Reform UK's chronicles

[thenry]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Zia talks a lot of sense, in my opinion.

I reckon he should depart for the country his parents legally came from.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Zia talks a lot of sense, in my opinion.

He does - but in yesterday's Question Time he lost the audience because he was very rude to one of the question askers.

I thought that the token refugees (granted) acquitted themselves well. That doesn't detract from my view that we should push the boats back.

Also, I had no problem with two accepted refugees being part of the BBC audience. The protest by Reform UK is highly confected and will only appeal to the unreasonable people.

However, the BBC audience mix seemed to me to be skewed toward the Green leader rather than a broad selection of Dover opinion. I said "seemed" deliberately because I only have a feeling that the bulk of Dover electors are opposed to the immigration attempts v=by the boat people.

Although I agree with the audience member in this case, I don't have as much of a problem with politicians rebuking the audience on Question Time. I don't know why we've elevated voters to untouchables, no matter what they say. You hear absolute morons on QT, from people who don't understand how tax bands work, to people spouting conspiracy theories, to just unhinged people. The politician should be able to say 'nah, you're wrong' instead of pandering to them. Some voters are absolute morons who have brain-eating bacteria starving to death in their heads.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Damien

Although I agree with the audience member in this case, I don't have as much of a problem with politicians rebuking the audience on Question Time. I don't know why we've elevated voters to untouchables, no matter what they say. You hear absolute morons on QT, from people who don't understand how tax bands work, to people spouting conspiracy theories, to just unhinged people. The politician should be able to say 'nah, you're wrong' instead of pandering to them. Some voters are absolute morons who have brain-eating bacteria starving to death in their heads.

In general terms you're not wrong. But I see this as a salesman/customer matter. Yusuf's job is to sell Reform UK to the public. Rule #1 is not to insult the customer. The non-buying signals from the audience makes clear his failure on the night.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

What, when he was a kid? Do come off it, you are as bad as they are, making up stupid stuff.

The point is, he has a set of policies that none of the other parties like, but they know this is really what most people want. That, and nothing else, is the issue, and not what Farage did when he was a mischievous youngster (if indeed that is even true - people will say anything these days).

As for scrutiny, you will find regular press conferences given by Nigel Farage and Zia Yusuf, when the press have plenty of opportunity to quiz them over their policies and their personal convictions. Watch them on YouTube. The fact that you don’t hear much about it is because the mass media and the opposition politicians want to shut them up. So they just sling mud and make false accusations.

Nor did Farage, according to Farage. People making allegations does not make it true.

Farage was 17 or 18 when he was alleged to have said these things. Not a kid as you state. Farage says 20 people can't possibly remember that far back yet for someone reason he has super-human powers and can!

That's the kind of nonsense that you might readily swallow, but I don't. One thing most of the country has learnt is to start believing the victims. We're seeing Reform in full-on Donald Trump mode. If you were Jewish and someone made such comments to you when you were a teenager then it would be hard to forget them. Particularly as there would be generations still alive who had fled Nazi persecution whose traumatic life stories would be all too familiar to you.

Remember, we're not talking about an old-fashioned use of language but what seems to be very hurtful bullying of minorities which has led to holocaust survivors asking him to apologise.

No one's perfect in their teenage years. But Farage would be better off apologising for his behaviour then and disowning those opinions now. Calling the victims liars is only making the situation worse.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Farage was 17 or 18 when he was alleged to have said these things. Not a kid as you state. Farage says 20 people can't possibly remember that far back yet for someone reason he has super-human powers and can!

That's the kind of nonsense that you might readily swallow, but I don't. One thing most of the country has learnt is to start believing the victims. We're seeing Reform in full-on Donald Trump mode. If you were Jewish and someone made such comments to you when you were a teenager then it would be hard to forget them. Particularly as there would be generations still alive who had fled Nazi persecution whose traumatic life stories would be all too familiar to you.

Remember, we're not talking about an old-fashioned use of language but what seems to be very hurtful bullying of minorities which has led to holocaust survivors asking him to apologise.

No one's perfect in their teenage years. But Farage would be better off apologising for his behaviour then and disowning those opinions now. Calling the victims liars is only making the situation worse.

So you’ve found him guilty. Where’s your evidence?

If you actually did your research, Farage denies these allegations and has received letters of support from those who knew him, who gives rather different picture than this whining political opportunist. He’s no more than a mudslinger.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

What, when he was a kid? Do come off it, you are as bad as they are, making up stupid stuff.

Do you finally acknowledge that these accusations are from when he was 17/18 and not a kid?

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The point is, he has a set of policies that none of the other parties like, but they know this is really what most people want. That, and nothing else, is the issue, and not what Farage did when he was a mischievous youngster (if indeed that is even true - people will say anything these days).

These accusations are stronger than simply being mischievous:

"He used to sing: 'Gas them all, gas them out, gas them all, into the chambers they crawl' - and the rest of those horrible words," he said.

https://news.sky.com/story/nigel-far...laims-13479621

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

So you’ve found him guilty. Where’s your evidence?

If you actually did your research, Farage denies these allegations and has received letters of support from those who knew him, who gives rather different picture than this whining political opportunist. He’s no more than a mudslinger.

Repeating what Farage says in a rant is not doing your own research. You need to apply some critical thinking to this.

There's multiple named accusers here. And Farage has quoted one unnamed person in his support but said he's received other letters too. Which evidence do you think is strongest?

https://news.sky.com/story/nigel-far...laims-13479621

[Carth]

Anyone that uses a link to Sky News in an argument has instantly lost it as far as I'm concerned, they're about as trustworthy as any other 'influencer'

It's a wonder you haven't asked AI what it thinks . . or maybe you have?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Carth

Anyone that uses a link to Sky News in an argument has instantly lost it as far as I'm concerned, they're about as trustworthy as any other 'influencer'

It's a wonder you haven't asked AI what it thinks . . or maybe you have?

What's the most trustworthy news source out of these three? A teenage wannabe influencer on TikTok who's not done a day's work in her life? A channel licensed as entertainment funded by a billionaire in Dubai (GB News)? Or a regulated TV news channel like Sky News?

[Carth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

What's the most trustworthy news source out of these three? A teenage wannabe influencer on TikTok who's not done a day's work in her life? A channel licensed as entertainment funded by a billionaire in Dubai (GB News)? Or a regulated TV news channel like Sky News?

None of the above, they're all some kind of brainwashing gimmick

Who gives a toss what he may or may not have said 43 years ago. Its a completely different era.
As I'm sure members know, I cant stand the guy, but seriously, this feels like desperation on someones part.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Paul

Who gives a toss what he may or may not have said 43 years ago. Its a completely different era.
As I'm sure members know, I cant stand the guy, but seriously, this feels like desperation on someones part.

This is the BBC being totally biased