Richard adds disclaimer to website

Christina · 21-07-2006, 01:26 PM

I am happy to report that Richard has added this to his website.

Quote:

"Disclaimer: The views expressed here are solely those of Anthony Butcher. They are presented as opinion only. Anthony Butcher will be supporting Richard Suchozewski in the leadership election"

I wasn't intending to post again today, but I had to add this thread to show he's taken the criticism onboard. I was genuine about my complaint and Richard has now made it right.

exo-politics · 21-07-2006, 02:12 PM

I don't believe that is a new feature. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that to have been there from the start. I certainly remember it being there the first time I visited that page.

It's been there from at least the 19th;
http://66.249.93.104/search?hl=en&q=...e+Search&meta=
As Google cache can verify.

mkpdavies · 21-07-2006, 02:18 PM

You would have to be a complete moron to not realise it, even if it wasn't there.

How many clues do people need?

C_steam · 24-07-2006, 01:10 PM

Thanks Exo.

For those who didn't follow the link:-

Quote:

This is G o o g l e's cache of http://www.richard4leader.co.uk/two-horse-race.html as retrieved on 13 Jul 2006 16:40:40 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.

so on 13th July the disclaimer was there.
Pretty clear, I think.

Christina · 24-07-2006, 01:19 PM

If the disclaimer has always been there, and I missed it, I will apologise, make an apology on my blog and ask Chad to post an apology to me on UKIP Home.

Are you saying it has always been there, C-steam? Seriously, I've been honest in everything I've written about it and if it was a mistake on my part, I wish to correct it.

Anthony Butcher · 24-07-2006, 01:23 PM

To be fair to Christina, there have been a couple of minor changes to the article, following a complaint by John Moran, on behalf of Nigel.

Firstly, he objected to the phrase 'Nigel staked his reputation on Bromley', so I added in the phrase 'in my opinion' to oblige.

Secondly, they claimed that I couldn't possibly know how much money was spent in Bromley, and so had no basis for using the £75,000 figure. Hence, I have updated this to a more accurate number of £85,000, and made it clear that this money was largely sent in for the by-election and wasn't originally party money.

Interestingly no complaint was made about the rumours of adultery, which was the part I was concerned about.

Christina · 24-07-2006, 01:26 PM

Thank you Anthony, I started this thread to show that Richard had taken on board how things could be misunderstood, and how he has acted to correct it, which is a very good sign in my estimation. Being called a moron is not a good sign.

C_steam · 24-07-2006, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Are you saying it has always been there, C-steam? Seriously, I've been honest in everything I've written about it and if it was a mistake on my part, I wish to correct it.

My memory (not the most reliable part of me, but not the worst performing part either) says it was always there, the google cache is pretty conclusive also.

Also - and he won't mind me saying this - Tony is unlikely to have written such an article WITHOUT putting a disclaimer on.

Christina · 24-07-2006, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony Butcher

To be fair to Christina, there have been a couple of minor changes to the article, following a complaint by John Moran, on behalf of Nigel.

Firstly, he objected to the phrase 'Nigel staked his reputation on Bromley', so I added in the phrase 'in my opinion' to oblige.

Secondly, they claimed that I couldn't possibly know how much money was spent in Bromley, and so had no basis for using the £75,000 figure. Hence, I have updated this to a more accurate number of £85,000, and made it clear that this money was largely sent in for the by-election and wasn't originally party money.

Interestingly no complaint was made about the rumours of adultery, which was the part I was concerned about.

That's my last on the matter.

Christina · 24-07-2006, 05:39 PM

http://www.clickpress.com/releases/D...347005cp.shtml

Quote:

Government: UKIP LEADERSHIP ELECTION BECOMES A TWO-HORSE RACE Previous Release
Next Release

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[+] Receive News Alerts via email/RSS

Email: RSS
UKIP LEADERSHIP ELECTION BECOMES A TWO-HORSE RACE

The forthcoming leadership election for the UK Independence Party today became a two-horse race with the launch of Richard Suchorzewski’s campaign. The 42 year-old Chairman of UKIP Wales, who represents the modernising wing of the party, will be challenging the front-runner, UKIP MEP Nigel Farage, in the September election.

[ClickPress, Tue Jul 11 2006] The forthcoming leadership election for the UK Independence Party today became a two-horse race with the launch of Richard Suchorzewski’s campaign. The 42 year-old Chairman of UKIP Wales, who represents the modernising wing of the party, will be challenging the front-runner, UKIP MEP Nigel Farage, in the September election.

“My aim is to grow UKIP from an anti-EU party into a full pro-British party” said Richard who is known in the party as ‘Richardski’ due to his unpronounceable surname.

“No other party stands for British freedom from the EU, British democracy and British values. UKIP must protect and promote the British way of life”.

“I have been inundated with emails, letters and telephone calls from UKIP members asking me to stand; they don’t want to vote for more of the same from the present party leadership. They want a professional party with a full-time leader based in Britain, not Brussels.”

Supporters of Richard Suchorzewski say that he is the strongest challenger to Nigel Farage. "Richard is the leader UKIP needs if it is to become a professional political party. As Chairman of UKIP Wales, he has already proved that he is diplomatic, decisive, professional, a genuine listener and a good public speaker, with strong political and organisational experience” said a senior party member.

"UKIP will become the pro-Britain party under his leadership".

For more information and a press pack please visit:
http://www.richard4leader.co.uk

Phone: 01446 739850
E-mail: Richard@richard4leader.co.uk

You have lied to me saying that it was just Anthony's opinion and only morons would think it was Richard's stance.

This is Richard's official Press Release.

:evil:

21-07-2006, 02:18 PM	#3 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,183 Party: Libertarian Party	You would have to be a complete moron to not realise it, even if it wasn't there. How many clues do people need? __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

21-07-2006, 02:12 PM	#2 (permalink)
exo-politics Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 54	I don't believe that is a new feature. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that to have been there from the start. I certainly remember it being there the first time I visited that page. It's been there from at least the 19th; http://66.249.93.104/search?hl=en&q=...e+Search&meta= As Google cache can verify.

24-07-2006, 01:19 PM	#5 (permalink)
Christina Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Eccleston, St Helens Posts: 1,529	If the disclaimer has always been there, and I missed it, I will apologise, make an apology on my blog and ask Chad to post an apology to me on UKIP Home. Are you saying it has always been there, C-steam? Seriously, I've been honest in everything I've written about it and if it was a mistake on my part, I wish to correct it.

24-07-2006, 01:23 PM	#6 (permalink)
Anthony Butcher Administrator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Long Ashton, Bristol Posts: 10,208 Party: None	To be fair to Christina, there have been a couple of minor changes to the article, following a complaint by John Moran, on behalf of Nigel. Firstly, he objected to the phrase 'Nigel staked his reputation on Bromley', so I added in the phrase 'in my opinion' to oblige. Secondly, they claimed that I couldn't possibly know how much money was spent in Bromley, and so had no basis for using the £75,000 figure. Hence, I have updated this to a more accurate number of £85,000, and made it clear that this money was largely sent in for the by-election and wasn't originally party money. Interestingly no complaint was made about the rumours of adultery, which was the part I was concerned about.

24-07-2006, 01:26 PM	#7 (permalink)
Christina Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Eccleston, St Helens Posts: 1,529	Thank you Anthony, I started this thread to show that Richard had taken on board how things could be misunderstood, and how he has acted to correct it, which is a very good sign in my estimation. Being called a moron is not a good sign.