Former Tory MP Neil Hamilton on UKIP campaign trail (From Daily Echo)

2@

So that's four articles on UKIP in two days. Is the Echo biased towards UKIP at all?

What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

The difference is that UKIP is not the other three.

Is this man not the same person who was found guilty of receiving money from certain owner of Harrords and telling more than few fibs?

It may be difficult for all political set ups to gurantee that all their members are squeeky clean. As was found out when mass abuse of MPs expenses was rightly exposed by the Torygraph.

But why is it that UKIP tends to attract more than most the geezers with either very shady or criminal past?

Surely sensible thing for UKIP would have been to keep their equal number of Chris Huhne skelton locked up in some secure cupboard, and certainly not to bring him out to canvass in Eastleigh.

On the other hand one man band of Nigel F has not exactly full of big hitters like other political parties. So the UKIP hasn't got much of a choice but to depend upon people like Hamilton.

Hamilton? Really? ROFL

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

I would say they have the same to offer actually - slogans and undeliverable promises.

I'm willing to bet Mr Hamilton has a working printer though.

"Former Tory MP Neil Hamilton on UKIP campaign trail"

hmm, for accuracy shouldn't the headline read DISGRACED former mp neil hamilton?

a mendacious man embroiled in cash-for -questions scandal less than 20 years ago.

a man not fit for public office.

his who's-who entry says it all really (if true - copied from wikipedia) - "In Who's Who, Hamilton is described as a writer, actor, broadcaster and entertainer."

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

I would say they have the same to offer actually - slogans and undeliverable promises.

I'm willing to bet Mr Hamilton has a working printer though.

LOL. southy's problem is he went for a 'capitalist printer' despite everything he has told us about capitalism. A real own goal when he could have chosen a 'socialist printer' from, er, Cuba, Vietnam.

Stephen J wrote:

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

The difference is that UKIP is not the other three.

And they are more open with there bigotry.

southy wrote:

Stephen J wrote:

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

The difference is that UKIP is not the other three.

And they are more open with there bigotry.

.. so now you are saying there is a difference. Make up your mind.

Hamiliton is a proven corrupt sleazy greedy bankrupt ex-politician.
What party in their right minds would want this jerk canvassing for them?
He sums up everything wrong with westminster in one man, if indeed he is one.
Knock on my door Hamilton, I'll give you a suprise.

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

Their leader.

He may only be one man band, but is producing better results than us on the left.

Whether you agree with him or not, he talks to the point and is consistent with his argument. Does not keep on jumping upon every issue that arises and ditches it as soon as something else comes up; as most of our small groups on the left tend to do.

Yes UKIP is better financed than us and media gives them favourable coverage.

But rather than moan about what left can't do much about, why do we not ask ourselves, how come we on the left and even NuLabour have allowed the most important issue of opposition to the EU be hijacked by UKIP and Tories?

Did your party Socialist Party in its past life as Militant within the Labour Party support Bryan Gould, who consistently opposed what became EU because he was rightly predicting that it will be threat to UK's sovereignty? NO, in fact they supported John Denham against him in Itchen selection against the wishes of their wards, who had nominated Bryan.

Under Kinnock for opportunist and populist reasons despite warnings from likes of Tony Benn and Arthur Scargill Labour ditched its opposition to EU and allowed political right to occupy this space.

It is no good keep on complaining, as I have said many times before left groups must give up tribal cannibalism, learn to work together, stop trying to pull fast ones on people and start sticking to issues rather then keep on jumping from tree to tree like wild monkeys.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Is this man not the same person who was found guilty of receiving money from certain owner of Harrords and telling more than few fibs?

It may be difficult for all political set ups to gurantee that all their members are squeeky clean. As was found out when mass abuse of MPs expenses was rightly exposed by the Torygraph.

But why is it that UKIP tends to attract more than most the geezers with either very shady or criminal past?

Surely sensible thing for UKIP would have been to keep their equal number of Chris Huhne skelton locked up in some secure cupboard, and certainly not to bring him out to canvass in Eastleigh.

On the other hand one man band of Nigel F has not exactly full of big hitters like other political parties. So the UKIP hasn't got much of a choice but to depend upon people like Hamilton.

Careful now. Just in case m'learned friends are reading, you might want to agree with the Standards and Privileges Committee's final conclusion that there was no compelling evidence that he took money from Fayed.

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

Apart from repeating the mantra of 'no cuts' what does your lot offer? Is this why you attract Parish Council levels of votes on a good day and UKIP have got MEPs? Stick with an unrealistic and unachievable policy that only appeals to minority groups and they will be the only ones that will vote for you if they can be bothered to go out on a Thursday.

I can only think that Cameron has asked Hamilton to be seen to be supporting UKIP as part of a 'Dirty Tricks' campaign.

.. so, that's two more UKIP stories today and both high up the listing.

That's 6 in all since last Monday.

Is that more than all the other parties put together?

freefinker wrote:
.. so, that's two more UKIP stories today and both high up the listing.

That's 6 in all since last Monday.

Is that more than all the other parties put together?

And all with the constant not very veiled reminder at the top of the page about Chris Huhne, which masquerades as headline news.

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

Apart from repeating the mantra of 'no cuts' what does your lot offer? Is this why you attract Parish Council levels of votes on a good day and UKIP have got MEPs? Stick with an unrealistic and unachievable policy that only appeals to minority groups and they will be the only ones that will vote for you if they can be bothered to go out on a Thursday.

And it took them 20 plus years to get to that state, we only been at it for 4 years max and have achive more than UKIP did in its first 10 years.

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

Apart from repeating the mantra of 'no cuts' what does your lot offer? Is this why you attract Parish Council levels of votes on a good day and UKIP have got MEPs? Stick with an unrealistic and unachievable policy that only appeals to minority groups and they will be the only ones that will vote for you if they can be bothered to go out on a Thursday.

And it took them 20 plus years to get to that state, we only been at it for 4 years max and have achive more than UKIP did in its first 10 years.

Until i started reading this paper and southys garbage i never heard of this crew he keeps on about but i have certainly heard of U.K.I.P so that blows his illusions right out of the water.

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

Apart from repeating the mantra of 'no cuts' what does your lot offer? Is this why you attract Parish Council levels of votes on a good day and UKIP have got MEPs? Stick with an unrealistic and unachievable policy that only appeals to minority groups and they will be the only ones that will vote for you if they can be bothered to go out on a Thursday.

And it took them 20 plus years to get to that state, we only been at it for 4 years max and have achive more than UKIP did in its first 10 years.

Six years after being founded UKIP had three MEPs. What electoral successes has TUSC had so far?

Stephen J wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

Apart from repeating the mantra of 'no cuts' what does your lot offer? Is this why you attract Parish Council levels of votes on a good day and UKIP have got MEPs? Stick with an unrealistic and unachievable policy that only appeals to minority groups and they will be the only ones that will vote for you if they can be bothered to go out on a Thursday.

And it took them 20 plus years to get to that state, we only been at it for 4 years max and have achive more than UKIP did in its first 10 years.

Six years after being founded UKIP had three MEPs. What electoral successes has TUSC had so far?

They have three MEPs that are 'biting the hand that feeds them.'

I note that while Farage wants the UK out of Europe, he was not prepared to 'get out of Europe' himself, and stand as a candidate in Eastleigh.

I guess MEPs get paid a few bob more than MPs.

Stephen J wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Is this man not the same person who was found guilty of receiving money from certain owner of Harrords and telling more than few fibs?

It may be difficult for all political set ups to gurantee that all their members are squeeky clean. As was found out when mass abuse of MPs expenses was rightly exposed by the Torygraph.

But why is it that UKIP tends to attract more than most the geezers with either very shady or criminal past?

Surely sensible thing for UKIP would have been to keep their equal number of Chris Huhne skelton locked up in some secure cupboard, and certainly not to bring him out to canvass in Eastleigh.

On the other hand one man band of Nigel F has not exactly full of big hitters like other political parties. So the UKIP hasn't got much of a choice but to depend upon people like Hamilton.

Careful now. Just in case m'learned friends are reading, you might want to agree with the Standards and Privileges Committee's final conclusion that there was no compelling evidence that he took money from Fayed.

Please correct me if I am wrong. But I am under the impression that Court of Law accepted that he received envelopes containing plenty of cash.

House of Commons Committee may have nominal respectability attached to them, but who sits on those? Colleagues and friends of the very MPs whose conduct they are supposed to investigate.

Had it been to these committees scandal of MPs expenses may have remained a secret, or covered up with some plausible excuses. Thanks to Torygraph duck houses and dry rots got exposed. Along with trouser presses claimed by Lib Dem’s darling the liar Mr. Huhne

First formed as the Anti-Federalist League in 1991, in 1993 change name to UKIP.
Sked resigned from the leadership and left the party because he felt they are racist and have been infected by the far-right.
Referendum Party was dissolved in 1997/8 on the death of Goldsmith and many of the members joined UKIP which in 1999 saw there first 3 seats won.
At its peak had 22,000 members this as now drop off to 19,000 members.

I was closer when i said 10 years, than your 6 years but still good guest work from both of us.

But like I said we only been at it for 4 years our time as yet to come, and have achived much more then UKIP at the same period, our membership is higher and is still rising, but UKIP seems to be falling.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

Stephen J wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Is this man not the same person who was found guilty of receiving money from certain owner of Harrords and telling more than few fibs?

It may be difficult for all political set ups to gurantee that all their members are squeeky clean. As was found out when mass abuse of MPs expenses was rightly exposed by the Torygraph.

But why is it that UKIP tends to attract more than most the geezers with either very shady or criminal past?

Surely sensible thing for UKIP would have been to keep their equal number of Chris Huhne skelton locked up in some secure cupboard, and certainly not to bring him out to canvass in Eastleigh.

On the other hand one man band of Nigel F has not exactly full of big hitters like other political parties. So the UKIP hasn't got much of a choice but to depend upon people like Hamilton.

Careful now. Just in case m'learned friends are reading, you might want to agree with the Standards and Privileges Committee's final conclusion that there was no compelling evidence that he took money from Fayed.

Please correct me if I am wrong. But I am under the impression that Court of Law accepted that he received envelopes containing plenty of cash.

House of Commons Committee may have nominal respectability attached to them, but who sits on those? Colleagues and friends of the very MPs whose conduct they are supposed to investigate.

Had it been to these committees scandal of MPs expenses may have remained a secret, or covered up with some plausible excuses. Thanks to Torygraph duck houses and dry rots got exposed. Along with trouser presses claimed by Lib Dem’s darling the liar Mr. Huhne

Hamilton lost the libel case against Fayed. It was a civil case, and so he was not and could not be found guilty of anything. It might sound like semantics, but it's as well to be precise when linking people with words like 'criminal' on a public forum.

Stephen J wrote:

freefinker wrote:
.. so, that's two more UKIP stories today and both high up the listing.

That's 6 in all since last Monday.

Is that more than all the other parties put together?

And all with the constant not very veiled reminder at the top of the page about Chris Huhne, which masquerades as headline news.

Pretending to be a news paper for enjoying the benefits of the principle of free press, Echo appears to be abusing its local news paper monopoly in our area.

Editor Murray should stop pretending that this web site is not politically biased. Some of us will have more respect for him if he openly declares that he is against not only the left but also against even NuLabour.

At least another American citizen Rupert Murdoch's paper like Sun are open about their support for political parties, Why owned by another American media empire Echo can't be honest about its political agenda?

Is it abuse of power? Or monopoly? Or dishonesty? Or lack of courage? Or clever journalistic practice, trying to influence public opinion by providing selective information, while pretending to be independent neutral informer of news?

I suspect it is the last trick being played to undermine hard left, the Greens and NuLabour etc.

ohec wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

Apart from repeating the mantra of 'no cuts' what does your lot offer? Is this why you attract Parish Council levels of votes on a good day and UKIP have got MEPs? Stick with an unrealistic and unachievable policy that only appeals to minority groups and they will be the only ones that will vote for you if they can be bothered to go out on a Thursday.

And it took them 20 plus years to get to that state, we only been at it for 4 years max and have achive more than UKIP did in its first 10 years.

Until i started reading this paper and southys garbage i never heard of this crew he keeps on about but i have certainly heard of U.K.I.P so that blows his illusions right out of the water.

You not hear of them because they are new, and not been around very long, so hearing about them this quickly is not bad when you take into account that the TUSC do not get the meadia coverage like the other Right wing Partys do.

Linesman wrote:

Stephen J wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:
What do UKIP really have to offer that is difference from all other Right wing partys, Nothing at all.

Apart from repeating the mantra of 'no cuts' what does your lot offer? Is this why you attract Parish Council levels of votes on a good day and UKIP have got MEPs? Stick with an unrealistic and unachievable policy that only appeals to minority groups and they will be the only ones that will vote for you if they can be bothered to go out on a Thursday.

And it took them 20 plus years to get to that state, we only been at it for 4 years max and have achive more than UKIP did in its first 10 years.

Six years after being founded UKIP had three MEPs. What electoral successes has TUSC had so far?

They have three MEPs that are 'biting the hand that feeds them.'

I note that while Farage wants the UK out of Europe, he was not prepared to 'get out of Europe' himself, and stand as a candidate in Eastleigh.

I guess MEPs get paid a few bob more than MPs.

Not only more but lots and lots more. Also as you are aware even EU's own auditors keep on refusing to sign accounts off, so we never know if MEP's claims are genuine or some of them too have been behaving like member of British Parliament.

What do UKIP have to offer? They offer us a voice, Labour, Conservatives and Libs all want Britain to be in a federal EU UKIP want us out of the EU UKIP is a Party for British people and Britain, LibLabCons are more concerned about the EU and other countries. look around reread the papers and you will see that - even though a lot is kept out of the papers Vote UKIP for a Better Britain

UKIP is a party that is giving hope to many of us who are feeling very disappointed by other parties. It would be wonderful if ALL parties could work together to get this country back on track but that seems unlikely.

UKIP seems to be the only party that wants to take us out of the EU which is like a breath of fresh air in these very depressing times.

Stephen J wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

Stephen J wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Is this man not the same person who was found guilty of receiving money from certain owner of Harrords and telling more than few fibs?

It may be difficult for all political set ups to gurantee that all their members are squeeky clean. As was found out when mass abuse of MPs expenses was rightly exposed by the Torygraph.

But why is it that UKIP tends to attract more than most the geezers with either very shady or criminal past?

Surely sensible thing for UKIP would have been to keep their equal number of Chris Huhne skelton locked up in some secure cupboard, and certainly not to bring him out to canvass in Eastleigh.

On the other hand one man band of Nigel F has not exactly full of big hitters like other political parties. So the UKIP hasn't got much of a choice but to depend upon people like Hamilton.

Careful now. Just in case m'learned friends are reading, you might want to agree with the Standards and Privileges Committee's final conclusion that there was no compelling evidence that he took money from Fayed.

Please correct me if I am wrong. But I am under the impression that Court of Law accepted that he received envelopes containing plenty of cash.

House of Commons Committee may have nominal respectability attached to them, but who sits on those? Colleagues and friends of the very MPs whose conduct they are supposed to investigate.

Had it been to these committees scandal of MPs expenses may have remained a secret, or covered up with some plausible excuses. Thanks to Torygraph duck houses and dry rots got exposed. Along with trouser presses claimed by Lib Dem’s darling the liar Mr. Huhne

Hamilton lost the libel case against Fayed. It was a civil case, and so he was not and could not be found guilty of anything. It might sound like semantics, but it's as well to be precise when linking people with words like 'criminal' on a public forum.

Stephen, thanks for correcting my misunderstanding of the situation and my apology for badly worded statement, which may have given the wrong impression about former Tory MP

The Hamiltons ! My God ! How on earth does UKIP think this is good publicity ? Disgraced Tory MP and his overpowering wife . Hold on no UKIP what a wonderful idea carry on regardless , there must me plenty of disgraced ex Tory M.P.'s out there !
You are not the only Eurosceptic party and the Tories definitely are pro-Europe. When Cameron can convince me he can persuade Turkeys to vote for Christmas then I might believe he stands a chance of persuading the E.U. parliament to take a budget cut.

jonnyx wrote:
"Former Tory MP Neil Hamilton on UKIP campaign trail"

hmm, for accuracy shouldn't the headline read DISGRACED former mp neil hamilton?

a mendacious man embroiled in cash-for -questions scandal less than 20 years ago.

a man not fit for public office.

his who's-who entry says it all really (if true - copied from wikipedia) - "In Who's Who, Hamilton is described as a writer, actor, broadcaster and entertainer."

I dont think he should be called Disgraced, he was not found guilty of anything..he lost a case of libel against a man who said Prince Philip was a Nazi and other wild comments. I think both he and his wife have worked hard since to rebuild their lives. At least he is an intelligent entertaining personnality that has ALWAYS loved this Country of ours and will work to save us from the EU.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Is this man not the same person who was found guilty of receiving money from certain owner of Harrords and telling more than few fibs?

It may be difficult for all political set ups to gurantee that all their members are squeeky clean. As was found out when mass abuse of MPs expenses was rightly exposed by the Torygraph.

But why is it that UKIP tends to attract more than most the geezers with either very shady or criminal past?

Surely sensible thing for UKIP would have been to keep their equal number of Chris Huhne skelton locked up in some secure cupboard, and certainly not to bring him out to canvass in Eastleigh.

On the other hand one man band of Nigel F has not exactly full of big hitters like other political parties. So the UKIP hasn't got much of a choice but to depend upon people like Hamilton.

No he was not found guilty of receiving money from the phoney pharo..he lost a libel case...He was never guilty of any Political wrong doing.He cares about our Country and was a Eurosceptic when Nigel Farage was in short trousers.He has the Political know how and intelligence .If you want to make our Country great again then give UKIP a chance.The other 3 parties ahve shown how weak they are.

HettyGetty wrote:
UKIP is a party that is giving hope to many of us who are feeling very disappointed by other parties. It would be wonderful if ALL parties could work together to get this country back on track but that seems unlikely.

UKIP seems to be the only party that wants to take us out of the EU which is like a breath of fresh air in these very depressing times.

No they are not, the Socialist have been on about it since the day Tory Ted Heath took us into the EU with out a vote.
The only party offering a real difference is the TUSC who also offer the vote on EU

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

Stephen J wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

Stephen J wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Is this man not the same person who was found guilty of receiving money from certain owner of Harrords and telling more than few fibs?

It may be difficult for all political set ups to gurantee that all their members are squeeky clean. As was found out when mass abuse of MPs expenses was rightly exposed by the Torygraph.

But why is it that UKIP tends to attract more than most the geezers with either very shady or criminal past?

Surely sensible thing for UKIP would have been to keep their equal number of Chris Huhne skelton locked up in some secure cupboard, and certainly not to bring him out to canvass in Eastleigh.

On the other hand one man band of Nigel F has not exactly full of big hitters like other political parties. So the UKIP hasn't got much of a choice but to depend upon people like Hamilton.

Careful now. Just in case m'learned friends are reading, you might want to agree with the Standards and Privileges Committee's final conclusion that there was no compelling evidence that he took money from Fayed.

Please correct me if I am wrong. But I am under the impression that Court of Law accepted that he received envelopes containing plenty of cash.

House of Commons Committee may have nominal respectability attached to them, but who sits on those? Colleagues and friends of the very MPs whose conduct they are supposed to investigate.

Had it been to these committees scandal of MPs expenses may have remained a secret, or covered up with some plausible excuses. Thanks to Torygraph duck houses and dry rots got exposed. Along with trouser presses claimed by Lib Dem’s darling the liar Mr. Huhne

Hamilton lost the libel case against Fayed. It was a civil case, and so he was not and could not be found guilty of anything. It might sound like semantics, but it's as well to be precise when linking people with words like 'criminal' on a public forum.

Stephen, thanks for correcting my misunderstanding of the situation and my apology for badly worded statement, which may have given the wrong impression about former Tory MP

Don't get me wrong; I can't stand him. He reckons that two of his best attributes are not being either Jonathan Aitken or Jeffrey Archer.

If he was not guilty why did he have to "rebuild" his career divorce88?

Surely if he was such an honest innocent man he would have started legal proceeding under tort and sue for damages for defamation?

If there is any reason UKIP will win, it is because people are so apathetic towards the existing governing parties, they might decide to try something new, regardless of what they represent in the long run.

As for someone comments about this being an alternative to the "ruling elite" hahaaaa...

He was voted out of Paliment in Tatton in 1997.The Labour and LIb dems stepped their candidates down so all votes would go to Martin Bell.He "rebuilt" a career the same way as all the hard working people of the Ford plant will have to now the EU money has helped it move to Turkey. He did fight to clear his name by suing for libel but could not secure the funds to fight the Guardian Newspaper. Unfortunatly in this Country you have to be rich to do this. He has never been found guilty of any wrong doing in Parliment nor outside of it. The forensic tax officers found no evidence of any payments .The Parlimentry standards committee found no wrong doing either..