There doesn't appear to be a thread on this and I found it quite suprising as debates on the BNP have raged across this forum in the past.

Last night the UK's far right ultra nationalist party the BNP had their leader appear on a legitimate political discussion show on our state sponsored television channel, the BBC.

Some have argued that allowing him to appear legitimises his party, others have argued that as they hold 2 European MP's that it is right for the BBC to include the BNP in the programming and that it is up to viewers to decide. Certainly, it has been something of a publicity coup and the show reached 8 million viewers, half of the active television viewing public in the UK last night.

On the show Griffin received a hostile reception, he was called out on his views, his facts and figures, and it was highlighted that he runs a hate based political organisation. He was even called out on his presenting his party using moderate and saleable language with a view to change once in power (with supporting video evidence referenced in the program which I have since viewed myself and it is indeed true, Griffin appears on a podium with a former KKK leader and says that they must use saleable rhetoric and reveal their full manifesto only once in power).

The audience too was mostly hostile, whilst outside the studio protests against the BNP being validified by this appearance turned violent and 6 police officers where injured as the crowd tried to gain entry to the studio.

During the show the chair gave ample opportunity to Nick Griffin to speak, and even silenced interuptions and heckling from the panel and audience to allow him to do so - but Griffin presented a poor image of himself and his party and was unable to justify his political views.

He cited scientific reports (which i've read up on) where the BNP appear to use selective quoting to support their ideals, and as fellow panelist Bonnie Greer pointed out their website's "history" of Britain is an aweful distortion of fact.

Greer has since stated that Griffin was shaking during the show, and commented that he appeared completely unable to defend his views. Suggesting if anything that the editing of the show broadcast itself plays down Griffin poor performance and grants him more credit as a public speaker. None-the-less, Griffin gave a poor account of his parties views and policies.

Since he has attacked the BBC and asked for a repeat appearance, asking to discuss "issues of the day" and not his parties extremism. He has also asked for an hour long one-on-one broadcast against Jack Straw to discuss "issues of the day". It would appear that Griffin is using this opportunity to portray himself as the victim of a "lynch mob" (his choice of words) and wants us to disregard his seedy faschism and hate based politics and give him the chance to appear as a moderate.

The ramifications of his appearance will take a while to settle down, as the BNP try to use this as a platform to snowball popular support in their favour in a similar way as the French nationalists did a few years ago.

Personaly I feel very concerned that inspite of the poor performance the BNP may be able to use this as a political springboard. The darkest future I can imagine for Britain is the BNP in power (with Sharia Law being implemented as a close second).

I was just about to create a thread on this very topic becky.

Nick griffin was shaking like a poodle in a thunderstorm most of the way through the show, plus muttering and stuttering, and he seemed all but unable to back anything up that he was challenged about with actual fact, or any kind of a valid response, although with that much going on at him, im not surprised that he couldnt think straight, who could.


I agree that the BNP in power would be a bad thing, definately, and i do not agree with his attitude towards race and religion, or his use of patriotic wartime images to glorify his campaign, however, his point that this country is becoming over-run with foriegn visitors and that it is high time that something was done about it is a valid one in my eyes.

There are very few people who would want a man like him in power, i certianly would not want the BNP running thie country, but with the somewhat lax policies on immigration that governments past and present have introduced and allowed have indeed over stretched this country and flooded it with immigrants and asylum seekers.

My only fear is that there will be people out there who will vote BNP on the strength of that, as griffin and his crew seem to be the only ones who say they are prepared to tackle the immigration issue.

I very much doubt that they would ever get enough votes to win an election, and even if they did, im sure something would be done somewhere to make it so the BNP couldnt win anyway, as the country would descend into anarchy if they did manage to become leaders.

Funny how Jack Straw isn't often attacked for his political past!!!

Quote from danthebangerboy :

my only fear is that there will be people out there who will vote BNP on the strength of that, as griffin and his crew seem to be the only ones who say they are prepared to tackle the immigration issue.

When you actually look at it all the parties do have immigration policies, the BNP's is one of mass deportation and extermination to preserve it's ideal of the "indiginous English" gene pool, which it claims dates back to 17000 years ago.

In point of fact Britain was not inhabited 17000 years ago, but a little over 10000 years ago people started emmigrating here, Neolithic man first came to Britain from the Basque region of Spain, and this was supplemented with other genetic influences following that initial migration.

Anyway the point is, all the parties do have a politicy on immigration, but the problem is that no policy is going to deliver on all the buzz points.

The BNP say they are the only ones willing to deal with "illegal immigrants" by sending them home. Actually, "illegal" immigrants are sent home.

The problem immigration faced was in a monumentally poor conception of what would happen when the EU floodgates where opponed, but in point of fact the influx from Eastern Europe has since reversed and the flow of population is now returning with many Poles and Romanians returning home to their now more affluent home countries.

Britain does have high immigration, but it is more of a buzz word than a problem. Some people are worried because of the "ghetto" mentality, people emmigrating tend to form social groups and live in the same area creating a them and us situation, this is hampered by abysmal religious tolerance laws that are giving press airtime to a non-proportional representation of the islamic community.

Many Westerners fear Islam because of it's treatment of women, homosexuals and most of all it's intollerence to other religions, combined with a ghetto culture, and combined with the recent influx of Eastern European stock, it's created a situation ripe to be exploited by fear mongering.

The truth however is far from reality, whilst mainstream Islam doesn't sit well with Western values the fact is provided we keep communication and provided Western and Islamic cultures MIX at street level, then what we'll have in Britain is more of the moderate Muslim population who are, on the whole, quite agreeable.

Moderate Islam, moderate Christian, moderate Aethiest... The key word is moderate. It's the extremist element that needs to be quashed, and responding to fear of one extremism by turning to another isn't going to solve the problem - it's going to exhacerbate it.

Very good points becky, and i agree with all of them, however, its when the so called 'accurate' immigration figures are mentioned in the media as they are so often, plus claims that there are xxxx amount of illegal immigrants here, but the real figure is unknown due to whatever reasons, and it is this unknown amount of illegals that are here that annoys the narrow minded people i would guess, you know the drill, 'they come here, take our jobs, or the lazy ones move into housing and claim benefits, this is crippling this place for british people, blah blah, send em back, etc..'

I do not agree with it myself, but when there is apparently 2.6 million unemployed in the UK, i can see why some people have that flawed mindset, as to them, it would ease the problem of mass unemployment in the UK, as all the illegals would be sent home and brits would take the jobs, sorted! but as i said, that is a flawed and innacurate mentatality shared by some, not me.

Oh it is a problem. Look out of your window. The rate of change of 'apparent race' is accelerating. Whilst I have no problem with a gradual influx of foreign blood, or indeed foreign skin colours, it's the fact that on my way to work (and chances are on anyones way to work on this forum) you see more and more people that aren't born in Britain, and/or with British parents, or whatever exact definition of foreign you want to use.

Immigration is a problem, and whilst the BNP's methods to get rid of them (or control it) are excessive, they are one of the few parties that actually have a plan to do something. The Tories and Labour Party (and the Liberals, but they're even less likely to get to power than the BNP!) haven't got a clue what to do, how to do it, or even why it needs to be done.

My opinion...

Here is a link to the episode on BBC iPlayer (not everyone will be able to view it).

I've never seen someone so In denial. I'm glad they had him on, just so we could watch his reputation get hammered.

IMO The BNP pose a threat to the nation, so you could classify them as terrorists and arrest them.

I've never quite understood the duality of illegal immigrants taking our jobs AND our social unemployment benefits, but ho hum...

I think the British public need to learn the difference between an immigrant and an illegal immigrant.

Quote from Becky Rose :

Last night the UK's far right ultra nationalist party the BNP had their leader appear on a legitimate political discussion show on our state sponsored television channel, the BBC.

You've been suckered in by the MSM and the Labour Party - the BNP are a far left party, just look at their manifesto, they are basically Labour but with an immigration policy (all be it goes too far).

Personally I think he had every right to be on the show, it was very biased against him but that is an accurate reflection of the country in my opinion. I think the show exposed the fact that Nick has learnt he can't be openly racist, but his views have no changed, he is still racist and so are the BNP. It makes me sick that some people born in this country think that they somehow have more rights than a person that has worked and made an effort to be a part of this country. I want to see more violence directed towards racist people and racist organisations, they should have to live in fear like their victims.

Quote from boothy :

You've been suckered in by the MSM and the Labour Party - the BNP are a far left party, just look at their manifesto, they are basically Labour but with an immigration policy (all be it goes too far).

I just read it, it was hard reading for me given that the closest I could be described to right wing is "slightly right of communism", however it did use lots of simple and easy to understand words: It's pretty far right as you can go, and *shudder* to think it might one day get implemented.

just to state my position, i'm totally against any form of racism and i took great delight when i heard about the BNP candidate that got a taste of his own policies and was totally confused in the proccess to be told in mold by a scouser to "f**k off back to england, the scouser of course was a flint resident who's accent for some reason is very very reminisent of a liverpool resident.

however i was disappointed at how the program was allowed to run. what was needed last night was for questiontime to run to it's normal agenda of audience questions based on the current news / concerns so it would become apparent how the BNP is a one trick pony instead all we got, apart from the homosexual question, was a whole hour on the BNP's "racist" policies which may have played into their hands by allowing them to campaign in the northern seats they are currently targeting on the platform of how the southerners in power are all under the control of imigrants

Right, here's how I see the whole situation

I personally find most of Nick Griffin's views/beliefs wrong. However, for as long as he is part of a legally constituted political party he is entitled to make his views known, however much people may disagree with them. I had absolutely no problem with him being allowed on the show. On the face of it it was a triumph for free speech. The UAF plus other protestors outside the building for all intents and purposes are possibly the biggest group of hypocrits I've ever seen protest anywhere. Claiming to be defenders of free speech and opposed to fascism yet ready to use violence and criminal acts to stop someone expressing views they don't like....nothing wrong there at all!

The show itself was more of a farce than anything else. Question Time usually has a selectively-picked audience and last night's was no exception, with the number of fresh-out-of-school liberal studenty types and so-called 'ethnic minority groups' was disproportionate. The BBC also explicitly stated they'd changed the format to accomodate Nick Griffin, and as far as I can remember there wasn't a single actual proper question in the first half-hour, it was purely focused on who could stick the boot into Griffin the hardest - bar Chris Huhne who actually didn't speak for most of the show, and came out at the end looking the best of the bunch. Yes Griffin made a balls up of some of the material he came out with and was shaking, but wouldn't you be in that situation - a hostile panel and a hostile audience baying for blood attacking you from all sides when it is your first appearance on such a show? But I hate to say it, I found myself agreeing with a portion of what he said. His summary of Islam (when applied to the extreme forms) was spot on. In it's extreme forms it is a fundamentally violent religion, and if people coming over here to the UK refuse to live by our laws or integrate into our society they have no place here. Jack Straw came off looking as bad, if not worse than Griffin. We all knew exactly what would happen where Griffin was concerned, but for a member of the governing party to come off as that awful in his answers, especially that textbook question dodge is concerning...and we wonder why the BNP is gaining more power? With people like that in power it's not surprising. It's also worth noting that whenever they've had people from organisations such as the IRA there hasn't been this much furore

In conclusion, the show, although it'll now be wheeled out constantly as an example of 'BBC impartiality' was anything but that. Biased to it's very core, the show just goes further to cement the left-wing bias of the BBC as a corporation. Anyone notice the absence of Muslim speakers when the token topic on Stephen Gately was introduced at the end? Anyone notice the totally misguided statements about Enoch Powell? I could go on. Yes, Griffin was poor. But so was Jack Straw in equal measures. The panel were so busy falling over themselves to stick the boot in on Griffin that they forgot to focus on the issues in hand, namely the economy and, dare I say it, global warming (urgh).

so yeah. I don't agree with Griffin on a majority of things, but as almost all the other parties seemingly refuse to touch immigration with a bargepole it's unsurprising that he is gaining influence

See attachment.

Just something some people may find interesting; a debate that took place on, yes, Facebook. Aston and Yusuf are both people I never expected to take an interest in this kind of politics. I guess the BNP are able to unite the nation in debate, that's for sure. Yusuf, in case you were wondering, lives in Britain but is originally from South Africa.

This took place last night, about 10 minutes after the show ended.

Quote from Mp3 Astra :

See attachment.

Just something some people may find interesting; a debate that took place on, yes, Facebook. Aston and Yusuf are both people I never expected to take an interest in this kind of politics. I guess the BNP are able to unite the nation in debate, that's for sure. Yusuf, in case you were wondering, lives in Britain but is originally from South Africa.

This took place last night, about 10 minutes after the show ended.

they speak sense mostly....I'd totally forgotten about the 'dick' comment

Don't be fooled by him though, just because he made some reasonable points dosen't mean thats whats going on inside his head, his whole aim being there was to try and create a respectable, watered down image of the BNP, like they said, he is very deceptive.

Anyway, the single biggest cause of immigration today was the way that European nations screwed over nations which they colonised, perhaps if we hadn't screwed them over, then perhaps they would have no reason to ever immigrate here in the first place, essentially, people with similar attitudes to Nick Griffin laid the seeds for the massive immigration several hundred years ago. People immigrate for a reason, not just for the hell of it, the best way to tackle immigration is to take away the reason to immigrate.

Quote from 5haz :

Don't be fooled by him though, just because he made some reasonable points dosen't mean thats whats going on inside his head, his whole aim being there was to try and create a respectable, watered down image of the BNP, like they said, he is very deceptive.

not fooled by him in the slightest

Quote from mookie427 :

His summary of Islam (when applied to the extreme forms) was spot on.

You know, extreme forms of Christianity can be violent aswell.

Religion itself is where the real problem lies.

v1rgo some things you've completely misread in my post, and i'm going to do an ironic Griffin cameo here and say you've misquoted me :P

I wasn't saying the audience outside was validity, that was organised by Unite as far as I know. I was saying their argument was in the BBC giving the BNP political validity by inviting them onto Question Time.

I'm not interested in how Jack Straw appeared, because he appeares on TV all the time and is an irrellevence. This is about the first appearance by an ultra right wing militant fascist group in an established public political arena.

Quote :

I don't believe the "big three" are ever going to tackle immigration.

They all have policies on immigration, Labours is arguably the most relaxed. I've not personally read up on the Liberal Democrat one, the Conservatives have a policy too involving a cap to stem the speed of change.

Personally I really don't care about the whole issue, a persons birth country is a non-issue to me, but I appreciate i'm in a minority with my view there - none-the-less all the parties appear to have a manifesto on immigration, however, it's not their main policy rhetorric.

It is the rhetoric of the Daily Mail and similarly "small words only" newspapers (who happen to agree with the BNP on this point) that none of the parties have a manifesto on immigration. However it's not the fact.

Quote :

I'd watch it.

This is exactly my greatest fear out of this whole situation, that people will think it moderate and fair to hear them out, and that will give the BNP the chance to present a moderate viewpoint without the unmoderate nature of their party being presented. Put simply, you can't let a fire burn in your living room and let it tell you not to come in without a fire extinguisher.

Not confronting the BNP's true nature, and discussing with them only on the topics they want to discuss, is like voluntarily sensoring yourself from the things they don't want you to hear.

It is absolutely vital to the future of this nation that we don't give intollerent groups the opportunity to present watered down versions of themselves without also presenting the truth.

This is why religious commentators have no place on the news (where currently they do) and it is also why the BNP should not be given the opportunity for a "current affairs only" discussion.

Do not encourage the lion out of the playpen. The German people did that in the 30's and that had such a horrific outcome that it is still ingrained in the nations subcontious.

Quote from Becky Rose :

This is why religious commentators have no place on the news (where currently they do) and it is also why the BNP should not be given the opportunity for a "current affairs only" discussion.

Such is the power of the BBC that a simple television appearance has become a fantastic marketing tool for this party. I warned you guys about the wrongs of the BBC but do you lot listen... nooooo.

They really have mucked up this time. Whilst I do not disagree with the invitation, the way the show was broadcast clearly shows the BBC to have an agenda.

The whole thing was a mockery. I think the tory baroness was the only person to come out of it with some self respect.

Highlights of the show for those who missed it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QAvkFS_cgk

Quote from v1rg0 :

When I get in to power I'll hire you to handle dissidents. For now, stick your head back in the sand.

The amount of harm and terror they would cause to the UK's people if they should get into any position of serious power, plus the fact they can preach hate just as well as any 'extremist' muslim means they should be treated in the same way as Al Quaeda. (And for all we know Al Quaeda could be a made up organisation to keep the people in fear and justify wars of conquest, whereas the BNP are definately a real threat).

Just because Griffin tries to sound all respectable and moderate dosen't mean he is, he is as much an extremist as anyone who would be labeled a 'terrorist', just coming from a different angle.

And yeah, its because of the current govt that the BNP are gaining popularity, as somebody once said, "I beg you to quarrel on an empty stomach", In other words, if the government is doing its job properly and keeping the people happy (like not being the USA's glove puppet and taking part in unwanted wars of conquest) then extremists wont be able to make inroads like they do.

Anything is a threat if you don't agree with what they want. The point of a democracy is that the people 'choose' what they want. Right now we want a government that doesn't know its arse from its elbow, and who can't control anything - hospitals, wars, immigration...

If the people choose the BNP then it is simple because the majority want that. There is no need for arguing or bickereing, or even trying to explain why you don't like the BNP, because you are safe (and they are not a threat) until/unless the Tories/Labour really screw up (which they are doing bit by bit).

Do I want the BNP in power? No. Would I welcome some of their policies (or at least the acceptable public veneer of their policies) being used by the current government? Hell yes.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Anything is a threat if you don't agree with what they want. The point of a democracy is that the people 'choose' what they want.

And this why in history our ancestors have ensured we kept certain freedoms. But suddenly the dumbass "I aint got nothin' to hide!" brigade have ensured if any dodgy party was elected we would be ****ed quicker that at any point during history. I hope now they can wake from their state of complete ignorance.