Change font size
It is currently Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:35 pm


Forum lockedPost a reply Page 1 of 2   [ 26 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 3:39 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:11 am
Posts: 24869
Location: Bradford
People do not want Gordon Brown as their prime minister for another five years but have no enthusiasm for the Conservative Party, according to an opinion poll for The Independent.

View full article here

_________________
We are a satellite state of the Greater European Empire, ruled by a supreme government in Brussels. We owe this government neither loyalty nor obedience. It is not our government. It is theirs. It is our enemy.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 5:14 am 
Question: Is there a primary cause for this sour attitude? {What part of it can be blamed on the blind pursuit of the AGW agenda by both parties?]


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 6:01 am 
I don't get it.
Why not UKIP? If they want a right-leaning Government and the Tories suck balls, then whats wrong with UKIP?
Surely they deserve a chance to fuck up as well?


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 7:57 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:53 am
Posts: 1391
Location: England
SING A SONG OF PARLIAMENT
================================


SING A SONG OF PARLIAMENT,

POCKETS FULL OF CASH.

FRAUDULENTLY CLAIMING,

AND ADDING TO THEIR STASH.

WITH THEIR PLOY DISCOVERED,

THEY SAID THEY'LL GIVE IT BACK.

IF YOU OR I HAD DONE THE SAME,

WE'D PROMPTLY GET THE SACK.



SING A SONG OF FREEBIES,

SNOUTS ALL IN THE TROUGH.

GIVING BACK THEIR ILL-GOT GAINS,

IS JUST NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

SPONGING OFF OUR EARNINGS,

WITH A LIKELY TALE.

IF WORKING FOLK HAD DONE THE SAME,

THEY'D SOON END UP IN JAIL.



SING A SONG OF FRAUDSTERS,

COUNTING OUT THEIR MONEY.

THEY SMILE AND LOOK QUITE UNASHAMED,

AS THOUGH THEY THINK IT'S FUNNY.

SITTNG IN A SECRET PLACE,

COUNTING OUT THEIR DOSH.

ON PLUGS FOR BATHS AND CLEANING MOATS,

FOR CRISPS AND ORANGE SQUASH.



SING A SONG OF MP's,

WHO TOOK US FOR A RIDE.

IT'S UP TO US AT ELECTION TIME,

THEIR FUTURE TO DECIDE.

IT'S GONE TOO FAR TO BRING BACK TRUST,

OF ANYONE IN POWER.

TO MOST OF US THEY'LL ALWAYS BE

A REALLY GREAT BIG SHOWER.
(AND A BUNCH OF CROOKS).

My Mother emailed me this.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:18 am 
Contemplationist wrote:
I don't get it.
Why not UKIP? If they want a right-leaning Government and the Tories suck balls, then whats wrong with UKIP?
Surely they deserve a chance to fuck up as well?


I reckon that the 13% mentioned in the ComRes survey is largely represented by UKIP; just like the EU, it is the "elephant in the room" that the media and the big three don't want to talk about. The first past the post voting system will probably ensure that they get no more than two or three seats (if they are lucky), but they will ensure that Cameron does not get a healthy (for him... not us) working majority. ABC... Anyone But Cameron!

The people that read this blog are probably more clued-up than the average voter or media commentator and will know that UKIP has NEVER been a "one trick pony". Their initial reason for existing was of course their objection to the passing into law of the Maastricht treaty and it was felt that the CON-servative party would never (unilaterally) leave the newly formed European Union; indeed this act was really the cause of Margaret Thatcher's downfall. Along with the motive of leaving the EU, it was felt by UKIP luminaries that such a hijack by the political elite should never be allowed to happen again. The best way to ensure this was the second of the UKIP's reasons for being, the desire to instigate binding local and national direct democracy, under such a system any future government, other than a military dictatorship, would never be able to perform anything as seedy as the antics that the traitor Heath and the clown Major got up to.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:40 am 

Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:14 am
Posts: 312
Location: The Heights of High Wycombe
The UKIP manifesto is at http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/UKIPmanifesto2010.pdf

This is priority :), but electric road vehicles are presently a cul de sac.

11 Energy & the Environment
UKIP accepts that the world’s climate changes, but we are the first party to take a sceptical stance on man-made global warming claims. We called for a rational, balanced approach to the climate debate in 2008, before the extensive manipulation of scientific data first became clear. Polls now show a majority of the British people share this scepticism despite protests from another LibLabCon-sensus. UKIP now calls for an immediate halt to unjustified spending on renewable sources that has led to massive energy price hikes and fuel poverty. UKIP will:
· Increase nuclear power generation to provide up to 50% of our electricity needs. Because Britain’s domestic energy plants are ageing and renewable energy sources have been shown to be unreliable, UKIP will pass hybrid Acts of Parliament to accelerate the planning process and allow old reactors to be replaced
· Support the efficient extraction of indigenous coal for use in cleaner, coal-fired electricity generation plants
· Oppose wind farms in general and require large new wind power schemes to be funded by the market. Most current schemes have proved uneconomic, often operating at less than a third of capacity - sometimes less than a tenth - thereby producing a derisory amount of power
· Ensure any large new wind farms are constructed offshore. UKIP regards onshore wind turbines and the accompanying power lines as eyesores in beautiful countryside
· Repeal the UK’s Climate Change Act and return to a Department of Energy
· Immediately repeal disastrous EU Directives such as the Large Combustion Plant Directive. The Directive threatens to put the lights out by closing a quarter of the UK’s domestic coal and energy plants by 2015 without providing any realistic, working alternatives. UKIP will pull out of EU Carbon Trading Schemes, the proposed EU Carbon Tax and binding targets on renewable and bio fuels
· Stop funding the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change and the UN Framework Convention, and fund the Met Office according to forecast accuracy
· Establish a Royal Commission under a High Court Judge that will allow scientists to reach a conclusion about the facts and economic implications of global warming
· Ban schools from using global warming propaganda such as Al Gore’s film ‘An Inconvenient Truth’
· Divert billions of pounds of funding from wasteful global warming-related spending toward environmental improvements of real value
· Encourage the reduction of waste and
promote effective methods of recycling
· Incentivise and support electric road vehicles, the comprehensive electrification of rail lines and accompanying infrastructure
· Reduce environmental bureaucracy to a minimum - consistent with good practice and international standards - while ensuring
necessary legislation is effectively enforced
· Protect the environment by controlling immigration and the associated building demand
· Invest in more flood and coastal

Download the full Energy & Environment policy from the ‘Policies’ section of http://www.ukip.org

_________________
Whilst entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts!


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:43 am 
Stephen Jenner: I disagree on the 13% entirely being represented by UKIP. That result is split between UKIP and the BNP primarily. I did read a YouGov poll which showed UKIP only being 2 points above the BNP....

You have to remember, most readers of this blog would be your traditional Tory voter whom on a whole, would be more likely to vote for UKIP. In saying that, we do have BNP supporters on here. However, getting back to the point, its your working and lower middle class support that goes towards the BNP which isn't represented too much in UKIP's traditional support arenas....

Its like I argued once before. People can't "see" the EU but immigration is entirely something they can see everyday. As soon as immigration is mentioned, people usually jump on the BNP bandwagon with UKIP more so for your anti-EU vote. However, with immigration being a very, very key concern in this election, I can see the BNP doing quite well...

I'll be open minded here. If lucky....I could see possibly 1-3 UKIP MPs and possibly 1-3 BNP MPs. Not sure where UKIP might win but I have a feeling Nick Griffin is going to win Barking. On top of that, Darby himself might claim Stoke Central (its looking like Labour isn't putting up much of a challenge in that area, same with the Tories!) and I suspect a breakthrough in the North.

I recall Nick Griffin himself saying something to supporters that this will be the last time the BNP fights itself as a minority party. Come the next election, they'll be part of the mainstream. I think in both the BNP and UKIP's case, should they manage to get Westminster representation, this could become a very real prospect down the line.

I do feel though both the tiddlers at this point coming away with nought won't be a scenario. There's too much public anger and frustration out there. Either way, its going to be a very interesting election.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:45 am 

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:11 am
Posts: 6700
UKIP energy Policy,
What's not to like??

_________________
If you don't get grumpy as you grow older then you aren't paying attention


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:59 am 
Pericles wrote:
The UKIP manifesto is at http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/UKIPmanifesto2010.pdf

This is priority :), but electric road vehicles are presently a cul de sac.

· Incentivise and support electric road vehicles, the comprehensive electrification of rail lines and accompanying infrastructure


I agree Pericles, it does seem a little bit out of place knowing what we know, such vehicles merely shift environmental pollution to the vicinity of the generating plants, some of the exotic materials used in their construction, are potentially more damaging than petrol fumes or diesel particulates.

However, the principals of personal transport and the freedom to travel... (er) freely, are now fairly ingrained and it would be wrong to discourage them, however we are really in need of these fabled hydrogen powered motors, who's only waste is water; I suppose we shall just have to wait.

Still, better to get 90% right, than 90% wrong!


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:20 am 
Ksim3000 wrote:
Stephen Jenner: I disagree on the 13% entirely being represented by UKIP.


Ksim3000: If you notice, I did not say "entirely"... and I would agree that BNP and Greens would have a part to play in the "others" pile.

Norman Tebbit reckons that if either UKIP or BNP are going to win any seats, it will be Farage in Buckingham, (usually Tory) and Griffin in Barking (usually Labour); the Greens being the Guardian reading version of the BNP, the two minnows for disaffected Labour voters.

For me, as I said in my previous comment, the big issues are the EU and direct democracy, all the rest including immigration policy and the closely allied "multi culti" fads of the last fifty or so years from the big parties, can be dealt with through first, getting back our sovereignty and second, giving the demos the ability to trim government's sails mid-term, using the two tools of direct democracy.

Finally, along with many other reasons for not having much regard for the BNP, I am not sure that I trust them when it comes to the EU, historically, they have been almost fanatical about union with Europe and only Griffin has changed this... I sense opportunism.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:25 am 
Been predicting a hung parliament for some time now, on the basis that neither the Conservatives or Labour have made it clear that they really want to change direction in any major way. The public do not wish to go down the path that the two major parties are going.

That path is defined by the following

1. No change in immigration policy

2. No change in our dealings with the EU.

3. Marginal change in energy policies.

4. No change in our policy as regards AFG, Iraq, or involvement in the domestic affairs of Islamic countries.

The UKIP intends to change all the above. I even go along with change in #4, as they have made a show of intention by their support of Geert Wilders.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:47 am 
Surprise, surprise

EU laws cost twice as much as British ones to enforce, says report

A study by Open Europe, found Brussels legislation has cost the British economy £124 billion, accounting for 71 per cent of the total cost of all red tape, both national and European, implemented in Britain since 1998.

The think tank studied thousands official impact assessments to find that EU regulation is 2.5 times less cost effective than domestic laws.
..
A European Commission spokesman said: “The Open Europe study lacks rigour and is intentionally misleading. The headline figures suffer from a methodological bias. It confuses stocks and flows, it suffers from double-counting, it does not consider what repealing EU regulations would imply either in terms of foregone benefits or alternative regulatory costs.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... eport.html

This is right up North Street. Looking forward to comment.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:16 am 
I did not know where to post this essay. It is well worth reading.

The Immigration Jihad
Several hundred years ago when the forces of Islam wanted to capture Vienna, they came with the sword and the cannon and laid siege to the city walls. Today they simply take a plane. While Vienna was able to resist repeated sieges, it was not able to resist Islamic immigration, and as a result the city looks a good deal more the way it would have had it fallen to an actual siege. Today as much as a third of Vienna is of foreign origin. And as many as 50 percent of Viennese schoolchildren have a non-German language as their mother tongue.

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2010/03 ... jihad.html

The question is, how do we save ourselves without destroying ourselves, or without admitting that in a free and fair fight, we were defeated and Islam won. This means the following rules towards Muslims in the West.

1. No force or compulsion as regards the practice of their religion.

2. No forced repatriations of people who are citizens.

The problem is compounded that whatever is done, must be done soon. Twenty years from now is too late.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:23 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:11 am
Posts: 24869
Location: Bradford
DP111 wrote:
Surprise, surprise

EU laws cost twice as much as British ones to enforce, says report

A study by Open Europe, found Brussels legislation has cost the British economy £124 billion, accounting for 71 per cent of the total cost of all red tape, both national and European, implemented in Britain since 1998.

The think tank studied thousands official impact assessments to find that EU regulation is 2.5 times less cost effective than domestic laws.
..
A European Commission spokesman said: “The Open Europe study lacks rigour and is intentionally misleading. The headline figures suffer from a methodological bias. It confuses stocks and flows, it suffers from double-counting, it does not consider what repealing EU regulations would imply either in terms of foregone benefits or alternative regulatory costs.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... eport.html

This is right up North Street. Looking forward to comment.


And ninety-five-point-two percent of statistics are made up on the spot. Sad though it is to say it, the OE report is bollocks.

_________________
We are a satellite state of the Greater European Empire, ruled by a supreme government in Brussels. We owe this government neither loyalty nor obedience. It is not our government. It is theirs. It is our enemy.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Exactly right
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:40 am 

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:32 am
Posts: 824
Location: Tasmania
There are probably 1000 reasons why I will not be voting Labour in the coming election. But here's one more. According to the Daily Mail today, the RAF's 14 planned Airbus A330-200 tankers will not be able to
Quote:
be flown in warzones because they lack proper protection, a National Audit Office [NAO] report has revealed...Fitting them with armour, anti-missile systems and early warning kit to allow them to operate in ‘high threat environments’ would cost the taxpayer hundreds of millions of pounds more, the spending watchdog said.

The NAO condemned the 27-year private finance initiative deal struck between the MoD and defence consortium AirTanker as being severely undermined by ‘shortcomings’... The report, published today, attacked the MoD for failing to carry out a ‘sound evaluation of alternative procurement routes’ and not demanding to see a breakdown of the costs of subcontractors. This raised the prospect that it had paid over the odds for the aircraft....Astonishingly, the NAO report said that initially it was ‘not envisaged’ that the joint tanker and transport planes would be required to fly directly into conflict zones. This is apparently why no funding was provided for protective equipment.


Also deplorable is the fact that Labour Ministers announced the contract in 1998, but because of delays, including not finalising the contract until 2008, these inadequately protected aircraft won't actually be available until 2016 - despite the whole project costing an astronomical UKL12.3 billion for only 14 of these aircraft. See:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... t-war.html

Watchet


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum lockedPost a reply Page 1 of 2   [ 26 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
610nm Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net