Council candidate John Lyndon Sullivan wrote online: 'I rather wonder if we shot one "poofter" (GBLT whatevers), whether the next 99 would decide on balance, that they weren't after-all? We might then conclude that it's not a matter of genetics, but rather more a matter of education.'
Are you going to add to your post to make clear that Sullivan is not a council candidate this year and that this was all over the news a year ago prior to him failing to get elected?
Meanwhile homophobic Tory councillor Ken Gregory is still a Tory councillor in spite of his police caution.
Richard
I am far more interested in the prejudice than the detail!
What you are doing is equivalent to pointing out the age of Vanessa Paradis singing "Joe le Taxi". Some details need to remain unknown.
Shame. Following your last 'mistake' when you were forced to apologise after making unfair and defamatory claims against an MEP candidate I had thought you might have learned your lesson. It seems you have not and are only interested in the smear no matter what the actual facts.
Notable as well that you are only interested in the prejudice when it is displayed by former UKIP council candidates not current Tory councillors.
I think that goes one step beyond hypocrisy.
I am interested in the political battle, Richard.
This election is not being fought on the playing fields of Eton.
And Farage needs to adjust his tactics to his opponent's chosen terrain.
Concentrating on the EU elections and a handful of council elections where carefully chosen and vetted candidates stood a real chance of gaining control would have been a better strategy.
Winning a couple of councils would be far better in the long term for UKIP than winning hundreds of councillors. It would give them an opportunity to show responsibility in office and chamber, which is self-denied to them in the EP.
Thousands of unvetted candidates spouting off idiotic comments on social media is just exposing the party to widespread attack and ridicule.
And I am here more to enjoy the ride than reach a destination. The kippers are certainly not short on providing entertainment to the onlooker. It matters not whether persecution by the media is fair or principled. It is simply political reality.
@RichardTyndall Basically an admission that he, along with the mainstream media, think lies are fair game when it comes to smearing UKIP #scrutiny
Why all the limericks and clerihews and haikus all of a sudden? It was Limerick Day four days ago. I wrote loads of limericks but nobody seemed to follow on from it.
Local elections - London "We think of London’s 32 boroughs there are nine real ‘battle boroughs’. These are the councils where change is a real possibility and you will see these indicated on our interactive map by the cross swords symbol.
Overall, we are predicting a good showing for Labour with gains in Merton and Tower Hamlets alongside the retention of all of their current boroughs. We also think the Tories will hold on in Hammersmith and Fulham and Barnet and take Kingston, leading to a disappointing night for the Lib Dems. And finally, we foresee a good night for ‘other’ parties. UKIP will make gains in outer London and will return up to 50 councillors across the capital whilst smaller parties will also see an increase in seats, aided by low turnout relative to 2010, as voters move away from the mainstream parties."
"These Eastern Europeans - where are they all coming from?"
Used to know a chap who was reknowned for such self-answering questions. "What's in this meat and potato pie?" sticks in the mind.
If they don't specify the meat you probably don't want to know.
"Meat and potato pie" is very much a Yorkshire delicacy. When I ventured to question which particular "meat" was involved in its preparation I was openly rebuked for having such bare-faced cheek to ask.
You should have learnt by now not to mention Yorkshire on this forum, Peter. Before you know it, we'll be reading endless self-important dirges about "God's own county" and be be subjected to synthetic reheats of the war with Lancashire.
Isam the media has always told lies about politicians. One of the most widely touted stories about John Major was that he tucked his shirt in his underpants. It was a complete fabrication by a journalist. In the 97 election Labour monstrously misrepresented Tory pension policy. Hague's foreign land speech was misrepresented, it was nowhere near as insidious as portrayed in advisable as it was. If you get into politics it's a rough game with very few rules. You can cry foul all you like but it won't get you anywhere. If you just soak up your punishment they eventually get bored and move on to other things.
Shame. Following your last 'mistake' when you were forced to apologise after making unfair and defamatory claims against an MEP candidate I had thought you might have learned your lesson. It seems you have not and are only interested in the smear no matter what the actual facts.
Notable as well that you are only interested in the prejudice when it is displayed by former UKIP council candidates not current Tory councillors.
I think that goes one step beyond hypocrisy.
I am interested in the political battle, Richard.
This election is not being fought on the playing fields of Eton.
And Farage needs to adjust his tactics to his opponent's chosen terrain.
Concentrating on the EU elections and a handful of council elections where carefully chosen and vetted candidates stood a real chance of gaining control would have been a better strategy.
Winning a couple of councils would be far better in the long term for UKIP than winning hundreds of councillors. It would give them an opportunity to show responsibility in office and chamber, which is self-denied to them in the EP.
Thousands of unvetted candidates spouting off idiotic comments on social media is just exposing the party to widespread attack and ridicule.
And I am here more to enjoy the ride than reach a destination. The kippers are certainly not short on providing entertainment to the onlooker. It matters not whether persecution by the media is fair or principled. It is simply political reality.
@RichardTyndall Basically an admission that he, along with the mainstream media, think lies are fair game when it comes to smearing UKIP #scrutiny
Sam
The media are not telling lies.
They are simply applying a filter to their coverage of UKIP which prefers stories about idiotic candidate behaviour and statements to a balanced scrutiny of policy.
I apologised for a mistake I made, not one made by the press. I misread a retweet as suggesting Bill Etheridge had likes on his Facebook page from extreme right wing groups. Had I read the source more carefully, I would have realised the Facebook page belonged to a UKIP supporter who had been liked by Etheridge.
UKIP have to stand by or condemn the material being reported by the media. It is no good just claiming that the party is being persecuted unfairly.
@RichardTyndall Basically an admission that he, along with the mainstream media, think lies are fair game when it comes to smearing UKIP #scrutiny
Yep and I will make sure that he is reminded of that at every opportunity in the future. I wonder how long he will be happy to be branded a liar and hypocrite on the basis of his own admissions.
Isam the media has always told lies about politicians. One of the most widely touted stories about John Major was that he tucked his shirt in his underpants. It was a complete fabrication by a journalist. In the 97 election Labour monstrously misrepresented Tory pension policy. Hague's foreign land speech was misrepresented, it was nowhere near as insidious as portrayed in advisable as it was. If you get into politics it's a rough game with very few rules. You can cry foul all you like but it won't get you anywhere. If you just soak up your punishment they eventually get bored and move on to other things.
At least with the Tories you can have a proper tear-up and they don't take their ball home. I can see here Isam is coming from on some points but, as you say, politics is a big boys' game.
They are simply applying a filter to their coverage of UKIP which prefers stories about idiotic candidate behaviour and statements to a balanced scrutiny of policy.
I apologised for a mistake I made, not one made by the press. I misread a retweet as suggesting Bill Etheridge had likes on his Facebook page from extreme right wing groups. Had I read the source more carefully, I would have realised the Facebook page belonged to a UKIP supporter who had been liked by Etheridge.
UKIP have to stand by or condemn the material being reported by the media. It is no good just claiming that the party is being persecuted unfairly.
O'Brien specifically lied this afternoon by making a false statement and then when challenged on it maintaining he was correct. Funnily enough it was the same 'mistake' you made.
As I say, I will be enjoying keeping your earlier posting and reminding you of it at every opportunity. Put simply you can no longer be trusted.
Did someone mention the self-important bumptious booliak James O'Brien of LBC? Here is a clip of me phoning in to his radio programme a few years ago when he did a show about Christmas round-robin letters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ndI92L-HEU P.S. The "Harold and Gladys" in the letter (and their entire family) do not exist. I invented and wrote the whole thing myself.
Local elections - London "We think of London’s 32 boroughs there are nine real ‘battle boroughs’. These are the councils where change is a real possibility and you will see these indicated on our interactive map by the cross swords symbol.
Overall, we are predicting a good showing for Labour with gains in Merton and Tower Hamlets alongside the retention of all of their current boroughs. We also think the Tories will hold on in Hammersmith and Fulham and Barnet and take Kingston, leading to a disappointing night for the Lib Dems. And finally, we foresee a good night for ‘other’ parties. UKIP will make gains in outer London and will return up to 50 councillors across the capital whilst smaller parties will also see an increase in seats, aided by low turnout relative to 2010, as voters move away from the mainstream parties."
Hammersmith & Fulham is a weird old borough - Labour in the north, Tory to the south, thanks to thousands of sloaney imports from the Shires who can't afford Chelsea. London in miniature, it even has three league football clubs to choose from - more than any other borough in the UK.
1. Does Axelrose know which Miliband he is working for?
Is this about the tweet 'he' sent to David? Sent from a spoof account with the surname 'Alexrod' (presumably a reference to the typo in the initial Labour announcement). Pretty funny though, given the real Axelrod misspelling Ed's second name on his real account.
very minimally. it's mainly Axelrose appeals to my juvenile sense of humour
Local elections - London "We think of London’s 32 boroughs there are nine real ‘battle boroughs’. These are the councils where change is a real possibility and you will see these indicated on our interactive map by the cross swords symbol.
Overall, we are predicting a good showing for Labour with gains in Merton and Tower Hamlets alongside the retention of all of their current boroughs. We also think the Tories will hold on in Hammersmith and Fulham and Barnet and take Kingston, leading to a disappointing night for the Lib Dems. And finally, we foresee a good night for ‘other’ parties. UKIP will make gains in outer London and will return up to 50 councillors across the capital whilst smaller parties will also see an increase in seats, aided by low turnout relative to 2010, as voters move away from the mainstream parties."
Hammersmith & Fulham is a weird old borough - Labour in the north, Tory to the south, thanks to thousands of sloaney imports from the Shires who can't afford Chelsea. London in miniature, it even has three league football clubs to choose from - more than any other borough in the UK.
Did someone mention the self-important bumptious booliak James O'Brien of LBC? Here is a clip of me phoning in to his radio programme a few years ago when he did a show about Christmas round-robin letters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ndI92L-HEU P.S. The "Harold and Gladys" in the letter (and their entire family) do not exist. I invented and wrote the whole thing myself.
This election is not being fought on the playing fields of Eton.
And Farage needs to adjust his tactics to his opponent's chosen terrain.
y.
Sam
The media are not telling lies.
They are simply applying a filter to their coverage of UKIP which prefers stories about idiotic candidate behaviour and statements to a balanced scrutiny of policy.
I apologised for a mistake I made, not one made by the press. I misread a retweet as suggesting Bill Etheridge had likes on his Facebook page from extreme right wing groups. Had I read the source more carefully, I would have realised the Facebook page belonged to a UKIP supporter who had been liked by Etheridge.
UKIP have to stand by or condemn the material being reported by the media. It is no good just claiming that the party is being persecuted unfairly.
O'Brien told a blatant lie, Farage queried it, and O'Brien confirmed it as fact.
O Brien "We've got John Lyndon Sullivan here it has emerged overnight, he is a councillor of yours in Gloucestershire..."
*Reads offensive tweet*
Farage:" People saying silly things, we have had more of it than we would like.. but whats going on in the other parties? Im perfectly happy to have a debate about our idiots and our people who are offensive..."
O'Brien "Good so what happens to John Lyndon Sullivan then, for that tweet?"
Farage: "He's not a councillor is he? He's a council candidate?"
O'Brien "I think he is already in the council"
Farage " Is he? I dont know I havent heard his name"
O Brien " Well he's got your party'sname on the ballot paper"
Farage "There's a big difference from being on the ballot paper and being an elected councillor"
Hammersmith & Fulham is a weird old borough - Labour in the north, Tory to the south, thanks to thousands of sloaney imports from the Shires who can't afford Chelsea. London in miniature, it even has three league football clubs to choose from - more than any other borough in the UK.
H&F is fascinating and it is fascinating how influential people associated with it have been in recent years. Wandsworth has always been the London Borough that is most baffling. It's been a Tory council for 30+ years yet from 1997-05 all the parliamentary seats were Labour.
Local elections - London "We think of London’s 32 boroughs there are nine real ‘battle boroughs’. These are the councils where change is a real possibility and you will see these indicated on our interactive map by the cross swords symbol.
Overall, we are predicting a good showing for Labour with gains in Merton and Tower Hamlets alongside the retention of all of their current boroughs. We also think the Tories will hold on in Hammersmith and Fulham and Barnet and take Kingston, leading to a disappointing night for the Lib Dems. And finally, we foresee a good night for ‘other’ parties. UKIP will make gains in outer London and will return up to 50 councillors across the capital whilst smaller parties will also see an increase in seats, aided by low turnout relative to 2010, as voters move away from the mainstream parties."
Hammersmith & Fulham is a weird old borough - Labour in the north, Tory to the south, thanks to thousands of sloaney imports from the Shires who can't afford Chelsea. London in miniature, it even has three league football clubs to choose from - more than any other borough in the UK.
That's a fantastic document. Shows you what a strange Labour citadel Islington is too - "in all but three local elections since 1964," there have been no Tory councillors on the council. The sort of London champagne socialist stronghold that drives PBers up the wall (although SeanT chooses to live in another - Primrose Hill!)
Hammersmith & Fulham is a weird old borough - Labour in the north, Tory to the south, thanks to thousands of sloaney imports from the Shires who can't afford Chelsea. London in miniature, it even has three league football clubs to choose from - more than any other borough in the UK.
H&F is fascinating and it is fascinating how influential people associated with it have been in recent years. Wandsworth has always been the London Borough that is most baffling. It's been a Tory council for 30+ years yet from 1997-05 all the parliamentary seats were Labour.
It's always had really low council tax - I think it was £1 at one point. Must be split ticket voting down there - has always been a flagship Tory borough, as you say.
This election is not being fought on the playing fields of Eton.
And Farage needs to adjust his tactics to his opponent's chosen terrain.
y.
Sam
The media are not telling lies.
They are simply applying a filter to their coverage of UKIP which prefers stories about idiotic candidate behaviour and statements to a balanced scrutiny of policy.
I apologised for a mistake I made, not one made by the press. I misread a retweet as suggesting Bill Etheridge had likes on his Facebook page from extreme right wing groups. Had I read the source more carefully, I would have realised the Facebook page belonged to a UKIP supporter who had been liked by Etheridge.
UKIP have to stand by or condemn the material being reported by the media. It is no good just claiming that the party is being persecuted unfairly.
O'Brien told a blatant lie, Farage queried it, and O'Brien confirmed it as fact.
O Brien "We've got John Lyndon Sullivan here it has emerged overnight, he is a councillor of yours in Gloucestershire..."
*Reads offensive tweet*
Farage:" People saying silly things, we have had more of it than we would like.. but whats going on in the other parties? Im perfectly happy to have a debate about our idiots and our people who are offensive..."
O'Brien "Good so what happens to John Lyndon Sullivan then, for that tweet?"
Farage: "He's not a councillor is he? He's a council candidate?"
O'Brien "I think he is already in the council"
Farage " Is he? I dont know I havent heard his name"
O Brien " Well he's got your party'sname on the ballot paper"
Farage "There's a big difference from being on the ballot paper and being an elected councillor"
Local elections - London "We think of London’s 32 boroughs there are nine real ‘battle boroughs’. These are the councils where change is a real possibility and you will see these indicated on our interactive map by the cross swords symbol.
Overall, we are predicting a good showing for Labour with gains in Merton and Tower Hamlets alongside the retention of all of their current boroughs. We also think the Tories will hold on in Hammersmith and Fulham and Barnet and take Kingston, leading to a disappointing night for the Lib Dems. And finally, we foresee a good night for ‘other’ parties. UKIP will make gains in outer London and will return up to 50 councillors across the capital whilst smaller parties will also see an increase in seats, aided by low turnout relative to 2010, as voters move away from the mainstream parties."
Hammersmith & Fulham is a weird old borough - Labour in the north, Tory to the south, thanks to thousands of sloaney imports from the Shires who can't afford Chelsea. London in miniature, it even has three league football clubs to choose from - more than any other borough in the UK.
That's a fantastic document. Shows you what a strange Labour citadel Islington is too - "in all but three local elections since 1964," there have been no Tory councillors on the council. The sort of London champagne socialist stronghold that drives PBers up the wall (although SeanT chooses to live in another - Primrose Hill!)
It is interesting. I've often thought that instead of having largish multi member wards that the wards should be split into smaller chunks which might diversify representation a little in places.
This election is not being fought on the playing fields of Eton.
And Farage needs to adjust his tactics to his opponent's chosen terrain.
y.
Sam
The media are not telling lies.
They are simply applying a filter to their coverage of UKIP which prefers stories about idiotic candidate behaviour and statements to a balanced scrutiny of policy.
I apologised for a mistake I made, not one made by the press. I misread a retweet as suggesting Bill Etheridge had likes on his Facebook page from extreme right wing groups. Had I read the source more carefully, I would have realised the Facebook page belonged to a UKIP supporter who had been liked by Etheridge.
UKIP have to stand by or condemn the material being reported by the media. It is no good just claiming that the party is being persecuted unfairly.
O'Brien told a blatant lie, Farage queried it, and O'Brien confirmed it as fact.
O Brien "We've got John Lyndon Sullivan here it has emerged overnight, he is a councillor of yours in Gloucestershire..."
*Reads offensive tweet*
Farage:" People saying silly things, we have had more of it than we would like.. but whats going on in the other parties? Im perfectly happy to have a debate about our idiots and our people who are offensive..."
O'Brien "Good so what happens to John Lyndon Sullivan then, for that tweet?"
Farage: "He's not a councillor is he? He's a council candidate?"
O'Brien "I think he is already in the council"
Farage " Is he? I dont know I havent heard his name"
O Brien " Well he's got your party'sname on the ballot paper"
Farage "There's a big difference from being on the ballot paper and being an elected councillor"
Isam the media has always told lies about politicians. One of the most widely touted stories about John Major was that he tucked his shirt in his underpants. It was a complete fabrication by a journalist. In the 97 election Labour monstrously misrepresented Tory pension policy. Hague's foreign land speech was misrepresented, it was nowhere near as insidious as portrayed in advisable as it was. If you get into politics it's a rough game with very few rules. You can cry foul all you like but it won't get you anywhere. If you just soak up your punishment they eventually get bored and move on to other things.
The underpants thing was just one of many outrageous lies and smears that the Tories had to put up with between 1992 and 1997, much of it down to Alistair Campbell (soon to have his reputation shredded by Sir John Chilcot) and Max Clifford (currently serving 8 years in prison for sex crimes)
Have you had a preview of the report? And if you haven't, and it is not to your liking, will you and the rest demand yet another inquiry till you get the answer that suits?
Have you had a preview of the report? And if you haven't, and it is not to your liking, will you and the rest demand yet another inquiry till you get the answer that suits?
I'm confident Sir John has got to the bottom of what Blair and his sinister agents were up to.
Isam the media has always told lies about politicians. One of the most widely touted stories about John Major was that he tucked his shirt in his underpants. It was a complete fabrication by a journalist. In the 97 election Labour monstrously misrepresented Tory pension policy. Hague's foreign land speech was misrepresented, it was nowhere near as insidious as portrayed in advisable as it was. If you get into politics it's a rough game with very few rules. You can cry foul all you like but it won't get you anywhere. If you just soak up your punishment they eventually get bored and move on to other things.
The underpants thing was just one of many outrageous lies and smears that the Tories had to put up with between 1992 and 1997, much of it down to Alistair Campbell (soon to have his reputation shredded by Sir John Chilcot) and Max Clifford (currently serving 8 years in prison for sex crimes)
Oh absolutely. Of course some senior Tories did themselves no favours but the level of vitriol heaped upon the Conservatives and the lies (Mellor in the Chelsea strip for instance) were incredible.
Isam the media has always told lies about politicians. One of the most widely touted stories about John Major was that he tucked his shirt in his underpants. It was a complete fabrication by a journalist. In the 97 election Labour monstrously misrepresented Tory pension policy. Hague's foreign land speech was misrepresented, it was nowhere near as insidious as portrayed in advisable as it was. If you get into politics it's a rough game with very few rules. You can cry foul all you like but it won't get you anywhere. If you just soak up your punishment they eventually get bored and move on to other things.
The underpants thing was just one of many outrageous lies and smears that the Tories had to put up with between 1992 and 1997, much of it down to Alistair Campbell (soon to have his reputation shredded by Sir John Chilcot) and Max Clifford (currently serving 8 years in prison for sex crimes)
Oh absolutely. Of course some senior Tories did themselves no favours but the level of vitriol heaped upon the Conservatives and the lies (Mellor in the Chelsea strip for instance) were incredible.
I actually voted Labour in 1997 (forgive me Jack W for I did sin ) But the way John Major and the Tories were treated by the media in that period still leaves a nasty taste in the mouth all these years on.
UKIP and Farage aren't facing anything like that level of vitriol and really have nothing to complain about, Re. their press.
This election is not being fought on the playing fields of Eton.
And Farage needs to adjust his tactics to his opponent's chosen terrain.
y.
Sam
The media are not telling lies.
They are simply applying a filter to their coverage of UKIP which prefers stories about idiotic candidate behaviour and statements to a balanced scrutiny of policy.
I apologised for a mistake I made, not one made by the press. I misread a retweet as suggesting Bill Etheridge had likes on his Facebook page from extreme right wing groups. Had I read the source more carefully, I would have realised the Facebook page belonged to a UKIP supporter who had been liked by Etheridge.
UKIP have to stand by or condemn the material being reported by the media. It is no good just claiming that the party is being persecuted unfairly.
O'Brien told a blatant lie, Farage queried it, and O'Brien confirmed it as fact.
O Brien "We've got John Lyndon Sullivan here it has emerged overnight, he is a councillor of yours in Gloucestershire..."
*Reads offensive tweet*
Farage:" People saying silly things, we have had more of it than we would like.. but whats going on in the other parties? Im perfectly happy to have a debate about our idiots and our people who are offensive..."
O'Brien "Good so what happens to John Lyndon Sullivan then, for that tweet?"
Farage: "He's not a councillor is he? He's a council candidate?"
O'Brien "I think he is already in the council"
Farage " Is he? I dont know I havent heard his name"
O Brien " Well he's got your party'sname on the ballot paper"
Farage "There's a big difference from being on the ballot paper and being an elected councillor"
The pertinent issue is not the status of the UKIP representative. Whether Sullivan was an elected councillor or a prospective candidate is de minimis.
The question for Farage to answer was whether it is acceptable and appropriate for a representative of the party he leads to suggest in public that shooting one "poofter" would be a good method of converting ninety-nine others to revert to heterosexuality.
They are simply applying a filter to their coverage of UKIP which prefers stories about idiotic candidate behaviour and statements to a balanced scrutiny of policy.
I apologised for a mistake I made, not one made by the press. I misread a retweet as suggesting Bill Etheridge had likes on his Facebook page from extreme right wing groups. Had I read the source more carefully, I would have realised the Facebook page belonged to a UKIP supporter who had been liked by Etheridge.
UKIP have to stand by or condemn the material being reported by the media. It is no good just claiming that the party is being persecuted unfairly.
O'Brien told a blatant lie, Farage queried it, and O'Brien confirmed it as fact.
O Brien "We've got John Lyndon Sullivan here it has emerged overnight, he is a councillor of yours in Gloucestershire..."
*Reads offensive tweet*
Farage:" People saying silly things, we have had more of it than we would like.. but whats going on in the other parties? Im perfectly happy to have a debate about our idiots and our people who are offensive..."
O'Brien "Good so what happens to John Lyndon Sullivan then, for that tweet?"
Farage: "He's not a councillor is he? He's a council candidate?"
O'Brien "I think he is already in the council"
Farage " Is he? I dont know I havent heard his name"
O Brien " Well he's got your party'sname on the ballot paper"
Farage "There's a big difference from being on the ballot paper and being an elected councillor"
To be fair to you that is an open and shut case, by your sounds of it.
Tbh that sounds more like an on-air mistake rather than 'media lies' etc.
Iirc the Cyril Smith allegations date from when he was a Labour councillor about a decade or so before he was a Lib MP. But that gets dropped from any story about it.
The media smell stories, find a Kipper saying something as dodgy as possible, slap a dramatic headline on it, throw it at Farage, wallow in outrage.
Did someone mention the self-important bumptious booliak James O'Brien of LBC? Here is a clip of me phoning in to his radio programme a few years ago when he did a show about Christmas round-robin letters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ndI92L-HEU P.S. The "Harold and Gladys" in the letter (and their entire family) do not exist. I invented and wrote the whole thing myself.
Absolutely top class.
You have an inner satirist John Loony. Reminds me of Craig Brown.
Isam the media has always told lies about politicians. One of the most widely touted stories about John Major was that he tucked his shirt in his underpants. It was a complete fabrication by a journalist. In the 97 election Labour monstrously misrepresented Tory pension policy. Hague's foreign land speech was misrepresented, it was nowhere near as insidious as portrayed in advisable as it was. If you get into politics it's a rough game with very few rules. You can cry foul all you like but it won't get you anywhere. If you just soak up your punishment they eventually get bored and move on to other things.
The underpants thing was just one of many outrageous lies and smears that the Tories had to put up with between 1992 and 1997, much of it down to Alistair Campbell (soon to have his reputation shredded by Sir John Chilcot) and Max Clifford (currently serving 8 years in prison for sex crimes)
GIN
But sometimes lies can tell the truth.
This was certainly the case with the story about John Major tucking his shirt into his underpants. Similarly the Spitting Image depiction of him eating a single pea with his fork.
Such stories make real Brits warm to his pooterish character.
Isam the media has always told lies about politicians. One of the most widely touted stories about John Major was that he tucked his shirt in his underpants. It was a complete fabrication by a journalist. In the 97 election Labour monstrously misrepresented Tory pension policy. Hague's foreign land speech was misrepresented, it was nowhere near as insidious as portrayed in advisable as it was. If you get into politics it's a rough game with very few rules. You can cry foul all you like but it won't get you anywhere. If you just soak up your punishment they eventually get bored and move on to other things.
The underpants thing was just one of many outrageous lies and smears that the Tories had to put up with between 1992 and 1997, much of it down to Alistair Campbell (soon to have his reputation shredded by Sir John Chilcot) and Max Clifford (currently serving 8 years in prison for sex crimes)
Oh absolutely. Of course some senior Tories did themselves no favours but the level of vitriol heaped upon the Conservatives and the lies (Mellor in the Chelsea strip for instance) were incredible.
How did anyone verify that Major did not tuck his shirt into his pants?
Isam the media has always told lies about politicians. One of the most widely touted stories about John Major was that he tucked his shirt in his underpants. It was a complete fabrication by a journalist. In the 97 election Labour monstrously misrepresented Tory pension policy. Hague's foreign land speech was misrepresented, it was nowhere near as insidious as portrayed in advisable as it was. If you get into politics it's a rough game with very few rules. You can cry foul all you like but it won't get you anywhere. If you just soak up your punishment they eventually get bored and move on to other things.
The underpants thing was just one of many outrageous lies and smears that the Tories had to put up with between 1992 and 1997, much of it down to Alistair Campbell (soon to have his reputation shredded by Sir John Chilcot) and Max Clifford (currently serving 8 years in prison for sex crimes)
Oh absolutely. Of course some senior Tories did themselves no favours but the level of vitriol heaped upon the Conservatives and the lies (Mellor in the Chelsea strip for instance) were incredible.
How did anyone verify that Major did not tuck his shirt into his pants?
I actually voted Labour in 1997 (forgive me Jack W for I did sin ) But the way John Major and the Tories were treated by the media in that period still leaves a nasty taste in the mouth all these years on.
The Tories deserved every last drop of that vitriol. They caused the largest forced mass eviction in Britain since the Highland clearances, ruined masses of small businesses they had assiduously helped to create, all for an insane European policy.
It is no accident that UKIP have a £-sign as their emblem.
UKIP, on the other hand, have done nothing in comparison, a word alien to the media it seems.
I actually voted Labour in 1997 (forgive me Jack W for I did sin ) But the way John Major and the Tories were treated by the media in that period still leaves a nasty taste in the mouth all these years on.
The Tories deserved every last drop of that vitriol. They caused the largest forced mass eviction in Britain since the Highland clearances, ruined masses of small businesses they had assiduously helped to create, all for an insane European policy.
It is no accident that UKIP have a £-sign as their emblem.
UKIP, on the other hand, have done nothing in comparison, a word alien to the media it seems.
They deserved to lose the general election for their stupid ERM policy (supported at the time by all political parties and the political establishment and nearly all newspapers) and for a variety of other issue's I'll not go into now, but the feeding frenzy on the corpse was in bad taste and OTT.
@GIN1138 There were certain rumours doing the rounds during the coal strike....all of which have been denied (several by the police in the area around Orgrieve). Now we all know that the Yorkshire police are honest and above reproach... Meanwhile up in Scotland I was offered a job driving the coal wagons, brand new Volvos specially purchased for Yull and Dodds. No licence needed, and police protection from Hunterston to the Craig and back. Orders from the police escort? pedal to the metal and if you hit anything your back will be covered. You may think her sainted, we knew what she really was. Lad who offered me the job was one of my mates....never spoke to the scabbing shit thereafter
@corporeal posted - Tbh that sounds more like an on-air mistake rather than 'media lies' etc.
Iirc the Cyril Smith allegations date from when he was a Labour councillor about a decade or so before he was a Lib MP. But that gets dropped from any story about it.
The media smell stories, find a Kipper saying something as dodgy as possible, slap a dramatic headline on it, throw it at Farage, wallow in outrage.
Then Kippers defend themselves with paranoia.
I've listened to all of the interview and I must say it was a bad day at the office for farage,he let O'Brien bully him with the Questions.
But my biggest concern was,why the hell did UKIP media team let farage go do a interview with O'Brien,when we know that O'Brien is a left of centre aggressive to any one on the right,especially ukip.
Even I would have expected race,immigration and candidates for the all 20mins interview thrown at me from O'Brien,but farage looked at points unprepared and that was just lazy politics.
@GIN1138 There were certain rumours doing the rounds during the coal strike....all of which have been denied (several by the police in the area around Orgrieve). Now we all know that the Yorkshire police are honest and above reproach... Meanwhile up in Scotland I was offered a job driving the coal wagons, brand new Volvos specially purchased for Yull and Dodds. No licence needed, and police protection from Hunterston to the Craig and back. Orders from the police escort? pedal to the metal and if you hit anything your back will be covered. You may think her sainted, we knew what she really was. Lad who offered me the job was one of my mates....never spoke to the scabbing shit thereafter
Sounds like the guy offered you the chance to get on your bike and find work and earn an honest wage - bit off to turn him down.
The pertinent issue is not the status of the UKIP representative. Whether Sullivan was an elected councillor or a prospective candidate is de minimis.
The question for Farage to answer was whether it is acceptable and appropriate for a representative of the party he leads to suggest in public that shooting one "poofter" would be a good method of converting ninety-nine others to revert to heterosexuality.
Of course not. And unlike the hypocritical Tories UKIP have consistently sacked candidates who espouse such views. Of course it is hard to sack a candidate when it turns out that he isn't a candidate in the first place.
My list of Tory homophobes and racists still holding council positions is growing. Unlike your claims these are facts not smears.
I actually voted Labour in 1997 (forgive me Jack W for I did sin ) But the way John Major and the Tories were treated by the media in that period still leaves a nasty taste in the mouth all these years on.
The Tories deserved every last drop of that vitriol. They caused the largest forced mass eviction in Britain since the Highland clearances, ruined masses of small businesses they had assiduously helped to create, all for an insane European policy.
It is no accident that UKIP have a £-sign as their emblem.
UKIP, on the other hand, have done nothing in comparison, a word alien to the media it seems.
They deserved to lose the general election for their stupid ERM policy (supported at the time by all political parties and the political establishment and nearly all newspapers) and for a variety of other issue's I'll not go into now, but the feeding frenzy on the corpse was in bad taste and OTT.
No sympathy.
John Major hung onto power for grim death, despite being responsible for the biggest foreign policy disaster since Suez. He put the country's political system under the most incredible strain. We were lucky not to have riots.
The Tories haven't won a majority since - deservedly so, in the main.
The pasting Major received helped relieve the build-up of bile in the country until the 1997 GE, but the boil wasn't lanced until the death of the Princess of Wales.
@GIN1138 There were certain rumours doing the rounds during the coal strike....all of which have been denied (several by the police in the area around Orgrieve). Now we all know that the Yorkshire police are honest and above reproach... Meanwhile up in Scotland I was offered a job driving the coal wagons, brand new Volvos specially purchased for Yull and Dodds. No licence needed, and police protection from Hunterston to the Craig and back. Orders from the police escort? pedal to the metal and if you hit anything your back will be covered. You may think her sainted, we knew what she really was. Lad who offered me the job was one of my mates....never spoke to the scabbing shit thereafter
Not sure what your getting at really, but on the basic principle of the miners strike, Maggie was absolutely right to take the hard line she did.
Scargill and his union bullies were attempting to depose a democratically elected government (one that had been elected on a landslide and with a huge mandate for change)
It wasn't the first time the NUT had brought down an elected government either (mind Heath was an idiot for going to polls in February 74, so his downfall was partly of his own making)
But the bottom line was, we couldn't keep going on being blackmailed by this Union and it's militant leaders.
I don't agree with everything she did, but compare and contrast Thatcher's government from 79 to 90 and the progress that was made, to Labour's term in office from 1997-2010, which may just go down as the worst government in 300 years!
And I freely hold my hands up and admit I helped them on their way by voting for them 1997 and sitting on my hands in 2001 (By 2005 I had woke up and smelt the coffee and voted Lib-Dem and 2010 as you know I voted Con)
@TGOHF Like him. I didn't have an HGV licence, Unlike him I had pride. The state turning a blind eye to the laws of the land may suit you, you seem like you are made of the same type of jelly. As for little Gin? Having prejudged the issue, he wants the law of the land applied, but only if it suits his views.
Tykejohnno I think that is UKIPs Achilles heel that deep down they lack the professionalism. Enthusiastic amateurism is grand but it's being exposed relentlessly. The dodgy candidates highlights a proper vetting process. The trouble today was caused by a few different things, firstly a true pro would never have allowed that to happen that's O'Flynn's fault, if they had allowed it to happen they would have briefed and prepped their man to within an inch of his life partly O'Flynn's fault for not insisting partly Farage's for not demanding it. Finally there is absolutely no way you should ever intervene like that, whatever the reason and that is O'Flynn's fault. So to me the big issue is UKIP have a media man who sucks and a leader who needs to up his media game because for someone who wants to play in the big league you need to control your image.
@TGOHF Like him. I didn't have an HGV licence, Unlike him I had pride. The state turning a blind eye to the laws of the land may suit you, you seem like you are made of the same type of jelly. As for little Gin? Having prejudged the issue, he wants the law of the land applied, but only if it suits his views.
You judged this chap for earning a living. Weird for someone who supports a party called Labour.
I'm not sure about this. "Ttwo hours of free parking for all residents during Friday prayers, respect religious beliefs when making planning decisions, and oppose further betting shops in Newham" all seem like perfectly acceptable policies. On the other hand, courting a particular sect (in the "sectarian" sense) clearly can go too far... I think the line might be whether a policy is for the disproportionate exclusion of other groups, but I'm interested what others think.
Why should religious reasons be taken into account in planning decisions? That would require a change to the law so not a matter for the council in any case. A church or mosque should comply with planning rules and no religious group should demand special favours in this way. I'm sick of groups using their religion as some sort of free pass.
Progress? Sell off council housing at a pittance while removing the ability from the councils to use what little they did get for new housing stock. All those people making a buck then using the rest to borrow like there was no tomorrow. Then, all these newly Torified morons borrowed to the hilt, while Britain pished the now cheap oil into the power stations. She set the ball rolling, her and her brainless yank "economist" friend, Blair who you detest so much merely carried on her insanity. Now you can get back to blaming everything that happened since onto your minority of choice,
O'Brien specifically lied this afternoon by making a false statement and then when challenged on it maintaining he was correct.
So much the same as the Kippers, and in particular you, claiming that Cameron gave a cast-iron guarantee to hold a referendum even after ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.
The pertinent issue is not the status of the UKIP representative. Whether Sullivan was an elected councillor or a prospective candidate is de minimis.
The question for Farage to answer was whether it is acceptable and appropriate for a representative of the party he leads to suggest in public that shooting one "poofter" would be a good method of converting ninety-nine others to revert to heterosexuality.
Of course not. And unlike the hypocritical Tories UKIP have consistently sacked candidates who espouse such views. Of course it is hard to sack a candidate when it turns out that he isn't a candidate in the first place.
My list of Tory homophobes and racists still holding council positions is growing. Unlike your claims these are facts not smears.
Richard
Sullivan stood for UKIP at a Newent Council election in May 2013.
Pinknews reported at the time:
UKIP candidate John Sullivan who claimed regular physical exercise in schools can “prevent homosexuality” has failed to be elected as a councillor for Newent in Gloucestershire.
Mr Sullivan’s comments, which have since been deleted, were made on a Facebook group called “Traditional Britain Group.”
He also applauded Russia for banning gay pride marches in Moscow, saying: “Well done the Russians.”
Mr Sullivan came second in Thursday’s contest.
He was 391 votes behind the Conservative winner Will Windsor-Clive, who was elected on 988 votes.
UKIP has its own internal LBGTQ group which unambiguously condemned Sullivan's statements shortly before the election:
The LGBTQ in UKIP committee is extremely angry and disappointed by the comments made by a small number of UKIP local candidates, particularly ... John Sullivan.
These candidates, who haven’t been vetted and produce their own campaign literature, have let down the hundreds of outstanding UKIP candidates who in no way indorse the comments made, and the Party in general.
Whilst we believe in freedom of speech, this does not mean UKIP should therefore accommodate people with obnoxious beliefs such as suggesting LGBTQ people are inferior or abnormal.
We are informed by the Party that they are thoroughly investigating each of the cases raised by the media. It is unlikely these investigations will be concluded before Thursday.
It is our belief that these candidates should have the UKIP whip drawn from them, and that future candidates are properly vetted and literature officially approved before being published.
The candidates named above shall be receiving direct correspondence from us in the near future.
If Farage had been as forthright in his interview with O'Brien, we wouldn't be having this discussion tonight.
I'm not sure about this. "Ttwo hours of free parking for all residents during Friday prayers, respect religious beliefs when making planning decisions, and oppose further betting shops in Newham" all seem like perfectly acceptable policies. On the other hand, courting a particular sect (in the "sectarian" sense) clearly can go too far... I think the line might be whether a policy is for the disproportionate exclusion of other groups, but I'm interested what others think.
Why should religious reasons be taken into account in planning decisions? That would require a change to the law so not a matter for the council in any case. A church or mosque should comply with planning rules and no religious group should demand special favours in this way. I'm sick of groups using their religion as some sort of free pass.
Not the greatest post of the day.
Religious reasons should be taken into account because that's how that section of the population lives their life. So, religious schools etc. They do, after all, pay their taxes and vote.
Of course religions should comply with planning rules, but who sets them? The council they themselves elect, of course.
Religious citizens are voters as well and can demand whatever they wish, despite what 'Dawks' like you think.
O'Brien specifically lied this afternoon by making a false statement and then when challenged on it maintaining he was correct.
So much the same as the Kippers, and in particular you, claiming that Cameron gave a cast-iron guarantee to hold a referendum even after ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.
@TGOHF You are happy for unlicenced and quite often banned drivers belting up and down the road at high speeds if it suits you. The Tories, strong on law and order (except of course if it suits them otherwise, or any of their rich mates) Banks guilty of money laundering? hand the naughty bank a small fine..The bank.....not the bankers who thought all these schemes and wiles up. Billions in dodgy deals, and no one is guilty?
Progress? Sell off council housing at a pittance while removing the ability from the councils to use what little they did get for new housing stock. All those people making a buck then using the rest to borrow like there was no tomorrow. Then, all these newly Torified morons borrowed to the hilt, while Britain pished the now cheap oil into the power stations. She set the ball rolling, her and her brainless yank "economist" friend, Blair who you detest so much merely carried on her insanity. Now you can get back to blaming everything that happened since onto your minority of choice,
I suspect we're getting boring now, so this will be my final comment (we'll never agree anyway)
The progress that was made from 1979 to 1990 was quite incredible (this country in the 1970's was a total basket case, the sick man of Europe, "managing the decline" People even spoke seriously about the possibility of military coup's)
Of course in making the changes that pulled us up by the boot straps a lot of people got hurt and left out along the way, but unfortunately it probably couldn't have been any different.
The country left to Labour in 1997 was by far a better place than the one the Conservatives inherited in 1979. Most of that was due to Thatchers reforms.
What did Labour do with the country from 1997 to 2010? Pretty much every major index you look at went backwards under Labour. There was the dodgy dossiers. The lies. The war. The Great Recession. 13 years of Gordon Brown being in our national politics. Now we even face the break-up of the country itself after being promised by Labour that devolution would "kill independence stone dead"
"When parliament is giving up powers, it should ask us, the people, in a referendum first".
Bravo!
What a tragedy it is that Labour and the LibDems reneged on their promises, and thus prevented that happening. Cameron, and the Conservatives, of course voted for that referendum, but sadly did not have a majority in parliament.
Tykejohnno I think that is UKIPs Achilles heel that deep down they lack the professionalism. Enthusiastic amateurism is grand but it's being exposed relentlessly. The dodgy candidates highlights a proper vetting process. The trouble today was caused by a few different things, firstly a true pro would never have allowed that to happen that's O'Flynn's fault, if they had allowed it to happen they would have briefed and prepped their man to within an inch of his life partly O'Flynn's fault for not insisting partly Farage's for not demanding it. Finally there is absolutely no way you should ever intervene like that, whatever the reason and that is O'Flynn's fault. So to me the big issue is UKIP have a media man who sucks and a leader who needs to up his media game because for someone who wants to play in the big league you need to control your image.
What you say about UKIP professionalism, I've been saying for a long time. However, they have improved greatly over the last 18 months and bears no relationship to where it was in 2010.
Both O'Flynn and Farage will, I hope, learn from this episode and not let Mccarthyite questioning tactics put them off balance in future. This has been a long campaign for UKIP as a party and for Nigel Farage as leader, One can only hope that the battering from the MSM and the rest of the Establishment these last 4 weeks, has not made them too tired and careless.
@GIN1138 As we shouted loudly at the time. a country that makes nothing is a country heading to the wall. Our economy under Thatcher and her idiot friend (and aided by a brain dead ex film star) based itself on running a huge casino.....fortunately for the Yanks, even they started to do some simple maths. Our clever Eton boys were to busy inserting their pencils into their orifices and selling the family silver. (Brown sold the gold later)
The closure comes after the party's Freepost address was sent blood and faeces. Now ain't that nice. The so called anti fascists using fascist tactics.
I'm not sure about this. "Ttwo hours of free parking for all residents during Friday prayers, respect religious beliefs when making planning decisions, and oppose further betting shops in Newham" all seem like perfectly acceptable policies. On the other hand, courting a particular sect (in the "sectarian" sense) clearly can go too far... I think the line might be whether a policy is for the disproportionate exclusion of other groups, but I'm interested what others think.
Why should religious reasons be taken into account in planning decisions? That would require a change to the law so not a matter for the council in any case. A church or mosque should comply with planning rules and no religious group should demand special favours in this way. I'm sick of groups using their religion as some sort of free pass.
Not the greatest post of the day.
Religious reasons should be taken into account because that's how that section of the population lives their life. So, religious schools etc. They do, after all, pay their taxes and vote.
Of course religions should comply with planning rules, but who sets them? The council they themselves elect, of course.
Religious citizens are voters as well and can demand whatever they wish, despite what 'Dawks' like you think.
Atheist citizens are voters as well, and can demand whatever they wish, despite what "imaginary friend believers" like you think.
I'm not sure about this. "Ttwo hours of free parking for all residents during Friday prayers, respect religious beliefs when making planning decisions, and oppose further betting shops in Newham" all seem like perfectly acceptable policies. On the other hand, courting a particular sect (in the "sectarian" sense) clearly can go too far... I think the line might be whether a policy is for the disproportionate exclusion of other groups, but I'm interested what others think.
Why should religious reasons be taken into account in planning decisions? That would require a change to the law so not a matter for the council in any case. A church or mosque should comply with planning rules and no religious group should demand special favours in this way. I'm sick of groups using their religion as some sort of free pass.
Not the greatest post of the day.
Religious reasons should be taken into account because that's how that section of the population lives their life. So, religious schools etc. They do, after all, pay their taxes and vote.
Of course religions should comply with planning rules, but who sets them? The council they themselves elect, of course.
Religious citizens are voters as well and can demand whatever they wish, despite what 'Dawks' like you think.
Actually I'm one of the few religious people on this site so not a Dawks. But planning rules are set by the various Town and Country Planning Acts and planning decisions can only be taken for planning reasons not for religious or other reasons. If a building would not be allowed to be built under current laws then the fact that the building is for a religious purpose should not make a difference.
Imagine this scenario: your neighbour applies to build an extension which overlooks you, takes away your privacy, is out of keeping with the neighbourhood and fails to comply with the local plan etc and is turned down. Then he says that he is going it use it for his prayers. Why should that be relevant? And why should it be allowed just because the builder is religious when anyone else would have it refused?
What appears to be being demanded here is just that and I don't agree: no group should be allowed to waive some sort of religious trump card overriding the rights of others.
On Faragegate, I can't work out why O'Flynn butted in to the interview when the presenter had made clear he was rounding things up anyway?
Presumably he'd been getting more and more angry with the way the interview was going and couldn't control himself in the end, but it seems very unprofessional.
If he was any good as a PR, instead of getting so worked up he couldn't control himself, he should have been on to the Councillor allegations at the start of the interview. Imagine if Farage had been able to counter the accusation that the candidate was a UKIP Councillor when infact he wasn't? Would have really turned the tables.
You will be heading the wrong way on the ferry! Make sure you don't get sucked into a late night as you will need to be up at 6.00 am to catch the run through the Stockholm archipelago!
As we shouted loudly at the time. a country that makes nothing is a country heading to the wall
No you didn't. You shouted that duff nationalised or semi-private industries, riven by class warfare, should be subsidised by the taxpayer to make shoddy goods which no-one wanted to buy, that newspapers should be intimidated so that they were too scared to buy new technology, that telecoms should be a state monopoly so that it was a criminal offence to connect any device to your phone unless you'd rented it (you couldn't buy it, of course) at hugely inflated prices from a state-approved list of massively out of date devices manufactured by union-approved dinosaur companies, even that the City should retain its restrictive practices of jobbers and brokers with fixed pinstripe-friendly commissions (I'm not making this up!)
You will be heading the wrong way on the ferry! Make sure you don't get sucked into a late night as you will need to be up at 6.00 am to catch the run through the Stockholm archipelago!
I don't mind getting up early to see it. Wasn't able to do it the other way round unfortunately.
Big change in India today, Modi has a huge mandate for reform, will be interesting to see the reforms he has for India's economy and whether it will increase tensions with Pakistan. A big blow for Congress and the Gandhi family, but perhaps Priyanka is now their only hope for a return to power, with Sonia and Rahul retiring from the scene
As we shouted loudly at the time. a country that makes nothing is a country heading to the wall
No you didn't. You shouted that duff nationalised or semi-private industries, riven by class warfare, should be subsidised by the taxpayer to make shoddy goods which no-one wanted to buy, that newspapers should be intimidated so that they were too scared to buy new technology, that telecoms should be a state monopoly so that it was a criminal offence to connect any device to your phone unless you'd rented it (you couldn't buy it, of course) at hugely inflated prices from a state-approved list of massively out of date devices manufactured by union-approved dinosaur companies, even that the City should retain its restrictive practices of jobbers and brokers with fixed pinstripe-friendly commissions (I'm not making this up!)
Well said Richard. You make a much better job at this stuff than me.
I'm not sure about this. "Ttwo hours of free parking for all residents during Friday prayers, respect religious beliefs when making planning decisions, and oppose further betting shops in Newham" all seem like perfectly acceptable policies. On the other hand, courting a particular sect (in the "sectarian" sense) clearly can go too far... I think the line might be whether a policy is for the disproportionate exclusion of other groups, but I'm interested what others think.
Why should religious reasons be taken into account in planning decisions? That would require a change to the law so not a matter for the council in any case. A church or mosque should comply with planning rules and no religious group should demand special favours in this way. I'm sick of groups using their religion as some sort of free pass.
Not the greatest post of the day.
Religious reasons should be taken into account because that's how that section of the population lives their life. So, religious schools etc. They do, after all, pay their taxes and vote.
Of course religions should comply with planning rules, but who sets them? The council they themselves elect, of course.
Religious citizens are voters as well and can demand whatever they wish, despite what 'Dawks' like you think.
Atheist citizens are voters as well, and can demand whatever they wish, despite what "imaginary friend believers" like you think.
Feel free to point out where I disputed that right.
@ Have a look who was running all these companies at the time? That's right? All the well connected Oxford and Cambridge chappies who ran them into the deck. Now we have to get Japanese, Koreans. Indians to keep what little we have left running. Britain! The economic whore of the world (never knowingly undersold)
Imagine this scenario: your neighbour applies to build an extension which overlooks you, takes away your privacy, is out of keeping with the neighbourhood and fails to comply with the local plan etc and is turned down. Then he says that he is going it use it for his prayers. Why should that be relevant? And why should it be allowed just because the builder is religious when anyone else would have it refused?
Funny, that's what a UKIP candidate in Brent said and was vilified by the media for.
Big change in India today, Modi has a huge mandate for reform, will be interesting to see the reforms he has for India's economy and whether it will increase tensions with Pakistan. A big blow for Congress and the Gandhi family, but perhaps Priyanka is now their only hope for a return to power, with Sonia and Rahul retiring from the scene
Perhaps Congress should de-Gandhify and find someone competent.
@ Have a look who was running all these companies at the time? That's right? All the well connected Oxford and Cambridge chappies who ran them into the deck.
Now you are making yourself look spectacularly stupid.
Here's a hint: do a modicum of research. You will find that well-connected Oxford and Cambridge chappies of the 1960s and 1970s steered well away from running any manufacturing companies.
Some of them went into the City, protected as it was from competition by restrictive practices - until Maggie swept all that away on the 27th October 1986, one of the most significant dates in our modern history.
If you are genuinely interested (which I doubt, because you won't want your prejudices to be confronted by cold reality), read this book - written by a grammar-school lad of modest background, who lived through it all:
@Richard_Nabavi Read the real story of the UCS "sit in" A rich twat who thought ships were still riveted, and a workforce who wanted to build modular ships. A stupid idea of course, we would build ships in the best old traditions,stuff like building in modules was only for wartime and those insane asians
You will be heading the wrong way on the ferry! Make sure you don't get sucked into a late night as you will need to be up at 6.00 am to catch the run through the Stockholm archipelago!
I don't mind getting up early to see it. Wasn't able to do it the other way round unfortunately.
Andy
Helsinki nightlife is a bit sparse. Only about ten or so bars are licensed to stay open to 3:00 am and most are attached to the big hotels.
If you want a flavour of the city in the early hours try going to the (almost) all night café in a very small hotel opposite the very large Hotel Vaakuna near the Central Station. The café is called Ravintola (restaurant) Seurahuone.
Not much booze but excellent Columbian coffee and a chance to eat the great Finnish café delicacy: a sort of moccasin pastry shoe filled with rice. Wonderful people watching too.
Ravintola Surahuone is on Brunnsgatan off Mannerheimintie (the sole wide dual roadway in the centre).
O'Brien specifically lied this afternoon by making a false statement and then when challenged on it maintaining he was correct.
So much the same as the Kippers, and in particular you, claiming that Cameron gave a cast-iron guarantee to hold a referendum even after ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.
That's politics, is it not?
Cameron gave that guarantee and was backed up by Hague with his 'We shall not let matters rest there'.
They did of course, thus proving themselves liars.
The closure comes after the party's Freepost address was sent blood and faeces. Now ain't that nice. The so called anti fascists using fascist tactics.
The protester has to remain anonymous of course. Somehow I doubt this was because of professional commitments to be politically impartial or some other legitimate reason...
Comments
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~nuff0084/ge15forecast/
DUP will be getting interested on those numbers...
@RichardTyndall Basically an admission that he, along with the mainstream media, think lies are fair game when it comes to smearing UKIP #scrutiny
"We think of London’s 32 boroughs there are nine real ‘battle boroughs’. These are the councils where change is a real possibility and you will see these indicated on our interactive map by the cross swords symbol.
Overall, we are predicting a good showing for Labour with gains in Merton and Tower Hamlets alongside the retention of all of their current boroughs. We also think the Tories will hold on in Hammersmith and Fulham and Barnet and take Kingston, leading to a disappointing night for the Lib Dems. And finally, we foresee a good night for ‘other’ parties. UKIP will make gains in outer London and will return up to 50 councillors across the capital whilst smaller parties will also see an increase in seats, aided by low turnout relative to 2010, as voters move away from the mainstream parties."
Source: http://www.londoncommunications.co.uk/2014/05/lca-predicts-2014-local-elections/
FM says "No" he is not a liability for the Yes campaign #repscot
Before you know it, we'll be reading endless self-important dirges about "God's own county" and be be subjected to synthetic reheats of the war with Lancashire.
Luxury...
The media are not telling lies.
They are simply applying a filter to their coverage of UKIP which prefers stories about idiotic candidate behaviour and statements to a balanced scrutiny of policy.
I apologised for a mistake I made, not one made by the press. I misread a retweet as suggesting Bill Etheridge had likes on his Facebook page from extreme right wing groups. Had I read the source more carefully, I would have realised the Facebook page belonged to a UKIP supporter who had been liked by Etheridge.
UKIP have to stand by or condemn the material being reported by the media. It is no good just claiming that the party is being persecuted unfairly.
The media are not telling lies.
They are simply applying a filter to their coverage of UKIP which prefers stories about idiotic candidate behaviour and statements to a balanced scrutiny of policy.
I apologised for a mistake I made, not one made by the press. I misread a retweet as suggesting Bill Etheridge had likes on his Facebook page from extreme right wing groups. Had I read the source more carefully, I would have realised the Facebook page belonged to a UKIP supporter who had been liked by Etheridge.
UKIP have to stand by or condemn the material being reported by the media. It is no good just claiming that the party is being persecuted unfairly.
O'Brien specifically lied this afternoon by making a false statement and then when challenged on it maintaining he was correct. Funnily enough it was the same 'mistake' you made.
As I say, I will be enjoying keeping your earlier posting and reminding you of it at every opportunity. Put simply you can no longer be trusted.
Here is a clip of me phoning in to his radio programme a few years ago when he did a show about Christmas round-robin letters:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ndI92L-HEU
P.S. The "Harold and Gladys" in the letter (and their entire family) do not exist. I invented and wrote the whole thing myself.
(guns & roses if you don't get the reference)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oczj6thd4CY
http://www.londoncommunications.co.uk/cms/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/boroughmap.pdf
O Brien "We've got John Lyndon Sullivan here it has emerged overnight, he is a councillor of yours in Gloucestershire..."
*Reads offensive tweet*
Farage:" People saying silly things, we have had more of it than we would like.. but whats going on in the other parties? Im perfectly happy to have a debate about our idiots and our people who are offensive..."
O'Brien "Good so what happens to John Lyndon Sullivan then, for that tweet?"
Farage: "He's not a councillor is he? He's a council candidate?"
O'Brien "I think he is already in the council"
Farage " Is he? I dont know I havent heard his name"
O Brien " Well he's got your party'sname on the ballot paper"
Farage "There's a big difference from being on the ballot paper and being an elected councillor"
O'Brien" He is an elected councillor"
He isnt.
http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/ukip-anti-gay-politicians-lose-election030513
How is that not media lies?
Its all here, the first 2 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4Rq7avG234
Can't you just apply Edmund's widget?
Have you had a preview of the report? And if you haven't, and it is not to your liking, will you and the rest demand yet another inquiry till you get the answer that suits?
This time from Huff Post.
http://huff.to/1jDv6U9
UKIP Small Business Spokesman has problem with his family business employing illegal immigrants. Matter being appealed.
UKIP and Farage aren't facing anything like that level of vitriol and really have nothing to complain about, Re. their press.
Don't be overly sure, they still haven't nailed your sainted Lady for all her misdeeds yet.
The pertinent issue is not the status of the UKIP representative. Whether Sullivan was an elected councillor or a prospective candidate is de minimis.
The question for Farage to answer was whether it is acceptable and appropriate for a representative of the party he leads to suggest in public that shooting one "poofter" would be a good method of converting ninety-nine others to revert to heterosexuality.
Iirc the Cyril Smith allegations date from when he was a Labour councillor about a decade or so before he was a Lib MP. But that gets dropped from any story about it.
The media smell stories, find a Kipper saying something as dodgy as possible, slap a dramatic headline on it, throw it at Farage, wallow in outrage.
Then Kippers defend themselves with paranoia.
You have an inner satirist John Loony. Reminds me of Craig Brown.
Immitating his hero Superman, perhaps?
But sometimes lies can tell the truth.
This was certainly the case with the story about John Major tucking his shirt into his underpants. Similarly the Spitting Image depiction of him eating a single pea with his fork.
Such stories make real Brits warm to his pooterish character.
Kippers note I said polls not Poles - no need to panic...
It is no accident that UKIP have a £-sign as their emblem.
UKIP, on the other hand, have done nothing in comparison, a word alien to the media it seems.
Axel rod is a sock puppet...
There were certain rumours doing the rounds during the coal strike....all of which have been denied (several by the police in the area around Orgrieve).
Now we all know that the Yorkshire police are honest and above reproach...
Meanwhile up in Scotland I was offered a job driving the coal wagons, brand new Volvos specially purchased for Yull and Dodds.
No licence needed, and police protection from Hunterston to the Craig and back.
Orders from the police escort? pedal to the metal and if you hit anything your back will be covered.
You may think her sainted, we knew what she really was.
Lad who offered me the job was one of my mates....never spoke to the scabbing shit thereafter
Iirc the Cyril Smith allegations date from when he was a Labour councillor about a decade or so before he was a Lib MP. But that gets dropped from any story about it.
The media smell stories, find a Kipper saying something as dodgy as possible, slap a dramatic headline on it, throw it at Farage, wallow in outrage.
Then Kippers defend themselves with paranoia.
I've listened to all of the interview and I must say it was a bad day at the office for farage,he let O'Brien bully him with the Questions.
But my biggest concern was,why the hell did UKIP media team let farage go do a interview with O'Brien,when we know that O'Brien is a left of centre aggressive to any one on the right,especially ukip.
Even I would have expected race,immigration and candidates for the all 20mins interview thrown at me from O'Brien,but farage looked at points unprepared and that was just lazy politics.
My list of Tory homophobes and racists still holding council positions is growing. Unlike your claims these are facts not smears.
John Major hung onto power for grim death, despite being responsible for the biggest foreign policy disaster since Suez. He put the country's political system under the most incredible strain. We were lucky not to have riots.
The Tories haven't won a majority since - deservedly so, in the main.
The pasting Major received helped relieve the build-up of bile in the country until the 1997 GE, but the boil wasn't lanced until the death of the Princess of Wales.
Scargill and his union bullies were attempting to depose a democratically elected government (one that had been elected on a landslide and with a huge mandate for change)
It wasn't the first time the NUT had brought down an elected government either (mind Heath was an idiot for going to polls in February 74, so his downfall was partly of his own making)
But the bottom line was, we couldn't keep going on being blackmailed by this Union and it's militant leaders.
I don't agree with everything she did, but compare and contrast Thatcher's government from 79 to 90 and the progress that was made, to Labour's term in office from 1997-2010, which may just go down as the worst government in 300 years!
And I freely hold my hands up and admit I helped them on their way by voting for them 1997 and sitting on my hands in 2001 (By 2005 I had woke up and smelt the coffee and voted Lib-Dem and 2010 as you know I voted Con)
Like him. I didn't have an HGV licence,
Unlike him I had pride.
The state turning a blind eye to the laws of the land may suit you, you seem like you are made of the same type of jelly.
As for little Gin? Having prejudged the issue, he wants the law of the land applied, but only if it suits his views.
Progress?
Sell off council housing at a pittance while removing the ability from the councils to use what little they did get for new housing stock.
All those people making a buck then using the rest to borrow like there was no tomorrow.
Then, all these newly Torified morons borrowed to the hilt, while Britain pished the now cheap oil into the power stations.
She set the ball rolling, her and her brainless yank "economist" friend, Blair who you detest so much merely carried on her insanity.
Now you can get back to blaming everything that happened since onto your minority of choice,
That's politics, is it not?
Sullivan stood for UKIP at a Newent Council election in May 2013.
Pinknews reported at the time:
UKIP candidate John Sullivan who claimed regular physical exercise in schools can “prevent homosexuality” has failed to be elected as a councillor for Newent in Gloucestershire.
Mr Sullivan’s comments, which have since been deleted, were made on a Facebook group called “Traditional Britain Group.”
He also applauded Russia for banning gay pride marches in Moscow, saying: “Well done the Russians.”
Mr Sullivan came second in Thursday’s contest.
He was 391 votes behind the Conservative winner Will Windsor-Clive, who was elected on 988 votes.
UKIP has its own internal LBGTQ group which unambiguously condemned Sullivan's statements shortly before the election:
The LGBTQ in UKIP committee is extremely angry and disappointed by the comments made by a small number of UKIP local candidates, particularly ... John Sullivan.
These candidates, who haven’t been vetted and produce their own campaign literature, have let down the hundreds of outstanding UKIP candidates who in no way indorse the comments made, and the Party in general.
Whilst we believe in freedom of speech, this does not mean UKIP should therefore accommodate people with obnoxious beliefs such as suggesting LGBTQ people are inferior or abnormal.
We are informed by the Party that they are thoroughly investigating each of the cases raised by the media. It is unlikely these investigations will be concluded before Thursday.
It is our belief that these candidates should have the UKIP whip drawn from them, and that future candidates are properly vetted and literature officially approved before being published.
The candidates named above shall be receiving direct correspondence from us in the near future.
If Farage had been as forthright in his interview with O'Brien, we wouldn't be having this discussion tonight.
Religious reasons should be taken into account because that's how that section of the population lives their life. So, religious schools etc. They do, after all, pay their taxes and vote.
Of course religions should comply with planning rules, but who sets them? The council they themselves elect, of course.
Religious citizens are voters as well and can demand whatever they wish, despite what 'Dawks' like you think.
youtu.be/sQ2n7oMcSi0
You are happy for unlicenced and quite often banned drivers belting up and down the road at high speeds if it suits you.
The Tories, strong on law and order (except of course if it suits them otherwise, or any of their rich mates)
Banks guilty of money laundering? hand the naughty bank a small fine..The bank.....not the bankers who thought all these schemes and wiles up.
Billions in dodgy deals, and no one is guilty?
The progress that was made from 1979 to 1990 was quite incredible (this country in the 1970's was a total basket case, the sick man of Europe, "managing the decline" People even spoke seriously about the possibility of military coup's)
Of course in making the changes that pulled us up by the boot straps a lot of people got hurt and left out along the way, but unfortunately it probably couldn't have been any different.
The country left to Labour in 1997 was by far a better place than the one the Conservatives inherited in 1979. Most of that was due to Thatchers reforms.
What did Labour do with the country from 1997 to 2010? Pretty much every major index you look at went backwards under Labour. There was the dodgy dossiers. The lies. The war. The Great Recession. 13 years of Gordon Brown being in our national politics. Now we even face the break-up of the country itself after being promised by Labour that devolution would "kill independence stone dead"
Labour's term was an unmitigated disaster.
"When parliament is giving up powers, it should ask us, the people, in a referendum first".
Bravo!
What a tragedy it is that Labour and the LibDems reneged on their promises, and thus prevented that happening. Cameron, and the Conservatives, of course voted for that referendum, but sadly did not have a majority in parliament.
Both O'Flynn and Farage will, I hope, learn from this episode and not let Mccarthyite questioning tactics put them off balance in future. This has been a long campaign for UKIP as a party and for Nigel Farage as leader, One can only hope that the battering from the MSM and the rest of the Establishment these last 4 weeks, has not made them too tired and careless.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ukip-cancels-freephone-number-after-protesters-repeatedly-called-to-push-up-costs-9388799.html
As we shouted loudly at the time. a country that makes nothing is a country heading to the wall.
Our economy under Thatcher and her idiot friend (and aided by a brain dead ex film star) based itself on running a huge casino.....fortunately for the Yanks, even they started to do some simple maths. Our clever Eton boys were to busy inserting their pencils into their orifices and selling the family silver. (Brown sold the gold later)
The odd one out is BiSexual.
Don't worry - we'll genuinely will save you all.
You should all chill out on a Friday night.
Atheist citizens are voters as well, and can demand whatever they wish, despite what "imaginary friend believers" like you think.
Imagine this scenario: your neighbour applies to build an extension which overlooks you, takes away your privacy, is out of keeping with the neighbourhood and fails to comply with the local plan etc and is turned down. Then he says that he is going it use it for his prayers. Why should that be relevant? And why should it be allowed just because the builder is religious when anyone else would have it refused?
What appears to be being demanded here is just that and I don't agree: no group should be allowed to waive some sort of religious trump card overriding the rights of others.
Presumably he'd been getting more and more angry with the way the interview was going and couldn't control himself in the end, but it seems very unprofessional.
If he was any good as a PR, instead of getting so worked up he couldn't control himself, he should have been on to the Councillor allegations at the start of the interview. Imagine if Farage had been able to counter the accusation that the candidate was a UKIP Councillor when infact he wasn't? Would have really turned the tables.
You will be heading the wrong way on the ferry! Make sure you don't get sucked into a late night as you will need to be up at 6.00 am to catch the run through the Stockholm archipelago!
That's how it works in Switzerland.
But we're all agreed on the right amount of languages to speak and where and when we should speak them aren't we?
That's right? All the well connected Oxford and Cambridge chappies who ran them into the deck.
Now we have to get Japanese, Koreans. Indians to keep what little we have left running.
Britain! The economic whore of the world (never knowingly undersold)
http://i.imgur.com/QdPFGX5.jpg
Here's a hint: do a modicum of research. You will find that well-connected Oxford and Cambridge chappies of the 1960s and 1970s steered well away from running any manufacturing companies.
Some of them went into the City, protected as it was from competition by restrictive practices - until Maggie swept all that away on the 27th October 1986, one of the most significant dates in our modern history.
If you are genuinely interested (which I doubt, because you won't want your prejudices to be confronted by cold reality), read this book - written by a grammar-school lad of modest background, who lived through it all:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Death-Gentlemanly-Capitalism-Investment/dp/0141043393
Read the real story of the UCS "sit in"
A rich twat who thought ships were still riveted, and a workforce who wanted to build modular ships. A stupid idea of course, we would build ships in the best old traditions,stuff like building in modules was only for wartime and those insane asians
Helsinki nightlife is a bit sparse. Only about ten or so bars are licensed to stay open to 3:00 am and most are attached to the big hotels.
If you want a flavour of the city in the early hours try going to the (almost) all night café in a very small hotel opposite the very large Hotel Vaakuna near the Central Station. The café is called Ravintola (restaurant) Seurahuone.
Not much booze but excellent Columbian coffee and a chance to eat the great Finnish café delicacy: a sort of moccasin pastry shoe filled with rice. Wonderful people watching too.
Ravintola Surahuone is on Brunnsgatan off Mannerheimintie (the sole wide dual roadway in the centre).
Lab maj 2.94
They did of course, thus proving themselves liars.