Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Letter from Nick Farage of UKIP about shutting Commonwealth citizens out of British forces | |
Author: Jim (Canada) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 22:08:38 11/25/04 Thu I sent an e-mail to Nick Farage of the UKIP about the disgraceful banning of Commonwealth citizens from British forces unless they become British. In his reply, he says that it is definitely an EU directive. Here is my letter: Dear UKIP: Did you know that the 8,000 or so Commonwealth personnel serving in the British Armed Forces have been told that they must become British citizens or they must leave? At the same time, Britain is signing up to an EU Army. This is an absolute disgrace! The Commonwealth has always come to Britain's support in major wars - the Boer War, First World War, Second World War, Korean War, Falklands War. They are now to be shut out for European forces - countries that have tried to destroy Britain in the past. I strongly urge UKIP to publicise this fact and to take a strong stand against it. I hope you agree with me on this. Regards, Jim Alcock Here is his reply, notice how he talks about Britain's unique relationship with the English-speaking world: Dear Mr Alcock, The reason for this change is European Union single market rules with regards the employment of "third party" nationals. Once again the EU damages our unique relationship with the English Speaking world. Long live the spirit of Vimy Ridge. Yours, Nigel Farage, UKIP M.E.P South East I think there is some potential for the FCS with UKIP. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> Subject: Contacting Farage | |
|
Author: Mister Helpful [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 22:39:14 11/25/04 Thu The name of Farage's secretary in Brussels/Strasbourg is Aurelie Laloux. You can reach her Monday-Thursday at the European Parliament in Brussels on +32 2 284 9855. You can also send a letter to Farage's office in Brussels, of which the address is: European Parliament Bâtiment Altiero Spinelli 07H140 60, Rue Wiertz B-1047 Bruxelles If you want someone who will be more likely to pay attention to your concerns, and possibly do something about them, then I suggest a very affable MEP named Tom Wise (also UKIP, of course) - his e-mail address is thwise@europarl.eu.int and he would be your man. Also, since you're at it, you might as well contact the Chief Whip, Jeffrey Titford, at eastern@ukip.org. I know his secretary, an extremely kindly lady by the name of Heather Conyngham. She did, in fact, tell me once that she wants closer links with the Commonwealth on immigration and trade and that she doesn't understand why we've joined up to the wrong bloc. If you send Jeffrey an e-mail, write "care of Heather Conyngham" and she'll pass it on. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Also the Tories hate this too | |
|
Author: Paddy (Scotland) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:02:21 11/25/04 Thu [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: bloody good job they do! | |
|
Author: Matt(UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:21:05 11/25/04 Thu I'm about to find out the Liberal point of view. I sent a letter to my local MP. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: I hope that Nigel wasn't too surprised to find out that his name had been changed to Nicholas! | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:36:45 11/25/04 Thu As I have mentioned before, I have never met a UKIP member who has not been interested in what I have to tell them about the FCS. Well, maybe Kilroy, but then he's pretty much the only Labour-leaning member If we can just survive another year - until after the 'consitution' is rejected in a referendum - things will start to look up. We will have to leave the EC, and then some progress can be made, and in this context the UKIP people will be useful. I suggest, quite simply, that we canvass the Ukippers by pointing out that their proposal to leave the EU would be much more popular if they were able to suggest an alternative once outside. People have been cowed by a generation of EC propaganda into believing that we can't survive 'on our own'. This may be deplorable, but it means that, although the majority of Brits hate the EC, the majority are very uncomfortable about about leaving altogether. I would guess that this discomfort could be obliterated overnight if UKIP, or whomsoever it may be, could stand up and say, "Look, we wouldn't be on our own: have a dekko at THESE proposals." If one of the presidents were to write to one of Mister Helpful's contacts, I strongly suggest that this is the line which you take. (Oh, and things are even more optimisitc than this, because the new US Secretary of State will make damn' sure that no obstacle is put in the way of our leaving. Whatever we think about the USA, when they can be bothered they are diplomatically very useful!) [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: Americans aren't stupid... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:59:13 11/26/04 Fri I think that they are well aware that Europe is going to 'happen' whether they like it or not, and would rather that they had at least one ally on this side of the pond, and that is of course the UK. The Americans would hate to see the British economy and, of course, the British military, used by a European administration with an anti-American agenda. And Dr Rice wants to have closer ties with the UK, involving possible membership of NAFTA, which is incompatible with Britain joining the USE. But anyway, my main point was about UKIP and the line which the FCS should take when contacting them. The American thing was just a footnote. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: The UK in NAFTA would be a good start - it would build economic ties with Canada | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:12:09 11/26/04 Fri [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Nowadays, the USA will help us when we need it most. | |
|
Author: Paddy (Scotland) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 12:19:39 11/26/04 Fri I truely believe that the USA would be happy to help us out on this one at least. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: I Wonder... | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:52:12 11/26/04 Fri I often wonder why people automatically assume that the US would support Britain’s withdrawal from the EU. I think we can safely say that Britain’s membership has stalled the “European Project” over the years, and has possibly delayed the creation of the federal European Superstate, that the central European powers have made their dream, for several years. This new power has been proclaimed as a “counter-balance” to the US, which is a euphemism for an economic and possibly military rival. A European Superstate with Britain as a member would almost certainly be a divided state, and thus potentially weaker. Put this in context with the bizarre position that the current US administration (well, the President at least) has taken, making no secret of their wish to see Tony Blair win a third term. It is reputed that Michael Howard has been banned from the White House. It seems to have escaped the attention of the President’s strategists, that if America wants a reliable ally in Europe with an independent foreign policy and an independent military, then Michael Howard is the only prospective occupant of Number 10 that can make this happen. However, as the President’s strategy will doubtless not extend beyond the next four year window, perhaps this position is not so surprising after all. The fact remains that another Blair Government, with a ratified EU constitution (Blair will fix the referendum), will destroy the transatlantic alliance, the “special relationship”, and the prospect of America having any major military allies in their next military adventure. There is a fundamental paradox here, one that will eventually be addressed by what is in the US national interest, and not ours. It remains to be seen what they will judge as being in their national interest. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |