UKIP Exposed!

[eight]

http://bnp.org.uk/category/ukip-exposed/

http://bnp.org.uk/files/2009/05/ukip5-corrupt-as-llc.jpg

[efq]

Hahaha, It's so funny how UKIP are doing better than them idiots hahaaaaaaaaaa
http://www.ukip.org/images/mast_header_full_09_2.jpg

[eight]

I did think BNP for the win..

Until i read some of there policies :L

All i want is immigration kicked out! is that too much to ask?!?! :'(

[efq]

http://www.ukip.org/images/mast_header_full_09_2.jpg

[Immenseman]

all the people at my college in the year above are like "im voting bnp it's gna be so fni lolzzz"

[FlyingJesus]

The reason UKIP MEP's haven't done anything useful is probably due to the idea that they try getting elected just to boycott the EU meetings and such... if they're not there they aren't going to be doing much for good policy. It's a crap idea but this article is even worse.

On another note what's up with UKIP using pictures of Churchill everywhere? Fairly sure he wasn't a member :S

[Catzsy]

Even funnier was that Winston Churchill called for a 'United States of Europe' in a speech in 1946. Extract:

I must now sum up the propositions which are before you. Our constant aim must be to build and fortify the strength of the United Nations Organization. Under and within that world concept we must re-create the European Family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe. And the first practical step would be to form a Council of Europe. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can. The salvation of the common people of every race and of every land from war or servitude must be established on solid foundations and must be guarded by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than submit to tyranny. In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together. Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America and I trust Soviet Russia-for then indeed all would be well-must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine.

The full speech can be read here:
http://www.europa-web.de/europa/02wwswww/202histo/churchil.htm

[Fez]

If the BNP get in power then I can assure you, this country will be on it's knees.

[lick]

omg at this, suxs for u if they get elected w/e

We support the re-introduction of corporal punishment for petty criminals and vandals, and the restoration of capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute, as by DNA evidence or being caught red-handed.

[eight]

I dont mind the capital punishment coming back.

But what is corporal punishment?

[Fez]

While I stand for a fairer justice system, I don't stand for the death penalty been brought back. I believe that if you murder someone, you should get life, a life for a life. But no segregation in prisons, if they get raped and tortured - so be it.

[eight]

Im for the death penalty as long as the reason is good.

If the murder was in self defence of you or protecting someone else, I dont think you should go to jail at all.

If someone was to rob your house, and you attack them and kill them, I dont think you should go to jail.

However if someone goes around looking for people to savagely murder or murder young children, then I'd happily watch them get the capital punishment :)

[Jordy]

The reason UKIP MEP's haven't done anything useful is probably due to the idea that they try getting elected just to boycott the EU meetings and such... if they're not there they aren't going to be doing much for good policy. It's a crap idea but this article is even worse.

On another note what's up with UKIP using pictures of Churchill everywhere? Fairly sure he wasn't a member :SHe's considered a 'great' britain and it's a very 'british' image. UKIP regularly say how we fought so we weren't part of Europe and how soldiers gave up our lives so we remained the UK, governed by ourselves. Churchill is just a good image they include which sums up why we were fighting in World War II. He was a Tory but I suppose today, Churchill's views are probably closest to UKIP.


Even funnier was that Winston Churchill called for a 'United States of Europe' in a speech in 1946. Extract:

I must now sum up the propositions which are before you. Our constant aim must be to build and fortify the strength of the United Nations Organization. Under and within that world concept we must re-create the European Family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe. And the first practical step would be to form a Council of Europe. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can. The salvation of the common people of every race and of every land from war or servitude must be established on solid foundations and must be guarded by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than submit to tyranny. In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together. Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America and I trust Soviet Russia-for then indeed all would be well-must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine.

The full speech can be read here:
http://www.europa-web.de/europa/02wwswww/202histo/churchil.htmOn the contrary Churchill also said:
We have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe but not of it. We are linked but not combined. We are interested and associated but not absorbed.



Churchill's views on Europe can be found here, scroll down to #4:
http://www.rogerhelmer.com/eumyth.asp

[xxMATTGxx]

If the BNP get in power then I can assure you, this country will be on it's knees.

I will also leave the country if they got elected. I think its the only party I would never like to see run the United Kingdom.

[Fez]

Im for the death penalty as long as the reason is good.

If the murder was in self defence of you or protecting someone else, I dont think you should go to jail at all.

If someone was to rob your house, and you attack them and kill them, I dont think you should go to jail.

However if someone goes around looking for people to savagely murder or murder young children, then I'd happily watch them get the capital punishment :)

Murdering someone in self-defence is still murder. I think that the judge should be able to make a fair decision, but more than likely I think they should at least make them face some sort of sentence.

I agree with the robbing house thing, all of it. No one has the right to assault your house, as they themselves could've killed you. Then again it is like self-defence and you should get a small sentence.

I think it's better for them to be in prison for all their life, they may end up killing themselves, it's better than giving them the easy way out with capital punishment.

[Nick.]

I will also leave the country if they got elected. I think its the only party I would never like to see run the United Kingdom.
good luck leaving the country at the ripe old age of ... matt ;)

[ifuseekamy]

He's considered a 'great' britain and it's a very 'british' image. UKIP regularly say how we fought so we weren't part of Europe and how soldiers gave up our lives so we remained the UK, governed by ourselves. Churchill is just a good image they include which sums up why we were fighting in World War II.

Kind of ironic that we fought against a fascist nationalist party and yet here we are with a fascist nationalist party of our own steadily gaining more and more support.

[Catzsy]

He's considered a 'great' britain and it's a very 'british' image. UKIP regularly say how we fought so we weren't part of Europe and how soldiers gave up our lives so we remained the UK, governed by ourselves. Churchill is just a good image they include which sums up why we were fighting in World War II. He was a Tory but I suppose today, Churchill's views are probably closest to UKIP.

On the contrary Churchill also said:
We have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe but not of it. We are linked but not combined. We are interested and associated but not absorbed.





Churchill's views on Europe can be found here, scroll down to #4:
http://www.rogerhelmer.com/eumyth.asp


Yes well association without being absorbed is the EU although I do appreciate some would like to take our sovereignty too but that is not at this moment in time and is pretty unlikely to happen.

Having read other Churchill speeches I am convinced, although as he is no longer with us I do not know, that he would not have been against it and quite honestly Jordy something out of a conversative web page is not a particuarly reliable source as far as I am concerned. We all know Politicians will skew anything around to seem as if it represents their point of view.
I think what we need is a referendum about the whole subject. UKIP and some of the Conservatives do have some valid views which cannot be denied.
I am not sure if UKIP has enough 'clout' though to make a difference.

Matt, I went on an anti BNP Rally today but I feel, unfortunately, with the expenses rows going on that they will pick up some votes. Hopefully not enough to get any seats.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Winston Churchill in that speech is not calling for a european superstate, he is calling for a european family to avoid future wars, as europe had a history of wars between the French, Spanish and British colonial empires. Winston Churchill would never of wanted european-unelected dominance from Brussels as that was exactly what he was fighting and what millions gave their lives for.

Jordy is correct on the Churchill issue, two of our greatest Prime Ministers, Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher were both for a united europe in which trade and relations were close, but not being dominated by europe. We do not need to be governed by Europe to be part of Europe.

As for the thread starter, UKIP participate fully in the European Parliament and defend British interests to the best of their ability, they are not as bad as the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats when it comes to fraud as the last time UKIP had corruption issues was a few years ago, and Nigel Farage instantly dismissed those members from UKIP. There was one member who he couldn't dismiss as due to Proportional Representation in the European Parliament, you vote for the actual candidate and there was no way Farage and UKIP could call another election.

[alexxxxx]

UKIP are scum mate. They can't fill out any purpose in the Eu parliament and they waste taxpayers money by not turning up. Kilroy Silk was in I'm a celeb get me out of here when he should have been in brussels working. UKIP are failed tories. This is the only thing i think the BNP get right.

[-:Undertaker:-]

UKIP are scum mate. They can't fill out any purpose in the Eu parliament and they waste taxpayers money by not turning up. Kilroy Silk was in I'm a celeb get me out of here when he should have been in brussels working. UKIP are failed tories. This is the only thing i think the BNP get right.

They are scum yet they are one of the only parties in the European Parliament who are protecting British interests and sovereignty? - Take a look at the Liberal Democrats and Labour and their expenense claims and then you tell me who is the worst.

Kilroy Silk is now gone and those MEP's who orginally were up to no good Nigel Farage dismissed from the party instantly. As usual when the left start losing ground you dismiss parties such as UKIP as scum and racists, when they are simply not.

[alexxxxx]

They are scum yet they are one of the only parties in the European Parliament who are protecting British interests and sovereignty? - Take a look at the Liberal Democrats and Labour and their expenense claims and then you tell me who is the worst.

Kilroy Silk is now gone and those MEP's who orginally were up to no good Nigel Farage dismissed from the party instantly. As usual when the left start losing ground you dismiss parties such as UKIP as scum and racists, when they are simply not.
UKIP can't do anything about britain's membership of the EU in the parliament. Misleading voters in my opinion. They say 'no the eu, no to this, no to that' but infact it doesn't do anything and can't do anything about it. Looks like mr cameron has had a bit of a problem with his expenses atm (according to the mail, so it's probably not really that true, as it isn't reported anywhere else.). Everyone's taken advantage of the situation. Lib Dems have had the least prolific expenses claims and are now 2nd in the polls. Cakes and biscuits aren't anywhere near as bad as mortgages that have already been paid off. Or a church donation.

Liberal Democrats will gain ALOT more support in the next election. It will probably end up being Conservative > Lib Dem > UKIP > Labour in EU elections. The Problem with UKIP is that they are a one-issue party, if they had some proper policies with a long term goal maybe they would been seen as a more serious party.

[Catzsy]

Winston Churchill in that speech is not calling for a european superstate, he is calling for a european family to avoid future wars, as europe had a history of wars between the French, Spanish and British colonial empires. Winston Churchill would never of wanted european-unelected dominance from Brussels as that was exactly what he was fighting and what millions gave their lives for.

Jordy is correct on the Churchill issue, two of our greatest Prime Ministers, Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher were both for a united europe in which trade and relations were close, but not being dominated by europe. We do not need to be governed by Europe to be part of Europe.

As for the thread starter, UKIP participate fully in the European Parliament and defend British interests to the best of their ability, they are not as bad as the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats when it comes to fraud as the last time UKIP had corruption issues was a few years ago, and Nigel Farage instantly dismissed those members from UKIP. There was one member who he couldn't dismiss as due to Proportional Representation in the European Parliament, you vote for the actual candidate and there was no way Farage and UKIP could call another election.


But how can you say we have 'european-unelected dominance from Brussels '

Isn't just rhetoric without any specific examples? :P I personally have nothing against UKIP. They have their beliefs and stand by them. They are trying to make a difference as they see it. It is a genuine belief and a genuine party.
What I can't comprehend is the sweeping statements made without any real substance to back that up. The BNP is a different matter. They have a
'suited and booted' public image which masks a quite sinister hidden agenda IMO.

[-:Undertaker:-]

UKIP can't do anything about britain's membership of the EU in the parliament. Misleading voters in my opinion. They say 'no the eu, no to this, no to that' but infact it doesn't do anything and can't do anything about it. Looks like mr cameron has had a bit of a problem with his expenses atm (according to the mail, so it's probably not really that true, as it isn't reported anywhere else.). Everyone's taken advantage of the situation. Lib Dems have had the least prolific expenses claims and are now 2nd in the polls. Cakes and biscuits aren't anywhere near as bad as mortgages that have already been paid off. Or a church donation.

Liberal Democrats will gain ALOT more support in the next election. It will probably end up being Conservative > Lib Dem > UKIP > Labour in EU elections. The Problem with UKIP is that they are a one-issue party, if they had some proper policies with a long term goal maybe they would been seen as a more serious party.

UKIP haven't stated they have the power to withdraw from the European Union, they are saying a vote for UKIP is a no to the European Union. If we are talking about misleading how about this; In the 2005 General Election Labour promised to hold a referendum on EU reformal yet have refused us this right as they know they will lose because people do not want to live in a European superstate.

Mr Cameron had the wisteria issue and I think every MP's expenses should be looked into and if they are found to have done wrong they should be dismissed from parliament by the Queen and should then go to court and face the same consquences that normal people do, I couldn't give a damn whether its the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, Labour, UKIP, Conservative, Liberal Democrat - if they have committed blatent fraud then they should go down.

UKIP are more than a one issue party, granted the European Union is at the heart of its policies but that is what appeals to its voters, particulary as it is seen as the Thatcher Government reborn. UKIP stand basically for what Margaret Thatcher stood for, hence when I read UKIP's policies I decided they suit my beliefs far better than the present Conservative Party does, and it is the same with many slightly disillusioned tory supporters.

Liberal Democrats have apparently suffered worse in the expenses fiasco, I do hope the election plays out as; Conservatives > UKIP > Liberal Democrat > Labour as it will mean at the General Election Labour and the Liberal Democrats are both weak, meaning that it will prevent a possible hung parliament.

Then again, I like the possible idea that if a hung parliament did occur, the Liberal Democrats would force Labour or the Conservatives to accept Proportional Representation, and if it was a fair PR system then partys such as UKIP would then gain seats at national elections.


But how can you say we have 'european-unelected dominance from Brussels '

Isn't just rhetoric without any specific examples? :P I personally have nothing against UKIP. They have their beliefs and stand by them. They are trying to make a difference as they see it. It is a genuine belief and a genuine party.
What I can't comprehend is the sweeping statements made without any real substance to back that up. The BNP is a different matter. They have a
'suited and booted' public image which masks a quite sinister hidden agenda IMO.

The real policies that come out of the European Union are made up by the Commission, the parliament is just to pass them through and the commision nearly always gets its regulations/policies/laws through the European Parliament. It is like the Soviet Union, it had a parliament yet it wasn't democratic.

Which sweeping statements?, you'd think half the stuff which comes out of Brussels is not true, but it is. You have laws on the colour of traffic lights right up to the effort to form a European military, all which the people of Europe do not once, hence why the only three countries which were given a vote said NO.

As for suited and booted you are only sterotyping like that as I did before I knew UKIP properly, as they are a small party compared to the big three. Farage seems a nice man and he is strong on his beliefs and idealogy - something which many politicians don't have anymore.

[alexxxxx]

UKIP haven't stated they have the power to withdraw from the European Union, they are saying a vote for UKIP is a no to the European Union. If we are talking about misleading how about this; In the 2005 General Election Labour promised to hold a referendum on EU reformal yet have refused us this right as they know they will lose because people do not want to live in a European superstate.

Yeah, but I think they've implied it so. Labour promised a vote on the constitution, which was then re-drafted after failure to please voters in France and now has passed here as a new treaty, which is not completely the same thing.



Mr Cameron had the wisteria issue and I think every MP's expenses should be looked into and if they are found to have done wrong they should be dismissed from parliament by the Queen and should then go to court and face the same consquences that normal people do, I couldn't give a damn whether its the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, Labour, UKIP, Conservative, Liberal Democrat - if they have committed blatent fraud then they should go down.

The thing is that I don't think many people don't understand in this debate is that they haven't done anything wrong whatsoever. Their expenses claims were allowed by the system. The problem is with the system and not the MPs. If you were allowed to pay for your furniture in your new flat in London, you would take it wouldn't you? Most people would.



UKIP are more than a one issue party, granted the European Union is at the heart of its policies but that is what appeals to its voters, particulary as it is seen as the Thatcher Government reborn. UKIP stand basically for what Margaret Thatcher stood for, hence when I read UKIP's policies I decided they suit my beliefs far better than the present Conservative Party does, and it is the same with many slightly disillusioned tory supporters.

UKIPs policies are for old romantics who are resisting the challenges of today. They would like to see a British dominance of the world like in the 19th century that just isn't possible today with the muscle of others in the world present today.



Liberal Democrats have apparently suffered worse in the expenses fiasco, I do hope the election plays out as; Conservatives > UKIP > Liberal Democrat > Labour as it will mean at the General Election Labour and the Liberal Democrats are both weak, meaning that it will prevent a possible hung parliament.

Show me some examples... Because I've failed to see many big stories featuring LibDems, but I have with tories and labour... UKIP won't get as many votes as LibDem because they are an awful party and don't provide any solutions on a local or regional level.



Then again, I like the possible idea that if a hung parliament did occur, the Liberal Democrats would force Labour or the Conservatives to accept Proportional Representation, and if it was a fair PR system then partys such as UKIP would then gain seats at national elections.

With a close election, the Lib Dems will ultimately control. It its 40/40/20% wise. Lib Dems want PR because it will help them in the end in parliament.



The real policies that come out of the European Union are made up by the Commission, the parliament is just to pass them through and the commision nearly always gets its regulations/policies/laws through the European Parliament. It is like the Soviet Union, it had a parliament yet it wasn't democratic.

The comission is appointed by the governments of all 27 nations. Most, if not all, nations are pro-EU and will therefore send a pro-EU commisioner. The EU Parliament has to 'swear in' these commisioners and can fire them also. Although it's unlikely.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Yeah, but I think they've implied it so. Labour promised a vote on the constitution, which was then re-drafted after failure to please voters in France and now has passed here as a new treaty, which is not completely the same thing.

Numerous bodies and even EU supporters across the European Union have stated the Libson Treaty is the constitution but just re-written in a less imposing manner.


The thing is that I don't think many people don't understand in this debate is that they haven't done anything wrong whatsoever. Their expenses claims were allowed by the system. The problem is with the system and not the MPs. If you were allowed to pay for your furniture in your new flat in London, you would take it wouldn't you? Most people would.

It was within the rules, correct. However fixing mortage payments and claming for duck houses and spending hundreds on a garden is not acceptable. The green book as it was known stated sensible requirements can be allowed, and i'm sure the above and many other expenses claims are not required as an MP. I admire the Liberal Democrat MP, I think its the one who is on Question Time a lot and she doesn't have a flat as she always saw it as a waste of money.


UKIPs policies are for old romantics who are resisting the challenges of today. They would like to see a British dominance of the world like in the 19th century that just isn't possible today with the muscle of others in the world present today.

It was policies the same as UKIP's that pulled this country from the brink of utter complete collapse in the 1970's/1980's. If you want another failed/failing socialist state then please do move to a socialist state, as the people of this country do not want another repeat of 1970's Britain or the formation of a state similar to the Soviet Union/North Korea/Peoples Republic of China. The socialist brand always states we need 'new solutions for new challenges' - well socialism isn't new, it was a fairytale which died in the twentieth century along with the millions who starved to death with it.


Show me some examples... Because I've failed to see many big stories featuring LibDems, but I have with tories and labour... UKIP won't get as many votes as LibDem because they are an awful party and don't provide any solutions on a local or regional level.

Just telling you what I heard on Sky News from a political commentator who said out of the main three parties, the Liberal Democrats had come worst off despite more media attention on the Conservatives/Labour. The Liberal Democrats are an awful party, socialism with a smile. The polls are showing UKIP ahead of the Liberal Democrats so we'll have to see what happens.


With a close election, the Lib Dems will ultimately control. It its 40/40/20% wise. Lib Dems want PR because it will help them in the end in parliament.

I want Proportional Representation as long as it is implemented fairly, it will greatly help partys such as UKIP and maybe it will force the main parties to develop some real opinions instead of playing hide and seek with policies.


The comission is appointed by the governments of all 27 nations. Most, if not all, nations are pro-EU and will therefore send a pro-EU commisioner. The EU Parliament has to 'swear in' these commisioners and can fire them also. Although it's unlikely.

Then it is not democratic, it doesn't reflect the view of the people of Europe. You got it the wrong way around, the nations, the people are anti-EU and the governments are pro-EU, hence why when the people of Europe were actually given the chance to vote on the EU reform proposals the EU got a NO from France, a NO from Denmark and a NO from Republic of Ireland, but it simply will not accept NO for an answer.

[Hushie]

Rather have a corrupt government than a racist one.

[Jordy]

UKIP are scum mate. They can't fill out any purpose in the Eu parliament and they waste taxpayers money by not turning up. Kilroy Silk was in I'm a celeb get me out of here when he should have been in brussels working. UKIP are failed tories. This is the only thing i think the BNP get right.Robert Kilroy-Silk is an independent now and has been quite a while. He fell out with UKIP.

How the hell are they a waste of taxpayers money more than anyone else? At the end of the day whether it's a UKIP, Labour, Tory or Lib Dem MEP the same amount of money is going to be spent. Hopefully voting UKIP will ensure in the future that the money isn't being wasted. The money may as well be wasted on a UKIP MEP who will try to bring the 'wasting' to an end rather than signing away power.

[alexxxxx]

How the hell are they a waste of taxpayers money more than anyone else? At the end of the day whether it's a UKIP, Labour, Tory or Lib Dem MEP the same amount of money is going to be spent. Hopefully voting UKIP will ensure in the future that the money isn't being wasted. The money may as well be wasted on a UKIP MEP who will try to bring the 'wasting' to an end rather than signing away power.

UKIP are as bad as the rest: http://www.zimbio.com/UK+Political+Gossip/articles/189/Will+UKIP+exposed+before+June+4th

UKIP don't hold enough power to pull us out of the EU and don't want to participate. Don't kid yourself that UKIP are whiter than white cause it isn't true. They lost 2 of their MEPs due to fraud charges, Kilroy left (though he is still in the parliament, so he was still elected as a UKIP member). An average of 60% attendance is AWFUL. My college thinks anything less than 96% is unacceptable, 60% would definately get you kicked out. They aren't there to help your interests, they are there to pick up their expenses cheques and leave. If the EU Parliament's expenses were leaked, it would expose everyone, like now. There aren't any completely clean parties but let's remember that not everyone claims thousands upon thousands either.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Robert Kilroy-Silk is an independent now and has been quite a while. He fell out with UKIP.

How the hell are they a waste of taxpayers money more than anyone else? At the end of the day whether it's a UKIP, Labour, Tory or Lib Dem MEP the same amount of money is going to be spent. Hopefully voting UKIP will ensure in the future that the money isn't being wasted. The money may as well be wasted on a UKIP MEP who will try to bring the 'wasting' to an end rather than signing away power.

Exactly, i'd rather have UKIP members recieving the money rather than some Labour/Conservative/Liberal Democrat MP who is sitting in Brussels signing away our sovereign power. As Nigel Farage said on Question Time, he has to balance being at home and at Brussels, unlike other MEP's from other parties who sit in Brussels and sign in to recieve their cheques.


UKIP are as bad as the rest: http://www.zimbio.com/UK+Political+Gossip/articles/189/Will+UKIP+exposed+before+June+4th

UKIP don't hold enough power to pull us out of the EU and don't want to participate. Don't kid yourself that UKIP are whiter than white cause it isn't true. They lost 2 of their MEPs due to fraud charges, Kilroy left (though he is still in the parliament, so he was still elected as a UKIP member). An average of 60% attendance is AWFUL. My college thinks anything less than 96% is unacceptable, 60% would definately get you kicked out. They aren't there to help your interests, they are there to pick up their expenses cheques and leave. If the EU Parliament's expenses were leaked, it would expose everyone, like now. There aren't any completely clean parties but let's remember that not everyone claims thousands upon thousands either.

UKIP aren't a party like the others which sit in Brussels signing in everday to recieve fat pay cheques, so yes their attendance will be less than other parties. The fact is UKIP are there to help our interests, they defend Britains interests at Brussels unlike the other partys. Anyone who is standing up to the European Union is helping this countrys interests.

[GommeInc]

Is this an attack at the EU vote, or is it a stab at the party in general? I still don't get the difference between general and EU elections :P The EU one just seems pointless to me :P I'm stuck between UKIP and the Tories to vote for (if I am voting).

[omgDAN!]

A vote for a far right party is a total wasted vote. If UKIP or BNP got into any power that mattered, then we would all be doomed. They wouldn't be able to successfully manage finance, law, or parliament.

UKIP are as racist and fascist as BNP and other far right parties, they just have a more polite way of putting it across. It's not as simple as cutting EU spending or stopping immigration, their advertising campaigns are so disallusioning.

And I think a lot more people would vote Conservative if it wasn't for David Cameron being such a loud mouth, arrogant ****. If I was old enough to vote, I'd be voting Labour in this and Labour in the General Election next year.

Oh and http://simonrenwick.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/ukip-failings.jpg.
Benefit fraud - nice! They say immigrants are coming for the welfare, yet some of their MEP's think they can have some even when they aren't entitled to it.

[-:Undertaker:-]

A vote for a far right party is a total wasted vote. If UKIP or BNP got into any power that mattered, then we would all be doomed. They wouldn't be able to successfully manage finance, law, or parliament.

UKIP are as racist and fascist as BNP and other far right parties, they just have a more polite way of putting it across. It's not as simple as cutting EU spending or stopping immigration, their advertising campaigns are so disallusioning.

And I think a lot more people would vote Conservative if it wasn't for David Cameron being such a loud mouth, arrogant ****. If I was old enough to vote, I'd be voting Labour in this and Labour in the General Election next year.

Oh and http://simonrenwick.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/ukip-failings.jpg.
Benefit fraud - nice! They say immigrants are coming for the welfare, yet some of their MEP's think they can have some even when they aren't entitled to it.

How hypocritical of you and i'll explain why.

You state UKIP had people involved in fraud and so forth in the party, I said this earlier to. However unlike the main partys Nigel Farage acted quickly and at that time back in 2004 and so on to punish those who were involved in fraud. Due to Proportional Representation UKIP were powerless to call bi-elections for these MEP's as you vote for the candidate and not the party.

All that in mind, compare to the main three, one of whom, Labour, you say you would vote for in an election. You have MP's clamining on non-existent mortages, ministers resigning due to being exposed as the thieves they are and a Chancellor who has the nerve to increase taxes every year in the middle of a recession, hitting already hard hit families despite fiddling his expenses.

You provide some hard-hitting evidence that UKIP is racist, because I know and you know that really your just spewing this utter rubbish out as the left usually do. If you want a dangerous party, take a look at some of the socialist parties who are running in the elections, by far more dangerous to this country with their idealogy than the right is as the right actually has a lot of support in England and is infact the political mindset of the people of this country.

UKIP has black, asian etc. candidates standing for election so your argument is again, worth nothing. You only say they are racist, as you are from the left of politics, the political correct side of politics - the same people who branded Michael Howard in 2005 a racist because he dared to launch the Conservative Election Campaign on the issue of immigration.

It is as simple as leaving the EU and controlling our own borders because that is what the rest of the world seem to do pretty well. To speak of common sense in this country now sees you being labelled a racist by the politically correct and enough is enough - people have had enough of it!

How can you tell me that UKIP and the Conservatives could manage law when this government has totally lost control of what is right and what is wrong, with murderers and rapists being sent to 'life' in prision which is 5 years, then they are let out yet again to commit more crime.

How can you say that UKIP and the Conservatives would have no idea how to run the economy when in 1979 Margaret Thatcher was elected because of the failures of the James Callaghan Labour government which nearly saw this country being taken over by the military as things got so bad, and in her years in office saw the United Kingdom go from a collapsing economy to one of the fastest growing and prosperous economies in the world. To add on; Labour decided to sell a large portion of our gold stocks back in around 2000 while they were at a 25 year low and not only that, but Gordon Brown told international gold markets one week before he was planning to sell that he was due to sell, meaning the price of gold plummetted further. Furthermore, this Labour government has left the country sinking in debt because of absurd spending plans and no concept of simple idea that you spend what you have, not what you don't have.

How can you say UKIP could not run parliament when we've seen Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats all fiddling expenses, signing away soverign power to the European Union and only noticed their "terrible mistake" of fiddling expenses after they were caught by the Daily Telegraph.

The advertisement campaign is fine, the views of Sir Winston Churchill were far more similar to UKIP than they are to the Conservative Party of today. A vote for UKIP is saying NO to unlimited immigration, NO to £40 million a day and NO to being governed by unelected eurocrats in Brussels.

[Sammeth.]

Oh this is the icing on the cake. Deffo sticking with labour now. I'm glad UKIP has been exposed.

[Jordy]

Oh this is the icing on the cake. Deffo sticking with labour now. I'm glad UKIP has been exposed.I must ask, when posting in the Current Affairs threads are you incredibly sarcastic or just very socialist?

[myke]

ok.. the idea of the BNP taking over the country is pretty daunting and scary!

urm. yeah, i'm worried about any change in the way the country's run

[Browney]

polls yesterday put the tories and all the fringe parties collectively on 30%...

[Sammeth.]

I must ask, when posting in the Current Affairs threads are you incredibly sarcastic or just very socialist?

Incredibly sarcastic. I don't follow politics that much at all but I do support labour :8

[ifuseekamy]

ok.. the idea of the BNP taking over the country is pretty daunting and scary!

urm. yeah, i'm worried about any change in the way the country's run
It's not their racist 'white is right' ideology that bothers me so much as their demands that everyone performs national service to legally be a citizen and have the right to healthcare and the vote etc. They are fascists and anyone who votes for them is spitting on the graves of the millions of Britons who fought to keep fascism out of our country.

[-:Undertaker:-]

The problem with the BNP is that it can be reversed, they say whites only yet we have a Black Police Officers Association. The actual system is just as racist as the BNP itself. It needs to be sorted, either you have it one way or the other, not both ways.

[Fez]

The problem with the BNP is that it can be reversed, they say whites only yet we have a Black Police Officers Association. The actual system is just as racist as the BNP itself. It needs to be sorted, either you have it one way or the other, not both ways.

Yeah but if we asked for a White Police Officers Association then we'd be called racist wouldn't we?

[Frodo13.]

I dont mind the capital punishment coming back.

But what is corporal punishment?


Corporal punishment is stuff such as the use of canes at school, public whippings for criminals etc. It's something I support actually.

[Ramones]

The problem with the BNP is that it can be reversed, they say whites only yet we have a Black Police Officers Association. The actual system is just as racist as the BNP itself. It needs to be sorted, either you have it one way or the other, not both ways.

Lol, do you think they made a black police officers association for the sake of it?

What actually is ukips policy on immigration btw? That's the thing that intrigues me the most about them. I personally believe making the immigration laws tighter could have a detrimental impact on the economy.

[CHA!NGANG]

Suppose even if BMP do get elected, the Queen still has to approve it which she might not do.

[Frodo13.]

Suppose even if BMP do get elected, the Queen still has to approve it which she might not do.


I wish people would stop talking about the Queen like she has any real power. If the Queen ever intervened a way would be found to strip her of her powers.

[AgnesIO]

omg at this, suxs for u if they get elected w/e

We support the re-introduction of corporal punishment for petty criminals and vandals, and the restoration of capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute, as by DNA evidence or being caught red-handed.


What party is that?

And BNP's poster about UKIP is bull. Thery have described themselves rather well actually...

Corrupt..

[luce]

:eusa_wall:eusa_walli don't support a party i just want every single person who isn't of British Bg to be kicked out unless they're doing a good job. AND I DON'T MEAN BUILDER OR FLOWER MAKER I MEAN DOCTOR OR FOOTBALLER(lol)

is it really to much to ask. also i'm not racist, racist is coming into our country expecting our jobs and benifits and then we go to yours and get shot. yaay

[ifuseekamy]

I wish people would stop talking about the Queen like she has any real power. If the Queen ever intervened a way would be found to strip her of her powers.
She has the right to dissolve government and call for elections if they don't follow parliamentary procedure. Despite claims that the monarchy is undemocratic, it's the last and only line of legal defence we have from corrupt politicians.

[Ramones]

She has the right to dissolve government and call for elections if they don't follow parliamentary procedure. Despite claims that the monarchy is undemocratic, it's the last and only line of legal defence we have from corrupt politicians.

Although true in fact i think the last time a monarch tried to disagree with the government was in like the 17th centuary or something and she was killed for it(or something along those lines). It's pretty well known what frodo said that even if she did try and stop somebody coming to power the rules would be changed so she no longer had that power.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Lol, do you think they made a black police officers association for the sake of it?

What actually is ukips policy on immigration btw? That's the thing that intrigues me the most about them. I personally believe making the immigration laws tighter could have a detrimental impact on the economy.

I do indeed think they have a BPA for the sake of political correctness, so we must choose; do we allow both or still allow a sort of apartheid system which is emerging from political correctness.

UKIP stands for a total ban on immigration for a period of 5 years while the current mess on immigration is sorted out, then a policy similar to such as the United States/Austrailia have would be implmented.


Suppose even if BMP do get elected, the Queen still has to approve it which she might not do.

The Queen would be wrong to deny that party power anyway, if a party if elected and wins a General Election she really has no right to block them from office. If she did attempt to, it would spark a consitiutional crisis and the monarchy would most likely be dissolved.


I wish people would stop talking about the Queen like she has any real power. If the Queen ever intervened a way would be found to strip her of her powers.

I agree, she does have the power but if she used that power then she would spark a consititional crisis in which the monarchy would almost certainly be dissolved.

[zaphod9642]

bnp get elected we go into civil war i think LOL also we cant survive without the EU's relationship we will go down

i think we just need to vote raving ooney party! their there for a laff they have like no polocies xD

[-:Undertaker:-]

bnp get elected we go into civil war i think LOL also we cant survive without the EU's relationship we will go down

i think we just need to vote raving ooney party! their there for a laff they have like no polocies xD

Is that why when we joined the European Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1990 on the advice of the European Union, the Pound Sterling nearly collapsed and luckily we withdrew just in time to save our currency and country from financial meltdown?

Is that why we pay £40 million a day to the European Union yet the European Union has billions upon billions of taxpayer money go missing from its books/records every year and no one seems to know where the money has gone?

Is that why when we joined the proto-type EU, our agriculture collapsed overnight because British products could not compete with low prices from across Europe?

Is that why French and British fishermen strongly disagree with EU regulations and policy on fishing and have protested time and time again that it is putting them out of business? - yet the EU seem to think they know better than the fisherman about the topic of fishing.

[zaphod9642]

.
two of our greatest Prime Ministers, Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher

what a load of crap.
winston chichill fair enough but margaret ******* thatcher u need help if you think closing all the coal mining industry was good. she was rubbish!

anyway sorry for going off topic i just rly hate her


we wont survive without the EU's help btw

[omgDAN!]

How hypocritical of you and i'll explain why.

You state UKIP had people involved in fraud and so forth in the party, I said this earlier to. However unlike the main partys Nigel Farage acted quickly and at that time back in 2004 and so on to punish those who were involved in fraud. Due to Proportional Representation UKIP were powerless to call bi-elections for these MEP's as you vote for the candidate and not the party.

All that in mind, compare to the main three, one of whom, Labour, you say you would vote for in an election. You have MP's clamining on non-existent mortages, ministers resigning due to being exposed as the thieves they are and a Chancellor who has the nerve to increase taxes every year in the middle of a recession, hitting already hard hit families despite fiddling his expenses.

You provide some hard-hitting evidence that UKIP is racist, because I know and you know that really your just spewing this utter rubbish out as the left usually do. If you want a dangerous party, take a look at some of the socialist parties who are running in the elections, by far more dangerous to this country with their idealogy than the right is as the right actually has a lot of support in England and is infact the political mindset of the people of this country.

UKIP has black, asian etc. candidates standing for election so your argument is again, worth nothing. You only say they are racist, as you are from the left of politics, the political correct side of politics - the same people who branded Michael Howard in 2005 a racist because he dared to launch the Conservative Election Campaign on the issue of immigration.

It is as simple as leaving the EU and controlling our own borders because that is what the rest of the world seem to do pretty well. To speak of common sense in this country now sees you being labelled a racist by the politically correct and enough is enough - people have had enough of it!

How can you tell me that UKIP and the Conservatives could manage law when this government has totally lost control of what is right and what is wrong, with murderers and rapists being sent to 'life' in prision which is 5 years, then they are let out yet again to commit more crime.

How can you say that UKIP and the Conservatives would have no idea how to run the economy when in 1979 Margaret Thatcher was elected because of the failures of the James Callaghan Labour government which nearly saw this country being taken over by the military as things got so bad, and in her years in office saw the United Kingdom go from a collapsing economy to one of the fastest growing and prosperous economies in the world. To add on; Labour decided to sell a large portion of our gold stocks back in around 2000 while they were at a 25 year low and not only that, but Gordon Brown told international gold markets one week before he was planning to sell that he was due to sell, meaning the price of gold plummetted further. Furthermore, this Labour government has left the country sinking in debt because of absurd spending plans and no concept of simple idea that you spend what you have, not what you don't have.

How can you say UKIP could not run parliament when we've seen Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats all fiddling expenses, signing away soverign power to the European Union and only noticed their "terrible mistake" of fiddling expenses after they were caught by the Daily Telegraph.

The advertisement campaign is fine, the views of Sir Winston Churchill were far more similar to UKIP than they are to the Conservative Party of today. A vote for UKIP is saying NO to unlimited immigration, NO to £40 million a day and NO to being governed by unelected eurocrats in Brussels.

Couldn't be arsed reading that (some of us have better things to do), but by reading the last 2 paragraphs then I find your whole view very funny. UKIP have fiddled their expenses, we have seen UKIP MEPs on TV at the other side of the world when they are being payed to be in Parliament. But anyway, they wont get power in my constituency (I don't live in an area full of brainless, mindwashed fascists).

[alexxxxx]

ukip couldn't run parliament because they are a 1-issue party (even the BNP have more issues than UKIP), 25% of their MEPs were kicked out or left or were imprisoned and their average attendance is only 60%. They don't even do their voters wishes in parliament. They are useless. NO2EU have at least said they won't waste money by going!

[omgDAN!]

ukip couldn't run parliament because they are a 1-issue party (even the BNP have more issues than UKIP), 25% of their MEPs were kicked out or left or were imprisoned and their average attendance is only 60%. They don't even do their voters wishes in parliament. They are useless. NO2EU have at least said they won't waste money by going!

Exactly. What's the point in sharing views with someone, if the person you elect to represent them doesn't even go to parliament. It's like employing someone and they don't even turn up for work but you still pay them.

[alexxxxx]

oh and undertaker, our currency collapsed in price because the tories overvalued it and it was the target of speculators, not because of it... If we stayed on it, we probably would be using the euro right now.

[-:Undertaker:-]

what a load of crap.
winston chichill fair enough but margaret ******* thatcher u need help if you think closing all the coal mining industry was good. she was rubbish!

anyway sorry for going off topic i just rly hate her


we wont survive without the EU's help btw

Excuse me, you have just totally ignored what I said on the European Union and cannot back up your claim that we need the EU despite me posting numerous examples of why we don't need the EU.

As for the coal industry, somewhere along the line your maths teacher, or your common sense must of collapsed as i'm afraid; when something is not making money and is having to be subsidised by the taxpayer while the government is in debt it needs to be closed for the survival of the country, why should the rest of the country pay higher and higher taxes to keep a industry alive which was of no use, and was infact a burden on this country?


Couldn't be arsed reading that (some of us have better things to do), but by reading the last 2 paragraphs then I find your whole view very funny. UKIP have fiddled their expenses, we have seen UKIP MEPs on TV at the other side of the world when they are being payed to be in Parliament. But anyway, they wont get power in my constituency (I don't live in an area full of brainless, mindwashed fascists).

If you find my view funny then challenge it, instead of ducking it. I have said before, UKIP MEP's who were found to be involved in fraud were expelled from the party back in around 2004 and Nigel Farage has explained this many time. UKIP has not been involved in the expenses scandel and the issue of being paid for being a MEP is common sense, they are not going to do it for free are they?

UKIP has a much cleaner record than that of Labour, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats and has not been involved in the recent expense scandel.

How dare you call UKIP facists, the BNP may tend to lean to facism UKIP are exactly the same values as what Winston Churchill and Maraget Thatcher held, was Churchill a facist?

You explain to me how UKIP are facists, go on. The left always name the right side of politics facists as they think it will provoke a fear of Nazism when UKIP are nothing like the Nazi Party. You are keen to throw out claims such as your claim that UKIP are facists yet you have not at all backed it up and you refuses even more so, to disprove/challenge what I wrote above yet you dismiss my view as very funny, tell me why you disagree and then maybe it'll actually show that you maybe know what you are talking about.


oh and undertaker, our currency collapsed in price because the tories overvalued it and it was the target of speculators, not because of it... If we stayed on it, we probably would be using the euro right now.

Indeed the tories took us into it and that is why I believe the Conservative Party needs to sort out the issue of the EU if it is ever to offer a real change and what people want. They took us out yes, and a good move because the people of this country do not want European Union and do not want to be using the Euro as our currency. The damage was already done though and that is why the EU issue needs to be sorted once and for all in the Conservative Party.

[Frodo13.]

Is that why when we joined the European Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1990 on the advice of the European Union, the Pound Sterling nearly collapsed and luckily we withdrew just in time to save our currency and country from financial meltdown?


Withdrawing the Pound from the ERM wasn't a matter of choise. Major was forced to withdraw it because he wasn't competant enough to keep it above it's lower limit. On Black Wednesday, Major kept on rising the interest rates in order to prop the pound up, but it just put the UK into a recession, which led to businesses collapsing and the housing market crash. On one single day, Major's government lost us £3.4 billion. The pound took another 4/5 years to reach the value it had before Black Wednesday. So, withdrawing from the ERM saved our country? Hardly, it almost destroyed it.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Withdrawing the Pound from the ERM wasn't a matter of choise. Major was forced to withdraw it because he wasn't competant enough to keep it above it's lower limit. On Black Wednesday, Major kept on rising the interest rates in order to prop the pound up, but it just put the UK into a recession, which led to businesses collapsing and the housing market crash. On one single day, Major's government lost us £3.4 billion. The pound took another 4/5 years to reach the value it had before Black Wednesday. So, withdrawing from the ERM saved our country? Hardly, it almost destroyed it.

The currency before the ERM was fine, but when we joined the ERM the currency became unstable and we had to withdraw so indeed, it did save the currency from becoming void. I believe it was a terrible decision to join and the only good thing that came out of it was that it stalled european intergration.

Other nations such as Italy and Ireland also suffered on Black Wednesday and according to Wikipedia, the United Kingdom did well compared to other nations on that day.

[Frodo13.]

The currency before the ERM was fine, but when we joined the ERM the currency became unstable and we had to withdraw so indeed, it did save the currency from becoming void. I believe it was a terrible decision to join and the only good thing that came out of it was that it stalled european intergration.

Other nations such as Italy and Ireland also suffered on Black Wednesday and according to Wikipedia, the United Kingdom did well compared to other nations on that day.

But Britain was never forced to sign it by anyone in Europe, infact, the UK had been refusing to sign it since 1978 I believe. Thatcher was pressured by Major. I don't agree with the ERM and our involvement in it, but Thatcher/Major should of never agreed to it in the first place.

The subject of remaining in the EU, I do support it, and whilst I'll be the first to admitt it has it's faults, there is several reasons I support it. These are;


Free health care across EU
Right to work anywhere in the EU
The EU courts has not set any precedent in criminal cases, thus part of the argument saying the EU courts have too much power is void.
The EU Courts of Human Rights give a more global representation of what the world believes to be morally right, arguably creating fairer results.
Being a participant of the EU has created thousands of jobs for British people, jobs which wouldn't be available if we left the EU.
Could be said that membership of the EU can lead to cheaper prices in shops. These foreigners do come over here, and do get paid less than a British worker. As a result, we can enjoy cheaper prices than if something is made in Britain or by British workers.

[-:Undertaker:-]

ukip couldn't run parliament because they are a 1-issue party (even the BNP have more issues than UKIP), 25% of their MEPs were kicked out or left or were imprisoned and their average attendance is only 60%. They don't even do their voters wishes in parliament. They are useless. NO2EU have at least said they won't waste money by going!

They are not a one issue party, you are throwing claims around that are not true. If you look at the Green Party website then yes that is a one issue party, whereas UKIP has its stance on many subjects, crime, immigration and so forth, a lot of which, sadly, nowadays is decided in Brussels by the European Commission.

Do not tell me that UKIP are useless, at least they attempt with other euro-sceptic partys to stand up to the EU and defend national interests, whereas the other lot, mostly Labour and the Liberal Democrats are fairly happy to continue to sign away our sovereignty and taxpayer money to come faceless, unelected eurocrats.


Exactly. What's the point in sharing views with someone, if the person you elect to represent them doesn't even go to parliament. It's like employing someone and they don't even turn up for work but you still pay them.

They do go to the parliament, compared to the MEP's of the other parties, of which most of them do stay in Brussels and sign in everyday to recieve extra funds, yet do not actually attend the parliament.


But Britain was never forced to sign it by anyone in Europe, infact, the UK had been refusing to sign it since 1978 I believe. Thatcher was pressured by Major. I don't agree with the ERM and our involvement in it, but Thatcher/Major should of never agreed to it in the first place.

The subject of remaining in the EU, I do support it, and whilst I'll be the first to admitt it has it's faults, there is several reasons I support it. These are;


Free health care across EU
Right to work anywhere in the EU
The EU courts has not set any precedent in criminal cases, thus part of the argument saying the EU courts have too much power is void.
The EU Courts of Human Rights give a more global representation of what the world believes to be morally right, arguably creating fairer results.
Being a participant of the EU has created thousands of jobs for British people, jobs which wouldn't be available if we left the EU.
Could be said that membership of the EU can lead to cheaper prices in shops. These foreigners do come over here, and do get paid less than a British worker. As a result, we can enjoy cheaper prices than if something is made in Britain or by British workers.
I agree fully, we should never have gone into it in the first place. I won't go on about the points you made on the European Union because you actually will state what you believe in, without throwing words like facist/racist about like some others do and refuse to back up their points of view. :)

[AgnesIO]

ukip couldn't run parliament because they are a 1-issue party (even the BNP have more issues than UKIP), 25% of their MEPs were kicked out or left or were imprisoned and their average attendance is only 60%. They don't even do their voters wishes in parliament. They are useless. NO2EU have at least said they won't waste money by going!

Oh and you think the Cons and Labour Party will do what voters want - yeh come back down to earth..

---

On the other hand, Dan that thing about MT being one of the greatest UK PM's.. :P

She started the economies meltdown.

[Frodo13.]

I agree fully, we should never have gone into it in the first place. I won't go on about the points you made on the European Union because you actually will state what you believe in, without throwing words like facist/racist about like some others do and refuse to back up their points of view. :)

Yes, UKIP are definatly not racist, they are basically just an olden day Conservative Party. I personally think that if someone don't want to vote for one of the main 3 parties in the UK, then they should vote UKIP. For a party with little power, they've got a good head on their shoulders. Reasons for me not supporting them however is their view on the EU. I actually think their view on imigration is OK (the British people get to choose who works here), however I'm unsure how that would be carried out in practice.

[champions]

Most of you can't vote so I don't know why you are debating this?

[GommeInc]

Reasons for me not supporting them however is their view on the EU. I actually think their view on imigration is OK (the British people get to choose who works here), however I'm unsure how that would be carried out in practice.
The last I heard was a "point system" or a qualifications system. Can't remember why goes with which party, or if both apply to UKIP :P


Most of you can't vote so I don't know why you are debating this?
That is an odd thing to say, with that reasoning alone you've destroyed the education system - why learn about Hitler when we weren't alive to witness it? Why care about Henry VIII when he is long gone? Because they've all had some effect on time, history to be precise, that has effected the past and the present. Debating the EU and Local elections, though the majority can't vote, is still fine considering it has a huge effect on everyone.

Some people have an interest in it. Like people who find train drivers, astronauts, doctors and footballers interesting, though not old enough, smart enough or physically able enough to do these jobs :)

[-Eyeless-]

They are not a one issue party, you are throwing claims around that are not true. If you look at the Green Party website then yes that is a one issue party, whereas UKIP has its stance on many subjects, crime, immigration and so forth, a lot of which, sadly, nowadays is decided in Brussels by the European Commission.

I remember a few years ago we had to get into groups at school and we had a mock election my group used the manifesto and issue's of UKIP and I definitely remember it not being a one issue party, in fact a lot of the issue's that they concentrated on where things which other parties may turn a blind eye to. So I agree with you Undertaker that it is not a one issue party, but I have to say I wouldn't currently waste my vote on them since that vote could go towards a party with a better chance of winning and I would rather gradual progression to a better Britain rather than vote for a party without a chance of getting into power.

[-:Undertaker:-]

On the other hand, Dan that thing about MT being one of the greatest UK PM's.. :P

She started the economies meltdown.

Margaret Thatcher did not create this meltdown, Thatcherism was never the ethics of spend what you almost definetly do not have, that was a new hyper trend which grew during the 1990's. The difference between the Thatcher government and this government was that Thatcher believed in saving money for a rainy day, whereas Labour have uncontrolled spending planbs year on year.


Most of you can't vote so I don't know why you are debating this?

Maybe because we want to; why are you commenting if you think the discussion is pointless?


I remember a few years ago we had to get into groups at school and we had a mock election my group used the manifesto and issue's of UKIP and I definitely remember it not being a one issue party, in fact a lot of the issue's that they concentrated on where things which other parties may turn a blind eye to. So I agree with you Undertaker that it is not a one issue party, but I have to say I wouldn't currently waste my vote on them since that vote could go towards a party with a better chance of winning and I would rather gradual progression to a better Britain rather than vote for a party without a chance of getting into power.

Two reasons, I think UKIP now has potential to become a bigger party especially if a Cameron government turns out to be a disaster therefore UKIP will again grow. The second reason being, if UKIP can show to the Conservatives that people want a real Conservative policy on the European Union and other policy areas, it could eventually pressure the Conservative Party to correct its internal struggle over the EU.

[-Eyeless-]

I agree if those things do happen then they do have massive potential to grow but in the next election their chances are extremely slim so it could take another 1 or possibly 2 elections for them to gain a strong foothold and then be taken more seriously.

[Ramones]

The currency before the ERM was fine, but when we joined the ERM the currency became unstable and we had to withdraw so indeed, it did save the currency from becoming void. I believe it was a terrible decision to join and the only good thing that came out of it was that it stalled european intergration.

Other nations such as Italy and Ireland also suffered on Black Wednesday and according to Wikipedia, the United Kingdom did well compared to other nations on that day.

Quote of the century.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I agree if those things do happen then they do have massive potential to grow but in the next election their chances are extremely slim so it could take another 1 or possibly 2 elections for them to gain a strong foothold and then be taken more seriously.

I agree, hopefully it will pressure the Conservatives to make real change. While I think the country will certainly be best with the Conservatives in office, I think if David Cameron is not radical enough like Margaret Thatcher then he will fail and maybe if the Conservatives lose one more General Election it would make them look deeply into their policys and maybe then we'd get the real, right-wing opposition the Conservative Party is supposed to offer.


Quote of the century.

Would you prefer if I used a biased source with seemingly no moderation/fairness, such as a Conservative-supporting website?

[omgDAN!]

In a nutshell, many people see UKIP as a far right party. There are better parties that are proud of being British / English without being so racist and fascist. UKIP are just a polite BNP. I believe, without being offensive, that anyone that falls for the UKIP advertising campaign is a fool, as is anyone that votes Conservative because "they've had enough of Labour".

But then that's just my opinion...

[-:Undertaker:-]

In a nutshell, many people see UKIP as a far right party. There are better parties that are proud of being British / English without being so racist and fascist. UKIP are just a polite BNP. I believe, without being offensive, that anyone that falls for the UKIP advertising campaign is a fool, as is anyone that votes Conservative because "they've had enough of Labour".

But then that's just my opinion...

Why do you refuse to answer why you think UKIP are facists/racists?

[Hecktix]

UKIP are as bad as the BNP if you ask me, their immigration policies aren't much different which is appalling.

[-:Undertaker:-]

UKIP are as bad as the BNP if you ask me, their immigration policies aren't much different which is appalling.

It is racist to control immigration?

[Jordy]

UKIP are as bad as the BNP if you ask me, their immigration policies aren't much different which is appalling.Lmao what nonsense. I agree their immigration policies are similar to an extent, but the BNP has some incredibly far right and racist policies. That's like saying Liberal Democrats are as bad as Labour because they're both Pro-EU. Yes they share similar ideas and policies in certain areas but they are no where near as bad as each other.

[omgDAN!]

Why do you refuse to answer why you think UKIP are facists/racists?

I don't read your posts because you just keep repeating yourself throughout this whole thread.

Stopping immigration doesn't solve the problem nor does it show that your proud to be British. Britain is a country where people have always been welcomed, and simply stopping people coming in is not British nor is it sensible. 'Say NO' - that's all well and good, if you're five years old. People need explanations, not big purple and yellow banners pointing in our faces that don't even make any sense. All I'm saying is that there are better parties than UKIP at having good British values without being totally childish and throwing all of the toys out of the pram.

[Jordy]

I don't read your posts because you just keep repeating yourself throughout this whole thread.

Stopping immigration doesn't solve the problem nor does it show that your proud to be British. Britain is a country where people have always been welcomed, and simply stopping people coming in is not British nor is it sensible. 'Say NO' - that's all well and good, if you're five years old. People need explanations, not big purple and yellow banners pointing in our faces that don't even make any sense. All I'm saying is that there are better parties than UKIP at having good British values without being totally childish and throwing all of the toys out of the pram.Okay then we'll see if you answer to me. Frankly you're EXACTLY like a Labour Politician. You avoid questions everytime. Just quote this post and answer me straight, nothing else.

Why do you think UKIP are facists/racists?

[omgDAN!]

Okay then we'll see if you answer to me. Frankly you're EXACTLY like a Labour Politician. You avoid questions everytime. Just quote this post and answer me straight, nothing else.

Why do you think UKIP are facists/racists?

Because
they
want
to
stop
immigration
without
actually
taking
anyone's
views
or
situations
into
account.

Read their manifesto (if you can manage it).

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't read your posts because you just keep repeating yourself throughout this whole thread.

Stopping immigration doesn't solve the problem nor does it show that your proud to be British. Britain is a country where people have always been welcomed, and simply stopping people coming in is not British nor is it sensible. 'Say NO' - that's all well and good, if you're five years old. People need explanations, not big purple and yellow banners pointing in our faces that don't even make any sense. All I'm saying is that there are better parties than UKIP at having good British values without being totally childish and throwing all of the toys out of the pram.

Excuse me, you haven't answered my question.

Lets try again.

Why do you think UKIP are racists/facists?



Because
they
want
to
stop
immigration
without
actually
taking
anyone's
views
or
situations
into
account.

Read their manifesto (if you can manage it).

Finally we got there.

That firstly has nothing to do with facism, secondly that view is the view of the majority of the British publics view, do you think people agree with uncontrolled immigration in which terrorists/criminals are entering this country?

How is it racist to control immigration?

[omgDAN!]

Right, here it is, quoted from the UKIP Manifesto for the slow people here who can't spend 2 minutes of their life without refreshing the Habbox Forum page.


Immigration

The only people who should decide who can come to live, work and settle in Britain should be the British people themselves. We can only do this outside of the EU political union. The open-door immigration policy has been voted against by only one party – UKIP.


If that's not racist then you are - or are near enough to be - far right. It's that simple.

And I think you'll find out what the majority think when the results come through on Sunday, not everyone is as silly as you (however much you think it makes SOOOOOO much sense everyone should vote for them) :).

[Hecktix]

There is nothing wrong with the immigration system in the UK.

Before you start slating immigrants for sitting at home doing nothing whilst being paid our money, show me some proof for this.

What about those immigrants working in crap conditions for crap pay?

The argument immigrants take up all the jobs... okay.. name me a job that an immigrant has that you'd really really like as a career?

Immigration doesn't need controlling.
What needs controlling is the recession.

In my opinion both UKIP & the BNP are narrow minded.
They would do everything they could to sort out immigration and get out of Europe.

So where does all the other (more important) stuff fit in?

[Jordy]

Right, here it is, quoted from the UKIP Manifesto for the slow people here who can't spend 2 minutes of their life without refreshing the Habbox Forum page.



If that's not racist then you are - or are near enough to be - far right. It's that simple.

And I think you'll find out what the majority think when the results come through on Sunday, not everyone is as silly as you (however much you think it makes SOOOOOO much sense everyone should vote for them) :).Fine then I'll make you an offer, if you're that sure UKIP won't do well in the elections... If UKIP beat Labour in the European Elections you have to put UKIP banners in your signature for a fortnight. And if Labour beat UKIP I'll be willing to put something socialist of your choice in my signature for a fortnight.

Still think that the British people don't want border control? You've continued to look overlook the likes of terrorists.

(I'm willing to take this up with anyone else btw)

[-:Undertaker:-]

Right, here it is, quoted from the UKIP Manifesto for the slow people here who can't spend 2 minutes of their life without refreshing the Habbox Forum page.

If that's not racist then you are - or are near enough to be - far right. It's that simple.

And I think you'll find out what the majority think when the results come through on Sunday, not everyone is as silly as you (however much you think it makes SOOOOOO much sense everyone should vote for them) :).

I can not believe your so called logic, well i'm afraid if its 'racist' to want border control for our country then your right, me and the vast majority of this country are 'racist'.


There is nothing wrong with the immigration system in the UK.

Before you start slating immigrants for sitting at home doing nothing whilst being paid our money, show me some proof for this.

What about those immigrants working in crap conditions for crap pay?

The argument immigrants take up all the jobs... okay.. name me a job that an immigrant has that you'd really really like as a career?

Immigration doesn't need controlling.
What needs controlling is the recession.

In my opinion both UKIP & the BNP are narrow minded.
They would do everything they could to sort out immigration and get out of Europe.

So where does all the other (more important) stuff fit in?

It is not the immigrats we are against, we are against uncontrolled immigration, people recieving benefits from the state with no intention to contribute to this country and finally the criminals and terrorists which are gaining access to this country - why do you think France is keen to get them from Calais to here as soon as possible? - because the French stick up for their national interests and know that our pathetic government does not.

It is a complete joke and the closer 2010 approaches, the less time Labour has left.

[Hecktix]

Still think that the British people don't want border control? You've continued to look overlook the likes of terrorists.

Yep 'cause every immigrant in this country is a terrorist.

Sorry how many terrorist attacks have there been on the UK in the forty or fifty decades immigrants have been coming to the UK?

And the only major attack was carried out partially by BRITISH CITIZENS.

Oh wait there.. the BNP would say they aren't British citizens because they aren't white... :rolleyes:

@ Undertaker.. give me some evidence that the majorty of immigrants sponge of the state and i'll change my view :)

[-:Undertaker:-]

Yep 'cause every immigrant in this country is a terrorist.

Sorry how many terrorist attacks have there been on the UK in the forty or fifty decades immigrants have been coming to the UK?

And the only major attack was carried out partially by BRITISH CITIZENS.

Oh wait there.. the BNP would say they aren't British citizens because they aren't white... :rolleyes:

@ Undertaker.. give me some evidence that the majorty of immigrants sponge of the state and i'll change my view :)

I didn't say the majority, don't put words in my mouth.

Those who do sponge off the state/commit crime, and as UKIP are proposing, would be sent home over that 5 year period, then after the issues are sorted out a system similiar to the United States or Austrialia would be introduced, and it would mean we could control our own immigration rather than the unelected European Union doing so for us.

[Hecktix]

There will always be people who sponge off the Government, immigrants or not.

In all honesty trying to remove these people is nit-picking there are more important issues to be addressed.

[-:Undertaker:-]

There will always be people who sponge off the Government, immigrants or not.

In all honesty trying to remove these people is nit-picking there are more important issues to be addressed.

You would rather let them carry on? - yes we have people like this ourselves, we do not need more of them.

There are other issues, and that is why the main UKIP policy is the withdrawal from thr European Union because until we do, we cannot sort out immigration and various other policy areas the European Union controls.

[Hecktix]

Name one thing apart from immigration that Europe has 'control' of over our lives that could be called innappropriate.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Name one thing apart from immigration that Europe has 'control' of over our lives that could be called innappropriate.

Our economy, courts and law, business, fuel, agriculture, fishing..
The final and most important one is, our parliament.

[GommeInc]

Ummm, UKIP are against unlimited immigration, not immigration in general. They support the idea that people who come to this country should support and work for it, not just hide-away. The BNP "stereo-type" argument against immigration is "Anyone who is black, or not traditionally british, should be kicked out". Though really their idea is more radical than UKIP, the BNP want immigration to stop, rather than be limited. I think you may have got your stories muddled up, because UKIP aren't against immigration, just unlimited immigration - a huge difference ;)


Immigration

The only people who should decide who can come to live, work and settle in Britain should be the British people themselves. We can only do this outside of the EU political union. The open-door immigration policy has been voted against by only one party – UKIP.
That's not racism. You do not know the meaning of racism, I fear. What they are saying is, immigration is OK but only people who are qualified and useful should work and live in the UK. That's not racism, racism is:

"If it's black, it's gotta go back."
"It's french, chuck 'em in the trench."

And many other rhyming words with nationalities. Again, you do not appear to know any of the parties policies.

Also, to some of you, immigration costs the country MILLIONS a day (that's allowing people in aswell as keeping people out). So anyone who is using the "We should be focusing on the recession, not immigration" card need a damn good slap in the face, considering that money could be put to better use.

[alexxxxx]

can someone please show me some proof that immigration costs us millions a year.... the BNP said recently that immigrants cost the UK 12billion a year, but seeing as only 14% of people in the UK are born outsife the UK, that works out at £2million for each immigrant a year.... which doesn't happen.

Immigrants don't cost us money, they contribute in taxes. Asylum seekers CAN'T because they aren't allowed to work and theres not alot we can do about asylum seekers.

[Hecktix]

Our economy, courts and law, business, fuel, agriculture, fishing..
The final and most important one is, our parliament.

Europe have barely any control over our economy & business.
The main thing Europe have a grasp on is the courts & law and I fail to see how a universal law system would not be beneficial.


can someone please show me some proof that immigration costs us millions a year.... the BNP said recently that immigrants cost the UK 12billion a year, but seeing as only 14% of people in the UK are born outsife the UK, that works out at £2million for each immigrant a year.... which doesn't happen.

Immigrants don't cost us money, they contribute in taxes. Asylum seekers CAN'T because they aren't allowed to work and theres not alot we can do about asylum seekers.

Well said.

[ifuseekamy]

The main thing Europe have a grasp on is the courts & law and I fail to see how a universal law system would not be beneficial.

Because it's not democratic. It's like the land they gave to Spain, I'm not going crazy over the loss of some land but the point is we had no say in the matter.

[Hecktix]

Like you say that's a bit of land.

I think the EU is beneficial for Britain.
We won't switch to the Euro though, which I think is the worst thing about being part of the EU.

[jam666]

Like you say that's a bit of land.

I think the EU is beneficial for Britain.
We won't switch to the Euro though, which I think is the worst thing about being part of the EU.

Why on earth should we switch to the euro?

The pound is what makes us british, it is also one of the strongest currencys in the world and therefore benefits our economy a great deal.

For example if there was financial crisis somewhere else in europe or the rest of the world for example, we would be un-affected as we have an entirely different currency from them.

How can you say a piece of land is a piece of land? hang on a minute if they decided to give the city of london to the french for example? would you tolerate it?. I think not as it is the same priniciple. we have controlled gibrolta for nearly 300 years so why should we allow them to take stretches of sea that WE own?

I would go through more points as to why we should NOT be in the EU but i wont. I dont see any point in myself explaining everything to yourself as when you contribute to an argument you have to have evidense to support your claims and you dont.

[Hecktix]

Comparing the City of London to a bit of the ocean is a crap analogy.

I did say it converting to the Euro would be the worst thing about being in the EU.

We do vote for our MEP's and the majority of seats that will be won on Sunday will be Conservative rather than UKIP or BNP, and this suggests to me that there isnt a desperate desire of British people to get out of the EU.

[alexxxxx]

Why on earth should we switch to the euro?

The pound is what makes us british, it is also one of the strongest currencys in the world and therefore benefits our economy a great deal.

For example if there was financial crisis somewhere else in europe or the rest of the world for example, we would be un-affected as we have an entirely different currency from them.

How can you say a piece of land is a piece of land? hang on a minute if they decided to give the city of london to the french for example? would you tolerate it?. I think not as it is the same priniciple. we have controlled gibrolta for nearly 300 years so why should we allow them to take stretches of sea that WE own?

I would go through more points as to why we should NOT be in the EU but i wont. I dont see any point in myself explaining everything to yourself as when you contribute to an argument you have to have evidense to support your claims and you dont.

Can you read? He said the € is a BAD idea... :eusa_clap

And they didn't give control to the spanish, there was just a mix-up. The spanish don't control some water, they just enetred that water when they had been assigned to look after it. They went away when the Gibraltans told them to go away. :eusa_clap

[jam666]

Like you say that's a bit of land.

I think the EU is beneficial for Britain.
We won't switch to the Euro though, which I think is the worst thing about being part of the EU.

This suggests that the worst thing about being in the EU is not switching to the euro. Therefore you want to switch to the euro.


Comparing the City of London to a bit of the ocean is a crap analogy.

I did say it converting to the Euro would be the worst thing about being in the EU.

We do vote for our MEP's and the majority of seats that will be won on Sunday will be Conservative rather than UKIP or BNP, and this suggests to me that there isnt a desperate desire of British people to get out of the EU.

No it is not abit of a stupid analogy, it is the same principle i even mentioned this in my previous statement.

There is quite alot of people wanting out of the EU, if you actually read the Conservative party policy, you will see that they WILL hold a referendum on the signing of the lisbon treaty if they come into power before it is signed. Labour has promised a referendum since 2005 but has it delivered? No.

Can you read? He said the € is a BAD idea... :eusa_clap

And they didn't give control to the spanish, there was just a mix-up. The spanish don't control some water, they just enetred that water when they had been assigned to look after it. They went away when the Gibraltans told them to go away. :eusa_clap

The EU had no right in letting the spanish look after an area of the ocean that WE own.

[Hecktix]

There is quite alot of people wanting out of the EU, if you actually read the Conservative party policy, you will see that they WILL hold a referendum on the signing of the lisbon treaty if they come into power before it is signed. Labour has promised a referendum since 2005 but has it delivered? No.


And everything the tories say is Gospel is it?
How can you be sure their promise won't be empty too?

[jam666]

And everything the tories say is Gospel is it?
How can you be sure their promise won't be empty too?

I have not said that everything the Conservatives say is gospel, i simply stated it from their own policy on the issue.

I cant be sure but i believe them 100% more than labour as they have being so called calling a referendum since 2005 and have they delivered? No. The same thing goes for many other labour policys aswell.

Your use of the word "too" is very interesting as this suggest thats you believe that the labour party cannot keep promises and you support them! so why talk about whether the Conservatives will stick to their policys when its obvious the party you support doesnt.

[Hecktix]

Every politician lies. Empty promises are part of the deal unfortunately. It's how they get elected at the end of the day.

No, Labour have not held a referendum about whether we want to be in the EU or not, then again they haven't signed the treaty yet either :rolleyes:

I support Labour because the majority of their work has had positive effect on this country in the past 12 years.

I may have been slightly more open to the tories if their leader wasn't David Cameron.

[jam666]

Every politician lies. Empty promises are part of the deal unfortunately. It's how they get elected at the end of the day.

No, Labour have not held a referendum about whether we want to be in the EU or not, then again they haven't signed the treaty yet either :rolleyes:


The only reason Gordon Brown will not hold a general election is because of the lisbon treaty. They want to sign it before the next general election as they know that the Conservatives will hold a referendum on the issue as if it is already signed by the time the Conservatives come into power they will not hold a referendum on this issue.

The majority of the things they have done in the last 12 years has not being good. Look at our debt situation now? Before labour came to power the Conservatives left government with one of the best debt records this country has ever seen. However now the labour government has raked up so much debt it will take up until atleast 2030 to pay off.

You cant condem a party for their leader, especially since labours leader is gordon brown. Lets look at the MP exspenses problem. Who was first to act? David Cameron. Who sat by and did nothing? Gordon Brown.

[Hecktix]

The only reason Gordon Brown will not hold a general election is because of the lisbon treaty. They want to sign it before the next general election as they know that the Conservatives will hold a referendum on the issue as if it is already signed by the time the Conservatives come into power they will not hold a referendum on this issue.

Pretty sure the only reason Gordon Brown won't hold a general election is becuase he knows it would be a landslide victory for the tories and it would be him giving up - which isn't really a good image of a party trying to remain in Government. The reason Brown hasnt called a GE is because he wants to give Labour a chance to redeem themselves and possibly win back a few votes.

I believe Labour will hold a referendum before the treaty is signed. Who knows, this could be Mr Browns trick to win back support? He is looking for something...

You can criticise a party for their leader when that leader could be your Prime Minister.

& if I remember rightly David Cameron just slated Labour MP's saying they were greedy, then the Conservative expenses were announced...

The expenses row comes from Parliamentary Legislation that's been in place years, it's humanity that caused the expenses problem, as humanity is generally greedy nowadays.

[jam666]

Pretty sure the only reason Gordon Brown won't hold a general election is becuase he knows it would be a landslide victory for the tories and it would be him giving up - which isn't really a good image of a party trying to remain in Government. The reason Brown hasnt called a GE is because he wants to give Labour a chance to redeem themselves and possibly win back a few votes.

I believe Labour will hold a referendum before the treaty is signed. Who knows, this could be Mr Browns trick to win back support? He is looking for something...

You can criticise a party for their leader when that leader could be your Prime Minister.

it's rather obvious that the Conservatives will win with a landslide victory so what is the point in continuing to wreck our country for another year?

How can you believe labour will hold a referendum before the next general election? This is entirely based on opinion not fact therefore has no basis as Labour have being promising a referendum since 2005 but we still have not had one 4 years down the line.

Labour cannot redeem themselves. To much damage has being done as witnessed by the events of the last 48 hours.

The Conservatives dealt with MP's who abused the system much more better than labour. The have orderd every single member of their party to pay back the money they claimed in exspenses if the things they claimed for were not deemed fair as by the council appointed to sort out the exspenses mess.

[ifuseekamy]

Politics is all idealism and fantasy anyway. It's impossible to please everyone. I'm against the EU because it's an undemocratic system with unelected leaders and I'm not really into an Orwellian government.

[-:Undertaker:-]

can someone please show me some proof that immigration costs us millions a year.... the BNP said recently that immigrants cost the UK 12billion a year, but seeing as only 14% of people in the UK are born outsife the UK, that works out at £2million for each immigrant a year.... which doesn't happen.

Immigrants don't cost us money, they contribute in taxes. Asylum seekers CAN'T because they aren't allowed to work and theres not alot we can do about asylum seekers.

The costs of;

Those immigrants who commit crime, will cost us millions, if not billions.
The cost of housing them in prison.
The cost of benefits to those who refuse point blank to work.
The cost of neogiations to take them back to their orginal country.
The cost of deporting them for various reasons.
The cost of accepting immigrants from the channel.
Immigration and illegal immigration both tie in together because this country has no border controls and is a failure when it comes to immigration. To say immigration doesn't cost us, you must think the whole country is stupid.


Europe have barely any control over our economy & business.
The main thing Europe have a grasp on is the courts & law and I fail to see how a universal law system would not be beneficial.
Well said.

The European Union has a massive effect over all our business and economy. Businesses have to show banking, tax reciepts, have to abide by EU rules and regulations or be closed down, the list continues right down to the last kiwi which is 1mm out.

The European Union has a massive effect on our economy, and otherwise you wouldn't support the EU if it didn't otherwise its orginal goal and aim would be void. The EU controls what goods are shipped/driven where, the prices, the size of fruit that can be sold - everything and you are kidding yourself if you think they don't.

If you think a foreign, unelected commission is "beneficial" to this country, a country which has had one of the oldest and longest running democratic parliaments in history then you don't deserve to live in this country and I am serious, you are basically arguing for a dictatorship - they are not elected and we have no say on what they tell us to do; that is the same basics as Mr Stalin and Mr Hitler ran their corrupt, unelected governments on.

On the anniversary of D-Day, to say that you wouldn't mind large and important parts of our country ruled by the unelected EU is just two fingers to the millions who gave their lives to stop us being ruled by a foreign, european force, at least that was elected though.


Comparing the City of London to a bit of the ocean is a crap analogy.

I did say it converting to the Euro would be the worst thing about being in the EU.

We do vote for our MEP's and the majority of seats that will be won on Sunday will be Conservative rather than UKIP or BNP, and this suggests to me that there isnt a desperate desire of British people to get out of the EU.

The same basic still applies, that ocean, that land, that part of the world belongs to the United Kingdom and our navy and not the EU, Kingdom of Spain or the spanish navy. Have you ever heard of appeasement? - that is what caused the second world war, we just ignored the Third Reich as it took over most of Europe, do you think we should now appease anyone claiming our lands? - that means the Falklands go to Argentina, Gibraltor to Spain and goodness knows how many other claims there are on our country and soverign territory.

I have a suggestion, if you think there isn't a desperate desire for the British people to leave the European Union, how about holding a referendum on our membership?

[alexxxxx]

The costs of;

Those immigrants who commit crime, will cost us millions, if not billions.
The cost of housing them in prison.
The cost of benefits to those who refuse point blank to work.



MOST immigrants are not eligible for benefits, most immigrants do not commit crimes...





The cost of neogiations to take them back to their orginal country.
The cost of deporting them for various reasons.
The cost of accepting immigrants from the channel.

'Immigrants from the channel' are ASYLUM SEEKERS and are NOT IMMIGRANTS. They are a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING. Many people mix them all up. Most immigrants are not eligible for benefits, all illegal immigrants can't recieve benefits and asylum seekers can't work because they aren't allowed.



Immigration and illegal immigration both tie in together because this country has no border controls and is a failure when it comes to immigration. To say immigration doesn't cost us, you must think the whole country is stupid.
This country does have border controls... I guess you don't venture in and out of this country very often because every time i enter and exit i have to show my passport. It is scanned and then given back to me. You know how alot of immigrants are coming through at the moment, through Ireland apparently. Immigration benefits us in so many ways it's untrue. Even a senior UKIP member used polish workers to do up his house. Immigrants put in more money than they take out, they work in our hospitals because we don't have enough doctors and nurses. Immigrants put in more money than they take out of the system.



The European Union has a massive effect over all our business and economy. Businesses have to show banking, tax reciepts, have to abide by EU rules and regulations or be closed down, the list continues right down to the last kiwi which is 1mm out.

The European Union has a massive effect on our economy, and otherwise you wouldn't support the EU if it didn't otherwise its orginal goal and aim would be void. The EU controls what goods are shipped/driven where, the prices, the size of fruit that can be sold - everything and you are kidding yourself if you think they don't.
The EU DOESN'T control which goods are shipped and where, it's a free market and allows every good, person to go WHEREVER THEY WANT.



If you think a foreign, unelected commission is "beneficial" to this country, a country which has had one of the oldest and longest running democratic parliaments in history then you don't deserve to live in this country and I am serious, you are basically arguing for a dictatorship - they are not elected and we have no say on what they tell us to do; that is the same basics as Mr Stalin and Mr Hitler ran their corrupt, unelected governments on.
The EU is beneficial to our economy and it's completley wrong to think that's untrue. Don't tell me whether If I am worthy or not to live in this country, or you are as bad as Hitler himself who told people who and who couldn't be German, then gassed them. If you know what the EU comission is, you will realise taht is isn't TRUELY unelected. There is one comissioner sent from each nation which the democratically elected government sends. 'Why can't we elect our seat on the UN Security council? or in NATO?' It's the same principal. If people don't want the EU, they vote for a non-EU party, which they will have a chance to do so in the next general election. They can also vote in the EU elections which are being completed in the rest of the EU nations at the moment.



On the anniversary of D-Day, to say that you wouldn't mind large and important parts of our country ruled by the unelected EU is just two fingers to the millions who gave their lives to stop us being ruled by a foreign, european force, at least that was elected though.
No, no it's not. It's showing we can work together to make Europe a better place and do you know what, it has WORKED. Where have the wars been in europe within the last 60 years, oh yeah, in the communist blocs and in the baltic states. Not us at all.Don't blind yourself with nationalism! We are as great as a nation as France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, Sweden, Ireland and we've all come to realise that we can all prosper if we work together, pool some resouces and allow everyone to trade with each other. It's a big two fingers up to our fallen soldiers if we continue to pull ourselves apart. Good economic growth since we joined the EC/EU.

Most people want the right to live and work in other countries. Most business owners want the right to sell their goods abroad with no restrictions. Most universities would like to be able to co-operate with other universities and have exchange programs without a large fianancial burden. Most people would like to drive in other countries without having to take another test/have their drivers licence translated at a cost to them. Most people would like to appeal to the European Court of Human rights so their children's DNA isn't stored on a database. Many, many benefits.

[-:Undertaker:-]

MOST immigrants are not eligible for benefits, most immigrants do not commit crimes...

'Immigrants from the channel' are ASYLUM SEEKERS and are NOT IMMIGRANTS. They are a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING. Many people mix them all up. Most immigrants are not eligible for benefits, all illegal immigrants can't recieve benefits and asylum seekers can't work because they aren't allowed.

This country does have border controls... I guess you don't venture in and out of this country very often because every time i enter and exit i have to show my passport. It is scanned and then given back to me. You know how alot of immigrants are coming through at the moment, through Ireland apparently. Immigration benefits us in so many ways it's untrue. Even a senior UKIP member used polish workers to do up his house. Immigrants put in more money than they take out, they work in our hospitals because we don't have enough doctors and nurses. Immigrants put in more money than they take out of the system.

The EU DOESN'T control which goods are shipped and where, it's a free market and allows every good, person to go WHEREVER THEY WANT.

The EU is beneficial to our economy and it's completley wrong to think that's untrue. Don't tell me whether If I am worthy or not to live in this country, or you are as bad as Hitler himself who told people who and who couldn't be German, then gassed them. If you know what the EU comission is, you will realise taht is isn't TRUELY unelected. There is one comissioner sent from each nation which the democratically elected government sends. 'Why can't we elect our seat on the UN Security council? or in NATO?' It's the same principal. If people don't want the EU, they vote for a non-EU party, which they will have a chance to do so in the next general election. They can also vote in the EU elections which are being completed in the rest of the EU nations at the moment.

No, no it's not. It's showing we can work together to make Europe a better place and do you know what, it has WORKED. Where have the wars been in europe within the last 60 years, oh yeah, in the communist blocs and in the baltic states. Not us at all.Don't blind yourself with nationalism! We are as great as a nation as France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, Sweden, Ireland and we've all come to realise that we can all prosper if we work together, pool some resouces and allow everyone to trade with each other. It's a big two fingers up to our fallen soldiers if we continue to pull ourselves apart. Good economic growth since we joined the EC/EU.

Most people want the right to live and work in other countries. Most business owners want the right to sell their goods abroad with no restrictions. Most universities would like to be able to co-operate with other universities and have exchange programs without a large fianancial burden. Most people would like to drive in other countries without having to take another test/have their drivers licence translated at a cost to them. Most people would like to appeal to the European Court of Human rights so their children's DNA isn't stored on a database. Many, many benefits.

You are right, most illegal immigrants aren't eligable for benefits, however they still recieve them from the state because the state will not leave them to fend for themselves now will it. The state has to look after them once they are here, it cannot leave them on the street.

UKIP are not totally against immigration how many times does this have to be said, what we are against is uncontrolled, illegal immigration and it does happen, either we have no border control or it is doing a pathetic job of it, because at the moment there are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people in this country that the government does not even know are here. If a UKIP member used a polish worker for his house then fair dos because they believe in immigration which is needed.

The EU does control it, it makes sure all member states trade with eachother and can't snub another member state, that was why agriculture in this country was decimated overnmight when we joined the ECC because our apples just couldn't compete with cheaper varietys from all over Europe.

Hang on, is the EU commission elected - NO it isn't, I didn't ask whether or not its chosen by our government, I asked whether it is elected. As the main body which creates our laws, estimated by the Germans as over 75% I would think we deserve the right to elect them, or even better, to get rid of them.

Good economic growth came from Margaret Thatcher reforms, not the European Union. Billions go missing from the audits of the European Union every year, we want our money and we don't want it being sent off to Brussels to fund the gravy train there.

You REFUSE to accept a referendum of the European Union for one reason alone, you KNOW IT WILL LOSE. You know it, The European Union itself knows it, the Labour government knows it, all European Union supporters know it.

There are no two ways about it, the French, Dutch and Irish all said NO, how many times do people need to say NO until you and the European Union get the message?

Give us our referendum on the European Union, or at least support the need for a referendum regardless of whether you support the EU or not. If not then it is clear to everyone that you yourself know it would lose and in that, you clearly believe, as the Labour government does, that the people are too stupid to make their own mind up about it despite Labours' former Europe Minister, Caroline Flint not reading the treaty herself yet trying to tell us that the EU is vital for this country.

Do the people of Europe want the European Union? - NO.

[ifuseekamy]

Like you say that's a bit of land.

I think the EU is beneficial for Britain.
We won't switch to the Euro though, which I think is the worst thing about being part of the EU.
We won't have a choice which is the point being made. Whatever the EU says goes, they give themselves legal Supremacy over member nations.

[jam666]

I am finding it increasingly annoying the amount of people who post and actually support the labour idealism and if not labour, then Lib dem as they are practically labours little brother.

I do not worship the Conservatives however i do vote for them.

It never seeks to amaze me how much people contradict themselves when posting and then going on and on about one issue when the majority of people have already addressed these issues further up the thread.

If people actually took time to do some research instead of going in all guns blazing, STOP. and think why am i saying this?, what is the point of me saying this? do i have any evidense to support my argument? All of these points should be considerd before posting labour idealism.

I myself respect others views aslong as they simply state and support their claims instead of the usual labour > UKIP labour ftw.

Why is it that the majority of labour supporters support labour? because they know no different. Many people are often brought up by their parents to vote for a specific party and whilst that is fair, surely people are capeable of reading party policies and thinking for themselves rather than just automatically believing everything their parents say to be the truth.

One example of this is a post that appeared earlier this week on the forum. It said something about the conservatives caused 3million people to be unemployed in the 1970's due to mining industry closing. However if you open your eyes you will see that the un-employment figure is close to 3 million right here right now therefore that argument has no basis.

I could go on and on but i honestly just wish people who support this and that party (mainly labour) would stop for a moment and just think.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I am finding it increasingly annoying the amount of people who post and actually support the labour idealism and if not labour, then Lib dem as they are practically labours little brother.

I do not worship the Conservatives however i do vote for them.

It never seeks to amaze me how much people contradict themselves when posting and then going on and on about one issue when the majority of people have already addressed these issues further up the thread.

If people actually took time to do some research instead of going in all guns blazing, STOP. and think why am i saying this?, what is the point of me saying this? do i have any evidense to support my argument? All of these points should be considerd before posting labour idealism.

I myself respect others views aslong as they simply state and support their claims instead of the usual labour > UKIP labour ftw.

Why is it that the majority of labour supporters support labour? because they know no different. Many people are often brought up by their parents to vote for a specific party and whilst that is fair, surely people are capeable of reading party policies and thinking for themselves rather than just automatically believing everything their parents say to be the truth.

One example of this is a post that appeared earlier this week on the forum. It said something about the conservatives caused 3million people to be unemployed in the 1970's due to mining industry closing. However if you open your eyes you will see that the un-employment figure is close to 3 million right here right now therefore that argument has no basis.

I could go on and on but i honestly just wish people who support this and that party (mainly labour) would stop for a moment and just think.

I agree and I was involved in that thread, of which the majority of them refused to answer mine and the forum member Jordy's questions, instead dodging the questions and spewing out socialist hate against the Conservatives and UKIP and when futher questioned on why they hate them, the general message appears to be because thier families told them to hate them particular parties.

The supporters of UKIP here, we have looked into the partys policies as you and myself have looked into Conservative policy and come to our own conclusion rather than copying that of our parents unlike the forum member HabbaJabba or whatever his name is.

It is like people are claiming that UKIP is a one policy party when it covers a wide spectrum of issues, along with people calling UKIP and the Conservatives racist for having a policy on immigration, unlike Labour.

This is why politics can never be discussed properly in real life, because as soon as a party like UKIP or the Conservatives open their mouth on immigration or the European Union they are accused of being racist, nationalist and facist - just like in the 2005 General Election Michael Howard was accused of being racist for proposing being tough on immigration.

The left always names the right racist or argues that the right is for the rich when it is the opposite, most poor countrys all have a history of left wing politics/socialism or still are socialist. In the words of Margaret Thatcher to Simon Hughes, a Liberal Democrat; "would you rather the poor be poorer?."