UKIP, it's all over!

[geoffreys]

Nigel Farage may insist UKIP is not a racist party, so why does it attract so many racists?

Some expelled or sacked ex ukippers..

Rozanne Duncan
Ken Chapman
Dave Small
James Elgar
Andre Lampitt
William Henwood
Joseph Quirk
Gerard Batten
Magnus Neilson
Harry Perry.... Former Offerton councillor Harry Perry’s Twitter feed is astonishing. As well as prolific sharing of material about the ‘sin of feminism’ and the ‘disease’ of homosexuality, Perry is obsessed with the idea of ‘white genocide’:
Eric Kitson
David William Griffith
Ron northcott
Donald Grewar

Just some of his gaffes..
Farage sails close to the wind...his biggest recent gaff being that infamous poster of Syrian refugees when he campaigning to leave the EU...Users on social media were quick to compare the advert to a Nazi propaganda film with similar visuals and featuring Jewish refugees

Once asked if a group of Romanian men moved in next to you, would you be concerned....I think you would be,” he told LBC radio during an interview. Asked whether he would also object to living next to German children, he said: “You know the difference.”

He blamed immigration on being stuck on the M4....
People who do not have HIV...can enter the uk...
Suggesting that Chinese are called a certain slur normally...
Parts of the uk like a foreign land...hearing foreign voices on the train..

Then we go onto how he thought breast feeding women should sit in a corner, he suggests there is no gender pay gap or discrimination as women in the work place are ' worth less..

He's loathsome...and to be pals with the Orange narcissist mysognistic racist across the Atlantic...not surprised..

I take it you don't like him then!

I don't think she like anybody Austin.
Geoff.

[Pete G]

I think the Farage poster well illustrates exactly how far UK have drank the kool aid with respect to 'equality' issues generally.

Take the much agonised over Farage poster, which was actually reported as a hate crime to the police many times [and incidentally then in a Kafkaesque justification the very people who were reporting this as a hate crime then pointed to these complaints that they had made themselves as proof positive as a surge in reported hate crime post the referendum]. It is a picture of reality inasmuch as it is an actual picture of the tide of migrants progressing towards Europe. It was neither staged nor photoshopped, just a picture which expressed the reality of life for those migrants, the volume of them, and the reality of existence for those people who live in places on the borders of Europe now. The numbers were not photographically enhanced. Do we really want to suggest that reality can somehow be racist? Would the poster had been less offensive if it had been turned into a parody of reality by photoshopping in a more ethnically diverse crowd?

No? Must have been the text then. The poster contained two pieces of text.

The headline 'Breaking Point, the EU has failed us all' I have not actually heard anyone argue that this is not demonstrably true. The crowds in the picture are a result, centrally, of two factors. Firstly, in her role of unofficial head of the EU and with the full support of a majority of the EU machine offered residency to any immigrant that could make it to Germany unconditionally despite it being directly contradictory to EU regulations. Also of course the EU has completely broken its own rules as to registration and distribution of these migrants. In what way can that be regarded as not 'failing us all' especially the residents of those benighted countries of the frontline of the reception of these immigrants. And even if you considered that this had been handled perfectly, in what way might it be considered racist? Are you suggesting that UKIP would have considered this level of immigration perfectly acceptable if they had been white Canadians?

Finally it bore the tag line 'we must break free of the EU and take back control of our borders [implicitly if we want to avoid the social consequences of allowing immigration on this scale]. Again in what way is this not demonstrably true? Under EU refugee regulations the EU are perfectly in their rights to set immigration targets for each EU member state, distribute immigrants coming into the EU accordingly, and then fine member states 250,000 euros for each refugee they refuse to take against that target.

And again, in what rational way can this observation be considered racist?

It is just a demonstration of the way the liberal/left has now completely perverted the word to the point where it now simply means 'anyone who asks me consider facts which seem in conflict with the narrative I have now generated for myself' and has therefore lost any power it once had.

Which is a bit of a shame, I think, because the original use of the term, and the repudiation of its proponents seemed to me to establish some important moral principles, now lost in the miasma of offence taking and virtue signalling, a loss for which the left are, I think, exclusively responsible

[cyprusgrump]

I think the Farage poster well illustrates exactly how far UK have drank the kool aid with respect to 'equality' issues generally.

Take the much agonised over Farage poster, which was actually reported as a hate crime to the police many times [and incidentally then in a Kafkaesque justification the very people who were reporting this as a hate crime then pointed to these complaints that they had made themselves as proof positive as a surge in reported hate crime post the referendum]. It is a picture of reality inasmuch as it is an actual picture of the tide of migrants progressing towards Europe. It was neither staged nor photoshopped, just a picture which expressed the reality of life for those migrants, the volume of them, and the reality of existence for those people who live in places on the borders of Europe now. The numbers were not photographically enhanced. Do we really want to suggest that reality can somehow be racist? Would the poster had been less offensive if it had been turned into a parody of reality by photoshopping in a more ethnically diverse crowd?

No? Must have been the text then. The poster contained two pieces of text.

The headline 'Breaking Point, the EU has failed us all' I have not actually heard anyone argue that this is not demonstrably true. The crowds in the picture are a result, centrally, of two factors. Firstly, in her role of unofficial head of the EU and with the full support of a majority of the EU machine offered residency to any immigrant that could make it to Germany unconditionally despite it being directly contradictory to EU regulations. Also of course the EU has completely broken its own rules as to registration and distribution of these migrants. In what way can that be regarded as not 'failing us all' especially the residents of those benighted countries of the frontline of the reception of these immigrants. And even if you considered that this had been handled perfectly, in what way might it be considered racist? Are you suggesting that UKIP would have considered this level of immigration perfectly acceptable if they had been white Canadians?

Finally it bore the tag line 'we must break free of the EU and take back control of our borders [implicitly if we want to avoid the social consequences of allowing immigration on this scale]. Again in what way is this not demonstrably true? Under EU refugee regulations the EU are perfectly in their rights to set immigration targets for each EU member state, distribute immigrants coming into the EU accordingly, and then fine member states 250,000 euros for each refugee they refuse to take against that target.

And again, in what rational way can this observation be considered racist?

It is just a demonstration of the way the liberal/left has now completely perverted the word to the point where it now simply means 'anyone who asks me consider facts which seem in conflict with the narrative I have now generated for myself' and has therefore lost any power it once had.

Which is a bit of a shame, I think, because the original use of the term, and the repudiation of its proponents seemed to me to establish some important moral principles, now lost in the miasma of offence taking and virtue signalling, a loss for which the left are, I think, exclusively responsible

[Lynsab]

Farage is fast becoming a hate figure in the UK especially if interviewed on tv or in the news, the comments after nowadays are very disparaging....moreso when appearing in the latest happening with the POTUS.

In fact Farage just last week says he's worried about coming out of his house nowadays...

Of course many ordinary voters in the UK are well aware of the incitement and hatred he caused...I won't link to such forums but there's many.

I can see one or two on here prefer to defend such politicians and their words. Of course they are allowed to say as much....but it seems if you are grossly anti Farage or Trump you mustn't say a word...hardly fair that is it.

[geoffreys]

Farage is fast becoming a hate figure in the UK especially if interviewed on tv or in the news, the comments after nowadays are very disparaging....moreso when appearing in the latest happening with the POTUS.

In fact Farage just last week says he's worried about coming out of his house nowadays...

Of course many ordinary voters in the UK are well aware of the incitement and hatred he caused...I won't link to such forums but there's many.

I can see one or two on here prefer to defend such politicians and their words. Of course they are allowed to say as much....but it seems if you are grossly anti Farage or Trump you mustn't say a word...hardly fair that is it.

Life's a bitch sometimes Lyn, but who is stopping you saying "a word"?

Geoff.

[cyprusgrump]

Farage is fast becoming a hate figure in the UK especially if interviewed on tv or in the news, the comments after nowadays are very disparaging....moreso when appearing in the latest happening with the POTUS.

In fact Farage just last week says he's worried about coming out of his house nowadays...

Of course many ordinary voters in the UK are well aware of the incitement and hatred he caused...I won't link to such forums but there's many.

I can see one or two on here prefer to defend such politicians and their words. Of course they are allowed to say as much....but it seems if you are grossly anti Farage or Trump you mustn't say a word...hardly fair that is it.

I don't think anybody is suggesting that you 'mustn't say a word'...

But just because most people that post in the media and forums that you read agree with you doesn't make you right. Most of the people that post in the media that I frequent have very differing political views to yours.

The problem that has been pointed out above is that many of the left believe that 'debate' consists of throwing unfounded abuse and insults at those that disagree with their world views... Like this for instance...

He's loathsome...and to be pals with the Orange narcissist mysognistic racist across the Atlantic...not surprised..

Even by your own rules, insulting those you disagree with means you've largely lost the argument.

I've always believed those who resort to personal insults have lost the arguement...

[Mrblobby]

Hasn't Farage resigned from UKIP ?

He answered questions well on piers Morgan last week . I like him .

It amused me when he said he is staying in his MEP role until Brexit is done . No doubt there will be some good exchanges at EU Parliament meetings .

[Dominic]

Hasn't Farage resigned from UKIP ?

He answered questions well on piers Morgan last week . I like him .

It amused me when he said he is staying in his MEP role until Brexit is done . No doubt there will be some good exchanges at EU Parliament meetings .

Yes, Bravo. Just what we want when we are trying to negotiate a decent deal. That clown sat there insulting the rest of them.

[Pete G]

I can see one or two on here prefer to defend such politicians and their words. Of course they are allowed to say as much....but it seems if you are grossly anti Farage or Trump you mustn't say a word...hardly fair that is it.

I would not dream of trying to shut someone up, in fact my intention was to get a response, not quash one.

My point was that, if we agree [and I think we do] that being a racist is a pernicious thing to be, then calling someone one is a serious matter, or at least should be.

I'm not aware of anything Farage has said that could be called racist, by any reasonable use of the word. He has, to the contrary as far as I'm aware, said his aim is to protect the rights of those people legally resident in the UK regardless of their race, creed, or colour, and wishes control mass migration on the same basis. I cannot understand how this can be considered racist, in fact seems to me to be the exact opposite.

If anyone is aware of any actual racist statements he has made, I'd be interested to hear, and would happily join you in a campaign to have him prosecuted, as he would surely have broken the law. I find racism of any sort as repulsive as the next person.

Which is why I object to the left/liberal usage of it as a general purpose insult and/or debate stopper

[Poppy]

It seems to me that Lynsab is one of those that are inciting hatred. Cyprus Grump is right when he says that you have broken your own rules Lynn.Re Farage I certainly don' t think he is a clown either Dominic - quite the reverse actually. I too watched his interview the other night and found that he had twice cheated death which is maybe one of the reasons he lives life like he does but I found it appalling what his children have had to endure and it is these personal expressions of hatred that fuel the fires.
I must say that some comments on here are not appropriate under the heading " politics for moderates"!!

[geoffreys]

It seems to me that Lynsab is one of those that are inciting hatred. Cyprus Grump is right when he says that you have broken your own rules Lynn.Re Farage I certainly don' t think he is a clown either Dominic - quite the reverse actually. I too watched his interview the other night and found that he had twice cheated death which is maybe one of the reasons he lives life like he does but I found it appalling what his children have had to endure and it is these personal expressions of hatred that fuel the fires.
I must say that some comments on here are not appropriate under the heading " politics for moderates"!!

You are absolutely right Poppy, and as I said in an earlier post some comments have been libellous.
Lyn has called Nigel a racist more than once for example - she has no evidence to substantiate that.
She has made similar comments about Donald Trump and myself.
None of us are racists, but we hold strong views about most things, including extreme islamists and immigration.
She should be confined to the "Pit" (IMO).
Geoff.

[Mark]

It seems to me that Lynsab is one of those that are inciting hatred. Cyprus Grump is right when he says that you have broken your own rules Lynn.Re Farage I certainly don' t think he is a clown either Dominic - quite the reverse actually. I too watched his interview the other night and found that he had twice cheated death which is maybe one of the reasons he lives life like he does but I found it appalling what his children have had to endure and it is these personal expressions of hatred that fuel the fires.
I must say that some comments on here are not appropriate under the heading " politics for moderates"!!

You are absolutely right Poppy, and as I said in an earlier post some comments have been libellous.
Lyn has called Nigel a racist more than once for example - she has no evidence to substantiate that.
She has made similar comments about Donald Trump and myself.
None of us are racists, but we hold strong views about most things, including extreme islamists and immigration.
She should be confined to the "Pit" (IMO).
Geoff.

Perhaps not libellous, and hopefully not for the pit, the cut and thrust of debate should be encouraged, as long as it does not get personal.
Geoff you should be proud to be compared with Trump!!!

[Steve - SJD]

[and incidentally then in a Kafkaesque justification the very people who were reporting this as a hate crime then pointed to these complaints that they had made themselves as proof positive as a surge in reported hate crime post the referendum].

So you're suggesting that the increase in reports of hate crime were not true and it was just the complaints about the
poster that increased numbers??

It is a picture of reality inasmuch as it is an actual picture of the tide of migrants progressing towards Europe. It was neither staged nor photoshopped, just a picture which expressed the reality of life for those migrants, the volume of them, and the reality of existence for those people who live in places on the borders of Europe now. The numbers were not photographically enhanced. Do we really want to suggest that reality can somehow be racist? Would the poster had been less offensive if it had been turned into a parody of reality by photoshopping in a more ethnically diverse crowd?

Personally I wouldn't have said the poster in itself was racist rather his usual attempt at shock tactics to try
and grab attention. However this approach is dangerous - it creates a them and us situation builds resentment
and creates division in the wider public. When you repeatedly wind people up with rhetoric, distort facts and reinforce
a message that the country is at breaking point then you shouldn't be surprised if the consequences are that some
of your followers do actually break.

The headline 'Breaking Point, the EU has failed us all' I have not actually heard anyone argue that this is not demonstrably true. The crowds in the picture are a result, centrally, of two factors. Firstly, in her role of unofficial head of the EU and with the full support of a majority of the EU machine offered residency to any immigrant that could make it to Germany unconditionally despite it being directly contradictory to EU regulations. Also of course the EU has completely broken its own rules as to registration and distribution of these migrants. In what way can that be regarded as not 'failing us all' especially the residents of those benighted countries of the frontline of the reception of these immigrants. And even if you considered that this had been handled perfectly, in what way might it be considered racist?

How has the EU failed us all exactly? Sure it's not perfect and I certainly don't agree with all their decisions but
on the refugee crisis how have they failed. There were thousands of people fleeing several conflicts even before
Merkel made her offer and those people would still have come. Should the EU have just put up some big walls or
allowed those making the journey by sea to just drown? How would the sight of beaches strewn with dead refugees
and thousands of unwanted, desperate & trapped people not played into ISIS's narrative? Of course Farage's answer was
that we couldn't afford to be too compassionate to those fleeing from conflicts in Muslim countries - unless they were
Christians.

Indeed if the EU policies towards refugees are such a failure and so attractive to refugees how come there are
millions more refugees in non-EU countries?

When you talk about the crowds are a result of two factors and associate them solely with the EU then that
rather over simplifies things. Let's not forget the various civil wars, failed interventions & regime change,
wide spread military bombardments that have been swayed by various geo political interests over the years.
Those fleeing wars certainly didn't ask to be caught up in all this and many long for days past and to be
able to return home.

Are you suggesting that UKIP would have considered this level of immigration perfectly acceptable if they had been white Canadians?

Yes - Farage said as much.

Finally it bore the tag line 'we must break free of the EU and take back control of our borders [implicitly if we want to avoid the social consequences of allowing immigration on this scale]. Again in what way is this not demonstrably true? Under EU refugee regulations the EU are perfectly in their rights to set immigration targets for each EU member state, distribute immigrants coming into the EU accordingly, and then fine member states 250,000 euros for each refugee they refuse to take against that target.

How many times has the EU taken that action? How many of the current refugees have come to the UK so far - forgetting the claims of hoardes of refugees.

It is just a demonstration of the way the liberal/left has now completely perverted the word to the point where it now simply means 'anyone who asks me consider facts which seem in conflict with the narrative I have now generated for myself' and has therefore lost any power it once had.

I agree that people use the term too liberally however I don't agree that it has gone as far as you suggest. Personally
I don't go looking for examples and am kind of a word and deeds man. Sometimes perhaps racist is not the best
description and xenophobic or bigoted would be better descriptions.

To add balance what we are also seeing is that some people are clearly feeling emboldened and feel it's now perfectly
acceptable to publically denigrate and insult people based solely on their faith. That it's ok to tar all immigrants with
the same brush and that using fear and fake propaganda to spread that message is fine. That combining religion
with refugees, legal immigration & illegal immigrants makes a bigger target for people to rally against. That the
ills of the country can easily be blamed on foreign institutions and immigration rather than looking closer to home.

No, Racism & descrimination are on the increase imo and I fear for my children and the future of the country. The populist rhetoric used recently has only served to ensure more division across the board and that's not going away any time soon.


Cheers

Steve

[Steve - SJD]

You are absolutely right Poppy, and as I said in an earlier post some comments have been libellous.
Lyn has called Nigel a racist more than once for example - she has no evidence to substantiate that.
She has made similar comments about Donald Trump and myself.
None of us are racists, but we hold strong views about most things, including extreme islamists and immigration.
She should be confined to the "Pit" (IMO).
Geoff.

The absolute defence to a libel claim is that the statement complained of is truthful.

It wouldn't be difficult to show that Trump was racist given that a Federal complaint was brought against
him for the descrimination employed over housing. Then there are issues he's had with employment, his words
and his associations. Plus there's the first amendment...

Similarly with Farage I don't think it would be too difficult to find statements if you had the inclination.
If I recall correctly he's already stated that he would have no laws against descrimination based on nationality,
colour or race.

Cheers

Steve

[cyprusgrump]

Similarly with Farage I don't think it would be too difficult to find statements if you had the inclination.
If I recall correctly he's already stated that he would have no laws against descrimination based on nationality,
colour or race.

The question has been asked enough times - why not point some racist comments that Farage said out...?

Lynsab will help you I'm sure.

[Dominic]

I have moved this from the Politics for Moderates to the Politics forum.

With regards to personal attacks, that refers to people on here. IE, if I slagged off CyprusGrump because his avatar was too red, that would count as a personal attack. However, if I said that David Beckham had a big hooter, then that would not count as a personal attack, because David Beckham doesn't post on here.

[Dominic]

Similarly with Farage I don't think it would be too difficult to find statements if you had the inclination.
If I recall correctly he's already stated that he would have no laws against descrimination based on nationality,
colour or race.

The question has been asked enough times - why not point some racist comments that Farage said out...?

Lynsab will help you I'm sure.

Here's Farage saying we should abolish race discrimination laws:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31846453

Here's Farage saying he meant that businesses should be able to favour home nationals, as opposed to giving the job to the candidate who is
better qualified for it. If that isn't promoting racism, what is it?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... nterpreted

[Lynsab]

Brilliant and eloquently put as always Steve...I agree these few people have changed the dynamics for many who live or where born in the UK, they must not be allowed to get away with it. I don't know how other than fight their words whenever I see them...there's a growing need to do so IMO.

Thanks Dominic ... am I alone in thinking it would be nice for Beckham to post on here? sigh...

I'm not engaging with your nonsense Geoff, unless everyone likes your type of ideal politician you've always thrown your toys out the pram. Then hounded people for obscure replies that mean little, I'm not playing your game...find someone else..

[cyprusgrump]

Here's Farage saying he meant that businesses should be able to favour home nationals, as opposed to giving the job to the candidate who is
better qualified for it. If that isn't promoting racism, what is it?

It should surely be down to a business owner to decide who to employ...?

An astute business owner will surely employ the best candidate for the job be it a local, forriner, black, white, yellow, male, female, straight, trans, etc...?

A business owner that discriminates against any of the above because of his/her own personal prejudices will surely lose out to the more competitive business that chooses the best candidates? Also, customers are likely to shun a business that is known to be discriminatory...

Sadly, if you have anti-discrimination laws you eventually end up with quotas with businesses forced to employ a certain number of locals, forriner, black, white, yellow, male, female, straight, trans, etc... Rather than the best employee for their business.

And of course you end up with lots of taxpayer's money spent on policing anti-discrimination laws.

You also end up with the ghastly situation where a cake shop is prosecuted for not baking a cake which has a message that their strong religious beliefs disagree with.

So no, not racist...

[cyprusgrump]

I have moved this from the Politics for Moderates to the Politics forum.

With regards to personal attacks, that refers to people on here. IE, if I slagged off CyprusGrump because his avatar was too red, that would count as a personal attack. However, if I said that David Beckham had a big hooter, then that would not count as a personal attack, because David Beckham doesn't post on here.

No personal attacks that I have seen...

I just pointed out that if you believe "those who resort to personal insults have lost the arguement..." (or even argument), that must surely apply equally to those that attack others on the board as those that make personal attacks on David Beckham.

Or perhaps. Double Standards?