What's Italian for 'kipper? Anti-migrant stunt goes awry.

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

AW111 said:

Am I mistaken, or are many of the vociferous anti-AGW posters also vociferous pro-UKIP posters?

I noticed that as well.

FWIW I think both issues (MMGW and UKIP) have reasonable arguments "For" and "Against" - unfortunately the "We're absolutely right and if you disagree then you're all a bunch of BBC supporting lefty groupthink useful idiots" Brigade tend to weaken their case by not accepting this.

The common factor is that anti-AGW viewpoints and anti-UKIP-bashing viewpoints (UKIP bashing that's punted via the racism card) are based on evidence/data. Those who can't beat evidence/data attempt the same smear tactics and name-calling on both types of thread. Now we've got people who believe in one myth telling people to believe in another myth while smearing people who don't accept their myth. The irony runs very deep with this one.

[AW111]

turbobloke said:

<snip>

The vociferious minority of a loyal liberal-left persuasion who don't get to see much if any material in The Guardian or on the BBC which is commonplace on PH are shocked to realise that unlike CIF, having a rational viewpoint supported by credible evidence doesn't result in posts being deleted and access denied.

<snip>

Can one assume that CIF has banned you?

[turbobloke]

AW111 said:

turbobloke said:

<snip>

The vociferious minority of a loyal liberal-left persuasion who don't get to see much if any material in The Guardian or on the BBC which is commonplace on PH are shocked to realise that unlike CIF, having a rational viewpoint supported by credible evidence doesn't result in posts being deleted and access denied.

<snip>

Can one assume that CIF has banned you?

Together with other PHers who dared to post moderately worded narrative with links to research evidence. Can one assume you disagree with silencing different viewpoints for the sake of portraying a false consensus?

[Colonial]

Breadvan72 said:

It just keeps getting better: So contrite are UKIP about the racist tt Lampitt that they have just re broadcast his election spiel in Wales. The TV station said "are you sure?", but UKIP said "yeah, put it on".

Maybe, just maybe, they are trying to appeal to a racist voter, and know that people who get offended won't vote for them anyway. It's risky, but I can see why they would go through such a ploy.

It's coming back more and more to a very cynically put together approach, orchestrated by a very convincing snake oil salesman.

[turbobloke]

Colonial said:

Breadvan72 said:

It just keeps getting better: So contrite are UKIP about the racist tt Lampitt that they have just re broadcast his election spiel in Wales. The TV station said "are you sure?", but UKIP said "yeah, put it on".

Maybe, just maybe, they are trying to appeal to a racist voter, and know that people who get offended won't vote for them anyway.

Maybe so, or maybe not.

The most banal of practical explanations can turn out to be more relevant than conspiracy theory.

[10 Pence Short]

Colonial said:

Maybe, just maybe, they are trying to appeal to a racist voter, and know that people who get offended won't vote for them anyway. It's risky, but I can see why they would go through such a ploy.

It's coming back more and more to a very cynically put together approach, orchestrated by a very convincing snake oil salesman.

Forget what Farage says about wanting MPs in our parliament, or growth of UKIP as a domestic power- this is all a total red herring. It is entirely based upon maximising their position in the EU to make maximum profit.

Amongst British voters there has long been apathy towards EU elections. Just look at the turnout figures, they're abysmal. This means a party who wants to achieve results in EU elections doesn't need to mobilise too many people to get them.

Farage knows that there are enough EU sceptics, ignorants, xenophobes and racists out there that, if they can be persuaded to vote, can swing the balance in EU elections in UKIP's favour. They're not bothered about middle-of-the-road voters because they don't vote in EU elections in any case, so they don't need to be overcome.

It is our apathy towards the EU that provided UKIP the opportunity.

Once they've got their MEP wins, UKIP are back on the gravy train, hardly attending, claiming maximum allowances, pensions, salary and expenses, whilst associating with other European racists and producing virtually no discernible work on behalf of their constituents. It's a multi-year contract to earn loads of wonga for doing very little work.

Who wouldn't want that?

[TKF]

mrpurple said:

Nothing like a good bit of UKIP bashing to cheer everyone up.
So all the other parties are full of saints then?

I see you flipped through the UKIP handbook to the page entitled "How to deal with evidence that UKIP candidates are actually xenophobic/racist/homophobic/delete as applicable loons"

It's a fairly blank page isn't it? Just the words "ignore, deflect, accuse".

[AW111]

turbobloke said:

Together with other PHers who dared to post moderately worded narrative with links to research evidence. Can one assume you disagree with silencing different viewpoints for the sake of portraying a false consensus?

I disagree with silencing opposing viewpoints, but I agree with moderating those who flood threads with repeated copies of the same post again and again.

Life is never simple, is it - so many issues come down to where you draw the line.



Did you get any explanation for post deletion / ban?

[turbobloke]

Who doesn't dislike troughers. Is there any evidence UKIP MEPs are better than, worse than, or about the same as, the large number of non-UKIP MEP troughers?

[TKF]

You couldn't make this up. Not only is Farage's wife cahmin ov'rere nikkin ahh jobs but it seems the "British worker" in this ad is Irish.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27154700

>checks handbook<
This is yet another attack on UKIP by the MSM/establishment. (am I doing it right? My handbook is old and has some Godfrey phrases about Bongo-Bongo land and sluts)

Edited by TKF on Sunday 27th April 10:47

[10 Pence Short]

turbobloke said:

Who doesn't dislike troughers. Is there any evidence UKIP MEPs are better than, worse than, or about the same as, the large number of non-UKIP MEP troughers?

Aren't they supposed to be better than the others?

In any case, their absolute work done and influence imposed is measured by their own actions and achievements. On any measure UKIP have a pretty abysmal record of participation in the EU Parliament and results from their (lack of) work. It is worse than their domestic rivals but, even if it weren't, how would that end justify the means?

Can any UKIP fans point us to any meaningful achievements by their MEPs since the inception of UKIP?

Edited by 10 Pence Short on Sunday 27th April 10:50

[turbobloke]

AW111 said:

turbobloke said:

Together with other PHers who dared to post moderately worded narrative with links to research evidence. Can one assume you disagree with silencing different viewpoints for the sake of portraying a false consensus?

I disagree with silencing opposing viewpoints, but I agree with moderating those who flood threads with repeated copies of the same post again and again.

Me too, so a first post which becomes a last post adds to the irony I wasn't banned for repetition, deviation or hesitation merely for posting something which committed heresy against doctrine.

Exactly the same thing applies to my replies on other PH threads arising from activists starting attrition loops covering the same old topics, that get patient re-explanations of matters already explained. Better than insults, would you not agree? Though I begain pointing out the attrition loop effect when it reached silly proportions. In other examples of sameness, there are questions that politicians, the BBC, Guardian etc won't address or answer, which recur from time to time. This can be healthy as it allows the avoidance and diversionary tactics to be made visible.

AW111 said:

Did you get any explanation for post deletion / ban?

Nothing whatsoever.

In this thread there are similar attributes appearing, due to the shared politics behind the scenes. So, to keep on topic...

The BBC and The Guardian support AGW, support the EU and demonise UKIP due to the associated politics, not because there is anything much by way of data and credible evidence to justify their position. Those who support the same politics as the BBC and The Guardian tend to take a similar stand on these issues. What a surprise!

BBC veteran Peter Sissons speaking about beeb DNA said:

Whatever the United Nations is associated with is good — it is heresy to question any of its activities. The EU is also a good thing, but not quite as good as the UN.

All green and environmental groups are very good things. Al Gore is a saint.

At this point Septic Peg might predict we'll soon be told how wonderful the UN is, that the UN hates UKIP due to racism, UN expense claims add up to nothing much, and its dad is bigger anyway. While also asking when Toynbee and Monbiot will be canonised...as the thread spins its way onwards and sidways

In terms of the thread, somebody might say that as the story appears to be unfounded, the topic is moribund. UKIP bashing not so. Long live discussion and open debate, long live the thread

[turbobloke]

10 Pence Short said:

turbobloke said:

Who doesn't dislike troughers. Is there any evidence UKIP MEPs are better than, worse than, or about the same as, the large number of non-UKIP MEP troughers?

Aren't they supposed to be better than the others?

Is there evidence that they are or are not...this was my question.

[Colonial]

turbobloke said:

Maybe so, or maybe not.

The most banal of practical explanations can turn out to be more relevant than conspiracy theory.

The most banal explanation that the people making the decisions are absolute idiots with no thought given to consequences of them not reviewing their work and a party that simply doesn't care.

[turbobloke]

Colonial said:

turbobloke said:

Maybe so, or maybe not.

The most banal of practical explanations can turn out to be more relevant than conspiracy theory.

The most banal explanation that the people making the decisions are absolute idiots with no thought given to consequences of them not reviewing their work and a party that simply doesn't care.

That's possible but not banal!

Can we take it you won't be voting for UKIP

[10 Pence Short]

turbobloke said:

Is there evidence that they are or are not...this was my question.

Yes, take a look at their voting record, for example (participation, rather than direction). Look at their use of expenses and maximisation of financial gain (in opposition to their public stance). Look at their formal associations with racist groups and the use of such to gain financial benefits (more than £1m) by forming Groups with them. Look at their lack of influence in the EU by their refusal to participate properly.

Where are the fruits of UKIPs labour as a group of MEPs?

You are adept at finding evidence, so I doubt I have to spoon feed you with URLs to demonstrate the above as being evidenced.

[turbobloke]

PS

For avoidance of doubt the smiley indicated awareness of xolonial's location.

[Colonial]

turbobloke said:

That's possible but not banal!

Can we take it you won't be voting for UKIP

Out of interest what do you put the decision to broadcast the unedited version?

I am clearly in the cynical camp, but laziness and ineptitude is an option.

[Mojocvh]

Guam said:

dandarez said:

mrpurple said:

Nothing like a good bit of UKIP bashing to cheer everyone up.
So all the other parties are full of saints then?

No. They're worse!

Like these Tory gits who thought this funny ...in France.

FRANCE! of all places.

Pot, Kettle & Black eh?

Nothing unusual about that, just some good old Tories "aving a larf", now if it had been royals we might have had serious concerns....................oh wait!



Its only racist if you are working class, if you are part of the elite it is misplaced humour!

Depends just where in France though......

EfF

Edited by Mojocvh on Sunday 27th April 11:18

[turbobloke]

10 Pence Short said:

turbobloke said:

Is there evidence that they are or are not...this was my question.

Yes, take a look at their voting record, for example (participation, rather than direction). Look at their use of expenses and maximisation of financial gain (in opposition to their public stance). Look at their formal associations with racist groups and the use of such to gain financial benefits (more than £1m) by forming Groups with them. Look at their lack of influence in the EU by their refusal to participate properly.

Where are the fruits of UKIPs labour as a group of MEPs?

You are adept at finding evidence, so I doubt I have to spoon feed you with URLs to demonstrate the above as being evidenced.

The warmth of your compliment is much appreciated

With your own finely tuned sleuthing skills you'll also be able to find very easily a 2013 study based on 2012 numbers claiming that MEPs had an average income of £182,826 including allowances.

In UKIP-bashing articles, for which the BBC, The Mirror and The Guardian are just about the only places to look (certainly the easiest by far, shared political dogma etc) there are protest pieces about UKIP expenses that look as though they're aiming for effect purely from the sums involved rather than making any comparisons.

So purely for the record, against that £180k average, we're told that papers seen by the Sunday Mirror in an article also easily found, and it must be genuine as it's not in the Daily Mail, show UKIP MEPs claimed an average of £35,635 in allowances in 2012. Add that to their £79,000 salary and it looks to be well below the overall average.

This relates to overall pay, in terms of individual allowance payments the variation among UKIP MEPs named in the various Mirror/Guardian articles is between £40k and £80k and ideally we'd need the overall average purely for allowances to get the full picture.

For whatever reasons, UKIP don't appear to be the biggest drain on EU resources.

Edited by turbobloke on Sunday 27th April 11:27