Latest from UKIP Daily

Leadership elections: Open Letter to Members


Dear Colleagues,

Henry Bolton for leader because his international networking, methodical military mind and administrative ability put him into a league far above the other candidates.

They are all intelligent, articulate and well meaning, but none seem to have Henry’s high level ability and experience nor his perception as to how we must build the Party Institutions without which we cannot become a fighting force to be reckoned with, and capable of overcoming

The enemy without:

* The Brexit backsliders in Westminster;

* The insidious Cultural Marxists using Political Correctness to undermine our freedoms;

* The extremist minority within the Islamic world, who seek to rule the world;

and the enemy within:

* The top down attitudes of the UKIP ruling elite –

whose latest wheeze is to appoint Regional CONTROLLERS !!!

We are Kippers! We are not here to be treated as marionettes by a ruling elite of puppet masters!

Henry Bolton has a wholly different approach, which respects and involves us ordinary members of UKIP. One example is


Henry Bolton as Leader would appoint Spokesmen and women for each policy area, together with a panel of up to 10 Spokesman’s Advisory Group Experts. Shortly stated:

1) Every Branch, MEP, MP, AM and City Mayor would be able to submit Policy Proposals to the relevant SAGE

2) SAGE would review each proposal

3) SAGE would then decide whether to develop the proposal or not:

A – they might reject the proposal, subject to resubmission with changes, or

B – decide to proceed further.

4) The Policy would then be developed into a White Paper

5) The White Paper would be sent to all Branches

6) The White Paper would be subject to a vote at Conference

7) The Conference would either:

A – Reject the White Paper or

B – Approve it, whereupon it would become Party Policy.


* involves ordinary UKIP members through their Branches;

* is a democratic “bottom up” approach;

* and will replace the “top down” approach by which the ruling elite have alienated so many ordinary members to the point of despair.

By healing current divisions SAGE will restore the Party to health.

And, most importantly SAGE provides a procedure by which all the ideas of all the other candidates can be processed methodically for possible inclusion in the next Manifesto.

SAGE is manifestly inclusive. There is no point in voting for any of the other candidates.


All the candidates in this election for Leader of UKIP have good points, requiring serious consideration, but only Henry Bolton has the methodical approach, the organisational ability, the man management experience, the diplomatic skills and the fearlessness to oppose and defeat our enemies:

the BLOB outside the Party – but firstly the BLOB within the party, without whose demise this party cannot succeed.

Sincerely, Hugh Moelwyn Hughes, UKIP Founder Member

The opinions in this letter are those of HMH. Henry Bolton has had no part in the composition of this letter.


~~~~~ ***** ~~~~~


Ed: We have now received video clips from the Newport Q & A Meeting with Henry Bolton (see the report) which detail his position on further issues of great importance to UKIP members:

“Why I am standing for UKIP Leader”

“On the purpose of UKIP”

“On islam and British Identity”

“On Terrorism”

“On Police and Border Force Cuts”

We publish these clips in the hope that the statements by Henry Bolton will inform the debate in this Leadership election.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email
About Hugh Moelwyn Hughes (11 Articles)
Hugh Moelwyn Hughes is a founder member of UKIP

73 Comments on Leadership elections: Open Letter to Members

  1. Is any candidate 100% perfect, no. Is any candidate another Nigel, no. If every member of U.K.I.P. voted for us at an election would we get any M.P.s. It is doubtful. Without votes and M.P.s we can do very little. So we need people from the other parties to become U.K.I.P. supporters and voters. Which of the candidates for leader is the most likely to achieve that objective. For me that is Henry Bolton. Whether or not he is the candidate I agree with, or like the most, is irrelevant, it is who the most people in the country will vote for that matters.

  2. The SAGE process described above appears to be unworkably ponderous and bureaucratic.

    If Henry’s other proposed systems are equally so that would confirm my worst fears about the potentially robotic and stiff nature of his organisational plans.

  3. Will our anger be directed at the Jehovah Witnesses group as well? A friend of mine (a one-time forced member) tells me that their ‘methods’ of intimidation are unpleasant too and should be looked at with interest by the ECHR.


    comments attacking one poster will be binned -and don’t dare to come with “he started it”, you’ve been quite provoking yourselves (you know who you are!).
    You’ve carried this over from a thread where comments have been closed. It’s got to stop or I will stop it.
    You might pause and think how all this plays into the hands of those who’d like nothing better than have UKIP Daily stopped and taken down.

    Yes, this site is for you – but it’s not for you to the exclusion of all others.

    So stop it – THIS IS THE ONLY WARNING.

  5. Hear, hear, Dee!
    It must be awful for AMW not to have Slivnik’s respect; she must be losing sleep over it.
    Meanwhile, Tomaz should ponder how much he deserves – respect that is – and how quickly it can be lost when decent people see through a person’s pretensions.

  6. According to Guido, Bolton has now warned that UKIP is in danger of becoming the UK Nazi Party.

    He is clearly worried about AMW’s popularity, but this attack is beyond the pale.


    Nobody should trust this man.

  7. Some of the actions listed appear to be changes to the constitution because they take policy decisions away from the NEC.

    The constitution states that

    “6.7 The NEC shall establish standing subcommittees for policy,”

    The NEC duties include 6.2 “d) approving the Party’s policies and manifestos;”

    7.1 “The Party Leader shall give political direction to the Party and shall be responsible for the development of the Party’s policies with the agreement of the NEC.”

    That suggests that HB would first have to change the constitution.

    The rules for changing the Constitution are very hard to understand, but the leader can’t propose changes.

    Changes come from the NEC or “at the request of twenty or more properly constituted and duly registered constituency associations or branches”

    “Such amendments shall only come into force after a postal ballot of the membership has been held in which not less than two-thirds of members voted in favour of them.”

    If I have read the rules correctly, even if elected as leader there is no way the leader can simply impose these ideas. First he has to persuade the NEC to abdicate their power or he has to find 20 branches to propose the idea and then there needs to be a vote of the members with 60% agreement.

    To solve this perhaps step 6 could be changed to:

    6) The White Paper would be subject to a vote by the NEC.
    But even then it appears to breach the constitution because the creation of policy is to be by a committee set up by the NEC, not by the leader.

    Have I misread or misapplied the rules?

  8. Personally I don’t think this kind of article should appear in UKIP Daily, or else it just descends into a stream of them.

    In any case, I didn’t make it past the first paragraph as the none of the three qualities described in the first paragraph are what we require. The description is of a bureaucrat when what is needed in a political leader is vision. I have seen HB at hustings and he clearly lacks vision, and I would challenge if his experience has any relevance at all for the task in hand. Does he have the personality and message to help distinguish us as a party and bring old and new members back? I don’t think so.

    Also I object to them claiming that Farage has endorsed him, he hasn’t, he acted as a referee. As Jane Collins has found out with Bown, being a referee is not the same as an endorsement.

    • Dear Graham – as we’ve had numerous articles/statements by and for AMW, JRE, DK, JC and AP, and earlier by BW and DA, why do you now object to this one, endorsing HB?
      BTW – it’s not HB and his team who say Nigel endorses him – that comes from some readers who obviously haven’t looked at his website.
      Whilst you are perfectly free to post you comments about why you don’t like/object to HB, others have the same right to write about why they endorse him or indeed any of the other candidates, no?
      AFAIK – and I ought to, being the E-i-C – this is still ‘UKIP Daily’, not “AWM Daily”.

      • Yes that’s my point, too numerous articles from campaign teams. It amounts to unpaid advertising rather than free discussion. Advocates are never critical of their own candidate, or positive about other candidates, just “my guy is the greatest”. Personally what I enjoy about this website is it’s free discussion, but too many of these articles kills it off. I’m not particularly anti-HB but this article was the straw that broke the camels back. The worst in the genre was the DK one from last week.

        • I think it would have been much better if the candidates had posted their own cvs on here and been willing to answer questions even if it is somewhat of a baptism of fire – I believe all questions are genuinely asked by people that would like to know.

          This site is as near as one can get to interactive democracy – or would be, if the candidates would embrace the concept. I’m sure at the moment it’s extremely challenging and exhausting for the editors, but no-one can say we on here don’t put forward our views!

          To her credit, Jane Collins gave it a go – dipped a toe in the water!

          • In all fairness, the candidates have been and are trundling up and down the country, from one branch to the other to present themselves and their programme to members. Even they have only got 24 hours a day, and travelling, eating and sleeping (a bit) should have priority at this time of the proceedings over posting comments, much as we’d like to have them.

        • Point taken, Graham – up to a point only though, because members/readers have asked for more info from and on the candidates which is fair enough: given the candidates’ info in the “Independent’ accompanying the ballot which is, I’m sorry, as uninformative as can be.
          This time round, many members not living in London had never heard of a number of candidates, so informing them was obviously a task for UKIP Daily.
          The hustings reports by members, and the endorsement for this or that candidate by a member are certainly more welcome, as far as I’m concerned, than endorsements coming from the Party Aristocracy.
          But give it a bit over two more weeks and it’ll be over, done and dusted and we can all go back to talk of HS2, reform of the HoL, and hopefully about Article 50, Brexit, and the failure of the Tory government …

  9. We all have views with many saying only AMW can achieve their aims. One question, why does she have to be leader? Surely her voice will still be heard if she has a position within the UKIP leadership TEAM. As leader would she give time to the other issues? I agree she needs to be there in the vanguard against the cultural invasion but I have my doubts about her being leader. I am glad that (some) other candidates have said they will work with her and hope that she is there after the election.

    • She has to be leader because UKIP is such a small party, and quite honestly doesn’t warrant a deputy leader saying the odd thing on TV. She will draw the attention that UKIP so badly needs.

      • If AMW becomes leader UKIP will become an even smaller party as those who can see that her approach would be totally counter productive, head for the exit.

        As you say, she would indeed draw attention but the wrong sort of attention.

  10. Look guys, I’ve never had anything to do with party management and don’t want to and share the frustration with the NEC and HQ in general, though you are in danger of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Our main misfortune was Nigel’s sudden departure.

    I actually think the temporary leader and chairman have done their best in very difficult circumstances. It’s the party rules that need reviewing.

    I have been a Ukiper for about 5 years, a chairman for 3. I am also vice chair of my parish council ( as an independent) and leader of the very small UKIP group on the District council. I appear in the local papers regularly. I say this simply to illustrate that I get to talk to hundreds of people, sometimes during elections to thousands, try addressing 2 or 3 local secondary school assemblies at a general election, you will soon feel the mood of the audience. Then there are those doorsteps.

    If AMW gets elected the vast bulk of those people will regard us as no better than the BNP, moderates will leave in droves. branches will collapse. The only other candidate most people know is Whittle, a typical minor politician in every respect. He’s not exactly loveable.

    Please, actually read the article in here by Henry, it makes perfect sense and we so need an organiser, diplomat and negotiator. Those 3 skills are essential and I see no one else who can match them. He may appear a bit grey but with Kurten to back him up it would be no problem. Vote with your head, not your heart or pet prejudices.

    • If the vast bulk of people do regard UKIP as BNP, Icini, it will be because people within UKIP haven’t stopped tell them it will be that since AMW announced she would stand. The shining lights of UKIP have been shockingly disloyal to the Party – for all her faults I’m sure Mrs. May wouldn’t diss any of her Tory Party representatives similarly, whatever her private opinions are. It’s called Party loyalty, and has been absent for some time in UKIP – ‘Independents’ still taking MEP salaries although they no longer speak for UKIP – it goes on and on.

      • Loyalty to the party ? Naturally but not to an individual leadership candidate who I believe will destroy it and intends to use it simply to push a personal agenda that goes well over the top. I’m prepared to fight for the survival of my party.
        You may not have noticed but the big two have splits of their own, it seems most Tories want May to go before another election or sooner. Corbyn also has problems, he did well because the Tories had a lousy campaign, not because the majority of his grassroots love him.

        • Iceni, how can wanting to ban a system that denies the legal rights of some citizens be seen as pursuing a ‘personal agenda’?

          How can vociferously clamouring for ‘one law for all’ be against the interests of the Party? I am curious.

          Personally, I am proud to be belong to a party that contains so many outspoken members in favour of same.

          By the way, is it my imagination or have other candidates become more outspoken on the subject of Islam recently?

          Of some significance is the fact that a strong message to Muslims on video from Nigel Farage, formerly noted for his reticence on the subject, has been withdrawn from YouTube. His visit and speech to the AFD in Germany may be factors in the timing.

          Whoever becomes leader, for me, had better not renege on our expectation of promise in dealing with this most pressing issue of our time, yes, and in conjunction with Cultural Marxism.

        • Apologies, Icini.

    • @icini You say ‘If AMW gets elected the vast bulk of those people will regard us as no better than the BNP.’ Sorry I simply don’t believe that. Things have moved on drastically in just the last few months on social media at least. I put this down to Tommy Robinson doing work for TheRebelMedia YouTube channel. Once Tommy started harassing some of the Muslim rape gangs outside the courthouses people really started listening to the anti-Islam message and could see he wasn’t the racist bigot he was made out to be. Also his appearance on Good Morning Britain raised his profile and the message.
      I know as a committed Christian you feel that an attack on Islam and Muslims is somehow unchristian well I’m afraid you just have to snap out of that.
      I was in church at the weekend and the reading about telling the truth to the Wicked Man came up. As you know the Bible deals in hyperbole to get its message across well the message was this. If you are not prepared to confront the wicked man and point out his evil ways to him because of laziness or the reason of the day being ‘not to offend’ then you are responsible for his damnation and you damn yourself in the process. If you then are not prepared to tell Muslims ‘Hey Muhammad was seriously bad news and you not should follow him’ then you are doing Muslims a disservice. That’s the Christian way.
      Going back to AMW. I have been watching her Twitter following and she gets about 100 new followers a day. Over the last few weeks she has gained several thousand new followers. Things are happening whether you like it or not.

      • I am familiar with the bits of the Koran usually quoted. Sounds rather like parts of the Old Testament to me. Naturally, with the BNP more or less destroyed supporters will turn to an alternative, right now that looks like it could possibly be us. No thanks.

        • There’s a catch in your comment, Icini – the Old Testament was superseded by – the clue is in the name – the New Testament. What has superseded the Koran, Hadith and Sura? Nothing can, because it is the word of Mohammed the perfect man, God’s messenger. And Mohammed lived in the days when barbarity was the norm – your comments are either disingenuous or ill-informed.

          • Having visited several Muslim countries I know that a great number of individuals do not take every word of the Koran literally. Some of the clerics are another matter and that is where we need to direct our attention in the UK. Last time I looked, the Old Testament still formed part of the Bible.
            I doubt anyone in UKIP would deny there is a problem, what we do disagree with is how to resolve it. Declaring a religion is evil because some followers do evil things is counterproductive to say the least.
            Prosecuting criminals and stopping criminal acts is one thing and very necessary, classing all followers of a religion as intrinsically bad is quite another.

        • @ icini
          “Sounds rather like parts of the Old Testament to me”.
          I simply can’t believe you’re coming up with this old chestnut; it was laughed out of the courtroom in terms of defending or excusing islam a while back.
          Now, have you been to a jolly stoning of an adulteress in the UK lately, as prescribed in the OT? Even the Jews stopped doing that quite some time ago, and the OT is actually their history and punishment manual, not ours. The Christian take on stoning adulteresses is “Ye who are without sin, cast the first stone.”
          Thereafter, we in the West dragged ourselves out of the Dark Ages, through the Reformation and Renaissance and into the Age of Enlightenment and Reason. We ignored the nastier bits in the OT and decided for ourselves whether to be religious or not.
          Did islam do that? No, it stayed exactly the way it was 14 centuries ago and still is today. No self-examination, no self-criticism, no reform, no humanising, no let-up on cruelty, bigotry, misogyny, racism, ‘allah-on-our-side’ violence, or vicious punishments. Hands are still being cut off, people are still being beheaded, women are being publicly stoned or thrashed for committing ‘adultery’ which is often actually being raped, but she needed 4 male witnesses to confirm it. There was only one witness – the rapist – so he denies it and she gets whipped, locked up and wishes she had never opened her mouth.
          Of course, you could go abroad and see these things for yourself NOW, or you could wait a few years until it’s happening here in the UK after the islamists snatch power in our country and we’re living under sharia law. If you’re still around then, you’ll remember the BNP as quite mild, reasonable people, really. Your children or grandchildren won’t have heard of them.

          • We also had the Holy Inquisition, Conquistadores, the slaughter of South American natives, of pagan Slavic and Baltic peoples by the Teutonic Order, the jailing of homosexuals, hangings, legal wife beatings etc. & did some of these things throughout our history bar the last few decades. Since then, we have progressed and now teach children about homosexuality, gender fluidity, feminism, same sex marriage and sex change operations. The Muslims are behind us on this too.

            At what point of cultural ‘progress’ do you reach the optimum point and you are entitled to feel superior to anyone who differs?

            Were we at our optimum when we abolished wife beating, hangings and criminalization of homosexuality, but before affirmative action, transgenderism and same sex marriage? Or after all of these things? Or are we still improving and we will be at our best once we have legalized pedophilia (which some prominent Labour politicians have argued in favour of)?

            Which culture is more successful is an objective question. Historically, Britain has been much more successful, I would argue due to the rule of law, limited government, free enterprise – in other words, libertarian values. Whether this will remain so after the shift to socialism and authoritarianism and moral and social decay remains to be seen.

            What others do in their own countries is their business. Here, our law applies. But it needs to be enforced, and it isn’t. That is the problem – and that is not the fault of Muslims. If we visit other countries, we must equally abide by their laws, abhorrent and alien as they may seem to us (& ours no doubt to some of them).

            Is our culture superior to theirs? To each, their own. I don’t feel the need to feel superior, they can do what they want as long as I can do what I want. The most advanced culture to me is the one at the purest point of libertarianism. This is not AMW’s vision, which, to me, due to its bigotry and authoritarianism, is also barbaric. I see no reason why her adherents should feel superior to Muslims.

            I concur that stoning women who were raped as though they were adulteresses is cruel and unjust. I am less sure that chopping thieves’ hands off is more unjust to the criminals than our treatment of thieves (i.e. mollycoddling them) is unjust to their victims.

          • The curious thing is that stoning for adultery is not actually in the Koran. It is in the Hadith. And applied first to a Jewish pair, not to Muslims.

            Within the Koran the punishment for adultery is dependant on whether the woman was a slave when she married or was not a slave. The punishment for the former is half that for the latter.
            Which of course implied a punishment other than death – since you cannot be half killed, or killed twice.

          • Replying to Tomaz:

            The problem with “whataboutery” is that you will always find examples of cruelty. However, the key point is to look at those who started each religion.

            Jesus admonished one of his followers who cut off a person’s ear. Mohammed, by contrast, commanded violence and killing, (just read the Koran to verify this for yourself) and killed hundreds with his own weapon.

            You really cannot equate them.

            Christians are not supposed to lie, although a few might do. By contrast, Muslims are permitted to lie, (taqiyya) particularly to their wives, and to non-believers.

        • It looks to me more and more as though the BNP might have been ‘early adopters’ of some ‘wrong’ views that are more and more becoming accepted views.

          I stand braced for protests.

    • The problem with your argument Icini is that UKIP is already regarded as far right by many. I lost count of the number of times I have been called “racist” or “Nazi” when handing out UKIP leaflets on the high street.

      Beyond Brexit the next huge challenge is Islam. Islam itself, not “Islamism” or “extremists”.

      Do you read the Koran? Do you know the terms “abrogation” and “taqiyya”?

  11. Yesterday I posted my ballot paper to London. My question is why have the candidates been so slow in posting their manifestos and personal statements?
    daily UKIP, you tube, local/national newspapers, twitter, facebook. etc.
    There is an amateurishness about the dissemination of policies and personalities in UKIP. It is too late now to be promoting HB as the saviour of the human race. I have wayched the videos above and I think he has some very good qualities and is an asset to the party.
    UKIP is in a mess and the elite attitude of certain officials and MEPs make reform both difficult and very necessary at the same time.
    The very first thing to do after the result of the ;eadership election is root and branch reform. What on earth are we doing having EU style Commissioners being appointed as party Regional Controllers? Democracy where art thou?
    The new leader MUST act quickly and decisively to unite the party ESPECIALLY if s/he has a small mandate ( the largest vote but say only 20% of the electorate or less).
    One obvious way to do this is form a kitchen cabinet of the talents and invite all/most of the candidates whose names were on the ballot paper to be part of a new force to appeal not just to dyed in the wool kippers but the general public.
    I also have the worry that half the possible voters in this leadership election have made up their mind based solely upon name recognition or similar peripheral reason and eschewing candidates also on the basis of gossip/ name recognition.
    I cannot wait to see who the winner will be. I hope I am not suicidal afterwards.

    • Kain. When the fun stops it’s time to quit. To be a politician a sense of humour is required. It’s an utterly mad game. There may be serious matters to be addressed but I doubt it is actually immediate disaster for anyone except us if we get the election wrong.
      Anything can happen in politics as recent events have demonstrated. Wherever UKIP heads UKIP people will continue to fight for freedom. democracy and British values, it’s just we have different ideas about how to go about it… which of course is the biggest problem of all. The revolution UKIP started will not fade, even if we do. We can all be proud of the part we played.

    • You received a ballot paper? I’m still waiting. Surely they should have all been sent out together?

      • I haven’t received mine either. I contacted Head Office and they said that if I still hadn’t received it by Wednesday to get back to them and the Returning Officer would issue one manually for me.

        Hope this helps.


  12. I’m sticking with David Kurten – inclined to agree with Icini about David & Henry, I am still unhappy with Henry’s decision to challenge AMW – TWO weeks after the candidate list was released.
    However both of them have said they will work together if one is elected. David has the charisma and Joe Public appeal, Henry has the skillset to make the changes we need to become great again happen. Whichever of them is leader or deputy if they play to their strengths with MSM and internally I believe they can do the job our country so badly needs

  13. icini what makes you think there is a large pool of voters that would go for Henry’s version of UKIP or any of the other candidate’s version of UKIP? I can tell you there isn’t. You’ve voted now so that’s great but AMW offers fireworks whereas the others offer sparklers at best. And you know hat happens with sparklers. They last about 10 seconds then burn your fingers. Which is what I can see happening with UKIP if anyone other than AMW wins.

    • That much I agree with, she does offer fireworks – the kind that will burn down, if not blow up, the whole house on day one.

      • Then, Tomaz, it can re-build – like a forest fire sweeping through the land, and in only a few days, fresh new young shoots emerge.

        • And then TPTB will drive cattle and sheep all over the fresh new young shoots to graze them to the ground while dumping their manure over the rest, suffocating those which hadn’t yet been eaten …

      • You are quite right, Tomaz. You cannot in any way compare a Henry Bolton to Anne Marie Waters.

        HB was a paid soldier under HMG/Armed Forces instruction.

        Anne Marie is self funded and under no external impetus to put her life on the line, as undoubtedly anyone does who speaks out against Islam publicly: Salman Rushdie, Ayan Hirsi Ali, Geert Wilders being high profile ones and there are numerous others.

        Additionally, AMW probably has to watch her back from both directions; I do not trust our governments.

  14. “The extremist minority within the Islamic world, who seek to rule the world;”

    Those who commit acts of terrorism against us might be in the minority – for now. However all who follow and whose lives are controlled by a belief in Islam are the enemy; all desire that our country be turned into an Islamic caliphate. The demographics are on their side; all they need to do is wait for their numbers to reach the critical point at which they can take control.

    Ignore the growth of Islam at your peril.

    Ignore the desires of their silent majority at your peril.

    Islam has no place in our country and its adherents must be vanquished before they gain that critical number.

    • Well said JackT.

    • @JackT
      Exactly the line that struck me too, with the same force it did you.

      It defines Henry as an apologist for the religion of peace and an appeaser towards its adherents. I cannot improve upon your reaction.

      • An apologist and appeaser?
        You did watch the video, didn’t you?

        • Viv, I watched the video and it is wonderful that Henry has fought for us – he is undoubtedly a Patriot and an able and brave soldier, a gentleman and knows his way round the corridors of power. But his manner of speaking and delivery, I’m sorry, just imho will not inspire.

          Also I would just like to say that in the bravery stakes, doesn’t AMW put her life on the line every single day for her country and in defense of the people in it. You don’t have to be in uniform to fight for Britain.

          Additionally, your comment yesterday about the fact that he would bring UKIP together is quite valid, but how many are we? We need to inspire new members – we need to look outward, not inward.

          • Oh please. I cannot allow this claim that AMW is putting her life on the line in any way comparable to the risks Henry has taken (actually being in the line of fire and exploding bombs) for the country or to compare her demagogic whipping up of frenzy against Mooslems to what he has actually done to fight terrorism to go unchallenged.

            This is on par with women who regret having had consensual sex the night before complaining that they have been the victims of the same crime as someone who was brutally beaten and forcibly penetrated.

            It is the difference between a spoilt, silver-tongued snowflake who knows how to complain, stir trouble and feels entitled to take charge of an organization they have done nothing to build up, and someone who has actually rolled up their sleeves and got their hands dirty doing some good for the country.

          • If Anne Marie is never in danger because she criticizes Islam, why is everyone so afraid of drawing cartoons of Mohammed, why can we burn a bible but not a koran – why did Piers Morgan become hysterical when Tommy Robinson picked up a koran on TV – you owe me an answer, Tomaz.

            Incidentally Tomaz I not only re-tweet Tommy Robinson when appropriate, I have donated, especially when he needed funds for a top barrister to stop him from going back to prison – where he had recently nearly been killed. The barrister was hired, and after his submission,the case was dismissed, with the judge saying it should never have been brought. I am extremely proud, and glad I could afford to help Tommy, even if only in a small way. So I expect to be standing next to Panmelia in the UKIP dock! Though, last time I looked it was a free country.

        • “Apologist and appeaser” in AMW supporter lingo is just their term of abuse entirely equivalent to the term “wacist” which other left wingers use – in other words, “not one of us”. This is all “standard left wing” (to quote AMW) methodology – “if you are not with us, you are against us” (“and therefore we can shoot you”, was the original communist interpretation, but here it means “and therefore we can verbally attack you and slander you and don’t have justify our actions”) – and thus reveals them for who they really are.

          • @ Slivnik
            This refers to your previous post @ 3.43pm.
            Again with sexual references against women – a whole scenario of a woman crying ‘rape!’ when it’s a lie, unlike ‘someone who was brutally beaten and forcibly penetrated’. Does this kind of language turn you on? Is it necessary? What does it have to do with AMW? I have never heard her complain that her life is in danger, although I have no doubt that it is. You also imply that she is a ‘spoilt snowflake’. What do you know of her upbringing? Is the ‘snowflake’ bit a racial slur, or what?
            Since your article and your antagonistic replies to people who commented, plus further comments such as those on this page, the normal quality, tone and style of ukipdaily has suffered.
            Please restrain your language; we’ve heard enough from you about daughters’ genitals, an imaginary rape, brutal beating and forcible penetration.
            AMW and her supporters have plenty to do trying to fight against real muslim rapes and real FGM crimes against girls and women.

          • Panmelia,

            Well said Pan. This person’s comments are often depraved as you say usually against the female sex, perhaps that is why he despises AMW’s so much, but there again he supports Jane Collins so maybe he is just some sort of weird pervert.

    • That is a fine declaration, Jack – but where does HB say he’ll disregard islam? Doesn’t he in fact say that he recognises that threat full well, having been at the sharp end?
      Declarations are twelve to a dozen – what is needed are policies and a platform from which to get them implemented. HB has pointed out some of what he thinks needs to be done, what UKIP Policies should be.

      • I think all candidates would state that they believe in “one law for all, and that’s British law”.

        But it’s just rhetoric for all but one of them.

        Ask yourself why there is only one candidate receiving death threats for her beliefs. Could it be that she is the only one who makes the followers of islam believe that she might actually work against their aims, whereas the rest will simply keep stating platitudes and doing nothing tangible to make changes?

        Referring to the problem as being caused by “extremists” is, I would have thought, giving tacit approval to those who follow an ideology that wishes to subjugate or kill non-believers but who have not yet actually carried out Allah’s wishes. Even so, 72 virgins and guaranteed passage to paradise is a pretty appealing promise, isn’t it?

        Peter Whittle stated on Newsnight that he would not say islam was evil, and he is second only to AMW in his outspokenness and courage to confront the advance of Sharia.

        Henry Bolton has islam some way down his agenda, perhaps because he has already found tackling it “too hard”. He has a great CV but, from what I’ve been able to infer, too few real results.

        AMW has rattled the establishment, the MSM, and presumably quite a few followers of islam. That doesn’t seem like a bad start.

        • Or maybe he (and others) have Islam some way down their agendas because that is where it belongs, both in terms of UKIP priorities and the priorities of the British public. Because they have a sense of perspective and can see what in the big picture view is important, rather than having an obsession with just one fringe issue which has nothing to do with UKIP’s values and is the top obsession to only a tiny proportion of the electorate (<2% as we have seen at the last General Election, and as these people (the BNP and EDL) have learned time and time again). The number one priority is still Brexit.

    • “Islam has no place in our country and its adherents must be vanquished before they gain that critical number.”

      I shake my head in disbelief when I read stuff like this.

      People who share your view make the same mistake I see time and again when they insist on treating a religion as an amorphous blob whose followers all share exactly the same aims.

      Wake up and look at human psychology. When it comes to religious belief, there is nothing more fragmented. It is why in every major religion you get groups within groups within groups. And many of those groups often hate each other.

      The violent and authoritarian sects within Islam are power hungry and and very dangerous. We all get that without needing patronising lectures from some Ukippers who think they have discovered something the rest of us have missed. You haven’t. It’s just that we recognise that dealing with the problem is going to be a long and arduous task, very careful and clever handling and absolutely will require to encourage effort and support from those Muslims who reject extremism.

      Your statement clearly aims to remove all Islam from this country which would alienate swathes of Muslims who hate and fear the extremists. Talk of ‘vanquishing’ would not be seen as a rational approach by the majority of the electorate in this country – and they’d be right.

      • A very well argued contribution. I hope to read more of your posts in the future.

      • @ David Penn
        Problem is, there has been nothing BUT ‘very careful handling’ of the problem of islam in this country – so careful as to have had no effect whatsoever in curbing its demands, its ambitions, its power-grabbing and its disgusting practices. There has been NO ‘clever handling’ of the problem from successive governments, just calisthenics: kowtowing, bending over backwards, and sinking to the knees with forehead on mat. The two administrations before sharia May’s current ‘A Happy Eid to all muslims! sickening sycophantic antics, actually empowered the muslim patriarchs with sharia courts and money to spend on them!

        It is you who sees the sunni majority ummah as an ‘amorphous blob’, all in it together and happy as clams; but you don’t look at who benefits, who is subjugated , who suffers. islam is an extreme patriarchal cult of men in which all the men are lords of the earth unless they are homosexuals, in which case they can expect to be ostracised, whipped or murdered. The women are the men’s chattels: their ’tilth’ as the koran charmingly puts it, domestic slaves, and breeders of sons with which to perpetuate the cult. The women are whores and eligible for rape if they don’t envelop themselves in thick cloth, preferably head to toe. The children are the property of the father and he gets them, however violent he may have been been to his wife (beating her is OK with a certain width of stick or bar) whom he can divorce by saying it three times. The father may want his daughters to be FGM’ed so that he can marry them off more easily later to someone he has chosen. It is the womenfolk who are expected to arrange the FGM and inflict on their daughters what was inflicted on them.
        islam is a horror cult from the dark past, yet it is allowed to squat in our country, bring us down, and do as it likes by playing the ‘race’ card whenever challenged, even though it is not a race. The power of the muslim men must be broken and their women and children protected. The only thing the men will understand is that we are strong, stronger than them, and our laws and culture, not theirs, will prevail. The time to do it is now, before it’s too late.

  15. Yep, have voted for Henry. Pleased to see him rising up the bookies lists as a possible new leader. I’m staring to get quite upset with the AMW supporters, they seem unable to grasp they there is no huge pool of potential voters who would go for her version of UKIP. I suspect that if my branch vetting group considered her application for membership, she’d be rejected. This contest is about selecting a winner, not about demonstrating how much you dislike Islam or your support for feminism.

    There is simply no one with the qualities required to take us forward except for Mr Bolton, possibly with David Kurten as deputy.

    I will wait for the conference but it seems that there is at least a chance I still have some future in UKIP, though to be honest, unless David or Henry get in, I doubt it’s worth wasting my time and money on my favourite party for much longer.

    • Hear, hear Icini!

    • There are four leaders I could live with (maybe five, I know nothing about Aidan Powlesland, he was never well known, he seems not to have built up a profile at all and he seems to be a non-factor at this point in this race) – Jane Collins, Henry Bolton, David Kurten and JRE.

      I don’t know much about Kurten, other than that he used to be at one point very close to Whittle (although maybe they’ve fallen out now) and they did some things together (to do with tithing) which I think open non-trivial questions about their integrity.

      Decent people, however, might potentially vote for any of these four. If they all stay in the race (and I know it’s late in the game), the vote will be split too many ways and the lunatic fringe is likely to take over. I hope maybe some of them will still see sense and pull out and endorse another. Jane and her team were the first to recognize the importance of this and were willing to make the sacrifices (at scale – Bill Etheridge was actually the first), which is why she has my support. But she is not the only candidate to have my respect.

      • I think you will find the ‘lunatic fringe’ is Antifa, Tomaz! As well as those wanting to demolish not only our statues, but our history and our culture.

        • Well Dee,

          I have voted now, and it is for one of the one’s Tomaz has mentioned, but I don’t consider AMW’s to be any less decent or those that vote for her of the lunatic fringe. However, does that now make me ‘decent’ in Tomaz’s mind?.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.