UKIP Uncovered

UKIP Uncovered
What motivates the leaders of the United Kingdom Independence Party?

Saturday, September 20, 2003

Damaging Eurorealism

Any still interested in the wierd sayings of Greg Lance-Watkins might wish to follow the exchange from an internet group that we quote below. In the context of UKIP and the meeting that takes place today there is a lesson to be taken away. The effect of GLW's activities on the Eurorealist cause has been disastrous. Nevertheless, time spent on determining what he intended or whether he was controlled by external forces to act as he did is time wasted. All that now immediately matters is the disastrous effects his presence has had on the anti-EU cause. There will be ample time for full post mortems when the end-game with the EU (which we are now entering as Blair leaves for Berlin to most probably bargain away yet more of our nation's sovereign rights) is over. All in the ant-EU cause can now have no further truck with this man as they too will be tainted with extremism.

Similarly with UKIP. Time spent discussing how the party got to this point, who was chiefly responsible and their possible motives will today be time wasted. Where does the the party go from here? How can it best help the eurorealist cause? These should be the sole considerations in the minds of those attending. Somebody will no doubt record the history and point the finger of blame further down the line. We wish the attendees good luck and good judgement.

Herewith the overnight exchange. We have removed the name of the democracy movement spokesman, who we do not know.

From: "Greg Lance Watkins"
you will have observed that the glee with which you and others made fools of yourselves over my appearance on the front page of The Sunday Telegraph was totally blown out of the water by the apology I received from the paper and the journalist who wrote the story. GLW

The following was the reply to this from a Democracy Movement e-mail address

Er, hardly. Greg's whole case, in standard politician style, is that he was quoted 'out of context'. Yet what possible explanatory context could "well done the patriot in Sweden" have been put into to explain it? None. His congratulation of the murderer as a patriot is as clear as day. In fact, Lance-Watkins went on to say "Yes, I do support the execution of elected politicians when they seek to betray the electorate and their country". He repeated that quote in an e-mail to me, so it wasn't the product of a Sunday Telegraph conspiracy to misrepresent him.

Even if prefaced by something along the lines of not supporting violence, that would just be evidently contradictory to the clear meaning of these other quotes. Like saying "I support joining the euro, but I support keeping the pound." He was clearly too stupid to realise this, or he didn't care. The Sunday Telegraph had to choose which half of his contradictory gibberish he actually meant, and went with the pro-murder theme because that was the obvious subject of and reason for his e-mails. He can't complain about that, and he certainly can't pretend his meaning was perverted. He should be man enough to take responsibility for this and apologise for the damage he has done the cause as a result.

Because thanks to Lance-Watkins, millions of people will now
have noted with distaste that eurosceptics welcomed the murder of Anna Lindh, when not even our most overt enemies dared to suggest a eurosceptic was responsible or link our cause to that act. He has yet to explain why he thought such a statement would attract support to euroscepticism from any right-thinking person, and has childishly stopped answering my e-mails which ask this simple question, having finally run out of arrogant bluff and bluster.

Lance-Watkins is not a eurorealist. He talks the talk, and some people fall for that. But his activities continually betray three aims - to disrupt, divide and discredit eurorealism. Whether we are talking about his Sweden atrocity; his efforts to get eurorealists to talk about other eurorealists or groups as seemingly part of a friendly conversation but then send those comments to the subject; his vitriolic attacks on virtually all campaigning groups to try to put activists off getting involved with them and prevent them campaigning with others in an effective, organised way; or his staple continual spamming of as many e-addresses as he can get hold of with rambling, nutty e-mails in the name of euroscepticism....it all adds up.

Whether he is doing this for his own perverse amusement, or for money, or for some other reason, no-one can be sure. But thankfully his comments about Anna Lindh have at last driven this home to the few who still gave him the benefit of the doubt.

To which Christina Speight added the following comments:-

"Did GLW send you a copy of the supposed 'apology'? (Or are you supposed just to take his word? !!! ) I cannot for the life of me see what they could possibly apologise FOR? He either said it or he didn't. After that comment is free! In any case he has, as you say, repeated it elsewhere. Incitement to murder can hardly be taken out of context. It is a criminalact.

The man's cornered and will probably turn nasty. Look out for phone calls in the middle of the night!! (He's DONE that!)"

posted by Martin |8:43 AM