What's Italian for 'kipper? Anti-migrant stunt goes awry.

[Zod]

PRTVR said:

But the thread is not about any of the other parties, it contained Kipper in its heading, and the purpose was to smear UKIP, it is that simple.

The thread is now way beyond its original (misguided) theme.

[PRTVR]

Zod said:

PRTVR said:

But the thread is not about any of the other parties, it contained Kipper in its heading, and the purpose was to smear UKIP, it is that simple.

The thread is now way beyond its original (misguided) theme.

It may have but it still kept to its original purpose.

[pcvdriver]

Breadvan72 said:

At least two people who happen to be lawyers have posted on this thread so far as I know, but neither of them has called anyone else howwid. You may perhaps be misremembering the sarcastic question "did the howwid man on the Internet say howwid things about your Idol and upset you?", to which the answer, judging by the foot stamping, frothy outrage and bitter purple tears above, is yes.

Aw bless!!! Don't be howwid to the little boy..... That's not vewwy nice....

[DonkeyApple]

Guam said:

DonkeyApple said:

Guam said:

DonkeyApple said:

Guam said:

DonkeyApple said:

Why is it that if you question what UKIP is doing or if you voice concern in regards to elements of its membership you are left wing?



But keeping relevant to this thread, why do UKIP consort with far right parties? What is the reason or purpose or even the need?

Well as someone who is historically left wing in outlook yet am considering voting UKIP I do see where those criticisms come from.

However to your last point, you keep dragging that up without defining exactly your issue, as the thread relates to purely the EU groupings and it has been answered several times, there is a requirement foisted on parties to collect in groupings, those groupings have to be of broadly similar views, but there is no necessity for them to share all viewpoints.

Applying the same standards one would expect the Tory's in CRS to be hard line bible thumpers who draw inspiration for policy from the old testament, sorry DA its a non argument, the most basic of research will indicate how this stuff works and you can if you wish, examine the members of every grouping without too much effort.

Its a structural necessity and the members of that grouping have a common interest which is withdrawal from the EU, its no more than that as far as I can see, unless you can show different.

Thanks. I know that a response has been put forward in the past but there is still no explanation as to why UKIP need to do this?

If the aim is to leave the EU then it is the UK people and a domestic referendum that they require.

Surely these partnerships within Brussels are about attempting to destroy the EU as opposed to us leaving it? What right does anyone from one country have to force a belief or action on the people of another? Least of all a party whose existence seems to be based on this not being done to us?

This is what I do not understand and can't seem to have explained. It would help if it were clarified as to whether people want Britain to leave the EU or for the EU to be destroyed and what their reasonings are.

Personally, I don't buy into the argument that we would be financially worse off by leaving. I can see issues with doing business as the lesser EU members attempt protectionism. I don't see EU migration as a huge issue. I feel that any immigration issue we have is based on non Christian, inbred village idiots.

Frankly, I do not understand what UKIP are doing in Brussels when it serves no purpose to the UK.

From everything I read on the background and the relevant EU regs, groupings get Committee places, extra funding and more debating time in the chamber, a Party therefore needs to do it, if it is to fully represent the national interests of its constituents, I agree with the point that there should be no need and it is to my mind a reasonable criticism of the internal mechanism that the EU created, that requires such decisions to be made, it forces parties (all of them) to hook up with bedfellows they may otherwise choose not to if this requirement was not in place.

That is also my understanding but if UKIP stands for leaving the EU, or at least having a referendum, then why are they sitting in the EU forming allegiances with some extreme parties in order to obtain additional funding and to try and influence EU actions?

In reality, how is it possible to even be in the same room as some of these right wing parties, let alone do deals with them. I simply cannot get my head around this minor point, let alone why they are in Brussels.

They should be in the UK rallying the British people to vote for them.

This is what doesn't add up for me. Why are they in Brussels?

I understand that however it seems to me that would play into the hands of those (the main 3 ) parties who would keep us in, like it or not, agree with all their views or not, UKIP are the only party that have been putting the views of a large number of the population on issues like the EU, being at the heart of the beast gives them insight into the mechanisms, even the greatest of their media critics have been found wanting in their knowledge if how the behemoth functions.

My distaste of the Eu goes back to my time working out of Strasbourg and daily encounters of the Gravy train riders, whatever side of the political spectrum they were on they were wallowing in the trough (mere snouts is not enough), the fact someone is trying to do something is good enough for me.

For me the worst aspects (coming from the left) was finding those like Healy and Kinnock etc indulging themselves at the very best restaurants at our expense,

Seeing the large numbers of hookers at the bus stops after midnight in Strasbourg being picked up by official cars (paid for by us) etc etc etc.

The elites are playing us for mugs and have done for decades.

Again I agree, but I don't believe it is up to the British to be the morality police for mainland Europe, any more than they should be ours. If UKIPs aim is for Britain to leave the EU then why are they in the EU soaking up funding and getting involved in matters which we, if not in the EU, would have no truck with?

Surely it is better to just leave the EU than try and change it or collapse it or obstruct it? This is why I am not understanding what UKIP are up to as all I can see is another group milking us just like the Kinnocks and many others.

The Tories are the best bet for a referendum and the reality is that if one is held it will almost certainly result in a successful vote to leave. And at that point we walk away from all the people who are milking a system that is seemingly at odds with very many Britons.

[anonymous-user]

don4l said:

Breadvan72 said:

Don4l, look it up. One of the Lega Nord's leading lights called for segregation on the buses in Milan. A smear is not a smear when it's true.

It is not true that UKIP have called for segregation on busses.

You know that as well as I know it.

If you have something of substance to say about UKIP, then you should say it. As a lawyer, you are well aware that argument by association is a logical fallacy. I am sure that you would never be stupid enough to attempt this in court.

No one has suggested that UKIP has called for segregation of buses, so your point is redundant. UKIP chooses to associate itself with a party whose sound bites have included the Milan buses sound bite. By the way, guilt by association works just fine in Court if the person under fire has chosen the association and it is one that a carries with it certain consequences. That's why there are cases about common enterprises, conspiracies (criminal and also civil), gang membership, and so forth. There is no logical fallacy inherent in such cases, and there is no logical fallacy in saying that if UKIP associates itself with the Lega Nord it is open to being criticised for doing so.

The logical fallacy is "Police Officer X takes bribes, therefore all Police Officers are dodgy". See also "Some Romanians are lazy and dishonest, therefore all Romanians are lazy and dishonest".

[otolith]

Breadvan72 said:

The logical fallacy is "Police Officer X takes bribes, therefore all Police Officers are dodgy". See also "Some Romanians are lazy and dishonest, therefore all Romanians are lazy and dishonest".

EFD member X has fascist tendencies, therefore...?

[Mark Benson]

DonkeyApple said:

Again I agree, but I don't believe it is up to the British to be the morality police for mainland Europe, any more than they should be ours. If UKIPs aim is for Britain to leave the EU then why are they in the EU soaking up funding and getting involved in matters which we, if not in the EU, would have no truck with?

Surely it is better to just leave the EU than try and change it or collapse it or obstruct it? This is why I am not understanding what UKIP are up to as all I can see is another group milking us just like the Kinnocks and many others.

The Tories are the best bet for a referendum and the reality is that if one is held it will almost certainly result in a successful vote to leave. And at that point we walk away from all the people who are milking a system that is seemingly at odds with very many Britons.

I think a lot of people, me included are sceptical that the Tories will actually deliver an open and honest in/out referendum. Indeed, I'm doubtful at the moment that they'll form a majority government.

The 'Cast Iron Guarantee' (leaving the loophole for Gordon Brown to jump through by rushing to sign the treaty, which he predictably did) and the 'Bonfire of the Quangos', being the two most prominent electioneering promises not delivered.

[WinstonWolf]

Guam said:

Mark Benson said:

DonkeyApple said:

Again I agree, but I don't believe it is up to the British to be the morality police for mainland Europe, any more than they should be ours. If UKIPs aim is for Britain to leave the EU then why are they in the EU soaking up funding and getting involved in matters which we, if not in the EU, would have no truck with?

Surely it is better to just leave the EU than try and change it or collapse it or obstruct it? This is why I am not understanding what UKIP are up to as all I can see is another group milking us just like the Kinnocks and many others.

The Tories are the best bet for a referendum and the reality is that if one is held it will almost certainly result in a successful vote to leave. And at that point we walk away from all the people who are milking a system that is seemingly at odds with very many Britons.

I think a lot of people, me included are sceptical that the Tories will actually deliver an open and honest in/out referendum. Indeed, I'm doubtful at the moment that they'll form a majority government.

The 'Cast Iron Guarantee' (leaving the loophole for Gordon Brown to jump through by rushing to sign the treaty, which he predictably did) and the 'Bonfire of the Quangos', being the two most prominent electioneering promises not delivered.

^^^^ This!

Yup, a cast iron guarantee of a straight in/out referendum by a certain date. We've been 'promised' a referendum for long enough, the time has come for one and then we can all move on.

I believe UKIP are the only party that will deliver.

[anonymous-user]

The Bonfire of the Quangos did happen, sort of, but it cost us more than it saved, last time I checked. BTW, one of the quangos slashed was the Environment Agency. Guess what happened in the winter just gone*.

I am all in favour of selected quango killage, as we are over governed and over regulated, but the plan didn't work out as it had not been costed properly. Costing policies, eh? Tricky stuff, I gather.


* I am not suggesting that all of the OMGFLUDKAOS was caused by the recent cuts, or that the Agency did not need a haircut, but some of the cutting may have had some adverse impact on resilience.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 15th April 11:55

[4v6]

I suggest a good book, try "How lawyers lose their way." by Stefancic and Delgado.

[anonymous-user]

The rubbish satnav on my phone is my preferred method.

[anonymous-user]

Guam said:

[List of Establishment gits, bds, rotters etc]

With everything else that has occurred in the decades since then (that we know of), why would any rational person not be distrustful and disparaging of the elites?

Who would not be attracted to a new mob with a different composition from the ruling Elite?

Point us in the direction of that mob please, and we can all sign up. UKIP? These are not the droids you are looking for.

[FredClogs]

WinstonWolf said:

Yup, a cast iron guarantee of a straight in/out referendum by a certain date. We've been 'promised' a referendum for long enough, the time has come for one and then we can all move on.

I believe UKIP are the only party that will deliver.

The Tories have given cast iron guarantees of a referendum in 2017, have they not?

[WinstonWolf]

FredClogs said:

WinstonWolf said:

Yup, a cast iron guarantee of a straight in/out referendum by a certain date. We've been 'promised' a referendum for long enough, the time has come for one and then we can all move on.

I believe UKIP are the only party that will deliver.

The Tories have given cast iron guarantees of a referendum in 2017, have they not?

No, they haven't. It's "after negotiating better EU membership terms". That is not a cast iron guarantee, it's conditional.

[FredClogs]

WinstonWolf said:

FredClogs said:

WinstonWolf said:

Yup, a cast iron guarantee of a straight in/out referendum by a certain date. We've been 'promised' a referendum for long enough, the time has come for one and then we can all move on.

I believe UKIP are the only party that will deliver.

The Tories have given cast iron guarantees of a referendum in 2017, have they not?

No, they haven't. It's "after negotiating better EU membership terms". That is not a cast iron guarantee, it's conditional.

CMD promised an in/out referendum on the EU in 2017, the bill (you need to get a referendum passed as a law) went through the commons but was apparently rejected by the Lords (unelected appointed commissionaires that they are).

http://news.sky.com/story/1204407/eu-in-out-refere...

[FredClogs]

Guam said:

FredClogs said:

WinstonWolf said:

FredClogs said:

WinstonWolf said:

Yup, a cast iron guarantee of a straight in/out referendum by a certain date. We've been 'promised' a referendum for long enough, the time has come for one and then we can all move on.

I believe UKIP are the only party that will deliver.

The Tories have given cast iron guarantees of a referendum in 2017, have they not?

No, they haven't. It's "after negotiating better EU membership terms". That is not a cast iron guarantee, it's conditional.

CMD promised an in/out referendum on the EU in 2017, the bill (you need to get a referendum passed as a law) went through the commons but was apparently rejected by the Lords (unelected appointed commissionaires that they are).

http://news.sky.com/story/1204407/eu-in-out-refere...

But then it can neither be Cast Iron or a guarantee can it?

Well we do live in a democracy don't we?

Although he has threatened to use the Parliament Act to push it through...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-25977258

I've certainly heard Cameron and other Tories say in very plain English that if they win the next election they'll be a referendum in 2017. if you can't believe them then that's another issue but to my ears they are guaranteeing it.

[otolith]

The Environment Agency is a non-departmental public body, but it's not really what most people would think of as a quango - it's too involved in service delivery, too large, too high profile and as a result, too accountable.

[WinstonWolf]

Guam said:

FredClogs said:

Guam said:

FredClogs said:

WinstonWolf said:

FredClogs said:

WinstonWolf said:

Yup, a cast iron guarantee of a straight in/out referendum by a certain date. We've been 'promised' a referendum for long enough, the time has come for one and then we can all move on.

I believe UKIP are the only party that will deliver.

The Tories have given cast iron guarantees of a referendum in 2017, have they not?

No, they haven't. It's "after negotiating better EU membership terms". That is not a cast iron guarantee, it's conditional.

CMD promised an in/out referendum on the EU in 2017, the bill (you need to get a referendum passed as a law) went through the commons but was apparently rejected by the Lords (unelected appointed commissionaires that they are).

http://news.sky.com/story/1204407/eu-in-out-refere...

But then it can neither be Cast Iron or a guarantee can it?

Well we do live in a democracy don't we?

Although he has threatened to use the Parliament Act to push it through...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-25977258

I've certainly heard Cameron and other Tories say in very plain English that if they win the next election they'll be a referendum in 2017. if you can't believe them then that's another issue but to my ears they are guaranteeing it.

SO why has he not done just that then? There is nothing else for the buggers to do they have no work on right now

Correct, it is not a cast iron guarantee. It is waffle designed to garner a few votes, nothing more, nothing less.

If they want to guarantee a referendum they have the power to do it. If they choose not to I can and will vote for someone who will.

We've had the carrot dangled for long enough, let's cut the crap and get the vote done and dusted so we can all move on.

[anonymous-user]

UKIP can guarantee nothing as the party has no chance of forming a Government or holding the balance of power in a hung Parliament.

Cameron has made his promise. He is a politician, and he might break it, but I think he means to keep it. I am not a fan of Cameron, and I may be wrong about his plans, but I think if you really want the referendum you should vote Tory. I am concerned about the EU (democratic deficit, financial waste, CAP, mission creep) but it is not sufficiently high up on my list of concerns about stuff to make me vote Tory.

[Countdown]

4v6 said:

Countdown said:

To be honest I thought most of that that was quite mild compared to some of the stuff I've read on the "lefty" bashing threads.

Still, if you think it's offensive, feel free to report to the mods.

Report to the mods?
What, that some lefties are eliminating all doubt as to their innate idiocy?

You said "surely a bit much, even for here" followed by a LONG list of comments. If they've upset you, report to the mods. It does surprise me that people like you seem happy to dish it our but can't seem to take it.

4v6 said:

Far be it for me to deny them the platform or opportunity to do so and long may it continue, but I would still like answers to the question I've posed twice now without result: What is it they so hate about farage/ukip?

Speaking for myself I don't hate him as such. he appears to be another oleaginous politician preaching to a certain section of society. To turn it around why is it OK to question/abuse other politicians or other political parties but not NF or UKIP?