***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 23 *****
As above.*
* this site does not endorse any political party in any shape or form. Any posts/links deemed offensive by moderators will be removed
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 7 May 15 at 10:23
|
Um, I take it all my fellow Kippers listened to Dear Leader on LBC Radio last week?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvIYNbaYiC4
Erm, very poor quality recording, didn't realise that as I listened to it live :(
moved from previous thread
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 27 Mar 15 at 10:28
|
Yes although the Youtube video is terrible, this one is better:
www.lbc.co.uk/watch-nigel-farage-live-on-lbc-96464
|
It isn't that easy for any immigrant in a foreign country to make a decent living.You have to be able to pick up the language very quick if you don't it won't work.That was in my case over fourty years ago.I didn't do lots of writing and it shows.) Reading no problem.I speak average German and little French.I made plenty of friends over the years and also met plenty who don't like foreigners.That never bothered me that much if needed I could look after myself.Politicians in Europe never thought this through the immigration policy.
Maybe it's best for the UK to get out the E.U.Then the politicians here can decide which way to go regarding immigration.Maybe I am talking rubbish.)<
|
How many times does it have to be repeated UKIP ISN'T AGAINST IMMIGRATION or immigrants.
Even in the unlikely event that the UK did leave the EU, there would still be immigration to this country. The UK was built on immigration.
The problem is, as I see it anyway, that the open-door policy is simply wrong, any Tom, Dick, or Harriet can come into this country now from the EU.
UKIP's policy is to let in quality people of any race or religion - people who can add to this country - similar to what they have in place in Australia.
Dutchie my old son, I've noticed your grasp of the English language has improved since you been on this forum ;)
|
>>How many times does it have to be repeated UKIP ISN'T AGAINST IMMIGRATION or immigrants <<
I dont even bother anymore, it isnt about what is true, it is simply tribal loyalties that dont have any foundation in reason.
I do often wonder that if people spent half as much time having a calm exchange of views and open discussion of the various issues, whether society would improve alot quicker.
I was looking at a leaflet today and it struck me how sad it was that politics in this country has now come down to fighting back against outright lies from opposition parties. The real substance of the issues takes a poor second place to tribalism.
|
If there is a difference between, to use Farage's phrase "British born" and immigrants, then I would call that discrimination and thus superficially against immigration.
However, if one encourages highly qualified and experienced immigration, how then will UKIP protect the jobs of the "British born"? Because that would tend to suggest that UKIP believe its ok for "British born" to compete for the higher paid jobs requiring such skills, potentially losing out to the foreign born, but that all the unskilled work *must* be done by the "British born".
Are you sure you want to vote for that? Because surely you can understand where that will ultimately lead?
|
|
I think their idea is to bring where there is a shortage rather than targetting high or low skilled, I think anyway.
|
>> >>How many times does it have to be repeated UKIP ISN'T AGAINST IMMIGRATION or immigrants
>>
But for a lot of observers being anti immigration, together with getting out of Europe, is it's USP.
>> >> I was looking at a leaflet today and it struck me how sad it was
>> that politics in this country has now come down to fighting back against outright lies
>> from opposition parties.
Add and their media stooges to 'lies from opposition parties and irrelevant distractions' and I'd agree 110%.
Whatever the merits or messages (and I wish he'd find and define them) of Ed Miliband the size if his kitchen and how he eats a bacon sarnie are utterly irrelevant.
|
> >> >> I was looking at a leaflet today and it struck me how sad it was that politics in this country has now come down to fighting back against outright lies from opposition parties
Add and their media stooges to 'lies from opposition parties and irrelevant distractions' and I'd
>> agree 110%.
>>
>> Whatever the merits or messages (and I wish he'd find and define them) of Ed
>> Miliband the size if his kitchen and how he eats a bacon sarnie are utterly
>> irrelevant.
I think they are in a certain way relevant, mainly because these type of things work. Often on this thread things are viewed through the eyes of people heavily interested in politics, they know the backgrounds, past history of the politicians, what the exit polls showed in an election 30 odd years ago. But most people don't have that level of interest, that's why how someone eats a sandwich matters (although there's no smoke without fire).
In all honesty I can say, in the last 10 years or so politics has maybe come up once or twice at work. Most people just aren't interested, the media do this sort of stuff because it works.
|
>>But for a lot of observers being anti immigration, together with getting out of Europe, is it's USP.<<
The key word there is observers. How people within UKIP view their 'mission' is very different to the sort of observers that you would seek opinion from. It is painfully difficult to find observers who are impartial, from either side, although Prof Matthew Goodwin has done better than anyone else.
>>Add and their media stooges to 'lies from opposition parties and irrelevant distractions' and I'd agree 110%.<<
The trouble with the media is that even intelligent people treat it as some sort of impartial observer simply relaying facts which is exceptionally naive given the painfully close links between journalists and political parties.
Amol Rajan does appear to be attempting to move the Indy back to some genuine independance for which he deserves much credit.
I really dont care about Ed's two kitchens, he is wealthy, alot of wealthy people have two kitchens. What I care about is the vision and the ideas, neither of which Labour seem to have. It is no suprise that the Greens, with their big vision, are starting to erode Labour from the Left because whether you agree with them or not, they do actually have something distinct to offer. Labour vs the Tories is like watching a VW vs Audi comparison.
Last edited by: Stuu on Sat 14 Mar 15 at 00:29
|
We are not a colonial world power anymore policing the planet is now done by the Americans.
They spend fortunes on the armed forces big business.We have nuclear capability,who would want to attack us? Putin is no fool.
|
|
I don't think it's a case of spending a fortune, but neither should we take the freeloader way out. That's been going on a while, it's dawning on some countries that 'the US will take care of everything' isn't the wiseist choice.
|
>> We have nuclear capability,who would want to
>> attack us?
>>
Someone who doubts our resolve ever to use the nuclear option?
|
Just for a giggle at kipper's expense, which are real reasons for KIP people being suspended and which made up :
i.huffpost.com/gen/2758464/thumbs/o-UKIP-SUSPENSIONS-570.jpg?7
Answers at foot of clip.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 26 Mar 15 at 22:17
|
Roger
The Main two parties do NOT have supporters filling every political discussion with claims that UKIP are going to break the mould of the main parties lying, cheating and expense fiddling.
UKIP do.
So get your supporters to be more moderate.. or face the reaction when your members are proven to be liars/cheats /racists.
UKIP have all my sympathy they deserve. None..They brought it on by claiming to wipe the slate clean.
.Live by the sword? Die by the sword.
|
>> On the other hand........................................
>>
>> thomasevansukip.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/lib-lab-con-suspended-stepped-down.html
TL:DR
That list would be more convincing if it focussed on the egregious (racism/sexism/ant Semitism etc) and the truly criminal - sex offenders etc.
Instead it's largely composed of the dross disqualified for (a) non payment of Council Tax and (b) failure to attend meetings.
|
ohh, well a new one for me. Wish I'd known it years ago.
Thanks.
|
|
Used on another forum I inhabit. Forgot it's not quits acquired the currency of IMHO etc.
|
>> Used on another forum I inhabit. Forgot it's not quits acquired the currency of IMHO
>> etc.
>>
Four-letter acronyms are too long to bother learning.
|
Acronyms - I was re-reading The Cuckoo's Egg over the weekend and had forgotten Stoll uses the acronym IOTTMCO* a couple of times. As I probably read it last when it came out, in 1989, I think the world has perhaps moved on, so I'd forgotten its intended meaning.
Might be useful in some sort of geeky way at some point.
*Intuitively Obvious To The Most Casual Observer
|
>> Just for a giggle at kipper's expense, which are real reasons for KIP people being
>> suspended and which made up :
>>
>> i.huffpost.com/gen/2758464/thumbs/o-UKIP-SUSPENSIONS-570.jpg?7
>>
>> Answers at foot of clip.
>>
TL:DR
|
Yes - UKIP do have some daft idiots in our midst. I put it down to over rapid expansion, lack of resources to check every single new member, (I do think we have some infiltrators, not always at grass-roots level) and over-enthusiasm in welcoming defectors - particularly other party's deselected cast-offs. This is a Head Office fault - no question.
Regrettably, we do also attract some undesirables, but perhaps naively, we rely on folk's declaration when they join, affirming no past ties to far right parties. But - how do you check?
The media are always attacking us as "racist", due to our proposal for a points based visa immigration system, similar to that of Australia, which to a particular element makes them think we are a home for them. If they do not articulate their beliefs in public until it is most embarrassing, how are we (or any other party) able to tell?
The female councillor who had a "problem with Negroid features" should have been outed by her local branch, who were, perhaps, aware of her phobia. That was a dereliction of duty, in my opinion and heads should roll.
We do chuck 'em out PDQ when transgressions come to light.
The latest scandal of Ms. Atkinson and the expense claim was truly deplorable and has made all of us in the party sad & cross. It has undoubtedly harmed us, particularly in Folkestone, a target seat, where she was the PPC. (She WAS a long-time Tory, remember.)
So yes, we have bad apples, as do other parties, but we also have a wide range of policies, many of which resonate well with the voters.
Our members are truly passionate in many cases, especially those who post in Social Media. This causes them sometime to go over the top, in claims of "victory", denigration of other politicians on a personal basis and other silly hyperbole.
So we, or I at least, acknowledge our faults and hope for more maturity as the party gets older.
|
Novel campaigning in South Thanet: 'vote Ukip or Nige'll come and pee through your letterbox'.
www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/28/nigel-farage-ukip-south-thanet-marina-oloughlin
|
|
Ah - Bunny Whatsername; typical Grauniadistan!
|
Why the main stream media is trying to black out UKIP?
The actual articles are against UKIP yet most comments are pro-UKIP.
Even in Guardian/Telegraph there are loads of pro-UKIP supporters.
If LibDem/SNP/Plaid Cymru don't upset mainstream media, why they are running away from UKIP?
|
>> Even in Guardian/Telegraph there are loads of pro-UKIP supporters.
A comfortable third in the polls, so they clearly resonate with a lot of people.
It baffles and depresses me in equal measure, but it is a fact.
|
>> If LibDem/SNP/Plaid Cymru don't upset mainstream media, why they are running away from UKIP?
>>
There are only two men who might be in No 10 by mid May and neither of them are Nigel Farage. The press will focus on the main battle. There is a sideshow over whether Nige might win in Thanet and whether Mark Reckless can save his seat. Carswell is the only one likley to be in the Commons next session.
Nigel was on the BBC news earlier launching part of UKIP manifesto in Dover. Unless today's format/edits are radically different from yesterday's he'll be on every bulletin. The BBC has an obligation to impartiality.
The papers do not. Nonetheless he gets mentions in today's Telegraph election page www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/ . He's also being covered by Guardian from time to time.
The presence of UKIP trolls commenting below the line on press coverage tells us diddly.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 31 Mar 15 at 13:17
|
|
That is a long statement / poem Mark.A Brit would say I get my coat(.smiley
|
Email received today:-
At first it may seem strange that just 8 days before a UK General Election, I travelled to Strasbourg this morning to give a speech in the European Parliament. But it should become clear after you watch and share this video.
The crisis in the Mediterranean has shed light on the idea that there should be a common European migration and asylum policy that I believe poses a threat to our civilisation.
WATCH:
tinyurl.com/ot9taqf
Mr Cameron and Mr Miliband both can’t and won’t address this issue. They know there are no opt outs. They know that as an EU member state, we will likely have to accept the idea of “burden sharing†for illegal migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees. And they know that the British government will be rendered impotent on this issue. That’s why they won’t talk about it.
But I will.
I stood up for the British people in the European Parliament today and said NO to this policy.
Of course UKIP understands that there is a humanitarian crisis. Of course we realise that human beings are suffering. But as I argue in the video, not only have we caused this by forcing Libya to be a failed state, after bombing it, but also Europe keeps Africa in poverty with its agricultural and fisheries policies. I believe, if such a term can be used, that UKIP occupies the ‘progressive’ ground on this issue.
That’s why I want you to watch this video, and share it with your friends and family. People should know what’s going on here.
And only one party is willing to be brutally honest about the extremist threat, as well as the potential new burden on our public services caused by another wave of mass migration.
Unless there are UKIP MPs in the House of Commons after May 7th, I fear we will be led into this common European policy, and be forced to absorb what could be millions of people over the next few years, something that our country can ill-afford.
At least if we have common sense voices in our own Parliament, we can begin to fight back against this policy, as well as do what is right, and best, to stop these migrants suffering and dying, just like the Australians have done.
Kind regards,
Nigel Farage
Leader of the UK Independence Party
Published and Promoted by Steve Crowther on behalf of UKIP, Lexdrum House, King Charles Business Park, Newton Abbot, Devon TQ12 6UT
|
Good to see someone talking sense at last.
Pat
|
|
Farage is a realist. Realism is the opposite of socialism ........ it took me 60 years to understand that.
|
1 Hour Ago
EU has just voted to force the UK into an EU wide 'asylum seeker' system by 438-229. The UK will now be forced to accept hundreds of thousands of those arriving in the Med by boat & has basically just opened up UK borders to all of Africa & the Middle East
|
>> 1 Hour Ago
>>
>> EU has just voted to force the UK into an EU wide 'asylum seeker' system
>> by 438-229. The UK will now be forced to accept hundreds of thousands of those
>> arriving in the Med by boat & has basically just opened up UK borders to
>> all of Africa & the Middle East
>>
Have you got a (neutral) link to this ?
|
>> Have you got a (neutral) link to this ?
I've been looking for one but it's not yet made mainstream media. It's not in the Guardian yet or the BBC. Mail and Express gleefully report Farage's suggestion that half a million IS terrorists could arrive in UK any day.
Context pf those reports suggests there's a plan afoot to ease burdens on Italy, Malta and other 'front line' countries where refugees fetch up. There's a further issue as for all the bluster about asylum seekers coming here and being given benefits and houses the number arriving on our shores are comparatively small. Germany has taken huge numbers and head/head to it's indigenous population so has Sweden. So next step is to try and even that up a bit across the whole of EU.
Even if you left the EU and towed the UK (or at least England, Wales and NI) out into the Atlantic the problem arising from unrest in the ME and sub Saharan Africa would still exist a=and on international relations and humanitarian grounds we'd still be under pressure to take our 'share'.
|
What do you want done then Roger? Force them all to stay in the region they are trying to flee?
Leave them to drown if they're approaching by sea?
What is it you want other than to protect your own back yard now you don't want to travel to anyone else's?
No doubt if you were in the position of needing to run from one country to another for the health of you and your family, you'd stay and die, because you'd understand that the country you could run to would rather you didn't.
Watching Farage spout his tired old, reactionary claptrap is embarrassing.
|
I hold no brief for UKIP and I don't see it being a player after the forthcoming election, but I'm getting tired of the ritual offensive sneering at the party and its adherents and the imputation to them of having the wrong (usually racist) motives when they come out with statements that would be taken at face value from another party.
It is just possible that Farage is right now and again, and on this he has a point. If it is being exaggerated for emphasis then that is no different to the spin applied by (and to) all parties and politicians.
The fact that the other parties sing from a different hymn sheet is not evidence of the wrongness of the UKIP position on matters relating to the EU - the fact is that those parties cannot agree while their position is to remain in it.
For example, whether or not they are content with current net migration levels between Britain and the EU, there is absolutely nothing they can do about it. Rather than make this point transparently, both Labour and the Conservatives have themselves sought to pander to anti-immigration sentiment by loudly announcing residence qualifications for claiming benefits.
To the Libya question.
Farage's warning seems reasonable to me, in part because scooping up anybody who embarks on an unseaworthy rustbucket from north Africa in the direction of Italy will not stop people there being oppressed or having their heads hacked off by religious fanatics.
There are some obvious potential unintended consequences if this develops into a formal refugee programme (which, please note, it hasn't yet - all that seems to have been agreed is that there will be a common asylum policy).
I have no argument with the principle of accepting asylum seekers who are otherwise subject to death and torture. The issues are that it is going to be impossible to solve the problem in Libya in that way; that the existence of a refugee programme will massively expand the numbers who wish to migrate; and a real danger that the risks of importing the problem to Europe will not be properly considered.
Italy has already discovered the consequences of simply decriminalising illegal immigration, which was to expand the demand dramatically- goo.gl/TDBuhp (Spectator, September 2014) - an article that also makes the implicit point that Cameron had more chance of being struck by lightning than of reducing net migration to "tens of thousands" (a pledge which, had it come from UKIP, would of course have been labelled racist).
I'd be more impressed with the EU if there was agreement to do what is necessary to make life tolerable for the boat people where they already are, and a recognition that we will not avoid unwanted consequences of illegal immigration simply by making it legal.
Undoubtedly we will, as a nation and as a world, have to get our heads around globalisation and the legitimate aspiration of people everywhere to go where they think they will be better off, but that won't be brought about by ill considered emotional responses to the plight of the boat people. At least as likely is that we will create some major new problems and divisions in Europe, and the situation in the territories controlled by IS will not improve at all.
|
>> It is just possible that Farage is right now and again, and on this he
>> has a point. If it is being exaggerated for emphasis then that is no different
>> to the spin applied by (and to) all parties and politicians.
Its different, UKIP stokes up a fear, usually on divisive racial issues and then plays to it.
>> To the Libya question.
>>
>> Farage's warning seems reasonable to me, in part because scooping up anybody who embarks on
>> an unseaworthy rustbucket from north Africa in the direction of Italy will not stop people
>> there being oppressed or having their heads hacked off by religious fanatics.
So, if they are still being suppressed there, where is the cure at source of people wanting, needing to get the hell out of there. The point is, he offers no solutions to the root cause (often a UKIP failing) and the unspoken alternative he offers is to let them all drown (or worse assist in the drowning)
>> Italy has already discovered the consequences of simply decriminalising illegal immigration, which was to expand
>> the demand dramatically- goo.gl/TDBuhp (Spectator, September 2014) - an article that also makes the implicit
>> point that Cameron had more chance of being struck by lightning than of reducing net
>> migration to "tens of thousands" (a pledge which, had it come from UKIP, would of
>> course have been labelled racist
Think you will find that being criminalised upon landing is the last worry that these people have and far from on their minds when they left.
The root cause is of course instability and lawlessness in the source country. For which we must share some (actually a lot - as we are the ones always clamouring to get stuck in somewhere foreign) of the blame.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 29 Apr 15 at 19:40
|
>> but I'm getting tired of the ritual offensive sneering at the party and its adherents and the imputation to them of having the wrong (usually racist) motives when they come out with statements that would be taken at face value from another party.
Since you replied to me, I'll pick that up.
In my case at least, its not ritual and in fact its tiring. But what does one do? Ignore it?
Farage is a nuisance. Mostly, to me, he is a nuisance because of two things;
1) He's not dumb and understands how to appeal to people.
2) The audience he has chosen to appeal to, or at least the emotions within that chosen audience, are by and large unpleasant
What Farage is offering is scapegoats. At times those are scapegoats by virtue of being foreign, sometimes by virtue of their religion. At other times it will be their represented value or their lifestyle.
What he is offering is the opportunity to have a nice simple instance to blame for everything that bothers you or that is causing you pain. Scapegoats can be comforting, I guess.
Yet all too frequently that is a scapegoat by race or religion and those happen to be two things which really bug me. Those are also two things which appeal to people of a particular mindset who also particularly bug me.
And it seems to me that the majority of UKIP supporters are those to whom racial and religious discrimination appeal.
I wholeheartedly disagree with the Labour party. However, by and large their views do not offend me, I simply think that they are mostly wrong.
ditto the Greens, or the SNP for that matter.
Politically I suspect that I am further from Bromp than I am from Roger yet Bromp does not offend me. However, Bromp is not racist (religion-ist, etc. etc.) and Roger is.
UKIP is embarrassing but not much of a danger in itself. In truth, it is rather useful. It at least stops the main parties ignoring difficult stuff. However, what it reveals about some of its members and lots of its supporters is offensive.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 29 Apr 15 at 19:51
|
>> Italy has already discovered the consequences of simply decriminalising illegal immigration, which was to expand
>> the demand dramatically- goo.gl/TDBuhp (Spectator, September 2014) - an article that also makes the implicit
>> point that Cameron had more chance of being struck by lightning than of reducing net
>> migration to "tens of thousands" (a pledge which, had it come from UKIP, would of
>> course have been labelled racist).
I don't think the two are linked, few would be put off by any legal situation, they want to get here and that's it. They aren't going to worry about wants happening in some parliament buildings in Europe.
>>
>> I'd be more impressed with the EU if there was agreement to do what is
>> necessary to make life tolerable for the boat people where they already are, and a
>> recognition that we will not avoid unwanted consequences of illegal immigration simply by making it
>> legal.
>>
>> Undoubtedly we will, as a nation and as a world, have to get our heads
>> around globalisation and the legitimate aspiration of people everywhere to go where they think they
>> will be better off
I'd agree with that.
>>
|
>> EU has just voted to force the UK into an EU wide 'asylum seeker' system
>> by 438-229. The UK will now be forced to accept hundreds of thousands of those
>> arriving in the Med by boat & has basically just opened up UK borders to
>> all of Africa & the Middle East
Firstly there is NOT hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers washing up on european shores. Secondly they are not ALL coming here, and thirdly All of Arica and the middle east is not trying to get to the UK.
|
>> 1 Hour Ago
>>
>> EU has just voted to force the UK into an EU wide 'asylum seeker' system
>> by 438-229. The UK will now be forced to accept hundreds of thousands of those
>> arriving in the Med by boat & has basically just opened up UK borders to
>> all of Africa & the Middle East
>>
well i'm not sure how 'forced' it was. But I can't admit to knowing the how the voting system works.
Hundreds of thousands seems unlikely. Last year there was about 100k arriving in Italy by sea. There would need to a doubling of them and all of them to come to the UK, that's not going to happen.
I think you need to be more realistic about what is and about to happen. It's this sort of overegging the pudding does UKIP no good at all and makes them sound silly.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Wed 29 Apr 15 at 18:30
|
What this does all do of course is underline the stupidity of interfering with, and destabilising other countries within distance of our (meaning European) borders.
And as far as Miliband Bblaming the tories, he supported the air strikes on Libya.
|
In place of these wild UKIP claims, let me put forward the figures quoted by the BBC.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24583286
"On 21 April the UN refugee agency UNHCR reported that so far in 2015 a total of 36,390 migrants had reached Italy, Greece and Malta by sea.
The vicious civil war in Syria has sent the numbers of Syrian migrants soaring. That is now the dominant feature of irregular migration to the EU.
Afghans, Eritreans and other nationalities are also fleeing poverty and human rights abuses.
Last year, some 219,000 refugees and other migrants crossed the Mediterranean, and at least 3,500 lives were lost, the UNHCR reports.
In 2013 the total reaching Europe via the Mediterranean was much lower - about 60,000."
Pro rata, the UK would only be required to give refuge to 25-30,000 of these unfortunate people per year, not the hundreds of thousands claimed, AND A HUMANE GOVERNMENT WOULD BE DOING THIS REGARDLESS OF EU MEMBERSHIP.
|
>> Pro rata, the UK would only be required to give refuge to 25-30,000 of these
>> unfortunate people per year, not the hundreds of thousands claimed, AND A HUMANE GOVERNMENT WOULD
>> BE DOING THIS REGARDLESS OF EU MEMBERSHIP.
Brilliant post and welcome back to the forum.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 29 Apr 15 at 20:25
|
>> >> Pro rata, the UK would only be required to give refuge to 25-30,000 of
>> these
>> >> unfortunate people per year, not the hundreds of thousands claimed, AND A HUMANE GOVERNMENT
>> WOULD
>> >> BE DOING THIS REGARDLESS OF EU MEMBERSHIP.
>>
>> Brilliant post and welcome back to the forum.
Try drawing a line through 60,000 and 219,000 to see where it goes next.
I would agree that forecasting (as well as always being wrong) is more complicated than that, but the 60,000 wasn't much of a clue to the 219,000 was it? Even the BBC should spot that.
|
>> >> Pro rata, the UK would only be required to give refuge to 25-30,000 of
>> these
>> >> unfortunate people per year, not the hundreds of thousands claimed, AND A HUMANE GOVERNMENT
>> WOULD
>> >> BE DOING THIS REGARDLESS OF EU MEMBERSHIP.
>>
>> Brilliant post and welcome back to the forum.
Didn't take long.
From the Guardian - 5,800 rescued off Libyan coast this weekend. That's nearly half the total for the whole of May last year.
I'll be surprised if it doesn't exceed half a million over the next 12 months.
goo.gl/DGilJV
|
>> The UK will now be forced to accept hundreds of thousands of those arriving in the Med by boat & has basically just opened up UK borders to all of Africa & the Middle East
They will still be vastly outnumbered by ignorant reactionary British prats like you Rastaman. So no need to worry.
Incidentally, the Jeremy Clarkson thing makes him seem pretty civilized. As one would expect.
Yee-hah! A scowly already! Bring it on mofos.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Wed 29 Apr 15 at 20:37
|
>> >> The UK will now be forced to accept hundreds of thousands of those arriving
>> in the Med by boat & has basically just opened up UK borders to all
>> of Africa & the Middle East
>>
>> They will still be vastly outnumbered by ignorant reactionary British prats like you Rastaman. So
>> no need to worry.
Just as well then!
|
>> Just as well then!
I'm regretting that I called you a prat Rastaman. So easy to be ruder than one should be. I keep doing it by accident. Sorry anyway.
|
>>I'm regretting that I called you a prat Rastaman
As a penance you could vote for UKIP.
|
>> >> Just as well then!
>>
>> I'm regretting that I called you a prat Rastaman. So easy to be ruder than
>> one should be. I keep doing it by accident. Sorry anyway.
>>
>>
No problems!
I was considering replying in haste & rudeness to a post by another member, but having slept on it I'm glad I did not ;-)
|
Thought I'd better fill in my postal vote this morning being we're getting near to the big day.
Put a big X next to David Mathews, my local UKIP candy date.
Looked at top of the form to see Mrs Ann Dog!!!!
So it's been nice knowing y'all, if I can get a message across from the other side, I will.
RIP
|
>> www.itv.com/news/2015-04-29/ukip-asks-police-to-investigate-the-bbc-over-have-i-got-news-for-you/
>>
>>
So things are going well for UKIP? Getting their excuses in early?
The trend is quite clear tinyurl.com/lc4osh4
Last edited by: madf on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 14:56
|
"The trend is quite clear tinyurl.com/lc4osh4"
Plenty of charts to pick from there ........... just choose the one that tells you your preferred story.
|
>> Plenty of charts to pick from there
Far too many for a sane person to bother with. Can't help remembering Father William:
'I have answered three questions, and that is enough,'
Said his father. 'Don't give yourself airs!
Do you think I can listen all day to such stuff?
Be off, or I'll kick you downstairs!'
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Thu 30 Apr 15 at 15:27
|
|
Vote UKIP, get Labour - and probably SNP thrown in.
|
That's what Conservative want to you to believe.
I shall be voting UKIP simply because I like their policies.
|
I'm not voting Conservative this time but they're right I'm afraid, movi.
Happily, I'd not be surprised at zero UKIP seats, including the two they fernagled recently. By elections is just by elections.
|
>> Happily, I'd not be surprised at zero UKIP seats
>>
As I'm not standing for UKIP it won't be a surprise to me either
|
If you doubted whether Farage had any political nous, then read this.
"The BBC should "exterminate" shows like Dr Who and Strictly Come Dancing, Nigel Farage has suggested as he insisted that the corporation should focus on public service broadcasting instead of entertainment.
tinyurl.com/qjbld6e
He's crazy Strictly is very popular...
Bonkers.
|
Farage has been curiously ineffective in this election. I know he is not a well man but he seems to have become bored with the party he has created and is perhaps looking forward to resigning as the leader. He has said he will if he does not gain a parliamentary seat.
Without Farage of course UKIP will simply be seen as the collection of oddballs and cranks that created the 2010 manifesto. I doubt that many could name another member of the party.
|
|
Just checked her out. Quick poll amongst my colleagues here (all three of them). Zilch recognition of her I'm afraid. Carswell was better known. "the weird guy who looks as though he has had a stroke was one comment"
|
"the weird guy who looks as though he has had a stroke..."
That's a bit personal - you mix with some nice people, CG. Carswell is actually one of the handful of honest MPs.
I have to come clean and say that I can't name any Lib/Lab/Con party members who aren't already MPs.
|
|
Actually he's a really nice bloke. Hospital porter so it's a sort of clinical observation.
|
>>the weird guy who looks as though he has had a stroke
You shouldn't refer to Ed Miliband like that.
:}
|
I doubt that many could name another member of
>> the party.
>>
>>
I'd agree with that, I couldn't name anyone else in their party. The douglas chap's name rings a bell now but without a prompt I wouldn't have guessed his name or anyone else's in UKIPs name.
Farage's career after the election is interesting, part of me thinks he might have simply had enough and wants to give it up, but then part of him is a political type of person and could no more stop it than he could stop breathing.
|
"If you doubted whether........ "
Did he put it on tablets of stone?
|
>> "If you doubted whether........ "
>>
>> Did he put it on tablets of stone?
>>
No but it fell on stony ground...
|
|
I wonder how in touch, I suppose we'll find out soon enough.
|
|
Maximum of two seats I would guess.
|
My 13-year-old granddaughter insists that Nigel Farage looks like a rat. Although she's an artistic girl, the comparison seems a bit far-fetched to me.
However, sometimes for a moment or two I see what she means, almost. It makes me feel a bit sorry for him.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Mon 4 May 15 at 13:56
|
>> I wonder how in touch, I suppose we'll find out soon enough.
Is that the same as a Jimmy Saville touch?
|
|
Private Eye has been reporting the Express support for UKIP, apparently Desmond wants a peerage and reckons that's his best bet.
|
>> "The BBC should "exterminate" shows like Dr Who and Strictly Come Dancing, Nigel Farage has suggested as he insisted that the corporation should focus on public service broadcasting instead of entertainment.
That was the headline...
What he said was...
“When it comes to entertainment, the BBC should be proud of its ‘crown jewels’ such as Strictly Come Dancing and dramas such as Dr Who. They have become valuable global brands as well as programmes hugely appreciated by British audience. '
Slight difference!
|
>>Slight difference!
Indeed.
But the difference was that the "headline" reported what he said in an interview and "what he said" reported a separate statement he made after the interview.
|
>> But the difference was that the "headline" reported what he said in an interview and
>> "what he said" reported a separate statement he made after the interview.
>>
Did you watch the clip?
He did not say that at all, Andrew Marr did.
And Farage pulled a face as if to say don't be a pr@t... then carried on talking and not allowing himself to be drawn into that comment.
|
|
No, I didn't. But the second most certainly came from a statement. Point me at a clip and I'll watch it though.
|
How do Roger, still plugging away? :-) Hope all is well in your area.
I prefer this NnH story, not least because I know him and was his first point of contact when he joined us:
nopenothope.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/a-letter-from-ukip-candidate-and.html?spref=tw
He is also just a very nice guy and great company.
|
"UKIP Candidate Blames British Government for 7/7"
tinyurl.com/mazerns
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-england-32595003
"If this lad turns up to be our prime minister I will personally put a bullet in him. That's how strong I feel about it."
Questioning Mr Jayawardena's background, he said: "His family have only been here since the 70s. You are not British enough to be in our parliament. I've got 400 years of ancestry where I live. He hasn't got that."
Would be funny in the Daily Mash.
And y'all are concerned about the SNP?
|
You (I anyway) can't help feeling sorry for Nigel Farage with 'support' from crazed thuggish halfwits like that.
He's done the decent thing, fired the culprit an apologized decently to the Sinhalese Mr Jayawardena. But damage limitation isn't 100% successful, ever.
|
You (I anyway) can't help feeling sorry for Nigel Farage with 'support' from crazed thuggish halfwits like that.
One feels that he ought to be grateful to the Mirror for helping UKIP to do their quality control for them.
It's not so much the thuggish bit that worries me - because I'm cynical enough to suspect that half of our MPs are equally thuggish. It's the halfwit thing. To actually come out and say this to anyone but your nearest and dearest is seriously, seriously, stupid.
And UKIP should have spotted that before nominating the chap.
|
>> And UKIP should have spotted that before nominating the chap.
And therein lies the whole crux of the UKIP problem.
In a rush to be a big party it needed numbers. People, Candidates, Workers and money. In doing that it has gathered in all the dross from other parties and causes, with all their whacky unpalatable desires, all wanting UKIP to champion their cause.
If Farage wants to be taken seriously, and he wins his seat, he needs to get the people and party direction sorted quickly after the election. If he doesn't win his seat, the party is down the toilet.
|
All UKIP needs to do to weed out the nutters is insist as part of the interview process, the candidate is interviewed in a pub . After a couple of drinks, many people become quite garrulous...
I fact, it does not need to be an interview as such.. Just a "social meeting". People who aspire to nutcase ideas usually like to start about them...
|
After a couple of drinks, many people become quite garrulous...
Ah yes, in vino veritas.
Bit of a problem when it comes to interviewing teetotalers, but one always get the impression that they aren't attracted to UKIP. But the whole idea of having the interview process down in the pub really fits the UKIP image quite well.
It also raises the question of whether Mr Blay was rather garrulous precisely because he had taken more liquid refreshment than was advisable. I wonder if the chap from the Mirror was buying.
|
UKIP Thread Volume 21 - Dog
