Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » There’s nothing Farage could do about this but this but Nic

13»

Comments

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,823



    I'm not aiming any vitriol. However, you do seem to play with the issue of race quite a lot, and it is one issue that when you go stomping in with your size 12s, you can end up saying something stupid.

    You haven't aimed any harsh criticism at me? That's one of the definitions of vitriol that I know..

    And do you have any other quickly accessible, maybe bookmarked, examples of my playing with the issue of race?

    I've been accused of being a racist on here in the past, and just this evening one who accuses people who I disagree with of racism.

    I've admitted in the past my difficulties in dealing with the complexities surrounding immigration. While I'm instinctively against an open door policy, most of the friends I made during my seven years living in London wouldn't have been there were it not for the lax immigration rules we had.

    Am I racist, or a lover of immigration? Or both?

    You're obviously the one who should make the final call on that.
    I wouldn't presume to make that judgement. What I would say is that you (like many of your cohort) like to use racism as a 'killer argument' against your opponents. That was also the basis of our last disagreement. I don't find that racist but neither do I find it an advancement of the anti-racist cause, because it cheapens real racism.

    You have a poor memory. Our last disagreement was due to my pointing out that someone was a "9-11 truther".

    I still haven't accused anyone here of racism. I asked which party was most likely to attract racists. I can still understand your shame at the obvious answer.
    You pointed out that this person was a truther because you felt that by implication that made them an anti-semite, and that therefore MikeK shouldn't have posted the link. Today you're again very heavy handedly playing with the issue to try and embarrass supporters of an opposing party for 'sharing a platform' with racists. For your idiotic question to work, you even had to single out white racists -itself a clumsy allusion to race. You insensitively and very cynically use race as your trump card. By all means rock on with it -personally I just think it makes you look silly.

  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    Tim_B said:

    Tim_B said:

    .

    Tim_B said:

    .


    Yes, the popularity of College Football is mind-blowing - until you think about it a little more carefully and take in the sheer size of the States. Firstly some pretty big cities don't actually have NFL teams, and so if you're a fan, college is the highest level you can logistically watch - most notably Los Angeles and UCLA, but also Austin and the Texas Longhorns - Austin being roughly double the population of Liverpool. Alabama (population 4.83m) has no teams at all in any of the major professional leagues. Secondly, even those teams who share a catchment area with an NFL team aren't too put out as each team only plays 8 guaranteed home games a season (or 7 now for some due to the London games), meaning that there's always going to be greater demand, unlike perhaps baseball where MLB teams play a ludicrous 162 game season, or basketball which has an 82 game regular season plus their own elongated play-offs. Add in the fact that it has the appeal of supporting your local team, whose players will always be 'yours' even when they graduate to the NFL and you've got something that's huge business.

    Alabama is the classic example. Everyone is either an Alabama fan or an Auburn fan. When I drive through the state I often listen to the Paul Finebaum radio show. I remember once when a caller asked about the assistant linebackers coach Auburn had just hired and went on to describe his previous career in some detail. Those folks are crazy.

    Alabama fan Harvey Updyke poisoned the oak trees at Toomers Corner in Auburn during Auburn's national championship season in 2010. Updyke was arrested after a man calling himself "Al from Dadeville" — Updyke's middle name is Almorn — phoned Paul Finebaum's radio show claiming he poured herbicide around the 130-year-old oaks after Auburn's win against rival Alabama during Auburn's 2010 national championship season. The caller signed off by saying, "Roll Damn Tide."

    The trees were removed April 23, 2013. He spent 6 months in jail for his pains. New oaks are shortly to be replanted.

    I've been to games at both Alabama and Auburn. Many college fans also support an NFL team.

    There is a paasion, tradition, and pageantry to college football. The NFL is a faster and better product.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,889
    valleyboy Yes, it was very enjoyable although as usual with Hollywood a bit of artistic licence

    Have also seen Mr Turner which I also enjoyed, will probably wait for Paddington to come on the TV or DVD. Next month the final Hobbit and Exodus Gods and Kings I both want to see in the holiday season
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,917
    edited November 2014

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    I know people who are of 'ethnic minorities' - one Lebanese, one Cambodian-Canadian - who have no problem voting UKIP. And judging by accounts of Reckless on walkabout during the Rochester campaign, he received support from a range of backgrounds.

    Quite often, the people most worried about immigration - are immigrants themselves.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Well, as I've pointed out before, I, Sunil and MikeK are from ethnic minorities, yet to persistently try and associate us with racism.

    This sh1t ended in Rotherham.

    Debate the issues properly or shut up.
  • FalseFlag said:

    FalseFlag said:



    I'm not aiming any vitriol. However, you do seem to play with the issue of race quite a lot, and it is one issue that when you go stomping in with your size 12s, you can end up saying something stupid.

    You haven't aimed any harsh criticism at me? That's one of the definitions of vitriol that I know..

    And do you have any other quickly accessible, maybe bookmarked, examples of my playing with the issue of race?

    I've been accused of being a racist on here in the past, and just this evening one who accuses people who I disagree with of racism.

    I've admitted in the past my difficulties in dealing with the complexities surrounding immigration. While I'm instinctively against an open door policy, most of the friends I made during my seven years living in London wouldn't have been there were it not for the lax immigration rules we had.

    Am I racist, or a lover of immigration? Or both?

    You're obviously the one who should make the final call on that.
    I wouldn't presume to make that judgement. What I would say is that you (like many of your cohort) like to use racism as a 'killer argument' against your opponents. That was also the basis of our last disagreement. I don't find that racist but neither do I find it an advancement of the anti-racist cause, because it cheapens real racism.

    You have a poor memory. Our last disagreement was due to my pointing out that someone was a "9-11 truther".

    I still haven't accused anyone here of racism. I asked which party was most likely to attract racists. I can still understand your shame at the obvious answer.
    Labour. Has the highest number of minority voters who have the strongest levels of ethnocentricism, or racism if you prefer.
    That's why I originally asked about white racists.
    Well UKIP does show the ocassional sign of sticking up for the interests of indigenous Britons, if you want to call that racism.
    Just in case you missed it, I asked which party is most likely to attract the votes of white racists at the next election.

    The only posters to not answer with their answers, and to seemingly take offence at the question, are Kippers.

    This confirms my belief that the answer to my question is UKIP.
    I don't take offense at it, however I have a question for you.

    Which part do you think attracted the votes of white racists at the last three elections?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,889
    Sarkozy elected as leader of the UMP Party with 64.5% of the vote, lower than he hoped
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/29/nicolas-sarkozy-ump-party-leadership-elected
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548



    You pointed out that this person was a truther because you felt that by implication that made them an anti-semite, and that therefore MikeK shouldn't have posted the link. Today you're again very heavy handedly playing with the issue to try and embarrass supporters of an opposing party for 'sharing a platform' with racists. For your idiotic question to work, you even had to single out white racists -itself a clumsy allusion to race. You insensitively and very cynically use race as your trump card. By all means rock on with it -personally I just think it makes you look silly.

    I haven't noticed MikeK pushing that person's views since, so maybe I had a point?

    I haven't made any aspersions about anyone here being racist, in fact I've been quite clear that I don't believe they are. I've merely implied with my question that Kippers are lining up with racists, and that they're embarrassed about that (which as decent folk they should be).

    You're arguing with me because of your shame at that fact. I don't judge you for that, I understand and accept it.

    If racists agreed with me I hope I'd try to distance myself from whatever views i held which would enable their agreement. I hope I wouldn't just try to deny that they agreed.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    I know people who are of 'ethnic minorities' - one Lebanese, one Cambodian-Canadian - who have no problem voting UKIP. And judging by accounts of Reckless on walkabout during the Rochester campaign, he received support from a range of backgrounds.

    Quite often, the people most worried about immigration - are immigrants themselves.
    Correct.

    Immigrants would face increased competition for housing and jobs from the newcomers, just like the WWC.

    Immigrants have faced demands on them to pay for new schools and other institutions, but nobody ever asked them if it was OK.

    And for those obsessed by racism, existing BME Britons do not appreciate having to compete against White immigrants precisely because of the racism they would face.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Well, as I've pointed out before, I, Sunil and MikeK are from ethnic minorities, yet to persistently try and associate us with racism.

    This sh1t ended in Rotherham.

    Debate the issues properly or shut up.
    Well said @Ninoinoz. OGH has completely lost the plot this evening and the threads this weekend carry a completely anti UKIP hystirical tone.

    And with that I'm off to bed.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    I know people who are of 'ethnic minorities' - one Lebanese, one Cambodian-Canadian - who have no problem voting UKIP. And judging by accounts of Reckless on walkabout during the Rochester campaign, he received support from a range of backgrounds.

    Quite often, the people most worried about immigration - are immigrants themselves.
    I never suggested that all people supporting UKIP are racist. I put forward the idea that most of the white racists will vote UKIP, and thought that maybe Kippers would be uncomfortable with that.

    You're obviously not so well done to you all.

    Go UKIP
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548



    I don't take offense at it, however I have a question for you.

    Which part do you think attracted the votes of white racists at the last three elections?

    I already said that I was ashamed that the party I support was the home of many racists, and glad that a good proportion of them had left for UKIP


  • I don't take offense at it, however I have a question for you.

    Which part do you think attracted the votes of white racists at the last three elections?

    I already said that I was ashamed that the party I support was the home of many racists, and glad that a good proportion of them had left for UKIP
    Do you regard a person concerned about immigration as a racist or a realist?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    I guess the embargo expired...

    @LabourList: Kinnock backs Murphy for Scottish Labour leader http://labli.st/1FGQjKO
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,917
    edited November 2014

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    I know people who are of 'ethnic minorities' - one Lebanese, one Cambodian-Canadian - who have no problem voting UKIP. And judging by accounts of Reckless on walkabout during the Rochester campaign, he received support from a range of backgrounds.

    Quite often, the people most worried about immigration - are immigrants themselves.
    I never suggested that all people supporting UKIP are racist. I put forward the idea that most of the white racists will vote UKIP, and thought that maybe Kippers would be uncomfortable with that.

    You're obviously not so well done to you all.

    Go UKIP
    I'm not really fussed to be honest. Who would you rather the 'white racists' vote for? An extremist, fascist party, like on the Continent?

    UKIP have subdued the extreme right. You should thank them!

  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548



    I don't take offense at it, however I have a question for you.

    Which part do you think attracted the votes of white racists at the last three elections?

    I already said that I was ashamed that the party I support was the home of many racists, and glad that a good proportion of them had left for UKIP
    Do you regard a person concerned about immigration as a racist or a realist?
    I've also, on this thread, said that I'm concerned about immigration. And that I don't believe anyone here is racist.

    Which party do you think racists will vote for in next year's election?
  • I love my brick!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,889
    Shiney2 Clearly most of the UKIP rise came from BNP and Tory voters (given the Labour vote rose) and the Tory vote fall was not even half the UKIP vote rise, while the BNP vote fell by more than the Tory vote, clearly no coincidence, nor the loss of all the BNP MEPs on a night UKIP topped the poll!


  • I don't take offense at it, however I have a question for you.

    Which part do you think attracted the votes of white racists at the last three elections?

    I already said that I was ashamed that the party I support was the home of many racists, and glad that a good proportion of them had left for UKIP
    Do you regard a person concerned about immigration as a racist or a realist?
    I've also, on this thread, said that I'm concerned about immigration. And that I don't believe anyone here is racist.

    Which party do you think racists will vote for in next year's election?
    UKIP, Labour and Conservative.
  • TwistedFireStopperTwistedFireStopper Posts: 2,538
    edited November 2014
    Does every PB thread now come down to arguments about race, or who is, or isn't, a racist? Mind you, at least we can blame Mike for this one!
    Oh, and on topic, no one in their right mind would want an endorsement by Griffin. Farage should tell him to eff off pdq.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    I know people who are of 'ethnic minorities' - one Lebanese, one Cambodian-Canadian - who have no problem voting UKIP. And judging by accounts of Reckless on walkabout during the Rochester campaign, he received support from a range of backgrounds.

    Quite often, the people most worried about immigration - are immigrants themselves.
    I never suggested that all people supporting UKIP are racist. I put forward the idea that most of the white racists will vote UKIP, and thought that maybe Kippers would be uncomfortable with that.

    You're obviously not so well done to you all.

    Go UKIP
    I'm not really fussed to be honest. Who would you rather the 'white racists' vote for? An extremist, fascist party, like on the Continent?

    UKIP have subdued the extreme right. You should thank them!

    I'd rather they didn't vote for the same party as me, even if it costs my party a few seats.

    I'm grateful for UKIP in one way; they've helped detoxify the Tories more than Dave's green posturing could ever have done. UKIP is the nasty party now.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    I don't pretend to be an informed observer on this, but I understood UKIP to have two key objectives - withdrawal from the EU and control of UK borders.

    There's no way that's racist.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    Scott_P said:

    I guess the embargo expired...

    @LabourList: Kinnock backs Murphy for Scottish Labour leader http://labli.st/1FGQjKO

    Seems like the majority of people in Labour on both sides of the border want Murphy to get it. They musn't think his Blairite reputation will be a problem.
  • Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    I know people who are of 'ethnic minorities' - one Lebanese, one Cambodian-Canadian - who have no problem voting UKIP. And judging by accounts of Reckless on walkabout during the Rochester campaign, he received support from a range of backgrounds.

    Quite often, the people most worried about immigration - are immigrants themselves.
    I never suggested that all people supporting UKIP are racist. I put forward the idea that most of the white racists will vote UKIP, and thought that maybe Kippers would be uncomfortable with that.

    You're obviously not so well done to you all.

    Go UKIP
    I'm not really fussed to be honest. Who would you rather the 'white racists' vote for? An extremist, fascist party, like on the Continent?

    UKIP have subdued the extreme right. You should thank them!

    I'd rather they didn't vote for the same party as me, even if it costs my party a few seats.

    I'm grateful for UKIP in one way; they've helped detoxify the Tories more than Dave's green posturing could ever have done. UKIP is the nasty party now.
    Labour are the nasty party.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Scott_P said:

    I guess the embargo expired...

    @LabourList: Kinnock backs Murphy for Scottish Labour leader http://labli.st/1FGQjKO

    It was boring when "Henry" told us by accident the first time.
    The sky didn't fall in when we found out early because no-one actually gives a rat's arse.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to be an informed observer on this, but I understood UKIP to have two key objectives - withdrawal from the EU and control of UK borders.

    There's no way that's racist.

    Both of which objectives i agree with. And I haven't called UKIP racist; I've said they're the most likely to attract racists.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    I know people who are of 'ethnic minorities' - one Lebanese, one Cambodian-Canadian - who have no problem voting UKIP. And judging by accounts of Reckless on walkabout during the Rochester campaign, he received support from a range of backgrounds.

    Quite often, the people most worried about immigration - are immigrants themselves.
    I never suggested that all people supporting UKIP are racist. I put forward the idea that most of the white racists will vote UKIP, and thought that maybe Kippers would be uncomfortable with that.

    You're obviously not so well done to you all.

    Go UKIP
    I'm not really fussed to be honest. Who would you rather the 'white racists' vote for? An extremist, fascist party, like on the Continent?

    UKIP have subdued the extreme right. You should thank them!

    I'd rather they didn't vote for the same party as me, even if it costs my party a few seats.

    I'm grateful for UKIP in one way; they've helped detoxify the Tories more than Dave's green posturing could ever have done. UKIP is the nasty party now.
    Labour are the nasty party.
    I won't argue with that! Except maybe to change it to "thick and nasty"
  • Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to be an informed observer on this, but I understood UKIP to have two key objectives - withdrawal from the EU and control of UK borders.

    There's no way that's racist.

    Both of which objectives i agree with. And I haven't called UKIP racist; I've said they're the most likely to attract racists.
    Well if you agree with both of those objectives you should vote UKIP because there is no way in a million years they will happen under the Tories.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,823
    edited November 2014



    I haven't noticed MikeK pushing that person's views since, so maybe I had a point?

    I haven't made any aspersions about anyone here being racist, in fact I've been quite clear that I don't believe they are. I've merely implied with my question that Kippers are lining up with racists, and that they're embarrassed about that (which as decent folk they should be).

    You're arguing with me because of your shame at that fact. I don't judge you for that, I understand and accept it.

    If racists agreed with me I hope I'd try to distance myself from whatever views i held which would enable their agreement. I hope I wouldn't just try to deny that they agreed.

    1. You think that if it makes you feel better

    2. I'm offering you some friendly advice. Like I said before, you're perfectly at liberty to continue using race to make your point. It's blundering and crass, but hey -we've all got our thing.

    3. If this is true, I feel sorry for you. To be dissuaded from a thought out and principled stance merely because someone else who has other views you disagree with agrees on this one thing is utter idiocy. Are you really so willing to jettison your beliefs? Odd.

    I take it you're prepared to recant your concern about immigration expressed a few posts down. It is shared by the BNP (they're quite vocal about it I hear).

  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,917
    @jonnyjimmy

    As nigel4england points out, 'racists' vote for a range of parties, including those on the left. Lest we forget, the BNP were national socialist. Any party you vote for, you have to accept some of its policies you will disagree with, and some of its other voters you would disagree with. It's called democracy.
  • Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

  • Tim_B said:

    Tim_B said:

    Tim_B said:

    .

    Tim_B said:

    .

    Alabama is the classic example. Everyone is either an Alabama fan or an Auburn fan. When I drive through the state I often listen to the Paul Finebaum radio show. I remember once when a caller asked about the assistant linebackers coach Auburn had just hired and went on to describe his previous career in some detail. Those folks are crazy.

    Alabama fan Harvey Updyke poisoned the oak trees at Toomers Corner in Auburn during Auburn's national championship season in 2010. Updyke was arrested after a man calling himself "Al from Dadeville" — Updyke's middle name is Almorn — phoned Paul Finebaum's radio show claiming he poured herbicide around the 130-year-old oaks after Auburn's win against rival Alabama during Auburn's 2010 national championship season. The caller signed off by saying, "Roll Damn Tide."

    The trees were removed April 23, 2013. He spent 6 months in jail for his pains. New oaks are shortly to be replanted.

    I've been to games at both Alabama and Auburn. Many college fans also support an NFL team.

    There is a paasion, tradition, and pageantry to college football. The NFL is a faster and better product.
    That's an incredible story, although perhaps the fanaticism is no different to our relationship with our own most popular sport, football - it's just spread around 92 clubs (at least...), with around 40-50 or so capable of drawing large crowds. A comparable situation would be if the UK only had 10 Premier League clubs, and then everything else was universities - as South Yorkshire as it is has about 80,000 people watching its teams (despite all of them being almost universally dreadful, it would be higher if they were closer to their 'historic' positions) when at home, and similar stats for other large urban areas you'd probably get a similar phenomena if our own footballing structure was similar.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    1 has he mentioned it since?

    2 your "friendly" advice is noted. Thanks. What other quotes have you saved of mine where I used race to make a point? I don't think you'll find any.

    3 I quite clearly said I would try distance myself from the views I held which would align me with racists, not all of my views because racists agreed with some of them. Try reading it again, and try not calling me an idiot for taking a reasonable stand point.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,034

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    Sunil's avatar is conveniently colour coded....

    this means I'm either supporting the LDs or... worse.. the SNP! Let me just go find a nice picture of Tebbit.. I may be some time!
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    That doesn't prove you're not confused!
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    edited November 2014
    HYUFD said:

    Shiney2 Clearly most of the UKIP rise came from BNP and Tory voters (given the Labour vote rose) and the Tory vote fall was not even half the UKIP vote rise, while the BNP vote fell by more than the Tory vote, clearly no coincidence, nor the loss of all the BNP MEPs on a night UKIP topped the poll!

    I've been bemused by posters who are comfortable with the idea that people travel thousands of miles to this country, but struggle with the idea that people move 20-30 miles within this country.

    So, @HYUFD, considering the BNP got zero seats in the 2004 Euros, where did those votes originally come from?
    Clue: Both their seats were won in the North of England.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,823
    edited November 2014

    1 has he mentioned it since?

    2 your "friendly" advice is noted. Thanks. What other quotes have you saved of mine where I used race to make a point? I don't think you'll find any.

    3 I quite clearly said I would try distance myself from the views I held which would align me with racists, not all of my views because racists agreed with some of them. Try reading it again, and try not calling me an idiot for taking a reasonable stand point.

    Your views on Rotherham and your concern about immigration aligns precisely with the BNP. Under your bizarre logic you should cease to be concerned.

    (1 or 2 it was kinder not to comment)

  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    @jonnyjimmy

    As nigel4england points out, 'racists' vote for a range of parties, including those on the left. Lest we forget, the BNP were national socialist. Any party you vote for, you have to accept some of its policies you will disagree with, and some of its other voters you would disagree with. It's called democracy.

    I know that, I said already that I was ashamed to have voted with so many racists in the past. I'm glad that so many of them are now Kippers.

    Which party do you think is most likely to attract white racists at the next election?

    This isn't a test of whether you're a racist. I'm pretty damn sure you're not. But if you deny that racists are going to be attracted to UKIP then you're mad, stupid or lying.

    Who racists would support is the only thing I've questioned. That may appear to imply that I think UKIP is racist, but that would be to confuse implication and inference.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    Tim_B said:

    I don't pretend to be an informed observer on this, but I understood UKIP to have two key objectives - withdrawal from the EU and control of UK borders.

    There's no way that's racist.

    Both of which objectives i agree with. And I haven't called UKIP racist; I've said they're the most likely to attract racists.
    More likely than Britain First?

    Think again.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    1 has he mentioned it since?

    2 your "friendly" advice is noted. Thanks. What other quotes have you saved of mine where I used race to make a point? I don't think you'll find any.

    3 I quite clearly said I would try distance myself from the views I held which would align me with racists, not all of my views because racists agreed with some of them. Try reading it again, and try not calling me an idiot for taking a reasonable stand point.

    Your views on Rotherham and your concern about immigration aligns precisely with the BNP. Under your bizarre logic you should cease to be concerned.

    (1 or 2 it was kinder not to comment)

    No. Under my "bizarre" logic, an octopus isn't a spider.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,823

    1 has he mentioned it since?

    2 your "friendly" advice is noted. Thanks. What other quotes have you saved of mine where I used race to make a point? I don't think you'll find any.

    3 I quite clearly said I would try distance myself from the views I held which would align me with racists, not all of my views because racists agreed with some of them. Try reading it again, and try not calling me an idiot for taking a reasonable stand point.

    Your views on Rotherham and your concern about immigration aligns precisely with the BNP. Under your bizarre logic you should cease to be concerned.

    (1 or 2 it was kinder not to comment)

    No. Under my "bizarre" logic, an octopus isn't a spider.
    Well that's something we can both agree on. Night!

  • @jonnyjimmy

    As nigel4england points out, 'racists' vote for a range of parties, including those on the left. Lest we forget, the BNP were national socialist. Any party you vote for, you have to accept some of its policies you will disagree with, and some of its other voters you would disagree with. It's called democracy.

    I know that, I said already that I was ashamed to have voted with so many racists in the past. I'm glad that so many of them are now Kippers.

    Which party do you think is most likely to attract white racists at the next election?

    This isn't a test of whether you're a racist. I'm pretty damn sure you're not. But if you deny that racists are going to be attracted to UKIP then you're mad, stupid or lying.

    Who racists would support is the only thing I've questioned. That may appear to imply that I think UKIP is racist, but that would be to confuse implication and inference.
    Racists will will support UKIP, Labour and Conservatives.

    Now please give up because with every post you look more ridiculous.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    1 has he mentioned it since?

    2 your "friendly" advice is noted. Thanks. What other quotes have you saved of mine where I used race to make a point? I don't think you'll find any.

    3 I quite clearly said I would try distance myself from the views I held which would align me with racists, not all of my views because racists agreed with some of them. Try reading it again, and try not calling me an idiot for taking a reasonable stand point.

    Your views on Rotherham and your concern about immigration aligns precisely with the BNP. Under your bizarre logic you should cease to be concerned.

    (1 or 2 it was kinder not to comment)

    On your edit, I think you meant "less embarrassing". MikeK hasn't mentioned it since, and I haven't made many race related comments; the vast majority have been about Weird Ed.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    RobD said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    Sunil's avatar is conveniently colour coded....

    this means I'm either supporting the LDs or... worse.. the SNP! Let me just go find a nice picture of Tebbit.. I may be some time!
    I have several spares I could lend you.
    Would you prefer autographed or unsigned?
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    1 has he mentioned it since?

    2 your "friendly" advice is noted. Thanks. What other quotes have you saved of mine where I used race to make a point? I don't think you'll find any.

    3 I quite clearly said I would try distance myself from the views I held which would align me with racists, not all of my views because racists agreed with some of them. Try reading it again, and try not calling me an idiot for taking a reasonable stand point.

    Your views on Rotherham and your concern about immigration aligns precisely with the BNP. Under your bizarre logic you should cease to be concerned.

    (1 or 2 it was kinder not to comment)

    No. Under my "bizarre" logic, an octopus isn't a spider.
    Well that's something we can both agree on. Night!

    Sleep well ✌
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,034
    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    Sunil's avatar is conveniently colour coded....

    this means I'm either supporting the LDs or... worse.. the SNP! Let me just go find a nice picture of Tebbit.. I may be some time!
    I have several spares I could lend you.
    Would you prefer autographed or unsigned?
    Not sure that would even be legible in an avatar!
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    @jonnyjimmy

    As nigel4england points out, 'racists' vote for a range of parties, including those on the left. Lest we forget, the BNP were national socialist. Any party you vote for, you have to accept some of its policies you will disagree with, and some of its other voters you would disagree with. It's called democracy.

    I know that, I said already that I was ashamed to have voted with so many racists in the past. I'm glad that so many of them are now Kippers.

    Which party do you think is most likely to attract white racists at the next election?

    This isn't a test of whether you're a racist. I'm pretty damn sure you're not. But if you deny that racists are going to be attracted to UKIP then you're mad, stupid or lying.

    Who racists would support is the only thing I've questioned. That may appear to imply that I think UKIP is racist, but that would be to confuse implication and inference.
    Racists will will support UKIP, Labour and Conservatives.

    Now please give up because with every post you look more ridiculous.
    Your shame at being associated with racists is bound to make you lie, if you're not mad or stupid. Any one of those is forgivable.

    Voting in a way that makes Weird Ed more likely to be our prime minister isn't.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    edited November 2014
    @marktheowl

    Soccer in the UK is tribal: rival fans fight and hate each other because of the team they support. There is nothing like that in the US sports fan - it's a game.

    I've been tailgating at football games - both college and pro - and rival fans tailgate, eat and drink together, and have fun doing so.

    There is no seating segregation at stadiums, except for block seat allocations. If you buy a couple of tickets to a game you are likely to find yourself sitting next to a fan of the opposing team.

    In the 93 season I was at a Cowboys Falcons game at the Georgia Dome, naturally wearing my Cowboys gear. A couple of rows in front was a drunk Cowboys fan, shouting abuse and being generally obnoxious and annoying. We were in a sea of Falcons fans. and Dallas were losing badly. Eventually the oboxious guy was ejected, and all of a sudden all the Falcons fans eyes focussed on me.

    It was an anxious moment, but then a Falcons fan said "We like you - you take it like a man!" and that was that. We interacted and generally it was good.

    Dallas came back to the Dome and won the Superbowl several weeks later - and I was there!

    It was the end of a remarkable stretch of Buffalo going to the Superbowl 4 straight years and losing every time - the last 2 to Dallas.

    There is an ESPN 30 for 30 documentary called "Roll Tide - War Eagle" (or maybe it's the other way around) which documents the whole Auburn vs Alabama situation, and Updyke is featured.

    Regarding numbers, there are 32 NFL teams, and about 125 FBS colleges.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    Sunil's avatar is conveniently colour coded....

    this means I'm either supporting the LDs or... worse.. the SNP! Let me just go find a nice picture of Tebbit.. I may be some time!
    I have several spares I could lend you.
    Would you prefer autographed or unsigned?
    Not sure that would even be legible in an avatar!
    True. My desktop wallpaper wouldn't compress that small and keep the detail.
    Non signed, then!
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    I've been told before by friends that I'm like a dog with a bone when I'm arguing.

    This dog is tired and needs to go to bed.. Night all
  • @jonnyjimmy

    As nigel4england points out, 'racists' vote for a range of parties, including those on the left. Lest we forget, the BNP were national socialist. Any party you vote for, you have to accept some of its policies you will disagree with, and some of its other voters you would disagree with. It's called democracy.

    I know that, I said already that I was ashamed to have voted with so many racists in the past. I'm glad that so many of them are now Kippers.

    Which party do you think is most likely to attract white racists at the next election?

    This isn't a test of whether you're a racist. I'm pretty damn sure you're not. But if you deny that racists are going to be attracted to UKIP then you're mad, stupid or lying.

    Who racists would support is the only thing I've questioned. That may appear to imply that I think UKIP is racist, but that would be to confuse implication and inference.
    Racists will will support UKIP, Labour and Conservatives.

    Now please give up because with every post you look more ridiculous.
    Your shame at being associated with racists is bound to make you lie, if you're not mad or stupid. Any one of those is forgivable.

    Voting in a way that makes Weird Ed more likely to be our prime minister isn't.
    Lie? What the fuck are you on about?

    You've gone too far now, you have been indulged all night but the Weird Ed bit has given the game away, just fuck off and never call me a liar ever again.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,034
    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    Sunil's avatar is conveniently colour coded....

    this means I'm either supporting the LDs or... worse.. the SNP! Let me just go find a nice picture of Tebbit.. I may be some time!
    I have several spares I could lend you.
    Would you prefer autographed or unsigned?
    Not sure that would even be legible in an avatar!
    True. My desktop wallpaper wouldn't compress that small and keep the detail.
    Non signed, then!
    Thinking about it, they really should be placed alongside portraits of HM in job centres! ;)
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    Sunil's avatar is conveniently colour coded....

    this means I'm either supporting the LDs or... worse.. the SNP! Let me just go find a nice picture of Tebbit.. I may be some time!
    I have several spares I could lend you.
    Would you prefer autographed or unsigned?
    Not sure that would even be legible in an avatar!
    True. My desktop wallpaper wouldn't compress that small and keep the detail.
    Non signed, then!
    Thinking about it, they really should be placed alongside portraits of HM in job centres! ;)
    Life-size statues? One each side of the main door!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,034
    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:

    RobD said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    Sunil's avatar is conveniently colour coded....

    this means I'm either supporting the LDs or... worse.. the SNP! Let me just go find a nice picture of Tebbit.. I may be some time!
    I have several spares I could lend you.
    Would you prefer autographed or unsigned?
    Not sure that would even be legible in an avatar!
    True. My desktop wallpaper wouldn't compress that small and keep the detail.
    Non signed, then!
    Thinking about it, they really should be placed alongside portraits of HM in job centres! ;)
    Life-size statues? One each side of the main door!
    Not at all intimidating, hah!
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    I've been told before by friends that I'm like a dog with a bone when I'm arguing.

    This dog is tired and needs to go to bed.. Night all

    They told me you had a boner and wanted to go dogging :-)
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    @jonnyjimmy

    As nigel4england points out, 'racists' vote for a range of parties, including those on the left. Lest we forget, the BNP were national socialist. Any party you vote for, you have to accept some of its policies you will disagree with, and some of its other voters you would disagree with. It's called democracy.

    I know that, I said already that I was ashamed to have voted with so many racists in the past. I'm glad that so many of them are now Kippers.

    Which party do you think is most likely to attract white racists at the next election?

    This isn't a test of whether you're a racist. I'm pretty damn sure you're not. But if you deny that racists are going to be attracted to UKIP then you're mad, stupid or lying.

    Who racists would support is the only thing I've questioned. That may appear to imply that I think UKIP is racist, but that would be to confuse implication and inference.
    Racists will will support UKIP, Labour and Conservatives.

    Now please give up because with every post you look more ridiculous.
    Your shame at being associated with racists is bound to make you lie, if you're not mad or stupid. Any one of those is forgivable.

    Voting in a way that makes Weird Ed more likely to be our prime minister isn't.
    Lie? What the fuck are you on about?

    You've gone too far now, you have been indulged all night but the Weird Ed bit has given the game away, just fuck off and never call me a liar ever again.
    I woke back up just to respond to this absurdity.

    If you state that racists aren't more likely to be attracted to UKIP than other main parties then you're either lying, or you're mad, or you're stupid.

    Don't say something so ridiculous and then act so offended.

    I think it must be past your bed time as well.
  • @jonnyjimmy

    As nigel4england points out, 'racists' vote for a range of parties, including those on the left. Lest we forget, the BNP were national socialist. Any party you vote for, you have to accept some of its policies you will disagree with, and some of its other voters you would disagree with. It's called democracy.

    I know that, I said already that I was ashamed to have voted with so many racists in the past. I'm glad that so many of them are now Kippers.

    Which party do you think is most likely to attract white racists at the next election?

    This isn't a test of whether you're a racist. I'm pretty damn sure you're not. But if you deny that racists are going to be attracted to UKIP then you're mad, stupid or lying.

    Who racists would support is the only thing I've questioned. That may appear to imply that I think UKIP is racist, but that would be to confuse implication and inference.
    Racists will will support UKIP, Labour and Conservatives.

    Now please give up because with every post you look more ridiculous.
    Your shame at being associated with racists is bound to make you lie, if you're not mad or stupid. Any one of those is forgivable.

    Voting in a way that makes Weird Ed more likely to be our prime minister isn't.
    Lie? What the fuck are you on about?

    You've gone too far now, you have been indulged all night but the Weird Ed bit has given the game away, just fuck off and never call me a liar ever again.
    I woke back up just to respond to this absurdity.

    If you state that racists aren't more likely to be attracted to UKIP than other main parties then you're either lying, or you're mad, or you're stupid.

    Don't say something so ridiculous and then act so offended.

    I think it must be past your bed time as well.
    Define racist
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Tim_B said:

    I've been told before by friends that I'm like a dog with a bone when I'm arguing.

    This dog is tired and needs to go to bed.. Night all

    They told me you had a boner and wanted to go dogging :-)
    I don't often do so but that made me LOL!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,034

    Tim_B said:

    I've been told before by friends that I'm like a dog with a bone when I'm arguing.

    This dog is tired and needs to go to bed.. Night all

    They told me you had a boner and wanted to go dogging :-)
    I don't often do so but that made me LOL!
    You don't often what? Go dogging, or "lol"?

    ... i'll get my coat.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    @jonnyjimmy

    As nigel4england points out, 'racists' vote for a range of parties, including those on the left. Lest we forget, the BNP were national socialist. Any party you vote for, you have to accept some of its policies you will disagree with, and some of its other voters you would disagree with. It's called democracy.

    I know that, I said already that I was ashamed to have voted with so many racists in the past. I'm glad that so many of them are now Kippers.

    Which party do you think is most likely to attract white racists at the next election?

    This isn't a test of whether you're a racist. I'm pretty damn sure you're not. But if you deny that racists are going to be attracted to UKIP then you're mad, stupid or lying.

    Who racists would support is the only thing I've questioned. That may appear to imply that I think UKIP is racist, but that would be to confuse implication and inference.
    Racists will will support UKIP, Labour and Conservatives.

    Now please give up because with every post you look more ridiculous.
    Your shame at being associated with racists is bound to make you lie, if you're not mad or stupid. Any one of those is forgivable.

    Voting in a way that makes Weird Ed more likely to be our prime minister isn't.
    Lie? What the fuck are you on about?

    You've gone too far now, you have been indulged all night but the Weird Ed bit has given the game away, just fuck off and never call me a liar ever again.
    I woke back up just to respond to this absurdity.

    If you state that racists aren't more likely to be attracted to UKIP than other main parties then you're either lying, or you're mad, or you're stupid.

    Don't say something so ridiculous and then act so offended.

    I think it must be past your bed time as well.
    Define racist
    If I were to you'd act all offended again and deny being whatever I defined.

    Let me be clear. Once again.

    I'm not calling UKIP racist. I'm not calling you or anyone else racist.

    What I'm saying is that people who are racist, under most reasonable definitions, are more likely to vote UKIP than they are to vote for other parties at the next election.

    Now I'm going to bed. You should too before you ride the offended bus too far.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    What a car commercial should be......

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__fK7crTlzw
  • Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    That doesn't prove you're not confused!
    If I felt UKIP were a racist outfit I wouldn't have voted for them.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited November 2014

    @jonnyjimmy

    As nigel4england points out, 'racists' vote for a range of parties, including those on the left. Lest we forget, the BNP were national socialist. Any party you vote for, you have to accept some of its policies you will disagree with, and some of its other voters you would disagree with. It's called democracy.

    I know that, I said already that I was ashamed to have voted with so many racists in the past. I'm glad that so many of them are now Kippers.

    Which party do you think is most likely to attract white racists at the next election?

    This isn't a test of whether you're a racist. I'm pretty damn sure you're not. But if you deny that racists are going to be attracted to UKIP then you're mad, stupid or lying.

    Who racists would support is the only thing I've questioned. That may appear to imply that I think UKIP is racist, but that would be to confuse implication and inference.
    Racists will will support UKIP, Labour and Conservatives.

    Now please give up because with every post you look more ridiculous.
    Your shame at being associated with racists is bound to make you lie, if you're not mad or stupid. Any one of those is forgivable.

    Voting in a way that makes Weird Ed more likely to be our prime minister isn't.
    Lie? What the fuck are you on about?

    You've gone too far now, you have been indulged all night but the Weird Ed bit has given the game away, just fuck off and never call me a liar ever again.
    I woke back up just to respond to this absurdity.

    If you state that racists aren't more likely to be attracted to UKIP than other main parties then you're either lying, or you're mad, or you're stupid.

    Don't say something so ridiculous and then act so offended.

    I think it must be past your bed time as well.
    Define racist
    If I were to you'd act all offended again and deny being whatever I defined.

    Let me be clear. Once again.

    I'm not calling UKIP racist. I'm not calling you or anyone else racist.

    What I'm saying is that people who are racist, under most reasonable definitions, are more likely to vote UKIP than they are to vote for other parties at the next election.

    Now I'm going to bed. You should too before you ride the offended bus too far.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2550153/A-leading-Jewish-commentators-damning-question-This-Tory-MP-lied-Nazi-antics-So-sanity-does-Cameron-stand-him.html

    plenty of members of other parties seem to like that uniform as well.


  • Lie? What the fuck are you on about?

    You've gone too far now, you have been indulged all night but the Weird Ed bit has given the game away, just fuck off and never call me a liar ever again.

    I woke back up just to respond to this absurdity.

    If you state that racists aren't more likely to be attracted to UKIP than other main parties then you're either lying, or you're mad, or you're stupid.

    Don't say something so ridiculous and then act so offended.

    I think it must be past your bed time as well.

    Define racist

    If I were to you'd act all offended again and deny being whatever I defined.

    Let me be clear. Once again.

    I'm not calling UKIP racist. I'm not calling you or anyone else racist.

    What I'm saying is that people who are racist, under most reasonable definitions, are more likely to vote UKIP than they are to vote for other parties at the next election.

    Now I'm going to bed. You should too before you ride the offended bus too far.

    Just grow up, I'm angry you called me a liar but not playing the victim card which you seem keen on.

    Now, working on the admittedly unreliable assumption that UKIP will get 15% of the vote and Labour and Tory will get 33% each, I would say UKIP are the third party in line to have most racists voting for them.

    Almost every Tory will have grave concerns about immigration, so say that would be 25% of the vote. Assuming Labour's 33% of the vote is made up of 50% WWC, that's around 16% of the vote, and as we can see from posts on this thread not every prospective UKIP voter could be possibly deemed a racist so say 33% of their share of the vote, so 5%.

    So to answer your ridiculous question:

    1. Conservative

    2. Labour

    3. UKIP
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    another richard says.... ''I just use the 'ragheads' example as a contrast to those people here who obsess about one UKIP nobody calling another UKIP nobody 'Ting Tong'
    For the record I think 'Ting Tong' is also derogatory and that Little Britain was a vastly overrated, deeply nasty 'comedy'.
    Whether the UKIP nobodies viewed it in those terms I wouldn't know. But I would hope they do now.''

    A 'nobody'? In that case everybody in UKIP is a nobody. Taking various other comments by various other nobodies I think we can work out what goes on in the kipper mind.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    That doesn't prove you're not confused!
    If I felt UKIP were a racist outfit I wouldn't have voted for them.
    Maybe you were distracted trying to find a train station you haven't visited yet :-)
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited November 2014

    another richard says.... ''I just use the 'ragheads' example as a contrast to those people here who obsess about one UKIP nobody calling another UKIP nobody 'Ting Tong'
    For the record I think 'Ting Tong' is also derogatory and that Little Britain was a vastly overrated, deeply nasty 'comedy'.
    Whether the UKIP nobodies viewed it in those terms I wouldn't know. But I would hope they do now.''

    A 'nobody'? In that case everybody in UKIP is a nobody. Taking various other comments by various other nobodies I think we can work out what goes on in the kipper mind.

    Ah yes, Flightpath, the poster that has contributes to the rise in UKIP voters on this forum like no other. When I am having one of my Tory moment I wince with embarrassment, then when I have a UKIP moment I want you to please continue insulting people.

    Remind me, how many ethnic PPCs do the Tories have, any how many do UKIP have ? I am sure all those candidates agreed to stand for UKIP because they are racist.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited November 2014
    I think Mr Griffin hasn't looks too closely at their candidates if he feels he can support UKIP, they seem a bit more diverse than his usual preference.

    http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/590x/POLITICS-Ukip-214858-474603.jpg
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    I am not surprised that the FBU were quick to congratulate Penny Mordaunt on her appointment to that Ministerial role. As an MP for Portsmouth, she has already proved to be a fantastic ambassador for the Navy and the Royal Marines in this Parliament.

    AndyJS said:

    A female Tory Minister made a spoof Commons speech on animal welfare in order to say an obscene word after a dare at a dinner with Navy officer friends.

    Communities Minister Penny Mordaunt said ‘c**k’ six times, ‘lay’ or ‘laid’ five times and mentioned the names of at least six officers during a debate on poultry welfare.

    Her speech, recorded in full in Parliament’s Hansard official report and broadcast on television, received a formal reply from a fellow Minister, who believed her interest in the
    subject was genuine.

    Speaker John Bercow was also duped, making copious notes as Naval Reservist Ms Mordaunt addressed the House.


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2854421/Minister-staged-obscene-Commons-debate-BET-Tory-says-c-k-six-times-lewd-stunt-sailor-pals.html

    Thé Mail rreally has no sense of humour. I can't be thé only personne to find that mildly amusing. And thé word c**k, as thé Mail spells it, is hardly obscene.

    It's got nothing to do with whether or not someone has a sense of humour, it's the fact that it was bringing the Commons into disrepute, (if that's possible given the low esteem it's already held in).
    When she got her ministerial position, Penny Mordaunt didn't even know that she was responsible for the Fire Service. She actually asked the FBU on twitter why they were tweeting congratulations to her, and saying they looked forward to working with her.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,889
    Ninoinoz Mainly from Labour they have now switched to UKIP
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited November 2014
    Oh dear. In effect Tories 2015 Manifesto requires approval in Germany.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11263037/Eurosceptics-hopping-mad-over-claims-Angela-Merkel-intervened-in-David-Camerons-attempt-to-curb-migration.html

    Senior Conservative MPs are threatening a new revolt over Europe amid claims that the German chancellor Angela Merkel had intervened in David Cameron’s plan to curb European Union migration.

    Leading Eurosceptic Tories reacted angrily to reports that Mrs Merkel had warned Downing Street she would not tolerate any attempt by the UK to place a cap on the number of European migrants coming to Britain.

    They will table a bill on Wednesday — ahead of the Autumn Statement — that would attempt to enshrine in law Britain’s right to control its borders and allow Westminster to override the EU’s principle of free movement of workers.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,889
    Artist Murphy is now removing some Blairite baggage eg he now supports a 50% top tax rate, opposed by the SNP and Blair and backed by Miliband and Kinnock
  • Indigo said:

    Oh dear. In effect Tories 2015 Manifesto requires approval in Germany.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11263037/Eurosceptics-hopping-mad-over-claims-Angela-Merkel-intervened-in-David-Camerons-attempt-to-curb-migration.html


    Senior Conservative MPs are threatening a new revolt over Europe amid claims that the German chancellor Angela Merkel had intervened in David Cameron’s plan to curb European Union migration.

    Leading Eurosceptic Tories reacted angrily to reports that Mrs Merkel had warned Downing Street she would not tolerate any attempt by the UK to place a cap on the number of European migrants coming to Britain.

    They will table a bill on Wednesday — ahead of the Autumn Statement — that would attempt to enshrine in law Britain’s right to control its borders and allow Westminster to override the EU’s principle of free movement of workers.
    Outrageous behaviour by the Germans. Don't they know they have a responsibility to pass a treaty doing whatever David Cameron thinks he needs to get through the news cycle? The same goes for the other 26 countries as well.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Outrageous behaviour by the Germans. Don't they know they have a responsibility to pass a treaty doing whatever David Cameron thinks he needs to get through the news cycle? The same goes for the other 26 countries as well.

    Or I guess they could stop the megaphone diplomacy, let him set whatever policy he wants, what with being a democratically elected government and all, and then negotiate about it later.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    And yet Sarkozy is now a fan of repatriating laws from the EU as well. Lets face it @EdmundinTokyo, the deck is now being stacked in Cameron's favour when it comes to the EU. At the end of the day, I suspect that the EU wants the UK in the periphery of the EU project rather than being out of it altogether undermining its core ideals.

    Indigo said:

    Oh dear. In effect Tories 2015 Manifesto requires approval in Germany.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11263037/Eurosceptics-hopping-mad-over-claims-Angela-Merkel-intervened-in-David-Camerons-attempt-to-curb-migration.html


    Senior Conservative MPs are threatening a new revolt over Europe amid claims that the German chancellor Angela Merkel had intervened in David Cameron’s plan to curb European Union migration.

    Leading Eurosceptic Tories reacted angrily to reports that Mrs Merkel had warned Downing Street she would not tolerate any attempt by the UK to place a cap on the number of European migrants coming to Britain.

    They will table a bill on Wednesday — ahead of the Autumn Statement — that would attempt to enshrine in law Britain’s right to control its borders and allow Westminster to override the EU’s principle of free movement of workers.
    Outrageous behaviour by the Germans. Don't they know they have a responsibility to pass a treaty doing whatever David Cameron thinks he needs to get through the news cycle? The same goes for the other 26 countries as well.

  • Indigo said:

    Outrageous behaviour by the Germans. Don't they know they have a responsibility to pass a treaty doing whatever David Cameron thinks he needs to get through the news cycle? The same goes for the other 26 countries as well.

    Or I guess they could stop the megaphone diplomacy, let him set whatever policy he wants, what with being a democratically elected government and all, and then negotiate about it later.
    They're not going to pass this, so why should they pretend they are? The only purpose served by keeping their intentions secret would be to enable people who wanted to lie to British voters about them.
  • The Sunday Times
    "Allegations of vote-buying by the winning Russian and Qatari World Cup campaigns are contained in a secret database lying in the vaults of the England 2018 bid. The existence of the database and some of its allegations are revealed in a dossier compiled by The Sunday Times that has been submitted to a House of Commons committee, at its request, and which was published yesterday.

    Officials from England’s World Cup bid gathered detailed information from ex- MI6 agents hired to spy on its rivals and British embassies around the world, according to the dossier.

    Their intelligence database contained “incendiary” claims that Qatar and Russia were suspected of using their vast sovereign wealth to seal key support and that the two countries were thought to have swapped votes in a “collusion” pact brokered through a massive bilateral gas deal."

    If true, then surely Russia and Qatar must forfeit the next two World Cup tournaments. Either that or the UK's Football Associations and their European counterparts (undoubtedly along with many other countries' football authorities) should withdraw from the qualifying process for both competitions.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited November 2014
    fitalass said:

    And yet Sarkozy is now a fan of repatriating laws from the EU as well. Lets face it @EdmundinTokyo, the deck is now being stacked in Cameron's favour when it comes to the EU. At the end of the day, I suspect that the EU wants the UK in the periphery of the EU project rather than being out of it altogether undermining its core ideals.

    Indigo said:

    Oh dear. In effect Tories 2015 Manifesto requires approval in Germany.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11263037/Eurosceptics-hopping-mad-over-claims-Angela-Merkel-intervened-in-David-Camerons-attempt-to-curb-migration.html


    Senior Conservative MPs are threatening a new revolt over Europe amid claims that the German chancellor Angela Merkel had intervened in David Cameron’s plan to curb European Union migration.

    Leading Eurosceptic Tories reacted angrily to reports that Mrs Merkel had warned Downing Street she would not tolerate any attempt by the UK to place a cap on the number of European migrants coming to Britain.

    They will table a bill on Wednesday — ahead of the Autumn Statement — that would attempt to enshrine in law Britain’s right to control its borders and allow Westminster to override the EU’s principle of free movement of workers.
    Outrageous behaviour by the Germans. Don't they know they have a responsibility to pass a treaty doing whatever David Cameron thinks he needs to get through the news cycle? The same goes for the other 26 countries as well.


    The hitch there is that the things Sarkozy wants the EU to stop doing are the things Cameron wants it to keep doing, and vice versa.

    This happens because the EU is a web of bilateral quid-pro-quos. France wants Britain to do A, Britain wants France to do B, they make the deal and get the EU to enforce it. It'll always be popular in Britain to advocate that the EU stops A and just does B, and popular in France to advocate that the EU stops B and just does A.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    This whole scandal stinks, lets hope its finally blown wide open. I have no problems with the various British football associations boycotting either of these World Cups, and if they did I would be delighted if other European countries followed suit. Peter, you have message via Vanilla too.

    The Sunday Times
    "Allegations of vote-buying by the winning Russian and Qatari World Cup campaigns are contained in a secret database lying in the vaults of the England 2018 bid. The existence of the database and some of its allegations are revealed in a dossier compiled by The Sunday Times that has been submitted to a House of Commons committee, at its request, and which was published yesterday.

    Officials from England’s World Cup bid gathered detailed information from ex- MI6 agents hired to spy on its rivals and British embassies around the world, according to the dossier.

    Their intelligence database contained “incendiary” claims that Qatar and Russia were suspected of using their vast sovereign wealth to seal key support and that the two countries were thought to have swapped votes in a “collusion” pact brokered through a massive bilateral gas deal."

    If true, then surely Russia and Qatar must forfeit the next two World Cup tournaments. Either that or the UK's Football Associations and their European counterparts (undoubtedly along with many other countries' football authorities) should withdraw from the qualifying process for both competitions.

  • fitalass said:

    This whole scandal stinks, lets hope its finally blown wide open. I have no problems with the various British football associations boycotting either of these World Cups, and if they did I would be delighted if other European countries followed suit. Peter, you have message via Vanilla too.

    The Sunday Times
    "Allegations of vote-buying by the winning Russian and Qatari World Cup campaigns are contained in a secret database lying in the vaults of the England 2018 bid. The existence of the database and some of its allegations are revealed in a dossier compiled by The Sunday Times that has been submitted to a House of Commons committee, at its request, and which was published yesterday.

    Officials from England’s World Cup bid gathered detailed information from ex- MI6 agents hired to spy on its rivals and British embassies around the world, according to the dossier.

    Their intelligence database contained “incendiary” claims that Qatar and Russia were suspected of using their vast sovereign wealth to seal key support and that the two countries were thought to have swapped votes in a “collusion” pact brokered through a massive bilateral gas deal."

    If true, then surely Russia and Qatar must forfeit the next two World Cup tournaments. Either that or the UK's Football Associations and their European counterparts (undoubtedly along with many other countries' football authorities) should withdraw from the qualifying process for both competitions.

    Thanks fitalass, message received and noted.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    Did somebody mention UKIP and ethnicity? The UKIP candidates who stood in the parliamentary by-elections in which I was a candidate were as follows:

    White: 33.3%
    Black: 33.3%
    Asian: 33.3%
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,034
    On the Times story: Why were we spying on our own embassies??
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited November 2014
    fitalass said:

    This whole scandal stinks, lets hope its finally blown wide open. I have no problems with the various British football associations boycotting either of these World Cups, and if they did I would be delighted if other European countries followed suit. Peter, you have message via Vanilla too.

    The Sunday Times
    "Allegations of vote-buying by the winning Russian and Qatari World Cup campaigns are contained in a secret database lying in the vaults of the England 2018 bid. The existence of the database and some of its allegations are revealed in a dossier compiled by The Sunday Times that has been submitted to a House of Commons committee, at its request, and which was published yesterday.

    Officials from England’s World Cup bid gathered detailed information from ex- MI6 agents hired to spy on its rivals and British embassies around the world, according to the dossier.

    Their intelligence database contained “incendiary” claims that Qatar and Russia were suspected of using their vast sovereign wealth to seal key support and that the two countries were thought to have swapped votes in a “collusion” pact brokered through a massive bilateral gas deal."

    If true, then surely Russia and Qatar must forfeit the next two World Cup tournaments. Either that or the UK's Football Associations and their European counterparts (undoubtedly along with many other countries' football authorities) should withdraw from the qualifying process for both competitions.

    While you are still riding your high horse, please remind us how Germany "won" the 2006 World Cup 12 - 11 when the New Zealand delegate left the day before the votes were taken having made the journey in the first place.

    South Africa was shafted so brazenly that the world football community had to give SA the following World Cup.

    Did any particular FA give Gucci handbags to the "wives" [ who carry lots of votes presumably ] of FIFA delegates ? I see they were just presents !!!
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    HYUFD said:

    Artist Murphy is now removing some Blairite baggage eg he now supports a 50% top tax rate, opposed by the SNP and Blair and backed by Miliband and Kinnock

    I thought Sturgeon is on record saying she favours the 50% rate in Scotland.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    fitalass said:

    I am not surprised that the FBU were quick to congratulate Penny Mordaunt on her appointment to that Ministerial role. As an MP for Portsmouth, she has already proved to be a fantastic ambassador for the Navy and the Royal Marines in this Parliament.

    AndyJS said:

    A female Tory Minister made a spoof Commons speech on animal welfare in order to say an obscene word after a dare at a dinner with Navy officer friends.

    Communities Minister Penny Mordaunt said ‘c**k’ six times, ‘lay’ or ‘laid’ five times and mentioned the names of at least six officers during a debate on poultry welfare.

    Her speech, recorded in full in Parliament’s Hansard official report and broadcast on television, received a formal reply from a fellow Minister, who believed her interest in the
    subject was genuine.

    Speaker John Bercow was also duped, making copious notes as Naval Reservist Ms Mordaunt addressed the House.


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2854421/Minister-staged-obscene-Commons-debate-BET-Tory-says-c-k-six-times-lewd-stunt-sailor-pals.html

    Thé Mail rreally has no sense of humour. I can't be thé only personne to find that mildly amusing. And thé word c**k, as thé Mail spells it, is hardly obscene.

    It's got nothing to do with whether or not someone has a sense of humour, it's the fact that it was bringing the Commons into disrepute, (if that's possible given the low esteem it's already held in).
    When she got her ministerial position, Penny Mordaunt didn't even know that she was responsible for the Fire Service. She actually asked the FBU on twitter why they were tweeting congratulations to her, and saying they looked forward to working with her.

    Our "sexiest" MP did not even know that Fire Service came within her remit.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    I laugh at all those answering by not answering my question. I know that you all know the answer but are ashamed by it because of your common association with it.

    I don't believe that any of you are racist, hence your shame, but you will share a political base with the racists as long as you stick with the party you currently support.

    And there we have it, the famed guilt by association.

    So heartily condemned by TSE when he became a victim, but used before by him and again now.

    A very dangerous game to play, TSE and Mike.
    You continue to exhibit the traits of someone ashamed by their association with racists.
    Well, at least I am a member of an ethnic minority, unlike you.

    I am also a Christian, and Christ associated with lepers, Mary Magdalene, publicans, Samaritans, etc.

    How am I to spread the Gospel if I preach only to the converted?
    Yet you seem entirely comfortable with supporting the same party as ex-BNPers..

    It must be complicated being a non-white-English Kipper (I've always suspected that Sunil is wracked with confusion before he says anything!).

    What do you know about my ethnicity?
    Your suspicions are wrong, JJ. I voted UKIP at the Euros.

    That doesn't prove you're not confused!
    If I felt UKIP were a racist outfit I wouldn't have voted for them.
    No, you are just naive !!!
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    The Tories are clearly climbing in SCotland in recent days. Where is Fitalass ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,034
    surbiton said:

    The Tories are clearly climbing in SCotland in recent days. Where is Fitalass ?

    You just replied to one of her posts, LOL.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,889
    Surbiton Salmond certainly opposed the 50% rate, not sure about Sturgeon
This discussion has been closed.