Post: #76

I've only just seen the thread, so by no means am I trying to sidetrack its evolution, but the first post ranting about the SNP was completely off and it makes it sound like the OP doesn't really know anything about Scottish politics but decided to write about it anyways. Not everyone who votes SNP would actually vote for the SNP if an independent Scotland existed. For a significant amount of people (I can't say 100% certainty if it's a majority or simply a significant minority) the SNP are a vehicle towards independence, and not a reflection of the popularity of their policies. We're not all left-wing nutjobs, and we don't all dream of a nanny state. It's easy to forget that for a long time Scotland was a Conservative country and not a Labour country.

On a second point, we're not some subsidised layabout country, and our contribution to the UK is a surplus. Every year our allocated spending goes down despite us continuing to contribute substantially. The UK is very lucky the independence vote failed due to the older generations voting heavily against it.

And now that I've laid that out, the interesting point of current polls in Scotland is that it suggests the SNP could wipe out a majority of Labour seats in the country. Personally that would be great as I think Labour are a joke, and for once the forthcoming election may actually hinge on how many seats Labour can pick up in Scotland. It also depends on what happens in England, but from my own national perspective, if the SNP gain enough seats to influence the outcome of the overall UK government, we'll be in a real position to get more devolution and take a further step towards independence.

Post: #77

(03-11-2015 08:49 AM)H1N1 Wrote:  

(03-11-2015 07:49 AM)Que enspastic Wrote:  Any takers for the London meetup? These discussions always fly better with a pint

When is this happening/where is the information on it? Didn't realise these things went on!

I propose before Easter, either next week or the week after, on a Thursday evening in London, ideally one of Angel/Shoreditch/Soho.

Post: #78

So Cameron has said that he won't do a third term as Prime Minister IF he is elected in May. However somehow the halfwit liberals from New Labour see this as 'presumptuous' and arrogant.

Post: #79

I look at British politics a fair bit, but I am still an outsider.
When I see the Tories I, as Delingpole said in an interview, nothing more than the British equivalent of RINOs.

They have failed to do the jobs Cameron explicitly promised he would do, refused to stand for conservative principles.
It's time for UKIP.
If I am missing something, kindly let me know. Because I am an outsider.

Post: #80

There's irony: right as I'm about to compose a post I get a leaflet through the door for my prospective Conservative candidate.

I'm not a fan of Melanie Phillips but she does a good job here of succinctly explaining why people are so disillusioned with David Cameron and the Conservative party:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do20TbYFTzU

I remember when I was a kid there were pictures of John Major and Tony Blair on the television and I asked my mother who those people were. She said that they were the people competing to run the country. I pointed and said that I hoped John Major would win. How prophetic.
I cannot in good conscience ever vote for the Labour party. Over the course of 13 years they systematically and deliberately (as confirmed by former MPs) transformed this country into something unrecognizable just to spite the Tories. They lied about immigration, they lied about boom and bust, they lied about 45 minutes. But of course, Governments don't lie to people - they engage in disinformation.

Honestly, I want to believe that my vote matters and that it would count for something. I want to believe that I could help to usher in something that might lead to some prosperity and cultural damage control. But the truth is that for all intents and purposes I'd just be shoveling shit. It feels like whoever wins we just trade a turd for a slightly more polished turd.
I'll still vote though - damned if I'm going to throw away a right that people have fought and died for.

(03-10-2015 07:12 AM)Constitution45 Wrote:  A question here for the U.K members. Will any of you consider moving country depending on the outcome of this election ?

Personally I will probably leave quite sharpish if New Labour get in. I can imagine that freak who is the head of the party, being like Francois Hollande but on crack if he got any resemblance of power.

I'm always worried when politicians talk about getting into power. They're in office to serve and when they talk about power it shows they're in it for the wrong reasons.

That being said, I'm becoming more and more tempted as time passes. As I've started travelling and seeing other countries it makes me believe that there are better places out there.
I think the linchpin for me will be if the DPP, Alison Saunders, manages to get the Yes means Yes bill passed in the House of Commons. If the country wants to demonize me for being a man then it won't have to worry about me for much longer.

Post: #81

(03-12-2015 08:26 AM)tattiemasher Wrote:  I've only just seen the thread, so by no means am I trying to sidetrack its evolution, but the first post ranting about the SNP was completely off and it makes it sound like the OP doesn't really know anything about Scottish politics but decided to write about it anyways. Not everyone who votes SNP would actually vote for the SNP if an independent Scotland existed. For a significant amount of people (I can't say 100% certainty if it's a majority or simply a significant minority) the SNP are a vehicle towards independence, and not a reflection of the popularity of their policies. We're not all left-wing nutjobs, and we don't all dream of a nanny state. It's easy to forget that for a long time Scotland was a Conservative country and not a Labour country.

One of their main policies is an independent Scotland with all the bells and whistles of being in a Union. See NHS funding, railway subsidies, business etc.

Vast majority of Scots are of the Braveheart tunnel vision variety. They have an inhospitable arrogant attitude towards the English. If any outsider wants to know why English people are arrogant themselves then you need only to see Scotland, Ireland and the Welsh for the first three reasons why.

A long time conservative country? Not since I have been alive and that is 3 decades. Labour heartland for good reasons; Welfare, welfare and subsidies.

SNP brought those goodies and more so labour got a good kicking.

Quote:On a second point, we're not some subsidised layabout country, and our contribution to the UK is a surplus. Every year our allocated spending goes down despite us continuing to contribute substantially. The UK is very lucky the independence vote failed due to the older generations voting heavily against it.

- Free University at the cost of English treasury
- NHS in Scotland is governed by Scottish politics but receives more money from the Treasury based in England
- Each person in Scotland receives more money per head from government spending than England

And I am missing a lot of others here.

Quote:And now that I've laid that out, the interesting point of current polls in Scotland is that it suggests the SNP could wipe out a majority of Labour seats in the country. Personally that would be great as I think Labour are a joke, and for once the forthcoming election may actually hinge on how many seats Labour can pick up in Scotland. It also depends on what happens in England, but from my own national perspective, if the SNP gain enough seats to influence the outcome of the overall UK government, we'll be in a real position to get more devolution and take a further step towards independence.

Lets be honest here, any person who believes the SNP holding the British parliament to ransom in order to put forth policies that benefit Scotland and only scotland is a moron.

Its bad enough Labour favours the EU but to add Scotland as an insult is going to cause major problems.

And then you mention independence. By that meaning you have no right to be in the British parliament, so basically once you declare your independence you need to be evicted from the House of Lords, House of Parliament and stop receiving British treasury money.

You are no longer British (which A scot never identified with anyway) so why should England support you?

Post: #82

If Scotland had gone independent, it's highly likely they would now be bust. This is due to the massive decrease in oil prices, their main moneymaking source.

Post: #83

(03-25-2015 12:24 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(03-12-2015 08:26 AM)tattiemasher Wrote:  I've only just seen the thread, so by no means am I trying to sidetrack its evolution, but the first post ranting about the SNP was completely off and it makes it sound like the OP doesn't really know anything about Scottish politics but decided to write about it anyways. Not everyone who votes SNP would actually vote for the SNP if an independent Scotland existed. For a significant amount of people (I can't say 100% certainty if it's a majority or simply a significant minority) the SNP are a vehicle towards independence, and not a reflection of the popularity of their policies. We're not all left-wing nutjobs, and we don't all dream of a nanny state. It's easy to forget that for a long time Scotland was a Conservative country and not a Labour country.

One of their main policies is an independent Scotland with all the bells and whistles of being in a Union. See NHS funding, railway subsidies, business etc.

Vast majority of Scots are of the Braveheart tunnel vision variety. They have an inhospitable arrogant attitude towards the English. If any outsider wants to know why English people are arrogant themselves then you need only to see Scotland, Ireland and the Welsh for the first three reasons why.

A long time conservative country? Not since I have been alive and that is 3 decades. Labour heartland for good reasons; Welfare, welfare and subsidies.

SNP brought those goodies and more so labour got a good kicking.

Quote:On a second point, we're not some subsidised layabout country, and our contribution to the UK is a surplus. Every year our allocated spending goes down despite us continuing to contribute substantially. The UK is very lucky the independence vote failed due to the older generations voting heavily against it.

- Free University at the cost of English treasury
- NHS in Scotland is governed by Scottish politics but receives more money from the Treasury based in England
- Each person in Scotland receives more money per head from government spending than England

And I am missing a lot of others here.

Quote:And now that I've laid that out, the interesting point of current polls in Scotland is that it suggests the SNP could wipe out a majority of Labour seats in the country. Personally that would be great as I think Labour are a joke, and for once the forthcoming election may actually hinge on how many seats Labour can pick up in Scotland. It also depends on what happens in England, but from my own national perspective, if the SNP gain enough seats to influence the outcome of the overall UK government, we'll be in a real position to get more devolution and take a further step towards independence.

Lets be honest here, any person who believes the SNP holding the British parliament to ransom in order to put forth policies that benefit Scotland and only scotland is a moron.

Its bad enough Labour favours the EU but to add Scotland as an insult is going to cause major problems.

And then you mention independence. By that meaning you have no right to be in the British parliament, so basically once you declare your independence you need to be evicted from the House of Lords, House of Parliament and stop receiving British treasury money.

You are no longer British (which A scot never identified with anyway) so why should England support you?

You seem to have a misunderstanding of how Scotland gets and spends money. We receive a block grant, which goes up or down depending on how money is spent in the rest of the UK. For the past few years it has only been going down. Once we receive that grant, it's up to us how we spend it. Free education? We sacrifice other things to pay for it. NHS? It's separate in Scotland and thus once again, if we spend more on that, we spend less on other things.

To reiterate, if we spend more on something than the rest of the UK does, we spend less on other things.

As for receiving more per head, we contribute more per head than most of the UK. And that's with the UK government not assigning hydrocarbon revenues to the Scottish contribution.

And yes, as a Scotsman, I want Scotland to be able to extract as much benefit from being in the UK as possible. Holding the balance of power in the UK parliament is a great way to do that. I'd love for us to be independent (and of course in that case we wouldn't be in the HoL, HoP, or receive money from the UK government, why even bring that up?) but until we do, taking the UK government for a ride is all good by me.

I'm not going to go into the topics of why the English dislike Scotland/Wales/NI or vice-versa, because it's irrelevant to the thread and will only end with someone trolling.

Post: #84

All you've done is confirm what everyone thought anyway about the SNP. Cool, thanks for that.

Post: #85

I agree with Constitutuon 45 on the first page of this thread;

"There is the possibility of labour and tories doing a joint coalition to block UKIP from getting in. It is a hard one to measure as the question time audiences on the BBC are barely representative of the overall population. If you listen to the mainstream outlets you will be lead to believe that everyone is a feminist progressive lol."

There will be a LabCon grand alliance. UKIP the greens and SNP will gain so many seats between them that neither Labour nor the Tories will be capable of forming a majority. With the HUGE support for UKIP in Britain, I hope UKIP will come 3rd and form the opposition.

Post: #86

UKIP don't have any hope at all, due to massive propaganda from the media painting them as racist and bigoted. I posted a link to their policies earlier in this thread and I can't see anything racist or bigoted in their policies.

Post: #87

(03-26-2015 09:09 AM)Lizard King Wrote:  UKIP don't have any hope at all, due to massive propaganda from the media painting them as racist and bigoted. I posted a link to their policies earlier in this thread and I can't see anything racist or bigoted in their policies.

Yes the sound 'racist' basically means 'stop thinking and start being emotional now'.

UKIP are doing the right thing - they accept that there is only so much that rational, intelligent talk can do, and are making a point of including non-whites amongst their front-men, most likely for their race alone. It would be nigh on impossible to continue the 'racist' bullshit against a clearly racially diverse group, and since that is the main device by which the UKIP is attacked, will render the opposition powerless. I'd do the same thing if I was the party chairman. The country may be insane, but insanity is what you have to work with to fix it in spite of itself.

Post: #88

(03-25-2015 12:37 PM)tattiemasher Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 12:24 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(03-12-2015 08:26 AM)tattiemasher Wrote:  I've only just seen the thread, so by no means am I trying to sidetrack its evolution, but the first post ranting about the SNP was completely off and it makes it sound like the OP doesn't really know anything about Scottish politics but decided to write about it anyways. Not everyone who votes SNP would actually vote for the SNP if an independent Scotland existed. For a significant amount of people (I can't say 100% certainty if it's a majority or simply a significant minority) the SNP are a vehicle towards independence, and not a reflection of the popularity of their policies. We're not all left-wing nutjobs, and we don't all dream of a nanny state. It's easy to forget that for a long time Scotland was a Conservative country and not a Labour country.

One of their main policies is an independent Scotland with all the bells and whistles of being in a Union. See NHS funding, railway subsidies, business etc.

Vast majority of Scots are of the Braveheart tunnel vision variety. They have an inhospitable arrogant attitude towards the English. If any outsider wants to know why English people are arrogant themselves then you need only to see Scotland, Ireland and the Welsh for the first three reasons why.

A long time conservative country? Not since I have been alive and that is 3 decades. Labour heartland for good reasons; Welfare, welfare and subsidies.

SNP brought those goodies and more so labour got a good kicking.

Quote:On a second point, we're not some subsidised layabout country, and our contribution to the UK is a surplus. Every year our allocated spending goes down despite us continuing to contribute substantially. The UK is very lucky the independence vote failed due to the older generations voting heavily against it.

- Free University at the cost of English treasury
- NHS in Scotland is governed by Scottish politics but receives more money from the Treasury based in England
- Each person in Scotland receives more money per head from government spending than England

And I am missing a lot of others here.

Quote:And now that I've laid that out, the interesting point of current polls in Scotland is that it suggests the SNP could wipe out a majority of Labour seats in the country. Personally that would be great as I think Labour are a joke, and for once the forthcoming election may actually hinge on how many seats Labour can pick up in Scotland. It also depends on what happens in England, but from my own national perspective, if the SNP gain enough seats to influence the outcome of the overall UK government, we'll be in a real position to get more devolution and take a further step towards independence.

Lets be honest here, any person who believes the SNP holding the British parliament to ransom in order to put forth policies that benefit Scotland and only scotland is a moron.

Its bad enough Labour favours the EU but to add Scotland as an insult is going to cause major problems.

And then you mention independence. By that meaning you have no right to be in the British parliament, so basically once you declare your independence you need to be evicted from the House of Lords, House of Parliament and stop receiving British treasury money.

You are no longer British (which A scot never identified with anyway) so why should England support you?

You seem to have a misunderstanding of how Scotland gets and spends money. We receive a block grant, which goes up or down depending on how money is spent in the rest of the UK. For the past few years it has only been going down. Once we receive that grant, it's up to us how we spend it. Free education? We sacrifice other things to pay for it. NHS? It's separate in Scotland and thus once again, if we spend more on that, we spend less on other things.

To reiterate, if we spend more on something than the rest of the UK does, we spend less on other things.

As for receiving more per head, we contribute more per head than most of the UK. And that's with the UK government not assigning hydrocarbon revenues to the Scottish contribution.

And yes, as a Scotsman, I want Scotland to be able to extract as much benefit from being in the UK as possible. Holding the balance of power in the UK parliament is a great way to do that. I'd love for us to be independent (and of course in that case we wouldn't be in the HoL, HoP, or receive money from the UK government, why even bring that up?) but until we do, taking the UK government for a ride is all good by me.

I'm not going to go into the topics of why the English dislike Scotland/Wales/NI or vice-versa, because it's irrelevant to the thread and will only end with someone trolling.

You receive more spending on the NHS, education and public services then England does per head. Prove to me you don't when many others with better bargaining chips than you have proved it to be so.

You contribute more per head than the rest of the UK? Where did you dig that up from? Are you on about the oil business? The same business which has been annihilated by the Arabs?

Those oil companies do business in London last time I checked so without the City you're left with no real selling point except for the EU.

As you're a Scotsman I can guarantee that your xenophobia and lust for power blinds you from the horrendous idiocy your country wants to embark upon. Read the history books on your country. It was England who lent a hand to Scotland and not vice versa in order to stave off a country turning to barbarism should it implode like it was going to.

Why would I bring up the fact you shouldn't be able to vote in a British parliament should you declare independence?

The same fact the USA has no UK influence in Congress. You do not belong there, thats why. You are a separate entity which governs itself and as a result your own spending needs are from the people within Scotlands borders.

Where in this scenario are you seeing a good, prosperous future for Scotland?

Post: #89

(03-26-2015 12:46 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 12:37 PM)tattiemasher Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 12:24 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(03-12-2015 08:26 AM)tattiemasher Wrote:  I've only just seen the thread, so by no means am I trying to sidetrack its evolution, but the first post ranting about the SNP was completely off and it makes it sound like the OP doesn't really know anything about Scottish politics but decided to write about it anyways. Not everyone who votes SNP would actually vote for the SNP if an independent Scotland existed. For a significant amount of people (I can't say 100% certainty if it's a majority or simply a significant minority) the SNP are a vehicle towards independence, and not a reflection of the popularity of their policies. We're not all left-wing nutjobs, and we don't all dream of a nanny state. It's easy to forget that for a long time Scotland was a Conservative country and not a Labour country.

One of their main policies is an independent Scotland with all the bells and whistles of being in a Union. See NHS funding, railway subsidies, business etc.

Vast majority of Scots are of the Braveheart tunnel vision variety. They have an inhospitable arrogant attitude towards the English. If any outsider wants to know why English people are arrogant themselves then you need only to see Scotland, Ireland and the Welsh for the first three reasons why.

A long time conservative country? Not since I have been alive and that is 3 decades. Labour heartland for good reasons; Welfare, welfare and subsidies.

SNP brought those goodies and more so labour got a good kicking.

Quote:On a second point, we're not some subsidised layabout country, and our contribution to the UK is a surplus. Every year our allocated spending goes down despite us continuing to contribute substantially. The UK is very lucky the independence vote failed due to the older generations voting heavily against it.

- Free University at the cost of English treasury
- NHS in Scotland is governed by Scottish politics but receives more money from the Treasury based in England
- Each person in Scotland receives more money per head from government spending than England

And I am missing a lot of others here.

Quote:And now that I've laid that out, the interesting point of current polls in Scotland is that it suggests the SNP could wipe out a majority of Labour seats in the country. Personally that would be great as I think Labour are a joke, and for once the forthcoming election may actually hinge on how many seats Labour can pick up in Scotland. It also depends on what happens in England, but from my own national perspective, if the SNP gain enough seats to influence the outcome of the overall UK government, we'll be in a real position to get more devolution and take a further step towards independence.

Lets be honest here, any person who believes the SNP holding the British parliament to ransom in order to put forth policies that benefit Scotland and only scotland is a moron.

Its bad enough Labour favours the EU but to add Scotland as an insult is going to cause major problems.

And then you mention independence. By that meaning you have no right to be in the British parliament, so basically once you declare your independence you need to be evicted from the House of Lords, House of Parliament and stop receiving British treasury money.

You are no longer British (which A scot never identified with anyway) so why should England support you?

You seem to have a misunderstanding of how Scotland gets and spends money. We receive a block grant, which goes up or down depending on how money is spent in the rest of the UK. For the past few years it has only been going down. Once we receive that grant, it's up to us how we spend it. Free education? We sacrifice other things to pay for it. NHS? It's separate in Scotland and thus once again, if we spend more on that, we spend less on other things.

To reiterate, if we spend more on something than the rest of the UK does, we spend less on other things.

As for receiving more per head, we contribute more per head than most of the UK. And that's with the UK government not assigning hydrocarbon revenues to the Scottish contribution.

And yes, as a Scotsman, I want Scotland to be able to extract as much benefit from being in the UK as possible. Holding the balance of power in the UK parliament is a great way to do that. I'd love for us to be independent (and of course in that case we wouldn't be in the HoL, HoP, or receive money from the UK government, why even bring that up?) but until we do, taking the UK government for a ride is all good by me.

I'm not going to go into the topics of why the English dislike Scotland/Wales/NI or vice-versa, because it's irrelevant to the thread and will only end with someone trolling.

You receive more spending on the NHS, education and public services then England does per head. Prove to me you don't when many others with better bargaining chips than you have proved it to be so.

You contribute more per head than the rest of the UK? Where did you dig that up from? Are you on about the oil business? The same business which has been annihilated by the Arabs?

Those oil companies do business in London last time I checked so without the City you're left with no real selling point except for the EU.

As you're a Scotsman I can guarantee that your xenophobia and lust for power blinds you from the horrendous idiocy your country wants to embark upon. Read the history books on your country. It was England who lent a hand to Scotland and not vice versa in order to stave off a country turning to barbarism should it implode like it was going to.

Why would I bring up the fact you shouldn't be able to vote in a British parliament should you declare independence?

The same fact the USA has no UK influence in Congress. You do not belong there, thats why. You are a separate entity which governs itself and as a result your own spending needs are from the people within Scotlands borders.

Where in this scenario are you seeing a good, prosperous future for Scotland?

From the sound of your message you've convinced yourself already that Scotland is a worthless and ungrateful cause, but I'll reply one more time for the benefit of others who may be following the thread.

There's no point in looking at spending per head on health, education and public services, because those are devolved areas. We receive a block grant, and we choose how to spend it. In this case, we choose to spend more per head on those things, and spend less per head on other things.

Don't twist my words either. I said we contribute more than most of the UK, not all of the UK. Some regions contribute more, and yes London is one of them. That's even without factoring in hydrocarbon revenues.

As for oil, prices are low, but output in many countries is still higher than it was during high prices. Part of the slump is due to supply outstripping demand. If you think that companies would rather leave the oil in the ground of Scotland than take it out at a lesser profit, or miss out on any sort of profit because they want an office in London, then I would guess you're not in the hydrocarbon industry. Not to mention you forget there's a lot of oil companies working out of Aberdeen.

The stuff about xenophobia, lust for power, history...I'm not going there as you're borderline trolling.

I still see no reason to bring up not being able to vote, receive money from or influence the UK government if Scotland were independent. No-one has said they would, no-one has said they wanted to. It's a bizarre line of debate to go down.

Scottish people think we can at the very least maintain our current level of prosperity because, believe it or not...we're Scottish and we believe in ourselves. We don't expect to suddenly become rich, it's not even about that. For those who support independence it's about being in full control of the decisions that shape our country, for better or worse. Funnily enough, similar to why many people on here value independence and being in control of their own destiny.

Post: #90

^Sorry, but how does Scotland contribute more than lots of areas in the UK? Other than your oil, you don't really contribute anything except unproductive financial services. Even the North in England is more productive.

The Scots have been scrounging for decades, with Labour just pandering for their vote. The fact is that if Scotland left the union, Labour would have no chance of getting into power. England is actually a very conservative country, and if there were 59 less MPs (assuming Scotland left the Union and that most of the 59 now redundant Scottish seats were held by Labour), then the Tories would gain a massive advantage.

In addition, gerrymandering by previous Labour governments still gives Labour an advantage in England. There are far too many seats in poor inner-city areas.

Fed up with the entitled attitude of lots of Scots (if you're on this forum, you're a clear exception to this). Miliband, Sturgeon and Salmond are all in the same boat as far as I'm concerned.

As the french say, j'en ai marre.

Post: #91

Can anyone make out what happened the other day? Trending at the moment is a story about 'Britain First' gatecrashing a meeting by a left wing group called 'beyond UKIP' because they ecently forced nigel farage out of a pub in kent.

The news reports aren't very clear and full of bias. Apparently what the left wing group did was a 'demonstration' or a 'protest' and what the right wing group Britain first did was an 'attack'.

Post: #92

The left wing group stormed Farages local pub while he was there with his family to harass him. He left because his children were frightened by the lefty, mostly militant gay, group. BTW England First are nothing to do with UKIP, in fact UKIP do not accept members who have previously joined various groups including England First, BNP, EDL, NF, etc

Post: #93

One group stormed a pub and threatened a man and his family, in a private, non-political setting.

One group stormed the political space of a politically motivated group where all of the members were committed activists.

It is entirely logical and consistent that the former should be praised and the latter condemned. If you're a journalist.

What I so enjoyed about the statements by 'Beyond UKIP' in response to their meeting being stormed was how predictable their soundbites were:

'There were pregnant women inside' & 'We could barely hold back the door against 15 huge men'.

Because only a leftist, feminist could fail to see the irony in the above statements; only they could be so lacking in self-awareness to fail to realise the absurd contradiction of their position. It would be funny if: A.) most people didn't fail to appreciate the absurdity, and B.) it wasn't our country this was happening in.

Post: #94

From the landlord of the pub. ; "As a Guardian reader for over 50 years and a Downe resident for over 20 years, including eight years as landlord of the Queen’s Head, I find your article (Big trouble in middle England, G2, 24 March) disappointing, to say the least. This was in no way a political demonstration but an ill-disciplined, attention-seeking rabble with no thought of other people’s safety or enjoyment. They booked the George & Dragon under false pretences for larger numbers and purposes than it is suitable for, thereby ruining normal customers’ afternoon enjoyment.

A large number of families use this pub and the Queen’s Head for a peaceful Sunday lunch and social gatherings. Young children with their parents (including the Farage children) were terrified by these events. Mr Farage remained calm during these so-called demonstrations and certainly had no minders, heavies or aides with him. Your correspondent omits the fact that the driver of the hired coach refused to transport the rabble back to Bromley, worried about their behaviour and no doubt his safety. Also, the article does not take into consideration the damage caused to the business and reputation of these well-run pubs. I’m not, of course, going to stop buying or reading the Guardian, but hope for a return to more balanced and objective reporting.
Alan Dear
Downe, Kent"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015...test#img-1

Post: #95

(04-01-2015 08:33 AM)Guitarman Wrote:  I’m not, of course, going to stop buying or reading the Guardian, but hope for a return to more balanced and objective reporting.
Alan Dear
Downe, Kent"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015...test#img-1

Herein lies the problem. This translates as:

'Even though I am aware that what you printed is false, and deliberately so, and whilst I appreciate that right-thinking people should be pro-objectivity in principle, to the extent that I will get my name in the paper as a decent sort of chap for encouraging it be upheld, I will none-the-less contradict this principle by willingly continuing to support your propaganda in the event that you fail to take my limited criticism seriously. I am grateful for the opportunity you, your editorial staff, your reporters and all concerned with your operation provide me with each and every day to embrace my own hypocrisy and suppress what I know to be true in favour of a peaceful life spent saying and thinking the right things as I have been taught to do.'

What is sad is that this chap came closer to piercing the media veil than most will in a lifetime.

Post: #96

"I’m not, of course, going to stop buying or reading the Guardian, but hope for a return to more balanced and objective reporting."

What an idiot, just stop reading it. It will never be balanaced or objective with their insane feminists and leftist slant on everything.

The Independent which is probably shit as well had this to say:
"After organising what they called a “diversity cabaret” in Downe last week, Beyond Ukip members confronted Mr Farage in the pub where he says he was having Sunday lunch with his family. The Ukip leader has since said that his children were so frightened by the activists that they ran away."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...46379.html

a diversity cabaret! I don't know if I can imagine what sorts of horror that would involve the sort of mental scarring that would have on familes and children.

Also how can they call themselves 'beyond UKIP' it seems pretty offensive and it steals UKIP's name. Could they not take em to court for that?

Post: #97

That is why in the UK you should not take seriously anything the media say about UKIP.

And yes, Farage will get my vote come May 7th!

Post: #98

The Guardian just makes me sick. I have their app downloaded and often check the 'opinion' articles before a workout, to fill myself with rage.

On another note, did any of the other UK guys see any of the 'Free Speech' TV debate programmes on BBC 3? It was everything you could expect from the BBC, including the 'ethnically representative' audience (in which only about 20% are white, most of whom are gay and stoners). Then of the course the young, trendy male and female presenters who openly mock right wing policies.

Anyway, I'll try and find some youtube clips for you American/ rest of the world guys, but I'll skim over the worst bits.

In the fourth episode they had a woman from UKIP on, and the first question was why does UKIP attract people with 'bigoted' views. She responded well, and then another audience member (white, male, Essex style voice, those massive ear lobe stretching earrings) said it was probably because they had racist policies. He was asked to name these policies, to which he obviously couldn't, but the presenters quickly switched away from him.

Post: #99

(04-01-2015 10:21 AM)britchard Wrote:  The Guardian just makes me sick. I have their app downloaded and often check the 'opinion' articles before a workout, to fill myself with rage.

On another note, did any of the other UK guys see any of the 'Free Speech' TV debate programmes on BBC 3? It was everything you could expect from the BBC, including the 'ethnically representative' audience (in which only about 20% are white, most of whom are gay and stoners). Then of the course the young, trendy male and female presenters who openly mock right wing policies.

Anyway, I'll try and find some youtube clips for you American/ rest of the world guys, but I'll skim over the worst bits.

In the fourth episode they had a woman from UKIP on, and the first question was why does UKIP attract people with 'bigoted' views. She responded well, and then another audience member (white, male, Essex style voice, those massive ear lobe stretching earrings) said it was probably because they had racist policies. He was asked to name these policies, to which he obviously couldn't, but the presenters quickly switched away from him.

Makes me wonder what real public opinion actually is. I genuinely don't believe these freaks that you see on the BBC are representative of the British public. Most Brits I come across don't have these social justice views you see them fawning over on Question time.

This next month will be interesting, they have the big debate on Thursday night with UKIP which should be interesting. It does seem that people will vote conservatives as a safety to ensure Labour won't get in. If New Labour do get in, just imagine what it would be like

Post: #100

The BBC propaganda machine has switched on into full anti-UKIP mode. Newsnight was showing a stream of "working class" people explaining why they're voting Labour.

I literally shouted at the TV for a good minute and a half on how stupid they are. A person who works for a living, doesn't seek welfare and wants to better themselves wants to vote in a party that does the exact opposite (read history) and hates the party which enabled the UK to steer a stormy front and keep pace with Germany.

This is the average hick voter the UK can rely upon in its time of need.