It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The UK Independence Party is NOT racist

page: 33
20
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Back on planet Earth, UKIP are set to win fewer than 5 MPs this week and that may be the most they ever get in a general election.

Many of the UKIP policies are backward-looking to me, UKIP seems to appeal to insularity and nationalism in an exciting and globalising world. Its like they want to pull up the drawbridge and retreat.

All this stuff about immigration, its population growth its a challenge, but it is nothing new, the infrastructure does inevitably catch up. The net immigration into the UK is for the most part economic migration (whether from the EU or from the rest of the world) and on balance it is good for the UK economy. But the surge in net immigration, especially since 2004, is due to temporary factors which will play themselves out soon and things will return to a normal and a sustainable level. The UK's economy does not have the capacity to create infinite numbers of jobs for infinite numbers of migrant workers.

UKIP's appeal is to older voters and its offer of an independent plucky Little England going it alone is harking back to a bygone age. Withdrawal from the EU, opposition to green energy, a return to grammar schools, these are backward-looking policies.
edit on 6-5-2015 by tdk84 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-5-2015 by tdk84 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: woodwardjnr

Now im not pro UKIP and Mr Leathley is clearly an idiot but how is that statement violent? I get the sexist and racist part.......




Took me a while to work out but on his original facebook posts he alludes to rape and agrees with someone elses comment saying "I'd stick a cannon up her a*** and fire her into Israel, see how long she lasts
" which is pretty damn violent.

www.facebook.com... - avail on web archives as he's now deleted it.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: tdk84
, a return to grammar schools, these are backward-looking policies.


How is grammar school backward?

Selecting the best and brightest and pushing them to be the best is nothing but good.

Dumping them in a comprehensive school that caters to the lowest common denominator and goes as the speed of the slowest learner is a good way to disfranchise them.

Only people who are against Grammar school in my opinion are the ones too stupid to pass the 11+.
edit on 6-5-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-5-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: bastion

Why don't you have a look at some of the things she has said in the past. If you're going to be castigating folks for mindless rants, Yasmin alibhi-brown has a few peaches.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:42 AM
link   
In what possible way is UKIP racist? It is NOT racist to put your own nation first and whoever states such a stupid thing is clearly an idiot who just believes in the MSM version of things. Similar to how Ron Paul was attacked by the American MSM, UKIP gets attacked here. Everyone knows that, in the West anyway, all you have to do is successfully label a person or party as racist and let the public do the rest but fail to see that Anti-EU parties across Europe are rising as well. People have had enough of the corruption and nonsense spouted by EU bureaucrats. The EU itself is a good idea though.

Do I want a UKIP government? Probably not because they don't have enough experience yet. But getting them to become the third biggest party will force the Conservatives to stick to their EU referendum pledge and that's what I want, hence why I'm voting UKIP and that's why everyone else should do too. Labour and that idiot Miliband would happily sell Great Britain out to Europe if they could get away with it. They don't even acknowledge that there's an immigration problem nor are willing to give a figure on how much is too much immigration. A full party of idiots supported by idiots who screwed us over with the Iraq War and borrowed money till we were on the brink of bankruptcy. I'm simply amazed that anyone still votes for them.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: tdk84
, a return to grammar schools, these are backward-looking policies.


How is grammar school backward?

Selecting the best and brightest and pushing them to be the best is nothing but good.

Dumping them in a comprehensive school that caters to the lowest common denominator and goes as the speed of the slowest learner is a good way to disfranchise them.

Only people who are against Grammar school in my opinion are the ones too stupid to pass the 11+.


The return to Grammar schools, the least important, 5 words given, you focus on.

Its the return to high educational fee's and privatisation I have issue with all the way up to University level. Even at high school level your talking about £4000 a term, £12000 a year. That how you disfranchise people.
edit on 6-5-2015 by tdk84 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

What does that have to do with him making racist, sexist and violent comments?



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: tdk84

Its the return to high educational fee's and privatisation I have issue with all the way up to University level. Even at high school level your talking about £4000 a term. That how you disfranchise people.


Grammer schools are free like Comprehensive schools at least round here. The only entry requirement is to pass the 11+ or get a good SAT score at 14 and transfer schools.
edit on 6-5-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: tdk84

Its the return to high educational fee's and privatisation I have issue with all the way up to University level. Even at high school level your talking about £4000 a term. That how you disfranchise people.


Grammer schools are free like Comprehensive schools at least round here. The only entry requirement is to pass the 11+.


I am personally in favour of bringing back grammer schools as long as it is to seperate acedemic and vocational students and both are treated equally.

I've seen too many talented but not acedemic kids go wrong because they are made to feel inferior.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: bastion

It's more a point about your double standards.
ukip person says something. ..shock horror.

LibLabCon does something. ..silence.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: tdk84

Its the return to high educational fee's and privatisation I have issue with all the way up to University level. Even at high school level your talking about £4000 a term. That how you disfranchise people.


Grammer schools are free like Comprehensive schools at least round here. The only entry requirement is to pass the 11+.


I am personally in favour of bringing back grammer schools as long as it is to seperate acedemic and vocational students and both are treated equally.

I've seen too many talented but not acedemic kids go wrong because they are made to feel inferior.


I 100% agree with that. Comprehensive schools need to be viewed as more than just sink schools and need just as much support but to cater to is less academically minded students.

But equally the best and brightest should not be held back by the slower learners and its best to separate them.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   
First time I've been able to vote since I was too young in the last election. Haven't decided who to vote for. None of the parties seem to be appealing to me.

Politics sucks.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Jesus where do you live? You usually get bursaries, never heard of free. Even with a bursary your talking over £6000 a year.

If it wasn't for state funded schooling and the low fees I had to pay at university I wouldn't of got my degree that's for sure.


edit on 6-5-2015 by tdk84 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: tdk84
, a return to grammar schools, these are backward-looking policies.


How is grammar school backward?

Selecting the best and brightest and pushing them to be the best is nothing but good.

Dumping them in a comprehensive school that caters to the lowest common denominator and goes as the speed of the slowest learner is a good way to disfranchise them.

Only people who are against Grammar school in my opinion are the ones too stupid to pass the 11+.



Well here I am to disprove your point, a grammar school pupil who opposes grammar schools


The selection process is unfair, largely favouring middle class kids (backed up by stats). This is possibly down to private tutoring and private primary school and knocks the social mobility argument on the head. Grammar schools also draw in resources including good teachers that could otherwise be advantageous to all children regardless of their ability.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boeing777
First time I've been able to vote since I was too young in the last election. Haven't decided who to vote for. None of the parties seem to be appealing to me.

Politics sucks.


Heres an idea for you.

Get all of your canditates and get them to stand side by side. Then get a dart, close your eyes and spin round ten times and throw the dart.

Vote for the one that screams in pain.

This way when it turns out they are useless and corrupt at least you have the satisfaction of knowing you put a dart in their face.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific

Good idea



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 10:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: tdk84
a reply to: crazyewok

Jesus where do you live? You usually get bursaries, never heard of free. Even with a bursary your talking over £6000 a year.

If it wasn't for state funded schooling and the low fees I had to pay at university I wouldn't of got my degree that's for sure.



Medway.

I think your confusing private schools with Grammer schools.

All you need for Grammer is a 11+ pass.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Scouse100

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: tdk84
, a return to grammar schools, these are backward-looking policies.


How is grammar school backward?

Selecting the best and brightest and pushing them to be the best is nothing but good.

Dumping them in a comprehensive school that caters to the lowest common denominator and goes as the speed of the slowest learner is a good way to disfranchise them.

Only people who are against Grammar school in my opinion are the ones too stupid to pass the 11+.



Well here I am to disprove your point, a grammar school pupil who opposes grammar schools


The selection process is unfair, largely favouring middle class kids (backed up by stats). This is possibly down to private tutoring and private primary school and knocks the social mobility argument on the head. Grammar schools also draw in resources including good teachers that could otherwise be advantageous to all children regardless of their ability.


I can second that. I went to Private primary for a couple of years before the costs were too tall during my parents divorce and was withdrawn.

Grammar Schools favor the wealthy.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Scouse100

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: tdk84
, a return to grammar schools, these are backward-looking policies.


How is grammar school backward?

Selecting the best and brightest and pushing them to be the best is nothing but good. I felt slowed down a restricted in my learning.

Dumping them in a comprehensive school that caters to the lowest common denominator and goes as the speed of the slowest learner is a good way to disfranchise them.

Only people who are against Grammar school in my opinion are the ones too stupid to pass the 11+.



Well here I am to disprove your point, a grammar school pupil who opposes grammar schools


The selection process is unfair, largely favouring middle class kids (backed up by stats). This is possibly down to private tutoring and private primary school and knocks the social mobility argument on the head. Grammar schools also draw in resources including good teachers that could otherwise be advantageous to all children regardless of their ability.


And as someone who transferred from a comp to a Grammer after my SATs I 100% disagree.
At comp I was disfranchised and utterly bored.

Just because us middle class kids have parents that care about our education should not mean we get punished. If the working class want in, stop pissing around at school buck up and start learning.

I knew a good number of working class kids who went to Grammer and moved on to bigger and better things like ox-bridge , opportunity's they would not have had in a local sink school. For them is a was social mobility springboard and some are now doing better than me!
edit on 6-5-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: tdk84

originally posted by: Scouse100

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: tdk84
, a return to grammar schools, these are backward-looking policies.


How is grammar school backward?

Selecting the best and brightest and pushing them to be the best is nothing but good.

Dumping them in a comprehensive school that caters to the lowest common denominator and goes as the speed of the slowest learner is a good way to disfranchise them.

Only people who are against Grammar school in my opinion are the ones too stupid to pass the 11+.



Well here I am to disprove your point, a grammar school pupil who opposes grammar schools


The selection process is unfair, largely favouring middle class kids (backed up by stats). This is possibly down to private tutoring and private primary school and knocks the social mobility argument on the head. Grammar schools also draw in resources including good teachers that could otherwise be advantageous to all children regardless of their ability.


I can second that. I went to Private primary for a couple of years before the costs were too tall during my parents divorce and was withdrawn.

Grammar Schools favor the wealthy.


As crazyewok said there is a difference between private and grammer schools.

Grammer schools concentrate on more acedemic subjects leading to a more acedemic career.

Comprehensive schools were supposed to offer a more balanced schooling more suited to those who would be more than likely manual or skilled labour.
edit on 6/5/2015 by nonspecific because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
20
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join