Forum Topic

I would be very interested to know just how much truth (if any) there is in Phil’s allegations and I’m sure we will soon find out. However, given Phil’s track record of telling untruths I would not be at all surprised if all or most of what he says is complete bunkum. I reminded forum readers only recently about the way that he had deliberately shaded the truth over the chronology of two posts written by Vanessa and Robin so as to score a cheap political point against the latter, yet when provided with proof of his mendacity he just contemptuously shrugged it off.It just so happens that the posts in question related to allegations that he had sought meetings with one of Hounslow’s newly-defected UKIP councillors last year. If that turns out to be true – and presumably it would be possible to find out – then this has the potential to seriously blow up in his face, especially now that he has referred to that party as ‘hard right’. After all, what on earth would an alleged born-again anti-fascist hope to achieve by holding such a meeting?I think it is very telling that Phil responded to those allegations by saying they were a “total fabrication” yet then went on to say that “At that time I had not set eyes on said individual (the UKIP councillor) since the election count in 2010”. In a subsequent post he again emphasised that “at that time I had neither held nor requested such a meeting”. What is the implication of the words “AT THAT TIME”? Did he later request to meet with the UKIP councillor and if so, was such a request granted? If the answer is yes, then what was discussed?Of course Phil doesn’t have to answer that question (and knowing him he will either get terribly sanctimonious or will just blow another raspberry at me) but the fact remains that if meetings actually were requested or held then it makes his condemnation of Labour seem really quite bogus. I would also be amused to know exactly why Phil thinks UKIP would be likely to siphon more votes off his party than off Labour. Precisely what are the implications of this assumption? As I understand it there are 16 UKIP councillors standing throughout Hounslow, a borough with 20 wards. So surely there is an 80% chance of one standing in Isleworth, in which case what is the big deal? Are we seriously to believe that there is also a Labour-inspired conspiracy in the other 15 wards as well?On a broader note, I suspect a lot of people will find any testimony offered by Phil to be untrustworthy. I recently mentioned that he had accused Robin of posting an anti-immigrant comment under the name of Sue Hird. People can judge for themselves if that was true. Then there was the row on the “New Life in Brentford” thread in which Phil and two of his allies accused Robin of posting in the name of a Romanian bloke. (One of them even claimed that he had managed to miraculously work out that the author’s IP address was based in Southall yet when challenged as to how he could know such a thing without even having asked the moderator, he fell eerily silent).As for the issue of candidates having friends or acquaintances in other parties, I will merely make the following observations: Both Phil Andrews and Paul Fisher (presumably ICG candidates for Isleworth?) are Facebook friends with Linda Green (Labour candidate for Isleworth). Should we infer from this that the ICG have “donated” one of their candidates to Labour? Phil and Paul are additionally Facebook friends with at least one of Isleworth’s Tory candidates and Phil himself with two sitting Labour Councillors. Phil recently referred to this sort of thing as an example of a politically “incestuous” relationship but surely the simple truth is that people sometimes have friends who do not share their political views, so what’s the big deal?As for Kelly Males, was she really connected with the Labour Party (as Phil is hinting) or is this just another conspiracy theory? Remember that on the Chiswick forum recently Phil was accusing Trevor Inns of being a member of the Labour Party. Trevor blew his top at this and immediately posted a new thread entitled “Phil Andrews is a liar”, which I believe resulted in him being suspended.And yet, as I understand it, when one Labour activist subsequently contacted Trevor to ask him if he would like to become involved he responded by saying that he had absolutely no interest in party politics. So how does that square with Phil’s claim? I’m afraid it all fits into the pattern of smoke and mirrors which has been the hallmark of Phil’s political career. Please be advised to take anything he says with a pinch of salt, at least until we can establish some hard facts.

Terry Watson ● 4303d

Kelly Males, bezzie mate of Isleworth Labour Councillor Sue Sampson.Let me clear - I'm not saying Kelly is herself a Labour member.  She may be, she may not be - I really don't know, and I care even less.  But as well as them being drinking buddies she owes a huge amount to Sue who has helped her out to put it mildly.  Does anybody really believe she would stand against Sue without her blessing?  Especially for a hard-right party which we are led to believe represents everything Labour opposes.A few months ago various friends of Sue were writing letters to the Chronicle trying to justify the Council's plans to take Isleworth Public Hall away from the community-led Friends group which has lovingly cared for it for years, while Sue herself remained in the shadows (that's right, the same Public Hall that Labour are now claiming to have "saved" because the Friends group are the only bidders left in the ring now the others have chosen not to pursue their interest).Kelly was one of them.  She referred in her letter to the sum of £85,000 which was the amount the Hall was claimed to have been losing each year.  This was "information" that had not been made publicly available, having been refused even to the bidders.  The only people who had been given this figure were the Labour Group!Kelly has in my view made a bad decision allowing herself to be thrust into the public eye in this way.  The last thing she needs in her life right now is media attention and the spotlight shone upon her and her private affairs.  Sue may have helped her in the past, but she is certainly not helping her in this instance.The really audacious thing about all this is that Labour nationally are in the process of starting a campaign to encourage recent migrants to register to vote to counter the UKIP threat.  Meanwhile Labour locally, who issue allegations of "racism" with gay abandon at just about everybody, are actively encouraging an outspokenly anti-immigration group to field a candidate in the hope that she will syphon a few protest votes from a non-racist residents' group whose (self-induced) "threat" to Labour is very strictly local.You really couldn't make it up, could you?

Phil Andrews ● 4304d

Topic: A one-off response to Simon Anderson (Boredom Warning - for interested parties and anoraks only!) Forum Home Posted by: Phil Andrews Date/Time: 11/03/08 12:52:00  As promised I am going to, for once and for once only, respond to the various allegations made in your letter to Ruth Cadbury (gee, you do get about don't you?) and emphasised in your posting this morning.  Everything you need to know is here if only you could be bothered to read it and take it in.  Beyond this I don't intend to engage in a dialogue with you.My responses are in bold:"Then IVYTAG was set up by andrews with Mr B in charge then at the end of 2003 i was thrown of NITA because i did not like what was happening on that group and i themn got involve with Andrews to my regret now..he asked me to take over IVYTAG and told Mr B to hand it to me..." Not true as well you know.  Ivytag was in existence for some considerable time before you were kicked out of NITA and subsequently joined the organisation which you had previously spent most of your waking hours attacking.Ivytag was always supported by the ward councillors as it was clear that a large body of residents had no confidence in NITA as a representative body for all the residents on the estate.  Its launch was even covered in the ICG newsletter Village News, so the insinuation that you have made in the past in the manner of a blackmail threat - that the ICG's involvement in the project was some kind of secret - is absurd and way off the mark.  However Ivytag was in actual fact not set up by me, but by George Burrell (Chair), the late Tom Reader (Vice Chair) and Gareth Evans (Secretary).Far from "telling" Mr. Burrell to hand the chair over to you, I implored him not to (a) because you were not a resident of the estate and I felt it was tactically wrong for a non-resident to be the focus of attention, and (b) because it was already clear to me that you were a loose cannon with an agenda of your own and a man of questionable honour, honesty and integrity.  Sadly Mr. Burrell did not take my advice, and as I had no power to overrule him the transition took place."...when i took over there was about 4 members when i resigned last year there was nearly 300 members with a large number of Ethnic Residents."I don't know where on Earth you have got this from.  Ivytag never operated a card-carrying membership arrangement as you must surely know, having been its Chair.  It was always taken as read that all residents of the estate who considered themselves to be a part of it were a part of it.  This was the case when you assumed the top job just as it was when you left.  There were no indicators of "membership" at either time, although I am prepared to concede that you leant the group a huge amount of energy and drive, and raised its profile on the estate considerably.You seem to forget that I have attended meetings with you at which there have been, maybe, eight or ten people present and which you later announced through various internet forums had been attended by 50 or 100 residents.  When I pulled you on this on one occasion you countered my public correction by claiming that the remaining 90 people had arrived after I had left (which was a good thirty minutes after the conclusion of business), then e-mailed me privately to tell me that the lie had been a "clever trick" (!).I presume by "ethnic residents" you mean people from minority communities?  Other than your somewhat clumsy reference, any specific point which you might be making eludes me."andrews promised residents on the estate that there would be a new R.A that every resident could be part off and it would be un political but this is not whats happened:"The current Chair is, I believe, a Labour Party supporter/member.  A number of her fellow committee members are supporters or members of the ICG, and others still have no allegiances that I am aware of.  The person whose self-induced exclusion you complain of was a committee member of the ICG.  So which political agenda is it being claimed that I am following by supporting the new association?"The Ex Nita members were holding secrets meetings behind the Ex IVYTAG members backs..."So how do you know about them?"...they did not have a constitution or bank Account and when the Vice Chair of the URA and Ex IVYTAG member Mr Ayoby raised all this it went ignored he then raised these issues with Andrews who did nothing about it..."I chaired the Extraordinary General Meeting at which the Hounslow Homes Model Constitution was formally adopted, with one minor alteration to allow for a larger committee membership than the model allowed for.  I have no idea whether the new association has managed to set up a bank account yet - these things take time to organise - but what precisely has that got to do with the rules to which the association operates and how does it justify your conduct?"i also raised things with him and i was called a liar."Wrong Simon, the one occasion when I have called you a liar was when you doctored the minutes of a meeting of Ivytag at which I had been present to include fabricated quotes from me urging Ivytag members to attend the EGM in large numbers to "vote off" former NITA members, when you knew full I had said no such thing and would not say such a thing as it ran contrary to everything I had always stood for.Only a liar would do this.  Only a real dumbass would then give me the doctored minutes and ask me to photocopy them for him!!!"In December 2007 Mr ayoby was verbally attacked by the Secretary of the URA and ex NITA member in front of the Whole group, it was so bad it ended Mr Ayoby having a minor Heart attack 4wks later, Andrews knew about this and did Nothing when Mr Ayoby spoke to him again."If Mr. Ayoby's experience made him ill then I am truly sorry to hear this and I hope he is very much on the mend.  I have no knowledge of this alleged incident as I wasn't there, however if Mr. Ayoby had a complaint about the way he claims he was treated then there are channels through which to pursue it.  To my knowledge he hasn't availed himself of these procedures.You say I "did nothing".  What do you propose I should have done, exactly?  One moment you accuse me of controlling the new TA, the next you seem to feel I should intervene every time there is a disagreement at a Committee meeting.  This is Committee business, not mine.  As long as due process is being followed it is not my concern. "Another long term resident of Ivybridge, Ex IVYTAg member Resigned from the URA over what happened she informed Andrews (whom she has been friends for for years) and he did nothing."I spoke to the lady only recently.  She resigned because she is "fed up with all the aggro", and feels compromised because she considers Mr. Ayoby to be a friend.  She reserves judgement on Mr. Ayoby's behaviour and is only interested in doing good things on the estate rather than taking part in bickering.It is anybody's right to resign.  Again, what is it exactly that you expect me to do?"Then in January Mr Ayoby went to the URA meeting and submitted 8 applications from Ethnic Residents and Ex IVYTAG members to join the URA, the Chairwoman refussed to accept them and 3mths now they have not responded to those letters because they dont want them so to say all is welcome is wrong."Oh Buddha, I really wish that one of you two could hire a brain cell from somewhere and try to get your heads around this one.The meeting to which Mr. Ayoby took his gang was A COMMITTEE MEETING.  The people he took along were NOT MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.As residents of the estate the people concerned are ALREADY members of the new association.  There are two methods by which one can join the Committee, one is by being elected at an Annual General Meeting, the other is by co-option.You cannot just take a group of people to a Committee meeting who are not members of that Committee and insist that they be admitted.  Would you come to a meeting of Borough Council, sit in the Chamber and insist on the right to take part and vote in the debate?This is not the first time that Mr. Ayoby has pulled this stunt.  The original Working Group, as you will remember, comprised ten pre-agreed members.  At the first meeting Mr. Ayoby arrived with another resident in tow, an elderly lady who is a personal friend of mine and a member of my Church.  It was my embarrassing duty to have to ask her to leave.  I don't know whether Mr. Ayoby engages in this behaviour to be deliberately obstructive or whether he genuinely doesn't understand what a committee is, but for you to be encouraging him in this behaviour is pure mischief."In Febuary Mr Burrell had told Mr Ayoby and myself that they were having a EGM but they did NOT invite any EX IVYTAG member"Errr....Mr. Burrell is a former Ivytag member, indeed he is a former Chair.  At least least one other former Chair of Ivytag was also present, I believe, as well as several other ex-Ivytag members.  What I presume you mean is that no ex-Ivytag members who were NOT ON THE COMMITTEE were invited.  This is because it was an EGM of the COMMITTEE, not of the association.  Give me strength, I know this will get through in the end!"In Febuarys meetings Mr Ayoby was voted off the URA started by Mr Burrell, there was no constituion in place so this was Un Constitional and Un Democratic as it was not put on the Agenda and some of the Ex Ivytag members who did not att the meeting ave now stated if they knew what was going to happen they would of gone."I have been given a full account of this meeting by several Committee members and also by a Tenant Participation Officer at Hounslow Homes.  Mr. Ayoby was not voted off the Committee.  Mr.  Burrell proposed a vote of No Confidence in Mr. Ayoby, as anybody is entitled to do at any time without notice.  Mr. Ayoby announced that if the vote went against him he would walk.  It went against him, and he walked.The other ex-Ivytag members would not have been able to attend because they are NOT MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE (I'm starting to tear chunks of hair out now.  Heck Simon, everyone has a right to be obtuse but you have begun to abuse the privilege)."Mr Ayoby was thrown off because he spoke out about what was happening, at the EGM Cllr Andrews was present at this secret meeting and knew this was going to happen."Mr. Ayoby was not thrown off, as explained above.  I was not present at the meeting."The problem i see is that Cllr Andrews is controlling the URA and pulling all the strings and he has let down all the residents of Ivybridge down and residents are seeing this.I want ALL residents on Ivybridge to no what is going on with the URA and that Cllr Andrews is running things.This weeks article in the Chronicle was a publicity stunt to make Andrews happy.remember he started IVYTAG because NITA wouldnt play ball with him.. . . now he has power he has everything sewn up and shouldnt get away with it and i am here to excist your group in any way or form against this man."Having failed to use me and the ICG as a vehicle through which to pursue your vendetta to your desired conclusion, you now run back to the arms of New Labour, where I am sure your excistence will be gratefully received.  Any port in a storm, where those people are concerned."He states i should not get involved with Issues on Ivybridge as i dont live there fair enough but it was ok for me to be involved when i was doing his Dirty work over there..i will not sit back and see residents over there be treated and lied to in this way.He blames the Labour group for what happened in the past on the Estate, i admit that when NITA was running it had to much interference from The Labour Group (this is me being honest) but he is a hippocrit as he is doing it now."No, I stated that it would be unreasonable for you to expect to chair any new association as you do not live on the estate (Google "Basil Fawlty" and "the bleeding obvious" for an explanation of why this should be).  This was something I had made clear to you from the very beginning.  But of course you had other ideas and assumed, for some strange reason known only to yourself, that you would outflank me and most of your Ivytag colleagues on this.  When it dawned on you that you couldn't you threw a hissy fit, hence these latest outbursts and your relentless manipulation of the pathetically gullible Mr. Ayoby.Simon this is the first and last response you will get from me on this.  The good people who use this forum deserve better than to have their facility dominated by this rubbish, which is of limited interest to 99% of users.  You have ended up with precisely the result that your devious behaviour has deserved throughout.  I wish you all the very best with your new colleagues, whom you may find more appreciative of your trickery, manipulation and underhandedness.

Terry Watson ● 4305d

Oh yes Ian, in all this excitement I'd forgotten about that.In the interests of balance, here's one from Robin on Councillor Theo Dennison, made on a Facebook forum moderated by Councillor Sampson, who appears to have made no effort to delete it.I wonder if Robin's apologists from within and around the local Labour Party, on and off this forum, will be similarly leaping to the defence of Councillor Dennison?>>>Robin TaylorLABOUR RE-SELECTS ICG SUPPORTERA Hounslow Labour Councillor who poured scorn on his party colleagues while publicly praising a former convicted racist felon has been re-selected by his local ward branch.Syon Councillor Theo Dennison (pictured, below left) boasted that he had used his privileged access to Labour Party membership records to search for opponents of ex-National Front activist Phil Andrews (below right) with the intention of handing their addresses over to him. Andrews himself was a member of the NF from 1977-89, during which time he served a prison sentence for assaulting a police officer at a racist rally. But in the 1990s he ended all formal ties with the far right to set up and lead Hounslow’s Independent Community Group (ICG).The concept behind the ICG was first devised by Andrews in his NF days. Writing in a fascist publication in 1984 he argued that the party’s influence could best be expanded through a policy of community engagement. Although the stated aims of today’s ICG owe little to the philosophy of the NF, its tactic of physically stalking its opponents is one characteristic which it arguably does share with fascist groups.The ICG began standing candidates in a number of Labour-held wards in the 1990s and by 2006 had won enough seats to form a coalition with the Conservatives on Hounslow Council. This broke what had been a 35-year-long tenure of power by Hounslow’s Labour Group, dubbed a ‘self-serving incestuous mob’ by Andrews. In the ensuing four years the Tory/ICG coalition won plaudits from local racists by voting to close down the internationally-acclaimed “Hounslow Language Service”, which gave specialist English tuition to refugee children. However, the ICG was swept from power in 2010 after it emerged that Andrews had put in an expenses claim for the cost of a holiday flight.Some fear that Labour’s re-selection of Theo Dennison may have made the party a hostage to fortune as whenever he feels aggrieved by his Labour colleagues he tends to strengthen his ties with Andrews. Dennison had previously approached the former fascist in 2009 after failing in a bid to oust the then incumbent Labour MP Ann Keen as the area’s parliamentary candidate. In 2012, subsequent to being demoted from the Hounslow Council Cabinet, Dennison publicly praised the ICG for having higher standards than Labour and criticised his own councillor colleagues for allegedly being obsessed with Andrews' far-right past.Perhaps more ominously Dennison has not only enthusiastically defended the former NF activist from criticism but quite pointedly refused to distance himself from a comment that Andrews had made in which he compared one Hounslow Labour Councillor unfavourably with a pile of dog excrement.Dennison has faced internal disciplinary proceedings over a variety of matters and as well as losing his cabinet post has been stripped of his previous position as Chair of Planning. However there is dismay that local party chiefs have given him the go ahead to stand again, especially as six other sitting councillors have been denied the right to seek re-selection. His closest ally, Cllr Colin Ellar, argues that to suspend him from the group would cause more problems than it solves.Dennison continues to keep Andrews informed of the internal goings-on within Hounslow Labour Party and in so doing has enabled the former NF activist to interfere in recent selection contests. This has led to concerns being raised that the ICG leader may gain access to the party’s Voter ID database for Isleworth Ward, where Andrews is hoping to stage a political come-back next May. Does it matter whether Labour or the ICG prevails in Isleworth in 2014? That depends on whether you think the cause of good race relations would be significantly affected by the re-emergence of Phil Andrews on the local stage. There is a general recognition that Andrews is obsessively narcissistic and has serious anger management issues but anti-fascist opinion is divided over whether he still subscribes to his old racist ideology.Like • Share • 11 August 2013 at 13:29• • Seen by 40Karen Jewitt likes this.<<<

Phil Andrews ● 4305d

I was recently surfing the net and happened across an article about the ICG. At the end of said article was a series of quotes made by Phil Andrews.Given that Phil will soon be asking for the support of voters I think it's only fair that people are made aware of some of the charming terms of endearment which he has been levelling at others over the years. For this reason I've copied and pasted the series of quotes below...Phil Andrews then and now...On Britain: "An Americanised, bastardised multi-racial sewer". (1984).On local anti-fascist journalist Stefan Bialoguski: "Paranoid and unbalanced". (1989).On American tourists: "The scum of the earth". (1985).On anti-fascist magazine Searchlight: "A monthly hate sheet". (1989).On the Holocaust: "The most absurd of war-time fairy stories". (1984).On the Anti Nazi League: "A marauding gang of hooligans". (1994).On BNP leader Nick Griffin: "I have difficulty seeing in him the swivel-eyed monster of traditional anti-fascist folklore". (2009).On Hounslow Labour Group: “A self-serving incestuous mob”. (2005).On former Labour MPs Ann and Alan Keen: “Parasites”. (2010).On Liberal Democrat activist Conal Stewart: “A repulsive arse”. (2009).On Evening Standard journalist Andrew Gilligan: "A lying scumbag". (2008).On anti-fascist activist Robin Taylor: "Disturbed". (2014).On Tory Party activist David Giles: "A liar and a moral coward". (2012).On Labour Party activist William Hughes: "A gutless creep". (2006).On local tenants’ leader Al Ayobi (a former ally): “Despicable… an incontinent liar, a lunatic and a fantasist of truly ludicrous proportions”. (2010).On local tenants’ activist Simon Anderson (another former ally): “A liar, a dumbass and a man of questionable honour, honesty and integrity”. (2008).On former Isleworth Labour Councillor Vanessa Smith: “Low and treacherous”. (2014).On Isleworth Labour candidate Sue Sampson: “No more welcome on most people’s doorsteps than a pile of dog poo”. 2010).On Brentford FC supporter Trevor Inns: "A dickhead". (2014).On anti-fascist campaigner & Labour activist Dave Hughes: "Demented". (2008).On himself: “Us old-fashioned sorts believe that honesty and integrity still have a part to play in local politics". (2010).^^^ I am reliably informed that the above is just the tip of the iceberg.I wonder if, in his quieter moments, Phil Andrews ever pauses to reflect on the fact that he has spent his entire life being angry at people..?

Terry Watson ● 4305d

It's very noble of you to keep reassuring us on this issue Vanessa but I really don't understand why you constantly feel it is your role to - you no longer being involved with the party and having nothing to do with its local campaign team etc.You are in good company though as a similar assurance was given to us on this forum some time ago by Councillor Theo Dennison, a man for whom I happen to have a lot of respect (even if he did evidently blow a gasket at the recent hustings during a debate with the ICG Chair).Unfortunately when he did give us this assurance he was taken to task by a fellow Labour councillor and Cabinet member, who took the part of "Rob" rather than defend her Hounslow colleague.These things would be much easier for us mere mortals to get a handle on if those who elect to comment were first to agree upon a common line.  Maybe we should ask one of "Rob's" many Facebook friends who sit on Hounslow Council for a definitive account of his involvement/non-involvement in Isleworth politics?The issue of course is not which constituency party "Rob" happens to be a member of.  It is whether people in THIS constituency party are still mug enough to listen to and act upon his self-serving bile, and the evidence that they do is regrettably there for everybody to see.In other words "Rob" himself is not important.  The relationship that others feel they have with him is, because it has long-term implications for the balance of our local politics.

Phil Andrews ● 4307d