• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
JackieO

Neil Hamilton-A man misunderstood?

Recommended Posts

I've always been of an opinion that the Hamilton's were tossers.

However after watching the interview with Sargon below he comes across as knowledgable and intelligent.

Was he the target of an establishment stitch up? After reading some of Tommy Robinson's book it is amazing to see how far they will go to destroy anyone they see as a threat.

Have an open mind, It is worth a look.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JackieO said:

I've always been of an opinion that the Hamilton's were tossers.

However after watching the interview with Sargon below he comes across as knowledgable and intelligent.

Was he the target of an establishment stitch up? After reading some of Tommy Robinson's book it is amazing to see how far they will go to destroy anyone they see as a threat.

Have an open mind, It is worth a look.

 

He seems quite different when his awful wife isn't present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I got a lot of flack from friends during the last Welsh Assembly elections when I pointed out that Hamilton was talking about the things that mattered to the local people. Considering that he was fairly new to it all and others had been in Welsh politics for decades that was quite a feat - or maybe it was just a sign of how out of touch and complacent the political class is.

He seemed to have, during Radio & TV interviews, a far better grasp of the real issues facing Welsh people than many people I know within Welsh politics and the Welsh media.

But he is an ex-Tory and thus is hated by so many forever and a day here in Wales. But people voted for him and he got elected. Ironically, after his election I heard many people who had been pro proportional representation up until that point then decide that 'something had to be done' about it. Hypocrits.

I regularly see tweets demanding that he is removed from the Welsh Assembly. But he has been a breath of fresh air talking commonsense. Alas, he doesn't get much coverage by the Welsh media - funny that.

Edited by The Masked Tulip
typo, found one, can't be arsed looking for more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The Masked Tulip said:

But he is an ex-Tory and thus is hated by so many forever and a day here in Wales.

Brainwashing hey. I hated this man but knew nothing about him....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you get anywhere near parliament as a Conservative MP without being very capable, you also need a healthy dose of cunning and out and out nasty streak. I don't mean that in a negative "conservatives are all evil" just that it's such a solid political party that you need to be tough as hell and want to play the political game. 

In terms of Hamilton, it's cyclical that cunning got him in trouble and the Conservatives equally used that political nous to destroy him. 

I think the biggest issue is somebody like Hamilton jumping ship across parties, certainly cross over between UKIP and the Conservatives, but it just looks somebody desperate to gain power and control by any means possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gilf said:

but it just looks somebody desperate to gain power and control by any means possible. 

But he's jumped once 16 years ago and has stuck with UKIP even when it was at it's lowest ebb under Henry Bolton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JackieO said:

But he's jumped once 16 years ago and has stuck with UKIP even when it was at it's lowest ebb under Henry Bolton.

He's not arsed anymore - has enough money to die/ be a bit controversial - not following the narrative etc 

Like most of the pigs

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mattydread said:

He's not arsed anymore - has enough money to die/ be a bit controversial - not following the narrative etc 

Like most of the pigs

 

Doesn't look that way

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JackieO said:

I've always been of an opinion that the Hamilton's were tossers.

However after watching the interview with Sargon below he comes across as knowledgable and intelligent.

Was he the target of an establishment stitch up? After reading some of Tommy Robinson's book it is amazing to see how far they will go to destroy anyone they see as a threat.

Have an open mind, It is worth a look.

 

 

Ive not watched it, unfortunately I cant bear the bloke and his wife.

As long as they are singing for the UKIP songsheet, UKIP will never be a credible party. 

Farage is better off going it alone and starting a party called Leave.eu or something similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Green Devil said:

 

Ive not watched it, unfortunately I cant bear the bloke and his wife.

As long as they are singing for the UKIP songsheet, UKIP will never be a credible party. 

Farage is better off going it alone and starting a party called Leave.eu or something similar.

Agreed, but the problem is it takes a long time to establish a political party, it's not just about the main figures, there's a whole network down to grass roots involved. I'm sure Farage would love to dump UKIP and go it alone but unless he found a billionaire sponsor I doubt if it's doable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Sargon interview, Hamilton says we should accept a Steptoe government if it means getting rid of May. I despise May, so have no issue with that, but i'm not going to fool myself that the chances are that if immigration controls are loosened by Steptoe, thats it for political solutions. Done. Gone. Even with the Tories, given they havent reduced immigration, its only 2 or 3 election cycles until sovereignty minded people are outnumbered and outvoted. But if Steptoe came and ramped up immigration in that same way bliar did, we'd be looking at net figures close to a million a year. Sounds an impossible number, but then if you'd said 300k would be coming annually 10 years from now in 1995, people would have likely called you a scaremongerer. 

See, this is what worries me about the pragmatism of these people. Its not people's views that have shifted all that much, its the people themselves. Compare the 1992 election to the 2017 election. If 2017 had the same demographics as 1992, the Con vote would have been 46%, Labour 38%, instead of 42.5 vs 40.5%, purely because the non white vote, which goes about 75% to Labour, and under 20% to tories, has gone from under 5% to over 10%. What would have been a likely landslide ended with a forced coalition. 

Hamilton says 'governments come and go'..sure, but the consequences of their policies, particularly with regards to immigration, remain. Until they can talk frankly about these difficult issues, the input factors, they really are putting the horse before the cart. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PatronizingGit said:

In the Sargon interview, Hamilton says we should accept a Steptoe government if it means getting rid of May. I despise May, so have no issue with that, but i'm not going to fool myself that the chances are that if immigration controls are loosened by Steptoe, thats it for political solutions. Done. Gone. Even with the Tories, given they havent reduced immigration, its only 2 or 3 election cycles until sovereignty minded people are outnumbered and outvoted. But if Steptoe came and ramped up immigration in that same way bliar did, we'd be looking at net figures close to a million a year. Sounds an impossible number, but then if you'd said 300k would be coming annually 10 years from now in 1995, people would have likely called you a scaremongerer. 

See, this is what worries me about the pragmatism of these people. Its not people's views that have shifted all that much, its the people themselves. Compare the 1992 election to the 2017 election. If 2017 had the same demographics as 1992, the Con vote would have been 46%, Labour 38%, instead of 42.5 vs 40.5%, purely because the non white vote, which goes about 75% to Labour, and under 20% to tories, has gone from under 5% to over 10%. What would have been a likely landslide ended with a forced coalition. 

Hamilton says 'governments come and go'..sure, but the consequences of their policies, particularly with regards to immigration, remain. Until they can talk frankly about these difficult issues, the input factors, they really are putting the horse before the cart. 

This.

But if you look at the recent ejection of a very senior Democrat from a safe seat in New York to an untested latino, purely due to the ethnic vote, the lefties just do not get it.  They do not see that the end result of importing groups of 'others' is not them in charge, lording it over the 'others;', but that the 'others' create their own ruling class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wherebee said:

This.

But if you look at the recent ejection of a very senior Democrat from a safe seat in New York to an untested latino, purely due to the ethnic vote, the lefties just do not get it.  They do not see that the end result of importing groups of 'others' is not them in charge, lording it over the 'others;', but that the 'others' create their own ruling class.

Anyone think that the days of a non Muslim mayor of London are well behind us?

And so it begins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JackieO said:

Me neither before this day...

I respect Sargon so was curious to why he would give the time of day to an "obvious cunt" like Hamilton.

I was surprised at what I found in the interview. Worth a look definitely.

If we act on feelings aka he/she's an "obvious cunt" are we not like SJW's who are emotion based?

Question everything I'd say.

We have been hideously lied to for decades and probably much longer!

 

Edit

BTW this thread  is probably going to put me in the dog house with the other half!

We may well be but Neil Hamilton is not the person to push change to voters.

 

5 hours ago, swiss_democracy_for_all said:

Agreed, but the problem is it takes a long time to establish a political party, it's not just about the main figures, there's a whole network down to grass roots involved. I'm sure Farage would love to dump UKIP and go it alone but unless he found a billionaire sponsor I doubt if it's doable.

The problem is UKIP is not a credible party. Its full of loons like neil hamilton. If Nigel started his own party, at least it would be credible. He is the only credible person to come from UKIP IMO. At the end of the day, all its a complete mess, its left too late (which was the plan from the start) and unfortunately it looks we are heading to "Outer Colony of the EU" status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wherebee said:

This.

But if you look at the recent ejection of a very senior Democrat from a safe seat in New York to an untested latino, purely due to the ethnic vote, the lefties just do not get it.  They do not see that the end result of importing groups of 'others' is not them in charge, lording it over the 'others;', but that the 'others' create their own ruling class.

Yep. We can be as untribal as we want. I see little evidence of other tribes giving up their tribalism. 

And why would they? Democracy, after all, works on groups/voter blocks. 

Dershowitz the latest to realize once he's outlived his usefulness, they'd rather affliliate with their own, thank you very much...

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/149551/alan-dershowitz-really-victim-marthas-vineyard-mccarthyism

 

Hardly new or limited to the US. I remember when Bernie Grant died, Abbott was appalled that a white might be included in the choices to contest his seat, reminding us this is a 'black seat' (even though, incredibly, given her attitude, its actually one of the few inner London areas that is still - just - majority white)

We're not supposed to see race, you see. Unless you are not white. Then you are always supposed to see race, and act accordingly if that race is white. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, PatronizingGit said:

In the Sargon interview, Hamilton says we should accept a Steptoe government if it means getting rid of May. I despise May, so have no issue with that, but i'm not going to fool myself that the chances are that if immigration controls are loosened by Steptoe, thats it for political solutions. Done. Gone. Even with the Tories, given they havent reduced immigration, its only 2 or 3 election cycles until sovereignty minded people are outnumbered and outvoted. But if Steptoe came and ramped up immigration in that same way bliar did, we'd be looking at net figures close to a million a year. Sounds an impossible number, but then if you'd said 300k would be coming annually 10 years from now in 1995, people would have likely called you a scaremongerer. 

See, this is what worries me about the pragmatism of these people. Its not people's views that have shifted all that much, its the people themselves. Compare the 1992 election to the 2017 election. If 2017 had the same demographics as 1992, the Con vote would have been 46%, Labour 38%, instead of 42.5 vs 40.5%, purely because the non white vote, which goes about 75% to Labour, and under 20% to tories, has gone from under 5% to over 10%. What would have been a likely landslide ended with a forced coalition. 

Hamilton says 'governments come and go'..sure, but the consequences of their policies, particularly with regards to immigration, remain. Until they can talk frankly about these difficult issues, the input factors, they really are putting the horse before the cart. 

I agree that a Steptoe Government would involve some kind of Customs Union and probably even slacker controls on immigration. Ironically the one MP that actually puts immigration at the top of his agenda and isn ' t afraid to use the I word is John Mann. The Tory right come up with politically correct stuff about regaining complete control of trade etc. Mann is the only one unfraid to use the I word without fear or invitation.

Unfortunately for every John Mann you have got ten Dianne Abbots whose objective is  being a pressure group for migrants and 80 million population here we come.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.