A Discussion of a Junius Post on A Forum!
Quote Originally Posted by (REDACTED) View Post
Well, on that subject, did anyone catch a very interesting BBC radio 4 Documentary a while back called “The Political Club“. It was an investigation into the ways this country’spolitical parties are funded through “donations” made by the politicians elected to office from the salaries they collect.At one level this seems fair enough, after all, what you do with your disposable income after tax is your business and nobody else’s.But there was a darker side. Nigel Farage admitted it, speaking for what he said was the first time on the issue. In brief, as an MEP he is allowed to claim a certain amount of money which is supposed to be spent on projects of benefit to his constituents, but Farage admits in the programme that he allowed funds taken in that manner from the EU to be used for promoting his party at the national level.And what was worse was what happened when the EU auditors found out. According to Farage on the programme, he was visited by officials who asked “whether or not he wanted to be made a martyr” and offered him a deal whereby they would misfile the paperwork they had uncovered, and he would be free to continue to abuse the EU expenses in this way, PROVIDED he stopped blabbing far and wide about it. So he agreed,he shut up, he kept on bleeding EU expenses into the UKIP coffers and the EU Officials went off and left him in peace. He claimed that this BBC programme was the first occasion on which he had made any comment since that visitation.Now, I have no means to know if other parties are up to the same game as this. But I wondered if anyone had heard about this and what their views were.
TO WHICH I REPLIED:
sadly to collude in this corruption is unequivocally to admit you are corrupt and corruptible.
So from the horses mouth we have an admission he was offered a corrupt deal by The EU and accepted it.
I presume the corruption of promising the electorate before an election that NO UKIP elected official would practice nepotism and then paying his wife £30K a year without telling his colleagues, leaving them to read about it in the meeeeja is acceptable corruption – just as there are some who believe the UKIP MEP Towm Wise colluding with his researcher to steal public money should not have gained him a 2 year prison sentence.
Do you agree with the corruption of booking in on a Friday morning in Brussels to immediately (+-) and the dash off to the airport to steal £280.00 for a day’s attendance is acceptable corruption.
The corruption of stealing from the public purse by signing in on a Friday to get £280.00 and any other benefits in Strasbourg when there is no Official business on Fridays in Strasbourg is acceptable!
You would therefore side with The President’s Office then and refuse to answer a question on this subject – when challenged I presume you would say, after rejecting it, that you would look up some grounds to justify not answering.
Have you thought of campaigning FOR The EU? – As almost every aspect of The EU seems to be run on this level of corruption.
I for one find it unacceptable – I do NOT believe our National Representatives at a cost (for an MEP) of £2,590,000 a year EACH or £49,000 a week, which on an EU maximum hours is over £1,000 an hour cost of an MEP should on top of this be deciding WHAT fiddles they can and do make and what they spend them on!
To claim it is OK for UKIP MEPs to do because you believe in what they CLAIM to do with the money is clearly reprehensible – ipso facto it exhonorates UKIP’s partners in the vile EFD Group investing the money they steal from you and I to spend on Racism, anti Judaism, beating up homosexuals (actually dressing them as rabbits and hunting them with firearms!), holocaust denial or just stealing money as Tom Wise did to buy a car, over 1,000 bottles of wine and pay off his credit cards!
We do seem not to share the same morality – though to be fair (REDACTED) you do not go so far as to advocate corruption – merely seemingly condone it as you do not speak out against it.