Woolwich serious incident

Hmm well it's more of a forum thing I guess, though some news sites have used polls as a general populace ref before. I'd just like to see for myself at least, what people are or would be voting for on this forum.

More than likely conserv would be top, but who knows :)
Judging by the average gender, socio-economic class & age groups of the posters in this forum I'd guess (may be totally wrong).

50% Con
10% UKIP
15% Labour
15% Lib-Dem
10% Other (Greens/BNP/don't vote out of reasons other than laziness)
 
We don't have an open border policy.

We certainly do for EU citizens. Even for non-EU citizens it's laughably easy - intra-company transfers designed to lower wages for UK citizens. Stay here for 5 years and become a British citizen yourself.

This doesn't happen, nowhere do we have a mandatory "you must promote different cultures" rule.

Nevertheless it happens, see how the recommendations of town planners are ignored when planning permission for a Mosque is submitted. See how councils have to provide sites for travellers and tolerate illegal sites.

Fly the Union Jack or Cross of St. George and you're a racist.

Neither does this.

That is exactly why the police took so long to investigate allegations of Muslim paedophile gangs targeting vulnerable girls.
 
Ironic really, as the last two posts you made contributed nothing to either the story or the debate which came from it.

Keep 'contributing'.

If you want news updates then how about...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
http://news.sky.com/
http://www.itv.com/news/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/

Just saying...

Personally I've found this thread pretty illuminating, as I now understand why I disagree with certain posters on so many different issues.

It seems they are idiots (who would have guessed).

LoL I asked a reasonable question, has it turned into the usual mud slinging or is it worth checking for updates on the incident.

There is no debate on who is 'contributing' why is that an issue? The back and forth of "You're a lefty, no you're a racist" is tedious but you seem to like that side of it so keep 'contributing'

I'm glad you have learned something about the OcUK community, at least you have that to take from all this excellent debate.
 
No, they're labelled as racist because they're racist.

I know nothing about UKIP or their policies but I do find it quite odd and hypocritical that you continue to label them as racist without, from what I can see, providing any justification for doing so. Care to elaborate as to why you are all over this thread calling them racist? Genuinely interested.
 
I know nothing about UKIP or their policies but I do find it quite odd and hypocritical that you continue to label them as racist without, from what I can see, providing any justification for doing so. Care to elaborate as to why you are all over this thread calling them racist? Genuinely interested.

For the same reason the liblabcon do, fear!
 
For all the idiots, morons and general racists who are claiming UKIP aren't racist here is some evidence:

Links with European far-right parties

UKIP are part of the EFD group (Europe of Freedom and Democracy)
Included in this group are the Danish People's Party, the True Finns Party, the Dutch SGP and the Italian Lega Nord. All of these groups are far-right and have been accused of racism.
Nigel Farage is co-President of the EFD along with Francesco Speroni from Lega Nord who described multiple murderer Anders Breivik as someone whose:
“ideas are in defence of western civilisation."

Another member of the EFD (Mario Borghezio) declared in a radio interview that Anders Breivik had some:
"excellent" ideas"
Nigel Farage's reaction was to write a letter to him asking him to withdraw the comments or UKIP would pull out of the EFD.
Mario Borghezio did NOT apologise but instead responded with an extraordinary speech in which he raged:
"Long live the Whites of Europe, long live our identity, our ethnicity, our race… our blue sky, like the eyes of our women. Blue, in a people who want to stay white."
Nigel Farage did NOT withdraw from the EFD, he continues to co-preside along with the leader of the Lega Nord.
He did however expel MEP Nikki Sinclaire from UKIP as she refused to take part in the EFD because of their “extreme views”.


Links with domestic far-right parties

Ukip has no links to the BNP,” explained Farage in 2007. The first line of any description of Ukip calls it “a libertarian, non-racist party”. What party, other than one skating close to the lines of taste and decency, needs to describe itself as “non-racist”? Farage boasted on The Andrew Marr Show (20 January 2013) that “Ukip is the only UK party to explicitly ban BNP members from joining”. What party, other than a party whose policies are attractive to such organisations, would need to do that?

Christopher Monckton, their Scotland Leader and Head of Policy Unit invited the now-defunct British Freedom Party – an amalgamation of mostly breakaway BNP members led by a former Ukip candidate until January 2013 – to join Ukip: “I would very much like them to come back and join us and we stand together.” Ukip’s excuse for this lapse? Monckton had been away on a tour of the US and was not up to speed with current policy. More recently, however, Farage refused to vote to oppose moves for the European Union to fund the BNP.

The founder of the party, Alan Sked, says it has become "extraordinarily right-wing" and is now devoted to "creating a fuss, via Islam and immigrants”.


Xenophobia

“Our traditional values have been undermined. Children are taught to be ashamed of our past. Multiculturalism has split our society. Political correctness is stifling free speech”, stated the Ukip manifesto. Their “Pocket Guide to Immigration” promises to “end support for multiculturalism and promote one, common British culture”. After attracting some negative publicity, it has disappeared :rolleyes:

One of UKIP's prospective MP candidates recently wrote:
"A removal of multi-culturalism and assimilation of these people needs to be done to save them from the abyss of exclusion and welfare. Above all, one should not shy away of contemplating forced repatriation, or threatening it to further assimilation, as a result of their lack of economic contribution to the UK."
In fact their position on “forced repatriation” and “assimilation” is indistinguishable from the BNP’s. Except, perhaps, that Ukip’s 2005 manifesto advocates that all incoming immigrants should be “subject to health checks” for “communicable diseases”.

More recently, during BBC’s Question Time, Farage caused upset with some gross generalisations he made about Bulgarian people. He sent his trusted lieutenant and deputy chairman of the party Paul Nuttall to Bulgaria to defuse the situation. Nuttall explained that he had nothing to apologise for, since he never bashed Bulgarians, but was just noting facts. He stressed that “Brits fear all immigrants, regardless of where they would come from.”


Islamophobia

“On the question of Islamification,” said Farage during a well-received speech, “we have to do a bit more to teach our children of the values of our Judeo-Christian society.” He proceeded to note that at least 20 police forces are turning a blind eye to the operation of Sharia Law and expressed admiration for countries which say: “You’re welcome to come here and to have your children here… but if you’re coming here to take us over, you’re not welcome.”

A recent manifesto commitment to "tackle extremist Islam by banning the burqa or veiled niqab in public buildings and certain private buildings" was further explained by Farage: "I can't go into a bank with a motorcycle helmet on. I can't wear a balaclava going round the District and Circle line.”

Finally, Ukip peer Lord Pearson put it unequivocally. "The Muslims are breeding ten times faster than us," he said. "I don't know at what point they reach such a number we are no longer able to resist the rest of their demands."


Misogyny

Ukip’s only female MEP (after the expulsion of Nikki Sinclaire) Marta Andreasen, recently threatened to leave the party, labelling Farage as an “anti-women Stalinist dictator” whose view is that “women should be in the kitchen or in the bedroom”.

This came as no surprise. His grasp of sexual politics has always been tenuous at best. As he explained in a Telegraph interview:
“Lap dancing? Don’t have the time these days, but I used to go to them. Like it or not, they are a fact of life. You are talking about normal behaviour there. Everyone does it.”
Then, asked about extra-marital affairs, he conceded:
“Well, we’re all human. There is a big difference between that sort of thing and being really bad.”

When Godfrey Bloom MEP, infamous for making a speech in the European Parliament – one of his better ones – while heavily intoxicated, said that “no employer with a brain in the right place would employ a young, single, free woman”, Farage’s reaction was “Dear old Godders! Godfrey's comment [as above] has been proved so right.”


Views on the less able

In 2007, Jack Biggs alleged that he had been banned from running as a candidate because of his disability and presented significant evidence in support. Later, high-ranking member Alexandra Swann sided with a Ukip councillor who said it was dangerous to allow those who do not work to vote. Political Scrapbook reported her as saying that:
“allowing people to vote on how other people’s money is spent — if they don’t contribute — is dangerous”.
This, presumably, would include those unable to contribute because of disability.

Finally, the apotheosis (and demise of Godwin’s law, forever hence) came when a UKIP candidate aired his repugnant views about compulsory abortion of all disabled babies.


Homophobia

Ousted MEP Nikki Sinclaire, who came out as a lesbian, won a sexual discrimination case against UKIP after refusing to sit with its homophobic allies in the European parliament.

On a private members’ forum, senior UKIP member and former parliamentary candidate Dr Julia Gasper claimed some homosexuals prefer sex with animals. The Mirror reported her as saying: “As for the links between homosexuality and paedophilia, there is so much evidence that even a full-length book could hardly do justice to the *subject.” (Ironically, UKIP General Secretary Jonathan Arnott had banned a discussion on the site on gay issues, because he feared that someone “is going to screenshoot comments and send them to a newspaper”.) She was sacked.

More recently a UKIP Croydon North candidate tweeted: "A caring loving home is a heterosexual or single family. I don't believe (a gay couple) is healthy for a child." He did so, after retweeting an article written by a National Front supporter who claimed there was "no such thing as homophobia". He was sacked.

However, Olly Neville, the former UKIP Youth Chairman, was also sacked for supporting same-sex marriage. Sack them all, as long as we don’t have to talk about it, seems to be the policy.

{Source: ALEX ANDREOU }

Nigel Farage is an utter tool, UKIP are a complete joke and people who vote or support them are either stupid, racist or in a lot of cases BOTH!
 
Last edited:
I know nothing about UKIP or their policies but I do find it quite odd and hypocritical that you continue to label them as racist without, from what I can see, providing any justification for doing so. Care to elaborate as to why you are all over this thread calling them racist? Genuinely interested.

There's a veritable plethora of information out there telling you what has happened. I'm not sure linking to it all is viable.

Members kicked out for not joining racist groups.
Founder member leaving for not liking the direction the party took.
Councillors and members being investigated by the police for racist remarks.
'Suggestions' that Obama is a closet Imam and if he got on a greyhound bus with a rucksack he'd get off
Another councillor said 'Islam is a cancer which needs to be cured with radiation'

Those were the first results. There's a hell of a lot more and recent to going back years.
 
For all the idiots, morons and general racists who are claiming UKIP aren't racist here is some evidence:

Not a single piece of compelling evidence. The majority of your "evidence" doesn't relate to racism, the remainder does not fit the definition of racism. Xenophobia for example, is not racism. Not that I even agree you've provided an example of that.
 
There's a veritable plethora of information out there telling you what has happened. I'm not sure linking to it all is viable.

Members kicked out for not joining racist groups.
Founder member leaving for not liking the direction the party took.
Councillors and members being investigated by the police for racist remarks.
'Suggestions' that Obama is a closet Imam and if he got on a greyhound bus with a rucksack he'd get off
Another councillor said 'Islam is a cancer which needs to be cured with radiation'

Those were the first results. There's a hell of a lot more and recent to going back years.

Ah, OK. So, you are calling UKIP racist because some of their party members have, or have allegedly, expressed racist views and not necessarily because the party has a racist manifesto or agenda.

It's strange, because if you do a search for other major political parties it seems some of their members have resigned or are being investigated for alleged racism. Do you consider them to be racist political movements too?

Bringing it closer to home, and on that basis, if some members of this forum express racist views, which doesn't seem to be uncommon, does that make OCUK a racist forum?

Of course it doesn't which is why I think calling a political party racist based on the views of some of their members (elected or otherwise) is slightly short sighted, in my opinion of course.
 
lol, I give up.
You can lead a donkey to water ....blah ...blah (And yes I know it's Horse but I thought Donkey was more apt ;-) )

You guys keep thinking that UKip are not fundamentally a racist or bigoted party and the rest of us more enlightened folk will continue to think you're a bunch of pathetic bigots or at best intellectually challenged.
I have provided ample solid evidence with links and the fact you refuse to except it speaks volumes of the sort of person you are.
 
Last edited:
lol, I give up.
You can lead a donkey to water ....blah ...blah (And yes I know it's Horse but I thought Donkey was more apt ;-) )

You guys keep thinking that UKip are not fundamentally a racist or bigoted party and the rest of us more enlightened folk will continue to think you're a bunch of pathetic bigots or at best intellectually challenged.
I have provided ample solid evidence with links and the fact you refuse to except it speaks volumes of the sort of person you are.

Crazy by name...yes you should just give up you've lost mate.
 
lol, I give up.
You can lead a donkey to water ....blah ...blah (And yes I know it's Horse but I thought Donkey was more apt ;-) )

You guys keep thinking that UKip are not fundamentally a racist or bigoted party and the rest of us more enlightened folk will continue to think you're a bunch of pathetic bigots or at best intellectually challenged.
I have provided ample solid evidence with links and the fact you refuse to except it speaks volumes of the sort of person you are.

I don't think or know anything about UKIP or any other political party for that matter, couldn't give a monkeys.

I'm just interested in how people come to conclusions when forming their own opinion and from what you've posted, I would not consider that to be "ample solid evidence" on which to be forming an opinion and then getting all raged about it on a forum.

I think that says more about you as an individual than anyone who seeks to challenge or pry as to why you, or anyone else, thinks that.
 
Back
Top Bottom