UKIP can certainly pick em!
Julia Gasper - a UKIP candidate in Oxfordshire - has already been featured on this blog. She has a very low opinion of homosexuals! LINK.
She also has a very low opinion of Muslims:
UKIP candidate: ‘Koran is worse than Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf’
A candidate for UKIP has compared Islam’s holiest book to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, Political Scrapbook can reveal. Academic Julia Gasper — a former Westminster hopeful and current council candidate in Oxford – said the Koran was “fascist” and compared those who defend Islam to holocaust deniers.
In emails seen by Scrapbook, Gasper ranted:
“Why is it any more wrong to assert that the Koran is a fascist book than to assert that Mein Kampf is a fascist book? The Koran is a lot more explicit in advocating hate and murder than Mein Kampf is.”Having dismissed comparisons between sections of the Koran and the Old Testament as “not valid”, Gasper responded to suggestions that her hateful bile was demonising Muslims:
“Words like “demonization” are just self-deception. They are being used to persuade you to keep your eyes shut. In fact, the apologists for Islam are really very similiar to Holocaust deniers.”To compound matters, the rant comes to light as another UKIP candidate is suspended for expressing sympathies with Norwegian mass-murder Anders Breivik – and just days after Julia Gasper herself was slammed for saying gays should stop ‘complaining about persecution’ and start thanking straight people for giving birth to them.
Looks like they’ll be making that a double suspension then.
To read the original: LINK
Also see: LINK.
And here is an article regarding her rants against readers of Pink News:
UKIP candidate Dr Gasper: PinkNews readers ‘should be sectioned under Mental Health Act’
Outspoken UKIP city council candidate Dr Julia Gasper has said today that PinkNews.co.uk readers have made ‘anonymous death threats and hysterical accusations of being a murderer’ against her, and that most should be involuntarily committed for psychiatric treatment.
Dr Gasper said she saw similarities between her situation and that of Salman Rushdie, whose 1988 work The Satanic Verses led the Ayatollah of Iran, a country which executes gays, to put a fatwa out for his own execution.
The UKIP candidate for Oxford City’s Quarry and Risinghurst ward had written that gay people needed to stop “complaining about persecution” and start expressing “gratitude” to straight people, on whom they are reliant to be born.
She also suggested a link between homosexuality and paedophilia should be examined when selecting gay couples to adopt a child.
The majority of the views expressed do not seem to reflect official policy of UKIP, a political party which advocates withdrawal from the European Union, though it does also oppose marriage equality for gay couples. A UKIP spokesman said the party did not not share or support her views, but it did support her right to hold them.
Following our story from last week, Dr Gasper, who has a doctorate in English literature and lectures at the Stanford University Centre in Oxford, wrote this morning: “Thanks to all my friends on Pink News!
“The publicity you have given me has hugely increased the readership of my blog and supporters are pouring in. I am beginning to understand how Salman Rushdie felt when denounced by crazy extremists. Poor guy. The more you make anonymous death threats against me and hysterical accusations of being a murderer, the more deranged you all sound.
“It’s a shame that most of you are completely mad and need to be sectioned under the Mental Health Act. Just ring up your GP, tell him your symptoms and ask for help.”
Roweena Russell, a former chair of the International Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender Youth and Student Organisation, was advised by Dr Gasper in an email that she needed to be sectioned. She told PinkNews.co.uk she had written Dr Gasper a carefully-worded message following the revelations about her blog.
Ms Russell said: “I’m appalled that somebody would use hard fought-for legislation against the people who’ve had to fight for it.
“As a long-term political activist I’m disgusted she’s used this kind of language, Using mental health as a slur on top of every else she’s doing is just unacceptable. I really can’t believe it.”
Dr Gasper continued on her blog: “About a year ago, somebody I know in Oxford confided that he was being bullied at work. I knew he was gay, as a mutual friend had mentioned it, but I didn’t ask him whether the bullying was related to him being gay. I just regarded it as a case of bullying, which is always unacceptable, and I was horrified.
“I did everything I could to help him. I suggested he go to the management, or to a union if he belonged to one. I sent him links to websites that told him his legal rights and suggested courses of action. I even went further than that, and put him in touch with an old friend of mine who is an occupational health professional. She is experienced in helping and supporting people in cases like this and she has a lot of expertise.
“But he rejected all this help. He chose to do nothing at all about it and just resigned from the job. When he told the local committee he wanted to be a candidate for UKIP, I bent over backwards to help him. I did everything I could to encourage him to stand up for his convictions. Curiously enough, he reacted by making accusations of bullying and injustice against me. He interpreted help and kindness as persecution. At that point, I felt I had to give up. I am not qualified to deal with cases where there may be mental issues, but I think I know what some of the symptoms are.”
Since PinkNews.co.uk wrote of Dr Gasper’s blog posts, the blog’s follower numbers have risen by over thirty percent, from three to four.
To read the original: LINK
And what does UKIP's leadership think of her views? They "support her right to hold them". No surprise there! But what else can you expect from a party that happily sits alongside fascists, racists and homophobes in the EFD group?
Steve Moxon was a UKIP candidate ...... until he wrote this on his blog:
Anders Breivik and his manifesto: a great deal of nonsense has been written
A great deal of nonsense has been written about Anders Breivik, the man who ruthlessly attacked the ruling Norwegian Labour Party.
That pretty well everyone – myself not excluded – recoiled at his actions, does not belie the accuracy of Breivik’s research and analysis in his ‘manifesto’, which is in line with most scholarship in respect of both PC and Islam.
It is clear that the mass of ordinary people are considered with utter contempt by the government-media-education uber-class across the Western world; this as the result of ‘cultural Marxism’. So we are, in effect, ‘at war’ within our societies over PC, as Breivik claims.
And Islam seems not to be a benign religion that is toxic only to the extent that some have adopted a veneer of Western revolutionary thinking after Marx to produce a fundamentalism. Breivik makes an exhaustively detailed convincing case that the problem is inherent in the core of the religion itself and how it is interpreted generally; contrary to what I have previously understood (until recent reading of scholars had already set me along these lines).
It is not through any Christian religiosity that Breivik arrives at his position: he is not in any way a practising Christian, let alone a Christian fundamentalist as has been claimed — or, rather, guessed. But it is when he gets on to Christianity in his ‘manifesto’ that Breivik’s thesis seems to me perhaps to be weak.
A Christian based governance is inherently “serving” and therefore not as corruptible as other forms, Breivik argues. But what about the evidence from history – and, yes, this is a long time ago, granted – of the corrupt payments for ‘indulgences’? He says that whereas “Liberal modernity” is down to “a God of Mammon” and Islam is “the will of God in Sharia”; with Christianity “the government is first accountable to the revealed will of God”. Well, isn’t this just any projection those in power care to think up? Looking at our own Christian leaders, currently this seems to be PC.
Christianity has to rise again, Breivik hopes: presumably he thinks (correctly) that religion in some form is inevitable, so that rather than the humanism that simply substituted mankind for God to beget Marxism, we’d be better off with the status quo ante. This is similar to the positions of Franco and Hirohito, who sought not the revolutionary overthrow of elites in the interests of the masses — as would Marxists and their very close brothers the fascists – but merely to bolster fading national religions (Catholicism and Shintoism) and monarchies. Yet is it not something more than mere optimism to expect that some return to rationality will replace PC-fascism after it implodes?
As for his take on the gender [sic] aspect of PC, it may be that Breivik was influenced by his immediate family background. He had a relationship with his family members, excepting his father, who left the family when Anders was aged just one. He always maintained full contact with his mother, notwithstanding lamenting what he regarded as her promiscuity.
This Breivik blames on the moral relaxing that attended PC, though it seems more likely that this was an association rather than that PC was the major causal factor (PC in any case not being a significant presence at this time). Surely it was instead down to the advent in the 1960s of near-infallible contraception, which relieved men of the obligation to enter ‘shotgun marriage’. [This is the basis of the 'great disruption', as Francis Fukuyama terms the social change Breivik bemoans.
It may be that his early experiences and how he reviewed them in later life are a critical part of Breivik’s motivation to move from what is a worthy analysis to the sort of violence few would contemplate (at least seriously), let alone carry out. Maybe we will get to know in time, after the wild speculations have evaporated and a more dispassionate focus comes to bear.
A loner Breivik appears not to be: he had friends. There is no evidence that Breivik is insane or even psychopathic: his calmness during the attack does not mean that he would be indifferent to people in other situations. He’s intelligent, well-educated, and very capable of clear thought – though whether or not he ‘over-thought’ regarding strategy is another question. Though his actions may turn out to be counter-productive, at least for now he’s succeeded more than anyone else in prompting a very widespread focus on the major problem that is PC. That can hardly be denied.
To read the original: LINK
UKIP's leadership were hoping that Moxon's comments would not become widely known. However, the press became aware of it and UKIP was forced to act:
Sheffield UKIP candidate removed over Breivik blog post
A man who was due to stand in Sheffield’s local elections for UKIP has been stripped of the candidacy over comments made on his blog.
Steve Moxon, a former government whistle-blower, is standing in the Dore and Totley ward.
On his blog he said Norwegian killer Anders Breivik’s thesis on Islam and political correctness was accurate.
Mr Moxon said he “resolutely does not agree with” his crimes. UKIP said his comments were at odds with its policy.
Breivik, 33, killed 77 people in Norway last July. He is currently on trial accused of terrorism and mass murder.
Mr Moxon, a former civil servant, first came to prominence in 2004 when he made claims that key checks were waived by immigration staff in Sheffield to make the numbers coming to Britain seem less dramatic when the EU expanded.
He told BBC Radio Sheffield he had been “amicably” removed as a candidate but remained a member of UKIP.
He said: “I would stress that I do not in any way agree with Anders Breivik’s actions.
“In the unlikely event I get elected I guess I would be an independent at least for a while.”
In a statement, UKIP said: “We note that Steve Moxon has not condoned the actions of the maniac Breivik.
“However, he has made a number of remarks on subjects such as the Breivik manifesto and Islam that are at odds with UKIP policy and perspective.”
Mr Moxon posted the comments on his blog last August. UKIP said it was unaware of the remarks when it selected him as a candidate, as it would have taken an “inordinate amount of time” to read everything written by prospective candidates during the vetting procedure.
The remaining candidates contesting the Dore and Totley seat are Hafeas Rehman for Labour, Liberal Democrat Colin Ross, Conservative Anne Smith and Rita Wilcock from the Green party.
To read the original: LINK
Mr Moxon responded with a post on his blog. It is interesting to note Moxon's comments regarding the UKIP/Arnott statement. We have highlighted them in red:
On happily being suspended as a UKIP candidate
This is just to state that I am quite happy with the decision to suspend my candidature; this being because of the usual numptie misrepresentation of position by media that UKIP Party Chairman Steve Crowther understandably thought might ensue and thereby represent a threat to UKIP chances in Thursday’s elections in London.
This follows usual Party-politically-motivated bigoted wild misrepresentation and ignorance by a minority on local discussion boards re a blog post here (below) way back in August last year, which I had written on the topic of the wild nonsense written about Anders Breivik.
In that post — and in all posts I have made on the subject of Breivik, to such as Psychology Today — I stressed that Breivik’s actions were clearly appalling and insupportable, but that the scholarship on the origin and development of ‘political correctness’ fascism (and that is an accurate application of that term) is fully in line with what Breivik wrote in his ‘manifesto’.
I am myself published in a science journal on the origin and development of ‘PC’, and of how this has created serious misrepresentation of data and analysis in the topic of intimate-partner violence.
The statement put out by the UKIP Sheffield and National Organiser, Jonathan Arnott, is, however, not as Jonathan read to and agreed with me.
Jonathan stated to me that the issues were “outside the orbit” of the party’s politics.
That is very different to “remarks … at odds with UKIP policy”.
UKIP has no disagreement with me on anything, so far as I’m aware; and certainly no disagreement on any topic has been put to me.
The Party hardly could have such a disagreement unless it wants to disagree with the weight of published scholarship, and clearly it is hardly likely to engage in such illogical foolishness; and the Party is determinedly anti-PC in any case.
To read the original: LINK
Mr Moxon is now standing as an Independent. It should be noted that UKIP only acted after the story was brought to the attention of the press. It should also be noted that UKIP MEPs are still happy to
sit alongside MEPs from True Finns - the party that Breivik cited as his inspiration. LINK. Moxon's removal was an attempt at damage limitation rather genuine anger at what he said.
The story was also featured in The Guardian:
Sheffield UKIP candidate sacked over Breivik comments
Former Home Office whistleblower Steve Moxon, who triggered a ministerial resignation in 2004, will stay on ballot as an independent
Here's an interesting twist in the career of Steve Moxon, who made headlines in 2004 as the 'Home Office whistleblower' who revealed confidential details over immigration checks being waived.
The row which involved applicants for entry from eastern European countries which were on the threshold of joining the EU at the time, led to the resignation of the junior Home Office minister Beverley Hughes.
Moxon was feted for a time, but many of his initial sympathisers such as Michael Howard and David Davis backed off rapidly after revelations of his extreme view and the publication of his book The Great Immigration Scandal. This went well beyond revelations from the world of Sir Humphrey; its take on immigration more widely was described by Simon Wolley of Operation Black Vote as "a poisonous rant."
Moxon's opinions have now cost him his place as UKIP's candidate in Sheffield's local elections, where he is standing for the Dore and Totley ward, a Liberal Democrat stronghold in Nick Clegg's constituency. The party has dropped him after attention was drawn to a post he wrote on his blog last August which endorsed the reasoning in the testament of the Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Breivik.
He wrote, inter alia:
That pretty well everyone – myself not excluded – recoiled at his actions, does not belie the accuracy of Breivik's research and analysis in his 'manifesto', which is in line with most scholarship in respect of both Political Correctness and Islam.Moxon has repeated this week that he rejects Breivik's terrible actions, but his inability to understand that approval of the killer's analysis, whose publicising and promotion from obscurity appears to have been the purpose of the murders, is too much for UKIP. Suspending his candidature, the party says:
It is clear that the mass of ordinary people are considered with utter contempt by the government-media-education uber-class across the Western world; this as the result of 'cultural Marxism'. So we are, in effect, 'at war' within our societies over PC, as Breivik claims.
We note that Steve Moxon has not condoned the actions of the maniac Breivik. However, he has made a number of remarks on subjects such as the Breivik manifesto and Islam that are at odds with UKIP policy and perspective.Moxon will stay on the ballot paper as an independent. He told BBC Radio Sheffield that he remained a member of UKIP but:
In the unlikely event I get elected, I guess I would be an independent at least for a while.The other candidates for Dore and Totley are Hafeas Rehman (Labour), Colin Ross (Liberal Democrat), Anne Smith (Conservative) and Rita Wilcock (Green)
To read the original: LINK