Good morning, everybody!
It’s the second day of Conference, and members are slowly trickling in. There will be more interesting speeches by outstanding speakers – we hope to get the videos of Neil Hamilton’s speech which got a standing ovation, I was told; that of Paul Oakleys on immigration which as praised by everybody, and of course Gerard’s speech – and the videos will also be forthcoming.
Also, to whet your appetite and make you keep looking: I’ve met ‘Count Dankula’ and have his permission to republish his videos relevant to free speech. So watch this space!
As many of you knew – there was the Gala Dinner last evening. Something happened … Before pudding, we always have the speeches. First up was Nigel Farage. He gave a great speech, very well received – but then, before Gerard had walked to the back to give his speech. I didn’t see it, having sat right at the back.
On a more cheerful note (sorry, David, I simply cannot resist!): when our Party Chairman Tony McIntyre had some difficulties with the microphone, David (who sat opposite me at the dinner table) cheerful sang “oh Tony Toneee” …
Stand by for updates.
This is Duty Editor Mark Angelides reporting from the event…
A Battle for the Soul of UKIP?
UKIP hosted a Gala dinner last night that was in part to celebrate 25 years since the birth of the party, but also an opportunity to thank those who have given so much of their time, efforts, and of course, funds to keeping UKIP going through the fat times and the lean.
Among the otherwise jolly festivities, food, drink (plenty of drink), and auction fun, there were speeches; two of particular note. Nigel Farage and Gerard Batten spoke briefly about the direction and history of the party, and what was revealed was two very different visions for the future.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the main area of difference and contention was regarding Tommy Robinson. Nigel spoke passionately about being a leader and about being human, stating that it is always possible to make mistakes. He went on to highlight what he saw as one of his greatest (and most correct) decision as the leader… and that was to ban from membership all those that have previously been members of the BNP and EDF. He explained that it is not a question of having one person join, it is the people who will follow on behind, and the damage that would do to the carefully built reputation of UKIP.
Gerard, on the other hand, spoke about making decisions being the main role of a leader, and that how (in as many words) bringing in those who have been left out in the cold would be good for the party.
The audience reaction was enthusiastic for both speakers, showing that perhaps there is a real divide within the party over the issue of Mr Robinson. The question remaining is whether this divide could prove to be fatal? Is the issue of a single man being allowed to join the party enough to create a serious schism?
Yet this is not doomsaying. There is no need for a Catholic style schism within the root and branch of the party. UKIP has always been the party of common sense, and common sense tells us that adults can disagree with each other and still work towards a common goal.
Where do you stand? Let us know in the comments section!
One of the arts of leadership is to use all useful people, find a good hole, and stuff em in. Where they can do the most good
Everybody who knows me and my commenting will know that i have a great respect for Nigel Farage. Since knowing more about Gerard Batten, I have conceived a similar respect for him and his willingness to stand up and state his views without fear or favour. I hope that both Nigel and Gerard will be able to find common ground enough to carry UKIP forward into a future that will see the party take its rightful place on the centre of the political stage.
I have great sympathy for Tommy Robinson. His devotion to the cause of the restoration of justice and decency in Britain is a quality that only a great patriot could show. In the past he carried out his activities in the only way he knew how. Confronting the issues fearlessly and at great personal/physical cost. This has brought him into direct conflict with the ‘politically correct’ brigade. They have not hesitated to label Tommy ‘Far Right’ as though the epithet could somehow neutralise the effects of the wrongdoing that he was trying to expose. I do not oppose his membership of UKIP. It would mean that he would have to become part of the team and no longer act as an independent warrior. UKIP in its turn would need to unite on the issue that is, manifestly, uppermost in the crusade that Tommy has followed. Thus, UKIP, united upon this matter would be well placed to counter and refute the howls from the ‘liberal/left’ with dignity and strength.
It was lovely to meet some of you at Conference and even nicer for me to meet up with Viv again – we only seem to meet at Conference and I couldn’t make it last year.
For myself, I had a great time and thoroughly enjoyed it. The stall seemed to be a success and we raised a few pennies towards running this site – thank you to everyone who contributed.
Roll on the Spring conference!
Thank you and well done to yourself and everyone else that gives us something to chew on while keeping us from insulting each other.
Well done to you all.
🙂
Perhaps the Robinson impasse could be resolved , or rather the potential for difficulties arising from the precedent of agreeing Robinson’s membership. (Just an aside: has Robinson stated a wish to join Ukip?) Re-write the membership form to the effect that the applicant should sign a declaration that he/she has not, or no longer belongs to an extremist organisation. Further, a rider – covering any who lie and wish to promote extremism within UKip- that expulsion will follow for any guilty of breaking the rules. I appreciate that there may be a thin line at times ( eg criticism of Islam ) but that would be for Ukip hierarchy to decide on.
I have no problem with Robinson but it sets a precedent. How can Ukip then deny membership to those from an organisation which, hitherto, was proscribed? Would we be walking straight into a trap which left wingers would exploit? Mind you, Labour , glasshouses and stones comes to mind so perhaps we shouldn’t be too precious.
Oh dear how awful.
The BNP and the EDL.
Enemies of te state and presumably UKIP.
The two organizations who did something about girls being groomed and raped whilst Nigel and UKIP sat on its hands – just as complicit as the lib/lab/con, the police and social services.
The disgrace is around UKIP’s neck not those people who seeing the BNP was the one party doing something – joined it.
Funny sort of rules in this party.
You must be excluded for being BNP or EDL.
But not if you were a communist, a fascist, or SWP.
You can join as a paedophile, a rapist, a killer of kittens.
How bizarre.
Why are you not searching the background of every new member.
In a free society should a party who prides itself on supporting freedom then intrude into the privacy of many decent people to check – like Hope not Hate or Witchfinders General if they have ever dared to join something they
believed to be right and proper at the time.
Goodness me – lets really put the icing on the cake.
Russian spies, Mr Putin – complete with fake novichok that doesn’t kill….
Seriously how about potential islamic terrorists – all 23,000 of them being watched – please welcome in.
NO problems there for UKIP.
Its absolutely ridiculous and rather nasty to be singling out many genuine people – because many BNP and EDL are decent people.
They can join the lib/lab/con and have become their councillors but not UKIP?.
You couldn’t make it up.
I attended the conference and the dinner. I also promised Viv (and an NEC member) that I would write a detailed review of my reaction to the conference but that will take me a few days.
Re Tommy, my view is the Party is not yet ready to engage formally with him, for fear of what will follow.
But a further set of policies, a “martial” manifesto section (as in martial law), that makes the Party’s position unequivocally supportive of his objectives, sufficient for him to direct his considerable support our way politically, would go a long way to building further impetus while buying time to resolve internal differences.
He is in a desperate situation fighting a significantly manipulated establishment campaign to silence or even kill him, and he needs to know we are with him and under Gerard leadership, will fight alongside him.
But I think there’s a lot more to be done at our end, to develop our memberships understanding of what we are all up against, before the Party is ready to embrace Tommy more fully.
Elsewhere in the conference, all 3 non-English ukip leaders indicated their wish to see all their National Assemblies abolished and power returned to direct rule from Parliament.
Under a Ukip-led Parliament, certainly.
Under a Libconlab dominated one? I I I Don’t think so. Work to be done I suggest…
Sorry Alan we don’t have time to fudge and fiddle.
UKIP needs to pull its finger out and actually commit to something.
Too much fiddling and fudging and not an MP in the Commons after 25 years
What a dismal record.
We need Tommy, we need to show the public we are made of guts and commitment.
We need to show the working class – the backbone of Britain from Agincourt to the London blitz via Waterloo that we stand with them – as they face an isolated political position.
Whilst you dally with your report there is talk of another election.
For goodness sake – lets get on with things.
Gerard has spelt it out.
The best leader ever – lets get behind and actually do something to save our country not wait for the soap to wash our Oh ! so clean hands.
UKIP missing the bus as usual…
For goodness sake….
Hello Alan,
I don’t agree on the abolition of N.I., Scots and Welsh Assemblies and question the waste of time dismantling them. Personally I don’t believe it will ever happen.
Ironically, we dislike the ‘unseen’ masters in Brussels controlling politics in London but wish masters in Westminster and Whitehall to control politics in Anglesey.
Surely UKIP should be producing policies that increase the standard of living and work prospects of the Northern Irish, Scottish and Welsh.
I am very impressed with Gerard Batten and for the first time in my life want to join a politial party. However, I’m waiting to hear about the Tommy Robinson decision. In my eyes he is an absolute hero and has HUGE support out here in the real world. Far from damaging UKIP I think he will bring in more supporters. If UKIP doesn’t let him in I might not join. You can’t be the party of free speech (and what has he said that’s so terrible?) and refuse Tommy Robinson who has done so much to highlight the betrayal of our communities by the political class.
Hello Arthur,
You know as well as I do that threatening to do something you’re already doing is a waste of effort.
My answer to you is the same as for everyone else.
Come on board and don’t let those you disagree with stop you. Pay ypur entrance fee, sign any welcome note you receive and then get stuck it.
If you want to see things work in your favour, you have to join and then join in instead of hopping about on the sidelines.
You think you’re correct Arthur ?
Join UKIP and prove it.
Regarding Tommy Robingson I am behind Gerard Batten 100% as in granting Tommy membership as a one off and not to be used as as a latch lifter.
Give it a membership number yes / no vote online would suffice.
Two basic freedoms are at issue here.
Freedom of speech and freedom of association.
You cannot have just a bit of either – its the whole or none.
If you support freedom of speech you have to support speech you may not like but support the right for it to be said.
As a party we cannot claim to support freedom of speech and then deny those like Tommy his right
Tommy and his supporters should all be allowed membership.
We march with them, listen with them. cheer with them, and pat each other on the back – and then turn around and say sorry mate – you just ain’t good enough for UKIP.
Humbug.
We need Tommy and his followers more than they need us.
There are other parties ready to grasp Tommy with both hands and they will grow and we will decline again onto the path to nowhere we have previously been led on far too long.
Gerard Batten is right.
He is a great man and a great leader.
It is his vision we need to follow,
To really believe in freedom, not just parrot the word when we like what is said
Freedom and membership not only for Tommy but his followers too.
As has been suggested a quarantine of a year or so, OK
But if UKIP is to have a future, to be perfectly frank, that future is in Sunderland and Swindon, Grimsby and Folkestone not the wealthy mansions of Surrey and St Albans
If its toryism you are after go and join May, follow Leave and let the rest of us, the people, create a populist party for Britain – with Batten.
Hear hear, Emily. Spot on.
Time to stop the crap. Dump the Yaxley Lennon aka TR case and cause.
Stoopid and unprofitable and divisive to UKIP cause. Agree with Nigel.
UK Homo Sap.
Would that be the same Nigel who is absolutely terrified of facing up to Islam which seeks to dominate not just the UK but the entire world?
It’s as plain as the nose on your face that his philosophy is that it’s better to be a live coward than a dead hero. Do you agree with him there?
Here is clear picture of Farage and his views on islam, thus its crimes against British kids and its threats to us all.
The other day in Australia
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/09/video-nigel-farage-grows-flustered-stalks-out-of-interview-when-questioned-about-the-jihad-threat
And from last June – his complete surrender to islam in Britain
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/06/robert-spencer-nigel-farage-warns-well-lose-a-battle-between-the-west-and-islam
Britain and UKIP need a Churchill not a Chamberlain.
Exasperating experience has been that every time a waste of time ( loosely quoting ‘Mark Twain’ Clements to argue with those reared on BBC and CNN and MSM and whose brains (loosely quoting Vladimir Putin) have been become formless mushy-pea mash.
Of course it was mainly Kashmiris who perpetrated the mass abuse of white working class girls but just as sick are the senior cops and council executives and councillors et al who shut it up and covered it up.
So Islam is in the dock? Grow up. Anyone any grasp of the destruction of the traditional christian communities (e.g.,Chaldean catholic, Syrian orthodox, all brought about by the west and its Gulf tyranny war criminal invasions?
What about the over 70 million white war-mongering fundie xtians in USA and their bag carriers also in UK who regale in the Western destruction of Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria etc. …..The FUKUS-NATO regimes along with their salafist, wahhabi, munafiqin Gulf tyrannies and terrorist proxies like al nusra/ahrar al sham al qaeda and ISIS etc. and the ever expansionist “Oded Yinon” Israeli regime string-pulling.
Of course if you want to find out who your real rulers are, then (quoting ,supposedly Voltaire) find out who you are not allowed to criticise. Interesting if free speech based on robust evidence will be allowed in this reply.
The /TR’Yaxley Lennon case and cause is toxic so get over it!
UK Homo Sap.
I notice that you have neatly avoided answering my questions about Farage by indulging in whataboutery.
But who exactly are the “real rulers…..who you are not allowed to criticise.”?
If you mean the group that I think you mean, then not only are commentators on this forum terrified of criticising it but so is Farage.
This whole business is not about TR at all. It’s about Farage’s integrity – or rather lack of it.
I attended the conference, but didn’t go to the dinner – because at the end of a day at conference I feel saturated with political discussion.
I respect both Nigel and Gerard, but I think Nigel should take a back seat now. I can’t fault anything Gerard has said about Muslims, and I think Tommy Robinson may be a special case. I trust everyone has seen his talk at the Oxford Union – where I think he presented his case extremely well.
UKIP can’t be yet another organisation that feels embarrassed to discuss mainly Muslim rape gangs in our cities.
David.
Regarding the assertion in your last sentence, I think it’s pretty obvious that if, heaven forbid, Farage became leader of UKIP again, then the issue of Muslim rape gangs and indeed the entire issue of Islam wouldn’t be discussed at all.
Peter,
I don’t want to criticise Nigel in any way! I still drink coffee from a Nigel mug. Clearly everyone who leads UKIP has a tight rope to walk, and not everyone walks it the same way. Nigel definitely brought our party to the prominence it enjoys today, and gave us the referendum victory.
There is an awful lot wrong with Britain by now, and we don’t want to blame Nigel for not dealing with everything.
David.
It seems to me that you are a trifle inconsistent.
We can certainly blame Farage for not dealing with Islam, after Brexit the most important issue of our time and which Farage is absolutely terrified of facing.
Please see the post by Emily above and the videos to which she refers.
And you “don’t want to criticise Nigel in any way!”
Enjoy your coffee in your Nigel mug while you still can.
Well we both agree on the policy of our current leader, so I’d say there isn’t much to argue about. I suspect if you became leader of UKIP you would find the job far more challenging than you think – the MSM would twist every word you said – yet interviews on the MSM are an essential part of the post. I’m just glad we have a steady hand at the helm now, and I am glad that Nigel got us to the position where we are today.
Stacey Dooley needs our votes on Strictly next week.
https://youtu.be/b2nlIfn8tNA
Don’t be a k**b.
Language, please! 😡
You don’t recognise her then Arthur ?
It will be interesting to see how long it takes before the Grauniad tries to do her in.
I thought she needed a vote or three for her past efforts.
The Grauniards young dynamic progressives such as Dame Polly and Young Owen (31) would rather watch their domestic staff hoovering, than watch tacky nasty homophobic gender-specific racist Strictly.
Tommy Robinson:
I have previously expressed some concerns here on a previous article on this matter.
While I have read his excellent book, and watched many of his videos, I do understand his background regarding the EDL and his aborted attempt to join the BNP, and I do support his brave attempts to expose and call out Islamism and grooming gangs and all that.
I perhaps feel there are still unanswered questions about the people who have financially supported him both while working for Rebel Media and as an ‘independent’ – and I’m not referring to those hard-working individuals who have donated what money they can spare through his crowdfunding website.
(Just google for “Tommy Robinson Shillman Fellow” and look through some of the results just to get a feel for things)
The thing is, that Tommy Robinson is barred from joining UKIP under party rules that proscribe organisations like the EDL and the BNP, both of which Tommy has been involved with.
But ‘making an exception’ to the rules, in order to permit Tommy to join UKIP, would open up a whole can of worms.
The other approach, to get rid of the proscribed parties rule, would allow Tommy to join, but then equally *could* allow a number of actual far-right racists to join the party, essentially a free-for-all.
If an exception is made for Tommy, how many others would then come forward and then seek to claim the same exception?
(It is interesting to note if you look through comments being left on UKIPs Facebook page posts, the number of people commenting that “if Tommy becomes UKIP leader I’m joining/voting” has increased recently!)
All I would say is that while I would welcome Tommy into our party, I would equally be watching out for “what happens next” with regards to what Tommy’s ‘wealthy backers’ try to do, whether that be stealthily influence party policy or to directly infiltrate us.
The other question to be asked, which I have asked previously, is “why UKIP and not For Britain?”
I ask the same question to you Stuart.
“Why UKIP.and not For Britain.”
Unfortunately its in the nature of right wing organisations to have leaders who are egotistical and undemocratic in style – like AMW. The same goes with the DVLA, Vets, and others. It is impossible to herd them into a single party. The left on the other hand unites and doesn’t fight each other. The Communists don’t fight seats against Momentum/Labour candidates for example. All the SWP / Communists / Antifa and others are also Labour members and back Corbyn for practical- election winning- numbers sake. One elected the trouble for ‘moderate’ Labour would start big time. But they would have power.
We can all see that on this site we have openly FB and AMW fans who can’t agree with the more moderate UKIP types and some who are even further right than AMW. Clearly UKIP has no ‘typical’ member.
Tommy Robinson wants to join UKIP because otherwise he has to start his own party to keep in the – money earning- public eye, as he knows that he can’t boss AMW for instance and no one else would have him.
Moderate UKIP ( like Julian Flood ) know that Robinson might entice some of the troublesome Britler Youth to join – but that the moderate UKIP voters would not tolerate it and then just defect to the Tories. His argument (published today) is a sound one,
Under a TR regime UKIP would probably end up as a proscribed organisation within a year as it would become a party so far outside the Overton window (racist/violent) that it would be forced to shut down… thats if it wasn’t bankrupted due to donors pulling the plug immediately or through internal corruption and theft.
Why are we right-wing and why are other groups far-right.
I’m seeing real-Lefty street protests in fake-Lefty Labour areas.
It always happens with Lefties. Wrong sort of Socialism. Wrong sort of Fascism. Wrong sort of Communism.
Just because the State controlled msm sticks a label on you, doesn’t mean you have to agree and repeat their mistake at every opportunity.
While sat in the audience this morning, I overheard part of a conversation, and I was myself asked if I’d been at the gala dinner last night, apparently they were saying that Farage had been booed?
Not so to my hearing anyway. He made his appeal re not involving Tommy and somebody reacted with an abrasive comment which Tony McIntyre snuffed out immediately. That was it. And shortly afterwards, Nigel left.
I’m still undecided on Tommy Robinson. I can see both sides – it’s a toughie.
I can see both sides too. But do we really want to be like the nasty left who shut out all voices and views that do not echo their own. I do think Tommy was badly treated by our, not so just as we thought, justice system and his mistreatment needs to be made public. I would not however support him having any position of power in the party and as with ALL members we could kick him out if he brought the party into disrepute.
That might just be the answer, Jackie. Allow anyone to join as an ordinary member but if they’ve been a member of another party, prohibit them from standing as a branch officer, NEC member, spokesman, candidate at any level or any other party officer for a period of time – say five or ten years. It would need a constitutional change, but do you think it’s an idea?
Hello Debbie,
The compromise you detail should be for all new members.
I would treat those that held positions in another political party differently to those that were just members.
‘Ordinary’ members could be kept off of candidate lists for a year and those that wished for power elsewhere could wait 5 years or more.
It would increase membership while stopping bandwagon jumpers looking for another cause to ruin.
Debbie and Bryan, I agree with both of you, except that perhaps 3 years would be long enough. We certainly do not want UKIP to be invaded and spoiled by outsiders who do not share our ideals – whether on not they previously belonged to another party.
As I understand it, we are the only party who bans ex-members from the far right party from joining.
I imagine if Tommy Robinson joins, he will want some sort of prominent role promoting the need to tackle extreme Islam.
As I understand it, people do not need to be members of UKIP to post on here, so it would be nice if TR contributed here for a bit, discussing the issue, and what his plans would be.
Debbie.
With all due respect, to me it’s quite simple.
Does UKIP stay locked in a straightjacket as “The Nigel Farage Party”, getting absolutely nowhere and eventually fading into oblivion, or does it completely reinvent itself, take the bull by the horns and move into the real world?
Looks as if the PeterUST tendency has swiveled to willingly embrace straightjacket of “The TR (YAXLEY LENNON) NASTY PARTY”.
Never have I heard a word in conversation or in print as here from anyone who has any competence to pronounce objectively and sapiently on the diverse elements of Islam. For God’s sake—-does anyone understand the various disparate groupings that do not fit into the too frequent trite, ignorant generalisations positing a homogeneous mass of moslems?
Who knows or cares about whether the over-generalisations employed to disregard the massive differences between Zaudi extremist Wahhabi Suuni version of Islam, mainstream Sunni and the Shia/ Alawite, or Zaidi or Ismaeli -etc.—or that most sunnis and all shia- alawites (and every one of the traditional, ancient christian churches’ leaders in Syria support the alawite government, desoite the propaganda to the contrary from western journalists and regimes.
Regarding focus on Koranic verses alone being blood-curdling, look at the beam in the eyes of the ignorant and/or arrogant, open eyes to the mass killings and rape and pillage and lying and religious hatred in the likes of Old Testament Deuteronomy and the almost impossible to obtain Soncino edition of The jewish Babylonian Talmud.
For the party’s sake end the lemming-like rush to the cliff-face by being increasingly and palpably regarded as the nasty islamophobic party—God knows, almost on every occasion when bringing up UKIP to non-kippers, I have to try to put UKIP in a positive light.
The YAX-LEN TR issue is toxic.
Move into the real world or UKIP will become a derided extinct fossil.
UK Homo Sap.
Actually, I have never voiced any support for TR. In fact quite the opposite. When the issue of the possibility of TR becoming a member of UKIP was first raised I stated that I had (and still have) serious reservations about him, the same reservations that I had (and still have) about AMW.
Both of them are very enthusiastic supporters of the group that I believe you are referring to in another of your comments on this thread. Please read my reply to that comment.
I would imagine that Momentum/Labour and the Tories want TR to join UKIP too, as a diversion from real politics —-whilst they battle it out for the general election which I really think will happen quite soon.
May cannot hold on much longer.
As a former NEC member, I appreciate that if the directors make a mistake with bad financial consequences for the party, it is THEIR houses, savings, and ability to be directors at risk – not ours, as Dr. Tomaž Slivnik, of this parish, can confirm.
I don’t think so. Its incorporation stops personal liabilities doesn’t it?
Not if the NEC deliberately make bad decisions when they should have known better.
https://united-kingdom.taylorwessing.com/synapse/duties_personal_liabilities.html
“A number of statutes contain provisions stating that if a company commits a criminal offence, a director is also guilty of the offence if it is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to have been attributable to any neglect on the part of, the director.”
So if the courts find UKIP guilty by association for something Tommy, as a member does, as happened in the Jane Collins case, and the NEC is blamed for admitting him to membership, those NEC members voting “let him join” could be held personally liable for any UKIP fines…
I see. That sort of decides the issue then as TR is a proven hothead. He cannot be relied upon to act sensibly
There is an argument to say the party should be restructured so the NEC aren’t the fall guys in such a case, but that would require constitutional change.
As the party is currently structured, anyone on the NEC who wants to keep a (safe) roof on their head and savings account should vote “No.”
So Farage doesn’t want former members of certain groups in the party because of “the damage that would do to the carefully built reputation of UKIP.”
And what exactly is that reputation that has been carefully built? A party of fuddy-duddies, a party which is just floundering about and hasn’t the remotest idea where it is going?
Farage, like his geriatric middle class garden party attending supporters who live in a world of fantasy totally divorced from reality, is an out and out snob.
And, sadly, Batten doesn’t seem to be all that sure of himself. What is the point of making an exception for TR or indeed anyone for that matter? The proscribed list should be discarded entirely.
Yes, there is certainly a battle for the soul of UKIP ahead.
I’m starting to wonder if Nigel needs his freedom from UKIP.
Hasn’t said a word for UKIP for ages, doesn’t seem keen to share a stage with Gerard, prefers Leave Means Leave but still turns up to tell UKIP members off at Conference.
I’m all for loyalty and debt to Nigel for his unmatched work for Brexit but his view on everything else should be kept off the stage unless he is willing to debate like the rest of us.
Farage was at the gala dinner, but was he even at the rest of the conference? Too busy with his Leave Means Leave buddies perhaps?
Peter,
Like many, I have supported Tommy by writing letters and signing a petition , talking to neighbours
and family members who had no Idea about the plight this freeborn Englishman.
Tommy has to be the exception , we know all we need to know about Tommy and then sum,
there is no way I will be standing in our town handing out UKIP leaflets with a certain ex BNP racist,
knowing some of his views , I don’t think that he will have much joy standing next to me.
Within a few years UKIP would become the BNP.
I wish Tommy and his family all the best , and Gerard many years of leadership.
Tommy Robinson shows political judgement, bravery and determination and is popular.
He left BNP aged 20
He started the EDL and left when not able to control violent elements.I don’t understand the fuss about the EDL
Thy ask for UK parliament control over immigration Don’t we all want that?
He recognises the 2 great threats of Islam and the restriction on free speech
He speaks up about Muslim rape gangs and suffers the consequences.
He would be an asset to UKIP
You don’t UNDERSTAND ‘the fuss’ about the EDL ?
Here’s one of Tommy’s recruits…
The guy say he doesn’t want Islamic sharia law in UK.
I agree with him
Seems you don’t like working class people, with northern accent and and no tie, expressing their opinions.
I’m listening to my editor and concur with Bryan. I’m not debating TR until Thursday/Friday.
It’s all down to votes for me Viv.
A nice big coalition of Britons of all class, colour, creed and religion uniting as one against the LibLabCon.
If we state that a rough past or criminal record means you are excluded from politics, that’s possibly 5 million Britons. Cross them off.
Then we dislike those that are reactionary against a religious ideology that carries an underlying need to change their host nation into the backward s-hole they left behind. That’s another couple of million voters crossed off.
If you keep playing the moral high ground, or suffer with a superiority complex dressed up in class prejudice, you end up on 4% with nothing different to offer than the LibLabCon.
Our enemy’s enemy is our friend.
If there’s a vote and someone is sitting on their hands, can they vote for Tommy on my behalf please ?
In the 40s I was a patriot, inthe early 50s I was communist . in the mid 50s is sat in an army bunkhose with two thousand othersquaddies chanting ” hate, hate, hate, hate “.for an hour or two. We’d probably joined Tomm Robinson just for the ficht.,I wonder what the police would have done then ? I know the officers kept their heads down. Jeremy would have run for his life. Literally. Anyway When I reached 21 I vaguely decided didn’t understand enough to say anything. I have a conviction for riding a bike without lights, In spite of the fact that 18months earlier my mum got shouted at for having lights on the same bike ( Offialdom .in the form of an airraid warden was no loger necessary ). I was brought up by a grandmother who left germany in the twenties, who gave me a full and lively description of how officialdom always evolves. I’ve had no reason to change her view. I’ve always been suspicious of officialdom and and it’s motives ( Rightly ) . Offialdom was halted in its tracks in the early 60s due to the popularity of Northcote-Parkinsons Laws which showed reality, and temporarily slowed em down until Apalling Socialist governments become thenorm.
You want to know. why they were apalling. ? Another post sometime perhaps. I’ve just sat thru a bunch of speeches. So , of course I would support Tommy. I feelsorry for those who would oppose.
Wow. How old are you Sir … if you don’t mind me asking?
I had no idea of your background before this.
This is very important. As an historian these personal histories matter. They should be recorded. They should be learned from.
Take heed everyone..
With respect and awe.
Kind Regards Sir,
K
I get your point. In the 40s I was a child. I believed in Santa Clause and Fairies because my elders and betters said they existed. In the 50s I was a teenager and scared of dying and going to hell because my elders and betters said that was what would happen if I didn’t behave. In the 60’s and 70’s I was politically gullible and voted to remain in the Common Market because my ‘so-called’ elders and betters said it was the right thing to do. I thought they knew what they were talking about so I believed them. By the turn of the century I realised I had been bamfoozled all my life – Santa Clause, fairies, hell, the Common Market and much else. I was so disenchanted by the fact that I had allowed myself to be taken in that now I don’t believe anything my elders and betters say.
A child thinks as a child, but when a child becomes an adult it starts to think for itself and childish things become redundant.
The Tommy Robinson debate is all about childish thoughts.
Adults, especially adults belonging to a free speech and anti-Establishment political party, should not be frightened of childish name calling by our inferiors.