What's Italian for 'kipper? Anti-migrant stunt goes awry.
Discussion
Mr Snap said:
steveT350C said:
Mr Snap said:
"Yes, it'll be fun in the next GE watching UKIP candidate after UKIP candidate get shot down in flames for saying stupid things, posting racist comments on twitter etc etc.
All of today's column inches are about the racist comments made against Lenny Henry by the UKIP candidate for Enfield."
In the context of his reply to Lenny Henry's recent lobbying, in what way were the comments racist?
Mr Snap, please answer....
If you can't understand why the comments might be seen as racist, then there's not much point arguing with you. If you have information that the papers haven't published, let us know what it is. (Please don't tell us he was misquoted and he was telling Lenny to go back to the black country…). "Yes, it'll be fun in the next GE watching UKIP candidate after UKIP candidate get shot down in flames for saying stupid things, posting racist comments on twitter etc etc.
All of today's column inches are about the racist comments made against Lenny Henry by the UKIP candidate for Enfield."
In the context of his reply to Lenny Henry's recent lobbying, in what way were the comments racist?
Mr Snap, please answer....
Edited by steveT350C on Sunday 27th April 15:31
I'll tell you what, let's wait and see what UKIP party central says about it, eh? Then, when he's been thrown out or reprimanded, we can discuss it again.
Here is the quote, via BBC,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27176803
and, you have still not answered why YOU think what he said, in context, was racist?? Please explain.....
steveT350C said:
AW111 said:
One thing I genuinely don't understand : where is the single UKIP supporter who says "yep, we have an image problem caused by a (tiny) minority of xenophobes; we have to get better at background checking our candidates / advertising, and make it plain that racism is a big no-no".
There's a lot of talk about smears and spin, but surely if you want to win seats in a general election, you would be seriously concerned at stopping the bad PR at the source, ie from within the party.
I think Mr Farage has said that, and done that....There's a lot of talk about smears and spin, but surely if you want to win seats in a general election, you would be seriously concerned at stopping the bad PR at the source, ie from within the party.
As a 'start-up' party with high growth, it is very difficult to keep a 100% clean sheet.
Breadvan72 said:
steveT350C said:
AW111 said:
One thing I genuinely don't understand : where is the single UKIP supporter who says "yep, we have an image problem caused by a (tiny) minority of xenophobes; we have to get better at background checking our candidates / advertising, and make it plain that racism is a big no-no".
There's a lot of talk about smears and spin, but surely if you want to win seats in a general election, you would be seriously concerned at stopping the bad PR at the source, ie from within the party.
I think Mr Farage has said that, and done that....There's a lot of talk about smears and spin, but surely if you want to win seats in a general election, you would be seriously concerned at stopping the bad PR at the source, ie from within the party.
As a 'start-up' party with high growth, it is very difficult to keep a 100% clean sheet.
steveT350C said:
Why have you made bold 'the'
Here is the quote, via BBC,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27176803
and, you have still not answered why YOU think what he said, in context, was racist?? Please explain.....
If you can't understand why I made 'the' bold, then there's probably not much point explaining that to you either. Maybe if you thought for a few moments about Lenny Henry's place a birth. Otherwise, there's not much to be done apart from instituting you into the Honourable Order of the Terminally Baffled Whooshed Parrots. Congratulations! Here is the quote, via BBC,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27176803
and, you have still not answered why YOU think what he said, in context, was racist?? Please explain.....
As for why I think the statement was racist. Well, old chap, telling black people to go and live in a "black people's country" especially when they were born in the UK, is generally considered to be racist. Don't blame me, I don't make the rules.
How can it be a start up when it has been contesting elections since the 1990s and has several MEPs? The Greens were going for ages before they got one MP in 2010. Would you have called them a start up? How about the BNP? Extant for years, have had a few Councillors, no MPs. A start up?
Something that would be a start - those UKIP MEPs doing the jobs that they are paid to do.
Something that would be a start - those UKIP MEPs doing the jobs that they are paid to do.
Ozzie Osmond said:
Breadvan72 said:
the same old xenophobes, homophobes and assorted loons keep popping up.
Thank goodness they do. Shows UKIP for what it really is. Nasty fringe outfit, appealing to the narrow-minded and "nationalists" of the old school. Mr Snap said:
steveT350C said:
Why have you made bold 'the'
Here is the quote, via BBC,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27176803
and, you have still not answered why YOU think what he said, in context, was racist?? Please explain.....
If you can't understand why I made 'the' bold, then there's probably not much point explaining that to you either. Maybe if you thought for a few moments about Lenny Henry's place a birth. Otherwise, there's not much to be done apart from instituting you into the Honourable Order of the Terminally Baffled Whooshed Parrots. Congratulations! Here is the quote, via BBC,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27176803
and, you have still not answered why YOU think what he said, in context, was racist?? Please explain.....
As for why I think the statement was racist. Well, old chap, telling black people to go and live in a "black people's country" especially when they were born in the UK, is generally considered to be racist. Don't blame me, I don't make the rules.
Edited by steveT350C on Sunday 27th April 16:42
AW111 said:
One thing I genuinely don't understand : where is the single UKIP supporter who says "yep, we have an image problem caused by a (tiny) minority of xenophobes; we have to get better at background checking our candidates / advertising, and make it plain that racism is a big no-no".
There's a lot of talk about smears and spin, but surely if you want to win seats in a general election, you would be seriously concerned at stopping the bad PR at the source, ie from within the party.
This is what I have been saying though, albeit not a kipper. There's a lot of talk about smears and spin, but surely if you want to win seats in a general election, you would be seriously concerned at stopping the bad PR at the source, ie from within the party.
Ukip were infiltrated by the BNP we know it they know it. They rejected the overtures from Griffin and dealt with those at the top end who were sympathetic to BNP.
The problem that remains is that there are still infiltrators from BNP in the party. How many? Well who knows and the rate the membership has grown a real vetting is not possible. However it is possible to vet those who rise in the hierarchy and in particular put up as candidates or as the face. It must be possible to vet these people. It only takes one to slip through and the damage is done.
I'm sorry if this view is not palatable but it needs to be said and sorted.
It's like the Farage employing his wife thing. They said it so however inconvenient it was and how stupid it was to make that promise it should havenbeen kept.
On the other hand I have been warning for two years that this election campaign will get very dirty. The speed with which it has gone there is simply showing how scared the usual suspects are, rightly or wrongly we will see on the day, and the lack of real non smear arguments from the usual suspects shows a paucity of policies and ideas.
A key UKIP theme here seems to be the making of paper thin excuses for persistent bad behaviour. Guam says "perhaps it was contracts" as an excuse for repeating the Lampitt broadcast (it wasn't, as a few seconds of Googling would have shown). Steve says "UKIP is a start up" (it was founded in 1993 and has several elected members of political entities). Others don't even bother with excuses. They simply ignore the endless stream of "oops, another UKIP candidate saying really bizarre and/or unpleasant things", and suggest, sometimes in shrill terms, that for some reason it is unfair to point these incidents out.
There is a legitimate debate about whether the UK should remain in the EU, but UKIP, whilst proposing "leave the EU" as its main or sole articulated policy, brings together an assortment of people some of whom seem to want rather more than just that. Some of what some of those people want is pretty ugly, as their tweets and UKIP forum posts etc confirm. Others want stuff that is just daft (all taxi drivers to wear uniform - a manifesto pledge), but with the bigots on one end and the fringe loons on the other, where does this leave the sensible debate about in/out of the EU?
There is a legitimate debate about whether the UK should remain in the EU, but UKIP, whilst proposing "leave the EU" as its main or sole articulated policy, brings together an assortment of people some of whom seem to want rather more than just that. Some of what some of those people want is pretty ugly, as their tweets and UKIP forum posts etc confirm. Others want stuff that is just daft (all taxi drivers to wear uniform - a manifesto pledge), but with the bigots on one end and the fringe loons on the other, where does this leave the sensible debate about in/out of the EU?
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 27th April 16:48
Breadvan72 said:
A key UKIP theme here seems to be the making of paper thin excuses for persistent bad behaviour. Guam says "perhaps it was contracts" as an excuse for repeating the Lampitt broadcast (it wasn't, as a few seconds of Googling would have shown). Steve says "UKIP (founded 1993 and possessed of elected members of political entities) is a start up". Others don't even bother with excuses. They simply ignore the endless stream of "oops, another UKIP candidate saying really bizarre and/or unpleasant things", and suggest that for some reason it is unfair to point these incidents out.
There is a legitimate debate about whether the UK should remain in the EU, but UKIP, whilst proposing "leave the EU" as its main or sole articulated policy, brings together an assortment of people some of whom seem to want rather more than just that. Some of what some of those people want is pretty ugly, as their tweets and UKIP forum posts etc confoim. Others want stuff that is just daft (all taxi drivers to wear uniform - a manifesto pledge), but with the bigots on one end and the fringe loons on the other, where does this leave the sensible debate about in/out of the EU?
Out, of course...There is a legitimate debate about whether the UK should remain in the EU, but UKIP, whilst proposing "leave the EU" as its main or sole articulated policy, brings together an assortment of people some of whom seem to want rather more than just that. Some of what some of those people want is pretty ugly, as their tweets and UKIP forum posts etc confoim. Others want stuff that is just daft (all taxi drivers to wear uniform - a manifesto pledge), but with the bigots on one end and the fringe loons on the other, where does this leave the sensible debate about in/out of the EU?
steveT350C said:
Breadvan72 said:
steveT350C said:
AW111 said:
One thing I genuinely don't understand : where is the single UKIP supporter who says "yep, we have an image problem caused by a (tiny) minority of xenophobes; we have to get better at background checking our candidates / advertising, and make it plain that racism is a big no-no".
There's a lot of talk about smears and spin, but surely if you want to win seats in a general election, you would be seriously concerned at stopping the bad PR at the source, ie from within the party.
I think Mr Farage has said that, and done that....There's a lot of talk about smears and spin, but surely if you want to win seats in a general election, you would be seriously concerned at stopping the bad PR at the source, ie from within the party.
As a 'start-up' party with high growth, it is very difficult to keep a 100% clean sheet.
As to that 'founded last century' line, I'm lovin it
UKIP: founded 1993
LibDems: founded 1988
Labour: emerged 1900
Liberals: evolved 1850
Tories: founded 1834
Whigs: formalised 1784
Whigs: founded 1678
Lots of dates can be found for some parties and the above is a selection based on some of the available information on each Party.
The other young Party also has an image problem as they're even less popular than UKIP. Each one of the Party list above has had its moments with oddballs diverting attention from policy issues.
Breadvan72 said:
Still ducking the awkward questions about bigotry in the ranks, I see, WW.
At least with Gordon Brown his own bigot response was caught by a microphone, it was OK though as he was the leader of a long-established Party at the time. The claimed 'bigot' had a complaint for GB with some resonance to this thread - Eastern European migrants - yet a mortified and penitent GB himself, and just about every commentator, judged GB to be wrong with his smear 
Lessons from history etc.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff