SevenRivers   10 #25 Posted May 19, 2014 I just hope the Islamic Party of Britain will be getting their own thread otherwise its just racist  I hear they have very good voter retention on account of the death sentence to anybody switching their vote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
GLASGOWOODS   10 #26 Posted May 19, 2014 I bet you were up all night printing those  It would be interesting to know how fishy knows they're all tossers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Doom   10 #27 Posted May 19, 2014 I thought Suzanne Evans was excellent on Sunday afternoon, her interview is 1 minute in:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aIXF3yYd_k  I think it just goes to show that UKIP do have more than Nigel Farage able to deal with media interviews.  Interesting that she mentioned in the last week that the Tories, Liberals or Labour have had 17 councillors arrested, charged or convicted and another 13 involved in racist, sexist or homophobic incidents...  Regards  Doom Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Closet Guy.   10 #28 Posted May 19, 2014 It's called The British Muslim Party (BMP)!  :hihi:  ---------- Post added 19-05-2014 at 22:47 ----------  I hear they have very good voter retention on account of the death sentence to anybody switching their vote  Oooooh you are naughty Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Closet Guy. Â Â 10 #29 Posted May 19, 2014 It would be interesting to know how fishy knows they're all tossers. Â I would never risk a ban by stating the obvious Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Penistone999 Â Â 10 #30 Posted May 19, 2014 I have some ''UKIP are tossers'' posters. Â Whats up old boy.................. dont like a party that says it how it is. ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Marx   10 #31 Posted May 19, 2014 UKIP are a bit like religion. Most Christians can't be bothered trying to understand the bible. They just like the bits that mean something to them. They are able to ignore all the genocidal, racist and misogynistic content by applying cognitive dissonance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Anna B Â Â 1,414 #32 Posted May 19, 2014 Sorry, but I think this will kill political debate stone dead, and ruin Sheffield Forum. Â Debate is on SF is organic, it twists and turns and transforms into different viewpoints. We discuss things because we have differing viewpoints. They cannot necessarily be ascribed to just one particular party. Â So far we're on to page two of this thread and nobody's yet made a serious political point about UKIP. Â I hope we're going to return to the old system after the European elections. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
SpikeMac   10 #33 Posted May 19, 2014 Sorry, but I think this will kill political debate stone dead, and ruin Sheffield Forum. Debate is on SF is organic, it twists and turns and transforms into different viewpoints. We discuss things because we have differing viewpoints. They cannot necessarily be ascribed to just one particular party.  So far we're on to page two of this thread and nobody's yet made a serious political point about UKIP.  I hope we're going to return to the old system after the European elections.  You are absolutely right Anna. This decision has been made to make moderation easier. That is the wrong way round.  There has been no serious discussion of any political issue tonight. That is entirely down to the baffling decision to restrict any kind of debate. Let's not forget that one of the moderation team is a UKIP activist. I wonder if that had any bearing on the censorship that we are seeing:rolleyes: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
medusa   16 #34 Posted May 19, 2014 You are absolutely right Anna. This decision has been made to make moderation easier. That is the wrong way round. There has been no serious discussion of any political issue tonight. That is entirely down to the baffling decision to restrict any kind of debate. Let's not forget that one of the moderation team is a UKIP activist. I wonder if that had any bearing on the censorship that we are seeing:rolleyes:  We're not restricting debate, just channelling it into one thread per party so that no party gets an unfair amount of publicity or discussion.  If people want to use the threads to discuss the concept of the threads then they clearly have no serious political points to make.  And yes, on of the moderating team campaigns for UKIP. He does, however, follow the moderating guidelines and stays away from the politics threads during election time, so please leave him out of the discussion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
SpikeMac   10 #35 Posted May 19, 2014 We're not restricting debate, just channelling it into one thread per party so that no party gets an unfair amount of publicity or discussion. If people want to use the threads to discuss the concept of the threads then they clearly have no serious political points to make.  And yes, on of the moderating team campaigns for UKIP. He does, however, follow the moderating guidelines and stays away from the politics threads during election time, so please leave him out of the discussion.  But one of the parties is much more controversial than the rest. By "channeling" debate, you are actually restricting it. For example, we can no longer debate the endless list of UKIP nutters and their faux pas. They are all confined to one thread, where discussion will make no sense.  I think that you need to sleep on this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Doom   10 #36 Posted May 20, 2014 You are absolutely right Anna. This decision has been made to make moderation easier. That is the wrong way round. There has been no serious discussion of any political issue tonight. That is entirely down to the baffling decision to restrict any kind of debate. Let's not forget that one of the moderation team is a UKIP activist. I wonder if that had any bearing on the censorship that we are seeing:rolleyes:  You see I go the other way, I think this should have been done much earlier.  We've had the ridiculous situation whereby people against UKIP have been endlessly trawling the internet to find negative stories about them, creating a lot of similar threads.  To make a point I did the same Friday night trying to find negative stories about Labour and had 4 new threads within 5 minutes. It started getting ridiculous, with so many different political threads, nobody knew where they were.  I also found a couple of stories about immigration/asylum on Saturday morning for good measure. I noticed most of my threads were pulled, whereas the anti UKIP ones remained, therefore the mods must have a bias against UKIP as far as I'm concerned.  The mods create mega threads for other topics, it makes perfect sense to do it for political stories. People can still put links to the stories on here, but what they can't do now is put their own spin on the title of the thread.  Regards  Doom  ---------- Post added 20-05-2014 at 06:36 ----------  I thought this was a good article:  http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/douglas-murray/2014/05/the-smears-against-nigel-farage-and-ukip-have-reached-spectacular-depths/  Some selective comments from the article:  Today’s pages include the Times repeating a story from last year in the hope of successful guilt-by-association. The story is that Geert Wilders (the ‘Dutch Xenophobe’ as the Times headlines him) would like Nigel Farage to join him and Marine Le Pen in an anti-EU Brussels voting bloc. What neither the Times nor any other newspaper wishes to give Farage any credit for is that he refuses to join that bloc precisely because of the presence in it of a party like the Front Nationale. And yet the press continues to attempt to portray Farage as leading a British National Front.  Firstly – if Farage had wanted to run a party which allied itself with the far-right, racist attitudes of the National Front or BNP he could have done so years ago. As it is, former members of the BNP are forbidden from joining UKIP and in his earliest days in the party Farage waged a small war precisely to get rid of those who wanted to form any such alliance.  Now that doesn't paint the picture the Tory and Labour media want to portray of UKIP and Mr Farage.  There's some seriously bias media reporting at the moment, but I suspect most people will see through it, although some are bound to be swayed.  Regards  Doom  ---------- Post added 20-05-2014 at 06:52 ----------   What was it Nigel Farage said...  Regards  Doom Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...