Awol

Thank f*** for that.

I'm not sure how you can post that (without a mischievous smirk) in the face of the evidence of how UKIP put forward their case on immigration (and not just in the odd leaflet for which an individual - say Woolas, for example - might be accused of cynically playing upon immigration fears to whip up the electorate in one particular area/constituency). I cannot see how you (or anyone else) can seriously argue that for them to couch it in the terms that they do (e.g. to talk about what is the entire population of both countries whose status changes on Jan 1st) is not intended to make people fearful (of these two countries' nationals and by extension any other immigrants - especially when they also say in the same leaflet, "Proposed new housing developments are due largely as a result of mass immigration from within Europe"). If they said that 29 million people from R & B will have access to the UK from 1st of Jan then that is a statement of fact. Does that mean they will all move here? No. Does that mean they would in theory have the legal right to do so if they wished? Yes, it does. From what I've seen and read of Farage's arguments he has presented the potential problems associated with a large influx of migrants from these countries in three main ways: 1. The potential strain on the benefits system and public services , i.e. health, education and housing. Are these services not already over strained? Is there money available to make further substantial investments in these services at the moment? I don't think there is or one would assume those investments would already be happening. If someone from those countries comes to UK and claims they are self employed and looking for work then they can access the benefits system within weeks. That benefits system allegedly provides a level of income that exceeds the average wage in R & B. It's not difficult to imagine what the result might be. 2. Youth unemployment. With one million young unemployed Britons currently looking for work, is a potential influx of unskilled labour (who will be prepared to be exploited by employers for sub-minimum wage conditions) going to make it even more difficult to get those people into jobs? I think the answer to that is fairly obvious and much like the mass immigration from Poland enabled employers to drive down wages for both artisan tradesman and unskilled workers it would be reasonable to expect a repeat of that situation - while accepting that migrants from R & B will have more EU countries to choose from than Polish migrants did when they came to UK. I'm not anti-immigration, it is essential to fill gaps in the skilled labour market. I do think that being unable to control the flow of unskilled immigration is potentially damaging to those sections of our society least able to afford it. 3. Crime. It is obviously offensive to suggest an entire population are basically crooks, however Farage was trotting out a statistic from the Met Police in the run up to these elections that was so inflammatory that if it was incorrect he would he been crucified for it. In last 3 years there have been 30,000 arrests of Romanians in London out of a total Romanian population of 80,000...That's a staggering number and looking at those figures is it really illegitimate to raise the question of whether we should actually be able to control the flow of people from that country? If you don't control your own borders then you are not really a sovereign nation.

Amplifying the point: To argue that British people deserve social welfare benefits and others do not is by definition xenophobic. It doesn't make the policy xenophobic, but it does make the person or group advancing the argument xenophobic. Not if we are using the English definition of xenophobic. Wishing to see one's government put it's own people first doesn't denote fear or hatred of foreigners, any more than wishing to leave the EU makes one a racist who hates Europeans. It's that misuse of language in favour of reasoned argument that is creating the space for UKIP to thrive. If these election results (and the fact UKIP have come second in 4 of the last 5 by-elections) are anything to go by then as a strategy it is clearly failing. UKIP are forcing issues onto the political agenda that have been deemed taboo by the cosy consensus politics of recent decades - Cameron wouldn't have promised an EU referendum in 2017 without the pressure from UKIP on his general election prospects - which is healthy and essential for a robust democratic process. That is the value in what they are doing and imho, the reason why they are rapidly becoming more popular. I do wonder whether a similar insurgent party to the left of Labour and more in tune with the prevailing VT politics would receive the same level of opprobrium on here?

:-) No, it really doesn't. The fact that the VT leftie brigade all repeat each others assertions that UKIP are horrible racist Nazi's doesn't actually make it so. Besides, the adherents of that comically cretinous pillock Ed Miliband should be popping the Lambrini corks, short of Cameron making some incredible policy changes then UKIP will totally scupper any chance of a Tory majority in 2015. Even so Labour really haven't done that well in these elections given the obvious failings of the coalition. From UKIP to go from 9 councilors 4 years ago to 140 today is a stunning advance and even people who hate them should be able to recognise that fact. Some of the UKIP people - prospective candidates and some (a minority) of their supporters are indisputably extremist, and not extremist compared to some soft middle, but genuinely extreme. From holocaust denial, to racism - all kinds. But that's not why they proved popular. That's just evidence of a kind that they're actually a shambles. I doubt as a core value, they are racist or extreme. It's just that they are a rag-tag bunch. Their policies are a ludicrous mix of "no to everything", because they've based their appeal initially on a single issue (anti EU) and then as their internal e mails reveal, got themselves into a position where the rest of their so called policies are just an ill thought through add on, not agreed to by anyone within the party as their coherent views. So much so they've talked about just getting a think tank to draw them some up. They're just a bunch of things that sound good to certain ears, and kind of a desire to go back to the imaginary past, somehow. Their success reflects multiple things - the continuing break up of two party politics, the unpopularity of the tories amongst their own supporters - there's now two tory parties - the Ken Clark middle ground one, and the close to UKIP section. It reflects Labour not having any policies, it reflects the Lib Dems no longer being the party of protest, as they're part of the Gov't. And it reflects that UKIP have successfully appealed to a part of the electorate that thinks no one really represented them. I agree with you about Cameron and Labour's problems. I don't doubt that some people who vote UKIP are extremists, the same goes for other parties. You could argue that it's better those individuals are voting for a mainstream party that doesn't share their extremist views than some of the real nasty b*stards out there - like Ed Balls Wanting a properly structured immigration policy is not racist, it's common sense. Obviously I don't agree with much of the rest of the sentiment you express regarding lack of policy, but even if that were true the official opposition have no policies whatsoever. Seemingly that is an issue UKIP should be bashed for while Labour are given a pass despite supposedly being political "grown ups". How does that work, isn't it just rank hypocrisy from the Labour cheerleaders? - which I'm not suggesting you are, btw. Yes UKIP are taking advantage of the genuine grievances against the established parties by tapping into otherwise ignored issues of major concern to large parts of the electorate. Well done them, that is their job.

:-) No, it really doesn't. The fact that the VT leftie brigade all repeat each others assertions that UKIP are horrible racist Nazi's doesn't actually make it so. Besides, the adherents of that comically cretinous pillock Ed Miliband should be popping the Lambrini corks, short of Cameron making some incredible policy changes then UKIP will totally scupper any chance of a Tory majority in 2015. Even so Labour really haven't done that well in these elections given the obvious failings of the coalition. From UKIP to go from 9 councilors 4 years ago to 140 today is a stunning advance and even people who hate them should be able to recognise that fact.

Bloody Tories splitting the UKIP vote..

That's pathetic. Even by your standards.

Well, having never heard of this UK Libertarian you can sign me up as a UKIP supporting racist. I'm staggered that a man of your intellect would make such a leap, but fair enough. That the left wing colleagues on here are getting their recycled fair trade skiddies in a twist is no surprise, but I'd say this: If you are genuinely an opponent of free nation state democracy then you are not who I thought you were - or who you purport to be - in a bollitical sense.

That a party with the central policy of promoting the supremacy of nation state democracy can be portrayed as right wing extremists just goes to show how successfully the left wing has captured and corrupted the language of political discourse. Want your country's laws to be made only by people accountable to the electorate? You're an extremist little Englander. Want an immigration policy that is based on recruiting skilled migrants that the economy needs instead of loads of unskilled labour? You're a racist. Want people in charge who will actually put the people of Britain before the interests of the rest of the world? You're a xenophobe. Really? F*** off. Ridiculing people who believe those three points to be legitimate and important is a get out clause for lefties, avoiding the need for a reasoned rebuttal. What it won't achieve is stopping people who agree with that message from voting UKIP, which given the high level of concerted media and political attacks over the past week is clearly causing the establishment some concern.

Police say 2 accused were getting 'direction and guidance' from al-Qaeda elements......in Iran....

If these guys have stashed the usual self-justification videos to be released after they are deceased, I'd be surprised if this wasn't referenced. They couldn't have controlled/planned that date, but I'm sure they had a good chuckle about it.

Or Cheshire. Look out Gideon ... So you're saying there is a potential upside..

Or Cheshire.

...which also make great remote detonators, if you are trained in that sort of thing..

OMFG, he's a Jedi?

I'd be grateful if our Bostonian posters could de-bunk the following claim (for the benefit of a few former colleagues posting on Facebook): Do certain bars in Boston serve drinks called the "car bomb" and "kill a Brit"? My default reaction is to call BS, but I've never been and some people are claiming first hand knowledge... Cheers

I don't know, what does that mean? Something to do with chess, they're all playing chess now, vampires and zombies are yesterday. So there's hope for the yoof yet..

I don't know, what does that mean?

Sorry... Don't be, clearly you were the official photographer at the event. I just hope you got paid. Dont think he'll be getting paid As he seems to have gone to the wrong place as charing cross was packed just now on the news footage Come on, lads. You can do better than this. It was actually meant tongue in cheek, any implied insult would have been far more direct!

Sorry... Don't be, clearly you were the official photographer at the event. I just hope you got paid.

probably didn't have their mummy or Daddy with them to give parental consent Very good.

We all know you'll be watching it really - with misty eyes and a big box tissues.

They come from good stock

That's what made America a great power.

WTF are you talking about?? Er, his home has just been bombed and he's feeling a bit emotional? Maybe? Give it a rest and use your head.