About us

My photo
Members & staff of UKIP past & present. Committed to reforming the party by exposing the corruption and dishonesty that lies at its heart, in the hope of making it fit for purpose. Only by removing Nigel Farage and his sycophants on the NEC can we save UKIP from electoral oblivion. SEE: http://juniusonukip.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/a-statement-re-junius.html

Wednesday, 25 February 2009

Douglas Denny on Michael Zuckerman, Soggy Sheep and Nigel Farage

You will recall that UKIP’s NEC recently denied Niall Warry the right to renew his UKIP membership. However, after Mr Warry threatened legal action against UKIP it was quickly decided to reverse this decision. Mr Warry is now at liberty to renew his membership.

I can reveal that Farage and Zuckerman were extremely worried to hear that Niall had more than enough money to fight the case. To make matters worse they were advised that he could even win! That’s why they backed down.

As you can imagine certain UKIPPERS were extremely unhappy with this sudden U-turn. Douglas Denny was particularly incensed by the decision and bitterly complained to Jonathan ‘Nice but Dim’ Arnott about Michael Zuckerman and Nigel Farage’s handling of the matter.

Subject: Niall Warry case


Please consider this to be a personal email. I'm there merely to take minutes and give any reports when requested. I don't want to be quoted on this as it's not appropriate for me to comment publicly on NEC decisions especially given that I'm not on the NEC.

I have three questions further to the ones you raise which I believe support your position. My 'gut' feeling is with you on this one :

1. Would a judge really force a political party to have as a member someone that they do not want?

2. There was a note on the Head Office system saying that Niall Warry had stated he would not be renewing his membership. Therefore are we within our rights to treat that as a resignation that has been post-dated (and on which basis we did not take disciplinary action sooner), in which case this is in any case a new membership application and can be rejected?

3. The chance that this is a bluff must surely be very high - what does Niall Warry have to gain from taking legal action in order to get himself back into the party and then immediately suspended?


Jonathan Arnott

End of first email

Subject: Re: Niall Warry case - reply - Douglas > Jonathan Arnott


Many thanks for your kind support and comments on this.

Indeed any e-mail to me is personal unless you say otherwise. I consider the medium in principle to be the same as a written letter.

I am frankly quite put out that we allowed ourselves to be railroaded by Warry into a ridiculous decision, with what is quite obviously a bluff intended to discommode us. It makes us look foolish and weak. I was surprised Nigel even looked like a soggy sheep and waffled about it.

It annoys me that we seem to be fire-fighting all the time instead of taking attacks like this face-on with hard resolve, and kicking them into touch. In fact if such cases ever get anywhere near a court, one can always make a retraction/apologies then at the first hearing which is enough to put a stop to it.

As you say, Warry already had made it clear he had resigned - that was stated at the committee but everyone ignored its significance - and a verbal statement alone to that effect is enough of a contract in law to be applicable in any court. Furthermore he would never have the money himself to make a challenge in court, and anyone putting up the moolah would be utterly stupid risking wasting it on a very weak case, which would almost certainly go against with nearly 99.9% probability.

These two issues would never get beyond a letter or two between solicitors

If Ok with you I might put these further points of yours in another general e-mail to the NEC if there is no further response from MZ.

I will force his hand eventually or make him look a fool.

I have to say too that to me, MZ has proved himself to be a dubious P. Secretary. There have been a number of times when I have wondered about his competence as a lawyer.

I don't mind saying that because I would happily say so his face (I would not say anything about someone behind their back that I would not be willing to say to their face). In fact have come close to doing so. The only reason I have not is for the sake of conciliatory harmony in the NEC, but it is not easy for my personal disposition to accept fools lightly, and those last two decisions lead by him which swung the NEC into unnecessary decisions are foolish enough by any standard in my opinion.

I know for a fact he deliberately will not answer anything to anyone, unless practically forced to, and complained to me once about being too busy to answer silly people asking silly questions - as he sees it. The whole idea of a PS is to deal with the queries coming in, and organise the direction of party business within his remit. He does not seem willing to do this, beyond narrow confines of what he deems suitable. My opinion is if he does not like the heat he should get out of the kitchen.

His other opinion about the alleged libel by Paul made by Abbott is another case in point - I am quite sure MZ is wrong in thinking any court would consider such a weak linkage to be a libel - and even if it did, they would most likely loose their own costs if not the whole case. It would never get that far.

We were railroaded into a weak position by a bluff again.

To put a libel case forwards it costs £20,000 + (that figure was from Zuckerman's own mouth about libel mentioned in the past) - and no one is going to risk that kind of money on a weak case like that. Apparently another solicitor who actually deals with libel cases that Paul Nuttal knows thinks MZ is totally wrong.

That's good enough for me.

Anyway - I shall wait to see if any further response then turn up the heat on Michael if he does not comply with my request to answer.

Best regards,


P.S. Hope you enjoyed your stay in Gibraltar. Did you win any chess

End of second email.

Oh dear! Has Dippy Denny gone to far? Can we expect his name to be added to Nigel’s infamous hit list? He should have realised long ago that you criticise Fuhrer Farage at your peril. However, I would not get too upset if Denny falls from grace. He has always been one of the more obnoxious members of the NEC. He has been actively involved in the NEC’s corruption , lies and dishonesty ever since he was elected to that body. He has colluded with Farage in removing decent members from UKIP and has repeatedly slandered people like Geoffrey Collier and John West. He is widely disliked in UKIP and is regarded by many as being thick and without a shred of ability or integrity. Indeed, he has achieved nothing of note since joining UKIP and should crawl back under whatever slimy stone he came from.

1 comment:

Greg L-W. said...


Denny has once again shown himself to lack integrity, morality or ethics.

Many will recall that although elected to the NEC by an ill informed membership he had been fired for dishonesty, untrustworthy behaviour and attempting to corrupt an election by a majority vote of the NEC.

Denny was chucked out to all intents and purposes and replaced by Geoffrey Kingscott as Returning Officer in the last leadership election sham!

A vicious little man without principles willing readily to lie and cheat to curry favour with his puppet master.

Denny has openly attacked those who seek probity and transparency in the party and his public behaviour on forums such as that formerly called UKIP Forum has been dishonest and degrading for UKIP - much as it may have served him well personally and kept his master in comfort on the gravy train.

It is hard to find ANY action this odious little man could be commended for - he openly attacked the last credible Chairman, is clearly not only a know all of huge self interest but also a bully and busy body with a prodigious chip on his shoulder - sad in one so blinkered.

Denny and those like him that the undeniably corrupt Farage has gathered around him bring shame on UKIP such that however many votes they may gain they will be votes AGAINST the values of these United Kingdoms and a betrayal of Patriotism.

As there is clearly no Party of ethics and probity supporting us or our Country then let the EU & Local Elections and any election hence forth until we are free be a vote as a referendum to leave the EU and in opposition to the dishonest and duplicitous Lisbon Constitution - Just write on YOUR ballot papers
Do not fail to vote in either disgust or apathy Make YOUR VOTE count write:


Risk being one of an honourable few in Britain but remember no British Politician has altered one significant phrase in either the CAP or CFP.

It matters not a jot who is elected - what matters is that those who seek election whether Labour, Conservative or Lib.Dim. will need the votes of those who write:

On their ballot papers - to gain seats in the future.

Greg L-W.