UKIP - The Future - Volume 4

[TTwiggy]

Scuffers said:

TTwiggy said:

All I saw was an article with scant information. Public figures must get death threats on an almost weekly basis from various nutters. The only thing making this vaguely newsworthy is that the bloke has a Muslim-sounding name and the threat was of beheading. As such it's case of 2+2 equalling 'ALLAH AKBAR!!!'

with respect, the story then goes on to say:

news said:

Police have arrested a man in connection to an alleged threat to behead a UKIP candidate in Newcastle.

so, the Police just go an arrest people for making death threats on a weekly basis?

I noted the arrest. It still doesn't provide enough information for MGJohn's assertion that this is what happens when you 'open your doors to all and sundry'.

Nutter makes threat. Threat is reported. Nutter is arrested. If it gets as far as a court and he's up on terrorist charges, then maybe there's something in it. Otherwise it remains a threat from a nutter, to be filed away with all the other nutter-related activity that occurs in this country on a regular (probably daily) basis. And while I'm not a BiB, I'm sure that in these days of social networks, the police spend a great deal of time on threats of this nature.

Edited by TTwiggy on Wednesday 29th April 17:44

[Scuffers]

TTwiggy said:

And while I'm not a BiB, I'm sure that in these days of social networks, the police spend a great deal of time on threats of this nature.

I'm sure they do, however, they are not arresting people on a daily basis.

as you say, time will tell if this is just another sad basket case or a serious nutter.

edit:

he's now been charged:

news said:

Aftab Ahmed has been charged with threats to kill after David Robinson-Young claimed he received a phone call from a constituent complaining about the Middle East.
The 44-year-old, of Winchcombe Place, Heaton, is due to appear before Newcastle magistrates on Thursday.

Edited by Scuffers on Wednesday 29th April 17:59

[don4l]

MGJohn said:

UKIP's Nigel has at least rattled their cushioned against reality Ivory Towers. However, one thing is certain come May 8th and thereafter..

Meet the new boss ... same as ... so, rejoice.... We're still doomed ...

I'm looking forward to Nigel's maiden speech. I wonder if Cameron and Miliband will attend.

Hopefully, Clegg will be unable to attend, due to him spending more time with his family.

[johnxjsc1985]

don4l said:

I'm looking forward to Nigel's maiden speech. I wonder if Cameron and Miliband will attend.

Hopefully, Clegg will be unable to attend, due to him spending more time with his family.

Cleggy will be playing golf with Danny Alexandra. Jim Murphy caddying

[PRTVR]

TTwiggy said:

MGJohn said:

PRTVR said:

Thanks for commenting on the post, I purposefully did not comment on it to see if anybody else would, I feel that there is an awful lot of self censorship going on, it would appear that the word is not mightier than the sword ( or gun )

je suis charlie

You're welcome. Yes, heavily sanitised I suspect in line with their excessive overkill pc-stance. Thus allowing for that selective sanitation, even a casual trawl of the pc-leftie-riddled BBC's own headline crimes including far too many sickeningly horrific ones, shows how well our crime figures have been enriched and enhanced by our "open to all" immigration lack of policy.

Just another facet of getting so many things quite simply ... wrong.

Reading the last three or so posts on this thread leaves me ever more sick at the way this Nation continues to excel at getting so many things quite simply wrong!

UKIP's Nigel has at least rattled their cushioned against reality Ivory Towers. However, one thing is certain come May 8th and thereafter..

Meet the new boss ... same as ... so, rejoice.... We're still doomed ...

All I saw was an article with scant information. Public figures must get death threats on an almost weekly basis from various nutters. The only thing making this vaguely newsworthy is that the bloke has a Muslim-sounding name and the threat was of beheading. As such it's case of 2+2 equalling 'ALLAH AKBAR!!!'

Also, who's to say he's an immigrant? Having a foreign-sounding name is no indicator of not being born here. He might be 5th or 6th generation. His grandfather might have fought for the British army in WWII. My point? We don't know anything about him.

The point is not what has gone on in the past it is what is happening now, how many news stories this year have there been of white Catholic British people threatening to chop off peoples heads?
which religion appears to default to violence and chopping peoples heads off when they disagree with something or someone, if as you say it is just some random nutter why are they predominantly Muslim?
My point was that it looks like violence is been used to control what people say , not just directly but indirectly due to fear, for me that is just totally wrong in a democracy.

[TTwiggy]

PRTVR said:

My point was that it looks like violence is been used to control what people say , not just directly but indirectly due to fear, for me that is just totally wrong in a democracy.

Except that nobody in this country is actually having their views silenced by fear, are they? This bloke made a threat and was dealt with.

There are many countries in the world where people on all areas of the political spectrum are too afraid to speak out. This country is not one of them.

[PRTVR]

TTwiggy said:

PRTVR said:

My point was that it looks like violence is been used to control what people say , not just directly but indirectly due to fear, for me that is just totally wrong in a democracy.

Except that nobody in this country is actually having their views silenced by fear, are they? This bloke made a threat and was dealt with.

There are many countries in the world where people on all areas of the political spectrum are too afraid to speak out. This country is not one of them.

Yet,
but each one of these actions add together to create fear,
would you think twice before speaking if somebody threatened to cut off your head ? I am sure I would, we must not end up like the other countries.

This is the last post from me on the subject as it has gone way off topic.

[Halb]

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/mu...

Morrissey: I nearly voted for Ukip. I like Nigel Farage a great deal

[wc98]

Mrr T said:

Can I suggest an alternative title.

"The great leader again demonstrates he has no idea how the EU or asylum works."

would you mind commenting on this http://order-order.com/2015/04/29/where-is-the-out... instead of being a blinkered moron.

[wc98]

MGJohn said:

Wow ... Not seen a single mention of that on any of the main TV News Channels. Someone actually brought to book for it too. Surely deserves more exposure or have the powers that be quashed the "free speaking" media on this for some reason or other. At least the lefty BBC has it on-line.

Message to UKIP... we need more immigrants. We're told this time and time again so must be correct.

Plus... on TV right now. Same old stuff from Red Ed. "Working Families" will be a billion quid worse off under five more years of Cameron and the Tories.

I don't think I can take another eight days of this stuff...

indeed. it almost prompted me to email the bbc again,almost. remembering what a waste of time it was last time i will not bother,i will just keep emailing and posting the link to the petition to scrap the licence fee to as many people as possible.fk them.

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

Too powerful a message?
Lets look at UKIPs defence policy:
1) "increase spending" on defence to 2% from its current level or, umm 2%
2) Retain our nuclear deterrent. With no specifics apart from renewal, which the majors also support but with more detail
3) Continue with the carriers that Labour & coalition have built, but with an investigation into an unaffordable change based on uninformed speculation
4) Create 1 new job
5) Relieve armed services from paying tax when overseas on operational duty, but with no definition of what counts as overseas or operational. But leaves the possibility (for example) of RN in port at Dubai not paying tax whilst soldiers in NI do not
6) Opposing an EU army- which obviously would not happen if we leave the Eu. Though whilst UK army operating under European command they make no mention of where NATO commanders are European


Has powerful been redefined to mean "like being swatter with a piece of limp lettuce"?

Which is not to say that any of the parties defence policies has been good at this election, but UKIPs is no better than the rest

you really are a blinkered old tory troll!

Just for you:

JustAnotherLogin said:

Too powerful a message?
Lets look at UKIPs defence policy:
1) "increase spending" on defence to 2% from its current level or, umm 2%

you know like the rest of us that's total b0ll0cks, even with them fiddling the books massively to include the kitchen sink, it's not 2%.

JustAnotherLogin said:

2) Retain our nuclear deterrent. With no specifics apart from renewal, which the majors also support but with more detail

What do you want them to put in their election manifesto? the complete RFP for Tridents replacement? (and remind us again what detain the Lib/Lab/Cons have put forward?)

JustAnotherLogin said:

3) Continue with the carriers that Labour & coalition have built, but with an investigation into an unaffordable change based on uninformed speculation

once again, what do you expect in a manifesto?

I, for one agree with them, the decision to not equip them for CAT/Trap is catastrophically stupid, quite apart from the ongoing farce that is the F-35B programme, the shear cost per unit of the F35B (~$104m) vs. the F/A-18 Super Hornet ($60m), (and the ongoing maintenance costs) makes it a ridiculous proposition as the sole aircraft available to a carrier - and that's before we consider the needs for cross-decking within NATO.

The whole carrier build programme has been one huge political bodge, starting with the decision NOT to make them nuclear powered, they should have been finished by now, at half todays projected costs, all they're currently is a job creation scheme for the Scott's (and look how thankful they are!)

JustAnotherLogin said:

4) Create 1 new job

WTF are you on about?

JustAnotherLogin said:

5) Relieve armed services from paying tax when overseas on operational duty, but with no definition of what counts as overseas or operational. But leaves the possibility (for example) of RN in port at Dubai not paying tax whilst soldiers in NI do not

don't be childish, this kind of detail takes seconds to define.

JustAnotherLogin said:

6) Opposing an EU army- which obviously would not happen if we leave the Eu. Though whilst UK army operating under European command they make no mention of where NATO commanders are European

This is almost comical, you clearly have no idea of the difference between NATO and the EU (clue, it's not about the nationality of the staff).

I used to think you were an intelligent person arguing from a solid personal viewpoint, several hundred posts later I can see your just another blinkered tory muppet without a clue.

SO you will have clear answers to the following
1) Umm, yes it is currently 2%. Even the UKIP manifesto admits that. Perhaps you should read what you are so keen on
2) Well Tories and Labour have said how many submarines, or even whether it will be submarine based. What is UKIPs answer?
3) Perhaps you wopuld care to show your cost-beenfit analysis for catapults vs STOVL through life, including what type of catapults you are basing that on
4) Again, have you read the UKIP manifesto, it is #4 in the defence section so pretty obvious
5) If it takes seconds to define, please do it. Otherwise it is ambiguous meaningless nonsense
6) I have a clear understanding of the difference between EU and NATO, why does it matter what the difference is for whether our troops are under the command of a (say) German general

[JustAnotherLogin]

Farage's nightmare?

Ashcroft said:

In Thanet South I found the Conservatives two points ahead of UKIP, 34% to 32%, despite nearly nine out of ten voters there saying they have had campaign contact from the challengers. In my recent polls in the constituency I have found the Labour share drifting down as the Tory share edges up, suggesting that Labour supporters may be lending their vote to the Conservatives to stop Nigel Farage. However, the lead remains well within the margin of error and the seat could still go either way.

[Halb]

The protest vote swings both ways...normally a boon to Farage....could end him there.

[jogon]

JustAnotherLogin said:

Farage's nightmare?

Ashcroft said:

In Thanet South I found the Conservatives two points ahead of UKIP, 34% to 32%, despite nearly nine out of ten voters there saying they have had campaign contact from the challengers. In my recent polls in the constituency I have found the Labour share drifting down as the Tory share edges up, suggesting that Labour supporters may be lending their vote to the Conservatives to stop Nigel Farage. However, the lead remains well within the margin of error and the seat could still go either way.

It's gone from a 9pt lead to now 2pts down in a matter of days. Take of of what you will but the bookies ain't altered much.

[Scuffers]

JustAnotherLogin said:

SO you will have clear answers to the following
1) Umm, yes it is currently 2%. Even the UKIP manifesto admits that. Perhaps you should read what you are so keen on
2) Well Tories and Labour have said how many submarines, or even whether it will be submarine based. What is UKIPs answer?
3) Perhaps you wopuld care to show your cost-beenfit analysis for catapults vs STOVL through life, including what type of catapults you are basing that on
4) Again, have you read the UKIP manifesto, it is #4 in the defence section so pretty obvious
5) If it takes seconds to define, please do it. Otherwise it is ambiguous meaningless nonsense
6) I have a clear understanding of the difference between EU and NATO, why does it matter what the difference is for whether our troops are under the command of a (say) German general

Yup, you're an idiot.

[FredClogs]

JustAnotherLogin said:

Farage's nightmare?

Ashcroft said:

In Thanet South I found the Conservatives two points ahead of UKIP, 34% to 32%, despite nearly nine out of ten voters there saying they have had campaign contact from the challengers. In my recent polls in the constituency I have found the Labour share drifting down as the Tory share edges up, suggesting that Labour supporters may be lending their vote to the Conservatives to stop Nigel Farage. However, the lead remains well within the margin of error and the seat could still go either way.

Oh dear, what a shame, never mind.

[MGJohn]

TTwiggy said:

All I saw was an article with scant information.

>> much snipped <<

Also, who's to say he's an immigrant?

Yes indeed. Who said he was... did you ?

However, even after sanitisation imbalance of the headlines, numerous immigrants have enriched our crime statistics. FACT! Who said that you may well ask. I can tell you, our beloved media including the lefty-pc-riddled BBC said that each and every time they report such higher profile heinous crimes over the years..

All clear now ...

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

SO you will have clear answers to the following
1) Umm, yes it is currently 2%. Even the UKIP manifesto admits that. Perhaps you should read what you are so keen on
2) Well Tories and Labour have said how many submarines, or even whether it will be submarine based. What is UKIPs answer?
3) Perhaps you wopuld care to show your cost-beenfit analysis for catapults vs STOVL through life, including what type of catapults you are basing that on
4) Again, have you read the UKIP manifesto, it is #4 in the defence section so pretty obvious
5) If it takes seconds to define, please do it. Otherwise it is ambiguous meaningless nonsense
6) I have a clear understanding of the difference between EU and NATO, why does it matter what the difference is for whether our troops are under the command of a (say) German general

Yup, you're an idiot.

Is that really the best you can offer?

I expected little and you still managed to disappoint

[smn159]

MGJohn said:

Yes indeed. Who said he was... did you ?

However, even after sanitisation imbalance of the headlines, numerous immigrants have enriched our crime statistics. FACT! Who said that you may well ask. I can tell you, our beloved media including the lefty-pc-riddled BBC said that each and every time they report such higher profile heinous crimes over the years..

All clear now ...

Not really, no.

Are you saying that immigrants commit disproportionately more crime that the indigenous population or that they commit some crimes?

[Scuffers]

JustAnotherLogin said:

Is that really the best you can offer?

I expected little and you still managed to disappoint

Tough, CBA to engage in pointless debate with you.