"I suppose if Better Together can't get people off their arses to campaign for them, they have to accept whatever help they can get."
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Doing a lot of leafleting in Sweden Stuart ?
As a foreigner it's really none of your business you know. I hope you haven't been sending any money, you'll upset malc.
I mean if Mr Taylor rented a cheap flat and called it his address for electoral purposes then you'd be good with it ?
I wasn't entirely ecstatic about Souter's relationship with the SNP (though a couple of friends far more lefty than me met him and found him a personable bloke), but a) he's always lived and voted in Scotland and b) he's not even a major funder, let alone the main one, of the Yes campaign. If Mr Taylor indulged in some face-saving jiggery pokery to get a vote in the referendum, it wouldn't change my opinion of him or BT in the slightest.
I didn't think it would change your opinion at all. What you object to is someone funding your opposition, that's just politics. The list of objections though is just not very credible given the source of some of your own funding. And if Nats object so strongly to "foreigners" then why is New York based Alan Cumming in the campaign or has he bought his house in Scotland yet for some face-saving jiggery pokery ?
Did you actually read what I said?? I specifically said ban them in public spaces which demand human interaction - schools, courts, etc - but do NOT ban them anywhere else, even if we fiercely disapprove.
That's what I said. Up there. in the comment whereto you are apparently replying.
Do you need a biscuit and a lie down?
I did indeed read what you said and I was agreeing with some of it (hence me mentioning those bits) whilst disagreeing with you about the idea that they are either rude or antisocial. Why get upset about what someone is wearing? And it certainly doesn't equate with spitting which is a filthy habit that has the potential to spread disease.
BTW - I'm assuming that Scottish bred tax evaders will be returning to the country to make their contribution, right?
No issue with foreigners with no vote funding the Bitter Together mob, says it all. They cannot even raise money in Scotland but need to get it from foreigners.
I think this is more the reality.
D
Donation to the No team. - This sorry excuse for a haggis is in league with those southern puffters – burn him…!
Does that mean you will decline any donations from ‘foreigners? – No, Didn’t think so.
YES have already said there should be no funding from foreigners. Given we have not seen the weasels of Bitter Together trumpeting anything I can presume they are true to their word unlike NO who will sell their soul to the devil.
I've always thought of Alex Ferguson as a Scot myself, and one of Scotland's best known figures.
Alan, Yes but not as far as the referendum vote, as far as I am aware he is not on electoral register or eligible to vote.
Did you actually read what I said?? I specifically said ban them in public spaces which demand human interaction - schools, courts, etc - but do NOT ban them anywhere else, even if we fiercely disapprove.
That's what I said. Up there. in the comment whereto you are apparently replying.
Do you need a biscuit and a lie down?
Why get upset about what someone is wearing? .
Free speech only goes so far, someone wearing a Ku-Klux Clan mask and walking around London (or anywhere) would rightly be arrested. Try telling people then that 'why get upset?'
I mean if Mr Taylor rented a cheap flat and called it his address for electoral purposes then you'd be good with it ?
I wasn't entirely ecstatic about Souter's relationship with the SNP (though a couple of friends far more lefty than me met him and found him a personable bloke), but a) he's always lived and voted in Scotland and b) he's not even a major funder, let alone the main one, of the Yes campaign. If Mr Taylor indulged in some face-saving jiggery pokery to get a vote in the referendum, it wouldn't change my opinion of him or BT in the slightest.
I didn't think it would change your opinion at all. What you object to is someone funding your opposition, that's just politics. The list of objections though is just not very credible given the source of some of your own funding. And if Nats object so strongly to "foreigners" then why is New York based Alan Cumming in the campaign or has he bought his house in Scotland yet for some face-saving jiggery pokery ?
Cumming has always kept a house in Scotland
So when he was telling the press he was going to buy one last year, he was buying a second one ? can't really see it malc.
Did you actually read what I said?? I specifically said ban them in public spaces which demand human interaction - schools, courts, etc - but do NOT ban them anywhere else, even if we fiercely disapprove.
That's what I said. Up there. in the comment whereto you are apparently replying.
Do you need a biscuit and a lie down?
Why get upset about what someone is wearing? .
Free speech only goes so far, someone wearing a Ku-Klux Clan mask and walking around London (or anywhere) would rightly be arrested. Try telling people then that 'why get upset?'</blockquote
Well they shouldn't. Wearing a stupid costume should not be sufficient reason to be arrested.
Might I ask you, if "No" wins the referendum should the question be then parked for a generation ?
As a democrat, I would say what any democrat would say: that it is for the electorate to decide if, and when, an issue is "parked" or "unfinished business".
I guess all other things being equal, it will depend on the size of the margin.
"I suppose if Better Together can't get people off their arses to campaign for them, they have to accept whatever help they can get."
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Doing a lot of leafleting in Sweden Stuart ?
As a foreigner it's really none of your business you know. I hope you haven't been sending any money, you'll upset malc.
LOL, I am sure Stuart has a valid address on the electoral roll and is an eligible voter Alan.
I mean if Mr Taylor rented a cheap flat and called it his address for electoral purposes then you'd be good with it ?
Cumming has always kept a house in Scotland
So when he was telling the press he was going to buy one last year, he was buying a second one ? can't really see it malc.
Alan, I am sure i saw somewhere recently that he had kept a house here, not my cup of tea so usually I would not read anything about him or any other of those supposed celebrities. Bunch of fannies as far as I am concerned. Personally he can have his opinion but unless he is voting he should not be in any campaign. I only wish I had as much dosh so that I could go to the other side of the world and shout about it.
When I lived in Sparkbrook in Brum in the early 80s all our neighbours were Pakistani Moslems. If you weren't a student your were a Moslem. I do not ever remember seeing a woman in a burqa or a niqab. They covered their heads but you could see their faces and they wore saris with trousers. That leads me to believe that most of the wearing that goes on today is about making a statement, and that further leads me to the conclusion that it is being done of the woman's own volition. I hate the statement that is being made, but I can't see a case for a blanket (or a sheet!) ban in public places.
"I suppose if Better Together can't get people off their arses to campaign for them, they have to accept whatever help they can get."
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Doing a lot of leafleting in Sweden Stuart ?
As a foreigner it's really none of your business you know. I hope you haven't been sending any money, you'll upset malc.
LOL, I am sure Stuart has a valid address on the electoral roll and is an eligible voter Alan.
He can't have as I'm reliably informed that's just face saving jiggery pokery. Stuart wouldn't stoop that low.
This would be fair enough IF the burka and the niqab weren't inextricably linked to, and emblematic of, a culture - fundamentalist Islam - which is undeniable misogynistic, and patriarchal, and is indeed responsible for hideous crimes against women across the world.
So are atheists or religious people more likely to wear these garments?
"I suppose if Better Together can't get people off their arses to campaign for them, they have to accept whatever help they can get."
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Doing a lot of leafleting in Sweden Stuart ?
As a foreigner it's really none of your business you know. I hope you haven't been sending any money, you'll upset malc.
LOL, I am sure Stuart has a valid address on the electoral roll and is an eligible voter Alan.
He can't have as I'm reliably informed that's just face saving jiggery pokery. Stuart wouldn't stoop that low.
"I suppose if Better Together can't get people off their arses to campaign for them, they have to accept whatever help they can get."
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Doing a lot of leafleting in Sweden Stuart ?
As a foreigner it's really none of your business you know. I hope you haven't been sending any money, you'll upset malc.
LOL, I am sure Stuart has a valid address on the electoral roll and is an eligible voter Alan.
He can't have as I'm reliably informed that's just face saving jiggery pokery. Stuart wouldn't stoop that low.
Did you actually read what I said?? I specifically said ban them in public spaces which demand human interaction - schools, courts, etc - but do NOT ban them anywhere else, even if we fiercely disapprove.
That's what I said. Up there. in the comment whereto you are apparently replying.
Do you need a biscuit and a lie down?
I did indeed read what you said and I was agreeing with some of it (hence me mentioning those bits) whilst disagreeing with you about the idea that they are either rude or antisocial. Why get upset about what someone is wearing? And it certainly doesn't equate with spitting which is a filthy habit that has the potential to spread disease.
If you don't find a full-body black shroud complete with almost-total face-mask "antisocial" then perhaps you need to do a bit more socialising.
What's that rather good joke? "A woman knocked on my door in a niqab so I spoke to her only through the letterbox, so she knew how it felt".
This would be fair enough IF the burka and the niqab weren't inextricably linked to, and emblematic of, a culture - fundamentalist Islam - which is undeniable misogynistic, and patriarchal, and is indeed responsible for hideous crimes against women across the world.
So are atheists or religious people more likely to wear these garments?
*braces self*
Religous or not you would have to be barking to be dressed like that. If someone tried to tell me some God had decreed that I had to wear that stuff to be religous I would know what was being peddled , bovine manure of the finest quality.
Did you actually read what I said?? I specifically said ban them in public spaces which demand human interaction - schools, courts, etc - but do NOT ban them anywhere else, even if we fiercely disapprove.
That's what I said. Up there. in the comment whereto you are apparently replying.
Do you need a biscuit and a lie down?
I did indeed read what you said and I was agreeing with some of it (hence me mentioning those bits) whilst disagreeing with you about the idea that they are either rude or antisocial. Why get upset about what someone is wearing? And it certainly doesn't equate with spitting which is a filthy habit that has the potential to spread disease.
If you don't find a full-body black shroud complete with almost-total face-mask "antisocial" then perhaps you need to do a bit more socialising.
What's that rather good joke? "A woman knocked on my door in a niqab so I spoke to her only through the letterbox, so she knew how it felt".
First they came for the burqas then they came for the Keffiyehs, then the headscarfs. By the time they came for my balaclava there was no one left to defend me.
Trust Richard_Tyndall To get everything back to front.: The Niqab and Burqa are a threat to every thing that Britons used to hold dear: freedom of expression the right to debate in an open society and freedom to practice any religion or none.
Poor Richard cannot see that the Islamists living in Briton want desperately to see Sharia Law introduced in this country by whatever toe-hold they can manage. Useful idiots like Richard - who I still cannot believe is a kipper - and the lefty elite are helping them when they support the right to wear a burka and/or niqab in public. They cannot see that it is another step in the islamation of the nation.
But to make a mockery of the beautiful poem by Pastor Martin Niemoller in a wicked and mocking parody is shameful
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me -
This would be fair enough IF the burka and the niqab weren't inextricably linked to, and emblematic of, a culture - fundamentalist Islam - which is undeniable misogynistic, and patriarchal, and is indeed responsible for hideous crimes against women across the world.
So are atheists or religious people more likely to wear these garments?
*braces self*
Religous or not you would have to be barking to be dressed like that. If someone tried to tell me some God had decreed that I had to wear that stuff to be religous I would know what was being peddled , bovine manure of the finest quality.
True. Amazing that *billions* of people avoid either pork or beef because of something someone said over a thousand years ago. Mmm, bacon...
Did you actually read what I said?? I specifically said ban them in public spaces which demand human interaction - schools, courts, etc - but do NOT ban them anywhere else, even if we fiercely disapprove.
That's what I said. Up there. in the comment whereto you are apparently replying.
Do you need a biscuit and a lie down?
I did indeed read what you said and I was agreeing with some of it (hence me mentioning those bits) whilst disagreeing with you about the idea that they are either rude or antisocial. Why get upset about what someone is wearing? And it certainly doesn't equate with spitting which is a filthy habit that has the potential to spread disease.
If you don't find a full-body black shroud complete with almost-total face-mask "antisocial" then perhaps you need to do a bit more socialising.
What's that rather good joke? "A woman knocked on my door in a niqab so I spoke to her only through the letterbox, so she knew how it felt".
"They should be tolerated in private life, but society should openly express its disapproval. They are just f*cking rude. It's like spitting. It's antisocial."
So are the grossly obese wearing shell suits needles in noses face tattoos....
You've got an agenda. Get over it and you'll feel better
When I lived in Sparkbrook in Brum in the early 80s all our neighbours were Pakistani Moslems. If you weren't a student your were a Moslem. I do not ever remember seeing a woman in a burqa or a niqab. They covered their heads but you could see their faces and they wore saris with trousers. That leads me to believe that most of the wearing that goes on today is about making a statement, and that further leads me to the conclusion that it is being done of the woman's own volition. I hate the statement that is being made, but I can't see a case for a blanket (or a sheet!) ban in public places.
This would be fair enough IF the burka and the niqab weren't inextricably linked to, and emblematic of, a culture - fundamentalist Islam - which is undeniable misogynistic, and patriarchal, and is indeed responsible for hideous crimes against women across the world.
So are atheists or religious people more likely to wear these garments?
*braces self*
Religous or not you would have to be barking to be dressed like that. If someone tried to tell me some God had decreed that I had to wear that stuff to be religous I would know what was being peddled , bovine manure of the finest quality.
True. Amazing that *billions* of people avoid either pork or beef because of something someone said over a thousand years ago. Mmm, bacon...
Jared Diamond in his book Collapse, speculates that a bizarre aversion to eating fish may have been the difference between survival and collapse for the Greenland Norse.
Some Chieftan's daughter choked on a fishbone, or something, and it suddenly becomes a cultural injunction not to eat fish and a people fail to survive.
Anorak.. every muslim I know, and thats quite a few, eat bacon and pork, usually in sausages.I can also take you to almost exclusively Muslim clubs in London where gambling is carried out and vast amounts of booze is consumed. .. ..and the girls were not wearng veils, of any description
Just imagine waking up in a hospital ward after a serious operation to be greeted by someone wearing a full face covering: (and I don't mean a surgical one).
Just imagine waking up in a hospital ward after a serious operation to be greeted by someone wearing a full face covering: (and I don't mean a surgical one).
"At least with piercings and tattoos..usually worn by idiots, you can get to see their faces"
The reason the 60's were The 60's were so people could do their own thing. I'm not going to start now giving in to petty parochial prejudice and allow a bunch of reactionaries to set down rules how others should live their lives.
First they came for the burqas then they came for the Keffiyehs, then the headscarfs. By the time they came for my balaclava there was no one left to defend me.
Trust Richard_Tyndall To get everything back to front.: The Niqab and Burqa are a threat to every thing that Britons used to hold dear: freedom of expression the right to debate in an open society and freedom to practice any religion or none.
Poor Richard cannot see that the Islamists living in Briton want desperately to see Sharia Law introduced in this country by whatever toe-hold they can manage. Useful idiots like Richard - who I still cannot believe is a kipper - and the lefty elite are helping them when they support the right to wear a burka and/or niqab in public. They cannot see that it is another step in the islamation of the nation.
But to make a mockery of the beautiful poem by Pastor Martin Niemoller in a wicked and mocking parody is shameful
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me -
"A threat to everything that Britons hold dear"
Have a word with yourself, yer man Nuttall doesn't want it banned. There should be sensible restrictions, in certain places, where the nigab would be inappropriate. Anyone wanting a full ban should be, well, banned.
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Yep, you get the impression that even UKOK politicians aren't brimming with enthusiasm for the good fight (and who could blame them considering some of the sh*te they're required to spout). Actually, it'd be good to have a straw poll amongst the soi-disant Unionists on here as to what support they've given to the cause - a tasty little cheque to BT, leafletting the mean streets of Aboyne, sending a 'get well soon' card to Johann Lamont? C'mon folks, dare to speak the name of that which you love!
What we have here are two extreme positions: banning the niqab in all situations and allowing it in all situations. But it should be banned in places like hospitals and schools and it's mind-boggling that it isn't IMO.
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Yep, you get the impression that even UKOK politicians aren't brimming with enthusiasm for the good fight (and who could blame them considering some of the sh*te they're required to spout). Actually, it'd be good to have a straw poll amongst the soi-disant Unionists on here as to what support they've given to the cause - a tasty little cheque to BT, leafletting the mean streets of Aboyne, sending a 'get well soon' card to Johann Lamont? C'mon folks, dare to speak the name of that which you love!
The cynic in me thinks, some UK Conservatives think, a net loss of 58 non conservative MPs isn't such a bad thing.
First they came for the burqas then they came for the Keffiyehs, then the headscarfs. By the time they came for my balaclava there was no one left to defend me.
Trust Richard_Tyndall To get everything back to front.: The Niqab and Burqa are a threat to every thing that Britons used to hold dear: freedom of expression the right to debate in an open society and freedom to practice any religion or none.
Poor Richard cannot see that the Islamists living in Briton want desperately to see Sharia Law introduced in this country by whatever toe-hold they can manage. Useful idiots like Richard - who I still cannot believe is a kipper - and the lefty elite are helping them when they support the right to wear a burka and/or niqab in public. They cannot see that it is another step in the islamation of the nation.
But to make a mockery of the beautiful poem by Pastor Martin Niemoller in a wicked and mocking parody is shameful
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me -
Trust the idiotic reactionary Mike to get it utterly wrong. It is people like you who give UKIP a bad name. Thankfully it looks like Paul Nuttall has seen sense. banning stuff just because we don't like it is utterly un-British (or un-English if you prefer) and has no place in a free society.
There are places where it is right to restrict usage for practical reasons which are the places Sean has mentioned. But the idea that we should ban stuff we don't like for no other reason than it offends our sensibilities (well the sensibilities of a strange reactionary minority) is just wrong.
Should we ban Shellsuits? After all they are apparently far more of a sign of belonging to a section of society that is likely to commit crime and violence. Should we have banned football shorts and scarfs in the 80s when they were the uniform of the hooligans?
It is your sort of reactionary garbage that will always hold back UKIP so I am glad we seem to be turning our back on you.
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Yep, you get the impression that even UKOK politicians aren't brimming with enthusiasm for the good fight (and who could blame them considering some of the sh*te they're required to spout). Actually, it'd be good to have a straw poll amongst the soi-disant Unionists on here as to what support they've given to the cause - a tasty little cheque to BT, leafletting the mean streets of Aboyne, sending a 'get well soon' card to Johann Lamont? C'mon folks, dare to speak the name of that which you love!
Leafletting lovely Aboyne? You're letting them off lightly!!
Send Jack W to Ferguslie.
Send Alanbrooke to Whitfield.
Send Fluffy Thoughts to Rockall. In January. In the middle of a gale. Without a sleeping bag.
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Yep, you get the impression that even UKOK politicians aren't brimming with enthusiasm for the good fight (and who could blame them considering some of the sh*te they're required to spout). Actually, it'd be good to have a straw poll amongst the soi-disant Unionists on here as to what support they've given to the cause - a tasty little cheque to BT, leafletting the mean streets of Aboyne, sending a 'get well soon' card to Johann Lamont? C'mon folks, dare to speak the name of that which you love!
Leafletting lovely Aboyne? You're letting them off lightly!!
Send Jack W to Ferguslie.
Send Alanbrooke to Whitfield.
Send Fluffy Thoughts to Rockall. In January. In the middle of a gale. Without a sleeping bag.
LOL so now you do want foreigners involved. Well at least the Nats are consistently inconsistent ;-)
*snip* Richard and MikeK hold forth with handbags *snip*
Purple on Purple action! Or is this a clash of the mauve and lilac factions?
Splitters!
This is a fight that has been on the cards for a while within UKIP. There are a minority of long time members like myself who viewed UKIP as the best chance for a proper Libertarian/ small state party and who see leaving the EU as an integral part of that process.
Unfortunately in recent times there has been a large influx of members who - encouraged to some extent by the leadership - see UKIP as a reactionary party where they can rail against all the modern 'evils' like gay marriage. At the moment they appear to be in the ascendancy but my hope is that the argument can still be won within the party and that the 'small state', libertarian viewpoint - which is still claimed to be an integral part of the underlying philosophy - will prevail. Certainly I am encouraged by comments like those of Nuttall who seem to see the error of pursuing the 'clothes are evil' policy that has hitherto been to the fore.
woger...thats over 40 years ago.. we are now discussing what appears to be an influx of immigrants that want to wear the full body Burqa..that hides their faces ..completely.. what have the 60's got to do with it. Do try and catch up..
Veil Ban Policy Has Been Reversed, Deputy Leader Paul Nuttall Says: Ukip has abandoned its policy of ba... http://t.co/k38H3FUhXg
I havent read it or seen it, and I think its wrong and I'll tell Nuttal to his face tomorrow.
Setting aside the moral rights and wrongs, it is also electorally stupid. UKIP were the only party with a policy on banning the burqa, which polling evidence (and evidence from newspaper blogs) shows is extremely popular with the public, supported by 60-70% of people.
This is exactly the kind of robust, We're Different To The Rest "pro-British" policy which has drawn people TO Farage's party in the first place. Now they just throw it away on a whim?
An act of electoral self harm. It will get them zero votes, no credibility and cost them support. Cameron will be pleased.
There is nothing at all 'pro-British' about banning stuff just because you don't like it.
Is it allowed to walk down a main street wavig the Nazi Swastika flag.. It is just a piece of cloth with a rather snazzy design on it.. Is it banned because we dont like it?
I exposed the 'Plebgate' stitch-up last year. So why are police STILL investigating? | Michael Crick via @spectatorhttp://specc.ie/19i5PKK Retweeted by PlatoSays View summary "
It is impossible to seriously argue with SeanT's point that the niqab is seriously rude and antisocial. It says, unequivocally, that I do not want to have dealings with you or interact with you in any way as you are not a part of my social group and it would be wrong to do so.
Having said that some goths might well think the same way.
If I was persuaded that it was the woman's choice I suspect I would think about it like abortion. I would very much regret the decision the woman was taking but I would respect her right to do so. But I just don't believe it. The thinking comes from a society with such alien (at least in modern terms) values and attitudes that it is really founded on women not having choices or really any independent judgment at all.
In tolerating the niqab we are tolerating women being subjected to such mores in our own society, simply because a bunch of complete idiots thought multiculturism a good idea. It is wrong and we should not tolerate it. We diminish ourselves and our own values by doing so.
*snip* Richard and MikeK hold forth with handbags *snip*
Purple on Purple action! Or is this a clash of the mauve and lilac factions?
Splitters!
Are you comparing them to the People's Front for Judea and the Judean People's Front?
I fear we might be the Popular Front. "he's over there".
If it's any consolation, I do agree with you, whilst I might dislike the Burqa, telling people in this country what they can, and cannot wear is very unBritish
*snip* Richard and MikeK hold forth with handbags *snip*
Purple on Purple action! Or is this a clash of the mauve and lilac factions?
Splitters!
This is a fight that has been on the cards for a while within UKIP. There are a minority of long time members like myself who viewed UKIP as the best chance for a proper Libertarian/ small state party and who see leaving the EU as an integral part of that process.
Unfortunately in recent times there has been a large influx of members who - encouraged to some extent by the leadership - see UKIP as a reactionary party where they can rail against all the modern 'evils' like gay marriage. At the moment they appear to be in the ascendancy but my hope is that the argument can still be won within the party and that the 'small state', libertarian viewpoint - which is still claimed to be an integral part of the underlying philosophy - will prevail. Certainly I am encouraged by comments like those of Nuttall who seem to see the error of pursuing the 'clothes are evil' policy that has hitherto been to the fore.
If the choice for UKIP is between those two paths, I wish you the very best of luck.
Personally I think people should wear what they like in their own time, but if a business , lets say a restaurant , didn't employ a lady because she wanted her face covered up in her religious dress, would it run the risk of being called some sort of -ist?
Is it allowed to walk down a main street wavig the Nazi Swastika flag.. It is just a piece of cloth with a rather snazzy design on it.. Is it banned because we dont like it?
You'd be upsetting Buddhists, Sikhs and a few other religions if you did that
Is it allowed to walk down a main street wavig the Nazi Swastika flag.. It is just a piece of cloth with a rather snazzy design on it.. Is it banned because we dont like it?
You'd be upsetting Buddhists, Sikhs and a few other religions if you did that
This would be fair enough IF the burka and the niqab weren't inextricably linked to, and emblematic of, a culture - fundamentalist Islam - which is undeniable misogynistic, and patriarchal, and is indeed responsible for hideous crimes against women across the world.
So are atheists or religious people more likely to wear these garments?
*braces self*
Religous or not you would have to be barking to be dressed like that. If someone tried to tell me some God had decreed that I had to wear that stuff to be religous I would know what was being peddled , bovine manure of the finest quality.
True. Amazing that *billions* of people avoid either pork or beef because of something someone said over a thousand years ago. Mmm, bacon...
Is it allowed to walk down a main street wavig the Nazi Swastika flag.. It is just a piece of cloth with a rather snazzy design on it.. Is it banned because we dont like it?
You'd be upsetting Buddhists, Sikhs and a few other religions if you did that
And at the other end of the spectrum, our judiciary has repeatedly jailed the 'naked rambler' for his [anti]sartorial choice.
Is it allowed to walk down a main street wavig the Nazi Swastika flag.. It is just a piece of cloth with a rather snazzy design on it.. Is it banned because we dont like it?
You'd be upsetting Buddhists, Sikhs and a few other religions if you did that
Is it allowed to walk down a main street wavig the Nazi Swastika flag.. It is just a piece of cloth with a rather snazzy design on it.. Is it banned because we dont like it?
You'd be upsetting Buddhists, Sikhs and a few other religions if you did that
And at the other end of the spectrum, our judiciary has repeatedly jailed the 'naked rambler' for his [anti]sartorial choice.
Now the naked rambler is someone who should be forced to wear the Burqa
Is it allowed to walk down a main street wavig the Nazi Swastika flag.. It is just a piece of cloth with a rather snazzy design on it.. Is it banned because we dont like it?
You'd be upsetting Buddhists, Sikhs and a few other religions if you did that
And at the other end of the spectrum, our judiciary has repeatedly jailed the 'naked rambler' for his [anti]sartorial choice.
Now the naked rambler is someone who should be forced to wear the Burqa
I still think it is the will of Allah (SWT) that we are all born in our, er, birthday suits!
Isn't it a bit depressing for Unionists that even folk who support Scotland's continuing membership of the Yookay can't be bothered to get off their arses to campaign?
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Yep, you get the impression that even UKOK politicians aren't brimming with enthusiasm for the good fight (and who could blame them considering some of the sh*te they're required to spout). Actually, it'd be good to have a straw poll amongst the soi-disant Unionists on here as to what support they've given to the cause - a tasty little cheque to BT, leafletting the mean streets of Aboyne, sending a 'get well soon' card to Johann Lamont? C'mon folks, dare to speak the name of that which you love!
Leafletting lovely Aboyne? You're letting them off lightly!!
Send Jack W to Ferguslie.
Send Alanbrooke to Whitfield.
Send Fluffy Thoughts to Rockall. In January. In the middle of a gale. Without a sleeping bag.
Stuart , Jack's nose would bleed if he got north of Watford
Alan I believe would hold his own having had good training at home
I've got an old copy (1922 or so) of the Jungle Book, which has an elephant and a swastika on the front.
The Nazis were bloody good at branding. The salute that's referred to as a Nazi salute was actually used by plenty of others (paintings depicted the Romans giving it, and US schoolkids used to do it when saying the pledge of allegiance). Likewise, they nicked the Roman (German, arguably?) eagle, and invented, I believe both the rings and the torch of the Olympics.
I've got an old copy (1922 or so) of the Jungle Book, which has an elephant and a swastika on the front.
The Nazis were bloody good at branding. The salute that's referred to as a Nazi salute was actually used by plenty of others (paintings depicted the Romans giving it, and US schoolkids used to do it when saying the pledge of allegiance). Likewise, they nicked the Roman (German, arguably?) eagle, and invented, I believe both the rings and the torch of the Olympics.
Are you saying Baloo the Bear was a Nazi?
I'll never be able to sing the bear necessities without wanting to goosestep along to it from now on?
not entirely unpredictably, there's a GTA V related outcry. A torture scene, apparently (don't have the game due to poverty and also lacking the time, really).
Has anyone here seen that scene, and also played The Last of Us? It'd need to go some to be more harrowing. Also, the torture scene in MGS3 didn't stop that game being rated 15 (a guy's electrocuted whilst suspended from the ceiling and hooded).
Is it allowed to walk down a main street wavig the Nazi Swastika flag.. It is just a piece of cloth with a rather snazzy design on it.. Is it banned because we dont like it?
You'd be upsetting Buddhists, Sikhs and a few other religions if you did that
And at the other end of the spectrum, our judiciary has repeatedly jailed the 'naked rambler' for his [anti]sartorial choice.
Now the naked rambler is someone who should be forced to wear the Burqa
I still think it is the will of Allah (SWT) that we are all born in our, er, birthday suits!
I'm relieved you added the link: I was pondering the relevance South West Trains. I appreciate God moves in mysterious ways but even so...
Comments
Come the big day, one wonders just how many of them will get off their arses to actually bother to vote?
Differential turnout will be crucial if it is close.
Doing a lot of leafleting in Sweden Stuart ?
As a foreigner it's really none of your business you know. I hope you haven't been sending any money, you'll upset malc.
As a foreigner it's really none of your business you know. I hope you haven't been sending any money, you'll upset malc.
LOL, I am sure Stuart has a valid address on the electoral roll and is an eligible voter Alan.
http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2013/09/19/political-toilet-graffiti-of-the-day/
He can't have as I'm reliably informed that's just face saving jiggery pokery. Stuart wouldn't stoop that low.
PS I wonder how TSE's getting on ? ;-)
*braces self*
PS I wonder how TSE's getting on ? ;-)
Probably got sore Ballochs by now
LOL
First they came for the burqas then they came for the Keffiyehs, then the headscarfs. By the time they came for my balaclava there was no one left to defend me.
Trust Richard_Tyndall To get everything back to front.: The Niqab and Burqa are a threat to every thing that Britons used to hold dear: freedom of expression the right to debate in an open society and freedom to practice any religion or none.
Poor Richard cannot see that the Islamists living in Briton want desperately to see Sharia Law introduced in this country by whatever toe-hold they can manage. Useful idiots like Richard - who I still cannot believe is a kipper - and the lefty elite are helping them when they support the right to wear a burka and/or niqab in public. They cannot see that it is another step in the islamation of the nation.
But to make a mockery of the beautiful poem by Pastor Martin Niemoller in a wicked and mocking parody is shameful
First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me -
"They should be tolerated in private life, but society should openly express its disapproval. They are just f*cking rude. It's like spitting. It's antisocial."
So are the grossly obese wearing shell suits needles in noses face tattoos....
You've got an agenda. Get over it and you'll feel better
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sari
Some Chieftan's daughter choked on a fishbone, or something, and it suddenly becomes a cultural injunction not to eat fish and a people fail to survive.
..and the girls were not wearng veils, of any description
I don't have sore ballochs.
Despite all my preparation and planning, I ended up calling him Mister Ballows.
"At least with piercings and tattoos..usually worn by idiots, you can get to see their faces"
The reason the 60's were The 60's were so people could do their own thing. I'm not going to start now giving in to petty parochial prejudice and allow a bunch of reactionaries to set down rules how others should live their lives.
"A threat to everything that Britons hold dear"
Have a word with yourself, yer man Nuttall doesn't want it banned.
There should be sensible restrictions, in certain places, where the nigab would be inappropriate. Anyone wanting a full ban should be, well, banned.
Actually, it'd be good to have a straw poll amongst the soi-disant Unionists on here as to what support they've given to the cause - a tasty little cheque to BT, leafletting the mean streets of Aboyne, sending a 'get well soon' card to Johann Lamont? C'mon folks, dare to speak the name of that which you love!
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ashmorejohn1/the-dog-who-looks-just-like-vladimir-putin-f3db
The latest YouGov poll showed the following changes from GE2010:
Con: -1%
UKIP: +9%
Maybe the question is making the wrong assumptions.
There are places where it is right to restrict usage for practical reasons which are the places Sean has mentioned. But the idea that we should ban stuff we don't like for no other reason than it offends our sensibilities (well the sensibilities of a strange reactionary minority) is just wrong.
Should we ban Shellsuits? After all they are apparently far more of a sign of belonging to a section of society that is likely to commit crime and violence. Should we have banned football shorts and scarfs in the 80s when they were the uniform of the hooligans?
It is your sort of reactionary garbage that will always hold back UKIP so I am glad we seem to be turning our back on you.
Send Jack W to Ferguslie.
Send Alanbrooke to Whitfield.
Send Fluffy Thoughts to Rockall. In January. In the middle of a gale. Without a sleeping bag.
There's a school of thought that remainder UK will have a permanent Tory majority.
Can't see it happening, there'd be a realignment of the left in the country, and who knows what happens then.
Splitters!
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9026601/the-mystery-of-plebgate/
"Perhaps the police can’t crack the case. Or perhaps, equally worrying, they don’t want to."
Unfortunately in recent times there has been a large influx of members who - encouraged to some extent by the leadership - see UKIP as a reactionary party where they can rail against all the modern 'evils' like gay marriage. At the moment they appear to be in the ascendancy but my hope is that the argument can still be won within the party and that the 'small state', libertarian viewpoint - which is still claimed to be an integral part of the underlying philosophy - will prevail. Certainly I am encouraged by comments like those of Nuttall who seem to see the error of pursuing the 'clothes are evil' policy that has hitherto been to the fore.
Do try and catch up..
Vitesse wearing British 1st Airborne Division colours this Sunday in commemoration of the Battle of Arnhem
Mohamed Moallim @jouracule
Vitesse wearing British 1st Airborne Division colours this Sunday in commemoration of the Battle of Arnhem
pic.twitter.com/HZkFJA1ouq
It is just a piece of cloth with a rather snazzy design on it..
Is it banned because we dont like it?
I exposed the 'Plebgate' stitch-up last year. So why are police STILL investigating? | Michael Crick via @spectator http://specc.ie/19i5PKK
Retweeted by PlatoSays
View summary "
https://twitter.com/NickCohen4
Having said that some goths might well think the same way.
If I was persuaded that it was the woman's choice I suspect I would think about it like abortion. I would very much regret the decision the woman was taking but I would respect her right to do so. But I just don't believe it. The thinking comes from a society with such alien (at least in modern terms) values and attitudes that it is really founded on women not having choices or really any independent judgment at all.
In tolerating the niqab we are tolerating women being subjected to such mores in our own society, simply because a bunch of complete idiots thought multiculturism a good idea. It is wrong and we should not tolerate it. We diminish ourselves and our own values by doing so.
Lab lead now between 3% and 4% - the lowest it has been since Spring 2012.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2
Also: it should be the Purpler Front for Judea.
Lab 37%
Con 33%
LD 11%
Seats:
Lab 346
Con 254
LD 24
Labour clear of the winning post by 20 seats.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
http://io9.com/so-this-physics-grad-student-made-a-mindblowing-bohemia-1333515132
Alan I believe would hold his own having had good training at home
I've got an old copy (1922 or so) of the Jungle Book, which has an elephant and a swastika on the front.
The Nazis were bloody good at branding. The salute that's referred to as a Nazi salute was actually used by plenty of others (paintings depicted the Romans giving it, and US schoolkids used to do it when saying the pledge of allegiance). Likewise, they nicked the Roman (German, arguably?) eagle, and invented, I believe both the rings and the torch of the Olympics.
I'll never be able to sing the bear necessities without wanting to goosestep along to it from now on?
not entirely unpredictably, there's a GTA V related outcry. A torture scene, apparently (don't have the game due to poverty and also lacking the time, really).
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/127963-Grand-Theft-Auto-V-Torture-Scene-Causes-Uproar
Has anyone here seen that scene, and also played The Last of Us? It'd need to go some to be more harrowing. Also, the torture scene in MGS3 didn't stop that game being rated 15 (a guy's electrocuted whilst suspended from the ceiling and hooded).
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/uk-polling-report-average-2