UKIP - The Future - Volume 4
Discussion
TTwiggy said:
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.
You stress threats. You appear determined to miss the point. I was referring to realities. Not this single nutter threat or any other threats. There again he may not have been a nutter but someone all set to turn a threat to reality. 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.
Not threats, actual serious criminal incidents many of which could have been nipped in the bud from the outset and thus avoided. Had their criminal history in their country of origin been revealed by a simple process then such undesirable criminal immigrants would not be allowed in at all. We need to discriminate on the quality of the individual irrespective of their race, colour, religion or what have you.
However, they are already here having come in their numbers via our unchecked open to all ever wider doors free passage policy.
Obviously we need more of these types immigrants ... You know it makes sense.
smn159 said:
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.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 ...
Are you saying that immigrants commit disproportionately more crime that the indigenous population or that they commit some crimes?
One thing is an undeniable certainty. If we checked all comers for their criminal history in their place of origin or elsewhere, serious crime by immigrants to the UK would be much fewer in number.
jogon said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
Farage's nightmare?
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. 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.
However I think it is touching the faith people have in bookies odds
They do just reflect how much money people put on each option, not any in-depth analysis
Though if you think they are the best guide you may care to note that the best odds on the Tories are 6/4 and UKIP evens. Which suggests the Tories are ahead in South Thanet
Personally I think that is irrelevant though
MGJohn said:
You stress threats. You appear determined to miss the point. I was referring to realities. Not this single nutter threat or any other threats. There again he may not have been a nutter but someone all set to turn a threat to reality.
Not threats, actual serious criminal incidents many of which could have been nipped in the bud from the outset and thus avoided. Had their criminal history in their country of origin been revealed by a simple process then such undesirable criminal immigrants would not be allowed in at all. We need to discriminate on the quality of the individual irrespective of their race, colour, religion or what have you.
However, they are already here having come in their numbers via our unchecked open to all ever wider doors free passage policy.
Obviously we need more of these types immigrants ... You know it makes sense.
If you have a particular point to make then maybe you should be clearer in future, rather than assuming that a tenuous link to a non-story concerning a possible death threat made by a person who may or may not be an immigrant will be enough to get your message across. HTHNot threats, actual serious criminal incidents many of which could have been nipped in the bud from the outset and thus avoided. Had their criminal history in their country of origin been revealed by a simple process then such undesirable criminal immigrants would not be allowed in at all. We need to discriminate on the quality of the individual irrespective of their race, colour, religion or what have you.
However, they are already here having come in their numbers via our unchecked open to all ever wider doors free passage policy.
Obviously we need more of these types immigrants ... You know it makes sense.
JustAnotherLogin said:
jogon said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
Farage's nightmare?
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. 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.
However I think it is touching the faith people have in bookies odds
They do just reflect how much money people put on each option, not any in-depth analysis
Though if you think they are the best guide you may care to note that the best odds on the Tories are 6/4 and UKIP evens. Which suggests the Tories are ahead in South Thanet
Personally I think that is irrelevant though
... Ashcroft's "the seat could still go either way." negates all he's written previously...Statin' the bleedin' init...
... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Is that Tories 6-4 Against or 6-4 ON?
Just checked two on-line bookies. Your 6/4 must be Odds against so Tories actually second favourites.
Their odds for South Thanet both show UKIP at odds-on favourites @ 8/11 ( 11 to 8 on ) and @ 4/6 ( 6 to 4 ON) , Tories 11/8 ( 11 to 8 Against ) and 6/4 ( 6 to 4 Against ). So with those two bookies and no doubt many others, UKIP is the clear favourite ...
So clearly a close running two horse race for the bookies with Labour a distant 9 to 1 Against and 150-1 and upwards others including the Pub Landlord @ 150-1...
Money does talk but not always accurately. Here's why. To some folks a few thousand quid on a bet is loose change to them. To him losing that large sum means less to him that my throwing away twenty quid on a losing bet. It's all relative.
Some years ago, someone I know told me he saw a well known race commentator place a few thousand on an ante-post horse race bet. Ante-post being days or even months before the event which usually means far better odds than on race day. True wealth is relative. I remember the horse and watched the race on TV sometime later. Amazingly, that commentator was actually commentating on that race and as "his" horse drew away from all the others as they approached the winning line, you could not tell from the commentator's voice or demeanour that he had just won the equivalent of the value of my house! You'd have never known. A true professional!
I find it all a fascinating subject.
A really wealthy person decides to throw away say a few thousand betting one of the candidates and money talks thus odds usually change. Large sums like that are loose change to them. Doesn't make it a certainty irrespective of the amounts involved. Loose change to me is a fiver or tenner and I sometimes throw away that on a joke bet fancy.
TTwiggy said:
If you have a particular point to make then maybe you should be clearer in future, rather than assuming that a tenuous link to a non-story concerning a possible death threat made by a person who may or may not be an immigrant will be enough to get your message across. HTH
You read into it whatever you like. I assumed nothing. You still come across determined to see things that are clearly not there.MGJohn said:
You read into it whatever you like. I assumed nothing. You still come across determined to see things that are clearly not there.
So why did you draw a link between our apparent open door immigration policy and the story about the Ukip candidate who received the death threat? I don't think that I'm the one intent on seeing things that aren't there.TTwiggy said:
MGJohn said:
You read into it whatever you like. I assumed nothing. You still come across determined to see things that are clearly not there.
So why did you draw a link between our apparent open door immigration policy and the story about the Ukip candidate who received the death threat? I don't think that I'm the one intent on seeing things that aren't there.MGJohn said:
You read into it whatever you like. I assumed nothing. You still come across determined to see things that are clearly not there.
TTwiggy said:
So, either you have no idea why you posted what you did, or you are unwilling to explain.
Which is it?
he has already answered :Which is it?
'You stress threats. You appear determined to miss the point. I was referring to realities. Not this single nutter threat or any other threats. There again he may not have been a nutter but someone all set to turn a threat to reality.
Not threats, actual serious criminal incidents many of which could have been nipped in the bud from the outset and thus avoided. Had their criminal history in their country of origin been revealed by a simple process then such undesirable criminal immigrants would not be allowed in at all. We need to discriminate on the quality of the individual irrespective of their race, colour, religion or what have you.'
Move on.
NicD said:
he has already answered :
'You stress threats. You appear determined to miss the point. I was referring to realities. Not this single nutter threat or any other threats. There again he may not have been a nutter but someone all set to turn a threat to reality.
Not threats, actual serious criminal incidents many of which could have been nipped in the bud from the outset and thus avoided. Had their criminal history in their country of origin been revealed by a simple process then such undesirable criminal immigrants would not be allowed in at all. We need to discriminate on the quality of the individual irrespective of their race, colour, religion or what have you.'
Move on.
I'm sorry, but I still don't see the connection between the story he commented on and the point he was trying to make.'You stress threats. You appear determined to miss the point. I was referring to realities. Not this single nutter threat or any other threats. There again he may not have been a nutter but someone all set to turn a threat to reality.
Not threats, actual serious criminal incidents many of which could have been nipped in the bud from the outset and thus avoided. Had their criminal history in their country of origin been revealed by a simple process then such undesirable criminal immigrants would not be allowed in at all. We need to discriminate on the quality of the individual irrespective of their race, colour, religion or what have you.'
Move on.
It's interesting however that you think I should 'move on'. I don't recall you handing out similar advice when one of the regulars spent five pages hounding someone about a tattoo issue that never was.
JustAnotherLogin said:
Though if you think they are the best guide you may care to note that the best odds on the Tories are 6/4 and UKIP evens. Which suggests the Tories are ahead in South Thanet
if that is your understanding of how the betting odds work it makes some of your other posts on this thread a bit easier to understand 
TTwiggy said:
NicD said:
he has already answered :
'You stress threats. You appear determined to miss the point. I was referring to realities. Not this single nutter threat or any other threats. There again he may not have been a nutter but someone all set to turn a threat to reality.
Not threats, actual serious criminal incidents many of which could have been nipped in the bud from the outset and thus avoided. Had their criminal history in their country of origin been revealed by a simple process then such undesirable criminal immigrants would not be allowed in at all. We need to discriminate on the quality of the individual irrespective of their race, colour, religion or what have you.'
Move on.
I'm sorry, but I still don't see the connection between the story he commented on and the point he was trying to make.'You stress threats. You appear determined to miss the point. I was referring to realities. Not this single nutter threat or any other threats. There again he may not have been a nutter but someone all set to turn a threat to reality.
Not threats, actual serious criminal incidents many of which could have been nipped in the bud from the outset and thus avoided. Had their criminal history in their country of origin been revealed by a simple process then such undesirable criminal immigrants would not be allowed in at all. We need to discriminate on the quality of the individual irrespective of their race, colour, religion or what have you.'
Move on.
It's interesting however that you think I should 'move on'. I don't recall you handing out similar advice when one of the regulars spent five pages hounding someone about a tattoo issue that never was.
DrDeAtH said:
BGARK said:
Might be short notice but where can I get a UKIP sign for outside my house?
Phone the Ukip office...http://www.crimeshieldmanufacturing.co.uk/windowsh...
Scuffers said:
DrDeAtH said:
BGARK said:
Might be short notice but where can I get a UKIP sign for outside my house?
Phone the Ukip office...http://www.crimeshieldmanufacturing.co.uk/windowsh...
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.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/12881691.Controve...
I struggle to understand the mentality of someone who thinks that it is acceptable to issue death threats on the basis of political beliefs.
Would it be acceptable to issue death threats on the basis of skin colour? Or sexuality?
Surely, all death threats are wrong, and should be condemned?
don4l said:
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.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/12881691.Controve...
I struggle to understand the mentality of someone who thinks that it is acceptable to issue death threats on the basis of political beliefs.
Would it be acceptable to issue death threats on the basis of skin colour? Or sexuality?
Surely, all death threats are wrong, and should be condemned?
).Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff