And so has come the moment of reality for new-look UKIP and its not even slightly charismatic leader Adolf von Batten: the Mail on Sunday has done a hit piece on the party’s MEP candidate Carl Benjamin, who styles himself Sargon of Akkad. Batten and Benjamin are adamant it’s all lies and they’re going to sue, but I have to tell the less than dynamic duo that they will be wasting their time - and a non-trivial amount of money.
Carl Benjamin - damaged goods before he joined UKIP
The article, under the by-line of the MoS’ political editor Glen Owen, tells readers “Now Ukip candidate who said he 'wouldn't even rape' a Labour MP says it's OK to sexually abuse boys”. He said WHAT? There is more. Rather a lot more. “Police are examining sickening statements about child abuse made by a highly controversial Ukip candidate”.
I em not a racialist but, und zis is a big but ...
Do go on. “A YouTube broadcast in which Mr Benjamin says: ‘I can be quoted as saying you can f*** young boys. It’s actually not as controversial as you think. Depends on the child, doesn’t it? The ancient Greeks were pederasts. It was considered to be normal. It was mentoring’ … The dossier also includes a screenshot of a social media message in which Benjamin says he needs ‘something to really trigger’ outrage, adding: ‘Do you have any underage porn or child porn? I will delete it fast so nobody gets in trouble.’”
And there is yet more: “Other material studied by the police include a now-deleted 2015 video showing him repeatedly using the racial slurs ‘n****r’ and ‘sp*c’. He described two people as a ‘fag’ and a ‘retard’, and said it was ‘just f***ing fine’ to call an Asian woman a ‘ch*nk’”. As Zelo Street pointed out some months ago.
So what of Batten and Benjamin’s reaction to the MoS outing? Adolf declared “This is part of the MSM smear campaign. These were fabricated tweets & it was proved at the time four years ago. Either the Mail doesn’t care or they didn’t check. Carl will be suing the Mail”. What did the subject of the article have to say for himself?
“The dirty smear merchants at the Daily Mail are going to write a slimepiece about a conversation they haven't even listened to. Just recorded my half of it” told Benjamin, using his @backworldsman1 Twitter account, which he maintains in defiance of a ban handed down by the platform. Today he added simply “We will hold them to account”.
The @WarPlanPurple Twitter account, another Benjamin presence, posted a photo with the tag #SmearMerchants, depicting journalists as peasants. But both Batten and Benjamin have a problem. The MoS article includes this nugget: “Last night, when asked about the child-sex remarks, which he made in 2014, Benjamin - who is standing for the EU parliament’s South West England constituency - said: ‘It was an abstract conversation. You are a dirty, dirty smear merchant.’” So he admits the conversation took place.
Moreover, by the time they get a legal action together - if they get a legal action together - the European Parliament elections will have been and gone. Carl Benjamin was damaged goods even before he joined UKIP. Making him a candidate was beyond foolish.
And that’s before the press starts on the rest of the Kipper hopefuls. Bye bye UKIP.
Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by adding to its Just Giving page at
I believe he has right about ancient Greece, but so what? What was acceptable there nearly 3000 years ago isn't acceptable now.
ReplyDeleteProbably wont make a single UKIP supporter think twice about voting for him or his party. BTW Tim, I do wish you would refrain from posting these people's photographs quite so often as you do. It makes an interesting read that bit harder to stomach having to look at them. We all know what Batten, Benjamin, Hopkins, Farage et al look like all too well.
ReplyDeleteI second AndyC. I don't want to see any more photos of these pillocks unless they're in handcuffs and being led away to start a very long sentence.
ReplyDeleteIt is incredibly easy to sue for defamation in the UK. The claimant is massively favoured, usually if they can show that any part of what the defendant said was untrue or not verifiable, then they will win. The tweet about child porn was fabricated and Sargon didn't post it and the mail claimed he did. So this should be enough. The legal claim might not be finished in time for the election, but he will win. The mail will have to retract.
ReplyDeleteHe is in deep nothing.
ReplyDeleteHis supporters come from his own platform and mostly from the alternate media which quite ironically debunked everything that was thrown at him within 2 days.
Take the recent child abuse smear: youtube.com/watch?v=Iz0FPS-aImk
And done.
At this point there are 2 things happening:
1. The established media is burning away the remainder of its own credibility with gasoline
2. Every smear piece just elevates Carl higher and higher, not only in the eyes of his own platform, but thanks to the backlash, slowly even among the normal population.
Your idea that he is in deep anything is misplaced. His voting circle is coming from youtbe and alternate media. None of them read trash like the daily mail.
Every smear so far has been debunked resoundingly. It's interesting that the name the article was written under, Glen Owen, doesn't appear on the Mail on Sunday Twitter site and all searches for this, presumably, man have revealed very little to date. No way, therefore, of letting this 'dirty dirty smear merchant' (hope this catches on as much as 'fake news' has!) know how most sensible and just people feel. Don't hold back in letting the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday know though...
ReplyDelete@5
ReplyDeleteHis "Voting circle", to use your happy phrase, needs to come from South West England and Gibraltar. Those from alternative media who are not registered to vote in the UK, and do not live in that area, have nothing to do with it.
@6
Owen is the MoS' political editor. If you can't find anything about a paper's political editor, you aren't looking in the right place.
The article has used four different quotes from four different conversations. He even jokes in one of the conversations that he could be quoted as out of context as saying such a horrible thing even though he was speaking against it. Shame the writer of this garbage didn't find this out before printing.... Twat.
Delete@8
ReplyDeleteHello Carl.
Let me put you straight.
It matters not a jot that quotes come from different conversations.
Also, this post is not "printed". Perhaps you meant "published".
Hope the dry cleaning bills aren't too much for you.