douglas denny

You say:-

also:-

There is a lot of rubbish here about things being "unarguable".

Well I argue it.
It is excrement! And your standards if you believe this rubbish are evidently of the same quality.

Would you like to give me the written evidence of your libellous statement please.

It cetainly IS arguable. Until and unless there is evidence suitable for a court of law with a conviction - I shall support the British way: which is to assume innocence until guilt is proven.

Anyone who listens to GLW is a fool. The man is an anti-UKIP agent provocateur - probably set-up and paid for by the BNP or government.

His output is the same quality and stink of the effluent of a sewer.

For example: He says of a lady who writes on this forum:-

[SNIP. This is sick even for GLW. Please don't repeat it here]

Now would you like to tell me if this is the kind of output you might expect from a sane gentleman?

Certainly not sane.

Certainly not gentlemanly - by MY standards.

Evidently your "standards" include accepting this kind of rubbish as you obviously condone his insane ramblings.

Douglas.
-

mkpdavies

Why hasn't UKIP taken GLW to court for these comments? Looks like an opportunity to make some cash for the party to me.

__________________
http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/
http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/
http://lpuk.org

My ignore list

Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Hartlepool

ops: :roll: ops: :roll: ops: :roll: ops:Extremely ungentlemanly to mention a ladies name like that.

What about the Election of Candidates to the Discipline Commitee?

Was it done above board,Democratically and what was your role in this election Denny?

Just out of Democratic interest you understand. :wink:

douglas denny

I don't know.Probably can't be bothered with the hassle.

GLW is certainly asking for it - and hasn't got a leg to stand on either, it would be an open and shut case of libel.

If I had the resources I would have already done so - he has libelled me too.
A chum of mine did so recently for being libelled on an internet forum and won £10,000 I believe.

Douglas.
-

soundasapound

Read the earlier post, should explain Ashford so-called 'Shenanigans'

Again, its its the usual rumour mill. I take it you will apologise for making/repeating unfounded allegations? Why is there so much speculation and not enough proof? it makes discussions ****. Well done Denny for speaking up, if there is any cloak and daggers stuff, its through the lack of information filtered through by the Chairman, General Secretary and Senior Members and those responsible for press/media releases :x

douglas denny

You are fully entitled to know all about it if you are a UKIP member - of which an anonymous name does not. I could say go away - you might be BNP.

However - there is no secret about it.

Yes I assure you it was all done democratically. A bit messily because of a number of factors which have been discussed openly too - but nevertheless democratically and correctly.

It has been discussed ad nauseum. I now say to peple who want to query this - go to Petrina Holdsworth who was chairman of the NEC at the time; was present at the business meeting; and who knows all about it. people do not seem to want to listen to what I have said. I think it is a case of there are none so deaf as those who don't want to hear.

As regards the DC itself there is a lot of confusion and nonsense talked about it out of ignorance of the way it works and what it does.

So to put that record straight here it is in a nutshell:-


The Disc.Cttee has very strict rules about how to procede and what can and cannot constitute a breach which requires disciplinary action.

there is a lot of hot air and blather about sending people off in the tumbril's to execution by the DC; usually for "bringing the party INTO phpbb_disrepute" - but it is mostly just that - hot air. There can be no bringing the party INTO phpbb_disrepute unless it is a serious attack/misdemeanour on the party from someone within the party. It is an internal party mechanism to deal with breaches of good party function/administration.

There has to be a clear breach of the rules and/or constitution;

there has to be clear evidence;

there has to be a written complaint

- before there can even be an assessment by the Party Secretary, who has to investigate the evidence presented; ; give the defendant a right of reply or discuss with the defendent the allegations; .......and can then decide if there is a case to answer.

If he/she decides there is - then a whole range of procedural stuff comes INTO phpbb_play which gives the 'defendant' a chance to explain his misdemeanour; which if satifactorily explained or apologised for can be dismissed.

Then it goes to a selected 'panel' who decide if there is a case to answer by examining the eveidence - where they may dismiss it.

If not then it goes to a full disciplinary committee who decide on the evidence preented. The 'defendent' is invited to be present and explain to the DC.

There are thus three levels in which the case is assessed before there is a decision. At all levels there can be dismissal of the case if there is not sufficient evidence to convince the adjudicators.

If you are particularly interested and can show you are a member of UKIP I will, if you want, send you a copy of the rules.

There is only one case in the pipeline at the moment. The whole case has been delegated to someone other than the Party Secretary because it was me who mentioned the case in the NEC last for a quick resolution; but it was transfered to the DC by the NEC (quite correctly in fact).
As I stated my case to the NEC it would be inappropriate for me to continue in my normal role - I delegated so there is no conflict of interest.

Douglas.
-
-

Intbel

What shennanigans?

Put up, shut up or just gfy.

realwales

No further written evidence of the unarguable fact that Tom Wise & Nattrass
have brought UKIP INTO disrepute than the National Media.
As for Knapman I believe one can still purchase Private Eye providing the
written evidence.
As for Bannerman, Denny & Fuller clear written evidence is provided by them
on this very web site.

Perhaps Mr. Denny acquittal of your duty might be more apposite than
posturing on this list in your official capacity.

SponPlague

Big Chief I-Spy says no marks for failing to spot Nigel Farage MEP :twisted:

Hartlepool

Ah,Mr Nigel,heard a lot about him,has he ever brought the media down on UKIP?