UKIP: Annabelle's feeling the heat

We were extremely saddened to hear that Ms Fuller has been feeling rather upset recently. Her 'reputation' in Westminster circles is now in the gutter (was it ever any higher?) following her attempts to smear Andrew Bridgen's name by accusing him of sexual assault. We are informed that MPs have now been advised to steer well clear of this women and her associates. Does that include Nigel Farage?

Here is a recent hissy fit from Ms Fuller. It comes as no surprise that she is incapable of making ANY comment without resorting to foul language.

Taken from the UKIP Forum:

Full Name: Annabelle Fuller

Bobfm, it would be defamatory if it were untrue.

I hardly think this would have passed the Sunday Mirror legal team nor the press office of the MET or my solicitor if it were not the truth.

Given these facts, it may be wise to consider what you say and remember that the 1996Act also covers the internet.

I have had enough ***offensive language auto-deleted by forum*** written about me over the years to put up with it any longer.

Spon: there are many things I could say about you and your possible negative impacts on the party. However, I do not. Whether it's a matter of idleness in the case of someone who is irrelevant in my life or a possible concern for your occasional feelings I cannot be bothered to look into. You can pontificate on the issue if you will: I am sure it will fill up the lonely hours.

End of hissy fit.

Here are three Junius archive articles which mention Ms Fuller. The first is by Gregg Beaman (former lead UKIP MEP candidate in the NW), the second is by Del Young (former UKIP NEC member) and the third is by John West (former UKIP PPC and Branch Chairman).

I was heartened yesterday to receive a letter from senior and respected members of the UK Independence Party expressing their thoughts, and fears, on the future of the Party. I agreed with them and some of the reasons I stood down as lead candidate in the North West for the Euro elections, and as Regional Organiser, are virtually the same.

Of course the clique in control of the party have tried to blacken my name. They have accused me of using a pseudonym on an internet forum to criticise the Leader. I was not registered on that forum but anyway, big deal, it shows how small-minded the current leadership clique are and how they respond to criticism perceived or real.

They also accused me of using my position as Regional Organiser to gain advantage in the election for the list in the North West. Paul Nuttall, and his little sidekick in Brussels, Michael McManus, lodged a complaint about a letter I supposedly sent to members canvassing their support in the Euro election poll. Of course the letter doesn't exist as every member in the North West knows. The complaint was withdrawn anyway, but they have still used the imaginary letter to try and blacken my name.

Note that this blog is no longer 'Gregg Beaman's Blog'. The reason being that I was tired of receiving unpleasant 'anonymous' comments after I stood down. Who was sending the unpleasant 'anonymous' comments? Well at least one sender was Rachel Oxley. How do I know? Because I goaded the 'anonymous' one and received a text message from Rachel Oxley owning up. How very grown up and mature. Is she the kind of woman who should be Vice Chairman of a national political party?
I then had Lisa Duffy emailing people claiming that I stood down because of a debilitating illness and because I had only expected to come third rather than first. More fibs from a member of the ruling clique.

One of life's ironies is that it was only in May 2008, at the North West Spring Conference in Morecambe, that Rachel Oxley and Lisa Duffy had complained to me that Annabelle Fuller had spent the Saturday evening texting Nigel Farage, quite suggestively and quite openly, about what she wanted to do with him when he came to the North West the following day. Lacking the courage of their convictions they happily passed it on to me. But later Duffy was terrified that the Party Chairman was upset with her for 'spilling the beans' on the Leader. And that was after them specifically asking me to pass on their concerns to the Party Chairman.

But Lisa Duffy was that way inclined. Before the last leadership election she had phoned me in a terrible panic after she had been contacted to consent to Farage's nomination but had already promised to consent to David Campbell Bannerman's candidacy. She didn't understand that democracy worked that way. She clearly lacks the courage of he convictions, if indeed she has any convictions. Don't fight for what you believe, just stay in with the right people seems to be her philosophy.

A few weeks before I stood down I had been critical of Nigel Farage to Rachel Oxley, describing him as a liability. It may be a coincidence but Rachel Oxley never spoke to me again after that. I only received an email from her informing me that she would no longer speak at a meeting of members that I had organised in Cumbria. Not very professional I thought, but very spiteful. I now see that it typifies the lack of respect for the members that typifies certain people in the current leadership clique.

That is some of the background that added to my increasing disillusionment over the last couple of years and, ultimately, to my decision to walk. But, most importantly, I had come to realise that after having MEPs since 1999 the Party had failed to move our cause forward. In 2008 we still only achieved 2% in the Crewe and Henley by-elections. A quarter of our MEPs elected in 2004 had gone, and I don't need to go into detail. In my opinion too many of the remaining MEPs have been seduced by the position, especially the current party leader, and they ignore the fact that we have failed to make any impact in Parliamentary elections, which they continually argue will come with the resources gained from having MEPs.

In August I was told that Paul Nuttall was to become Party Chairman. I knew then that I could no longer continue. I had always felt that Paul was only in it for what he could get. The way he grovelled to Farage, even starting to dress like him, had made me cringe and some of us in the North West had even started referring to him as 'Scouse Farage'.

When the results of the members' poll were announced I was told that Farage was jumping up and down ranting that I had to be removed from the top of the list, and I heard that from three different sources. I wondered what had happened to the Party that had offered so much hope to so many of us. All my doubts about even standing in the European elections were still there and I was not prepared to stand if all it meant was a good living for five years for no political gain. Their behaviour had convinced me, more than ever, that there is an element in the Party only interested in the 'gravy train', their own vanity and little else.

As far as Farage is concerned I knew when I met him, during the Preston by-election in 2000, that he was the personification of vanity and ego with little behind that wafer thin facade. I have seen his childish temper tantrums when he doesn't get his own way, when I was on the NEC and later when I was on the Elections Committee. I have seen him bully people and have stood up to him when he has tried to bully me. He must be one of the coarsest most vulgar individuals I have ever come across. The proposed changes to the party constitution are a result of the complete lack of principle of the current leader and chairman and, it must be said, the lack of courage shown by certain members on the Party's NEC.

One thing Farage has excelled at is driving decent, honest people away. There is no room under Farage's leadership for open debate and discussion, and God forbid there should be any disagreement with him. When people have had enough and go his clique then proceed to try and blacken their names, and others have had much worse smears than I have directed at them. He only wants around him people who are easily flattered and who do not think for themselves.

The current changes to the constitution, if approved, will remove the right of the members to contribute to the party's future and will certainly remove the right of members to criticise the decisions of the leadership. UKIP will then be no different from the European Union that it was formed to fight.

Finally I remember appearing in a TV debate in 2004 when Labour MEP Arlene McCarthy accused UKIP of lacking the principle of Sinn Fein, who refused to take their seats in a parliament they opposed. I have thought long and hard about that comment since and have to say that Sinn Fein are now power sharing in Ulster. Where are UKIP?


To read the original: LINK

Del Young on Fuller

Date: Saturday, 26 July, 2008, 16:52

Saturday 26 July 2008

Dear Mr. Whitaker,

First of all let me say that I can sympathise with the fact that a stupid, selfish and destructive action concerning the posting of John West’s MEP media interview on YouTube by Annabelle Fuller has put you in a difficult position.

When the actions of others put us in difficult positions it can be highly frustrating, however given the circumstantial evidence that there is a 99% chance that this video was indeed posted by Miss Fuller, from your email I get the impression that you have not spoken to Miss Fuller indepth regarding this matter.

Instead you have chosen to email the National Executive of the party a fanciful story from Miss Fuller, which is hugely insulting to what little intelligence I possess.

Not only is it damaging to Mr. West that this video has been leaked, it is potentially far more damaging to the party that this video and Miss Fullers Comments – “UKIP are the Eurosceptic nutters” etc. - have ended up in the public domain, and indeed I believe it was posted for a time on the BNP website for god’s sake.

The leader and his disciples have always accused innocent hard working activists of doing things to damage the party and yet one of his most protected confidants has done immense damage to the party with her vengeful, spiteful actions.

As the Chairman of the party and NEC, your first loyalty should be to the best interests of the party and the cause for which we fight, but increasingly over the years you and the majority of NEC members seem to have put loyalty to the leader ahead of the interests of the members, the party and our cause.

As an NEC member I have a duty to work with the elected leader of the party to take our cause forward, but I do not owe that duty blindly and unquestioningly – I have to balance what help or support I give to our leader with the best interests of the party, its members and our objectives.

It has been an open secret within the party that Miss Fuller was under the protection of the party leader and that is why on many occasions Miss Fuller has written things on internet forums that were hugely offensive to members, including certain NEC members and yet no action has ever been taken against her.
Indeed there was a particular series of postings on an internet forum regarding Tom Wise & Roger Knapman a year or two ago by an individual and Miss Fuller which caused some concern to me in so much that this individual and Miss Fuller must have had first hand and unrestricted knowledge of the matter.

At that time I raised my concerns to the NEC and they were minuted regarding persons in the press office having access to information of a sensitive nature and not handling it with confidentiality and care.

I later found out that the person in question was Miss Fullers partner and I was assured by Clive Page that Miss Fuller would not make any future postings and that she had been warned about her behaviour.

Yet after a couple of months Miss Fuller was once again posting on Internet forums commenting in ways unbecoming of a professional member of this party.

Indeed she stated on the Independence and Democracy forum that she is not answerable to the party, instead claiming that she reported to someone in the European parliament and yet it seems she has open licence to abuse UKIP’s name, members and NEC.

If Miss Fuller chooses to resign from whatever positions she holds or indeed from the party before a disciplinary hearing can be arranged, if that is deemed appropriate, there is little that you can do.

However I still believe you should have had a meeting with Miss Fuller to establish all the facts in this matter and prepared a report for the NEC to consider, at the specially convened meeting Eric Edmonds requested and any response to the wider members then agreed by the NEC, instead of this Hollywood fantasy involving a taxi driver and a mysterious computer specialist - I did not realise Stephen Spielberg had joined the party!

Miss Fuller’s actions have left the party with a potentially very large can of legal worms and a high risk of financial liability, I understand that Mr. West has now engaged lawyers and intends to sue the party, as it was UKIP that was responsible under the data protection act and not Miss Fuller.

I would also like to point out that all members of the NEC are liable and responsible for any financial liabilities of the party.

I also believe that the police will be interviewing Mr. West in the near future with a view to launching an investigation and that the information commissioner to whom this matter has been reported may also conduct an investigation, which may lead to the party receiving a sizeable fine.

So you see Mr. Whitaker, Miss Fuller may have walked off into the sunset, whilst we are left to face the music and the possibility of picking up a number of huge bills and your email has done very little to help matters and gives the impression we are running for political numpties of the year award (hotly contested with Gordon Brown I believe).

I suspect that this may not be the last we see of Miss Fuller with regards to UKIP and the InDem group and their activities, I rather suspect that she will be employed by someone connected to UKIP or as a consultant in the 2009 campaign and hence again given the right to apparently speak on behalf of the party.

What has happened to Mr. West has been totally hurtful, unprofessional and hugely unacceptable on all levels, however sometimes we cannot control what happens to us, but we can manage the effects of what happens to us.

As an NEC member I want to work with you and the other members of the NEC in managing this very fine mess once again, created by someone under the protection of the party leader.

Firstly I would respectfully suggest that you write a letter on behalf of yourself and the NEC unreservedly apologising to Mr. West and call an extraordinary NEC meeting as requested by Eric Edmonds so that we can work through and manage where possible, repair where we can, apologise where we must and ensure that the party does not find itself in this position again.

There is an increasingly distasteful pattern appearing in the party, that when party members raise concerns or lodge complaints, they are treated with disdain, contempt and viciousness and in some cases are openly attacked or have lies told about them.

There also seems to be a general refusal to investigate complaints, which in turn leads to further dissatisfaction and trouble that could have been avoided in the first place.

Dr. David Abbott stressed at the NEC meeting in July that we really need to investigate John West’s and others complaints, because failure to do so upsets the activists and rubs the members up the wrong way, sadly his request as per usual appears to have fallen on deaf ears.

Mr. Whitaker you are a very intelligent man and I know you are better than this.

Loyalty to our leader is admirable and should be encouraged, but that loyalty cannot take precedence over the interests of the members and our cause, if the leader is hell-bent on taking us down a very narrow political dead end, there is no good to come from us ignoring the signs and pretending that we cannot see the dangers that lie ahead – it is our duty to advise the leader that he must change direction – this is not disloyal, this is common sense.

At the NEC meeting in June I tried to point out to our leader some of things he needs to change and some of the things that he needs to change, including certain personnel, to get the party back on the right road but this also fell on deaf ears.

We need to have a clear functional and effective strategy, working closely with our branches and our activists in moving forward and growing the party, as our hardest task is to educate the British people on the dangers of the Political EU.

Simply concentrating on returning as many MEP’s as possible in 2009, whilst maybe being admirable and right is not a wholesale or effective strategy for achieving what we must achieve in the UK .

One does not have to like the messenger, but it does help on the odd occasion to listen to the message.

Please call an extraordinary NEC meeting for early in August so that as an NEC we can ask the relevant questions and uniformly manage this mess.

The NEC needs to get back and manage this party as laid down in the constitution, as there are far too many individuals or little groups who are unaccountable to the NEC and yet are making decisions or taking actions whilst being given licence and protection by the leader to use UKIP’s name, sometimes causing damage to the party’s name or members, whilst the NEC is responsible and liable for any recriminations.

It is time for us to stop being the see no evil, hear no evil, but do much evil club.

I have no doubt I will be branded mal-content or trouble maker etc. as usual, however I can assure you that I have just one agenda, and that is to save this country from the political EU and to make this party as strong and effective as it can be to achieve that aim.

Yours truly,

Del


See: LINK

John West on UKIP and Fuller


Many of you will know by now that I was thrown out of UKIP by a Disciplinary Committee chaired by Derek Clark MEP, who is currently under investigation by OLAF.

The original complaint was made by Jeffrey Titford - Clark’s friend and colleague. Michael Zuckerman, the Party Secretary, even continued to handle the paperwork for this hearing after he informed me that he had withdrawn from the case. The result, in my opinion, was a Kangaroo Court and not an independent inquiry. The outcome was as expected.

My only crime was to report Jeffrey Titford to Essex Police based on the details of his former office manager, Ken Bennett, who told me of alleged financial irregularities involving Titford’s parliamentary allowance.

I was forced to do this after Nigel Farage - via a third party - refused my request for an internal investigation into the allegations that Titford had misused his parliamentary allowances.

I can only guess at the reasons behind Farage’s decision. However, I note that previous requests for an independent audit into the finances of UKIP’s MEPs were also refused. Also, it is interesting to note just how violent are the attacks on anyone who questions the validity of UKIP accounts. One can only draw the conclusion that there is something to hide.

It is an absolute disgrace that a British citizen can be disciplined by a political party for acquitting his duty and going to the Police and asking them to investigate a suspected crime.

That I can be condemned by Nigel Farage, Paul Nuttall, David Bannerman (and the grubby little clique that openly support them on this matter) for doing my civic duty tells you all you need to know about their complete lack of morality and sense of justice.

Farage, Nuttall, Bannerman and the rest of the clique are sending out a clear message to the members - if you are made aware of an alleged crime involving a UKIP member you had better keep your mouth shut or else!

I wonder if UKIP intends to put this very unusual law and order policy in their election manifesto?

I can confirm that the Police file on Titford has now been passed to OLAF for evaluation. Neil Thomson of OLAF has said that I may be called as a prosecution witness if they decide to proceed with the case.

I can also confirm that I have reported both Titford and Zuckerman to the relevant authorities. I have asked them to investigate the use of UKIP’s internal disciplinary process to discipline a potential prosecution witness (if any such case were brought against Titford at the behest of OLAF).

I can assure you that the matter is far from closed.

It is my view that Nigel Farage and many of the leadership of UKIP have been conning the British public for years. Their trumpeted Euro-scepticism is now no more than a cynical ploy designed to fool people into voting them back onto the EU gravy train.

When I first joined UKIP I actually believed that UKIP was sincere in its endeavour to extricate Britain from the European Union! I must now confess that I was conned along with thousands of other trusting members.

Some of UKIP`s MEPs are now part of the problem. Thanks to their love of the good life they have forgotten about why they were elected and who they are supposed to represent.

It is no wonder that EU officials now appear to regard UKIP as part of the EU establishment!That Farage ignored a number of UKIP’s own rules in order to get Marta Andreasen – who defines herself not as a Eurosceptic but an EU reformer - onto the MEP list illustrates the level of his so-called Euro-scepticism!

I find it laughable that certain UKIP members can suggest that I was supposedly waging a campaign against the likes of Stuart Gulleford in order to damage his chances of becoming an MEP list candidate!

I would suggest that these individuals get their facts right before making such remarks, indeed I suggest they locate some facts in their belligerent arguments.

In fact, if you ascertain the ‘time line’ with accuracy it shows that it was Mr Gulleford, Mr Titford and their supporters who were involved in a campaign to smear certain members who expressed an interest in becoming MEPs.

In late 2007 I received a threatening letter from George Curtis, the Eastern Counties Chairman.This was sent to me after I had organised a conference on immigration for UKIP!

In the letter I was told to watch my step or else.

I complained to John Whittaker and NEC about this but nothing was done. I was not even sent an acknowledgement. So much for Dr Whittaker representing the interests of the members!

In April 2008 Jeffrey Titford and Stuart Gulleford used UKIP’s Eastern Region membership email database to send out an email to hundreds of members. In this email Christopher Hudson and I were attacked for organising a UKIP conference on law and order.

According to Titford & Gulleford we had ignored the wishes of the NEC and were holding the conference in order to promote ourselves and our friends.This was totally untrue, a fantasy grounded on not one single substantive fact or shred of evidence.

Both Gulleford and Titford were aware that the NEC had given me authorisation and encouragement to hold the conference. Both were also aware that Christopher and I were thinking of putting our names forward for the Euro elections.

That both Titford and Gulleford abused their positions in order to attack fellow members is obvious and undeniable. That this was done in order to damage our chances of being selected MEP candidates is also obvious and undeniable.

I should add that Lisa Buckle, who works in Titford’s office, confirmed to me in 2008 that the email was sent out at the behest of Stuart Gulleford.

So please don’t insult the intelligence of members by suggesting that Stuart Gulleford and Jeffrey Titford are somehow the innocent victims of a smear campaign orchestrated by me.

I have also been criticised by some members for complaining about the way the MEP selection process was handled.

But if you were made aware of rigged panels, grubby little deals between UKIP members and broken rules would you stay silent?

And let us also not forget a breach of contract with each and every candidate who paid £250.00 to be listed as candidates!

Even UKIP’s own Returning Officer has said that the process was flawed and should have been rerun.

That Gill, as the appointed party officer, failed in his duty, as did the NEC in refusing to even acknowledge the numerous complaints by members, suggests that they have much to hide.

If the selection process had been fair and the rules had been followed I would have happily campaigned for the lead candidates.

What I cannot accept is a selection process that was rigged in order to get the likes of David Bannerman - a man who has been accused of lying about his supposed close relationship to a former PM - elected as lead candidate.

Members will be aware that shortly after I complained about the MEP selection process my MEP video interview was posted on the internet in a direct breach of trust by an employee of UKIP and the IND/DEM Group.

That it was placed on You Tube by Annabelle Fuller, an employee of the Party and the IND/DEM Group, was confirmed to me by Clive Page who phoned me on 19th July 2008 at 6.50pm to deny his personal involvement in the sordid business.

That Miss Fuller placed the video on You Tube at the behest of Nigel Farage - her very ‘close friend’ - in order to defame me was also confirmed to me by Clive Page.

Members may also be interested to know that John Whittaker threatened to resign over the video leak if Farage refused to sack Fuller.

For 48 hours Farage refused to do so. However, Whittaker would not back down and Farage was forced to terminate her employment.

Farage then tried to persuade Lord Pearson and Bob Spink to employ her. To their credit both refused to do so. He then contacted the Taxpayers Alliance. They also refused to employ her.

I have been told that Fuller has now been re-employed on the sly by Godfrey Bloom MEP.

In two newspapers ( the Independent and Daily Mail) Fuller has claimed that she was forced out of UKIP due to sexism. That Farage was prepared to support Fuller’s sordid little fantasy in one of these articles clearly illustrates the man’s dishonesty and immorality.To this day I have never received an apology from anyone in UKIP’s leadership for the video leak.

We have all witnessed UKIP’s collapse since 2004 and the sharp decline in membership numbers due to Farage’s inept and talentless leadership.

High profile members have left and Bob Spink, UKIP`s former MP, now seeks to put a distance between himself and the party.

I personally feel saddened that our party has been reduced to a cult where the cry is seemingly ‘the Leader is always right!’

A true leader listens to his members. He does not ignore them.

Under the current leadership UKIP will be lucky to get more than a couple of MEPs elected in June.

UKIP should be bounding ahead by now, but they are short of funds and are now dependent on donations from Alan Bown and Stuart Wheeler.

Many of us have not forgotten that it was Farage who promised at the Leadership election that he would bring many large donations into the party. Another failed promise.

Over a five year period UKIP`s MEPs could have quite legitimately paid a percentage of their earnings into the party, as other parties do, to fund future election campaigns. However, they decided not to.

If they will not put the party first why should the party support them ?Under Farage UKIP’s internal dealings have been lacking in openness and integrity.

Farage is egotistical, paranoid and lacking in integrity. He sanctions the ambushing and expulsion of decent members and supports kangaroo courts. He condones harassment , threats and verbal abuse. He conducts witch-hunts against his assumed enemies and gets his cronies to smear his opponents as BNP supporters. His behaviour and actions would make Robert Mugabe proud!

UKIP has been led to destruction by a leader and a compliant NEC that appears to seek to destroy anyone who displays talent and initiative and thus threatens their position.

UKIP is now finished as a force in British politics and deservedly so.

A vote for Farage and UKIP is now little more than a vote for the betrayal of the British people.

Clearly a man who, it is rumoured, can’t even keep his marriage vows can never be trusted to keep his word to the British public.

However, I know that many UKIP members believe that the Party can somehow be saved if Farage is forced to resign after June 4th.

I applaud their optimism but sadly I know that their efforts will come to nothing.UKIP is now beyond help as it is not just Farage who would have to go. Many others would also have to walk the plank.

A UKIP led by Nuttall or Bannerman would still be unelectable.

It may interest members to know that I possess documents on UKIP that conclusively prove that UKIP‘s leadership is corrupt. Some of these documents have never been made public.

I regard it as my duty to release these to the public prior to June 4th.I will be doing this in order to give the voters the chance to see how UKIP’s leadership lied, rigged the MEP selection process and smeared decent members in order to maintain control of UKIP and thereby keep their grubby little snouts in the EU’s trough.

In conclusion, I would suggest that Nigel Farage and the rest of his clique would do well to heed the words of Oliver Cromwell who when faced with a corrupt and dishonest clique of self-serving MPs used these famous words:

“You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!”


See: LINK