How vile is Nigel Farage and his party?

I shall be voting for a party who want the UK to be self governing and control its borders.

Radical I know. Somewhat extreme if one's definition of 'extremism' is doing the bleedin' obvious.

Orioles is a sensitive type,his concern for Romanians is touching but misplaced.

No sane person would want a group of Romanians are Roma living next door.

The figures are out and they are staggering,the Liberal elite who benefit from unlimited immigration are shutting down all talk on this subject.
You can't stereotype or profile but when the figures for ATM crime and Romanian criminal gangs are this high it ceases to be profiling and becomes a description of the suspect.

That response was her (in)famous response to an interview question about xenophobia, rtb. It has haunted her ever since :)

I agree with much of what you say - particularly about how anodyne politics has become. There is almost no deep thought and the rise of politics a career without conscience has been catastrophic. My thoughts on Blair btw make my view of Farage seem positively warm.

The problem with modern populist parties imo is that, in the media world we live in, demagoguery is once more to the fore. Not since ancient Athens (stay with me here, it's a brilliant point lol) has a politician found it so easy to appeal to such a large section of the population (getting Churchillian) and allow dangerous ideas to become the currency of everyday discourse.

Couple that with politicians who reek of mediocrity and even fear (I've never seen anyone run like Cameron - it's as if the real world has come knocking and he's **** the bed) and we arrive at a very dangerous situation.

The answer is honesty and integrity, but that same media I mentioned earlier is so uncompromising and ubiquitous that the politician will have to be willing to be hoist. Commentators and the public live in this weird binary (sic) world where anyone short of a saint is by definition unfit and that has closed down intelligent debate, leaving the field for the entitled, or grey men or braying, shameless opportunists.

Dark days.

Dark days indeed Orioles. You can see why some dyed-in-the-wool supporters of Enforced Multiculturalism in Britain are doing so from the safety of France and Switzerland.

Wouldn't you be happier in Rochdale or Rotherham, with Your People?

Injera 23 Apr 15 16:07 Joined: 04 Jan 03 | Topic/replies: 6,333 | Blogger: Injera's blog
I shall be voting for a party who want the UK to be self governing and control its borders.

Radical I know. Somewhat extreme if one's definition of 'extremism' is doing the bleedin' obvious.

A sensible decision Injera.

Not a lot of people know this but even LABOUR governments used to do this before the supremacy of European Law took hold. And absolutely no-one complained. Nowadays apparently it's racist, or at the very least un-progressive and/or backward-looking to want to manage one's own borders and laws. Who woulda thunk it?

The BBC has just quoted the IFS saying none of 4 political parties have made it clear how the deficit would be cut.

The Beeb mention Labour, Cons, Lib Dems and SNP.

No mention of the other party...who have had their manifesto independently audited.

The IFS have not looked at UKIP's proposals..

An acquaintance of mine is exactly like that, Alun.  He is forever banging on about the evils of Farage, Cameron and the right-wing in general.  He lives in Fribourg for 280 days of the year for tax reasons!

The chap is a director of a company called Pall, a fair-sized concern by all acoounts.  I reckon he's on about £2m a year.

Name and shame the hypocrite

I don't really want to name him, sir, he's never done me a bad turn.

The company makes filters for the medical industry and they're eye-wateringly expensive, even though they are quite cheap to produce.  A few weeks ago a £600,000 order accidently got opened in a 'contaminated' area and had to be binned.  Nobody got hauled over the coals for the mistake, hardly batted an eyelid really.  They just packed up a new lot and off they went!

Burton-Brewers     23 Apr 15 11:50 
how did he do in last night's interview? I never saw it



As usual Farage came out with outlandish sweeping 'scaremongering figures'

In relation to the boat refugees. Farage said ' mark my words there will be  ' millions coming over in a couple of years. '

Let's assume as he used the plural of million, that he meant at least 2 million, let's also assume that a couple of years means 2 years.

2 million migrants coming over in boats in 2 years, equates to c [b]3000 a year[/b


Er ....Farage .... don't be ridiculous !

I don't recall that coming up at all in the interview Facts. Can you point me to where Davies pressed Farage on the issue and also where he said, "mark my words there will be millions coming over in a couple of years"?

Question for orioles if your game:

Do you think in principle that permanently legally resident tax-paying EU nationals should be entitled to vote at the GE? ( currently they are not )

doh - you're

That's an interesting question, bongo.

I suspect that if the European project continues, its a racing certainty. After all, as I'm sure you know, it's already the case for EU elections and certain political bodies in the UK. Personally, I wouldn't object.

I presume you've retired hurt? Might there be a chance of you returning to bat if the likes of Facts can keep you in the game for a while orioles? I know I'm being cruel. It's like asking Glenn McGrath to go out and score a ton for you but needs must.

Have you been at the Windolene again?

Brasso tonight.

Knob polishing. No doubt.

Enough of this flirting. Have you found any actual evidence yet for your assertion or are you out of the game?

I replied, at length, earlier.

Although frankly, if you're going to try and make a case for Farage and Ukip as clear thinking, reasonable human beings, it may be a long haul and I can't guarantee a prolonged chit chatesque to and fro - I haven't missed that element.

You did but as I pointed out it was in no way relevant to your earlier contention. I presumed you had more to offer.

Facts
2 million migrants coming over in boats in 2 years, equates to c 3000 a year

3000 a year?????

I make 2 years at 3000 a year equal 6000 not 2 million.

800 on one boat last week.

Mind you, Facts can't read this post as I'm one of the 12 that are blocked.

Lucky he's not the chancellor of the exchequer with maths like that.

Well, EO, if my quotes were so irrelevant, why seek to answer them?

My post showed exactly where Farage and ukip sit and supports my contention and was thus precisely relevant.

When you seek to roll back laws protecting people from discrimination, it hardly places those groups in an exalted position! Similarly protestations that 'we all know what they're like' is unlikely to discourage resentment. Farage and ukip both encourage and feed off this scaremongering and hatred - to pretend otherwise is asinine.

Your revelation that Farage would rather we accepted immigration from former colonies (itself preposterously racist - 'we've at least tamed them by colonising them') rather than Christian Europeans (again, delivered without a shred of irony) is scuppered somewhat by Farage's suggestion that if we must accept refugees from the med, let's only accept Christians, placing other religions beyond the pale.

Farage was once asked directly about demonising sections of society and could only bleat 'I'm demonising the political class'. He at least grasps the concept, if not its breadth, although I doubt he cares.

What chimp with a machine gun would?

EO

Apologies, it wasn't the Evans interview. He made the claim on BBC news, earlier in the day.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32409901

At 1.30 into the clip

Someone on here someone of some standing said “allow dangerous ideas to become the currency of everyday discourse.” Would this include mass immigration?
Anybody with the slightest intelligence, knew that this was always going to lead to trouble.
The annoying thing is it was all totally avoidable, thanks to this mistake we now have huge problems here today, and the prospect of a future similar to that of Northern Ireland at the height of the troubles.

I suspect that at law school students learn a clever ploy which is this:

If you can't explicitly validate a damning assertion with one piece of evidence, validate a different and feebler assertion with lots of pieces of evidence.

NF is stating that if the message from Italy and Greece is that anyone making the crossing will be accepted then figures will soar.
What's wrong with that? Common sense tells you that will happen.

Also, morally, what is the difference between not rescuing British Nationals kidnapped by ISIS (on the basis we don't do deals with terrorists) yet helping to rescue non-British nationals in the Mediterranean (on the basis we are happy to - ultimately - support people smugglers and tribal warlords)?

akabula     24 Apr 15 13:47 
NF is stating that if the message from Italy and Greece is that anyone making the crossing will be accepted then figures will soar.
What's wrong with that? Common sense tells you that will happen




But not millions ( I.e 3000 a day )

I wouldn't be so sure of that Facts.

I suspect that at law school students learn a clever ploy which is this:

If you can't explicitly validate a damning assertion with one piece of evidence, validate a different and feebler assertion with lots of pieces of evidence.

I think that was for you orioles.

And of course I would agree because I was quite clear why you had failed to validate your assertion.

When you seek to roll back laws protecting people from discrimination, it hardly places those groups in an exalted position! Similarly protestations that 'we all know what they're like' is unlikely to discourage resentment. Farage and ukip both encourage and feed off this scaremongering and hatred - to pretend otherwise is asinine.

Of course repeal doesn't put those groups in an exalted position. The law on discrimination already does that.

We can argue the pros and cons of such legislation and I'm sure you won't be surprised to know I sit in the Powell camp that it is for people to choose who, how and why they will discriminate against if that is what they wish and it is for other citizens to judge them on this how they see fit. I would judge them negatively for the record. If the populace at large thinks a business operates racist policies then they can withdraw their support and if enough of them feel so strongly about the issue the business will fold. That's capitalism.

I note you once again make another assertion about Farage without evidence. That is what is asinine given your previous.

Your revelation that Farage would rather we accepted immigration from former colonies (itself preposterously racist - 'we've at least tamed them by colonising them') rather than Christian Europeans (again, delivered without a shred of irony) is scuppered somewhat by Farage's suggestion that if we must accept refugees from the med, let's only accept Christians, placing other religions beyond the pale.

You're becoming hysterical. I very much doubt anybody else would have arrived at that bizarre conclusion about the commonwealth and with good reason. It's extraordinarily weak and frankly barmy.

By the way he didn't seek to put other religions beyond the pale. He was quite explicit about the torrid time that Christians are having in much of Africa. They aren't wanted in vast swathes and are being murdered en masse in some places. If you need any further evidence of their plight even in the most desperate of situations when these people find themselves on a ship with other people in a desperate situation they get tossed overboard because they are Christian.

Now that is what I call fuccked up.

Man, you have really lost your game while I was away. What the hell happened?

There's not a single unsupported assertion and pretending I'm being evasive, or that you don't understand, won't get the beast on its feet. Of course Farage considers the Commonwealth tamed, otherwise, why on earth pick them? It's not difficult but you seem, well, all at sea and as for dragging poor Enoch out of his vault yet again ...

Now sharpen up and promise me that your wisdom will prove a beauteous flower when next we meet. You were once briefly diverting.

Kind of you to say so and you put me in something of a dilemma. Truth or kindness? I'll go with kindness. You were once less evasive.

Allow me to bring you back to your statement. After all they are your words:

Whenever a political party decides that it will clearly indentify and demonise a section of the population on the basis of race, creed or colour, the only outcome can be tragedy.

Following that you did make your little speech but I think Bongo covered that more than adequately. I'm not asking for the earth but big statements like that really do need compelling evidence. I was fair to you. Some people will see things as you do. Perhaps most. Perhaps it has been a collective good thing. I don't know about that but it is perfectly clear that citing a desire to repeal discrimination legislation is no evidence for your assertion. You are trying to build a skyscraper with playing cards in a hurricane.

Where is your actual evidence that he has demonised people on the basis of race, creed or colour?

If the best of your argument remains this fanciful notion that he prefers the commonwealth because they are in essence a bunch of Uncle Tom's then we need say no more about it but you've clearly slipped a long way whilst on your sabbatical. Surely you have more to offer? I'm beginning to see why your luvvie lot find formulating an actual argument worthy of the name so difficult.

Very entertaining thread.  Well done, Eeternaloptimist.  You might have made a typing error in your username, but you have won the battle of words on here.

Why thank you sir. I'm an easy guy to please really. The problem I have is with all the snide comments and yet a complete inability to back them up. Fair play to orioles. He didn't do it very well but at least he had a go. The rest? I shiit em. There's a list as long as a giraffe's dicck of people taking pot shots who freeze when you put them on the spot.

Yikes. Thanks for repeating my post.

This really IS it for you, right?

No wonder you never made it.

That would depend on your definition of made it orioles. The way I see life is that I define whether it has been a success or failure. I don't worry about whether other people think I could or should have done this or that and being totally honest I'm happy how it turned out. I never aspired to a house by Lake Geneva, the big car, fancy house or any of the other status affectations. I had two goals in life and I've achieved them. That's good enough for me.

Dressing and feeding yourself?

Having sex with your wife and mother.

^that's the sort of voter UKIP attracts, a sad, pathetic amateur keyboard warrior who can't even spell his own name the dope

put him down orioles, you've embarassed him enough

Aren't you the Gallagher Dildo wannabe who was giving it out late the other night as well? So what's your story? Do you need a bit of dutch courage before posting and have to raid the drinks cabinet when your parents retire for the night? I'm being kind of course when I say parent(s).

I think he's managed that far better himself, the poor sod.

farage used the phrase  "Scottish terror" yesterday.
now i realise the SNP may not be to your liking but seeing as they have been a party of governance in Scotland for some time i would suggest "terror" is a tad unreasonable.

Don't come the high and mighty orioles. We could have kept it civil but you wanted to take the gloves off. Don't start crying now.

???

what gloves? it's been far too warm for gloves lately

That depends how far north you are. It was pretty cold up here today.

quite far north in uk terms, but still not cold enough for gloves.
also very little terror on the go, which was nice

I think there's a lot of people who are indeed quite terrified of the perceptio of the post election possibility of the Scottish tail wagging the English dog northanlite. The Scots tend to be more to the left of the English in general and a lot of English people don't want socialism let in through the back door. They will also be deeply disturbed about Salmond's boasts about writing Labour's budgets.

but we were told we should stay in the union and use our influence accordingly.
now it seems that influence is unjust and frightening to the rest of the uk.
A confusing message, ridiculous & the reason the SNP support has sustained.

I noted John Swinney making that point on QT. It's clearly part of the SNP strategy and it's a good line but I don't recall it being an issue in the way their are playing it. The Scottish people were asked to stay to play their part in the union. I'd imagine that is still how most people feel in England but there were a lot of divisive comments made during and post campaign by SNP supporters who didn't have the good grace just to accept the democratic will of the majority in Scotland.

This campaign has a bit of a whiff of the independence campaign. The SNP seemed to be running away with that one at one stage as well but I think the strong arm tactics of some of their supporters led to a feeling amongst some of those who did want the union to remain intact that they should keep their powder dry. It is just possible that the SNP won't do as well as the popular perception suggests.

Anyway I'm away to my bed. Good night and here's hoping Cotter gets the Scots firing in a few months time.

And before I go apologies to orioles. My comment was meant as a humorous retort to his comments but I appreciate not everybody finds such humour funny.

Good evening gents. This has been an interesting thread, although the recent personalisations have diverted it somewhat, leopards and spots eh orioles  ???. If it can be brought back on track as has been attempted by Eeternaloptimist then so much the better.

just to clarify, a bout of Atrial fibrillation has woken me from a sound sleep, it will take 2 hours for the medication to settle it down, so this is not a an alcohol fuelled post.

i suspect the SNP will do about as well as the polls suggest because they have been so constant.I guess if a lot of tactical voting goes on that may change a bit.
i think that while there were divisive comments made on both sides during the referendum it was the scare tactics & blatant lies of the union side that have helped the SNP. Nobody is buying it anymore.
The SNP have picked up plenty no voters since September

northanlite, I find it really interesting but not surprising that the last minute scrambling around by Westminster to hold the union together has awoken the politically erudite Scots to their new found place in British politics, long may it last.

our idiotic voting system blows up in the face of lazy politicians who assumed it was a 2 party system.
democracy in action and hallelujah for that. i hate ukip ideas but they have helped shake it up too.

I like Ukip for that very reason, they don't have a cats chance in hell of getting more than 3-5 seats, but have punched way above their weight and actually shaken up and distracted the dopey 2 who totally underestimated the depth of feeling in Scotland.

the other thing to note will be that while the SNP only get around 48% ish of the votes cast they may well get around 90% of the seats in Scotland & the old firm of british politics will call foul.
the irony is that most who voted that way support PR.
it's a very fascinating election for once.

I believe (and hope) you have it spot on. The important thing is the next term and how wisely the new "power" is used from all perspectives. Fascinating, and gloriously refreshing indeed.

the snp won't have any power but if they get the projected 45-50 mp's they will have some clout.
i think people forget they won a majority in a PR system in Scotland which most observers thought impossible. don't underestimate them but also don't fear them. they are not a loony fringe party. although their ultimate aim is obvious they are not the one issue party the westminster parties would have you believe.

It's early days but this election could be a watershed in British politics, particularly in respect to PR in the next 10 years.

Apr 25, 2015 -- 2:57AM, northanlite wrote:

the snp won't have any power but if they get the projected 45-50 mp's they will have some clout.i think people forget they won a majority in a PR system in Scotland which most observers thought impossible. don't underestimate them but also don't fear them. they are not a loony fringe party. although their ultimate aim is obvious they are not the one issue party the westminster parties would have you believe.

I hope nobody is buying the Westminster spin, it's hackneyed beyond belief. Nicola is not the bogeyperson they want people to believe, I really believe the (politically)dopey Brits are finally waking up. Fingers crossed, and that despite it's many ills, the interweb thinghy is serving a useful purpose is shaping the thus far incestuous media.

another thing often forgotten is where the initial snp support came from in the 1970's.
it was a mixture but much of it was from a lot of disaffected conservative voters.
the labour didn't fall it was the tory vote that crashed and many went SNP.
now it's that labour vote that is being chased so they appear very left wing but a strong anti union conservative element exists at the heart of the SNP.

I hope more, rather than less of us realise that. Never the less the next 5 years will be an education unparalleled in recent political history. Can't wait !!.

I'm up come on who's first I'm voting ukip or s n p

very good.

Well I do live in Kent

fair play to you

Cheers I'm not a key board warrior

Cheers I'm not a key board warrior

Just schizophrenic

Brilliant

I thank you seriously just bipolar having a great time at the moment just waiting for the black cloud. Few months yet I hope signed off sick until June 14th

I am voting UKIP and believe all the smearing and intimidation from the vermin in Westminster is causing a lot more to vote UKIP rather than the reverse.

Er....I don't think so

I am a socialist but i have had enough of being lied to by all partys,new labour sold the working man down the river,the torys have always done so,the snp will tax the working man down the river to keep their giro wallah supporters on their side,the greens are mental the lib dems are coonts,
I am voting ukip just to give them all a kick up the arse and i dont care if they eat babies practice black magic rituals or are in incestuous relationships with their sisters i have had enough of all the lying,fraudulent,obfuscating,****s time for change.

I understand your frustration, if not your reasoning!

flushgordon

Miliband 's Labour Party is not Blair's New Labour. Hth

Oh, and if you're going to vote UKIP, sorry, but you're not a socialist . Hth too.

How do you know that Facts? Before 97 people said that Blair would be more socialistic in office and that he was merely seeking not to scare the horses. When Brown was taking over the same cry went out. Time will till what Milliband would do but to make assumptions as this stage risks disappointment for you. Socialism is dead in this country.

And you're the expert are you ?

To be fair your expertise appears opaque and im being generous in my critique.
Sheeple like yourself can and will be conned but eventually the penny will drop and you will realise tort labour two cheeks of the same arse.
You want the facts ,you cant handle the facts dgfith.
Labour party so out of touch it puts uber blairite jim murphy in charge of the most anti blairite part of the country and wonders why snp are doing well.

I didn't claim to be the expert on the subject facts. I'm giving a view based on what dopes like you said previously. Of course this time it could all be very different but you were the one making bold statements about the future.

We'll see.

We probably won't. Milliband will have resigned in less than a month.

Tory supporters are really panicking at the realistic possibility of Miliband being prime minister

I don't think it will come as a surprise to Tories that in a two horse race there is a realistic possibility that one of them can win or at least put themselves in the position to win. I'm certainly predicting the Tories to be by some margin the biggest single party and I haven't ruled out the possibility of a majority for them. I have ruled out the possibility for Wallace. Or is it Gromit?

Eeternaloptimist     25 Apr 15 21:25 


' "..........I'm certainly predicting the Tories to be by some margin the biggest single party ....'

We'll find out soon enough. I fear you are making the classic socialists mistake of cconfusing what you hope will happen for what will actually happen.

Rumours of a PALL takeover, shares up twenty percent.  No tip from my acquaintance, the bastard!

A PALL takeover poker?

Yeah, it's a company we were chatting about earlier on the thread, EO.  I know one of the directors, but he never gave me the nod about this takeover malarkey.  Gutted.

The little people only get let in during the mania phase. That's the time the smart money having made it's profit is coming out. Somebody has to pay off the smart ones and suckers will do as well as anybody.

I say smart when in truth they aren't necessarily. Many of them are just sociopaths using inside info who will turn their granny over for a few bob. If you knew a horse's leg was going to drop off you wouldn't need to be smart to lay it. Just not to get caught.