Nick Griffin on Question Time
It was the exposure he'd long dreamed of. It was the opportunity to move from the fringes to the mainstream. It was a moment when Nick Griffin - the self-styled "most loathed man in Britain" - could have tried to persuade the British people that he thought what they thought about immigration and that voting for him could shake the cosy political establishment out of its complacency.
That's what the leader of the BNP hoped for. It's what those who despaired about his invitation to appear on Question Time feared. That is not how it turned out.
Exposure can work both ways. For much of the programme, Nick Griffin did not speak to the British people. He talked instead about himself and struggled to explain his past views and actions.
He was not a Holocaust denier, he insisted - but could not say why he had compared those who believed that Hitler killed millions of Jews with those who believed that the Earth was flat.
On the other hand, he could and did say that the "indigenous people of Britain" - by which he insisted he did not mean whites - were themselves victims of genocide. Surprisingly few of them appear to have noticed.
The Ku Klux Klan was not all bad, he went on, but Islam mostly was. And so on and so on.
That is not to say that Nick Griffin did not take the opportunity to make a direct appeal to voters. He presented himself as the moderniser of the far right - the creator of "New BNP". The old BNP had, he conceded, been racist. He had talked of wanting to create an all-white Britain. But now he and his party merely wanted to shut the door to newcomers and were happy to let everyone else stay.
Will that convince many? Probably not, but it may give cover to those who are fed up that their views and concerns have been ignored. There may well be people who feel that Nick Griffins views are too eccentric or too dangerous to make him a candidate for high office but who, nevertheless, feel that voting for him is a means to give the rest of the political class a mighty big kick.
That, in the end, will be the key to whether the BNP continues to rise or begins to fall. Will voters now feel they know what the BNP really stands for and cannot stand for it? Or will they say that's largely irrelevant if your aim is to tell other politicians: "It's time you woke up to our concerns"?
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I thought he did very well considering the hostility of the panel and the audience which was not representative of the indigenous white population of this country , indeed the BBC's left wing bias shone through like a beacon. Well done Mr Griffin you did yourself proud.
Complain about this comment
I think that last night's appearance will attract some voters to the BNP. However, I think vastly more who've already voted for them previously will not now, so I'm expecting their overall support will fall. I think a lot of people just voted for them to make a point, a point that thankfully now seems to have been heard by the parties who are actually in a position to do something about it.
Baroness Warsi probably came out the best from last night in my eyes. She came across as knowledgeable and passionate and at least was willing to recognise the root cause of the rising BNP support and that the issues needed to be addressed.
Griffin just came across as evasive and a bit twitchy. The only way he could have looked personable and sensible was if they'd sat him inbetween Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman.
Complain about this comment
The more you misrepresent and bully, the more you will play into Griffin's hands.
Complain about this comment
If Nick Griffin convinced anyone of anything other than the fact that his views are abhorent and incoherent I would be surprised. To be honest I found the programme boring. Let's move on please.
Complain about this comment
I thought it was a fantastic programme...Bonnie Greer in particular was graceful, intelligent, well spoken, kind and thoughtful - and did an amazing job in showing Nick Griffin for who he really is. For the most part, I thought he looked extremely uncomfortable - fidgeting, nervous, anxious...quite honestly, he was totally routed by the panel, and a good job too. Thank goodness this was a bad move for the BNP - I dont doubt their right to be represented on the panel, that is good and proper, as democracy was clearly at work here...for the good of the people, for the good of the nation, and for the good of individuals. Nick Griffin should have left the studio feeling really rather ashamed, and with his tail between his legs!
Complain about this comment
Chris Huhne (Lib Dems), Jack Straw (Labour) and Sayeeda Warsi (Conservatives) were all excellent panellists on last night's episode of Question Time. I found Mr Griffin's views on the Holocaust, Islam and homosexuals, to be highly objectionable.
Complain about this comment
Highlights more than anything the need for a serious review of our immigration policies now.
I think that the party that addresses this issue seriously will win the next election.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Question Time did Nick Griffin a load of favours, emphasising the things he critises, the lack of free speach about problems in our society. It was indeed a Nick Griffin bashing exercise with everything heavily weighted in all regards against him, the chairman panelists and an unprepresentative audience, and he handled himself very well indeed in the circumstances.
Complain about this comment
Unfortunately, I have to agree with #1.
Griffin did very well in front of a hostile audience and panel.
If the BBC had put up a panel of substance, and sought an audience which represented the country, he would have done badly.
The whole episode has done BNP recruitment a real service. But this is not the problem; the problem is the increasing of racial intolerance and prjudice in our country as a direct result of the actions of an inept, grasping, uncaring and criminal government.
Complain about this comment
Whatever happened to freedom of speech and debate? Nick Griffin is being personally attacked instead of listening to the policies, that will protect British interests. Our society is being eroded, because we are losing our identity and traditions, and it is about time someone stood up and enough is enough, we are British, and we do deserve to live in our own country and have our own traditions and beliefs without threats or intimidation, which is currently happening. You know that is what all our armed forces over the last century fought for.
Complain about this comment
Much as I despise the BNP I find the media vitriol truly disturbing. Over a million people voted legitimately for this party and in a democratic state that purports to pride itself on freedom of speech they deserve equality of access to the media as all other democratically elected parties.
There is a reason why those people felt sufficiently disenfranchised enough from the main parties to vote BNP and I believe it helps all of us to better understand what that reason is through dialogue rather than simply ignoring them and refusing to engage.
In my opinion the decision of Question Time to grant Nick Griffin public exposure was a smart move on three fronts:
1. It upheld the principles of our democratic system
2. It exposed Nick Griffins views to blunt analysis that revealed them to be comfortably within a range of utter ludicrousness to frankly disturbing, which can only help to provide further distance between the BNP and the general public.
3. It actually forced the other parties to confront and engage in the key issue that has provided oxygen to the BNP, namely immigration. Jack Straw honestly came out as evasive and uncomfortable as Nick Griffin in this one specific area, with Baroness Waresi admrably prepared to acknowledge the issue and offer some options for discussion.
In short, yes the BNP are odious, but they represent the views of a significant minority, winning power legitimately. It is better to understand their views and address them rather than simply shout them down.
Complain about this comment
Seriously, so that's what now passes as robust political debate?! And did my ears deceive me ... did the regular 3 stooges really keep making the accusation against Nick Griffin that he was not to be trusted, that he was merely trying to put on a positive spin on an unpopular message, that he would say one thing but do another? And they did all that with a straight face?
The program may not have done much to increase to increase the BNP's credibility but it did reveal just how inadequate the others are at tackling the issues. The only interesting point came when there was ALMOST a debate about immigrtation.
Complain about this comment
You know what Nick, for once, I agree with your analysis, all the way.
More along these lines please, this is more like it.
(s'alright, you can pick yourself off the floor now... :-) )
Complain about this comment
Having watched last nights Question Time it was interesting to say the least . Here we had the much derided leader of the BNP in which both the panel and the audience gave a 'hostile' reception . He did not come across at all well , some of his answers / comments were to some offensive to others ridiculous . However here are some points to ponder - What if the programme had been held in the North West eg Burnley , Manchester etc. , would the audience have been as hostile ?
Some of his answers / comments have certainly caused debate , but will he look at improving how he puts himself across on television in future ?
Overall he put in a very poor performance , he was nervous and did not come over at all confident .
The audience was not an overall representation of the UK and the panel was rather weak .
One thing is clear though the political mainstream parties are going to have to tackle the BNP head on and confront the issues which got them a million votes . One final note , and it is of great concern that the politicians confront and deride not only the BNP but all extremist groups religious or otherwise and do so on programmes like Question Time .
Complain about this comment
Too much of the questioning gave Nick Griffen the opportunity to spout the BNP policies. He should have been questioned on things like Climate Change, transport and all the other routine big political issues that you never hear related to the BNP; I think this would have exposed him as a very lightweight amateur with a limited and extreme agenda, but one that voters could see has no developed policies on the big issues. He got too much time on his own question/answers and some of the other panellists were quite poor. I'm no supporter of the BNP but I heard NG come out with points that I'm convinced will strike true with many disaffected voters.
Complain about this comment
I'm not sure I agree with Nick, as I despaired when I watched QT last night. Time and again there were the glimpses, as Nick points out, of what the BNP is, but to my mind, without fail either panellists or the audience interrupted and let Griffin and the BNP off the hook. I can see why the left wanted him silenced and banned, they just can't keep their mouths shut and let the man hang himself. So now he will reiterate his claim that he is persecuted by the Political Elite and Establishment. Still, if nothing else it should have shown the floating voters, the ones that matter, that he is not a man capable of leading the country. But talk about snatching defeat (well maybe a stalemate) from the jaws of victory, it seems that this is a common trait of our Establishment, not just Gordon Brown. I think Nick summed it up, the level of aggression towards him will mean that many will be feel justified in voting for him to upset the establishment in general and the Left in particular. Silence would truly have been Golden in this instance.
Still, it reminded my of why I gave up watching QT, it is a waste of time, maybe I'm a bit miffed at myself for being conned (again) into thinking it would be worth watching and I would get some Political insight from it. In fact, I'm now even annoyed that I wasted my time on reading all of Nick's previous Blog on the subject. Maybe in a week or two I'll feel like looking in on these BLogs, but in the meantime I'm off to look for a job.
Complain about this comment
The BBC, terrified of being accused of providing a platform for Griffin, and browbeaten by the hysterical over-reaction of people like Peter Hain (is there a leadership contest in the offing?), deliberately skewed the make-up of the audience so that it would be universally hostile to the BNP.
So we never had a proper debate, and it just resorted into a silly shouting match.
Despite Griffin's poor presentational skills and obvious difficulties when dealing with some of the darker elements of his beliefs, a lot of people in this country, who certainly weren't represented in the audience, support the core policies of the BNP in relation to immigration and the EU.
Like it or not, I suspect the BNP's level of support may increase after this episode, because Griffin will be seen as a victim of a mugging by the political elite, a "normal" bloke trying to espouse the views of many while being howled down by the usual PC rent-a-mob.
Complain about this comment
I was very saddened to see Nick Griffin, slandered, falsely accused, jeered at, called names, and simply hated by practically all the people on this show. The problem is that this audience was not representative of everyday British society and instantly appeared to have been 'cherry picked'. I always thought that ethnic minorities in the UK represented about 9% of the population, but nearly half the audience was of ethnic appearance, and this IS relevant especially as one of the guests had made nationalistic comments in the past about immigration and Islam. The panel had obviously rehearsed material to feed the audience on their views of the BNP. Whilst open-minded about the BNP I would like to have heard more from their leader, but was otherwise thwarted by the continuous deliberate over talk that rendered any answers to audience questions futile. If David Dimbleby had taken a more impartial stance and held back the antagonists we'd have heard more. But, Griffin was the winner tonight. He was bullied and not allowed to finish the majority of his sentences, even so he made some excellent points, especially about immigration which made government propagandist Jack Staw squirm.
Complain about this comment
Was Nick Robinson watching the same programme? The worse thing about the programme was the audience. Mr Griffin was hugely outnumbered in that room which was, as someone else has pointed out, not typical of UK society.
Looks like the BBC's efforts to discredit him have failed (not that I'll be voting BNP).
Complain about this comment
Although Nick Griffin did not come across as a very competent moderniser of fascism it is still unwise to dismiss him. It is important that to be tough on the BNP and tough on the causes of the BNP should be the strap line of mainstream political parties. Letting them get away with their deliberately confusing talk on ethnicity and britishness as the recent Newsbeat interviews did only helps their cause. Politicians need to be much better briefed on what these political bandits are up to. But there needs to be a better response to the reasons for their popularity with large section of the disaffected working class particularly in areas where there is wide ethnic diversity and serious deprivation.
Complain about this comment
The justification for allowing Griffin on Question Time was to expose the true, nasty nature of himself and his party. Here he was in a deep hole with some deeply unpleasant stuff hidden in the corners of the hole that he desperately wished to leave in the shadows and with only a shovel for company. The other four panelists were equipped with powerful torches and the opportunity to shine a bright light in the hidden corners.
So what did the do? They bullied, harrassed and diverted atention every time one of the corners was approached - assisted by an audience whose behaviour verged on mob-like and a chairman who was more like a ringleader. The representatives of the main parties, particularly Shaw as a member of the government which has been in power for 12 years, did more with their torches to expose their own and each other's inadequacies - not least on the topic of immigration, vital in the context of BNP activites.
It was pathetic. I can't imagine that many people who have voted BNP, or are contemplating to do so, would have learned anything they didn't already know about Griffin or the BNP or been persuaded to change their voting intentions. Fortunately, Griffin came across as a shifty, charisma free zone prone to inapproriate grinning - so very little harm done as a result of his being painted as ganged up on, cornered and bullied and hardly given a chance to finish a single sentence.
Instead of taking the opportunity to show people inclined to vote BNP why they shouldn't, they did more help the rest of us understand why it happened - less by the seductive messages from the BNP than sucked in by a vacuum created by failures of this and past governments.
Pathetic.
Complain about this comment
Oh dear. As suspected, the BBC loaded the audience with ethnic minorities and Lefties and have now succeeded in harrassing and bullying Griffen to the point he can now claim that the Left just want him silenced for telling things the way they are (in the BNP's eyes). What was needed was a very balanced audience, a very balanced panel and questions on the subjects of the day. It turned into an hysterical rant against the BNP, music to their ears... The BBC have really messed this up. This will force more people into the BNP's fold. Griffen spoke on immigration etc in a manner which to you or me seemed racist but to many in poor areas that have suffered as a result of immigrants rather than benefitted from them it would have seemed that the mainstream parties do not acknowledge any issues and do not want to discuss them.
Sorry. This was a win for the BNP and a big mistake by the BBC, firstly for allowing it and secondly for rigging the audience and panel. The biggest losers will be Labour as it is they who will lose support to the BNP.
Complain about this comment
I am sorry to have to say this but our elected government came out very badly on this one , it just proves they are floundering on immigration because they have let go of the rope. If this program had been filmed in say Manchester or other Northern town the outcome might have been different . I do not like or would ever vote for the BNP but i do believe that immigration and the erosion of the British identity will come to a head , the BNP are saying what a lot of British people think , rent a mob at the doors of the bbc are just that a mob, in their way they are pushing their agenda onto the public, it is time this country and government got its act together instead of being pushed along by events , why cannot they see just how angry the people are ! all they think about is how hard done by they are on expenses ...12 years and no proper border control or immigration regulation , it is truly worrying .
Complain about this comment
Griffin made a lot of abhorrent statements but just by reading 'Have Your Say' I can see already people ignoring those and supporting the under dogs: the BBC did the BNP a lot of favours not just by having him on the show but by stacking the cards so heavily against him.
I would hope most of the people voting for the BNP would not actually want to see them get in but they just don't have anyone else they would vote for.
(I always vote Green btw)
Complain about this comment
So Nick Griffin came across as a blithering idiot with no real policies or answers, no surprise there, Jack Straw and Baroness Warsi did the same.
Chris Huhne did reasonably well I thought and Bonnie Green exceptional.
The only thing that has come of this whole BNP/QT saga is that previously the imigration debate has been stifled for fear of accusations of racism, issues that have been allowed to fester will now be brought out into the open (hopefully) and a full and frank debate should ensue.
And when the issues of racism and immigration have been aired, debated and decided, can we turn our attention to the next issue that politicians of all shades fear to tackle, that of drugs, hard/soft, clampdown/decrim/legalise, punishment/treatment etc. None of these issues are being debated.
Complain about this comment
Although the BBC invited Nick Griffin onto Question Time, from that point on the whole set-up was designed to be hostile towards him and pander to the vocal left. As others have said the audience was not representative of the UK population.
The rate of immigration has changed the face of Britain dramatically in the last 50 years and people do feel threatened by this. Unless the main political parties can get a grip of immigration there will be trouble in the future.
Complain about this comment
Mr Griffin clearly needs to be better advised as to how to present himself on TV. The chairmanship of Mr Dimbleby was a disgrace and the audience appeared to have been carefully selected and I cannot believe it was a representative cross-section of the population of Britain. In the face of that Mr Griffin should have immediately stopped speaking when interrupted, thereby showing a degree of dignity that was lacking elsewhere, leaving the external audience to judge how the beliefs and actions of panel and studio audience obstructed free speech, surely a key British value.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
When will the liberals realise that the BNP is thought by many white working people to be their only voice? These are not the people who ask for tickets to Question Time. They watch other channels at the time. They resent unrestricted immigration as jobs going to 'bloody foreigners'. They resent the special treatment multiculturalism gives to minorities. I am not such a person but I reckon I understand such views more than our liberal intelligensia does.
Complain about this comment
I thought it was absolutely astonishing that David Dimbleby allowed this programme to degenerate into the 'Nick Griffin Show'. Of course, there was always going to be great hostility towards this vile indvidual but Dimbleby, in my view, did not chair the programme in his usually normal fair way.
He has control over questions the audience ask and whilst I appreciate there were always going to be a lot of folk who wanted to vent their anger at Griffin many main issues of the day were never discussed.
The majority of us already know what Griffin and the BNP stand for and last night's programme will not endear many sane people to change their minds. Thank God they are and will remain in the minority!!
Complain about this comment
As I hoped Nick Griffin came out of last night's programme looking pretty pathetic.
However the way it was acheived, with an oh so obviously rigged audience, a panel who had no intention of debating the issues, but merely to attack Griffin personally.
A bit like throwing a cat into Battersea Dogs Home and saying that the cat didn't come out of it very well.
If you really want to shut the BNP down it has to be done in a normal field of combat. Not an arena where the sympathy factor can come into play.
I fear, like others have already said, that the BNP might just get a boost from this.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
While I'm not a great fan of any recent Labour or Conservative governments, seeing Nick Griffin made me appreciate having Gordon Brown as PM!
Complain about this comment
I have to say last nights question time was appaling as a stage for political debate, in the end it turned out to be the 'Heckle Nick Griffin' show rather than being on current political issues.
I almost burst out laughing when Nick Griffin was trying to defend the 'indigenous' culture of the UK, he seems to have forgotten that the white majority are at best bastardised race, with mixtures of Celtic, Saxon, Roman, and Galic blood been added over the last 2000 years.
As for whether the BBC should or should not have had Mr griffin on the show is irrelevant, and I give credit to the BBC for inviting him on and showing him up to be an odious and bigoted indivdiual that he is, hopefully the next time he is on there will be a deeper probing of his policies.
To all those tht say he shouldnt have been on the show, where do you draw the line? After the BNP is refused, do you 'ban' members of the British Communist Party, the Muslim Council of Britain, or other small parties because you dont like thier policies.
Until the BNP is banned as a political party, they have as much right to appear as any other political party.
Complain about this comment
BBC proved a point of the BNP and shot itself in the foot. The audience, panel, host and questioners were not representative of the poor white working class dissafected who are not represented by the mainstream parties and media and are disenfrachised. In fact as always with the BBC there appeared to be a strong bias towards the establishment, left wing, pro immigration, pro EU, London centric and those buying into a multicultural society. These peope are bound to hate the BNP because they have so much to lose by them gaining popularity and so many of them including the BBC have their noses in the trough. They are also the very people who hate the uneducated white working class, who are persecuted by the mainstream. BBC News 24 also had a strong bias of commentators of such an ilk which I could not believe. In fact the BBC by their ineptitude has once again proved a point to those who remain attracted to the BNP and will no doubt increase their popularity.
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson cannot make such assertions from an appearance which did not allow openminded people to hear what Mr Girffin had to say about the party, its manifesto and its aims... Instead there were actual verbal attacks from people who thought they knew what the BNP were about, and seemed to just come on to "have a go" based on their pre-concieved idea. From this kind of arena nothing about the BNP has been learnt, but has showed many of the uk public to be ignorant.
Complain about this comment
It was unfortunate that almost all the questioning centred around the BNP. It was not a normal QT.
I doubt that very many of the 'white working class' will have watched QT - after all it's generally pretty boring for folk not into politics - but those that did will probably have felt some sympathy for Nick Griffin, given the way he was harassed.
Complain about this comment
There is only one reason for the rise of far-right groups like the BNP - or even far-left groups or any other political group with extreme or radical views - the abject failure of mainstream political parties.
I am disappointed that last night's QT turned into a BNP bear-baiting session, when it could have been so much more. I don't think Mr. Griffin in himself came over wonderfully well, but the manifest hostility of the audience, and the blatant delight of the other political panellists at being given the chance to take the moral high ground and make political capital out of the event was unpleasant.
I will never vote BNP come what may, but as long as the government and opposition parties continue to fail the British people (all of them!) the BNP will continue to flourish and will continue to have legitimate arguements that disenfranchised people will want to listen to.
Complain about this comment
Do I agree with the BNP? No, I don't.
Do I think they have a right to be heard? Yes I do.
The BBC, the idiots on the panel and those in the very loaded audience turned Nick Griffin into a victim. Well done, u gave the Slightly Right of Tory BNP a big lift.
Complain about this comment
The vitriolic approach taken by the panellists was absolutely appalling. It does none of them any credit. I do not recall Griffin being allowed to finish one sentence before being effectively spat at. Jack Straw threw away any of his principles - I much liked the point at which Warsi told him he'd not told the truth. I had no opinion on Chris Huhne previously but now I have no respect for him at all. Actually there was no need for Griffin to be there - the other children could have quite easily had a their tantrum and spitting match on their own.
Let's face it Griffin does not come across as particularly sharp or practiced as a debater. He was at a tremendous and deliberately organised disadvantage last night but it backfired on his and the BNP detractors. I found myself beginning to understand that there is a sizeable proportion of traditional British voters who will support them for good reason - driven by the failings of Straw and Huhne et al more than because of the BNP offer. It was made very clear last night that although Straw and Huhne and the career politicians should be listening to this they "just don't get it". That is their problem and it will increasingly be a big one.
Overall. Griffin and BNP 2, the Politician Gang 0
Complain about this comment
It was an unusual question time in format.
It did look like it was anti Nick Griffen.
I think the holocaust question was the best one along with his comment on the pacifist wing of the KKK.
He was made to look what he i,s which is a pretty superficial pedaler of hate. However most of the panel were very nervous to start with and so really found it difficult to make good points. - as did most of the audience.
I don't think any of them get why there is a 'rise' of the extreme right and this led to trying to justify recent immigration.
The reality is that shifts in the shape and skill mix needed in our economy (with the collapse of the manufacturing sector) has led to wide swathes of working class unemployment. The main parties have all accepted this as being inevitable as we move to a service based economy, and because we do not believe in state intervention. We tell them to get different skills, we tell them to move somewhere else and they think why. We want to blame them for there inability to adapt. They want someone to blame and it is easy to blame it on communities who to them seem to have adapted well to the changes in the economy.
There is no political paradigm in any of the main parties which understands how to ameliorate the effects of the changing dynamics of our economy - moving to high skills economy. So long as we ignore the needs of this section of our community - as long as we see it as reasonable to export low skills from our country we will continue give an opportunity to the BNP.
So although many people will be laughing at the way Griffin was made to look stupid last night it will have little effect on the rise of his odious party.
Sad but true.
Complain about this comment
BobRocket wrote:
"So Nick Griffin came across as a blithering idiot with no real policies or answers, no surprise there, Jack Straw and Baroness Warsi did the same.
Chris Huhne did reasonably well I thought and Bonnie Green exceptional."
I disagree - the final question both elicited the same pious response from them - that they believed free speech was a fundamental basic of our democratic society. They both, Huhne in particular, had spent the previous 50 minutes completely denying Nick Griffin from speaking freely by bombarding him with popularist(!)accusations and interrupting his answers.
The show was stacked heavily in favour of the establishments views and did not allow a full discussion to emerge. Nick Griffin, on the few occasions when he was not being interrupted by an increasingly irritating Huhne, failed to convince that the views held by him and his party are with much credit. However the problems with immigration and with the appallingly politically correct approach to our "yuman rights" were briefly touched upon and did reveal some hypocrisy within the government and opposition parties.
Instead of using the BNP as an excuse to dismiss discussions of these topics as being on the fascist right wing agenda and increasing distorted reaction each time they are raised - allow us some sensible and serious debate as to the potential damage some of these issues do. Our society is now becoming dangerously 'victorian' in that people are not saying what they would like to say as its not considered 'correct' and you don't know who will make a complaint against you. This is not free speech - this is controlled speech and is dangerous.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I think the BBC was right in allowing Nick Griffin on to the question time programme. Nick Griffins views are totally alien to the british peoples general opinion regarding raceism in our society, the unfortunate aspect of the issue is that some people subcribe to his veiws as is evident as his party now has two seats in the Eu parliment.
I think personally the the B N P will fail in its efforts to persuade other than extremeists into its ranks. The BMP will as other extremeist parties be consighned to the annals of time, lost and forgotten.I saw last nights programme and I watch all the programmes broadcasted unfortunately we still see our polititions avoiding the question and sitting on the fence or using deflection tactics, will it alter? I think not
Complain about this comment
I heard Peter Hain on the radio this morning banging on about the BBC giving the BNP a platform. He's wrong (Surprise!) The government have given the BNP a platform. All The mainstream political parties have given the BNP a platform. People like Peter Hain have given the BNP a platform. They don't see that, of course.
I didn't watch Question Time. I try not to listen to what politicians have to say anymore. They are so depressingly two-dimensional.
Complain about this comment
Griffin has moved the BNP away from some of it's more extreme positions such as Holocaust denial, forced repatriation and criminalising homosexuality, however as last night's QT showed he carries too much baggage from those days to ever be taken seriously.
The danger as I see it is not from Griffin but from who could come after him. I think it's possible that a future BNP leader could move the party further into the mainstream by dumping the racial ideology and by campaigning on a law and order based platform of bringing back hanging and flogging, capping immigration and ending multi-cultural programs. Such a party would appeal to a lot of disaffected white working class voters and could hurt Labour in a lot of seats.
Complain about this comment
That was a complete stitch up! It seemed to be a let's-all-kick-Nick-Griffin-fest. All the panelists had been given cribs sheets of "facts" to castigate NG with. Even David Dimbleby dropped any pretense of being a neutral ringmaster chairing the debate and started reading accusations off a script.
Why weren't any BNP supporters allowed in the audience? I applied and was turned down. Normally the audience is "scientifically selected" to represent the full range of views; not last night!
Complain about this comment
I was shocked and saddened by the recent Panorama report on the racist abuse directed at Tamanna Rahman and Amil Khan in Bristol. Good people of any race or religion are welcome on my road. I hope, though, that the people who oppose BNP racism also oppose religious-based racism such as that which allows people to be sentenced to death for changing their religion in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
Complain about this comment
Here in Belgium the right-wing party Vlaams Belang has always had the opportunity to participate in media coverage of all sorts. Their points of view are definitely much more moderate than the BNP's, but their main statement is also that Islam is a threat to our western civilisation.
Is it such a taboo to think about this ? Isn't it true that Islam has big problems with issues such as equality of men and women, homosexuality, separation of religion and government ?
After centuries, Western Europe has managed to get rid of the domination of the Catholic Church. Are we prepared to return to this domination by another religion ?
Complain about this comment
Some of the respondents on this page claim that the audience was not representative of the British public but there was, in fact, a small number of Griffen's supporters in the audience; statistically, a handful of BNP supporters would be expected since they polled 1 million out of a total population of 65 million. Simple arithmetic. Presumably what those complaining mean by a representative audience is a typical audience of the 1950s but we have moved on since then in many ways for the better.
Of course there are issues that need to be addressed, not least the resentment felt by a substantial number of the unskilled and uneducated in our society. Too many young people leave school with nothing to help them earn a good living in the modern world.
Complain about this comment
One of the most bizarre moments you'll ever see on a political broadcast...
Nick Griffin, a British white supremacist, attempting to lecture Bonnie Greer, an African American playwright and cultural commentator, on the Klu Klux Klan.
Now I have seen everything.
ps Nice to see some BNP supporters coming out of the woodwork here... why don't you contribute more often?
The reaction from all quarters on last night's show goes to prove that one will believe what one wants to believe.
Complain about this comment
I thought Warsi came across well last night but Jack 'man of straw' Straw looked pretty daft. Nick Griffin was all shaking and sweaty. He was relentlessly attacked by an un-representative BBC audience; ultimately time will tell whether this has helped the BNP's standing across the country.
Frankly this is just a massive distraction and allows the mainstream politicians to collectively hand-wring and win easy points from the electorate.
Complain about this comment
No surprises in the much hyped appearance of Nick Griffin on question time ,it went as many expected..
On balance the BNP could not have wished for a better outcome.In fact the rent-a-crowd outside the BBC was the icing on the cake.
As expected a hostile invited audience and an equally hostile panel harangued Griffin with the same tired old accusations,the result of which will only increase support for the BNP.
Undoubtedly he will be seen by many people, who usually don't bother to vote, as a victim of "bulling", and may decide to support him at the next election.
A crowd of young-white-and not too bright,leftists setting off flares ,blocking streets ,and attacking the police ,doesn't go down well in middle England.
A black American leftist lecturing about the English (who apparently don't exist ,and are really African)wont go down well either.
In fact peoples minds on ether side of the argument wont be changed.It will be the large numbers of the population not concerned with politics, but watched because of all the publicity ,that will benefit the BNP.
If the BNP can keep the controversy rolling they can only benefit from the attention.
Complain about this comment
If the intention last night was for free and fair political debate about actual issues the:
1. Why was the audience packed with Guardian readers?
2. Why did David Dimbleby have no embarrasing (or abhorrent) quotes from other panellists?
3. Why, in a pre recorded programme, which was then edited, did someone manage to purposefully miss pronounce Nick, much to the amusement of the audience?
4. Why did the line of questioning look to demonise the BNP from the off?
I live on a large, predominantly white, working class estate in Cheshire. You only have to go there, see the place and speak to people, to realise why a large number of them vote for parties like the BNP. These are the forgotten estates, predominantly ex labouor, and now represented by no one. The nearest to a best fit is the BNP, and yes it does have a racist element, but it also speaks a few home truths as well, and for many people it makes a change.
I think Griffin has some awful views. His views on the holocaust being right at the top, and sinking migrant boats too. However, his shut the door policy on immigration makes sense, we need to control our borders, we do NOT have endless resources to look after the world. His view on homosexuality, i am not saying it should be outlawed, but you know what, i do feel uncomfortable seeing grown men kiss one another, its a fact, and i think many people feel the same, even though they do not hate gay people. I don't think we should teach homosexuality in schools, we should provide support to children who are sexually confused, but it should be on their terms, and not imposed through teaching. And should gay people adopt? No they shouldn't, not that they are not good parents, but what about a childs right to mother and father? Can you imagine the bullying beyond the school gates? And political correctness regarding Islam. You and I know that it is a predominantly peaceful religion, however, look at its own hard core factions which want to make Britain a Muslim state, opress women and impose their ways of life on us when we don't want them to. We need to address this properly, but no one will instigate the debate through a fear of what will happen!
And you know, we need to debate these issues, because they matter. Look at our society right now? We have a country on its knees, ruled by Brussels, with thousands of people clamouring for tax payers hard earned money when they get here, so that they can live out their dream. Well i'm sorry but we can't look after everyone.
And as for Jack Straw saying the BNP do not fit in with the ideals of Britain. Neither do a lot of immigrants who live in their own isolated communities. And over a million people voted for them, and dismissing their views and concerns on national television like that will only make feel further excluded from their own country, and make them more determined to vote for the BNP, as they are not being listened too.
So Nick Griffin, i applaud you, you have the guts to instigate debate on important issues which matter to the people who were massively under represented in last nights audience, because the left wing BBC did nothing to ensure proper debate and fair representation. It is just a pity that I would never vote for you because of the underlying hate you foster, however, i appreciate many of your moral standpoints.
Thank you.
Complain about this comment
Makes one wish that Germany had had Question Time in c.1932
Complain about this comment
I have no idea why I was moderated.
The BBC have totally got the result they did not want.
The audience was cherry picked and biased. Nick Griffin despite being attacked on all sides, came out as the hero, the only person prepared to speak out for the British public.
The public are disenchanted with mainstream politicians and if those same politicians are orchestrated in their attack on the BNP then the public will take the opposite view.
Reverse psychology is what happened and the BBC sawed off the branch they were sitting on. Yay!
Complain about this comment
It's hilarious to see all the right wing extremists flooding the boards this morning, accusing the QT audience of being "full of Guardian readers" and the BBC of orchestrating this.
It's the only way the poor dears have of saving face.
They can't possibly accept that their hero showed himself up badly last night and revealed his true colours. The guy didn't need editing or selective questioning - he dug his own grave with his ludicrous nonsense.
He's been exposed and his fans are embarrassed and frustrated.
(And I say that as someone who has absolutely no time for the 3 main parties, but at least recognizes there is a scale of unpleasantness to be judged here)
Complain about this comment
Death in the Afternoon,
The bull always loses in a bullfight.
Hemmingway described the primordal spectacle and ballet that preceded the inevitable coup de grace. This was what an audience pays for - the bull displays it's strength and danger, the matadors their cunning and skill.
Poleaxing bull in the opening minutes of the fight, and dragging the lifeless body around the ring turns a noble bullring into an abattoir.
Complain about this comment
In the 70s Left wing 'Trotskyists', very vocal, highly dedicated, tried to take over publicity, forums, etc., starting with university magazines. Funnily enough, the BNP, although right wing, give me the same feeling.
Luckily Griffin, as we saw, is a lightweight, no intelligent person would mistake him for Prime-minister material.
Complain about this comment
So what did you expect from a debate of this nature?
A few home truths were aired and if given the chance Mr griffin could have said a lot more of what the general public wished him to say on their behalf, As a lot was left unfinished due to hostile interference
One of the main issues was immigration of which is a sore point for many of the white British public they see their every day liberties being eroded by a lax British government in tackling this delicate subject
in case of inflaming ethnic groups.
Never the less some good points were aired and brought into the open and will perhaps be aired in the near future?
Complain about this comment
I was actually quite surprised when I saw some of the reviews of last night's program. The BBC are clearly focussing on some of the more extremist things that he said in their reviews to colour some people's opinions. Whilst he did appear twitchy and uncomfortable throughout some of the questioning I was surprised to hear some relatively reasoned answers coming from Nick Griffin. I'm by no means a supporter, he's clearly a vile little man, but it's clear that the failure of the mainstream parties on certain issues (Particularly immigration) allows extremists to gain support.
I do however, agree that Question Time was the wrong platform for the BBC to use. Britons tend to support an underdog and with 5 people (Including DD) against him as well as a carefully selected audience, he was just that. As was touched upon in This Week after Question Time a more appropriate platform to expose Mr Griffin would have been an interview with Andrew Neal or even Paxman. I'd like to see him try and squirm his way out of some of their questions.
Complain about this comment
What continues to baffle is the arrogance of the leading parties , they say they listen or will change but they never deliver. Everybody can see whats wrong with this country and where we need to improve. Why do people travel 1000s of mile passing through countless countries to get to our shows … because we are an easy touch
I love this country and vote regularly but feel for real change you need to be radical , Voting for the tories and labour gives me nothing new. My vote will go and continue to go to a party from now on who will better my family firstly and look after this country second. Why do we fight in far off countries , if it is the right thing to do then why doesn’t the rest of the world think so ,because the rest of the world do not think it’s the right thing to do. We need to get our own house in order first before we knock on somebody’s else’s demanding “do as I say not as I do !”
So with that and eventually my point, at least Mr Nick Griffin was honest which is more than can be said for the other so called bastions of the political society , that’s why they are gaining support and the sooner the likes of Brown and alike cotton on the better. Do not sit on the fence , do not belittle us ,do not talk in riddles … drop the arrogance and try talking to us as human beings. I think you will be pleasantly surprised with the outcome. And DO do something for the people of the UK first and not the world ,we deserve it and now demand it.
As labour will soon find out , their inability to acknowledge what the people wanted will cost them dearly. If you only realized a few years back what was important to the people you will still be in power next June.
Complain about this comment
Well done to the BBC for inviting him on. People like that should be exposed and, unlike David Irving, Nick Griffin is easily exposed. Well done to the panel for appearing with such a character instead of supporting censorship.
Complain about this comment
While I find Griffin's views loathesome and pandering to the lowest number, his rising has come from the pathetic politics we endure in this country. The rest of the panellists may be able to take the moral hgih ground but I'd rather they just came out with some policy ideas to fix the issues rather than attack a minor political entity who has flourished because of their lack of political ability. The panellists were all shades of each other (literally and racially!) and for the Lib Dem guy to come out and talk about Griffin as if he is just power hungry is totally hypocritical.
Complain about this comment
55. Spot on. Your remarks should be in the Press.
My big agonising question now is whether I will vote BNP or Tory in the General Election. I am leaning towards the BNP as they are brave enough to speak out for the majority of the British Public and they don't have the expenses scandal hanging over them either.
Complain about this comment
In an ideal world the BNP would not exist, and it would not be necessary to invite them onto popular political programmes.
Given that the BBC did invite Nick Griffin, and I think they were right to do so, the program went as well as expected.
Griffin came over as stupid and odious (and devious as well). The panellists and audience confronted Griffin with reasoned argument rather than emotion (I had feared the program would descend into chaos). Hopefully we won't be seeing Griffin and his ilk on our screens for a long long time.
Griffin's pathetic performance supports my view that the self-styled anti-fascist mob oustide the BBC, and the anti-free-speech wing of the Labour Party (Hain etc) were just plain wrong.
Well done BBC.
Complain about this comment
This was a farce, it probably did a great favour to the BNP.Setting the show up with a hostile audience, a panel of lightweights and not allowing Griffin to speak or finish his answers to questions made one wonder who were the facists.It was an exercise in the bullying tactics attributed to the BNP. Staw and Hulme were blustering and out of their depth and Warsi sounded as though she was talking to the school debating society.The strange Afro American lady appeared to have one agenda, demonstrating her dubious superior intellect. Why if this issue is so important did none of our political heavyweights put themselves in the firing line ? Did Griffin frighten them or were they afraid to appear because they have no answers to what Griffin realises people worry about.
Complain about this comment
The Chairman of YouGov made an interesting point yesterday when he said that their own research showed that half of people who vote BNP do so for purely racist reasons. The other half are more complicated.
But it seems that despite the media love of saying that main stream parties are pushing people into the arms of the BNP, the real reason people vote BNP is that they like their extremist policies on one level or another or are in areas where BNP lies are especially effective. This is NOT weakness in policy from the other parties, it is good local spin by the racists. But the media is so busy kicking main stream politics that it cant see the screaming obvious.
It is madness pussy footing around the issue:
A large number of people in this country are racist or biggotted.
White supremacist web sites, anti Islam sites and anti Jewish sites have vast followings, not just in America but in our country too.
But, thanks to modern political correctness, much of this vile sentiment has been buried - until now.
The BNP has given people the confidence to be more open about it again and far right website allow people to easily find others with similar twisted ideas - this is all very, very dangerous.
Griffin may have come across as a fool last night, and the politicians on the panel may be patting each other on the back, but the reality is that he is leading a racist marketing machine that is working; QT last night will be a positive, not a negative for him in marketing terms.
Complain about this comment
Comment #1 is spot on,I think the so called 'handpicked' audience did not give a true reflection of the majority of voters in this Country,the programme did not deal with more important issues facing the UK at this time.
Complain about this comment
I think the bias towards ethnic minorities in the crowd didn't really help mr Griffin, why does the BBC insist on filling the audience of question time with an unrepresentative cross section of the British people?
However Mr Griffin did well to counter the attacks coming at him from all angles, I don't agree with everything he stands for, but compared to Jack Straw his answers were at least honest.
Baroness Warsi was the most impressive member of the panel, and showed how the Conservative party will be looking to gain votes from dissafected Labour voters who would otherwise vote BNP with some more right wing policies and a tough stance on immigration.
Complain about this comment
Only saw a bit (as it was dull and BNP guy was being "predictable" - trying to hide his despicable views).
The surprise for me (in what I saw) was how bad Straw was. After Straws performance you can see how BNP gains enough popularity to get a couple of people elected. He was evasive, incoherent, went off on tangents, missed the point. Then when BNP guy said he could not explain something because of some law, Straw claimed that as Justice Minister he had the right to waive that law for the BNP for the program. There was probably no such law and BNP just being evasive, but Straw did not seem to know that and then thought he had the right to waive that law there and then. Does Straw think he has that much power and is he has is it right that he can use it that way ?
Complain about this comment
Well done to the BBC for having the BNP on QT, free speech is a vital part of our democracy. No surprise that Nick Griffin was evasive and unable to hold his own in a debate, and I don't think it will successfully recruit him any more members. I was worried that the show would be a stitch-up but actually I thought the audience well-balanced considering where it was filmed, and there was vocal support for Griffin so his supporters had been allowed in in proportionately representative numbers.
I thought Chris Huhne did okay, once he settled into the debate, but couldn't Labour have found someone more articulate and tougher in debate than Jack Straw? He seemed as evasive as Griffin at times. If only it had been Alan Johnson! Baroness Warsi did well on immigration but fell down on homosexuality.
If only we coudl vote for Bonnie Greer! Somehow I think politics isn't for her, she has too much integrity.
Complain about this comment
I thought Nick Griffin's views were not directly challenged by facts: especially his Muslim view which was just dismissed as incorrect,he was no worse than Jack Straw who refused to answer the Question of whether or not the Government's lack of understanding resulted in the increased BNP vote. I understand he may have a hidden agenda but it was not made clear by the panelists and they missed a great opportunity to destroy his party and beliefs if it is true.
I think and hope his discreditation of the BBC was an appalling lack of judgement.
Thanks for this forum
Complain about this comment
I hope that we, the indigenous British people, are treated better than the indigenous Africans, Asians, Americans and Australasians were treated by our Christian ancestors.
Complain about this comment
42#
I dont normally find myself agreeing with you, but I think you've called it right. Well said.
Complain about this comment
Nick Griffin spent his time defending himself because the show appeared a set-up designed to facilitate personal attacks on Nick Griffin, rather than discredit the BNP through the power of rational argument. From the outset, Mr Griffin was personally attacked in a way I have never seen on Question Time, by both panellists and Mr Dimbelby. I find Mr Griffin's views abhorrent, but the arguments descended into farce - Bonnie Greer's (and Mr Griffin's) questionable grasp of the glacial history of the British Isles and the place of Neanderthals in European social history being a particular low point. Mr Dimbleby's chairing of the event was unbalanced and unfair, and I agree with the other comments that Mr Griffin did a fair job of defending himself and making the other panellists look like howling wolves attacking a sheep. It would have been far more destructive to the BNP to have a balanced argument over the issues that the BNP has sought to exploit in its favour - unemployment, the social exclusion of the white underclass in Britain's cities, immigration - and to show the BNP in this context as reactionary and illogical. That both myself and other comments feel a degree of sympathy for Mr Griffin (but not for his views) suggests the show neither achieved its aims, or did the political process any favours whatsoever.
Complain about this comment
I watched the show and attempted to have no pre-conceptions about Griffin, I thought he did not do well with the pre loaded questions, except perhaps when Jack Straw made his speech about the brave Tommies of WW2 and how much we owe them, Griffin's retort to this was 'yes my Father served in the RAF during WW2 and Mr Straws was imprisoned for being a conscientious objector' I had to laugh at the look on the pompous Straw's face, best moment of the night for me. On the whole Griffin seemed to be generally bullied by the specially selected panel, the specially selected audience and very surprisingly Mr Dimbleby the panel chairperson who I think did himself great harm last night. I suspect that the argument to Ignore the BNP is perhaps the best one, trying to gang up on them in clumsy fashion only makes them into victims. Very badly played last night folks.
Complain about this comment
Oh, if you really want to see how racist this country can be, just read your own Have Your Say section of this website.
Everytime immigration is mentioned, the far right wing swamp the board with thinly disguised racist comments (goodness knows who lets some of those comments through). And they always manage to get the top ten recommended spots.
Admittedly the system allows this - without an UN recommend button, once the debate is swaying one direction it is very difficult to regain balance, but that just shows how determined the right wing are to get in there and sway public opinion. Very organised.
If this country does go down the tubes, it wont be because of multiculturalism, it will because politicians and the media are blind to the amount of casual racism that really exists.
Complain about this comment
I switched off this sanctimonious rubbish half way through. I wanted an intellectual debate not an example of bear baiting. This will have done no harm to Mr Griffin.
Complain about this comment
The party leader looked shifty.
The party leader denied.
The party leader lied.
The party leader tried to cover up his past.
Will we vote for this party?
Yes, I think Labour will still get a decent percentage of the vote in the next General Election.
Question Time over and we still have an immigration problem.
Complain about this comment
Like most people commenting here, I despise racism, and would never, ever consider voting for the BNP. Indeed, the drift of the BNP's core philosophy is frightening. But am I alone in thinking that the left-wing 'rent-a-mob' demonstrating outside the BBC are at least equally frightening?
This issue exposes the weakening in our democracy over the last two decades. We are governed - irrespective of party - by an increasingly elitist and conformist clique which is becoming despised by a large and growing proportion of the electorate.
We need debate if we are to have a healthy democracy. What we do NOT need is 'we-know-what-is-best-for-you' establishment elitists like Peter Hain trying to censor that debate. The glare of publicity is the best antidote to extremists like the BNP.
Complain about this comment
The only positive thing that could come out of this is that it may awaken the sleeping silent majority, who by their inaction and or indifference have allowed these people to gain a foothold in British Politics. Those who don’t vote can NOT complain when they do not like their elected representative.
If you don’t like them vote against them.
Complain about this comment
Oh look, the sky hasn't fallen in as a result of Nick Griffin's appearance on QT. The scenes of rabid protestors against free speech will do more to boost the BNP's core support than Griffin's own performance.
Nick Griffin came across as a political lightweight who when questioned on issues he must have been very prepared on struggled to articulate a response - although given the bear pit atmposphere, this is probably not surprsing.
I must disagree with those who thought Baroness Warsi performed well ('there's no such thing as a bogus asylum seeker') - to me she just reinforced the view that her title has more to do with her background than her personal qualities. Both the Baroness and Jack Straw struggled to get across much more than soundbites aimed at getting an easy round of applause.
Complain about this comment
53 - Northern Punk - thank you for saying what I didnt say in my earlier post.
Complain about this comment
Audience did not look like a representive sample of the UK population.
It all seemed one sided all against NG which will help his them against the rest attitude. Which will be very unfortunate indeed.
Best question came form a colour guy in a suit that Jack Straw refused to answer. Until somebody realises the mistakes of the last 12 years then he will unfortunatley gain support.
the issues in burnley/nelson have been known about for 6 years+.
All 3 main parties are well behind the curve which has allowed the BNP to rise.
The was no discussion about the inforement of the minimum wage on imigrants. They are treated like bounded labour in many place. With accommodation deduced at source.
Where as a british gesser will have to pay tax/ni and council tax mortages transports and all the other stuff the immigrants will not have to pay. As many on farms live in caravan or barns etc or divide it by 12 or more as that what they pack into a house.
which means that localls need to earn far more to just be in the same place.
So that 2 things high tax's for low earners and the minimum wage that have brought about this problem both labour polices
Complain about this comment
At the very least, last night's programme allowed Nick Griffin to provide proof that he is, in fact, a serious British politician. In repsonse to questions he was brazenly able to deny what was propositioned, and to provide the answer that he wanted to provide, and not the one that was solicited by the question. Just like politicians from the main parties, of all shades of political opinion. This at least left him looking normal.
So, is he right? Who knows. Do I agree with all the policies of the party? No. Might I ever vote for them? Personally, no, but I know others who would.
It's really time for a grown up, serious, adult debate, but that's been true for the past 40 years, and we haven't had one yet.
Let's have the elction, and see what happens.
Complain about this comment
Unfortunately Nick Griffin was not allowed to speak long enough for me to get much of an opinion of him. Everyone, including David Dimbleby, used this programme as a BNP/Nick Griffin bashing party. I must agree with Nick Griffin on one of the things he said.... I too don't like to see grown men kissing in the street.
Complain about this comment
I was unimpressed with him.
The fact that he was on the show is not the BBC's fault, it is the fault of the main political parties for showing such contempt and arrogance to mainstream society. They live in their 'political ivory tower' far away from the rest of us, making decisions that affect our lives and the quality of life for future generations. At 61m, this country is far too overcrowded, but we are now seeing our population surge towards 71m over the next 25 years, and to 86m by the middle of the century.
Does anyone want this? Can you imagine the strain on resources in this small island for living space, food supply, water, power, education and health, and what will happen to the ecosystem. These are the concerns of many of us, i consider myself Liberal minded and could never vote BNP, but it is dismaying that the main parties ignore this issue.
The only way to stop the rise of the BNP is to address these issues, and have a more balanced immigration system and foster a stable population, better coped to deal with the challenges of the 21st Century. Until the major parties review our immigration policy, the BNP will remain in the headlines.
Complain about this comment
@66 Flame Patricia
... no surprise there then.
Complain about this comment
If there is such a rise of "racism" in this country (Yougov would say that wouldn't they), then it is thanks to this government allowing our country to become invaded by foreigners, some of whom are useful members of our society, many more who are not.
Complain about this comment
In the end I think it has been a good thing for British democracy to have allowed the BNP on QT.
It has allowed the British public see for themselves who and what the BNP stands for. What their abhorant values really are and how they treat those they percieve as different.
Many voters who were undecided as to whether the BNP were worth the vote surely must be decided now. They must see the BNP as a disgusting regime that encourages rasism, hatred, intolerance and facism.
I think Bonnie Greer's final comment(i think) summed it all up
'The British public has too much common sense'
we cannot allow this party or man to recieve power. Ever.
Complain about this comment
For me I did not understand why the panel and the audience did not just set about Griffin hitting him on the head with sticks, it might have been more comfortable to watch. I cannot say how it played to anyone who has sympathy towards Griffins views, but to me, I came away disliking the whole lot of them, the panel and the audience. Straw particularly the hypocrisy of this man and his continual lechures just astounds me. Griffin was nervous, I would be nervous too faced with a threatening mob, both inside and outside the studio. I do not see any difference, essentially, in someone like Griffin forcing their views on us than those self righteous people on the panel and in the audience doing the same thing. It just reinforced for me that democracy is dead and we are led by the nose by minority groups who continually get their own way.
I wanted to see a fair and balanced programme where Griffins views where exposed for what they are, instead all I saw is everything I have come to dislike in our society. Bully tactics to win over the population and an opponent who was not up to the fight. In the end one starts to wonder exactly what it is that the established parties are so afraid of. Maybe it is that they have spectacularly failed in every area with regard to Britain, that they are now even running scared of a small party like the BNP. I do not think this was an attempt to open the debate on immigration, race or BNP politicies, I think it was an effort by the 3 main parties, particularly Labour to close it, and for me it back-fired. People who voted for the BNP and those living in areas of high levels of immigration, will now be reassured that there is an attempt to silence them and as such the BNP vote will increase.
It now seems in our society it does not matter what you vote because it is those who shout loudest who get heard and as such get their own way.
Complain about this comment
I don't believe Nick Griffin performed well on QT last night - he really showed his true colours in terms of holocaust denial, islamophobia, and rubbing shoulders with the KKK. His abhorrent views were laid out for all to see and I can only hope that those who have voted for the BNP in the past can now see what they have voted for. A bigoted party with no place in modern British society.
However, at the same time I thought Jack Straw put up a far from convincing performance - at times he seemed to be spouting pre-prepared speeches and appeared nervous and twitchy. Chris Huhne might as well not even have been there. Both Straw and Huhne interrupted frequently, which allowed Griffin to take a back seat and not have to justify his viewpoint. Baroness Waresi clearly stood out on the panel responding articulately and confidently to Griffin's racist rhetoric.
The BBC were right to allow Griffin his democratic right to speak, however undemocratic his party's policies. It was uncomfortable viewing at times, but I believe the final outcome can only damage to the BNP moving forward.
Complain about this comment
A waste of an opportunity - it was so one-sided as to make it useless. Even Dimbleby set himself up to be judge and jury; I thought the idea was that the viewing public would be this?
Pathetic!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#84 Baroness Warsi is right, there is no such thing as a 'bogus asylum seekers'. 'Asylum seeker' is a legal term given to people who are claiming asylum because they will be harmed or persucuted in their home country. Having asylum seeker status means that you get certain legal restrictions; an asylum seeker cannot work, for example. Once the asylum seeker's case is heard, they will either be allowed to stay, in which case they are given refugee status, or they will be deported, in which case they will be deemed to be here as an illegal immigrant. At no time are they 'bogus' asylum seekers.
Complain about this comment
#55 - At 09:16am on 23 Oct 2009, NorthernPunk wrote:
If the intention last night was for free and fair political debate about actual issues the:
1. Why was the audience packed with Guardian readers?
2. Why did David Dimbleby have no embarrasing (or abhorrent) quotes from other panellists?
3. Why, in a pre recorded programme, which was then edited, did someone manage to purposefully miss pronounce Nick, much to the amusement of the audience?
4. Why did the line of questioning look to demonise the BNP from the off?
= = = = = = =
And I'd like to add a 5th question
Why did the prequel interviews on the show before it had even been aired include NO one who was pro- the BNP (say, a BNP voter), neutral, or even an ordinary citizen not negatively affected by the presumed aims of the BNP? No, we had a Jew, an Asian, Chris Huhne and the Shadow Community Cohesion minister Baroness Sayeeda Warsi who all wittered on endlessly against.
No one even spotted that if you NEED a "Community Cohesion" minister you've got problems that mediation probably won't sort out.
They are BOUND to produce balanced arguments, aren't they? Oh, sure.
Not one other panel member or critic offered any solution to the looming population crisis, to the fragile peace in quarters of some cities, to the increasing threat of riot; just the usual, decision-averting drizzly political verbiage.
No. I was a mix of sad and angry at the BBC, certainly angry at that "put up" show. The BBC staged it under the flag of "impartial" - but it was far from impartial.
Very disappointing - but it has earned my support for Nick Griffin as an honest, sincere person, who acquitted himself remarkably well given those skewed impartial circumstances.
And it's goodbye to the Lib dems for me. I had no intention of voting either Tory or Lab next year - no way - the Lib dems were a possibility - though they really lost it after sacking Charles Kennedy. Nick Clegg inspires nothing but there was some hope while Vince Cable and Chris Huhne ran the show. Now even that's gone. So who I can vote for remains to be decided.
Complain about this comment
I see the BNP are now complaining they were not given the opportunity to discuss current political events and it was all about the BNP.
The BBC is paid for by the public. That public money is not there to provide a platform for the BNP. The program was about viewers/audience questions (viewers/audience being those who were in effect paying for everything). Thus, the questions those people had was about the BNPs attitudes. So nothing wrong with people using their air time to ask what was of interest to them. If the BNP don't like it they should setup their own TV station with their own money and invite other politicians in for the discussions they want. But when it is being done with our money and they accept the invite for our questions then they can jolly well answer then and like it and not gripe about it when they come across badly.
They should remember that they were not the only ones to come across badly - just look back at Straw's performance.
Complain about this comment
The QT audience was simply very poor - given a golden opportunity to really challenge Griffin and ask difficult questions two-thirds simply opted to call Griffin racist/homophobic etc. And the panel were not much better.
Also the debate was far too centred on Griffin, and not enough challenging the other speakers (dismissing BNP's electoral success as expenses saga protest vote is too simplistic and easy) - by far best question of the night was 'rise of BNP due to failure of Labour's immigration policies?' and Straw's 'answer' was hopeless.
The panellist and many commentators have stated that Griffin came across badly/evasive etc. Unfortunately its not about whether Griffin came across badly to the 95% of people who are rational and would never dream of voting BNP; its about how he came across to the 5% who might and being painfully honest was Griffin any more evasive than Straw or any other politician?
There needs to be far more intelligent/articulate reponses to the threat of a vile organisation like the BNP
Complain about this comment
There was a consciencious objector on the Today program this morning, and when it was put to him that fascism would have won out if everyone acted like he did. He denied that was true - so Jack Straw's dad was right all after all.
Complain about this comment
I have been watching QT since I was a small child but I will think twice about turning it on in future. Has there ever been such a display of incoherent dogmatic, illogical gibberish from a group of panelists and audience alike.
Not to mention grotesque bullying from the host, Mr Dimbleby, who I have the utmost respect for under normal circumstances.
I think the white working classes will see this as an attack on them by the il(liberal) elite. Middle class, left wing hand wringers (and was there some, my god the sentiment flowed thick and fast) denying them all the things they so vehemently espouse (right to heritage, ethnic identity, freedom from persecution, free speech etc.)
The decision to allow Mr Griffin onto the show was criticised at first, but now we see the true agenda. Lynch him with a hand picked panel and audience ready with a thousand quotes, true or other wise, so as to discredit him once and for all in the eyes of the nation.
But the British aren't quite as stupid as they may think, it may yet back fire on them, we will only find out when this weak and discredited administration is forced to hold an election and then we will see.....
Joe davy
Complain about this comment
I'd just like to comment on two points of History that were raised in QT by Ms. Greer.
(a) There is archaeological evidence that there were humans living in Southern Britain during the 'cold' phase of this current 'Ice Age', which hasn't actually ended yet.
and (b) While the Roman Empire was made up of many countries and races, not everyone in it could be a Roman citizen. I refer to the existence of the 'incidio' class that existed, a class outside the protection of the Law in Britain and indeed one of the few ways of becoming a citizen was to become a legionary in the Roman army. It didn't help that Roman Britain was two-tiered with there being a Britannia Prima and a Britannia Secunda.
Much the same as in Wales in the Middle Ages where the only way around English Anti-Welsh laws was to join the English army and become a denizen.
Complain about this comment
It was fair for QT to mainly concentrate on Griffin and his views; he wants platforms to put them forward, so it is reasonable that people should be allowed to press him on his views.
Griffin didn’t come across well, he’s clearly thick-skinned but his evasiveness over having spoken at a KKK meeting spoke volumes (I found the video on youtube afterwards - ‘Nick Griffin + KKK’) as did his attempt to say that he was trying to be a moderate next to the Klan leader, which was laughable.
Griffin’s views on the Holocaust are naive and risible; my dad fought in WW11 and had friends that helped liberate Belsen. Trying to say the Nazis never had a deliberate policy of exterminating Jews is simply fantasy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/4445811.stm
Griffin’s knowledge of history is pretty shaky: ‘Indigenous people have been here for 17,000 years’. Britain was only re-occupied after the ice age ended 12,000 yrs ago [first known settlers were at Pakefield in Suffolk] and successive waves of Romans [Legions came from all over Europe] Saxons, Danes and Normans all both drove original Britons (aka Celts) out to the fringes and contributed massively to the gene pool. At the start of the 6th century (c 500 AD), a Gaelic tribe from the north of Ireland called the Scoti migrated and settled in what is now roughly modern day Argyll and drove the Picts from the area; most Scots are descended from these Scoti, or from Vikings. Migrants (Lombards, Flemish and Walloons, Huguenots; by the end of the 18th century there were around 10,000 Africans living in Britain.) have continued to add to the British gene pool since Norman times.
I thought Huhne and Warsi both calm impressive speakers; both could attract my vote at the next election. But Griffin came across as the freak-show side of politics.
Complain about this comment
The debate was managed well and the panel and audience (in particular Bonnie)were fantastic. It showed Griffin up entirely. If Griffin is going to get any publicity, this is the way to do it. I looked at the BNP website yesterday and was sickened by its content. Funny how today they have a temporary site, knowing people will be looking at it. This party constantly mask their true policies and play to the fears and frustrations of ordinary people, promoting tribalism over globalism. Griffin was acting last night; any sensible person saw through him. But the other political parties must come forward with sound immigration policy and rebuild trust to stop this party winning over the minds of the less sensible.
Complain about this comment
I haven't managed to get through all the comments yet, so forgive me if someone above has already made this point, but to those saying the audience was not representative of the country as a whole you do rather miss the point...
The audience was representative of London, where the debate was held and in keeping with QT's usual format.
The population of grim northern towns like Burnley would hardly be representative of Britain as a whole either.
Complain about this comment
For the the first time, someone spoke the truth about the state of this nation's appalling lack of control on immigration. Whoever said it, and whatever they stand for is insignificant. The point being made by Nick Griffin was highly relevant...that is the massive impact uncontrolled immigration has had on communities across this nation, where many have lost their identity and infrastructure to cope with the heaving numbers of immigrants pouring into this country.
It certainly appears to me, our current government has spent vast amounts of money housing and supporting out of control immigration, rather than ensuring that those already living in this country eg indigenous are sufficiently supported by it's own country. By that I mean vulnerable run down areas, and vulnerable children and adults. This is an area massively under-supported and ignored by our leading politicians.
Well done the BBC for allowing Nick Griffin into this question time. Because this man had the courage to address a question on the vast majority of indigenous people's tongues today.....when will this government take proper control of our borders and stem mass immigration to our country. Immigration is a good thing, but not when it is at the expense of those already living in the UK on or below the poverty line, in run down estates, or hostels, overburdening our health infracture and education infrastructure etc etc that are simply creaking at the seams.
We cannot as a nation provide enough specialist educational schools to meet the needs of a large number of children with disabilities, many many children with disabilties are suffering extraordinary hardship and robbed of an education because there are no local schools to meet their specialist needs. Many of these specialist were systematically shut down some 12 years ago. These are our indigenous vulnerable people/children whose needs ought to be addressed first before allowing mass immigration.
Nick Griffin made some excellent points on the BBC that other leading politicians should start listening to because I listened as many others did to Nick Griffin, and many of us are agreeing with the comments he bravely addressed last night in front of a hand picked hostile audience.
Complain about this comment
I think the picture of Griffin at the top of this page should have been lighted from below to give a menacing appearance. Come on, BBC, surely you can be more biased than the above effort.
Complain about this comment
Can we just have some more issues discussed next time BBC? Rather than simply attacking BNP. All in though- it was great to have some debate and include BNP. Our democracy can take any viewpoint. I would guess that without him, the BNP would fall apart. He certainly isn't stupid (Oxbridge educated I think) but neither is he very polished. They'll probably keep growing until someone, somewhere puts a limit on the UK population. It's up to the Tories to do it or they'll have themselves to blame for BNP success.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
99. At 10:11am on 23 Oct 2009, DeimosL wrote:
They should remember that they were not the only ones to come across badly - just look back at Straw's performance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, although it was a veritable vertuoso compared to Mr. Griffin!!
Complain about this comment
#97
Have to disagree with you on that one. To me, a bogus asylum seeker is someone seeking to come here for economic reasons who then claims they are being/likely to be persecuted in their own country as a reason for being allowed to stay.
If this claim is rejected then the legal definition for their position may be illegal immigrant but the fact is that their claim for asylum status was bogus.
It's like someone who claims benefits (or expenses) that knowingly were not entitled to - they are bogus claimants but they are not legally defined as such.
Complain about this comment
I like the way people are still focusing on Nick Griffin when it was Jack Straw, an ex-communist, who made himself look the fool. He did not answer a single question outright for the entire evening and NG struck him down with his very first comment and Straw had to resort to petty name-calling afterwards.
NG also receive a round of applause for his first 2 answers (when he actually got chance to finish a question that is!) from sections of the audience which was great to see.
I am not a fan of Nick Griffin but I am a big admirer of the many good, honest nationalists, some of whom I consider good friends, that the BNP has within it's ranks.
Griffin did OK, but he does struggle under pressue sometimes; I have witnessed this first hand but regardless of anything else. He stood up, in the face of a hand picked audience and hand picked questions and did well.
Complain about this comment
Small point from a floating / Tory voter.
Whilst groups like the National Black Police Officer's association and the Metropolitan version of the same exist. Whilst the Muslim Council of Great Britain exist, whilst the self serving Race Relations board or whatever commission it stands for these days exists there will always be a BNP or similar.
These minority groups exist not to be inclusive, they seek out a specific target audience and solely exist to get their demographic the best possible deal, usually to the detriment of their polar opposite. What's the difference between any of them and the BNP?
It is very easy to look for excuses or answers as to why the average heterosexual, white, married, Christian, anglo-saxon person, for want of a better description, would feel alienated by main-stream parties who only seem to listen to the particular minority who are shouting loudest this week.
If the Police have 10 crimes to investigate and 9 are against a white middle/working class person and one is against someone of the current minority of choice then if the police only have time to investigate one of those crimes it would seem that the minority case would get the time. This is because if they did not they know a whole bunch of aggressive, politically-motivated, drum-banging lawyers and agitants would come down on the chief constable and shout hime down with cries of racist / homophobe / islamophobe etc. He doesn't need the aggro. He also knows if he ignores the white middle class, they will have a chunter and then get on with earning a living or trying to. He knows no-one will stand up for the majority as they have all been cowed into submission for fear of being accused of the aforementioned homophobia / racism etc.
Whilst this situation exists, there is a lovely home for all of the disaffected people who feel alienated from their own society, it is called the BNP. Now the BBC / left wing and to some extent tory press miss the point and bang on about racism etc. where the BNP are concerned. But are the Metropolitan Black Policemen's Association not racist by the same token, how many White members do they have?
Whilst the "one rule for them and a different one for us" applies the BNP will sadly flourish.
Complain about this comment
If you believe the tosh you have written, Nick, it can only be because you live in the BBC microenvironment. If you think that this show damaged or exposed Nick Griffin in any way, just have a look at the Have Your Say today. The fact is that the mainstream parties all refuse to talk about immigration. Jack Straw appeared to be reading answers to questions last night. The audience and the panel appeared to think that attacking NG would do the trick. Actually, by refusing to discuss immigration sensibly and by effectivley ganging up on NG, it made him look like a victim.
This programme was broadcast one day after the ONS (the official government statistician) forecast a population growth faster than at any time in our history AND said that this was due mainly to immigration. Yesterday also saw an article jointly written by Nicholas Soames and Frank Field (i.e. labour and conservative together) berating the failure of governments to deal with immigration. If you wish to defeat the BNP, you certainly won't do it by violent demonstrations and by persoanl attack in Question Time. You will only do it by dealing with the underlying disenfranchisement of the white working class, which is switching from Labour to the BNP.
I know that the BBC is in love with Islam, but I would recommend the series of serious history books written by Bernard Lewis to anyone who thinks that Islam will not try to change the society in which Muslims live. That is the fundamental difference between Islam and other immigrants, such as Sikhs, Jews etc who come to live here but accept the indigenous culture as the environment to which they hav erelocated.
Complain about this comment
I've had a thought. Not particularly knew, and probably not particularly popular. But here goes.
If we adopt some form of PR here for national and local government elections, the BNP could actually benefit, particuarly since some of their policies do resonate with large parts of the polpulace, whether you like it or not.
This might in fact be a good thing, since it would force the mainstream parties to pay attention to the majority in this country. Then you have to ask yourselves, is there any place in this country for extreme views held by bigoted people, who would attempt to force their views upon us, regardless?
Discuss.
Complain about this comment
for me, it was like when I throw a dinner party here in Hampstead, North London for some nice refined people and it gets crashed by someone who has absolutely zero table manners; don't know if that's happened to you but it's extremely embarrassing, let me tell you - and that's what I felt throughout the programme - Embarrassed - socially embarrassed in my own home - only the BNP can do that ... yet another reason why they should be banned, perhaps the best one
Complain about this comment
So the odious Mr Griffin got his time in the spotlight, problem is by the end of the programme he'd achieved martyr-like status. Obviously handpicked questions from the audience designed to show him up as a racist rather than a proper debate about immigration (the elephant in the room). The sanctiomonious waffling from Jack Straw was by far the most digusting performance on display. Here's a man appeasing extremist in his own constituency to garner votes, who represents a government that has launched two unnecessary wars on foriegn countrys, curtailed our civil liberties like no other, and created more debt than any in this country's peactime history. Yet, for tonight, reasonable debate was left along with the guardian-reading flying pickets at the BBC gates, as everyone rounded on the pantomime villian Nick Griffin.
Whether people like it or not, the BNP represent the views of 2 million people in this country so hardly a fringe party. In fact, there are more people who voted BNP than there are muslims living in the UK. Maybe the mainstream parties should actually stop and listen to the man in the street's view on immigration and get off their high horses for a change instead of villifying anyone who disagrees with them.
Complain about this comment
My post at #22 has been moderated. There was nothing controversial or offensive in it and it made no reference to any other posters. I am genuinely bemused as to why it has been moderated. Can anybody enlighten me? The person who asked for it to be moderated or the moderators themselves?
Thanks in anticipation.
Complain about this comment
Nick Griffin's performance last night was ridiculously bad and laughable but just as bad was the sight of the 3 mainstream MP's queuing up to see who could give the best sermon against the BNP. They had all their pre prepared sound bites that they had to get in to please their party leaders, instantly forgetting that they are part of the reason Griffin was there in the first place...
Complain about this comment
Whilst it was good to see the rascist exposed - I was annoyed that those who put him there are still in denial of responsibility.
People don't vote for the BNP, they are voting against the other parties
Jack Straw represents a party which continued the policies of the Tory party which brought us to the brink of collapse (and don't get too excited, we still have a long way to go yet) - and the 'other guy' fits somewhere in the tiny crack between them.
After last night my vote will go to either David Dimbleby or the lady from the British Museum - because all the rest can go to hell.
Griffin uses the anger about the failure of Capitalism to engineer hate against the minorities - but the real criminials are all 'upwards'. I don't see many immigrants leaving the country for their yachts in Monaco to 'sit out the recession' - no that is a privilege solely for the rich (or ruling classes if you want to be historical)
Whilst this country is going to hit the skids and millions wil have to make sacrifices - MP's have been busy dipping their hands in the till, allowing bankers to take 'printed money' straight out of the back of the bank of England and have assisted in locking us into higher taxes for years to come.
Congratulations for defeating the monster YOU CREATED
Complain about this comment
#99. At 10:11am on 23 Oct 2009, DeimosL wrote:
"I see the BNP are now complaining they were not given the opportunity to discuss current political events and it was all about the BNP.
The BBC is paid for by the public. That public money is not there to provide a platform for the BNP."
I also am a license fee payer. I am utterly fed up with talking heads in the shape of Brown, Mandelson, Cameron, Osborne forever on my screen, with their annoying obfuscations, lies, suppositions, never answering questions directly let alone honestly (d'you remember Jacqui Smith repeating a line again and again, parrot fashion, no matter what she's asked).
I think Nick Griffin should have his chance on a BBC platform - I paid to see him - I don't watch much television (I once calculated that it costs me about £3.50 per programme) so why shouldn't I?
And I was incensed by the BBC deciding to present the BNP in a bad light, not just by way of the programme but the surrounding coverage. I was expecting impartiality. I was equally incensed by the programme totally focusing on Griffin with no other issues being raised.
And STILL no panelist came out to explain how they're going to deal with some looming and imminent problems: overpopulation and integration. Multiculturalism was always a daft idea in a tiny island like ours. You've seen the result, the banners wielded by minority communities who seek to take the country over. Their aims are no less sinister than anything the BNP can come up with. How are we going to deal with them?
Complain about this comment
69. At 09:32am on 23 Oct 2009, Gurubear wrote:
"The Chairman of YouGov made an interesting point yesterday when he said that their own research showed that half of people who vote BNP do so for purely racist reasons. The other half are more complicated."
I said that yesterday and I didn't need a poll to tell me that!
Complain about this comment
Yes, Nick Griffin made himself look foolish, but not nearly as foolish as Jack Straw. Jack is simply incapable of answering any question, even though he was allowed the time to finish his remarks. The "rivers of blood speech" that was, even in the context of this show, taken out of context, still needs reading - shame some of the audience hadn't read it. But why would the ethnic majority of the audience want to when it serves as a tool to brandish anyone a racist, who dare want to debate important issues. Enoch Powell was responding to concerns at that time, regarding immigration numbers and the dangers of inaction by government. We should all be careful - there were some applause for Mr Griffin from the audience. Enoch Powell talks of intergration - meaning that the foreigners who come to the country should be afforded equal rights and be indivisible - has this happened? Positive discrimination has been the reaction to consecutive governments failure to address 'ordinary' peoples concerns over immigration. If we are to believe the myth of the multi-cultural society, then why is there a need for things like community centres for ethnic minorities and the muslim council of great britain etc? I hear it all the time when people are discussing these issues - "i'm not a racist but..." why do people need to qualify themselves first, before entering into debate? Well done BBC for allowing him on the show and well done Mr Griffin - you just made pollitics interesting. In the words of Bob Hoskins....'it's good to talk'. He didn't say,"as long as we don't offend any one". Lets start offending eachother, maybe then we, as a society, will come to some truths.
Thanks (lib dem voter)
Complain about this comment
Bit of trivia here, although it may be more significant than one thinks:
Winston Churchill, Jim Callaghan, Barak Obama, David Cameron AND Nick Griffin
THEY ARE / WERE ALL LEFT HANDED.
Complain about this comment
It came over as a Bash Nick Griffen evening. Hoped for more chance to actually hear what his policies are, instead of the vitriol that came from panelists and audience. Made Mr. Griffen look a victim. Great pity.
Complain about this comment
Where was the discussion of the postal strike?
Complain about this comment
My overwhelming impression of Mr Griffin and his party comes from the visual pamphlets they hand out. An impression of skinheads and men that resemble Serbs from the Yugoslav Wars as they stand beside Campaign vans. I'm white, 42 and yes, do think multiculturalism and 'pc' have gone a little too far. However I am a graduate and know instinctively we all need to work 'as a team' to have any chance at all in a globalised world. Besides, even if they were elected, BNP Britain would be dislocated in International Affairs like South Africa was in the 60s and 70s. But Ms Greer needs to be mindful that white british people do have a spiritual connection with Angles, Saxons and Vikings and the numerous other multiple-layers of British history since 500AD. To wave that aside as 'whacky' by alluding to the ice age or original African tribes is as deeply insulting as dismissing a West Indian man's connection to Slavery, Africa, Windrush or the other rallying points of being black. Sociologists like Stuart Hall take great pains to tell us they are 'black and proud' of their ethnicity. To deny English/British people this innate history as Ms Greer seemed to was quite offensive and could push rational people to the right. King Alfred the Great means far more to me than the African diaspora, whether invention, myth or origin story-it's mine, this matters to me, I'm English, it should be equally respected.
Complain about this comment
I thought Baroness Warsi's comment about there being "no such thing as a BOGUS asylum seeker, only asylum seekers" was disingenuous at best.
Straw would not have done any better though. Britain is an island. There are masses of "Safe havens" between the UK and many of the countries the "Asylum seekers" come from. They are NOT trying to get into the UK because they come from war-torn anywhere...they are trying to get into Britain because they know Britain is stupid enough to try and fix the world's problems. We give free healthcare and free housing.
If 30 asylum seekers knocked on Baroness Warsi's front door and said "we want shelter in your luxurious home", would she take them in? She has enough money in her bank account to support 30 people, so does Jack Straw, to a basic level. Why do the political elite think it's right that we have to keep on taking these people onto our estates and into our hospitals, because the elite know it will not affect them in their mansions, it will not affect their gold plated pensions or private health insurance.
They do not see the creaks and cracks developing in the infrastructure. If Gordon Brown went to an NHS hospital it would be announced weeks beforehand, it would suddenly find budget for a fresh lick of paint, all the difficult cases would either be cancelled or shoved out the door.
The elite do not see Britain as it really is. Only as they wish to see it with their insulated Westmister, expenses paid lifestyles. The elite are living in their utopia at our expense. Whilst they do not see or care to see what is really going on in Britain the BNP will flourish amongst the under- and lower-classes.
Complain about this comment
The media and political establishment still don't know how to deal with the BNP, but that may be because they don't recognise the level of alienation that exists. The kind of bullying shown on this programme is one current tactic,another is simple exclusion, but these increase the BNP's appeal as the honest outsider. In the end the real issues of multiculturalism, housing, employment and immigration do actually have to be debated and addressed.
Complain about this comment
I realise the only defence for BNP supporters is that the audience were 'hand picked to be hostile towards Nick griffin' - simply because his arguments failed dismally.
However, having looked at the BNP members list for my area (West London) - the audience was very much representative of the views out there. In my area of about 1.5 million people there are less than 20 BNP members - so how can you argue it wasn't representative.
Sure, maybe if you're comparing it to your little 'white's only enclave' in a Northern city then you might have a different view - but the reality is that the number of people who actually support the BNP are tiny in comparison to those who do not.
All I'm waiting for now is for the BNP headquarters to get burnt down and for the blame to be put on 'the communists' and the goal of 'victimisation' will be complete.
You won't fool me, and it would appear nor will you fool the majority of the country.
"We're quite happy to have a whip round and buy you and your supporters a plane ticket to the south pole - a colourless landscape"
Complain about this comment
My worry about last night was that those who voted for the BNP before did so because they felt their voices were not beiong heard by the current Labout government on issues including immigration. Now I know that as soon as you mention the immigration word and that it should be slowed or stopped that you are automatically branded as having a racist view but I am sorry this is not the case.
I do not agree with or support the BNP and could never bring myself to vote for this racist party, but they will gain support all the time the problem of immigration is being denied by the main political parties.
Complain about this comment
The BBC were right to invite NG onto the show, Peter Hain is not thinking it through. By inviting him it allowed us all to see what a nasty, shifty, charlatan he is. Had Gordon Brown, say, performed like a grinning oaf, most on here would be deriding him as useless, but political bigotry makes some people blind. NG performed appallingly. Every point he made could not be supported by any rational argument. He ducked and dived to try to avoid revealing his true colours and failed miserably. But the panel let him off the hook. Only David D put him on the spot and didn't he squirm.
The BNP have one valid argument: that immigration has happened too quickly, been too focussed in certain areas, and not sufficiently resourced to allow disparate cultures to sit alongside each other and, to some extent, integrate.
Fair enough, so let's tackle the issue then the BNP and Flame Pat will go away.
Complain about this comment
A friend's son was selected and offered a post for training as Metropolitan police officer.
HOWEVER, he was kept "on ice" for three years because, the police told him, they did not have enough BLACK POLICE OFFICERS and had to recruit them first.
If that is not racism in reverse then what is?
NB another young lad in that situation sued and won because of the police discriminating against him as a white boy
Complain about this comment
I watched QT for the first time in years. I am quite to say I WAS a member of the labour party and reveled at the time they were brought to power. Time for change, the people spoke and voted them in.
During a general election programme, I forget which, a "high ranking" stalwarts labour politician commented on Nick Griffin gaining votes. It was something along the lines of "It doesn't matter how many seats we gained or lost tonight. What we need to focus on is that HE has gained thousands of votes. This is worrying."
None of the other political panelists answered any of the questions. Nick Griffin did (well tried to!). None of the other panelists had a coherent "party" line that reflects the public view. Nick Griffin did.
Of all the views expressed by the panelists I found myself to be siding with Nick Griffin. I feel sick! Sickened by that the only opposition that mainly represents my views for the direction of this country is alined with who my Grandfather fought against to save.
I will make absolutely sure I vote at the next election to stake my claim I DIDN'T VOTE BNP!
Complain about this comment
The left has some great orators such as Tony Benn and George Galloway. Both of them can handle tough interviews and give as good as they get. But you have to ask how well they would perform when faced with an entire panel, hand picked audience, questions and host all determined to find fault with everything they said. George Galloway gets a fairer hearing on Fox News ! The BBC claimed they had to invite Nick Griffin on the programme because of political balance, yet everything about Question Time wasn't. It wasn't a debate is a show trial. BBC News 24 asked two people in the audience to give their views - a middle class Indian women and a a middle-class Jewish man - not what you would call floating BNP voters.
The BBC definately over-egged the pudding on this one
Complain about this comment
69.Gurubear wrote:
"A large number of people in this country are racist or biggotted."
Actually the figure is 100%. We all are on anything to do with differences between people. It's called being Human. All that varies is by how much these views are held, voiced, or acted upon.
I'm sick of hearing from people who think they are above it all and aren't "racist", or "fatist", or "wealthist", or "classist", or whatever other -ist you care to describe. It's blatant hypocracy.
Last night Griffin proved to be an incompetent, ill-educated (history-wise) idiot. However, he is useful in bringing to the fore the issue of immigration. When we can finally disentangle that from "race" then we can have the debate that is needed in this country. I say that as an immigrant myself. What was clear from last night is that people like Jack Straw refuse to engage on the issue because it would reflect so badly on their failed policies.
What we need is the debate that should have occured 40 years ago but was stifled by the Rivers of Blood speech and the unjustified reaction to it. I was hoping a start may have been made last night, but there you go; a hate figure that can't debate the real issue, two spineless men who won't answer the question, and a moderator who was openly hostile. Only the two women can be given any credit for trying to address the questions and showing a bit of common sense.
Complain about this comment
'For much of the programme, Nick Griffin did not speak to the British people. He talked instead about himself It seems to me that far from allowing an examination of BNP policies...'
For much of the programme, Nick Griffin wasn't allowed to be heard at all. Actually this was nothing short of an attempted playground ambush by the BBC, which has backfired badly. Instead of allowing a reasoned debate, which would have exosed the holes in BNP policy, we were treated instead to the PC, 'rentamob', ably assisted by the inept and one sided Chair, howling down every syllable.
Read the BBC, 'Have Your Say'. Lots of comments from people who express themselves unlikely, (at present), to vote BNP but much more sympathetic because of last night's debacle.
Whoever planned last night's show, decided on the totally unrepresentative audience, etc, can take comfort in the fact that they probably added ten per cent to the BNP vote.
Complain about this comment
Not convinced that with the BBC putting the BNP in such a hostile environment helped to destroy his views. The BNP supporters will feel vindicated that the main stream parties on the panel had no answer to the perceived immigration issue.
With the recession deepening and big cuts in public sector programmes I don't see the end of the BNP just yet.
Complain about this comment
What's all the fuss about? Protesting people and political parties have nothing to be frighten of if what they say is true and Griffin is a nut case.
However, making such a 'to do' about a televison appearance is only going to make people sit up and listen to what Griffin has to say. The obvious manipulation of questions to make Griffin in a worse light was so obvious, Dimbleby was not impartial, and Straw jumping in there about his Jewish ancestry did not get the desired applause.
Two very important questions were either skimmed over or not answered properly at all.
However, to get a true picture of the feelings of the British public I do feel that holding the debate in this location was wrong. I think a different attitude would be seen if Wales, Scotland or Cornwall had been the chosen venue.
All in All, I do not think the mainstream parties have anything to worry about, but by creating all this fuss and name calling 'they' obviously do.
Lastly, if you read this Mr Griffin, I'd seriously rethink what you wear on the TV. You looked uncomfortable, and squashed in your attire.
Complain about this comment
the views of Nick Griffin and his party will always be classed as extreem but extreem views have in the past created good in the long run.
we can only hope that the people of this island can see the good not just the bad and progress forward.
the minority indiginous races of this little island already knows what its like to be marginalized and pushed further out of their home areas, some are fully governed by imports to their areas.
they have the right to extreem views but are ignored.
if all these smaller groups tied up the establishment may well have to take notice.
Complain about this comment
I am glad that the BNP appeared on last night's show as it has shown them to be the clueless, out-of-touch, backward party that they really are. Nick looked nervous and only came out with stupid attacking lines against Straw (his dad didnt serve in the RAF, blah blah).
It is now up to the mainstream parties to seriously address Immigration.
I personally think Chris Huhne did a good job, as well as Bonnie.
I am a little disappointed, however, that no-one questioned the Tories alliance with right-wing fascists in Europe. The Tories sit in the ECR Group in the European Parliament alongside holocaust deniers as well. I would say check out Edward Macmillan-Scott's Wikipedia page, but hey ho, one of his Assistants already deleted information that testifys that.
Complain about this comment
Does anyone know the viewing figures for last night?
Complain about this comment
The more you bully Nick Griffin, the more voters he will get.
The way the media and all the politicians have behaved towards him makes me feel they are in fact in the wrong, rather than Griffin. Ive never considered voting BNP, and never will, but a lot of people watching last night will vote BNP at the next election.
Complain about this comment
It would be interesting to know just how many of the QT audience or the protesters outside the building actually bothered to vote at the local and European elections.
I know the turn out for those elections was very low. Now my point is this. If you do not use your vote, you have no right to complain when political parties you do not like gain seats.
Perhaps if more of those people slating Nick Griffin and his party, had bothered to drag themselves away from their TV's and actually used their vote, then perhaps, Mr Griffin would not now be a MEP! It's not just Griffin who should hang his head in shame, so should all of the non voters who through their laziness, allowed this to happen.
Complain about this comment
I dislike the BNP and all they stand for. However, Nick Griffin is actually right about Churchill being closer to the BNP than any other party.
Despite what we're all taught in school, Churchill was not a very nice man. He was a believer of eugenics (selective breeding - you know, the thing Hitler believed in?) as well as being a Mussolini admirer until 1937 (so much for his great stance against fascism). He used mustard gas on the Kurds, and there is a genuine Churchill quote that goes "I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes." Another telling one is "I will not pretend that, if I had to choose between Communism and Nazism, I would choose Communism." Way to battle fascism, Winston. The simple truth is Churchill cared not a jot for the rest of the world, he only cared about Britain and its empire (he also had some "interesting" views on Ghandi and India as a whole).
Churchill was no better than Stalin, yet while one is thought of as merely "the lesser of two evils", the other was crowned as the "Greatest Briton" a few years ago by BBC viewers, thanks to our enormous ability to ignore certain inconvenient truths.
The BNP thrive on misinformation and repainting history for their own needs. Unfortunately, it's exactly how the rest of the political spectrum and the media operate as well. People like Nick Griffin exist because we lack the will to properly educate people - why don't we start by retelling our own history in more truthful terms, starting with the tyranny of the British Empire? Perhaps if people knew the truth about "Great" Britain, they would realise how pointless the BNP's message is.
Complain about this comment
Ah yes, along with Nick Griffin, Barak Obama, David Cameron and Winston Churchill more left handed politicians :
Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton
Something Freudian in that perhaps? Brown and Blair out of that particular picture.
Complain about this comment
Sagamix 118
I think that puts in a nutshell yours and political parties, (particularly Labours attitude), to people who are and think differently. Just because someone does not live up to your expectation of good table manners you would ban them from your dinner party.
I would have the good manners to allow them not only to come but to enjoy their evening. What gives you right to decide who is socially acceptable.
Complain about this comment
55. NorthernPunk
"..but you know what, i do feel uncomfortable seeing grown men kiss one another,"
That will shorten your 'places to holiday' list.
ps how do you feel about women kissing each other?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
101#
"There was a consciencious objector on the Today program this morning, and when it was put to him that fascism would have won out if everyone acted like he did. He denied that was true"
Well, he would do, wouldnt he? Sounds like it was a bit of a loaded question. The conchie couldnt deliver a factual answer (no-one knows what the true outcome would have been, but chances are, it would have been close to what the presenter put to him) - but for him to say that fascism would not have won in face of conscientious objectors is madness.
" - so Jack Straw's dad was right all after all."
Not sure what you mean by that? Right about what?
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson wrote" On the other hand, he could and did say that the "indigenous people of Britain" - by which he insisted he did not mean whites - were themselves victims of genocide. Surprisingly few of them appear to have noticed." May I suggest to you Nick that if you lived in some of the deprived areas of this country where the ethnic minorities have become the ethnic majorities, rather than comfortable Hampstead or Islington, then YOU MOST CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE NOTICED! And in addition, at NO TIME did Griffin say that he did not mean whites when referring to the indigenous people of Britain. What he said, in reply to hostile and irrelevant questioning on the issue was that it was not a matter of colour. Indigenous is indigenous, be you white English or Zulu.
Complain about this comment
The panel was not the correct mix. They had:
One Liberal, One Labour, One Conservative, One BNP.
Where does that condescending Black American lady Greer come in? She spoke to Griffin and the audience as though she was a presenter on Play School. In treating everybody as children she did herself no favours. We are all adults and quite capable of making up our minds.
Her place should have had another elected political party, such as UKIP or the Greens. Why not?
Complain about this comment
While the BNP Leader did come across as being very uncomfortable, he was faced with a barrage of questions which no other person on the panel did, I think he dealt with the variety fairly well.
Personally I do think that in this country our traditions and our belief system has been degraded by past governments and of course the more people who do not share the same values as the British people will naturally water these values down. But it is not right to persecute them for it, they want to come here because of how nice we actually are and because of the amount of benefits they can claim. Why else are they queuing to get out of France?
Mr Griffin did make a few good comments, we are overcrowded. If the government figures are to be believed we are to have 70,000,000 people living here by 2030. This to me is outrageous. Why? Because there is a clear link between overcrowding and violent crime, a clear link between population growth and pollution growth as well as the amount of land we will have to build on. You cannot house an extra 10,000,000 on true Brownfield land. Grass areas, moors and beauty spots will have to be built on.
Further more, again with an extra 10,000,000 people coming into Britain, the argument is always about their skills. This on the face of it seems a fair argument, however do we recognise differing cultures and beliefs could prove to further reduce British traditions? Should our citizenship test, test more rigorously on these matters?
Personally I would do the following, the amount of people who left this country last year, should be the same number of people, give or take say 10,000 to account for overlapping family commitments etc, and allow that number of people in the following year. We can select which of these people we believe are best suited and can offer us the most. It should be a privillage to come onto British, English, Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish soil. Not, as it partially is now, a given right.
I do not believe race should come into who we allow into the country, but differing cultures I do believe we should be careful so as not to dilute our own.
Complain about this comment
In a democracy, all views must be heard - so there was never any question that the BNP shouldn't be represented on Question Time. But to my mind a great opportunity was missed. Most of the audience and Panel were so breathlessly wound up, ready to attack Griffin, that they made the basic mistake of appearing to gang up on him, continually interrupt him and eventually almost victimise him. It would have been much more effective if they had let him speak at length in order that the mature British public could have quite sensibly made up their own minds about his puerile policies. Caledonian Comment
Complain about this comment
Unfortunately there was little or no debate about policies on Question Time.
All the participants concentrated on personalities - mostly trying to undermine the credibility of the other rather than explaining what their position was and the logic of taking that position.
So plenty of heat but very little light.
Complain about this comment
118#
Other CTP's?
And they are "refined" you say? Fancy......
Wouldnt being "refined" go against the grain somewhat and be seen as ever so slightly elitist in such company? (especially if you have to step over the working class homeless, asleep in the doorway to the mansion building under a copy of the Socialist Worker)
Bet the after dinner conversation around the free trade instant coffee and petit-fours is riveting... Armagnac and Cuban cigars would be, I guess, verboten?
Complain about this comment
1) Last night's performance by the Creep Griffin was no surprise to some. Take his bonkers 2007 defence of racism on Newsnight when he accused the BBC of "Demonising racism". Bewildered presenter Gavin Estler couldn't help blurting out:
"What? There's a good side to racism?"
To which Griffin, aware of his slip, muttered something incoherent about the word very 'racism' being a fiendish Trotskyite plot to do something or other. The BBC being naturally in league with Trotsky.
2) If it wasn't for YouTube, the panel would have been stymied. Thank god for web2, it may live up to its political promise yet. Most panellists referred to the online archive of Griffin in more candid times. He has no hiding place.
3) Griffin at least did history a service by forcing an examination of the real Churchill as opposed to the myth. His history as an early enthuisiast for enforced eugenic sterilisation, and his ordering troops to open fire on striking miners, and his determination to keep the disgusting, random, health system which almost lost us the war against fascism should all be forced down the throats of those who idolise him. Churchill's political reality is far nearer to fascism than manyy would like to admit. And his character much closer to the 'petrified adolescent' of Bevan's famous insult.
4) Why does Griffin single out fundamentalist Islam as the only misogynist religious sect? At that level, most religions are.
5) All racists are pathologically suppressing their true sexuality, so his reaction to two men kissing is not a surprise.
6) Fascism is always result of capitalism in crisis, not immigrants or any other scapegoat, and not the fault of evil or mnasty people. The design faults of the capitalist class-system are why the BNP has seats on local councils and the european Parliament they despise, and is on TV now.
7) The BBC can never win. Two weeks ago, the profit-crazed tabloids were demanding the fascists 'Right' to be on QT. When they granted it, they were reviled for seeking an audience. When it got that audience, it was reviled, but if nobody had watched, it would also be in the dock.
Complain about this comment
#134 I sincerely doubt Gordon Brown, nor any mainstream politcian would stand up well to a 1 hour barracking from the panel, Dimbleby and the audience.
Complain about this comment
I was very interested in watching Nick Griffin, but it was a waste of my time. It was purely an opportunity for other parties to have a go at him. I also thought the audience was unfairly balanced against Nick Griffin, which to be honest, started making me feel like I had to back him, as I would with any person being so openly bullied. I wanted to hear his views on the Mail strike, but this episode had no interest in current issues. I also thought David Dimbleby did a terrible job as Chair - you would have thought he was a member of the panel. I also agreed with Nick Griffin's comments about the Lefty BBC. If anything, it has made me at least consider his views at the next election, where previously, I wouldn't have given his party the time of day.
Complain about this comment
Were you watching the same programme as the rest of us?
A very poor interpretation of a shockingly bad BBC production.
This was far and away the most biased and unfair epsiode of QT I have ever sat through and the media coverage of it that has followed (including this blog) by selectively misquoting single clauses as representative of the views expressed in this show is a disgusting indictement of the media need for ratings over substance.
Complain about this comment
117#
No matter how small the minority who were bigoted?
See Ian Paisley... and a number of other NI political figures for that matter.
See also Al Muhajiroun, Hizb-Ut-Tahrir, Hamas... demonstrations against Danish cartoonists, returning British troops in Luton... EDL and BNP...
Bigotry is wrong. But then again, so is burying issues under the carpet when they are seen as being important to an electorate because mainstream political parties do not see it as politically expedient to address those issues.
Complain about this comment
All nick griffin wanted to do last night on question time was get the message across that britain if full, we need to stop letting immigrants into this country. He never mentioned chucking anybody out, the audience and panel even David D ganged up and would not let the guy finish a sentence. The coutry is in reccession, OAP's are suffering, Education and child safety are neglected and their are no jobs, why on earth do we carry on letting people in. Jack Staw said himself that people come into this country on temp visa's and then dissapear, labour cannot be bothered keeping track of them. just because Nick Griffin does not stand in line and keep his mouth shut he is branded a facist and a racist, what ever happened to freedom of speech ?
Complain about this comment
The UK is supposedly a country of free speech, where the unwritten rules convey that "I don't agree with what you say. In fact I deplore what you say. But I would lay down my life to defend your right to say it"
In turning the show into a "Nick Griffin bashing exercise" where he was barely availed of the courtesy to fully answer a single question without interruption, the panelists and the audience have, in my opinion, scored a massive own goal.
Complain about this comment
@ja
"Chris Huhne (Lib Dems), Jack Straw (Labour) and Sayeeda Warsi (Conservatives) were all excellent panellists on last night's episode of Question Time"
What? Straw struggled to remember his script in his opening. Huhn showed himself to be little but a spinner and Sayeeda Warsi was, as always, a waste of air time. Bonnie Greer was in the wrong place.
The audience was dominated by childish ranters e.g. the one who said something about buying Griffin a ticket out of the UK...it was playground level jibing yet a got a big cheer. Utterly pathetic (there were exceptions).
As for Griffin, if he'd been given more time to talk he might have finished the job of hanging himself.
I think the blame for a wasted opportunity lies with those who chose the panel. Cable, Hague and Field would have been better.
Complain about this comment
Saga #118
Everytime you open your mouth it is plain to see why we need the BNP and a free press. Your left wing "intelligensia" views are always sidelined by the desire to ban or proscribe anything or anyone who doesn't implicitly agree with you. I do not wish to vote BNP, may father is black, I am white. But fools like you will do more harm than good, but then again I always said Labour flourished under the "laws of unintended consequences" whereby their desire for minute control of everything eventually hurts those they try to help. Just look at employment law as a single example, only works in the Public sector so they impose it on the private sector to help Harman's women... who in their right mind would employ a young mum or mum-to-be now? For every case where someone wins £30k at a tribunal there are thousands who won't get a job...except in the public sector.
You've got to loosen the reins, Labour does not always know best. Legislature (ban this, ban that, control the other) will not solve everything.
If we got tough on the cause of the BNP, Labour wouldn't get a vote...unintended consequences you see.
Complain about this comment
I have watched the BBC's Question Time, missing very few, since it started. I can't think of anyone that came anywhere near the lunatic performance of the convicted racist thug appearing in last nights programme.
It looks as though the BNP voters have got the leader they deserve.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
OK, last night's program may well have destroyed Mr Griffin, but it still leaves open the question of which party will genuinely try to deal with problem of multiple deprivation in parts of our inner cities.
New Labour, in which people placed a great deal of hope in 1997 has failed. The Tories and the Lib Dems appear, judging from their representatives' attacks on the government's immigration policies last night, to be trying to jump onto the same bandwagon, that carried Mr Griffin to electoral success.
Multiple deprivation existed long before the recent influx of immigrants. Politicians' attention was being drawn to it by reports such as "Born to fail" way back in the 1970s and before. The only Prime Ministers who led governments that seem to make serious attempts to tackle it, were Lloyd George and Atlee.
Why do most politicians give little more than lip service to this problem, giving people like Mr Griffin the chance to fill the vacumn. Could it be that these areas are usually in safe Labour seats so that, under the UK's single member constituency system, the votes of the people living there make no difference at all to the results of elections?
Complain about this comment
#135: "HOWEVER, he was kept "on ice" for three years because, the police told him, they did not have enough BLACK POLICE OFFICERS and had to recruit them first.
If that is not racism in reverse then what is?"
That is not racism in reverse, it is just downright racism full stop. Oh no, hang on, the lad in question is white, correct? Sorry, that is not construed by the mainstream as racism, I'm afraid. Sorry pal.
Complain about this comment
Straw and his ilk just don't get it. Does n't he realise just how the British public despise him and his fellow parasites at Westminister. Greedy and corrupt politicians have wrecked the country and feathered their own nests with taxpayers money - our money! No wonder people are turning to the BNP. Well done Nick! At least he says what the majority of British people think.
Complain about this comment
To those who complain that the audience was unfairly balanced against Mr Griffin,may I point out the following.
If the audience of,say,100 people was fairly balanced to the BNP's share of votes,there would have been 0.6 of one person present to support Mr Griffin.
Enough said,I think.
Complain about this comment
I don't believe it was immigration that gave oxygen to the BBC. It was the expenses scandal that created such disgust in people that they could be bothered to vote. No more people than normal voted for the BNP, it just less people voted for any of the others. Regarding immigration, the media and the general public seem to have real difficulty distinguishing between legal and illegal immigration. Legal immigration has been decreasing for a number of years, illegal immigration is at best educated guesswork.
"Immigration" is a fantastic scapegoat, just racist enough to appeal to "purity of the bloodline/retention of indigenous culture" viewpoints, but not specific enough to offend those "obviously not English" British types.
On Freedom of speech/expression, does anyone believe that freedom of the press extends to the right to print untruths? Perhaps when quoting someone, but in an editorial?
Complain about this comment
To compare Nick Griffin to Robert Mugabe (post 8 by Amistad2000) is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in months. The issues in Zimbabwe are somewhat more complex. Because Mugabe has taken a stance e.g. on land ownership after a period of white (arguabally racist) rule, it does not make him a racsit or equivalent to Griffin. Not to justify the way Mugabe goes about doing things, but the opinions of the "general" public really do worry me at times.
Complain about this comment
143. At 11:11am on 23 Oct 2009, newScottishlassie wrote:
.....I am a little disappointed, however, that no-one questioned the Tories alliance with right-wing fascists in Europe.
**************************
I was disappointed that the show was not run in its normal format too.
It was a set-up designed to damage the BNP via its leader Nick Griffin.
An admirable intent but it didn't work I would suggest.
All right minded people are aware of what Griffin represents and they are never going to vote for him anyway. Those that support the racist aspect of the BNP might just have learnt how shallow the BNP really is if discussion had been allowed to cover a wider variety of topics - as QT usually does. We' would probably have found out very quickly that outside of the immigration issue, the BNP can offer nothing.
However, in line with its impartial balanced remit, I now look forward to the BBC promoting similar format QTs with say David Cameron in Glasgow or Gordon Brown in the stockbroker belt.
Complain about this comment
It is no good those on the left keeping on saying that Griffin performed badly. That may be so, however more damage was done to our political system (particularly Labour with the hapless Straw), last night than ever Griffin could have achieved if he had been treated with civility. In an effort by the 3 main parties and a very bias audience to close Griffin down, it only made the viewer reflect on why they were attempting to do so. The impression given was that the 3 main parties have failed so badly to address the problems of immigration in this Country they are trying to silence any descenting voice including those of the public. This will mean without representation, because the public who want a voice, are now very aware that none of the 3 parties are willing to deal and address their problems, the BNP vote will grow.
I am afraid it was a very good night for Griffin, he was made to look very much the victim of the established parties refusal to deal straight with the public.
Complain about this comment
Do I like or even consider voting for Griffin - no.
But watching the violent rent-a-mob outside and the orchestrated hate campaign inside the studio, the big message I got from this episode is as follows....
It just goes to show that the BNP were correct in one thing: the danger to democracy and our traditional way of life from labour and uncontrolled immigration is very real.
It sounds like we need to wake up and someone provide a party like the dutch freedom party so that ordinary people have someone to vote for.
Complain about this comment
There are huge continents such as Africa and Australia which have a far lower ratio of population to land.
My answer: repatriate all those trying to sink our small island to those lands with the space and resources.
Why not? You don't have to be a brain surgeon to work that one out now do you?
Complain about this comment
The BBC's disgrace was not so much in giving airtime to yet another Britnat party, but to broadcast this in nationally in Scotland in the middle of an important by-election campaign, giving a platform to four of the Britnat contenders, only one of which is likely to save its deposit and ignoring all of the home rule parties, of which only the SNP is likely to offer a real challenge to NuLab. BBC impartiality? I think not.
Looking on the bright side, those Scottish voters who watched it will, no doubt, have been bemused by yet another Tweedle trying to grab the unionist rattle and so more likely to be convinced that the reeking quasi-democratic polity of Westmidden is not for them.
Complain about this comment
It was an incredibly weak performance by Nick Griffin, but at the same time, I despaired at the line of questioning on last night's programme.
When on Question Time was there ever such a witchhunt against one member of the panel?
What happened to the usual format of discussing the various issues of the day? If this had been followed, I'm sure we would have seen how lightweight Nick Griffin and his party really are.
I do not sympatise with the views of the BNP, and have no intention of ever voting for them, but if anything, after last night's programme I felt a sense of disappointment in the Chairman and other members of the panel, except Bonnie Greer.
Complain about this comment
Not only was the panel not balanced, the questions did not follow the usual format of QT did they?
I fully expected it to proceed as normal with topical questions and answers. Post Strike, Climate Change, etc etc
However, it was one huge politically driven exercise in which the BBC were complicit, to rubbish the BNP with an audience of surprise surprise strident London lefties who are afraid of the BNP.
Oh yes, the fear could be cut with a knife. That is why they all ganged up and bullied the one brave man in the room (and I don't mean Bumblebee, bless him!).
Complain about this comment
That wasn't Question Time. It was a public trial of the history of the BNP and its leader. Nick Griffin wasn't given a chance to express his party's views on the major current issues. Consequently most of us don't know what the BNP stands for but we may all feel sorry for the unfair treatment reserved to its leader and a few of us may vote for them as a protest against the establishment. Just think what would have happened if the same treatment had been applied to one of the three major parties!
By the way I found Jack Straw rather patethic: just couldn't answer straight and simple questions. Nick, does he remind you of somebody else?
Complain about this comment
Most of the above show why eyewitness accounts are unreliable.
It is difficult to believe everybody watched the same programme!
Nick was bad, Nick was good, the audience were bad the audience was good, Dimbelby was a disgrace, Dimbelby was excellent etc.
I will say it wasnt cricket but if you have an iffy past and iffy policies you must expect a rough ride in such a forum.
As to Nick Griffins lack of media presentation skills would Brown have done any better he is an appalling performer on unscripted questions as this big three debate will show if it ever comes off.
Complain about this comment
Alas I missed the QT programme. I suspect that having Nick Griffin on was a blessing for Jack Straw. Must have been a nice change for a Labour politiican to not automatically be the main target for criticism.
Anyone seen the economic figures? Another record for Labour!
"The UK economy unexpectedly contracted by 0.4% between July and September...meaning the country is still in recession.
It is the first time UK gross domestic product (GDP) has contracted for six consecutive quarters, since quarterly figures were first recorded in 1955."
Complain about this comment
Who said that Nick Griffin was intelligent and clever, if he is he did'nt show any signs of that lastnight, but to be fair to him he was well and truly ambushed, perhaps deservedly so, if he was that clever he would have seen it coming, I don't think we have anything to fear from this man, he's on a road to nowhere.
Complain about this comment
Why was the program pre-recorded? More to the point, what material was edited out?
Complain about this comment
"far right" - Nick the BNP are a authoritarian Left Wing party with an unpleasant interest in race. They claim to be socialists. Can we stop this BBC smearing of right of centre politics please ?
Complain about this comment
118. At 10:35am on 23 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
for me, it was like when I throw a dinner party here in Hampstead, North London for some nice refined people and it gets crashed by someone who has absolutely zero table manners; don't know if that's happened to you but it's extremely embarrassing, let me tell you - and that's what I felt throughout the programme - Embarrassed - socially embarrassed in my own home
-----------
Yes, but don't worry. Jack Straw won't be a minister for much longer.
Complain about this comment
As a black man i found Griffin hilarious. He did exactly what i expected him to do, made himself look stupid. This was to such a degree at one stage I actually pityed him
Best was Bonnie Greer who had exactly the correct tone you need to have with people like him
We need to hear more from him and more cross-examinations, not less
I actualy think his support will increase temporarily, but those who voted for him who didn't realise who he was, will fall back at the Election
Complain about this comment
Post 147 you may well be right re Churchill.
After all it was he that wrote the "authorised" history of the Second World war that won him the Nobel Prize for Literature.
Complain about this comment
So,Nick Griffin walked into the BBCs "democracy and free speech impartiality trap".David Dimbleby could perhaps have waited a bit longer before abandoning his role,to join the bashing up.What a thoroughly depressing sight.It was hard to choose who scored the most points for their display of hatred.In my book Nick Griffin ended up looking no better,or worse than the baying mob.And still were none the wiser about BNP members expenses,whether they have duckhouses or not.Whether they support the fabulous Blunkett US (one way)extradition treaty blah blah blah....
Complain about this comment
I'm not a BNP member but well done Nick on standing your ground from an attack by every panalist on QT except Bonnie.
At least he speaks his mind and attemps to answer questions unlike Straw who couldn't even answer yes or no.
Unless the other parties wake up and do something about immigration the BNP will only prosper from one sided shows like this.
Complain about this comment
Quote: [On the other hand, he could and did say that the "indigenous people of Britain" - by which he insisted he did not mean whites - were themselves victims of genocide. Surprisingly few of them appear to have noticed.] Unquote.
Most of the people I know have noticed that our culture has been overwhelmed and changed for the worse, Nick.
We have no need for fundamentalist religions with 7th century concepts of justice and retribution in our society. Unless our mainstream parties face up to the facts of impending over population and cultural regression, we will slide further away from the ideal of a liberal, civilised and sensible society. The first step would be to stop funding and then to ban sharia law in England. Let us rather defend the vulnerable in our society with good British law and policing, and be proud to do so.
Complain about this comment
I love Great Britain and hate the way this government is in denial about the immigration problem. I love everything about our country and the diversity of its people but we have reached a tipping point at which immediate action must be implemented to halt further immigration.
Question time was disappointing as I would like to have listened to usual plitical debate instead of which I witnessed ganging up by people who should know better against a guy who holds a particular opinion
Complain about this comment
If someone tells a small truth about something very specific, and his opponents tell lies or refuse to listen on that subject, then the next time that person speaks a lie a lot of people will believe what he says rather than his opponents. This is how the BNP manage to secure such a large vote.
Griffin's an odious lying evil bigot, but because the other pannelists (especially straw) refused to even counter his arguments with reasoned thoughts (preferring instead to just refuse to even listen to any of the points) the other pannelists lose the argument in the wider view of a lot of the electorate. It's incredibly dangerous not to counter the BNP arguments.
You can't just stick your fingers in your ears and go "la la la I can't hear you. you're racist" and expect to win the argument.
Griffin's performance was as nasty/pathetic as I would have expected, but the other pannelists were hopeless in countering his arguments.
If Straw and the other pannelists use reasoned arguments, then the BNP vote would fall to nothing, but they're failing to do so.
When Straw was asked about European migration he just told blatent lies, instead he should have simply said "yes, we underestimated the number of people, and we don't really know because we don't count people out we only count people in, but we're going to fix that next time round and we'll resource our councils properly, but we're not going to arbitrarily ban people from the country on grounds of race because that's just plain evil"
I was hoping that the other panellists would destroy Griffin's credibility with reasoned arguments, but instead the pannelists and audience were just abusive and didn't counter any of the arguments. It played right into the BNP's hands.
Very disappointing.
Complain about this comment
However much you disagree with Nick Griffin's views,we do still live in a democracy and he has as much right as anyone else, within the limits of slander and libel, to express his views.
He does, however, reflect national concern about excessive immigration and if Jack Straw and his colleagues had taken steps to address this concern some time ago it's possible that candidates from the BNP would not have been elected.
The problem with immigration is that immigrants tend to drift towards existing immigrant communities and this unsettles the indigenous local population, who feel that they are being swamped.The race riots in Lancashire were a consequence of this.
A lot of problems could be avoided if the government had a planned immigration policy which ensured that there was a fairer and less threatening distribution of immigrants throughout the country.
It would also help if immigrants who do come here have skills which the native population do not have, thus not taking jobs that UK nationals could do.
Similarly, it would also help too if our EU partners would take their fair share of immigrants, economic migrants, refugees etc rather than ferry them onto us. For example, immigrants who arrived in France should have been adopted by France rather than being allowed to come through the Channel tunnel to the UK.
Very soon we will be having a general election and all that entails.I just hope that the major parties take the BNP threat seriously and come up with acceptable, well planned immigration policies.If they do it's more likely that the BNP will lose support.If they don't, we might all be losing a lot more.
Complain about this comment
I thought Jack Straw did a lot of damage to his party - denying there was an issue with imigration & that it didn't need capping, he also deneyed that the British race has 'White' roots.That's rediculous,it is not a racist comment to acknowlege our ancestors were white even if they had mixed blood!They are all missing the point that the BNP got votes because people want the main parties to wake up to the fact that Britain is full, we can't take anymore whatever their colour!!!We are loosing our identity as a nation & that needs addressing too.
Complain about this comment
Nick Griffin was not allowed to speak long enough, A very biased program, quite disturbing really.
I will check the BNP website out and see for myself.
Thankyou BBC for opening my eyes, I will in future be less trusting of your News
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
@NorthernPunk
"but you know what, i do feel uncomfortable seeing grown men kiss one another, its a fact, and i think many people feel the same, even though they do not hate gay people."
And you know what? I feel uncomfortable seeing old people kiss one another. Or ugly people. Or obese people. And I think many people feel the same, even though they do not hate old, ugly or obese people. A truly enlightened person doesn't base their morality on visceral reactions.
"I don't think we should teach homosexuality in schools"
Whenever people word it like this, it makes it sound like the mechanics of gay sex are being taught in schools! They are not and never have been. The only thing schools do is acknowledge that gay people exist and gay relationships exist. And yes it is NORMAL - it's normal that there is a minority of people who are gay. That's as normal as there being a minority who are left-handed. No-one tries to suggest it's a majority characteristic, or tries to persuade children to become gay. People like Griffin who use words like "teaching" and "promoting" homosexuality are tapping into that fear, trying to scare parents by appealing to that visceral discomfort I just spoke of.
"we should provide support to children who are sexually confused, but it should be on their terms, and not imposed through teaching."
Agreed. And on adoption...
Can you imagine the bullying beyond the school gates?"
That's a circular argument - essentially, gay adoption is wrong because there are people who think it's wrong. We would never have moved forward if odious views hadn't been challenged. Now if your argument is about the strengths and weaknesses of two fathers/mothers rather than one of each, then that's a valid one. I don't have an answer because I'm not a psychologist/sociologist and I realise that what people think of as "common sense" can sometimes be way off base.
Complain about this comment
It was easy to see Griffin was uncomfortable and the man knew he'd be in a hostile atmosphere, from the audience and the panel themselves. Under the circumstances, I think he handled himself pretty well. But the BBC, indirectly through the panel and audience, took the opportunity to attack him all the time, instead of letting him speak on other key issues such as economic recovery, Northern Ireland, etc. If he was given the chance to speak as a leader of a political party, I think maybe THAT would've shown how single minded and overall weak the BNP is.
However the man does have a point on mass immigration and over population, especially so during the recession. Having this opinion does not mean you support the BNP!
Complain about this comment
#173 "To those who complain that the audience was unfairly balanced against Mr Griffin,may I point out the following.
If the audience of,say,100 people was fairly balanced to the BNP's share of votes,there would have been 0.6 of one person present to support Mr Griffin.
Enough said,I think."
Presumably, a small minded person would fit the bill?
Having said that, I suppose if QT was being recorded in certain parts of the country you might have needed 20 BNP members in the audience.
Complain about this comment
#130. At 10:52am on 23 Oct 2009, purpleangelgeorgina wrote:
"I thought Baroness Warsi's comment about there being "no such thing as a BOGUS asylum seeker, only asylum seekers" was disingenuous at best.
Straw would not have done any better though. Britain is an island. There are masses of "Safe havens" between the UK and many of the countries the "Asylum seekers" come from. They are NOT trying to get into the UK because they come from war-torn anywhere...they are trying to get into Britain because they know Britain is stupid enough to try and fix the world's problems. We give free healthcare and free housing.
If 30 asylum seekers knocked on Baroness Warsi's front door and said "we want shelter in your luxurious home", would she take them in? She has enough money in her bank account to support 30 people, so does Jack Straw, to a basic level. Why do the political elite think it's right that we have to keep on taking these people onto our estates and into our hospitals, because the elite know it will not affect them in their mansions, it will not affect their gold plated pensions or private health insurance.
The elite do not see Britain as it really is. Only as they wish to see it with their insulated Westmister, expenses paid lifestyles. The elite are living in their utopia at our expense. Whilst they do not see or care to see what is really going on in Britain the BNP will flourish amongst the under- and lower-classes."
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
That's exactly where it's at. These politicians - Straw, Huhne, Baroness Warsi live a comparitive life of luxury. They seek to govern the country yet they haven't a clue what life is like down here on the street for many of us. None of those who spoke against the BNP live or have ever lived in a riot torn town, or a town where most people are afraid to go out at night. None of them have been poor or lived among those suffering real hardship.
They wouldn't know a forgotten white working class person if they tripped over them. They are soft, pampered people protected by secutiry staff living in nice houses in nice areas for the most part - or they, like Nick Griffin would be kicking up a stink about the state of the nation.
Sooner or later matters like overpopulation and Islamification will have to be addressed. Even after last night's show these politicians will return their heads to the sand. They'll continue denial of any problem. Then it'll be too late.
I applaud Nick Griffin to have the guts and determination to bring these looming problems to the forefront.
Complain about this comment
189#
Excellent post GH!! :0)
Complain about this comment
The programme was a wasted opportunity. Sadly predictable with too much focus on the more odious prior statements of Mr Griffin who performed very badly in dealing with these. I doubt anyone watching was not aware of these and his performance is unlikley to have changed anyones views on this aspect one way or the other.
The views expressed by the BNP are very simple - it does not matter what the problem is then it is some minorities fault and making them go away will fix it. Well it won't, the underlying problems are far more complex than such a simplistic explanation. Had QT followed the normal format of dealing with actual questions and issues we may well have seen this much more clearly, unfortunately they took the easy route.
It would have done more service in exposing the lack of any sensible resolutions other than 'send em home' or who know maybe a more sensible answer may have slipped from Mr G's lips by accident if the normal format had been respected.
Lack of sensible political debate and failure to address issues in the round are what allow such odious groups a stage on which to perform. The failure to understand and engage honestly with much of the electorate are the reason such minority parties garner such support as they do based on trite single issues will fix the world. Did the establishment learn nothing from the emergence of UKIP? If you fail to address the issue then a party will emerge to fill the void speaking to the part of the electorate who do not feel engaged by the main stream.
When the programme did address the issue of immigration the main parties lack of clear strategies and arguments for or against were exposed. The simplistic close the door argument made by Griffin sounded almost reasonable. The reasons behind this and the consequences of doing what he proposes are far more dangerous but very few will understand the flow of events which would follow from actually implementing such a strategy and the disaster that would be for our country. Neither party seemed prepared for a debate over this or to expand or debate with Griffin properly.
Sadly I think overall this programme has ended up a net benefit to the BNP due to the excessive focus on the well known deficiencies and lack of attempts to expose the false logic at the heart of their rather nasty core beliefs.
Complain about this comment
Look at your own BBC forum. It is obvious that the BBC commentators are out of step with the public view of events.
I have no respect for the journalists, politicians and activists who have connived for years to stifle debate about the issues which the BNP discusses openly.
I, and I am sure, many others do not want you or anyone else to decide what we will hear or what we must think.
The good news is that the BNP will have gained a lot of new voters after seeing the orchestrated way in which the audience, panellists and protesters outside the BBC building shouted, attacked and insulted a fellow panellist, but mostly failed to engage in debate.
Complain about this comment
Question Time last night was poor to say the least. It should have been called the 'The Mr Griffin Show' for the relevence it actually had. I found out what I knew already that Mr Griffin and the British National Party believe in putting British citizens first, Islam does not have a place in British society (without modernising to accept democracy etc) and that the British National Party promote an isolationist agenda for our military.
It's upsetting because I hoped the British National Party would have their polices questioned. Now, we have Mr Griffin as the 'man against the establishment'. Question Time did not benefit the British National Party but Question Time and the individuals who attended have gave Mr Griffin a huge boast as the man taking on the world and the 'big three'.
Last thing, to be fair the KKK organisation has changed since 1960. It would be ignorant to claim that KKK is a single entity and in fact there are multiple KKK groups which have different policies, some of which operate peacefully. I can't defend the KKK leader in question or his organisation but I do feel it as inappropiate and misleading to represent the KKK as it was back in the 60's.
Oh, and Churchill? Churchill was more in tune to fascism rather then democracy as we understand it today. In fact Churchill was a large supporter of the Empire Era and certainly did not believe in democracy for those we oppressed.
I feel the under educated on these matters will be strayed along.
Complain about this comment
I would never consider voting BNP, or UKIP for that matter, but I heartily agree with many who have commented that the programme was diverted into Griffin bashing. The audience seemed to be unusually unrepresentative. David Dimbleby at times acted as an interviewer rather than a chairman, and did himself no favours. The whole thing stank as a rather put up job, and issues such as the level of imigration were constantly diverted into questions of colour, rather than looking at the issue of how many people the UK can take before it becomes fatally overcrowded. On this issue, Jack Straw was at his most evasive. I vividly remember David Blunket when Home Secretary saying on Newsnight that there was no practical limit to immigration in the Government's view. I bet no Government minister would now dare say that, only a few years later. It was perhaps revealing that the questioner who had most to say about the level of immigration was himself black, and appeared very well educated.
In summary, the BBC and David Dimbleby failed last night through not being impartial and allowing Griffin to hang himself. It turned into a witch hunt worthy of the KKK and gave the impression that the BBC has an agenda, as many suspect, rather than being an impartial public servant as it is supposed to be. Many of the BNP supporters see themselves as victims, as Baroness Warsi notably explained; vilifying their chosen party will only help to confirm them in their views.
Complain about this comment
The audience should be unbiased
Complain about this comment
It is very easy to focus on the wrong thing with the BNP because of what strikes you first.
The ideology is, at root, extremely flexible and adaptable.
The key recurrent theme is that group X is coming in, taking jobs and/or not working and stealing or taking benefits, and affecting the local culture by being different.
If we had QT 40 years ago, he would have been complaining about Caribbeans, not the Muslims; 50 years ago the Italians; 70 years ago, the Irish; 90 years ago the Jews; and before that the Huguenots, Scots, Catholics, Normans, Vikings, Saxons, Romans etc etc.
If aliens landed and started setting up ghettoes, he would be on his soapbox about them.
He is providing some form of voice and aggressive kickback for people, often in the poorest areas, who feel marginalised, unheard, ignored and threatened. His platform is a confused mix of deformed nostalgia and "common sense" platitudes current in his electoral base which they use to define some level of pride and identity.
The source of the perceived threat changes year on year, the feeling is constant.
In practical terms, the inter-community conflict he creates and reacts to is what we focus on.
The solution is not just to tut and tell people to play nicely.
Nor is it to "address" those peoples concerns by just agreeing with them and doing something ill advised and grossly unfair.
A lot of it comes down to addressing the problems experienced by people of all types at the sharp end of the UK's class structure and scrabbling at the bottom of the economic pile.
Complain about this comment
Nick, I admire your work most times but are you sure your are commenting on the same programme the rest of us were watching last night?
You write:
'Exposure can work both ways. For much of the programme, Nick Griffin did not speak to the British people. He talked instead about himself and struggled to explain his past views and actions.'
As most of us saw: Mr. Griffin was not allowed to 'speak to the British people' - the whole programme was about him defending himself against seemingly overwhelming odds. I wonder how any of the other panelists would have faired in the same 'hot seat'?
I also note you did not comment upon was the make-up of the audience. Previous QTs usually included people of all political and religeous persuations as well as being representative of race, gender, age and sexual preference. My personal take was that I did not see any one much over the age of 40 in the audience. How can that be fair or reasonable?
I don't fully support Mr. Griffin but I have to agree he is right about the BBC. They used to be upheld by the people of the world as the mouth-piece of unbiased truth and decency. Didn't see much of that last night.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Fubar 205
Yes I liked that one as well it made me laugh.
Complain about this comment
#79 Gurubear wrote:
"Oh, if you really want to see how racist this country can be, just read your own Have Your Say section of this website.
Everytime immigration is mentioned, the far right wing swamp the board with thinly disguised racist comments (goodness knows who lets some of those comments through). And they always manage to get the top ten recommended spots."
They always get through to the top ten recommended spots because they're the subject of multiple voting by those who use multiple identities linked to a single e-mail address. Any attempt to point this out is rejected by the censors (sorry, moderators).
The moderation on HYS is a disgrace. Most of the posts here would await moderation for ever because they would go right over the moderators' heads. Rather than being rejected, intelligent posts are simply left to wither on the vine.
Contrariwise, the most vile racism gets through under a thin veneer of reasonableness. However, the Most Recommended list is no measure of public opinion; it will continue to be a snare and a delusion as long as it can be so easily manipulated.
Complain about this comment
#118 oh yeah and banning them would play into their hands, then where will we be, thanks a bundle for that idea. we have enough off-topic banning these bloggs for it to be a serious threat to debate.
what you do not understand is it that attitude that is driving there support. It not that I support them I do not but I see people around me turning to them because of the failure of others like Jack Straw
Perhaps we should ban communist as many people find them odeous too
or Ban people from becoming MP id thier fathers did not fight for
freedom given that the holocaust did happen and he has jewish parentage
too.
So it ok for my uncle's and grandfathers to go fight a save other when his own do not.
I think that was a very sick fact that came to light that HIS party has went to war and around 400 solider have lost there lives many others injured because HE wanted them to go to war.
So it alright for everybody elses family to fight on his behalf but not his.
They are the sorts that should be banned from office.
Sagamix go on answer that one then please.
Complain about this comment
It was apparent from the start of Question time that Nick Griffin of the BNP was effectively facing an unruly lynch mob. David Dimbleby (of all people) needed to remain impartial and not be abrupt, contradictory and condescending as he was toward Mr Griffin. I am not a supporter of the BNP, but the rise of such repugnant politics can only be blamed on the incompetence of the main stream parties, who as usual, are either not listening or simply not interested in the many concerns of the electorate. Of course Britain will benefit from the proactive individuals who wish to migrate here, but we do not need those, who come intending to sponge-off our benefits system. My partner is a nurse and she has experience migrants arriving in the country suffering from various serious medical issues such as TB. We need to look toward the immigration policies of Australia they have the right approach to who is permanently welcome in their country.
Complain about this comment
Can we plase have a blog on the current reality of economic figures Vs "The weare best placed.....blah blah" statements of the incompetents running the country?
This is only getting worse, our economy is shrinking with non-existent interest rates and hundreds of billions in funny money being created, how bad will thins get when those props are removed?
Complain about this comment
BNP are a ridiculous party. There is a fundamental issue in this country that needs to be addressed. Personally think the million who voted for them must be racist to a degree because there are plenty of other protest vote parties or you can spoil your ballot. Why confer legitimacy to a party that is racist, given they legally need to alter their constitution why did the BBC not wait for them to be a law abiding organisation before putting them on our screens.
Fundamental problem that needs to be addressed is that Immigration is and always has been a positive influence. When the Romans and French came we enjoyed increased technology and trade. If we wish to retain a Creative society we need a diverse one that is forward looking not one that looks at the past with rose tinted spectacles and wishes to remain static. A melting pot is the only way we will achieve this, it is the best way to achieve this, no country is or has been static as he would like to see it and is a regressive, isolationist, economy hurting (that’s the pound in mine and your pocket disappearing (I am sure a scapegoat could be found to blame)), we would all be ill because the NHS would be under-staffed.
Yes I do not think we should be encouraging low skilled people into the economy because we have enough 'indigenous' (as Nick Griffin would put it) low skilled people in this country who with a bit of socialisation might actually be bothered to turn up for work and do it well..... But given this is easier said than done, I would rather get service with a smile delivered in a foreign accent at my local coffee shop, than either no service, or service with a grunt by a bunch of people incapable of communicating in a satisfactorily customer orientated way. A hard truth but one many of us are familiar with.
Immigration of bright, talented, and typically the type of person prepared to travel thousands of miles for work are young and quite entrepreneurial, should not be halted, and as for Asylum Seekers... well these people have been tortured, persecuted, threatened with death by the same people with the level of intolerance Nick Griffin stands for, I think they deserve a break, especially when the people who often complain about them taking 'their' council homes etc... are the lazy people who have never contributed to this society in any material or positive way themselves.
I am happy for 'indigenous' white British people to live in this country, I am one of them (although my Great, Great, Grandmother was Danish), but lets not give those that actually define themselves this way something to vote for, don’t fan their narrow minded world view, don’t expect the British licence fee payer be content to pay for this type of circus. Don’t let politicians afraid of alienating voters avoid the issue that at least a million racists are out there, a vote for the BNP is a vote for an intolerant society that will end in poverty.
Complain about this comment
The programme was far from impartial - in fact - it was a tedious, long winded attack on Nick Griffin that did little to reveal the reasoning of why this party has come into existence in the first place.
Jack Straw was wrong to attack Griffin from the off - his crass attack about Churchill led to some seriously heated words and flared tempers. The entire audience too were baying for his blood - never on Question time before have I seen the first three rows made up entirely of people of asian origin.
This was a honey trap by the BBC and the mainstream political parties and I'm afraid it has backfired. He had secured a million votes during the european election and with well over 10 to 20 million people watching last night - I think that number is set to rocket.
As some have pointed out - if this had been filmed in a Northern city or town where wooly multiculturalism isn't a white city staple - you'd have seen a very different demographic asking some very different questions.
If anything this proves once and for all that the UK needs to be broken up. If the mainstream can collude to shut down a fringe paty because they pose a significant danger to the status quo - we are being denied our democratic right to vote for somone other than the big 3.
After the next general election it will be a bulk of conservative MP's in english seats with no mandate in Scotland. Do the conservatives intend on giving the people of Scotland an equal platform with which to challenge policies that might benefit england but damage scotland? No, they don't - just as Thatcher didn't, Blair failed to and Brown dismisses as unnessecary.
My point is that sooner or later - politicians need to address the decisions they and those before them made that created the environment where parties like the BNP, Sinn Fein and SNP can rise to prominence. Although none of these parties have anything particular in common - they demonstrate that dissilusioned people will only put up with being ignored for so long before they act to secure satisfaction.
Complain about this comment
I'm not a BNP supporter - I really am a floating voter - and I think the three main parties really let themselves down by their personal attacks on Nick Griffin rather then debating policy.
They made him look better and themselves look worse.
And the abandonment of impartial chairing didn't help.
Floating voters don't warm to politicians being 'nasty'.
What a wasted opportunity!
Complain about this comment
Nick Griffin was the proverbial Christian thrown to the lions. The baying mob wanted blood and the whole of QT was devoted to BNP bashing. Politically, I am a cross-bencher, but Griffin was never allowed to fully answer the questions put to him. The whole format was wrong for last night's programme and was poorly chaired by the usually reliable Dimbleby who was obviously anti Griffin/BNP.I like to see good cut and thrust debate on this programme but the mob ruled the day - after all, it's supposed to be discussing/debating topical issues, so why no questions on the Royal Mail strike or Blair being put forward for the EU presidency?Last night's programme was a complete waste of time and achieved nothing.
Complain about this comment
#204 You have really explained this well. The governments denial that there are problems will drive people to be racist when that is not what they are.It is frightening to be on a bus with twenty or so people & be the only 'white' person. Is that a racist comment???
Complain about this comment
The programme was a disappointment. The format did not lend itself to a forensic examination of BNP policies; indeed it is possible it created sympathy for Griffin, so one sided were the exhanges, with a highly partisan Chair (complete with prepared quotes) and a London chattering class audience. Straw's contribution was the usual package of evasions - a "net fall in increase in immigration" being Labourspeak for immigration continuing to increase.I was also rather disturbed that Bonnie Greer, as a member of the British Museum Board, should have such a hazy grasp of British history that she thought that the African, Asian etc members of the Roman army stayed here after the Romans withdrew. They were soldiers who left with the army just as British soldiers left what had been British colonies. Altogether, as an exercise in public education the programme was a missed opportunity.
Complain about this comment
Nick Griffin was right about one thing-islam is nasty and persecutes Christians, not only in muslim countries but also in heavily populated muslim areas in West Yorkshire etc. Typically, the token muslim on the panel said absolutely nothing about this.
Complain about this comment
You'd think that Nick Griffin would have a more tolerant attitude to vilified minorities with outdated views (all religions, basically) wouldn't you?
Complain about this comment
The whole programme was a farce, a smokescreen to distract the plebs away from the overiding worries of the country, strikes recession etc....
Complain about this comment
179 - There are huge continents such as Africa and Australia which have a far lower ratio of population to land. My answer: repatriate all those trying to sink our small island to those lands with the space and resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
And should Australia and the Americas repatriate all the people of European origin back to Europe?
Complain about this comment
I think it is probably fair to say that Griffin was bullied to some extent but if his parties you tube postings of BNP meetings are anything to go by I can not really see why he is complaining, he should be used to all that rah rah rah nonsence by now. I think if we learned anything from last nights show it was just how easy it was to show him up for being a complete liar. Now if we could only show up the facists on the left of politics for being liars in the same way I think I for one would be a far happier person.
Complain about this comment
Fear and extremism float to the surface in any economy where there is poor education, no representation, sub-standard housing and services, and lousy employment opportunities.
We all know Britain is a broken society and Westminster doesn't listen.
So why are you surprised that the BNP has a toe-hold in certain parts of the country.
The last 3 years of Major's government and the dozen years of Nu-Labour created the vacuum for Nick Griffin and his ilk. Governments that promised all sorts of idealistic ambitions, and hadn't the foggiest idea how to deliver.
We just seem drawn to vote for incompetents, and hope they can't do too much damage. System change is all that will work, I reckon.
Jack Straw was the poorest panelist, then Griffin.
Don't vote for either of them.
Complain about this comment
I think the issue with last nights programme is that it, in a way, justified his argument. The whole debate waged a war on "Britishness" (i.e. there is no such thing as a British people because of the Vikings, the Romans, the Normans etc). I find this a bit distateful, as DNA and nationality are 2 different things. I am sure we all have vast arrays of heritage, but that doesn't make us less British. Her point that Maoris are more indigenous of New Zealand than we are British may be factual, but sits in the camp of removing national identity to my mind. Otherwise, why not have a free-for-all. We can all go where we like as long as your DNA proves your cave-dwelling fore-fathers once visited!
As before, I would never go down the BNP route, but I think we belittle "Britishness" too much whilst being scared to challenge anyone elses ethnicity or value to the country in fear of being labelled a "racist". I am proud to be British, I have no idea of my ancestry and to Bonnoe Greer's mind, I presume that makes me ineligible! I thought she was fantastic, by the way, except that one point. Nobody would argue with an asian/african man about his heritage - that would be racist. I am a little fed up of white, christians being fair game.
Complain about this comment
I was very disappointed in the way Nick Griffin was treated on Question Time. It was a complete witch hunt by a left wing audience and pannel.
He was invited to the London studio where the BNP are least popular so it was always going to be a barrage of abuse.
In London it is a cosmapolitan city where everyone seems to have intigrated well. Unfortunatly this is subject has a north/south divide. Where I live Yorskire/Lancashire area, there is a terrble problem of segrigation and racial tentions and this is where Nick Griffins BNP party seems to be getting all his votes. So surely for fairness this is where he should have faced the qustion pannel.
Iam not a BNP member or fan but i believe in everyone deserving freedom of speech and a fair crack of the whip.
While ever the main steams parties keep tip toeing round the issues of immigration and political correctness he will continue to pick up votes round this area. It made me cringe to see Jack Straw(who gave a terrible account of himself bumbling his way round questions and not actually giving any yes or no answers) make out that these problems dont exist.
It will take a main stream party to take a firm stance on Imigration and Equality issues, and try to work on the intigation of northern England to finnaly blow the BNP party out of the water.
And the next time Nick Griffin is on TV rather than abuse him give him time to talk about his parties policies and beliefs and you will give him enough rope to politcally hang himself rather giving him martyr status.
Complain about this comment
As my username suggests I consider myself European British and Jewish but not English; that is simply my language.
I watched Questiontime with interest with an open mind not thinking one way or the other. Although I agree that Mr Griffin did appear fidgety I think anyone would if they were the centre of attention, so I will dismiss that aspect. I am a great believer in the democratic right of all to speak, as i think in this day and age there is not the threat of the past that some imagine, and that includes the BNP.
I think overall that he was representing the opinion of many white working class people here in the UK and now even many immigrants are sympathetic to the BNPs stand (as long as they are not in the firing line that is). The problem today is that there is so much paranoia that a BNP supporter is viewed almost like a paedophile and so it is more underground and bottled up. Far better to let these things out in the open. In the circumstances i think he came out more 'posivitely' from the BNPs point of view than his opponents would wish especially being attacked and not allowed to answer most things. Also, it was quite evident that the BBC wanted to create a hostile audience, although to its credit it obviously wanted a cross-section of society this was not a representive sample in the proportional sense.
I suspected that Mr Griffin would concentrate on the appeal against Islam as that is the strongest negative feel in the UK (and Europe) today, and so touched on a real nerve. There is a real fear about Islam and a a counter paranoia from Muslims as well.
In conclusion, i think the BNP will increase their vote in the Election as all the parties have tried to occupy the centre ground.
As a footnote, there are many 'local' people who see 'benefits' poured upon asylum seekers while they have the crumbs. This is an issue that needs really addressing as it is one of the prime causes of discontent.
Complain about this comment
204. Atrisse. You are dead right. It's so simple but they have scales on their eyes. Time alone will tell.
Complain about this comment
228. Are all the Europeans abroad living in squalor, living off benefits, not working, expecting those who work to pay their pensions and health benefits then? Are they spitting in the street, smuggling banned foods into the country, having forced marriages, honour killings and going against the views and culture of the countries they have moved to?
Well then if your answer is yes - certainly, repatriate all those disgraceful uncivilised Europeans as they are posing a huge threat the economy, stability and culture and safety of the countries they have fought tooth and nail to get into.
Ha! Wake up.
Complain about this comment
As far as I know the BNP is not an unlawful party and therefore I presume has the same right to appear on TV as other political parties. I did think it was orchestrated and it was like being in front of a lynch mob but then it did achieve massive viewing figure for the Beeb which is all they are interested in. Give the British public some credibility I am sure that given the content and performance of Nick Griffin they will be able to draw their own conclusions without the bloodhound like baying of media and politicians. We are a democracy after all, and even Jack Straw conceded that we were not bound by European Law on holocaust denial. We will believe what we want to believe not what we are told to believe. I certainly know that having seen Nick Griffin in action I am even more convinced than I was before that he is a nasty piece of work without the courage of his convictions and I certainly would not want him anywhere near Government. Thank you BBC for not caving in to censorship.
Complain about this comment
The British love an underdog, and The Question Time rout will have made Nick Griffin the underdogs' underdog. It was a stupid mistake to tackle him in the way
The panel should have should have talked to the million people, apparently young white males in the main, who voted for the BNP and the next million people who might feel pushed to do so and addressed their concerns. Instead they attacked Griffin, and by extension sent the message out that the mainstream isn't interested in listening to the million that already voted BNP.
Our mainstream politicians and the media need to stop the constant negative comments on a) White People b) Young People and c) Men (special note to Harriet Harman) and start listening to their concerns. The fact that those voters feel that a twitching inconstant and contradictory man like Griffin is their best chance to be heard tells you just how alienated our political classes are making them feel.
Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem, Green, UKIP, SNP.....go and engage with them now, or we will all pay a heavy price.
Complain about this comment
Give Nick G time to clearly state his views on the subjects of interest and he will show himself to be lacking in talent, shifty and bigoted (perfect as labour govt minister then!).
What we got was a kangeroo court which merely allows him to play the role of victim.
The BBC allowed this to happen - very poor production values.
Net effect is to close down the debate on immigration. We need that debate but in a non-racist way. It is not racist to say this country is struggling to accept large numbers of immigrants and policies will need to be in place to restrict immigration to those people who have skills the country needs - that say nothing about what colour of skin people have or what religion they practice.
We need to understand why asylum seekers (both legitimate and bogus), who pass through many safe, democratic, countries but do not make an asylum claim until they arrive here. In some cases it is for entirely understandable reasons (historic or family ties to UK, fact they speak English) for others the reasons are simply economic. If we do not have that knowledge and open it up to debate all we will get is a debate couched in "benefit scrounging" type name calling. This plays into the hands of the BNP.
Complain about this comment
I'm no fan of Griffin but he will be delighted with the way things went last night. That was the most biased QT audience since the disgraceful post 9/11 mugging of the American Ambassador by a bunch of anti-American bigots. The people Griffin is aiming for don't post on this blog, they are a home in places like Barking, Dagenham, Thurrock and Stoke, they will have seen him try to express their concerns and get shouted down by a baying mob and by establishment politicians like Straw and Huhne who were tainted by the expenses scandal.
From Griffin's point of view it was mission accomplished. The BBC should have played this like any other edition of QT and not turned it into Griffin Time.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I am an indigenous person, slightly under middle age (I hope ;o)) I work in the City ( I hate what I see there going on each day;;-)but it pays the bills) I earn in excess of £150k or there about. I do not come from a deprived area nor could I be categorised as working class. I am neither a racist, a bigot or a Nazi. I am a member of a legal party, the BNP, and proud of it. Believe me when I say I am not on my own.
I do wish people, especially main stream politicians and the media stop keep blaming the sole rise of the BNP on dissatisfied working class people from deprived areas.
I want them all to wake up and see that it is people from all walks of life that are switching to them. I joined and voted for them because I viewed policies on their website on law and order, the NHS, reform of the welfare system, reform of the House of Commons, the close the door policy in respect of immigration, the return of ALL service personnel currently fighting illegal wars that we started. ((Spouse of an ex serviceman) and thought that is how it should be!
Please tell me why I should get up every week day at 05:00am, go to work 100 miles (one way) away from my home, pay half my salary in so called legal deductions, tax & NI, and arrive home at 22:00, if I’m lucky, all at my own expense, while the majority of benefit claimants can’t even manage to have a wash? Also, while my MP, mention no names, but Mr Burns is a dead ringer, lives around the corner from me and is entitled to have a 2nd home in London or is that his 1st home????; all paid for at my expense. Why does he not join me at the station each morning at 05.35, I could give him a lift and wouldn’t even charge him for petrol.
Seriously, enough is enough, as the good ole Gov said the other day, or there abouts, never has so much been owed by so few to so many.
Thanks Nick, that was a brave move last night and has made me even more determined to canvass on your behalf in my affluent area.
Complain about this comment
The party which is brave enough to take up the immigration issue on behalf of our interests will be the party which wins the election.
End of ..
Looking back over all these comments I think that summarises it all. I am now bored with stating the obvious.
Complain about this comment
Considering that the chairman, remaining 4 panel members and the entire audience were completely anti-BNP, I thought Nick Griffin did surprisingly well. The British like an underdog - remember John Sergeant on Strictly Come Dancing?
What struck me was how scared the 3 main political parties obviously are of the BNP. Rightly so, because when NG was allowed to speak, he was saying things which chime with many so-called 'white working-class' voters. Jobs, housing and benefits going to immigrants, NHS and education resources straining at the seams due to increases in population, the perceived threat of Islam, etc.
I expect the BNP will continue to gain support, unless another political party grasps the nettle of immigration (white and non-white), and the subsequent population explosion.
Complain about this comment
I wonder if with the passage of time we may look back on last nights debate and think Nick Griffith a genius. For someone who is a professional public speaker and a Cambridge graduate he wasn't given the chance to articulate his arguments.
Bullied, unable to express his views without being called a racist, victimised by the nanny state and frustrated at not being listened to, this is how a large proportion of hardworking people feel, empathy is a powerful thing.
Complain about this comment
In these days of mass communication and information and in a shrinking world, Nik Griffin is NOT dangerous - but just another pityful, ill-informed man who misguidedly thinks he's doing the right thing. That he can't explain what exactly an 'immigrant' is, is hilarious...but then - how many people actually apreciate that we are ALL immigrants to whatever extent/definition(?)
That there was so much controversy in him appearring (whether we like it or not, as a voted in Euro member) led to an over the top, unproductive mass attack on him - which was frankly embarassing. Countless attacks, without allowing him to make answer which would have actually made him appear more silly than last night did. It was a reactionary audience who were out for blood and not discussion and moving on. To be honest, I was very surprised and dissapointed by Mr Dimbleby, whose job is to remain an impartial host.. So: Nik Griffin is just annoying, insulting, but will never be powerful of influential to anyone but the cerebrally challenged minority. So why worry...?
However - what IS dangerous (though very predictable)is the way that the general mood of talk went last night: It appears that Mr Griffin has only come into any position due to concerns of recent immigrations from Central Europe. Also, whilst the attacks were going on at Nik Griffin last night, there was plenty of mention of non-caucasian (whatever that is) immigrants, but none of caucasian ones. There was also mention of the holocaust. I appreciate that these were very arguably legitimate and appropriate topics last night - but the ommission of other 'sections' of the more recent immigrant minority was telling.
Then the talk changed to a generally agreed topic that what was wrong was not immigration - but recent immigration...obviously referring to (and mentioned more than once) immigration from central Europe (eg: Polish EU members since April 2004).
What puzzles me is this: How can an audience and panel so rabidly attack someone (although that person is worthy of ridicule) relating to their intolerance of immigration, then be against the most recent waves of legal immigrants from another EU country? As such, can those of that viewpoint be considered to be slightly mixed up and possibly as bad as Mr Griffin himself? Arre the British Islands overall only anti-central European/against recent immigrants? It seems that some who are second or third generation immigrants from are against the more recent wave of immigrants should perhaps know better - ad reflect on the period in the 80s when the economy dipped and vulgar people started being anti-Asian or Black (those groups being the most recent immigrant groups at that time).
Perhaps it's worth noting that much was made of the figure of Winston Churchill somehow being a figure of heroism and racial tolerance? Perhaps it's worth looking at how racist a person he actually was. He also betrayed Poland at the end of WWII at Yalta - 'selling' it to Stalin, Poland in turn suffering another 45 years under horrible communist oppression and resulting in thousands of deaths and 'disappearences (my own family suffered horribly and lost family lives during that period). Poland is only just recovering form that time. Perhaps we'd also be living today under a Nazi dictatorship if it wasn't for the role of Polish servicemen here, for our freedom and theirs. It may also be worth noting that Poland lost many millions of innocent lives during WWII amd it was the intention of Hitler et al to wipe out all Polish nationals (quoted several times). the 'holocaust' was indeed a terrible Jewish tragedy - but equally ( if not more) a tragedy for Polish nationals, of whatever faith. At the end of WWII Churchill also made a pact with Stalin that all Polish servicemen serving alongside British ones in the British isles be classified as illegal aliens. The Polish troops were unallowed to join in the VE Day celebrations in the UK - a little known fact here (and was to the discgust of the British servicemen who fought alongside them abroad and over our skies). 'Perhaps' then Churchill is not such a whiter-than-white figure after all then, so let's not get lost in propoganda-filled, untrue images.
The 'bottom line' is this: The world is getting smaller. Borders are political and man-made. Tolerance is the ONLY way forward for the world. We can't pick and choose which immigrants are 'ok'. We can't suddenly consider someone a threat who has taken a job (that a 'British' person may not do) once the economy dips.
IF we want to consider ourselves human and tolerant we have to not pick and choose, but embrace all. IF we consider certain legal immigrants to be ok and others not then we are no better than the powerless and pityful Mr Griffin and should perhaps be looking at ourselves.
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinson's analysis is completely wrong and seems to reflect the joy of the media and politicians ( and the BBC) who are relieved that, on the face of it,Griffin came out apparently badly, thus giving themselves the chance to spout the obvious about Griffin's policies and pat themselves on the back for their ensuing declamatory prose.
However,Griffin actually came across as someone who was being "got at" and not given a chance to elaborate nor answer questions fully. Bullying springs to mind.
The Chair's role was appallingly biased, and it was almost embarrassing to see such unfairness ( in the guise of objective questioning). Mr. Dimbleby clearly had a BBC directive ( or felt he had) to do this, no doubt to justify their (correct)invitation to Griffin to appear in the face of so much opposition from the vocal minority of the Left.
The scene outside the BBC of those who wish to suppress free speech ( and block the roads to the public) speaks volumes about the Left wing and their complete disregard for democracy.
Those who support Griffin will see a martyr - those who haven't previously voted for him may well now - out of sympathy for the quashing of free speech and reasonable debate.
The other politicians there did not appear concerned that the normal range of questions ( ie the Post Strike is rather topical, as is the talk of increasing MP's pay) and format of the programme were completely subsumed by the attacks on Griffin.
Jack Straw failed to answer important questions and came across as utterly vacuous and insincere.
Contrary to the media comment today, Griffin and the BBC's "fix" with an audience not reflecting the ethnic proportions of this country, will have boosted votes for him and his Party.
Complain about this comment
235. There are lots of people of non-European origin living here who don't live in squalor, off benefits. And there are lots of people of European origin living in squalor in the Americas. What's more, when their ancestors went to the Americas they did far worse things to the local population than 'spitting in the street, smuggling banned foods into the country and having forced marriages'.
Complain about this comment
Just got back from my OAP luncheon club. Guess what we were talking about?
Two comments stuck:
1. If every man had acted like Jack Straw's father during the war, the Nazis could have walked in without a shot being fired.
2. Surprise that the Beeb didn't extend the programme by 10 minutes while they carried Griffin out and lynched him!
Complain about this comment
I found it sad that a political platform was turned into a personality contest.
The main issue of this story is not the BNP or Nick Griffin but that almost 1 million people voted for the party only a few months ago and THEY (the people) deserve for the leader of the party they voted for, to be able to express and debate the political views of the party, irrespective of whether you agree with them or not, in a manner that is fair with all the other political parties.
This should be normal practice in a democracy. Personally I totally disagree with the fabric and policies of the BNP but believe the best way to discredit them and expose their politics is by mature, democratic debate on policy rather than personality and insult.
Being judge and jury will only have strenghtened the BNP support whereas a fair politcal debate would have demonstrated to the British people that they are a discredited party who do not merit their vote.
Complain about this comment
God forbid the next leader of the BNP is good looking and articulate.
NG already has a million votes, if the other parties do not wake up and tackle the real issue of lax immigration policy, then that will double even under Griffin. If a white Obama ever emerged under the BNP banner then they can look forward to 6 Million votes and MPs not just MEPs.
Addresss the real fears of the majority and stop pandering to the minority whilst trying to air your PC credentials.
The main parties just do not get it and last might's QT proved that they still do not get it. Just shouting at a man with a million votes WILL get rid of the man with a million votes. He will be turned into a man with two million votes.....
Complain about this comment
purple angel georgina @ 167
fools like you will do more harm than good
"fools" like me? - but weren't you just saying earlier that the Police take a crime against a poor black person more seriously than one against an affluent white?
I'd have to go a bit to beat a cracker like that in the "F" stakes, wouldn't I?
Complain about this comment
When economies go bad the local poor and the immigrant poor and their racial and cultural difference become the issues. They are pitted against each other in trying to secure employment and the idea that somehow the origin of birth should provide advantages. This is another complication caused by the bankers and investment firms. The arrogance of the bankers with their bonuses only exascerbates the problems as to anyone this appears to the a society based on class and suffering is the problem of the lower and working class. This has happened before. When the financial industry destroys the economy and is then bailed out with taxpayer funds, rewards itself for stealing twice and facilitated by elected officials, one might expect some anger being expressed. The last century saw many changes in many countries fostered by economic problems. Those shut out of the discussions tend to shout loudly and express ideas that most do not accept, but can gain support simply from those who feel that change is needed and that the current system is only for the wealthy. Those at the top tend to ignore the anger at the bottom...until it is too late.
Complain about this comment
I hate the BNP and all they stand for. But I stopped watching after a few minutes because the whole programme seemed so biased that I was in danger of feeling sympathetic.
Complain about this comment
There seems to me to be another reason why the BNP did so well in the Euro-elections, that has not been debated at all.
The cynic in me noted that one anti-European rightwing newspaper managed to time the MP's expenses scandal to perfection by drip feeding allegations against MPs from all three major parties over months leading up to it. The effect of this as, as they must have known, was to engender a large protest vote from the electorate.
Since all three major parties support UK membership of the EU, and that newspaper patently does not (at least not in anything like its present form), the net effect of this - as the paper must have known - was to bolster the UKIP vote - which would almost certainly have declined otherwise.
That paper was also mysteriously silent on the fact that UKIP itself was the subject of an even larger financial scandal, with a UKIP MEP having been set to prison for defrauding UK taxpayers out of over £70,000 in benefits - so UKIP are no paragons of virtue either.
Of course, UKIP were quite successful as the paper inquestion must have intended, but many of their 'supporters' were really only registering a protest vote. Inevitably, of course, the BNP profited too - probably by more than anyone expected.
It shows the dangers which arise when a national newspaper tries to derail the democractic process, and that the BNP are not the only nasty factor in UK politics.
Complain about this comment
Anyone who has read any of my previous comments will know that i am not a fan of the BNP.
But last nights question time made slightly uncomfortable viewing. The expenses scandal asside,I cannot recall Question Time being used as an arena for that kind on intensive, aggressive questioning of one individuals beliefs.
On a 'normal' edition of Question Time we gain insight into the political parties through politicians views on the issues of the day, not through intensive questioning of their core beliefs. As others have remarked, without Griffin on the panel you would have expected last nights programme to focus on the postal strike, instead it wasn't mentioned even in passing.
There are other arenas on british TV under which politicians are intensively scrutinised at the personal level. Interviews with Jeremy Paxman or John Snow spring to mind, Question Time has never been that kind of programme.
Having said that i feel no sympathy at all for griffin or his party, but i do feel that by changing the format the BBC have played into his hands and reinforced the conspiracy theories which BNP members are strongly encouraged to believe exist against them, not least by the party website.
Complain about this comment
159. At 11:29am on 23 Oct 2009, DaiDigital wrote:
5) All racists are pathologically suppressing their true sexuality, so his reaction to two men kissing is not a surprise.
-------------------------------------------------------
What? Where do you dig a 'fact' like that up from?
How do you prove someone is suppressing their sexuality?
Perhaps heterosexuals are suppressing their racism? I don't know ...
Or perhaps its just rubbish someone made up.
Anyway before the accusations - I am neither a racist or a homosexual (unless I'm suppressing either and I don't know), I'm just curious to know how people come up with stuff like this!
Complain about this comment
I'm surprised Jack Straw showed no empathy with Nick Griffin, wasn't it Mr Straw who a year or so ago was driven to asking female veil wearers to uncover their faces in his constituency surgery as he could not fully interact with them with their faces covered. If I recall correctly he was indignant when told it was a politically incorrect thing to do.
Complain about this comment
So after all the 'hype' we still don't really know what the BNP stand for.
But we do know the following;
Labour - there is no problem whatsoever with immigration.
Conservative - there possibly might be a problem, by we don't wish to talk about it.
Lib/Dem - Oh! that problem!
Like it or not, the topic ain't gonna go away. It is going to be brought up time and time again at the hustings next year. I just hope that all politicians are better prepared than they were last night.
Complain about this comment
have a go at the Nick Griffin Show, was exactly that! this was NOT Question Time as we know it. I thought it unfair, as this man has the guts to say what MOST think. Do we not have freedom of speach ? or it is not PC to say ? I wanted a show where Questions were aimed at all the panel. I Believe the audiance was picked and the programme to have been set up. Political Correctness just get's worse.
Complain about this comment
In truth Griffin was pretty poor, but that doesn't really matter. Look what was exposed to eight million people last night: that the mainstream political establishment doesn't think there is any such thing as an indigenous people in these islands. They think the whole concept is absurd. They joked about glaciers. Why are the English the *only* people in the world who are to be denied a homeland? And then, that the mainstream see no need to cap population growth caused by immigration - this would be "authoritarian". Another ten million - why not! That the mainstream, even though they didn't counter Griffin's arguments on Islam at all, still refuse to accept that the growth of Islam here is in any way harmful.Oh, and that the mainstream,a nd the BBC, are quite happy to put their faux differences apart to mount a group assault on anyone who disagrees.
Griffin is *one man*. He may be the figurehead, but he is not the movement. Nor is his grubby little group the only threat to the mainstream doctrines. Perfectly decent, liberal people, are sick of uncontrolled immigration, sick of throwing away everything that made this country good, sick of being told they have no right to expect things to remain as they were, sick of being told they must "celebrate" diversity...
A hard rain's gonna fall....
Complain about this comment
I thought Straw and Warsi had a good debate about immigration, but overall none of them really tackled a big issue, which is that people buy the myth that English people have been made into second-class citizens.
The BNP thrive on the idea of a conspiracy, that X, Y and Z are conspiring against X, Y, and Z (the indigenous British in this case).
It's a shame that immigration is not tackled and then it takes the BNP getting 1 million votes before it enters mainstream debate, and then most of the show is about it.
Griffin showed himself as a far-right nasty-man who relies on the idea of this conspiracy, but the issues which force people into his grubby paws were not properly addressed. Straw tried, and I thought did pretty well all night, but didn't make the case forcefully enough. People need to know that it's ok to feel proud to be British without being labelled racist, which is something the Tories have traditionally done far better than Labour. Due, I think, to our more bleeding heart liberal wing (including me to some extent).
Griffin's a right winger, so I don't like him. But if enough people shun pride in their origins (e.g. being British), there is a vacuum created into which the likes of Griffin step.
Complain about this comment
Around 8 million people watched QT, which is four times its normal audience.
Mistake #1 by the BBC management was to change the format of the program to focus almost exclusively on the BNP in an attempt to deflect criticism that it was not the right forum to take Mr. Griffin to task.
English people are usually fair minded and those who watched the programme will probably think that on balance, Mr. Griffin was unfairly treated.
As to the actual issues, in this bloggers view, Mr.Griffin/BNP are plainly wrong on some subjects (e.g. the Holocaust=flat earth), on others muddled (e.g. racial orgins) and correct on some (e.g. Islamic Bank stability).
Overall, in the short-term, I expect that support for the BNP will grow, due partly to this QT event but in the longer run, as English people cast around for alternatives to the discredited 'big three' and the dubious BNP, they will hopefully realise that respectable alternative political entities do actually exist for the English people e.g. the Greens, English Democrats and independents.
Complain about this comment
The programme was just a witch hunt against Nick Griffin.
There was no debate , just finger pointing at the BNP , what a waste of time .This was an opportunity to expose the BNP policies but only a couple were heard.
It was funny watching Jack Straw squirm when he couldn't answer the question on Labours immigration failures.
Bad production which has only raised BNP's profile,gave people a chance to let off hot air and let some of the panel show their 'look how multi-cultural I am' card.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
248. Zydeco wrote:
Just got back from my OAP luncheon club. Guess what we were talking about?
Two comments stuck:
1. If every man had acted like Jack Straw's father during the war, the Nazis could have walked in without a shot being fired.
No, if every man had acted like Jack Straw's father during the war, there wouldn't have been a war! Seemples.
Complain about this comment
Well, in my opinion question time plumbed new depths last night.
If there had been some attempt to have "normal" question time with Nick Griffin as "another" member of the panel then I think he would have shown himself and his party up. Unfortunately it was a circus. Mr Dimbleby, as ringmaster, did little to facilitate proper debate. Huhne and Straw were very poor (perhaps they were the clowns).
The other political groups need to look at the issues and fears that the BNP highlight. Immigration is a vote winner for the BNP because people fear it is not being managed correctly.
Come on politicians get your finger out and provide some integrity and substance to stand up to Nick Griffin and his party!
Complain about this comment
My biggest issue is providing for my family, without a job this becomes difficult. I perceive the entry criteria for immigrants to be very lax and then when I try to get help with training, so I can get back into work, I am told that unless I am an immigrant I will have to pay for this myself.
As you can imagine this is not the answer I am looking for, I have worked hard for 20 years paid my taxes and because I was born here I am not entitled the same resources as someone who has just arrived here.
So I watch QT in the hope that having the BNP on will bring up the debate about immigration with the main 2 parties, but no, what I get is Jack Straw telling me that there isn’t a problem even though they have no idea of numbers coming in or out and that we shouldn’t turn anyone away.
This leaves me with the problem that our 3 main political parties don’t have the strength to discuss the issue for fear of being called a racist by the media when this is a clear issue with voters in this country. Until last night I would not have considered voting BNP but it seems this is the only way to kick the main 3 parties into some kind of action.
Complain about this comment
@ 237
Our mainstream politicians and the media need to stop the constant negative comments on White People and start listening to their concerns
pitch for the racist vote you mean? No Thank You
it's bad enough when Brown does that with silly slogans like "British Jobs For British Workers!" but if he (or the Clowns, for that matter) start doing it with actual policies then it's time to bring out the worry beads
Complain about this comment
I am intrigued by two things: that Nick (Robinson) asks questions that non-telly-watchers like myself might have hoped he would answer, and the surprising degree of anti-BBC sympathy with Griffin that appears on several of these posts. Times columnists' combined opinion seems to be that irrespective of how Griffin may have fared, the other panellists opposing him were largely unimpressive. Which is possibly how the egregious Griffin managed to get there in the first place. Another excellent columnist suggests that trendy, ineffectual liberal angst may have helped him get there too. Incidentally a show where everyone sets out to 'get' one of those appearing is a curiously new format for Question Time and for serious broadcasting.
Perhaps they shouldn't have aired or even recorded this programme after all. I didn't think so beforehand but I do now.
Complain about this comment
GAberdeen has hit the nail on the head. It is the failure of the so-called mainstream politicians to address effectively and coherently the root cause of the issues affecting our country, that has allowed minority parties to grow and gain support; and so it could be with the BNP. God forbid that they (the BNP) should prosper at the ballot box, but the more this Government and future ones fail to meaningfully address the issues of poverty, social exclusion and education, the wider these extremist views will permeate our communities.
Whilst last night's programme unfortunately descended into a 'bash Nick Griffin' party, it did give a glimpse as to just how ludicrous he and his party could be made to look if they were scrutinised dispassionately. Unfortunately, the very nature of their political views makes this incredibly difficult, but other politicians must avoid the trap of playing Mr Griffin's game, they're not good at it and it is ultimately unedifying in the eyes of the public and a real opportunity was lost last night to takle him and his party on the wider issues - education, health, defence etc. etc.
Whilst I am sure that Mr Hain's views are strongly and honestly held, his expressions of outrage and his bullying tactics against the BBC reminded me, frightening so of the so-called "Reverend" Ian Paisley. The only way we will defeat the BNP is by confronting them head on at EVERY opportunity and exposing them for the racist, bigotted and vacuuous party that they truly are.
Complain about this comment
Dreadful. I watched the first ten minutes and, rather than discussing current affairs, the economy or other policy matters, this was simply an oppoortunity for some (very poor, in the case of Jack Straw) professional politicians to fight over who got to sit on the moral high horse.
It's hardly a suprise that Mr Griffin holds some rather unpleasant views, so why bring this up constantly? What's the point? Lots of people have unpleasant opinions, but this is purely subjective. What I consider objectionable may be considered quite reasonable by others. However, Mr Griffin's denial of the holocaust is just stupid- it happened and can only be denied if you're idiot enough to ignore the acres of evidence.
As to Jack Straw's early assertion that we went to war against racism in the second world war: we didn't. We went to war because the German state became too aggressive to be tolerated. The claim about fighting racism is rubbish but seems to be becoming received wisdom.
All in all, a bad show on many levels, from both the BBC and our elected representatives.
Complain about this comment
235 Flame Pat
"Are all the Europeans abroad living in squalor, living off benefits, not working, expecting those who work to pay their pensions and health benefits then? Are they spitting in the street, smuggling banned foods into the country, having forced marriages, honour killings and going against the views and culture of the countries they have moved to?"
So this is your view of immigrants? All immigrants. Not just the odd few but all of them. And your solution is to send them to the Australian bush because there is more room there. How can you expect anyone to take you seriously? You and your BNP friends get more ridiculous by the day.
Complain about this comment
So many comments against the way QT was conducted. If Mr.Griffin had a proper, sensible & fair policy the audience would not have mattered and he would have easily stood against the barrage. Its because he is ill-informed and lack very basic knowledge, that he is what he is, a racist with racist policies inciting hatred. Europe had only one indigineous race and thats the Neanderthals, extinct 25000 years ago. Unfortunately its the lack of knowledge that leads to all these issues.
Complain about this comment
#239
Well said JPS. Whether you agree with all of their views, you need to recognise that on immigration (not forced repatriation) and Europe both BNP and UKIP reflect a majority view in large parts of England. the longer the issues are ignored by mainstream partie, and fears are pooh poohed, the more support the extremists will attract and then, one day...
Complain about this comment
I deplore the BNP and everything its stands for. However, one should not just focus on the BNP. They have gained political legitimacy by purporting to have the solutions to Britain's problems by the application of a known, tried and tested template of prejudicial actions against minority groups. This is exactly how the tabloid press sell newspapers, largely to those who prepared to ignore truth and believe anything bad about anyone but themselves. The Chancellor of Germany, Corporal Adolph Hitler used this propaganda template in his rise to power. His belief in a supreme pure Arian race had messianic overtones. Nick Griffin believed Hitler might have gone a bit too far. I wonder what bit of too far. Was it the millions of Jews exterminated for being Jewish. Or the putting to death the Mentally Impaired, the Disabled, the Gypsies, the Homosexuals, or the Jehovah Witnesses'? None of us should give credence to lies or any form of prejudice because history teaches us that this only leads us all into a pit of darkness and filled with tragedy and human despair.
Complain about this comment
241. At 1:23pm on 23 Oct 2009, Exasperated_Brit wrote:
I am an indigenous person,
From listening to Nick Griffin and reading the BNP website I now know how to interprete that.
Complain about this comment
i think the BBC were in a no win situation last nite, if they hadn`t of given this party a platform they would of been accused of going against the so called freedom of speech this country (Britain when it suits) is supposedly accomstumed to. But by holding what i saw as a witch hunt i think they have damaged there already weening relationship with the public. I was in two minds about watching the program as i find it difficult to watch, as with all politics blame is the name of the game, and i get tired of listening to politicians NOT answer the questions after all isnt the program called QUESTION TIME!!!!
I would like to say i dont agree with most of what MR Grifin says (although when i lived in london and was made homeless through no fault of my own i might add, i went to see if i could get some help and was told in no uncertain terms that because i wasnt from london to go back to where i came from.(somerset) but the people behind me, who from there complete lack of any spoken english, were obviously not from Britain were given a emergency place to stay and money for food etc)
I think that the public are fed up with labour, many of us remember and realise that alot of todays problems are down to thatcher and the conservatives.
So i ask who should i vote for in the next election. It wont be any of the main parties. And although i doubt very much if i would vote B.N.P the public want change and after last nights program where Mr Griffin was not given a fair chance to speak(even the live audience seem to be hand picked against him) I think although people might not like him, the 30-40% of people that dont use there vote could well CHANGE there minds and use there vote all be it in maybe the wrong way to get CHANGE in parliment.
Complain about this comment
"The councils believe all of those seeking asylum should be permitted to work while awaiting the result of their claim."
The statement above is concerning asylum seekers in the United Kingdom by the BBC reporting on a group campaigning for greater rights and privilages for asylum seekers in the United Kingdom.
Despite unemployment rising and the UK still considered to be in recession, we bare witness to further attempts to help those around the world instead of helping those at home. I do wish the world was not limited by the amount of resources. However I am realistic and understand that Britain can not afford to look after the world through our benefits systems, health care system and basic rights to allow everyone who manages to enter the UK the right to work.
I'm not supportive of the BNP (I am a member of a different organisation). However does anyone else feel that on occasions its the liberal left who actually give the BNP a purpose and cause through their ideas?
Complain about this comment
jc @ 262
those who watched the programme will probably think that on balance, Mr. Griffin was unfairly treated
I agree, John - political junkies like us lot might see an absurd individual being made to look even more absurd - but out there in our equivalent of Middle America, I reckon a lot of people would see a guy (the plucky underdog, as it were) getting bullied whilst trying to say a few silly but populist things - the whole thing worth maybe 500k votes - but hope I'm wrong, obviously
Complain about this comment
I'm afraid Nick Robinson you've got it wrong again.You ,the rest of the BBC and the government are totally out of touch with public opinion.
If you coulld only k listen to conversations throughout this country you would understand how the BNP are at least airing those views.
I'm afraid that your scope of peoples opinions is far too narrow and is not giving a true picture.
Complain about this comment
I thought the Baroness came out best, the Lib Dem was all bleaty, Jack Straw was eviscerated by the jibe about his conscientious objector father, the American was simply window dressing, and Dimbleby focused all his attention on Griffin. I did think the audience had been handed pitchforks and torches too
Round 1 to the real world, now get him on everyday topics and his Partie's policies
The only negatives; al jebeeba allowed Griffin to say he'd been discriminated against, but when there is presumably so much indignation around it is hardly surprising: and the rent a mob outside who tried to deny the opportunity to show up Griffin on a national platform
Complain about this comment
Nick Griffin looked like the most concise and level-headed person there. Everyone else was hysterical and refusing to listen to anything he said. The moron in the crowd who shouted "RUBBISH!" when Griffin had the nerve to say that some people feel uncomfortable saying gays kissing just highlights that the audience selected was no in any way impartial.
We need the BNP because they're the only party who have the bottle to stand up for the white working class.
Complain about this comment
Lets move the immigration issue off the moral high ground and into the basic swamp that is our current economic climate.
We live on a small group of islands that has a finite amount of land, and which is being eroded by the sea as I type this.
We are in recession, have been for 18 months, but were stagnating previously, and will be for some time.
We have over 2 million people unemployed, and further numbers on other benefits.
We can't grow enough to feed the current population.
We import the majority of our energy.
We are predominantly a service industry economy.
We are faced with the fact that our major source of income for the past 20 years, financial services, is in decline, and in dager of leaving the country in total.
We owe the world more money than we are capable of raising.
Now, who thinks that the answer to our problems is increasing the number of people on this crowded little island?
What are your compelling economic reasons for holding this view?
Note, I have not based any of my comments on race, nationality, colour, creed or religion. Just cold, economic, hard hearted numbers and facts.
Complain about this comment
The BBC should wake up and smell the coffee, or at the very least have a sniff at the public mood here! Griffin's presence on the QT panel was inappropriate and unwelcome. Programmers are naive to imagine this has done anything other than harm to our rather damaged sense of fairness in this country.
Complain about this comment
150. At 11:21am on 23 Oct 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
"How would you feel about two women kissing each other?"
It would make me just as uncomfortable.
I am not a religious person, i am not a bigot or a homophobe...all i am saying is, it is a fact of life that seeing this does make many feel uncomfortable. They have every right to be happy, but the above is still true
so, if you were trying to imply that i would find it tittilating in any way, there you go.
Complain about this comment
"265. At 1:53pm on 23 Oct 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
No, if every man had acted like Jack Straw's father during the war, there wouldn't have been a war! Seemples. "
No, because there has to be fighting for there to be a war.
Jack Straw's father left others (like my relatives) to do the fighting, while valuable resources were spent on feeding him while he was in jail. Well done, Jack's dad. Not at all selfish, mate. A big pat on the back.
Complain about this comment
The best way to ensure that some one will be condemned is to allow them to speak for themselves.
It is even better if they are allowed to do so uninterrupted and then when dry of mouth, empty of their content and exposed in all their rhetoric, then a careful, quiet, considered, meaningful dismantling of the argument takes place. Not with in the scope of young Dimbleby.
But boy would his father Richard have done a good job on Griffin still I think he did a good job on himself.
Complain about this comment
264. At 1:51pm on 23 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
@ 241
I am neither a racist, nor a bigot. I am a member of a legal party, the BNP, and proud of it
if you're really NOT a racist or a bigot (and you say that, so it must be true) and you really ARE a member of the BNP (ditto) then it only leaves one thing for you to be - and you MUST, by definition, be this particular thing that I'm talking about
four letters, starts with an "F"
and don't worry ... like you said, you're "not alone"
********************************************************
Ignorence is bliss. What is this four letter word begining with an F?
I take it is is something unkind?
Complain about this comment
I worry that Griffin is easy to hate. An educated man (and inverse snobbery is omnipresent in our society), and often a misrepresented man, his opponents had to stifle him, and not let him respond to most of the allegations made against him on the programme.
This really shouldn't be necessary. He went into QT as a Nazi, in the public imagination, and he comes out a victim. As abhorrent his ideas and his colleagues in the BNP are, he emerged a credible, articulate (good humoured!) and thoroughly electable man. I would like to see him on QT again, just to hear him discuss what should have been said.
Does he have a stance on the postal strike? How would he reform Westminster? How would he have handled the Lockerbie bomber? This might have exposed his weakness as a politician, but sitting him in the stocks in front of a baying crowd did him more credit than was necessary.
Complain about this comment
It was very clear that the panel bullied Nick Griffin and talked over him and the audience was made up largely of ethnic minorities - not exactly a fair representation of public opinion. Jack Straw showed how ARROGANT and out of touch he is. He completely missed the point and has grossly underestimated and misunderstood the public's concerns about immigration. He failed to deal with and tried to evade a question about Labour's disastrous asylum and immigration policy. This is a small and extremely overcrowded country on course for a population of 70 million due to Labour's horrific mismanagement of the immigration system and its open border policy. People feel very strongly about this because it has far-reaching effects: on housing, jobs, public services, quality of life, the environment, culture etc. A recent poll in the Times showed over 80% of the public (of all races) are very concerned about immigration. Yet the very arrogant Jack Straw and Labour Government has still failed to grasp the point and as a result people will continue to turn to the BNP. The Government has completely FAILED to heed the wake up call, and this issue will not go away.
Nick - It is correct that much of the programme was talking about Nick Griffin's personal views in the past. But that is not what people are interested in. People are interested in the FUTURE and how to deal with the existing problems facing this country. This country has gone downhill rapidly under this Labour government and people have had enough. It is time for a change which cannot come quickly enough. It is time for a party that actually speaks up for Britain.
Complain about this comment
#22 and #120
Request to moderators.
It is now over six hours since I posted #22 which has been moderated. Still no emails from the moderators to explain why it has been moderated,which surely can't be right. How long does it usually take for this process to happen and/or for the post to be reinstated if it was reported but the complaint not upheld.
Advices please.
Complain about this comment
#251 saga
wonderfully spun old chap, Gordon and Mandy would be so proud.
I said none of those things but you managed to turn it into something completely different.
Funnily enough, although it is by no means funny, I don't think poor black, particularly black on black crime is taken seriously enough by the pandering liberal elite, they are just not "ethnic" or "minority" enough these days. No, religion and sexual orientation are the things to hang your hat on, much more "Islington" After all Brixton was so "yesterday" wasn't it? I would be interested to know your idea of affluent. Yes, the rich, political elite, councillors, MPs, the upper echelons, lawyers and the like will be reacted to, but that wasn't what I said, so well spun was your rebuttal. White Joe Schmoe, a teacher, a nurse, A fireman, office workers etc. People with aspirations but by no means affluent or politically motivated will be ignored when the boxes need to be ticked to satisfy the London Mafia.
Labour (and the Tories BTW) are always much more interested in how it looks than how it is. So I stand by my original post, an ethically, religiously or sexual orientation motivated crime will get priority in most cases so the correct percentages can be reached and the boxes ticked and the pension right secured for another year or two. Joe Schmoe can just wait his turn, after all what can he do about it? There isn't even a box for "English". Well, so far 1 Million people have discovered what to do about it.
It is odd that I don't hold with the BNP, but like many others find myself standing up for them....Well done The Liberal / Left elite. A thoroughly well thought out plan.
Complain about this comment
276. At 2:09pm on 23 Oct 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
Extract from the Oxford English Dictionary. That is the one with the multi coloured cover!
indigenous adjective
/ɪnˈdɪdʒ.ɪ.nəs/ adj
naturally existing in a place or country rather than arriving from another place
Complain about this comment
Bonnie Greer was the best of the panel, outdoing the political 'heavyweights', treating Griffin with a modicum of common courtesy and proceeding to intellectually pummel his half-baked but pernicious ideology.
Griffin was hopeless and shambolic and I'd be embarrassed if I were a BNP member but I wonder what ordinary, new BNP voters think of it (and how many of them saw it)?
Complain about this comment
1. At 07:18am on 23 Oct 2009, debskeay wrote:
"I thought he did very well considering the hostility of the panel and the audience which was not representative of the indigenous white population of this country"
Indigenous from when?
From the beginning - or the convenient point of 17,000 years ago?
Maybe if you read about natural history rather than taking 'Nick Griffin soundbytes' to educate yourself you wouldn't look so foolish.
I can see why this comment was under moderation for so long.
WE ARE ALL FROM AFRICA ORIGINALLY - OR DO YOU DENY THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD FOR CONVENIENCE OF YOUR IDIOTIC ARGUMENT?
Complain about this comment
It was a huge exercise in reverse psychology. What it appeared to do and what it ACTUALLY did was the opposite.
To the eyes of millions of people watching (including me) it came across as a huge orchestrated attack on Nick Griffin. The audience was cherry picked with the majority against him. True there was a smattering of support in the form of a cleverly placed respectable pin suited professional looking black man who actually said what most of us wanted to say: It is the government's immigration policies - or lack of them -which has caused this swing towards the BNP.
Jack Straw, usually looking half asleep on PMQs and laid back almost horizontal on Marr etc., had to project himself and really push himself in this programme, that was his raison d'etre. He probably doesn't much care; he is a Lord in waiting with mega bucks stashed and to come. He is in a failing, ailing government whose boat is sinking. He knew the part he was playing and so did the other panellists.
Well, what it did was to see Nick Griffin as the ONLY person brave enough to speak out for the public. Swathes of this country are now changed irrecovably because of immigration. FACT. That is the bottom line and all other politico-intellectual speak goes over their heads.
Nick Griffin was nervous and unused to such a high profile forum. Anybody would be. However, he has put his foot on the ladder and unless one of the two major parties stands up and recognises the HUGE problems which the Labour government (and to some extent the Conservatives before them) has dumped on us the respectable, normal British public the BNP will get millions more votes come the General Election.
The dye is cast. To the millions disaffected by the expenses debacle there is no way they would agree with the panel in attacking Griffin - after what THEY'VE done? No Way. To see THEM adopting the moral high ground against somebody so obviously saying what the public WANTS to hear is hypocrital in the least.
Griffin came out as the hero and I am torn now as to whether to vote for BNP or Tory. It's a very tough decision but Britain HAS to change for the better.
The programme was a huge exercise in reverse psychology. What it set out to do and what has happened has actually brought about the reverse.
Yay!
Complain about this comment
Shame on you BBC, shame on you BBC, those were the comments i heard on the 6 o'clock news last night which prompted me to watch question time, well shame on you, shame on you, all those wanna be media whores who wanted to be photographed on the front page by showing their distaste to the BNP, when what they really did was disrupt thousand of londers lives last night by conducting an illegal demonstration closing off a main street into the late hours o the night causing misery to thousands and thousands of working people trying to return home during rush hour, SHAME ON YOU, which leads me to, i don't support or disapprove of nasty nick and his party, however i will agree with every word he has said today, yes he was unfairly treated and why is it the bbc is playing it down whilst sky news is showing it as it is? judging by the way "the pack" attacked and treated nasty nick, has by 100% increased him and his party's popularity, i agree with everything he said today, especially his views on London, that was not a typical British audience last night, that audience does not represent the views of millions of Britons.
Thank you
Complain about this comment
"150. At 11:21am on 23 Oct 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
"How would you feel about two women kissing each other?""
Some of the happiest moments of my life have involved just such an encounter.
Complain about this comment
Why does the pathetic Peter Hain continue to bleat about the success of the BNP? When will he and his ilk realise that the prime reason for the advance of the BNP is the total failure of this useless Government to address the legitimate concerns of the voting public.
Like it or not, uncontrolled immigration is a legitimate concern. Labour don't want to address it because they know it won't be their problem in a few months time. The Conservatives are scared of it lest they be accused of racism. The Lib. Dems. are irrelevant.
In this dangerous vacuum a significant number of despairing voters will turn to whoever appears to be willing to address the problem, even if that option means voting for the abhorrent BNP. The majority of British people are not racist; they are simply fed up with being ignored by a political class whose primary concern appears to be the maximisation of their expenses claims.
Complain about this comment
(adding to my comment at #273)
To all those who keep harping that Mr Griffin faced a hostile audience...Please read up on Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King and you would realise how foolish your thinking is. These great men had a just cause so they feared no one. A hostile crowd never bothered them. They didnt flinch because they had a JUST cause.
Complain about this comment
#22 My contribution on this post on this topic posted at 8.23am but was moderated and only just reinstated 6+ hours later with a vastly reduced chance of anybody reading it. Perhaps that was the idea of the complainant?
A system is flawed which permits an objection which is not upheld to effectively allows the objector ro censor the entry by burying it until overtaken by other postings and by events.
Complain about this comment
addressing the "concerns" of the white working class:
this is the nub of it
it's important we do it; address the real issues of poverty, deprivation and stunted opportunity, I mean, not pander to the smokescreen, racially based "concerns" about too many foreigners - once we drop the toxic, race based stuff we can see (see very clearly) that these issues are about class, yes, but NOT about colour - the issues bedevilling the white working class are just the same as those affecting the underprivileged of ALL colours/creeds in this country - it's absolutely vital that this is recognised, otherwise we really are on a slippery slope - what's very noticeable, of course, is that whenever anyone puts forward some policy ideas which will genuinely help the underprivileged, they (the ideas) are howled down by a reactionary chorus of "socialist claptrap" - this from the very same people who chunter on about how we have to "address the concerns" of the working class - risible
Complain about this comment
You've got to laugh at all the wingeing babies on this blog who complain that Nick griffin was 'attacked', 'picked on' and the audience were partizan and 'hostile'
Obviously the people making these comments have never seen the following:
A black man beaten by skinheads for no other reason than the colour of his skin
A mob chasing an asian man down the street hurling abuse, bricks, bottles and stones and racial obsenities
A child at school on their own because they don't 'fit in' with the views of rascist white kids.
I have seen these and compared to the pussy footing around Griffin last night the idea that he was 'attacked' is laughable.
Bring the man to me and I shall show you what 'attacked' looks like.
My only consolation is that there are so many rascists on this blog because they are all sitting at home without a job and have nothing better to do.
I realise they blame immigrants for this - but seeing how 'intelligent' they are I think even a mass immigration of Madagascan pond weed would probably reduce their chances of getting employment in the future.
Complain about this comment
I believe that the BBC was absolutely correct to allow Nick Griffin to appear on Question Time. We live in a democracy and freedom of speech is our right. It is rather disappointing that the once mighty QT has been dumbed down over the years and is now no more than a slanging match. DD is a poor substitute for the late great Robin Day! I am a lifelong Labour Party supporter and abhor racism, sexism, xenophobia & homophobia- The BNP are a vile party but unfortunately their message resonates with a sizeable minority of the law abiding decent UK public. The Audience was not a representative cross section of British Society and the panel were rather weak. Luckily the leader of the BNP is not of the calibre of Sir Oswald Mosley who would have relished the opportunity to appear and would have wiped the floor with the panel. Dimbelby was far from impartial, Griffin was very poor and exposed for what he is- Straw was just wet and the panels seating arrangements were most interesting! It would be wrong to suggest that the BNP support comes entirely from the disenfranchised working class! I have overheard far too many disturbing conversations in pubs, on trains and buses to believe that to be the case. The island mentality and superiority complex persists in this former imperial power- our society carries the racist baggage of many previous centuries and the BNP can easily tap into this vast untapped suspicion of anything 'foreign' or 'not of our kind' . The main parties need to wake up and smell the coffee!
Complain about this comment
sc @ 214
it made me laugh
well that's nice, Susan, I like to think of you laughing ... and we need all the fun we can get (don't we?) in this grim old "million votes for the BNP" country of ours
Complain about this comment
Brit @ 241
I am neither a racist, a bigot or a Nazi. I am a member of a legal party, the BNP, and proud of it. Believe me when I say I am not on my own
you're a Fool then, you're telling us?
in which case, yes babe you're right ... you are not alone ... far from it
Complain about this comment
I am white (well I was the last time I looked) - but I don't need any extra attention to my problems as some are suggesting.
So why shoudl political parties listen to the small number of moaning white people out there who cannot stand on their own two feet?
Perhaps if you had listened at school you wouldn't feel the competition from the unskilled migrant who has nothing more than a desire to work hard (well harder than you anyway) and has already shown desire by travelling across continents with very little money.
One thing all parties missed last night (including the audience) is that a large reason for immigrants coming here is because we have a tendency to invade their country and bomb the hell out of their homes (Iraq, Afghanistan).
Are they supposed to sit tight and wait to see if the British get bored and the dictator returns, or should they get off their backsides, cross time zones in order to see this 'great Democratic system' for themselves?
Last night (and today) I have seen people in total denial. Still - they say ignorance is bliss and there are a few on here who are certainly proving that...
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Darling sounds like Lamont. I suppose he will be right, eventually, but how much will it have cost us? before you rule this as "off topic", economic issues have been raised here, but obviosuly they aren't important enough to merit Nick's attention
Complain about this comment
20. At 08:15am on 23 Oct 2009, mozgren wrote:
"Was Nick Robinson watching the same programme? The worse thing about the programme was the audience. Mr Griffin was hugely outnumbered in that room"
....just as the fascists are outnumbered in the world 600 to 1.
Doesn't anyone realise the studio is in West London and the population down here "Don't look like it does in Burnley"
- oh sorry, I forgot, never been out of your street yet have you?
Complain about this comment
PAG @ 292
It is odd that I don't hold with the BNP
it IS odd yes, given the sort of tosh you seem to believe
Complain about this comment
It's interesdting how many of the comments say "I'd never vote BNP but ...".
That's why nothing changes in British politics except the colour of the rosette every few years. Until everyone's more concerned about the issues than they are about being considered 'respectable' we'll be on the same political merry-go-round for ever more.
Complain about this comment
Firstly, I would like to congratulate the BBC for coming to the fore and allowing Mr Griffin on Question Time. I, and several others watching that night, are not supporters of the BNP or any right-wing group, and never have been. But I am curious to listen to a point of view, different from my own, and without constant interruption.
I feel an injustice has been done, both to him, and the public at large. It was as if the whole idea of inviting Griffin to QT, had been to lure him into the studios, abuse him and then deny him time/air to speak. Mr Dimbleby, a man I much admire, joined in with this attack, which certainly exposed the weaknesses, not of Nick Griffin, but of others on the panel. Jack Straw, who to my mind seemed completely out of touch with reality (perhaps he was unwell?), couldn't relate to anyone on the programme. With sensible and strong interjection from Baroness Warsi, Jack Straw looked bewildered. Griffin kept cool and maintained his ground, yet was hounded by what appeared to be an anxious, complacent, dare I say, sardonic lynch-mob. Anyone under that pressure would look defiant. If we are a democracy, we should treat people on the panel equally - as far as possible. He was victimised...and this was on the BBC?
Shame on you!
In short, the programme was a mock trial, and will possibly exacerbate the political situation, achieving the opposite effect to what I guess was intended. Griffin still remains a man who has been denied the rights of others in public life, to speak!
Complain about this comment
I couldn't believe Dimbley's inability to control the thing. I got fed up after hearing Straw's opening soliloquy that seemed to go on forever. He could have cut it down to a minute. As for Huhne, he's cost the Lib Dems my vote. I once held him in respect as one of the movers since they sacked Charlie Kennedy. As for Bonnie Greer, she was a waste of space. They all seemed to miss the point. I wanted to hear about BNP policies. I wasn't given the chance.
Nobody dealt with the looming immigration issue - just the usual political evasiveness from Straw, Huhne and Baroness Varsi - what they'd like to do but can't - or the Islamification of Britain which we know the Archbishop of Canterbury seems to support. If only people would read the Koran their eyes might be opened. Nobody answered why minorities are allowed to be racist but whites aren't.
It ended up a debacle, sniping and abusing Nick Griffin.
I'm angered. I'm a license payer. The only way I'lll be assuaged is if I see Straw, Brown (in particular Brown) Huhne or Baroness V put in the same hot seat under the same conditions and I'd like to be in the audience, able to ask a question or two.
Complain about this comment
brit @ 288
Ignorance is Bliss
that your Design for Life, is it?
(sorry, Manics!)
Complain about this comment
286. At 2:22pm on 23 Oct 2009, potatolord wrote:"
"No, because there has to be fighting for there to be a war.
Jack Straw's father left others (like my relatives) to do the fighting, while valuable resources were spent on feeding him while he was in jail. Well done, Jack's dad. Not at all selfish, mate. A big pat on the back."
Let me rephrase that Potato... if all men were like Jack Straw's father there wouldn't be any wars.(in an ideal world)
My family on my father's side has a rich and decorated military history, my father fought in the war but he and I were both of the opinion that it is immoral to force someone to bear arms. Sounds like you disagree.
If valuable resources were spent on Straw snr. it was hardly his fault, he didn't ask to be jailed.
Complain about this comment
52. At 09:12am on 23 Oct 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
"ps Nice to see some BNP supporters coming out of the woodwork here... why don't you contribute more often?"
They're not, it's the same set of people using multiple accounts to make the BNP support look bigger than it is. Any regular poster will realise a lot of these accounts have appeared today and will never appear again.
Complain about this comment
writingsonthewall@
#295.
Is it now wrong to be proud to be British? The human race may have started in Africa, but I have never considered myself African, I don't even consider myself British but I do believe nationality is important as it is not simply a matter of location or identity but values of our society, democracy and our culture and traditions.
Besides we're all originally from Africa but Africa did not exist all those years ago, so I see it misleading that you are actuallly suggesting we're from Africa when Africa did not exist. Therefore I wonder, would you call yourself African as we are from a location that happens to be apart of the African continent?
I guess you'd quick to say your a citizen of the world or some nonesense like that.
Complain about this comment
#295
you wrote:
WE ARE ALL FROM AFRICA ORIGINALLY - OR DO YOU DENY THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD FOR CONVENIENCE OF YOUR IDIOTIC ARGUMENT?
Was it called Africa then? Plate movements have broken the land mass up nicely, but the given names are what we have allocated relatively recently, in the big scheme of things. I don't think many people would argue against incontrovertible proof about where the "cradle" of civlisation was, but that was millions of years ago. Wonder how Kenyans would re-act if we all turned up and said this is our place of birth?
Complain about this comment
I would point out that people who describe Nick Griffin as the 'underdog' are way off the mark.
"under-cockroach" is the correct description, well it is until he's stepped on and then he's simply 'a slimy mess'
Complain about this comment
240. At 1:23pm on 23 Oct 2009, flamepatricia wrote:
"What they do in private is their own affair. The condition is a very RARE one and hardly requires talking about AT ALL."
'they'?
You mean homosexuals, ethnic minorities, Jews?
...all the same to you - right?
What happened to you to make you such a bitter and twisted person?
I bet you can judge a person just by looking at them can't you.
Complain about this comment
I am not a supporter of the BNP, nor in fact, any other political party. I do, however, believe in the basic principles of democracy, which include an unfettered Right of Passage, Freedom of Speech and a national broadcasting corporation that offers unbiased views to its audience. None of these basic rights were offered to Mr Griffin last night.
The BBC News channels concentrated on the protests outside the studio prior to the programme being broadcast, interviewing various members of the group, who insisted on referring to Mr Griffin as a Fascist. The definition of Fascism is as follows:
'A system of government marked by centralisation of authority under a dictator, stringent socio-economic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship'
Mr Griffin might be many things, but neither he, nor the party he represents certainly show any leanings towards this doctrine. Quite the opposite in fact. The behaviour of the BBC last night was more of a Fascist action than anything I have previously witnessed.
The programme itself was blatantly biased against Mr Griffin. Instead of its usual format of asking questions on current affairs and matters of concern, it was merely a smear campaign against Mr Griffin. The usual format would have involved questions on topics in the news that week. The Postal Workers dispute or example, or the fact that the Country continues to slide into recession would have featured in the programme had Mr Griffin not been on the panel. Instead, virtually every question and comment was aimed to embarrass Mr Griffin, with the panel and the audience guilty of making cheap jibes and personal attacks on Mr Griffin, many of which may in fact be deemed to be slanderous.
It was obvious that Mr Griffin’s fellow panellists would attempt to undermine his credibility, but their behaviour last night went far beyond the acceptable. Even David Dimbleby, who I admire as a broadcaster, attempted to score cheap points by reprimanding Mr Griffin for smiling, prior to answering a question on the Holocaust because it was an important matter. Panellists, particularly MPs, often smile prior to answering questions they may have difficulty in answering to the audience’s satisfaction, and Mr Griffin was no different in this respect. (We all remember Hazel Blears’ odious grins, prior to being questioned over her expenses, and the shapes and noises emanating from the jowls of Eric Pickles trying to justify a second home allowance because he has to travel for forty minutes to get to Westminster). These are important matters too. But smiling prior to answering awkward questions is what MPs do, and I can’t remember any of them being berated for smiling prior to answering, and treated like a child. Shame on you Mr Dimbleby.
Mr Griffin was rarely allowed to answer a direct question without being interrupted by one of the panellists or a member of the audience, and Mr Dimbleby did little to prevent this. On the one occasion a member of the audience asked a question regarding ‘British Jobs for British Workers’ that may have warranted a positive response from Mr Griffin, he wasn’t allowed to answer. Instead, a fellow member of the audience, without invitation, interrupted prior to Mr Griffin being given the opportunity to respond, and was allowed to talk about her own situation involving immigrant workers. This was both rude and untypical of the programme’s usual format, yet Mr Dimbleby did nothing to prevent it.
The only subject that wasn’t directly designed to humiliate Mr Griffin was on the subject of Stephen Gately, and even this seemed engineered to provide for further humiliation.
All in all, I think it was a shameful exercise by the BBC who should be held accountable for such blatant bias against Mr Griffin at the Licence Payer’s expense.
Complain about this comment
Political discussion and intelligent, informed debate, GCSE style!
The whole sickly icky show kind of made me realise what it must be like to be ganged up on and bullied by social workers.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
@dotconnect
@northernpunk
As a whole British society continues to instill a negative attitude towards homosexuality. For all the good work done in schools to educate kids about the existence of gay people/relationships, homophobic bullying is widespread in schools. That seeing two men kissing causes a visceral reaction is interesting when seen in the context of the high levels of violence and anti-social behaviour on our streets. Perhaps some people are more comfortable seeing two men beat each other up, than two men demonstrating love and affection for each other. I would suggest that this visceral reaction is the responsibility of the person having it, and it is up to them to gain some insight into themselves, take ownership of their visceral reactions, not continue to be led by self-ignorance. It isn't about gay people, we just want to get on with our lives and not be abused by people with no control over their visceral reactions.
Complain about this comment
293. Exasperated_Brit:
indigenous adjective
/ɪnˈdɪdʒ.ɪ.nəs/ adj
naturally existing in a place or country rather than arriving from another place
=
interpret, verb
to give or provide the meaning of; explain; explicate; elucidate: to work out the significance of, interpret a hidden meaning...
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
242. At 1:25pm on 23 Oct 2009, flamepatricia wrote:
"The party which is brave enough to take up the immigration issue on behalf of our interests will be the party which wins the election. "
Ok - lets explore that then shall we?
So we close the borders - don't let anyone in.
How are you going to fill the vacancies in nursing? Untrained and unemployed builders perhaps?
I suppose re-connecting the spinal cord is similar to push-fit plumbing..
How are you going to stop people coming in by boat? A mass border patrol around the country?
Do you need a shoot to kill policy (because not having one isn't really wokring in Calais is it?)
Who is going to pay for it all?
What about the increased crime on the streets because you've moved the police out to monitoring borders?
(and really don't believe all crime is from immigrants - I've only ever met white criminals)
What are you going to do with people already here - round them up and remove them?
- what if they have family here? - deport them too?
- what if they were born here? - they should go as well right?
- what about me? I was born here, but after my summer holiday my skin looks 'kinda brown' - should I be kicked out too - unless i can prove I am British back to 17,000 years ago?
What about 'white people' who go abroad and marry - should they leave their partners behind?
What about children born outside of this country to British parents - are they immigrants? - Should British parents leave them abroad?
What about Australians, South Africans, Americans? Are we stopping them coming in too because they are immigrants - or do we let them off because they are 'white'?
I am dying to know how this 'tackling immigration' is going to come about.
Did you not pay attention last night? You cannot stop immigration any more than you can stop Cyanide mixing with the water in the trent when a company dumps it.
Lets have some answers then flamepatricia.
You've had a lot to say - so lets hear it.
Complain about this comment
283. At 2:21pm on 23 Oct 2009, U14147588 wrote:
"Now, who thinks that the answer to our problems is increasing the number of people on this crowded little island?"
It's funny you should say that because a few weeks ago I went to Northumberland and there is plenty of room up there.
Just another myth put out to justify rascist selection.
If it's so crowded here why don't you leave? I can get you a flight quite cheaply and you can go live in the Sahara desert where there are no people for miles around.
Maybe you feel the island is small because your so obese now nothing looks big enough anymore (doorways, cars, rollercoaster rides) - is that the case?
Complain about this comment
It's OK folks. Ken Livingstone has just told Sky viewers that ALL Londoners are comfortable with the amount of immigration and diversity in London.
This is the sort of ignorant statement that is part of the problem!
Pretending it isn't happening doesn't make it go away. It builds up resentment and causes just the climate that the BNP needs to spread its evil web.
Complain about this comment
I was very dissapointed with last nights programme, even thought NG wasn't exactly the best panelist, I do think he was treated with a little too much hostillity which I think will do more good for him than harm. I already knew the BNP was a racist party and tbh I didn't think it needed an intire programe argueing about it, I thought that they should of debated about the bigger issues of today which would have been where NG would really fail. The only panalist that shone was Bonnie Greer, Baroness Warsi hit the nail on the head with her comments about Labours failed immigration policy, it's a shame JS couldn't admit it!
Complain about this comment
285. NorthernPunk
"so, if you were trying to imply that i would find it tittilating in any way, there you go."
Just making sure there was no hypocrisy or discrimination involved there, NP.
Complain about this comment
"295. At 2:40pm on 23 Oct 2009, writingsonthewall wrote:
1. At 07:18am on 23 Oct 2009, debskeay wrote:
"I thought he did very well considering the hostility of the panel and the audience which was not representative of the indigenous white population of this country"
Indigenous from when?
From the beginning - or the convenient point of 17,000 years ago?
Maybe if you read about natural history rather than taking 'Nick Griffin soundbytes' to educate yourself you wouldn't look so foolish.
I can see why this comment was under moderation for so long.
WE ARE ALL FROM AFRICA ORIGINALLY - OR DO YOU DENY THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD FOR CONVENIENCE OF YOUR IDIOTIC ARGUMENT?"
If the 'convenient point' of 17,000 years ago is daft, what does that make the origin of the species in Africa? That was quite a long time ago. Things have changed a bit.
There are issues that need to be addressed about immigration and I think a more mature approach is needed tahan screeching "racist fascist" at anyone who brings up the topic.
Do I support the BNP. No, couldn't wouldn't.
Do I think that they are tapping in to concerns that a lot of people have and that the mainstream parties just won't address? Yes, I do.
People living together from different cultures can create friction especially if it's not managed, especially if it's ignored that there might be a problem at all. This is a lesson from history and has involved many peoples with many different creeds, colours and religions. It's naive to think otherwise.
There's a story about India whilst under British rule. It was the habit of the locals to throw the still living wives of deceased husbands on to the funeral phyre of the deceased. When a British officer ordered the practice to be stopped, he was told by a local tribal leader "This is our culture" to which the officer replied "And it is our culture to take people who do such things, put them against a wall and shoot them. So if you continue with your culture, we will continue with ours". I'm reminded of this whenever I hear another story about so-called "honour" killings.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
300. At 2:50pm on 23 Oct 2009, sidkris wrote:
(adding to my comment at #273)
To all those who keep harping that Mr Griffin faced a hostile audience...Please read up on Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King and you would realise how foolish your thinking is. These great men had a just cause so they feared no one. A hostile crowd never bothered them. They didnt flinch because they had a JUST cause.
------------------
No, they didn't flinch because they were remarkable people.
The justness of their cause was completely irrelevent.
Hitler never flinched. Was his cause just?
Complain about this comment
293. At 2:33pm on 23 Oct 2009, Exasperated_Brit wrote:
"Extract from the Oxford English Dictionary. That is the one with the multi coloured cover!
indigenous adjective
/ɪnˈdɪdʒ.ɪ.nəs/ adj
naturally existing in a place or country rather than arriving from another place "
You will notice it doesn't specify "At a certain point in time" - which is what Nick Griffin was saying last night.
By his rules I could decide 'indigenous' means '5 minutes ago' or I could use 130,000 years ago.
....but I'm sure you saw through that because you're such a clever chap - I mean you managed to find a dictionary all by yourself!
Complain about this comment
I understand that Mr Griffin is going to complain that the BBC arranged the show to misrepresent him. Did he not think that this would be a possibility and prepare himself properly for it? No, he gave the matter as much thought as the BNP gives its policies.
It seems to me that he peddles soundbites but is unable to justify his thinking. OK, other parties are guilty of that. However, I did not see Mr Griffin look anyone in the eye during the whole program and he as much as admitted that he tailors his answers to fit his audience.
If anyone thinks that a vote for the BNP is a protest against dishonest politicians, they are as delusional as this nasty little bigot.
Complain about this comment
I have to say that if Nick Griffin is the most articulate, media-savvy and politically astute person the BNP has to offer, they are unlikely to make much more of an impression.
Then again, I was totally underwhelmed by Jack Straw.
I know he's supposed to be a "safe pair of hands" and he has a constituency with mixed ethnic/cultural voters, but I wonder what on earth the quality of debate is like around the Cabinet Table.
(Got to admit, I prefer Brown Cabinet Meetings to Blair Sofa Sessions!!)
Population levels are an issue for any country, regardless of the mix of people living there. Somebody has to analyse/plan/fund and deliver education, medical attention, social care, transport, housing and all the other general services required by different levels of population.
Sometimes, some countries "breed" themselves into difficulties, so resources get overwhelmed. Sometimes countries allow immigration influxes that provide a sudden strain.
I thought Straw was hopeless on the immigration/population issue. That has nothing to do with race. (After all, if all the British origin folks tried to come home we'd all be standing on poles - that's with a little p - because the UK is rather small...
I've enjoyed working with and among people from 100 plus countries and from many religious backgrounds - many of which I don't understand.
I believe the BNP is a despicable organisation.
But the UK is getting a bit full. And by not addressing the issues, governments have for decades allowed odd-ball groups like the BNP to tap into some easy-target complaints.
Griffin was under huge pressure. Good. Didn't sound too convincing. Good. I'd have thought that the pictures of his possee of goons (sorry - protection team) would be enough to put people off.
But some folk have been running the country for a long time and we still don't have decent housing for UK military or the socially deprived. Still have loads of children who are delivered, functionally illiterate and innumerate, into the job market.
The next time Brown says he/NewLab did "The right thing at the right time", I'd like to explode in close proximity to him.
Complain about this comment
The fact we have a cartoon villain like Nick Griffin appearing on Question Time has to be indication of one thing - how bad our mainstream politicians are at addressing the major concerns of UK voters. If more people felt their frustrations over immigration, crime, benefits and unemployment were being handled proactively the rather childish opinions of people like Nick Griffin would rarely see the light of day.
Complain about this comment
The only people to blame for the existence of the BNP as it is today is the Labour government. There are a host of issues relating to race in this country which no one dares speak about. Blair in particular courted the asian community and any discussion about race/immigration and its effects on Britian was certainly not on his agenda. We pussy foot too much this country about race. We live under a reseigme where were are constantly told, "You can`t say that," and for some people who have done just that, it has meant a knock on the door from the old bill. Nick obviously did not get a good look at the invited audience - even by London standards one could hardly pretend it was a cross section of society. The poor chairmanship allowed everyone to pour their scorn, hatred - call it what ever you want on Griffin. Which as far as I was concerned is not the point of Question Time. It should and usually is a broad discussion on the hot topics of the day; but because the way QT was handled last night it centered entirley on Griffin - not his party`s policies but on him as an individual. Jack Straw, representing the government, hardly played a blinder - his performance was very lack lustre. Lets have a rematch with panellists who want an open debate. This time outside London with an audience that is truely a cross section i.e. more whites than people from ethnic minorities. Then lets have a discussion on the BNPs policies without the audience baying like a mob at one individual.
Complain about this comment
302. At 2:54pm on 23 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
addressing the "concerns" of the white working class:
******************
However torturous or illogical some of your posts are, there is usually some form of twisted 'rationale' behind them.
This post however, defies all understanding.
Try again!
Complain about this comment
Excellent Question Time Bonnie Greer and David Dimbleby played Griffin perfectly challenging his views in an calm understated way. Like the master in dealing in this kind of person Louis Theroux. Jack Straw was OK but Baroness Warsi and Chris Huhne spoiled it by loosing their temper. It would have been better if it was a normal programme discussing other issues, but the questions come from the audience so that wasn't going to happen. Maybe it should have been longer?
I didnt think of checking Youtube until Jack Straw mentioned it. Search for Nick Griffin the KKK and the old Roger Cook clip are most entertaining.
Lots of first time comments from BNP cyberactivists(their website encourages it?) today.
Complain about this comment
302. At 2:54pm on 23 Oct 2009, sagamix wrote:
Well put.
Unfortunately for people to be able to distinguish class they must think about it - it's much easier to spot people by the colour of their skin (like the colour of their football shirt) - that requires little or no thinking.
In the meantime all these 'poor downtrodden white people' actually idolise the people that put them there whilst demonising those who are 'down there with them'.
Still - who wants to pick a fight with someone they might lose to - right?
Complain about this comment
Hey writingsonthewall, maybe you should go on question time, or better still ricky gervais "your avin a laugh", and expose you suburban roots instead of dissing working class unemployed people writting on blogs, we can clearly see which side your batting for, and clearly predict the outcome of your judgements and comments, probably the closest you get to london is the face of big ben on the itv news.
Arrespectttaaa.
(no need to reply i'm going outto look for a job)
Complain about this comment
So Nick, how d'yer reckon this week's gone from your perspective?
You've put up 3 blogs on pretty much the same thing, and got a lot of postings, but are you happy with the content? I mean, apart from the normal soppy liberal left wing hippies (and they know who they are) the majority of the posts seem to support the "policies" of the BNP, whilst not exactly endorsing the perosnality of its leader. is that what you and your chums expected?
Meanwhile, you have managed to avoid some other important topics, like the fact that the new head of the army, who has been happily discrediting Gen Dannatt, to comply with his government paymasters, and who seems to claim that our troops are well-equipped and to a high standard, and they will be proving that consistently over the next 5 years. Also avoiding your attention is the fact that we are STILL in recession, when all the countries (like Germany and France) who, according to the Downing St deceivers, we were better placed than, have got out of recession, and they haven't dug a financial black hole anywhere near as deep as ours. What happened? Sleeping on the job? Or, more likely, busy blowing smoke?
Complain about this comment
So he's planning to complain about being greeted by a 'lynch mob', just proves bullies crumple when someone stands up to them.
Having defended the KluKluxKan there's a certain amount of irony about his complaining about a 'lynch mob'...
If the UK is only meant to contain 'native Britons' does that mean everyone related to those who emigrated to the US, NZ, etc, deported to Australia, retired to Spain etc will need to be forcibly repatriated? I'm no mathematician but even if he could deport everyone he classes as 'non-native' I don't think they'd all fit....
Complain about this comment
#303 WritingsontheWall said:
"You've got to laugh at all the wingeing babies on this blog who complain that Nick griffin was 'attacked', 'picked on' and the audience were partizan and 'hostile'
Obviously the people making these comments have never seen the following:
A black man beaten by skinheads for no other reason than the colour of his skin
A mob chasing an asian man down the street hurling abuse, bricks, bottles and stones and racial obsenities
A child at school on their own because they don't 'fit in' with the views of rascist white kids.
I have seen these and compared to the pussy footing around Griffin last night the idea that he was 'attacked' is laughable.
Bring the man to me and I shall show you what 'attacked' looks like.
My only consolation is that there are so many rascists on this blog because they are all sitting at home without a job and have nothing better to do.
I realise they blame immigrants for this - but seeing how 'intelligent' they are I think even a mass immigration of Madagascan pond weed would probably reduce their chances of getting employment in the future."
1. if Nick Griffin was black would he have been picked on in the same ways about his views on race etc? (im not saying i support them, but come on...double standards...we CAN be proud of who we are)
2. I am a skinhead, i don't go around beating up blacks and asians. im university educated, i hold down a good job, i have friends of all races and creeds. Please don't stereotype. yes the skinhead movement got hijacked by some unsavoury characters, but it didn't start out like that.
3. Have you ever seen white kids chased by black and asian youths just for being white? you know, it does happen. And its the same for your schools comment.
4. All these racists sat at home on this blog, because they have no job. How come your on here? do you not have a job?
5. Based on your comments and many others, it seems the ignorance with regards to life in general is mutually held between all of us. We are all as bad as one another
Now lets have a common sense debate where we are not scared of debating real issues.
Complain about this comment
c555 @ 298
Some of the happiest moments of my life have involved just such an encounter (two women kissing each other)
Andy, it's okay ... it really is, babe ... we all know you're a normal red blooded Tax "Advisor"
Complain about this comment
writingsonthewall:
#303.
"Obviously the people making these comments have never seen the following:
A black man beaten by skinheads for no other reason than the colour of his skin
A mob chasing an asian man down the street hurling abuse, bricks, bottles and stones and racial obsenities
A child at school on their own because they don't 'fit in' with the views of rascist white kids."
I guess, you've never seen racism against whites or do you believe there are no racists in non-white communites? It was not that long ago that Britain seen their own race riots, so I have no idea where your coming from exactly.
"I have seen these and compared to the pussy footing around Griffin last night the idea that he was 'attacked' is laughable.
Bring the man to me and I shall show you what 'attacked' looks like."
No thanks. I disagree with Griffin but do not believe an individual should be abused in any shape or form, but thanks for showing your true colours. You'll happily abuse the BNP and their minority views, well not in my name mate!
"My only consolation is that there are so many rascists on this blog because they are all sitting at home without a job and have nothing better to do."
Please note you are also writing on these blogs, so what's your point? It be a day off for some and it's arrogant to assume that everyone always has the weekend off, or perhaps we use a computer for work purposes? You are quite arrogant.
"I realise they blame immigrants for this - but seeing how 'intelligent' they are I think even a mass immigration of Madagascan pond weed would probably reduce their chances of getting employment in the future."
Yes, you certainly are arrogant and believe your superior to those who are generally worried about the effects of immigration. If the population is increasing, primarily through immigration, so won't it increase competition for jobs? Lets also keep in mind that unemployment is rising still and the recession is not over, so the real victims I beleive are the immigrants from abroad because the Government have not taken actions to give assurance to the natives (that includes many who are third generation migrants or even longer) about their job security and services. You can expect a hostile reaction when concerns have been ignored.
Complain about this comment
Sticks and stones etc, etc......
I have looked at your account on this blog and would like to put a couple of facts to you.
In the last 5 hours you have contributed nothing of any use to this site, not even giving us your take on last night’s QT. 8 out of 10 of your submissions are where you extract snippets from other peoples comments and opinions and reply with juvenile one liners.
Now come on Jack, I am paying your wages get back to work. I'm sure Gordon is looking for you in the corridors of his mind, sorry power.
Complain about this comment
Mrs Shields @ 312
It's interesting how many of the comments say "I'd never vote BNP but
it is, isn't it?
wonder how many of them are lying?
Complain about this comment
The audience was representative. Most of us despise Nick Griffin. I found the whole charade amusing to be honest. Even funnier is the reaction of a lot of people here claiming he was "bullied". I didn't think he was bullied, his opinions were just shown to be absurd. There is absolutely no way Nick Griffin can ever take part in a debate where this is not going to happen -- unless it's an internal debate at the BNP. His views are so wide of what the majority find acceptable that last night was the only possible outcome. As for the audience not representing British society, it isn't supposed too. It's supposed to represent it's location, in last nights case, London. This was always going to happen, what did Nick Griffin expect? Does he actually believe his own spiel when he claims the majority agree with him? Did he seriously expect an audience, ANY audience, to welcome him with open arms?.
I'm also getting tired of the "the BNP are the white working class peoples only voice!". I am white and working class and would appreciate not being associated with these morons.
Complain about this comment
215. At 12:34pm on 23 Oct 2009, aizoon0 wrote in regard to the Have Your Say forum:
They (the far right) always get through to the top ten recommended spots because they're the subject of multiple voting by those who use multiple identities linked to a single e-mail address. Any attempt to point this out is rejected by the censors (sorry, moderators).
###
Ha! I quite agree - I didn't say do because I thought it may not get posted,
It is well known that far right groups organise themselves to hijack forums like Have Your Say. Some Pro smoking lobbies do the same thing and search out blogs that are anti-smoking to post nasty replies.
Although Have Your Say is not meant to be an accurate reflection of societies views, what it does do regularly is give a distorted, and sometimes sickening view of our society.
The BBC obviously realise this as when they quite from it on the News Channel, they almost never quote the top comments.
It would be a far better commentary if they simply removed the Recommend functionality which allows it to be hijacked, and simply left it as a list in post date order.
Although the hijackers can still swamp, they can also get lost in the overall pile of posts.
That way, when contentious subjects like this come up, Have Your Say actually serves a real purpose rather than becoming the laughing stock of political forums - I am sorry, chaps, it really is.
Complain about this comment
I dont believe in what the BNP stands for and I would of hoped a true debate would lead to the other 3 parties being able to give a reasoned answer to the issues which have given the BNP their seats.
I find it bizarre however that the BBC was invaded by people who are trying to protect the cornerstones of our democracy, of which free speech is one, by trying to stop other people speaking. Even certain politicans tried to have his appearance banned which seens rather Ironic to say the least. If we believe in freedom then an articulate and well thought out argument would be enough to persaude the vast amount of voters that they do not have to believe and vote in the BNPs 'ideal'
I also wonder how many people started voting BNP as they feel we no longer have a history as a nation. I may well be wrong, and would welcome any further education on this but my opinion of this country is that it was historically a white population. This isnt meant as a racist comment just an (assumed) observation on our past. I am proud that we are now mainly tolerant of all people, no matter their creed or colour, race, religious beliefs or any other standard of which we differentiate but this doesnt mean we always have been. We appear to be so worried in this country about offending people that we forget about our culture. You read about Councils who refuse to put up christmas decorations in public places due to the fear of upsetting others but I honestly dont think any Jews/ Muslims/ Sikhs/ Hindu's living in the UK would really take offence at this just as I wouldnt at a visible sign of their celebrations.
Maybe if the main parties werent so quick to hide our heritage then the need to vote for a party keen to bring it back to the fore would decline
Complain about this comment
So Mr Griffin is now complaining to the BBC about his treatment on Question Time?
The BBC has been vilified for giving him the opportunity to present his views?
He apparently (according to those of my friends who watched it, and at least some posters) made a fool of himself.
Is that the fault of the BBC?
And he expects to be taken SERIOUSLY??
Now can we please get back to real life - like a 7p in pound increase in Income tax and VAT on food?
Complain about this comment
#304 wilpowerd wrote:
"The island mentality and superiority complex persists in this former imperial power- our society carries the racist baggage of many previous centuries"
I agree with most of your post, but I don't think its fair to say that the British were or are uniquely or especially racist. I could tell you a relevant story of my personal experience in Japan, but I think it's best left untold.
Do we have a national superiority complex? I rather doubt it. Guilt, fear, and insecurity more like.
Complain about this comment
#328 "You cannot stop immigration any more than you can stop Cyanide mixing with the water in the trent when a company dumps it."
That's an odd metophor to use in connection with immigration.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
is the average BNP voter racist?
well first up, I'd say it's intelligence and level of education which are the bigger factors; the lower is the first and the more sub standard the second, then the more likely is the person to vote for the BNP - think we can see that from many of the posts on here, can't we?
having said that, I think it's only Political Correctness (something I hate, as you know) which prevents us acknowledging that, yes, there's a large element of racism too - when anyone is talking On The Record, they always feel duty bound to opine that this particular section of the electorate are NOT racist, they just have valid "concerns" - well yes and no, please see 302 for further detail on this
Complain about this comment
318. At 3:12pm on 23 Oct 2009, Thomas_Porter wrote:
writingsonthewall@
#295.
"Is it now wrong to be proud to be British? The human race may have started in Africa, but I have never considered myself African"
...that's because you're beign convenient about your choice of 'what time period I originate from'.
When you say 'proud to be British - proud of what exactly? The wars we started? The colonialism we imposed onthe world or maybe our treatment of the Africans (our brothers by the way)?
"I don't even consider myself British but I do believe nationality is important"
So what is 'nationality'?
Arbitary borders drawn up by 'rulers' to define where we can and can't go. Take a trip to the French / Belgium border and cross back and forth a few times - notice any difference in the people? No - because nations are a man made phenomenon, not a natural one. We are all pink inside my friend, cut me and I bleed like you - no matter what 'Nation' we are held to.
"Besides we're all originally from Africa but Africa did not exist all those years ago, so I see it misleading that you are actuallly suggesting we're from Africa when Africa did not exist. Therefore I wonder, would you call yourself African as we are from a location that happens to be apart of the African continent?"
The land we now call 'Africa' is where we all originated from. I believe at that time we call the land Pangea - but you won't find that in a BNP history manual.
"I guess you'd quick to say your a citizen of the world or some nonesense like that."
So what are you? A citizen 'not of this world'?
You may choose to define yourself by the borders your master set for you - but I threw off my shackles of slavery when I denounced the concept of nations.
Still - I suppose if you don't have someone telling you what to do then you really don't know what to do - do you?
Complain about this comment
319. At 3:12pm on 23 Oct 2009, U14147588
Seriously - is that the best you have
"oh it wasn't called Africa back then" sneer, sneer.
I ould have described it as Pangea, but I didn't want to confuse your tiny little mind.
Complain about this comment
To Writingsonthewall - various posts
You really do make a lot of assumptions don't you?
I am sitting at home without a job am I? Must be wasting the company's time...
What if I run my own company?
Never been out of my street haven't I? Oh, well thanks for that.
Oh and saga..... nice try, but what I do love you for is the fact that most of what you say will have the exact opposite effect on most floating people. I would think that most floating voters are fed up with being told how we must think, what we must say and how we must say it by people who are so far removed from reallife that they are just not worth listening too.
Why should anyone have to embrace multiculturalism? because we are ordered to? I don't think so.....
Complain about this comment
Writings on the Wall:
"(and really don't believe all crime is from immigrants - I've only ever met white criminals)"
Can white people not be immigrants?
I think thats known as racism.
Complain about this comment
322. At 3:18pm on 23 Oct 2009, m-turner
Are you daft?
Hitler didn't walk onto the stage and announce he was going to go all authoritarian and genocidal on everyone - if he had he wouldn't have won the vote for chancellor.
If that's your reasoning for Nick Griffin not being a fascist then you are destined to serve under a dictator who tell you he's not and you believe him!
Complain about this comment
#320 writingsonthewall wrote:
"I would point out that people who describe Nick Griffin as the 'underdog' are way off the mark."
I agree with you.
I'm slightly surprised how many people have bought into the argument that Griffin was bullied by the panel and the audience.
As far as I'm concerned Griffin was (correctly) given his opportunity on national television to put his case. It was then quite correct for everyone else in the studio to point out how odious and confused this case was. If you believe in free speech it doesn't mean that you can't robustly refute nonsense, and if everyone else agrees and acts together so much the better.
Now I see Griffin is complaining that the programme was made in London so the audience was biased against him, and London is not a British city anymore, and so on, and no doubt other nonsense that I don't particularly want to hear.
Complain about this comment
326. At 3:22pm on 23 Oct 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
293. Exasperated_Brit:
You need to clam down Gordon, Jack's (sagamix) looking for you.
See you all Monday off home now to polish my gold badge. ;-)))
Complain about this comment
Writingsonthewall
just read some more of your posts...do yourself a favour a think before you write.... just insulting people you have no idea about just makes you look silly and no-one will listen to you.
I mean what is this all about...
---------------------------------
Maybe you feel the island is small because your so obese now nothing looks big enough anymore (doorways, cars, rollercoaster rides) - is that the case?
---------------------------------
Really...think about it.
Complain about this comment
"I've only ever met white criminals" W-on-the-wall.
You're don't choose which criminals you meet along ethnic lines do you? 26% of the prison population are from ethnic minorities.
Complain about this comment
The elephant in the room.....
As long as the current British political elite continue to ignore it the parties that mention it will continue to thrive.
The elephant is not going away either it is getting bigger and bigger.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"316. At 3:12pm on 23 Oct 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
286. At 2:22pm on 23 Oct 2009, potatolord wrote:"
Let me rephrase that Potato... if all men were like Jack Straw's father there wouldn't be any wars.(in an ideal world)
My family on my father's side has a rich and decorated military history, my father fought in the war but he and I were both of the opinion that it is immoral to force someone to bear arms. Sounds like you disagree.
If valuable resources were spent on Straw snr. it was hardly his fault, he didn't ask to be jailed."
Ah, if all men were like Jack Straw's father it would be a very different world indeed. If only everyone would hold hands and sing songs of togetherness under a rainbow sky then the world would be a far better place.
My family has a similar history to yours. I would agree that it is probably immoral to force a man to bear arms, however I would suggest that a man who won't stand up to defend his home and family is not worthy of the name.
Complain about this comment
a fellow blogger quoted something the other day, which I feel is relevant to this BNP debate - re Freedom of Speech:
a precious thing which we interfere with at our peril - the only real justification for removing the freedom of speech from, say, a Political Party is if THEY (once in power) would remove freedom of speech from us
now, if we take "us" to mean the whole of Britain as we now know it ... and surely we must ... then it's fairly clear, isn't it?
and whether you agree or you don't, when it comes to the matter of deciding if we should seek to the BNP, a bit more considered thought and a little less reactionary howling would be in order, don't you think?
Complain about this comment
I've watched Question Time quite alot before and am interested in the debates that take place on the issues of the week since the last show.
After watching the show last night I thought like most it was good to get the BNP bashed for their views. However after watching it again today it seems not like the QT i've watched before. It was all about the BNP, nothing about Postal Strikes or new troop numbers to afganistan. I seriously think that this has done more good to the BNP than harm. The heads of the BBC said they treated all parties equal however on last nights shows it wasn't equal and I think alot of people will view it as an attempt to get the BNP on the panel and then appear to just bully and bash Nick Griffin.
I am not a BNP supporter but I think the format was totally different and as a result has given someone people the view that Nick was targeted as I ask the other issues were not discussed. I just hope it hasn't turned alot of people to the BNP and we won't see a BNP MP in Westminister next spring.
Complain about this comment
Well whatever the rights and wrongs of the BNP there are a heck of a lot of posts saying the same thing. That the programme was poor had a bias and was unfair.
The format, the panel, the audience and the host all come in for repeated criticsm from regular sensible contributors to this blog.
They cant all be wrong.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"Nick Griffin did not speak to the British people. He talked instead about himself"
Yes, Mr Robinson, that's because the questioners, the panellists and the 'independent' Chairman Dimbleby insisted on continually ASKING ( and bullying ) Mr Griffin about himself. What else, therefore, would he answer ? Strikes me you're just as left-wing and deny freedom of speech as the rest of the BBC.
Complain about this comment
328. At 3:33pm on 23 Oct 2009, writingsonthewall wrote:
I am dying to know how this 'tackling immigration' is going to come about.
Did you not pay attention last night? You cannot stop immigration any more than you can stop Cyanide mixing with the water in the trent when a company dumps it.
************************
You are right in thinking that immigration can't be stopped - nor should it be.
However it can be controlled.
Proper border controls that check people in and out.
A proper method of deporting those who should be deported.
Repeal the HRA to stop people remaining in the UK because they own a cat!
Make conditions of entry much stricter.
Reduce Britains attractiveness as a 'first point of entry'. No handouts of any sort for at least one year and must have a job already arranged.
Apply the rule that says asylum must be claimed in the first 'safe' Country. i.e. unless claimants have flown in direct from an 'unsafe' area, assume they have crossed several other 'safe' Countries before reaching here.
A complete review of what skills are really needed, combined with an investigation as to why we cannot provide such skills from those already here.
Complete parity for all in the allocation of benefits, housing and services. i.e. building on Green Belt land without planning permission for some but not others.
Its not rocket science. But it will need determination, probably a lot of money, but most of all the will to do it.
Complain about this comment
This afternoon I have had to fill in some very boring forms, and have simultaneously listened to the QT programme on iPlayer, not having seen it last night.
My observations are that Mr. Griffin was not roughed up quite as badly as I had assumed from our bloggers comments but I did find the audience immensely irritating and kind of wished they were'nt there.
I was very disturbed to hear Mr. Griffin equate English to the British on at least two occasions.
When the Scots and the Welsh are able to enj