UKIP - The Future - Volume 3

[JustAnotherLogin]

NicD said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

Where should I be looking

keep looking in the same place, seems to work for you

Or, you could open your other eye.

You do realise you are just part of this hilarious sideshow trying to talk down UKIP. Toiling away, trying to sound serious and analytical.
Still, you are known by the company you keep.

So you are unable to answer the question and resort (once again) to abuse? That seems to be the conclusion

I asked a perfectly reasonable question. You said that Farage being hypocritical didn't matter, and that substance did. What evidence is there that Farage or UKIP have any substance at all?

[NicD]

JustAnotherLogin said:

So you are unable to answer the question and resort (once again) to abuse? That seems to be the conclusion

I asked a perfectly reasonable question. You said that Farage being hypocritical didn't matter, and that substance did. What evidence is there that Farage or UKIP have any substance at all?

it is hardly abuse, just some gentle prodding, hoping to make you question why you persist in these faux serious attempts.

If you think I have any interest in pandering to your 'questions', well not tonight Josephine.

This thread is hardly more than light relief these days and I can live with that.

[Scuffers]

JustAnotherLogin said:

So you are unable to answer the question and resort (once again) to abuse? That seems to be the conclusion

I asked a perfectly reasonable question. You said that Farage being hypocritical didn't matter, and that substance did. What evidence is there that Farage or UKIP have any substance at all?

Said this before, but you keep putting up the simpleton front...

It does you no favours, and personally, i think it makes you look like some embittered twonk.

You know just as well as the rest of us what UKIPs positions/policies are, but keep on banking on about lack of polices.

Grow up Ffs.

[zygalski]

NicD said:

keep looking in the same place, seems to work for you

Or, you could open your other eye.

You do realise you are just part of this hilarious sideshow trying to talk down UKIP. Toiling away, trying to sound serious and analytical.
Still, you are known by the company you keep.

I hate to be the one the break this to you, but all the latest projections for May I've seen show UKIP returning 2 MPs out of 650 seats.
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
It seems to me like you guys are the odd ones out. But then a few angry kippers can shout so very loudly & drown out an entire room of people. Or a forum, for that matter.

[BGARK]

zygalski said:

It seems to me like you guys are the odd ones out. But then a few angry kippers can shout so very loudly & drown out an entire room of people. Or a forum, for that matter.

It is true that only a small percentage of the population are what you might call "intelligent".

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

So you are unable to answer the question and resort (once again) to abuse? That seems to be the conclusion

I asked a perfectly reasonable question. You said that Farage being hypocritical didn't matter, and that substance did. What evidence is there that Farage or UKIP have any substance at all?

Said this before, but you keep putting up the simpleton front...

It does you no favours, and personally, i think it makes you look like some embittered twonk.

You know just as well as the rest of us what UKIPs positions/policies are, but keep on banking on about lack of polices.

Grow up Ffs.

Who is playing the simpleton? Yes I know very much what UKIPs policies. I strongly suspect that I know more about them than many Kippers. What I can't see is the "substance" NicD alluded to.

Funny how you lot like to call out any unsubstantiated statement made against UKIP but you don't like the reverse
You feel it OK to accuse other politicians of lying and everything else, but when Farage does the same it doesn't matter
Any abuse of Kippers is unacceptable, but you can call me an "embittered twonk"

There is that word hypocritical again. Writ large

[NicD]

Thats the funny thing, i am generally relaxed about the other parties, after all, I have voted for most of them over the years.

I support UKIP, i don't put down everyone else, except perhaps when prodded.

I have little interest to denigrate the other parties on their fanboy threads.

And if no fanboy thread, you can always start it.

[Scuffers]

JustAnotherLogin said:

Who is playing the simpleton? Yes I know very much what UKIPs policies. I strongly suspect that I know more about them than many Kippers. What I can't see is the "substance" NicD alluded to.

Funny how you lot like to call out any unsubstantiated statement made against UKIP but you don't like the reverse
You feel it OK to accuse other politicians of lying and everything else, but when Farage does the same it doesn't matter
Any abuse of Kippers is unacceptable, but you can call me an "embittered twonk"

There is that word hypocritical again. Writ large

Then why do you feel the need to keep repeating stuff you already know the answer to then?

Definition of insanity is when you keeping the same thing and expect a different outcome.

[don4l]

JustAnotherLogin said:

Scuffers said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

So you are unable to answer the question and resort (once again) to abuse? That seems to be the conclusion

I asked a perfectly reasonable question. You said that Farage being hypocritical didn't matter, and that substance did. What evidence is there that Farage or UKIP have any substance at all?

Said this before, but you keep putting up the simpleton front...

It does you no favours, and personally, i think it makes you look like some embittered twonk.

You know just as well as the rest of us what UKIPs positions/policies are, but keep on banking on about lack of polices.

Grow up Ffs.

Who is playing the simpleton? Yes I know very much what UKIPs policies. I strongly suspect that I know more about them than many Kippers. What I can't see is the "substance" NicD alluded to.

Funny how you lot like to call out any unsubstantiated statement made against UKIP but you don't like the reverse
You feel it OK to accuse other politicians of lying and everything else, but when Farage does the same it doesn't matter
Any abuse of Kippers is unacceptable, but you can call me an "embittered twonk"

There is that word hypocritical again. Writ large

I think that reneging on a pledge to hold a referendum that will affect everyone's life is a bit more important than employing one's wife.

Borrowing £40Bn to give to countries who have space programmes (which my kids will have to repay) is also important.

Cutting Police and Defence spending is also important.

Why are you not bothered by these things?

[Zod]

Mojocvh said:

Zod said:

Mojocvh said:

Zod said:

Mojocvh said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

What I want for renegotiation and what we might get are different things.

As I have said before, if new immigrants cannot claim benefits for 5 years then I could live with that. That is I believe achievable.

So you DO NOT support limiting immigration to those who could prove to be of use to the country then?

Are you of use to the country? There are plenty of self-made entrepreneur inmigrants who would never have passed such a test.

I think jali doesn't need you to comment for him so butt out, cmd's lovechild.

I'm not commenting for him, but asking you whether you are any use to the country. Being offensive doesn't impress.

Shall we take this outside? Just saying as your aim (so far) appears to be to disrupt any discussion on the merits of UKIP by any means including flaming UKIP supporter's whenever you can.

there's a discussion going on. You are just oversensitive

[Zod]

NicD said:

Thats the funny thing, i am generally relaxed about the other parties, after all, I have voted for most of them over the years.

I support UKIP, i don't put down everyone else, except perhaps when prodded.

I have little interest to denigrate the other parties on their fanboy threads.

And if no fanboy thread, you can always start it.

the thing is that nobody has started a fanboy thread for any party other than UKIP. I know there's a thread about the Tories, but it's not a fanboy thread.

[Zod]

dandarez said:

turbobloke said:

allergictocheese said:

turbobloke said:

Deliberate misunderstanding there? The example referred to is of a complaint (email) and a vacuous reply, not a family member in paid work. Anyone could be forgiven for thinking there was a fanatic at work typing your replies with your PH log-in.

There are some of us who agree with some UKIP policies who haven't voted UKIP so the fanatic smear has a whiff of hypocrisy in view of the 'accidental' misunderstanding.

The inference from your post was that family interests were inappropriately influencing Cameron's decision making.

Only if you strain hard enough.

The obvious interpretation of my post follow for the self-identified hard of thinking

1) the payment of £300,000 to CMD's FiL who happens to be a rich landowner includes money from the hikes we all face in energy bills that pay for subsidies to unnecessary, costly and ineffective windymills
2) this hike in energy bills has a disproportionate impact on many pensioners, there are pensioners who cannot afford to heat their homes adequately, choosing to eat or heat, and in some cases buying large books for 50p from charity shops as cheap fuel to burn
3) when complaining to CMD about the nonsensical nature of Tory Party policy on energy and the environment - which is based around climate fairytales, and results in redistribution of wealth from poor pensioners to rich landowners - a risible reply may well have come from CMD's SiL Alice Sheffield, and I pointed out she was paid from Party funds.

Presumably you're obtuse enough to consider my mention of Alice was because I considered the nature of the reply from her desk was due to her influence on CMD when she's clearly a button clicking stamp licker (probably not noticing they come with adhesive these days).

There was no other inference to be drawn, notwithstanding strenuous efforts to find one as a figleaf for an already-failed contrived posting scenario.

Meahwhile, there was a question somewhere about which if any Party has an energy policy that is a) viable and not based on renewables (shown to be a fail) and b) would put an end to windymill proliferation.

Brilliant! I do love articulate replies. Well done. 10/10.

but that's just what it is not: Farage employed his wife, nobody else. Cameron's FiL enjoys a subsidy available to any other landowner with a windfarm.

[JustAnotherLogin]

[quote=NicD]Thats the funny thing, i am generally relaxed about the other parties, after all, I have voted for most of them over the years.

I support UKIP, i don't put down everyone else, except perhaps when prodded.

I have little interest to denigrate the other parties on their fanboy threads.

Odd, even a cursory pick of a few random pages shows you calling people "mentally challenged" or an "a***hole".

So we must not insult UKIP supporting posters on here, even though you insult those who are not
We must not insult Farage, even though every other politician is allowed to be insulted in these threads
We must not pick apart UKIPs policies, even though you are allowed to criticise those of other parties

It is impossible not to get the impression that you and many others just want this thread to be a celebration of eventual triumph of Farage and the Kippers, as he gets carried down the Mall by beautiful women to be crowned Emperor.

This thread is not "owned" by UKIP. It is about UKIP. Why should the counter-opinion not be stated? As I have said before, it is dangerous to read only the views of the people who agree with you. Listen to others, you just might learn something

[968]

Zod said:

ut that's just what it is not: Farage employed his wife, nobody else. Cameron's FiL enjoys a subsidy available to any other landowner with a windfarm.

Blasphemy! You dare criticise the sacred Farage? He that can do and say no wrong? He that was formerly a banker, but now a man of the people? You heretic.

[Scuffers]

Zod said:

ut that's just what it is not: Farage employed his wife, nobody else. Cameron's FiL enjoys a subsidy available to any other landowner with a windfarm.

Yes, but anybody else is unlikely to be penning replies to questions sent to the PM.

[NoNeed]

Farage does not employ his wife!!


UKIP employs Farages wife as a personal secretary to the leader do to the hours that meetings take place many times around and after midnight it makes sense.


Unless somebody else knows differently.


I thought I would look for the interview where this was stated and found another
A report on the BBC with nick Robinson interviewing
According to Nigel she did the job free for 7 years then got paid for a couple of years and is now doing it free again.

Edited by NoNeed on Saturday 31st January 20:44

[allergictocheese]

NoNeed said:

Farage does not employ his wife!!


UKIP employs Farages wife as a personal secretary to the leader do to the hours that meetings take place many times around and after midnight it makes sense.


Unless somebody else knows differently.

Of course, you're absolutely right. The UKIP party hierarchy could sack her without getting agreement from Farage and hire someone else, if they wanted to.

Nope. Didn't think so.

[Scuffers]

allergictocheese said:

Of course, you're absolutely right. The UKIP party hierarchy could sack her without getting agreement from Farage and hire someone else, if they wanted to.

Nope. Didn't think so.

So, tell us, how does this affect UKIP's policies?

[NoNeed]

allergictocheese said:

Of course, you're absolutely right. The UKIP party hierarchy could sack her without getting agreement from Farage and hire someone else, if they wanted to.

Nope. Didn't think so.

UKIP hierarchy could sack sir nige if they so desire.



I am not a kipper I am a pro EU conservative but I detest they way people are spreading bullst like it's fact where UKIP are concerned, Don't you realise you do more for the growth of UKIP than any UKIP campaign could.

[allergictocheese]

Scuffers said:

So, tell us, how does this affect UKIP's policies?

I haven't said that it does. I merely pointed out that any criticism of David Cameron for having family members' benefit from his political career applies equally to any other politician who might do the same including, in particular, Nigel Farage.

Or is it different with our Nige? After all, every prominent politician only has their wife act as their secretary, yeah?