Ukip. All discussion here please.

[chalga 10]

It isn't our problem so why take a share of it? As for Germany continuing to take on the problem on behalf of everyone else in Europe... who are you trying to kid!?!

 

.

 

It wasn't your problem in the past,but that didn't stop refugees being taken in from loads of countries over decades,all of a sudden it seems like that has come to a halt.........seemingly coinciding with an oncoming election and a rise of UKIP.....although that hasn't stopped Farage from proclaiming that it is/was a problem created by NATO,and that the UK should be taking more refugees,although that may well be a well set trap by him for Cameron.

I don't need to speak further on Germany,they speak for themselves with their policy and actions,everyone can see that it is way up above anything else most other EU countries can match,that says everything about them.

[Harvest 10]

The trouble with the opinion polls is there is such a huge gap between them, UKIPs range is somewhere between 10 and 18%, and this doesn't take into account the silent vote.

 

But the one thing they do all agree on is that that support won't amount to more than 2 or 3 seats. Won't you be discouraged when that happens?

[truman 10]

But the one thing they do all agree on is that that support won't amount to more than 2 or 3 seats. Won't you be discouraged when that happens?

 

It's a daft system isn't it? They regularly poll at around 15% but will get less than 1% of the seats...

[retep 68]

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 15:16 ----------

 

[/color]

 

Because if UKIP got in power then it would get a lot worse, if ya think its bad now then wait til they get in.. look at the bile that comes out of their mouths .. every other week, one is muttering racist drivel which goes right up to the leader

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 15:19 ----------

 

'' It was God's revenge for the Somerset Floods for legalising Gay marriage ''

 

Said David Silvester who defected to UKIP in 2012 .. Now do you really what people like this in power ?

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 15:21 ----------

 

UKIP are an a even extremer version of the Tory Party, their very much alike ... Their no different .. its a myth if ya think they are any different..

 

Why not we had Bliar and Camoron.

[Harvest 10]

It's a daft system isn't it? They regularly poll at around 15% but will get less than 1% of the seats...

 

It certainly is. If I lived in Rotherham I might consider a UKIP vote on the offchance it broke up the red insanity. But as I live in Hallam I will be voting for whoever stops the same madness engulfing Sheffield. So probably Libdems as things stand.

 

Now when the next election happens in October 2015 it will be a whole new world and a completely different set of targets.

[panzer1 10]

Chalga few points from my side as an average bloke.

1. According to all current and projected studies of German population, it is in decline as is Italys. Germany NEEDS immigration to pay for their projected elderly population.

2. We are a small island and one of the most densely populated countries. We cannot take them all in. Why is it that earlier immigrants such as the Afghans were 90% young males, few females and kids. Were only young males persecuted? and now that we have spent a lot of money and heroic service personnel lives to make Aghanistan safe have they not gone back.Surely they should rebuild that country rather than working in car washes here.

3. Most of these immigrants are coming from countries which fought protracted wars to get rid of the European colonial powers that ruled them and gave them peace and stability, now they are desperate to live under these colonial powers.

4. If you ever need NHS or DHSS help in the future and do not get it remember your hard earned tax dollars have been spent providing succour to these needy immigrants and that is why you did not get it. There is only so much public money to go round.

 

Last but not least, getting excited for first time over an election. My vote may be wasted in voting UKIP but I have my fingers crossed that there may be some upsets.

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 21:13 ----------

 

Chalga just another thought. I know you have mentioned the strength of European economies and you are quite right however some of the richest countries ( not with a high performing economy ) are arab and muslim such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia etc. The majority of immigrants are muslim and or arab but you do not see the aforementioned countries offering them shelter. I also have to wonder if the traffic was the other way with white Christian immigrants trying to get into arab and African countries if they would be waiting to welcome them with open arms. I know you may now decide to brand me a racist etc but these are thoughts that occur to average people who do not have any particular political views but just wish to see themselves/family and fellow brits of all persuasions/colours/creeds/religions cared for in a country that is already under pressure.

[chalga 10]

Chalga few points from my side as an average bloke.

1. According to all current and projected studies of German population, it is in decline as is Italys. Germany NEEDS immigration to pay for their projected elderly population.

2. We are a small island and one of the most densely populated countries. We cannot take them all in. Why is it that earlier immigrants such as the Afghans were 90% young males, few females and kids. Were only young males persecuted? and now that we have spent a lot of money and heroic service personnel lives to make Aghanistan safe have they not gone back.Surely they should rebuild that country rather than working in car washes here.

3. Most of these immigrants are coming from countries which fought protracted wars to get rid of the European colonial powers that ruled them and gave them peace and stability, now they are desperate to live under these colonial powers.

4. If you ever need NHS or DHSS help in the future and do not get it remember your hard earned tax dollars have been spent providing succour to these needy immigrants and that is why you did not get it. There is only so much public money to go round.

 

Last but not least, getting excited for first time over an election. My vote may be wasted in voting UKIP but I have my fingers crossed that there may be some upsets.

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 21:13 ----------

 

Chalga just another thought. I know you have mentioned the strength of European economies and you are quite right however some of the richest countries ( not with a high performing economy ) are arab and muslim such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia etc. The majority of immigrants are muslim and or arab but you do not see the aforementioned countries offering them shelter. I also have to wonder if the traffic was the other way with white Christian immigrants trying to get into arab and African countries if they would be waiting to welcome them with open arms. I know you may now decide to brand me a racist etc but these are thoughts that occur to average people who do not have any particular political views but just wish to see themselves/family and fellow brits of all persuasions/colours/creeds/religions cared for in a country that is already under pressure.

 

 

There's a difference between refugees and immigrants,Germany doesn't need to take in refugees,but it does.....the same has been said about the UK,that it needs immigration to pay for its ageing population,but we are talking refugees here.......I am not saying anything about taking all refugees in,I am pointing out the difference between what Germany is doing and what many other EU countries are doing,and a lot more people are saying the same thing.....if countries don't want to take in refugees,that is up to them,it's their policy.......comparing what different countries are doing about refugees is valid,whether they are EU,muslim or anywhere else in the world,I held Germany up as an example for what can be done,nothing wrong with that.......others can do more,including muslim countries.

Not all people that want to live peaceful lives in stable countries are the same people that have been fighting to rid their countries of colonial rule.......you can't lump everyone together,different people want different things.........people might have wanted colonial powers out of their countries,it doesn't mean that they wanted them replaced with militias and jihadists,but they got that in some cases,and dictators too,which a lot put up with until outsiders decided that they should not have to put up with them and helped organise violent overthrows which resulted in more refugees.

[blake 10]

Looking at the election forecasts it seems that we are certainly heading for a hung parliament with UKIP perhaps taking 12% of the vote.

 

nationwide they have no hope of getting that. 10% would be brilliant. But it is more likely to be quite a bit less than 10%.

 

they have not had a good campaign and UKIP have not stood up to scrutiny really. The voters are not stupid.

[ElasticMan 10]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage/11573247/Ukip-asks-Scotland-Yard-to-investigate-BBCs-Have-I-Got-News-To-You.html

 

Political Correctness gone mad.

 

The UK Independence Party has asked Scotland Yard to investigate the BBC, claiming that comments made about Nigel Farage during an episode of Have I Got News For You might hinder his chances of electoral success.

 

---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 11:18 ----------

 

 

 

 

Let's not mention the counter demonstrations against the Nazis..........or just ignore the fact that Germany is taking them in,and coming out as top economy.

 

UKIP - Defending free speech for Everyone! Unless you say anything bad or silly about them - in which case they are calling the police.

[chalga 10]

Yesterday, Nigel Farage, the leader of the UK Independence Party, argued that the EU’s response to the migrant deaths crisis ran the risk of admitting half a million terrorists on to EU soil. He based this claim on the threat of the ‘Islamic State’ (Daesh) terrorists to send such killers to the EU via means of smuggling routes, and demanded that David Cameron veto the EU plans.

 

Do these claims make sense? Not in the slightest. First of all, the EU policy, as I discussed last week, is essentially to reaffirm the status quo. The current limited maritime surveillance missions will be expanded, although it is not clear if they will amount to fully-fledged rescue missions. This probably means that more people will reach the EU, but this will only be for the reason that fewer of them will drown en route.

 

Once in the EU, they will be able to make claims for asylum – but that is no different to the current law. The EU’s plan does not involve any changes to EU asylum legislation; it simply calls on Member States to apply those laws. The EU did commit to some form of direct resettlement of refugees from third countries – but EU leaders could not even agree on the tiny number of 5,000 refugees to be settled next year.

 

Farage would prefer a policy of returning people to the countries they left. In fact, asylum-seekers can already be returned to their countries of origin or transit, if it is clear when examining their application that those countries are safe. But in accordance with the UN (Geneva) Refugee Convention – which UKIP purports to support – they cannot be returned to an unsafe country. Libya, for instance, is clearly unsafe: there are widespread whippings, beatings, electric shocks and hangings of migrants. In any event, asylum-seekers who prove to be terrorists must be denied refugee status or other forms of protection status, as the CJEU has confirmed.

 

Farage demands that David Cameron veto the EU’s plans, but that simply isn’t possible, because the UK has an opt-out from EU asylum and immigration law. We can choose not to participate, and indeed the UK has already chosen not to participate in any of the second phase EU asylum measures, except for those which transfer asylum-seekers from the UK to other Member States. We can choose not to participate in any future measures too – although as noted already, the EU is not even planning any new asylum laws in response to the deaths. Since the UK has an opt-out, it does not have a veto. But in fact, no Member State has a veto on EU asylum policy. Most EU immigration and asylum law has in fact been subject to qualified majority voting since 2005. (Laws on legal migration were subject to unanimous voting until 2009; but the EU’s plan does not address legal migration issues).

 

As regards border control operations in particular, the UK doesn’t participate fully in the EU’s border control agency, Frontex. In fact, according to the EU Court of Justice, legally we can’t participate in Frontex, since we don’t participate in the full Schengen system of abolishing internal border controls. Instead we have an informal arrangement, for instance supplying some hardware to assist with the expanded surveillance operations. But even that sort of informal arrangement is under challenge in a case pending before the CJEU.

 

In some ways, Farage’s own policy runs its own risks. He has argued that Christians in particular should be admitted as refugees into the EU. As I have pointed out, this again violates the Geneva Convention that UKIP purport to support, since that Convention requires non-discriminatory application on grounds of religion, and it would also be unfeasible to distinguish between Christians and Muslims during rescue at sea. But if Christians are being resettled directly from areas afflicted by Daesh, the UKIP policy would provide the perfect opportunity for ISIS fighters to pretend to be Christian as a way to ensure entry into the EU.

 

As an assessment of terrorist methodology, Farage’s claims are also suspect. The bulk of Daesh atrocities have not been carried out in the EU, but in Syria and Iraq, as well as by affiliated groups in Libya and Nigeria. Most of the people who have been linked to Daesh in Europe have been EU citizens who travelled to parts of the Middle East to participate in atrocities. Any migrants who were rescued from boats or who were resettled directly from conflict areas would presumably be disarmed of any weapons they were carrying en route. Of course, they might obtain weapons once they reached the EU; but since Farage is an outspoken critic of gun control, he is part of the problem, not of the solution, to that issue. As for the figure of half a million Daesh fighters coming to the EU, that's 20 or 30 times the CIA's estimate of the total number of all Daesh fighters.

 

Finally, Farage argues that the EU has cynically used the migrant deaths crisis to develop a comprehensive immigration and asylum policy. If only it had: in fact, the EU’s response is largely marginal and ineffectual. Indeed, Farage is throwing some huge stones inside this glass house. It is Farage who is trying to ‘weaponise’ the tragic deaths of hundreds of people, taking this opportunity to make an inaccurate and incoherent rant in the midst of an election campaign.

Posted by Steve Peers at 05:38

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Labels: asylum, Mediterranean, migrant deaths, Nigel Farage, refugees, UKIP

 

http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/fact-checking-nigel-farage-will-eus.html

[loraward 10]

In any event, asylum-seekers who prove to be terrorists must be denied refugee status or other forms of protection status, as the CJEU has confirmed.

 

 

How would you set about proving that someone is trying to gain entry into Europe in order to commit terrorist acts, they don't even know who most of the migrants are because they are told to destroy their identity documents.

[chalga 10]

How would you set about proving that someone is trying to gain entry into Europe in order to commit terrorist acts, they don't even know who most of the migrants are because they are told to destroy their identity documents.

 

Let Farage answer it......he's saying that 500,000 will do it........how does he prove it?