Gimlet Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Strange post? I thought the jocks wanted (as is their right) independence surely he cant be condemned for recognizing their wishes, or is your post just another tooth gritting anti anything 1 degree right of your absolute left.. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalconFN Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Strange post? I thought the jocks wanted (as is their right) independence surely he cant be condemned for recognizing their wishes, or is your post just another tooth gritting anti anything 1 degree right of your absolute left.. KW The clue is in the name UKIP.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 The clue is in the name UKIP.... a bigger clue is jockland dont want to be united comprehend understand eh!! doh KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 (edited) The jocks want to be independent as long as we keep pouring money in to prop them up. Still want to send MPs to westminster to vote . Dream on Scottie Edited April 1, 2013 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalconFN Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 a bigger clue is jockland dont want to be united comprehend understand eh!! doh KW No, I don't understand. Firstly 'jockland' as you call it haven't had any referendum on independence, and all the suggestions are that the majority want to keep the union together; secondly, why call your political party the United Kingdom Independence Party if you only have any interest in one part of the kingdom? I'm all for shaking up the political system to breathe some fresh air into Westminster but some quick-talking, snake-oil salesman doesn't fill me with much confidence I'm afraid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 No, I don't understand. Firstly 'jockland' as you call it haven't had any referendum on independence, and all the suggestions are that the majority want to keep the union together; secondly, why call your political party the United Kingdom Independence Party if you only have any interest in one part of the kingdom? I'm all for shaking up the political system to breathe some fresh air into Westminster but some quick-talking, snake-oil salesman doesn't fill me with much confidence I'm afraid. Maybe the choices generally made by Scots previously with regards to voting point to the fact it would be a waste of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalconFN Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Maybe the choices generally made by Scots previously with regards to voting point to the fact it would be a waste of time. Yes, very true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 I'm all for shaking up the political system to breathe some fresh air into Westminster but some quick-talking, snake-oil salesman doesn't fill me with much confidence I'm afraid. Nor me, we've got a Parliament packed with those priviliged parasitic spivs already which is why I shall be voting for UKIP and Nigel Farage, a rare straightforward politician who merely acticulates what every intelligent person can see for themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
novice cushie shooter Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 I know where you're coming from kdubya but as long as we govern the Scots and Welsh (even to a lesser extend) we're still a British nation. To be honest, I don't think I would be too bothered if the Scots and Welsh wanted to totally go their own way so long as they didn't expect any hand outs from the English. Same with Cornwall, effectively, as they've been whining for a few years now about being independant. Can't see that they would get very far though. They find it tough down there even with our help. How about we change the name from united kingdom to england rulers of evreyone... Imo there has only been the press coverage for an independant scotland not very much been said against it. I personally would prefer a 'united kingdom' i dont see any benefits of independance seeing as the english government sold off all our oil fields leaving us with very little industry nowadays now the textiles,shipyards etc are dwindling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 (edited) How about we change the name from united kingdom to england rulers of evreyone... Imo there has only been the press coverage for an independant scotland not very much been said against it. I personally would prefer a 'united kingdom' i dont see any benefits of independance seeing as the english government sold off all our oil fields leaving us with very little industry nowadays now the textiles,shipyards etc are dwindling. How about we change the name from united kingdom to england rulers of evreyone... Imo there has only been the press coverage for an independant scotland not very much been said against it. I personally would prefer a 'united kingdom' i dont see any benefits of independance seeing as the english government sold off all our oil fields leaving us with very little industry nowadays now the textiles,shipyards etc are dwindling. I hear what you're saying but its not England that rules and abuses Britain, its London. Urban, metrosexual, man-bag carrying, stylish, prissy, self-important spoilt brat London. And believe me, there are plenty of English people who hate them just as much as Scots do. London has done as much damage to England as it has t Scotland. Get rid of London and the UK would work. Edited April 1, 2013 by Gimlet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 (edited) Strange post? I thought the jocks wanted (as is their right) independence surely he cant be condemned for recognizing their wishes, or is your post just another tooth gritting anti anything 1 degree right of your absolute left.. KW No they don`t want independence and I`m not Scottish or left wing either The clue is in the name UKIP.... secondly, why call your political party the United Kingdom Independence Party if you only have any interest in one part of the kingdom? Spot on... a bigger clue is jockland dont want to be united comprehend understand eh!! doh KW The majority do not, but that is just what I see and hear living here in Scotland, but of course you would know better living in the land of those who hang monkeys eh? Edited April 1, 2013 by henry d Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalconFN Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 MPs come from all walks of life and from all areas not just London. What you are saying makes no sense at all, London is the capital city, it is home to Parliament and the biggest wealth creator in the country but it doesn't produce our MPs or decide their policies. I try to avoid London as much as possible but this type of knee-jerk London bashing is pointless and factually inaccurate. If you really want to blame anyone for the state of Britain today then blame all the moaners that wont vote and the scroungers that won't work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 MPs come from all walks of life and from all areas not just London. What you are saying makes no sense at all, London is the capital city, it is home to Parliament and the biggest wealth creator in the country but it doesn't produce our MPs or decide their policies. I try to avoid London as much as possible but this type of knee-jerk London bashing is pointless and factually inaccurate. If you really want to blame anyone for the state of Britain today then blame all the moaners that wont vote and the scroungers that won't work. There's nothing knee-jerk about it. London is increasingly divorced from the rest of the country. Nor is it factually inaccurate. It is fantasy to suppose that ordinary MPs and local party activists determine policy in the major parties. There is a London-centric elite established across the political spectrum and across the broadcast and print media. It may be home to the Parliament building but it certainly isn't home to Parliamentary democracy, that fled long ago to Brussels and the EU Commission. Nor does it resemble any Capital city of England that I can recognise. London has turned into an invidious political and social experiment that afflicts most other parts of the UK. It simultaneously sucks wealth and political influence away from other regions and cities while inflicting on all a destructive tide of mass migration through foreign influx and white-flight. London is a toxic hothouse and a EU stooge city - Europe's transAtlantic hub. I heartily wish we could float it out into the North Sea and blow it up. I agree about the whining non-voters and the undeserving beggers. But they are a part of a social sub-set that has been created by the present cross-party political establishment and its London based ruling elite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 (edited) The ice age is coming, the sun's zooming in Meltdown expected, the wheat is growing thin Engines stop running but I have no fear' Cause London is burning and I live by the river Edited April 2, 2013 by overandunder2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secretagentmole Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 Looks good apart from supporting coal instead of wind power. Er why? We have plenty of coal reserves, bring about lots of employment if deep mining was started again. Wind power is bog all use on a calm day! It is no use if the wind speeds are too high either! So both times you have, what is in effect, an oversized laundry line prop! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secretagentmole Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 OK then, defend this; Ban schools from showing Al Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth. What`s next after this? Showing evidence that is factually correct. After all in Tudor times we used to grow oranges in this country. Tell me how many orange plantations do you see? Do you actually know how much of the atmosphere is carbon dioxide, how much of that is man made, how much of that is attributed to Britain? There is NO scientific evidence for global warming, there is NO statistical evidence to show that we have contributed to it! For those who want to know there is 0.038% of CO2 in the atmosphere and 3% of that is attributed to mankind, so in other words mankind is responsible for 0.00114& of atmospheric CO2, for crying out loud, a gnat breathing out by something that can measure levels to 0.038% will give a greenhouse effect scientist a coronary or a cash bonus for research! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 Showing evidence that is factually correct. After all in Tudor times we used to grow oranges in this country. Tell me how many orange plantations do you see? Do you actually know how much of the atmosphere is carbon dioxide, how much of that is man made, how much of that is attributed to Britain? There is NO scientific evidence for global warming, there is NO statistical evidence to show that we have contributed to it! For those who want to know there is 0.038% of CO2 in the atmosphere and 3% of that is attributed to mankind, so in other words mankind is responsible for 0.00114& of atmospheric CO2, for crying out loud, a gnat breathing out by something that can measure levels to 0.038% will give a greenhouse effect scientist a coronary or a cash bonus for research! I was not contesting the case, I was contesting the right to ban things from schools. Give children/young people the ability to critique, don`t just use them as banks of knowledge, whatever would Paulo Freire say Any hoo, as you brought oranges into the equation, a little digging brought this to light.... " in addition to apples, pears, plums, cherries and woodland strawberries which had been grown here for centuries, new fruits from southern Europe were introduced into the gardens of the wealthy. these included quinces, apricots, raspberries, red and black currents, melon, and even pomegranates, oranges and lemons. the last were never really successful however, and citrus fruits continued to be imported from Portugal, the bitter Seville type of orange now being imported by improved sweet oranges carried from Ceylon into Europe by the Portuguese, and known as Portingales." A Taste of History 10,000 years of Food in Britain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secretagentmole Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 It says "never really successful", but they were grown! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted April 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reece Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 I was not contesting the case, I was contesting the right to ban things from schools. Give children/young people the ability to critique, don`t just use them as banks of knowledge, whatever would Paulo Freire say Banning one sided propaganda from schools is no bad thing. Personally I disagree with UKIP about climate change but Al Gore's film is propaganda and should not be shown in schools unless they also show the counterargument as well. Give kids both sides of the debate so they can choose for themselves, they should not just be given one side of the argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted April 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 should not just be given one side of the argument. Seems UKIP are okay with banning one side of the argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keg Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 Er why? We have plenty of coal reserves, bring about lots of employment if deep mining was started again. Wind power is bog all use on a calm day! It is no use if the wind speeds are too high either! So both times you have, what is in effect, an oversized laundry line prop! Bang on! Whilst I agree that we need to recycle and be as green as possible, we are sat on loads of coal and surely the technology to clean most of the gasses that go up the chimney must be there. Germany and China still burn coal. The tree huggers say no to coal and nuclear but do not come up with any valid alternatives. Carbon capture is a long way off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpkiller Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 AL Gore's film is presented as scientific fact with lots of shiny celebrities thrown in (if I remember correctly) so that people are scared from an early age into doing what the government wants (usually paying more tax) What i particularly dislike is its an american film but its america thats one of the major environmental concerns in the world. To turn it on its head would mein kampf be ok in school? we should always be wary of anything very one sided and purporting to be the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ OK if your so worried then you pay the renewable extortion price of £140 per MW hour for offshore wind I dont want to, but hang on I dont have a choice do I ? I have to pay for the unproven and irrational fear of a bogey man who almost certainly does not exist, still as soon as your lights start to go out ( which they will) you will soon want your "unclean" energy, then wont you, I cannot understand how the gullible believe that the likes of wind power is the result of energy companies wanting to save the planet rather than their wish to receive the subsidy it attracts, have you ever seen the 3 card trick? KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted April 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 (edited) OK if your so worried then you pay the renewable extortion price of £140 per MW hour for offshore wind I dont want to, but hang on I dont have a choice do I ? I have to pay for the unproven and irrational fear of a bogey man who almost certainly does not exist, still as soon as your lights start to go out ( which they will) you will soon want your "unclean" energy, then wont you, I cannot understand how the gullible believe that the likes of wind power is the result of energy companies wanting to save the planet rather than their wish to receive the subsidy it attracts, have you ever seen the 3 card trick? KW I'm not that worried really, I see no reason to believe its not true and I trust the many, many scientists who have studied the field. I also support nuclear and other forms of energy not just wind (which i actually like, Think they look cool ) I like this part of UKIP: £3.5bn will be spent on nuclear power plants to provide 50% of energy, I just see no reason for this part: oppose wind farms. • Stop funding UN's climate change panel. • Ban schools from showing Al Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth. Edited April 2, 2013 by gazzthompson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.