UKIP magazine brands gay pride march 'parade of depravity'

Irn Bru wrote:Christian supporters of the party wrote of the march’s “vulgarity and wickedness” in a magazine

A gay pride march was a “parade of depravity” featuring “a great deal of vulgarity and wickedness”, according to an article published by church-going UKIP supporters.

Christian backers of the anti-EU party ran a magazine piece condemning the “sodomites” taking part in the annual carnival.

The report also says parents should “be bothered” about kids being taught by gay teachers.

The astonishing homophobic rant was launched in a regular newsletter issued by Christian Soldiers UKIP, which is the self-proclaimed “Christian Fellowship of the UK Independence Party Fighting through Christ for deliverance from EU tyranny”.

Party leader Nigel Farage previously wrote for the magazine, urging supporters to “follow our consciences”.

The piece published in one of Christian Soldiers’ regular updates to supporters launched a blistering attack on last summer’s Manchester gay pride event.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukip-magazine-brands-gay-pride-5100416

The sad truth about UKIP and what lurks beneath the surface just keeps seeping out day-by-day.

I'm sure there are some decent Ukippers but it's time they spoke up and cleaned out the people that come out with this nonsense instead of making excuses for them.

Irn Bru wrote:The latest immigration figures show that it is still going up and the Tories have failed to meet their targets.

The crux of the matter on the main source of immigration is that Thatcher signed the Single European Act and Major signed the Maastricht Treaty which opened up our borders to uncontrolled migration for all European citizens and that's a fact.

Irn Bru wrote:Labour never started the whole thing. It started with Heath lying to the British public that there would be no further integration into Europe without the express will of the British people - folowed up by Thatcher and Major.

Are you denying that?

Irn Bru wrote:I suggest you look at the targets that this government have set for immigration and where they stand at the moment.

Irn Bru wrote:And just to add. You said you were fine with immigration so what's your beef and how does that square with the Mirror article?

Brasidas wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:And just to add. You said you were fine with immigration so what's your beef and how does that square with the Mirror article?

I guess you are not supid you fail to comprehend, my view is that it has created unwarranted tension in this country because the levels were too high and too fast to allow for integration. I am fine with immigration, but not incompetant policies which allowed for the rise of xenophobic views to rise and this is all down to the mass immigration Labour allowed.
So now we have seen parties like UKIP rise in support based on the incompetance of labour over immigration.
So trying reading what is being stated thicko, even a 5 year old could understand.

Irn Bru wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

I guess you are not supid you fail to comprehend, my view is that it has created unwarranted tension in this country because the levels were too high and too fast to allow for integration. I am fine with immigration, but not incompetant policies which allowed for the rise of xenophobic views to rise and this is all down to the mass immigration Labour allowed.
So now we have seen parties like UKIP rise in support based on the incompetance of labour over immigration.
So trying reading what is being stated thicko, even a 5 year old could understand.

But you have repeatedly defended immigration on here whatever the numbers and argued the case for it against the Ukippers on every occasion.

Your tearing yourself apart by arguing for it and now putting up a case against it. You're confused

Brasidas wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

I guess you are not supid you fail to comprehend, my view is that it has created unwarranted tension in this country because the levels were too high and too fast to allow for integration. I am fine with immigration, but not incompetant policies which allowed for the rise of xenophobic views to rise and this is all down to the mass immigration Labour allowed.
So now we have seen parties like UKIP rise in support based on the incompetance of labour over immigration.
So trying reading what is being stated thicko, even a 5 year old could understand.

But you have repeatedly defended immigration on here whatever the numbers and argued the case for it against the Ukippers on every occasion.

Your tearing yourself apart by arguing for it and now putting up a case against it. You're confused

I still do defend immigration, what I do not defend is the incompetance of a policy which has allowed for the rise of racial and xenophobic tensions.
This is why you struggle to comprehend anything.
I will defend against racial and xenophobic arguments against immigration but I will also condemn incompetance of labour which has created tensions in this country.
I will still argue against UKIP on this, but blame must be laid at the door of labour for creating these problems.

Irn Bru wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

I still do defend immigration, what I do not defend is the incompetance of a policy which has allowed for the rise of racial and xenophobic tensions.
This is why you struggle to comprehend anything.
I will defend against racial and xenophobic arguments against immigration but I will also condemn incompetance of labour which has created tensions in this country.
I will still argue against UKIP on this, but blame must be laid at the door of labour for creating these problems.

So you are saying that immigration is fine whatever the numbers but against it because immigration is the cause of racial and xenophobic tension and the reason for the Christian group to publish what they did in their magazine as reported by the Mirror?

Bear in mind that the borders were opened up by the Tories when giving your answer.

Brasidas wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

I still do defend immigration, what I do not defend is the incompetance of a policy which has allowed for the rise of racial and xenophobic tensions.
This is why you struggle to comprehend anything.
I will defend against racial and xenophobic arguments against immigration but I will also condemn incompetance of labour which has created tensions in this country.
I will still argue against UKIP on this, but blame must be laid at the door of labour for creating these problems.

So you are saying that immigration is fine whatever the numbers but against it because immigration is the cause of racial and xenophobic tension and the reason for the Christian group to publish what they did in their magazine as reported by the Mirror?

Bear in mind that the borders were opened up by the Tories when giving your answer.

I am saying that the levels under Labour have created problems. Immigration would not be the main forth coming topic for this election, if not for the incompetance of Labour. I am all for immigration but it should be controlled to reasonable levels, of which Labour failed at, to the point now we have untold dissention in the country.
If you cannot understand this, it shows also why you are incompetant.

Irn Bru wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

I am saying that the levels under Labour have created problems. Immigration would not be the main forth coming topic for this election, if not for the incompetance of Labour. I am all for immigration but it should be controlled to reasonable levels, of which Labour failed at, to the point now we have untold dissention in the country.
If you cannot understand this, it shows also why you are incompetant.

So you are changing your mind then and that immigration should have been controlled and that Heath, Thatcher and Major should never have signed us up to all this? That's basically what you are suggesting isn't it?

And remember it was the Wilson Labour government that gave the country a referendum on Europe. Not once did the Tories offer that choice to the electorate ever - FACT.

Anyway, I've got work to do and would think you have as well so in the meantime think about your position on this and  what you are coming out with here because your message is confused.

Catch you later.

Brasidas wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

I am saying that the levels under Labour have created problems. Immigration would not be the main forth coming topic for this election, if not for the incompetance of Labour. I am all for immigration but it should be controlled to reasonable levels, of which Labour failed at, to the point now we have untold dissention in the country.
If you cannot understand this, it shows also why you are incompetant.

So you are changing your mind then and that immigration should have been controlled and that Heath, Thatcher and Major should never have signed us up to all this? That's basically what you are suggesting isn't it?

And remember it was the Wilson Labour government that gave the country a referendum on Europe. Not once did the Tories offer that choice to the electorate ever - FACT.

Anyway, I've got work to do and would think you have as well so in the meantime think about your position on this and  what you are coming out with here because your message is confused.

Catch you later.

Have never changed my mind about anything which again you still cannot admit to the incompetance of Labour, which sums what a twat you are on every debate.
You keep deflecting to irrelevant points as per usual as we are talking about mass immigration which has created the tension we see today. Again I have no issue with immigration but I can see how if too high and too fast it will create problems.
Do not tell me what to do you pathetic weasel, now jog and and borrow yourself back down the hole where you belong.

Brasidas wrote wrote:Who says I even back the EU as a body, I am going on about free movement.I want to see a world that has no boundaries, that will take time, my view on the EU is a stepping stone to this but has many faults to start with, where  more democratic process to vote in an elected European government would be better in my books. As what difference does it make again if the laws made are right?
It does not make any difference. :

Brasidas wrote wrote:I want to allow anyone a chance, by placing a points system is thus discriminating, where someone who could be of value, is thus denied based on where they may have been born which denied them the benefits you had. That is not equal but elitist again.

So my views are even different to the EU, so taking that approach is not going to work based off their policies. :

Brasidas wrote wrote:Again anyone should have a right to come here, where nobody should be denied a chance of a new life if they want to come and work and abide by laws:

Brasidas wrote:I am all for free movement which is not the point being made ha ha ha ha ha, what thick jock, but this has to have limitations you thick Scottish ----, how does that not register with a fuckwit like yourself?
Again the view is on how Labour made the public angry at how its immigration policy was utter shit you dumb fuck, or does this not register with a benefit leprous like yourself.
I am happy with good immigration but one that is sensible you weasel. Why is this so difficult to reprehend?
Would you like to speak in your original tongue of Russian?
Can you not see the point yet you pathetic little vermin?
Let me speak in English for you. My views on immigration here are irrelevant, what is relevant is how a inept party has divided the nation.
Can you understand now tiny Tim?

This is not about me or my views but about how incompetent that party is that you love has brought about discord in this country.
Are you denying this dickhead?

Brasidas wrote wrote:Who says I even back the EU as a body, I am going on about free movement.I want to see a world that has no boundaries, that will take time, my view on the EU is a stepping stone to this but has many faults to start with, where  more democratic process to vote in an elected European government would be better in my books. As what difference does it make again if the laws made are right?
It does not make any difference. :

Brasidas wrote wrote:I want to allow anyone a chance, by placing a points system is thus discriminating, where someone who could be of value, is thus denied based on where they may have been born which denied them the benefits you had. That is not equal but elitist again.

So my views are even different to the EU, so taking that approach is not going to work based off their policies. :

Brasidas wrote wrote:Again anyone should have a right to come here, where nobody should be denied a chance of a new life if they want to come and work and abide by laws:

Brasidas wrote:My views on immigration are irrelevant to what Labour did, which is typical of the left looking to divert their wrongs mongo.
It seems you are incapable of answering this because you are such a twat I guess.
Hey ho, at least you are not denying they are incompetent, so no more t say really.
Thanks dickhead

Brasidas wrote wrote:Simple solution, we need immigration going forward as even at present we have skilled shortages and also because we are going to need to address the age balance being as by 2050, 25% of people are going to over 65. This will mean more carers, doctors, nurses etc to accommodate more people susceptible to illness and this is just one problem.


So the simple solution is to build more infrastructure:

Brasidas wrote wrote:We still need immigration the point you are missing, so yes it will cost, but the facts are this, EU immigration/migration has benefited the country to the tune of 20 billion, where as British people have cost the nation to the tune of 600 billion.


We need immigration, you cannot get around this fact, it is no good whinging about it but how to deal with the increase in population needed.
So you need to build more infrastructure:

Brasidas wrote wrote:The urban landscape accounts for 10.6% of England, 1.9% of Scotland, 3.6% of Northern Ireland and 4.1% of Wales.

Put another way, that means almost 93% of the UK is not urban. But even that isn't the end of the story because urban is not the same as built on.

In urban England, for example, the researchers found that just over half the land (54%) in our towns and cities is greenspace - parks, allotments, sports pitches and so on.

Furthermore, domestic gardens account for another 18% of urban land use; rivers, canals, lakes and reservoirs an additional 6.6%.

Their conclusion?

In England, "78.6% of urban areas is designated as natural rather than built". Since urban only covers a tenth of the country, this means that the proportion of England's landscape which is built on is…


2.27%.

Yes. According to the most detailed analysis ever conducted, almost 98% of England is, in their word, natural.

Elsewhere in the UK, the figure rises to more than 99%. It is clear that only a small fraction of Britain has been concreted over


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-18623096


Stacks of room for more:

Brasidas wrote:I am all for free movement which is not the point being made ha ha ha ha ha, what thick jock, but this has to have limitations you thick Scottish ----, how does that not register with a fuckwit like yourself?
Again the view is on how Labour made the public angry at how its immigration policy was utter shit you dumb fuck, or does this not register with a benefit leprous like yourself.
I am happy with good immigration but one that is sensible you weasel. Why is this so difficult to reprehend?
Would you like to speak in your original tongue of Russian?
Can you not see the point yet you pathetic little vermin?
Let me speak in English for you. My views on immigration here are irrelevant, what is relevant is how a inept party has divided the nation.
Can you understand now tiny Tim?

This is not about me or my views but about how incompetent that party is that you love has brought about discord in this country.
Are you denying this dickhead?

Irn Bru wrote:

Brasidas wrote:I am all for free movement which is not the point being made ha ha ha ha ha, what thick jock, but this has to have limitations you thick Scottish ----, how does that not register with a fuckwit like yourself?
Again the view is on how Labour made the public angry at how its immigration policy was utter shit you dumb fuck, or does this not register with a benefit leprous like yourself.
I am happy with good immigration but one that is sensible you weasel. Why is this so difficult to reprehend?
Would you like to speak in your original tongue of Russian?
Can you not see the point yet you pathetic little vermin?
Let me speak in English for you. My views on immigration here are irrelevant, what is relevant is how a inept party has divided the nation.
Can you understand now tiny Tim?

This is not about me or my views but about how incompetent that party is that you love has brought about discord in this country.
Are you denying this dickhead?

risingsun wrote:

risingsun wrote:

risingsun wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:It's been a long day and I'm away I'm away to my bed before I split my sides laughing.



Night Didge.