UKIP slams EU racism

Intbel · 31-05-2006, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eublues

It is unlikely that whatever motivated this was "racism". Surely they could have left their daggers outside. They wouldn't be allowed on a plane with daggers presumably.

Mebbe it was a wonderful, glorious plot to assasinate the entire commission?

Unlikely, but 'tis of such things are pleasant dreams made

andypandy · 31-05-2006, 08:50 PM

Perhaps it is the memory that a Sikh bodyguard killed Indian prime Minister Indira Ghandi, and that some Sikhs in India have been involved in acts of violence, even if they were not the original protagonists.

Or - maybe Sikhs hate the EU more than anyone else and have a secret plot to get shut of the whole load of undesirables that infest its chambers within the European Parliament - ok, that is a bit far fetched.

andypandy · 31-05-2006, 08:51 PM

We seem to have had similar thoughts, IntBel!

BASILDON BOY · 31-05-2006, 09:31 PM

UKIP are now falling over themselves to prove their anti-racism credentials!

They are now making loony left sounding proclomations.

Lurch to the right now a lurch to the left - people will start jumping off the good ship UKIP because they are feeling sea sick!

Edward Longshanks · 31-05-2006, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BASILDON BOY

UKIP are now falling over themselves to prove their anti-racism credentials!

They are now making loony left sounding proclomations.

Lurch to the right now a lurch to the left - people will start jumping off the good ship UKIP because they are feeling sea sick!

Err quite. 8) The BNP lifeboat will pick them up though!

Christina · 31-05-2006, 09:52 PM

Racism is about treating people differently. UKIP now stand for allowing certain people to carry offensive weapons, while anyone else would be arrested and gaoled for doing so.

Nice one! Don't UKIP look stupid. Again.

Independent UKIP · 31-05-2006, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christina

What annoys me is that this story has nothing to do with racism at all.

Is it not the case that Sikh is considered in law to be a race as well as a religion (like Jew)? And that there was a hugely controversial debate about extending the rights against incitement to hatred that Sikhs and Jews have to other religions just a few months ago?

Christina · 31-05-2006, 10:37 PM

If you believe that everyone in Britain should be subject to the same laws, does that make you racist if you object to Sikh man carrying daggers everywhere they go?

I'm not bothered about Sikhs being able to wear turbans instead of motor bike helmets (apart from in principle) but I am bothered about allowing people to carry offensive weapons!

Daggers are for wounding and killing people.

If a man has an argument with a Sikh man, will he be happy knowing the Sikh man carries a weapon that could injure or kill him? Wouldn't a man be a bit wary?

Either we allow all people to carry weapons to defend ourselves, or we allow none. The current situation is crazy.

mkpdavies · 01-06-2006, 08:03 AM

I think it was the way they were treated (ie not letting em go to the bogs etc) that is the real issue here.

I don't know the full facts, but I don't really believe they were treated like that due to issues of race, but perhaps the daggers thing was the issue.

On that score, then if everyone else can't be trusted to carry defensive knives, then neither should they. However, they still should have been treated a lot better in resolving the problem.

I'm not that happy with the release as it stands, as it leaves a lot of questions over what this really is about. I'm getting the whiff of oportunism, when there is not that much of a case to argue on the issue of race, which is disapointing for me.

This will now have certain people saying we moan when there are no releases and we moan when there are releases. I just think it has to be made clear what the charge is here. Sadly, at the moment I have to agree with Christina that it does put us in the same shabby camp of people who shout racism, just for fun. Maybe the idea is to whip up some controversey to get the story in the paper and then talk about the whole issue of shouting racism at every chance.

Straight from the Godfrey Bloom school of issue awareness methodology, which does actually work in the long run, but doesn't really do the UKIP image side of things any good. Mmmmmmm.

gawain · 01-06-2006, 01:38 PM

The Sikh delegation had come to discuss religious freedom. The Kirpan is a small ceremonial dagger and is one of five objects that Sikhs are required to wear after baptism. It is much the same as the Scottish sgian dubh. The other requirements are unshorn hair, a comb, a steel quoit, and a pair of cotton trousers. They had been told by the Parliament that they would be able to bring all these items with them. They were after all lobbying for religious freedom. Though the lion's share were from the UK some were from other European countries.
At 8pm the night before the security services of the Parliament decided that due to a simultaneous visit from the Dalai Lama they would change their decision. The Sikh delegation were not informed of this decision until they arrived for a number of MEP meetings at 10am yesterday.
When they arrived they were informed that they would not be allowed into the Parliament with their Kirpans. The inviting MEPs including Neena Gill (Labour) who is of Sikh extraction, Tom Wise, Derek Clark, Godfrey Bloom and Andrew Duff (Lib Dem). They protested but to no avail. The stand off lasted 4 hours in which time the younger members, thus unbaptised and not required to carry the kirpan, were signed in by Tom and Duff. When a polite request was made to the security that one of the elderly men be allowed to go to the toilet, with a personal guarantee provided by one of the MEPs, the suggestion that they be accompanied the 25 yards to the loo by one of the security guards it was turned down out of hand.
I can assure you that I do not lightly use the term racist, bored of having that calumny attached to UKIP, but I have absolutely no doubt that the rejection of this request was indeed accompanied by a degree of racism that seriously angered me.
At the end of the four hours stand off Jim Nicholson an Ulster Unionist and the MEP responsible for Parliamentary security was able to sign in 12 of the delegation.
It was a disgraceful display of petty minded bureaucracy with distinct racist overtones. For that alone I would have been happy to send out a press release on the subject. To my mind the fact it was Sikhs, people who have stood by our country time and time again when we needed them, and have been one of the most diligent hard working and loyal immigrant communities in the UK for many years just added to the fact. To my knowledge there has never been a case in the UK where a kirpan has been used in an offensive fashion, and I doubt very much if there will ever be.

01-06-2006, 08:03 AM	#19 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,183 Party: Libertarian Party	I think it was the way they were treated (ie not letting em go to the bogs etc) that is the real issue here. I don't know the full facts, but I don't really believe they were treated like that due to issues of race, but perhaps the daggers thing was the issue. On that score, then if everyone else can't be trusted to carry defensive knives, then neither should they. However, they still should have been treated a lot better in resolving the problem. I'm not that happy with the release as it stands, as it leaves a lot of questions over what this really is about. I'm getting the whiff of oportunism, when there is not that much of a case to argue on the issue of race, which is disapointing for me. This will now have certain people saying we moan when there are no releases and we moan when there are releases. I just think it has to be made clear what the charge is here. Sadly, at the moment I have to agree with Christina that it does put us in the same shabby camp of people who shout racism, just for fun. Maybe the idea is to whip up some controversey to get the story in the paper and then talk about the whole issue of shouting racism at every chance. Straight from the Godfrey Bloom school of issue awareness methodology, which does actually work in the long run, but doesn't really do the UKIP image side of things any good. Mmmmmmm. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

01-06-2006, 01:38 PM	#20 (permalink)
gawain Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 268	Ref: Sikh issue. The Sikh delegation had come to discuss religious freedom. The Kirpan is a small ceremonial dagger and is one of five objects that Sikhs are required to wear after baptism. It is much the same as the Scottish sgian dubh. The other requirements are unshorn hair, a comb, a steel quoit, and a pair of cotton trousers. They had been told by the Parliament that they would be able to bring all these items with them. They were after all lobbying for religious freedom. Though the lion's share were from the UK some were from other European countries. At 8pm the night before the security services of the Parliament decided that due to a simultaneous visit from the Dalai Lama they would change their decision. The Sikh delegation were not informed of this decision until they arrived for a number of MEP meetings at 10am yesterday. When they arrived they were informed that they would not be allowed into the Parliament with their Kirpans. The inviting MEPs including Neena Gill (Labour) who is of Sikh extraction, Tom Wise, Derek Clark, Godfrey Bloom and Andrew Duff (Lib Dem). They protested but to no avail. The stand off lasted 4 hours in which time the younger members, thus unbaptised and not required to carry the kirpan, were signed in by Tom and Duff. When a polite request was made to the security that one of the elderly men be allowed to go to the toilet, with a personal guarantee provided by one of the MEPs, the suggestion that they be accompanied the 25 yards to the loo by one of the security guards it was turned down out of hand. I can assure you that I do not lightly use the term racist, bored of having that calumny attached to UKIP, but I have absolutely no doubt that the rejection of this request was indeed accompanied by a degree of racism that seriously angered me. At the end of the four hours stand off Jim Nicholson an Ulster Unionist and the MEP responsible for Parliamentary security was able to sign in 12 of the delegation. It was a disgraceful display of petty minded bureaucracy with distinct racist overtones. For that alone I would have been happy to send out a press release on the subject. To my mind the fact it was Sikhs, people who have stood by our country time and time again when we needed them, and have been one of the most diligent hard working and loyal immigrant communities in the UK for many years just added to the fact. To my knowledge there has never been a case in the UK where a kirpan has been used in an offensive fashion, and I doubt very much if there will ever be.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

31-05-2006, 08:50 PM	#12 (permalink)
andypandy Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 880	Perhaps it is the memory that a Sikh bodyguard killed Indian prime Minister Indira Ghandi, and that some Sikhs in India have been involved in acts of violence, even if they were not the original protagonists. Or - maybe Sikhs hate the EU more than anyone else and have a secret plot to get shut of the whole load of undesirables that infest its chambers within the European Parliament - ok, that is a bit far fetched.

31-05-2006, 08:51 PM	#13 (permalink)
andypandy Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 880	We seem to have had similar thoughts, IntBel!

31-05-2006, 09:31 PM	#14 (permalink)
BASILDON BOY Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: N'Djamena, Chad Posts: 1,852	UKIP are now falling over themselves to prove their anti-racism credentials! They are now making loony left sounding proclomations. Lurch to the right now a lurch to the left - people will start jumping off the good ship UKIP because they are feeling sea sick!

31-05-2006, 09:52 PM	#16 (permalink)
Christina Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Eccleston, St Helens Posts: 1,529	Racism is about treating people differently. UKIP now stand for allowing certain people to carry offensive weapons, while anyone else would be arrested and gaoled for doing so. Nice one! Don't UKIP look stupid. Again.

31-05-2006, 10:37 PM	#18 (permalink)
Christina Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Eccleston, St Helens Posts: 1,529	If you believe that everyone in Britain should be subject to the same laws, does that make you racist if you object to Sikh man carrying daggers everywhere they go? I'm not bothered about Sikhs being able to wear turbans instead of motor bike helmets (apart from in principle) but I am bothered about allowing people to carry offensive weapons! Daggers are for wounding and killing people. If a man has an argument with a Sikh man, will he be happy knowing the Sikh man carries a weapon that could injure or kill him? Wouldn't a man be a bit wary? Either we allow all people to carry weapons to defend ourselves, or we allow none. The current situation is crazy.