hypochondriac

Dismissing all potential ukip voters as thick or idiots is a pretty pathetic tactic and just highlights that you can't debate sensibly.

I'm in a hotel room in krakow watching the Liverpool game so I can chat sh*t for as long as I want.

Has it been a constant refrain on here? Can't say I remember it apart from maybe one or two. I fear this thread is veering off topic and some are wishing to debunk myths that weren't even mentioned in this thread to begin with. What have Muslims got to do with the freedom of movement within the EU?

Who is saying that? Genuine question because that really isn't what I think at all.

And this was the post I was referring to btf.

Debunking a myth that we have a load of Muslims in this country? Has someone even posted about that? Personally I couldn't give a toss about that, I was talking about ukip and immigration not Muslims.

I'm not sure what myths you are debunking. Did you reply to my last post by the way? did you disagree with it?

I think minty was referring to you and your posts as much as anyone else's. Ps is the forum the David icke one? It is isn't it.

Where did I say put restrictions in place for occupations we need? What you do is you look at areas where immigration will be a benefit (such as medical professionals as you mentioned) and then you welcome a certain percentage in from all over the world. That way we get a controlled number of immigrants in who can benefit society. What you don't do is let anyone in who fancies coming regardless of how likely they are to contribute to society or not. It works well in other countries and it would work well here too.

Why would restricting immigration mean we would lose medical professionals? Surely if that is what we lack then we should welcome medical professionals to this country from all over the world. Arguably we would then have more choice rather than just restricting ourselves to those who live in the eu. I'm pro immigration but I'm anti the current situation which allows anyone from the eu to come here. How can we plan things when we never have any idea about the numbers that want to come here from one year to the next? It's crazy.

I didn't say that the rest of the world are excluded did I. I said that uncontrolled immigration from the eu excludes others from moving here. Which it does. Just like the USA and Australia, there should be a points based system if you want to come to live and work here. It's common sense.

Do you agree with the notion that uncontrolled immigration from all eu nations to the exclusion of others is unfair and unsustainable if more people move here than emigrate?

Of course you say fair play to him. Personally I'd be wary of any endorsement from yourself.

Running away is a classic tactic when you've lost the argument.

Dave has already tried dismissing ukip as fantasists and closet racists. It didn't work.

Oh dear. This attitude is why forage is doing so well.

Ever heard of John Douglas? In his latest book called law and disorder he talks about the jonbenet Ramsey case (the conspiracy nuts were absolutely convinced the parents were guilty there too) and how the parents were suspects: "with all my experience if I were ever a suspect you can bet I would have legal representation, the best I can find." You calling John Douglas a bad parent?

Indeed! If I were a mason and Jeff showed this attitude to me, I would be parking over his drive just to teach him a lesson.

Strange for someone who works for the cps!

Not sure if that was down to the judge or not but I would agree with that.

Ffs how?

Personally I thought the judge was very balanced and did a good job with what was a very difficult case. I listened to almost all the court proceedings and she explained her judgements very well. You can see how she has arrived at her decision. I heard nothing to suggest there was strong evidence of a row, if this was the case why was more not made of it? I consider oscar not knowing that reeva was in the bed to be unlikely but not impossible. It also fits with his character (and south African society in general) as someone who shoots first and asks questions later and who messes with guns. I know people like to scream guilty based on a few details of the case, but if you actually listened to the arguments presented in court in detail then you can see why the judge delivered the verdict she did.

Well they aren't appealing so clearly satisfied that he is being punished for what he did.

Reevas parents say they are happy with the sentence and that is the main thing.

The prosecution made a very poor case and failed to disprove Oscars version of events. The judge had to make a ruling based on what was put before her and imo on that score she did a good job. The prosecution is to blame here for the failure to secure a harsher sentence.