This was not a surprise this morning especially as
The 68-year-old said he wanted to "spend more time on his wider interests", including "the treatment of people with intellectual impairment, teacher training, the threat from Islamism and the relationship between good and evil" - as well as his dogs and family, the BBC reported.
I always had doubts about his acumen as a leader when his the main planks of his domestic policy was banning the Burqua and reinstating Grammar schools.
UKIP is such a broad church ranging from Colonel Angry to some left wingers only sharing a visceral hatred of the EU. Their happiest hunting ground being the EU elections. As one BNP supporter said-
Until UKIP and the BNP merge then neither will be truly successful.
UKIP are more 'respectable' and are fractionally larger, but the BNP won more votes per seat and beat UKIP in head-to-head contests.
Given that the Lib-Lab-Con-men are all the same and there is nothing to choose between them, we need a party that represents the true views of the British people.
BNP and UKIP supporters are very alike: they oppose domination by the EU, want to reduce immigration, want to cut taxes and want an end to the oppression of political correctness.
Despite the filthy lies you read in the media, the BNP are a moderate and reasonable party, and they and UKIP would get along fine together.
British politics would be much healthier with a strong and successful patriotic party, and only a merged BNP/UKIP can offer that.
That would be an Authoritarian nightmare to behold.
4 comments:
If the BNP and UKIP were suitable merger candidates, Farage has been living a lie.
I do not think he has.
Still, there is alot of truth that UKIP is held together by one policy and a single MP elected would likely expose the divisions.
The BNP might Hoover up support from disgruntled UKIPers, but frankly UKIP is better off rid of those IMHO.
"want to cut taxes"
The BNP may claim this but you look at their policies on, for example, pensions and health and it's a joke, this is why they can't be taken seriously.
They just say whatever the particular audience they are trying to appeal to wants to hear.
I especially liked the BNP's "Ministry of Truth" style web article on Lord Pearson's resignation.
Apparently at the last election UKIP "lost" 2 million votes. What the article didn't say, is that in order to reach this conclusion they have to compare UKIP's 2010 General Election result to their 2009 EU election result, whilst they compared the BNP 2010 GE result to their 2005 GE result.
If they'd compared like with like the BP would also have "lost" millions of votes, even taking into account the lower number of BNP GE candidates.
I didn't waste my time pointing this out on the article's comments section because the BNP would have censored it, I know they've done it to me in the past.
This is the party of truth, transparency and honesty that's better than the other parties. Not.
(Not that I like the UKIP either, and I like them even less with the shift in policy since Pearson took over)
NEVERTHELESS, THE CIVIL LAW is and must be neutral about who has a more noble or rewarding faith. The breakaway parishes ought to win every Office 2010facet of the lawsuit not becauseMicrosoft Office 2010 their beliefs or their politics are better, Microsoft wordbut because both lawOffice 2007and equity, along with common sense, are on Microsoft Officetheir side.Microsoft Office 2007 Not only does Virginia state law (the Division Statute)Office 2007 keyexplicitly apply to just such a Office 2007 downloadsituation as now exists, but the history Office 2007 Professionalespecially of The Falls Church argues against the claims of Outlook 2010the Virginia Diocese with which theyMicrosoft outlookhave disassociated.Microsoft outlook 2010First, The Falls Church wasWindows 7 founded, formed, and developed long before the diocese, or the national Episcopal Church, even existed.
Post a Comment