UKIP & the anti-fascist lot

[Simster]

The reason they are getting the level of publicity they are is because all three main parties feel threatened by UKIP. It also helps that foaming mouthed lefties can't help holding protests etc.

I don't agree with that at all. I think the Tories do certainly. And there are people in the Labour party who do too, but not to the same significant level. As for the Lib Dems, you were massively clutching at straws when you mentioned them earlier just as you are now - they are an openly PRO European party. You don't vote for them at all if you are inclined to get out of the EU. They have their own problems of vote desertion and I would guess no more than 2% at the door of UKIP.

But the simple fact is that UKIP are a single issue party, and the issue is very debatable and contencious for a variety of reasons.

 

[daveinprague]

Yes they are. You said "UKIPs flagship policy was to ban the burqa". Clearly that is NOT and never has been their "flagship" policy.

And no, you don't really make me bite because you're not worth responding to IMO - if you were I would have posted on your other tediously long thread. I just object to you making a point by lying. Do you know what "flagship" means?

Again, feel free to challange Dr Alan Sked, UKIP founder.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-morally-dodgy_n_2190987.html


and yes...you bit, and no, im not lying...
Sorry if youre feeling a bit of a tit, but thats your problem, not mine.
The only current thread 'I have', is a reggae thread. If you dont like reggae..dont post on it ;-D

 

[Dandyman]

So here we go ( and the list isn't exhaustive ! ) :

1. Getting us out of the EU
2. Points value immigration
3. Recall voting
4. Flat rate of tax
5. Tax only kicking in at £13k

Feel free to name call rather than put a rational political argument as usual !

1. Making it harder for British goods and services to be sold in Europe (although their real aim is an US style labour market).
2. Already effectively exists for non-EU migrants.
3. Gimmick
4. More tax cuts for the wealthy leading to lower tax revenues (unless they further increase regressive taxation on working people) and more cuts despite their claims to want to spend more on education, health and the Armed Forces.
5. It is better to ensure a decency threshold on wages otherwise this will effectively aid the better off more than than the worse off.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Again, feel free to challange Dr Alan Sked, UKIP founder.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-morally-dodgy_n_2190987.html


and yes...you bit, and no, im not lying...
Sorry if youre feeling a bit of a tit, but thats your problem, not mine.

Myself and Simster are never likely to agree on the EU or UKIP BUT I think we'll agree you spouting rubbish and constantly referring to the founder of UKIP ( who hasn't been involved for years ) isn't evidence of your claims. Supply the UKIP policy document that had the policy you claim and then it might be believable.

 

[daveinprague]

Who is spouting rubbish. Its what the founder of the party has said. Whether he has been involved for years or not, im sure he will know what the parties policies are dont you?
If it rubs people up the wrong way, challange him.

'The spokesman added that the party's policy on the burqa "had been dropped and not yet rewritten"

 

[Simster]

Again, feel free to challange Dr Alan Sked, UKIP founder.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-morally-dodgy_n_2190987.html


and yes...you bit, and no, im not lying...
Sorry if youre feeling a bit of a tit, but thats your problem, not mine.
The only current thread 'I have', is a reggae thread. If you dont like reggae..dont post on it ;-D

Christ, you really are thick. Sked may have founded UKIP but is now an opponent. What you have done is the equivalent of me asking Ed Milliband to describe Tory policy and present it as fact. The only tit on here is you, but you're the only one who can't see it.

 

[Simster]

'The spokesman added that the party's policy on the burqa "had been dropped and not yet rewritten"

Yes. This sounds like a "flagship policy" to me.

 

[daveinprague]

Simster, so you think that the founder of the party is not aware of the the parties current policies are, but people on NSC are better equipped?



You BIT.... They are not my words, but I knew what the reaction would be.
You can waffle all you like about him not being involved anymore....he isnt involved anymore as he realised the party had
been infested with racists, and rightwing bigots.

I didnt say the burqa was policy. He did. So you know the UKIP better than its founder? Whether he is involved still or not? Incredible arrogance.
Anyway, ill let you froth about nothing for the rest of the day. Thanks for joining in on the experiment.

 

[Dick Head]

Any chance we can group all these type of political threads into one big one? There's currently 3 or 4 on the front page of NSC and it's really not what we're all about, is it?

Everyone's about politics whether they like it or not.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Simster, so you think that the founder of the party is not aware of the the parties current policies are, but people on NSC are better equipped?



You BIT.... They are not my words, but I knew what the reaction would be.
You can waffle all you like about him not being involved anymore....he isnt involved anymore as he realised the party had
been infested with racists, and rightwing bigots.

I didnt say the burqa was policy. He did. So you know the UKIP better than its founder? Whether he is involved still or not? Incredible arrogance.
Anyway, ill let you froth about nothing for the rest of the day. Thanks for joining in on the experiment.

Given Sked left the party 15 years ago I doubt he has any proper knowledge of the party as it is now. It would be like comparing the Kinnock Labour Party with the Blair one or the Thatcher Tory Party with the Cameron one. Totally irrelevant.

 

[daveinprague]

You dont think he is aware of whats happening with 'his baby'? I know I would, and im pretty sure you would.
It doesnt compare with the others you mentioned. They didnt form the Labour and Tory parties. To think he wouldnt be aware
of whats going on with UKIP is a bit lame.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

You dont think he is aware of whats happening with 'his baby'? I know I would, and im pretty sure you would.
It doesnt compare with the others you mentioned. They didnt form the Labour party. To think he wouldnt be aware
of whats going on with UKIP is a bit lame.

A bit lame you say ? What's lame is you claiming UKIP wanted to ban something but the only evidence you can produce is a quote from someone who hasn't been in UKIP for 15 years. If what you claim is true you'd think there would be SOME evidence out there.

 

[Simster]

You dont think he is aware of whats happening with 'his baby'? I know I would, and im pretty sure you would.

The fact is, you labelled something "a flagship policy" in an effort to discredit people you oppose rather than sticking to the facts. You have done this by quoting someone who has no relevance to UKIP any more. It is simply NOT true to say banning the burqa is the flagship UKIP policy.

That really is you all over and what makes your posts such a tedious read.

 

[daveinprague]

Again...I didnt 'label' anything.
Dr Alan Sked labelled it.

Keep frothing.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Right these are going to be my policies

1. Getting us out of the EU
2. Points value immigration
3. Recall voting
4. Flat rate of tax (lower than UKIPs)
5. Tax only kicking in at £15k
6 Increase spending on the military
7 Increase spending on the NHS
8 Increase spending on Education

Surely i should get your vote now ? or if not, why not ?

We'd be bankrupt in 2 years. Where and how would you cut spending.

 

[daveinprague]

A bit lame you say ? What's lame is you claiming UKIP wanted to ban something but the only evidence you can produce is a quote from someone who hasn't been in UKIP for 15 years. If what you claim is true you'd think there would be SOME evidence out there.

Again, I didnt claim anything.

 

[Simster]

Again...I didnt 'label' anything.
Dr Alan Sked labelled it.

Keep frothing.

Back pedalling as usual. You got pulled up, so then directed me to the "UKIP founder", but even then he's got nothing to do with UKIP. This is how you opened up this conversation:

Insulting or not.
At the last general election, with the country facing the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression UKIPs flagship policy was to ban the burqa.

It's odd, your position on UKIP is broadly similar to mine yet you are by far the most annoying clown on the thread.

 

[daveinprague]

Who is backpeddling..certainly not me...youre the one frothing over something the founder of this party has said. You 'pulled me up', thinking it was something I said. Im sorry if the facts are different.
Did Dr Sked form the party? Yes. Would he know more about UKIP policies than you or me?
Apparently not as much as casual observers on NSC.

'Its extraordinary," Sked told the HuffPost UK, "that at the last general election, with the country facing the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, [Ukip's] flagship policy was to ban the burqa."

 

[Soulman]

A bit lame you say ? What's lame is you claiming UKIP wanted to ban something but the only evidence you can produce is a quote from someone who hasn't been in UKIP for 15 years. If what you claim is true you'd think there would be SOME evidence out there.

I believe he stated that it was UKIP's "flagship policy".....oh dear, no evidence yet.

 

[BigGully]

We'd be bankrupt in 2 years. Where and how would you cut spending.

I am beginning to think actually parties have very little options to impact on the big wheels of our economies, but can faff around on the peripherals .

Of course you might choose to spunk the money or withold money, but the important big cogs of our economy will keep turning, big business, financial services, big banks IMF and the USA blah blah blah. will all ensure that really there is very little scope to use this as a reason to invalidate any parties quest for power.