RedM Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 That Richard Corbett link doesn't work for me. Can someone post the contents / points. Ewen's Qoute on the "renewable energy sources" makes one very intrigued. If you Google 'UKIP racism' it'll be the third or fourth result. You can view it as HTML (it's a PDF in my link) although that doesn't work for me at work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_b Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 That Richard Corbett link doesn't work for me. Can someone post the contents / points. Ewen's Qoute on the "renewable energy sources" makes one very intrigued. It works for me. Maybe blocked by your firewall? It's a bit big for me to copy and paste here. The guy's correct about harvesting the wind slows it down (that's basic physics). I'm pretty sure the effect is very small though, so I think his motives for pointing it out could be dubious. The document doesn't explain why he said that, i.e. what his point was. Yes, harnessing wind energy will change the flow of the wind. But building nuclear fission reactors will leave us with radiactive waste, and buring coal will release all kinds of pollutants into the air. So his point is...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 If you Google 'UKIP racism' it'll be the third or fourth result. You can view it as HTML (it's a PDF in my link) although that doesn't work for me at work. Ta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 It works for me. Maybe blocked by your firewall? It's a bit big for me to copy and paste here. The guy's correct about harvesting the wind slows it down (that's basic physics). I'm pretty sure the effect is very small though, so I think his motives for pointing it out could be dubious. The document doesn't explain why he said that, i.e. what his point was. Yes, harnessing wind energy will change the flow of the wind. But building nuclear fission reactors will leave us with radiactive waste, and buring coal will release all kinds of pollutants into the air. So his point is...? DUDE! You're in the wrong thread for giving sensible opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_b Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 DUDE! You're in the wrong thread for giving sensible opinions. Sorry Martin, I'll ensure it doesn't happen again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Jesus, this Steve Reid guy is scary!! Shocking to think he could potentially be in a position of power!!! "Steve Reed (Chairman, UKIP Wells and Weston-super-Mare branch) has written:“Brussels requires us (Directive 2001/77/EC) to generate 12 per cent of all our energy and 22.1 per cent of our electricity from ‘renewable resources’ by 2010. I place ‘renewable resources’ in parenthesis [sic], because the resources meant are not renewable, whereas fossil-fuels are. … Fossil-fuels are constantly being produced on the tectonic conveyor-belt. This is not just academic nit-picking: these processes are generally very slow, but oil-wells do refill”." What a retard. The guy's correct about harvesting the wind slows it down (that's basic physics). I'm pretty sure the effect is very small though, so I think his motives for pointing it out could be dubious. His comment is outrageous. If i said that if i took a barrel of water out of the ocean then the sea level will drop would that mean anything? It's totally irrelevant on the scale of being completely outrageous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbleapple Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Fossil-fuels are constantly being produced on the tectonic conveyor-belt. This is not just academic nit-picking: these processes are generally very slow, but oil-wells do refill”." What a retard. May be i'm missing something. What is incorrect about the above? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 May be i'm missing something. What is incorrect about the above? err... the 'tectonic conveyor belt' moves quite slowly I would venture edit : and the clue is in the question 'fossil' fuels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 May be i'm missing something. What is incorrect about the above? Perhaps common sense? First off, it's totally missleading, and i doubt it's correct anyway. The shear time it takes, say a near 300million years for the process to happen, and the rate at which we have used most of the reserves up (100 years) means that comment is retarded. Plus the circumstances that are required for it to happen anyway means a particular pocket will probably not simply fill up again due to the conditions not being the same as they were 300 million years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 err... the 'tectonic conveyor belt' moves quite slowly I would venture So could a plane take off from it, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 So could a plane take off from it, then? Certainly could Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Brownshirts in blazers. 25 things you didn't know when you voted for UKIP. http://www.richardcorbett.org.uk/theres-something-about-ukip.pdf Plenty more out there too. Somewhat interesting. Not read all of it but most seems like "nit-picking" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 You may be right...... ....but I don't think so. No, I don't think so either, deffo aimed at you nutcases ;) I'm open to other views but keep hearing and seeing in real life what a state this pc lark has got us all into. If anything it seperates cultures more as folk aren't being treated with an even hand, not just my view, it's the reason parties like the BNP and UKIP are gaining ground. Now, if they are extremists as you say then what do we do? Ban them and bang goes democracy in this country which would be bad for us all or look at why people are p*ssed off and try and sort it without the fear of someone shouting the 'R' word just for the hell of it. IMO this country is going to get to a stage (some would argue it already has) where British born individuals are on the a*rse end of everything, being treated differently, is this not as racist as the other way round? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I'm open to other views but keep hearing and seeing in real life what a state this pc lark has got us all into. You only ever read the interesting stories in the papers though. Probably never hear about the the times that common sense has won over PC madness. Still, not saying it isn't over the top at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 You only ever read the interesting stories in the papers though. Probably never hear about the the times that common sense has won over PC madness. Still, not saying it isn't over the top at times. I rarely read the papers, I'm on about everyday experiences and the tv news, also the way that reporting is done these days with clear restrictions and one sided so as not to upset the over sensitive. There are so many people waiting in the wings willing to read into everything and questioning all that is said and done, they need to get on with their lives (if they have one) and we would all get on alot better, atm though they just seem to be fueling any divisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt H Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 the tv news Same as papers... People won't watch the news if every item was about how everything was going swimingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbleapple Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 err... the 'tectonic conveyor belt' moves quite slowly I would venture edit : and the clue is in the question 'fossil' fuels In my quote did he say it would happen over night? He simply said they renew eventually which is correct. Isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 No, I don't think so either, deffo aimed at you nutcases ;) I'm open to other views but keep hearing and seeing in real life what a state this pc lark has got us all into. If anything it seperates cultures more as folk aren't being treated with an even hand, not just my view, it's the reason parties like the BNP and UKIP are gaining ground. Now, if they are extremists as you say then what do we do? Ban them and bang goes democracy in this country which would be bad for us all or look at why people are p*ssed off and try and sort it without the fear of someone shouting the 'R' word just for the hell of it. IMO this country is going to get to a stage (some would argue it already has) where British born individuals are on the a*rse end of everything, being treated differently, is this not as racist as the other way round? The immigrants and their 'effect on our economy' is one of the favoured scapegoats chosen for us by inept governments and or the media for longer than anyone cares to remember. So far, those 'taking our jobs (and in that include raiding our benefit pots)' have included the Irish, the Blacks, the Asians, the Poles, the Muslims. Let's not forget it was the same for the Jews in Germany when young Adolf was but an impressionable youth. Who will be next? Women? Children? the disabled? tall people? ginger people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guigsy Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 i dont know about everyone else but im fecking fed up of the ammount of shit i get through the door every day trying to get me to vote for whoever it may be. I had 5 this morning... 3 were different things from the lib dems. 2 letters and a flyer. What a waste of paper... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 The immigrants and their 'effect on our economy' is one of the favoured scapegoats chosen for us by inept governments and or the media for longer than anyone cares to remember. So far, those 'taking our jobs (and in that include raiding our benefit pots)' have included the Irish, the Blacks, the Asians, the Poles, the Muslims. Let's not forget it was the same for the Jews in Germany when young Adolf was but an impressionable youth. Who will be next? Women? Children? the disabled? tall people? ginger people? The opposite, the news and media will try and avoid the groups you mention because it isn't pc. What about that programme a while back comparing a british builder to a polish one, showed the brit as a complete knob (which he was), he was hand picked as I know many decent builders. Now consider them picking a dodgy Polish builder and showing them up, yes they exist too, can you imagine the uproar! Common sense is needed, the money pot is running out and restricting those who dip their hand into it be they British, Polish, Muslims........whoever, is surely a way to a more secure future for all? Edit: Ginger people should get f*ck all !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted June 2, 2009 Author Share Posted June 2, 2009 I thought my previous posts had made if fairly clear to be honest. May I refer you back to those? Personally I will be voting for UKIP. I don't like the BNP as they are too racist but I like the idea of a party solely looking out for the interests of the UK abroad. The present government is too concerned with the interests of Europe in general. That's all I can find. It was a simple question, just wondered why you voted and what swayed it. Don't worry if you can't be bothered and would rather be rude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_b Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 That's all I can find. It was a simple question, just wondered why you voted and what swayed it. Don't worry if you can't be bothered and would rather be rude. I'm tempted to vote Tory. I don't trust Labour (the reasons are too tedious/convoluted to go into here), and I think a vote for the other parties will be a wasted vote. This justification has more holes in it than a piece of Swiss cheese, but that's my thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8060102.stm UK IP sounds ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_b Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8060102.stm UK IP sounds ok I think UKIP will do OK, especially if the electorate uses them as a protest vote against the sleaze-embroiled Labour & Tories. I just don't know if their policies are mature enough and thought-through enough to do a good job. It's a risky punt if not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 Brownshirts in blazers. 25 things you didn't know when you voted for UKIP. http://www.richardcorbett.org.uk/theres-something-about-ukip.pdf Plenty more out there too. Godfrey Bloom (UKIP MEP since 2004) has notoriously declared: “No selfrespecting small businessman with a brain in the right place would ever employ a lady of child-bearing age”. He applied for a place on the Women’s Rights Committee of the European Parliament, saying “I am here to represent Yorkshire women who always have dinner on the table when you get home. I am going to promote men’s rights”. He wanted to deal with women’s issues because “I just don’t think they clean behind the fridge enough” Stupid man. Vicki is looking at some fantastic new Financial Controller jobs and I suspect turned down at final selection by sexist FDs. She'll be earning considerably more than me, so I want her to get out there so I can retire and keep me in a manner of which I could become quickly accustomed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts