Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Talk about being on the ropes.
is he saying we shouldn't let Romanians into the the UK because some of them might be criminals?
I'm not racist, but look at the facts, they're all criminals.
Completely non racist, then.
Especially from places which are less socially developed than the UK.
Low living standards does that to a country.
Poverty and social exclusion is a huge motivator towards criminality. Is this not sociology 101?
have an issue with any of UKIP's policies?
With dodgy statistics.
Only a complete mug would be behind one party's policies 100%. I've always admitted this as they've come up. Denial of climate change and the shaky stance on gay marriage being the primary two.
encourages ill/negative feelings toward people from other nations?
Putting aside the inflammatory comments made by certain members that have been recognised as unacceptable by the party, it should be about the failures of the EU as a system, including the addition of countries failing to adequately support their own populations, but any criticism of this gets spun into being a slur on those countries' individuals.
that he wouldn't like to live next-door to. Does that not trouble you?
I just don't think his motivation is out-and-out hatred of those from a different culture to his (he does say that the majority of Romanians coming to the UK would make good neighbours in his apology), it's the concern that a troubled country - which he's apparently been to and seen the problems of first-hand - now has an open border with the UK and the statistics he believes, however mistaken you think he is (and there seems to be a valid argument either way to me), seem to exacerbate these concerns.
wouldn't it be fair to say that he is (intentionally or not) stirring up mistrust for those from other nations?
If I he had been to LA, and seen the gang problems there first hand, if a black American moved in next door to him, would it be acceptable for him to say that he wouldn't want to live next to them?
you attract people from parties like the BNP who actually have fascist policy, who just want a scrap with the 'lefties' and turn the argument into something it was never supposed to be in the first place. If the former group of people were prepared to have an intelligent debate (I know I've not really done that in this thread, but there are people better at this than I) without the name-calling in the first place, it would never have descended to this level. Of course if one of your main line of criticisms of the EU is the countries it lets in, you're going to offend people from those countries, but the main crux of UKIP's argument is that the UK shouldn't 'prop up' those countries, you might have to make a few enemies. I don't think the fight was ever meant to get this dirty, though.
that have been pouring out of the media, regarding members of UKIP and affiliates of UKIP are somehow unfair? Do YOU feel that all of the other major political parties have these bigotry related 'skeletons in the closet'?
It's overstated (and the recent Private Eye story about the Tories' collusion with the Guardian and others gives some idea as to why), and it certainly makes arguing from the 'out' position incredibly difficult when people think you're coming from a position of racism. But then, some think that being on the 'out' side makes you racist by default anyway. It doesn't, but it does mean you will have to be critical of the situation other countries, as that's one of the central issues.
Do I think bigots exist in other parties? Of course - bigots with blood on their hands, self-interest at heart and a couple of extremely disillusioned generations to sort out. A vote for any of them is a vote for complacency and stagnation. Even if you think UKIP won't change a thing in that respect, it's immensely entertaining seeing them trying to stay relevant in the face of a skilled demagogue like Farage.
hahaha. thanks to minimal government neoliberal idiots like you and Farage the EU has 'propped up' (as you so charmingly put it) large portions of this country for the last three decades.
picked up a lot of the slack after the Thatcher government cut pre-1979 regional policies to shreds
made any changes for the good of the country either
were ultimately necessary, but that she did them in a way that showed near contempt for the people affected by them.
Moreover the changes she brough about have left is in an era of selfishness, greed and shallow materialism, and she's responsible for vast numbers of problems that are still apparent today, problems that her descents - Cameron, Farage, the others to a lesser extent - are only happy to beat with a stick for their own personal gain.
Not a second world country.
it isn't party policy
of a conspiracy theorist who comes out with borderline racist trash fwiw tbf
should be something like:
percentage of all Romanians in England and Wales who have been imprisoned v percentage of individuals who served as a UKIP MEP who were subsequently imprisoned.
percentage of all prisoners in England and Wales who are Romanian v percentage of all prisoners in England and Wales who have previously served as a UKIP MEP
93% of crime over 28 countries had nothing to do with Romanians.
There's a problem there. Get your head out your ass.
I think that applies more to yourself.
It's ok to support UKIP, but don't be blind to the truth.
The ATM statistic isn't even a stat - it's an unfounded and unprovable quote.
The 7% statistic is bollocks. What crime? Do they mean arrests? What period of time? Why are you not questioning this? Romania has over 20m people. It's the 7th biggest population in the EU. Think before you decide to believe what is a propaganda leaflet.
C'mon man, surely politics is about the truth.
'Europol has identified 240 organised crime gangs from Romania which account for 6.7% of all criminal networks active in Europe'
how many crimes have they committed?
So to conflate the two is incredibly disingenuous.
Number of Romanians in Romania: 17.8 million
Proportion of Romanians in Romania alone, against the Population of Europe: 2.4%
My bad. Still disproportionate
1) The ATM stat is completely unfounded and can't be proved and was a quote from one man with no evidence.
2) The 7% stat actually refers to less than 7% of all criminal networks are Romanian.
3) Your population statistic was completely wrong.
Not exactly good is it? If UKIP are so right about these things, why are they not getting better stats? Or is it because they're racist prejudices can't be backed up by fact?
Something about having unspent convictions within 10 years when applying to live in this country etc. etc.
So all Farage wants to do to extend this is to... stop ALL Romanians from coming here because a minority of them have a questionable statistical propensity to commit certain types of crime? Have I read that correctly?
Think our current system's doing an alright job at keeping out the people Farage et. al. don't like. Imagine being someone who thinks Teresa May is too gentle on immigration :D
He's always advocated a points-based immigration system, like Canada and Australia, which reduces the risk of unskilled workers coming to the country, remaining in poverty and having to resort to crime. Doesn't discriminate based on country of origin either.
I thought these people were hard-wired socially-engineered criminals mate? Hence the need to use flimsy stats to overstate the risk of having them here. Turns out they're just like everybody else!
it isn't based on publicly available data. Literally, some dude just said it and it's now repeated as gospel. And no one knows what time period it covers. if any
and his department couldn't account for his comments.
So, some dude then.
well I never
I've worked for the police before, basic concepts like percentages, confidence intervals etc mystify them even at the high levels
Although I suspect if they go towards helping Farage's cause they'd do their best not to
backing up the /original/ quote then? Cool
the level of submission to authority that this suggests is tantamount to pulling one's trousers down an assuming a 'presenting' stance.
and accuses the po po of being in on the vast anti UKIP conspiracy web
without 'let me be clear, ukip is not a racist party' as the first line?
Stationary is not moving.
you disgust me
Just remember `E` for Envelopes = stationEry.
Changed my life that has.
or if an even higher proportion of crimes was committed by Romanian gangs, if you make a snap decision on someone based purely on what country they come from, it is racism. Would he be so happy to say he would be uncomfortable if a Black family moved in next door, then back it up with some figures suggesting black people were more likely to commit crime? Of course not, he knows that it is seen as OK to discriminate against Eastern Europeans or paint them all as members of organised ATM robbery gangs.
Great photo - sums their attitude up really.
I can't stand in the street shouting at someone that they're a racist without them getting annoyed about it.
She should've gone full Prescott on that guy in the edgy V for Vendetta mask.
She probably shouldn't go around wearing a racism rosette then
when a person can't stand in the street and promote bigoted ideology without being called out on it.
It's political correctness gone mad.
2. she doesn't even directly accuse the protesters of doing so. the comment she makes about it seems to be directed at some kind of abstract group of abuse-shouters.
Shouting that you and the people interacting with you are all racists.
You'd turn around and sock me one and I'd deserve it.
Violence on unarmed members of the public engaging in peaceful (if potentially offensive) protest
That's democracy maaaan
People are allowed to protest with anti racist placards, just like ukip members are allowed to be racist, free speech in action
centred around being elected to a position of power over others? If so, then no, I wouldn't. Even if I was in some kind of weirdo, anti-racism party, dedicated to being the best at multiculturalism and good times for all races. People have the right to peaceful protest and counter-protest in whatever way they want, as long as it doesn't constitute hate speech, and calling someone a fascist doesn't fit the definition of hate speech. (Before you respond to that, have a think about why first.)
Follow to my house and do it and that's different. But because one person follows you to your house, it doesn't mean that another person can't do it at a set event.
deserves everything he got and more
the guy in the middle of the photo, lifting his sunglasses up.
Not my words Michael, the words of Nigel Farage.
Whan | vlslted the country l was truly shoched by the llv1ng condltlons nd mll excluslon or a large Roma
mlnonty, lt ls difficul lo belleve mt such dlKrlmlnztlon stll exlsts in Europe loday
' ''v'.' iLut 1 (_)jl . ú';'| Url'.|f, IJrfE`?|( l?l ¡| ?E UK un|L`? tt%IL` ||`tri|)'J¡itif| yL)iL` (if r)` . lilt t'
92''ó of ll QTM crim in London ís commíttEd by Romnihns'
28,000 Romanins wero hrrcstcd ín the IElst five ycars in thc Metropoljtr Polcc rca alone
A 8 tha EU &&a , Euo Du& :
7./. of all crimg acroas thg & EU member 8tat9s was c8u8gd by 240 Rnanian ganga
We should not be ln a polltlcal unlon wlW Rom3nla, wlW an open door to all o thelr cltlzens. We must tahe back the
powe to stop crlmlnals rom 8l)terlng our country by t3hlng back control o our bDrdcrs The only way to do that ls
to lczve the EU
Then we chn glve Romnlnns who wnt to come to tha UK work permlts and do th n8u.sMry chEcks When thls
happens my answer to the questlon, .Should p6ople be concerned lf a group ot Romanlan men vd ln n6xt
door?' wttl be 'No-
is not aclst to want to stop organlsed Grlmlnal .qangs underm
g our way o fie
NDN b NP
since the fall of communism, roma groups have been targeted, ostracised and discriminated against...
so keep them out of my fucking country!!
Is the implication that non-EU workers are being turned away in favour of EU ones. Is there any documentary or anecdotal evidence that this is the case?
What I'm asking is whether or not any non-EU workers have been refused entry, such as the Indian doctors or Kiwi engineers mentioned by Big Nige in the LBC interview.
but not necessarily in favour of EU migrants, rather it would be the knock on effect of the coalition implementing a quota system on non-EU immigration.
I don't know whether it's a constant problem though - I suspect probably not, as we'd probably hear a lot of complaints from business that despite sponsoring people to come over they can't get the skilled staff they need if it was.
(See also my post below)
Basically the coalition wanted to cut immigration. It couldn't cut EU immigration so it had to cut skilled non-EU immigration. So it's not like I lost my place in the UK because of a *specific* EU worker, but because of the general anti-immigrant backlash that led to the tighter rules.
It wouldn't be a minority of cases though - see the list I post below - *most* non-EU doctors wouldn't be eligible.
And as regards complaints - law firms and other professional services firms have been yelling about this issue a lot - it's mostly been reported in the FT though. The law firm I worked for absolutely hated the new rules, it made it impossible to bring in skilled international lawyers.
The immigration rules changed in the last few years making it much, much harder for non-EU workers to work in the UK. Trying to make this short:
The old rule: visas based on combination of income and qualifications. (I got in with a Masters and reasonable income). This means you can work anywhere, if you can get a job. You can't get benefits. OR sponsorship - can only work for one company, who must show that they couldn't get an EU worker for the same job.
New rules: sponsorship, but there are very very few places. Sponsor firms must be licensed. OR under a shortage occupation (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/308513/shortageoccupationlistapril14.pdf) which includes some types of doctor, but not all. OR you can apply for one of 500 places under the exceptional talent scheme, or set up a business. It's hard, basically.
"It is difficult to believe that such discrimination still exists in Europe today."
It is, isn't it Nige?
This "ending discrimination against non-EU nationals" line is just beautiful.
then do not permit access into the country to romanian criminals who wish to extent their criminal activity to the UK, those Romanians who do not wish to 'be criminal' or 'bad' in the UK should be let in.
Asking people on the way in
I got asked if I was a football hooligan by a border woman going into Germany
not necessarily my own opinion, because it is not that simple. Illegality and therefore 'criminality' does not necessarily equate to 'bad' or 'immoral' or even 'antisocial', there is obviously a debatable amount of overlap, but there is also a tangible (but again debatable) misallignment.
unfortunately the worlds societies have positioned themselves a long way away from the position where they could remove such things
You're sliding very rapidly from "charming gadfly of the right" to "idiot spouting entirely unsupported, super-borderline racist doggerel" atm, and I'm in a really, really shit mood this week.
Just fyi, like.
Never suggested anyone had so much as brought the idea up, you scamp.
no one had even strongly implied it either
alright big man!
asking me to ban him for muscling in on your territory.
I think people are rebuffing him well enough without a moderator wading in. Censorship is the sort of thing UKIP would favor anyway. Don't stoop.
Here's a left wing opinion piece to debunk it"
Using unfounded, unverified statistics such as the UKIP leaflet does about Romanians is worse than an opinion piece in that it's deliberately misleading and saying something is a fact, when it isn't.
Also looking for reasons to tar an entire nation with the same brush is in and of itself a pretty shit thing to be doing isn't it?
If you are incapable of understanding the argument, you can dismiss the source rather than the content.
where do you think that has happened in this thread?
Including the misguided ramblings of their own leader in both interview and "open letter" but if they keep saying "not racist" someone must believe them.
that in response to an interview where he was humiliated by being brought up on incorrect statistics, he's tried to clear his name by using incorrect statistics.
UKIP are the best thing to happen to the internet since cats.
I imagine someone has crept up behind him and pulled his trousers down
I'm reminded of that Always Sunny... episode.
"Again - NOTHING SEXUAL"
cba to check
what a fucking nutter
percentage wise there are more ex-UKIP members in prison than there are Romanians - http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/farage-admits-he-was-pissed.html
Who would you want living next to you?
which is annoying, as it looks like I agree with a completely untrue statement. I mean, you do realise that graph doesn't show anything like what you just said it did, right?
having actually looked at it, you are right. Dont worry -dan- no one thinks you are an idiot. Just that I am an idiot :(
He's accepted in this interview that the 7% crime figure is incorrect already!