What's Italian for 'kipper? Anti-migrant stunt goes awry.
Discussion
0a said:
Breadvan72 said:
Yes, you hacked it. Give it back how very dare you!
Alas I need help to operate my new Android phone, my hacking skills are not particularly effective. I guess you got lots of responses though, so well done.
steveT350C said:
I said 'seem to be lawyers', as in they come across as. My spin sorry.
Currently is now. Your spin. Laws have been created for some 700 years in England. I bet there are a fair few of them, significantly more than have been made by the EU. Fact is that current most of our laws come from the EU. I don't want that, hence UKIP
What do you mean by now? When did now start? Was now this week, last week, last year? Currently is now. Your spin. Laws have been created for some 700 years in England. I bet there are a fair few of them, significantly more than have been made by the EU. Fact is that current most of our laws come from the EU. I don't want that, hence UKIP
Edited by steveT350C on Wednesday 9th April 21:59
"Fact is?" Prove it. Simply saying something is so does not make it so. Evidence, please. Show me a list of laws made "now" and explain their origins. If you can't (and I wager that you can't), then you must be, ahem, mistaken.
A little help: Today's stuff
The National Health Service (Liabilities to Third Parties Scheme) (Amendment) Regulations 2014
The National Health Service (Property Expenses Scheme) (Amendment) Regulations 2014
The National Health Service (Clinical Negligence Scheme) (Amendment) Regulations 2014
The Armed Forces (Powers of Stop and Search, Search, Seizure and Retention) (Amendment) Order 2014
The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Code of Practice (Appointed Day) Order 2014
Is now 2014?
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/2014
steveT350C said:
What lie about the membership fee?
Google is free at point of use, you know, but here's a start:-http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2009/05/ukips-britain-p...
Site stance explained:-
http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/about/
Some further analysis here.
http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2009/06/what-percentage...
For those who are running out of scrolls:
http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2009/06/what-percentage...
For those who are running out of scrolls:
that website said:
Conclusion
No one agrees on how much legislation and regulation stems from the EU. The 9.1% figure stated by the House of Commons Library is too low, as it only covers Statutory Instruments, not ALL laws; the higher figures of 84%, 75% and even 50% claimed by the likes of Hannan, Farrage and Cameron are based on miscalculations, misunderstandings, or sources unknown, and often derive from parts of the EU other than just the UK – and so with no hard evidence to support them must be dismissed as either too high or inapplicable to the British situation.
What is the true figure? No one knows. So any claims that state hard and fast percentages should – if we’re being intellectually honest – be treated with equal suspicion.
Not that any of this is likely to change the opinions of those eurosceptics convinced of the malicious and all-pervading influence of the EU on our daily lives, of course. But still. I’ve looked for the evidence, and this is what I’ve tracked down. If you know different, please do let me know – I’m interested in the truth of the situation, as without total transparency, such misinformation, misunderstandings and resentments are only going to grow.
Update, October 2010:
The House of Commons Library has published a new, much more comprehensive study of the percentage of UK laws that originate from the EU. It is freely available as a PDF and despite running to 59 pages I’d strongly recommend reading it in full.
Its conclusion? The true figure is around 15%.
I am not sure if 2010 is "now" or "before now". Let's assume before now, although when now started remains unclear. Has anything happened to change things much in this context since Oct 2010? If it has, I haven't noticed, but maybe someone can point to the evidence. No one agrees on how much legislation and regulation stems from the EU. The 9.1% figure stated by the House of Commons Library is too low, as it only covers Statutory Instruments, not ALL laws; the higher figures of 84%, 75% and even 50% claimed by the likes of Hannan, Farrage and Cameron are based on miscalculations, misunderstandings, or sources unknown, and often derive from parts of the EU other than just the UK – and so with no hard evidence to support them must be dismissed as either too high or inapplicable to the British situation.
What is the true figure? No one knows. So any claims that state hard and fast percentages should – if we’re being intellectually honest – be treated with equal suspicion.
Not that any of this is likely to change the opinions of those eurosceptics convinced of the malicious and all-pervading influence of the EU on our daily lives, of course. But still. I’ve looked for the evidence, and this is what I’ve tracked down. If you know different, please do let me know – I’m interested in the truth of the situation, as without total transparency, such misinformation, misunderstandings and resentments are only going to grow.
Update, October 2010:
The House of Commons Library has published a new, much more comprehensive study of the percentage of UK laws that originate from the EU. It is freely available as a PDF and despite running to 59 pages I’d strongly recommend reading it in full.
Its conclusion? The true figure is around 15%.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 9th April 22:32
4v6 said:
DonkeyApple said:
What has been interesting is that the wishy washy concept of free speech has permitted these loons to become legitimate political parties.
That wishy washy concept as you call it was paid for with the blood of millions so that people like you can exercise it whenever you want.If they hadnt, you and me would probably not be here.
Maybe youd like it removed because you dont agree with diverse opinions that dont match your own?
On the issue of "does UKIP have policies?", this is worth a look. This website seems to me refreshingly candid and reasonably balanced, whilst remaining broadly pro EU and not pulling its punches re UKIP:-
http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2014/01/would-you-vote-...
http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2014/01/would-you-vote-...
Re the comments, here's one that could fit into any PH UKIP thread.
Note also the familiar reference to lies and smears. Translated from UKIPspeak, this means "documented cases of UKIP members making racist and homophobic rants, being caught on the fiddle, etc".
bloke on website said:
Andrew mcneilis
February 8, 2014 at 8:09 am
You will really have to do better than this. UKIP has a clear and unambiguous message.
1. Believe in real democracy
2. Give the British people a referendum – in or out
3. Make it clear that you want out by voting UKIP in May 2014.
The pro EU mob are disingenuous to be polite. They advocate staying in a rotten marriage riddled with thievery, extortion, lies, bullying and domestic abuse.
UKIP – whatever you try and spin or smear – as an opposition party does not need detailed policies.
It is an insurgency to to plutocrats and they are very very afraid
Note the familiar mantra of "they are scared of us". There is no evidence that anyone is scared of UKIP, but I suppose that if you join a coalition of those who feel themselves slighted and dispossessed by "them", it may make you feel better to tell yourself that you are scaring "them".February 8, 2014 at 8:09 am
You will really have to do better than this. UKIP has a clear and unambiguous message.
1. Believe in real democracy
2. Give the British people a referendum – in or out
3. Make it clear that you want out by voting UKIP in May 2014.
The pro EU mob are disingenuous to be polite. They advocate staying in a rotten marriage riddled with thievery, extortion, lies, bullying and domestic abuse.
UKIP – whatever you try and spin or smear – as an opposition party does not need detailed policies.
It is an insurgency to to plutocrats and they are very very afraid
Note also the familiar reference to lies and smears. Translated from UKIPspeak, this means "documented cases of UKIP members making racist and homophobic rants, being caught on the fiddle, etc".
Yes, and democratic deficit is a real complaint (although bear in mind that when we change Governments we don't get all that much repeal). The point remains that if out of the EU we would have to comply with a lot of EU rules anyway in order to trade, and would then have even more of a democratic deficit.
If you said the membership fee is 30 when it is 21 you would be either mistaken or fibbing, and if you carried on saying it is 30 after being shown that it is 21 you would be fibbing.
In any event, Farage talks about the cost to the UK of being part of the EU. He puts forward a big headline number to scare the sort of people who scare easily. The actual headline figure is wrong, but also the figure is meaningless unless placed in context. He knows that (if he doesn't, he is staggeringly economically illiterate, but I don't think he is that), but he also knows what plays with certain types of voter.
In any event, Farage talks about the cost to the UK of being part of the EU. He puts forward a big headline number to scare the sort of people who scare easily. The actual headline figure is wrong, but also the figure is meaningless unless placed in context. He knows that (if he doesn't, he is staggeringly economically illiterate, but I don't think he is that), but he also knows what plays with certain types of voter.
powerstroke said:
Kermit power said:
You're only addressing point 1. How many of the laws you might want to repeal would we still have to comply with to continue trading with Europe?
You could just as easily ask how many laws would they have to comply with to trade with us!!?? the pro EU lot are always spouting about trade as if its one way...
don4l said:
Breadvan72 said:
If you said the membership fee is 30 when it is 21 you would be either mistaken or fibbing, and if you carried on saying it is 30 after being shown that it is 21 you would be fibbing.
In any event, Farage talks about the cost to the UK of being part of the EU. He puts forward a big headline number to scare the sort of people who scare easily. The actual headline figure is wrong, but also the figure is meaningless unless placed in context. He knows that (if he doesn't, he is staggeringly economically illiterate, but I don't think he is that), but he also knows what plays with certain types of voter.
Incorrect!In any event, Farage talks about the cost to the UK of being part of the EU. He puts forward a big headline number to scare the sort of people who scare easily. The actual headline figure is wrong, but also the figure is meaningless unless placed in context. He knows that (if he doesn't, he is staggeringly economically illiterate, but I don't think he is that), but he also knows what plays with certain types of voter.
Farage said that the "membership fee" is £55 million per day. What do you think that the membership fee is?
Further to the con job point, this may partly explain why UKIP supporters are so shrill and angry when their party is criticised. No one wants to admit that he or she has been played, and sold a bill of goods by a snake oil merchant. Hence all the foot stamping and toy from pram throwing whenever it is pointed out that the Emperor is b
k naked.
As for ridiculing those who support UKIP, if you follow a ridiculous creed, then expect to be ridiculed. It is the same for any faith group.
k naked.As for ridiculing those who support UKIP, if you follow a ridiculous creed, then expect to be ridiculed. It is the same for any faith group.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 10th April 09:49
mrpurple said:
Perhaps he has a lot of free time on his hands and doesn't have much paying work on his books?
Classic displacement activity. I post a lot when I'm busy, and vanish when I'm not. Procrastination Monkey becomes a Gorilla. As I said a few pages ago, I know that it is cruel and wrong to mock the afflicted, but I did offer to light a candle and say sorry. Maybe I should make it four candles.As for acolytes, I can't afford those - lawsuit bills too high when you offer to show them your etchings.
There are a fair few racists, but leave them to fester in the places where racists fester (eg: UKIP discussion boards). As someone astutely pointed out some time ago, it's about fear of competition, although sometimes (not always) spiced (lightly or heavily according to taste) with fear of people who are NLU. A few years ago, all the talk was of non EU migrants. Now the talk among the same people is of EU migrants, and the non EU lot, who were the disease and cultural erosion carrying bugbears of yesteryear, are hailed as innovators and entrepreneurs, unfairly barred by the horrid EU.
Bill said:
Mark Benson said:
I know, no one comes out of it with much of a reputation.
My point was, knowing this (and he surely does), why start a thread like this and return so often, just to keep it going.
It's like picking a scab. But the same could be said of pretty much any thread, certainly any involving politics or religion.My point was, knowing this (and he surely does), why start a thread like this and return so often, just to keep it going.
Mark Benson said:
Acolytes though - go on, admit it - secretly you love that thing 10PS does though, don't you.
Joking apart, I have a lizard-thick skin and genuinely don't care what a load of made up people on the internet think about me, whether positive or negative. I am always surprised that people allow themselves to get cross about words on a screen. I have never met 10PS, but I admire his honesty in talking of his experience going to prison for a mistake that any of us could make. He seems open minded, seems to take time to inform himself about stuff, helps people out in SPL (educated layman), and is sometimes witty, but I wouldn't actually snog him.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff