How UKIP And Their Supporters Turned An Abuse Scandal Into Political Point Scoring (trigger alert?) – SLATUKIP
Readers who visit the Vox Political Facebook page may be familiar with a commenter calling himself Lee Harris, who tries to take Yr Obdt Srvt to task every time a post appears that is critical of UKIP. Recently he started using the Rotherham abuse scandal in an attempt at political point-scoring against the Labour Party. If memory serves correctly, he has also posted links to a website calling itself ‘Labour 25’, containing stories about paedophilia among Labour Party members. Another commenter, Harvey Paul, posted a link to the same site in the ‘posts to page’.
Here’s why: As good UKIP members, it seems they have been ordered to use this issue – and the site, which was originally created by the British National Party, so now you know for sure on which side of the political fence UKIP sits! – to stir up public feeling against decent, law-abiding Labour members such as Yr Obdt Srvt.
The following article by Still Laughing At UKIP (SLATUKIP) lays it all out. It is published here in full, with apologies to the originators, because the issue is so important and the behaviour of UKIP and its members has been so utterly vile. You may see the occasional interjection in bold type; this will be a warning about the kind of material you may see if you click on certain links.
Here is the article:
Not many things shock us, but UKIP’s latest tactics to score political points on the back of a tragedy that has rocked our country, and use it to their advantage, is truly the lowest we have seen them go so far.
This morning (15/09) we were shown this tweet [do not click on this if you are of a nervous disposition; the image is appalling and may trigger a very strong emotional response] made by an account which is often tweeting pro-UKIP propaganda, and which was ‘favourited’ by our old friend Robin Cook.
We’re not going to reproduce the image of the screenshot we have here, or tweet it, because it’s so utterly vile and deserves no coverage. This is the worst we have seen in a continuous stream of memes and images attacking the Labour Party, and those who oppose UKIP, or those who oppose racial hatred directed at innocent Muslims.
Here are some other examples.
The following screenshot is crazy.
Child abuse exclusive to Labour areas only? I know most of UKIP’s support is misguided, but this?
In this one, UKIP is referring to BNP propaganda ‘Labour25′ that was doing the rounds over the years.
Here ‘Tommy Robinson’ ex leader of the EDL gets involved and shows his support.
And all this is seemingly legitimised by people like Jane Collins MEP, who seems to be able to refer to Labour as the ‘Paedophile Protection Party’? We’ve blogged about her before.
We ask this. If UKIP feel this is how to run a political campaign, by accusing everyone who opposes them of being paedophiles, or paedophile protectors/appeasers etc, then what are they actually capable of in power?
Of course, they are now using this to their advantage in Heywood and Middleton by-election. No surprise there!
Please take note of the names of all those who posted the tweets and comments quoted here. If you see those names elsewhere on the social media, feel free to tell other readers exactly what they are.
Regarding the Rotherham abuse case, SLATUKIP has also published what must be the most level-headed response to the hysteria that has been bandied about in the mainstream media and by UKIP’s stooges. Here it is:
Watching the news, the sheer number of child abuse victims mentioned in the report released by Rotherham Borough Council is monstrous. Today, a four-digit figure, and the suffering it represents, may have unshakably left a mark on the psyche of the British people – 1400. And rightly so – there is a danger of us all, liberal, or conservative, UKIP or non-UKIP, seeing this through the lens of social politics; prioritising the defending/attacking of the ‘PC cover-up’ theory over quiet reflection on the plight of the victims. We are determined not to do this and trust that others will not either, regardless of political affiliation. After appropriate time for reflection has passed, we can have a sensible, non-partisan debate about the causes of this unfathomably prolonged and heinous tragedy.
Thank you and take care.
If you were a UKIP sympathiser before reading this, how do you feel now? Sickened to the depths of your stomach? This is the political organisation that tricked the electorate into giving it more than 20 seats in the European Parliament last Spring; this is the party that likes to use – and identify itself with – far-right-wing BNP material to smear its opponents; this is the party that thinks it is all right to score political points using paedophilia.
Who’s willing to bet Farage will turn up to deny having anything to do with it?
Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
bringing you the best of the blogs!
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Great blog,worthy of a Woody Guthrie response.Ukip is a fascist party and all you fascists are bound to lose.
http://woodyguthrie.org/Lyrics/All_You_Fascists.htm
Political point scoring? If one Party tries to dismantle the NHS, is it political point scoring to point this out to the electorate? D’you just mention it and hope they scour the internet for proof? D’you simply hope they notice it’s not one party but two (i.e. Tory + Lib Dem)?. Would you not want to mention the fact that the Lib Dem establishment appear obsessed with pornography and (at least) female molestation too? Christ Mike, political point scoring is what your site is all about. Are you promising, on the Labour manifesto, that you won’t mention anything at all about UKIP sex scandals in the future on this site? Or do you think they won’t happen? Sorry, your standards have fallen.
And your eyesight appears to be failing. Did you not realise that I was highlighting an article by Still Laughing At UKIP?
Your opinion about my site is noted; I disagree – but then I would, wouldn’t I?
Gotta disagree to an extent here, Mike.
They have a point, in that it was several labour politicians (Most notably the odious diane abbott on an episode of QT – or was it newsnight?) Who stated as clear as day that it WAS ‘racist’ to notice there was a pattern of muslim pederasts targeting young white girls.
I was in Liverpool city centre when I was told the BNP were outside the crown court protesting about the Rochdale & Heywood case…..Without their protest we (Especially In Merseyside) would never have known about the trial & conviction as the MSM never made an utterance about it.
I think that was the 2nd or 3rd day of the trial – before the general public were made aware in the national media. I live in Merseyside & listen to a lot of local radio – but heard ZERO about it on there, or in ‘the echo.’
But that’s where their point ends. Paedophilia is NOT exclusive to the labour party, nor muslims in general, and we’re still waitin’ for a few (Living and/or serving MP’s & lords) to have the law catch up with them.
They should ALL hang imo.
PS. IIRC, abbott made what I deem to be a ‘racist’ speech about: “Too many blonde-haired, blue-eyed Scandinavian (Finnish?) nurses in the NHS” a while back.
Cuts both ways.
Your first point might be an issue of interpretation. It would be racist to suggest that only Muslims were targeting young white girls for paedophile offences and, if I recall correctly, it is likely that this was what Diane Abbott was trying to say. I agree that she regularly stuffs her foot in her mouth when talking about this subject, though.
Your point about the BNP protesting outside a crown court before the MSM mentioned the case is more to do with the media blacking it out than the Labour Party, I would have thought. Incidentally, were these BNP protesters the same people who smashed the windows of the local takeaway – when it was well-known to be under completely new management – shouting “rapists out” or similar slogans? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17899841
The thing about this sad affair that has left me feeling bemused is how the tactic of ‘gas-lighting’ has been successfully employed.
This has been achieved by the portraying the main instigators of this vile practice as belonging to one particular ethnic group.
No mention is made of the White males and females from the area of South Yorkshire who operated over a similar time-period as the Pakistanis who were were also jailed.
I could fill reams of – sorry waste bandwidth – with the names and sentences of all those in the South Yorkshire area who have been ‘banged-up’ for these crimes.
Instead might I be provided with the opportunity to provide both you and all of the readers of you blog/website with an address that will provide some 8interesting reading.
The website in question is to be found at: http://ukpaedos-exposed.com
With regard to gaslighting, I agree – that’s why I responded to Yossarian by saying “it would be racist to suggest that only Muslims were targeting young white girls for paedophile offences.”
My point was that I only found out what it was all about BECAUSE of the BNP protest. A stranger told me about it at the bus stop! He only knew because he’d asked a protestor what it was about.
Up until then, the mainstream media gave it a wide berth, and the hubbub of the protest garnered the attention of the public – who up until that point had been entirely ignorant of what had been going on.
WHY had there been a media blackout? I first heard of it later that evening, when I imagine the media couldn’t ignore it any longer.
Before then, there was the CH4 documentary about the same thing that’d been happening (In Bradford) that’d been pulled…..
….And of course the Rotherham report’s now in the spotlight.
But you cannot deny it was LABOUR politicians in Rotherham who kept schtoom & the labour party in the main in the Rochdale case who told us it was ‘racist’ to notice the emerging patterns of muslims targeting white girls – because it WAS them playing the race card more than any other party.
Why your saying it’s ONLY muslims targeting white girls I have no idea – I’ve never suggested that. It seems to me UKIP/BNP or whoever aren’t suggesting that’s the be-all and end-all of it, neither.
It also happened in Oxford as well, don’t forget. That seems to have gone relatively unnoticed.
Is it racist to note that muslims were targeting white girls? They don’t need admit it…. the evidence is there – especially in the Rochdale case.
For me, it’s a crime that ought to be punishable by physical castration as well as hard labour for the remainder of the perpetrator’s existence imo – Not just imprisonment – REGARDLESS of what race commits it against what other race. NO EXCEPTIONS.
There’s no cure & no rehabilitation of nonceism.
But to call someone racist for noticing a pattern is just as bad – if not worse – than what these ukip/bnp clowns are trying to pull. Both sides are deflecting away from the real issue.
And that’s that nonces ought to be experimented on as they’re of no use to society imo.
I’m not saying it’s only Muslims targeting white girls. You have taken that line out of context.
Here’s what I said: “It would be racist to suggest that only Muslims were targeting young white girls for paedophile offences and, if I recall correctly, it is likely that this was what Diane Abbott was trying to say” – that it would be racist to make that suggestion.
It isn’t racist to say that the Muslims who have been convicted of it were targeting white girls, of course; that is fact.
It would be wrong to accuse the Labour Party as a whole because individual Labour members or groups of Labour members have been discovered to be abusing children, or may be discovered of doing so. There are no two ways about it; you must not accuse everybody in an organisation whose membership numbers hundreds of thousands, based on the activities of a few people who happen to be members – and in this context, several dozen is a few people.
Going back to the court case, there could have been several legitimate reasons for the media not to have covered it prior to it reaching court. Details may have been scarce and newspapers/TV may have been wary of publishing anything that may later have been found to be in contempt of court. If you say the media reported on it the day it came to court, I wonder what more you expected.
And while we’re on the subject of abbot…..
If I’m right, I remember bernie grant backed her to the hilt. Wasn’t it him what said these finnish nurses “Probably wouldn’t know HOW to take a black man’s temperature”? Or words to that effect?
And who succeded grant?
That’s right – david lammy. The same david lammy who said the black smoke coming from the vatican was ‘racist’?
Wrong on many levels……
But hey? Let someone make a point about something (Whether they’re right or not in what they’re saying, it’s no worse than what the labour party’s been guilty of in the past, is it?)
Not as if labour’s sh*t doesn’t stink is it, Mike?
I hope not.
Will you please stop accusing Labour’s membership – hundreds of thousands strong – based on the actions or words of one or two people who happen to be members of the party?
I am a member of Labour; I happen to disagree with the words you ascribe to Labour members in this comment. But you are trying to associate me with them. That is inappropriate. Stop.
No, I’m not – that’s a touch paranoid isn’t it, Mike? I said it was labour MP’s who played the race card – and abbot in particular. Where did I generalise?
Dont twist what I’ve said. It’s in black & white what you’ve said.
Wilfully twisting what I’m sayin’ & ignoring what I have in order to make a point puts you in the same light as those clowns from the other website you’re complaining about.
You wrote: “Why your saying it’s ONLY muslims targeting white girls I have no idea – I’ve never suggested that.”
Neither did I – very clearly, in black and white, that I quoted back at you after you sent the above. I haven’t twisted anything; I responded to your words – and you, sir, did try to twist what I said. It’s there in black and white for anyone to see.
Since you did try to twist my words, and since you have tried to do it again, this conversation is over. I am not interested in anything else you are trying to say on this subject.