UKIP - The Future - Volume 3

[XJ Flyer]

mrpurple said:

eharding said:

So, to be clear...you think that UKIP's Mark Reckless was correct to propose a deportation policy (don't fanny about - 'retrospective immigration control'..really?), but you think the current UKIP leader was forced to disown that policy in public because he's some form of pinko liberal, and that UKIP would be better served - and get your vote - if they adopt a staunch pro-repatriation stance?

Sounds like a variation on a theme to me: Vote UKIP get CMD....

On the basis that actions speak louder than words and Farage is obviously all about bottling it when push comes to shove with the pro immigration cause and media,the above seems spot on.

[eharding]

XJ Flyer said:

mrpurple said:

eharding said:

So, to be clear...you think that UKIP's Mark Reckless was correct to propose a deportation policy (don't fanny about - 'retrospective immigration control'..really?), but you think the current UKIP leader was forced to disown that policy in public because he's some form of pinko liberal, and that UKIP would be better served - and get your vote - if they adopt a staunch pro-repatriation stance?

Sounds like a variation on a theme to me: Vote UKIP get CMD....

On the basis that actions speak louder than words and Farage is obviously all about bottling it when push comes to shove with the pro immigration cause and media,the above seems spot on.

So, when putsch comes to shove, and we witness the inevitable dust-up between the Parliamentary UKIP membership and the Farage-iste 'Kipper diaspora over who is, in fact, the Daddy - you'd be backing Reckless over Farage?

[XJ Flyer]

eharding said:

XJ Flyer said:

mrpurple said:

eharding said:

So, to be clear...you think that UKIP's Mark Reckless was correct to propose a deportation policy (don't fanny about - 'retrospective immigration control'..really?), but you think the current UKIP leader was forced to disown that policy in public because he's some form of pinko liberal, and that UKIP would be better served - and get your vote - if they adopt a staunch pro-repatriation stance?

Sounds like a variation on a theme to me: Vote UKIP get CMD....

On the basis that actions speak louder than words and Farage is obviously all about bottling it when push comes to shove with the pro immigration cause and media,the above seems spot on.

So, when putsch comes to shove, and we witness the inevitable dust-up between the Parliamentary UKIP membership and the Farage-iste 'Kipper diaspora over who is, in fact, the Daddy - you'd be backing Reckless over Farage?

On the basis of what seems to be an obvious difference in immigration policy between Farage and Reckless and so long as the rest in the form of committed to EU withdrawal,global warmist sceptic is all there,I think Farage at least has some questions to answer as to why he didn't back his candidate against the media and an open admission that maybe that was a mistake in this case.Depending on the answer to that question I'd say that Farage's leadership is safe.If not there's no way that I'd trust his electoral credibility.

[Axionknight]

eharding said:

Can't see the relevance there?

I think you'll find I'm an equal opportunity Tory - in that I regard Labour and UKIP as both equally, and without discrimination, utterly unprincipled scum-bags, and the Lib Dems the political equivalent of a toilet blockage - a mixture of soaked tissue-paper and turds that you know will be flushed away eventually, but can cause no end of annoyance and delay before it finally goes.

Bit rich from a Tory that is, a party so unelectable we haven't had them truly in power since 1997, a shameful party that sold out all it was to try and hold the middle ground, along with every other major party, making themselves indistinguishable from them in the process.

To top that off they elected a party leader with so few Tory values it's laughable, then they scratch their head and wonder why people leave in droves to vote UKIP - deriding them all the while with comments such as "swivel eyed loons" and Mr B.Johnsons fabulous comment branding UKIP supporters as the type of people who have sex with their vacuum cleaner.

[XJ Flyer]

Axionknight said:

eharding said:

Can't see the relevance there?

I think you'll find I'm an equal opportunity Tory - in that I regard Labour and UKIP as both equally, and without discrimination, utterly unprincipled scum-bags, and the Lib Dems the political equivalent of a toilet blockage - a mixture of soaked tissue-paper and turds that you know will be flushed away eventually, but can cause no end of annoyance and delay before it finally goes.

Bit rich from a Tory that is, a party so unelectable we haven't had them truly in power since 1997, a shameful party that sold out all it was to try and hold the middle ground, along with every other major party, making themselves indistinguishable from them in the process.

To top that off they elected a party leader with so few Tory values it's laughable, then they scratch their head and wonder why people leave in droves to vote UKIP - deriding them all the while with comments such as "swivel eyed loons" and Mr B.Johnsons fabulous comment branding UKIP supporters as the type of people who have sex with their vacuum cleaner.

I'd suggest that being a full on part of the cheap labour,pro EU,pro immigration,global warmist believing agenda in the LabLibdemCon alliance is a bit more than 'middle ground'.More like somewhere between the Greens and the Chinese Communist Party.

Unfortunately Farage seems to have created an epic fail by not distancing UKIP from that alliance by not backing Reckless in giving UKIP's immigration policies some teeth to match the rhetoric.

[NicD]

You disrupters with way too much time on your hands should find another hobby.

THIS is the future of UKIP - popular support from ordinary people:

[Esseesse]

XJ Flyer said:

So assuming that Farage is 'really' serious about at least closing the door to cheap labour east European EU immigration then what is the problem with that policy being applied retrospectively.

I've read this epic battle of XJ Flyer vs anyone without commenting because it seemed like boring nit picking about what may or may not have been a misinterpretation by Mr Reckless of policy, or a simple mistake, or a misrepresentation by the press (likely to some extent anyway).

Anyway, XJ, all that really matters is that we leave the EU. Surely you know that? Once the UK is no longer in the EU we will be free to have whatever immigration policy voters fancy, and I'm sure there will be someone to more closely fit your opinion. Until then I would suggest that you vote whichever way you think is most likely to result in a brexit, the die-hard Torys will tell you that Cameron is the only option, those more realistic will tell you that he's only offering a referendum because of UKIP, so vote UKIP.

[mrpurple]

Guam said:

Go on you all thought the 1.7 billion fiasco was the end of the ongoing mugging by the EU didnt you.

Today (timing is awesome) this appeared in the Express

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/537460/EU-demands...

Just got the accountants bill in for auditing 19 yrs of accounts...mine would never submit them before he was paid also.

[Esseesse]

Guam said:

Go on you all thought the 1.7 billion fiasco was the end of the ongoing mugging by the EU didnt you.

Today (timing is awesome) this appeared in the Express

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/537460/EU-demands...

I remember at the time of the great budget cut that Cameron likes to bang on about achieving, that the opinion among those who agreed the cut was something like "yes, we'll agree an on paper 'cut' to help you Mr Cameron, but it just makes it more likely we'll go over budget".

[Zod]

NicD said:

You disrupters with way too much time on your hands should find another hobby.

THIS is the future of UKIP - popular support from ordinary people:

What a waste of a post. I'm sure I can even find a picture of Miliband surrounded by ordinary people with pro-Labour placards.

Ooh, look!

[FiF]

Zod said:

NicD said:

You disrupters with way too much time on your hands should find another hobby.

THIS is the future of UKIP - popular support from ordinary people:

What a waste of a post. I'm sure I can even find a picture of Miliband surrounded by ordinary people with pro-Labour placards.

Ooh, look!

Wasn't there some recent discussion saying ukippers were being silly for complaining that the main parties are all the same.

Are those with the blue placards 'kippers then?

[Timsta]

Zod said:

What a waste of a post. I'm sure I can even find a picture of Miliband surrounded by ordinary people with pro-Labour placards.

Ooh, look!

Those posters say what we're all thinking.

Lib Dem? Tory? Now just the same.

Have Labour just admitted to being the same as the others?

[Zod]

FiF said:

Wasn't there some recent discussion saying ukippers were being silly for complaining that the main parties are all the same.

Are those with the blue placards 'kippers then?

You are not that simple, FiF. Read the blue placard again; it says LibDem and Tory are the same, i.e. Labour is different.

[FiF]

Zod said:

FiF said:

Wasn't there some recent discussion saying ukippers were being silly for complaining that the main parties are all the same.

Are those with the blue placards 'kippers then?

You are not that simple, FiF. Read the blue placard again; it says LibDem and Tory are the same, i.e. Labour is different.

Nope not being simple but it's just a different shade of the same argument and as usual you eeither miss the point or are just a hypocrite.

It's seen on here time and time again. Some campaigning technique is quite OK when used by one of the big three in some variant, but when UKIP or another party use it, hands thrown up in horror.

As I say hypocrites. Time and again.

In reality all three are different in some way but there are specifics where they are too tight. If one or more of those specifics covers issues of high importance to a voter then they are probably viewed all the same.

Anyway good luck to your lot in the vote today, whatever the outcome, arses are being kicked. Good. About time.

[wc98]

Guam said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2841686/Th...

The truth about East European migration: One in 30 Latvians are living in Britain, one in 60 Poles are also over here - and statistics don't even show latest influx
Statistics show 1.3 per cent of Eastern Europeans living anywhere in Europe are now in the UK
Britain is giving citizenship to more migrants than any other EU country, figures show
Since 2000, more than 2.1m migrants have acquired British citizenship
Data compiled by independent Migration Observatory at Oxford University
Romanian and Bulgarian migrant numbers have also continued to increase

[XJ Flyer]

Esseesse said:

XJ Flyer said:

So assuming that Farage is 'really' serious about at least closing the door to cheap labour east European EU immigration then what is the problem with that policy being applied retrospectively.

I've read this epic battle of XJ Flyer vs anyone without commenting because it seemed like boring nit picking about what may or may not have been a misinterpretation by Mr Reckless of policy, or a simple mistake, or a misrepresentation by the press (likely to some extent anyway).

Anyway, XJ, all that really matters is that we leave the EU. Surely you know that? Once the UK is no longer in the EU we will be free to have whatever immigration policy voters fancy, and I'm sure there will be someone to more closely fit your opinion. Until then I would suggest that you vote whichever way you think is most likely to result in a brexit, the die-hard Torys will tell you that Cameron is the only option, those more realistic will tell you that he's only offering a referendum because of UKIP, so vote UKIP.

The way it looks is that UKIP are offering a referendum to leave the EU.Which going by past example will turn into a pro EU pro immigration media frenzy in order to get the result that the LabLibdemCon alliance wants.From a UKIP vote point of view the big question is Farage a new Powell who is willing to stand up to all that and this time win out or not.So far all the indications are that he's not.So what does an anti EU vote actually mean and where does it actually get us in this case being that as I've said a non retrospective EU immigration barrier isn't worth the paper it is written on.Because by the time we're out all those who intend to come will have made sure that they are already here.

As for Farage's position in caving in to media pressure to water down that future immigration policy the fact is New Zealand have already shown a similar example in the case of British immigrants there.IE some time ago their immigration rules were changed to allow Brit truck drivers to work there.

That policy was since reversed.No surprise the new ruling applies retrospectively so all those who were allowed in then had to leave the country.None of which resulted in any media so called racist witch hunt against the NZ government and no backing down regards same.

So where's the big difference in the case of EU immigrants allowed here to work then having to go home retrospectively 'if' we leave the EU resulting in their work permit here no longer being valid.The fact is Farage bottled out at the first hurdle,in the face of LabLibdemCon controlled media pressure,let alone the real fight next year and/or during a Brexit campaign.

[Zod]

FiF said:

Nope not being simple but it's just a different shade of the same argument and as usual you eeither miss the point or are just a hypocrite.

It's seen on here time and time again. Some campaigning technique is quite OK when used by one of the big three in some variant, but when UKIP or another party use it, hands thrown up in horror.

As I say hypocrites. Time and again.

In reality all three are different in some way but there are specifics where they are too tight. If one or more of those specifics covers issues of high importance to a voter then they are probably viewed all the same.

Typical UKIP victim mentality: "hands thrown up in horror"!

[Wombat3]

The lighter side of life

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

[Esseesse]

Guam said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2841686/Th...

Can someone just clear something up from the linked article for me...

"Since 2000, more than 2.1million migrants have acquired British citizenship."

I thought those from Poland or wherever were free to live and work here... why are they acquiring British citizenship? Or is it someone else acquiring British citizenship?

As far as I was aware a Polish citizens (ok we're all actually EU citizens) could not vote in national elections, is that right? Surely if we're giving 'real' British citizenship away, they certainly are entitled to vote in any national elections. Also what is the requirement to gain British citizenship? A period of time working in the UK (Switzerland want 7 years IIRC) or something else? 2.1M is a not insignificant amount of political influence (3.5% of 60M).

[XJ Flyer]

Guam said:

Oliver Letwin

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2842145/Br...

Being absorbed into a Federal superstate is a distinct reality without reform it appears, so is he a xenophobe then

Ironically that was clear to all concerned from the day we joined the federalist scam.