RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


RCdc -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/23/2009 12:10:47 PM)

Hi puella

You can get it on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iKfrY9l2kY

BNP Nick Griffin on BBC Question Time Part 1
Just enter the entire title into the youtube search and change the Part 1 to get the next instalment.  It comes in 7 parts.




Politesub53 -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/23/2009 4:34:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

The hard right tends to do a lot better in elections during periods of recession, though. The only reason Hitler got his foot in the Reichstag door was due to the depression, was it not?


The depression wasnt the only reason Hitler did so well though. He appealed more to the public regards Germanic identity, which had been dealt a blow in WW1.

As for Britain, even in 1974  we had had the three day week, due to the miners strikes, a pay freeze forced on us by Heath, an Oil shortage caused by the war in the middle east. The National front could still only muster 0.2 % of the vote in the Febuary election, and 0.4 % again in October ( two elections due to a hung parliament )




LadyEllen -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/23/2009 5:12:57 PM)

Interest in the BNP isnt solely down to the issues of this recent recession though - when one investigates one finds that the origin of the surge in their vote is down to parts of the population who have found themselves in recession conditions for many years prior whilst simultaneously those they formerly voted into power have done nothing but support and nurture the elite and line their own pockets.

Let this entire episode be a wake up call to the moderates to remove the ground from under the BNP by actively responding to the problems of the country - problems which affect all of us in one way or another after all.

E




Starbuck09 -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 3:31:22 AM)

Ellen I thought that the question time in question [ha ha!] was a complete and unmitigated disaster as have all attempts thus far to combat the rise of the B.N.P. People who are convinced of the B.N.P.s moral bankruptcy will, I am sure, be reassured by the program. However those who  may be thinking of voting or indeed are supporters would have seen nothing but a disgraceful breach of the shows neutrality. At no point was the parties policies discussed or even approached. All those inclined towards the B.N.P. will see is that the major political parties have, yet again, been unable to debate the policies that they care about.

What is particuarly frightening here is the inference that politics in Britain has so degraded that there is no longer anyone with the intellectual capability to debate with someone like Nick Griffin Jack Straw appeared woefully out of his depth. Villifying him does nothing. Those who despise him do not need convincing those that do not will see it as unfair treatment of a legitimate party. The B.N.P. has risen in profile and membership consistently over the last eight years. Clearly the methods used to combat this are not working. The reason for this is that they are pitiful, the intellectual equivalent of sticking your tongue out at your opponent. Until they are treated as a legitimate party [which is precisely what they are] their opponents are simply handing them votes.




kittinSol -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 4:46:45 AM)

Debate can only occur between intellects of approximate magnitude. Nick Griffin is an idiot: there is no debating with morons.

As per the "issues" he supposedly represents, I think it's well established that they have no place in a civilised society. It's not by pandering to the far right's populistic agenda and by licking racists' arses that society will get out of the hole it's currently in.




Starbuck09 -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 4:50:20 AM)

That's no good KittenSol and that attitude will simply hand the B.N.P. votes. Nick Griffin is the leader of a legitimate party in a democracy. The only way to combat his popularity is through debate. Any other method is an affront to democracy and woefully ineffective as evidenced by their continued growth.




kittinSol -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 4:52:16 AM)

Like I already said, if his party is so legitimate, they will find it within themselves to find an articulate and intelligent leader who's not a blabbering idiot.




Starbuck09 -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 4:56:40 AM)

 His party is legitimate there is no debate there. Your personal view of Nick Griffin doesn't affect the veracity or paucity of his,and the party he represents, policies. If the Conservatives chose to debate Labour by saying Gordon brown is an idiot not worthy of bothering to enter dialogue with they would not get very far. Clearly this absurd [for a democacy] method is not working with regards to the B.N.P. It is rare that an ineffective methodology becomes effective simply through repetition usually such actions entail disaster.




kittinSol -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 4:59:51 AM)

And which policies would they be? We've already established that the membership requirements for the BNP are illegal. I know too well how these people operate, and it's anti-democratic. We all know too well what happens when a anti-democratic party uses the democratic platform to establish power.

What else can you tell me about the BNP? I'm curious about your take on it.




SaintIntensity -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:00:52 AM)

while NG is undoubtedly a pathetically one-dimensional racist etc. a few things should be considered :

1. the "typical" BNP supporter is unlikely to watch QT (its a tad middle-class) - anyone have the Guardian sales figures in Burnley?
2. Jack Straw denied that immigration policy has boosted the BNP's position - very few believe that so JS looked like a liar (a key point of BNP policy)
3. the audience weren't from areas where the problems the BNP thrives on are particularly prevalent - redo the show a hotspot and see what happens
4. in a post-show poll, 22% said they "would consider" voting for the BNP - thats a worrying figure (unless you are NG)

all QT did was justify many peoples' opinion of NG as a tit - but he was unlikely to "turn" them anyway - but his appearance DID lend him credibility
and it did highlight the government's crumbling immigration policy - which is music to the BNP's ears - Jack Straw lost more the other night than NG did as
his reluctance to come clean over the situation made him look shifty and dishonest against Griffin's paranoia and knee-jerk policies

I did like the ice-age issue - I want to be descended from a cute little Skrat thingy if thats PC




kittinSol -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:05:00 AM)

Immigration isn't the problem. The problem is the erroneous perception of the repercussions of immigration by a deliberately ignorant public who is facing economic difficulties. Whenever the shit hits the fan, people turn to find a scapegoat. What bothers me is that this happens again, and again, and instead of slamming the facts down to destroy the xenophobes' arguments, mainstream political parties pander to them and pussyfoot around the issues in order to gain racist votes.




Starbuck09 -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:05:36 AM)

 Their policies on immigration [which they are pushing hard as the three mainstream parties are worried about debating it so it kes them appear decisive] the abolition of faith schools, the stance on the war in Afghanistan and defence spending, national and civil service.  It wouldn't matter if it was the mosnter raving looney party getting seats in Europe we live in a democracy. The price of that is the ony politcal weapon at our disposal is debate. Anything else and you have a broad dictatorship. Who are you and I to dictate what people can and cannot vote for? The head in the sand approach is handing power to the B.N.P. because people disposed towards voting for them infer, understandably if perhaps not entirely accurately, that the opposition is too stupid to debate the issues they feel are important.




kittinSol -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:10:28 AM)

I disagree. Debating the BNP is giving them a legitimacy they do not have. This doesn't mean they should be ignored. Rather, instead of trying to garner their votes, the parties of democracy must put up a united front against the forces that seek to destroy democracy.

Of course, this won't happen because Labour and the Cons are greedy for votes. They will instill a subtle anti-immigrant flavour to their policies, just like it's happened in France, where people had the same idea you have that the National Front should be conversed with amiably.

These people are thugs, nothing else.




SaintIntensity -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:11:44 AM)

I never said it was "the problem" - but it is PERCEIVED to be a huge problem by a large number of people - and they are the BNP's target audience. The government's policies have been confused and ineffective - and NG & co will continue to make hay from it. Its only the BNP's inability to formulate policies in other areas that prevents more voters from other mainstream parties switching to them - even if done as a "short term fix".

The (rather arrogant) "x isnt the problem" doesn't wash with those who have already decided the issues that will affect their votes.




kittinSol -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:17:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SaintIntensity
The (rather arrogant) "x isnt the problem" doesn't wash with those who have already decided the issues that will affect their votes.


The Brits who are unhappy should emigrate to Kosovo [8|] . Seriously, what do you suggest is done about the morons who vote BNP? What kind of deliberate cretinery is it, to vote for such a platform? These voters don't deserve the democratic rights they enjoy. (I don't give a shit if this comes across as arrogant.)




SaintIntensity -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:17:54 AM)

a relevant blog from a BBC journalist

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/2009/10/the_bnp_and_the_white_working.html




Starbuck09 -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:19:25 AM)

What do you mean they don't have? They are a registered party in a democracy and they now have seats in the European parliament. They are completely legitimate.  People are voting for them primarily because they feel the three main parties have failed them on the isses they care abouts so they are now looking elsewhere. The logical moral and legal way to combat this in a democracy is to debate these issues and demonstrate that the B.N.P. are not the answer. How utterly pathetic that e have become so turgid a democracy that we cannot summon up the intellectual will to accomplish that. You and I have no right morally or legally to dictate wich ideas are worthy of debate. The yardstick is there for all to follow. Can you seriously imagine if Labour thought a good campaign strategy was to simply ignore their opponents? To pretend to be asleep when conservatives were making their speaches? They would look vstly incompetent which is how the main parties approach to the B.N.P. appars to those sympathetic to that party. The death kell for a democracy is ot the march of jackboots it is the sound of voters sleeping rather than bothering to defend what they have the only way they can through reason. Those idiots attempting to stop NcGriffin appearing are just as bad the day that ideas worthy of debate are decided by mob rule is the day democracy perishes.




Aneirin -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:34:01 AM)

To me, Griffin's party is useful, it needs to be there, for what it is, as a worry to the other parties. If BNP is gaining votes, politicians for their own survival need to ask why, and is it them that have caused the BNP to gain power. What the BNP represents to me, is abhorrent, it goes against all my own principles of tolerance and acceptance of others, but they have got some valid questions to campaign over, questions that the government seems to be failing miserably at addressing. Questions and issues that are very much in the common public eye and experience, housing and employment. I think those who have ascended to their ivory towers look back on their struggles, (if they in truth had them), with rose tinted sunglasses, they have lost touch with the reality of life in Britain, and depend on gathered information from advisors to create their viewpoint, not forgetting the communicated word from person to person, can be likened to Chinese Whispers, everyone in the chain of communication adds or takes a bit to suit their perspective and political agenda.

Immigration, I am ok with it, for the simple fact that I am ok with emigration, if people here see no problems with selling up and moving abroad, or working abroad to gain a better income, then there is nothing wrong with foreigners doing the same, to think otherwise, is hypocrisy, or does the imperial mentality still preside, it's ok for us, but not others.

Anybody that wants to come here, why not, I am sure if I lived in their country and sought a better future, I would be doing the same, putting oneself into another's situation brings light to a problem. But the problems we have are that of housing and employment. It stands to reason, the more people that come here need to be permanently housed, but  that permanence should not come before existing homeless people, for that, is only fair. Employment, well, industry seeks the most profit for the smallest outlay, Britons have a standard of living, we have been coached in it by past industry, we have needs that a basic wage will not cover, but immigrants will take those jobs, and with it, work damned hard, as they are used to it. The fault of Britons being unkean to do menial jobs that pay next to nothing, is because of the way our society has trained us, we have expectations, expectations created and laid upon us by education, industry and governments.

The lack of housing we all know keeps the house prices high, and we can't have the house prices dropping can we, what would the financiers banks and land holders say about that.

The BNP, as it stands, to me provides a thorn in the side of any government, and I do believe the upsurge of support for them, is an act of desperation by those that voted, tactical voting even, wake the politicians up. I believe Britain, is more Tolerant and accepting than the BNP suggests, and they may pass into the background once our political masters get a well thought out grip on what is ailing this country, and do something about it instead of offering knee jerk sound bites to make people think they care.




kittinSol -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:45:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09
What do you mean they don't have?


If you are speaking of their democratic credentials, this speaks louder than bombs:

"The BNP requires that all members must be members of the "Indigenous Caucasian" racial group. The party does not regard non-white people as being ethnically British, even if they have been born in the UK and are naturalised British citizens. Instead, Griffin has stated that "non-Europeans who stay", while protected by British law, "will be regarded as permanent guests".
The party has stated that it does not consider the Jewish, Hindu or Sikh religions to have a significantly detrimental or threatening effect, having several members with Jewish ancestry, but does not accept practising Sikhs or Hindus as culturally or ethnically British. In pursuit of the policy, the BNP has previously worked with extremist Hindu and Sikh groups opposing Islam, and actively tried to win Jewish votes.
The BNP is opposed to mixed-race relationships on the stated ground that racial differences must be preserved; the party said that "when whites take partners from other ethnic groups, a white family line that stretches back into deep pre-history is destroyed." Nick Griffin stated: "… while the BNP is not racist, it must not become multi-racist either. Our fundamental determination to secure a future for white children is restated, and an area of uncertainty is addressed and a position which is both principled and politically realistic is firmly established. We don't hate anyone, especially the mixed race children who are the most tragic victims of enforced multi-racism, but that does not mean that we accept miscegenation as moral or normal. We do not and we never will"."

Wiki: the BNP.




Starbuck09 -> RE: Nick Griffin - torn to shreds on QT? (10/26/2009 5:51:22 AM)

 It doesn't matter though KittenSol. They could be the party for paedophilia or using babies as cheap meat it's a democracy and peple are voting for them. The only way to stop that is demonstrate through debate that their policies are flawed. Would you be swayed by the argument that you are stupid and your beliefs ignorant? Of curse not you would come to the conclusion that the person flinging those epithets is a fool. The same is happening here but on a much much larger scale.

Just look at what you're saying Kitten you think some people don't deserve democratic rights for their views? Where does that end who decides which views deserve rights and which don't? Which political system does such methods bring to mind...i is not democracy.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875