Nigel Farage Launches New Brexit Party.

[smn159]

Troubleatmill said:

Terminator X said:

No, unrest is bubbling up as 17.4m people have been hung out to dry. The parties you mention offer them a solution vs the main parties who clearly don't.

TX.

And think of all the catchy slogans....
No deal is better than a bad deal
Leave means leave
Brexit means Brexit
A vote to leave the EU means leaving the SM and CU
..... we will implement what you decide.
They lied to you.

Farage has a very simple powerful truth to tell.

And 17.4 million people are hacked off by being asked to decide. Taking the time to vote and then being told “fk you” by the House of Remain.

But there are no solutions on offer are there? All of those slogans are as vacuous and meaningless as ever. The can mean whatever you want them to mean, which is presumably the whole point.

Farrage is playing you.

[Derek Smith]

psi310398 said:

I find her many of her views unappealing, as I do some of Corbyn's and May's, but that's my view and I recognise and am happy that others' mileages may vary. But it is apparent that you are utterly certain that your view of the world is inherently and self-evidently superior to hers.

As the UK appears, anyway, to be being run more for the convenience of big international corporations than for that of its people, I'm not that additionally bothered that AW defers to the Pope. Although, technically, I suspect she'd claim that her beliefs came from the Pope's superior. And I'm more scared by people who think they have a personal hotline to Him.

I'm utterly certain about gravity, although I know that there will be a new theory of gravity in years to come. I know Tuesday's are often being a bit meh. I doubt there will be anything that changes that, but I'll listen and if it is convincing will be convinced. I am keen on science but know that every current theory of science will be either replaced or heavily modified. I love history and am fascinated by it, but believe very little. That's the way with history. It is virtually identical to science in that fundamental. I view the world depending a great deal on both science and history. In other words, I'm open to argument.

I have a few inalienable beliefs, one of which is that gays and females should have the same rights, and obligations, as me and I should have the same rights and obligations as everyone else. I don't think either gays or women are born in sin. You can try and argue me out of these certainties but I can't see that anything you say will change that. It is not a world view. It is simple humanity.

How anyone who suggests that gays are sinful just because of the way they are born should be elected as an MP defeats me, and I believe it should defeat everyone with any feelings for others.

Her views on abortion are an abortion, but even though I am 100% certain that a woman who has been raped should have access to an abortion, I know there are other views. I've yet to find one convincing but have listened in the past. Her views on the state killing people who breach laws are held by many, but she has not the excuse of being unaware of the travesties of justice that have occurred in the past and obviously will in the future. An innocent or two hanged in the interests of vengeance does not seem to bother her. That's vicious. Victims of crimes are often blamed for it happening, often by both the offenders and the stupid. She does not have the defences of either for her beliefs. I think she is just nasty.

She has these nasty and reprehensible points of views because of what she has been told by various vicars. That's no excuse. I assume she does not, like the bible, support slavery. Is that just because her boss hasn't mentioned it?

[Stigproducts]

Derek Smith said:

I'm utterly certain about gravity, although I know that there will be a new theory of gravity in years to come. I know Tuesday's are often being a bit meh. I doubt there will be anything that changes that, but I'll listen and if it is convincing will be convinced. I am keen on science but know that every current theory of science will be either replaced or heavily modified. I love history and am fascinated by it, but believe very little. That's the way with history. It is virtually identical to science in that fundamental. I view the world depending a great deal on both science and history. In other words, I'm open to argument.

I have a few inalienable beliefs, one of which is that gays and females should have the same rights, and obligations, as me and I should have the same rights and obligations as everyone else. I don't think either gays or women are born in sin. You can try and argue me out of these certainties but I can't see that anything you say will change that. It is not a world view. It is simple humanity.

How anyone who suggests that gays are sinful just because of the way they are born should be elected as an MP defeats me, and I believe it should defeat everyone with any feelings for others.

Her views on abortion are an abortion, but even though I am 100% certain that a woman who has been raped should have access to an abortion, I know there are other views. I've yet to find one convincing but have listened in the past. Her views on the state killing people who breach laws are held by many, but she has not the excuse of being unaware of the travesties of justice that have occurred in the past and obviously will in the future. An innocent or two hanged in the interests of vengeance does not seem to bother her. That's vicious. Victims of crimes are often blamed for it happening, often by both the offenders and the stupid. She does not have the defences of either for her beliefs. I think she is just nasty.

She has these nasty and reprehensible points of views because of what she has been told by various vicars. That's no excuse. I assume she does not, like the bible, support slavery. Is that just because her boss hasn't mentioned it?

Nasty in your opinion. Others may agree with her and vote for her. They did before in Maidstone, which makes your point of view less than mainstream and morally superior. Her platform now is that she's going to fulfill the manifesto she is behind. So how about the Tories and labour. They say one thing but who knows what they really beleive.
BTW if a woman is raped, gets pregnant and has an abortion, how can you prove that first bit in time for the last bit? Otherwise if it's just woman who were raped who are allowed abortions you set yourself up for a few disgruntled innocent men whose child was murdered on the say do of a crazy person. How do the practicalites of due process work versus that 9 month deadline?

[smn159]

Abortion isn't murder - unless you happen to be a religious extremist?

[B'stard Child]

smn159 said:

Abortion isn't murder - unless you happen to be a religious extremist?

Unless compliant with the rules after 28 weeks it falls under Section one of Offences against the person - ie Murder

Unless you are saying the law is a religious extremist

[Stigproducts]

smn159 said:

Abortion isn't murder - unless you happen to be a religious extremist?

That's not the example used by poster deresksmith. He said AW was a nutjob because she was against abortion, even if a woman was raped, presumably to make her sound like a REALLY bad person. The suggestion being that abortion for another reason wasn't as an extreme view, but abortion after rape was something no right sounding person would have a problem with.
I'm not expressing an opinion on abortion, but in this case study suggested by Derek abortion was illegal, except if a woman was raped, then how exactly would that work? If the woman turned out to not have been raped then it is just a regular old abortion, which would be illegal in this scenario therefore murder presumably by a doctor of some kind. I'm not sure a doctor would want to put themself in the position of carrying out an otherwise illegal abortion unless the rapist had been charged, and convicted (pending appeals of course....OMG, that's a tough one, that can drag out for years sometimes...)

It's almost like Dereksmith posts an extreme abortion scenario to smear someone he doesn't like. My point is that the scenario is so extreme, unusual and fraught with practical problems itself, its irrelevant.

So lets just go back to "she doesn't agree with abortion". That really isn't that extraordinary of an opinion. Dereksmtih disagrees, he thinks abortion should be legal. Good for him. In that case he should vote for a party that agrees with that position. Getting back on topic, I just don't think there is one that can be believed anymore, becasue labour/tory are proven liars. At least AW is being upfront on her point of view. She might be lying too though and really be a big fan or abortion, and a a secret remainer!

[dai1983]

Troubleatmill said:

And think of all the catchy slogans....

They lied to you.

Would he have the audacity to use that given his track record?

[wc98]

Roman Rhodes said:

That 71 year old Ann Widdecombe with her 1950’s attitudes she’s a breath of fresh air I tell ya!

What are the party’s other ambitions (outside of its “main ambition”) that we’re all supposed to be rallying around? Presumably you have ‘inside knowledge’ because I can’t find mention of any policies.

to be fair i am surprised you are surprised by the appointment of widdicombe considering your views on leave voters. surely she will fit right in being old and holding out of date views ?


i tend to side with those that think religion and politics should never mix and would like to see all religious education removed from schools. if people want to go down that route as adults fine, keep it away from easily impressionable young minds.

[anonymous-user]

crankedup said:

Roman Rhodes said:

crankedup said:

El stovey said:

crankedup said:

Leicester Loyal said:

Looks like they are doing rather well so far.

They are doing extremely well, and this is the reason we have a bunch of ‘remainers’ in here bleating and whining. Always a good sign, show how strong the Brexit Party is growing daily.

The last thing a new party trying to attract more than just ex ukippers needs is retired old school bigots like her joining.

Quite frankly I doubt you think she’s good for the brexit party either.

People like her will put moderate brexiters right off your party and you will all be dismissed as another party for the angry and intolerant again. Like UKIP.

Moderate brexiteers?
I want the Brexit Partyto be attractive to all who have an interest in building a new political party. The bonus is of course it’s main ambition is that it ensures we leave the EU rather than be contained by the EU.
Said before the Party will, just like any sensible Party, ensure it weeds out extremists. I honestly believe the Brexit Party will be the best thing to happen in U.K. Politics for generations. Needs a fresh approach.

That 71 year old Ann Widdecombe with her 1950’s attitudes she’s a breath of fresh air I tell ya!

What are the party’s other ambitions (outside of its “main ambition”) that we’re all supposed to be rallying around? Presumably you have ‘inside knowledge’ because I can’t find mention of any policies.

But your not debating you are merely expressing an opinion! Two can play the same game you see.
New Political Party yet to develop, however most sensible rational people will understand that
development can take rather longer than just a few weeks.

I asked you a question. That is not expressing an opinion. The fact that you can’t answer it tells me all I need to know. “Most sensible rational people” would have some idea of policies that they want to implement if they are going to set up a party for anything other than a single issue. Most sane people would want to know what those policies were before offering their support. You seem to be another mug worshipping at the altar of St Nige. Keep donating!

[smn159]

B'stard Child said:

smn159 said:

Abortion isn't murder - unless you happen to be a religious extremist?

Unless compliant with the rules after 28 weeks it falls under Section one of Offences against the person - ie Murder

Unless you are saying the law is a religious extremist

92% of abortions occur before 12 weeks and 99.9 before 24 weeks, according to Google. Are you saying that they are murders?

[anonymous-user]

crankedup said:

Seeing Brexit to fruition is the first main ambition, clearly the established party’s have decided to lie, misrepresent, ignore and frustrate the 17.4 million voters who have instructed Government as per referendum.
The Brexit Party also has ambitions beyond the main objective, that is to oust the established Party’s to where they richly deserve to be, gone and best forgotten.

Would you like some maple syrup with your waffles?

[wc98]

Roman Rhodes said:

I asked you a question. That is not expressing an opinion. The fact that you can’t answer it tells me all I need to know. “Most sensible rational people” would have some idea of policies that they want to implement if they are going to set up a party for anything other than a single issue. Most sane people would want to know what those policies were before offering their support. You seem to be another mug worshipping at the altar of St Nige. Keep donating!

there are a few examples in recent history that would suggest the best thing for a country is the politicians in charge sitting on their hands doing nothing is actually the best thing they can do.
i have read many times on here that people shouldn't believe any manifesto and anyone that does is naive/stupid. at least if a party only has one policy in it's manifesto it has less chance of reneging on it and an even lesser chance of fking anything else up.

[B'stard Child]

smn159 said:

B'stard Child said:

smn159 said:

Abortion isn't murder - unless you happen to be a religious extremist?

Unless compliant with the rules after 28 weeks it falls under Section one of Offences against the person - ie Murder

Unless you are saying the law is a religious extremist

92% of abortions occur before 12 weeks and 99.9 before 24 weeks, according to Google. Are you saying that they are murders?

You need to read back your statement in Bold

[Leicester Loyal]

According to the polls they're going to win a majority if the European elections go ahead...

[smn159]

B'stard Child said:

You need to read back your statement in Bold

I'm going to assume that your answer is 'no' then and award you an internet pedantry point

[B'stard Child]

smn159 said:

B'stard Child said:

You need to read back your statement in Bold

I'm going to assume that your answer is 'no' then

It's no for the ones carried out in compliance with the legislation but yes for ones that aren't

smn159 said:

and award you an internet pedantry point

I'll take that

[Borghetto]

Stigproducts said:

That's not the example used by poster deresksmith. He said AW was a nutjob because she was against abortion, even if a woman was raped, presumably to make her sound like a REALLY bad person. The suggestion being that abortion for another reason wasn't as an extreme view, but abortion after rape was something no right sounding person would have a problem with.
I'm not expressing an opinion on abortion, but in this case study suggested by Derek abortion was illegal, except if a woman was raped, then how exactly would that work? If the woman turned out to not have been raped then it is just a regular old abortion, which would be illegal in this scenario therefore murder presumably by a doctor of some kind. I'm not sure a doctor would want to put themself in the position of carrying out an otherwise illegal abortion unless the rapist had been charged, and convicted (pending appeals of course....OMG, that's a tough one, that can drag out for years sometimes...)

It's almost like Dereksmith posts an extreme abortion scenario to smear someone he doesn't like. My point is that the scenario is so extreme, unusual and fraught with practical problems itself, its irrelevant.

So lets just go back to "she doesn't agree with abortion". That really isn't that extraordinary of an opinion. Dereksmtih disagrees, he thinks abortion should be legal. Good for him. In that case he should vote for a party that agrees with that position. Getting back on topic, I just don't think there is one that can be believed anymore, becasue labour/tory are proven liars. At least AW is being upfront on her point of view. She might be lying too though and really be a big fan or abortion, and a a secret remainer!

i tend to not read Delboy's bigoted opinions, as he comes across to me as an old fart trying to be "right on" and failing.

[Derek Smith]

B'stard Child said:

smn159 said:

Abortion isn't murder - unless you happen to be a religious extremist?

Unless compliant with the rules after 28 weeks it falls under Section one of Offences against the person - ie Murder

Unless you are saying the law is a religious extremist

It’s not murder. There is an offence of child destruction. I’ve not known any example of such a charge, but it is on the statute books. It’s a favourite of the Sergeants’ exam, along with tattooing of minors.

Stigproducts said:

Nasty in your opinion.

Glad to see I’ve made that clear.

[B'stard Child]

Derek Smith said:

B'stard Child said:

smn159 said:

Abortion isn't murder - unless you happen to be a religious extremist?

Unless compliant with the rules after 28 weeks it falls under Section one of Offences against the person - ie Murder

Unless you are saying the law is a religious extremist

It’s not murder. There is an offence of child destruction. I’ve not known any example of such a charge, but it is on the statute books. It’s a favourite of the Sergeants’ exam, along with tattooing of minors.

It's been a good few years since I last studied it - PACE was new then

[Stigproducts]

Leicester Loyal said:

According to the polls they're going to win a majority if the European elections go ahead...

It's almost like most people support them, and their principles, making them mainstream.

It's time extremists like dereksmith were silenced; those kinds of people can't be allowed to hold any kind of power in the UK (am I doing this right?)