UKIP - The Future - Volume 3

[brenflys777]

XJ Flyer said:

brenflys777 said:

XJ Flyer said:

don4l said:

XJ Flyer said:

But we should have the right to expect better and different in the case of UKIP.

Why?

Because that is what UKIP 'says' it is 'supposedly' all about.

Provide some quotes from UKIP themselves to support your interminably weak arguments. If you are right in thinking that UKIP are anti any immigration or that they propose to 'send back' immigrants British born descendants, then UKIP can stuff off if they expect my vote.

I don't think that's the case though, I think you are just deluded. You seem to have values closer to BNP than UKIP.

I think the idea of a retrospectively applied non EU immigration policy assuming we leave the EU is actually closer to the reasoning of the Labour to UKIP swing vote than the BNP.IE what's the point of a party that 'says' it will stop the import of cheap east European labour thereby reducing downward pressure on wages if that policy isn't applied retrospectively.

As for place of birth being the definition of nationality we've seen where that is going in the case of so called 'British' Jihadists.

Basically, you can't give quotes from UKIP to support your assertions because you are talking nonsense. Prove me wrong or please stop the incessant mashing of keyboard.

[jogon]

eharding said:

Can I just say at this point that watching two of the most demented, reactionary, bigoted and downright odious spacktards we've seen of late in the PH shire battle it out for the title of Biggest Throbbing Pure Blood 'Kipper Bell-End is deeply, deeply satisfying.

Poor old Nigel. Trying to keep a lid on UKIP's natural disposition to pick a fight with everyone and everything - themselves included - must be like keeping a pack of blood-crazed rabid ferrets stuffed down his trousers. No wonder he keeps wincing.

Maybe have one more gin and tonic buddy and you might just start to see sense possibly even type it.

[eharding]

jogon said:

eharding said:

Can I just say at this point that watching two of the most demented, reactionary, bigoted and downright odious spacktards we've seen of late in the PH shire battle it out for the title of Biggest Throbbing Pure Blood 'Kipper Bell-End is deeply, deeply satisfying.

Poor old Nigel. Trying to keep a lid on UKIP's natural disposition to pick a fight with everyone and everything - themselves included - must be like keeping a pack of blood-crazed rabid ferrets stuffed down his trousers. No wonder he keeps wincing.

Maybe have one more gin and tonic buddy and you might just start to see sense possibly even type it.

Watching that maddest of the bad-badgers XJ Flyer kick your sorry arse out of the ground by out-'Kippering you? Possibly time to break out the Champagne....

[jogon]

eharding said:

Watching that maddest of the bad-badgers XJ Flyer kick your sorry arse out of the ground by out-'Kippering you? Possibly time to break out the Champagne....

Your a delusional fool if you believe anything that numpty types, a waffling excuse that the working class won't believe an immigration policy that isn't retrospective.. lol the fact UKIP are THE only party with any credible immigration policy not just some reactionary back of fag packet tosh speaks volumes.

I'll save the champagne for Reckless

Edited by jogon on Wednesday 19th November 23:12

[eharding]

jogon said:

eharding said:

Watching that maddest of the bad-badgers XJ Flyer kick your sorry arse out of the ground by out-'Kippering you? Possibly time to break out the Champagne....

You're a delusional fool if you believe anything that numpty types, a waffling excuse that the working class won't believe an immigration policy that isn't retrospective.. lol the fact UKIP are THE only party with any credible immigration policy not just some reactionary back of fag packet tosh speaks volumes.

I'd agree that the only way to take XJ Flyer seriously would be to ingest or inhale copious quantities of recreational pharmaceuticals, but your crashingly poor sense of introspection (or a downright lack of shame) prevents you from seeing is that he's just complaining that UKIP isn't as "UKIP" as he'd like it to be ( or as Mr. Reckless professed in public, before Nigel sobered up enough to give him a slapping).

[brenflys777]

eharding said:

Watching that maddest of the bad-badgers XJ Flyer kick your sorry arse out of the ground by out-'Kippering you? Possibly time to break out the Champagne....

I'm saving something particularly nice for tomorrow evening results myself.

A twelve year old to celebrate the Lib Dem result (single malt!), a Cosmopolitan to celebrate Labours result, an Aftershock for the conservative result, and a nice pint of bitter for the UKIP win ( hopefully )

[mrpurple]

brenflys777 said:

I'm saving something particularly nice for tomorrow evening results myself.

A twelve year old to celebrate the Lib Dem result (single malt!), a Cosmopolitan to celebrate Labours result, an Aftershock for the conservative result, and a nice pint of bitter for the UKIP win ( hopefully )

I'll just have another brew if it's all the same to you.

[Axionknight]

I'm in the States, I'd kill a man for a cup of that tea.

[mrpurple]

Axionknight said:

I'm in the States, I'd kill a man for a cup of that tea.

Brenfly is a pilot I do believe..not sure he is into hiring hitmen though but you can only but ask.... anyone in mind?

[XJ Flyer]

eharding said:

XJ Flyer said:

jogon said:

XJ Flyer said:

As usual he's totally missed the point that the left are an erroneous reaction to low wage employment.While one of the reasons for that low wage employment is the alliance of the socialist and cheap labour pro immigration agendas of both Labour and the Cons.

Assuming UKIP's ideology shares that same pro immigration agenda,in the form of a so called non retrospective 'controlled' ( pro ) immigration policy,then what's in it for any Labour to UKIP swing vote.

The problem is for you lot IT IS happening, you may choose to deny it, but the signs are very clear and the dissent is growing amongst the ranks it is almost like wildfire.

If your a hard working, low income, not so smart Brit it is much easier to relate with Farage than Miliband the socially awkward plonk can't even eat a bacon sarnie without looking like a freak.

I think you'll find that the average Labour swing voter to UKIP is smart enough to realise that any so called anti EU immigration policy that isn't applied retrospectively isn't worth the paper it is written on.As for Miliband they are also smart enough to realise that it is the socialist and cheap labour pro immigration agendas of the LabCon alliance which is helping to keep those low incomes low.There is no way that any non retrospective 'controlled' immigration policy will fix that.

Can I just say at this point that watching two of the most demented, reactionary, bigoted and downright odious spacktards we've seen of late in the PH shire battle it out for the title of Biggest Throbbing Pure Blood 'Kipper Bell-End is deeply, deeply satisfying.

Poor old Nigel. Trying to keep a lid on UKIP's natural disposition to pick a fight with everyone and everything - themselves included - must be like keeping a pack of blood-crazed rabid ferrets stuffed down his trousers. No wonder he keeps wincing.

To be fair you've obviously never seen a full on inter Labour socialist v anti socialist,pro immigration v anti immigration,pro EU v anti EU,argument,during the Labour Party civil war years of the 1970's.When,in the best tradiditions of British politics we ended up with the worst of all worlds result in the form of Callaghan and Healey.

[brenflys777]

mrpurple said:

I'll just have another brew if it's all the same to you.

Cup of tea - sounds Reckless to me

I'll stretch to a pint of whatever your drinking after the results!

[Axionknight]

mrpurple said:

Brenfly is a pilot I do believe..not sure he is into hiring hitmen though but you can only but ask.... anyone in mind?

Nick Clegg? He'll likely want putting out of his misery when his party poll next to nothin' tomorrow.

[mrpurple]

brenflys777 said:

mrpurple said:

I'll just have another brew if it's all the same to you.

Cup of tea - sounds Reckless to me

I'll stretch to a pint of whatever your drinking after the results!

Sour milk to wash down the humble pie if he loses

[XJ Flyer]

eharding said:

jogon said:

eharding said:

Watching that maddest of the bad-badgers XJ Flyer kick your sorry arse out of the ground by out-'Kippering you? Possibly time to break out the Champagne....

You're a delusional fool if you believe anything that numpty types, a waffling excuse that the working class won't believe an immigration policy that isn't retrospective.. lol the fact UKIP are THE only party with any credible immigration policy not just some reactionary back of fag packet tosh speaks volumes.

I'd agree that the only way to take XJ Flyer seriously would be to ingest or inhale copious quantities of recreational pharmaceuticals, but your crashingly poor sense of introspection (or a downright lack of shame) prevents you from seeing is that he's just complaining that UKIP isn't as "UKIP" as he'd like it to be ( or as Mr. Reckless professed in public, before Nigel sobered up enough to give him a slapping).

Let's get this clear.Reckless defects from the Cons because he believes in a proper immigration policy that recognises the need to at least remove the downward pressure on wages created by our open door EU immigration policy.Then stands on that idea,including the common sense idea that for it to work it will need to be applied retrospectively.Then Farage says no we can't do that because it will upset the LabLibdemCon vote that we're not actually looking for to vote for us and their biased cronies in the media.While alienating the Labour swing vote that we are looking for.Great idea bearing in mind that Rochester is just a rehearsal for the main event next year.

[XJ Flyer]

mrpurple said:

brenflys777 said:

mrpurple said:

I'll just have another brew if it's all the same to you.

Cup of tea - sounds Reckless to me

I'll stretch to a pint of whatever your drinking after the results!

Sour milk to wash down the humble pie if he loses

It doesn't matter if he wins what matters is how Farage suddenly going Cameron,in regards to the immigration question,looks to the potential swing vote next year.

[eharding]

XJ Flyer said:

eharding said:

jogon said:

eharding said:

Watching that maddest of the bad-badgers XJ Flyer kick your sorry arse out of the ground by out-'Kippering you? Possibly time to break out the Champagne....

You're a delusional fool if you believe anything that numpty types, a waffling excuse that the working class won't believe an immigration policy that isn't retrospective.. lol the fact UKIP are THE only party with any credible immigration policy not just some reactionary back of fag packet tosh speaks volumes.

I'd agree that the only way to take XJ Flyer seriously would be to ingest or inhale copious quantities of recreational pharmaceuticals, but your crashingly poor sense of introspection (or a downright lack of shame) prevents you from seeing is that he's just complaining that UKIP isn't as "UKIP" as he'd like it to be ( or as Mr. Reckless professed in public, before Nigel sobered up enough to give him a slapping).

Let's get this clear.Reckless defects from the Cons because he believes in a proper immigration policy that recognises the need to at least remove the downward pressure on wages created by our open door EU immigration policy.Then stands on that idea,including the common sense idea that for it to work it will need to be applied retrospectively.Then Farage says no we can't do that because it will upset the LabLibdemCon vote that we're not actually looking for to vote for us.While alienating the Labour swing vote that we are looking for.Great idea bearing in mind that Rochester is just a rehearsal for the main event next year.

So, to be clear...you think that UKIP's Mark Reckless was correct to propose a deportation policy (don't fanny about - 'retrospective immigration control'..really?), but you think the current UKIP leader was forced to disown that policy in public because he's some form of pinko liberal, and that UKIP would be better served - and get your vote - if they adopt a staunch pro-repatriation stance?

[sjn2004]

eharding said:

XJ Flyer said:

jogon said:

XJ Flyer said:

As usual he's totally missed the point that the left are an erroneous reaction to low wage employment.While one of the reasons for that low wage employment is the alliance of the socialist and cheap labour pro immigration agendas of both Labour and the Cons.

Assuming UKIP's ideology shares that same pro immigration agenda,in the form of a so called non retrospective 'controlled' ( pro ) immigration policy,then what's in it for any Labour to UKIP swing vote.

The problem is for you lot IT IS happening, you may choose to deny it, but the signs are very clear and the dissent is growing amongst the ranks it is almost like wildfire.

If your a hard working, low income, not so smart Brit it is much easier to relate with Farage than Miliband the socially awkward plonk can't even eat a bacon sarnie without looking like a freak.

I think you'll find that the average Labour swing voter to UKIP is smart enough to realise that any so called anti EU immigration policy that isn't applied retrospectively isn't worth the paper it is written on.As for Miliband they are also smart enough to realise that it is the socialist and cheap labour pro immigration agendas of the LabCon alliance which is helping to keep those low incomes low.There is no way that any non retrospective 'controlled' immigration policy will fix that.

Can I just say at this point that watching two of the most demented, reactionary, bigoted and downright odious spacktards we've seen of late in the PH shire battle it out for the title of Biggest Throbbing Pure Blood 'Kipper Bell-End is deeply, deeply satisfying.

Poor old Nigel. Trying to keep a lid on UKIP's natural disposition to pick a fight with everyone and everything - themselves included - must be like keeping a pack of blood-crazed rabid ferrets stuffed down his trousers. No wonder he keeps wincing.

Talk about calling the kettle black....

http://nopenothope.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/heywood-...

[mrpurple]

eharding said:

So, to be clear...you think that UKIP's Mark Reckless was correct to propose a deportation policy (don't fanny about - 'retrospective immigration control'..really?), but you think the current UKIP leader was forced to disown that policy in public because he's some form of pinko liberal, and that UKIP would be better served - and get your vote - if they adopt a staunch pro-repatriation stance?

Sounds like a variation on a theme to me: Vote UKIP get CMD...but I could be wrong of course.

[eharding]

sjn2004 said:

Talk about calling the kettle black....

http://nopenothope.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/heywood-...
l

Can't see the relevance there?

I think you'll find I'm an equal opportunity Tory - in that I regard Labour and UKIP as both equally, and without discrimination, utterly unprincipled scum-bags, and the Lib Dems the political equivalent of a toilet blockage - a mixture of soaked tissue-paper and turds that you know will be flushed away eventually, but can cause no end of annoyance and delay before it finally goes.

[XJ Flyer]

eharding said:

XJ Flyer said:

eharding said:

jogon said:

eharding said:

Watching that maddest of the bad-badgers XJ Flyer kick your sorry arse out of the ground by out-'Kippering you? Possibly time to break out the Champagne....

You're a delusional fool if you believe anything that numpty types, a waffling excuse that the working class won't believe an immigration policy that isn't retrospective.. lol the fact UKIP are THE only party with any credible immigration policy not just some reactionary back of fag packet tosh speaks volumes.

I'd agree that the only way to take XJ Flyer seriously would be to ingest or inhale copious quantities of recreational pharmaceuticals, but your crashingly poor sense of introspection (or a downright lack of shame) prevents you from seeing is that he's just complaining that UKIP isn't as "UKIP" as he'd like it to be ( or as Mr. Reckless professed in public, before Nigel sobered up enough to give him a slapping).

Let's get this clear.Reckless defects from the Cons because he believes in a proper immigration policy that recognises the need to at least remove the downward pressure on wages created by our open door EU immigration policy.Then stands on that idea,including the common sense idea that for it to work it will need to be applied retrospectively.Then Farage says no we can't do that because it will upset the LabLibdemCon vote that we're not actually looking for to vote for us.While alienating the Labour swing vote that we are looking for.Great idea bearing in mind that Rochester is just a rehearsal for the main event next year.

So, to be clear...you think that UKIP's Mark Reckless was correct to propose a deportation policy (don't fanny about - 'retrospective immigration control'..really?), but you think the current UKIP leader was forced to disown that policy in public because he's some form of pinko liberal, and that UKIP would be better served - and get your vote - if they adopt a staunch pro-repatriation stance?

Bearing in mind that Farage needs the support of those who've turned their backs on Labour in the hope of exactly that policy I'm not saying Farage is a pinko liberal more a case of him being an appeaser of the cheap labour Con cause.Obviously unlike Reckless.With obvious implications regarding that anti immigration Labour UKIP swing vote at the election.

So assuming that Farage is 'really' serious about at least closing the door to cheap labour east European EU immigration then what is the problem with that policy being applied retrospectively.Bearing in mind as I said the obvious implications now on such immigration of those coming here sooner rather than later to beat any potential future deadline on new entrants from the EU.In addition to the massive numbers that have already arrived who Farage has,so far,made such a ( justified ) issue about.