Have you seen UKIP's latest poster?

Factually correct unlike the empty purse of the pensioner poster

Nigel said this morning that "Breaking Point" was the first of six posters. Has anyone seen the others? I'm all for free speech and hope they are rolled out to the public.

Can't wait to see the other five. They are almost certain to go down well with the undecideds who are wasting their time wrestling with the economic aspect.

I really don't get what all the fuss is about ...



Fact is, a vessel can only hold so much before it overflows.

Is the poster of people at the EU border trying to get in?

has the EU done a deal with Turkey to send some of these people back who do not qualify because there is a limit to how many refugees the EU countries are willing to take?

I like the comparison photo campaign poster from the 30s. Side by side an uncanny likeness. How prophetic Niges teacher called him a Nazi all those years back.

NF should print a poster with the words outside the EU Parliament:


At the entrance to the Visitors Centre of the European Parliament, there is a plaque with these words:

    “National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times….The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.”   

The Telegraph from April continues:

The destruction of national sovereignty is the ideological driving force behind the Brussels oligarchs as they plot to build their federal superstate. 

That explains why they are so obsessed with free movement, mass immigration and cultural diversity. Those are all instruments for smashing traditional nationhood and creating a new common European citizenship. As the EU’s rulers know only too well, a country without any borders or identity is not a country at all.

Have you seen the other five posters, Burton Brewers?

Are they being printed in Dover ex gratis I wonder?

What is the plan for them? Anyone from UKIP able to shed light on when the other five posters are getting unveiled?

I could understand the uproar of the poster if people were out there helping the people queuing up to enter the EU. If they were taking the people into their homes and feeding them. Do people that are complaining at the poster think everyone that comes to the EU borders should be let in?

What is the argument here? Why is it similar to the 1930s?

I'm all for free speech, Insidertrader. Let them get their posters out.

Well, all I can say is that one needs a check-up from the neck-up not to realise how open borders in a rich country equates to unlimited migration from poor countries.

Off to see my shrink

Jun 20, 2016 -- 5:59AM, InsiderTrader wrote:

I could understand the uproar of the poster if people were out there helping the people queuing up to enter the EU. If they were taking the people into their homes and feeding them. Do people that are complaining at the poster think everyone that comes to the EU borders should be let in?What is the argument here? Why is it similar to the 1930s?

There is no argument.

They've seen something on social media that says it's offensive so post it up here without knowing anything about it. We then got shrieks and abuse when challenged.

They are not quite sure why it is offensive but they insist that it is.
Handwringing at every opportunity because they can't quite nail Farage down, so they twist their own interpretation of the rhetoric and scream 'racist'.

It's funny because the Easter Europeans i know admit that they are collectively far more racist than Farage. They don't have much experience of the melting pot back home in Poland or Latvia.

The same picture was on the front page of the Guardian back in 2015. Not a word said. Hypocrites all of them

It's a long list of hypocrisies for these luvvies TMB.
They can't help themselves.

Trying to frighten pensioners with posters of empty purses. How low can you go. They are beneath contempt

Farage poster factual and even the Guardian printed it in there rag of a paper. Empty purse poster nothing short of a disgrace

What about this ruddy picture then?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-18/first-brexit-poll-since-jo-cox-killing-shows-remain-in-lead

Jun 20, 2016 -- 4:19PM, Try My Best wrote:

Farage poster factual and even the Guardian printed it in there rag of a paper. Empty purse poster nothing short of a disgrace

In what way was the poster with the refugees factual? The number of people applying for asylum, and the number of syrians being resettled in a UK resettlement programme, is miniscule.

The people with refugee status living in Germany and other EU member states don't get to just travel to and enter the UK either.

So tell me - what is the poster's factual message towards the UK's population? How do Syrian refugees that can not travel to the UK matter?

God how disgusting is that.

to loddy

You must be mad if you think that the resettlement programme of 20,000 Syrian refugees over the next 5 years is going to be the tip of the iceberg.

How so?

also, that's a purely UK resettlement programme. How is it relevant to the EU?

and since it's direct resettlement from Syria, how are refugees at the border of Slovenia relevant to it?

You know there are passport controls at Eurotunnel. You know there are passports control on ferries. You know there are passport controls at airports. You know the EU does not have the means or will to force any member states to take in refugees against their will. You know that the refugee travel document does not allow visa-free travel into the UK.

So I'll ask again: How is a large queue of Syrian refugees at the slovenian border factual and relevant to the UK's population?

The poster reads the EU has failed us all. Over a million migrants and refugees have reached the EU with all the pressures that entails. Previous year 280,000. This has happened and is factual. European interior ministers trying to get Romania Slovakia and the Czech Republic to take quota's and have been told to bugger off and the EU is supposed to be a harmonious place. It stands to reason that these people will have to go somewhere and as we are a cash cow for Brussels I have no doubt that they will end up here if we vote to remain. On top of this our membership fees will increase and the taxpayer will foot the bill for mass migration into the European zone as most of our fellow European countries are piss poor and have no money left. Once these refugees are naturalised and given the prize of an EU passport in the years ahead and our great leaders have totally caved in to European rule we will no doubt see plenty more of our refugee friends in the forthcoming years.

GEORGE Osborne was last night attacked on live TV for claiming Brexit would hit pensioners as he reluctantly admitted their income would actually be protected.
Presenter Andrew Neil told the Chancellor he should be ‘ashamed’ of a pro-EU advert showing an elderly woman holding an empty purse.
Last month, Mr Osborne had prompted controversy by claiming that quitting the EU would trigger higher inflation, leaving pensioners losing as much as £32,000.
In last night’s BBC interview, he continued to insist the elderly had ‘a lot to be scared about if we leave the EU’.
However, under heavy pressure from Mr Neil, he conceded pensioners would benefit from a ‘triple lock’ on their incomes.
This Government measure is enshrined in law and means the State pension will always rise by inflation or the rate of earnings or 2.5 per cent. Even if prices spike, their income will never rise by less than inflation.
During their fraught 30-minute encounter, Mr Neil pointed to the empty purse poster released by the Osborne-backed Britain Stronger in Europe group. He then told the Chancellor: ‘You’ve been scaring pensioners. You should be ashamed of yourself.’

You're making a number of wrong assumptions.

If the UK doesn't want to take in refugees, it doesn't have to. The UK has always blocked an EU-wide refugee programme (hence making its own that you mentioned earlier). The UK is not in the voluntary "coalition of the willing", countries willing to take in refugees from the italian and greek hotspots, and it will not be.

The housing costs of refugees are not paid from the EU budget either.

Regarding the naturalisation: I don't see how people that have lived in a European country for a number of years (I think 6-8 is the minimum requirement), have proven their language skills, have proven that they work and can feed themselves and have proven that they are law abiding people during that time should be seen as something negative.

edy, if costs of refugees are not paid for by EU budget how does EU allow free movement?


That aspect is unreconcilable IMO.

Furthermore, if EU allows free movement why is there not a EU budget for social security???  Why is their not a budget for conception and so forth???

Any one with have a brain can see to beat the system have kids and move to the place where the most money is disrupting the social fabric.

So those in eastern Europe are playing the game well, If Britain want to stay in Europe they are going to have to produce more kids at a growing rate or leave to survive!!

and since they need to already have a job to become citizen in e.g Germany, I'd put the chances of them going to the UK in desperate search of another one the moment they get a German passport rather low. Let's face it, the weather ain't making anyone come.

edy, this is another aspect that is not reconcilable.

How can someone get citizenship by having a job???

In regards to markets citizenship is worth more than a job. SO people will come, get a job, then get citizenship.

Thats a no brainer because getting citizenship for a job is overvaluing the job and not representing market value of the citizenship!!!

The [point for me about the migrant crisis is the way the EU totally failed at dealing with it in any shape or form, and are now getting bent over a barrel by the Turks.

That is not a world leader. It is a complete fooking shambles of an organisation.

Jun 20, 2016 -- 7:53PM, Wildone wrote:

edy, if costs of refugees are not paid for by EU budget how does EU allow free movement?That aspect is unreconcilable IMO.Furthermore, if EU allows free movement why is there not a EU budget for social security???  Why is their not a budget for conception and so forth???Any one with have a brain can see to beat the system have kids and move to the place where the most money is disrupting the social fabric. So those in eastern Europe are playing the game well, If Britain want to stay in Europe they are going to have to produce more kids at a growing rate or leave to survive!!

I don't understand your first question. Please elaborate.

There is no common social security system and so on because of singular national interests. You know, local governments hate giving away authority.

Your point on children is nonsense and inflamatory. It was also only recently ruled that the UK can deny child benefits to people that don't work.

How can someone get citizenship by having a job???

That's one of the requirements. All those things I listed need to be fullfilled, i.e have been in the country for a long time AND job AND law-abiding AND language test amongst some other smaller requirements. You can't just be there for a week, get a job and apply for citizenship.

absolutely, shab, I fully agree there. The EU has mostly failed in the refugee crisis because a lot of member states sadly fell back into national egoisms and the EU doesn't have the power and authority, contrary to the tyranny that it is often accused of, to effectively and quickly handle something like the refugee crisis if members can't agree.

Edy what I am saying is the costs of citizenship are not borne by the salary of a job!!

So how can citizenship be attached to a job and a set of tests???


Furthermore how does being a citizen give anyone the right to be responsible for having a child?? What is inflammatory about that???

No one has the right to be responsible for a child??? It is not a right, it is a duty!!! 

This is where EU has misplaced values regarding human reality. A person is not entitled to benefits because they have a job!!! A person is entitled to benefits because the society is sustainable. If the society is not sustainable then people move and people do not have kids except for people not willing to assume duties for having kids!!

The reasoning behind the job requirement is that the nationalising country wants some proof that the person can, and is willing, to provide for itself.

himself

What would be your requirements to gain citizenship?

Edy, having a job has nothing to do with a person being able to provide for themselves.

Whether a person can provide for themselves depends on the assets they have not a job they do!!!

This is how society is breaking down and people are flooding Britian and Europe.

Decsion makers are misplacing value on various rights assets and obligations between different sets of societies

That is correct. By job I meant not being on welfare/benefits.

Edy what does citizenship mean to u and what do you anticipate to get from it?

We were talking about refugees. Most of those people will not be on welfare due to a job, not because they have a decent amount of money around.

Jun 20, 2016 -- 8:24PM, Wildone wrote:

Edy what does citizenship mean to u and what do you anticipate to get from it?

Free movement in the EU and mostly visa-free travel.

You?

Edy, have you not heard of the working class poor??

What makes you think a job has anything to with some looking to have benefits???

If people from outside where coming to Britain to get jobs that are not there why would they come?

edu people can freely move throughout the world with a passport, what has that got to do with citizenship?

Certain passports, especially ones from EU countries, give you access to more travel destinations without the need for a visa.

So yes, that's very much an advantage of being a citizen of an EU country, something I anticipate to get from it.

Jun 20, 2016 -- 8:27PM, Wildone wrote:

Edy, have you not heard of the working class poor??What makes you think a job has anything to with some looking to have benefits???If people from outside where coming to Britain to get jobs that are not there why would they come?

What? I said that in some countries, like in Germany where a lot of refugees are, a requirement is to not be on welfare. For the vast majority of them that will be achieved through having a job.

https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php

for reference on how "powerful" specific passports are

So Edy if someone loses their  job, they lose their citizenship right??

Otherwise how does the job for citizenship reconcile??


So if one in 5 families not with one person working in USA, they are not citizens, is that right??

jesus, mate....

It was about becoming a citizen, at the time of the application, while your application is running

and that too is restricted. If you can prove that it wasn't your fault it's not a hindrance

edy, I am not trying to piss you off.

I am just saying people will come to Britain whether they think they will get a job or not just to get the social benefits paid for by current taxpayers and taxpayers in the past meaning the burden is shifted forward through debt.

This means Britain cannot remain in the EU and be sustainable, it will perish as a society as it has been known of in the past.

This is why British society has transformed and why British society gets far tougher in future years as scarce resources are used up

Mate, we were talking about refugees (living in continental europe), the naturalisation of them and them potentially coming to the UK. How they have to proof they can provide for themselves to become citizens (and with it gain the right to enter the UK)

Now please explain to me why a refugee living in Germany, having proven he's able to provide for himself, is going to the UK to apply for benefits.

Also, you'll find that people can't just stay on benefits and the EU very much allows throwing people out if they assume benefit fraud

Edy, why do you think I am talking about refugees??

I am talking about anybody, who thinks they can get a social advantage , leg up, from locational shift by moving to Britain.

The point is the benefits socially you receive in Britain do not come for free.

Like the pyramids of Giza was paid for by slaves nothing in life comes for free and some of these people closer to the ground understand these realities all too well while others in power positions seem to thing they earned the right to currently make the decisions they do!!!!

Edy, how are these people going to be thrown out??

Who is paying for the police force???

I am thinking you were talking about refugees because the thread is about a poster of refugees and you budded into the middle of a conversation about them? Fair enough of me to assume that, isn't it?

The pyramids were actually built by workers btw. The slaves thing is a myth

You got it wrong either way. You can not do a leg up and just stay on benefits.

How familiar are you even with British and European social security and the realities of it? Given that you are an Australian. I don't know **** about the situation at the arse end of the world.

Do you regularly visit the UK? Do you just read Daily Mail?