UKIP - The Future - Volume 3

[Mr_B]

Mrr T said:

Mr_B said:

Mrr T said:

Yazar said:

You are kidding right? Non-EU immigration is also still out of control, any clamping down of the student visa and other widespread immigration fraud for example are more for the PR headlines...

Also are you aware of the many loop holes of letting in non-EU via the EU. e.g. marry a non uk entry qualifying partner and live in the EU for 6 months= EU rights to overrule UK rules and so on.

And do you know how many of the sham marriages in the UK involve EU citizens posing as fake brides/husbands ?

And you bring up the Commonwealth brethren, these are people we can test on criteria/health/english level unlike the EU.

Do you ever do any research???

There has been a major crack down on student visa. With many collages no longer allowed to sponsor visas. Some of the best universities are now complaining it gone to far.

Obtaining a marriage visa anywhere in the EU is difficult. So what evidence do you have that lots of EU citizens are marring non EU citizens to get them into the UK. The answer is none.

Do you have any evidence of EU citizens entering into sham marriages in the UK. The answer I expect is again no.

As for testing Commonwealth citizens, where did you get that gem from? We do not test commonwealth citizens on health or English. depending on the type visas they apply for they maybe interviewed but that's it.

Yazar said:

Why do want to know of EU citizens bringing in Tropical diseases from outside the EU? You keep differentiating on the EU and non-EU, but the fact is that we cannot even test the EU citizens english level, never mind health.

Just as UK citizens are not tested before they move within the EU.

Blimey ! What evidence of sham marriages here ? You are kidding , right ? Sorry, but that's head up your bumhole stuff.

Do you ever read the posts before replying?

I know there have been sham marriages although the current Government has made it much harder to get marriage visas.

However, the poster was only referring to sham marriages of non UK EU citizens in the UK. I assume he means to non EU citizens. That I have never seen.

You might want to Google for 30 seconds before you reply to not look a fool on a subject you try and blur the reality from. You head is still in the sand, for some reason it's fashionable to do so on such subjects these days.

[dandarez]

flyingvisit said:

don4l said:

flyingvisit said:

jjlynn27 said:

'these sought of people'?

AFAIC most politicians are the same, self serving careerists. What I find eternally entertaining is the level of victim-hood among supporters of UKIP. So, the serving prime minister should comment that a bunch of losers were interrupting lunch of a minor celebrity? Would you expect Farage (peace be upon him) to denounce if someone interrupted Ed's lunch?

UKIP attracts, if you are to judge by this thread, disproportionate amount of ill-educated and in some cases downright illiterate people, who need to blame someone else for their own failures. These are the same revolutionaries who once upon a time adored Che. As the time goes by, they'll be the first to turn on Farage once they've found new god to worship. If it wasn't this entertaining predictability of posts would be quite frightening.

"...downright illiterate people..."

Do you mean this sort of thing?

• "victim-hood"

• "were interrupting lunch of"

• "disproportionate amount of ill-educated"

• "self serving"

• "As the time goes by"

• "once they've found new god to worship"

• "If it wasn't this entertaining predictability of posts would be"

Just asking.

I'm sure that jj was just pretending to be illiterate for the comedy effect.

He has an excellent sense of humour.

I mean, nobody could have a mistake in every sentence of a post that complains about illiterate people. Too funny!

Well, bugger me with a whoosh parrot. I never thought of that


P.S I've just spotted one more, but I really can't be arsed.

I can. Put him in his place, he deserves no less. First short sentence.

'these sought of people'

I doubt he can even spot the error in bold he's so righteous. Or should that be analfabeto?

[wc98]

Zod said:

Timsta said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

So you are accusing the roughly 3/4 of the population who support the Tories, Labour and Libdems of being "paedophile facilitators"

Possibly the ultimate ad hominem attack.

It would be offensive if it wasn't so blatantly ridiculous.

No. Read it again.

wc98 said:

this thread would also appear to attract paid trolls, the supporters of paedophile facilitators (you a tory ,lib dem or labour supporter ? if so ,you are one of these smile ) and people that want to discuss the current political situation ,as would be expected on a discussion forum.

I just read it again. Explain to me how it does not say that supporters of the Conservative, Labour or Liberal Democrat Parties are "supporters of paedophile facilitators".

there was supposed to be a bit of black humour in there ,indicated by the smiley .unfortunately now we know some of the extent past abuse has been covered up,and continues to be covered up by the mainstream parties there is an element of truth to my statement.(note it appears to be the tories that vetoed this http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5529/ministers-b... why ? )
as for supporting racists ,bigots etc if i vote ukip . i will not vote for any candidate that has been shown to be racist ,a bigot ,has taken part in fraud etc,or any party that does not deal with those issues prior to the general election. who knows,i may end up voting monster raving loony . as i said before, anyone but the mainstream bunch of cretins.
ps ,i may be an illiterate arse, but the wc stands for world champion ,so i was fairly good at something at some point

Edited by wc98 on Tuesday 24th March 03:36

Edited by wc98 on Tuesday 24th March 03:37

[Axionknight]

Yazar said:

If you are a noob who has kept the page length sertting to default then yes it will be. For the rest of us it is page 125!

Hope you enjoyed all those extra mouse clicks

I like my tiny pages, it helps to not overload my tiny mind.

[zygalski]

Axionknight said:

flyingvisit said:

"...downright illiterate people..."

Do you mean this sort of thing?

• "victim-hood"

• "were interrupting lunch of"

• "disproportionate amount of ill-educated"

• "self serving"

• "As the time goes by"

• "once they've found new god to worship"

• "If it wasn't this entertaining predictability of posts would be"

Just asking.

Actually I reckon on PH we have mostly high-functioning kippers. The Rain Man to your average autistic bloke, if you will.

[Mrr T]

Mr_B said:

Blimey ! What evidence of sham marriages here ? You are kidding , right ? Sorry, but that's head up your bumhole stuff.

Mrr T said:

Do you ever read the posts before replying?

I know there have been sham marriages although the current Government has made it much harder to get marriage visas.

However, the poster was only referring to sham marriages of non UK EU citizens in the UK. I assume he means to non EU citizens. That I have never seen.

Mr_B said:

You might want to Google for 30 seconds before you reply to not look a fool on a subject you try and blur the reality from. You head is still in the sand, for some reason it's fashionable to do so on such subjects these days.

Do you mean the google search which shows 7, yes 7 prosecutions in the last year.

Also I see Keith Vaz saying there are thousands but presenting no evidence to support his assertion.

So yes I did look. I assume you did not but as normal just assumed you know it all.

So can I suggest before you post you do some research outside the Daily Wail.

If you did you would discover its hard to get a marriage visa.

You cannot marry in the UK if you are only in the UK on a tourist visa.

Looking at the cases in the press I am assuming one partner was in the UK as an asylum seeker and was seeking marriage as they expected, or had already been refused status.

It seems the Government is addressing this issue.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/11/t...

[Axionknight]

zygalski said:

Actually I reckon on PH we have mostly high-functioning kippers. The Rain Man to your average autistic bloke, if you will.

I don't think there is any need for that at all.

Don't make me get on the outraged bandwagon, god damnit I'll do it!

[Zod]

UKIP's policy chief agrees with Cameron's policy to reform our relationship with the EU and stay in.

So what is UKIP's policy?

[Axionknight]

Why not check their website or wait for the manifesto? One member having different views to a party line is hardly the end of days is it?

Especially when she considers such reforms unlikely at all..... As the article says.

[jogon]

Zod said:

UKIP's policy chief agrees with Cameron's policy to reform our relationship with the EU and stay in.

So what is UKIP's policy?

From article -

She continued: “But I don’t think that is going to happen - that is the problem. If we could reform the EU that would be wonderful, but unfortunately this is an organisation that just won’t reform.”

[Scuffers]

Zod said:

UKIP's policy chief agrees with Cameron's policy to reform our relationship with the EU and stay in.

So what is UKIP's policy?

Zod in another "I'm really that stupid" shocker!

what she said was:

Asked “if you could negotiate reform you were happy with would you stay in?” Miss Evans replied: “Yes probably.”
She continued: “But I don’t think that is going to happen - that is the problem. If we could reform the EU that would be wonderful, but unfortunately this is an organisation that just won’t reform.”

ie, yes, if the EU were to reform (as in stop the expansionist/federal agenda etc) then who wouldn't?

but as we all know 100% that's not going to happen, then it;s a completely bogus argument.

No matter though, cause it's worked on the mighty ZOD!

[don4l]

Zod said:

UKIP's policy chief agrees with Cameron's policy to reform our relationship with the EU and stay in.

So what is UKIP's policy?

Zod... a bit of friendly advice.

Turn your computer off for the rest of today.

See how you feel tomorrow.

[Esseesse]

Hmmm, well I wouldn't want to remain in a reformed EU. Being happy with reform suggests that you think that the thing you're reforming isn't totally bad to begin with and just needs tweaking. The EU is in so many ways not desired, reform is futile. Sane people would scrap it and start again with something completely different.

Edited by Esseesse on Tuesday 24th March 09:41

[Scuffers]

Esseesse said:

Hmmm, well I wouldn't want to remain in a reformed EU.

if it went back to being a simple trade zone, I don't have an issue with it.

[FiF]

On the face of it she seems to be saying something that I thought Zod and I have previously agreed upon. Namely the view generally taken by folks with open minds of waiting to see the results of any negotiation and acknowledge the possibility that on balance it could be worthy of a vote to stay in.

But by his response to the above it seems he is another still trapped in the tribalism of it's something said by someone with the wrong coloured tie is automatically wrong in every respect.

[Esseesse]

Scuffers said:

Esseesse said:

Hmmm, well I wouldn't want to remain in a reformed EU.

if it went back to being a simple trade zone, I don't have an issue with it.

Yes but doing that doesn't sound like reform to me. It sounds like scrapping just about everything and selling off the EU parliament buildings etc.

When we 'reform' the NHS, it's still the NHS. If you reformed Alfa Romeo, nobody would suspect that they'd be no longer making cars, maybe just being more German about it.

[Zod]

Axionknight said:

Why not check their website or wait for the manifesto? One member having different views to a party line is hardly the end of days is it?

Especially when she considers such reforms unlikely at all..... As the article says.

Website says: "UKIP will leave the EU". No talk of negotiation. Just walk away.

[Zod]

FiF said:

On the face of it she seems to be saying something that I thought Zod and I have previously agreed upon. Namely the view generally taken by folks with open minds of waiting to see the results of any negotiation and acknowledge the possibility that on balance it could be worthy of a vote to stay in.

But by his response to the above it seems he is another still trapped in the tribalism of it's something said by someone with the wrong coloured tie is automatically wrong in every respect.

You, she and I agree on what is desirable, but UKIP's stated policy is simply to get out. Nothing to do with ties (what a tired metaphor).

[Zod]

don4l said:

Zod said:

UKIP's policy chief agrees with Cameron's policy to reform our relationship with the EU and stay in.

So what is UKIP's policy?

Zod... a bit of friendly advice.

Turn your computer off for the rest of today.

See how you feel tomorrow.

Yeah, thanks, but I think I'll decide for myself.

[Zod]

Scuffers said:

Zod said:

UKIP's policy chief agrees with Cameron's policy to reform our relationship with the EU and stay in.

So what is UKIP's policy?

Zod in another "I'm really that stupid" shocker!

what she said was:

Asked “if you could negotiate reform you were happy with would you stay in?” Miss Evans replied: “Yes probably.”
She continued: “But I don’t think that is going to happen - that is the problem. If we could reform the EU that would be wonderful, but unfortunately this is an organisation that just won’t reform.”

ie, yes, if the EU were to reform (as in stop the expansionist/federal agenda etc) then who wouldn't?

but as we all know 100% that's not going to happen, then it;s a completely bogus argument.

No matter though, cause it's worked on the mighty ZOD!

Not even asking is one way to be sure of not getting what you want.