FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Another Great Day for UKIP!
Another Great Day for UKIP!
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All parties have their scandals and skeletons in the closet, perhaps just not so many "Perhaps not so many each day, even!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All parties have their scandals and skeletons in the closet, perhaps just not so many
Perhaps not so many each day, even! ". Churchill got done for taking bribes. Asquith Lloyd George Balfour Profumo Mandelson Thatcher Currie Wilson Aitken Thorpe Archer David Mellor Cecil Parkinson Cyril smith ..,..............I could go on.. Lords,sirs,dames, Every party, every bit of scandal from corruption to fraud to favouritism to peadophile rings And I dare say a few racists along the lines as well. If you think those three are shocking I suggest picking up a history book and having a read  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Any new organisation will attract the nutters and head bangers. It takes time to filter them out. The other parties have had plenty of time to out the numpties but they still get out from time to time"  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"a minor blip, loads of people are still voting for them. check out facebook. "umm, really? I wonder... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"all the political parties have crooks its nothing new and the public is not shocked anymore i'd be more shocked if they found an mp that didn't have there hands in the till" Then open your eyes and stop just believing what you think you've head. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"a minor blip, loads of people are still voting for them. check out facebook. "trouble is for a 'young' party they keep having minor blips.. wonder how many blips make a.. whatever.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"all the political parties have crooks its nothing new and the public is not shocked anymore i'd be more shocked if they found an mp that didn't have there hands in the till Then open your eyes and stop just believing what you think you've head." pardon ????? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Triumphant day for the Uskippers! Two candidates have been suspended by the party today and a third candidate has resigned in less than 24 hours. From the Daily Fail: - MEP Janice Atkinson suspended after aide allegedly asked for fake receipt - Hours later Ukip confirmed candidate Stephen Howd had been suspended - Final blow came when Westmorland & Lonsdale candidate quit the party - Jonathan Stanley said he was sick of the 'open racism and bullying' in Ukip So remember folks: they are not a racist party, but their own candidates regularly resign because they are sick of the racism in the party. When they are not being booted out for being crooks, that is. Sounds like yet another day in paradise. "
Long may they keep up on similar days then..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Winston Churchill secretly accepted 5 grand the equivalent of perhaps millions in today's money,from Burmah Oil (now known as BP) to lobby the British government to allow them to monopolise Persian oil resources(Iran). And that was before he was prime minister!!!. I believe he was both a Tory and a liberal" Burmah Oil are not BP They were two very separate companies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!!" Indeed, but you won't be able to vote for any of these ukippers... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/ukips-20-suspended-members-janice-atkinson-joins-list-as-police-investigate-her-expenses-10123094.html | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's funny how they are branded racists just because they want a better deal for this country from the EU and to reduce the mass integration, which we have been subjected to over the last 20 years, and not just from Europe. But to be honest they are all the same, honesty is not a word that can be associated with politics " No, its because some of their members (usually but not always) prospective Parliamentary candidates exhibit their bigotry or sheer fuck wittedness on camera.. no one sets them up nor is it a conspiracy, they just do so.. we have had immigration btw for several hundred years not just the last 20.. and some in Parliament are very honest.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's funny how they are branded racists just because they want a better deal for this country from the EU and to reduce the mass integration, which we have been subjected to over the last 20 years, and not just from Europe. But to be honest they are all the same, honesty is not a word that can be associated with politics " They are not branded as racist because they want a better deal for Britain from the EU (which, incidently is not their policy on the EU) nor either because they want to reduce mass immigration (which also is not actually their policy on immigration). Unfortunately, having policies like or similar to those always attracts nutters and racists and it certainly looks like UKIP had attracted more than it's fair share. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Winston Churchill secretly accepted 5 grand the equivalent of perhaps millions in today's money,from Burmah Oil (now known as BP) to lobby the British government to allow them to monopolise Persian oil resources(Iran). And that was before he was prime minister!!!. I believe he was both a Tory and a liberal Burmah Oil are not BP They were two very separate companies " Burmuh were bought by Castrol who were bought by BP | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"all the political parties have crooks its nothing new and the public is not shocked anymore i'd be more shocked if they found an mp that didn't have there hands in the till Then open your eyes and stop just believing what you think you've head. pardon ?????" Stop just re quoting things and go find the real truth for yourself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All parties have their scandals and skeletons in the closet, perhaps just not so many
Perhaps not so many each day, even! .
Churchill got done for taking bribes.
Asquith
Lloyd George
Balfour
Profumo
Mandelson
Thatcher
Currie
Wilson
Aitken
Thorpe
Archer
David Mellor
Cecil Parkinson
Cyril smith
..,..............I could go on..
Lords,sirs,dames,
Every party, every bit of scandal from corruption to fraud to favouritism to peadophile rings
And I dare say a few racists along the lines as well.
If you think those three are shocking I suggest picking up a history book and having a read
"I agree wholeheartedly!! Anyone who thinks the 'top dogs' are whiter than white, need a check up from the neck up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At least Farage fronts up and deals with the the bad eggs straight away unlike the others who hang on till they really have to ! Come on UKIP " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Triumphant day for the Uskippers! Two candidates have been suspended by the party today and a third candidate has resigned in less than 24 hours. From the Daily Fail: - MEP Janice Atkinson suspended after aide allegedly asked for fake receipt - Hours later Ukip confirmed candidate Stephen Howd had been suspended - Final blow came when Westmorland & Lonsdale candidate quit the party - Jonathan Stanley said he was sick of the 'open racism and bullying' in Ukip So remember folks: they are not a racist party, but their own candidates regularly resign because they are sick of the racism in the party. When they are not being booted out for being crooks, that is. Sounds like yet another day in paradise. "Another day in Parliament in general sadly...quite why MPs are termed 'honourable' is quite beyond me... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Winston Churchill secretly accepted 5 grand the equivalent of perhaps millions in today's money,from Burmah Oil (now known as BP) to lobby the British government to allow them to monopolise Persian oil resources(Iran). And that was before he was prime minister!!!. I believe he was both a Tory and a liberal Burmah Oil are not BP They were two very separate companies " . My point was, it's not the people. It's the system, without radical reform of politics and the inner circles.... We,ll be going round in circles forever!. I'm a green party member, I'll vote for anybody that puts change on the agenda.... And I don't mean Obama change! I mean genuine upheaval totally radical wholesale thinking change. But that doesn't mean massive law changes or political systems reversals. Imagine one new law like all government notes, emails, letters meetings all being made public within ten years!. And like bankers making them actually be accountable when things go tits ten years down the line. So Gordon brown could be done for selling off the nations gold, when he was bribed to do so by banks, that's yours and mine everybody's money were taking about!. Thatcher could be done for being in cahoots with BAE and the Saudis. Blair with oil firms. Wholesale behind the scenes sell offs of the nhs going to firms that ten years later are full of ex ministers... I'm certainly not worried about some ukip candidate fiddling some expenses, fuck me all their doing is learning from the big boys. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"a minor blip, loads of people are still voting for them. check out facebook.
umm, really? I wonder..."I may be mistaken but according to a thread earlier if you have blocked someone then they shouldn't chat with you on the forums. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe." you probably wont answer but upon what basis is that claim made.. just whom are the 'best' people and are 'foreign' people now allowed to vote in our local /general elections..? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"all the political parties have crooks its nothing new and the public is not shocked anymore i'd be more shocked if they found an mp that didn't have there hands in the till Then open your eyes and stop just believing what you think you've head. pardon ????? Stop just re quoting things and go find the real truth for yourself." i am requoting because what u are saying makes no sense | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe. you probably wont answer but upon what basis is that claim made.. just whom are the 'best' people and are 'foreign' people now allowed to vote in our local /general elections..? " How can they be racist if foreign people are voting for them, but im sure you will think of a good reason to say that it makes no difference. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe. you probably wont answer but upon what basis is that claim made.. just whom are the 'best' people and are 'foreign' people now allowed to vote in our local /general elections..? How can they be racist if foreign people are voting for them, but im sure you will think of a good reason to say that it makes no difference." didn't say they were racist, they have evidently some within their membership who have been highlighted for their bigotry which was always going to be the case.. you have chosen not to answer what basis etc your claims above are made and whether 'foreign' people are allowed to vote..? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Triumphant day for the Uskippers! Two candidates have been suspended by the party today and a third candidate has resigned in less than 24 hours. From the Daily Fail: - MEP Janice Atkinson suspended after aide allegedly asked for fake receipt - Hours later Ukip confirmed candidate Stephen Howd had been suspended - Final blow came when Westmorland & Lonsdale candidate quit the party - Jonathan Stanley said he was sick of the 'open racism and bullying' in Ukip So remember folks: they are not a racist party, but their own candidates regularly resign because they are sick of the racism in the party. When they are not being booted out for being crooks, that is. Sounds like yet another day in paradise. "Proves they will not stand for fiddlers not like the tories or labour,could be a vote winner | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Triumphant day for the Uskippers! Two candidates have been suspended by the party today and a third candidate has resigned in less than 24 hours. From the Daily Fail: - MEP Janice Atkinson suspended after aide allegedly asked for fake receipt - Hours later Ukip confirmed candidate Stephen Howd had been suspended - Final blow came when Westmorland & Lonsdale candidate quit the party - Jonathan Stanley said he was sick of the 'open racism and bullying' in Ukip So remember folks: they are not a racist party, but their own candidates regularly resign because they are sick of the racism in the party. When they are not being booted out for being crooks, that is. Sounds like yet another day in paradise. Proves they will not stand for fiddlers not like the tories or labour,could be a vote winner" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think with a party like UKIP , the only thing that really matters is the Leader and I really can't see how he is a racist ! He wants us out of the EEC , as do I ! And I suspect he would disband UKIP if that ever happened !" The leader, great leader, dear leader. Raise the banners high as we march towards final victory! Dear leader works hard so the people can prosper! We cannot foresee his greatness to bring us beyond paradise! It is true as they say: Nigel Farage is best Farage! His glory is limitless! His beauty is endless! His generosity is infinite! His wisdom knows no bounds! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think with a party like UKIP , the only thing that really matters is the Leader and I really can't see how he is a racist ! He wants us out of the EEC , as do I ! And I suspect he would disband UKIP if that ever happened ! The leader, great leader, dear leader. Raise the banners high as we march towards final victory! Dear leader works hard so the people can prosper! We cannot foresee his greatness to bring us beyond paradise! It is true as they say: Nigel Farage is best Farage! His glory is limitless! His beauty is endless! His generosity is infinite! His wisdom knows no bounds! " . Wait till they release the Hollywood comedy and he has to hack Sony's website. I can hear the mumblings now.. Fucking little ja... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Winston Churchill secretly accepted 5 grand the equivalent of perhaps millions in today's money,from Burmah Oil (now known as BP) to lobby the British government to allow them to monopolise Persian oil resources(Iran). And that was before he was prime minister!!!. I believe he was both a Tory and a liberal" Yup, both Tory and Liberal - and a HUGE racist! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Winston Churchill secretly accepted 5 grand the equivalent of perhaps millions in today's money,from Burmah Oil (now known as BP) to lobby the British government to allow them to monopolise Persian oil resources(Iran). And that was before he was prime minister!!!. I believe he was both a Tory and a liberal Yup, both Tory and Liberal - and a HUGE racist! " . Remember though bribery, dishonesty and racism were perfectly normal traits back then!. Nowadays you can't even twang a birds bra strap without the pc brigade giving you a hard time  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe." Lol. UKIP are run by retards..I'd rather the thieves,and liars of labour or tory run the show than a party of retards.if you think things are shit in the uk(they're not.we are one of the most pampered and privileged humans to have ever lived)then imagine five years of a bunch of retards running the show.my choices are thieves,liars or retards... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe. Lol. UKIP are run by retards..I'd rather the thieves,and liars of labour or tory run the show than a party of retards.if you think things are shit in the uk(they're not.we are one of the most pampered and privileged humans to have ever lived)then imagine five years of a bunch of retards running the show.my choices are thieves,liars or retards..." Very eloquent | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe. Lol. UKIP are run by retards..I'd rather the thieves,and liars of labour or tory run the show than a party of retards.if you think things are shit in the uk(they're not.we are one of the most pampered and privileged humans to have ever lived)then imagine five years of a bunch of retards running the show.my choices are thieves,liars or retards... Very eloquent "I do like to make the effort on fab  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe. Lol. UKIP are run by retards..I'd rather the thieves,and liars of labour or tory run the show than a party of retards.if you think things are shit in the uk(they're not.we are one of the most pampered and privileged humans to have ever lived)then imagine five years of a bunch of retards running the show.my choices are thieves,liars or retards..." Here here! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Triumphant day for the Uskippers! Two candidates have been suspended by the party today and a third candidate has resigned in less than 24 hours. From the Daily Fail: - MEP Janice Atkinson suspended after aide allegedly asked for fake receipt - Hours later Ukip confirmed candidate Stephen Howd had been suspended - Final blow came when Westmorland & Lonsdale candidate quit the party - Jonathan Stanley said he was sick of the 'open racism and bullying' in Ukip So remember folks: they are not a racist party, but their own candidates regularly resign because they are sick of the racism in the party. When they are not being booted out for being crooks, that is. Sounds like yet another day in paradise. "....maybe its because they don't cover up....or protect the elite. ...like the other shower. .... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"a minor blip, loads of people are still voting for them. check out facebook. "If it's on Facebook then it must be true | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe." I'm one of best people. I don't and won't vote UKIP | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"a minor blip, loads of people are still voting for them. check out facebook.
umm, really? I wonder...
I may be mistaken but according to a thread earlier if you have blocked someone then they shouldn't chat with you on the forums."I'm not talking to you, or at least I wasn't till you directly addressed me in your post. However this is an open forum thread and I'll comment on it and on anything you say on it if I wish. If you don't like it report me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe. you probably wont answer but upon what basis is that claim made.. just whom are the 'best' people and are 'foreign' people now allowed to vote in our local /general elections..? How can they be racist if foreign people are voting for them, but im sure you will think of a good reason to say that it makes no difference." It's not UKIP's policies on Europe or immigration and, in my opinion, not even UKIP itself. Unfortunately it seems like quite a lot, although probably not all, of those who are attracted to UKIP seem to be. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe. you probably wont answer but upon what basis is that claim made.. just whom are the 'best' people and are 'foreign' people now allowed to vote in our local /general elections..? How can they be racist if foreign people are voting for them, but im sure you will think of a good reason to say that it makes no difference. didn't say they were racist, they have evidently some within their membership who have been highlighted for their bigotry which was always going to be the case.. you have chosen not to answer what basis etc your claims above are made and whether 'foreign' people are allowed to vote..?" With the exception of the Irish, EU citizens are aloud to vote most British elections except General Elections. Irish citizens and some citizens of other Commonwealth territories can vote in all British elections. All other foreign nationls have no right to vote in British elections | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All parties have their scandals and skeletons in the closet, perhaps just not so many
Perhaps not so many each day, even! .
Churchill got done for taking bribes.
Asquith
Lloyd George
Balfour
Profumo
Mandelson
Thatcher
Currie
Wilson
Aitken
Thorpe
Archer
David Mellor
Cecil Parkinson
Cyril smith
..,..............I could go on..
Lords,sirs,dames,
Every party, every bit of scandal from corruption to fraud to favouritism to peadophile rings
And I dare say a few racists along the lines as well.
If you think those three are shocking I suggest picking up a history book and having a read
" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At least Farage fronts up and deals with the the bad eggs straight away unlike the others who hang on till they really have to ! Come on UKIP "Farage is a joke he does not deal with anything. Worst thing that could happen is a coalition with him involved. Evil Hitler type person | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anyone who dares upset the establushment will feel the full wrath of the establishment on them. There will even be plants in ukip there to do wrong and make tgem look bad anyone that dares to loosen there grio on britain will get it. They did the same to the sno, sinn fien and the bnp. Whenever tgey are threatened th" Does UKIP really want to be consider as being in the same group as Sinn Fien and the BNP. Maybe it is run by retards after all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"a minor blip, loads of people are still voting for them. check out facebook.
If it's on Facebook then it must be true "Lol some people eh | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All parties have their scandals and skeletons in the closet, perhaps just not so many "Ukip has more and bigger closets than Ikea | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All parties have their scandals and skeletons in the closet, perhaps just not so many "Or perhaps they're just more experienced at dealing with it without the scandal. Or the press who are either red or blue team are less vociferous about it. There are more Labour and Tory MPs who've done time, or been done for fraud, than UKIPers and at least UKIP take action against their errant members, unlike Labour and Tories who usually protect their own. How many Labour and Tory members robbed the tax payers with their expenses? A scandalous system set up by themselves, it seems at least that UKIP are accountable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" farage isn't hitler. When he gathers a personal army of purple shirts" erm... "Mr Farage currently has a small security team from a private firm who provide personal protection" http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31634837" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All the best people vote ukip, not just white English people foreign people as well if you can be bothered to find that out instead of only believing what you want to believe. I'm one of best people. I don't and won't vote UKIP "No you aren't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Is calling people retards in the same class as calling people spicks or do you hold the moral high ground " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All parties have their scandals and skeletons in the closet, perhaps just not so many
Perhaps not so many each day, even! .
Churchill got done for taking bribes.
Asquith
Lloyd George
Balfour
Profumo
Mandelson
Thatcher
Currie
Wilson
Aitken
Thorpe
Archer
David Mellor
Cecil Parkinson
Cyril smith
..,..............I could go on..
Lords,sirs,dames,
Every party, every bit of scandal from corruption to fraud to favouritism to peadophile rings
And I dare say a few racists along the lines as well.
If you think those three are shocking I suggest picking up a history book and having a read
"Good post. You could have also mentioned John Stonehouse (Labour) John Major (Tory) Paddy Pantsdown and Charles Kennedy (Limp Dim) Yes the list could go on and on. UKIP's problem at the moment is that both the Tory and Labour press are out to get them and sleaze stories about the other party's are being kept very quiet (until after the election of course )
It will be very interesting to see what names come out of the Westminster paedophile enquiry, but don't expect to see any until after May 8th. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I also think UKIP are suffering because of the demise of the BNP and EDL ! People love to have a hate figure. ! Plus I suspect the moderate element of the other two will have joined UKIP , but how many former communists joined Labour , loads "What do you mean with FORMER? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I also think UKIP are suffering because of the demise of the BNP and EDL ! People love to have a hate figure. ! Plus I suspect the moderate element of the other two will have joined UKIP , but how many former communists joined Labour , loads
What do you mean with FORMER? "lol good point ! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"a minor blip, loads of people are still voting for them. check out facebook.
umm, really? I wonder...
I may be mistaken but according to a thread earlier if you have blocked someone then they shouldn't chat with you on the forums.
I'm not talking to you, or at least I wasn't till you directly addressed me in your post. However this is an open forum thread and I'll comment on it and on anything you say on it if I wish. If you don't like it report me."The moderator response on the other thread was that they can quote and address you, just not to ask you to unblock them.x  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Is calling people retards in the same class as calling people spicks or do you hold the moral high ground "Spicks?... Are spicks retarded? I make no claims on the moral high ground..i just see UKIP as retarded. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!!" I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas." . Yes and that's always my point... How shit are we, if we have to be a member of the EU ... To get employment rights!!! FFS. This stuff should be common courtesy in a first world country, not something that's imposed upon us from membership to a union. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" farage isn't hitler. When he gathers a personal army of purple shirtserm... "Mr Farage currently has a small security team from a private firm who provide personal protection" http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31634837"" as do a lot of people in the public eye, it's hardly the brownshirts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why oh why is hitler mentioned on the majority of ukip threads, farage isn't hitler. When he gathers a personal army of purple shirts and annexes the isle of sheppey.......then maybe a justified slur "Maybe look at the European parties he aligns himself with. You can tell a lot by the company people keep and he likes his fascist friends | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To try to claim that a policy to leave the EU or a policy to control immigration from the EU is racist is, in my opinion, totally ridiculous. As indeed is are claims that all other parties are filled with people who are corrupt and in it for themselves. I wonder if we can ever have a thread on UKIP that concentrates on the two main issues rather than on mud slinging. I know we can beat not only UKIP but the remaining Europhobe Tories to. I challenge the UKIPerres here to put forward the argument for leaving the EU and restricting free movement within the EU and how this would benefit the UK." . The question could be how does being a member of a union that's closed to free trade except within that union or agreed limits benefit the union?. Or how does moving 400 million people round a continent make for better efficiency of production?. There both completely nonsensical ideas born from fantasy. There not giving you any freedoms you didn't have, their just extending the border that your freedoms were limited to originally. I like it when people say can we have a sensible debate about the EU,unfortunately there's nothing sensible about modern capitalism. Is it sensible to buy cheap throw away Chinese pound shop shit, in a finite planet? Is it sensible to extract carbon fuels from ground risking poisoning our only water supply for ten generations, when we have the ability to do alternatives? Is it sensible to grow food above cost in the eu and then throw it away while half of the third world starves to death? Is it sensible to promote population growth when we're already very very congested, be it through immigration or extra births?. We stopped being sensible 40 fucking years ago, were in the age of plutocracy,apathy and stupidity | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Its funny watching that bellend farage drinking his pints, and constantly apologizing for the dipshits in his party " And are we sure he's not paying with repatriated money? He does require a top slice of repatriated money to cover the costs of the party. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To try to claim that a policy to leave the EU or a policy to control immigration from the EU is racist is, in my opinion, totally ridiculous. As indeed is are claims that all other parties are filled with people who are corrupt and in it for themselves. I wonder if we can ever have a thread on UKIP that concentrates on the two main issues rather than on mud slinging. I know we can beat not only UKIP but the remaining Europhobe Tories to. I challenge the UKIPerres here to put forward the argument for leaving the EU and restricting free movement within the EU and how this would benefit the UK.. The question could be how does being a member of a union that's closed to free trade except within that union or agreed limits benefit the union?. Or how does moving 400 million people round a continent make for better efficiency of production?. There both completely nonsensical ideas born from fantasy. There not giving you any freedoms you didn't have, their just extending the border that your freedoms were limited to originally. I like it when people say can we have a sensible debate about the EU,unfortunately there's nothing sensible about modern capitalism. Is it sensible to buy cheap throw away Chinese pound shop shit, in a finite planet? Is it sensible to extract carbon fuels from ground risking poisoning our only water supply for ten generations, when we have the ability to do alternatives? Is it sensible to grow food above cost in the eu and then throw it away while half of the third world starves to death? Is it sensible to promote population growth when we're already very very congested, be it through immigration or extra births?. We stopped being sensible 40 fucking years ago, were in the age of plutocracy,apathy and stupidity" You're always way better on the ecology stuff than the politics, in my personal opinion. (wonders when I real UKIPerr will actually put forward and argue their policies) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. " factually wrong.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. " Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury." ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To try to claim that a policy to leave the EU or a policy to control immigration from the EU is racist is, in my opinion, totally ridiculous. As indeed is are claims that all other parties are filled with people who are corrupt and in it for themselves. I wonder if we can ever have a thread on UKIP that concentrates on the two main issues rather than on mud slinging. I know we can beat not only UKIP but the remaining Europhobe Tories to. I challenge the UKIPerres here to put forward the argument for leaving the EU and restricting free movement within the EU and how this would benefit the UK.. The question could be how does being a member of a union that's closed to free trade except within that union or agreed limits benefit the union?. Or how does moving 400 million people round a continent make for better efficiency of production?. There both completely nonsensical ideas born from fantasy. There not giving you any freedoms you didn't have, their just extending the border that your freedoms were limited to originally. I like it when people say can we have a sensible debate about the EU,unfortunately there's nothing sensible about modern capitalism. Is it sensible to buy cheap throw away Chinese pound shop shit, in a finite planet? Is it sensible to extract carbon fuels from ground risking poisoning our only water supply for ten generations, when we have the ability to do alternatives? Is it sensible to grow food above cost in the eu and then throw it away while half of the third world starves to death? Is it sensible to promote population growth when we're already very very congested, be it through immigration or extra births?. We stopped being sensible 40 fucking years ago, were in the age of plutocracy,apathy and stupidity" You must be such an unhappy person. Live your life instead of concerning yourself with shit like this. Life is for living, not worrying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To try to claim that a policy to leave the EU or a policy to control immigration from the EU is racist is, in my opinion, totally ridiculous. As indeed is are claims that all other parties are filled with people who are corrupt and in it for themselves. I wonder if we can ever have a thread on UKIP that concentrates on the two main issues rather than on mud slinging. I know we can beat not only UKIP but the remaining Europhobe Tories to. I challenge the UKIPerres here to put forward the argument for leaving the EU and restricting free movement within the EU and how this would benefit the UK.. The question could be how does being a member of a union that's closed to free trade except within that union or agreed limits benefit the union?. Or how does moving 400 million people round a continent make for better efficiency of production?. There both completely nonsensical ideas born from fantasy. There not giving you any freedoms you didn't have, their just extending the border that your freedoms were limited to originally. I like it when people say can we have a sensible debate about the EU,unfortunately there's nothing sensible about modern capitalism. Is it sensible to buy cheap throw away Chinese pound shop shit, in a finite planet? Is it sensible to extract carbon fuels from ground risking poisoning our only water supply for ten generations, when we have the ability to do alternatives? Is it sensible to grow food above cost in the eu and then throw it away while half of the third world starves to death? Is it sensible to promote population growth when we're already very very congested, be it through immigration or extra births?. We stopped being sensible 40 fucking years ago, were in the age of plutocracy,apathy and stupidity You're always way better on the ecology stuff than the politics, in my personal opinion. (wonders when I real UKIPerr will actually put forward and argue their policies) ". Thanks mate ....I gave it a whirl.
Remember vote green | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anyway is there any word on a manifesto yet?" Due to be released in April, same time as the tories release theirs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Triumphant day for the Uskippers! Two candidates have been suspended by the party today and a third candidate has resigned in less than 24 hours. From the Daily Fail: - MEP Janice Atkinson suspended after aide allegedly asked for fake receipt - Hours later Ukip confirmed candidate Stephen Howd had been suspended - Final blow came when Westmorland & Lonsdale candidate quit the party - Jonathan Stanley said he was sick of the 'open racism and bullying' in Ukip So remember folks: they are not a racist party, but their own candidates regularly resign because they are sick of the racism in the party. When they are not being booted out for being crooks, that is. Sounds like yet another day in paradise. "If someone is guilty of wrongdoing, then yes, throw the book at them, suspend them or expel them from the party (which UKIP do very quickly in these cases). Shame the same can't be said for Labour and the tories. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anyway is there any word on a manifesto yet? Due to be released in April, same time as the tories release theirs. " I was wondering when you'd get here! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anyway is there any word on a manifesto yet? Due to be released in April, same time as the tories release theirs. I was wondering when you'd get here! " Lol, got to pop out now, so not able to stay, there is more to life than fabs forums. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. " NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. " the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. " Dress it up as much as you like. Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all supported PIE and all served as Labour front bencher's. IF they were Tory's or UKIPers you would be shouting from the roof tops. Double standards? Perish the thought | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. Dress it up as much as you like. Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all supported PIE and all served as Labour front bencher's. IF they were Tory's or UKIPers you would be shouting from the roof tops. Double standards? Perish the thought "Dromey was a trade union leader, the only connection is that he is now married to a woman who worked for the NCCL.. funny you mention the tories, think there is still a lot to come out about their MP's and others from the 80's in ongoing investigations.. and if you can show any factual link where they all openly on the record did support that organisation then feel free.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. Dress it up as much as you like. Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all supported PIE and all served as Labour front bencher's. IF they were Tory's or UKIPers you would be shouting from the roof tops. Double standards? Perish the thought "To be fair, Patricia Hewitt has apologised for her part in it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. Dress it up as much as you like. Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all supported PIE and all served as Labour front bencher's. IF they were Tory's or UKIPers you would be shouting from the roof tops. Double standards? Perish the thought "Paedophilia, it's the perfect smear because, even when the facts are finally revealed, any association at all still leaves a nasty stain. These are the facts in brief. PIE - Paedophile Information Exchange NCCL - National Council for Civil Liberties (now know as Liberty) In the late 70's and early 80's Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all worked for the NCCL in various capacities. At the same time the PIE, as part of its on going campaign to legalise most forms of paedophilia, set our to infiltrate a number of political organisations. How successful they were is still mostly unknown but they did succeed in fully infiltrating the NCCL and actually became an affiliate organisation to the NCCL. As a consequence of this affiliation it can, and often is, claimed that any one who worked for the NCCL during this period was also working for the PIE and therefore is a supporter of paedophiles. I personally think that that argument is non sequitur in that the NCCL campained on many other issues other than paedophilia during this period. Harman's comments on censorship and 'only naked photographs of children were it can be shown that actual harm has been done' sound indifensible as set out however if a little more attention had been paid to those remarks we would not have had totally ridiculous cases of prosecution possibly being brought on the bases of pictures of parents washing their babies or young children on beaches. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why oh why is hitler mentioned on the majority of ukip threads, farage isn't hitler. When he gathers a personal army of purple shirts and annexes the isle of sheppey.......then maybe a justified slur
Maybe look at the European parties he aligns himself with. You can tell a lot by the company people keep and he likes his fascist friends"It's true you can tell a lot by the company people keep... And how much paedophile company have the main parties been keeping or covering up? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Westminster is corrupt to the core, that's been my opinion since I was a wee dude - but some cannot handle the truth, or see it when it's right in front of their eyes! UKIPPERS are just an extreme of the norm, I'm afraid! Suckers!! "Wow! More extreme than paedophiles and people that take us to illegal wars? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. Dress it up as much as you like. Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all supported PIE and all served as Labour front bencher's. IF they were Tory's or UKIPers you would be shouting from the roof tops. Double standards? Perish the thought
Dromey was a trade union leader, the only connection is that he is now married to a woman who worked for the NCCL..
funny you mention the tories, think there is still a lot to come out about their MP's and others from the 80's in ongoing investigations..
and if you can show any factual link where they all openly on the record did support that organisation then feel free.."As "unleashed cracken" has pointed out all three were senior members of the NCCL at a time when that organization supported, some would say championed, PIE. And if they did nothing wrong then why, as someone else pointed out, did Hewitt (albeit belatedly) apologise? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Westminster is corrupt to the core, that's been my opinion since I was a wee dude - but some cannot handle the truth, or see it when it's right in front of their eyes! UKIPPERS are just an extreme of the norm, I'm afraid! Suckers!!
Wow! More extreme than paedophiles and people that take us to illegal wars? "apparantly so, people hold a dim _iew of anyone questioning immigration policies.....rascists they call them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Triumphant day for the Uskippers! Two candidates have been suspended by the party today and a third candidate has resigned in less than 24 hours. From the Daily Fail: - MEP Janice Atkinson suspended after aide allegedly asked for fake receipt - Hours later Ukip confirmed candidate Stephen Howd had been suspended - Final blow came when Westmorland & Lonsdale candidate quit the party - Jonathan Stanley said he was sick of the 'open racism and bullying' in Ukip So remember folks: they are not a racist party, but their own candidates regularly resign because they are sick of the racism in the party. When they are not being booted out for being crooks, that is. Sounds like yet another day in paradise. "Perhaps the engine just needed servicing before its journey. UKIP all the way, the only way to get our country back. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Smear and counter smear. Your party is more evil than mine. WTF is this. It's like kids arguing about their football team. What I have noticed is, so far, non of the UKIPerrs have actually put forward exactly what UKIP'S policies towards the EU and on immigration actually are and how they benefit the UK. "
I've noticed on numerous threads UKippers putting forward that there will be a referendum.
It's that sort of basic stuff that worries me.
Every single party will have some headline story of a bad apple over the next five weeks. The issue isn't that one is better than another (although I don't deny that when I see a pattern I notice it - on all parties) but that people actually look at the manifestos when they are published. Everyone should remember that we don't actually elect a government in this country; we elect a parliament who decide which party or parties can form a government. If it's close the only person that gets to ask for his party to do that is the incumbent Prime Minister.
I won't be voting UKIP as nothing they have said or done appeals to me. I think we should remain in the EU.
Everyone should be clear about their own local candidates and vote for what they believe.
These threads show me that whatever is said about UKIP the UKippers on here they are consistent and happy with their choice to vote UKIP. Slurring others, even tangentially, seems pointless.
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Winston Churchill secretly accepted 5 grand the equivalent of perhaps millions in today's money,from Burmah Oil (now known as BP) to lobby the British government to allow them to monopolise Persian oil resources(Iran). And that was before he was prime minister!!!. I believe he was both a Tory and a liberal Burmah Oil are not BP They were two very separate companies . My point was, it's not the people. It's the system, without radical reform of politics and the inner circles.... We,ll be going round in circles forever!. I'm a green party member, I'll vote for anybody that puts change on the agenda.... And I don't mean Obama change! I mean genuine upheaval totally radical wholesale thinking change. But that doesn't mean massive law changes or political systems reversals. Imagine one new law like all government notes, emails, letters meetings all being made public within ten years!. And like bankers making them actually be accountable when things go tits ten years down the line. So Gordon brown could be done for selling off the nations gold, when he was bribed to do so by banks, that's yours and mine everybody's money were taking about!. Thatcher could be done for being in cahoots with BAE and the Saudis. Blair with oil firms. Wholesale behind the scenes sell offs of the nhs going to firms that ten years later are full of ex ministers... I'm certainly not worried about some ukip candidate fiddling some expenses, fuck me all their doing is learning from the big boys." I like this idea. Shame it won't happen. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"a minor blip, loads of people are still voting for them. check out facebook. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Farage is on Marr now." It's just struck me that the Farage gormless grin belongs to Bobby Crush. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Smear and counter smear. Your party is more evil than mine. WTF is this. It's like kids arguing about their football team. What I have noticed is, so far, non of the UKIPerrs have actually put forward exactly what UKIP'S policies towards the EU and on immigration actually are and how they benefit the UK.
I've noticed on numerous threads UKippers putting forward that there will be a referendum.
"But that's not UKIP policy. UKIP's policy on the EU is that the UK should leave the EU. No referendum, no renegotiation, no discussion; just leave; end of. The only party actually putting forward the policy of renegotiation followed by a referendum is the Conservative party. " It's that sort of basic stuff that worries me. Every single party will have some headline story of a bad apple over the next five weeks. The issue isn't that one is better than another (although I don't deny that when I see a pattern I notice it - on all parties) but that people actually look at the manifestos when they are published. Everyone should remember that we don't actually elect a government in this country; we elect a parliament who decide which party or parties can form a government. If it's close the only person that gets to ask for his party to do that is the incumbent Prime Minister. I won't be voting UKIP as nothing they have said or done appeals to me. I think we should remain in the EU. Everyone should be clear about their own local candidates and vote for what they believe. These threads show me that whatever is said about UKIP the UKippers on here they are consistent and happy with their choice to vote UKIP. Slurring others, even tangentially, seems pointless. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. Dress it up as much as you like. Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all supported PIE and all served as Labour front bencher's. IF they were Tory's or UKIPers you would be shouting from the roof tops. Double standards? Perish the thought
Dromey was a trade union leader, the only connection is that he is now married to a woman who worked for the NCCL..
funny you mention the tories, think there is still a lot to come out about their MP's and others from the 80's in ongoing investigations..
and if you can show any factual link where they all openly on the record did support that organisation then feel free..
As "unleashed cracken" has pointed out all three were senior members of the NCCL at a time when that organization supported, some would say championed, PIE.
And if they did nothing wrong then why, as someone else pointed out, did Hewitt (albeit belatedly) apologise?"Accept Cracken's position however you still have not addressed the issue where you say its correct that there was support from Labour..? some would say that someone turning 'support' (since denied) in 'championing' is clutching at straws.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"a minor blip, loads of people are still voting for them. check out facebook.
umm, really? I wonder...
I may be mistaken but according to a thread earlier if you have blocked someone then they shouldn't chat with you on the forums.
I'm not talking to you, or at least I wasn't till you directly addressed me in your post. However this is an open forum thread and I'll comment on it and on anything you say on it if I wish. If you don't like it report me." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. Dress it up as much as you like. Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all supported PIE and all served as Labour front bencher's. IF they were Tory's or UKIPers you would be shouting from the roof tops. Double standards? Perish the thought
Dromey was a trade union leader, the only connection is that he is now married to a woman who worked for the NCCL..
funny you mention the tories, think there is still a lot to come out about their MP's and others from the 80's in ongoing investigations..
and if you can show any factual link where they all openly on the record did support that organisation then feel free..
As "unleashed cracken" has pointed out all three were senior members of the NCCL at a time when that organization supported, some would say championed, PIE.
And if they did nothing wrong then why, as someone else pointed out, did Hewitt (albeit belatedly) apologise?
Accept Cracken's position however you still have not addressed the issue where you say its correct that there was support from Labour..?
some would say that someone turning 'support' (since denied) in 'championing' is clutching at straws.."So the deputy leader of the Labour party only represents the Labour party when she isn't doing something distasteful. Or, as I believe in this case, plain bloody stupid driven by a blind belief that any minority, no matter how nasty, should be supported. Ditto the shadow minister for communities and local government. Ditto the former transport and health secretary. I would add that these three ( Harman, Hewitt and Dromey) were not just NCCL supporters or "involved" with the organisation, they were leading players in the group at the time it supported PIE. Hewitt served as its general secretary and in March 1976 openly backed PIE's call for the age of consent to be lowered to TEN To be fair to her On 27 February 2014, Hewitt in a statement apologised and took responsibility for the "mistakes" made, saying NCCL and herself had been "naive" about PIE. She is still the only one of the three to apologise.
Dromey was on the NCCL executive council for ten years including the period when it supported PIE.
Harman was the NCCL legal officer also during the period it supported PIE.
Neither has apologised, even if only for their naivety.
If that is not a strong enough link to Labour I don't know what is. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. Dress it up as much as you like. Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all supported PIE and all served as Labour front bencher's. IF they were Tory's or UKIPers you would be shouting from the roof tops. Double standards? Perish the thought
Dromey was a trade union leader, the only connection is that he is now married to a woman who worked for the NCCL..
funny you mention the tories, think there is still a lot to come out about their MP's and others from the 80's in ongoing investigations..
and if you can show any factual link where they all openly on the record did support that organisation then feel free..
As "unleashed cracken" has pointed out all three were senior members of the NCCL at a time when that organization supported, some would say championed, PIE.
And if they did nothing wrong then why, as someone else pointed out, did Hewitt (albeit belatedly) apologise?
Accept Cracken's position however you still have not addressed the issue where you say its correct that there was support from Labour..?
some would say that someone turning 'support' (since denied) in 'championing' is clutching at straws..
So the deputy leader of the Labour party only represents the Labour party when she isn't doing something distasteful. Or, as I believe in this case, plain bloody stupid driven by a blind belief that any minority, no matter how nasty, should be supported.
Ditto the shadow minister for communities and local government.
Ditto the former transport and health secretary.
I would add that these three ( Harman, Hewitt and Dromey) were not just NCCL supporters or "involved" with the organisation, they were leading players in the group at the time it supported PIE.
Hewitt served as its general secretary and in March 1976 openly backed PIE's call for the age of consent to be lowered to TEN To be fair to her On 27 February 2014, Hewitt in a statement apologised and took responsibility for the "mistakes" made, saying NCCL and herself had been "naive" about PIE. She is still the only one of the three to apologise.
Dromey was on the NCCL executive council for ten years including the period when it supported PIE.
Harman was the NCCL legal officer also during the period it supported PIE.
Neither has apologised, even if only for their naivety.
If that is not a strong enough link to Labour I don't know what is. "It is the above coupled with the labour groups wilful cover up of the Rotherham scandal and their tolerance of blatant racism by a leadership contender which makes me feel that I can never again vote labour. Every group has their problems, it is how the problems are dealt with that shows how much respect the group has for people. Austin Mitchell's comments a couple of weeks ago reflects the complacency and contempt that labour now hold for their own supporters. As a life long labour supporter and ex member, the current incarnation of the party really saddens me. Mr. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" farage isn't hitler. When he gathers a personal army of purple shirtserm... "Mr Farage currently has a small security team from a private firm who provide personal protection" http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31634837"" Has it occured to you that maybe Farage needs protection from violent groups such as the UAF? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas." Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Oh, it won't do anything to affect their support, of course. Their supporters know that they are backing racists and crooks. However, you have to ask yourself what it says about people who openly support a party of racists. " I dont vote for them because they are racist i would vote for them to get us out of Europe and to stop the flood of illegal immigrants entering this country thats not racist its good sense. The tories have had their fair share of sleaze in the past just cast your mind back to the arms to iraq scandal where 2 tory cabinet ministers were willing to let 2 innocent westland helicopter directors go to jail to cover up their own corrupt dealings, people have selective memories on here. Didnt geoffrey archer go to jail? Oh and the news of the world guy who was camerons chairman or something didnt he go to jail as well? Compared to that resignation is trivial | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. " And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Smear and counter smear. Your party is more evil than mine. WTF is this. It's like kids arguing about their football team. What I have noticed is, so far, non of the UKIPerrs have actually put forward exactly what UKIP'S policies towards the EU and on immigration actually are and how they benefit the UK. " Maybe you should have quoted the OP before you said that. It amazes me the amount of threads that get started on here throwing mud at UKIP, (very rare you get a UKIP supporter starting a thread to throw mud at Labour or the tories or one of the other parties). So is it any suprise to you then when other parties faults get pointed out on these threads? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander, If people don't like mud slinging they should'nt start it in the first place. You ask about UKIPs policy on the EU and immigration. UKIPs policy on the EU is......Leave the EU. Cameron and the tories said they would control immigration and get it down from Labours 250,000 average per annum, into the tens of thousands. Cameron said in 2010 if we don't achieve this then vote us out. He has not achieved it, in fact when the immigration figures were released a few weeks ago the figure has gone up to 300,000 per annum! Much of that is due to free movement of people within the EU. We cannot control our borders. If you cannot control the numbers coming here then how on earth can you plan for future infrastructure needs for example? (housing, public transport, Nhs, schools, etc are all under strain). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that." You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Smear and counter smear. Your party is more evil than mine. WTF is this. It's like kids arguing about their football team. What I have noticed is, so far, non of the UKIPerrs have actually put forward exactly what UKIP'S policies towards the EU and on immigration actually are and how they benefit the UK.
I've noticed on numerous threads UKippers putting forward that there will be a referendum.
But that's not UKIP policy. UKIP's policy on the EU is that the UK should leave the EU. No referendum, no renegotiation, no discussion; just leave; end of.
The only party actually putting forward the policy of renegotiation followed by a referendum is the Conservative party.
"I know, but it would seem others don't. The Nigel people should look at is DUP's leader. He may well have more sway in the post election carve-ups than Farage. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. " MEP's don't hold any real power, it is the unelected commision (or elected by secret ballot) that holds all the power in Brussels. Besides, MEP's cannot decide if Britain stays in the EU or leaves. That decision needs to be made either by a referendum in which the British people decide themselves, or my prefered option would be a UKIP majority government to take us straight out of the EU without the need for a referendum. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. MEP's don't hold any real power, it is the unelected commision (or elected by secret ballot) that holds all the power in Brussels. Besides, MEP's cannot decide if Britain stays in the EU or leaves. That decision needs to be made either by a referendum in which the British people decide themselves, or my prefered option would be a UKIP majority government to take us straight out of the EU without the need for a referendum. " I understand how it works. MPs don't make policy here the Cabinet of the ruling Government does that. How are they decided? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So what do people think about the Tory mp having dealings with the EDL to win votes for Dudley "Despicable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The British electorate have extremely short memories. How many UKIP members have openly supported paedophiles? Or have we already forgotten about Labours support for the Paedophile Indormation Exchange, or the sexual abuse of children that Labour turned a blind eye to in Rotherham, Rochdale and other areas? Let alone the abuse of the British people and their trust by all three 'major' parties. Lions led by Donkeys springs to mind. factually wrong.. Peter Entwistle is one of many easily found examples. He was convicted last year for procuring children for sex. He was ukip regional chairman in Bury. ty.. my point was about 'labours support for P.I.E. which is wrong.. NO. It is correct. Harriet Harman when opposing, yes OPPOSING, new laws banning child pornography said that "such a law would increase censorship” and argued that "a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered" Patricia Hewitt, general secretary of the Council from 1974 to 1983, had published in 1982 a document called “The Police and Civil Liberties”, in which she wrote that "Conspiring to corrupt public morals is an offence incapable of definition or precise proof.” Jack Dromey sat on the council’s executive committee for almost a decade, from 1970 to 1979, when the Council was working most closely with PIE. No matter how much the Labour party would like it all to go away. The facts are the facts. Labour are guilty as charged. the argument that 'labour' supported pie is bollocks.. none of them were MP's so how could it be policy that a party supported such an organisation.. Dress it up as much as you like. Harman, Dromey, and Hewitt all supported PIE and all served as Labour front bencher's. IF they were Tory's or UKIPers you would be shouting from the roof tops. Double standards? Perish the thought
Dromey was a trade union leader, the only connection is that he is now married to a woman who worked for the NCCL..
funny you mention the tories, think there is still a lot to come out about their MP's and others from the 80's in ongoing investigations..
and if you can show any factual link where they all openly on the record did support that organisation then feel free..
As "unleashed cracken" has pointed out all three were senior members of the NCCL at a time when that organization supported, some would say championed, PIE.
And if they did nothing wrong then why, as someone else pointed out, did Hewitt (albeit belatedly) apologise?
Accept Cracken's position however you still have not addressed the issue where you say its correct that there was support from Labour..?
some would say that someone turning 'support' (since denied) in 'championing' is clutching at straws..
So the deputy leader of the Labour party only represents the Labour party when she isn't doing something distasteful. Or, as I believe in this case, plain bloody stupid driven by a blind belief that any minority, no matter how nasty, should be supported.
Ditto the shadow minister for communities and local government.
Ditto the former transport and health secretary.
I would add that these three ( Harman, Hewitt and Dromey) were not just NCCL supporters or "involved" with the organisation, they were leading players in the group at the time it supported PIE.
Hewitt served as its general secretary and in March 1976 openly backed PIE's call for the age of consent to be lowered to TEN To be fair to her On 27 February 2014, Hewitt in a statement apologised and took responsibility for the "mistakes" made, saying NCCL and herself had been "naive" about PIE. She is still the only one of the three to apologise.
Dromey was on the NCCL executive council for ten years including the period when it supported PIE.
Harman was the NCCL legal officer also during the period it supported PIE.
Neither has apologised, even if only for their naivety.
If that is not a strong enough link to Labour I don't know what is. "but its not evidence or a fact to say that Labour supported the pie which you claimed earlier is it..? by definition one could say that the Tory DPP who protected one of his own when caught with child pornography and who was an actual member of pie shows the tories approved of paedophilia.. or that the same could be said about Leon Brittan when Home Secretary just happened to lose a 40 page dossier of information given to him containing the names of other alleged paedophiles, some Tories.. equally they would be wrong at this time pending ongoing investigations but so is saying Labour supported pie because 3 of its current MP's once worked for the NCCL for which the affiliation has been recognised as a mistake.. you cant have it just one way.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So what do people think about the Tory mp having dealings with the EDL to win votes for Dudley
Despicable.
"but not a surprise.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. MEP's don't hold any real power, it is the unelected commision (or elected by secret ballot) that holds all the power in Brussels. Besides, MEP's cannot decide if Britain stays in the EU or leaves. That decision needs to be made either by a referendum in which the British people decide themselves, or my prefered option would be a UKIP majority government to take us straight out of the EU without the need for a referendum. I understand how it works. MPs don't make policy here the Cabinet of the ruling Government does that. How are they decided? " The cabinet is not chosen in a secret ballot like the EU commision is. You said that people voting for MEP's is our say on the EU. Sorry but voting for MEP's is not a say at all on our membership of the EU. Voting for MEP's is a continuation of the status quo. Maybe the British public are trying to send a clear message to the main parties that they want out of the EU, when UKIP won the european elections last year with a majority of UKIP MEP's (but the main parties, tory and Labour won't listen to that message). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Triumphant day for the Uskippers! Two candidates have been suspended by the party today and a third candidate has resigned in less than 24 hours. From the Daily Fail: - MEP Janice Atkinson suspended after aide allegedly asked for fake receipt - Hours later Ukip confirmed candidate Stephen Howd had been suspended - Final blow came when Westmorland & Lonsdale candidate quit the party - Jonathan Stanley said he was sick of the 'open racism and bullying' in Ukip So remember folks: they are not a racist party, but their own candidates regularly resign because they are sick of the racism in the party. When they are not being booted out for being crooks, that is. Sounds like yet another day in paradise. "Yes quite simply Tory hybrids on speed  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Smear and counter smear. Your party is more evil than mine. WTF is this. It's like kids arguing about their football team. What I have noticed is, so far, non of the UKIPerrs have actually put forward exactly what UKIP'S policies towards the EU and on immigration actually are and how they benefit the UK. Maybe you should have quoted the OP before you said that. It amazes me the amount of threads that get started on here throwing mud at UKIP, (very rare you get a UKIP supporter starting a thread to throw mud at Labour or the tories or one of the other parties). So is it any suprise to you then when other parties faults get pointed out on these threads? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander, If people don't like mud slinging they should'nt start it in the first place. You ask about UKIPs policy on the EU and immigration. UKIPs policy on the EU is......Leave the EU. Cameron and the tories said they would control immigration and get it down from Labours 250,000 average per annum, into the tens of thousands. Cameron said in 2010 if we don't achieve this then vote us out. He has not achieved it, in fact when the immigration figures were released a few weeks ago the figure has gone up to 300,000 per annum! Much of that is due to free movement of people within the EU. We cannot control our borders. If you cannot control the numbers coming here then how on earth can you plan for future infrastructure needs for example? (housing, public transport, Nhs, schools, etc are all under strain). " UKIP central office is very good at briefing with inflammatory words, but avoiding use of facts, isn't it? So 61% of immigration last year was from everywhere else except the EU. 47% were from countries outside the EU. 14% were returning UK nationals. That leaves 39% from within the EU. Still strictly speaking 'much' of the total but much less than 61%. What's the UKIP party line going to be on the largest slice of immigrants, the 47% who come from non-EU countries and make up much of the immigrant population? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Speaking as a member of the Armed Forces, myself and many many others will be voting UKIP. Hopefully the South Coast will be purple!!!"
Hopefully not just the south coast. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!!" . UKIP till I die !!!!!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Smear and counter smear. Your party is more evil than mine. WTF is this. It's like kids arguing about their football team. What I have noticed is, so far, non of the UKIPerrs have actually put forward exactly what UKIP'S policies towards the EU and on immigration actually are and how they benefit the UK. Maybe you should have quoted the OP before you said that. It amazes me the amount of threads that get started on here throwing mud at UKIP, (very rare you get a UKIP supporter starting a thread to throw mud at Labour or the tories or one of the other parties). So is it any suprise to you then when other parties faults get pointed out on these threads? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander, If people don't like mud slinging they should'nt start it in the first place. You ask about UKIPs policy on the EU and immigration. UKIPs policy on the EU is......Leave the EU. Cameron and the tories said they would control immigration and get it down from Labours 250,000 average per annum, into the tens of thousands. Cameron said in 2010 if we don't achieve this then vote us out. He has not achieved it, in fact when the immigration figures were released a few weeks ago the figure has gone up to 300,000 per annum! Much of that is due to free movement of people within the EU. We cannot control our borders. If you cannot control the numbers coming here then how on earth can you plan for future infrastructure needs for example? (housing, public transport, Nhs, schools, etc are all under strain). UKIP central office is very good at briefing with inflammatory words, but avoiding use of facts, isn't it? So 61% of immigration last year was from everywhere else except the EU. 47% were from countries outside the EU. 14% were returning UK nationals. That leaves 39% from within the EU. Still strictly speaking 'much' of the total but much less than 61%. What's the UKIP party line going to be on the largest slice of immigrants, the 47% who come from non-EU countries and make up much of the immigrant population? " Try and twist it if you like, fact is Cameron said he would get it down from 250,000 into the tens of thousands. He has failed miserably. Its gone up from Labours 250,000 to 300,000. Cameron said if it is not achieved then vote us out, and thats what i intend to do, i hope other people will do the same. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. MEP's don't hold any real power, it is the unelected commision (or elected by secret ballot) that holds all the power in Brussels. Besides, MEP's cannot decide if Britain stays in the EU or leaves. That decision needs to be made either by a referendum in which the British people decide themselves, or my prefered option would be a UKIP majority government to take us straight out of the EU without the need for a referendum. I understand how it works. MPs don't make policy here the Cabinet of the ruling Government does that. How are they decided? The cabinet is not chosen in a secret ballot like the EU commision is. You said that people voting for MEP's is our say on the EU. Sorry but voting for MEP's is not a say at all on our membership of the EU. Voting for MEP's is a continuation of the status quo. Maybe the British public are trying to send a clear message to the main parties that they want out of the EU, when UKIP won the european elections last year with a majority of UKIP MEP's (but the main parties, tory and Labour won't listen to that message). " You clearly don't understand how it works. There's no democratic say whatsoever in the composition of the UK cabinet. It's picked by the prime minister. There's no re_iew of cabinet ministers by parliament. EU commissioners are nominated by elected governments. Their names are published. They are subject to investigation and ratification by MEP. They can be voted in or out as a whole by MEPs. There's nothing secret about that. Finally there's no requirement on any government to have a referendum about leaving the EU. If a country wishes to leave the EU it may hold a referendum if that's a constitutional requirement. However in a country like the UK the government could take us out without a referendum. You should know that because that's the approach UKIP would take if it ever got a majority in Parliament | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Smear and counter smear. Your party is more evil than mine. WTF is this. It's like kids arguing about their football team. What I have noticed is, so far, non of the UKIPerrs have actually put forward exactly what UKIP'S policies towards the EU and on immigration actually are and how they benefit the UK. Maybe you should have quoted the OP before you said that. It amazes me the amount of threads that get started on here throwing mud at UKIP, (very rare you get a UKIP supporter starting a thread to throw mud at Labour or the tories or one of the other parties). So is it any suprise to you then when other parties faults get pointed out on these threads? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander, If people don't like mud slinging they should'nt start it in the first place. You ask about UKIPs policy on the EU and immigration. UKIPs policy on the EU is......Leave the EU. Cameron and the tories said they would control immigration and get it down from Labours 250,000 average per annum, into the tens of thousands. Cameron said in 2010 if we don't achieve this then vote us out. He has not achieved it, in fact when the immigration figures were released a few weeks ago the figure has gone up to 300,000 per annum! Much of that is due to free movement of people within the EU. We cannot control our borders. If you cannot control the numbers coming here then how on earth can you plan for future infrastructure needs for example? (housing, public transport, Nhs, schools, etc are all under strain). UKIP central office is very good at briefing with inflammatory words, but avoiding use of facts, isn't it? So 61% of immigration last year was from everywhere else except the EU. 47% were from countries outside the EU. 14% were returning UK nationals. That leaves 39% from within the EU. Still strictly speaking 'much' of the total but much less than 61%. What's the UKIP party line going to be on the largest slice of immigrants, the 47% who come from non-EU countries and make up much of the immigrant population? Try and twist it if you like, fact is Cameron said he would get it down from 250,000 into the tens of thousands. He has failed miserably. Its gone up from Labours 250,000 to 300,000. Cameron said if it is not achieved then vote us out, and thats what i intend to do, i hope other people will do the same. " I'm not interested in what Cameron said. There was no twisting involved just a question for you about accurate use of the figures. Most of foreign immigration is not from the EU. Much may be, but 'most' it is not by a long distance. WHat is UKIP going to do about much of immigration (most of foreign immigration) from outside the EU? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. MEP's don't hold any real power, it is the unelected commision (or elected by secret ballot) that holds all the power in Brussels. Besides, MEP's cannot decide if Britain stays in the EU or leaves. That decision needs to be made either by a referendum in which the British people decide themselves, or my prefered option would be a UKIP majority government to take us straight out of the EU without the need for a referendum. I understand how it works. MPs don't make policy here the Cabinet of the ruling Government does that. How are they decided? The cabinet is not chosen in a secret ballot like the EU commision is. You said that people voting for MEP's is our say on the EU. Sorry but voting for MEP's is not a say at all on our membership of the EU. Voting for MEP's is a continuation of the status quo. Maybe the British public are trying to send a clear message to the main parties that they want out of the EU, when UKIP won the european elections last year with a majority of UKIP MEP's (but the main parties, tory and Labour won't listen to that message). You clearly don't understand how it works. There's no democratic say whatsoever in the composition of the UK cabinet. It's picked by the prime minister. There's no re_iew of cabinet ministers by parliament. EU commissioners are nominated by elected governments. Their names are published. They are subject to investigation and ratification by MEP. They can be voted in or out as a whole by MEPs. There's nothing secret about that. Finally there's no requirement on any government to have a referendum about leaving the EU. If a country wishes to leave the EU it may hold a referendum if that's a constitutional requirement. However in a country like the UK the government could take us out without a referendum. You should know that because that's the approach UKIP would take if it ever got a majority in Parliament" I understand perfectly well how it works thanks. And yes the cabinet is picked by the prime minister as you pointed out, not by a secret ballot in the way the EU commision is selected. MEP's are elected by the people, and then those MEPs vote for the commision in a secret ballot. The scope for corruption there in a secret ballot is obvious for all to see. If the EU wants to be more widely accepted then make the whole process openly transparent instead of the secrecy. I know a majority UKIP government would take us straight out the EU without a referendum, i made that point in an earlier post. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Smear and counter smear. Your party is more evil than mine. WTF is this. It's like kids arguing about their football team. What I have noticed is, so far, non of the UKIPerrs have actually put forward exactly what UKIP'S policies towards the EU and on immigration actually are and how they benefit the UK. Maybe you should have quoted the OP before you said that. It amazes me the amount of threads that get started on here throwing mud at UKIP, (very rare you get a UKIP supporter starting a thread to throw mud at Labour or the tories or one of the other parties). So is it any suprise to you then when other parties faults get pointed out on these threads? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander, If people don't like mud slinging they should'nt start it in the first place. You ask about UKIPs policy on the EU and immigration. UKIPs policy on the EU is......Leave the EU. Cameron and the tories said they would control immigration and get it down from Labours 250,000 average per annum, into the tens of thousands. Cameron said in 2010 if we don't achieve this then vote us out. He has not achieved it, in fact when the immigration figures were released a few weeks ago the figure has gone up to 300,000 per annum! Much of that is due to free movement of people within the EU. We cannot control our borders. If you cannot control the numbers coming here then how on earth can you plan for future infrastructure needs for example? (housing, public transport, Nhs, schools, etc are all under strain). UKIP central office is very good at briefing with inflammatory words, but avoiding use of facts, isn't it? So 61% of immigration last year was from everywhere else except the EU. 47% were from countries outside the EU. 14% were returning UK nationals. That leaves 39% from within the EU. Still strictly speaking 'much' of the total but much less than 61%. What's the UKIP party line going to be on the largest slice of immigrants, the 47% who come from non-EU countries and make up much of the immigrant population? Try and twist it if you like, fact is Cameron said he would get it down from 250,000 into the tens of thousands. He has failed miserably. Its gone up from Labours 250,000 to 300,000. Cameron said if it is not achieved then vote us out, and thats what i intend to do, i hope other people will do the same. I'm not interested in what Cameron said. There was no twisting involved just a question for you about accurate use of the figures. Most of foreign immigration is not from the EU. Much may be, but 'most' it is not by a long distance. WHat is UKIP going to do about much of immigration (most of foreign immigration) from outside the EU?" Not sure why you have to ask me as much of this is common knowledge. UKIP intend to have an australian style immigration points based system where the rules would be applied fairly and equally to everyone (with no favour given to EU citizens as currently happens). Cameron is key to all this as much as you'd like to dismiss his comments, the tories want to get immigration down into the tens of thousands so i'd like to know what are the Tory plans to achieve this? Can anyone tell me? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. MEP's don't hold any real power, it is the unelected commision (or elected by secret ballot) that holds all the power in Brussels. Besides, MEP's cannot decide if Britain stays in the EU or leaves. That decision needs to be made either by a referendum in which the British people decide themselves, or my prefered option would be a UKIP majority government to take us straight out of the EU without the need for a referendum. I understand how it works. MPs don't make policy here the Cabinet of the ruling Government does that. How are they decided? The cabinet is not chosen in a secret ballot like the EU commision is. You said that people voting for MEP's is our say on the EU. Sorry but voting for MEP's is not a say at all on our membership of the EU. Voting for MEP's is a continuation of the status quo. Maybe the British public are trying to send a clear message to the main parties that they want out of the EU, when UKIP won the european elections last year with a majority of UKIP MEP's (but the main parties, tory and Labour won't listen to that message). You clearly don't understand how it works. There's no democratic say whatsoever in the composition of the UK cabinet. It's picked by the prime minister. There's no re_iew of cabinet ministers by parliament. EU commissioners are nominated by elected governments. Their names are published. They are subject to investigation and ratification by MEP. They can be voted in or out as a whole by MEPs. There's nothing secret about that. Finally there's no requirement on any government to have a referendum about leaving the EU. If a country wishes to leave the EU it may hold a referendum if that's a constitutional requirement. However in a country like the UK the government could take us out without a referendum. You should know that because that's the approach UKIP would take if it ever got a majority in Parliament I understand perfectly well how it works thanks. And yes the cabinet is picked by the prime minister as you pointed out, not by a secret ballot in the way the EU commision is selected. MEP's are elected by the people, and then those MEPs vote for the commision in a secret ballot. The scope for corruption there in a secret ballot is obvious for all to see. If the EU wants to be more widely accepted then make the whole process openly transparent instead of the secrecy. I know a majority UKIP government would take us straight out the EU without a referendum, i made that point in an earlier post. " There's no point in trying to help you understand how the European Commission is appointed. You either have no idea and aren't willing to find out the truth or you've been commissioned by UKIP central office to try to to mislead people. You're clearly happy with dispensing half truths and lies on behalf of your party propaganda machine. There are plenty of valid points that can be made against the EU, but you'd have to use facts to make them stand up and that's a big problem for UKIP and some of its supporters. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. MEP's don't hold any real power, it is the unelected commision (or elected by secret ballot) that holds all the power in Brussels. Besides, MEP's cannot decide if Britain stays in the EU or leaves. That decision needs to be made either by a referendum in which the British people decide themselves, or my prefered option would be a UKIP majority government to take us straight out of the EU without the need for a referendum. I understand how it works. MPs don't make policy here the Cabinet of the ruling Government does that. How are they decided? The cabinet is not chosen in a secret ballot like the EU commision is. You said that people voting for MEP's is our say on the EU. Sorry but voting for MEP's is not a say at all on our membership of the EU. Voting for MEP's is a continuation of the status quo. Maybe the British public are trying to send a clear message to the main parties that they want out of the EU, when UKIP won the european elections last year with a majority of UKIP MEP's (but the main parties, tory and Labour won't listen to that message). You clearly don't understand how it works. There's no democratic say whatsoever in the composition of the UK cabinet. It's picked by the prime minister. There's no re_iew of cabinet ministers by parliament. EU commissioners are nominated by elected governments. Their names are published. They are subject to investigation and ratification by MEP. They can be voted in or out as a whole by MEPs. There's nothing secret about that. Finally there's no requirement on any government to have a referendum about leaving the EU. If a country wishes to leave the EU it may hold a referendum if that's a constitutional requirement. However in a country like the UK the government could take us out without a referendum. You should know that because that's the approach UKIP would take if it ever got a majority in Parliament I understand perfectly well how it works thanks. And yes the cabinet is picked by the prime minister as you pointed out, not by a secret ballot in the way the EU commision is selected. MEP's are elected by the people, and then those MEPs vote for the commision in a secret ballot. The scope for corruption there in a secret ballot is obvious for all to see. If the EU wants to be more widely accepted then make the whole process openly transparent instead of the secrecy. I know a majority UKIP government would take us straight out the EU without a referendum, i made that point in an earlier post. There's no point in trying to help you understand how the European Commission is appointed. You either have no idea and aren't willing to find out the truth or you've been commissioned by UKIP central office to try to to mislead people. You're clearly happy with dispensing half truths and lies on behalf of your party propaganda machine. There are plenty of valid points that can be made against the EU, but you'd have to use facts to make them stand up and that's a big problem for UKIP and some of its supporters. " I have looked into it in great detail as it happens. If people think there are inaccuracies in what i have said i would urge them to go and look into it themselves, rather than listen to either you or me on a forum. I am urging them to look into it themselves because i know what i said happens to be true. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. MEP's don't hold any real power, it is the unelected commision (or elected by secret ballot) that holds all the power in Brussels. Besides, MEP's cannot decide if Britain stays in the EU or leaves. That decision needs to be made either by a referendum in which the British people decide themselves, or my prefered option would be a UKIP majority government to take us straight out of the EU without the need for a referendum. I understand how it works. MPs don't make policy here the Cabinet of the ruling Government does that. How are they decided? The cabinet is not chosen in a secret ballot like the EU commision is. You said that people voting for MEP's is our say on the EU. Sorry but voting for MEP's is not a say at all on our membership of the EU. Voting for MEP's is a continuation of the status quo. Maybe the British public are trying to send a clear message to the main parties that they want out of the EU, when UKIP won the european elections last year with a majority of UKIP MEP's (but the main parties, tory and Labour won't listen to that message). You clearly don't understand how it works. There's no democratic say whatsoever in the composition of the UK cabinet. It's picked by the prime minister. There's no re_iew of cabinet ministers by parliament. EU commissioners are nominated by elected governments. Their names are published. They are subject to investigation and ratification by MEP. They can be voted in or out as a whole by MEPs. There's nothing secret about that. Finally there's no requirement on any government to have a referendum about leaving the EU. If a country wishes to leave the EU it may hold a referendum if that's a constitutional requirement. However in a country like the UK the government could take us out without a referendum. You should know that because that's the approach UKIP would take if it ever got a majority in Parliament I understand perfectly well how it works thanks. And yes the cabinet is picked by the prime minister as you pointed out, not by a secret ballot in the way the EU commision is selected. MEP's are elected by the people, and then those MEPs vote for the commision in a secret ballot. The scope for corruption there in a secret ballot is obvious for all to see. If the EU wants to be more widely accepted then make the whole process openly transparent instead of the secrecy. I know a majority UKIP government would take us straight out the EU without a referendum, i made that point in an earlier post. There's no point in trying to help you understand how the European Commission is appointed. You either have no idea and aren't willing to find out the truth or you've been commissioned by UKIP central office to try to to mislead people. You're clearly happy with dispensing half truths and lies on behalf of your party propaganda machine. There are plenty of valid points that can be made against the EU, but you'd have to use facts to make them stand up and that's a big problem for UKIP and some of its supporters. I have looked into it in great detail as it happens. If people think there are inaccuracies in what i have said i would urge them to go and look into it themselves, rather than listen to either you or me on a forum. I am urging them to look into it themselves because i know what i said happens to be true. " Good. They, and you, could start with the public hearings that are held where MEPs investigate newly proposed commissioners (see http://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/Commissioner_hearings/EPRS-Over_iew-of-Hearings-of-Commissioners-designate.pdf for the time table for the last lot) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"vote ukip !!! I'm an undecided voter but I think I'd be spectacularly stupid to vote for ukip. I am protected from discrimination, have employment rights and other freedoms enjoyed in part because of our EU membership. Turkeys are not known for voting for Christmas. Maybe not, but Turkey (the country) could soon become part of the EU. The EU is an expansionist organisation, do we really want to keep on continuing to open up our borders to more and more countries that keep on joining the EU (with free movement of people they will all have the right to come here if they wish). Ukraine is another country i think will soon join the EU. We need to get out and take back control of our own borders. Britain needs to decide for itself who it allows into our country, not eurocrats in Brussels. And they will do all this with out the British public having a say in all this change and some people are happy with that. You vote for MEPs the same as for the UK Parliament. That is our say. MEP's don't hold any real power, it is the unelected commision (or elected by secret ballot) that holds all the power in Brussels. Besides, MEP's cannot decide if Britain stays in the EU or leaves. That decision needs to be made either by a referendum in which the British people decide themselves, or my prefered option would be a UKIP majority government to take us straight out of the EU without the need for a referendum. I understand how it works. MPs don't make policy here the Cabinet of the ruling Government does that. How are they decided? The cabinet is not chosen in a secret ballot like the EU commision is. You said that people voting for MEP's is our say on the EU. Sorry but voting for MEP's is not a say at all on our membership of the EU. Voting for MEP's is a continuation of the status quo. Maybe the British public are trying to send a clear message to the main parties that they want out of the EU, when UKIP won the european elections last year with a majority of UKIP MEP's (but the main parties, tory and Labour won't listen to that message). You clearly don't understand how it works. There's no democratic say whatsoever in the composition of the UK cabinet. It's picked by the prime minister. There's no re_iew of cabinet ministers by parliament. EU commissioners are nominated by elected governments. Their names are published. They are subject to investigation and ratification by MEP. They can be voted in or out as a whole by MEPs. There's nothing secret about that. Finally there's no requirement on any government to have a referendum about leaving the EU. If a country wishes to leave the EU it may hold a referendum if that's a constitutional requirement. However in a country like the UK the government could take us out without a referendum. You should know that because that's the approach UKIP would take if it ever got a majority in Parliament I understand perfectly well how it works thanks. And yes the cabinet is picked by the prime minister as you pointed out, not by a secret ballot in the way the EU commision is selected. MEP's are elected by the people, and then those MEPs vote for the commision in a secret ballot. The scope for corruption there in a secret ballot is obvious for all to see. If the EU wants to be more widely accepted then make the whole process openly transparent instead of the secrecy. I know a majority UKIP government would take us straight out the EU without a referendum, i made that point in an earlier post. There's no point in trying to help you understand how the European Commission is appointed. You either have no idea and aren't willing to find out the truth or you've been commissioned by UKIP central office to try to to mislead people. You're clearly happy with dispensing half truths and lies on behalf of your party propaganda machine. There are plenty of valid points that can be made against the EU, but you'd have to use facts to make them stand up and that's a big problem for UKIP and some of its supporters. I have looked into it in great detail as it happens. If people think there are inaccuracies in what i have said i would urge them to go and look into it themselves, rather than listen to either you or me on a forum. I am urging them to look into it themselves because i know what i said happens to be true. Good. They, and you, could start with the public hearings that are held where MEPs investigate newly proposed commissioners (see http://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/Commissioner_hearings/EPRS-Over_iew-of-Hearings-of-Commissioners-designate.pdf for the time table for the last lot)" Newly proposed commisioners?.... and what does that have to do with the actual election process i was talking about then? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Speaking as a member of the Armed Forces, myself and many many others will be voting UKIP. Hopefully the South Coast will be purple!!!" Good on you....I'm ex-army..almost all my family,friend's,workmates and army pal's will be voting UKIP. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've trimmed this down a bit I have looked into it in great detail as it happens. If people think there are inaccuracies in what i have said i would urge them to go and look into it themselves, rather than listen to either you or me on a forum. I am urging them to look into it themselves because i know what i said happens to be true. Good. They, and you, could start with the public hearings that are held where MEPs investigate newly proposed commissioners (see http://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/Commissioner_hearings/EPRS-Over_iew-of-Hearings-of-Commissioners-designate.pdf for the time table for the last lot)" Newly proposed commisioners?.... and what does that have to do with the actual election process i was talking about then? I thought you understood the process? Commissioners are proposed by national governments. One per sovereign state. So last year, a whole new set of commissioners was proposed, by sovereign national governments, as is done every 5 years. Then each of these proposed commissioners has to go through televised public hearings held by MEPs. The link I gave was to the schedule for these public, televised hearings and showed the face and name and country represented for each proposed commissioner. That's an open and public process. The proposed commissioners become commissioners after they are voted in by the majority of MEPs in a publicly held open vote (so for example we know that Nigel Farage and the UKIP MEPs voted against them as did some conservatives). However a democratic majority of MEPs voted for the commissioners in an open vote in the European Parliament. " Thanks for that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Bullocks they are not racist just fed up with being run by non english" since when has this country ever been run by anyone but the corporations..? they are international, money talks.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've trimmed this down a bit I have looked into it in great detail as it happens. If people think there are inaccuracies in what i have said i would urge them to go and look into it themselves, rather than listen to either you or me on a forum. I am urging them to look into it themselves because i know what i said happens to be true. Good. They, and you, could start with the public hearings that are held where MEPs investigate newly proposed commissioners (see http://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/Commissioner_hearings/EPRS-Over_iew-of-Hearings-of-Commissioners-designate.pdf for the time table for the last lot)" Newly proposed commisioners?.... and what does that have to do with the actual election process i was talking about then? I thought you understood the process? Commissioners are proposed by national governments. One per sovereign state. So last year, a whole new set of commissioners was proposed, by sovereign national governments, as is done every 5 years. Then each of these proposed commissioners has to go through televised public hearings held by MEPs. The link I gave was to the schedule for these public, televised hearings and showed the face and name and country represented for each proposed commissioner. That's an open and public process. The proposed commissioners become commissioners after they are voted in by the majority of MEPs in a publicly held open vote (so for example we know that Nigel Farage and the UKIP MEPs voted against them as did some conservatives). However a democratic majority of MEPs voted for the commissioners in an open vote in the European Parliament. " Its not an open and publicly held vote, I think Douglas Carswell who was a Tory MP for many, many years before joining UKIP is much more knowledgeable on this subject than you or me, and in this clip i give the link for he openly called the (ex) head of the commision Barroso "unelected" and none of the Tory or Labour politicians sitting in the studio object to him saying that? If its not true then why are they not objecting to put Carswell right on the matter? (maybe because they know Carswell is right). Link is here..... www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnrggQ07D3w Clearly we are never going to agree on how the commision is elected but i'm still waiting for you to let us all know how the tories plan to get immigration down into the tens of thousands? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Clearly we are never going to agree on how the commision is elected but i'm still waiting for you to let us all know how the tories plan to get immigration down into the tens of thousands? " how will ukip manage to do that when they can't even stop lunatics from "infiltrating" their ranks and managing to become election candidates only to be removed after they've opened their mouths to spout stupid shit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've trimmed this down a bit I have looked into it in great detail as it happens. If people think there are inaccuracies in what i have said i would urge them to go and look into it themselves, rather than listen to either you or me on a forum. I am urging them to look into it themselves because i know what i said happens to be true. Good. They, and you, could start with the public hearings that are held where MEPs investigate newly proposed commissioners (see http://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/Commissioner_hearings/EPRS-Over_iew-of-Hearings-of-Commissioners-designate.pdf for the time table for the last lot)" Newly proposed commisioners?.... and what does that have to do with the actual election process i was talking about then? I thought you understood the process? Commissioners are proposed by national governments. One per sovereign state. So last year, a whole new set of commissioners was proposed, by sovereign national governments, as is done every 5 years. Then each of these proposed commissioners has to go through televised public hearings held by MEPs. The link I gave was to the schedule for these public, televised hearings and showed the face and name and country represented for each proposed commissioner. That's an open and public process. The proposed commissioners become commissioners after they are voted in by the majority of MEPs in a publicly held open vote (so for example we know that Nigel Farage and the UKIP MEPs voted against them as did some conservatives). However a democratic majority of MEPs voted for the commissioners in an open vote in the European Parliament. Its not an open and publicly held vote, I think Douglas Carswell who was a Tory MP for many, many years before joining UKIP is much more knowledgeable on this subject than you or me, and in this clip i give the link for he openly called the (ex) head of the commision Barroso "unelected" and none of the Tory or Labour politicians sitting in the studio object to him saying that? If its not true then why are they not objecting to put Carswell right on the matter? (maybe because they know Carswell is right). Link is here..... www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnrggQ07D3w Clearly we are never going to agree on how the commision is elected but i'm still waiting for you to let us all know how the tories plan to get immigration down into the tens of thousands? " I've got nothing to do with the tories. The whole of the european parliament debate and vote on the commission is available on video on their web site. That's public and democratic. Go find it - I can give you the URL if you need it. Do some proper research instead of quoting the party line and half truths. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Clearly we are never going to agree on how the commision is elected but i'm still waiting for you to let us all know how the tories plan to get immigration down into the tens of thousands? how will ukip manage to do that when they can't even stop lunatics from "infiltrating" their ranks and managing to become election candidates only to be removed after they've opened their mouths to spout stupid shit" UKIP would manage it by leaving the EU and bringing in an australian style points based immigration system where the rules are applied fairly and equally to everyone (no favour given to EU citizens as is currently happening). I disregard the rest of your comment because it is just nonsense. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've trimmed this down a bit I have looked into it in great detail as it happens. If people think there are inaccuracies in what i have said i would urge them to go and look into it themselves, rather than listen to either you or me on a forum. I am urging them to look into it themselves because i know what i said happens to be true. Good. They, and you, could start with the public hearings that are held where MEPs investigate newly proposed commissioners (see http://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/Commissioner_hearings/EPRS-Over_iew-of-Hearings-of-Commissioners-designate.pdf for the time table for the last lot)" Newly proposed commisioners?.... and what does that have to do with the actual election process i was talking about then? I thought you understood the process? Commissioners are proposed by national governments. One per sovereign state. So last year, a whole new set of commissioners was proposed, by sovereign national governments, as is done every 5 years. Then each of these proposed commissioners has to go through televised public hearings held by MEPs. The link I gave was to the schedule for these public, televised hearings and showed the face and name and country represented for each proposed commissioner. That's an open and public process. The proposed commissioners become commissioners after they are voted in by the majority of MEPs in a publicly held open vote (so for example we know that Nigel Farage and the UKIP MEPs voted against them as did some conservatives). However a democratic majority of MEPs voted for the commissioners in an open vote in the European Parliament. Its not an open and publicly held vote, I think Douglas Carswell who was a Tory MP for many, many years before joining UKIP is much more knowledgeable on this subject than you or me, and in this clip i give the link for he openly called the (ex) head of the commision Barroso "unelected" and none of the Tory or Labour politicians sitting in the studio object to him saying that? If its not true then why are they not objecting to put Carswell right on the matter? (maybe because they know Carswell is right). Link is here..... www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnrggQ07D3w Clearly we are never going to agree on how the commision is elected but i'm still waiting for you to let us all know how the tories plan to get immigration down into the tens of thousands? " Confusing... The official schedule does indicate that they is some sort of election ... So what's the case...? Is it an issue with semantics. Does Carswell call them 'unelected' because he feel the members of the public ought to have the right to vote such officials in..? Also are the elections public as per the schedule et al or do these sinister sounding secret ballots exist..? Tis all quite confusing as both possibilities can't be right. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Clearly we are never going to agree on how the commision is elected but i'm still waiting for you to let us all know how the tories plan to get immigration down into the tens of thousands? how will ukip manage to do that when they can't even stop lunatics from "infiltrating" their ranks and managing to become election candidates only to be removed after they've opened their mouths to spout stupid shit" UKIP would manage it by leaving the EU and bringing in an australian style points based immigration system where the rules are applied fairly and equally to everyone (no favour given to EU citizens as is currently happening). I disregard the rest of your comment because it is just nonsense. " just like we can disregard UKIP doing anything about immigration on behalf of their racist supporters .... mostly because they're a political laughing stock and will win diddly squat in the way of political power ..... they've lost more candidates in the last six months than Bhutan have lost international football matches .... ridiculous bunch of cock wombles (ukip not bhutan fc ) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
