Contributor Leaderboard

Before I go on, i'll just say that i'm in no way a BNP supporter, and in no shape or form do i 'rate' Nick Griffin; however, I have to disagree with you - Mrs Vic - that he was made to look a complete *** (insert chosen insult. I fully expected him to be so, and I was quite looking forward to a whitewash ( no pun intended) but faced with the simpering, pathetic Jack Straw and the complete no-hoper from the Lib-Dems, plus a token Black American historian and a very impressive Baroness Warsi (hope I got the name right) he was hardly exposed at all. There was nothing new bar the 'you're a Nazi' jibes that we always get, and that he always refutes, and it was quite clear that this, quite disgustingly, was set up to try and make the BNP look like a bunch of idiots. I think, quite franly, it backfired. I notice your reference to... "and yes, even the BNP supporter in the audience had his say... some indecipherable shouting by an unwashed greasy man... even Dimbleby couldn't be bothered..." and I found that, and one other instance, to be rather disconerting. If you are referring to the man I think you are, he simply put the question 'why are we allowing so many immigrants when we have a rising unemployment rate?' he didn't say he was a BNP supporter at all, and for Dimbleby to dismiss it with 'You've made your point' was, to be honest, disgusting; it was a fair question, a good one, and one that needs addressing, as subsequent discussion revealed. Griffin, quite rightly, later expressed his opinion that the BBC is a very biased organisation, and this merely proved that point. If Question Time is intended to give all participants a fair voice, this edition didn't. The other point that had me cringing was an example of the ridiculous political correctness that pervades such discussions as this; Straw, in answering a question from a man with very dark coloured skin, actually said '.....I'm from immigrant stock, you may or may not be.....' and, I must say, that has to be the funniest line of the show. The man was clearly from immigrant stock, and there was no need to shy away from the fact, a fact which - as was clear - the questioner was not disputing. All of thi smacks of sheer nonsense from the BBC, and I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with a lot of what Griffin has said since. Those who wish to denigrate him and his party, who think they should not be given a voice, should not be afforded what is referred to as the 'oxygen of publicity' should wathch their step, for without the right to speak, to say what one believes, we lose all other rights of freedom. I don't agree with much of the BNP's policies, so I don't vote for them. I don't agree with much of other parties policies either, so I don't vote for them. I do not, however, insist that they should not be heard, because I disagree with them. Furthermore, the historical knowledge shown by the political sides of the panel last night was woeful: bar theh token Black American (a historian) all seemed to have no idea that Churchill was a noted racist, all continue to misinterpret the much quoted, always out of context, Rivers of Blood speech by Powell, and all seemed oblivious to the rights of others to express views. My deepest concern, however, comes from the fact that despite the sensible and down to earth Baroness Warsi, Nick Griffin came across as less of a naughty schoolboy than the rest.

I certainly think that the audience was representitive of the weekly audiences of the show: do you expect a show to suddenly invite a coach load of ignorant oiks and skinheads just because there's a certain panellist? I'm a Blur and Pulp fan and I was invited to neither of the shows Alex James nor Jarvis Cocker. How many people did vote BNP? And what does that represent in comparison to the national population? 1 in 60? Take it to 1 in 40 if you must count the minors? Would that not represent the demographics of the audience? Curbing the right to free speech is the last worry in concern to the BNP. I don't believe we have free speech now under the current system, I don't think we ever have had, nor do I think we will. To me free speech and free thought go hand in hand, should we not be able to think freely without being pressured or coerced into one belief or another then there is no point of free speech. Influences in the media are too clever for most of the followers, with many of them not even knowing that they've been had. Should the Sun, the Star or the local social club put up a campaign to rid the country of hedgehogs because they are taking our taxes, there would be followers. Before any of debate or influence can take place, you have to educate the audience, if they don't have a well balanced view then there is little point. This is not validating your point GGGG, as I don't agree that everyone should have a say, more that everyone should kno the facts. It's very easy for someone to listen to a fool's promises and believe them if they are desperate for change... but if that change doesn't transpire and the promises are broken, what then? Say a party appears tomorrow, promising us all a job, a large house an acre of land and 30 days holidays a year... sounds good? Would you vote? Many would. Would the promises be fulfilled? No. Many people too far removed from the system see the answer as a cut and dried case of getting rid of asylum seekers... how many are there stealing the jobs of the Bedlingtonians? 5? 10? Right, so give the BNP their way... is anything going to change significantly round here? So why make it an issue? Voters are being coerced into thinking the BNP will help their circumstances... well it's not. Why should they be lied to? Should there be the facility to put out such nonsense? Socialism is the same, Communism, the Liberals, Labour and Tories too, whomever it is manipulting voters with lies, they should be stopped. Sadly, we prove that popularity will attract followers, we live in a nation where Goody, Cole and Cowell can win the nations hearts... surely this shows the stupidity of many. We seem to have reached the point where we allow freedom of choice, freedom of speech and the like, however, what it boils down to is a society churning out ill-educated and maliable proles capable of voting for a man with the charisma and looks of a sausage roll. I find the attitude of listening to sex offenders disgusting, GGGG, look at the nursery cases in the news over the last few weeks... at some point one of those parties must have made the suggestion to the others to go along with; what about all the women who sit back knowing their children are being abused; people are easily manipulated, and so no, some groups in society should not have a say. I guess that you are assuming incorrectly that I belong to some kind of -ism or other. There are many answers to Griffins arguments, most of them beginning with setting the record straight that asylum seekers are not to blame for the problems in this country for unemployment, the welfare state, education or the NHS. Looking a bit closer to home perhaps we need to look at our lifestyles and the impact they have on the state much more than the impact of the small percentage of immigrants. I have worked with vast numbers of asylum seekers, every single one of which was keen to work, volunteer, educate themselves, stay healthy, generally be a valuable member of the community. The money I have seen spent has always gone on the problems of the 'natives' in crime, benefits, social services, ill health and the like... the ammount spent on some of 'our own' families can top £1million a year when you count up benefits, housing and mainly the cost of serivces 'to put them right'... 1 child alone, damaged by their parents can cost the system £20,000 a month to support them in education and/or medical support, multiply that by a family of 5... the kids of course, stay with their parents, it would be unfair not to... and the parents? well they will get more beer money if they add another to the nest. I do not consider myself to be a citizen of the UK, but more of one of the world, just because we live on an island don't not mean our boundaries are so clear. On one hand 'we' allegedly support wars on many fronts to support the victims of rotten regimes, but then we have no compassion when victims of the most vile crimes come to us for support. Imagine you have been raped, seen your family killed and managed to escape to a 'nicer' place, you want to help build a supportive, trusting and loyal society, you want to fit in... who are we to send someone back to near certain death, just on the basis of less of an increase in next year's benefits. Do the people who vote BNP have absolutely no compassion for their fellow man? The show last night was not the Nick Griffin show, such in the same way the usually hilariously funny Charlie Brooker didn't get much of a say on last week's Have I got News For You, life isn't perfect, perhaps we just need to make the most of it instead of complaining.

Do you honestly believe that audience was representative of the UK population? No way! It's all very well calling the BNP racist, and saying they would curb the right to free speech, but if you won't give them a fair hearing all you are doing is allowing them to accuse you of the same tactics. Shouting someone down and attempting to put words in NG's mouth (as he rightly accuses the left-wing press, and Islamists, of doing) simply illustrates how weak the extreme left's arguments actually are. A lot further than Straw and his cronies (particularly Hain) would like. If sex offenders have anything to say then why shouldn't we at least listen? I suspect few do, but at times we might actually learn something which would benefit society. Certainly the hysteria fuelled by the gutter press does nothing for society. There's always the suspicion that the only reason many from the left find him "disgusting" is that they have no answer to any of his arguments. I'd have thought that Socialism and Communism owe much of their influence to their strategy of blaming "someone else for their situation" - as indeed did the Nazis! If you continue to shout him down, and advocate censorship, then ultimately you lose the battle for ideas and he wins by default!