Friday, 16 March 2012

You need a good virus checker

There is a saying that if you are going to sup with the devil take a long spoon. I occasionally look at Tony Butcher's Democracy Forum. Two days ago my virus checker stopped me accessing this site as my Norton system detected malicious software on the site. Norton say they have notified Tony Butcher of their findings.


Strange indeed but then I was contacted by someone who had had their email system hacked into and malicious emails sent out purporting to come from him. These fake emails were clearly meant to smear and damage this person's reputation.


This of course happened to me some months ago and emails advertising penile enlargement services were sent out to people on my mailing list purporting to come from me. It ended up amusingly when I was contacted by an  irate Cabal member saying they did not wish to receive these offers to which I could reply well obviously not as you are a big prick already.


The only connection between people suffering from these dirty tricks seems to be  EUKIP. If you are, or have been involved with EUKIP I suggest you get a good virus checker.


I see Farage's new UKIP constitution received a 91.9% Yes vote from the membership as reported by returning officer and Farage appointee Arnott. Such one sided support for a leader is usually only seen in third world dictatorships. When on the NEC I argued strongly for all UKIP ballots to be conducted by the Electoral Reform Society service to ensure there could be no questioning of the probity of the ballot. A pity this was not done for this latest UKIP ballot. The 91.9% Yes vote is bound to be questioned.




Trevor Colman and Tim Congdon at the Torquay conference successfully opposed Farage taking UKIP into a Pan European party. I warned Tim at the time that Farage would be back in the true EU way with the same proposal in a different envelope. Tim chose to accept Farage's reassurances on this matter, somewhat naive in my view.


12 comments:

Steve Allison said...

Hi Eric, the ballot on the new constitution was carried out by the same organisation that carried out the P-EP Ballot and used the same security features as the P-EP Ballot PLUS some additional features that were incorperated as a result of the experiences of the P-Ep Ballot (ie the inclusion of a refrence number and the use of a more opaque envelope) which actually made the Constitution ballot even more secure than the P-EP Ballot. The ballot papers were under constant surveillance from security cameras and this feed was available on-line to anyone who requested it. The only thing that was not taken up by the party was the offer to have up to six observers physically present during opening and counting. My sugggestion was to include the invitation in the Independence News and ask any member who was interested to send a sealed letter to the party. If there werre more than sox applications then these would have been chosen at random form all letters received. Strange that no-one challenged the probity of the P-EP Ballot but the Constitution ballot is now being questioned. Both wwere conducted by the same external organisation and I supervised both, although my involvement with the Constituttion ballot was behind the scenes. I can assure you the result was totally accurate and valid. I'm sure you can appreciate that as a former member of UKIP I had no vested interests either way, although had I still been a member I must admit my vote would have been NO.

Eric Edmond said...

Steve, I hope things are OK with you.All the reputable organisations I know use the Electoral Reform Society service for such ballots. You have to ask why UKIP does not do this.

The result is the end of UKIP as a democratic party so where do those of us who want to see our country out of the EU go?

Eric

Steve Allison said...

Easy answer to why not the electoral reform society. They cost too much. I ask again, why was there not a single whisper of complaint about the P-EP Ballot, which was carried out by the same people? Answer to that question of course is the people complaining this time are unhappy with the result so challenge the process. For the P-EP Ballot they got the result they wanted so accepted the process! You can't have it both ways! The allegations being made by Junius are frankly ludicrous and if there was ever any doubt about Junius' agenda is just to sling mud then these allegations prove they are just out to cause trouble and spread lies, rumours and innuendo about anything they disagree with about UKIP. Any slight vestigial credibility Junius might have retained has been totally destroyed in my opinion. I know the ballot was fair, I know there were no "yes" slips added to the count and I know every "no" vote was counted because I saw it all being done. Junius is so wrong about this so all it says to me is that they are probably just as wrong about everything else.

Eric Edmond said...

Steve when I got a quote from the ERS to handle MEP list voting it was virtually the same price as UKIP doing it themselves. What were your organisations costs compared to the ERS? Did you get a quote from ERS?

I had to cope with a continual load of misrepresentations from Farage about the ERS. He seemed not to have bothered contacting the ERS either. Many of his statements were just plain werong - nothing new there"

Steve Allison said...

Eric, actually all this is pretty accademic. Nigel runs UKIP, get over it. He always has and will continue to do so until he decides he dosen't want to any more. You know it, I know it and so does everyone else. Just move on! The things that got my goat were the implication the ballot was fixed. That was total bollocks. It wasn't. The other thing was the double standard of accepting without any quibble the integrity of the P-EP ballot because it produced the answer you wanted but then questioning the Constitutional ballot because the result wasn't what you wanted! Cake and eat it comes to mind. Anyway, I'm drawing a line under this one. Much better things to do with my time. www.puttinghartlepoolfirst.co.uk

Eric Edmond said...

Thx Steve. I look at comparative statistics. You only get 92% approval votes in dictatorships. I don't think you can maintain the ERS is too expensive without quoting your evidence.

I note your conclusions re UKIP are the same as mine. That is why I describe it as EUKIP to capture its deeply undemocratic control by the Cabal

So where do us leave the EU people go now?

Eric

Greg_L-W. said...

Hi,

sadly UKIP has a clear and undeniable track record of fiddling internal elections and thus regardless of Steve Allison's offensive rejoinder.

May I suggest people study the abuse of the internet by extremist UKIP staff such as the odious and utterly dishonest Mark Croucher also the official censures of UKIP by The Data Protection Commission.

I appreciate there are those who were and are on the payrpll and seeking preferment on the gravy train who have and do lie about UKIP for personal gain.

One need only consider Nigel's right hand Ms. Annabelle Fuller the foul mouthed liar who helped rig one of UKIP's elections.

Steve Allison must be describing the deficiency of Farage's testese or perhaps his own - Clearly his statement is wrong, untrue, unsound and dishonest!

One need only consider the liar and cheat Mick McGough and his criminal offensive spamming and serial dishonesty and corruption to PROVE Steve Allison's claims to be false.

Just look at the calliber of the self seekers on The NEC and the lack of ethics of those who remain as UKIP MEPs

Pwehaps someone can cite an example, outside of dictatorships & the third world where a 92% vote - the only mittigation being that the ONLY publicity on the imposition of the new dictatorial and centra;ised Constitution was staggeringly dishonest - little wonder that UKIP completely reversed its vote when last this undemocratic concept was put forward.

Clearly 92% return from the claimed membership list is in itself far from plausible let alone that they ALL voted in favour of an EU style centralised dictatorship - Even going so far as to use The EU's corrupt methods of if you don't get the result you want represent the question and bully the victims to vote agai.

May I suggest a perusal of Nigel Farage's various speeches in Ireland condemning the very methods he has chose to use for his own personal gain.

Sadly Steve Allison seems to be easily duped!

Regards,
Greg_L-W.

Steve Allison said...

Hi Eric, well I was going to draw a line under this one but now I'm being attacked by both Junius and GL-W and so far neither have allowed any comments from me to appear on their pathetic little blogs. You do have the decency to allow comments and good on you for that. Junius and GL-W apparently only allow comments that agree with them, which of course is their right, after all they are so twisted and bile filled about UKIP that they are beyond any reasonable argument. Anyway, as someone who claims to only print true and accurate stories and knows what is going on in UKIP Junius and GL-W are well behind the times with his story describing me as a UKIP Staffer. I was never a UKIP Staffer, when I was paid by UKIP it was on a self employed contract basis, never staff, and I haven't had any paid contract with UKIP for almost two years. So to describe me as a UKIP Staffer is hardly showing a finger on the pulse and knowledge of what is happening in UKIP. Similarly to describe ne as the UKIP Idiot of the month is a bit much since I'm not even a party member any more and haven't been since last year, which is why having a go at me is "prety accademic" lol If they /he is going to try and sling mud then they should try to keep up to date. If they are two years behind the times as far as what a former member like me is up to then they must be well out of touch with what is going on at the moment.

Greg_L-W. said...

Hi,

I had not previously believed that Steve Allison was fundamentally dishonest though I have doubted his abilities and integrity.

Firstly I stand by my EVERY comment relative to him.

Secondly as a UKIP supporter far predating his personal self promotion via UKIP and subsequent departure I fimnd his comments offensive.

Thirdly I have NEVER received a posting from Steve Allison.

Fourthly I moderate postings on my blogs to eradicate cowards unwilling to put their names to abusive, ill informed and foul languaged postings also spam as with the 20,000 offensive spams filtered out by my virus checkers from UKIP NEC member the liar Mick McGough.

Finally it is not appropriate for Steve Allison to shelter on Dr. Edmond's blog to lie about me.

Allison be man enough to admit the truth YOU HAVE EITHER deliberately lied about me in this posting or at very least set out to abuse this blog by misleading people deliberately.

IF you believe you have a genuine complaint to make them contact me directly using your own name and I will happily publish your posting, as with all others by identifiable individuals.

You have my 'e'Maill address and phone number openly published on my blogs so you clearly demean yourself by trying dishonestly to defame me on Eric Edmond's blog.

Sorry you became involved Eric - I shall address Allison's posting to my blog on my blog if he has the integrity to follow up with a posting to me as clearly your blog is a most inappropriate place for his dishonesty to continue.

Regards,
Greg_L-W.

Junius said...

Mr Allison is a liar. We have not published comments by the former UKIPPER because he had never sent us any to publish. His first comment was sent to us yesterday. And we published that!

That Mr Allison can so blatantly lie is, of course, of no surprise to us as he has turned lying on behalf of UKIP into an art form! His pathetic attempts to claim that 92% voted in favour of UKIP becoming a dictatorship is just the latest example of this.

Mr Allison claims that the Junius Team only publish comments that we agree with. More lies! There have been only four instances where we have declined to publish comments. Two were spam comments in Chinese, the other two contained nothing but foul language.

We are well aware that Mr Allison is no-longer officially a member of UKIP. However, he chose to defend UKIP’s leadership regarding the recent vote, plus he admits to watching the count. If you defend corruption then don’t be surprised to get caught in the crossfire!

So why not answer Mr Edmond’s question regarding the vote. Why wasn’t the Electoral Reform Society used to supervise the vote? And were they contacted for a quote?

The Junius Team

Steve Allison said...

OK "Junius Team" I'll answer the ERS Question. I have no idea if they were asked to quote. I was asked to oversee the Constitution ballot using the same people as carried out the P-EP ballot since there had not been one word of complaint about the integrity or probity of the result of that ballot and so using the same people and the same system seemed to be sensible. So will you answer my question? Why the unquestioning acceptance of the P-EP result but the huge outcry (from you anyway) about the constitution vote? If the constitution vote is unsound then by your logic so must the P-EP vote? I am now definitely drawing a line under this because i have no desire to waste my time with people who feel it is acceptable to insult me, question my inteligence and my integrity. I also note the double standards on use of photographs? You make a huge song and dance about Mark Croucher using a photograph of you without your permission but then you do exactly the same to me. Please remove all photographs of me from you sites unless you have my written permission, as the copyright holder, to use them. Permission which you currently do not have!

Anonymous said...

nice posting.. thanks for sharing.