fed up with the creeping islamisation of our country and would support her. We must wage war against the MSM as well as our inept government in any event so why not start off as we mean to go on?.

    • JackT, thank you for your honesty in being upfront about not being a UKIP member. No doubt many other people – some Disney character comes to mind as a prime example – who comment here are EDL, BNP, Antifa and other leftist agents provocateur, but they pretend to be good UKIPpers (some may also nominally be UKIP members but are primarily working for the interest of other organizations).

      • Tomaz,

        If you are referring to me you are completely wrong, I have been a member since 2013 and have never had anything to do with EDL, BNP or any other organisation. What a complete twit you are, to think I used to be quite impressed with your letters and comments but it turns out you are just plain stupid, never mind it takes all sorts.

  10. Make no mistake, a huge chunk of those who voted ukip in it’s hayday did so agreeing with what ukip stood/stands for and it’s aims, particulary relating to borders and who we let in (and who we could not put out), also sick of the “enabling” PC, voted also with the understanding of the threat, an extremely real threat, of islam.

    Many changed to a tactical vote believing T May re brexit and also many were fooled by comrade conbin’s lies, ignorant of labours siding with islam, particularly with terrorists re conbin and co.

    Ignorant also of labour being a main facilitator of islamisation and that communists often side with muslims due to the common goal of bringing down democracy.

    A wishy washy view, quiteness re islam etc has been a problem as well as more recently talking of a burkha ban then making a statement that showed he did not have much of a clue re islam., left many dissalusioned.

    AMW is not ignorant of islam and I strongly think will invigorate membership.

    Nazi bnp types might be attracted but we do not give them a voice.

    It saddens me however that many equate the majority of EDL, decent concerned working class non racist people with the likes of evil BNP.

    MSN, uaf, PC bricade etc really suceeded with their missinformation it seems.

    Some seem to on the one hand say they see islam is a promblem then go onto say something that only shows a blindness of the problem!

  11. To Thomas and ALL those that use a nice muslin narrative including of nice ones with qualifications.

    When they are questioned by someone “with knowledge of Quran and hadith they prove themselves to be using warfare lying.

    ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!!!

  12. AMW supporters seem to think that the rest of us don’t have problems with literal implementation of the Koran, ghastly behaviour of some Muslims and the tendency of the establishment to turn a blind eye. Simply not true, we’re as concerned about it as you. We just don’t believe in religious conflicts and wars of words as a way forward . Been tried before and only makes things worse. Calm and clear thinking, tempered with reason, negotiation, proper use of existing law and common sense is.
    Don’t use anger as a tool to turn UKIP into a rabble of hate driven fools with no hope of ever gaining influence or power.

    • Since I usually disagree with your comments (whether explicitly or not), I thought I would respond to this one which gives us much common ground.

      Perhaps the critical point is “proper use of existing law”. If only we would do this now, we would have no need for a strident change-agent like AMW. But we don’t: the police are steeped in Common Purpose and the MSM cover up anything that challenges their agenda.

      I think we need AMW in order to make people aware of those aspects of Islam that lie outside their normal lives if they are sufficiently fortunate to live in the shires or the countryside.

      Ultimately, so that we can, in practice rateher than theory, achieve proper use of existing law.

      We need AMW to raise awareness. Awareness will garner more support. Support builds influence. Influence is power.

      • G. I agree. It’s not about anger. It’s about recognition.

        There seems to a tipping point for some who recognise the problem but cannot, will not or dare not confront it.

        How many decades has it taken to get this far? And how much longer do they think it’ll take?

        Tomorrow’s adults have no bloody idea, my kid and her friends included who are nearly 15. AMW wants to see uk law applied unilaterally. Period. Good.

        I suggest the rest of us need to get behind every effort to undo the decades of indoctrination that are leaving our kids helpless while we still can. They simply have no idea what they will be dealing if our generations cannot expose it.

        I don’t see the BBC queuing up with relevant Plays for Today any longer. Do you?

  13. The logic of the original article is flawed in so many places that I can only hope it serves the cause of AMW by the law of unintended consequences. .

    I’m a theoretical physicist by qualification and I recall that creating a hypothesis that resulted in a demonstrable absurdity should provoke a review of the analytical steps and the assumptions behind them.

    Jane Collins as leader is clearly absurd. Laughably so, in fact.

    I like AMW’s view that the party is on a stronger footing if it raises a million one-pound donations rather than a one-million pound donation from an “interested party”.

    I agree with the sentiments of others on this page who believe it’s AMW or bust, and I don’t care who leaves or joins the party so long as it gains traction in tackling the insidious rise of a poisonous culture.

    If you don’t think Islam is the current greatest threat to our way of life, you don’t understand Islam.

    • I think that the ideology based on postmodernism and Marxism that dominates our universities, which has been indoctrinated in students who have gone into media, politics and even the justice system is a greater threat partly for the destructive force in its own right, but also because it makes discussion of the religion of peace socially hard and even a criminal offence.

      I suggest that tackling the issue you write about requires tackling this political ideology too.

      • Thank you for this response. I wholeheartedly agree with what you’ve said, and indeed I have tried in “pub conversations” to put across succinctly exactly the points you make.

        Alas, I do not have your eloquence. With your permission, I shall gladly use what you’ve said in my frequent “elevator pitches” to those whose eyes have not yet been opened to the threats we face right now.

        My belief is that we are best served by electing AMW to raise awareness of the islam issue. My hope is that by so doing, we are collectively able to address the underlying causes of its rapid growth in the UK – exactly those causes that you have described so well.

    • Let’s run an experiment to test your “Jane Collins as leader is clearly absurd. Laughably so, in fact.” hypothesis: A good scientist is always willing to be proved wrong when the experimental results disagree with the hypothesis. ?

      • If you thought you could fly and I didn’t, I’d be happy for you to prove me wrong by trying a leap from the top of a cliff.

        Always willing to admit when I’m wrong, but I’m wary of taking catastrophic long-shots on the basis of evidence suggesting it would be suicidal.

        A party led by Jane Collins would be dull, uncontroversial, ineffective, unattractive, unstable, and terminally damaged.

        Let’s not do that experiment. Let’s back AMW to give us a high profile leader to champion this country’s culture and attract thousands of new members who share her vision.

        • Gummy,

          You have hit the nail on the head re ‘UKIP United’, we will be laughed off the planet, I know she means well but best sticking to being a MEP where she cannot do too much damage.

  14. Jane Collins is unfit to be Leader. Her UKIP United press conference had no more than fifteen attendees. She is uninspiring, bland, and incapable of increasing our support.

    Anne Marie Waters or bust.

  15. Howard Keating // September 9, 2017 at 6:02 pm //

    For those interested: Currently (6.00pm) on JRE’s Facebook page:-

    Live streaming from Belfast – Anne Marie Waters (currently speaking), John Rees-Evans and David Kurten.

    • Howard,

      Thanks, I have watched it but am I the only one getting bored of them now? They keep saying the same things at every one, I wish they could start coming out with different comments now such as things which are happening now ie: what happened in Sheffield to the YI’s cancelled conference, recent rape cases of under age girls by you know who. Future marches against terrorism and implementation of Sharia through the back door, etc, etc.

      There are loads of topics they could be talking about relevant to the public who they want to vote for them, instead of talking about themselves all the time, and I am not sure that the public will be up in arms about ‘cultural marxism’ as it may sound a bit alien to them and not exactly ‘bread and butter’ stuff they are familiar with.

  16. ‘The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction’

    I must admit I have been waiting for an opportunity to use this Blake quote, and I think it is quite appropriate here. It is my belief that the analysis in this article is wrong.

    Clearly one of the main causes for a drop in support at the 2017 Elections was the absurd slogan of putting ‘country before party’ and following that up with a policy of advising supporters to back other parties. I believe the candidate you blamed for a drop in support was actually against that policy, so the criticism is at fault.

    To counter a drive, determination and passion with some sort of ‘intellectual argument’ I believe misses the whole point of gaining public support in outing the allaphont and any other injustice in the room.

    Anyone reading this article would be puzzled, given the full campaign manifesto of the candidate mentioned. If one mentions any of the philosophical labels, such as libertarianism or even cultural Marxism, to the person in street it will mean zilch, which probably means it does mean zilch. People want answers, they want to know why they are being cheated every way they look.

    No more same old same old, no more procrastination, no more prevarication, no more obfuscation., just questions and answers. Of course, this is just my opinion and we should look at all perspectives, so thank you for the article.

  17. I have not yet heard anything from AMW,making negative comments on other candidates? It’s Ann Marie for me.

    Iraqi Asylum Seeker in Derby on trial for child rape. His victims included vulnerable young children; some were passed around at rape parties organised by Afghan asylum seekers.This has taken FIVE YEARS to come to court.
    Once again inaction of police and social workers raise serious questions about a cover up.

    • NO END IN SIGHT (apologies for the typo above)

      • I cannot for the life of me understand the sang froid of decent members like Iceni and Dr Slivnik who do not recognise the extremity of culture clash leading to the casual and commonplace rape of 12 year old children by these aliens who are here without any moral value whatsoever.
        If it were my children I would have been in court as I would have decided to deal with the matter in a ‘blunt direct fashion’ no matter the cost to me. And I would have been proud of it.

        • I have visited several Islamic countries. I know that all Muslims are not the same. Take out your frustration on the law enforcement agencies who fail to deal with criminal acts, not on individuals who know that the election of the wrong candidate will quickly and finally destroy our party.

          • I know they’re not all the same as well. But there are far too many happily basking in the thrall of Islam while it remains unchallenged by the authorities. Have you been to Burnley or similar lately?
            We can thank Blair for giving it legs and AMW is very clear that Islam is her target but
            do you really see the current political establishment do anything to stop this curse without Anne and friends rattling their cage?

          • It is not Muslims in Islamic countries that is the issue here; it is Muslims in non-Islamic countries who cause problems – always. They are unable to accept any rule of law that opposes the teachings of the evil religion and want to impose it’s own rules on everyone.

        • @CK
          Sang froid? More like bloody indifference. If the depraved rape of white girls and the perverted mutilation of muslim girls doesn’t set your teeth on edge to an unbearable degree, what the hell does? I will support the person who is as angry about it as I am and who wants to replace the gutless sponges who masquerade as politicians, police chiefs, Labour councillors, social workers, judges, CPS et al ….That person is AMW, forget the rest.

        • CK,

          I agree, Iceni and Dr. Slivnik are showing that they are part of the problem I am afraid, unlike you and I they do not appear to be outraged by these monsters amongst us. Do they accept it as part of modern day life in Britain today along with terrorism, grooming gangs, Halal, FGM, subjugation of women, thousands of mosques some of which encourage hate speakers, 1000’s of sheep/goats throats slit in peoples back gardens and nothing done by the RSPCA about it during this Eid, young girls as young as 5yrs having to wear the hajib, members of the public being arrested for so called ‘hate speech’ against one specific religion.

          I could go on but I think that is enough to get your goat (poor goats it is them that get it really, usually with a blunt knife and some blood thirsty c**t wielding it) for the moment, but all this seems to have passed both Iceni and the Dr. by. Never mind leave them to live in their cozy little world of indifference until one day the truth crashes right into it, in it’s blood drenched and sadistic glory. Unfortunately for them that is what it will probably take.

          I also agree with you if anyone was to do this to a member of my close family, they or their family would be dealt with in as you say ‘a blunt direct fashion’, by me.

          • Absolutely right. Icini and Slivnik do not have a clue about what goes on in Muslim infested areas of the West which have been systematically invaders by hordes of terrorists and their supporters.

            UKIP United is such a joke. Not a chance that they take over the party. Slivnik fails to mention that David Coburn was such a failure as London Regional Chairman, that he was sent to Scotland to be an MEP candidate in 2014 due to his incompetence. Why would we want him as Deputy Leader? UKIP Scotland is his fiefdom and doesn’t even have 300 members. They could barely find any parliamentary candidates in 2017.

            Most of the MEPs need to go, Oakden needs to go, Crowther needs to go, and AMW is needed as Leader.

          • Byron,

            You are always blunt and to the point and I know you well! But we have to be, and you are absolutely right, looks like we need a good old clear out. David Coburn is too old fashioned and farcical to be any where near the leadership of this party.

        • Byron: I am Scottish, and have had dealings with UKIP Scotland in the past. I think ANYONE in UKIP would find that brief a difficult one! Even Nigel (especially Nigel, given the warm welcome he received last time he visited)…

          • Rob,

            I have been informed that David Coburn has worked hard in Scotland to get where he has and I have no reason to doubt it, but he never gives up reminding us of it, it gets a bit wearing after a while I’m afraid.

  19. Reading the article, the tension rose as candidates were dismissed. Who would be the chosen one? David Kurten? No. John Reese-Evans? No. Henry Bolton? No.

    Jane Collins. Okay. Hang on, did I read that right?

  20. Anne Marie is a Socialist (says Tomasz), and Socialists have caused the Jihad problem. (Not neccesarily anything to do with islam itself he implies.)

    But Anne Marie is also opposed to the Jihad problem and can explain why and what steps to take. So Anne Marie must therefore be a bigot, as well as a Socialist says Tomasz.

    While Tomasz is going to solve the Jihad problem, by opposing Anne Maries opposition to it.

  21. Calling for an overt libertarian brand for UKIP, as this letter does, would be as much of a dead end as anything else. Libertarianism attracts a few young men, only.
    I’m conflicted about this vote. Whittle or Waters? The party has to sidestep the MSM, which will never give it an inch. Whittle is the safest candidate from that point of view, but that’s hardly a reason to vote for him. I think he’s sound in his views but he doesn’t have the star quality.
    It’s true that AMW is polarising, which means easily unlikeable ( I think to women particularly). But I’ll probably vote for her. We have to point towards a country beyond Brexit, and the fundamental feature of it will be responsibility rather than rights, facts rather than feelings. Life has to be made harder for the irresponsible and we’ve all been irresponsible to an extent. It isn’t a fluffy sort of a vision and AMW isn’t a fluffy sort of person, but the hour for this is here. It might be realised in a small government capitalist way, it might have socialist elements.
    But there’s no way forward that won’t scare the horses.

  22. I am still a member and have a vote. I joined UKIP because it represented my views. When/if it ceases to represent those views I will leave.

    I agree that we have a problem with Islam but I do not think that it is best dealt with by singling out it’s adherents for abuse.

    AMW used to represent a group called One Law for All and I believe that this is where we should position ourselves. Most of our problems have been caused by politicians who have politicized our public services because they are afraid of causing offence to any minorty group you care to mention. I call it the tyranny of the minorities.

    Jane Collins and the team do not deny the problems we face but far from demonising minorities they speak out and work to get things changed. This is the action I require from my party leader – on all topics.

    I regret to say that I think our empahsis will change should AMW be elected leader – and in a manner which I will find myself unable to support – which will bring about my resignation.

  23. Tomaz, you obviously spent much time constructing your piece and it obviously goes to the heart of what you are all about. Fair play my friend. Your direct unambiguous openness should be applauded.

    I am sure you will therefore allow me to respond in an equally unambiguous open fashion, in true libertarian style.

    You and your comments place you very much in that quite popular club of member’s that I talk of who are deluded with grandeur, wearers of rose tinted glasses of past highs and most important of all, lacking of a finger on the pulse of what is happening in the minds of ordinary people today.

    You obviously need reminding that since June 24th 2016 we have made a right hash of things. To blame our trouncing at the polls this year on one aspect of our manifesto is ludicrous of you and, quite revealing actually.

    I am “a self respecting” and may I add, relatively successful, businessman. When things do not work in my business, I change the record. UKIP, right now has the opportunity via Anne Marie Waters offer to us to be our Leader, to change the record.

    You label Anne Maries campaign as an “anti-Muslim frenzy” and I assume you include us supporters of her as frenzied ! What naive rubbish you write.

    The lady has massive growing support from within and without the Party. Accept it nay embrace it. She is the future.

    • Tomaž Slivnik // September 9, 2017 at 4:10 pm //

      No, we have been making a right hash of things since much before then, indeed ever since 2014, when we adopted Patrick O’Flynn and Suzanne Evans’s socialist agenda. I have posted below polling figures which prove this, and which also prove exactly what effect that “one aspect of our manifesto” had on our poll performance.

      I am delighted to hear that you are a successful businessman. AMW will need your money if she wins the Leadership. Is this a promise then that you will donate the £400k to the party which will be needed overnight when the outstanding loans are called in if she wins? Because no one else will, and the idea that new members can be recruited who will do this is ludicrous. Many members will leave instantly and I wait with baited breath to see how many new ones will be recruited and how quickly by the time the party goes into administration 24 hours later.

      Thank you for your very kind compliment calling me deluded with grandeur, a wearer of rose tinted glasses and lacking a finger on the pulse of what is happening in the minds of ordinary people, and writing naive rubbish. Your wonderful manners speak loudly about your character, are quite revealing actually and should be applauded. Perhaps I shall adopt the nickname of Deluded and Out of Touch Rose Tinted Spectacle Wearer and Writer of Naive Rubbish in my future posts in your honour.

      • Tomaz we will all chip in what we can. And I do think this harping on about the fact that we are literally being blackmailed to vote a certain way, according to you and Peter Whittle, makes me question whether UKIP is a Libertarian Party or a bought and paid for dictatorship. I am sure the donors are decent, and not those sort of people. They may not re-invest, but they wouldn’t instantly pull the plug – I think you bring their good names into disrepute. If you are right, then I too am right about dictators.

        • The people you are accusing of blackmail are actually two donors who have donated, in one case, millions, and in the other at least many hundreds of thousands. The party has spent money beyond our means and we kept going back to them over and over and eventually they said hang on a minute, we’ve already given you tons of money, what are you doing with it, we can give a great deal but not as much as you’re spending, here’s a donation and a loan but you have to pay the loan part back some time. They have not made any threats, they have been extremely generous and patient. But if an infiltrator leader turns the party into something they cannot support and cannot be associated with, what do you think they will do? Stick with the party? Convert the loans into donations? Pull another one. And if you’re going to hurl this sort of abuse at them, I would think twice before donating any more if I were them.

          • Sadly, abuse is all I’ve come to expect from certain people during this leadership contest. Surely some respect for the rights of those who do not wish to support AMW would be in order. It would seem not.

          • I’m not accusing the donors of blackmail, Tomaz – I’m saying that you do our donors a disservice or worse by stating above “is this a promise that you will donate the £400k to the Party, which will be needed overnight” – “overnight when the outstanding loans are called in” – read what I said.

          • Tomaz,

            Excuse me, but are you saying that the donors are happy with their investments in the party during the last 12 months, if they are then they are not very good businessmen are they?

          • Just to remind you what was rehashed months ago, folks – the very generous loans are NOT immediately callable.

            Should a new leader fail to get on with the gentlemen in question, for whatever reason, there would be more than enough time for the new leader to make alternative arrangements, or, if other efforts regrettably failed, for the board of directors to address the problem of the leadership…

            Should it come to that, and I stress I hope NOT, the loans would still be in place. So there is no short-term need to worry about them.

      • Dear Tomaz
        You have my sympathy. J Wyatt (above) put so much pressure on me to vote for AMW that I found it necessary to finally disassociate myself from my local branch (of which he is also a member and, worryingly, the local PPC). He blamed me for the fact that he wouldn’t accept my refusal to support his chosen leadership candidate.
        He is argumentative, doesn’t respect anyone else’s right to have a different opinion and, in my experience, is something of an arrogant bully boy. As a result, my husband (not a party member but a long term UKIP voter) has said he will never vote UKIP again.

        I will never vote for Mr Wyatt (or ‘Jackboot Jeff’ as I now think of him) which means I won’t vote UKIP in any future GE or by-election if he is the PPC.

        He certainly does need to learn some manners but I doubt that will ever happen.

        So far as the money AMW is likely to need, I am sure Mr Wyatt will be happy to sell his Aston Martin to help fund the agenda for his political beloved.

        Kind regards.

        • Dear Brenda,

          Thank you for your kind words and support. I am sorry to hear about the way you have been treated. I hope common sense will prevail and that a sensible Leader will be elected who will both ensure that the Party does not become a party of frenzied bigots foaming at the mouth and screaming intolerance at anyone who dares question their claim that AMW is the Messiah.

          There will be very few people in UKIP who don’t realize that Europe is becoming Islamified and who do not oppose the political establishment’s failure to deal with terrorism, and there are certainly none such among the leadership candidates. But if you as much as dare point out that not all Muslims are criminals and that the law non-enforcement is not the fault of Muslims but of the corruption in the public sector, you get called a Muslim appeaser, a Dhimmi, a tool of the left, of being politically correct and of being afraid of being called a racist. Funnily enough by bigoted, jackbooted left wing AMW supporters like the friend you describe. She has managed to whip up even normally sensible people into an impatient and intolerant frenzy where they are incapable of hearing any arguments and reply with their stock intolerant message no matter how many times and in how many ways you try to politely put forward your argument. I believe that many of them are in fact agents provocateur for the EDL, BNP, Antifa, the Labour Party and other left wing organizations, whether they are UKIP members or not (I suspect many are not).

          Hopefully a decent person will win and we will get our party back. If that happens, I hope you and your husband can vote for UKIP again. Otherwise, I will join you in dropping my support for the party!

          Best wishes

          • Tomaz,

            I think your reaction is a bit over the top if you do not mind me saying so, but I do have sympathy for Brenda and her husband, as no one should feel bullied into voting for someone else’s preferred candidate. But you are free to vote for whoever you want, and we are only talking about one bully here, you cannot paint all AMW’s supporters being like him.

        • …my my how things change.

  24. I would urge ALL members to PLEASE, whatever the result, NOT resign your membership of the party if your preferred candidate doesn’t win.

    UKIP is needed now more than ever and I would ask all members to give whoever is elected leader a chance – at least 6 months in my opinion –
    and just ignore the media coverage, which in any case will blow over even if the ‘extreme’ candidate wins.

    Public opinion is NOT in tune with MSM and the new leader must be given a chance to get their message across to the public.

    • Nice thought Nick but it seems rather too late now, people are already leaving in droves and one way or another a split seems unavoidable. Either the AMW people will leave or the rest of us will and UKIP will become a sort of mild version of BNP/EDL. We stand a chance if Bolton or Curtis wins, otherwise that’s it.
      Just think how much time and money we would save by refusing to support a lost and misguided cause.
      Not to mention the Brexit the establishment would be free to impose on the country without a viable UKIP.
      All a very sad end to a glorious battle but a lost war.

  25. Ridiculous piece. So it’s not Muslim men that raped and abused all those girls. Apparently it’s either the Russians or the KGB or even Anne Marie herself who is to blame. Also please justify your claim that she is a nasty socialist in your eyes. As for supporting Jane Collins it would help if people could be assured that she won’t be declared bankrupt if elected. ( Yet another stick for the party to be beaten with by the media ). Or did she already pay the £385,000 in damages and court costs. I can’t find an answer to that particular one.

    • @ Mark
      Yes, it is ridiculous. And so is supporting Jane Collins who shouts potty comments out loudly and demands to know if AMW has a daughter when she knows fine well she has not. This was in a row over FGM, which I have detailed elsewhere on ukipdaily.
      We all know that socialism, cultural/post-modern marxism, communism or whatever one wants to call it is a truly rotten system, but the USSR and Iron Curtain came tumbling down with the Berlin Wall. Belief in it lasted only 100 years, although the deluded Western disciples try to keep it alive by betraying their countries. Maybe the decline in communism started to set in when Stalin popped his clogs c1953. It hasn’t lasted very long in the wider scheme of things.
      Whereas islam has been going for 1400 years and criminal madmo never dies, probably because he didn’t exist in the first place, and remains firmly lodged in indoctrinated brains as a model for male sexist behaviour and paedophilia.
      Blaming muslim rapes and other barbaric misogyny on communism is bizarre. The only connection I can see is the Labour penchant for corrupt muslim votes, which means they deny or ignore the patriarchal oppression of women. The Labour party is crammed with mouthy feministas moaning about VAT on tampons and ‘bodyfascism’ but they don’t seem to notice muslim women and girls being treated like s**t.

      • Panmelia, my local MP happens to be Labour’s Jess Phillips, a supposed ‘champion of female rights’ and here is an article from her own website about how she has reinstated some APPG group on the subject of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM):

        I have not long ago sent her an email asking her to explain her position regarding the ‘Great Repeal Bill’ three-line-whip, as well as her thoughts on the treatment of fellow Labour MP Sarah Champion, the deselection of Amina Lone and allegations of 6000 cases of child abuse in neighbouring Sandwell.

        I don’t expect to get a response.

        • @ StuartJ
          I wouldn’t put Foghorn Jess in charge of a group looking into ‘Finding your a**e with both hands’, let alone FGM. She’d better watch it though; any suggestion to Corbyn that it is only ethnic minorities, including muslims who commit this vile crime against their daughters and she’ll be whistling in the wilderness along with Sarah Champion. Corby gets upset if you tell him the truth and threaten his diversity god.

          • Yes Panmelia, Corbyn does not seem to mind a bit of FGM and grooming gangs of underage white girls going on does he? but I bet he is getting worked up about the Rohingya’s plight though.

          • Panmelia,

            Do you remember when ‘Foghorn Jess said on QT about the behaviour of some men in Birmingham on a Friday and Saturday night being comparable to what happened in Cologne a fewg xmas’s ago? Well, it turns out she was right because she must have known about these ‘Asian men abusing young girls, and there was me thinking she was exaggerating the facts.

            But she omitted to tell us it is scores of violent men with hundreds of young girls many under age, oh, and that most of the men are of Pakistani origin, but I suppose she just forgot that bit.

        • Stuart,

          Ask her why we have to keep having ‘think tanks’ on something which is quite straightforwardly against the law! As AMW’s says it is simple: just implement the law and prosecute the perpetrators, Oh, I forgot you cannot do that as this is a sensitive cultural practice mainly carried out by muslims. How silly of me to forget that they mostly seem to be exempt from British law and only answerable to sharia law, as this is viewed as a domestic issue.

          Jess Phillips seems to bat for both sides if you ask me, one minute she is running Pakistani men down and the next sucking up to them, maybe has something to do with her voting public, but I am just guessing there.

          What amazes me is how quiet all the Labour ‘luvvie ladies’ have been re Sarah Champian and Amina Lone, considering the sisterly support they are supposed to be giving each other.

          • @ DD
            No I haven’t forgotten Dhimmi Jess airily dismissing the Cologne attacks, along with other fake feministas making excuses as gross and insulting as hers. But I don’t believe she was referring to Pakistani muslim groomers and rapists, whether she knew about them or not. No, this false feminist was implying that white British men grab, grope, poke, assault and rape white British women as part of their fun on a Saturday night in Birmingham. She didn’t present a shred of evidence for this, naturally, but even if there was a kernel of truth in it she omitted to mention that such sex pests are well aware that what they were doing is WRONG and SHAMEFUL and ILLEGAL and PUNISHABLE. Which is more than the islamic ignorant pr***s in Cologne knew, because they’ve been brought up to regard all women not shrouded in a black blanket as whores. So Merkel let these Neanderthals into her country, obviously, because she’s an anti- white German commie, and globalist muslim-fan.

            I’m not in the least surprised that there was no sisterly support for Sarah Champion and Amina Lone. Leftards always put the rights of women way, way below ‘cultural relativism & enrichment of diversity’ on the PC scale of priorities. I know that from personal experience.

      • Well said, Mark. No histrionics just the facts. Tomaz, on the other hand, seems to be unsettled, as if he’s had a prod in the kidneys which he should have anticipated, but didn’t.

  26. Tomasz Slivnik: “AMW… is an anti-Muslim bigot.”

    OED: “Bigot: A person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.”

    52% of Muslims think homosexuality should be illegal.
    39% of them think wives should always obey their husbands.
    22% want Sharia law in the UK.
    3% agree somewhat with suicide bombers.
    1% agree completely with suicide bombers:

    The number of UK Muslims is doubling every 12 years:

    That will lead to a Muslim majority in the UK some time between 2040 and 2060:

    Most Muslims rarely attend the Mosque and just want a quiet life, just like most Christians. But that won’t stop the hard cases imposing sharia law once Muslims are the majority of British voters. AMW is the only politician in the UK who is talking about even slowing that process down. If that makes her intolerant of those wanting Sharia law and giving passive or active support to jihadis, colour me as intolerant too.

    • By Jove, Keith, you own a dictionary. I never would have guessed that from your other comments below. I had already inferred that you were intolerant, without the need to read all of this.

      Of course, homosexuality used to be illegal in the UK until quite recently, and Christians here also used to believe that wives should obey their husbands – again until quite recently. So British people have been intolerant bigots for most of their history too, according to you. It’s a sorry sight to see someone so ashamed of their own history.

      Just because some of those you are bigoted against are also bigots, does not make you not a bigot.

      • I note you fail completely to engage with my point: non-Muslims face a dark future in the UK by the middle of this century unless policies change radically. It is not bigoted to point that out and to say things have to change. AMW is the only candidate I have heard doing that.

      • Isn’t that the point Tomaz?

        The UK took about 100 years and 2 world wars to start lightening up, became an ever increasing bastion of normality that finally helped undermine the authoritarian regimes of Eastern Europe which you know a bit about, and now when we thought we would all live happily ever after, we find we are the target, again, of another evil creed, aided and abetted by the world and his dog.

        The Uk doesn’t do bigots. We’re British. We laugh at great dictators, play rugby and cricket, baffle the world with our collective stupidity and drive on the left.

        We’ve got a bit rusty with satire just now but it’ll come back. The worm’s turning. Can’t you feel it?

        • If you think the authoritarian regimes of Eastern Europe have been defeated, you are missing the point. Perhaps you should read Golitsyin’s book The Perestroika Deception. The Perestroika was not about the fall of communism, it was about communism changing its skin and taking over the world. Which it has done. You think political correctness and the social democratic consensus of the liberal elites is a spontaneous phenomenon? It is not. It is the result of decades of infiltration of the West’s political and public sector institutions with their agents of influence. Their disciples now run the likes of Common Purpose, the BBC, the MSM, the FCO, the police, etc. This is why the laws don’t get enforced. These people are not loyal to Britain. They allow their useful tools – like Muslim jihadi invaders – to destroy Britain but it is their deliberate inaction that is the real threat. They have been waiting patiently as sleepers for such a useful tool and now they have one. But they are the kings and queens on the chessboard of Britain’s enemies (in this case within), the jihadis are merely the pawns. And the Muslims peaceful majority is not a guilty party at all.

          • Dr T, I don’t disagree with if a word of this. So why the hostility to AMW? A socialist who wants to abolish inheritance tax !?! I can live socialists like that, they’re not the ones I grew up alongside.

            Her weapon is truth isn’t it? Exposure. And indomitable courage. Irish style. The stuff you’re talking about has taken decades to instill but the pace has rapidly increased in the last 20 years or so. And the visual impacts of Islam is the most recognisable part of it, for the vast majority.

            I left school 46 years alongside a man now ruining the BBC. It’s not new. But the useful tools as you put it, the visual symbolism of Islam, Sharia coming to a town near you soon, that is starting to motivate people.

            And that’s the stuff AMW wants to target, the simple impacts. She preaches Equality before the law, gender equality, she fights for the rape victims, challenges corrupted authorities, the MPs getting shouted down for telling the truth.

            What %age of the electorate can even spell common purposd let along define it? Not many I’d suggest.

            So, as the barman said to the horse, re AMW, why the long face?

            And what’s your preferred alternative ?

          • Tomaz,

            At last you aew beginning to talk some sense here but the Muslims peaceful majority will do as their masters dictate because they are so frightened of the consequences if they don’t. In many ways they probably see the danger much more clearly than we do because they have been under its thumb for years.

    • Hi, Other polls show much higher figures in those sections and include others such as how many would not report muslims planning terrorism etc and its shocking.

  27. Purple blood runs in my veins // September 9, 2017 at 1:10 pm //

    Anyone who goes for a curry, Tomasz, is supporting Halal torture of animals.

  28. Regarding the question of funding UKIP – which we keep being threatened will be a major concern if we vote for AMW, this is my assessment, I might be wrong – happy to be corrected.

    Jane Collins and UKIP United (Remember Paul, the Unity candidate!) are funded by a major and kind donor – was he the one that funded Suzanne last time round, or was that someone else. I’m afraid I haven’t kept abreast of these things – it didn’t, at the time, seem important.

    David Kurten is endorsed by one of our recent donors Arron Banks – might that be significant? David has said he would be happy to work with Henry Bolton.

    Henry Bolton is endorsed by Nigel Farage. Henry has said he would be happy to work with David Kurten. Might that too be significant?

    So we have a group comprising David, Henry, Arron and Nigel. Could it be that if either David or Henry win Arron might become a donor once again, and is that why he hasn’t started a new Party yet?

    We have another group led by Jane, funded by – I’m sorry, is it Alan Bowen? I apologize for not being sure. Might this group include Peter Whittle, who seems to be in good standing with our donors, who haven’t so far ‘pulled the plug’.

    So might this mean that our major funders, whoever they turn out to be, wiould still be in a position to influence the future direction of UKIP? I only ask because both Tomaz and Peter Whittle have said that the funding plug would be pulled if Anne Marie won the Leadership Election. So it would seem self-evidently the case…

    John Rees-Evans has said he too has sourced donors – we don’t know if they are minor or major. He has ideas of funding UKIP, I’m not clear about whether that would mean they had an input.

    Anne Marie is aware of the significance of not having a major funder behind her, because she has said her action on day one would be a major membership recruitment drive.
    I would commit to putting as much as I could afford into UKIP if that was the case – I think others might too, because it would be so refreshing for UKIP not to be in thrall to any major donors, kind though they are, being beholden to anyone is a bit like a Company who cannot afford to upset the Shareholders, is it not?

    I would be delighted if UKIP could stand on its own two feet – only that way can a Leader be truly free to lead, and a Party free to be really Independent in my humble opinion. Small(ish) contributions always welcome! The United Kingdom Independence Party should try really hard to live up to its name.

  29. Whilst agreeing with parts of your article Tomaz, I find myself surprised by some of your assessments and conclusions.

    I agree with you that Peter Whittle as leader would be the ‘slow death’ of the party but find your dismissal of Anne Marie Waters to be both unfair and essentially not libertarian.

    Like others in the party you appear seem to equate any opposition to the odious legal and political ideology of Shariah Islamic law as automatically being ‘anti-Muslim’. That is a fundamentally flawed assumption.

    In fact, the freeing of Muslim women from the oppression of Shariah is at the heart of Anne Marie’s policies. I would have thought that was not just a political choice for members of a libertarian party but a moral duty.

    The only reason I will not be voting for Anne Marie is that I believe John Rees-Evans is a better candidate for the difficult job of UKIP leader. My second choice would be David Kurten.

    Jane Collins and Henry Bolton have so far failed to produce manifestos. Their websites summarise pious generalisations rather detailed actions. Jane seems to think that a ‘straight-talking team will be enough, while Henry appears to think of UKIP as some sort of ‘failed state’ that needs to be reconstructed with layers of bureaucracy and civic management.

    Many years ago Nigel Farage had a vision for Britain and has fought to achieve it.

    John Rees-Evans is essentially a Faragist and he also has a broad, long-term vision for both UKIP and Britain that he will fight for. That’s why he has my vote.

    • Howard, AMW is a socialist. As a libertarian, I could never support a socialist leader, a socialist party or a socialist platform. It is everything I stand against. If she was only in favour of tough measures against terrorists and criminals (i.e. actually enforcing laws which already exist), I would be fully in agreement with her. Unfortunately, she is an anti-Muslim bigot, and that is not a libertarian position.

      • Mr Slivnik. Why would you call someone who does not want young Muslim girls having their genitals mutilated “anti-Muslim”?

        I would call that “pro-Muslim girls”.

      • Tomaz, Anne Marie is not an anti-Muslim bigot! Please, stick to facts. If she was she would not work with Muslim women to help them when they get in trouble because of Sharia Law, nor would she works with ex Muslims, unless all these, too, are bigots. Somewhere you were complaining she was friends with Miriam Namazi, an Iranian!
        Anne Marie started Sharia Watch because her Muslim best friend had a cousin suffering from a Sharia court ruling. She simply wants to rid Britain of Sharia Law for the benefit of Muslim women, and possibly the rest of us. It is a huge bar to Integration.

        I do try hard not to call people names, but might it be appropriate for all those who make these sort of unsubstantiated statements to ask themselves who the bigot actually is?

      • Anne Marie Waters’ manifesto, p.16: “For Britain to prosper, we need innovation, deregulation, and education… Be the one true party of small business, reducing or scrapping charges that will aid the rejuvenation of the high street. Encouragement of small business will increase innovation, entrepreneurship, and creativity. Small business also drives up standards through competition and customer care”.

        Strange words for a Socialist – if she is one. Have you read Anne Marie Waters’ Manifesto, Dr. Slivnik? Either you haven’t, and you are writing from a position of ignorance, or you have and you are misrepresenting her. Which is it?

        • 1) Yes, I have read her manifesto. I understand it was mostly written by Stuart Agnew’s wife. I complimented the manifesto to AMW at the hustings I attended (as per below).

          2) Re. ignorance. I have attended a hustings where AMW spoke and where she said it was important that we stick to what we believe in and not to change our position. I read to her her own past words that she believed in the right to strike, that she supported the labour unions, that she believed in a strong public sector and standard left wing fare. I noted her 10 year membership of the Labour Party and her connections to the Communist Party of Iran. I asked her when she’d had her Damascene conversion and started believing in small government and low taxes and wanted to lead a libertarian party, and what motivated her to do so. She said she never changed her beliefs and reaffirmed her support for the trade unions. A video recording of all this exists.

          3) I am not misrepresenting anyone, but thank you for that polite suggestion.

          I shall not stoop to your level but I would say that just because you know how to be rude and insulting and accuse and shout intolerantly at people about how ignorant they are, that doesn’t make you the one that’s not the ignoramus.

          • So why are you claiming she is a Socialist when the section on the economy in her manifesto makes it clear she is no such thing?

          • Because she has, in her own words, said as much (all but using the “socialist” word itself), because she has been closely linked to the Communist Party of Iran, because she has confirmed that she has not changed her positions since saying those things and has in fact expressly confirmed some of them and because I believe those parts of her manifesto were written by members of her team who are not socialists, not her. Indeed this is all already clear from my previous replies, so why are you asking the same question which I have already answered over and over again?

          • As she didn’t say “I am a Socialist”, that’s just your interpretation of some off-the-cuff remarks at a hustings.

            Are you seriously claiming that your interpretation of verbal comments trumps the section on the economy in her manifesto that I quoted, which makes it perfectly plain she is not a Socialist?

          • Alright then, she has, in her own words, said “Most of what I believe would be standard left-wing. I believe in a strong public sector. I definitively endorse the right to strike and I think the Labour Party needs to stand up for the right to strike more often. I always support the trade unionists, I’m naturally inclined to support the trade unionists and I think Labour needs to reconnect with the trade unions. I support strikers and certainly I support the right to strike. We need to return to the core Labour values, we need to protect the public sector.” Here: , you can watch it yourself. This was some time ago, but I asked her recently (i.e. at hustings) and she confirmed that she has not changed her views. She was a Labour Party member for 10 years, and their parliamentary candidate. She has not been in UKIP anything like as long. I’ve given the details of her connections to the Communist Party of Iran elsewhere on this page. In my book, this makes her a socialist. In yours, it doesn’t. We’ll have to agree to disagree, and readers can make their own minds up. You can quote a document Stuart Agnew’s wife has written if you like, but that doesn’t really add anything to the discussion.

          • There you go again, misrepresenting things. It’s not just some “document Stuart Agnew’s wife has written”, it’s AMW’s leadership manifesto, on AMW’s web site, and we can presume she has read it all and agrees with it all.

            If she really were a Socialist as you claim, it wouldn’t say “Small business also drives up standards through competition and customer care”, would it? Because that’s not the sort of thing a Socialist would ever say, is it?

    • Correction: ‘pious generalisations rather ‘than’ detailed actions’

  30. There are clearly only two candidates with proven team building and organisational ability from their prior careers and those are Henry Bolton and John Rees-Evans.

    Apart from Aidan Powlesland who is standing on an extreme libertarian small government ticket, I would have thought John Rees-Evans very well matches Dr Slivnik’s criterion for selection as a libetarian candidate.
    As someone who went abroad to set up a successful business in order to avoid the red tape that encumbers entrepreneurs in this country and one who is proposing that society is governed according to popular rule rather that by an elite operating behind closed doors, whether or not they are themselves beholden to ex-KGB agents of influence, his libertarian credentials are hard to fault.

    I presume at the time of writing, Dr Slivnik had not read Mr Crowther’s recent email concerning misrepresentations of fact. This did not surprise me at all as I had already done my researches on Companies House in pursuit of my own due diligence on a particular candidate. Dr Slivinik may well be a brilliant mathematician; however, I believe he may not be such a brilliant judge of character. In light of which it would be appropriate for someone with his standing in the party, to do a bit of due diligence himself before telling the rest of us how to vote.

    • Barrie Greatorex // September 9, 2017 at 8:18 pm //

      Having read through, somewhat casually, the comments following the article by Tomaz, I believe yours to be more in line with what the general public, floating and no voter considers “Common sense”. Flighty speeches and academically constructed arguments will have very little, if any, influence on their voting decisions. What the “Man in the street” wants right now is an end to the pontificating and delaying tactics of the ever more vocal Remain camp supporters. This is true UKIP territory and should be, for now, our main focus. Other matters concerning government policy are for the future, so put aside the Islamaphobia, Sharia Law, FGM and all things cultural on the back burner. A professional approach with a good dash of radicalism will bring them back to the polling booth. Personally I am with your two choices but as yet undecided which to go with.

    • Thank you for sharing your views. I did not tell anyone how to vote, I offered my analysis in the hope that you may find it useful. Everyone will of course decide how to vote themselves.

      The fact that I have reached a different conclusion from you does not mean that my due diligence was less thorough than yours or that I have not read the Crowther e-mail you refer to. It’s not great but I guess it’s OK to assume that everyone around you who disagrees with you is stupid and hasn’t done their research, but telling them you think that is almost never a good idea.

  31. Remember that immediately after the winner is announced that they will IMMEDIATELY be subject to intense media scrutiny.
    Membership will either increase (as lapsed members come back) or go into a death spiral based on just a few critical interviews the Sunday after conference. Marr. Neil . Peston.
    AMW would be chopped to pieces, and the financial crisis as Tomasz describes will really happen.
    Bolton would command respect, albeit that at the moment he appears perhaps a tad dull, he can warm up as his confidence improves.
    Interesting times……
    Its a two horse race now.

    • I understand that Newton Abbot Racetrack has got in on the act and is offering bets:(Jockeys in brackets) –
      BelgianWaffle (whittle) 2/1
      Blondie (collins) 5/1
      Bagman (kurten)10/1
      BarmyBarsteward (pownesland) 1000/1
      Brylcream (bolton) evens
      LornaDoone (JRE) 30/1
      OldNag (AMW) 50/1

      I am putting my shirt on oldnag – I am sure the bookies have it wrong. I might put £5 on barmybarsteward just in case.

    • Mr Bav, Anne Marie won’t be chopped to pieces, she did much better than Peter Whittle the other night in what was and will always be a set-up by BBC 2. She speaks the truth, is the reason – I’ll never forget Gerard Batten on Daily Politics, when Jo Coburn asked him about ‘Islam is evil’ – he asked for her alternative view. She had none. Her task will be made harder thanks to UKIP insiders – the questions will be something about MEP’s leaving as they threatened – members of UKIP have openly called you fascist – all the own goals so beautifully set up courtesy of our so called elite – but she will cope – she always does – and she has debated creditably the Oxford Union – she has a lot of experience.

      • Dee, Anne Marie won’t be making speeches in interviews with Andrew Neil et al. The agenda and time-table will be theirs’ and Anne Marie showed recently, in an interview with Nick Ferrari that she doesn’t always cope well when under pressure. In the LBC interview with Ferrari, she didn’t address the questions, she rambled on in an incoherent monologue, talking over, and so not hearing what he was saying/asking. One almost felt embarrassed for her.

        • Agreed. She won’t be interviewed by Andrew Neil either. Not on Sunday Politics at any rate. Neil has pulled out of the Sunday Politics as he said he wants his weekends back. I can’t blame him, he’s been doing it for years and isn’t getting any younger. He will continue to do some of the weekday ones though.

          Sunday Politics will now be hosted by Sarah Smith, hard left winger and daughter of the late John Smith who was once leader of the labour party. Should be fun!

          • Brenda,

            I bet Sarah Smith will not be as good as ‘Mr. Shouty’ though.

          • I was referring to interviews in general Brenda. I’d read that Smith was taking over the programme, so yet another one I may no longer watch. Seem to recall she went to the USA for O’Bama’s election for Channel 4 and was their Washington correspondent for a time.
            Labour leftie royalty of course: Onwards and upwards! The whole channel and most of the others is infested with them.

        • You are clearly out of touch with the membership and general public. The overwhelming majority of members and supporters of UKIP who I have spoken with applauded her LBC performance.

        • Actually, I felt embarrassed (also disgusted) by Ferrari’s appalling performance as an interviewer. He’s shockingly bad, I don’t know how he keeps his job. An interviewer is supposed to listen to answers, not constantly interrupt with one question after another. A good interviewer doesn’t heckle, insinuate, lie and put his own Leftard prejudice on show like dirty underwear. I know this is par for the course with MSM interviewers these days; they’re all annoying dipsticks. Ferrari is lousier than most.

          • They’re not there to give people an easy ride but I was pointing out that she loses her cool under pressure when she’s not in control. Could have been even worse if she’d been interviewed by James O’Brien.

          • This is a reply to Marie re James O’Brien interviewing AMW’s, don’t make me laugh she would make mincemeat of him. HaHa that would be worth listening to.

  32. It is with a mixture of sadness and exasperation that I note Tomaz joining other commentators who would like to consign all those young men and women, many of whom have now become adults, parents, workers and thinkers but who, in the days when they were young, passionate and unthinking joined the EDL or BNP, to the political wilderness for ever. Most of these people came from those towns where Muslim rape gangs were beginning to prey on family members or friends – no-one was taking any notice, and there was no Political Party to vote for.
    But those who condemn are unwilling to concede anything – unwilling to have anything to do with them. Those that do this might like to ask themselves why they won’t give a whole swathe of people, mostly now in their late twenties and thirties, a chance to attempt to shape the future of what is and will be their children’s country of origin.

    • I disagree
      The EDL was founded in 2009 and the Britain First ( BNP off-shoot ) was founded in 2014. So the ‘young, passionate and unthinking ‘ could have joined UKIP, which started many years before or any other main political party for that matter.
      They chose not to.
      AMW is a front for, and is sympathetic to, EDL, BNP, Britain First and Pegida.
      If elected UKIP will fall. If not by bankruptcy and irrelevancy, then by its ultimate proscription as a political party.

      • Britain First is a completely different entity – Pegida was not a Political Party. I couldn’t, but some UKIP members, I know I’m correct in saying, attended Pegida marches – not new members either. She is not a ‘front for’ anything, although there may be people who would love to be able to be members of UKIP who were in their youth EDL and BNP. As I recall UKIP in those days was mainly composed of members concerned with Europe, not the fact that Luton was rapidly becoming a hell hole for White and Sikh girls.

      • so you basically say that resistance to Islamization will bring “bankruptcy and irrelevancy”, and so on?

        Throwing lot of random buzz, like “EDL, BNP, Britain First and Pegida” isn’t very helpful. These groups are fragmented, some narrow nationalistic or/and religious, some confused, but none may be compared with AMW in meta-political style, completeness, and accomplishment.

        Just to the essense – could you please specify, which opinions, assessments or policies, published/expressed by AMW on Islam and Muslims, are wrong?
        Among them, some should be catastophically wrong, as you predict the demise of the UKIP.. Which ones?

        Oh and please don’t draw that “donors” argument anymore, as that simply brings the image of political party for sale.
        And who are these “donors” BTW, that only will agree with Sharia-compliant UKIP?

  33. From above regarding who is ultimately responsible for the rapes in Rotherham…
    ‘This is not the fault of Muslims, it is a home grown problem – it is a problem of socialism.’ Let’s hope Anne Marie drains the swamp when she wins. If not it will mean the party I have recently just joined is a madhouse.

    • Sean, you are a defender and supporter of Anne Marie who was in turn a very loyal and hardworking supporter of the Labour Party for most of her adult life, leaving only when it became obvious that she was not even going t be selected as a PPC, let alone elected as an MP. Labour is a Socialist Party and perpetrated it’s worst excesses as far as third world immigration is concerned, during the years Anne Marie was an active and supportive member.

      • All I can say is that Anne Marie was definitely in the wrong party; if Labour did not harness her undoubted talents, more fool them. Or perhaps her heart wasn’t really in it and this became more and more obvious to her as Labour abandoned its white working class voters’ interests in favour of muslims, anti-Jewish sentiments and PC claptrap (except toward the Jews, PC doesn’t apply to them for some reason).

        Whatever, I’m glad she joined UKIP and offered leadership out of the quagmire created by liblabcon traitors.

      • Marie there have been many people on the left including hardcore Marxists who have now shed those clothes and moved over to a common sense view of the world. These include the Hitchens brothers Peter and the late Christopher. To my detriment I probably watch far too many YouTube videos for my own good but one thing I gain is an insight into what people are thinking and I see many abandoning the especially when the penny drops in relation to the threat of Islam. I will link one individual who describes himself as being a typical leftie just one year ago. He is a 57 year old historian Brit living in Barcelona who started making videos against Islam just a few months. Previously he had been oblivious to the fact that the highest concentration of conservative Muslims lived in Catalonia. He now knows that. His ‘conversion’ story is a common one.

  34. Tomaz,

    I am one of the six people in this country who’s actually read your NEC resignation letter, and I must say you illustrated very well the brickwall between the NEC and the leadership. Yes we vote for NEC members, based on a pretty picture and a brief bio, then when elected they become absolutely uncontactable. You explained all the legal anomalies of being a political party AND a limited company, problems which must be resolved. If only a fraction of the evidence you presented in your resignation letter is factual, it poses serious thought for the next leader. The NEC is a black box which must be completely reformed or replaced.

    However – I am sorry to tell you, you have fallen for the same mindset about AMW that so many good people in the party have. I have a teenage daughter and I will do anything I can to stop her having to wear a hijab by the time she’s 30.
    I can promise you my friend, if AMW is elected, UKIP polling will start to go up again, then all the members who left immediately in righteous indignation can start creeping back again.

    • Well said. I read the NEC resignation letter as well and fully supported what Tomaz had to say in regards to the anti democratic nature of the party.

      Yet this attack of his on AMW is absurd. The West is suffering from an invasion by those who want to kill us.

      • Byron,

        Remember Tomaz is an ‘academic’, I think that may say it all. He is obviously trying to see the ‘good’ in us all. He needs to be reminded of when that Dutch film maker was killed in cold blood on the street, he asked his attacker if they could just talk about what was vexing him, that was just before he slit his throat and left him bleeding to death on the pavement.

  35. LOYALTY TO THE PARTY is an important component of being a member of a political party quite simply because individually we will all much of the time have some grouse about a particular high profile member and/or a particular policy. Were ‘poundland’to become leader ( he won’t he will struggle to reach 200votes)then I would be furious with the promotion of some of his ideas BUT I WOULD NOT LEAVE THE PARTY.
    You have threatened/promised to leave the party if AMW wins. Firstly I hope you keep your promise (my word is my bond) and secondly you condemn her as some sort of neonazi. I shall be voting for AMW but if she doesn’t win I shall be disappointed but not upset. That is democracy. I know AMW is right in many regards and I know her views resonate with great swathes of the ordinary working people of England and Wales (“the forgotten people”). He time will come. I shall not be leaving the party. BREXIT and many other things are far too important. You resigned from the NEC when you did not get your way now you have upped the stakes. Neither you nor I are that important Mister Slivnik (I know you – we met in Llandudno early last year). You are one of the brylcream boys and so it is no surprise that you support arch brylcream boy himself Henry Bolton. He might win I do not know; he is certainly ‘stealing’ the establishment votes off whittle hand over fist.
    This same Bolton made a vainglorious and stupid attempt at the 11th hour to have AMW removed from the ballot paper – hardly the mark of a scholar, gentleman, political strategist.

    • I endorsed Jane Collins.

      My comment about not being able to be associated with UKIP if AMW were to win was not a promise/threat. It was a simple statement of fact. I have been a member of the party for 10 years, I have put in a lot of time, I have made many friends, and it has become an important part of my life. I would not want to leave. But if AMW were to win, this would no longer be the same party. It would stand for the exact opposite of what it stood for when I joined and what I stand for. I cannot support a socialist party, or a leader linked to a communist party. I would not only be forced (reluctantly, I might add) out – by someone who has stood all her life against everything the party stands for and who has only recently joined, I would have to publicly distance myself from the party, denounce it and work against it. I would do so because I would believe this was the right thing to do, not to throw a tantrum or out of spite. I hope it won’t come to that. Thankfully, I believe it won’t.

      • Oh dear oh dear. Some in here remain convinced AMW will rescue UKIP. Listen to Tomasz, he and many of our elected representatives know better, we live in the real world, talk to people outside UKIP, know what our electors want, which is not AMW. Of course we are biased, we don’t want to leave the party we worked so hard for. Where would we go ? Start over again, just so she does not have to form her own party ?
        There are only 3 candidates worth voting for. Henry, David or third, Jane.
        Like so many others, an AMW win will see me my group and I moving to the Independent side of our council chamber, because the UKIP we joined will simply no longer exist.

      • Have you ever heard of “Road to Damascus conversions”? I do not speak for AMW herewith but I loosely know her and have spoken at some length to her.
        My feeling is that like a minority of educated intelligent people in their late 20s/30s AMW has slowly realised the distortions ubiquitous in the marxist/socialist doctrine and is shocked into confronting the facts. For example the Jay Report on Rotherham; it is blindingly obvious left wing people in power (senior police, all senior social workers,labour councillors, exconvict and europhile localMP Mcshane)preferred to cover it all up and deny the problem existed. They were prepared maybe happy to see this rape and drugging of children by pk grooming gangs to continue in the name of multiculturalism and a sick version of antiracism. I must warn you that this subject makes me have a volcanic temper and I shall not be happy till all those who aided and abetted this in 50-100 towns/cities in the northern parts of England are disgraced and in jail; and that further the perpetrators of these crimes are stripped of their citizenship. That you find my opinion extreme is your problem. This is how AMW thinks and I am certain how ten million more think.
        This subject is not going to go away; until justice is seen to be done.

        • Tomaž Slivnik // September 9, 2017 at 4:14 pm //

          Yes, I have heard of Damascene conversions, thank you. Indeed I asked AMW a couple of months ago when she had her Damascene conversion and what motivated her to have one. I was genuinely interested to find out. She replied that she has never changed her views, she still supports trade unions etc. I take her therefore at her own word and believe that she is still a left winger.

        • @ citizenkain
          I agree with every word you have written, CK. I am surprised and a little shocked at Tomaz’s apparent indifference to the depredations of islam and its followers in the UK. The presence of muslims has ruined lives and communities and is damn near to ruining our country with its outrageous primitive cult. Maybe Tomaz can’t remember Britain before islam and muslims and their never-ending demands became an issue, but I can. It was a happier place. Now they’re a serious threat and I want to see politicians in charge who have the guts to stand up for us and our rights, not muslims’ rights. They have the right to return whence they came and that’s it, sooner the better.

          • Panmelia, I too am both surprised and shocked that you infer indifference to the dreadful suffering of thousands of young girls at the hands of muslim rape and grooming gangs, by those of us who object to Anne Marie becoming leader of UKIP. The remark is unworthy of you.

          • @ Marie
            Didn’t you notice that I was referring to Tomaz’s indifference, not yours or anyone else’s? You infer too much, especially as I did not even mention AMW in my criticism of HIM. And this criticism was inspired by a crude comment he made about putting hands up girls’ genitals, which I addressed in an earlier post.

    • I’m afraid you are misinformed re Bolton/AMW. I am told by a very reliable source that Bolton queried AMW eligibility on nominations closing due to lack of continuous good standing per the rules. There was no response for weeks – hence the appearance of belatedness in an effort to resolve it.
      I will be voting for Bolton for all the reasons listed by Tomas. I cannot back the Collins team, because it simply isn’t strong enough. Bolton has said he will include JRE and DK in his team – he is the only one who can provide proper, rounded, credible, libertarian, open leadership.

  36. Tomas was going OK until he got onto the KGB moles everywhere, and let’s not blame the muslims. There certainly were Soviet-comintern inspired moles in the 40s, 50s and 60s but after then we enthusiastically took up the socialist mantle ourselves. Is he aware that this kind of rape culture is common wherever there are muslims living alongside non-muslims? It isn’t a UK-specific issue. Perhaps his views are clouded by his business partners/investors being muslims, at least he discloses this conflict of interest. After watching her twice at hustings it seems to me that Jane Collins can barely open her mouth without getting into trouble (including legal trouble) due to her loose use of words (which is caused by her loose understanding of fundamental concepts such as free speech) and has the knack of being able to alienate her own natural supporters as well as her enemies. Also I disagree with his assumption that the integration agenda led to the 2% vote, has he forgotten that we were wiped out in the council elections prior to the general election and prior to the integration agenda? Indeed we had already become an irrelevance to most people so that by the GE nobody was paying attention anyway, most press conferences were sparsely attended mainly with UKIP people in first two rows.

    • Very well argued Graham.

    • I did not say I had business dealings with Muslims. I said I had dealings with Turkish people and people from the Arab world. I do not ask people about their religion as it is none of my business. But it is quite possible that some of them are Muslims. I have friends whom I know are Muslims. They are normal decent people. Otherwise they wouldn’t be my friends. I know owners of Bangladeshi restaurants who are likely Muslims. Do you ever go for a curry? Fancy telling the restaurant owners that you support someone who thinks they are untermenschen every time you go? I am not prepared to look these people in the eye and say that I support someone who wants to treat them as second class citizens and put up their hands up their daughters’ genitals. It is as wrong as a German denouncing their Jewish friends in Nazi Germany.

      Perhaps we should learn about how to deal with the jihadi problem from the nation which has the best track record in the world of dealing with such problems – Israel. No one is under greater threat of Islamic terror than Israel. They are tough on terrorists and respectful of ordinary Muslims. If they tried to alienate all Muslims, they would instantly be overrun. And they know it. Instead, many ordinary people commute from the Gaza Strip to work in Israel and support Israel rather than their own oppressive governments.

      If you seriously think that the influence of the moles the KGB installed in the FCO and other government departments and public sector bodies during the Cold War is gone, think again. This influence isn’t gone in the UK any more than it’s gone in the U.S. or the Eastern (or indeed elsewhere in the Western) Europe.

      I am very aware of some things you say which are correct, but the drop from 13% support to <4% support at the G.E. was very precipitous and instantaneous and coincided exactly with Peter Whittle's launch of the integration agenda. It happened over the space of two or three days. I have published the poll numbers elsewhere on this site and I can publish them again.

      • Again, the drop in support happened already at the council elections, the reason for that drop in support was that many people thought UKIPs job was done, which was reinforced by having our own senior party members saying the same thing and being unable to present a case for the continued existence of UKIP. This continued into the GE campaign where this confusion resulted in us not running in hundreds of seats. Half of the activists in our branch declared they would vote Tory and not support our campaign (these are activists, not just members or voters!). Arron Banks was pushing his ‘country first, party second’ rubbish, HQ was not being decisive, PNs orginal message wasn’t very clear. The decision to run PN for Stoke was a turning point, that was pure stupidity as it immediately undermined him, he could have still been around now if it weren’t for that defeat, and at least the party would have some stability. But at root the big problem was Nigel giving up his position, the message it sent to everyone is ‘UKIPs own leader thinks it is job done, no need for UKIP now’. I guess he had been under enormous pressure but he showed no regard for succession. If you show any poll numbers then please include the council election results and you’ll see things don’t line up in the way you claim.

        • Tomaž Slivnik // September 9, 2017 at 3:52 pm //

          (2014) libertarian agenda

          2014 European Election result 26.6%

          (2015) Patrick O’Flynn’s socialist agenda introduced

          2015 General Election result 12.6%

          Opinion polls:

          2017/01/04 14%
          2017/01/24 14%
          2017/02/16 14%
          2017/03/27 12%
          2017/04/02 11%
          2017/04/17 10%
          2017/04/21 8%

          (2017/04/24) Peter Whittle’s “Integration” agenda launched – Burqa ban & FGM

          2017/04/25 4%
          2017/05/22 4%
          2017/05/31 4%
          2017/06/03 3%

          (2017) General Election result (2017/06/08) 1.8%

          When were the council elections? You argue a great deal about peripheral points and muddy the waters, but one look at the numbers clears them up again, as they speak for themselves, very loudly and clearly.

          • Tomas, this is a barely complete data set as it misses the only relevant data point, namely the referendum. Once the referendum result was in, support for UKIP collapsed in a straight line as your 2017 data show from 14% to 8% (no integration agenda can be blamed for this fall) but the slide didn’t stop there, the local elections gave a 5% vote share by 4 May. This was the peak of ‘May-mania’ as ex-Tories everywhere were fooled into thinking the new Maggie messiah had come. I think your analysis is based on a false hypothesis which is that UKIPs vote gains in the 2014-2016 period came from people wanting a libertarian alternative, when in fact UKIPs votes came from people wanting a referendum and wanting to leave the EU, we were useful for a while. and once no use any more we were dumped, and our support level now (which I believe is too low and is actually around 6-8%) is back to where it was pre-2014. UKIP got 3.1% in the 2010 general election and it is a credit to Farage’s leadership that in 6 years he got from that low baseline to victory in the Euros and then a referendum. But none of those gains had anything to do with being a libertarian party I am afraid, it was all about Brexit. Also, I believe many of your comments about islam are based on the belief that it is a religion and therefore you are comparing it to something like our CofE or even Catholicism, when in fact Islam is a complete civilisation which includes a religion but also law, government, financial system, family law, etc. Libertarianism cannot co-exist with Islam, it doesn’t fit into the same little box on the chart we call ‘religion’. It IS the whole chart.

          • Tomaz,

            Just face facts, it was the three ‘H’s’ that did it for us at Stoke: Hillsborough, Halal and the house that no one lived in. In short, it was Paul Nuttall that did it for us, and the bad advice he took to get us there.

        • Graham – “But at root the big problem was Nigel giving up his position, the message it sent to everyone is ‘UKIPs own leader thinks it is job done, no need for UKIP now”… Good to see there are other that have seen the light. Ukip have neglected their main objective. That includes Mr.Farage, who in my opinion has done more harm to the BREXIT campaign, post referendum. Destroyed the very party that should have been kept the pressure on since the leave vote! Instead the party and its membership have busied themselves with this nonsense. The massive split in the remaining membership, reinforced and evident by replies to this topic.

      • I would be interested to hear from Dr Slivnik to whom do these ex-KGB agents who were, presumably, communist sympathisers of the Bolshevik Empire before it collapsed, report these days? Presumably if it is Mr Putin, then they are not working hard enough to prevent the ferocious anti-Putin propaganda emanating from the FCO. We need to be told.

        • Tomaž Slivnik // September 9, 2017 at 3:57 pm //

          Who they report to today is a completely different question. Perhaps you should tell us what happened to those agents then, and the protégés they appointed. Did they just vanish into thin air in a puff of smoke? We need to be told!

          Do you seriously claim that the political establishment in Britain (and in other European countries) is working in the national best interest? And that e.g. Merkel, Cameron, Osborne are really promoting anything other than socialism (Merkel was a big fan of the East German regime and now she heads a right wing party). If you believe all this, what are you doing in UKIP?

          • You haven’t answered my question; who or what are these agents working for? Who finances them now? It is you who need to provide evidence for your hypothesis.

        • No, Tomaz. The British Globalist establishment is not working in the National interest. It is putting into practice the Coudenhove Kalerghi plan, Agenda 21 and Common Purpose. The are also signed up to the 1995 Barcelona Declaration, which is why we are where we are.

      • @ Tomaz
        “Put their hands up their daughters’ genitals”?! You’re as bad, if not worse, than Jane Collins with her ridiculous and lewd “Looking up girls’ skirts” protest against UKIP’s policy of examinations for FGM. It’s ethnic minorities, including a significant number, if not the majority, of muslims, who want to butcher their daughters’ genitals for reasons only a cruel, perverted, misogynist sadist could justify. Those of us with compassion wish to do whatever it takes to stamp out this practice in Britain for good and all. Having dedicated health professionals examine girls at risk is a two-way measure: first preventative, to deter savage parents from cutting up little girls who have been recorded intact and making their rest of their lives a sexual and gynaecological misery; second, retributory, to arrest, prosecute and severely punish those who have already ruined the child’s body. Of course, it would help if the existing laws were being enforced to deter and punish effectively. Peter Whittle is NOT a ‘religious bigot’ if he is opposed to islam and its barbarisms. One cannot be bigoted against islam because it is itself the embodiment of bigotry, prejudice, hate, envy, violence, racism, misogyny, homophobia and religious supremacism. The koran = bigotry against all kuffir.

        BTW, didn’t you ever wonder what those apparently civilised muslim businessmen were doing to their wives and daughters at home behind closed doors? I guess not; appearance is everything isn’t it?

        • Panmelia,

          What a disgusting phrase that is, I like you am aghast at how debased we are becoming on this vile subject, the terms being used are almost as bad as the crime itself.

      • Tomaz your Muslim friends are very aware if they really con sidered you as a friend, that allah says they are then, “of them”‘ the kuffar (the word itself comparable with the racist n word) and that allah sends them to hell.

        With muslims when in the minority’ seeming to be nice is just part of their required warfare lying.

  37. Not much ‘socialist’ about AMW’S programme, Tomaz, but insofar as her background and instincts are sympathetic to the ordinary people of this country, I suggest she has more of a chance of getting their vote than any amount of your Tory ‘libertarianism’.
    Trying to outflank the Tories-In-Name-Only is not going to bring us the mass support we need.

    The police haven’t failed through ‘socialism’ but PCness, of which the Tories are equally guilty. In fact it is the Tories who bear the major responsibility for our situation since they have the power to do something about it, but all they can think about is personal power and money.

    Good woman that she is, Jane doesn’t quite have the vision, the ideas or the passion.

    • I thought PCness is socialism.

      To me JRE and AMW both have flair. Significantly missing elsewhere. They’re all dull.

      AMW worries everyone, so ,no. JRE is OK if only held could drop his ridiculous Direct Democrcy nonsense. Does he not understand that people do not want to be bothered to vote on things. They’re too busy. Also DD is a cheapskate operation, being cheap and short term. Also the MSM inspite of its failings provides 83 % of peoples political information. People want representatives, even without power. So live and learn, and adapt ,and he’ll win.

      • AMW does not worry everyone as you put it tg spokes. AMW is the future of the party in my humble opinion. Through the hustings AMW has been able to lay the foundations for a way forward for UKIP. Under many of the other candidates UKIP can look forward to a slow death.
        A year is a short time in politics (sic) and given the immense changes happening in the world none of us can predict with any accuracy just what will be on the table in 2018.
        Prediction the Visegrad Group continue to antagonise the franco-german hegemony and Austria, Denmark, Greece, maybe Spain continue on their anti EU trajectory.

    • Stockholm Syndrome, in which captives cope with an unbearable reality by identifying with the aims of their captors, is why so many people believe in feeding the monster that is the modern state. Those of us who wish to slay the monster are not suffering from Stockhom Syndrome, something those of you who are cannot see.

    • In her own words, AMW supports the right to strike, trade unions, a strong public sector, and believes in “standard left wing” fare. She was a member of the Labour Party for 10 years, she stood as a Labour party candidate and named Maryam Namazie, a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Iran as her personal reference. But as always, this is no barrier to our old friend Quercus declaring that black is white, and white is black.

      Political correctness is a fundamentally socialist phenomenon. Even the origin of the phrase is the distinction between the strictly “politically correct” application of Stalinist doctrine and other forms of socialist doctrine.

      Libertariansm does not equal conservatism, and modern Tories are not even conservative, let alone libertarian. But this does not stop Quercus from hurling around words he considers contemptuous insults, like “Tory” at genuine libertarians.

      • Tomaz – I would imagine you would have to be extremely brave to be a member of the Central Committee of the Iranian Communist Party, fighting for workers rights, which is what they do. It isn’t anything like the Communist Party in a free country! So I’m told, because I looked into this.

        • I don’t doubt you have to be very brave. I am sure you had to be very brave to be a member of the Communist Party in Tzarist Russia. The Communist Party of Iran fight for the same thing which communist parties fight for everywhere else, which is the establishment of a communist regime in their host country. I have lived under communism. People in Britain still wear rose tinted spectacles when speaking about it, even though in fact it is a far more brutal, ruthless, cruel, merciless, murderous and evil ideology than national socialism, and few people today speak fondly of that one. Hitler was a total amateur in terms of slaughtering, torturing and enslaving people brutally compared to Mao, or even Stalin. Communism is a far, far, far far far far more evil ideology than you can ever hope to ascribe to Islam, even when interpreted by the most extreme Islamic terrorists.

          • Please Tomaz, I have no rose tinted glasses about communism. In fact Islam is communist Marxism on steroids, so I don’t understand why you aren’t exercised about the British demographic – but Iran don’t brook any alternative such as ‘soft communism’ – rights for workers.

          • If you think there is any such a thing as “soft communism” or that the Communist Party of Iran is in any way “soft”, you are looking at communism through rose tinted glasses.

            Islam is neither communism nor Marxism. You can argue that many or most or all Islamic-majority countries are authoritarian, but it is a very different sort of authoritarianism to communism/Marxism, and nothing like as malevolent. Sharia is merely rather cruel to those who do not follow its prescriptions. Communism is lawless, frenzied, psychopathic, sadistic and wanton murder and oppression with no rhyme or reason other than a raw thirst for power. Communism murdered over 100 million people in the 20th century alone. All Islamic states throughout the entire history of Islam have not come even close.

        • Tomaz, that’s why the left, Corbyn’s Communist Marxist left are in bed with Islam. They both want to collapse the system – and impose Totalitarian rule. I would ask you to investigate the Red/Green Alliance. We are alarmingly far down the road of Dawa, with Muslim supporting Labour being voted in, increasingly. That’s why Rotherham and so on was allowed to happen. It’s a pact.
          So Anne Marie, you see, has to be one or the other, either a UKIP believer or a Labour believer, she can’t be both. And, if you listen to her interview with Gad Saad, you will hear that she realizes what Labour has become, and has nothing but contempt for them.

        • Rather ironic that the communist party fights for workers rights in iran considering communists in iran sided with the muslims to depose the shah, who was giving his people freedom/democracy.


        And here AMW is, in her own words, standing up against grooming gangs as well as those in the mass media and UKIP that attempt to distort what she has to say. Don’t watch Tomasz’s video without watching this one…

      • Tomaz, unworthy! This was a much younger Anne Marie. Did you never start out believing one thing and as time went on change your mind? I know I did. For a long time I believed Palestine was in the right, Israel was wrong. I know now I believed propaganda – maybe you too have believed propaganda about Anne Marie.

        • I have already answered this. I asked her when she changed her mind (quoting the entirety of her quote from those “younger” days) and she replied that she didn’t. See my comments elsewhere under this post.

          • Regarding total number of deaths at the hands of Islam, Tomaz, a little investigation reveals that various historians’ estimates are as follows:
            120 m Africans
            60 m Christians
            80 m Hindus
            10 m Buddhists
            = 270m

        • Dee, as recently as the year before Anne Marie joined UKIP in 2014, she was still attempting to be selected as PPC for the Labour Party, and had she been successful she would almost certainly still remain a member of the Labour Party.

          • The last time I checked the majority of our voters came from the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats. Just look at where we performed well in both 2015 and 2017.

  38. Gerry Robinson // September 9, 2017 at 8:32 am //

    To me, as I wrote in an article which should come out today or tomorrow – It’s down to a short list of three. The ‘establishment’ candidate – Peter Whittle. The ‘reform UKIP’ candidate – David Kurten or the ‘big issue’ candidate – Anne Marie Waters.

    Jane Collins has not impressed at the hustings and reminds us too much of Diane James – and we all know where that ended… Henry Bolton comes across as too much as your standard arrogant politician – as soon as he starts speaking, for me, the filters come on. Much the same as Whittle in fact. Whittle – but in a less expensive suit..

    It’s OK to point out the ‘danger’ of AMW and point the blame at ‘socialist motivated police etc’ but that’s ignoring the fact that we’ve all witnessed the ‘Behead British Soldiers’ marches. Poppy-Burning. Sharia Patrols etc and the complete refusal of the Muslim community to police themselves in that regard. At least, that’s how it looks to many of us on the outside. The police may have been useless in Rotherham etc – but they were not responsible for the mindset and contempt that caused, and causes, these instances of sexual abuse to take place. Then we have the whole halal issue, schoolchildren being taken on ‘mosque days’ and paraded on television ‘trying out’ the burka or niquab and you can see why the libertarian sensitivities of many British people are inflamed. AMW understands this very well indeed.

    That’s why she’s gathering support. She’d have my vote if I were still a member..

Comments are closed.