BBC BLOGS - The Editors
« Previous | Main | Next »

Newsbeat and the BNP

Post categories:

Rod McKenzie Rod McKenzie | 11:25 UK time, Thursday, 1 October 2009

"The BNP doesn't deserve a second of airtime on a respected BBC station."
"Nick Griffin says what most of us are thinking - he stands up for Britain."

Just two of the contrasting texts among thousands we received after Newsbeat's interview with the leader of the BNP - and two young activists from the party. I'm happy to respond to those who argued, or complained, that we shouldn't have conducted the interview.

Nick GriffinYou can hear the interview here - and also read some of the background editorial thinking on all this in my colleague Ric Bailey's recent post and I'll try not to repeat his arguments.

So first, why was the BNP given airtime?
Well, we're impartial - that means we should examine all political parties and put their representatives on the spot with fair and firm questioning. Impartial journalism and censorship do not sit happily together. We believe in getting the facts and the arguments out there for people to decide - not in judging what is "right" or "wrong" in a political context - that's for you to do.

The BNP are not an illegal party. They enjoy electoral support and have elected representatives. It is the BBC's job to properly examine all legitimate political parties that operate within the law and for which people clearly vote.

Why are you forcing this stuff down your unwilling listeners' throats?
We're not. People have a choice whether to listen or not.

This may surprise you, but a great many texts we received yesterday were broadly supportive of the BNP. Over time, it's evident from following our listeners that the party touches a nerve of support or interest. The large pile of texts on my desk raise issues around immigration, political correctness and an apparent frustration with mainstream politics that means the BNP, or at least some of their policies, appeals to some people.

It's also clear that not much is known about the party's policies beyond immigration and race which is something we were keen to explore - and did. By the way, we also received messages of support from those who believed we had exposed the weakness of the BNP on a range of issues.

Why is the listener's view not heard?
It was. We put to Nick Griffin some of the texts we received including sentiments as tough as "you're a disgrace" and "how do you sleep at night?".

Debbie Randle's handling of the interview was extremely rigorous and the bulk of the tough questions she asked were inspired by, or directly quoted, listeners themselves.

But it's offensive to many others and ethnic minorities?
I accept for many others this is true. But others will understand that one of purposes of journalism in a democratic society is to explore and question - raising at times subjects some may find distasteful or shocking.

Rod McKenzie is editor of Newsbeat and 1Xtra News.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    Rod, I am by no means or you biggest but [shock ! horror ! probe !] I think this is an excellent posting and I agree with it 100%. Too many students have been denied the chance to debate with those holding extreme views and their critical faculties and powers of reasoning have been blunted as a result.

    The danger with this is that because they don't HAVE to argue with these people very soon they will NOT BE ABLE to win an argument with them as they will be out of practice - and if one cannot win a debate by words, then I'm afraid fisticuffs are not far behind.

  • Comment number 2.

    "Over time, it's evident from following our listeners that the party touches a nerve of support or interest" - This has been my belief for a long time. Whilst I admit that it is possible that I know the 'wrong' sort of people, the BNP express in public views on certain issues that very many people of my acquaintance express only in private due to fear of retaliatory action from the police and other authorities. To have this sort of debate in public is, in a my view, a big step forward.

  • Comment number 3.

    'This may surprise you, but a great many texts we received yesterday were broadly supportive of the BNP.'

    It doesn't suprise me at all, it may surpise you Mr McKenzie, that BNP members are frequently encouraged to participate in in letter writing/e-mail campaigns to various organisations, in support of the BNP. orchestrated from their website.

    Whilst I'm sure part of the positive feeback you received was genuine, much of it will have been repeat texts/e-mails from the same hardcore group of members.

    If you want to know exaxtly how the BNP operate have a good long read of their website, including the comments from members, they're not hiding anything, various campaigns to increase the perceived popularity of the BNP are frequently discussed.

    In fairrness a lot of the anti-bnp messages you received are likely to gave been organisedby the Anti-Fascists and other organisation.

    I think my point is that its a little naive to take the response generated by the BNPs appeareance on newsbeat at face value.

    So, its a little a naive to take any feedback you receive at face value.

  • Comment number 4.

    "Debbie Randle's handling of the interview was extremely rigorous and the bulk of the tough questions she asked were inspired by, or directly quoted, listeners themselves."

    I trust that the BBC's new found "toughness" will extend across all parties and will sound an end to the sycophantic approach that many of the Corporation's staff have taken during the last several years. I would suggest that the BBC, more than any other media outlet, have been largely responsible for watered down, bland, and passionless approach to politics that has inspired three political parties with not a jot of a difference between them.

    As for the BNP then if they inspire people to anger, to wanting if not demanding change, to wanting to make those changes, to wanting a truly impartial and neutral BBC, then that is what it must take. What do we want in Britain? A party that is hard on the surface but will not do anything when it gets to power, or a party that can afford to give an unpalatable point of view and stir our passions because they will never get to power? If we never saw New Labour, Tory Party, or the Lib Dems again would we actually miss them?

    Who will benefit if the BNP is dismissed from the scene?

  • Comment number 5.

    I was actually very surprised at the honesty of the man. When asked "would you be happy if one of your children brought home a non british boyfriend/girlfriend?" He actually answered truthfully.

    I've never heard another politician, ever. be so honest when asked a controversial question! Your average politician dodges when answering uncomfortable questions. This man was brutally honest.

  • Comment number 6.

    Also, Mr Griffin stated when asked if a black person could join the BNP that currently they can't. He likened it to the association of Black Police officers, which you can't join if you're white. Does this Police association get called racist??

    I'm not a racist or anywhere near one, members of my family are not "indigenous British", however this to me is also racism but against white people, which seems to be allowed in this country.

  • Comment number 7.

    I actually heard the interview and I thought that Griffin made some good points (and some I disagreed with) - does this mean I am going to vote for the BNP? No.

    What concerns me more than the BNP is the fact that there are many people out there who want to ban a legal party from being able to communicate with the voters simply because they don't agree with the parties message.

    An important part of our country is freedom to express our views and I find those people who try to supress this freedom to be far more dangerous than the BNP. The BNP are party that belongs on the fringe of UK politics and are only getting support because they feel free to address subjects that the mainstream parties are afraid to address for fear of being called racist.

  • Comment number 8.

    #1

    You are right in what you say. All that I know of this party is what the papers hysterically report about them.

  • Comment number 9.

    Problem with this country is that the Left wing is trying to ban anyone who disagrees with them from having an opinion. The irony is they call the BNP fascists and not to be trusted, but the only ones I can see stopping freedom and open discussions is the Looney Left.
    Freedom to all I say, open discussions and view points, then we can all go and vote in the privacy of the ballot box for who EVER WE CHOOSE !!!

  • Comment number 10.

    To be fair ROD

    What Nick Griffen says in public is never a problem. Its what he doesn't say that worries people.

    You should of asked , given the BNPs attitude to muslims which is openly displayed on their website, what would the BNP actually do with the muslim population if they came to power?

    Is Nick Griffen so politically illiterate that he actually believes that anybody who opposes the BNP must be a 'communist party member' (another view which i assume must be official as its frequently repeated in their website articles?

    What are Mr Griffens views on the BNP london assembly member who was recently suspended and made to attend an ethics course after being caught disseminating untrue stories about knife crime?

    These, mr mckenzie are tough questions on BNP policy, the views of their members and the activities of their political representatives.

    They were also questions that were not asked.

  • Comment number 11.

    Thanks for standing up to the left-wing and letting us, the public, decide what we want to listen to (or not), believe (or not) and vote for (or not). I have no time for the BNP but I believe that, as a legal legitimate party, they should be allowed to air their views. Maybe the left-wing parties should try doing the same rather than spending their time rubbishing everyone they don't agree with.

  • Comment number 12.

    11. At 1:48pm on 01 Oct 2009, matt_uk01 wrote:
    Thanks for standing up to the left-wing and letting us, the public, decide what we want to listen to (or not), believe (or not) and vote for (or not). I have no time for the BNP but I believe that, as a legal legitimate party, they should be allowed to air their views. Maybe the left-wing parties should try doing the same rather than spending their time rubbishing everyone they don't agree with.


    --------------

    The only name calling on this strand is being directed at the 'looney lefties', not by them.

  • Comment number 13.

    Oh, and Rod?

    Part of the BNP agenda if they should come to power is (i'm paraphrasing but the actual sentiment is clearly expressed in BNP literature) 'Non-ethnic British will be strongly encouraged to return to their countries of origin.'

    I think it would have been relevant to ask them what means of 'strong encouragement' they have in mind. (British ethnic origin is defined by the BNP as people of celtic, anglosaxon ,norse or irish ancestry- ie. white. How they classify those of mixed origins eg. celtic/caribbean is not made clear.

  • Comment number 14.

    What never ceases to amaze me is that whenever the BNP or even EDL (English Defence League) try to hold a meeting or a rally they are invariably attacked by a mob from the UAF ( United Against Fascism ). This organisation is supported by all of the main political parties. Even when after being asked not to hold a rally in Luton they cancelled their rally an anti-fascist mob turned up and attacked the police instead.

    The denial of free speech is fascism at it’s most repugnant and the insidious increase of political correctness control foisted upon us daily is similar to Hitler’s tactics in the thirties. We have even stooped to banning certain Enid Blyton’s children’s books. We cannot as a society act in such a way and then have the audacity to call the BNP fascists

  • Comment number 15.

    In reply to U14039534

    I think you will find that the assisted repatriation idea was in fact part of a scheme firt introduced by labour when they were last in ofice.

  • Comment number 16.

    Members of my family died fighting against the nazis in WW2 but they were not fighting so that the left wing of the Labour party could decide who was entitled to free speech and who wasn't. The BNP are not the nazi party, though their policies are not what I would vote for and as a legitimate political party, they have every right to make their views known, or is it illegal to hold views that differ from the Labour/ communist party. If as I suspect most people find their policies unappealing,they will not vote for them, but they have a right to be heard.

  • Comment number 17.

    At 2:52pm on 01 Oct 2009, igiveup2 wrote:

    What never ceases to amaze me is that whenever the BNP or even EDL (English Defence League) try to hold a meeting or a rally they are invariably attacked by a mob from the UAF ( United Against Fascism ). This organisation is supported by all of the main political parties. Even when after being asked not to hold a rally in Luton they cancelled their rally an anti-fascist mob turned up and attacked the police instead.

    ------------------------

    Nice try, but i live in birmingham & witnessed the English Defence League 'demonstration. Fair play, the anti-fascists did not behave well.

    Compared to the EDL howling racist abusde and violent threst every time they saw a women ibn a burkha, even if she was with young children, Screaming racists abuse at groups of young black men, obviously hoping for (but not getting a violent reaction).

    And if you've seen any video footage you will be fully aware that the attacks on police were carried out almost exclusively by the EDL, as backed up by the police statement.

    The anti-fascists can behave like thugs & i have no time for them.

    The EDL however are a bunch violent thugs with links to various Football Hooligan 'firms' (which is why they only march when the domestic calendar has gap - the last one was on the same day as England game).

    Finally its iinetresting to see them defended here, because Nick Griffen has made it explicitly clear that he will not tolerate BNP members being associated with the English Defence League. so he would have been embarassed by the number of EDL members wearing excalibur merchandise on the Birmingham march. (excalibur is the BNPas merchandising arm, sellin t-shirts with various witrty slogans such as 'it cool to be white' and 'agianst immigtration - don't unpack, you're going back'.

  • Comment number 18.

    I suprise UAF don't try and ban themselves

  • Comment number 19.

    15. At 2:57pm on 01 Oct 2009, igiveup2 wrote:
    In reply to U14039534

    I think you will find that the assisted repatriation idea was in fact part of a scheme firt introduced by labour when they were last in ofice.

    ----
    I think you'll find the labour scheme was aimed at illegal immigrants whereas the BNP policy is also aimed at non-whites whose famillies have been here for generations.

    Or do you deny that the BNP routinely referes to all non-whites as 'immigrants' regardless of how many generations the famillies have been here?

  • Comment number 20.

    "DitkosQuestion wrote:
    To be fair ROD

    What Nick Griffen says in public is never a problem. Its what he doesn't say that worries people."

    I would disagree here and would argue the opposite, because the BNP get invited to present their views so rarely they always play the defensive when asked about the negative side of the party (it happened yesterday). If we allowed the BNP into the open and allowed them to provide information about all their policies they would not be able to hide the negative side as easily.

    "You should of asked , given the BNPs attitude to muslims which is openly displayed on their website, what would the BNP actually do with the muslim population if they came to power?"

    I would assume that such questions might be raised in Question Time, however Griffin dodged such questions yesterday by suggesting that such topics would only be brought up if the interview raised them and he then went on to talk about the BNP's other policies.

    "Is Nick Griffen so politically illiterate that he actually believes that anybody who opposes the BNP must be a 'communist party member' (another view which i assume must be official as its frequently repeated in their website articles?"

    Well there is a difference between opposing the BNP and wanting them banned totally. I would say that politically I oppose the Labour party but they are a legal party with political support in this country and their views should be heard. The same is true of the BNP - let them speak and let the voters decide.

    Anyone who wants to ban the BNP for their political views would best be served taking a long look in the mirror. Wanting to ban someone from working in certain jobs because of their membership of a legal political party sounds pretty extreme to me - but that is something that is being considered!

    "What are Mr Griffens views on the BNP london assembly member who was recently suspended and made to attend an ethics course after being caught disseminating untrue stories about knife crime?"

    I haven't heard of the London assembly member being suspended after spreading untrue stories on knife crime, however it seems rather heavy handed when we have a Labour PM who has being spread untrue stories concerning "Tory cuts vs Labour Investment" and HE is still in a job.

    Perhaps the BNP do have a case when they claim unfair treatment ;-)

  • Comment number 21.

    The BBC are being too politically correct in allowing a greater platform for this minority and persecuted BNP group. ;)

  • Comment number 22.


    U14049534

    I think you'll find the labour scheme was aimed at illegal immigrants whereas the BNP policy is also aimed at non-whites whose famillies have been here for generations.

    Or do you deny that the BNP routinely referes to all non-whites as 'immigrants' regardless of how many generations the famillies have been here?

    When Labour were last in power i.e. Before thatcher we did not have an illegal immigrant problem, we were not signed up to even allow asylum seekers entry. It was this government who signed us up to this mess includind political correctness and the rediculous " Human Rights Act " which has become a criminals, illegal imigrants and travellers get out from natural justice.



  • Comment number 23.

    goldCaesar

    Perhaps you should live in Luton when the EDL never even showed up for a rally you would see then where the trouble comes from. I saw on the new a few weeks ago the BNP leader being pelted with eggs whist being peacfully interviewed outside parlement.

    The EDL actualy have ethnics in their membership try looking at their website

  • Comment number 24.

    23. At 3:50pm on 01 Oct 2009, igiveup2 wrote:
    goldCaesar

    Perhaps you should live in Luton when the EDL never even showed up for a rally you would see then where the trouble comes from. I saw on the new a few weeks ago the BNP leader being pelted with eggs whist being peacfully interviewed outside parlement.

    The EDL actualy have ethnics in their membership try looking at their website

    -------------

    1.As I said I live in birmingham you can ask me or any other ressident where the trouble came from because it was very widely witnessed, and not second hand from video footage.

    2.Whats an 'ethnic?'

    I prresume someone who isn't white. Do these loyal non-white EDL members no that they are referred to in such glowing terms as 'ethnics'.

    Besides unintelligent violent thugs come in all shades and religions, it doesn't somehow magically sanitise the violence of the EDL.

  • Comment number 25.

    I agree with U14049534, #13. I think the BNP should explain exactly how they intend to make repatriation work. The hint of coercion worries me most.

    I think that it is inevitable that there will be repatriation (or resettlement). I believe this to be the case mainly because it will be welcomed by many immigrants to the UK and not just first generation, recent immigrants but by second and third generation. It also will be welcomed by many of those native to the UK (if there is such a thing). However this will not happen unless it is probably financed with those being repatriated and the host country being properly financed.

    Nobody should be forced (unless they are here illegally) to go and no host country should be expected (nor will accept, I am sure) another ghetto on their territory. I would certainly not vote for a political party that deports people for no other reason than their ethnic background.

    However, I believe many immigrants aspire to return to their country of origin or their ancestors’ origin. This is arguably demonstrated by some immigrants to the UK who make a decent amount of money and actually do return to their country of origin to retire.

    At the moment we deny any chance of financed and organised repatriation. I believe that this matter should be seriously considered by the next government in power. I think this will result in a better situation in the UK and for those who take up the scheme.

  • Comment number 26.

    "But others will understand that one of purposes of journalism in a democratic society is to explore and question"

    So why do you not "explore and question" government motives for military adventures? The implicit BBC assumption is that they are benign and altruistic. The effective BBC view seems to be that questioning official government reasons would be biased.

    These lofty goals that BBC journalists fire off are actually only applied in particular circumstances. "Explore and question" applies to enemies, not allies (or the home government) whereas being "Unbiased/impartial" applies to allies, but not enemies.

  • Comment number 27.

    Fascist and Racist are now overused words used against anyone who has an opinion on something that some others might not agree with.

    I have heard interviews with many reasonable people who have sensible views on immigration being called racist when they were only pointing out the numbers of illegal immigrants entering the country.

    It is imperative that the BNP should be heard then people can make up their own minds what they are really all about. The British people can sometimes be stubborn and if someone tries to ban something they will react in support of the banned.

    We have nothing to fear from the BNP though some politicians may feel they have so of course as they are a legal party they have the same right as everyone else to try to get their message across.

    If they are the bogeymen then we will soon find out.

  • Comment number 28.

    I was apalled by Griffins comments, he claims the BNP are no longer racist but his comments clearly demonstrate they are.

  • Comment number 29.

    wether you like them or loathe them, the BNP are a legitimate political party and so MUST be allowed access to the same platforms as all the others.

    while I think the BNP take it too far, and I would never vote for them, I can see why some people consider it, it is time we started thinking about the people of this country

    and, I make no distinction about colour - I used to know a "coloured gentleman" who tried to join the national front - he was stunned that they wouldn't admit him as he agreed with almost all of their policies
    my immigration policies would apply to Canadians and Australians just as much as anyone else

    so, not the BNP - too extreme - but UKIP is starting to appeal, because NONE of the mainstream parties will listen

  • Comment number 30.

    These are the things that really annoy a vast swathe of the public
    Do asylum seekers get free dentistry: – YES
    Do they get free accommodation: – YES
    Do they get free food: - YES
    Do they get free medical attention: - Yes
    Do they get some financial benefits: - YES
    Did they apply for asylum in any other country like France: - NO
    Are their actions a breach of international asylum law: - YES
    And is this funded by the taxpayer. The same tax payer who cannot get a free dentist or has been on the local housing list for years
    I understand that recently in Birmingham residents were moved out of a large block of flats as they were considered unfit to reside in and too expensive to repair. However once they became empty they were all totally renovated for (you’ve guessed it) asylum seekers. No wonder the do-gooders want to silence Mr Griffin
    Recently I required emergency dental treatment yet even though I had paid into the system for 50years and I am a pensioner when I finally found a dentist I had to pay £48 for an extraction. You think that that is fair well I don’t and neither to most of the British public
    Lets just stop and think what we are doing for a moment
    we will remove the rose tinted specs and think about whom we are allowing into our society.
    In the early 1960s I was in Kingston Jamaica, It was two days after Jamaica got its independence. As an Englishman all made me very welcome.
    I returned to Jamaica some 18 months later and it was a very dangerous place. The so-called democratic elections of a prime minister called if I remember correctly Mr Manley resulted in no less than 400 murders.
    In Kenya (thought to be the most stable country in Africa) local elections resulted in gangs hacking each other to pieces with machetes and burning women and children alive as they took shelter in church halls very recently
    I was an Afghan I would have a legal right not only to beat and starve her but also to rape her at will
    And I could also have my daughters or sisters murdered if the were deemed to dishonour me.
    Zimbabwe is beyond description and society there is non-existent
    Even in South Africa people were having petrol soaked tyre’s put round their necks and set alight.
    I first went to the beautiful island of Fiji in the 1960 and there were a few emigrants their from the Indian subcontinent. By the late 1990s they had taken over causing a civil uprising.
    When did the last non-Muslim suicide bomber launch an attack in Britain?
    I could go on and on but the do-gooders have this fantasy that the people they let in here are all very nice and civilised. Has it ever occurred to them that some may be trying to escape retribution for their despicable deeds they committed in their own land and far from being innocent victims they just happened to be on the losing side.
    One of our most famous international war correspondents John Simpson met an extremely dangerous man in Afghanistan who had committed terrible crime, he was known as the “Human Dog” by way of his vicious acts. This “human Dog” has been identified and filmed living in London on benefits. Try reading his books they contain photos of him taken in London
    However we seem willing to accept immigrants from these countries with no way of knowing if they were the persecuted or the persecutors. The do-gooder liberal mindset is that all religions and races can live together in harmony. If such a scenario were true wars would not exist. We have witnessed over the last decade or two civil uprisings in not just the Middle East but in Tibet, China and Ceylon as well as Eastern Europe and the crumbling USSR. Most of these conflicts are orchestrated on religious or tribal grounds
    Accusing those who speak out against unrestricted immigration and publicly funded asylum of being nazi or racists is simply the cat calling one expects from those who find opposing views difficult to undermine. A harmonious society cannot exclude the interests of the indigenous population in favour of minority interests. The police stood by and allowed Abu Hansa to preach his hatred unopposed outside Finsbury Mosque yet the establishment now ban marches that oppose this type of hatred. I am afraid I am digressing here though the point raised is a valid one. The fact remains however that immigration is becoming a cause of significant anger and unrest. The majority feel that Britain has become a soft touch by way of its benefit system. If people wish to immigrate to the UK there is nothing to stop them from applying from anywhere in the world, even from France but they choose instead to sneak across the channel and try to claim bogus asylum. They are certainly not going to be persecuted for their politics in France. The only difference between France and Britain for asylum seekers is the welfare state.
    I am not a BNP or EDL member or supporter but as with a growing number I am utterly fed up with everyone being afraid to discuss immigration. Under international asylum law you are obliged to seek asylum in the first country you come to when leaving your own. Regardless of whether or not the UK under Labour decides to ignore international law or not it is still the LAW. That means that these people are illegal immigrants. It is estimated that approximately 100,000 illegal immigrants are at present in this country, which the government are afraid to deport in case it offends their human rights.
















    All of the above is TRUE and these are the societies we are allowing into our mists
    By the way on the TV news last night it said that a new law has just been passed to try to prevent the estimated 1000 per year forced arranged marriages that young
    Asian girls from Britain are forced into. That is about twenty a week, forced marriage is illegal in Britain. Some of these ethnic minorities wish to live in our country but have NO intention of obeying our laws and we are reduced to make even more laws to try to prevent them abusing young women in today’s Britain

    Now I will ask a question.
    If you allow immigration from these strife ridden nations how do you know that the immigrants are not the perpetrators of these despicable acts? you don’t.
    One of our most famous international war correspondents John Simpson met an extremely dangerous man in Afghanistan who had committed terrible crime, he was known as the “Human Dog” by way of his vicious acts. This “human Dog” has been identified and filmed living in London on benefits.
    Different cultures throughout the world have very different social values and those values do not for the most part change simply by emigrating. We do not simply import people we import cultures too. Furthermore there are members of British society who have paid into the state by way of taxes and NI contributions all of their working lives. And yes they do not get free dentistry or free accommodation or free food.
    Under international asylum law you are obliged to seek asylum in the first country you come to when leaving your own. Regardless of whether or not the UK under Labour decides to ignore international law or not it is still the LAW. That means that these people are illegal immigrants. It is estimated that approximately 100,000 illegal immigrants are at present in this country, which the government are afraid to deport them in case it offends their human rights. My point regarding Kenya ect is that though you may wish to bring Myra Handily as an example of criminals in the UK such has no comparison to the wholesale slaughter by thousands of Kenyans on their fellow countrymen simply because their side lost the election. Similarly we do not get 400 politically motivated murders at election time as happened in Jamaica. The Law in Afghanistan has recently been changed to make it legal for husbands to starve or rape their wives if they do not allow sex at least once every 4 days. These are the cultural differences we are allowing into Britain today.
    The British taxpayer has had to build and staff detention centres for these illegal immigrants so that we can process their applications to stay and the thank us by burning them to the ground. We have at the moment 2.500,000 unemployed, I wonder how many we would have if all the emigrants from Europe went home. The majority of the British do not want them here.
    My concerns are that regardless of the growing anger by a large portion of the population reference the recent massive increase in immigration to the UK public discussion about it is suppressed for fear of being deemed a racist
    The ordinary man in the street is not fooled by platitudes from the establishment and they know that asylum seekers are invariably bogus under international law and are financed by the taxpayer. Any attempt to gloss over this truth fools no one and does nothing to placate the disenfranchised but serves to anger them even more. My own experience outlined earlier regarding dentistry happens to British subjects every day and you can see on TV queues of people hoping to register with an NHS dentist whose treatment is not free even for OAPs. Fortunately the small cost to me was an irrelevance but to some it would be a significant expense. Do you honestly expect them to be happy about this state of affairs, how can you possibly justify it to someone with toothache who has paid contribution for years
    Having travelled extensively throughout the late 1950s and into the1960s I was struck by the fact that as colonial powers withdrew from their respective colonies or were ejected by their indigenous populations so these nations erupted into civil wars. Uganda, India, Mozambique. Rhodesia and Ceylon. Others like Jamaica became increasingly lawless but have now settled down. Such lawlessness and civil conflict still exists in many African nations like Somalia and has I believe returned yet again to Uganda
    However we seem willing to accept immigrants from these countries with no way of knowing if they were the persecuted or the persecutors. The do-gooder liberal mindset is that all religions and races can live together in harmony. If such a scenario were true wars would not exist. We have witnessed over the last decade or two civil uprisings in not just the Middle East but in Tibet, China and Ceylon as well as Eastern Europe and the crumbling USSR. Most of these conflicts are orchestrated on religious or tribal grounds this issue is not going to go away and just as an afterthought you may like to consider this.
    The most vociferous complainer about the immigration into the UK who spoke to my wife and I in Morrison’s was in fact a charming 66 year old from Trinidad an island I have visited on many occasions and yes she was black, she had arrived here in 1964


  • Comment number 31.

    Is it true that Nick Griffin is going to have a walk on part in Eastenders?

  • Comment number 32.

    The issue is not that the BNP were given open airtime its that the liberal alternative opinion was not presented equally with their other perspective. When Nick Griffin will be on Question Time Jack Straw, Justice Minister, will be beside him to present the reasoning as to why Griffin's views are thought of as extreme and why the other parties don't hold them. This will be balanced. On radio 1, this one off interview with Griffin shines a spotlight on the BNP without presenting the other parties similarly. Giving him space to articulate his views on a music radio station to people who are not choosing to engage in politics allows him to put his views to people who may not otherwise engage in politics and so this may be the only view on the subject they hear. Now you have the responsibility to create the debate on newsbeat which interviewing Griffin has begun, on the issues he raised; corporal punishment, the value of immigration to Britian, and capital punishment. More fundamentally though you are asking how young people want politics, your presenting the very initial ethical questions of policy. This is very important to take responsibility for.

    Christine
    Newcastle

  • Comment number 33.

    2 pauldberry
    "Whilst I admit that it is possible that I know the 'wrong' sort of people, the BNP express in public views on certain issues that very many people of my acquaintance express only in private due to fear of retaliatory action from the police and other authorities."

    This is interesting because I have long believed that the recent trend for compulsory political correctness has not done away with racism, but simply pushed it deep into the hidden recesses of people's minds.

    Life was easier when when you could spot the racists easily by their words and deeds. Now they can vote secretly for BNP and publicly pretend to think otherwise. Dangerous.

  • Comment number 34.

    3 goldcaesar
    "BNP members are frequently encouraged to participate in in letter writing/e-mail campaigns to various organisations, in support of the BNP."


    You have hit upon an interesting point. As a minority party they are trying very hard to build up support, and seem to be using all the technology available.
    Active support for mainstream parties has declined massively, leaving no real counter-offensive against the BNP's vile policies.

    IMO the more airtime scrutiny they get, the more people will see them as the wrong option. The racists will always stick with them, but the floating voters who are fed up with the aminstream parties need to see the BNP revealed for what it is. Otherwise it's own propaganda will win through sheer laziness of other parties.

  • Comment number 35.

    #30

    You've just about hit the nail on the head there with many of your comments.

    I think the main parties need to realise that the reason Nick Griffin and the BNP are getting so much exposure at the moment is because the British People (whatever colour they are) are FED Up with paying taxes to support hundreds of thousands of immigrants who come here for the free living.

    I've got no problem with helping a genuine political refugee but these so called asylum seekers should be claiming asylum in the first safe country they come to and this isn't happening.

    If they've got no right to be here, they should be flown immediately back. Let them appeal the decision from their own country. That's what Australia do!

  • Comment number 36.

    30 igiveup2
    "Accusing those who speak out against unrestricted immigration and publicly funded asylum of being nazi or racists is simply the cat calling one expects from those who find opposing views difficult to undermine."


    Yuo seem to have fallen into the classic trap of finding a few highly emotive issues which have been insufficiently addresses by the mainstream parties, and seeing the solution as a racist party which will end all immigration and start repatriating those here legally.

    You have gone from one extreme to the other, and this where the BNPs strength is - playing the emotive issues.

    This is why it is important that they are put on the spot with tough questions ... to reveal how far beyond the solutions to Joe Public's problems they will go.

  • Comment number 37.

    Happyneet - I've just looked at the constitution for the National Black Police Assocition on their website. As far as I can see, nowhere in the constitution does it state that anyone is specifically excluded from membership - indeed, it does state that their aims are "to promote good race relations and equality of opportunity within the police services of the United Kingdom and the wider community" and to exclude anyone from membership would clearly go against this.

    They do have full members and associate members, but the definition of full members is someone who can identify with the cause on a personal level - to quote from the Merseyside BPA website, "Full members must be able to satisfy our constitutional definition of ‘black’. Contrary to popular believe this does not mean you must be must be black as commonly understood, but rather have the ‘common experience and determination’ of people who are, because it is they that are typically far more likely historically and currently, to be on the receiving end of racism. Indeed we have a number of white full members, one of whom is currently an MBPA Executive Committee member. " In that respect, it's no different from a youth organisation within a political party which only allows full membership of people under a certain age but with which those older can associate. Indeed, the definition could extend to someone from Poland working in the UK, to a white Muslim, or even to a Scot working in England.

  • Comment number 38.

    No harm in interviewing them. Only very stupid, guillible people will vote for them.

  • Comment number 39.

    keithmlegg, thank you for the clarification. I was quoting directly from what I heard Nick Griffin say on Newsbeat. He clearly needs to do more research!

  • Comment number 40.

    #30

    I'm not a BNP supporter either, but that was a spot-on explanation of why a lot of people are. I have thought for many years that it's the right-on, PC council committees and quangos that are trying to force-feed 'multiculturalism' to a bewildered public who are responsible for the popularity of the BNP - not racists. It's not about race.

  • Comment number 41.

    the BNP are a pack of slugs, but should still be given air time so that they can be exposed for the poisonous litle cretins that they are

  • Comment number 42.

    It matters little what pseudo-intellectual arguments are put forward by respondents to this site and other sites. What matters is the growing support for the BNP, whether respondents like it or not. It is irrelevant what the BNP will or wont do with Muslims, with illegals, with mixed-marriages, with the EU, with Family Law, with taxation. What matters - all that matters - is that more and more people are sick to the back teeth of the parasitic mainstream Westminster parties and are seeking a new way forward. They want someone, anyone, to take up the cudgels on their behalf. The BNP appear to offer this. That's the B-all and End-all of it. Whatever else you say is meaningless.

  • Comment number 43.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 44.

    #42 you have a fair point. The mainstream parties have to start listening to the British people regarding immigration or the BNP are going to get more and more exposure as this is one of the main points on their agenda.

    I would like to hear a clear and orderly debate between the BNP and the other parties because 1, I would like to hear what other party views are regarding immigration and the EU and 2, I would like to hear more about the other things the BNP would do if they came to power, although extremely unlikely.

    to quote #42 "They want someone, anyone, to take up the cudgels on their behalf" this is very true because at the moment, nobody seems to be listening to what we want, which is why BNP, unsavoury as they are, are being lifted to the forefront as they will say the things that everyone else is scared to.

  • Comment number 45.

    42. At 1:43pm on 02 Oct 2009, meltonmark wrote:
    It matters little what pseudo-intellectual arguments are put forward by respondents to this site and other sites. What matters is the growing support for the BNP, whether respondents like it or not. It is irrelevant what the BNP will or wont do with Muslims, with illegals, with mixed-marriages, with the EU, with Family Law, with taxation. What matters - all that matters - is that more and more people are sick to the back teeth of the parasitic mainstream Westminster parties and are seeking a new way forward. They want someone, anyone, to take up the cudgels on their behalf. The BNP appear to offer this. That's the B-all and End-all of it. Whatever else you say is meaningless.

    -----------


    Sick of the mainstream we may be, but I and many others would have to have our fundamental principles somehow wiped from our minds and our IQs reduced before we could eveer except the BNP in charge of the country.

    Apaert from their plans to develop an apartheid system in the UK (what else do you call it when whites get priority) that would see us face the same kind of boycotts South Africa did, the BNP have no:

    Foreign policy
    Economic policy,
    Education policy

    And they can't seem to see that their policy of forcing the unemployed to work for beenefits will inevitably removed paid work from private contractors, creating a viscous circle of unemployment.

    They're 'send them back' policy would clearly destroty the NHS over night.

    They don't seem to understand that government is about more than an immigration policy which means that they completely lack any kind of political credibility.

    I read the BNP website nearly everyday (its a hobby & reminds me who's best) and I have never seen a single policy that wasn't described in purely black & white terms, ignoring the inconvieniant greys or a simplistic attempt to create something out of thin air.

    Given the very limited areas of policy they seem to have made a provision for , they come accross less as a political party, and more of a platform for people to howl about immigration.


  • Comment number 46.

    42. At 1:43pm on 02 Oct 2009, meltonmark wrote:
    It matters little what pseudo-intellectual arguments are put forward by respondents to this site and other sites. What matters is the growing support for the BNP, whether respondents like it or not. It is irrelevant what the BNP will or wont do with Muslims, with illegals, with mixed-marriages, with the EU, with Family Law, with taxation. What matters - all that matters - is that more and more people are sick to the back teeth of the parasitic mainstream Westminster parties and are seeking a new way forward. They want someone, anyone, to take up the cudgels on their behalf. The BNP appear to offer this. That's the B-all and End-all of it. Whatever else you say is meaningless.

    -----

    Thats us told then.

    Quick fact check for you.

    The BNP received slightly less than 1 millionm votes natinally in the Euro-election. They,amy as you say be gathering support but thats still less than 1/40th of the population showing active support fior the BNP.

    Secondly they won their european parliament seats, not by winning the poll but by coming 4th & 5th reapectively, if memory serves correctly.

    No matter how loud the members shout, no matter how many letters you write or how you inundate chat rooms and opinion pages, the actual statistics show that BNP support is tiny.

  • Comment number 47.

    Just to clarify, when i say 1/40th of the population voted BNP i've actually been rather generous, as i've discounted 20 million off the 60 million population of Britain as too young, too in prison or unable to vote for other reasons. Thats actually much too high.

  • Comment number 48.

    As a younger man I travelled the world extensively visiting all five continents and numerous countries and islands. My opinions for what they are worth are not based on liberal political theory but on my knowledge and experience of seeing other cultures first hand. Furthermore I am not a racist in any way having been a Trade Union convener I have represented members of all races both at factory level and at tribunals.

    It is a fact that under international asylum laws seekers of asylum MUST apply for asylum in the first country they arrive at when leaving their homeland. Any deviation from this law nullifies their asylum claim as asylum is only granted to those who face physical persecution for their politics or religion. Some 99.9% of those who claim asylum in the UK have crossed countries or even continents with the sole aim of getting to Britain thereby rendering their asylum claim bogus. There can only be one realistic reason why Britain is the chosen destination and that is our generous welfare state, to deny this fact is both ridiculous and disingenuous.

    Immigration is a different matter and this problem was caused by none other than the labour government who threw open our borders to the entire European Union thereby allowing a massive influx of Eastern Europeans.
    Such stupidity has thrown most of our front line services into great difficulty and has stretched their recourses regarding the provision of interpreters in schools, police stations and the NHS.

    The strains on our education system in some areas caused by the language difficulties are detrimental to all the children, as it must slow progress when half a class cannot speak our language. As a nation our tolerance is being stretched to breaking where we are constantly banned from saying thinking or participating in an ever-growing list of thing that might upset some ethnic religious community to whom we have allowed to live in our land.

    Any who cannot foresee the growing tensions within our society must be either blind or stupid. Politicians and do-gooders who try to down play or gloss over these issues are fooling only themselves and unless the voice of the disenfranchised indigenous population is heard we could easily see the UK descending into anarchy with or without the BNP

  • Comment number 49.

    48. At 3:48pm on 02 Oct 2009, igiveup2 wrote:
    "immigration is a different matter and this problem was caused by none other than the labour government who threw open our borders to the entire European Union thereby allowing a massive influx of Eastern Europeans"

    classic. for all your 'travels' that comment is pretty narrow-minded. employers employee eastern europeans because they value the work more. almost all low-paid jobs are now done by eastern europeans because quite frankly, brits were doing a disastrous job. the welfare state has led to people failing to appreciate their work.

    on my gap year, i worked in several offices (granted no foreigners there) and several cafes (all foreigners) but what i did come across was a enormous difference in attitudes and work ethic. in the office, my british counterparts choose to not go to work - simply because they can (either because they have 'flu' or more 'back ache' or aliens attacked their dog. well, employers know that not only will an eastern european show up to work, but they will show up on time, and more often than not do the job properly. in the cafe, my eastern european colleagues were eager (but miserable - they didn't smile haha) but they did the job properly, and effeciently.

    we only have ourselves to blame. if a brit can show on his CV, and from his references that he doesn't miss days off work, he achieves what his employer whats him to achieve. he/she will get the job.

    further to that, the BNP is taking a step back in time. i thought britain was moving in the right direction: race and nationality as important as eye colour. the bbc broadcasting racist nonsense is simply legitimising the racist views of the fascists who vote for them.

  • Comment number 50.

    RomeStu

    #36

    Quote “You seem to have fallen into the classic trap of finding a few highly emotive issues which have been insufficiently addresses by the mainstream parties, and seeing the solution as a racist party which will end all immigration and start repatriating those here legally.

    You have gone from one extreme to the other, and this where the BNPs strength is - playing the emotive issues.

    This is why it is important that they are put on the spot with tough questions ... to reveal how far beyond the solutions to Joe Public's problems they will go.” unquote

    The issues I have raised are highly emotive but they affect vast swathes of the British electorate and they are becoming increasingly disenchanted. Given a choice between the status quo, which is deteriorating daily, and the claims of the BNP that they will put a stop to immigration/asylum increasing numbers are turning to the extreme right.

    Let me give an example of the biased treatment that has been in action in the UK for at least twenty years. My mother-in-law was 82 when she died, she was widowed in the fifties and left to bring up 4 children. Her council house in which she had resided for almost 40 years had received almost no maintenance and was in a pretty poor state, I did some jobs for her myself. After her death the council completely renovated the property from top to bottom and allocated it to some Vietnamese boat people who at the earliest opportunity sold it on for a large profit. The question needs to be asked why was the house allocated to boat people when I know for a fact the local housing list had hundreds of locals waiting for accommodation? Why do councils repair and modernise homes for immigrants whilst British tenants are left to live in squalor? The tough questions do not need asking of the BNP but of the stupid do-gooders we have had in as governments.

    As for the unbelievably foolish and biased PC we have foisted upon us you couldn’t make it up. Our nation is made up of the English Irish Scotch and Welsh,
    However it is ok to call the scotch Jock’s the Welsh Taffy’s the Irish Paddy’s, Londoners cockneys, Liverpudlians Scouser’s but if you call an immigrant from Pakistan a Paki you can be arrested. If that is not racist discrimination I don’t know what is.

    The British people are VERY fed-up and the three main political parties are all afraid to make a decisive move to remedy this outrage so it’s no good trying to stifle the BNP as they appear to be the only party listening


    RomeStu

    #36

    Quote “You seem to have fallen into the classic trap of finding a few highly emotive issues which have been insufficiently addresses by the mainstream parties, and seeing the solution as a racist party which will end all immigration and start repatriating those here legally.

    You have gone from one extreme to the other, and this where the BNPs strength is - playing the emotive issues.

    This is why it is important that they are put on the spot with tough questions ... to reveal how far beyond the solutions to Joe Public's problems they will go.” unquote

    The issues I have raised are highly emotive but they affect vast swathes of the British electorate and they are becoming increasingly disenchanted. Given a choice between the status quo, which is deteriorating daily, and the claims of the BNP that they will put a stop to immigration/asylum increasing numbers are turning to the extreme right.

    Let me give an example of the biased treatment that has been in action in the UK for at least twenty years. My mother-in-law was 82 when she died, she was widowed in the fifties and left to bring up 4 children. Her council house in which she had resided for almost 40 years had received almost no maintenance and was in a pretty poor state, I did some jobs for her myself. After her death the council completely renovated the property from top to bottom and allocated it to some Vietnamese boat people who at the earliest opportunity sold it on for a large profit. The question needs to be asked why was the house allocated to boat people when I know for a fact the local housing list had hundreds of locals waiting for accommodation? Why do councils repair and modernise homes for immigrants whilst British tenants are left to live in squalor? The tough questions do not need asking of the BNP but of the stupid do-gooders we have had in as governments.

    As for the unbelievably foolish and biased PC we have foisted upon us you couldn’t make it up. Our nation is made up of the English Irish Scotch and Welsh,
    However it is ok to call the scotch Jock’s the Welsh Taffy’s the Irish Paddy’s, Londoners cockneys, Liverpudlians Scouser’s but if you call an immigrant from Pakistan a Paki you can be arrested. If that is not racist discrimination I don’t know what is.

    The British people are VERY fed-up and the three main political parties are all afraid to make a decisive move to remedy this outrage so it’s no good trying to stifle the BNP as they appear to be the only party listening


















  • Comment number 51.

    fvwall1
    #49

    QUOTE “
    Classic. For all your 'travels' that comment is pretty narrow-minded. Employers employee eastern Europeans because they value the work more. Almost all low-paid jobs are now done by eastern Europeans because quite frankly, Brits were doing a disastrous job. The welfare state has led to people failing to appreciate their work.” unquote

    I would not disagree with your statement for one moment, The welfare state together with the do-gooders we have in government have with their benefit system allowed the work-shy to turn jobs down. If immigrants can survive on the wages and do the work then the government should remove all benefits for the fit if they don’t take the jobs on offer. At one time you could not sign on the dole for several weeks if you got the sack, which encouraged people to take their work seriously.

    The BNP advocate capitol and corporal punishment but this has been banned since the late sixties and now we have feral gangs roaming the streets committing all kinds of crime even murders. When the capitol/corporal punishment abolition was being discussed they had on TV one night the chap who had actually administered the birch on the Isle of Man for the previous 28 years. He was asked if he thought it a detterent to which he replied the following
    “ I am the only person who has administered the birch on the island in all these years and I will tell you now that NO individual has EVER come back for a second helping.” Perhaps we should have a referendum on the issue we never got one before.

    I think the following poem sums up a lot of the publics views



    Down With The Nanny State.

    (The views of a grumpy old man)

    I am now of the opinion, that the nanny state thinks we are fools
    I have seen our society changing, I am staggered by some of the rules
    No longer do we have the freedom to take risks after weighing the odds
    When having considered the chances, put our fate in the lap of the gods
    Banned are the daredevil heroes of which our great nation was proud
    Adventure, thrill, exhilaration are simply no longer allowed
    Today it's all stresses and traumas caused by the slightest mishap
    Not by bombs, poverty or starvation but by insignificant crap
    We must not get upset or worried or ever receive reprimand
    Our lives must be like Mary Poppins or we will be mentally harmed
    Yet before councillors were invented and you were confronted with strife
    You didn't start whinging and whining you simply got on with your life
    Now it seems kids can't play conkers, at school unless wearing specs
    And firemen's poles are a hazard, I wonder what they'll think of next
    All workers now have to have footwear that has steel built into the toes
    Plus high visibility jackets worn over their normal work clothes
    What with PC and human rights rubbish and constant advice on our food
    We should tell all do-gooders to "Stuff it" up somewhere decidedly rude
    How do they think we all managed before all this twaddle arrived
    Through wars, poverty, depravation a hell of a lot still survived
    Nobody made a commotion if a schoolteacher gave you the cane
    It was considered unmanly if you couldn't cope with the pain
    Villains broke rocks up on Dartmoor and murderers paid with their lives
    Fisticuffs settled a dispute for only a coward used knives
    Hooligans given a birching, till their backsides were blooded and sore
    It's hard to look tough when you're crying so very few went back for more
    So don't patronise me with this drivel, my generations not dense
    We have learned how to roll with life's punches by just using sound common sense
    If we could just gaze in a crystal and the next fifty years we could glimpse
    Then I for one feel pretty certain we will then have a nation of wimps
    None of us need to be coddled, we don't need it all on a plate
    Let's stand up to all these busybodies and jettison the nanny state
    The result of this do-gooder nonsense is not very hard to detect
    By the loss of respect for each other and virtually no self respect
    Gone are the days of the nit-nurse, and gone is the headmasters cane
    Is society better off for it? well, perhaps we should all think again


  • Comment number 52.

    Expressing public disquiet

    Diddled

    George is in his eighties and he’s seen it all before
    He was born in the depression and was wounded in the war
    He hadn’t been a hero, but George had done his bit
    His legs had both been broken when a piece of shrapnel hit

    George with his new ungainly gait really didn’t care
    He had served his King and Country and was proud that he’d been there
    Once the war was over and he got a steady job
    George worked hard and did overtime to earn an extra bob

    He was careful with his money but you couldn’t call him mean
    He had known the pangs of hunger as a child when times were lean
    He never wasted money in the bookies or on ale
    He wanted some security in case his health should fail

    Came the National Insurance Scheme in 1948
    George gave the scheme his full support thinking it was great
    If we all join in together and we pay our weekly dues
    We should all get good pensions that can only be good news

    What with all our contributions and the taxes that we pay
    Well never in the future should we see a rainy day
    No humiliating means tests, no more workhouse for the poor
    The old can hold their heads up like they never could before

    Now George is getting frail and weak and needs a little care
    The pension that George thought he’d get simply isn’t there
    The savings that old George accrued long ago had dwindled
    The Council now want George’s house, no wonder George feels swindled

    Every evening in the news on all the TV stations
    The Government hand out our cash to lots of foreign nations
    What’s more it is a well known fact that cannot be disputed
    Folk come here and claim benefits who’ve never contributed

    Our leaders throw our cash around with philanthropic zeal
    Massaging their ego’s, Not caring how we feel
    To men like George an honest man the real reward is owed
    We should be taking care of him, not stealing his abode




    Britain Today.

    What Democracy ?

    Democracy, in Britain is nothing but a lie.
    From the dictionary the word should be deleted
    Whilst democracy’s the slogan that politicians cry
    The majority of us feel that we’ve been cheated
    With political correctness forced upon us every day
    Just in case the casual word may cause offence
    If you have a strong opinion be careful what you say
    Even though you may be talking perfect sense
    When we joined the E.E.U. I’m sure we took the view
    It would give a larger market for our trade
    Yet now our mighty nation has a legal obligation
    To abide by regulations Brussels made
    The referendum was denied, the politicians lied
    These decisions were decided by the few
    It was no doubt understood, M.Ps thought it would be good
    With a total disregarding of our view
    MP’s pull out all the stops to try to fill our shops
    With G.M foods that we don’t want to eat
    Whilst cameras check our speed on roads where there’s no need
    We’d be better off with coppers on the beat
    If confronted by a crook and you land a good right hook
    You may think that he deserved it, it’s his fault
    When he is on probation you’ll be locked up down the station
    To appear before a jury for assault
    When travellers leave a mess, you’d be spot on if you guess
    That authorities will turn an eye that’s blind
    Yet drop a fag end in the street and before it hits your feet
    You will get an instant ticket and be fined
    If asylums what you seek and English you can’t speak
    Benefits are paid for your welfare
    But if your British and your old, your property is sold
    To pay for any time you are in care
    If you chastise your child, because he has run wild
    That law will on your collar give a tug
    For no matter what you say, do-gooders rule the day
    Even though the child may grow into a thug
    In the interest of fair play referendums are the way
    The majority decide just where we go
    We shouldn’t change our laws or take part in futile wars
    To massage a political ego
    When we are due a big election, parties vie for our affection
    Promising the things they have in store
    It fair gives us the hump, they should take a running jump
    They must realise we’ve heard it all before.
    It is hard to understand who governs our fair land
    Or who it is that makes up all our rules
    Our politicians bore us, or totally ignore us
    Democracy in Britain! It’s for fools!!.
    .



  • Comment number 53.

    To igiveup2

    Thanks for taking the trouble to post your views.

    I believe you're combining health and safety legistlation with nostalgia, lack of democracy and racism.

    Also, pretending that you speak for the whole population, nation, majority, growing number, vast swathes of the British electorate, British people, etc means that you're obviously over-inflating a minority view, pretending you have a strong argument.

    You mention Abu Hansa, but obviously forget to mention that this nutter was preaching on the streets because they banned him from the mosque. But you're happy to generalise if it suits your argument.

    #48: "There can only be one realistic reason why Britain is the chosen
    destination"
    The attraction to England is also the English language, ties to the whole world due to past colonialism etc. Why is this "ridiculous"? If the benefit system is a soft touch, suggest improvements.

    Your view appears tribal and primitive, apportioning blame only to those who appear different (insert generalization here), what a "selfish gene" would tend to do. You might be surprised that most of the wasted cash goes to indiginous people (your definition) but obviously that doesn't stop you from guessing about the actual figures and not finding out what they actually are. I'm just guessing by the way.

    Why don't you object to Australians and New Zealanders, coming here working in our bars?

    Are you mulitlingual? This skill helps you have a richer, deeper experience of other cultures when you travel around the world. Multilingual people tend to have a broader view of things. Obvioulsy if you get mugged in Rio then don't let me stop you from thinking that all Brazilians are thieves, if you feel more comfortable doing so.

    Would your sympathy for George in your example of #52 be different if he was an immigrant? non-white? Why?

    It is easy for people to feel uncomfortable and avoid people that are different etc. and natural to diagnose problems caused by this unknown group, even if there is no rational link between them and any personal experiences. Your success or failure in life probably depends more on your own skill, talent, education and imagination than it does on inefficiency or savings in the system, or on people that look different, or spreading rumours that people that look different might be the perpetrators of despicable acts. Why is it that ugly people commit most crimes?

    If you had a problem with council house allocation did you ask the council what the policy was? What was their answer? Presumably you'd be unhappy if the Vietnamese or Poles (to use a cliche) did the renovation? Obviously blame the immigrants for the council rules.

    It's interesting that you don't think people come here to escape unreasonable cultural practices, just to continue them.

    You mention dentistry alot, presumably you would refuse to register and pay if the dentist was actually an immigrant?

    Why do you seem to be happy to generalise asylum seekers to all people that look different?

    When I become a pensioner some of my views will probably tend to be out-of-date and inappropriate.

    You're concerend about murder rates, but obviously would welcome an American in to your home (generalization!). What would make you feel more comfortable with an American compared with a Ugandan?

    I think you're just sick of lack of representation in a democracy.

    You could take a stand and stop eating curry and insist on egg and chips! :)

  • Comment number 54.


    QUOTE
    "As for the unbelievably foolish and biased PC we have foisted upon us you couldn’t make it up. Our nation is made up of the English Irish Scotch and Welsh,
    However it is ok to call the scotch Jock’s the Welsh Taffy’s the Irish Paddy’s, Londoners cockneys, Liverpudlians Scouser’s but if you call an immigrant from Pakistan a Paki you can be arrested. If that is not racist discrimination I don’t know what is."

    let me explain something. scouser is not a derogatory term, nor is it intended to connote inferiority, it is merely a nickname. the word 'paki' on the other has racist connotations. it is used to discriminate and to alienate people. that is why it is racist. because it is perceived to be racist. the word 'fat' can be a matter of fact or it can be offensive. the word 'paki' has no factual meaning. it is purely a word intended to offend.

    more to the point, is not irrelevant? you know the word is offensive. so there is no point in blindly advocating racism under the guise of some bizarre concept of equality. swear words have their meanings, so what? if you wish to describe a pakistani, then use the word pakistani, as there can be no confusion as to whether or not you have intended to offend.

    PC is there because idiots cannot work out for themselves what is offensive, what is racist, and so on. but that is a problem with our education system... something i can go into another time.

  • Comment number 55.

    and corporal punishment is a complete joke. the purpose of punishment is not to dehumanise people. murderers, rapists, extortionists, thieves have the same human rights as law abiding citizens. nobody has the right, nor should they have, to take those away. in the interests of public safety, the exception is - the rule of law, has decided over centuries (and we have granted human rights to people since 1066 - MC), that behaving in a certain way can lead to punishment. that punishment is the removal of freedom: imprisonment. it is the failure of the state that has lead to the majority of crimes in the first place. the BNP are just pandering to the uneducated idiots this country seems to have produced... look at prisoner numbers in Finland, as an example of what can be done when citizens are more important than how much money can be accumulated in politicians' trust funds...

  • Comment number 56.

    Rather than be up in arms about the interview (which I admit I missed) or just simply decrying the BNP as a racist dinosaur of an outmoded party (in which they may be right), perhaps people, especially if they are main-stream politicians, should be asking themselves the following:-

    1) Why is it the BNP have got two MEPs all of a sudden?

    2) Why is it that a significant part of OUR core vote has suddenly started voting for the BNP?

    3) Why is it that a significant part of OUR core vote may well do the same next time?

    Instead of hand-wringing and coming up with "they're all wrong" soundbites why don't the main parties stop navel-gazing and actually think on just why it is their own voters have deserted them in favour of what they [the parties] choose to decry as a fringe - and racist - party? Clue: it's not because their voters have all suddenly become racist, or because they were all in the closet.

  • Comment number 57.

    "What concerns me more than the BNP is the fact that there are many people out there who want to ban a legal party from being able to communicate with the voters simply because they don't agree with the parties message."

    Am I and this poster the only ones that find this position, especially as perpetuated by the UAF, to be ironic?

    People proclaiming to be anti-fasisct behave in a very fascist manner to try and make their point.

  • Comment number 58.

    'We put to Nick Griffin some of the texts we received including sentiments as tough as "you're a disgrace" and "how do you sleep at night?".'
    I've no doubt that you receive even more such texts and comments about Gordon Brown (not all from David Milliband) yet you are not so blunt when interviewing him! How does that make you impartial?

  • Comment number 59.

    I could be offended by the misuse of the word "Scotch", which should be applied only to whisky and a few other products, and is otherwise often used as a pejorative term.
    Many are offended by the epithet "fat" when used pejoratively.
    Many are offended (and frightened) by the close proximity of someone wearing a burqa.
    Should everyone who gives offence be arrested?
    I would not advocate addressing Pakistanis as Pakis but the PC brigade have encouraged a dangerous climate in which many choose to take offence too readily.
    Even when such a term is used pejoratively, at worst it may cause hurt feelings, not real harm (unless prolonged aggressive use constitutes harassment), yet causing "offence" has come to be seen as a crime.
    Perhaps we need to obsess less about "offence" and toughen up a little.

  • Comment number 60.

    The BNP are of course opposed to immigration. Has it ever occured to many of your contributors that there has never been a democratic mandate approving multi-culturism? Our politicians have never consulted the indigenous population if it was wanted, let alone considered the effect! As an example, Denmark was really liberal and approving of it until they discovered that it was being taken advantage of by the immigrants they had already accepted encouraging many more of their friends and relatives to join them because of the advantages they enjoyed. Eventually it was discovered that although at the time, immigrant population had increased to 5% of the total,they were in fact consuming 40% of the social budget! That means that it was costing the Danish taxpayers eight times as much to support immigrants as it did the indigenous population! Many of these immigrants also considered it their right to bring their cultural habits with them even when it conflicted with Danish law! Does that ring any bells here? Anyway, as a result of all that, Denmark has put a vigorous stop to it and the most restrictive immigration controls are now imposed. One now has to ask 'How much more does it cost here in the UK to support immigrants than it does the indigenous population?' Furthermore, can we afford it?

  • Comment number 61.

    This is a very emotive issue, but looking at it as coldly as possible, I think the BNP's biggest benefactors are the Tories and Labour. I think a lot of people see these parties as dull PR driven merchants of vebal manure, and this, I beleive, more than anything else, has pushed people into the arms of these extremists.

    Have I been tempted. Yes, but only to cheapen the result for Brown/Cameron, neither of whom, in my opinion, are fit to run a lemonade stand.

    Does frustration make me a racist? I hope not. But not having anyone to vote for is a frustrating experience and can push people to extremes.

    In conclusion, I congratulate the BBC for it's coverage on such a thought provoking issue. I don't know the answers, but this coverage will continue to make me think hard about it.

  • Comment number 62.

    The BNP is appealing to uneducated resentful people who failed to achieve anything with their lives.

    In the UK, it is a choice whether or not live in a council house and off state handouts. it is a choice. and it should be. if somebody wishes to suffer the indignity of living a life on benefits, and is happy to put off with habitual ridicule - so be it. that is failure of our education system to inspire ambition at a young age. over time less people will claim benefits. do not blame 'immigrants' who have beat you at your own game.

    further; define immigrants? people who have lived here how long? exactly - that is a farcical thing to try to argue - that immigrants or indigenous are any different. They are both the same: humans like you and i. further to that these particular humans seem to have a bit of character about themselves, have gone from another country in search of bettering themselves. i take my hat off to them. of course, i do not advocate a free-borders policy, and perhaps we should tighten it a little. but if we adopt australian or danish quasi-nazi policies then i'll eat my hat.

  • Comment number 63.

    62. At 12:32pm on 03 Oct 2009, fvwall1 wrote:
    The BNP is appealing to uneducated resentful people who failed to achieve anything with their lives...

    That is patronising, to say the least. A lot of uneducated people detest the BNP and many highly-educated people are members.

    ...In the UK, it is a choice whether or not live in a council house and off state handouts...

    Actually, for a lot of people it isn't a choice.

    ...australian or danish quasi-nazi policies...

    'Quasi-nazi' doesn't mean anything; but if you are suggesting that either those two nations embrace nazism, I suggest you look the word up.

    I don't agree with very much that you say, however, I'll defend up to a considerable degree of personal inconvenience your right to say it.

  • Comment number 64.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 65.

    64. At 1:59pm on 03 Oct 2009, igiveup2 wrote:

    At 00:23am on 03 Oct 2009, fvwall1 wrote

    sorry fvwall1 im not going to paste in your rather well articulated & reasoned post, but i do take issue with your position that the word 'paki' is not offensive, its all about context.

    When i lived in glasgow i found the term 'paki shop' in common usage where the english would normally refer to the 'corner shop'. I'm certain that 99% of the time there was no offence taken or given by the term.

    But it also also clearly an abusive term, if you don't believe me, you could try the ultimate acid test as to whether an expression is offensive, which is to use it on a group of adult males from whichever ethnicity the word or phrase refers to....

  • Comment number 66.

    The sad truth is that when people like Melanie Phillips are given a platform on the BBC, then it is only fair that Nick Griffin be accorded the same opportunity.

    Racism and religious hatred are undeniably offensive wherever they come from. You cannot tar one point of view without tarring the other.

  • Comment number 67.

    to you: 'it's an outrage',

    i refuse to accept that somebody educated could be racist - it is a paradox. if one were educated they would see that race, nationality and so on are as important as eye-colour, the un-educated people you speak of are clearly educated. my definition of educated is not simply passing your exams, it is having that extra inherent intelligence that realises the qualities of mankind.

    about council housing and benefits being a choice. you have missed my point. it is a choice, often made for us. as a child, one has many directions. for leadership they look to parents and school teachers, where those choices are made for them. and i speak from experience. i can sit on my high horse because i came from that situation, i had ambition, i could not understand why my school and family played down my desire to be successful as if it was something someone else did. something many of my schoolfriends seemed to accept. the BNP is just playing on that. the BNP is playing on that insecurity and unwillingness of people to try to achieve something.

    to you 'igiveup2'

    i won't rise to any of your blind suggestions, you would be humbled if you knew anything about who i am or what i have achieved.

    ye the politicians trust funds thing is probably nonsense... don't look into that... wouldn't want any conflicts of interest arising... The Finnish prison system is one to be admired however, and that comes from personal research.

    and perhaps i will provide you with a hint as to my field... you clearly have no idea about the case of tony martin, and have been reading the daily mail. unfortunately the law provides no right to shoot people simply because they are burgling your home. material possessions are not more valuable than human life. a number of issues were raised in that case. firstly, tony was in contravention of s18 Offences against person Act 1861. he pleaded self-defence, which was outright rejected at first instance because he shot the boys as they were running away, and crying shouts of 'i want my mummy' or something along those lines!

    although... on appeal if you are interested... he claimed self-defence of property (not considered at first instance), diminshed responsibility for somekind of mental illness he claimed to have and also provocation... so in the end the diminished responsibility reduced his conviction to manslaughter from murder...

    so what to do? well, taking the law into your own hands is what not to do. campaigning, and educating young people is what to do. asbo's are dehumanising reactionary tools that in many cases criminalise perfectly acceptable behaviour. the question that needs to be addressed is: 'why aren't we providing the kids in our schools with a reason to do well?' kids won't muck about if they believe they will gain something. it is no good dehumanising people with corporal punishment. if the BNP comes in they need to address education, and communities. as a kid the council decided they wouldn't pay for the youth club anymore because apparently people smoked, drank and took drugs. probably only a handful did. they shut the youth centre, so those people that did watch movies, play pool, ping pong and football were left with nothing, and a good amount of them probably turned to drink and smoking where they might not otherwise have done. instead we centralised local decisions and doubled the pay of politicians... then we wonder why kids muck about.

    In my humble opinion, the BNP is not addressing the real problem.

    oh and 'ditkos' you are mistaken - i argued paki is offensive, perhaps i should 'articulate and well-reason' better next time...

  • Comment number 68.

    fvwall1 wrote:

    "PC is there because idiots cannot work out for themselves what is offensive"

    The problem with PC is how it is applied; now a good example of this can be seen by the way the BBC says Islam should be treated more sensitively than Christianity, you can be as offensive as you like to Christians at the BBC (remember Jerry Springer the Opera?) However when it comes to Islam the BBC treats it with the upmost respect.

    See this link for more details:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/3198804/BBC-boss-says-Islam-should-be-treated-more-sensitively-than-Christianity.html

    The PC doesn't extend to the white working classes either, who are right down at the bottom of the PC victimhood status, and have been totally abandoned by New Labour and the left for more fashionable minorities. The BNP know this and that’s why they campaign in disaffected white working class areas.

    Now the white working classes were never asked if they wanted mass immigration into their areas, they were told. Anybody that objected to cultures that practiced honor killings, female mutilations, subjugation of women, forced marriage, forced polygamy and cultures that have a much higher crime rate had their names dirtied by the multi-culti left and their concerns ignored.

    When Islamist preachers of hate such as Abu Hamza hand out fliers saying how evil the West is on street corners, call for beheadings for unbelievers or gays to be thrown off a top of a mountain, they are almost never any opposition from left wing anti fascist groups.

    When the White working classes complain about discrimination or a legitimate grievance such as council house allocation they are not taken seriously.

    And people wonder why the WWC are turning to the BNP? How sad it is that nearly a million people voted for the BNP and see the BNP as a lesser evil than the mainstream parties.

    fvwall1 wrote:

    The BNP is appealing to uneducated resentful people who failed to achieve anything with their lives...

    Sneering at people won’t make the BNP go away, nor will character assassinations, labeling your opponent uneducated, resentful, or a racist. This tactic used by the PC left doesn’t work anymore.

    All slightly off topic but please be aware:

    _Marko is a BBC leftie that patrols the Editors blogs, he tries to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion from anybody right of centre and will often repeat the same questions again and again if he doesn’t like the answer. He has been exposed here on the editors before.

  • Comment number 69.

    "Sneering at people won’t make the BNP go away, nor will character assassinations, labeling your opponent uneducated, resentful, or a racist. This tactic used by the PC left doesn’t work anymore."

    so what is this?

    "Anybody that objected to cultures that practiced honor killings, female mutilations, subjugation of women, forced marriage, forced polygamy and cultures that have a much higher crime rate had their names dirtied by the multi-culti left and their concerns ignored"

    slightly hypocritical, you are highlighting the inadequacies of your opposition - proves my point:

    The BNP is appealing to uneducated resentful people who failed to achieve anything with their lives...

    and i am not PC left... if you read what i have written you will understand that i am in favour of prosperity, of ambition, and a working capitalist system. however, people need to get away from the desire to want to be classed into WWC, or middle or whatever, and just do things with people because they enjoy their company. there is no point in trying to distinguish people on arbitrary factors like race, nationality, salary... live your life and stop moaning about what someone else has got. if you want something, take the steps toward getting it instead of feeling sorry for yourself and ridiculing those people have decided to try an achieve something.

    i would like to see the system change, but attitudes need to change aswell. i can personally see how this system works, and i am using it (despite not liking it). moaning about how the system favours someone else won't help me. but what i can do, is continually voice my concerns about its flaws, and highlight improvements.

  • Comment number 70.

    I'm incredibly angry that the BBC have chosen to give the BNP and Nick Griffin the chance to preach their hatred on television. The BBC would never give people like Anu Hamza a platform for his hateful views, so I believe the BNP shouldn't be allowed to preach hatred to the masses.

    Although the BBC are hiding behind the reason that the BNP have been legitimately elected, and so have a right to voice their opinions. Some people believe that no matter how offensive certain views are, in Britain, every one is allowed freedom of speech. Again, the likes of Abu Hamza and others would be arrested for inciting racial hatred, so why should the BNP be allowed to incite racial hatred? Because they are white and wear suits, does that make their views less evil.

    It doesn't matter who you are, your race, your faith, you should not be allowed to incite racial hatred, or encourage violence.

    I'm disgusted that I'm paying a licence fee that allows ignorant people a platform for their views. And the BBC are trying to increase their licence fee by claiming that they create quality programmes. What a joke! The BBC didn't broadcast a charity appeal for Gaza, but allowing the BNP to spread their hate is okay. The BBC should be ashamed of itself!

  • Comment number 71.

    A few facts I think need highlighting, First it was the Labour party who came up with the idea of repatriating unwanted foreigners, Second it is the far LEFT UAF/ANL (funded by the trade unions) who are behind the overwhelmingly worst of the violence. It was the ANL/UAF/ SWP blaimed by West Yorks Police for inciting the riots in west yorks. The same lefties who attacked any and all people trying to enter a polling station during this election.It is the leftists who scream for democratic lawfully registered parties to be banned simply because they object to them. And lets not forget it is the left/ comminists/ socialists who have killed twenty times more innocent people including millions of jewish people than the Nazis ever did. The simple fact is that if the mainstream parties had dealt with the immigration and extremist muslim issues years ago the BNP would have no cause to exist.

  • Comment number 72.

    "Anybody that objected to cultures that practiced honor killings, female mutilations, subjugation of women, forced marriage, forced polygamy and cultures that have a much higher crime rate had their names dirtied by the multi-culti left and their concerns ignored"

    slightly hypocritical, you are highlighting the inadequacies of your opposition - proves my point:

    No not at all, these are legitimate concerns; however the PC left used to scream racism whenever these points were racism to close down the debate. Now that screaming racism doesn’t work anymore, I see that you are using a new tactic.

    Do you think any of the above has enriched Britain?

    and i am not PC left... if you read what i have written you will understand that i am in favour of prosperity, of ambition, and a working capitalist system

    You may be economically on the right, but socially you are defiantly on the left.

    The BNP is appealing to uneducated resentful people who failed to achieve anything with their lives...

    The Nazi were well educated, it never stopped them from being racist.

  • Comment number 73.

    To the modorators

    Please change “racism” to “raised” in my post in 72, in this paragraph:


    however the PC left used to scream racism whenever these points were racism to close down the debate. Now that screaming racism doesn’t work anymore, I see that you are using a new tactic

    Then please delete this.

    Thanks

  • Comment number 74.

    smartNewshound wrote:
    “The BBC would never give people like Anu Hamza a platform for his hateful views”
    I have seen Hamza interviewed on Newsnight and other BBC programmes.
    Of course the UAF and other leftie anti fascist groups did not protest outside the studios, however they will be protesting outside TVC when Griffin will be a guest on Question Time.
    See their link:
    http://www.uaf.org.uk/
    The left will continue to protest against fascist like Griffin, but will not protest against fascist like Hamza, the left have failed to move on from the 20th century prism of race through which lefties see the world.
    The left will keep on protesting against fascist like Griffin whereby they will increase the left's guilt. The left will then use this guilt to try and shame the rest of us into submitting to their socialist agenda.

  • Comment number 75.

    I was actually very surprised at the honesty of the man. When asked "would you be happy if one of your children brought home a non british boyfriend/girlfriend?" He actually answered truthfully.
    ==============================================================
    Why do Racists always assume that they are telling the truth or saying what the rest of us really feel. They don't - they only speak for other racists. Nick Griffin answered No to that question , that doesn't make him honest, it simply shows him to be a man who holds racist views.
    I would answer "yes" to that question. I am also being honest, that is what I sincerely think. I also shows me to be non-racist.

    Hitler believed he was right. That might make him "honest" but it didn't stop him being evil.

  • Comment number 76.

    fvwall1

    I doubt you could humble me in any way, you cannot even understand the points I raise. I never at any time suggested that Mr Martin was right to shoot the young lad. What I was saying that instead of pussyfooting around and giving this unfortunate lad huge leeway for his numerous offences all of which he chose to ignore. A severe birching after perhaps his third crime may well have dissuaded him from his criminal lifestyle. In which case he may well have been alive today and making a good contribution to society. One thing is certain our present approach is not working and youths know that society will allow the huge leeway before any real redress is implemented. Locking youths up is not the answer and failing to punish them severely for numerous crimes only allows them to sink further into a criminal way of life. Asboe’s are now considered a badge of honour to boast about but it is difficult to boast about sobbing after a birching and experience shows that few if any care to transgress the rules again.

  • Comment number 77.

    England is in desperate need of a military dictatorship , we have become ungovernable, marshall law should be declared in asbo areas and yoofs should be tazered on sight, bankers should be jailed for negligence and treason ( takin all our hard earned money and losing it)all unemployed people should be commandeered into th armed forces , benefits scrapped child allowance for first child only , pensioners to get a big fat increase so we can get some of the money back that we paid in not like the yoofs who never worked .yours, grizzlyeel

  • Comment number 78.

    "I was apalled by Griffins comments..." - davederrick

    Yet the UAF would have denied you that freedom to decide.

  • Comment number 79.

    All this fuss about what the BNP is allowed or not allowed to feature on BBC programmes is full of double-standards.

    The whole rumpus completely obscures the fact that nobody from the radical left of the political spectrum hardly ever features on any BBC programme.

    Let them all come on...it will be far more effective that a measly debate between party leaders which will just highlight that there's not a single genuine policy difference between any of the mainstream parties!

  • Comment number 80.

    Dear Editor,
    I have read it by journalism interests.
    Nothing wrong conducting interview with these people.
    In a democracy,these are all common views expressed by many free thinkers.This has to be encouraged by all media networks.
    BBC had shown that its impartial views,compared to other media networks.
    Now a days,so many political party heads, environmentalists,economist, writers on many world subjects,film personalities, students, and new trends on web editors, commentators on many important as well as less known subjects are common.
    Only, as an individual with modern thinking,modern progress and for real humanism, He or She can analyse,introspects,discuss with free minded individuals and with others for 100 per cent humanism outlook.
    Your articles is lively,worth to read on what is happening in any country.
    Always free views to be encouraged for further knowledge and sharing of many good thinkings to every body.
    I am a regular user of BBC and my contributions by many known as well as unknown words to others are with BBC World Services.
    Hope to get more interesting,useful subjects from you,editors,blogs writers and members from this great news channels.

  • Comment number 81.

    Bullies, criminals and hatemongers. Never again!

  • Comment number 82.

    What a load of fuss about nothing it is the BNP Britians other party the one the three other parties roll out when they fear the masses will not vote for them Griffins father was a Tory PM and was kicked out of the party but the son was not as for it being the white working class party is rubbish it is an off shot of politics its Politics for dummies drunk male bondings meetings usually in pubs or seedy hotels were they get up and rant about how they would change Britian if only blame, moan whinge it does what the Brits do well blame others. All Western countries have these club and the USA has loads of them what does it say about some of the white race. I wish people to see them as they are and what is their problem if all the none whites live then apart from the place becoming a wasteland as they would take their money with them and their families but I do not think many whites would say under the rule of the ignorant because they would turn their hate on them and it would be to do with how much money you earned and who you had to employ which would be on of their feral members as this is what these male bonding clubs are for.

    So show them to everyone and then they can see that there for the grace of god go them.

  • Comment number 83.

    VJS - pretty fair assessment, especially the consideration vis a vis the Danish position.

  • Comment number 84.

    It seems to me that many posters who complain about the level of immigration into the UK have not been met by opposing arguments but rather by accusations of racism, allusions to Nazism or just plain gainsay.

    I may not have read every one of the posts but I have not found any that criticises the immigrants themselves.

    I, for one, would emigrate to the UK if I lived in a poor country with no prospects, especially if a number of my countrymen and –women are already here. I am sure people coming to the UK don’t come here to make our lives worse. I do not blame the immigrants and I see very little evidence that anybody else does either.

    I certainly DO blame our government for allowing the rate of immigration to rise to the level that it has. I also think that it has seriously damaged our culture in the UK and this has manifested itself in many negative ways.

    I simply do not understand those who take an opposing view. They do not argue for more immigration, it seems. Some even argue for curbs on immigration. In fact I don’t understand what they are arguing for. They seem to simply gainsay or name-call and don’t seem to put together constructive arguments in favour of their position.

    Whether you are from the Left or the Right (or any other persuasion) why do you not put forward a constructive argument so that those who oppose the rate of immigration that we have endured can have a constructive debate with you?

  • Comment number 85.

    My comment of almost two days ago was inexplicably “referred to the moderators” yet has still neither been allowed nor removed: simply left in limbo apparently. Looks like a convenient way of suppressing comments without justification.

  • Comment number 86.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

 

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.