Does this suggest the tide is turning on immigration ?

BobQ

Sampong wrote: »

That directed at me? Go through every single one of my posts in this thread and show me where I said she isn't entitled to her opinion. Go on then - I challenge you..

#

No need to show you where, I never said you said this. The point is that she was invited to attend QT and was entitled to her opinion when asked for it.

Sampong wrote: »

It's kind of hard to agree with someone when they can't put together an argument based on any reason or thought, instead resorting to a verbal attack calling someone "disgusting" - that is below basic human decency - so no Bob I don't agree with her - nor would many others I imagine.

I quite appreciate why you and Badger and your UKIP friends are annoyed with QT. But I suspect that its nothing to do with this lady not having an argument. Its more to do with the fact she made your speaker look stupid.

The comment about UKIP being disgusting was made in the context of them praying on vulnerable people by telling them that 4 million Bulgarians are heading to a street near them. She pointed out this figure appeared in UKIP polling literature by assuming a poll by the Bulgarian Government showing that 56% of people wanted to emigrate. UKIP's interpretation of this was that all 4m of them would come to UK. If this is an indication of UKIP's integrity in using statistics heaven help us if they ever get into power. If UKIP indulge in that sort of scaremongering no wonder they get the flack they do. Your candidate's response was poor and even then she had to be asked on two occasions by Dimbleby to answer the question.

Sampong wrote: »

I suppose that, if a year ago I told you that one of the BBC's biggest ever stars would turn out to be a child abuser and the BBC turned a blind eye to it you would call me paranoid..........

Your anti-BBC agenda is understandable, but I do not think this is worthy of comment.

A._Badger

BobQ wrote: »

As I said above, many political activists of left and right have appeared in the QT audience. She did no more than any of them, ask a question. Sometimes the fact someone is an activist comes out in the discussion but not always.

Twaddle. She was a Labour plant. Why not grow up and stop trying to pretend otherwise.

BobQ wrote: »

I do not share her politics (as far as I know), but you seem to be very keen to defend UKIP (not the first time I seem to recall) so I assume you support them Which of the categories that Cameron identified do you fit into?:).

You don't share her politics? Why? Is she too far to the Right for your taste?

As for the attempted smear about UKIP. Yes, I do support their opinion about leaving the EU. Beyond that, no. I leave collective behaviour to ants.

That said, whether supporting UKIP is worthy of the ugly smears, mindless abuse and insinuations you and your fellow travellers (Cameron included) hurl at its members is justified, I think Melanie Phillips, helpfully recorded by another blogger, gave you the answer you deserve.

http://kebabtime.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/mel-gives-dc-both-barrels.html

BobQ

Sampong wrote: »

So he merely pointed out something that was correct, in that she was a fake, a stooge, a plant - somebody who was trying to pass themselves off as a random member of the public when it fact, she was a paid Labour party activist. That is fact and you can argue until you are blue in the face - and it will still be fact.

I for one will conceed that this lady is a member of the Labour Party, an activist for it, and that this fact was not disclosed by her during the brief opportunity she had to make her point.

But do you believe that everyone selected by QT to participate always declares that they are a political activist?

Are you saying that no UKIP activist has asked a question or spoken without first declaring their affiliation?

BobQ

A._Badger wrote: »

Twaddle. She was a Labour plant. Why not grow up and stop trying to pretend otherwise.

More abuse!

Define a plant? If a Conservative Councillor who asks a question that is anti-Labour but does not say he is a Tory a plant? I do not think so, anymore that she was a plant.

As for the attempted smear about UKIP. Yes, I do support their opinion about leaving the EU. Beyond that, no. I leave collective behaviour to ants.

That said, whether supporting UKIP is worthy of the ugly smears, mindless abuse and insinuations you and your fellow travellers (Cameron included) hurl at its members is justified, I think Melanie Phillips, helpfully recorded by another blogger, gave you the answer you deserve.

What ugly smears are you accusing me of? I have quoted Cameron (his views) and reported what this lady said on QT. What specifically have I said that is a smear of UKIP?

I saw Mel P valiantly doing a better job of defending UKIP than your own candidate (who I agree was quite impressive apart from on this issue). I imaging it was very uncomforable for Tory right (whether in or out of UKIP). Ken Clarke seemed more relaxed about things, he suggested that UKIP only knew what it was opposed to not what it agreed with, which is a little harsh.

Its been inmteresting to see the reaction of UKIP supporters to criticism.

Sampong

So first we have;

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Do you genuinely believe that David Dimbleby chooses the question time audience and the questions they ask? Seriously. No actually, are you serious?

and then we have;

BobQ wrote: »

I think its paranoia to say Twigg put her up to it. The BBC tries to select a balanced audience

and then you ask me;

BobQ wrote: »

I do not share her politics (as far as I know), but you seem to be very keen to defend UKIP (not the first time I seem to recall) so I assume you support them Which of the categories that Cameron identified do you fit into?.

whether I am a fruitcake, loony, or closet racist just for sharing a view on the EU and Immigration held by millions (watch the Mel Phillips video, she conveys my answer to you very well)

I don't consider myself a fruitcake, loony - nor do I consider myself a racist - if that is OK with you Bob. You're quite right that I do support UKIP so am quite used to being called such words (mainly racist). To me it's water off a ducks back but, nevertheless I find your and others stance on this quite abhorent. Hopefully now that these issues are being discussed more widely there will be a major social shift and people like you who label people racsts just for having legitimate views will be treated with the disdain they deserve.

Finally we seem to be getting somewhere.....

BobQ wrote: »

I for one will conceed that this lady is a member of the Labour Party, an activist for it, and that this fact was not disclosed by her during the brief opportunity she had to make her point.

Don't mention that to chewmylegoff or Stevie. You'll get branded crazy too. Hell, if Hamish and Mr Igetmypantsinapickle turn up, they may even brand you a racist like me.

BobQ wrote: »

But do you believe that everyone selected by QT to participate always declares that they are a political activist?

Nope

BobQ wrote: »

Are you saying that no UKIP activist has asked a question or spoken without first declaring their affiliation?

Nope - but I kind of laugh at this as UKIP have nowhere near the funding of the other parties so won't really have spare cash lying around to pay a psycho kid to shout a crazy rant at a rival party candidate.

By the way, do you have an example to refer me to where a UKIP activist was exposed after directing unjustified abuse at another person/party on Question Time?

Just wondering...........

Sampong

BobQ wrote: »

What ugly smears are you accusing me of?

This;

BobQ wrote: »

I do not share her politics (as far as I know), but you seem to be very keen to defend UKIP (not the first time I seem to recall) so I assume you support them Which of the categories that Cameron identified do you fit into?.

[/QUOTE]

Remember it?

This is where you are basically asking me if I am a fruitcake, loony, or closet racist.

That is what you meant..........isn't it?

Don't try to say otherwise, you will start to look silly.

ess0two

Sampong wrote: »

This;

Remember it?

This is where you are basically asking me if I am a fruitcake, loony, or closet racist.

That is what you meant..........isn't it?

Don't try to say otherwise, you will start to look silly.[/QUOTE]





Either way your at your're most voiciferous when an immigration thread starts.

StevieJ

A._Badger wrote: »

Does it have 'members'? You appear to know more about it than I.

That said, I tend to read widely. I advise you to try the same.

It doesn't show.

StevieJ

Sampong wrote: »

Are you sure? He made a statement that is quite clearly factual - in that she was a fake.

A fake what? Are you saying that she made a statement that she didn't believe?

A._Badger

Sampong wrote: »

This;



Don't try to say otherwise, you will start to look silly.

We already have him trying to deny she was a plant when it has been established that A/ she is a professional Labour activist and B/ had been in touch with Labour's Stephen Twigg before the show. Hard to see how he could look much sillier, really.