UKIP to help BNP get European money

[SevenRivers]

I cannot think of ANY regime that has achieved these four outcomes.Saying that no communist regime has achieved the same is fatuous.

 

So you wouldn't want to withdraw funding from Communists on the basis that nobody has ever achieved all those thing let alone communists, but would like to see the far-right parties strung-up with the same criteria. Double standards much.

[Halibut]

Hence the reason we need them to feel safe to seek help, and they won't feel safe whilst ever they fear being stigmatised for life.

 

What changes to the current situation do you propose?

 

One as to remember the only person that know about a paedophile before they commit a crime or are convicted of a crime is the paedophile.

 

That isn't always the case.

 

They can’t be identified and arrested to make children safe

 

Not unless they offend, no. Fair comment.

 

the best people to keep children safe are the paedophiles.

 

You might want to rephrase that.

[maxmaximus]

 

You might want to rephrase that.

 

Why?

How could anyone other than the paedophile protect a child from the paedophile?

[Halibut]

Why?

How could anyone other than the paedophile protect a child from the paedophile?

 

By the authorities putting the paedophile in a situation where they have no access to children, or where any access is very closely supervised.

 

Obviously.

[maxmaximus]

By the authorities putting the paedophile in a situation where they have no access to children, or where any access is very closely supervised.

 

Obviously.

 

How will they know who the paedophile is?

[Halibut]

How will they know who the paedophile is?

 

Hopefully because the paedophile themselves will tell them, or someone who knows the paedophile will tell them.

 

Clearly there is a climate around in which the very suggestion of paedophilia has people reaching for the pitchforks. At the same time though, we need to do all we reasonably can to keep children safe.

 

You're clearly not happy with the way things are, so I'm asking to explain how you think attitudes should change and what practical steps might be taken to achieve this.

 

The trouble is, when you start to talk about destigmatising paedophilia, it sounds perilously close to suggesting that we should accept paedophilia.

 

How about trying to clarify that please?

[maxmaximus]

Hopefully because the paedophile themselves will tell them, or someone who knows the paedophile will tell them.

 

Clearly there is a climate around in which the very suggestion of paedophilia has people reaching for the pitchforks. At the same time though, we need to do all we reasonably can to keep children safe.

 

You're clearly not happy with the way things are, so I'm asking to explain how you think attitudes should change and what practical steps might be taken to achieve this.

 

The trouble is, when you start to talk about destigmatising paedophilia, it sounds perilously close to suggesting that we should accept paedophilia.

 

How about trying to clarify that please?

 

We accept mental hilliness even though we know someone with mental hilliness could cause harm to others, we no longer stigmatise people with mental hilliness so it has become easier for them to seek help.

 

We accept people with hanger management issues despite the potential for them to cause harm to others, and because we don’t stigmatised them they can seek help.

 

If a relative of yours came forward and said he was attracted to children, would you reach for the pitchfork, disown them and sympathise with their plight and offer to help them live a life that doesn't involve the abuse of children.

 

Clearly we don't want children to be abused and the only way to prevent that is to work with the paedophiles to stop this abuse, they can't change their attraction to children but with help they can control it by finding an alternative sexual release. But this requires an acceptance of them as people and not just looking at them as dirty perverts that need shooting.

[southcoast]

Talk about missing the point.

 

This thread is about UKIP refusing to help prevent the BNP from getting European money. It's not about stopping the BNP from standing at elections. You actually implicitly admit in your second post above that the anti-EU BNP is the type of organisation that would readily turn to violence if denied its place in the EU trough. With friends like that.....

 

---------- Post added 30-01-2013 at 08:14 ----------

 

 

Not true. The article is about MEPs having the power to block access to EU money for political parties with MEPs whose policies don't fall in line with EU principles. UKIP is refusing to block the BNP's access to that money. No wonder Sheffield BNP got rid of you as its organiser if you can't understand such simple concepts.

 

 

What are you talking about:loopy:dont accuse me of being BNP,I find that offensive and silly.

I am UKIP and unlike you I think legal political parties are entitled to EU funding,you are the facist here with your moaning.

 

---------- Post added 30-01-2013 at 21:14 ----------

 

Stop lying. This is about UKIP instructing its MEPs not to block EU access to EU funds for the BNP. Your arguments on this are about as convincing as your pro-paedophilia views were when you were MrSMith.

 

You really ought to stop calling people liars,and making smears,but then again its par for the course isnt it.

[Halibut]

 

 

dont accuse me of being BNP,I find that offensive and silly.

 

Offensive? You've said on this Forum that you don't think people black people can be British - the BNP are your natural bedfellows so to speak.

 

Why does it offend you that people might assume a a person with racist views would support a racist party?

[andygardener]

Fun as the "you're racist" - "you're a nonce" - "you're a fascist" - "you're a fascist nonce" - "you're a commie nonce" - "you're a fascist commie nonce" has been, it's all massively off the topic of the EU Commission subverting democracy - any chance of any on topic comments?