Latest from UKIP Daily

No such thing as ‘plain sailing’ with UKIP …

Mike Hookem MEP

With the NEC’s decision yesterday to allow all eleven candidates to stand in this year’s leadership contest, we now have kick-off. We all knew already that this would be an extraordinary affair. While many candidates have been visiting branches and unofficial Hustings these past few weeks, in general everybody has held their breath, waiting for the outcome of that NEC decision.

Rumours abounded on candidates going to be barred. Many members – even those who said categorically they would not vote for her – were up in arms about that, deeming it unworthy of our Party not to allow members to make up their own minds by barring certain candidates.

Common sense prevailed – but this is not the end of the story by any means. There’s no such thing as ‘plain sailing’ with UKIP, and thank God for that! The first repercussions are being felt, and they are not restricted to UKIP but are being taken to the general public. Below is a press release just in, from Mike Hookem MEP. That press release went out to the MSM in general and we publish it unabridged, just as we received it:

UKIP MEP – “I will not turn a blind eye to racism in the UKIP leadership race.

Mike Hookem MEP resigns Whip’s job in European Parliament over Chief Whip’s outspoken support for Anne Marie Waters.

Senior UKIP MEP, Mike Hookem, has dramatically quit his Deputy Whip post in the European Parliament over Chief Whip, Stuart Agnew’s support for far-right leadership candidate, Anne Marie Waters.  

In an explosive letter to interim UKIP leader, Steve Crowther, Mr Hookem said he was “no longer prepared to carry out the position” due to Mr Agnew’s support for a candidate who is “not a fit and proper person to carry this party forward as its leader.”

In Thursday’s letter to Mr Crowther, Mr Hookem outlined how he was disturbed by Stuart Agnew’s proclamation that he “looks forward to telling his grandchildren in the future how he helped in the fight against Muslims,” and that he would keep a scrapbook of communications from those who disagreed with his position.

Speaking of his dramatic resignation, Mr Hookem said, “let Agnew add this to his scrapbook! I strongly disagree with the views Ms Waters and Mr Agnew promote and I would like to put as much distance between me and them as possible. If I were to continue in my position of Deputy Whip, I would be seen as supporting or at the very least turning a blind eye to extreme views and this is not something I am prepared to do. I am not a racist and have never campaign on race issues. While I do believe in controlled immigration, this position is about “space rather than race”; and I am not prepared to support someone who seeks to single out in section of our society simply due to their religious beliefs.”

Mr Hookem continued, “I would also like to clarify that my decision has not been influenced by my support for any other candidate. If I’m bluntly honest, I do not feel I can support any candidate in the current leadership race, including my two MEP colleagues. In my opinion none of them measure up to what is, and will continue to be an extremely difficult job. Examining the Candidates CV’s, I feel none have the ‘tools in the box’ that are required and many I think have confused ability with ambition.”

Mike Hookem’s press officer has also provided us with the actual letter which was sent to Steve Crowther. That letter, we’re told, went out on Thursday 10th August by email, the receipt of which was acknowledged by Mr Crowther in a phone call in the afternoon of Friday 11th Aug. The letter is thus clearly not a reaction to the NEC’s decision later that day.

The press release, by necessity, does not quote the full letter, and by necessity concentrates on a few salient points so the MSM can and will publish. However, to inform members, we’ll quote a few relevant sentences from the actual letter which did not make it into the press release and which will serve to explain Mike Hookem’s reasons:

“Throughout my ten-year membership of UKIP I have proudly toured the Yorkshire region and country as a whole, speaking to members, the media and the public to impress that we as a party are not racist.

Our policies are common sense when we speak on immigration/migration about “space not race”. I believe as a party that we accept an that an individual’s choice of religion is a personal issue and one of conviction, and we shouldn’t try to influence that choice. However as a party, we will speak against those who use their religion as an excuse to carry out acts of criminality, terrorism or twelfth century cultural practices. We speak out through the media and call for the protection of the general public and those in our communities via the rule of British law.”

Mike Hookem writes further:

“I have always had the highest regard and respect for Stuart as a person and as a senior member of the party but on this I have to strongly disagree and distance myself from his views. If I were to continue in my position of “Deputy Whip” I would be seen as supporting or at the very least turning a blind eye.”

Let me conclude by saying that, regardless if one agrees with Mike’s letter and the press statement or not: one must applaud his honesty, that he stands by his principles and that he comes out in the open on this issue – unlike some who prefer to work ‘through channels’ and who I most definitely shall not name on these pages!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
About Vivian Evans (322 Articles)
Vivian is a UKIP patron, Vice Chair of UKIP Cardiff and Editor in Chief of UKIP Daily

54 Comments on No such thing as ‘plain sailing’ with UKIP …

  1. It’s a bit rich Mike Hookem labeling AMW “extremist”, has he actually ever heard the girl speak ? ! the only thing she can be accused of is saying it as it really is. She speaks for millions.

    I tell you what I find extreme, squaring up to a colleague and engaging in fisticuffs, with or without handbags !

  2. An aptly named man (moron)
    Just the one to deliver a left hook to AMW after having delivered a right one to Woolfe

  3. Criticism of Islam from within Britain is not new. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, a Muslim refugee from Amin’s Uganda, is a regular contributor to The Independent and The Guardian. She sees Sharia as follows: “Sharia – a brutal law made by men, for men”. ‘Oppression within families is legitimised by these laws made up in the centuries following the birth of the faith. New Labour was complicit in the rise and rise of obscurantist Islam, the enemy of progressive Muslims the world over. Being a woman you see I am both dirty and a temptress. Read my lips: Sharia laws are made by men for men of the Middle Ages. In Sharia law, a man is double the value of a woman – so there is no equal access to assets. Custody is automatically given to the man in the event of a marital break-up. You can assume that the woman is always punished, no matter what the circumstances; equal status is never accorded’. Those were (part of) her views as mentioned in a London Evening Standard article written 11 years ago (and not available to view on the net). Why have our ‘leaders’ in Westminster not grasped the nettle regarding this evil cult before? Britain can do without the various problems and concomitant costs that Islam has brought. Sadly it looks like our children and grandchildren are stuck with them now. I’ll apologise should my Brexit vote eventually cause inconveniences but I won’t admit to agreeing to an unwanted and unwarranted change in the British way of life caused by Islam

  4. The dreaded “AMW” is merely one of 11 candidates standing for election – why the immediate histrionics? Surely Mike could wait for the membership to give their verdict? I conclude that Mike’s real problem is that the Party chose not to be dictatorial on this occasion – he wants “the elite” to keep control. Wisely in my view, the elite has realised the pitfall that awaited and has side-stepped it (well done!) – rejection by the membership would be much more convincing than a preemptive disqualification.

    And yet – do any of the other candidates have what it takes?

  5. Mr Hookem is not even worth writing, talking or thinking about! So come on guys, don’t give him air time. All the members will make their own choice, that’s democracy. I may not hold much favour to a few of the candidates (well, the ones I’ve heard of anyway!) and don’t want an extremist leader, nor, a wet f***ty one either sooooo. Come on you Ben!!! Whoops! But seriously, WE members will decide and bum to Mr Hookem I say.

    • Amorée you have a way with words!

      For those who don’t know Amorée she is like a limpet when she gets the bit between her teeth. “They don’t like it up ’em!”

  6. So he resigned as ‘Whip’ on a point of principle – but decided to keep his cushy overpaid MEP job for as long as he possibly can… And we’re supposed to be impressed? I think not!

    • And look at the timing. It is a month after Agnew came out for Waters at an MEP meeting. Pure coincidence that it that long for yet another MEP to attack Waters just as the NEC contemplated whether she could stand and a day after she is allowed through he pops up on anti-UKIP MSM?

  7. Susanna Calladine // August 13, 2017 at 11:11 am // Reply

    Hi to all.

    I can tell you that I don’t like it one bit when people tell me to ‘ calm down ‘. It usually makes me even worse.

    But, on this occasion, I’m going to ask every UKIP member and supporter to do just that.

    Because it’s important to know and understand, that dramatic resignations, emotive words and provocative statements are DESIGNED to ferment discord between us.

    So, instead of reacting in the way we’re expected to react – be calm, quieten down and be confident that the following will surely come to pass, namely :-

    1) We will ALL (hopefully) send off our completed ballot papers.

    2) The next UKIP leader will be announced in Sept.

    3) The NEC will HAVE to come to a compromise with the majority of UKIP members, who want decisive action to be taken on Islam – whether Anne Marie Waters is elected leader or not.

    4) If WE, the UKIP membership, DEMAND an official UKIP policy calling for a referendum on Islam be given to the British people, then we can FORCE a well-needed, nation-wide debate and subsequant vote – the same way we achieved the referendum vote on EU membership.

    5) The NEC are nothing without our membership
    – if they refuse us this referendum policy, we will simply move to Aaron Bank’s new party. (he’s currently waiting in the wings – watching the way UKIP goes ).

    Remember, the NEC is there to serve the members
    – the members are not there to serve the NEC.

    In conclusion, don’t get angry – get demanding.
    Be assertive. Be determined. Be prepared to move.

    We WILL have our referendum on Islam – and so will the British people !

    • I agree Susanna. Banks has been very quiet recently. I would guess that after the end of September, when the results of the leadership contest are known, he’ll suddenly burst onto the scene with a full manifesto and plenty of money, and invite disaffected Kippers to join him – and many will.

  8. Hookem views still being peddled on Twitter this morning! At least we know who TPTB don’t want as Leader, and ergo, who they do want! Subtlety was never the strong point at the top. So for me, there are only two or three candidates on my multiple choice ballot, even if it a 4 candidate choice on the ballot paper. I wonder if J R-E will also get ‘the treatment’ – if not, he’s obviously not seen as much of a threat!

  9. kenneth james ogilvie // August 13, 2017 at 9:39 am // Reply

    Hookam said he isn’t a racist. None us are but we are being disturbed by the Rise of Islam and the followers of Islam are Muslim. Nobody is hating all Muslims, but as the old saying goes” Not all Muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are Muslim. Islam is a cult not a religion in my book and you cannot be a racist against a cult or religion.
    At present I am not a member and I am waiting to see who the next leader will be. I favour either Kurten or Waters but both have faults. What is Hookam going to do if Waters gets elected, resign? Perhaps he should after all it was his altercation which got rid of a fine candidate in Woolfe. One more thing if he doesn’t like any of the candidates why didn’t he stand himself?

  10. Hookem should give up his membership and move to party more suitable for him such as the LibDems. There should be no place in UKIP for a supporter of Islam so he should be joined in resignation by Nuttall and anyone else who supports the enemy within.

    If UKIP will not fight against the invader who will? As an interested bystander I will join UKIP if AMW is elected and, hopefully, “drains the swamp”.

    I’m not familiar with the leadership election process but a straight vote between 11 candidates is unlikely to produce an acceptable result.

    • “Hookem should give up his membership and move to party more suitable for him such as the LibDems.”

      Haha, yes. Like this one:

      “Whether it’s the Koran or the Bible they point out that their Prophet preached goodness, toleration and care for others.” Abrogation – have you heard of it?

      “If we do that then none of the people who have died at the hands of political terrorists will have died in vain.” Idiotic!

      There is the typical Lib Dem response. Contemptible ignorance – Hookem can have some friends there and they can all sing Kumbaya together forever and ever – at least until they get their throats slit by some Muslim who follows the exact teachings of the Koran. “strike at their necks” it says.

      • Hugo, the simplistic thinking of Richard Kemp, whoever he is, is mind-boggling. The IRA were political terrorists he says, therefore we must regard muslim terrorists as political ones too. Were the IRA following instructions from the New Testament to kill and maim non-Catholics or anyone else who opposed their cause? No, they were defying its precepts, not following them; theirs was a political cause, not a religious one.
        In contrast, muslims have a handbook of hate and murder called the koran which far too many follow religiously – literally, not metaphorically.
        Kemp’s claim that ‘their Prophet preached goodness, toleration and care for others’ in the same way that Jesus did, is so absurd that it should be classed as a 1984-level ‘two and two make five’ mind-bender.

      • Thanks for the link Hugo, had a jolly good laugh at that!

        On a side note, while on his blog site, I found this one, very relevant to the subject matter:

        After having another jolly good laugh, I then became worried at the shocking ignorance of this fool. He also has a pop at fellow ‘progressives’ the Greens too, while failing to see just how irrelevant his own party are.

  11. PurplePottymouth // August 13, 2017 at 7:48 am // Reply

    BBC finds Peter Whittle acceptable? Beware! Do we want a leader who is part of the old guard who have got us into this mess – either by incompetence or design? Who decided that ‘integration’ should be our pre manifesto launch, press released policy item and not how our economic policies would set UKplc up to benefit from Brexit? Did Paul’s deputy have nothing to do with that? Does anyone out there understand Joe Public doesn’t read manifestos but they do watch telly ( usually the Biased Broadcasting Corp)? If Peter does why did we give MSM manna from heaven with burka bans & ensure our vote tanked?

  12. Hookem cannot argue logically against the statement “Islam is evil”.

    And so he makes accusations that AMW is right wing. And the favourite stupidity when you cannot win the argument – racism. (Despite the obvious inconvenient truth that several staunch critics of Islam have dark skin.)

    If he did attempt to argue that Islam is peaceful, using quotes from the Koran, I would have more respect for him. He might say “the Koran say there is no compulsion in religion”. or do the favourite quote of Clegg “whoever kills a man it is as though they kill all mankind…”. He would be factually incorrect due to abrogation, but at least he would be attempting to argue rationally.

    Instead he throws a strop and goes like a cry baby to the media.

    Come on here Mr Hookem and throw us your best verbal punch. You do not dare to, do you? Because you know that you will be floored straight away.

  13. Hookem is a paid stooge. Used to caused the problems with Woolfe and now, right on time to high light the Islamic issue and the in fighting within the party.
    Be very careful UKIP

    • kenneth james ogilvie // August 14, 2017 at 12:16 pm // Reply

      We’ve got Oflynn, Evans, Hamilton, Brinkly, Whittle and now Hookem . What a dysfunctional party we are becoming . No wonder Nigel left

  14. Enough is enough. Hookem was on the BBC earlier this evening saying that he believed Anne Marie Waters “should not be in the party at all” and is “not a fit and proper person to carry this party forward as its leader.”

    This is egregious interference in the leadership election. The NEC have approved the list of candidates, of which she is one, and they are all members in good standing.

    The pattern is clear. The two candidates considered to to a threat to the “favourite” are Waters and Kurten. On Thursday, two months after a rather pathetic article about Kurten, Evans and Whittle were quoted in an on-line publication calling for Kurten’s suspension (contrary to J.3.14 of the Rule Book) on exaggerated charges that are not supportable on the facts. But that’s not the point of course. Just get the smears out there among the wider membership and prejudice the choices.

    Etheridge had opened the attack on Waters several weeks ago with an article in The Telegraph. Now Hookem, a month after Agnew declared for Waters, suddenly finds he needs to resign as deputy whip and go public about it. Agnew informed the MEPs on 4th July that he was supporting Waters. What took you so long Hookem? A matter of timing the hoped for damage?

    We can expect this pattern to continue. There will be further attempts to discredit Waters and Kurten and depending on which of them is most likely to overtake Whittle will be subject to an onslaught.

    It is not a level playing field. Senior members of the party consider themselves above the rules.

    I want the swamp drained. If it is not then I am done with UKIP.

  15. Political correctness and the religion of peace:

  16. On Mike Hookem’s website, under the ‘about Mike Hookem MEP’ heading:

    ‘….however, joining UKIP was like a breath of fresh air. Plain speaking was the norm….’

    But not allowed for Anne Marie apparently, Mike?

  17. Phil O'Sophical // August 12, 2017 at 4:29 pm // Reply

    Now there are two people in the party publicly claiming, in true intolerant politically correct form, that two leadership candidates are unfit for public office (one for ‘homophobia’ which it wasn’t, and one for ‘Islamophobia’, which it isn’t), when what they mean is that they personally disagree with their views.

    And in the case of Evans, we’ve been here before, because she seemed to think Nigel was unfit for office, which says it all really. She (and clique) had their chance with the election of Nuttall, and we saw how that turned out.

    Now it seems both would once again rather damage the party by giving ammunition to their media and political opponents, than allow democracy to take its course, and then leave if one of the two they so dislike should be elected.

    If either of the two who have been maligned really is unfit for public office based on their views, what does that make Jeremy Corbyn and even more, John McDonnell, and where does it leave democracy?

    On a related point, doesn’t the fact that, rather than candidates coalescing around two or three like-minded individuals, there are 11 candidates, each distinctly setting out their stalls, show what a broad church Ukip always has been, behind the one overwhelming uniting factor of Brexit, now that that has been to an extent removed.

    • Phil, I haven’t seen any mention of Hookem accusing AMW of ‘islamophobia’, which at least would be focusing on her attitude to islam. No, he’s accused her, ridiculously of ‘racism’ – apparently he hasn’t twigged yet that islam is not a race.
      The word ‘islamophobia’, popularised by the Leftards of the Commission for Racial Equality (Unless You’re White) some years ago is an oxymoron when used as a criticism or accusation. Even the former director of the CRE(UYW), Trevor Whatisname, who coined it, did a backpedalling act on this 1984 word in a fairly recent TV programme he made about muslims and the ‘problems’ they create in the UK.

      There is no such thing as ‘islamophobia’; not unless we want to create meaningless words such as psychopathophobia or cancerophobia. Who wouldn’t dislike and fear a dangerous, marauding psychopath if he was hot on your heels? Who doesn’t fear and dislike being told they have a cancer that will change their life and kill them?
      Who in their right minds would not fear and dislike a religious cult with a ‘holy’ book that encourages killing or subjugating infidels, taking infidel women as sex slaves, cutting off hands, feet and heads, whipping, beating, mutilating female genitals, forcing young girls to marry old men, killing disobedient children for compromising ‘honour’, slaughtering animals as cruelly as possible, killing dogs as ‘unclean’; and whose ambition is to make everyone in the world worship some preposterous entity of their own imagination?

      It’s time we waged war on lazy PC Leftard duckspeak, and dismissed ‘racist’ and ‘islamophobia’ as meaningless boo-words. If challenged to explain exactly what the words mean, how many could offer a convincing explanation?

      • “a cancer that will change their life and kill them”

        An absolute fact for those who will come after us. Unfortunately too many have already experienced that in their young lives.

  18. The prevalence of misogyny, homophobia, and anti-Semitism is highest among Muslims – by some margin compared to other groups. The religion that feeds and nurtures such attitudes merits very critical scrutiny and if it is acceptable that Christianity be satirised and lampooned – it has been by the BBC for years – so should Islam be subject to debunking humour.

    But wait. We don’t do that because of the underlying threat of violence. Islam with the help of the left has created a special protected status for itself. For me, that is not the British way. It is cultural invasion.

    We are starting to fight back. The best way to do that is a legitmate subject of debate. Trying to silence someone we should be grateful to for getting it in the agenda at all is is wholly wrong. Hookem et al should get over themselves.

    For the attention of Mister Hookem (MEP Great Yorkshire Party)and all others who follow the cameroni line of “RoP..great religion”.
    These are just some of the things that islam commands its adherents to demand once it is in a position to do so by civic insurrection and use of force by any means necessary. All this has happened previously in countries from Turkestan/Sinkiang to Spain in no particular order
    1) Alcohol banned
    2) All dogs slaughtered
    3) None religious music banned
    4)Social dancing banned
    5) Slaughter of animals strictly by halal methods
    6) Closure of many churches or their sequestration as mosques if say a prime site or significant building. Complete eternal ban on the building of any more churches. Buddhist etc Temples to be razed to the ground.
    7) Supremacy of islam announced in Cathedrals Parliaments etc
    8) Only islamic education allowed in schools (home tutoring of other faiths tolerated.)
    9) Slavery legalised. Sex slavery and sale of women ‘normalised’. Rape of non muslim women by muslim men not deemed a crime.
    10) All none muslims offered three alternatives to death – convert to ‘the one true faith’ or if christian pay the special annual jizya tax – or flight. Literally run for your life.
    11) All those who pay jizya tax not allowed to own horses nor ride them. Haircut to be of the kind deemed insulting (to them)and non islamic. Certain items of clothing cannot be worn by non muslims and certain items of clothing must be worn by them.
    12) All aspects of life eg working hours, meal times, periods of work, periods of rest etc etc dominated by the islamic calendar and call to prayer.
    13) An almost complete ban on humour.
    14) If it is not formally allowed by the islamic holy books then it is banned.
    15) Women reduced to chattel ( effectively)and the almost complete ban of women from social life outwith the home. An end to any forum where the sexes mingle openly eg cinemas segregated etc
    16) Legal disputes always weigh in favour of the muslim against a non muslim.
    17) The world divided between the Dar al islam (the islamic world) and the dar al ghar ( the place of war/conflict).
    18) Lying and cheating a non muslim is not necessarily wrong. Raping a non muslim’s wife is not necessarily wrong under islamic law.
    For more info google search Robert Spencer arabic scholar of the USA.
    Could someone email this to Mike Hookem with my compliments?

  20. mis-spelled “ideology” in my last comment due to autocorrect (!) and no proof-reading. Apologies.

  21. Mr Hookem is being a bit premature. He should at least wait until a new leader has been elected and then if he is not happy throw his teddy out of the pram. This fit of pique is reminiscent of his fracas with the big bad Woolfe. I am no supporter of AMW but to have barred her would have been unjustified and caused others to react in an way that is also damaging to the party. Democracy has to be enacted and adhered to.

  22. Thank goodness Mike Hookem, who so clearly has shown he can distinguish between race and religion and between religion and poisonous idealogy, has chosen this moment to resign.

  23. Had Mr Hookem been thrown out for his part in bringing the Party into disrepute episode with Mr Woolfe, he wouldn’t be having his current day in the sunshine.

    When Ann Marie Waters hasn’t been elected, it seems a tad premature to be resigning, and arguably again bringing the party into disrepute.

    I fail to see why Mr Hookem couldn’t be patient, let democracy take ts course and then consider his position – or like the Junker et al, does he only believe in democracy when the vote goes his way?

  24. It is plainly idiotic to equate criticism of Islam with racism.

    Has Mr Hookem not heard of Ayaan Hirsi Ali? She is black, she suffered FGM at the age of five, she escaped from the mental slavery of Islam. She is now a staunch critic of Islam and receives death threats.

    Would Mr Hookem like to tell her that she is racist for criticising the evil so-called religion of Islam?

    Islam is a political ideology as well as a religion. Would you call someone a racist if they criticised Stalinism for example?

    Ayaan is such an inspiring person. Mr Hookem, please watch this video, and it would be helpful if you retract your baseless statement.

    • Absolutely. This is why some of us say so often on here that every member, and especially those in office, should equip themselves with information about this cult. Heaven knows there are that many people out there exposing its injustices and cruelties and barbarism. They include brave souls who have left the religion and are in fear of their lives and are, can you believe it, disbelieved or ignored – by non-Muslims who think they know better!

      In addition to the questionnaires for candidates that Hugo has thought of, perhaps a bibliography of recommended reading to include articles and YouTube clips (some have already been posted) can be pushed out to all the NEC members and local officials to try and plug the information gap because for some this subject appears unfathomably difficult and they need to get a grasp otherwise, how are they in any position to make reasoned assessments of anyone’s thinking or policy on the matter?

      The country actually can’t afford their ignorance any longer, in my opinion, and the Party cannot afford it either.

    • GEOFFREY CHARLES ELLIOTT // August 12, 2017 at 10:11 pm // Reply
      Hugo and everyone,click my above link and you can see what Ayaan and a whole host of other great leaders,thinkers past and present have to say about that most vile and verminous perverted of so called religions Islam.I believe this to be one of the best references about the death cult Islamists,and it is as relevant today as it was
      Centuries ago.I especially like what John Wesley,Mark Twain and of course what Winston Churchill had to say all those years ago.I urge you to keep it,if you can copy and paste do so,if not google the article up,and send yourself an email of it.I certainly will find it handy,in my articles and comments,and do intend to use those wonderful
      quotes to bring everyone’s attention to what is beyond a shadow of doubt the greatest threat that we have ever faced,from the most evil,and cruelest,bloodthirsty barbaric,hateful,despicable,detestable,loathsome persons ever to set foot on God’s Earth.I was going to say perhaps Mike Hookem,should have seen my link,before he voiced those absurdities,but on second thoughts,nothing could have altered his most
      blinkered version,in which he holds about the ever present dangers which we now face,and which he of course is unable to grasp,from the death cult Islamists who now infest our once great and former Christian country.

      • Geoffrey, well said.

        Everyone in UKIP, and certainly all those in seniour positions need to get rapidly up to speed on Islam.

        There is absolutely no excuse not to. The Koran is freely available online as are the writings and videos of those who know what they are talking about. Hookem is an ignorant embarrassment.

  25. “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,” – not Voltaire but it doesn’t really matter.
    Every candidate must be given the chance to express his thoughts and ideas in the knowledge that those who agree with him/her will vote in favour, and those who don’t, won’t.

    • Hi Debbie

      Great to put a face to the name and many thanks for all your input to UKIP Daily. Much appreciated.

      The phrase ‘I do not agree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it’ cropped up frequently in the ‘Rumpole of the Bailey’ books. Outside of that I have no idea quite where it originated.


      • ‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’
        The saying is incorrectly attributed to Voltaire but on investigation, I find it came from an English author named Evelyn Beatrice Hall in 1906. However, there is a French version which is claimed by our Continental neighbours as authentic.
        Voltaire was the nom-de-plume of an author called François-Marie Arouet who died in 1778. In 1906, a book ‘The Friends of Voltaire’ was published which included the saying and was written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall.
        As I say above, it doesn’t really matter who said it; it’s a great saying and should be the motto of UKIP.
        I remember when I was interviewed as a PPC I was asked why I thought the party voted against a motion in the European Parliament to ban Marine le Pen from addressing MEPs when every other party approved the ban. If I had remembered this saying, I would have quoted it.
        Thanks for your encouragement – it means a lot to the team.

  26. Perhaps I am behind the curve here, but who IS Mr. Hookham. Apart from being ‘involved’ into a ghastly embarrassing fracas in Brussels, what have been his shining achievements? He may have been the geezer who wore the Justice for BigAl tee shirt? But who didn’t support Big Al? That was no big deal. Is he going to continue receiving the generous remuneration delivered to him by virtue of UKIP members hard work? Or will he stand aside for someone who has the interests of UKIP at heart?
    As far as I’m concerned I’m glad he’s gone. The fact that he felt the need to smear a candidate publically, instead of just leaving if he felt so strongly gives him zero credibility in my book. Virtue signaling is abhorrent, bringing UKIP into disrepute is even worse. What is it with these people – you have one view, others have a different view. Not everyone feels it necessary to bare their souls, if souls they have, all over the Mainstream Media.

  27. Mike Hookem shows his abysmal ignorance of the issue and of what Anne Marie Waters stands for when he continually harps on ‘race’ and ‘racism’.
    islam is not a ‘RACE’ Mr Hookem, so you are talking through your fundament.

    ‘Race’ is an ill-defined and controversial subject (certain scientists deny it even exists), but even if we define it roughly by colour or continent such as White European, Black African, Brown Asian, Yellow Chinese/Japanese, Multi-coloured N/S America, ditto Australia – muslims will be found on every continent and of every colour. So it is nothing to do with race; it is everything to do with being an adherent to a ‘religion’ – more like a deadly cult – that is hostile to infidels and works for their subjugation to allah.

    When there is clear evidence of islamisation and terror in our own country and a brave candidate undertakes to fight it with all her might, it ill behoves someone with considerably less courage to insult her with the ‘racist’ label so beloved of the moronic Leftard/MSM/Establishment. No wonder Ukippers think that senior members of the party are keen to join the contemptible mainstream politicians.

    Hookem may be a fighting heavyweight, but he is an intellectual lightweight. I had little respect left for him after his fisticuffs with Woolfe; and that little has disappeared entirely after his ill-judged statement.

  28. According to the BBC “he was “very unhappy” that Ms Waters was on the leadership candidate list and said: “The NEC has got this totally wrong, they’ve made a mistake. We’ve opened the door to the far right and I don’t want to be part of that.”

    Perhaps the swamp will drain itself? 😀

  29. It just goes to show that once you throw your well-thought out remarks as press release to the MSM, it’s out of your control.
    See what Al Beeb has made of it:
    And please note that Al Beeb has scrambled to find yet another MEP who says he’d quit …

    • It was also interesting to see how the BBC article started off with Mike Hookem and finished with Peter Whittle.

      Read into that what you will, but I’m seeing Mr Whittle as the BBC’s ‘preferred’ winner.

      • Perhaps it’s not so much the BBC seeing Mr Whittle as their preferred winner but rather the Party “aristocrats’ doing their utmost to make Mr Whittle the winner because he is ‘acceptable’ to the BBC and the metro-MSM – and never mind what we members think or indeed want.

        • Now you mention it, Viv, that could be it – but why? As people have pointed out here on other threads, Peter Whittle says pretty much what Anne Marie says, plus he’s gay, as Anne is, so why does Mr Hookem find Anne’s opinions so objectionable and not Peter’s? Heaven forfend that he could be afraid of a strong woman!? Why are so many people threatening to leave if Anne Marie wins, and not if Peter does?

          • I can assure you that Whittle is the party elite’s choice. That fact alone should make you very wary. If elected he will morph into establishment man. I may well be among those who leave if he wins if only because he got there by foul means not fair.

        • GEOFFREY CHARLES ELLIOTT. // August 14, 2017 at 11:04 pm // Reply

          Dear Viv,what in your opinion has happened to both Bill Etheridge and Mike Hookem.Remember we both liked them,at one time I wanted Bill Etheridge to be our new leader,and I remember congratulating Mike Hookem,for speaking out against all those illegals camped out in Calais,all waiting for their chance to break into
          Britain,and Viv I knew you liked him also.Remember the wonderful evening we all had at the Patrons dinner and meal,we all had last October at the beautiful Atlantic Hotel in Porthcawl,organised by our friends and colleagues from the Bridgend branch,where Bill Etheridge stood in for Paul Nutall,who couldn’t make it,as he was asked to fund raise for a baby who was extremely ill,and had to be flown to the States
          for urgent medical treatment.That very night we had all hoped that Paul Nutall would announce to us,that he was standing in the leadership election.Looking back we all had such high hopes that Paul would unite our party and increase our membership,and support,and I thought back then,that in a few years time,UKIP would become the official opposition.Today what has happened to our Party seems unreal,just like a nightmare,which as I write continues to tear the party apart.What did they hope to achieve by attacking the Brave and courageous Anne Marie,and now we have Suzanne Evans and O’Flynn and even Peter Whittle also joining in attacking David Kurten,for upholding traditional family values,they do themselves no favours,we can all now see how spiteful and vindictive they really are.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.