source

A mob assembled outside the Canons Gait pub in Edinburgh's Royal Mile while Mr Farage was inside.

Witnesses said the crowd, which had been organised via social networking sites, shouted "You know as much about Scotland as you do about landing a plane",and told the politician to "go home."

Police had to escort Mr Farage from the pub for his own safety, and as he was driven away in a police van the crowd reportedly chanted "scum, scum, scum".

A mob gathered outside the Edinburgh pub which Nigel Farage was visiting - Twitter/@severincarrell

Mr Farage visited Edinburgh as part of a plan to build on electoral gains in England and start winning in Scotland.

The party, which wants Britain to leave the European Union, has no representation north of the border and polled just 0.91% of the total vote across the regions in the last Holyrood election in 2011.

Earlier this week Mr Farage, a member of the European Parliament, said: "We are growing in Scotland and have every intention of winning seats both at Holyrood and in next year's

European elections north of the border. A fantasy? Not in the slightest."

The party plans to make a start by contesting the Aberdeen Donside seat at Holyrood, made vacant by the death of SNP MSP Brian Adam last month.

Wow, doesn't sound like a popular guy.

He isn't.

Hes a pure, utter, vile scumbag who deserves many horrible things to happen to him.

Not surprised Edinburgh didn't take any of his gak.

Then again, same can be said for Labour, the Tories, Lib Dems and the Greens in general.

A lot of people in my part of the country feel he is some sort of messiah. These are the sort of people willing to stand up and claim "they took our jobs"

Personal my understanding of how leaving Europe will effect the UK and indeed the rest of Europe is not developed enough for me to form any opinion other than "better the devil you know"

UKIP are basically a one policy party though and anyone that wishes to be represented by a one policy party is a fool. That said I welcome the departure from the three party two party system, I just wish our local and indeed national media would give more time to some smaller parties and independent representatives that don't rely on sensationalist sound bites

 Bangbangboom wrote:
A lot of people in my part of the country feel he is some sort of messiah. These are the sort of people willing to stand up and claim "they took our jobs"

Personal my understanding of how leaving Europe will effect the UK and indeed the rest of Europe is not developed enough for me to form any opinion other than "better the devil you know"

UKIP are basically a one policy party though and anyone that wishes to be represented by a one policy party is a fool. That said I welcome the departure from the three party two party system, I just wish our local and indeed national media would give more time to some smaller parties and independent representatives that don't rely on sensationalist sound bites

I totally agree, To be honest I'm surpised Ron Paul was given any airtime whatso ever during the 2012 presidential race.
It doesn't help that the two parties in our 2 party system are polar-opposites of each other.

Well played the Scots, hopefully he'll start seeing a bit more of this. Him and his party are so arrogant about gaining 6% of the electorate and they think they speak for the people. Well I've met some of the people who they speak for and calling them people is generous, racist scum would be more appropriate.

Heh. I wonder how he's going to spin this for the cameras...

The thread title should have read Nigel Farage, trapped in a woman's body.

To be honest, this should happen to any of the main parties who come north.

UKIP is a joke... it is the party that wants to build more private schools, increase military spending, build more prisons and make bigger cuts than the conservative made.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
To be honest, this should happen to any of the main parties who come north.

No, it absolutely should not. This was an anti-racist demonstration, not an anti-English one. I don't think these protesters would be too happy picking on someone because of which country they are from.

The name 'Radical Independence Campaign' should say rather a lot. But some people are so tied up with PC dogmas they cant see beyond the witchhunt.

Farage is concerned about unchecked immigration, so he must be a 'racist' then.

 Orlanth wrote:
The name 'Radical Independence Campaign' should say rather a lot. But some people are so tied up with PC dogmas they cant see beyond the witchhunt.

Farage is concerned about unchecked immigration, so he must be a 'racist' then.

Sorry are we talking about the chap who once said "we will never win the n***** vote, the n** n**s will never vote for us", who called Belgium a non country, who accused Romanians of being criminals based solely on their country of birth, who has created ties within the EU Parliament with other far right organisations, some of whom actually support Anders Brevik. Yes, he is very much a racist.

 dæl wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
The name 'Radical Independence Campaign' should say rather a lot. But some people are so tied up with PC dogmas they cant see beyond the witchhunt.

Farage is concerned about unchecked immigration, so he must be a 'racist' then.

Sorry are we talking about the chap who once said "we will never win the n***** vote, the n** n**s will never vote for us", who called Belgium a non country, who accused Romanians of being criminals based solely on their country of birth, who has created ties within the EU Parliament with other far right organisations, some of whom actually support Anders Brevik. Yes, he is very much a racist.

Evidence for this please.

 Orlanth wrote:

 dæl wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
The name 'Radical Independence Campaign' should say rather a lot. But some people are so tied up with PC dogmas they cant see beyond the witchhunt.

Farage is concerned about unchecked immigration, so he must be a 'racist' then.

Sorry are we talking about the chap who once said "we will never win the n***** vote, the n** n**s will never vote for us", who called Belgium a non country, who accused Romanians of being criminals based solely on their country of birth, who has created ties within the EU Parliament with other far right organisations, some of whom actually support Anders Brevik. Yes, he is very much a racist.

Evidence for this please.

Not a problem.
You have the n word comment here
Calling Belgium a non country here
Romanians being criminals here
Being a president no less of the EFD, who have members who supported Anders Brevik, and recently made quite offensive comments regarding Italy's first black minister here

Satisfied?

 dæl wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 dæl wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
The name 'Radical Independence Campaign' should say rather a lot. But some people are so tied up with PC dogmas they cant see beyond the witchhunt.

Farage is concerned about unchecked immigration, so he must be a 'racist' then.

Sorry are we talking about the chap who once said "we will never win the n***** vote, the n** n**s will never vote for us", who called Belgium a non country, who accused Romanians of being criminals based solely on their country of birth, who has created ties within the EU Parliament with other far right organisations, some of whom actually support Anders Brevik. Yes, he is very much a racist.

Evidence for this please.

Not a problem.
You have the n word comment here
Calling Belgium a non country here
Romanians being criminals here
Being a president no less of the EFD, who have members who supported Anders Brevik, and recently made quite offensive comments regarding Italy's first black minister here

Satisfied?

Not at all.

You have the n word comment here
The alleged racist comments are accusations by Dr Alan Sked, are not backed up by any other testimony and can and should be written off as sour grapes as he was a former leader of UKIP. However these accusations are quoted as irrefutable truth by the Guardian and by Richard Corbett MEP.

Calling Belgium a non country here
If you watch this its about how Herman Van Rompuy, who was appointed President of the European Council, and was thus unaccountable.

Romanians being criminals here
You have twisted this. Farage is concerned about the large number of criminals from Romania coming to the UK, not saying all Romanians are criminals.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/380512/How-Romanian-criminals-terrorise-our-streets
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9896121/Up-to-one-in-three-Romanians-arrested-figures-show.html
http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_03_01/Romanians-are-the-second-most-arrested-of-all-foreigners-in-London/
Farage has reason to be concerned, and it is reasonable that he express those concerns.

Being a president no less of the EFD, who have members who supported Anders Brevik, and recently made quite offensive comments regarding Italy's first black minister here
Hold on you are accusing Farage of wrongdoing by being as member of this organisation http://www.efdgroup.eu/ . A group of parties, and Farage is not a member of the party to which the individual concerned belongs. That is beyond thin.

Is it bad that I kept hearing "Nigel" and the first thing that popped to mind is Nigel Thornberry?

This is hardly a popular outcry. A group of political activists all linked via twitter decided to mob him. That can happen to anyone.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dæl wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
To be honest, this should happen to any of the main parties who come north.

No, it absolutely should not. This was an anti-racist demonstration, not an anti-English one. I don't think these protesters would be too happy picking on someone because of which country they are from.

Nigel Farage is not Nick Griffin. Seeing extremists and, let's be honest, usually hippie weirdos, harassing him in the street, will only do his publicity good.

 Orlanth wrote:

You have the n word comment here
The alleged racist comments are accusations by Dr Alan Sked, are not backed up by any other testimony and can and should be written off as sour grapes as he was a former leader of UKIP. However these accusations are quoted as irrefutable truth by the Guardian and by Richard Corbett MEP.

Why has Farage not made any claim of libel? It would certainly be good for his image as a non racist.
How is it made to appear as irreutable truth? It is quoted. The exact wording makes very clear it is talking about a claim.

Calling Belgium a non country here
If you watch this its about how Herman Van Rompuy, who was appointed President of the European Council, and was thus unaccountable.

So its ok to make a racist remark as long as its a subject you feel strongly about?

Romanians being criminals here
You have twisted this. Farage is concerned about the large number of criminals from Romania coming to the UK, not saying all Romanians are criminals.
Farage has reason to be concerned, and it is reasonable that he express those concerns.

His exact quote was

"We are not just talking about pressure on services from immigration but also, and I have to say it, the crime associated with Romanians."

Now, there is a higher number of black people in prison than white. Would it be ok for a Home Secretary to say they wanted to deal with "crime associated with black people"?

Being a president no less of the EFD, who have members who supported Anders Brevik, and recently made quite offensive comments regarding Italy's first black minister here
Hold on you are accusing Farage of wrongdoing by being as member of this organisation http://www.efdgroup.eu/ . A group of parties, and Farage is not a member of the party to which the individual concerned belongs. That is beyond thin.

It is far from beyond thin. I said he had ties in the EU Parliament with some unsavoury characters, he absolutely does. EFD are an organisation made up of far right political parties from various countries and some of those parties are pretty extreme. Is it not relevant that Farage alines himself with Nazis?

 dæl wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

You have the n word comment here
The alleged racist comments are accusations by Dr Alan Sked, are not backed up by any other testimony and can and should be written off as sour grapes as he was a former leader of UKIP. However these accusations are quoted as irrefutable truth by the Guardian and by Richard Corbett MEP.

Why has Farage not made any claim of libel? It would certainly be good for his image as a non racist.
How is it made to appear as irreutable truth? It is quoted. The exact wording makes very clear it is talking about a claim.

Why would he need to? Alan Sked is a blast from the past, a disgruntled former party leader who made a personal comment once about Farage. The fact that the Guardian and others keep on quoting it is due to their clutching at straws. After all your link is from 2005, the one I saw is 2004. This is a rumour that runs and runs and if we remember was running in the Blair years, when truth was hard to come by and spin was accentuated especially with regards to half baked accusations of right wing extremism.
The fact that this tired and quote, that is little more than hearsay is what we hear and not fresh topical accusations of racism, let alone transcripts is itself indicative.

 dæl wrote:

Calling Belgium a non country here
If you watch this its about how Herman Van Rompuy, who was appointed President of the European Council, and was thus unaccountable.

So its ok to make a racist remark as long as its a subject you feel strongly about?

It was an exasperated remark not a racist one. Do you have any evidence that Farage discriminates against Belgians? Me neither.

 dæl wrote:

Romanians being criminals here
You have twisted this. Farage is concerned about the large number of criminals from Romania coming to the UK, not saying all Romanians are criminals.
Farage has reason to be concerned, and it is reasonable that he express those concerns.

His exact quote was

"We are not just talking about pressure on services from immigration but also, and I have to say it, the crime associated with Romanians."

Now, there is a higher number of black people in prison than white. Would it be ok for a Home Secretary to say they wanted to deal with "crime associated with black people"?

Two points raised here. The first is the statistical evidence of high rates of crime related to Romanians, which is a fair comment to make and be concerned about.
second it would be appropriate for the Home Secretary, or any other poltician to deal with "crime associated with black people". In fact they frequently do.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3637720/It-is-time-to-be-honest-about-black-crime.html
the trick is how it is done. For example many urban projects with investment targeted at ethnic groups have 'crime reduction' as a purpose. What is this implying here? Ethnic crime is an issue and dealing with the issue is not automatically synomymous with bigotry. The link above indicates this, action is being taken, frequently, but the key is avoiding half baked accusations from those who wish to be offended or point fingers and scream "racist".

 dæl wrote:

Being a president no less of the EFD, who have members who supported Anders Brevik, and recently made quite offensive comments regarding Italy's first black minister here
Hold on you are accusing Farage of wrongdoing by being as member of this organisation http://www.efdgroup.eu/ . A group of parties, and Farage is not a member of the party to which the individual concerned belongs. That is beyond thin.

It is far from beyond thin. I said he had ties in the EU Parliament with some unsavoury characters, he absolutely does. EFD are an organisation made up of far right political parties from various countries and some of those parties are pretty extreme. Is it not relevant that Farage alines himself with Nazis?

It's exceptionally thin and does you no credit.
For a start read this: http://news.sky.com/story/915384/mp-apologises-after-tweet-sparks-race-row - Link shown for comparative purposes.
An article based on racist comments by Diana Abbot. Would you endorse crowds mocking her for her 'racism'? I hope not. Would you condemn the entire Labour party as white hating racists on the backs of her comment? I hope not. Would you assume she is permanently tarnished as a complete bigot, or just someone who made a gaffe. I would suggest you steer towards the latter.
However would you treat Farage with the same reason? Sadly not, because you dont want to. Its easier not to. I respect Farage because he points out the elephant in the room, that takes balls, not necessarily hatred. The hatred is something you assume because it releases you from having to counter his ideology with rational thought if you can hand wave and dismiss it as extremist and beneath response.

Finally why do you insist on the idea that 'Farage aligns himself with Nazis'. Which of these parties are Nazis? I will even let you get away with claiming Neo-nazis as the same as Nazis, even though that isn't what you said.
Accusing any party of Naziism is very low below the belt. For a start Naziism is illegal in most of Europe
Defend or withdraw your frankly hysterical accusation please. Your gross hypocrisy is showing through.

 Orlanth wrote:

Why would he need to? Alan Sked is a blast from the past, a disgruntled former party leader who made a personal comment once about Farage. The fact that the Guardian and others keep on quoting it is due to their clutching at straws. After all your link is from 2005, the one I saw is 2004. This is a rumour that runs and runs and if we remember was running in the Blair years, when truth was hard to come by and spin was accentuated especially with regards to half baked accusations of right wing extremism.
The fact that this tired and quote, that is little more than hearsay is what we hear and not fresh topical accusations of racism, let alone transcripts is itself indicative.

Why would it be a good idea to contest a claim which is so politically damaging?

It was an exasperated remark not a racist one. Do you have any evidence that Farage discriminates against Belgians? Me neither.

Since when were exasperation and racism mutually exclusive? If his own words aren't evidence enough of his disrespect for the people of another nation then I don't know what else would be.

Two points raised here. The first is the statistical evidence of high rates of crime related to Romanians, which is a fair comment to make and be concerned about.
second it would be appropriate for the Home Secretary, or any other poltician to deal with "crime associated with black people". In fact they frequently do.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3637720/It-is-time-to-be-honest-about-black-crime.html
the trick is how it is done. For example many urban projects with investment targeted at ethnic groups have 'crime reduction' as a purpose. What is this implying here? Ethnic crime is an issue and dealing with the issue is not automatically synomymous with bigotry. The link above indicates this, action is being taken, frequently, but the key is avoiding half baked accusations from those who wish to be offended or point fingers and scream "racist".

That article is a joke. It is a gross misrepresentation of gang crime as black crime. Blair was stupid enough to talk about black crime and faced a backlash for doing so. You cannot ascribe criminality to a race, or target a race under legislation, that is racist.

For a start read this: http://news.sky.com/story/915384/mp-apologises-after-tweet-sparks-race-row - Link shown for comparative purposes.
An article based on racist comments by Diana Abbot. Would you endorse crowds mocking her for her 'racism'? I hope not. Would you condemn the entire Labour party as white hating racists on the backs of her comment? I hope not. Would you assume she is permanently tarnished as a complete bigot, or just someone who made a gaffe. I would suggest you steer towards the latter.

That's not even in the same ball park as the comments by the Italian ministers, how are they comparable? That's not to say she wasn't racist, she was and is rightly judged on it, especially by the left who have no respect for her any more. But to compare it to those comments about Italy's first black minister?

However would you treat Farage with the same reason? Sadly not, because you dont want to. Its easier not to. I respect Farage because he points out the elephant in the room, that takes balls, not necessarily hatred. The hatred is something you assume because it releases you from having to counter his ideology with rational thought if you can hand wave and dismiss it as extremist and beneath response.

It far easier to take his policies apart, they are uncosted, badly thought out, and would cause large amounts of damage to this country both economically and socially. They are a single issue party and have no long term plan for the country after that issue is resolved.

Finally why do you insist on the idea that 'Farage aligns himself with Nazis'. Which of these parties are Nazis? I will even let you get away with claiming Neo-nazis as the same as Nazis, even though that isn't what you said.
Accusing any party of Naziism is very low below the belt. For a start Naziism is illegal in most of Europe
Defend or withdraw your frankly hysterical accusation please. Your gross hypocrisy is showing through.

Did you read those articles? If those views aren't fascist then I don't know what is. Neither have been suspended for making such statements.

Defend or withdraw you accusation that I am a hypocrite. What have I said which is hypocritical?

 dæl wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
To be honest, this should happen to any of the main parties who come north.

No, it absolutely should not. This was an anti-racist demonstration, not an anti-English one. I don't think these protesters would be too happy picking on someone because of which country they are from.

It should have been an anti-english one as well.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
It should have been an anti-english one as well.

Why? What have the English ever done to you, other than pay for your socialist policies?

For doing the same thing Farage is doing. Coming North and thinking like they know enough about us to be voted in here.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
For doing the same thing Farage is doing. Coming North and thinking like they know enough about us to be voted in here.

The Tories I could understand, but Labour have history in Scotland. Do you think that true scotsmen should be forced to vote SNP regardless of whether they agree with their policies or not?

SNP or any other other party which puts policies for Scotland first.

Labour didn't do that so they aren't that well liked.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
SNP or any other other party which puts policies for Scotland first.

Labour didn't do that so they aren't that well liked.

So giving you devolution wasn't in Scotland's interests?

Not enough really, since Westminster still has some say in Scottish affairs.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Not enough really, since Westminster still has some say in Scottish affairs.

Nowhere near the say Scottish MPs have on English affairs. Westminster will always have a say as long as there is the union, we use the same currency so there has to be certain decision that have to be taken as the whole UK.

Well I have no opinion on this, but I would like to know what ANY ONE could have against Belgium as a nation. They have awesome food, and FN makes some of the finest firearms in the world.

I think the flash mob played right into Nigel's hands.

Trapping him in a pub, crickey, the police were proably called by the landlord to stop him drinking the place dry.

When the three main parties in the UK's government keep breaking their promises and are still neck deep in sleeze and jobs for the boys and girls then people are going to look for a credible alternative. The thing I find terribly amusing is watching Mr Farage on things like question time when the main parties representatives come across as very shallow, and attack the person (Mr Farage) rather than his arguments.

Mr Farage is not really my cup of tea. But them I have absolutely nothing in common with the rest of the leaders, can not identify with my local MP - I know who he is but I disagree with him being let to keep a few thousand he overclaimed in rent as he hadn't claimed any food allowance during the expenses scandal (I have to buy my own food at work!) - and so I think actually, out of the lot of them he's probably the one I would want to be stuck in a lift with (steady there now) and once he gets the funds to route out and BNP and silly sods that have crept into UKIP they will be very credible.

Slight aside
The funiest question time I have everwatched watched was with Nick Griffin (I certainly don't agree with any of his politics) but he is a very clever man. He presented clear concise arguments and responses to the questions asked. The funny bit was the conservative Baroness Warsi spending most of her time attacking him personally (rather than his politics) and interupting and generally being rude. All whilst appearing to hold very little opinions of her own. Has she got the heave ho yet? Has anyone voted for her yet?

 dæl wrote:

Why would it be a good idea to contest a claim which is so politically damaging?

It isnt polticially damaging. The Guardian printed it then, smearers in New Labour made pamphlets about it also, but Farage outlived the criticism. You and others like you are keeping it 'alive'. It looks like a simple case of trolling then. Skeds comments are after all a decade old.

 dæl wrote:

Since when were exasperation and racism mutually exclusive? If his own words aren't evidence enough of his disrespect for the people of another nation then I don't know what else would be.

Words in isolation are not. Which is why Diane Abbot is still an MP etc. Farage was insensed at an unelected and unaccountable President of Europe who by the way earns more in that position than Obama does.

 dæl wrote:

That article is a joke. It is a gross misrepresentation of gang crime as black crime. Blair was stupid enough to talk about black crime and faced a backlash for doing so. You cannot ascribe criminality to a race, or target a race under legislation, that is racist.

Why prove my point. Crime linked to ethnicity is very real, sweeping it under the carpet is dangerous to society. Just two days ago there were articles about Asian paedophile gangs targeting girls. Its swept under the carpet because it involves Asians and this the accusations are possibly "racist". However its acceptable to talk of "instituational racism" because some white in authority in the police are allegedly racist.
So it is ok to endorse ascribing criminality to a race anyway, you apply it to alleged hate crime if the perpetrator is white. A lot of the PC nonsense lot do that. This is why thay/you howl "racism" at some but not others. The imbalance is plain to see.

 dæl wrote:

That's not even in the same ball park as the comments by the Italian ministers, how are they comparable? That's not to say she wasn't racist, she was and is rightly judged on it, especially by the left who have no respect for her any more. But to compare it to those comments about Italy's first black minister?

I am not comparing Diana Abbot to the Italian MEP, I am comparing her to Farage. The Italian MEP is of no consequence, he have no reasonable connection to Farage and thus Farage is clearly not responsible for his alleged commentaries being in a completely different party in a different country.
The relevant point you missed is that Farage is hounded though you have yet to indicate that he is racist. While New Labour contains "racists" but you don't hound them.

 dæl wrote:

It far easier to take his policies apart, they are uncosted, badly thought out, and would cause large amounts of damage to this country both economically and socially.

Why didnt youn try that track to begin with, bashing UKIP policies is more mature than trying to smear Farage.

 dæl wrote:

They are a single issue party and have no long term plan for the country after that issue is resolved.

I am not sure thats true, UKIP was ceertainly founded in an anti-Federalist note but has evolved since then. However its a common sentiment Farage needs to address.

Did you read those articles? If those views aren't fascist then I don't know what is. Neither have been suspended for making such statements.

Farage isn't a 'fascist' and its possible you actually don't know what fascism actually is. 'Fascist' is just a buzzword to you for anyone with right wing ideology with concerns over immigration. Fascism actually is something different.
Besides I am calling you out on your accusation of Farage being a 'Nazi', which is more specific and even worse.
Nazi is a term brought out to smear critics of multi-culturalism by left wing extremists, and is a common smear word amongst students like the scum who harassed Farage yesterday.

Defend or withdraw you accusation that I am a hypocrite. What have I said which is hypocritical?

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Not enough really, since Westminster still has some say in Scottish affairs.

I look forward so seeing if the north of England votes with you to turn the county of Scotland back into a country after several hundred years of united rule.

I look forward even more, should the vote be for yes, to seeing the rest of the UK using its far superior position to get the best deal for the people of the UK.

It will be interesting how long the revoultion takes to overthrow independance once the north sea deposits run out and there is no money left. Or even more entertainingly if they are not ceeded to scotland.

In relation to the topic - glad to see people are keeping things classy. Protest all you want, but there are limits to the kind of behaviour you can engage in.

 Jasper wrote:
I think the flash mob played right into Nigel's hands.

Not at all, this is the first in what will be common occurrences of dissent against UKIPs hateful agenda. It shows the fact that there are more who don't agree with UKIP than do.

When the three main parties in the UK's government keep breaking their promises and are still neck deep in sleeze and jobs for the boys and girls then people are going to look for a credible alternative. The thing I find terribly amusing is watching Mr Farage on things like question time when the main parties representatives come across as very shallow, and attack the person (Mr Farage) rather than his arguments.

What arguments? That Mercedes will still sell their cars here if we leave Europe? Except that depends on whether we get a free trade agreement, and have to still abide by EU legislation. Or, as is more likely, we will have to pay import taxes on the car, raising it's price by a sizeable percentage. Food prices will go through the roof if EU subsidies go. Lots of businesses will leave the country.

Other than Europe his policies are even less thought out. Get rid of national insurance? So where are you finding the massive amount of revenue you lost, how else are you paying for doubling the prison population.

Mr Farage is not really my cup of tea. But them I have absolutely nothing in common with the rest of the leaders, can not identify with my local MP - I know who he is but I disagree with him being let to keep a few thousand he overclaimed in rent as he hadn't claimed any food allowance during the expenses scandal (I have to buy my own food at work!) - and so I think actually, out of the lot of them he's probably the one I would want to be stuck in a lift with (steady there now) and once he gets the funds to route out and BNP and silly sods that have crept into UKIP they will be very credible.

Farage has all the cash he could want, he has his salary of 60k, plus claims 2 million a year in expenses.

Slight aside
The funiest question time I have everwatched watched was with Nick Griffin (I certainly don't agree with any of his politics) but he is a very clever man. He presented clear concise arguments and responses to the questions asked. The funny bit was the conservative Baroness Warsi spending most of her time attacking him personally (rather than his politics) and interupting and generally being rude. All whilst appearing to hold very little opinions of her own. Has she got the heave ho yet? Has anyone voted for her yet?

Sorry did you watch a different programme?
He squirmed under questioning about holocaust denial, trying to justify himself with a grin on his face.
He tried to argue that the Klu Klux Klan he supported was a non violent one.

 Jasper wrote:
I think the flash mob played right into Nigel's hands.

Farage tried engaging with one agitator in debate, and his words and attempt were recorded fairly by most newspapers. All he got in return were repeated chants of 'Nazi scum'. The press, even the Mirror, has been supportive of him.

 Jasper wrote:

Trapping him in a pub, crickey, the police were proably called by the landlord to stop him drinking the place dry.

Watch guys. If you want a cheap shot at Farage this is how its done.
Yes he did have a drinks problem, probalby still does.

 Jasper wrote:

When the three main parties in the UK's government keep breaking their promises and are still neck deep in sleeze and jobs for the boys and girls then people are going to look for a credible alternative.

It was hoped that the Conservatives would try and recover the UK from the damage done by New Labour, but are more interested in lining their own pockets. They want austerity, but are going the wrong way about it.
Farage is thus the last chance option for cleaning up parliament.

The thing I find terribly amusing is watching Mr Farage on things like question time when the main parties representatives come across as very shallow, and attack the person (Mr Farage) rather than his arguments.

 dæl wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
I think the flash mob played right into Nigel's hands.

Not at all, this is the first in what will be common occurrences of dissent against UKIPs hateful agenda. It shows the fact that there are more who don't agree with UKIP than do.

When the three main parties in the UK's government keep breaking their promises and are still neck deep in sleeze and jobs for the boys and girls then people are going to look for a credible alternative. The thing I find terribly amusing is watching Mr Farage on things like question time when the main parties representatives come across as very shallow, and attack the person (Mr Farage) rather than his arguments.

What arguments? That Mercedes will still sell their cars here if we leave Europe? Except that depends on whether we get a free trade agreement, and have to still abide by EU legislation. Or, as is more likely, we will have to pay import taxes on the car, raising it's price by a sizeable percentage. Food prices will go through the roof if EU subsidies go. Lots of businesses will leave the country.

Mr Farage is not really my cup of tea. But them I have absolutely nothing in common with the rest of the leaders, can not identify with my local MP - I know who he is but I disagree with him being let to keep a few thousand he overclaimed in rent as he hadn't claimed any food allowance during the expenses scandal (I have to buy my own food at work!) - and so I think actually, out of the lot of them he's probably the one I would want to be stuck in a lift with (steady there now) and once he gets the funds to route out and BNP and silly sods that have crept into UKIP they will be very credible.

Farage has all the cash he could want, he has his salary of 60k, plus claims 2 million a year in expenses.

Slight aside
The funiest question time I have everwatched watched was with Nick Griffin (I certainly don't agree with any of his politics) but he is a very clever man. He presented clear concise arguments and responses to the questions asked. The funny bit was the conservative Baroness Warsi spending most of her time attacking him personally (rather than his politics) and interupting and generally being rude. All whilst appearing to hold very little opinions of her own. Has she got the heave ho yet? Has anyone voted for her yet?

Sorry did you watch a different programme?
He squirmed under questioning about holocaust denial, trying to justify himself with a grin on his face.
He tried to argue that the Klu Klux Klan he supported was a non violent one.

@ Dael,
( I would try to do the multi-quote thinge but only hash it up, so taking them one at a time)

I don't see why the UKIP adgenda is hateful. It seams relatively balanced. It has big holes in the spending comittments but then we currently have a 100 billion hole in the coalition comitment and 120 in the possible labour proposal. Controlling the boarder is not particulalry hateful, its sensible. Mr Farage is more attuned with Europe than most MPs, both the workings of the union, its follies and through the family he married into. You have to remember they are a relatively new party, slightly to the right than the current vanilla ones. Regarding the share of the vote UKIP has: Nobody voted for a ConLib coalition but we have one, nobody voted for the possible LabLib coalition Mr Clegg was reportedly trying to engineer, more people abstained from voting than voted for any of the main parties. Nobody voted for the current EU regime, although we have been promised several referedums which never happen. Nobody voted for our comissioners. Nobody voted for Baroness Ashdon (spelling?) or the EU President Mr Von Rumpy.

The latest question time appearance Mr Farage used the Met polices statistics into recent perceived crimewave carried out by organised gangs from a specific eastern european country and put forward a reasoanble argument as to why this may be occuring. Rather than offering a counter argument, or even agreeing his reaoning had any sense behind it the labour lady (forget who she was) on the show basically shrugged off the statistics and attacked Mr Farage. The same Mr Farage that had been to the country in question and discussed their inclusion in the EU as part of their part of the development to raise the population of the country out of poverty; but in a way to make their poorest more likely to want to remain with their country - nope still not hateful.

The proposed spending of UKIP is approx. 120billion unpriced, coincidentally the red tape burden on our economy from the EU. It'll never work that way, but then they will never form a single party government.
(I told you I would mess up the quote thing, here's one from Dael: )

"Other than Europe his policies are even less thought out. Get rid of national insurance? So where are you finding the massive amount of revenue you lost, how else are you paying for doubling the prison population."

When I was working in prison the average prisoner cost 36K a year to house not including the capital investment programme underway at the time. That is silly figure. Get them doing real porridge and this figure will collapse, I don't care if swindles, muggers and burglers share four to a cell. Incidentally I love the old plenum tower prisons because the wings really smell aweful. WIth reference to trade I was under the impression we are a net importer from Europe, if they want to shaft their economies further then they can chose to go away from free trade.

No the point was My current MP accidentally overclaimed but was let off; and did not volunteer to repay the overclaim. I don't mind an accidental overclaim but it is a matter of principal that he should have paid it back. Incidentally the same MPs expenxes have risen at twice the rate of inflation since he was elected as an MP, which is a little out of touch with me. It was not a comment about Mr Farage, he stands up for UK interests at the european level and deserves his wage.

Finally with the Mr Griffin thing. Of course he was going to be squirming the whole audience was out to get him. What I took from it though is:
He is clever and knows how to play the media - very polite on these occasions.
Most of the people on this ocassion out to get him were not, and found it difficult to argue his views as they hold very weak central ground ones of their own.
Again I don't agree with his politics but it would be much better to have a thoughtful person argue him under the table than just attack the person and give ground to the views he expressed. Kill off the arguments and policies don't attack the person; unless you just want to make a headline.

@Orlanth
I agree with your final sentiment. Too many people just accept that a mainly PC liberal media spoon feed them I find the American media more balanced.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Not enough really, since Westminster still has some say in Scottish affairs.

I look forward so seeing if the north of England votes with you to turn the county of Scotland back into a country after several hundred years of united rule.

I look forward even more, should the vote be for yes, to seeing the rest of the UK using its far superior position to get the best deal for the people of the UK.

It will be interesting how long the revoultion takes to overthrow independance once the north sea deposits run out and there is no money left. Or even more entertainingly if they are not ceeded to scotland.

May 9th poll

Independence 31
Remain in the union 59
Undecided 10

Among those certain to vote, 59% would vote 'No', up four points since February, while 31% would vote 'Yes', down three points. One in ten Scots are undecided, down a point.

Don't think it'll happen.

Euro collapse, when joining that was pretty key to Salmond's "policies" pretty much finished off any realistic chance of it happening anytime soon.



In Scottish Parliament voting intention, the SNP’s lead over Scottish Labour has narrowed to three points. Among those certain to vote, the SNP are on 39%, down four points since February, with Scottish Labour on 36%, up a point. The Scottish Conservatives saw the largest gain since February with an increase of three points to 16%, while the Scottish Liberal Democrats are on 8%, up a point.

Nicola Sturgeon has overtaken Alex Salmond as the most popular political leader in Scotland (49% of Scots are satisfied with her performance compared with 47% who are satisfied with Alex Salmond’s). The Deputy First Minister also has a net satisfaction rating (the proportion who are satisfied minus the proportion who are dissatisfied) of +14, although this is down three points since February. She is followed by Scottish Green Party leader Patrick Harvie, who has a net satisfaction rating of +11, and Scottish Labour Party leader Johann Lamont, who has a net satisfaction rating of +5. The long-term decline in the First Minister’s approval rating continues and is now +2, down five points since February, and down from a high of +35 in December 2011.


AS for the rascism, I'm sure farage isn't at all
he's always got on very well with our neighbours.

http://uk.politics.misc.narkive.com/0eAg9Y0D/ukrap-s-adulterous-farage-in-kinky-sex-with-slav

 Orlanth wrote:

Why prove my point. Crime linked to ethnicity is very real, sweeping it under the carpet is dangerous to society. Just two days ago there were articles about Asian paedophile gangs targeting girls. Its swept under the carpet because it involves Asians and this the accusations are possibly "racist". However its acceptable to talk of "instituational racism" because some white in authority in the police are allegedly racist.
So it is ok to endorse ascribing criminality to a race anyway, you apply it to alleged hate crime if the perpetrator is white. A lot of the PC nonsense lot do that. This is why thay/you howl "racism" at some but not others. The imbalance is plain to see.

So you are ok with legislation that only covers people of a certain race? That's really messed up.
What are you on about ascribing criminality to race for white people? A hate crime is a hate crime regardless who is involved, but we aren't talking about hate crimes, we are talking about treating one race differently before the law. That is racist.

Farage isn't a 'fascist' and its possible you actually don't know what fascism actually is. 'Fascist' is just a buzzword to you for anyone with right wing ideology with concerns over immigration. Fascism actually is something different.
Besides I am calling you out on your accusation of Farage being a 'Nazi', which is more specific and even worse.
Nazi is a term brought out to smear critics of multi-culturalism by left wing extremists, and is a common smear word amongst students like the scum who harassed Farage yesterday.

You could try actually reading my post, when did I say Farage was a Nazi, or a facist? I said he had ties to Nazis within the EU Parliament, something I have provided proof of.

Your hypocrisy is your bigotry of accusing Farage of being a bigot.
You don't base your opinions on Farage on logic, in fact you base only two points on Farage at all, the rest being about third parties Farage has no control over. One of those two being a third hand unrecorded quote that is not easily attributable to him and is frankly hearsay, the other being an exasperated outburst at a very dodgy, smug, unelected and unaccountable politician. The isn't enough to land a label of Fascist, let alone Nazi. Yet you make the label anyway...

my decision to dislike Farage is based on his scapegoating, casual racism, and ties with the extreme right. That's perfectly rational as reasoning to dislike and stand against a politician. He dislikes people because of what they are, I dislike him because of what he does. If you honestly can't see the difference then you have my pity. Also, stop thinking you know how I react to things, you don't know me. So stop making stuff up and then thinking you can call me a hypocrite because of how I acted in your fantasy.

... and not only do you advance the label unfairly at Farage you do so at his supporters. Calling them subhumans (bold text reference), which ironically is how Hitler preferred to see opponents. Also you openly endorse rent-a-mob array, a sign that not only do you disciminate horribly but are willing to endorse action based on your own bigotry. You proved that by posting the Radical Independence Campaign flyer as something positive.
Farage came to Edinburgh to meet the local people and he wasn't harrangued by local people but students and agitators from the extreme left. So this isn't a mass movement as you wish it portrayed, but a handful of sick fanatics who wish to silence a mainstream politician and isolate him from society, and that fact you want to see more of this type of action shows how low you can go.
For all your protestations of anti-fascism you are following the techniques and ideology of the Brown Shirts.

Yes racist skinhead scum are exactly that, scum. You think they chant a few slogans like the left do? Not at all, they are hooligans and thugs and have no place in politics.
You try and play this victim card of the left are silencing free speech, except they aren't, they are exercising their right to protest. How is anyone's free speech being compromised in any way? You obviously simply don't like it when people stand up for something you disagree with.

@ Dael,
There is plenty of legislation at the moment which specifies race which is silly unfair.

Positive descrimination springs to mind.
English Student being charge to study at Scottish universities.
The tax spend on the popultion being skewed towards scotland and wales; originally intended to bring the uk into a level playing field but now allowing free prescriptions and so on to be funded.

The only people he appear to dislike are the BNP, hence their exclusion from UKIP - this is probably illegal but go on UKIP. But ex BNP are free to joing other parties.

 Orlanth wrote:

Words in isolation are not. Which is why Diane Abbot is still an MP etc. Farage was insensed at an unelected and unaccountable President of Europe who by the way earns more in that position than Obama does.

Please, do stop this nonsense. The Europian President is not unelected. He is elected by the MEP's who are elected by us. It may not be a direct election, but then nither is the US election. The EU President gets aprox 300k euro, Obama USD 400k, approx 300euro. About the same, and Europ is about the same size as the US...

If your going to come up with arguments at least check the facts rather than spouting the same old lies.

 Orlanth wrote:

Why prove my point. Crime linked to ethnicity is very real, sweeping it under the carpet is dangerous to society. Just two days ago there were articles about Asian paedophile gangs targeting girls. Its swept under the carpet because it involves Asians and this the accusations are possibly "racist". However its acceptable to talk of "instituational racism" because some white in authority in the police are allegedly racist.
So it is ok to endorse ascribing criminality to a race anyway, you apply it to alleged hate crime if the perpetrator is white. A lot of the PC nonsense lot do that. This is why thay/you howl "racism" at some but not others. The imbalance is plain to see.

Again, what utter nonsense. I asume you are talking about operation Bullfinch? Please do show me how this is sweped under the carpet? I have seen reporting day after day. The crimes have nothing to do with there race.

Hate crimes have nothing to do with race. The only factor in labeling something a hate crime and investigating it as such is self identification of the victim. Nothing to do with race. The perpetrator being white has nothing at all to do with it being labled a hate crime.

Please show me a criminal link to ethnicity? There is non. There are higer rates of some crimes among some ethnic groups, but that has nothing to do with ethnicity and everthing to do wtih culture or social background. Take for example young black men. The high crime rates have nothing to do with being black and everything to do with social exclusion, low academic achevement and poverty. Labeling it as a race thing fails them, and all other poor, low achieving boys who end up in crime.

I'm sorry, but you are spouting racist nonsense. Your world view is clearly tainted by a feeling of persicution.

 Orlanth wrote:

Your hypocrisy is your bigotry of accusing Farage of being a bigot.
You don't base your opinions on Farage on logic, in fact you base only two points on Farage at all, the rest being about third parties Farage has no control over.

Farage IS a bigot. The third partys being his party members? People he DOSE have control over? That is the POINT in a party leader. Someone says something against the party line or puts the party in a bad light? You throw them out the party. Or people he has proven links to? He may have no control over what people say, but he dose have control over how he associates with.

 Orlanth wrote:

... and not only do you advance the label unfairly at Farage you do so at his supporters. Calling them subhumans (bold text reference), which ironically is how Hitler preferred to see opponents. Also you openly endorse rent-a-mob array, a sign that not only do you disciminate horribly but are willing to endorse action based on your own bigotry. You proved that by posting the Radical Independence Campaign flyer as something positive.
Farage came to Edinburgh to meet the local people and he wasn't harrangued by local people but students and agitators from the extreme left. So this isn't a mass movement as you wish it portrayed, but a handful of sick fanatics who wish to silence a mainstream politician and isolate him from society, and that fact you want to see more of this type of action shows how low you can go.
For all your protestations of anti-fascism you are following the techniques and ideology of the Brown Shirts.

So, you complain about people labaling Farage, but its ok for you to sling names about people who exercise there right to protest?

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

Words in isolation are not. Which is why Diane Abbot is still an MP etc. Farage was insensed at an unelected and unaccountable President of Europe who by the way earns more in that position than Obama does.

Please, do stop this nonsense. The Europian President is not unelected. He is elected by the MEP's who are elected by us. It may not be a direct election, but then nither is the US election. The EU President gets aprox 300k euro, Obama USD 400k, approx 300euro. About the same, and Europ is about the same size as the US...

If your going to come up with arguments at least check the facts rather than spouting the same old lies.

 Orlanth wrote:

Why prove my point. Crime linked to ethnicity is very real, sweeping it under the carpet is dangerous to society. Just two days ago there were articles about Asian paedophile gangs targeting girls. Its swept under the carpet because it involves Asians and this the accusations are possibly "racist". However its acceptable to talk of "instituational racism" because some white in authority in the police are allegedly racist.
So it is ok to endorse ascribing criminality to a race anyway, you apply it to alleged hate crime if the perpetrator is white. A lot of the PC nonsense lot do that. This is why thay/you howl "racism" at some but not others. The imbalance is plain to see.

Again, what utter nonsense. I asume you are talking about operation Bullfinch? Please do show me how this is sweped under the carpet? I have seen reporting day after day. The crimes have nothing to do with there race.

Hate crimes have nothing to do with race. The only factor in labeling something a hate crime and investigating it as such is self identification of the victim. Nothing to do with race. The perpetrator being white has nothing at all to do with it being labled a hate crime.

Please show me a criminal link to ethnicity? There is non. There are higer rates of some crimes among some ethnic groups, but that has nothing to do with ethnicity and everthing to do wtih culture or social background. Take for example young black men. The high crime rates have nothing to do with being black and everything to do with social exclusion, low academic achevement and poverty. Labeling it as a race thing fails them, and all other poor, low achieving boys who end up in crime.

I'm sorry, but you are spouting racist nonsense. Your world view is clearly tainted by a feeling of persicution.

 Orlanth wrote:

Your hypocrisy is your bigotry of accusing Farage of being a bigot.
You don't base your opinions on Farage on logic, in fact you base only two points on Farage at all, the rest being about third parties Farage has no control over.

Farage IS a bigot. The third partys being his party members? People he DOSE have control over? That is the POINT in a party leader. Someone says something against the party line or puts the party in a bad light? You throw them out the party. Or people he has proven links to? He may have no control over what people say, but he dose have control over how he associates with.

 Orlanth wrote:

... and not only do you advance the label unfairly at Farage you do so at his supporters. Calling them subhumans (bold text reference), which ironically is how Hitler preferred to see opponents. Also you openly endorse rent-a-mob array, a sign that not only do you disciminate horribly but are willing to endorse action based on your own bigotry. You proved that by posting the Radical Independence Campaign flyer as something positive.
Farage came to Edinburgh to meet the local people and he wasn't harrangued by local people but students and agitators from the extreme left. So this isn't a mass movement as you wish it portrayed, but a handful of sick fanatics who wish to silence a mainstream politician and isolate him from society, and that fact you want to see more of this type of action shows how low you can go.
For all your protestations of anti-fascism you are following the techniques and ideology of the Brown Shirts.

So, you complain about people labaling Farage, but its ok for you to sling names about people who exercise there right to protest?

Criminal link to ethnicity:
Reports into the majority of grooming gangs being non-white have been around for a while now. Recent large case in the news in the last few days. Getting away with it because the authorities and, useless, and too PC.
Metropolotan reports into the recent crimewave via gangs from a certain european country. This is not a social inclusion thing if they are travelling across here. Raise them out of poverty in their own country and blooming well make all of europe fair and prosperous.

Unfortunately it is sad but they (the reports) are out there.

The thing in Scotland is another case of attack the person because you are struggling to attack the policies.
It's like the Thatcher Out Out Out protesters outside Number 10 while she was slowly putting the lights back on in this country.

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,
There is plenty of legislation at the moment which specifies race which is silly unfair.

Positive descrimination springs to mind.
English Student being charge to study at Scottish universities.
The tax spend on the popultion being skewed towards scotland and wales; originally intended to bring the uk into a level playing field but now allowing free prescriptions and so on to be funded.

The only people he appear to dislike are the BNP, hence their exclusion from UKIP - this is probably illegal but go on UKIP. But ex BNP are free to joing other parties.

There is the Scottish university thing, but that is a nationality issue, not a race one. There is no such legislation as positive discrimination. The Equality Act makes it illegal to discriminate in any way.


In other news...

UKIP Joke Twitter Account 'Upik Tips' Has More Followers Than Its Official Channel
In a delicious twist of fate, the Ukip parody Twitter account '@UpikTips' has now got more followers than the UK Independence Party official account.

The account plays on the stereotype of a Ukip supporter and offers more than a nod to what Nigel Farage called the "handful" of embarrasing candidates which have blighted the party.

The account was originally called "Ukip tips" and had the biography "pretend you aren't a racist by wearing a suit."

However it changed its description after Twitter received a complaint that the account was 'misleading' people and was not making it clear enough it wasn't affiliated to UKIP.

The men who run the Twitter account told Huff Post UK: "If we've got one thing in common with UKIP, it's that we're both small-time jokeblowers. It's just that we've got more followers.

"We've had abuse from both sides of the argument, but that's the way we like it. People who don't get the joke are the joke. We wouldn't want it any other way."

http://huff.to/16CqKvz

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,
There is plenty of legislation at the moment which specifies race which is silly unfair.

Positive descrimination springs to mind.

There is no positive descrimination in the UK, with two exceptions.

1) The northen Irleand police have to employ approximatly equal numbers of Cathoilc and Protestant officers
2) The Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002, letting partys have all women short lists.

That is it. Any other descrimination is illigal. There are some reasons you can be excluded from the equalities act, but not positive descrimination.

 Jasper wrote:

English Student being charge to study at Scottish universities.
The tax spend on the popultion being skewed towards scotland and wales; originally intended to bring the uk into a level playing field but now allowing free prescriptions and so on to be funded.

That has nothing to do with racism or the EU. Noone here is talking about the Barnett formula. I think most of the UK agrees, including the govenment, that it needs looking at, but in light of the Sottish referendum its not the time to do it.

 Jasper wrote:

The only people he appear to dislike are the BNP, hence their exclusion from UKIP - this is probably illegal but go on UKIP. But ex BNP are free to joing other parties.

No, he wants to avoid being seen as having anything to do with the BNP. That is not the same as hating them. That shows that UKIP views match the BNP.

 Jasper wrote:

Criminal link to ethnicity:
Reports into the majority of grooming gangs being non-white have been around for a while now. Recent large case in the news in the last few days. Getting away with it because the authorities and, useless, and too PC.

Sorry but you are going to have to provide a source here. Claiming that the majority of paedophiles are non white while Operation Yewtree is going on simply can't be true.

 Jasper wrote:

Criminal link to ethnicity:
Reports into the majority of grooming gangs being non-white have been around for a while now. Recent large case in the news in the last few days. Getting away with it because the authorities and, useless, and too PC.

Show me those reports. I have never seen anthing about that. I have heard reports about there is an over reprisentation of pakistani men in child sex cases. This is not down to race, but the treatment of women in pakistani trible culture. It is not something inherant in there race.

There is also an over reprisentation of BBC staff. How about we put a boarder round White City too?

 Jasper wrote:

Metropolotan reports into the recent crimewave via gangs from a certain european country. This is not a social inclusion thing if they are travelling across here. Raise them out of poverty in their own country and blooming well make all of europe fair and prosperous.

Organised crime has come from eastern europe just as it did from Italy and russia in the past. Oh wow! devistating news! That is nothing to do with race and everthing to do with high levels of organised crime in ex eastern block countrys due to major upheaval and coruption in the post communist era. Nothing to do with race, no, or social inclusion. Everything to do with povety and coruption. Organised crime has nothing to do with the boarders of the UK. Organised crime will find a way to work in the UK unless we close the boarders.

@ Dael,
Historically Scottish People, Welsh People, even Cornish people are different races, they just have a similar skin tone and have been living together for hundreds of years.

Other example of racism in legislation/government
The Black police office assocition, Quango - although I presume you would argue that as it is only referring to a skin colour and not a specific race it is not racist.

The UK Equality Comission - Quango
Suppose to represent the ethnic make up of Britain but over staffed by certain ethnic minority staff.

Quotas for police and fire brigade staff spring to mind. Possibly a different subject as I want all coppas to be 6ft plus and built like they mean it. I'm tire of watching camera shows where the suspect wrestles through the arms of several whippy small officed and then jump over a suspiciously large fence at the bottom of the garden.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dæl wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

Criminal link to ethnicity:
Reports into the majority of grooming gangs being non-white have been around for a while now. Recent large case in the news in the last few days. Getting away with it because the authorities and, useless, and too PC.

Sorry but you are going to have to provide a source here. Claiming that the majority of paedophiles are non white while Operation Yewtree is going on simply can't be true.

Pull up Mr Farage's last appearance on question time, he refers to the report, the other panellist refer to the report.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,
There is plenty of legislation at the moment which specifies race which is silly unfair.

Positive descrimination springs to mind.

There is no positive descrimination in the UK, with two exceptions.

1) The northen Irleand police have to employ approximatly equal numbers of Cathoilc and Protestant officers
2) The Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002, letting partys have all women short lists.

That is it. Any other descrimination is illigal. There are some reasons you can be excluded from the equalities act, but not positive descrimination.

 Jasper wrote:

English Student being charge to study at Scottish universities.
The tax spend on the popultion being skewed towards scotland and wales; originally intended to bring the uk into a level playing field but now allowing free prescriptions and so on to be funded.

That has nothing to do with racism or the EU. Noone here is talking about the Barnett formula. I think most of the UK agrees, including the govenment, that it needs looking at, but in light of the Sottish referendum its not the time to do it.

 Jasper wrote:

The only people he appear to dislike are the BNP, hence their exclusion from UKIP - this is probably illegal but go on UKIP. But ex BNP are free to joing other parties.

No, he wants to avoid being seen as having anything to do with the BNP. That is not the same as hating them. That shows that UKIP views match the BNP.

Excluding people is positive discrimination.

EU students can study for free at scottish universities, students with an english address can not. Mr Farage was in Scotland for a Bi-election not a referendum.
You have to be blinkered to think he likes the BNP. Wanting the UK to be in a free trading area and controlling boarders is very different from the BNP adgenda.

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,
Historically Scottish People, Welsh People, even Cornish people are different races, they just have a similar skin tone and have been living together for hundreds of years.

No, they are not a different race. They are just not. SOME might like to claim they are, but they are not. The celts, as a race, ceased to exist a long time ago. On your basis we also have a split along the line of the danelaw.

 Jasper wrote:

Other example of racism in legislation/government
The Black police office assocition, Quango - although I presume you would argue that as it is only referring to a skin colour and not a specific race it is not racist.

The ABPO was a vital group in righting institutional racism in the police in the 70s and 80s. I admit it is loosing its use now, and should probably be questioned, but clearly people feel the need for it still.

 Jasper wrote:

The UK Equality Comission - Quango
Suppose to represent the ethnic make up of Britain but over staffed by certain ethnic minority staff.

Given that they only have about 150 staff I'm not sure how they can do this, or how you know this. Source please. I think this is made up.

 Jasper wrote:

Quotas for police and fire brigade staff spring to mind.

Quotas should not effect recrutment, but are about high level monitering of recrutment statistics. Infact Gloucestershire Police got in trouble for 'deselecting' potential because they were white. They broke the law. Anyway, they were droped in 2009 after only 10 years. Errors were made when trying to meet quotas, but that dose not meen they are racist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jasper wrote:

EU students can study for free at scottish universities, students with an english address can not.

That is because of an oddity in EU and UK law. Students from EU countrys must be treated as being local to the university. Due to the strange makup of govenment in the UK we have this strange anomaly. Thats not racist, but an oddity of the UK system.

 Jasper wrote:
Mr Farage was in Scotland for a Bi-election not a referendum.

Not what I was saying...

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

The only people he appear to dislike are the BNP, hence their exclusion from UKIP - this is probably illegal but go on UKIP. But ex BNP are free to joing other parties.

No, he wants to avoid being seen as having anything to do with the BNP. That is not the same as hating them. That shows that UKIP views match the BNP.

I'll start by saying I not fussed either way about who is in charge of the country - the only constant in politics is that they all seem to put petrol tax up. I'm not getting into the argument, I'd just like some clarification on a point.

How is not wanting to be seen to be affiliated with the BNP showing that UKIPs views match the bnp?

I'm a bit confused...

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

Criminal link to ethnicity:
Reports into the majority of grooming gangs being non-white have been around for a while now. Recent large case in the news in the last few days. Getting away with it because the authorities and, useless, and too PC.

Show me those reports. I have never seen anthing about that. I have heard reports about there is an over reprisentation of pakistani men in child sex cases. This is not down to race, but the treatment of women in pakistani trible culture. It is not something inherant in there race.

There is also an over reprisentation of BBC staff. How about we put a boarder round White City too?

 Jasper wrote:

Metropolotan reports into the recent crimewave via gangs from a certain european country. This is not a social inclusion thing if they are travelling across here. Raise them out of poverty in their own country and blooming well make all of europe fair and prosperous.

Organised crime has come from eastern europe just as it did from Italy and russia in the past. Oh wow! devistating news! That is nothing to do with race and everthing to do with high levels of organised crime in ex eastern block countrys due to major upheaval and coruption in the post communist era. Nothing to do with race, no, or social inclusion. Everything to do with povety and coruption. Organised crime has nothing to do with the boarders of the UK. Organised crime will find a way to work in the UK unless we close the boarders.

Surely the fact that a large proporation the grooming gangs are decendant from a particular country is a criminal link to ethnicity ie their race.
I don't understand the White City comment its a bit odd

So what you are saying about the border is that if we controlled it very well owe could reduce organised crime in the UK. Sounds like a good idea to me.

PredaKhaine wrote:

I'll start by saying I not fussed either way about who is in charge of the country - the only constant in politics is that they all seem to put petrol tax up. I'm not getting into the argument, I'd just like some clarification on a point.

How is not wanting to be seen to be affiliated with the BNP showing that UKIPs views match the bnp?

I'm a bit confused...

A load of people left the BNP and wanted to join UKIP seeing them as a less extreme party, but with the same aim. UKIP wants to avoid these people being in the party because they give the party a bad image, as racist. This may be because they don't want those views, but I think it is more likely that they know they have the votes but don't want the image.

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,
Historically Scottish People, Welsh People, even Cornish people are different races, they just have a similar skin tone and have been living together for hundreds of years.

Firstly it's thousands of years, and no, we are not different races, never were.

Other example of racism in legislation/government
The Black police office assocition, Quango - although I presume you would argue that as it is only referring to a skin colour and not a specific race it is not racist.

The UK Equality Comission - Quango
Suppose to represent the ethnic make up of Britain but over staffed by certain ethnic minority staff.

What's that? A quango representing a specific group. It's almost as if that was the purpose of a quango.

 Jasper wrote:

Pull up Mr Farage's last appearance on question time, he refers to the report, the other panellist refer to the report.

No, that is not a source, I cannot see the report, who commissioned it, what they were looking for, where they looked and what they found.

 Jasper wrote:

You have to be blinkered to think he likes the BNP. Wanting the UK to be in a free trading area and controlling boarders is very different from the BNP adgenda.

How is UKIP's blaming immigrants for everything any different from BNP's blaming immigrants for everything? They seem pretty similar.

Also, you just have to do some quick research to find a number of links between the two parties.

UKIP claim that former membership of other far right groups such as the BNP or NF mean people are not allowed to become members, but there have been some high profile exceptions.

John Brayshaw was exposed as being Chairman of UKIP's Vale of York branch and the BNP's National Treasurer at the same time.
Trevor Agnew was a UKIP parliamentary candidate and a well known BNP activist, he was expelled from UKIP in '99 and then allowed to rejoin, after which he pledged his support to the BNP in the '03 elections.
Andrew Moffat was a UKIP parliamentary candidate, and was a member of the National Front.
Martyn Heale is Chairman of UKIP's Thanet South branch, and was also a member of the National Front and stood as an NF candidate in Hammersmith in the late 70s.
Plus this week, Alan Ryall was disowned by the party for previous membership of the BNP, but remained on ballot papers as it was too late to remove him.

PredaKhaine wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

The only people he appear to dislike are the BNP, hence their exclusion from UKIP - this is probably illegal but go on UKIP. But ex BNP are free to joing other parties.

No, he wants to avoid being seen as having anything to do with the BNP. That is not the same as hating them. That shows that UKIP views match the BNP.

I'll start by saying I not fussed either way about who is in charge of the country - the only constant in politics is that they all seem to put petrol tax up. I'm not getting into the argument, I'd just like some clarification on a point.

How is not wanting to be seen to be affiliated with the BNP showing that UKIPs views match the bnp?

I'm a bit confused...

Yep, even with the price rigging re-bate we are due for the price is still going to go up some how.

Surely the fact that a large proporation the grooming gangs are decendant from a particular country is a criminal link to ethnicity ie their race.

You'll note that the vast majority of the bankers who have caused some issues of late and indeed the vast majority of "white collar" crime is carried out by white people.

Most of the corrupt MPs were white too.

Presumably then white people are inclined towards financial mismanagement and corruption then ?

@ Dael,

I give you a way to find the report and you say it's not the same as giving you a direct link. A few sentences later you ask me to do a little digging to look for spurios links. Hmmm Pot - Kettle (I'm I walking back into the racism debate!)

I was under the impression UKIP was blaming uncontrolled immigration. Which is blaming the system and very different from blaming immigrants.

Well Ron Northcott didn't help Farage's case yesterday

 reds8n wrote:

Surely the fact that a large proporation the grooming gangs are decendant from a particular country is a criminal link to ethnicity ie their race.

You'll note that the vast majority of the bankers who have caused some issues of late and indeed the vast majority of "white collar" crime is carried out by white people.

Most of the corrupt MPs were white too.

Presumably then white people are inclined towards financial mismanagement and corruption then ?

I think what that means if you line up all the bankers and politicians in a row. Preferably on the edge of a swiming pool, tell them you are taking a photo and to take one step back most of them will.

Try again:

What it means is that if you take all the bankers and politicians and line them up, if you want to look for financial miss management you would focus your efforts on the white looking chaps from the UK.

SImilarly the grooming thing. A large proportion of the convictions are from a small proportion of the UKs popoluation. So if you stand the population in line and want to find the grooming rings (in the adscence of evidence) unfortunatley you best use of resources to find the most is to look at that small proportion of the population. Sad but true ( for the grooming case they should flood everywhere to stamp it out completely - who cares if a few banksters get away with their loot)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hlaine Larkin mk2 wrote:
Well Ron Northcott didn't help Farage's case yesterday

Spoiler:

Poor Old Nigel, even his friends are out to torpedo him!

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,

I give you a way to find the report and you say it's not the same as giving you a direct link. A few sentences later you ask me to do a little digging to look for spurios links. Hmmm Pot - Kettle (I'm I walking back into the racism debate!)

I was under the impression UKIP was blaming uncontrolled immigration. Which is blaming the system and very different from blaming immigrants.

You haven't given me a way to find the report, you have said to try and find an hour long QT from about a month ago, and have it referred to in that. How does that give me a way to find the report?

You can choose to look up those names, I assure you they are all correct.

UKIP are blaming Europe and foreigners for our troubles, and make out that leaving the EU will be some kind of panacea, rather than the uncertain, difficult process it would actually be.

I think most of those quotes are quite funny to be fair. It's just all hot air.

I mean it does give fuel to the "English hate us" crowd, but it's not really a fair picture. I think the Independence polls will speak for themselves, the fact that Salmond and his nippy faced comrade Sturgeon have secured 16 year olds the right to vote on it is absolutely ridiculous and shows that their clutching at straws.

I will be extremely unhappy if we get Independence and I'm not alone in that.

SImilarly the grooming thing. A large proportion of the convictions are from a small proportion of the UKs popoluation. So if you stand the population in line and want to find the grooming rings (in the adscence of evidence) unfortunatley you best use of resources to find the most is to look at that small proportion of the population. Sad but true ( for the grooming case they should flood everywhere to stamp it out completely -

The Ceop study looked at the 2,379 potential offenders, reported to Ceop for grooming since 2008. The vast majority were men and most were aged 18 to 24.

Of the 940 suspects who were fully identified, 26 per cent were Asian, 38 per cent were white and 32 per cent were recorded as unknown. Some 3 per cent were black and less than 1 per cent were Chinese.

Ceop also identified 230 cases where suspects were working together in groups ranging from two to more than eight people. Of those gangs, 41 were Asian, 36 were white and 137 were of unknown ethnic origin.

As for those being targeted by these gangs, some 61 per cent of the 2,083 victims were white, while 2.6 per cent were Asian, 1.3 per cent were black and 33 per cent were of unknown ethnic origin.

http://www.channel4.com/news/ceop-warns-against-focus-on-race-after-major-grooming-study

figures appear to indicate that there's not really all that much difference when it comes to the numbers.

who cares if a few banksters get away with their loot)

err.. okay.

@ Dael,

Yes I have, you just haven't taken it.

As to UKIPs association with the BNP I do accept that some ex-members and possibly present members have gotten into the party as it is an underfunded party punching abouve its weight. When they get the funding to vet candidates I think some will get expelled.

We are closing down large power stations to comply with the UKs commitment EU policies. We are facing higher energy bills to suit EU policies. We are a net contributer even with our rebate. We struggle to kick out terrorists because of the EU court system (manned by Judges who in some instances have very little experience of sitting in judgement within their own countries). Their tax on financial transactions is going to hurt London.

The Euro has bankrupted the southern countries and is drawing the zone into a depression because the core countries of the euro are not willing to let countries breakawsy, devalue and export to recover. This is dragging us down with them.

Europe are responsible for contributing to a lot of our ills.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Medium of Death wrote:
I think most of those quotes are quite funny to be fair. It's just all hot air.

I mean it does give fuel to the "English hate us" crowd, but it's not really a fair picture. I think the Independence polls will speak for themselves, the fact that Salmond and his nippy faced comrade Sturgeon have secured 16 year olds the right to vote on it is absolutely ridiculous and shows that their clutching at straws.

I will be extremely unhappy if we get Independence and I'm not alone in that.

I think we will all suffer if Scotland does go it alone. PLease stay.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:

SImilarly the grooming thing. A large proportion of the convictions are from a small proportion of the UKs popoluation. So if you stand the population in line and want to find the grooming rings (in the adscence of evidence) unfortunatley you best use of resources to find the most is to look at that small proportion of the population. Sad but true ( for the grooming case they should flood everywhere to stamp it out completely -

The Ceop study looked at the 2,379 potential offenders, reported to Ceop for grooming since 2008. The vast majority were men and most were aged 18 to 24.

Of the 940 suspects who were fully identified, 26 per cent were Asian, 38 per cent were white and 32 per cent were recorded as unknown. Some 3 per cent were black and less than 1 per cent were Chinese.

Ceop also identified 230 cases where suspects were working together in groups ranging from two to more than eight people. Of those gangs, 41 were Asian, 36 were white and 137 were of unknown ethnic origin.

As for those being targeted by these gangs, some 61 per cent of the 2,083 victims were white, while 2.6 per cent were Asian, 1.3 per cent were black and 33 per cent were of unknown ethnic origin.

http://www.channel4.com/news/ceop-warns-against-focus-on-race-after-major-grooming-study

figures appear to indicate that there's not really all that much difference when it comes to the numbers.

who cares if a few banksters get away with their loot)

err.. okay.

But the Asian offenders (244ish ) is from the Asian decended population of the country is significantly less than the white population. So the offending rate per 1000 people in the Asian population is going to be higher. In the gangs statistics the suspected Asian Gangs is higher than the white gangs and from a smaller population again. So, again - unfortunately, that's where you need to put the largest proporation of the anti-grooming resources to effectively combat it.

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,

Yes I have, you just haven't taken it.

No you don't understand. How is Farage saying "I have a report here that states..." in any way useful to me, it doesn't give me the title, the author or the year of publication. Therefore I have no access to it. Saying I saw someone say something on tv is not a valid source.

As to UKIPs association with the BNP I do accept that some ex-members and possibly present members have gotten into the party as it is an underfunded party punching abouve its weight. When they get the funding to vet candidates I think some will get expelled.

They get 2 million a year from Farage alone, well the EU taxpayer anyway.

We are closing down large power stations to comply with the UKs commitment EU policies. We are facing higher energy bills to suit EU policies. We are a net contributer even with our rebate. We struggle to kick out terrorists because of the EU court system (manned by Judges who in some instances have very little experience of sitting in judgement within their own countries). Their tax on financial transactions is going to hurt London.

Do you think the only emissions targets we have are from the EU?

Europe are responsible for contributing to a lot of our ills.

Like what exactly?

 Jasper wrote:
We struggle to kick out terrorists because of the EU court system

The European court of human rights has nothing to do with the EU. Different organisations. A mistake Farage makes time and again too.

And most of the cases people site are nothing to do with the ECHR and everything to do with our courts upholding the law of the land and stopping Theresa May and her rather less than balanced views. See Gary McKinnon vs the case of Haroon Aswat.

 dæl wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,

Yes I have, you just haven't taken it.

No you don't understand. How is Farage saying "I have a report here that states..." in any way useful to me, it doesn't give me the title, the author or the year of publication. Therefore I have no access to it. Besides, the report just quoted shows what you were claiming to be false.

As to UKIPs association with the BNP I do accept that some ex-members and possibly present members have gotten into the party as it is an underfunded party punching abouve its weight. When they get the funding to vet candidates I think some will get expelled.

They get 2 million a year from Farage alone, well the EU taxpayer anyway.

We are closing down large power stations to comply with the UKs commitment EU policies. We are facing higher energy bills to suit EU policies. We are a net contributer even with our rebate. We struggle to kick out terrorists because of the EU court system (manned by Judges who in some instances have very little experience of sitting in judgement within their own countries). Their tax on financial transactions is going to hurt London.

Do you think the only emissions targets we have are from the EU?

Europe are responsible for contributing to a lot of our ills.

Like what exactly?

Somebody needs to teach me about the multi-quote thing.
The report is form the past month, Mr Farage refers to it by name, to be honest you could probably google it (other search engines are available).
What I was claiming is that there is a crime wave in London being carried out by gangs from a specific european country which Mr Farage has visited. You need to watch the question time if you want to verify the final bit of my claim.

I don't understand why UKIP is contributing £2m to the BMP as per your claim (you need to back this one up )

The only legally binding targets are from the EU.

I've mentioned a few ills - Euro driven economic depression, terror suspects at large, power issues, to name but a few, not to forget the Big Euro gravey train with accounts that have not been signed off for, is it, 15 or so years now.

 Jasper wrote:

What it means is that if you take all the bankers and politicians and line them up, if you want to look for financial miss management you would focus your efforts on the white looking chaps from the UK.

And BAM! you have your reason racial profileing is bad. You immediately start missing other possiblitys of who the perpirtator could be.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
We struggle to kick out terrorists because of the EU court system

The European court of human rights has nothing to do with the EU. Different organisations. A mistake Farage makes time and again too.

And most of the cases people site are nothing to do with the ECHR and everything to do with our courts upholding the law of the land and stopping Theresa May and her rather less than balanced views. See Gary McKinnon vs the case of Haroon Aswat.

I gather that if we leave the EU we leave the ECHR too. Sound very similar even tough they are different organisations.
The British courts are judging, quite frequently, on European laws which have been passed into British law which Britain honours, whilse some of our neighbours do not. I do agree that the British courts/system are not helping the situation. The french system continually persue their terrorists to get them deported and the Bristish system takes the heat off during appeals.

Garry McKinnon is a different kettle of fish.

 Jasper wrote:

Surely the fact that a large proporation the grooming gangs are decendant from a particular country is a criminal link to ethnicity ie their race.
I don't understand the White City comment its a bit odd

No, just... No... As I said. Social reasons. The treatment of women in some tribal areas. Anyway, most of these people were born in the UK.

 Jasper wrote:

So what you are saying about the border is that if we controlled it very well owe could reduce organised crime in the UK. Sounds like a good idea to me.

Closed. Closed our borders I said. I'm realy starting to think you have no idea what you are talking about. Closing our borders as in letting no one at all in. Organised crime will get in anyway. Always has. Always will. Nothing to do with imigration. Where it comes from may, but as long as there is a market for what they do it will get in.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

What it means is that if you take all the bankers and politicians and line them up, if you want to look for financial miss management you would focus your efforts on the white looking chaps from the UK.

And BAM! you have your reason racial profileing is bad. You immediately start missing other possiblitys of who the perpirtator could be.

Yes I agree you miss some but you get the majority. If you have the resources then you get them all. But we never have enough resources.

Note that I said focus your efforts which means you keep an eye on everything and a keen eye on the white UK banksters. That way you try to catch any change in the trends.

 Jasper wrote:

I gather that if we leave the EU we leave the ECHR too. Sound very similar even tough they are different organisations.
The British courts are judging, quite frequently, on European laws which have been passed into British law which Britain honours, whilse some of our neighbours do not. I do agree that the British courts/system are not helping the situation. The french system continually persue their terrorists to get them deported and the Bristish system takes the heat off during appeals.

Garry McKinnon is a different kettle of fish.

Your showing time and again you know nothing of what you are talking about. "Sound very similar even tough they are different organisations."

What you are saying is we should be able to throw who we want out of the country?

Garry McKinnon is not a diffrent kettle of fish at all. Both were wanted by the US, both were fighting it on mental health grounds. Please do tell me how they are diffrent?

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

Surely the fact that a large proporation the grooming gangs are decendant from a particular country is a criminal link to ethnicity ie their race.
I don't understand the White City comment its a bit odd

No, just... No... As I said. Social reasons. The treatment of women in some tribal areas. Anyway, most of these people were born in the UK.

 Jasper wrote:

So what you are saying about the border is that if we controlled it very well owe could reduce organised crime in the UK. Sounds like a good idea to me.

Closed. Closed our borders I said. I'm realy starting to think you have no idea what you are talking about. Closing our borders as in letting no one at all in. Organised crime will get in anyway. Always has. Always will. Nothing to do with imigration. Where it comes from may, but as long as there is a market for what they do it will get in.

TIghtly controlled would cut it down though.
The gang problem in London is not immigrants I was under the impression it was crime tourists.

 Jasper wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

What it means is that if you take all the bankers and politicians and line them up, if you want to look for financial miss management you would focus your efforts on the white looking chaps from the UK.

And BAM! you have your reason racial profileing is bad. You immediately start missing other possiblitys of who the perpirtator could be.

Yes I agree you miss some but you get the majority. If you have the resources then you get them all. But we never have enough resources.

Note that I said focus your efforts which means you keep an eye on everything and a keen eye on the white UK banksters. That way you try to catch any change in the trends.

Just... Wow... You don't get it at all do you. It brings down the effectiveness.

Ok. Lets try another approch. Why should all bankers be closely watched even if they have done nothing wrong? How about they keep a close eye on all UKIP supporters as some have proven links to far right organisations?

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

I gather that if we leave the EU we leave the ECHR too. Sound very similar even tough they are different organisations.
The British courts are judging, quite frequently, on European laws which have been passed into British law which Britain honours, whilse some of our neighbours do not. I do agree that the British courts/system are not helping the situation. The french system continually persue their terrorists to get them deported and the Bristish system takes the heat off during appeals.

Garry McKinnon is a different kettle of fish.

Your showing time and again you know nothing of what you are talking about. "Sound very similar even tough they are different organisations."

What you are saying is we should be able to throw who we want out of the country?

Garry McKinnon is not a diffrent kettle of fish at all. Both were wanted by the US, both were fighting it on mental health grounds. Please do tell me how they are diffrent?

If people are convicted or are due to stand trial in a different country then unless there is reason not to then they should be sent to stand trial.

Gary McKinnon is wanted by the US for hacking due to his curiosity.
Mr Hanza is wanted by Jordan where he has been convicted of organising terrorism (don't know the specific offence).
Gary is not a danger to the British population,
Mr Hanza possibly is a danger to the British Popultation.

That's quite a difference.

 Jasper wrote:

TIghtly controlled would cut it down though.
The gang problem in London is not immigrants I was under the impression it was crime tourists.

Your going round in circles now... Or are UKIP now suggesting we control the number of tourists?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jasper wrote:

Gary McKinnon is wanted by the US for hacking due to his curiosity.
Mr Hanza is wanted by Jordan where he has been convicted of organising terrorism (don't know the specific offence).
Gary is not a danger to the British population,
Mr Hanza possibly is a danger to the British Popultation.

That's quite a difference.

Seriously, I can't work out if your that stupid, or just lazy... Realy, go back and read what I put. Realy. I didn't bring up Abu HaMza. You did. Also, if you want to bring in arguments like that the US don't touture people. The ruling of the UK court was that those convictions were meaningless because it was on the basis of evidence obtaind under touture.

Gary McKinnon says it was curiosity. The US says otherwise. And since when is curiosity a defence?

If Abu Hamza is a threat to the UK why has he not been charged with anything here?

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,
There is plenty of legislation at the moment which specifies race which is silly unfair.

Positive descrimination springs to mind.

We don't have that in the UK.

English Student being charge to study at Scottish universities.

English isn't a race.

The tax spend on the popultion being skewed towards scotland and wales; originally intended to bring the uk into a level playing field but now allowing free prescriptions and so on to be funded.

Scotland and Wales aren't races.

The only people he appear to dislike are the BNP, hence their exclusion from UKIP - this is probably illegal but go on UKIP. But ex BNP are free to joing other parties.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

What it means is that if you take all the bankers and politicians and line them up, if you want to look for financial miss management you would focus your efforts on the white looking chaps from the UK.

And BAM! you have your reason racial profileing is bad. You immediately start missing other possiblitys of who the perpirtator could be.

Yes I agree you miss some but you get the majority. If you have the resources then you get them all. But we never have enough resources.

Note that I said focus your efforts which means you keep an eye on everything and a keen eye on the white UK banksters. That way you try to catch any change in the trends.

Just... Wow... You don't get it at all do you. It brings down the effectiveness.

Ok. Lets try another approch. Why should all bankers be closely watched even if they have done nothing wrong? How about they keep a close eye on all UKIP supporters as some have proven links to far right organisations?

If some one hadn't watched MPs would we have found out they were fiddling expenses?
Ditto - Bankers - Libor Rates?
Ditto - Oil Traders - Oil Price FIxing.

There are financial institutions in place to keep an eye on bankers if they don't want that then they should be bankers.

If resources are available it would be prudent to keep an eye on all Far right and far left supporters of politican parties if they can be linked to exteremism

 Jasper wrote:

The report is form the past month, Mr Farage refers to it by name, to be honest you could probably google it (other search engines are available).
What I was claiming is that there is a crime wave in London being carried out by gangs from a specific european country which Mr Farage has visited. You need to watch the question time if you want to verify the final bit of my claim.

I asked for a source on your claim of paedophiles being mostly asian. As that is false.

I don't understand why UKIP is contributing £2m to the BMP as per your claim (you need to back this one up )

No, Farage pays that to UKIP, money he takes as expenses from the taxpayer.

The only legally binding targets are from the EU.

I take it you've never heard of the Kyoto Protocol?

I've mentioned a few ills -
Euro driven economic depression

Which stems from Britain and the US

terror suspects at large,

That has very little to do with the EU and far more to do with the Covenant of Security.

power issues,

You've lost me

not to forget the Big Euro gravey train with accounts that have not been signed off for, is it, 15 or so years now.

The gravy train that UKIP are more than happy to squeeze every last pound they can from?

Shall we look at what the EU does for us?
Highly subsidised food.
Working time directive.
Equal pay.
Consumer protection law.
Fundamental human rights.

 Jasper wrote:

If some one hadn't watched MPs would we have found out they were fiddling expenses?
Ditto - Bankers - Libor Rates?
Ditto - Oil Traders - Oil Price FIxing.

There are financial institutions in place to keep an eye on bankers if they don't want that then they should be bankers.

If resources are available it would be prudent to keep an eye on all Far right and far left supporters of politican parties if they can be linked to exteremism

I'm sorry, I give up. I can't keep arguing with this kind of stupid. The FCA is not "to keep an eye on bankers". It is to regulate financial services. They don't keep an eye on anyone. Realy, get educated. You might learn a little about the world.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

TIghtly controlled would cut it down though.
The gang problem in London is not immigrants I was under the impression it was crime tourists.

Your going round in circles now... Or are UKIP now suggesting we control the number of tourists?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jasper wrote:

Gary McKinnon is wanted by the US for hacking due to his curiosity.
Mr Hanza is wanted by Jordan where he has been convicted of organising terrorism (don't know the specific offence).
Gary is not a danger to the British population,
Mr Hanza possibly is a danger to the British Popultation.

That's quite a difference.

Seriously, I can't work out if your that stupid, or just lazy... Realy, go back and read what I put. Realy. I didn't bring up Abu HaMza. You did. Also, if you want to bring in arguments like that the US don't touture people. The ruling of the UK court was that those convictions were meaningless because it was on the basis of evidence obtaind under touture.

Gary McKinnon says it was curiosity. The US says otherwise. And since when is curiosity a defence?

If Abu Hamza is a threat to the UK why has he not been charged with anything here?

If you can find some Amnesty reports from the late 90s the only contries which don't use torture and Norway and Switzerland and a handful of others.

A crime tourist is a figure of speech for some one coming here to comit petty crimes knowing that they will not be imprisoned and it is unlikely the british system will spare the resources to go after them once they return home. Controlling the borders will reduce this form of crime.

The discussion about the ills of the EU raised our inability to deport people due to the ECHR, specifically terror associated criminals. Remeber MR Hanza has been convicted in Jordan. I thought you brought up Mr McK as asked for the differences.
Curiosity is a defence if you have a diagnosed condition which would make you more curios than the average bear, so to speak.
If MR Hanza is not a threat why has he been under house arrest or in jail, or had extradition proceeding against him.

The butchering and splicing together of the terms 'race', 'ethnicity', and 'nationality'' in this thread make me sad.

It's like watching the blind debating with the blind.

 Jasper wrote:
I thought you brought up Mr McK as asked for the differences.
Curiosity is a defence if you have a diagnosed condition which would make you more curios than the average bear, so to speak.
If MR Hanza is not a threat why has he been under house arrest or in jail, or had extradition proceeding against him.

Seriously, just go back and read the people I quoted. And Abu HaMza has not been under house arrest his whole time in the UK. Realy... I don't know why I bother.

On a lighter note

UKIP's biggest donor (Demetri Marchessini) wrote a book "Women in Trousers: a Rear View", in which he says: "...by wearing [trousers] [women] are deliberately making themselves unattractive and are rushing like lemmings over a sartorial cliff."

To compile this book he stalked the streets of London with a photographer taking photos of women's arses and then published the most unflattering ones in his book.

For a lengthier view of the subject have a look at a preview here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Women-Trousers-Demetri-Marchessini/dp/0954510704

 dæl wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

The report is form the past month, Mr Farage refers to it by name, to be honest you could probably google it (other search engines are available).
What I was claiming is that there is a crime wave in London being carried out by gangs from a specific european country which Mr Farage has visited. You need to watch the question time if you want to verify the final bit of my claim.

I asked for a source on your claim of paedophiles being mostly asian. As that is false.

I don't understand why UKIP is contributing £2m to the BMP as per your claim (you need to back this one up )

No, Farage pays that to UKIP, money he takes as expenses from the taxpayer.

The only legally binding targets are from the EU.

I take it you've never heard of the Kyoto Protocol?

I've mentioned a few ills -
Euro driven economic depression

Which stems from Britain and the US

terror suspects at large,

That has very little to do with the EU and far more to do with the Covenant of Security.

power issues,

You've lost me

not to forget the Big Euro gravey train with accounts that have not been signed off for, is it, 15 or so years now.

The gravy train that UKIP are more than happy to squeeze every last pound they can from?

Shall we look at what the EU does for us?
Highly subsidised food.
Working time directive.
Equal pay.
Consumer protection law.
Fundamental human rights.

I have never claimed anything about Paedophiles. My claim was about grooming gangs and statistics ahve been posted which back this up.

Right I'm with you about the expenses thing. I'll look into that one.

Kyoto is not legally binding becase of refusals to sign up to it.

Britian and the US did not force the southern countries of europe to over borrow based on a low interest rate which helped the northern countries in the euro export. The western ecomony is a real mess. Placing everything on the US subprime is misplaced.

Power issues relate to us shutting coal stations (as I posted) and paying though the nose for green energy to meet the EU emission targets.

Subsidised food is via the EU pot of money to which we are a net contributer.
Working time directive makes us less competitive and forces some organisations into unrealistic working. But having sensible limits to prevent tiredness is important but could easily be done through the UK parliment - just like minium wage.
Equal pay is oart of anti-discrimination legislation.
Consumer protection act is a UK act of parliament
The UK signed the univeral declaration of Human Rights before the creation of the EU; which has the respect of other people's rights a requirement for you to enjoy your rights and more balanced. The UK has seperate human rights legislation to the EU.

@Steve Stevenson,
I didn't mention the FSA but they do keep an eye on banks in general. Individual banks also have mechanism in place.
I'm not arguing I'm discussing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ketara wrote:
The butchering and splicing together of the terms 'race', 'ethnicity', and 'nationality'' in this thread make me sad.

It's like watching the blind debating with the blind.

Yep I agree; and possibly guitly of a bit of it - sorry. The multi-quoting has got everything spinning. I'm in a metaphorical pub, under siege but without the pints to enjoy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
I thought you brought up Mr McK as asked for the differences.
Curiosity is a defence if you have a diagnosed condition which would make you more curios than the average bear, so to speak.
If MR Hanza is not a threat why has he been under house arrest or in jail, or had extradition proceeding against him.

Seriously, just go back and read the people I quoted. And Abu HaMza has not been under house arrest his whole time in the UK. Realy... I don't know why I bother.

No he hasn't been under house arrest the whole time in the UK.
But when asked what a European ill afflicted on the UK was I replied
not being able to extradite terror suspects because of the ECHR.

He has not been charge with anything in the UK but convicetd in abscence and as the courts do not recognise the legitimacy of the conviction the T. May has been seeking assurances that the re-trial, in Jordan, will be fair. But the EU court is blocking this on appeal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:
On a lighter note

UKIP's biggest donor (Demetri Marchessini) wrote a book "Women in Trousers: a Rear View", in which he says: "...by wearing [trousers] [women] are deliberately making themselves unattractive and are rushing like lemmings over a sartorial cliff."

To compile this book he stalked the streets of London with a photographer taking photos of women's arses and then published the most unflattering ones in his book.

For a lengthier view of the subject have a look at a preview here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Women-Trousers-Demetri-Marchessini/dp/0954510704

They (UKIP) do like to torpedo themselves.

Actually the UK's Equal Pay Act predates its membership of the EU and was not dependent on European human rights directives.

Similarly, the UK is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and is bound by that independent of the EU.

 Jasper wrote:

Power issues relate to us shutting coal stations (as I posted) and paying though the nose for green energy to meet the EU emission targets.

It is in our interests to not raise the global temperature by 2 degrees you know. Or are you one of these climate change deniers?

Subsidised food is via the EU pot of money to which we are a net contributer.

And you think the government will start paying these subsidies to farmers if we leave?

Working time directive makes us less competitive and forces some organisations into unrealistic working. But having sensible limits to prevent tiredness is important but could easily be done through the UK parliment - just like minium wage.

The working time directive makes us uncompetitive? How and compared to who? Not other European countries certainly. Now, its possible the maternity pay and sick pay bits do, but they provide so much social benefit that it is worth it.

Consumer protection act is a UK act of parliament

Actually the EU consumer rights directive is very important for consumer rights.

The UK signed the univeral declaration of Human Rights before the creation of the EU; which has the respect of other people's rights a requirement for you to enjoy your rights and more balanced. The UK has seperate human rights legislation to the EU.

Here you have shown you haven't a clue. The UK has the Human Rights Act 1998, which details how the ECHR interacts with English law. The Universal Declaration is not legally binding, the ECHR very much is.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Actually the UK's Equal Pay Act predates its membership of the EU and was not dependent on European human rights directives.

Similarly, the UK is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and is bound by that independent of the EU.

I didn't realise the Equal Pay Act pre-dated the EU. It didn't work very well!

The The Universal Declaration of Humand Rights is an awesome read. Unfortunately is is not law only a declaration. I think the UK would have done better just to write it into law a few years after they signed it, or a legalaly worded version of it.

 Jasper wrote:

@Steve Stevenson,
I didn't mention the FSA but they do keep an eye on banks in general. Individual banks also have mechanism in place.

Who are you talking about that "keeps an eye on the banks" then? And as I said the FCS dose not keep an eye on the banks. (The FSA dose not exist any more).

And you still didn't go back and read what I said... I didn't bring up Abu Hamza, you did.

You clearly don't know anything about the subjects you are talking about.

 Jasper wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Actually the UK's Equal Pay Act predates its membership of the EU and was not dependent on European human rights directives.

Similarly, the UK is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and is bound by that independent of the EU.

I didn't realise the Equal Pay Act pre-dated the EU. It didn't work very well!

The The Universal Declaration of Humand Rights is an awesome read. Unfortunately is is not law only a declaration. I think the UK would have done better just to write it into law a few years after they signed it, or a legalaly worded version of it.

What you mean something like this?

 Bangbangboom wrote:
A lot of people in my part of the country feel he is some sort of messiah. These are the sort of people willing to stand up and claim "they took our jobs"

Personal my understanding of how leaving Europe will effect the UK and indeed the rest of Europe is not developed enough for me to form any opinion other than "better the devil you know"

UKIP are basically a one policy party though and anyone that wishes to be represented by a one policy party is a fool. That said I welcome the departure from the three party two party system, I just wish our local and indeed national media would give more time to some smaller parties and independent representatives that don't rely on sensationalist sound bites

1. Who or what is he?
2. If you're going to hide out, hiding out in a bar is not bad.
3. Real menz don't hide, unless its from da wimminz.

 Jasper wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Actually the UK's Equal Pay Act predates its membership of the EU and was not dependent on European human rights directives.

Similarly, the UK is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and is bound by that independent of the EU.

I didn't realise the Equal Pay Act pre-dated the EU. It didn't work very well!

The The Universal Declaration of Humand Rights is an awesome read. Unfortunately is is not law only a declaration. I think the UK would have done better just to write it into law a few years after they signed it, or a legalaly worded version of it.

Even places like Sweden still have a pay differential between men and women. I suspect there is a bias built in society by biology -- men never have to take time out from careers for childbirth, etc. This could be alleviated by paying women for housework and child-rearing duties. That day probably will never arrive.

The UK has gradually moved to implement human rights legislation that supports the UDHR. It's difficult for a large nation and society to change. Signing the Declaration was a statement of intent, at least.

 dæl wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

Power issues relate to us shutting coal stations (as I posted) and paying though the nose for green energy to meet the EU emission targets.

It is in our interests to not raise the global temperature by 2 degrees you know. Or are you one of these climate change deniers?

Subsidised food is via the EU pot of money to which we are a net contributer.

And you think the government will start paying these subsidies to farmers if we leave?

Working time directive makes us less competitive and forces some organisations into unrealistic working. But having sensible limits to prevent tiredness is important but could easily be done through the UK parliment - just like minium wage.

The working time directive makes us uncompetitive? How and compared to who? Not other European countries certainly. Now, its possible the maternity pay and sick pay bits do, but they provide so much social benefit that it is worth it.

Consumer protection act is a UK act of parliament

Actually the EU consumer rights directive is very important for consumer rights.

The UK signed the univeral declaration of Human Rights before the creation of the EU; which has the respect of other people's rights a requirement for you to enjoy your rights and more balanced. The UK has seperate human rights legislation to the EU.

Here you have shown you haven't a clue. The UK has the Human Rights Act 1998, which details how the ECHR interacts with English law. The Universal Declaration is not legally binding, the ECHR very much is.

The world is still warming up from an ice age. We still have ice at the poles and still technically in an ice age. The global warming issue is are we accelerating it and the world now has a non-nomadic population which can not move to suit areas of the earth which become more difficult to inhabit (Just like Mr Farage's Pub) due to political boundaries.. There is compelling evidence on both sides. It is in the UKs interest to be at the fore front of renewable power technologies but it has to balance within the so-called energy trilema. Low Carbon VS Security Vs Cost. Shutting down at the moment sacficices the security and the cost in favour of the low carbon legally binding targets. Having battled to keep a few large UK power stations working during cold spells when the grid has been at breaking point it is very frustrating to have possible blacks outs almost forced up on us by poor energy policy.

You said we got subsided food from membership of the EU, we contribute more than we get in subsidies. If taxes are lowered (okay wishful thinking) then we have the money in our pockets to pay the farmers a fair wage. UK farming is underated, we have some awesome farmers and growers (greenhouses) out there.

The working time directive makes us less competitive with any advanced economy outside of the EU which does not have such restrictions (Aus, NZ, Canada, USA, to name but a few). Arguable having one parent at home would provide better social benefits than some maternity and sickness benefits (arg different topic) but both of these are not tied into EU only legislation - they would be law if we exited until the UK parliment decided otherwise.

I've never had to bash a shop over the head with the EU Consumer rights directive. The consumer rights are okay with me. To be honest I don't really know the difference. Presumably both say that if you buy a pint in a pub you are allowed to drink it before being bungled out by the police in front of an organised mob.

I agree that the Universal is not legally binding, it would be better if it was.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dæl wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Actually the UK's Equal Pay Act predates its membership of the EU and was not dependent on European human rights directives.

Similarly, the UK is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and is bound by that independent of the EU.

I didn't realise the Equal Pay Act pre-dated the EU. It didn't work very well!

The The Universal Declaration of Humand Rights is an awesome read. Unfortunately is is not law only a declaration. I think the UK would have done better just to write it into law a few years after they signed it, or a legalaly worded version of it.

What you mean something like this?

I don't know the exact bit and bobs of the European Convention but the universal declarations spirit of letting people get on and enjoy their rights whilst you can enjoy yours are a bit corrupted (maybe the writer was a CSM) when you can not deport suspects to trial, you can be deported on a european arrest warrant (without evidence or leave to appeal I think) and your TV can NOT (edited here) be repossed because it is your human right to watch This Morning.

But yeah something sort of like that which irons out all the sillyness.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Bangbangboom wrote:
A lot of people in my part of the country feel he is some sort of messiah. These are the sort of people willing to stand up and claim "they took our jobs"

Personal my understanding of how leaving Europe will effect the UK and indeed the rest of Europe is not developed enough for me to form any opinion other than "better the devil you know"

UKIP are basically a one policy party though and anyone that wishes to be represented by a one policy party is a fool. That said I welcome the departure from the three party two party system, I just wish our local and indeed national media would give more time to some smaller parties and independent representatives that don't rely on sensationalist sound bites

1. Who or what is he?
2. If you're going to hide out, hiding out in a bar is not bad.
3. Real menz don't hide, unless its from da wimminz.

UKIP is the UK independance party. They are for getting the UK out of the European Union.
The Chap in Question is Nigel Farage who is their leader and also a member of the European Parliament. (MEPs)
UKIP have several MEPs representing the UK in europe but have no member in the UK parliament.
UKIP has just one a few local elected officials because people are protesting at the 3 main political parties being useless.

Bars are good until the landlord asks you to leave.

Real men do hide when an internet mob has turned up.

Just heard the Mr F put the phone down on a BBC interview - awesome.

 Jasper wrote:

I don't know the exact bit and bobs of the European Convention but the universal declarations spirit of letting people get on and enjoy their rights whilst you can enjoy yours are a bit corrupted (maybe the writer was a CSM) when you can not deport suspects to trial, you can be deported on a european arrest warrant (without evidence or leave to appeal I think) and your TV can be repossed because it is your human right to watch This Morning.

Its exactly that kind of nonsense that undermines everything you say.

You complain that we can't get people from Europe to face charges in the UK then complain about the existance of european arrest warrants. European arrest warrants are just the same as UK arrest warrants. They are a notice to the local police force that someone needs to be arrested. Or do you suggest we should go though the long extradition process every time someone commits a crime in the EU (where the all countrys are members of the ECHR and have propper protection and due process in place)? There dose have to be evidence. Just like any arrest warrant.

Why is it wrong that we cannot deport suspects to trial when they may be tourtured or killed? That it the point in universal human rights. They are universal. You do not get to pick and chose who they apply to. We can deport someone as long as they are going to get a fair trial and not have there human rights removed. Human rights say nothing about deporting people.

No idea what your on about with TVs.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,
Historically Scottish People, Welsh People, even Cornish people are different races, they just have a similar skin tone and have been living together for hundreds of years.

No, they are not a different race. They are just not. SOME might like to claim they are, but they are not. The celts, as a race, ceased to exist a long time ago. On your basis we also have a split along the line of the danelaw.

Speak for yourself saxon dog!

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

I don't know the exact bit and bobs of the European Convention but the universal declarations spirit of letting people get on and enjoy their rights whilst you can enjoy yours are a bit corrupted (maybe the writer was a CSM) when you can not deport suspects to trial, you can be deported on a european arrest warrant (without evidence or leave to appeal I think) and your TV can be repossed because it is your human right to watch This Morning.

Its exactly that kind of nonsense that undermines everything you say.

You complain that we can't get people from Europe to face charges in the UK then complain about the existance of european arrest warrants. European arrest warrants are just the same as UK arrest warrants. They are a notice to the local police force that someone needs to be arrested. Or do you suggest we should go though the long extradition process every time someone commits a crime in the EU (where the all countrys are members of the ECHR and have propper protection and due process in place)? There dose have to be evidence. Just like any arrest warrant.

Why is it wrong that we cannot deport suspects to trial when they may be tourtured or killed? That it the point in universal human rights. They are universal. You do not get to pick and chose who they apply to. We can deport someone as long as they are going to get a fair trial and not have there human rights removed. Human rights say nothing about deporting people.

No idea what your on about with TVs.

Saying that I don't know the exact wording of a legal document but by the evidence of it implementation is is not doing the job it was intended to do, nor does the evidence denonstrate it adheres to the principals of a universally accepted (okay a few countries didn't sign it after the war) document. How does this undermine my comments?

No, my complaint is we can not get people out of the UK to face trial. But we can be called out of the UK to a european country on an european arrest warrant and have very little power to protect ourselves individually. The european arrest warrant is a good idea but there is not enough protection against its misuse or its use without good evidence; I don;t have links to the stories (check out the Daily Mail!) but there are cases were holdiay makers have been shipped back and held for long periods on remand in european countries before their cases are thrown out or disproven. The ECHR can do noting to protect against a EUro arrest warrant.

It is wrong to deport if someone faces persecution. The main chap talked about was convicted prior to his arrival in the UK. His retrial has been guaranteed in several ways and at several times to be fairly conducted and free of evidence gained from torture. But we still can not get rid of him.

The TV thing is a poke at what can and can not be repossed as people have a human right to a minimum standard of living (but forget that they should live responsibly to enbjoy it). To be honest its probably not an EU driven thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
@ Dael,
Historically Scottish People, Welsh People, even Cornish people are different races, they just have a similar skin tone and have been living together for hundreds of years.

No, they are not a different race. They are just not. SOME might like to claim they are, but they are not. The celts, as a race, ceased to exist a long time ago. On your basis we also have a split along the line of the danelaw.

Speak for yourself saxon dog!

I missed this one. Being split along the line of the danelaw sounds painful.

De - dum, thank you. I'll be appearing here all week.

The Germans have the working time directive too and they are a lot more productive and competitive than us.

They have better education and banking systems to support industry, though.

I really don't see why people would want to put in the hours the Americans and Japanese do. Or why they need to, with modern production technology.

 Jasper wrote:
(check out the Daily Mail!)

And thus the reason presents itself.

 Jasper wrote:

The TV thing is a poke at what can and can not be repossed as people have a human right to a minimum standard of living (but forget that they should live responsibly to enbjoy it). To be honest its probably not an EU driven thing.

And again you prove yourself to be completly ignorant of the world. I work in debt collection. I have worked in debt collection for close on 15 years. You have no idea how repossession works.

There is a very limited number of things a balliff cannot take. They cannot take things you need to live. This dose not include a TV. It includes things like basic furniture, cooker, fridge. This has nothing to do with EU law. It has nothing to do with UK legislation. It is part of UK common law. It dates back to the days of the Royal Assizes. These laws on what can and cannot be taken predate the concept of England as we know it today. They basicly say that you cannot leave someone destitute to pay a debt and that people have to live. It has nothing to do with any human rights laws AT ALL.

The debt collection industry dosn't think that you should be changing these laws, so why should you?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The Germans have the working time directive too and they are a lot more productive and competitive than us.

They have better education and banking systems to support industry, though.

I really don't see why people would want to put in the hours the Americans and Japanese do. Or why they need to, with modern production technology.

The Germans are better educated, kept and imporved the ir manufaturing base and more importantly kept wage inflation down, with the help of their unions, during the 10 year period that the souther countries over borrowed and allowed wage inflation to rise too high.

You're right people don't want to put in the USA/Japan style hours but with our education base in the UK is sadly slipping you need to put in the hours or accept a lower standard of living.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Goliath wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
(check out the Daily Mail!)

And thus the reason presents itself.

Don't understand this comment. The Daily Mail has lots of Anti-EU stories. If you want to find one to support an argument they are a natural place to go and search.

Or we could put the effort into an education and banking system that supports the creation of high quality jobs, like Germany.

The problem with the "work harder, not smarter" idea is that it is a race to the bottom and ultimately can only fail as we gradually compete more directly with China, South America and so on, which countries are starting from a lower cost base.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The key point being that the UK's decline is nothing to do with the EU.

 Jasper wrote:
(check out the Daily Mail!)

I would rather not.

 Jasper wrote:

but there are cases were holdiay makers have been shipped back and held for long periods on remand in european countries before their cases are thrown out or disproven. The ECHR can do noting to protect against a EUro arrest warrant.

So? People are held on remand in the UK only for there cases to be dropped or be found inocent. The only diffrence in other countrys is they are less likely to get bailed as they are a massive flight risk due to them having to be arrested on a european arrest warent in the first place. I.e. they have already run away.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

The TV thing is a poke at what can and can not be repossed as people have a human right to a minimum standard of living (but forget that they should live responsibly to enbjoy it). To be honest its probably not an EU driven thing.

And again you prove yourself to be completly ignorant of the world. I work in debt collection. I have worked in debt collection for close on 15 years. You have no idea how repossession works.

There is a very limited number of things a balliff cannot take. They cannot take things you need to live. This dose not include a TV. It includes things like basic furniture, cooker, fridge. This has nothing to do with EU law. It has nothing to do with UK legislation. It is part of UK common law. It dates back to the days of the Royal Assizes. These laws on what can and cannot be taken predate the concept of England as we know it today. They basicly say that you cannot leave someone destitute to pay a debt and that people have to live. It has nothing to do with any human rights laws AT ALL.

The debt collection industry dosn't think that you should be changing these laws, so why should you?

I didn't realise fridges pre-dated the concept of England as we know it.

My jest about the TV highlighted that people should be responsible for their actions and not fall back on human rights. Just like a mob turning up to hurl a few insults at Mr Farage and cost the rest of us tax player to pick up the bill for the police required to then protect him for this incident and at any future engagement.

I can't change laws. I don't remember suggesting that the debt collection laws need changing. People need to be made more aware of them to stop collectors conning their way into properties but apart from that they are okay.

Agree about not checking out the Daily Mail, you need to have your BS detector on full.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Or we could put the effort into an education and banking system that supports the creation of high quality jobs, like Germany.

The problem with the "work harder, not smarter" idea is that it is a race to the bottom and ultimately can only fail as we gradually compete more directly with China, South America and so on, which countries are starting from a lower cost base.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The key point being that the UK's decline is nothing to do with the EU.

I absolutely agree about education . Hopefully Mr Groves changes will get through without too much hassle from the Unions and we could do with less weak University courses. I think banking will be in a bad way in the UK, in or out of Europe their transaction tax is going to send banks and money flocking to Hong Kong.

When your main trading partner is in the cr*p it kinda pulls on you a bit. Maggie had us resurfacing for a time, well she got the lights back on.

 Jasper wrote:

My jest about the TV highlighted that people should be responsible for their actions and not fall back on human rights.

But it highlighted nothing but your missunderstanding of the subject. It has nothing to do with human rights and human rights do not stop people from being responsible for their actions. As you have shown time and again you do not understand the law, you do not understand the govenment and you do not have anything but hearsay and tittle tattle.

 Jasper wrote:

Just like a mob turning up to hurl a few insults at Mr Farage and cost the rest of us tax player to pick up the bill for the police required to then protect him for this incident and at any future engagement.

How about Farage takes responsability for himself and stands up for his policies? If they just wanted to hurl a few insults why are the police needed other than him wanting to hide behind his "rights".

 Jasper wrote:
Hopefully Mr Groves changes will get through without too much hassle from the Unions and we could do with less weak University courses.

Gove is an ideot who lives in the 1950s. Its not the Unions not wanting change, it is almost all teachers realising that roat learning and that kind of nonsense are of the past.

Weak university courses? Which would those be? I guess you mean the odd one that comes up like "David Beckham Studies"? You do know that these make up a vanishingly small number of courses right? UK universitys are some of the strongest in the world.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
(check out the Daily Mail!)

I would rather not.

 Jasper wrote:

but there are cases were holdiay makers have been shipped back and held for long periods on remand in european countries before their cases are thrown out or disproven. The ECHR can do noting to protect against a EUro arrest warrant.

So? People are held on remand in the UK only for there cases to be dropped or be found inocent. The only diffrence in other countrys is they are less likely to get bailed as they are a massive flight risk due to them having to be arrested on a european arrest warent in the first place. I.e. they have already run away.

Arrest warrants have usually been used when charges have been made in the abscence of the person and they are not able to answer any of the charges (give evidence) without adhereing to the warrant and then ending up in a foreign jail cell for far too long whilst an investigation starts. Think the Wikileaks chap and Sweden, arrest warrant on spurios one sided charges; and most of us don;t have the option of hangin out in the Peru Embassy (or wherever he is).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

My jest about the TV highlighted that people should be responsible for their actions and not fall back on human rights.

But it highlighted nothing but your missunderstanding of the subject. It has nothing to do with human rights and human rights do not stop people from being responsible for their actions. As you have shown time and again you do not understand the law, you do not understand the govenment and you do not have anything but hearsay and tittle tattle.

 Jasper wrote:

Just like a mob turning up to hurl a few insults at Mr Farage and cost the rest of us tax player to pick up the bill for the police required to then protect him for this incident and at any future engagement.

How about Farage takes responsability for himself and stands up for his policies? If they just wanted to hurl a few insults why are the police needed other than him wanting to hide behind his "rights".

Lots have people have misunderstanding of how debt collection works, that why so many collectors can con their way in. Don't deny it happens!

When a person in a wheel chair moves to stop you leaving a confrontation (you can't real force them out of the way) you have the option of standing outside and let tensions get worse or duck back in side and let worked up people let off steam shooting with less chance of it boiling over. He did the responsible thing for both him and the people protesting. If he fronted up and things had boiled over some of the protestors could be looking down the end of a criminal conviction to blight their futures.

Weak university courses include:

Fish stress management back from the mid 1990s and it just gets worse. Having 50% of the young population go to university is folly. You want the clever ones from ANY walk of life, then you need a good apprenticeship scheme to take the rest on, and get them through colleges and universities if it is then appropriate. (Wow , that sounds a UKIP / Mr Grove thing.)

Some of the UK universites are the best in the world be we are losing ground in the midfield universities with the rise of CHina and India.

 Jasper wrote:

Lots have people have misunderstanding of how debt collection works, that why so many collectors can con their way in. Don't deny it happens!

I didn't deny it. I'm not going to say it dosn't happen. It dose. It is a tiny minority of ballifs on the very outside of the whole credit industry that no reputable company would use. The industry is activly trying to stamp out the tiny number of problems. It is most definatly not "lots" or "so many". It is very very few. Most debt collection is not even balliffs. They are tiny part of the industry, and a tiny part of them are like that.

Those that do are committing a criminal offence and they should be held to account for it.

I don't get what your point is? Are you trying to make me look like a bad guy or embarrass me because of my job?

 Jasper wrote:

Fish stress management back from the mid 1990s and it just gets worse.

Again, you prove my point of not knowing what you are talking about. Fish stress management is a vital part of the aquaculture industry. Aquaculture (fish farming) is a major industry in the UK. Stressed fish don't grow well, get diseases and die.

Please please, for the love of god, stop reading rubbish news papers and think for yourself.

I don't disagree that a 50% aim for universitys is a bad thing. It's too much, but that has nothing to do with wether UKIP is a racist party or with the EU.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

Fish stress management back from the mid 1990s and it just gets worse.

Again, you prove my point of not knowing what you are talking about. Fish stress management is a vital part of the aquaculture industry. Aquaculture (fish farming) is a major industry in the UK. Stressed fish don't grow well, get diseases and die.

Please please, for the love of god, stop reading rubbish news papers and think for yourself.

I don't disagree that a 50% aim for universitys is a bad thing. It's too much, but that has nothing to do with wether UKIP is a racist party or with the EU.

You need to put up some smiley faces with statement like the fish one. It'll stop the forum rising as a baying mob and forcing you to take shelter in a nearby pub.

The fish stress management was a genuine course. I looked through it in a prospectus. I think it was aimed at ornamental fish - the big carp - you find in pools decorating fancy offices.
I suppose the chap who looked after Freddie Mercury's fish could have done with taking the course before the gardener switched off the pump to plug his lawnmower it. Wow that was 9 or 10 years ago now.

The university thing came in from another poster. But Mr G and Mr Fs (well Mr F is not to important as he will never get in) reforms should help stop the rot.
Universities have got a lot to do with the EU, the quirk were people resident in England have to pay if they go to Scottish Universities (Okay if you live in Wales you have to pay but the Welsh assemby subsidise it) whereas if it is the other way you do not.

 Jasper wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
(check out the Daily Mail!)

And thus the reason presents itself.

Don't understand this comment. The Daily Mail has lots of Anti-EU stories. If you want to find one to support an argument they are a natural place to go and search.

Ah, see the point that you've missed here, is that the Daily Mail is full of anti-EU stories. Many of which are utter hyperbole and fear-mongering. The Daily Mail is not a reliable source to get news from, unless you want it with a nice thick sheen of right-wingery and xenophobia.

To make an absurdist comparison, it's like someone backing up their hatred of the jews with "but it said in Mein Kampf that they were evil! Just read it and you'll see!" Not to say that your apparent reading of the Daily Mail has made you the lovely, vaguely xenophobic person here today, but that maybe you might be reading it because it backs up your own opinions?



(Yes, I do realise that I just Godwinned the thread)

 Jasper wrote:

You need to put up some smiley faces with statement like the fish one. It'll stop the forum rising as a baying mob and forcing you to take shelter in a nearby pub.

The fish stress management was a genuine course. I looked through it in a prospectus. I think it was aimed at ornamental fish - the big carp - you find in pools decorating fancy offices.

Why? I'm serious. Stress is a major cause of death in fish in aquaculture. Aquaculture is a major industry in the UK. Not much diffrence between Koi carp and commercial carp fisheries. Someone has to teach about it. Often universitys will run courses for one year for a major sponsor who has a number of people they want to attend, and open it up to other students to make extra money.

 Jasper wrote:

The university thing came in from another poster. But Mr G and Mr Fs

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about Gove has nothing to do with Universitys...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jasper wrote:

Universities have got a lot to do with the EU, the quirk were people resident in England have to pay if they go to Scottish Universities (Okay if you live in Wales you have to pay but the Welsh assemby subsidise it) whereas if it is the other way you do not.

You can't even use the facts I gave you right. It is a quirk of the UK that people resident in England have to pay if they go to Scottish Universities. Nothing to do with the EU.

Hang on,

Sorry Steve I didn't mean to imply anything about you. Accuse me of tittale tattle if you want but there are lots of reports of this inproper entry happening. Looking from the outside the industry and in it appear to be a problem (you get similar horror stories with clamping) and unfortunately and industry get tainted by the actions of a few.

In a similar way UKIP are tainted by silly things going, we need to wait and see how far any of the BNP / or racist have got into UKIP in there recent rapid expansion.

People need to live within their means, debts need collecting both from private individuals and from companies to keep the economy ticking over.

We obviously have differing opinions on somethings but I didn't mean any slight. I've quite enjoyed thrashing threw lots of things today.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

You need to put up some smiley faces with statement like the fish one. It'll stop the forum rising as a baying mob and forcing you to take shelter in a nearby pub.

The fish stress management was a genuine course. I looked through it in a prospectus. I think it was aimed at ornamental fish - the big carp - you find in pools decorating fancy offices.

Why? I'm serious. Stress is a major cause of death in fish in aquaculture. Aquaculture is a major industry in the UK. Not much diffrence between Koi carp and commercial carp fisheries. Someone has to teach about it. Often universitys will run courses for one year for a major sponsor who has a number of people they want to attend, and open it up to other students to make extra money.

 Jasper wrote:

The university thing came in from another poster. But Mr G and Mr Fs

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about Gove has nothing to do with Universitys...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jasper wrote:

Universities have got a lot to do with the EU, the quirk were people resident in England have to pay if they go to Scottish Universities (Okay if you live in Wales you have to pay but the Welsh assemby subsidise it) whereas if it is the other way you do not.

You can't even use the facts I gave you right. It is a quirk of the UK that people resident in England have to pay if they go to Scottish Universities. Nothing to do with the EU.

Do you really need a full time course for fish stress. No this is apprenticeship or college territory.
If you raise the standards within schools you get a student population more willing and capable of taking on serious courses and the soft ones will die away more quickly. His reforms (or some reforms) are important to achieve this.

Agree it is aquirk of the UK but it is a terrible situation where other european nationals have better access to UK universities than people resident in the UK have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Goliath wrote:

 Jasper wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 Jasper wrote:
(check out the Daily Mail!)

And thus the reason presents itself.

Don't understand this comment. The Daily Mail has lots of Anti-EU stories. If you want to find one to support an argument they are a natural place to go and search.

Ah, see the point that you've missed here, is that the Daily Mail is full of anti-EU stories. Many of which are utter hyperbole and fear-mongering. The Daily Mail is not a reliable source to get news from, unless you want it with a nice thick sheen of right-wingery and xenophobia.

To make an absurdist comparison, it's like someone backing up their hatred of the jews with "but it said in Mein Kampf that they were evil! Just read it and you'll see!" Not to say that your apparent reading of the Daily Mail has made you the lovely, vaguely xenophobic person here today, but that maybe you might be reading it because it backs up your own opinions?



(Yes, I do realise that I just Godwinned the thread)

It does carry stories that others don't and it is right wing. But once you apply the BS detector they can be quite interesting.

 Jasper wrote:

Do you really need a full time course for fish stress. No this is apprenticeship or college territory.
If you raise the standards within schools you get a student population more willing and capable of taking on serious courses and the soft ones will die away more quickly. His reforms (or some reforms) are important to achieve this.

No idea what the content or level of the course was. All I'm saing that a name of a course dose not in and of itself make it worthless.

 Jasper wrote:

Agree it is aquirk of the UK but it is a terrible situation where other european nationals have better access to UK universities than people resident in the UK have.

Well, fixing that would meen the reversal of devolution.

Steve,

I'm signing off. Need to dash before the angry mob finds me (no my name is not Nigel)! It's been interesting chattering.

Fair enough. It's been fun. I'll tell them you went the other way

EU students can study for free at scottish universities, students with an english address can not.

As it should be until the oppression stops.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

EU students can study for free at scottish universities, students with an english address can not.

As it should be until the oppression stops.

I do not think that word means what you think it means.

That clearly isn't true as students resident in the UK are EU students.

 Steve steveson wrote:


How about Farage takes responsability for himself and stands up for his policies? If they just wanted to hurl a few insults why are the police needed other than him wanting to hide behind his "rights".

What an idiotic thing to say. Thats the worst case of blame the victim I have seen in a long time.

Farage went to Edinburgh peacefully and when the imported mob harassed him he tried reasoning with them, as reported by the press. However the mob had no interest in reason.

The police ushered him away. Police are charged with protection of public figures, when incidents like this happen they take control. This is the same for any poltician.

The fact that he tried dialogue is proof enough that he was not hiding behind 'rights'. The police are needed because of scum, supported by apologists who think that such harassment is justifiable. Sad to see that some of those happen to infect Dakka.

Wow just wow, I don't even know where to start with all of this. It went all over the place.

 Frazzled wrote:

1. Who or what is he?

The leader of UK independence party and one of our representatives in the european parliament. Currently no UKIP members represent any UK constituencies in parliament. They did win some local council seats in recent local elections but don't control any councils.

Or

The Messiah he even walked away from a plane crash.

 Frazzled wrote:

2. If you're going to hide out, hiding out in a bar is not bad.

One could argue that there is no better place to hide out.

 Frazzled wrote:

3. Real menz don't hide, unless its from da wimminz.

Lol the pub is probably the best place for that as well.

Now on to some comments I want to that's wrong, I wish I didn't have to but feel I need to, respond to. I won't dig out the quotes because the thread just got to messy to bother finding them so I'm just going to paraphrase.

Its not immigrants its immigration that's causing problems in this country, believing that doesn't make me racist"

Sorry what? Don't get me wrong I understand why some people may not want immigration at the level it is, I don't agree with their believes but I do understand why they hold them. But stating that you don't believe that immigrants are causing a problem its the government letting them in that is causing the problem is so utterly idiotic I am lost for words. If the immigrants aren't a problem then surely immigration shouldn't be a problem. If immigration is a problem it must be because of the immigrants and yes you are being xenophobic.

I would respect these people more if they just admitted their believes but then doublethink is a powerful thing.

Now if its over population you have a problem with then that's a real concern, a global concern and all preventing immigration does is sweep it under the carpet and postpone the inevitable.

Most crimes are committed by black people therefore black people are obviously predisposed to commit crimes

So a disclaimer, I don't know the statistics for crime rates for different ethnic groups, its irrelevant, I don't care. This isn't stupidity, it is racism pure and simple. I'm not even going to waste my time explaining why.

 Steve steveson wrote:


How about Farage takes responsability for himself and stands up for his policies? If they just wanted to hurl a few insults why are the police needed other than him wanting to hide behind his "rights".

.

The man hung up on an interviewer this morning who was trying to discuss the matter, calling the man racist... I don't see that as him trying his best to hold a discussion. Have we had a response from him regarding the First Minister saying he's lost the plot yet? =P

If anyone's "scum" its this man. Our country's past the point when we should have people acting as though its still the days of colonialism.

 Wyrmalla wrote:


If anyone's "scum" its this man. Our country's past the point when we should have people acting as though its still the days of colonialism.

How is what Farage doing or saying 'colonialism'.

I mean his attitude. When you could go around acting like he does and it would be considered proper. As a country I think we're past the point that we fit that stereotype, but I guess somehow people like him still manage to crawl up.

 Wyrmalla wrote:
I mean his attitude. When you could go around acting like he does and it would be considered proper. As a country I think we're past the point that we fit that stereotype, but I guess somehow people like him still manage to crawl up.

What attitude, and acting like what? Please try to make sense.

Farage doesnt come across as someone who has an attitude problem, he is polite for one, unlike the people who came at him. Note that having policies you don't agree with is not a good definition of an attitude problem.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Wyrmalla wrote:
I mean his attitude. When you could go around acting like he does and it would be considered proper. As a country I think we're past the point that we fit that stereotype, but I guess somehow people like him still manage to crawl up.

What attitude, and acting like what? Please try to make sense.

Farage doesnt come across as someone who has an attitude problem, he is polite for one, unlike the people who came at him. Note that having policies you don't agree with is not a good definition of an attitude problem.

I take it you haven't seen him speak in the EU Parliament then? He's like a petulant child, insulting and throwing personal insults at anyone he disagrees with. That's hardly statesman like behaviour.


In other UKIP news, one councillor lasted a whole 12 days before being forced to resign over racist comments. This means the council will have to pay thousands for another election. Also the Sunday Mirror has discovered various other councillors making racist comments.

Nigel Farage’s UKIP party is still riddled with racism... despite his claim of a crackdown.
A Sunday Mirror investigation has discovered sickening rants on the Facebook pages of party officials.
Details of their vitriol emerged only days after Eric Kitson quit as a councillor in Stourbridge, Worcs, after we exposed his internet slurs against Muslims and Jews.
Last month Farage claimed “a huge amount of time and money” had been spent researching the backgrounds of council candidates.
He said: “Our membership is up nearly 50 per cent, and inevitably we are going to have one or two teething problems.”
But today we can reveal his members’ latest hate-fuelled ­postings.
Ukip’s leader of Lincs Council Chris Pain, the party’s East Midlands regional chairman, wrote: “Have you noticed that if you ­rearrange the letters in ‘illegal ­immigrants’, and add just a few more letters, it spells, ‘Go home you free-loading, benefit-grabbing, resource-sucking, baby-making, non-English-speaking ********* and take those other hairy-faced, sandal-wearing, bomb-making, camel-riding, goat-********, raghead ******** with you.’”
Mr Pain has also ­objected to foreign doctors working in the NHS.
Last May he posted a story about a Hungarian medic who bungled an operation on a four-year-old boy in Manchester, and wrote: “We don’t want them taking all the jobs in the local community and we certainly don’t want them working in our hospitals!”
Peter Entwistle, party chairman in Bury, Greater Manchester, labelled President Barack Obama a Muslim, writing: “I bet he’s a closet ‘Imam’ as well!
"If I ever see him on a Greyhound bus wearing a rucksack, I’m getting off!!”
The party’s deputy chairman in Scotland, Misty Thackeray, “liked” a Facebook group claiming “paedophilia is part of Islamic tradition”.
He also praised far-right Dutch politician Geert Wilders, a self-­confessed “hater of Islam”.
Recommending Mr Wilders’ new book, he said: “Geert is great ...(peace be upon him.. lol) ..!”
Meanwhile Tiggs Keywood-­Wainwright, a Ukip councillor in Boston, Lincs, complained about mosques being built in “quintessentially English” Cambridge. “Is nowhere sacred for the Brits in Britain any more?” she wrote.
“Bottom line is we have too many muslims in this country!”
Mr Pain said the comments on his Facebook pages were “not my original posts or writings”, claiming his ­account had been hacked.
Mr Entwistle laughed when confronted about his President Obama bus comments, saying: “I don’t think I’d be the only one getting off.”
Mr Thackeray refused to comment on “this ridiculous nonsense”. He said Mr Wilders was a “legally, democratically-elected politician”.
Ms Keywood-Wainwright admitted she “probably” regretted some of her remarks.
She claimed she meant there were too many Muslims “in certain areas”, adding: “My GPs are all Muslims and I have no ­problem with them at all.
"One of them is extremely nice and very, very good at her job.”
Farage described demonstrators who besieged him in Edinburgh on Thursday as “fascist scum”.
He also slammed the phone down on a BBC interviewer questioning him about Scots issues.

Source