View Full Version : UKIP for Eastleigh?
M Swanson
28-Feb-13, 09:54
Well, I've been waiting for this result from Eastleigh and we'll soon know the outcome. Will UKIP put the cat amongst the pigeons and shake-up the three major parties in British politics? I can't see them winning, but I'm sure they'll gain enough votes to shake the Establishment. That's no bad thing, imo. Do they enjoy any sort of support from Scots' voters, who have perhaps grown weary of being ruled by Brussels?
....Do they enjoy any sort of support from Scots' voters, who have perhaps grown weary of being ruled by Brussels?
Being ruled by Brussels if far more preferable to being ruled by Westminster.
UKIP accepts that the world’s climate changes, but we are the first party to take a sceptical stance on man-made global warming claims. We called for a rational, balanced approach to the climate debate in 2008, before the extensive manipulation of scientific data first became clear. Polls now show a majority of the British people share this scepticism despite protests from another LibLabCon-sensus. UKIP now calls for an immediate halt to unjustified spending on renewable sources that has led to massive energy price hikes and fuel poverty.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall when PM Nigel Farage invites the Chief Scientific officer to No. 10 for talks on Climate Change. Will he put cotton wool in his ears? The point is, the PM should listen to the best scientific advice, and that's the one for which overwhelming evidence supports it.
If UKIP are not prepared to listen to scientists then where does it stop?
Which part of "bunch of nutters" didn't you understand? :lol:
They are a one trick pony and someone has nicked their trick.
as much as i hope they win, if only to smack the lib/lab/con/dem crap, i don't think they will but they sure as hell will give them all something to worry about. As for the global warming palaver, why does it seem like Europe are the only ones to "be doing something about it"? China are burning so much coal in their steel furnaces that the supply line can't keep up with the supply, likewise the smog in China is disgusting, but again, why am i amongst those that have to pay for this? im all for reducing global warming if it is necessary but the new taxes on cars based on emissions (road tax was introduced for the road network expansion and maintenance!) and greenhouse gas emissions is getting drawn out to such an extent that i don't think the government believe they are going to get away with this tax for much longer.
MerlinScot
28-Feb-13, 21:37
Being ruled by Brussels if far more preferable to being ruled by Westminster.You try, then you come back to tell me how it feels being ruled by France and Germany.
Will UKIP put the cat amongst the pigeons and shake-up the three major parties in British politics?
No. They haven't got a cat in hell's chance. What they will do is split the tory vote, possibly handing the seat straight back to the FibDems.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall when PM Nigel Farage invites the Chief Scientific officer to No. 10 for talks on Climate Change. Will he put cotton wool in his ears? The point is, the PM should listen to the best scientific advice, and that's the one for which overwhelming evidence supports it.
If UKIP are not prepared to listen to scientists then where does it stop?
To me, being logical, "best scientific advice" and "overwhelming evidence" would point to a unified opinion, which it doesn't...so it appears to me that "best scientific advice" and "overwhelming evidence" are simply the scientific advice and evidence which confirms the opinions of those promoting the "best scientific advice" and "overwhelming evidence". Seems to me that "best scientific advice" and "overwhelming evidence" would, given the descriptions, be universally accepted as fact and there would be no argument. But then you do kinds have to consider, in this world of attracting funding and making good wage, how much opinion is predicated on what their monetary benefits will be rather than what is real fact.
Climate Change is certainly a fact...but then climate change is something which happens naturally and has over millenia with no human input at all. I'm not saying that, since the Industrial Revolution, we have not had a hand in increasing carbon emissions, but what we shouldn't be doing is knee-jerking, with renewables like wind turbines on every high point, before changing our own behaviours as to our own additions to carbon emissions.
I have asked you before, Rheghead, what you, personally, are doing to reduce your carbon effect on the world, if you are so worried about the future of the world as to inundate this forum with your opinions...as in I asked Do you run a car? How many electrical appliances do you run (and keep plugged in/on stand-by)? How high do you have your heating? Do you go foreign holidays by plane? How well insulated is your house? How much of your food comes from local suppliers from local sources? and received the response Cutting back on having stuff or doing the things that we want is not a part of a low carbon/sustainable economy. If it were then I'd be against it. So you illustrate from whence you come......you want to live as you live as long as you live...and hell-mend future generations..as long as you don't have to change your current lifestyle.
Why am I not surprised?
Climate Change is certainly a fact...but then climate change is something which happens naturally and has over millenia with no human input at all. I'm not saying that, since the Industrial Revolution, we have not had a hand in increasing carbon emissions, but what we shouldn't be doing is knee-jerking, with renewables like wind turbines on every high point, before changing our own behaviours as to our own additions to carbon emissions.
Since the industrial revolution, it is the pace of warming that is most alarming. You go look at the graph which displays the rate of change from when the Ice Age was at its coldest to the warmer periods and marry up the graph of the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere over that period and you will see a good match. If you calculated the rate of change over natural conditions and compare with what happened over the last 200 years and you will see that the rate of change in global temperature was 20 times faster since the industrial revolution. That is fact not fiction. So you are right, climate change is natural, but the numbers show how dire the situation really is.
Since the industrial revolution, it is the pace of warming that is most alarming. You go look at the graph which displays the rate of change from when the Ice Age was at its coldest to the warmer periods and marry up the graph of the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere over that period and you will see a good match. If you calculated the rate of change over natural conditions and compare with what happened over the last 200 years and you will see that the rate of change in global temperature was 20 times faster since the industrial revolution. That is fact not fiction. So you are right, climate change is natural, but the numbers show how dire the situation really is.
Blah blah blah blah blah..... and you think all the efforts of the population of the UK, currently 63 million, following any 'green' agenda is going to negate the effects of the industrialisation of China, population 1.5 Billion, India, population 1.2 Billion and Brazil, population 196 Million. Anything we in Britain are contributing to climate change is infinitesimal compared to what's being done by these growing industrial giants. I haven't even mentioned the USofA.
All the Green fascism in this country cannot hide the fact that climate change is happening and there is very very little the UK can do about it no matter how much you screw the population!
The situation is dire, so what? The planet isn't going to disappear, it's survived 4.5 Billion years and will probably survive until our sun dies in another few billion years. The human population won't last that long; as a species it'll probably fade as it fries but that's going to happen anyway.
No. They haven't got a cat in hell's chance. What they will do is split the tory vote, possibly handing the seat straight back to the FibDems.
Give that man a cigar! :)
MerlinScot
01-Mar-13, 09:37
Give that man a cigar! :)I had never seen anyone before to quote himself on a forum.
You're a first Flynn :lol:
Blimey! So the Conservatives weren't extreme, rightwing and racist enough for the good people of Eastleigh. I hope the Conservatives don't see it as their problem. :eek:
M Swanson
01-Mar-13, 10:46
Well, as I predicted the LibDems won, but it was UKIP that produced the best result on the night. They must be delighted with the 24% swing. Good for them! As I also stated, it would serve to give the other parties a good shake-up. The only chance I see of the Tories bouncing back from this, is for the party to return to its traditional roots and this applies too, to Labour, who abandoned their socialist core values years ago. Can't see it happening though. Too much corruption, money to be made and hypocrites running the shows. Anyway, a thumping good result for UKIP. Go Nigel. :cool:
Blah blah blah blah blah..... and you think all the efforts of the population of the UK, currently 63 million, following any 'green' agenda is going to negate the effects of the industrialisation of China, population 1.5 Billion, India, population 1.2 Billion and Brazil, population 196 Million. Anything we in Britain are contributing to climate change is infinitesimal compared to what's being done by these growing industrial giants. I haven't even mentioned the USofA.
All the Green fascism in this country cannot hide the fact that climate change is happening and there is very very little the UK can do about it no matter how much you screw the population!
The situation is dire, so what? The planet isn't going to disappear, it's survived 4.5 Billion years and will probably survive until our sun dies in another few billion years. The human population won't last that long; as a species it'll probably fade as it fries but that's going to happen anyway.
Well this is what the UKIP stands for isn't it? It is easier to deny the problem, ignore the problem or give up because you've convinced yourself of the futility of it all.
You mention the USA, India and China and use them as a stick to hit the 'green agenda' but the facts (you might not be interested in facts if they don't back up your point) are that UKIP is against wind farms and they question the scientific validity of climate change, while all this happening, USA, China and India have more wind power than the UK and are building their wind power faster in relative terms than the UK.
tonkatojo
01-Mar-13, 10:58
Blimey! So the Conservatives weren't extreme, rightwing and racist enough for the good people of Eastleigh. I hope the Conservatives don't see it as their problem. :eek:
Nope they just were cons in true blue LOL, curiosity makes me ask what you see as "their problem".
M Swanson
01-Mar-13, 11:00
Rheg said:-Well this is what the UKIP stands for isn't it? It is easier to deny the problem, ignore the problem or give up because you've convinced yourself of the futility of it all.
Yes, UKIP are an interested party. They're obviously not "denying," the problem, but recognise it for being what a great many people believe it is ..... out of Man's control, but a huge money-spinner; they're not "ignoring," the problem and have published their beliefs on innumerable occasions, even though recent research suggests that the public are tiring of the subject ....... and without global consent, (which will never come,) we can't hope to make hardly any difference anyway. Pretty "futile," imo! Trust me Rheg, the world will still be here for you to reach your three score years and ten, but probably a little poorer for wasting billions on trying to achieve something that is impossible.
macadamia
01-Mar-13, 12:12
I am delighted that all right-thinking Scots support UKIP - a truly INDEPENDENT party offering fresh solutions to the UK's many problems, thanks in the main to the sceloritic and patronising behaviour of all the other parties, who seemed to have combined from Lab, Lib, Con into a a one horse force similar to the Taliban. I call them the CALIBAN (after Shakespeare's shambling monster in "The Tempest").
Anyway, if UKIP succeed in the future in presenting the fresh face of politics, and if the Scottish electorate see the advantage, then Scotland, by voting for UKIP, could achieve both aims of the entire population - of becoming independent, AND remaining in a truly Independent UK.
Problem solved. Vote UKIP!
Trust me Rheg, the world will still be here for you to reach your three score years and ten, but probably a little poorer for wasting billions on trying to achieve something that is impossible.
Just what do you think life will be like for our children and their children if we do nothing? UKIP is stupid. It wants UK independence but nothing binds all peoples and countries more than the consequences of doing nothing about climate change. Some really scary things are predicted to happen. Scaremongering? It is if there is no realist likelihood of any of it happening. Do you feel lucky?
Well this is what the UKIP stands for isn't it? It is easier to deny the problem, ignore the problem or give up because you've convinced yourself of the futility of it all.
You mention the USA, India and China and use them as a stick to hit the 'green agenda' but the facts (you might not be interested in facts if they don't back up your point) are that UKIP is against wind farms and they question the scientific validity of climate change, while all this happening, USA, China and India have more wind power than the UK and are building their wind power faster in relative terms than the UK.
I don't care what UKIP's beliefs are. The only politician I will support is the one that recognises the green agenda for what it is - Fascism! It's a fraud to drive lots of people into poverty and make some landowners and foreign energy companies very very rich! You can dress it up anyway you want but there is a growing number of people in fuel poverty who couldn't give a flying fig about climate change because all they want is to be able to feed themselves and keep warm in winter.
The first duty of government is to protect the people, not line the pockets of the wealthy.
M Swanson
01-Mar-13, 15:03
I think life will go on much the same as it always has, Rheg. There are tens of thousands of climate changes throughout history. Why should this one be any different? And what's so stupid about wanting to visibly change the futures of so many children, by perhaps investing the money this and the global warming con has swallowed-up, by providing food for the starving? Hospitals to provide good health care? Education to the benefit of all? The list is endless. I mean, how many billions, worldwide has been invested in this exercise in "stupidity" started largely by the super-rich Gore? And what difference has all this money made, Rheg? Do you really believe that ALL nations will come together in this quest to harness Nature? Never in a million years, would be my guess, but I'm a realist. Meanwhile more money, desperately needed elsewhere, is pumped into this doomed project. Still, politically, it's been a useful distraction, for the unscrupulous, imo.
I don't need luck, thanks Rheg, as far as climate change is concerned. Things will trundle on, in much the same way as they always have since time began. How on earth anyone can believe that Man can change anything significantly, is beyond me.
i don't care what ukip's beliefs are. The only politician i will support is the one that recognises the green agenda for what it is - fascism! It's a fraud to drive lots of people into poverty and make some landowners and foreign energy companies very very rich! You can dress it up anyway you want but there is a growing number of people in fuel poverty who couldn't give a flying fig about climate change because all they want is to be able to feed themselves and keep warm in winter.
The first duty of government is to protect the people, not line the pockets of the wealthy.
hear hear!!!!!
M Swanson
01-Mar-13, 15:08
I don't care what UKIP's beliefs are. The only politician I will support is the one that recognises the green agenda for what it is - Fascism! It's a fraud to drive lots of people into poverty and make some landowners and foreign energy companies very very rich! You can dress it up anyway you want but there is a growing number of people in fuel poverty who couldn't give a flying fig about climate change because all they want is to be able to feed themselves and keep warm in winter.
The first duty of government is to protect the people, not line the pockets of the wealthy.
Bravo, Gronnuck. :cool: Though I lay it more at the door of liberal/Communism. And let's be fair, UKIP, as far as I'm aware, is the only party who have challenged this Climate change scaremongering and associated cons.
There are tens of thousands of climate changes throughout history. Why should this one be any different?
Firstly, the reason why it is different is that the temperature rise today is 20 times faster than previous times, I am certain that we won't be able to adapt to that rate of change and I'm definitely certain that flora and fauna will not be able to change.
Secondly, t is different because the physical world is different to when the last serious change in our climate occured. People and animals cannot migrate and adapt across closed borders, they are stuck in their countries, although open borders around the Serengeti is a reason to be optimistic.
James Lovelock, the darling of the anti-wind farm brigade, predicted that there will be a migration of peoples from the equatorial and sub-saharan regions to the more cooler northern countries like ours just to escape the devastation of climate change.
What is UKIP's position and answer for this phenomena? This really strikes a blow to UKIP's stance on immigration and their idea of independence and we are only seeing the start of what is yet to come. Arguably, one of the major reasons for immigration up till now has been climate change if we look back and see what has been happening to the Sudan and Ethiopia etc.
I don't care what UKIP's beliefs are. The only politician I will support is the one that recognises the green agenda for what it is - Fascism! It's a fraud to drive lots of people into poverty and make some landowners and foreign energy companies very very rich! You can dress it up anyway you want but there is a growing number of people in fuel poverty who couldn't give a flying fig about climate change because all they want is to be able to feed themselves and keep warm in winter.
The first duty of government is to protect the people, not line the pockets of the wealthy.
I disagree on every level. The drive towards a low carbon economy will make energy affordable to all. It will localise energy and bring benefits to areas that generate it. You talk about lining the pockets of the wealthy, but we've been lining the pockets of Arab rulers for decades for oil and gas. Hypocrisy at its worst Gronnuck. And UKIP want wealth generated in the country but they'd give out increasing amounts of money abroad for dwindling reserves of energy. And we would grind to a halt if we do not seek out new ways to generate energy. Mickey Mouse economics.
Nope they just were cons in true blue LOL, curiosity makes me ask what you see as "their problem".
Not being extreme, right wing and racist enough. Pay careful attention to what I'm saying as I think you misunderstood.:D
I disagree on every level. The drive towards a low carbon economy will make energy affordable to all. It will localise energy and bring benefits to areas that generate it.
Yeh yeh yeh..... meanwhile the ordinary people see their energy bills skyrocket and the landowners and energy companies get very very rich. What is it you don't understand? Surely it's not beyond the wit of man to raise money for investment without driving people to the point where they have to choose whether to heat or eat?
You talk about lining the pockets of the wealthy, but we've been lining the pockets of Arab rulers for decades for oil and gas. Hypocrisy at its worst Gronnuck.
I AGREE! But this is a prime example of what happens when you allow a few oligarchs take control and dominate a particular project. I'm old enough to remember Hydrogen powered cars and electric cars in the 50s. But these were never allowed to be developed because the oil industry was too powerful. This cannot be allowed to happen to the development of green energy.
And UKIP want wealth generated in the country but they'd give out increasing amounts of money abroad for dwindling reserves of energy. And we would grind to a halt if we do not seek out new ways to generate energy. Mickey Mouse economics.
As I said I'm not particularly interested in any political party. If we're going to develop green energy let's get on with it but lets not rob the poor to feed the rich. There must be a fairer more equitable way of funding this development.
Yeh yeh yeh..... meanwhile the ordinary people see their energy bills skyrocket and the landowners and energy companies get very very rich. What is it you don't understand? Surely it's not beyond the wit of man to raise money for investment without driving people to the point where they have to choose whether to heat or eat?
I understand that it is not renewable energy that is the major reason why our energy bills are going up. It is the rising cost of gas and coal that is the driver of rising fuel bills. I hope it isn't lost on you that the 'green' agenda is all about getting us off our addiction to fossil fuels off fossil fuels. :roll:
As it is, wind power is now cheaper than most forms of fossil fuel generation. And that is with the subsidies included.
I AGREE! But this is a prime example of what happens when you allow a few oligarchs take control and dominate a particular project. I'm old enough to remember Hydrogen powered cars and electric cars in the 50s. But these were never allowed to be developed because the oil industry was too powerful. This cannot be allowed to happen to the development of green energy.
but paying a few oligarchs is not what is happening. All over the country, thousands of farmers or landowners are using their land to develop wind farms. It is localisation in action!!
If we're going to develop green energy let's get on with it but lets not rob the poor to feed the rich. There must be a fairer more equitable way of funding this development.
I agree 100%!!! Unfortunately, we have to make the most of the capitalist system that we have. I really wish that it wasn't this way, if you read the Green Party vision of how we can get to a low carbon economy then you may have a different opinion. But at the moment, it is money that talks and that is the carrot. If it wasn't then no amount of generous goodwill will get the low carbon economy off the ground.
Poor ol' David Cameron. Caught between a rock and a hard place. The UKIP swing will put pressure on him to abandon the battle over the supposed 'middle ground' of British politics and push his party towards the neo-liberal tea party style rightwing. Great, the British public don't have any stomach for that sort of rubbish.
secrets in symmetry
02-Mar-13, 00:10
I nominate this thread as the worst I have seen since I joined this forum. It combines political ignorance and political lies with the notion that the man in the street can have anything worthwhile to say on global warming.
Just to reiterate....
The man on the street knows nothing about global warming, and his opinions are totally worthless.
Have you got it yet?
The man on the street knows nothing about global warming, and his opinions are totally worthless.
Have you got it yet?
That has to be the most fascist utterance we've had on the Org to date.
While the man in the street pays for the development of anything to counter or cope with global warming - he is entitled to an opinion.
macadamia
02-Mar-13, 09:12
The ignorant are all around us: and indeed occasionally ARE us. Think of the BBC Weather Forecasts - always right? For a long while, it was fact that the Sun went round the Earth. All the economists in the world were unable to predict the great Bank Crash of 2008, and none seem to know for sure how the consequences will play out. Every war is a failure of mankind to satisfactorily communicate. Bar-room drunks who give you a hug, claim to be your "besht friend" and then give you a slap are generally wrong in every direction. Politicians do tend to become separated from their constituents. People who think they're God's gift generally aren't. Rich people make prisons out of their own possessions. Poor people can be happy unless told they can't be by better off people. You'd probably be better off on a desert island with a carpenter than a brain surgeon. Life is a daily miracle, whatever or whoever you believe or disbelieve in. You can finish a sentence with a proposition, and nobody will die because of it.
Are we getting the drift, here? All we have is opinions, which we share with those who agree with us, and argue with those who don't.
Unless you drown cats, kill people, or do down your fellow man/woman, you are entitled to an opinion.
Live with it.
I don't care what UKIP's beliefs are. The only politician I will support is the one that recognises the green agenda for what it is - Fascism! It's a fraud to drive lots of people into poverty and make some landowners and foreign energy companies very very rich! You can dress it up anyway you want but there is a growing number of people in fuel poverty who couldn't give a flying fig about climate change because all they want is to be able to feed themselves and keep warm in winter.
The first duty of government is to protect the people, not line the pockets of the wealthy.
UKIP are fascists in disguise. Read their manifesto. Here are their plans for Scotland: http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/LocalManifestoScotsDL.pdf
And here are a few gems from their manifesto:
"Replace MSPs with Scottish Westminster MPs…" So no more talk of independence...
"Repeal the Human Rights Act…" Good luck earning a decent wage when you have no human rights.
"Restrict immigration so Scotland will be for the Scots and British first…" (are Scots no British in UKIP's eyes?)
"Abolish the Department for Climate Change..." Yeah, who cares what actual scientists think?
"Support new nuclear power plants…" Yup, loads of empty space in Scotland to store all that nuke waste...
M Swanson
02-Mar-13, 10:11
Thanks Flynn for posting the UKIP link. :cool: It proves, of course, that the claim that the Party is a one trick pony is ridiculous! So many policies across a broad political spectrum more like. I hope folks read this and discover for themselves, that first and foremost, UKIP studies the best interests of the British. They're all about handing back democracy to the people and restoring justice and fairness to the very people who have worked hard; sometimes died for and always contributed to Britain. Tick the boxes you agree with and I'm sure you'll come to understand why, in England particularly, UKIP are such a threat to the mainstream parties who have done so much to try and destroy our country; its' history and culture and way of life. It's a healthy sign that the likes of Flynn and his ilk are now turning their Kalashinikovs, (sic) on them. Don't be fooled. Decide for yourselves, after all, it's your children and grandchildren's futures we're debating here.
I won't dwell on Flynn's list, but let's take just one point he highlights. "Repeal," the HRA does not mean 'abolish,' as his comment suggests. That's nonsense. Magna Carta served us well for generations and there's also the opportunity of raising our own Bill of Rights. That just means, we'd be observing democracy and putting our interests first, for a change. Flynn must be dizzy with spinning this morning. :lol: That's my thoughts, anyway.
M Swanson
02-Mar-13, 10:20
Oh! and I won't be entering Godwin's Law into the debate, because I have a point of view to express myself. ;) If you want to find the true "Fascism" in this thread, then you could do worse than look to those posts, in which millions of people would be denied an input on a hot topic, such as Climate Change, because they don't possess the necessary academic qualification to satisfy Mr Anonymous. Or, anything remotely connected to having the right to decide our own Laws, NHS, education, our future, or shape of our democracy is considered "Fascist." It isn't! And don't you believe it. Decide for yourselves who the true Fascists are! I have!
Oh! and I won't be entering Godwin's Law into the debate, because I have a point of view to express myself. ;)
That is strange because every time you mention UKIP then I thought you were...
I nominate this thread as the worst I have seen since I joined this forum. It combines political ignorance and political lies with the notion that the man in the street can have anything worthwhile to say on global warming.Just to reiterate....The man on the street knows nothing about global warming, and his opinions are totally worthless.Have you got it yet?The greatest ignorance is always evident in those who think the "man in the street" knows nothing and is therefore not worth listening to. Time and time again this is proved wrong. Add arrogance to that ignorance and you find someone who's opinions are truly " totally worthless". Not because they dont know anything, often they are very knowledgeable but because they are so busy congratulating themselves on how much cleverer they are than everyone else that no one takes any notice. People just walk away because all the "you are really stupid" stuff is completely off putting and a barrier to passing on any message or knowledge.
secrets in symmetry
02-Mar-13, 14:06
That has to be the most fascist utterance we've had on the Org to date.
While the man in the street pays for the development of anything to counter or cope with global warming - he is entitled to an opinion.Nonsense.
Everything you've ever written about global warming on this forum is ignorant rubbish. You do not have an opinion worth listening to.
The same goes for the vast majority of people.
secrets in symmetry
02-Mar-13, 14:09
The ignorant are all around us: and indeed occasionally ARE us. Think of the BBC Weather Forecasts - always right? For a long while, it was fact that the Sun went round the Earth. All the economists in the world were unable to predict the great Bank Crash of 2008, and none seem to know for sure how the consequences will play out. Every war is a failure of mankind to satisfactorily communicate. Bar-room drunks who give you a hug, claim to be your "besht friend" and then give you a slap are generally wrong in every direction. Politicians do tend to become separated from their constituents. People who think they're God's gift generally aren't. Rich people make prisons out of their own possessions. Poor people can be happy unless told they can't be by better off people. You'd probably be better off on a desert island with a carpenter than a brain surgeon. Life is a daily miracle, whatever or whoever you believe or disbelieve in. You can finish a sentence with a proposition, and nobody will die because of it.
Are we getting the drift, here? All we have is opinions, which we share with those who agree with us, and argue with those who don't.
Unless you drown cats, kill people, or do down your fellow man/woman, you are entitled to an opinion.
Live with it.I've seen fewer straw men at a Wizard of Oz convention!
Seriously, do you really know as little about global warming as is apparently evident from your posts?
M Swanson
02-Mar-13, 14:17
That is strange because every time you mention UKIP then I thought you were...
Ay? Is this an attempt at humour, Rheg? I can never tell with you. :D Very strange!
The greatest ignorance is always evident in those who think the "man in the street" knows nothing and is therefore not worth listening to. Time and time again this is proved wrong. Add arrogance to that ignorance and you find someone who's opinions are truly " totally worthless". Not because they dont know anything, often they are very knowledgeable but because they are so busy congratulating themselves on how much cleverer they are than everyone else that no one takes any notice. People just walk away because all the "you are really stupid" stuff is completely off putting and a barrier to passing on any message or knowledge.
Brilliant and a very fair post, Squidge. The "worthless," would do well to read and heed this post. Repped.
MerlinScot
02-Mar-13, 14:32
UKIP are fascists in disguise. Read their manifesto. Here are their plans for Scotland: http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/LocalManifestoScotsDL.pdf ...
I never had any doubt about it... This anti-European agenda exists in many parties even abroad (look at the election mess in Italy), but what worries me is that many of these parties are actually racists and fascists in disguise.
Like we didn't have enough of this crap in two World Wars.
secrets in symmetry
02-Mar-13, 14:35
I never had any doubt about it... This anti-European agenda exists in many parties even abroad (look at the election mess in Italy), but what worries me is that many of these parties are actually racists and fascists in disguise.
Like we didn't have enough of this crap in two World Wars.Indeed. What's more amazing is that so many people actually vote for them. Then again, you read their posts on global warming, and then you understand why they'll vote for an amoeba if it hates foreigners.
MerlinScot
02-Mar-13, 14:39
Indeed. What's more amazing is that so many people actually vote for them. Then again, you read their posts on global warming, and then you understand why they'll vote for an amoeba if it hates foreigners.I absolutely agree with you. I refrained to comment on the global warming issues for years, it is one of those awful topics that people choose to 'ignore' because they can't take it. And it also is useless to try and discuss with them using logical arguments.
M Swanson
02-Mar-13, 14:54
Indeed. What's more amazing is that so many people actually vote for them. Then again, you read their posts on global warming, and then you understand why they'll vote for an amoeba if it hates foreigners.
LOL. Worra loada rats' nonkers, SiS. Unless you're prepared to substantiate your claims, of course. I know it's not a course you often choose, but it's infinitely more intelligent than stereo-typing, attacking those who don't agree with you and demonising millions of people and their opinions in the process. Fascism? Who has ever written on the Org that they "hate foreigners?" Name and shame them, I say. My, my UKIP's recent success has rattled a few cages, hasn't it? :lol: All very promising, imo! :cool:
Indeed. What's more amazing is that so many people actually vote for them. Then again, you read their posts on global warming, and then you understand why they'll vote for an amoeba if it hates foreigners.
It beggars belief that the same people can get away with calling climate scientists and green environmental campaigners 'fascists' and then spit the dummy out when their own rightwing political icons get the same but appropriate label.
secrets in symmetry
02-Mar-13, 15:11
I absolutely agree with you. I refrained to comment on the global warming issues for years, it is one of those awful topics that people choose to 'ignore' because they can't take it. And it also is useless to try and discuss with them using logical arguments.Yes, it takes a lot of time and effort to understand the science, and just as long to convince yourself that there's no other plausible cause for the global warming seen in the last 50 or 60 years.
It beggars belief that the same people can get away with calling climate scientists and green environmental campaigners 'fascists' and then spit the dummy out when their own rightwing political icons get the same but appropriate label.Yes, lol!
The difference is that climate change is based on solid science, and most people have no idea what that means. Just look at most posts on this forum.
Does it really matter if Global Warming is Natural or Man Made?
If it's going to have a detrimental effect on the planet (from the perspective of man) should we not be trying to do something about it no matter the cause?
secrets in symmetry
02-Mar-13, 16:01
Does it really matter if Global Warming is Natural or Man Made?
If it's going to have a detrimental effect on the planet (from the perspective of man) should we not be trying to do something about it no matter the cause?The cause is absolutely crucial! It it wasn't caused by our CO2 emissions we would be able to do sod all about it - because we wouldn't know what to do!
The cause is absolutely crucial! It it wasn't caused by our CO2 emissions we would be able to do sod all about it - because we wouldn't know what to do!
I agree that it is man made, I'm just saying that it's pointless arguing over the cause, just dismiss those that say otherwise, point out that it is happening & this is what we can do about it.
secrets in symmetry
02-Mar-13, 16:22
I agree that it is man made, I'm just saying that it's pointless arguing over the cause, just dismiss those that say otherwise, point out that it is happening & this is what we can do about it.I'm not arguing about the cause. I know what the cause is, and I'm educating the deniers.
M Swanson
02-Mar-13, 16:27
The cause is absolutely crucial! It it wasn't caused by our CO2emissions we would be able to do sod all about it - because we wouldn't know what to do!
Little, to sod all is the answer SiS. After all isn't a fact that ....... there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth's oceans expel more CO2as a result.
I agree that it is man made, I'm just saying that it's pointless arguing over the cause, just dismiss those that say otherwise, point out that it is happening & this is what we can do about it.
Ah! That's clinched it then. Two anonymous and unproven scientists state it's Man made, so it must be true! :lol: Perhaps you should ask SiS what difference, to date, pumping billions of pounds into this project, worldwide, has made, Al? And whether this money could have been much better spent elsewhere on humanitarian projects. Don't hold ya breath for an answer though. Millions of us, (and yes, that almost definitely involves you Al), aren't worthy of an opinion, or an answer apparently. ;)
M Swanson
02-Mar-13, 16:32
It beggars belief that the same people can get away with calling climate scientists and green environmental campaigners 'fascists' and then spit the dummy out when their own rightwing political icons get the same but appropriate label.
Ooh! Er! Who has called any scientist a "Fascist?" I must have missed that, Rheg. And what "rightwing political icon," has been labelled a "Fascist," on this thread and by whom?
Little, to sod all is the answer SiS. After all isn't a fact that ....... there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth's oceans expel more CO2as a result.
I don't think anyone is claiming that climate change at the end of the Ice age was caused by CO2 from cars and aeroplanes!! LOL
M Swanson
02-Mar-13, 16:37
LOL. Can't argue with that Rheg, but tell me, do you drive a car? Use a computer? Have white goods aplenty? Eat cooked meals? Ever fly on an aircraft and take holidays? Etc. etc. That's you banged to rights if you do! I know we're only talking about Britain contributing 2% of CO2, but you have responsibilities. :lol: Will you be going green, anytime soon? LOL Anyway, pleased you can't dispute the facts. :cool:
secrets in symmetry
02-Mar-13, 16:52
I don't think anyone is claiming that climate change at the end of the Ice age was caused by CO2 from cars and aeroplanes!! LOLIndeed. There's nothing more pathetic than the know-nothing posting crap from a website that posts little but lies.
One gets bored of refuting the same old nonsense year after year. What amazes me is that the know-nothings think they're posting something we haven't seen a million times before.
Nonsense.
Everything you've ever written about global warming on this forum is ignorant rubbish.
I haven’t written anything about global warming in this thread. All I’ve stated is that this country’s contributing to climate change is infinitesimal compared to that of a few of the world’s industrial giants.
You do not have an opinion worth listening to.
That’s only your opinion
The same goes for the vast majority of people.
That is arrogance personified.
I take it then you’re an authority on the subject, well good for you!
I don’t dispute there is climate change, I don’t dispute that something has to be done about it. If you read my posts you would quickly identify the main thrust of my argument is that most ordinary people can’t afford the ‘green’ surcharge on their energy bills never mind the current 5% VAT.
Your attitude epitomises the current green agenda, you don’t want to discuss how to fund it because it is easier to take it from the people who can least afford it.
M Swanson
02-Mar-13, 16:58
:lol: That's about right. Can't refute the facts as given, so rather than admit that, let's round on the poster and real scientist who stated the fact. How very desperate you are today, SiS. And chronically "bored," of course, by your own admission. LOL
M Swanson
02-Mar-13, 17:06
Here's yet another interesting myth-buster, for those with an open mind on the subject. Whatever any of you think, it's as valid as anyone elses opinion, so decide for yourself.
The UN proved that man–made CO2 causes global warming.FACT: In a 1996 report by the UN on global warming, two statements were deleted from the final draft. Here they are:
1) “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”
2) “No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to man–made causes”
To the present day there is still no scientific proof that man-made CO2 causes significant global warming.
secrets in symmetry
02-Mar-13, 17:43
I haven’t written anything about global warming in this thread. All I’ve stated is that this country’s contributing to climate change is infinitesimal compared to that of a few of the world’s industrial giants.
That’s only your opinion
That is arrogance personified.
I take it then you’re an authority on the subject, well good for you!
I don’t dispute there is climate change, I don’t dispute that something has to be done about it. If you read my posts you would quickly identify the main thrust of my argument is that most ordinary people can’t afford the ‘green’ surcharge on their energy bills never mind the current 5% VAT.
Your attitude epitomises the current green agenda, you don’t want to discuss how to fund it because it is easier to take it from the people who can least afford it.Your posts are incoherent, inconsistent and often wrong. You don't understand the issues so you lash out at anything you can. I doubt you know the difference between facts and opinions on climate change, and your last statement is a downright lie, which I suppose typifies the likes of you.
LOL. Can't argue with that Rheg, but tell me, do you drive a car? Use a computer? Have white goods aplenty? Eat cooked meals? Ever fly on an aircraft and take holidays? Etc. etc. That's you banged to rights if you do! I know we're only talking about Britain contributing 2% of CO2, but you have responsibilities. :lol: Will you be going green, anytime soon? LOL Anyway, pleased you can't dispute the facts. :cool:
I wasn't pointing any fingers of blame. If I thought for one second that going green had anything to do with living in a cave then I'd be against it and I doubt there would be much political support for it.
But i do know that if, You personally, don't think that manmade CO2 emissions had anything to do with climate change then how the heck do I expect, You personally, to do anything about it? That is why you need to go green without any effort on your part or without any knowledge. And that means that Government needs to act now.
IOne gets bored of refuting the same old nonsense year after year. What amazes me is that the know-nothings think they're posting something we haven't seen a million times before.
Yep, I do not believe for a second that the know-nothings actually know nothing. It takes skill of the utmost to seek out new information that spreads doubt in the clever way that they do in the face of overwhelming evidence.
Mystical Potato Head
02-Mar-13, 19:25
Yep, I do not believe for a second that the know-nothings actually know nothing. It takes skill of the utmost to seek out new information that spreads doubt in the clever way that they do in the face of overwhelming evidence.
Dont worry,i'm sure none of the know nothings believe for a second that the know it alls actually know it all.
Dont worry,i'm sure none of the know nothings believe for a second that the know it alls actually know it all.
Just like I think the know nothings do not know nothing, I also know that the know it alls do not actually know it all. But the unreasonable do not listen to reason, so I'm sure the reasonable have no reason to believe the reasons why the know nothings know nothing.
secrets in symmetry
03-Mar-13, 01:09
Yep, I do not believe for a second that the know-nothings actually know nothing. It takes skill of the utmost to seek out new information that spreads doubt in the clever way that they do in the face of overwhelming evidence.You overestimate them Rheghead. They know nothing and they're stupid.
It's not their fault they're stupid. Their problem is that they don't know they know nothing, and they don't know they're stupid. That's just stupid!
I won't dwell on Flynn's list, but let's take just one point he highlights. "Repeal," the HRA does not mean 'abolish,' as his comment suggests. That's nonsense. Magna Carta served us well for generations and there's also the opportunity of raising our own Bill of Rights.
Yes magna carta served well, it allowed us to send children down mines and up chimneys, to make people work 364 days a year for 3d a week. UKIP hark back to that. And their budget doesn't add up. Apparently EVERYTHING they promise will be paid for by money saved from not being in the EU. ALL their policies are based on racism, on the fear of 'johnny foreigner'.
UKIP are just a middle-class BNP.
M Swanson
03-Mar-13, 14:17
You overestimate them Rheghead. They know nothing and they're stupid.
It's not their fault they're stupid. Their problem is that they don't know they know nothing, and they don't know they're stupid. That's just stupid!
Is this really it, SiS? How sad and more than a tad disappointing.
Does it really matter if Global Warming is Natural or Man Made?
If it's going to have a detrimental effect on the planet (from the perspective of man) should we not be trying to do something about it no matter the cause?
Agreed...but doing something about it should start from the cause of it, not the result of it....and the cause is our lifestyles...and the result is carbon producing power stations and industries etc. If we won't cut back on our perceived entitlement to have it all and hell-mend those who come after us, then we could cover the whole UK with windmills...and make not an iota of a real difference to the progress of global warming....but then we aren't going to be around to reap the consequences of our running cars and 4x4s,hopping on planes to go on holiday, heating our houses so we can sit around in T-shirts, keeping our tellies, computers etc on standby, buying out of season foods which have an enormous carbon cost re import etc, etc.....we are handing the problems we have made, because we want to live as we feel entitled to live, over to our children and grandchildren.
The cause, if you look at it logically, has to be our lifestyles..because before we invented the Industrial Revolution, and proceeded to come up with all sorts of ways to use the coal, oil and gas we found, which made shifting goods all over the world easy...nature, left to itself, coped adequately with the occasional abberations which occured naturally. But if global Warming is a fact..nature cannot cope with the crap we are throwing into the atmosphere...so the obvious thing to do is stop throwing crap into the atmosphere...which would mean us drastically reducing our own carbon output.
Fat chance in our selfish society.
Agreed...but doing something about it should start from the cause of it, not the result of it....and the cause is our lifestyles...and the result is carbon producing power stations and industries etc. If we won't cut back on our perceived entitlement to have it all and hell-mend those who come after us, then we could cover the whole UK with windmills...and make not an iota of a real difference to the progress of global warming....but then we aren't going to be around to reap the consequences of our running cars and 4x4s,hopping on planes to go on holiday, heating our houses so we can sit around in T-shirts, keeping our tellies, computers etc on standby, buying out of season foods which have an enormous carbon cost re import etc, etc.....we are handing the problems we have made, because we want to live as we feel entitled to live, over to our children and grandchildren.
The cause, if you look at it logically, has to be our lifestyles..because before we invented the Industrial Revolution, and proceeded to come up with all sorts of ways to use the coal, oil and gas we found, which made shifting goods all over the world easy...nature, left to itself, coped adequately with the occasional abberations which occured naturally. But if global Warming is a fact..nature cannot cope with the crap we are throwing into the atmosphere...so the obvious thing to do is stop throwing crap into the atmosphere...which would mean us drastically reducing our own carbon output.
Fat chance in our selfish society.
The elephant in the room, the root cause, is too many people. The planet cannot sustain the human population as it currently stands, so somehow the population has to be reduced. But there are no easy answers to that.
M Swanson
18-Mar-13, 09:30
So, let's bring this nearer to home Flynn and bring it back to the thread topic. We are not able, in Britain to feed ourselves and there's always the problem of providing the sustainable power sources we need, for the future. And yet, you and your ilk, can see no problem in continuing with the policy of open borders and inviting millions more to come here. Do you have a finite number in mind? Any rough idea? Or, perhaps you believe the discussion should not be allowed to even take place? Let's just sweep UKIP under the carpet, huh Flynn and any old, tired, excuse will do?
The elephant in the room, the root cause, is too many people. The planet cannot sustain the human population as it currently stands, so somehow the population has to be reduced. But there are no easy answers to that.
Don't really think that, tbh....the problem is too many people in the western "civilised" world have, for centuries, been rubbing the noses of those in the "less civilised" countries in our superiority and our right to take what they have....and now they want some of what we have taken over the years at their expense..and that seems to me to be only fair. Maybe if we shared the world's food fairly, there would be less obesity in the West..or at least in the UK and USA...or is that too logical?
I get much more hacked off at the immigration of EU citizens, as soon as the floodgates are opened, who could be staying at home working at making their own countries rich rather than coming here and helping to make themselves rich(ish), even if only by selling The Big Issue, (which seems now to have become no longer a laudable method of trying to help the disadvantaged pull themselves out of the gutter, but a franchise on the same lines as Starbucks or MacDonalds) than I do at the illegals/asylum seekers....because a lot of the time we have deliberately produced the refugees/asylum seekers, either by invading and trashing their world..or by supporting dictators who then proceed to trash their world with our blessing..and often our help.
I agree the planet can't sustain the human population as it currently stands, particularly as we in the west are using up most of the resources which could, if we weren't so sodding greedy, go some way to feeding the starving elsewhere.....and just maybe stop them coming here. So all Western citizens who say, with a straight face, regardless of their political mindset, that "we can't sustain the current human population" really mean that we can't sustain the current human population and still let me, personally...have all to which I think I am entitled!.
We could feed ourselves in the UK (saves me answering the post following this one) if we cut back drastically on eating meat...and it seems to me that the rationing of WWII was a good way of ensuring a very basic food supply adequate enough to sustain health but not so OTT as to produce obesity....but hey...we are entitled to live the lifestyle we want...the great god Thatcher said it...so we are not prepared to cut back our consumption of anything we can buy so that others can get access to enough to eat to sustain life.
There are easy answers.....but nobody in Government asks the easy questions to get them...or will ever take the necessary steps to implement them..because Governments need problems to sort in order to justify their existence, their salaries, their expenses, and their taxpayer paid jaunts overseas clutching their red-hot passports...and if they don't have problems, they will invent them, as they did to justify the invasion of Iraq and will, in the fullness of time, use to justify the invasion /bombing of Iran.
Supporting UKIP because you dislike Labour, LibDem, or Tory, is like voluntarily drinking urine because you don't like Fanta, Coke, or Pepsi.
macadamia
21-Mar-13, 10:11
I think you'll find O Mighty Flynn, that most quacks would on balance say that drinking urine was healthier than guzzling all fizzy soft drinks......
Aye, if it's your own urine.
macadamia
21-Mar-13, 16:07
Ah, c'mon, you're taking the........
M Swanson
21-Mar-13, 18:54
LOL. Don't you mean he's full of ................ :D
M Swanson
21-Mar-13, 20:17
And yet, you and your ilk, can see no problem in continuing with the policy of open borders and inviting millions more to come here. Do you have a finite number in mind? Any rough idea? Or, perhaps you believe the discussion should not be allowed to even take place? Let's just sweep UKIP under the carpet, huh Flynn and any old, tired, excuse will do?
Perhaps you overlooked this one, Flynn? I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one who is interested in answers to these questions. I know Labour and Miliband now own to having made mistakes regarding the immigration policy they set in place, but what say you?
One key UKIP policy in the last Election was to demand the return of those patriotic songs on BBC Radio 4 at 5.30am, I used to look forward to hearing them.
Supporting UKIP because you dislike Labour, LibDem, or Tory, is like voluntarily drinking urine because you don't like Fanta, Coke, or Pepsi.
If that was directed at me..I don't support UKIP....I have never ever supported any Unionist Party....but I admit I'm not keen on the EU. I think EFTA is the way to go...but I will accept the decision of the Scottish population. I may spend some time banging my head off the nearest immovable object after the result...but I will accept it.
Perhaps you overlooked this one, Flynn? I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one who is interested in answers to these questions. I know Labour and Miliband now own to having made mistakes regarding the immigration policy they set in place, but what say you?
Ach...if we vote for Independence what does it matter to those outside Scotland how we end up..bar it is useful as yet another stick with which to beat us up beforehand in the scaremongering and talking crap stakes? Can those who have spent much of their existence agreeing with the "Scotland is subsidised by only English taxpayers" as if we, Wales and NI provide nothing to the pot, explain to me why you want to keep us? Really (except for the Trident base)?
You can't really be so stupid as to assume that the vision of an Independent Scotland provided by the SNP is what is definitely going to happen....can you? For example.....I have never voted anything but SNP since I became old enough to vote in the late 1960s,....but the sodding windmill proliferation and the staying in the EU idea, means I, for one, will be looking elsewhere to place my vote in an independent Scotland..and I'll bet I'm not alone..maybe not for the same reasons, though. The SNP are where they are because UK politicians subsidise and legislate for London and the South and ignore everywhere else..and they assumed we were all too thick to notice. We are lucky enough to have the Independence option, the North of England regions don't have that option....but just maybe, if we succeed, it might just make the Westminster arseholes realise that England and London is not the whole of the universe and have a go at fairness and equity throughout the rUK as they have never done to date in the UK.
We don't know before 2016 and we elect a Government, what anything will be like...but the SNP can do possibilites....and all interested political parties registered in Scotland can do the same (which will currently strike out Conservatives, Labour and the Lib-Dems as political parties....and are we overly worried?) Care to tell us all what life in the UK is going to be like if we vote"No"? Can you tell me what life in the UK is going to be next week, next month or next year given the U-turn propensity? No? Well then!
M Swanson
21-Mar-13, 23:57
Ach...if we vote for Independence what does it matter to those outside Scotland how we end up..bar it is useful as yet another stick with which to beat us up beforehand in the scaremongering and talking crap stakes? Can those who have spent much of their existence agreeing with the "Scotland is subsidised by only English taxpayers" as if we, Wales and NI provide nothing to the pot, explain to me why you want to keep us? Really (except for the Trident base)?
You can't really be so stupid as to assume that the vision of an Independent Scotland provided by the SNP is what is definitely going to happen....can you? For example.....I have never voted anything but SNP since I became old enough to vote in the late 1960s,....but the sodding windmill proliferation and the staying in the EU idea, means I, for one, will be looking elsewhere to place my vote in an independent Scotland..and I'll bet I'm not alone..maybe not for the same reasons, though. The SNP are where they are because UK politicians subsidise and legislate for London and the South and ignore everywhere else..and they assumed we were all too thick to notice. We are lucky enough to have the Independence option, the North of England regions don't have that option....but just maybe, if we succeed, it might just make the Westminster arseholes realise that England and London is not the whole of the universe and have a go at fairness and equity throughout the rUK as they have never done to date in the UK.
We don't know before 2016 and we elect a Government, what anything will be like...but the SNP can do possibilites....and all interested political parties registered in Scotland can do the same (which will currently strike out Conservatives, Labour and the Lib-Dems as political parties....and are we overly worried?) Care to tell us all what life in the UK is going to be like if we vote"No"? Can you tell me what life in the UK is going to be next week, next month or next year given the U-turn propensity? No? Well then!
Ay? LOL. I don't know who you think you're answering with this rant OQ, but it certainly has absolutely nothing to do with my quote, or question I posed. You've either mixed up the writer, or the thread, or you're living in a parallel universe. Or, maybe all three apply. You'll just have to find another donkey to stick this particular tail on. Unless you'd like to try again and answer some of the questions on IMMIGRATION I asked Flynn, perhaps? See post 69 :confused
because UK politicians subsidise and legislate for London and the South and ignore everywhere else..and they assumed we were all too thick to noticeOne issue for Scotland & the SNP is exactly this, except the geography is different. The central belt is getting the focus, to my mind Edinburgh and it's suburbia more so.
This is visible already, especially when you see what is happening to service in rural areas.
Scotland will get the same but different from politicians, independent or otherwise!
or you're living in a parallel universe.Don't knock parallel universes, they are truly fantastic places!
answer some of the questions on IMMIGRATION I asked FlynnWhy so much concern with IMMIGRATION? We are a migrant nation, a tad xenophobic are we?
M Swanson
22-Mar-13, 12:17
Don't knock parallel universes, they are truly fantastic places!
Why so much concern with IMMIGRATION? We are a migrant nation, a tad xenophobic are we?
"Knock parallel universes?" I didn't! I have no knowledge of them .... I've always been happy to live in this one. :D
"a tad xenophobic, are we?" Well, only you and yours ("we") can answer that one, Phill. ;) But yes, like so many other Britons I am greatly "concerned," with the numbers; strain on the NHS and collapsing infrastructure, caused by an unsustainable IMMIGRATION policy. Any chance you could answer the questions in #69? Go on Phill, be the first! :lol:
What is the actual question? A cap on immigration, a fixed number on those 'allowed' in? That seems to be your issue.
M Swanson
22-Mar-13, 20:42
And yet, you and your ilk, can see no problem in continuing with the policy of open borders and inviting millions more to come here. Do you have a finite number in mind? Any rough idea? Or, perhaps you believe the discussion should not be allowed to even take place? Let's just sweep UKIP under the carpet, huh Flynn and any old, tired, excuse will do?
There you go, Phill. These are the questions I've requested answers to, without any response.
[QUOTE=Phill;1015871]What is the actual question? A cap on immigration, a fixed number on those 'allowed' in? That seems to be your issue.[/QUOTE
All of these questions have been put to so many leading politicians that I've lost count; beginning with Blagger Blair and ending with Cameron. They're very clearly stated, yet not one has answered them directly, either by the politico's or any Org member, to my knowledge. Fingers crossed. :D
I'm still trying to work out exactly what the question is, as in 'clearly stated' rather than just a bit of a rambly. But I'll give it my best shot:
"And yet, you and your ilk" ......Dunno what your referencing here! :confused
"no problem in continuing with the policy of open borders" I'm happy with the relatively open borders we have, they are far from perfect and there are 'holes' but in the grand scheme of things they are pretty good.
I would add that in some sort of Utopian system with a cash limitless budget, it may be better to stop each and every single individual, interview them and if suspected they intended to harm the UK in anyway we could fire them off back to where they came from. But then we'd get the same in return whenever we went on holiday.
"Do you have a finite number in mind?" No, 'open' pretty much covers that. It's dynamic and as economics & society changes so do the migrant movements as we've seen over the centuries.
"Or, perhaps you believe the discussion should not be allowed to even take place?" I absolutely believe we should have a discussion. Based on facts though, not perceptions (lies) peddled by the likes of the Daily Mail, UKIP & BNP.
Does that answer any of your questions?
M Swanson
24-Mar-13, 14:29
Yes, thank you for the response Phill.
By "Flynn's ilk," I was referring to his extreme leftwing comrades.
So, you're "happy with the relatively open borders we have," and approve the "pretty good holes." Does this include the ease of illegal immigrants to gain access to Britain? Numbers vary from 600,000 to over a million, (as stated by David Blunkett). Do you think we should be concerned about how these criminals survive, that is, food, drink, shelter, healthcare, etc? If they're working illegally, I wonder how many jobs are lost to our existing 2.8 million unemployed?
Do you also believe that opening our doors to Bulgarian and Rumanian nationals, is of benefit to Britain? I mean, it's known that 68,000 Romanians already live in the UK of which the Metropolitan Police made a staggering 27,000 arrests in the last five years. Nobody has dared give an estimate of how many more will be headed here, but if we use the Polish figure then we could be looking at something in excess of 600,000. Are you happy with this, Phill and how many do you think should be settled in Wick?
Armed gatekeepers watching every stretch of beach, port and airport. Fortress Britain anyone?
By "Flynn's ilk," I was referring to his extreme leftwing comrades.You obviously know him, I don't so I can't really comment on his 'comrades'.
So, you're "happy with the relatively open borders we have," and approve the "pretty good holes." Does this include the ease of illegal immigrants to gain access to Britain? Numbers vary from 600,000 to over a million, (as stated by David Blunkett). Do you think we should be concerned about how these criminals survive, that is, food, drink, shelter, healthcare, etc? If they're working illegally, I wonder how many jobs are lost to our existing 2.8 million unemployed?
Now your twisting my words, I never said 'pretty good holes', you're not a Daily Wail Journo are you Ms Swanson?
The borders we have work both ways, freedom of movement is a good thing, but yes it does get abused, as it does in many countries.
I don't approve 'the holes' but understanding how the systems work I know the damage that 'Fortress Britain' would do. (courtesy of Rheggers)
Yes we should be concerned about illegal immigrants and we should do all we can to help the authorities route them out, in all our interests to do so. And to ensure we are not unwittingly colluding with them by utilising 'cheap' labour.
Drifting the thread slightly: the jobs lost to 'our' unemployed due to illegal immigrants would be difficult to quantify. The use of illegal immigrants and the black market they work in, including the trafficking of people for some of the more salubrious 'employments' falls outside the scope of the ONS and generally the taxman.
Do you also believe that opening our doors to Bulgarian and Rumanian nationals, is of benefit to Britain? I mean, it's known that 68,000 Romanians already live in the UK of which the Metropolitan Police made a staggering 27,000 arrests in the last five years. Nobody has dared give an estimate of how many more will be headed here, but if we use the Polish figure then we could be looking at something in excess of 600,000. Are you happy with this, Phill and how many do you think should be settled in Wick?Now we are just bandying figures about, have you any linkies and basis for these figures and what they mean, or are they just headline figures? According to Faragemania I'll have 3 families of Romanian's squatting in my bathroom unless I vote for him and 'his ilk'!
I remember the influx of Polish, crikey they are good workers. And I watched many of them go when the work dried up, one of the issues with our border controls is we don't know who's gone and where they've gone.
How many Chinese live in the UK? How many Pakistani's? How many Indian's? And frankly, what difference?
And as for where we 'settle' people I don't know! Is it a current ConLib manifesto policy to specify immigrants places of abode or is it a UKIP pledge, closely followed by the gas chambers no doubt.
You seem quite concerned with a small number of races, I never got a straight answer on your xenophobia so can we assume your just racist?
M Swanson
25-Mar-13, 00:08
Thanks for replying Phill, but if you don't mind I'll jump over most of the usual "racist," mantra many of us have grown tired of, if you please. Pity, really, because I thought you were serious when you championed "discussion," on the topic and thought it may be possible without childish name-calling and inappropriate responses to anything I have ever thought, or posted. Alas not! :roll:
Anyway, you asked for a link and this is just one of many to be found if you took the time to Google. There's plenty more where that one came from. I do hope folks will read this article, because no matter what the yea-sayers would dupe anyone into believing, this is a very serious topic that requires our attention. None of us are immune from the consequences of policies adopted by the few, without any input from the many.
It's interesting however, that you mention "the issues of our border controls is we don't know who's gone and where they've gone." It's pretty unbelievable that in an island nation like ours, it's not known who has arrived here; their nationality and who they are AND it's not known either, how many have left; who they are and where they've moved to. Surely, Britons have a right to answers.
How Romanian criminals terrorise our streets | UK | News | Daily Express
P (http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/380512/How-Romanian-criminals-terrorise-our-streets)erhaps you could "linky" us to Mr Farage's declaration that Phill of Wick will be accommodating three families in his bathroom, if he doesn't vote for him! :lol:
Thanks for replying Phill, but if you don't mind I'll jump over most of the usual "racist," mantra many of us have grown tired of, if you please.
Oh dear!
Alan Sked the founding member of UKIP doesn't do NUKIP does he?
Here are some of his comments.
"extraordinarily right-wing"
""Its extraordinary that at the last general election, with the country facing the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, [Ukip's] flagship policy was to ban the burqa."
"They're not an intellectually serious party. Their views on immigrants and on [banning] the burqa are morally dodgy."
Asked if Ukip is a xenophobic party, he replied: "It seems to be anti-Islam and anti-immigrant. If that adds up to xenophobic, then yes."
M Swanson
25-Mar-13, 00:34
Ah! Cherry-picking a-g-a-i-n, Rheg! I know many people who vote, Lib, Lab, Cons, but not I confess communist and there are some who are also, "anti-Islam, anti-immigrant and yes, xenophobic. This doesn't make UKIP any different than any other party. There is always a minority when dealing with major issues, surely.
Anyway, I think Sked's rant is more to do with sour grapes. Read this excerpt folks which will highlight the importants points Rheg seemed fit to skate over.
Sked was careful not to label all Ukip voters or members as xenophobes or Islamophobes: "There are thousands of broad-minded people in the country who want to get out of the European Union and [Ukip] seems to the only party they can vote for."
A Ukip spokesman rejected Professor Sked's claims and told the HuffPost UK: "We have no views on 'immigrants'. We have views on mass immigration but not on immigrants themselves. Alan is a decent chap and an academic but has had nothing to do with UKIP for 15 years. He knows not of what he speaks and retains a long-term bitterness towards the party."
Thanks for replying Phill, but if you don't mind I'll jump over most of the usual "racist," mantra many of us have grown tired of, if you please. Pity, really, because I thought you were serious when you championed "discussion," on the topic and thought it may be possible without childish name-calling and inappropriate responses to anything I have ever thought, or posted. Alas not!Not a mantra from me, just an observation. I wasn't doing any childish name-calling.
Anyway, you asked for a link and this is just one of many to be found if you took the time to Google. There's plenty more where that one came from. I do hope folks will read this article, because no matter what the yea-sayers would dupe anyone into believing, this is a very serious topic that requires our attention. None of us are immune from the consequences of policies adopted by the few, without any input from the many.
Perhaps you could "linky" us to Mr Farage's declaration that Phill of Wick will be accommodating three families in his bathroom, if he doesn't vote for him!
You, as I, know well we can just trawl Google et al for random linkies, as I could now link to the claim of my bathroom shenanigans as it is now on the interweb. I may be a pedant but your link is to an Express 'story'. Not really something that anyone could turn too as a basis of fact nor filled with verifiable meaningful statistics. The arrest figure does not take into account repeat offenders. Out of 1.4million arrests how does the 27k tally against other races? I would gamble that those who classify themselves as 'white British' account for the majority of arrests.
It's interesting however, that you mention "the issues of our border controls is we don't know who's gone and where they've gone." It's pretty unbelievable that in an island nation like ours, it's not known who has arrived here; their nationality and who they are AND it's not known either, how many have left; who they are and where they've moved to. Surely, Britons have a right to answers.I can't agree more, the staffing available now for border & customs control is woeful, succesive governments of both colours have seen to that. We know who's arrived (formally / legally) but not departed. But again your twisting my words.
I am more than happy to discuss this, and other topics. But when you keep twisting my words it's not really a discussion is it!
(http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/380512/How-Romanian-criminals-terrorise-our-streets)
Ah! Cherry-picking a-g-a-i-n, Rheg!
I wasn't cherry picking and neither was Sked, he was describing the party as a whole, as far as individuals are concerned then he wasn't prepared to label individuals as racist. That isn't cherry picking, it is the complete opposite.
UKIP was formed in 1992 after tories signed Maastricht, at that time Nigel Farage was a member of the tories yet there was the Referendum Party who campaigned for a referendum on EU membership. This just shows that Farage is not principled but is an opportunist for his own self promotion.
For a party that thrives on anti-EU sentiment a remarkable number of them enjoy sucking on the highly profitable EU teat.
Do you also believe that opening our doors to Bulgarian and Rumanian nationals, is of benefit to Britain?
According to Government statistics, UK nationals were 2.5 times more likely to claim DWP working age benefits than non-UK nationals. It would seem that it would make sense for us to kick out our own folks and import foreigners to cut national debt!
With all the benefit to the UK economy that foreign workers bring, our public purse we would be in a worst state without them.
http://fullfact.org/factchecks/immigration_and_benefits-28846
I can't help it but I keep coming to the conclusion that the reason why UKIP is having a surge in the polls is because we keep pandering to the myths on immigration rather than tackling them head-on. We should expose the lies that the rightwing media keep spreading, this Government won't do it because it traditionally relies on the misinformation that it peddles to the lower classes. Trouble is, the DM and Torygraph etc have gone a step too far and not even the Tories are seen to be xenophobic enough to repell the lazy foreigners who are gonna bankrupt us and marry our daughters.
I feel like I do actually live in a parallel universe sometimes, listening to some of the crap spewing from the pages of the media, reading some of the headlines.
Even the broadcast media just peddles lies and inaccuracies, I don't know how much is plain incompetence or do we live in a world of propaganda.
I am gobsmacked so many people believe the drivel.
UKIP is a protest vote and nothing more. Farage is good entertainment but is an empty vessel. The reality is we have no other options to vote for, blue tory or red tory and the former yellow tories. UKIP is filling a void just now.
One issue for Scotland,the SNP is exactly this, except the geography is different. The central belt is getting the focus, to my mind Edinburgh and it's suburbia more so.
This is visible already, especially when you see what is happening to service in rural areas.
Scotland will get the same but different from politicians, independent or otherwise!
So you can't deny that UK politicians subsidise and legislate for London and the South and pretty much
ignore everywhere else..and they assumed we were all too thick to notice........because if you could, I'm very sure you would have. Are you basing the Edinburgh and it's suburbia more so on the tram debacle? That, actually was passed against the SNP and passed by the Union oriented majority.
What happens now, and on what you appear to be basing your opinion, does not dictate what will necessarily happen in the future.....because all the Scottish opposition in an independent Scotland won't be continually trashing anything the SNP Government of Scotland tries to get through to suit their UK dictated agenda (which is currently that the SNP are bad people wanting to break up the Union and must be opposed in anything which won't make the Union parties look bad.....with opposition MSPs bearing in mind that Independence would kill their hopes for a lucrative UK political future) but will, I hope, actually encourage them to do what they are elected to do.....which is work for their constituents and their country. Can't say I've noticed a majority of Edinburgh voters demanding the tram system...any more than I ever noticed a majority of UK punters demanding a war on Iraq.......but I may very well have missed something.
Oh dear! I was actually agreeing with what you said.
I was also pointing out that the same is, and will happen in Scotland by the politico's of whatever flavour / colour. They will subsidise and legislate towards the powerbase, that is where the votes are.
In The UK, the MP's don't give a toss what happens outside London / South East. It is where the money & votes are. In Scotland the central belt is where the money & votes are.
I feel like I do actually live in a parallel universe sometimes, listening to some of the crap spewing from the pages of the media, reading some of the headlines.
Even the broadcast media just peddles lies and inaccuracies, I don't know how much is plain incompetence or do we live in a world of propaganda.
I am gobsmacked so many people believe the drivel.
UKIP is a protest vote and nothing more. Farage is good entertainment but is an empty vessel. The reality is we have no other options to vote for, blue tory or red tory and the former yellow tories. UKIP is filling a void just now.
Bear in mind that that the "protest vote" epithet was the UK opinion of the SNP a few decades ago (and appears to be little different today)........just a protest vote by anti-English racists..and look where we are now.
I don't really have a problem with controlling immigration (though it would be more sensible to be able to punt them out of the South/Midlands of England into areas with a wee bit of space) ...but I'm blowed if I can work out how we control what what we can't control.....as in immigration from the EU. That fact alone would dictate that any immigration limits would be solely directed at those from predominantly non-white countries...which does make it appear a racist proposition. But then, left to myself, I'd not be in the EU and wouldn't have the problem of limiting immigration annually to what we decide we can hack minus what we have to take because we have no choice.
Not that long ago, in my home area, housing officers used to say "if you aren't pregnant or Polish, you have no chance of a house"!
I see we are (probably expensively) U-turning again re border controls....now there's a surprise..a non-labour government changing what a nulabour government did. Easier to tear something up and start again than fund and people them to do their job properly. I don't suppose we will ever be told the cost difference between the two options, though.
Oh dear! I was actually agreeing with what you said.
I was also pointing out that the same is, and will happen in Scotland by the politico's of whatever flavour / colour. They will subsidise and legislate towards the powerbase, that is where the votes are.
In The UK, the MP's don't give a toss what happens outside London / South East. It is where the money & votes are. In Scotland the central belt is where the money & votes are.
Ah.......but much easier for a significant proportion of the Scottish punters to congregate en masse in Edinburgh to protest a Government's utter crap than it has ever been in the UK. Even a million UK punters didn't encourage Bliar homewards to think again. A million Scottish punters in Edinburgh congregating in front of Holyrood would work like a club with nails in it aimed at every Parliamentarian head! :lol:
One issue for Scotland,the SNP is exactly this, except the geography is different. The central belt is getting the focus, to my mind Edinburgh and it's suburbia more so.
This is visible already, especially when you see what is happening to service in rural areas.
Scotland will get the same but different from politicians, independent or otherwise!
So you can't deny that UK politicians subsidise and legislate for London and the South and pretty much
ignore everywhere else..and they assumed we were all too thick to notice........because if you could, I'm very sure you would have. Are you basing the Edinburgh and it's suburbia more so on the tram debacle? That, actually was passed against the SNP and passed by the Union oriented majority.
What happens now, and on what you appear to be basing your opinion, does not dictate what will necessarily happen in the future.....because all the Scottish opposition in an independent Scotland won't be continually trashing anything the SNP Government of Scotland tries to get through to suit their UK dictated agenda (which is currently that the SNP are bad people wanting to break up the Union and must be opposed in anything which won't make the Union parties look bad.....with opposition MSPs bearing in mind that Independence would kill their hopes for a lucrative UK political future) but will, I hope, actually encourage them to do what they are elected to do.....which is work for their constituents and their country. Can't say I've noticed a majority of Edinburgh voters demanding the tram system...any more than I ever noticed a majority of UK punters demanding a war on Iraq.......but I may very well have missed something.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.