Thank you for your leaflet but NO


I came home from work today to find a UKIP leaflet. The only concession to this being Scotland and not England was some lovely pics of your candidates, including David Coburn and the partner of David’s attack dog Caroline Santos – one Kevin Newton.

I wonder what possessed you to pay for the delivery of leaflets to an Island that welcomes new people as essential to maintaining a viable population. An island,that has during the summer months, employees from all over Europe. Brits being seemingly adverse to taking work that is seasonal in nature. An island that has two main industries, whisky and fishing – both of which rely on exports to the European Union. An Island that will soon have a ninth whisky distillery, bringing jobs and security to the Island. An investment by a French businessman who is free to undertake that investment and live here half a year because of the EU.

Nigel, the pride I have in my country is not damaged by our membership of the EU, but rather by the fact that there are those in this country who are seduced by your use of fear and lies to further your political career. The pride I have in my country has been dented by a party who has supporters who are happy to state on a public forum that the EU is trying to build a “coffee coloured nation of robots”.

Nigel I do not find that the damage to my patriotism is immense because we belong to the EU. But I do feel embarrassed now when talking to Italian and Spanish friends who used to see Britain as a place that was largely lacking in mainstream bigots in politics (not withstanding that laughable oaf BNP Nick) – who now ask me why UKIP is garnering such support as it is.

I find your “Facts at your fingertips” an insult to the intelligence of anyone who is capable of using the Internet. I notice that you want to tell the Human Rights Court where to go and quote the “cat” story. Your use of half truths and unverified statistics is an affront to my intelligence, that you should be considered a serious political party certainly does dent the pride I have my country.

Over the last few months I have witnessed senior members of your party try to shut down anti ukip twitter accounts, my own included. I have been been told that equality legislation is unnecessary that women do not face a glass ceiling and when facing racism people should not be so “sensitive”. Today I have had women in UKIP tell me it would be preferable if women stayed at home to look after their children, that they should not have them if both parents need to work and struggle with child care costs and that it would be communist for the state to provide affordable quality child care.

I have the answer of what to do with your leaflet, I could be crude but that’s not my style. Rather, because I care about my planet, which you clearly do not, I will shred the leaflet and place it in the recycling where hopefully it will become something useful like toilet paper.

Yours, in hope that you gain some #commonsense

Miss Indigenous Brit and my “coffee coloured” daughter


BlOCK BLOCK BLOCK it’s a troll!!!

The strange case of the UKIP and WomendefyUKIP

UKIP it seems have one rule for its own members and supporters and another for anyone who wishes to defy/disagree/comment on their policies and beliefs.

The great thing about twitter is you can choose who you follow and who you do not. You can read someone’s tweets or you can ignore them. If something is offensive you have the option to report the tweet and and if someone repeatedly mentions you, you have the option to block them.

Increasingly UKIP supporters/members are misusing this function to try and shut down accounts that seek to inform about UKIP polices (regardless of the whether what they say is right or wrong they have the right to say it)

By blocking accounts you can get them suspended by twitter for multiple mentions, so by having a conversation with someone and then not liking their views and pressing the block button they can end up losing their account. Marty Caine a senior organiser for UKIP is very fond of this .. Just try typing “marty caine blocked” into twitter search it’s educational as to Marty’s particular views on FOS.

This week has seen a rather pathetic attempt to shut down an account called @womendefyukip .. There is no mystery behind this account, it’s not funded by a political party, a union or the EU it was the idea of a group of women who think UKIP would be detrimental to women in the UK – in fact the twitter account is being run by one woman. The account is under suspension again for the fourth time. It has not been racist, offensive, arrogant, rude or made multiple mentions it just exits and that has been enough for some kippers.

The account had already been suspended twice due to mass reporting and then a new campaign of attrition was opened. The main culprit was Nationalalistuk. It’s debatable if he still a UKIP member he certainly was and he still supports them vocally!


This was the initial attack, massive Kudos and thanks to Bonnie Greer who spent a great deal of time yesterday and today questioning whether this was the attitude of a mature electorate and as a result having her TL assaulted by those whose use of the English Language is not as refined as it should be!

But Nationalist is not the only one .. David Coburn decided to add in his pennies worth along with Caroline Santos his sidekick.


David’s response was to say this was a joke however then we see this today ..


David Coburn is clearly encouraging David Sydney (El Cid) to work towards blocking an account. David Coburn is most defiantly a member of UKIP the lead MEP candidate in Scotland, London Organiser and probably a candidate for UKIP in the 2015 General Election. As a result the account was thus unsuspended this morning only to be suspended by this afternoon.

<a href="


David Coburn has clearly decided that democracy and FOS should only exist under his terms. One could conclude that Mr Coburn is fairly undemocratic and rather a bully. This seems to be the nature of the party.

Twitter need to look at people’s use of the block button. It would certainly stop this kind of behaviour if those maliciously using the report/block function found their own accounts suspended. Meanwhile people like David Coburn can continue their bullying behaviour and there are those of us who will work to show the electorate just whom they are proposing to elect to represent them.

I will end with this .. Which sums up the “tin foil hat” approach to politics that seems be the staple of UKIP, rather than considering that it’s just the 80% who do not support them!


The 85% who do not share UKIPs Vision

The 85% who don’t want UKIP

Matthew Goodwin and Robert Ford have written a very thorough and accessible book Revolt on the Right explaining where the support for UKIP comes from, the New Statesman has an article today going over the same ground, much research time and newspaper inches have been devoted to the minority. UKIP supporters on social media are a rag tag bunch of religious converts to the cause of kipperism and frequently use the term majority when talking about support for the party or it’s policies. But of course this is not true between 80-90% would not consider voting for UKIP in a General Election, the figure is even lower if you look at Scotland.

The numerous articles in the press and comments by those in the know say that UKIP are defining the political narrative, but should we be allowing them to do that. The 80% are the majority, some of them are on the right of political spectrum and some of them on the left. Should the 80% be held hostage by the fear of the political classes of a UKIP win in a marginal seat in the next General Election. Should the political leadership of the parties that we support focus on gaining back that core 11-15% of electorate who support UKIP, which to all intents and purposes is lost. There has been plenty of recent research that shows that they will vote UKIP whatever the other political parties do. With ex Conservative party voters prepared to vote UKIP even if it can be shown that a Labour Government might be the result.

The very vocal even fanatical support for UKIP on social media is one that books no disagreement, no grey zone where UKIP policies might be looked at by kippers without the rose tinted glasses. UKIP is right wether it be on a desire to return to a failed education system or in the denial of climate change or in their MEPs failure to vote on key issues that would bring benefits to the UK. But the great majority of UKIP supporters are not on social media, they are not on twitter all day extolling the virtues of small government and the horror of wind turbines. They are people who have been left behind by society they probably have no strong views on the virtues or not of a libertarian style government. They love UKIP because they see Nigel as straight talking prepared to say what others can not, an anti establishment figure but not too scary. Someone anti PC, anti those silly do gooders who prevent kids throwing snow balls, with a simple narrative to leave the EU and everything will return to a time that they can understand.

Whilst I enjoy my time on twitter gently prodding the kippers and pointing out their fallacies, I am waging a “personal” battle against the stubborn intransigence of kippers who when faced with facts will continue to spout the party line – they of course will say that I am wrong that I am part of the establishment, to this I quietly smile to myself and reflect on a lifetime of being so far from the establishment that I would be surprised if there is not a file on me somewhere.

But I want my political party to ignore UKIP, I don’t want the 10-15% dictating to the 80+% what the future of this country should be. I may not agree with Len MacCluskey, and kippers hate UNITE with a passion bordering on delusional, but when he says he wants Labour to have a bold vision for the electorate I agree. I don’t want it clouded by a desire to please a minority who will not return to the fold. I want a simple narrative that’s says to UKIP that if a majority want a referendum on Europe they will vote for parties that will hold one (and by a majority I mean 50% of the electorate). If the majority of the electorate want to abandon polices to negate climate change than they will vote for parties that will deliver that. If we really believe as a society that meritocracy would exist without government interference then we will vote for a party that will remove all equal rights legislation. Since there is no sign that we about to do that perhaps the political parties would refrain from foisting policies that 11-15% want on the rest of us.