BBC Question Time 22-10-09

[TrainBrain185]

Who are the Morons? The so called civilised demonstrators outside.......or the BNP Leader?

 

[Ferret]

Or both?

 

[90019]

I would've said both.

 

[Dai.]

Both without a doubt.

 

[Mojo]

I think very few people who watch Question Time are interested in the BNP so hasn't really done much for them.

 

[Old Timer]

I do not agree with the BNP, however neither do I agree with the various Left Wing groups who are in effect trying to prevent the exercise of the freedom to speech.

It is totally unacceptable that the Left should try to suppress the right of anyone to express an opinion. Even though you may disagree with that opinion, the suppression of the freedom of speech leads to the situation that occurred in the Soviet Union.

It is the standard tactic of the Left to do their utmost to suppress free speech because ultimately the ability to then speak out about the Left has already been lost. The only freedom of speech allowed is that which the Left agree with.

The most ironic thing of all is that the most brutal and racist governments and dictatorships have always been those of the Left, who ruthlessly remove any dissent and persecute minorities. Stalin for example is a perfect example of this, as are a variety of South American and African Left wing dictatorships.

The biggest threat to freedom comes not from the BNP, who will never be more than a minority protest party, but the massed ranks of the LEFT who are doing their utmost to shape this Country into their idealogical ideal by suppressing free speech and making concerted attacks on those who oppose them by labelling them racist, anti-gay, anti-feminist, etc, etc.

 

[Daniel]

I believe that we should just let them speak, to be honest. Let them say what they want to say, just as we listen to the (false..) promises of the Labour & Conservative party, we should listen, and let the people decide if they are talking sense, or just a load of bollocks.

(I would also like to add, that most drivers at the depot I am at agree that the RMT should not really have been protesting outside the BBC when they should be negotiating our pay deal! What does a union really have to do with a political party?)

 

[mrcheek]

I would say that both are morons.

This is supposed to be a free, democratic country. Whatever the BNP's views, tens of thousands of people voted for them in recent elections. They therefore have the right to be heard.

Some people call the BNP "fascists". Personally, I would say that the fascists are those who used force and violence as a way of trying to stop Nick Griffin speaking.

Personally, I have often said that if the BNP were allowed a fair platform on which to speak, it would actually harm them in the long run. Most BNP voters are simply proud to be British, and/or a bit ****ed off with mainstream parties. They do not share the vile views of Nick Griffin. I am sure that many people, after hearing Nick Griffin's actual views, and what he really stands for, are now regretting voting for him.

But to me, free speech is the most important thing. It was Voltaire who said "I disagree with what you say, but would fight to the death to protect your right to say it". Nobody seems to have that attitude today.

 

[NSEFAN]

It seems to me that both are moronic: The protesters are the fascists who like to complain about the opinions of others, and Nick Griffin is an ignorant, racist idiot who likes to view Britain through rose-tinted glasses.

I think Nick Griffin should be on TV shows like Question Time more often. It would give him more opportunities to show himself and his party up. It is far better for people to see and hear for themselves what a fool he is, rather than be simply "told" by the papers. The removal of the freedom of speech is what helps fascist regimes to start in the first place.

Good job BBC.

 

[Oswyntail]

IMHO, only Baroness Warsi and David Dimbleby came out of the programme with any credit. Jack Straw in particular seemed incoherent and very badly prepared. Instead of grilling Griffin and showing him up as an illogical prat, they responded to him by name-calling and sneers. Which is what he expected and wanted.

 

[Drsatan]

Having watched the show, it's clear that Mr Griffin is both somewhat ignorant and a racist. He seems like a very slimy guy if he has to deny saying that the holocaust never happened, or that "black men walk like monkeys".

However, this is a free country, and I do applaud the BBC for pulling out all the stops to make sure Nick Griffin appeared on the show. It's ironic that our right to free speech has been taken away though, due to the Racial & Religious hatred act 2006 and other such punitive measures.

The protestors outside looked like complete ****s as well. The UAF, the group which organised the demonstration, is actually run by members of the Socialist Workers Party, a far-left group which rejects democracy, and is led by Ken Livingstone. This is the same Ken who happily supported the construction of the East London Mega Mosque and invited some fundamentalist cleric to tea who said all homosexuals should be stoned to death.

 

[Mojo]

8 Million watched it last night, so it was obviously a ratings winner, according to the news that's 4 times more than normal.

 

[jamesontheroad]

This is supposed to be a free, democratic country. Whatever the BNP's views, tens of thousands of people voted for them in recent elections. They therefore have the right to be heard.

...

But to me, free speech is the most important thing. It was Voltaire who said "I disagree with what you say, but would fight to the death to protect your right to say it". Nobody seems to have that attitude today.

I agree. And remember that at the last elections (when the BNP made some gains) their overall net vote was no more than in previous elections. There was just a terrible turn out for the other major parties. Sadly disaffected voters seem to think that not voting = a protest vote. It doesn't. Not voting allows extremists to increase their share of the vote with no extra support. So no matter how little you care about politicians or politics, you have a duty to at least show up and spoil your ballot paper. That's a protest vote.

8 Million watched it last night, so it was obviously a ratings winner, according to the news that's 4 times more than normal.

Which is excellent news. Having been denied a voice in the press and on TV / radio, the BNP has been able to build up a conspiracy theory in their favour, and they've not been interrogated or challenged about their core beliefs. They need to be challenged at every opportunity, because then their slimy avoidance of key questions (like Griffin trying to avoid talking about his denial of the holocaust etc etc etc) became shamefully apparent.

Result? BBC 1 BNP 0.

 

[BlythPower]

"I do not agree with the BNP, however neither do I agree with the various Left/Right Wing groups who are in effect trying to prevent the exercise of the freedom to speech.

It is totally unacceptable that the Left/Right should try to suppress the right of anyone to express an opinion. Even though you may disagree with that opinion, the suppression of the freedom of speech leads to the situation that occurred in the Soviet Union/Nazi Germany.

It is the standard tactic of the Left/Right to do their utmost to suppress free speech because ultimately the ability to then speak out about the Left/Right has already been lost. The only freedom of speech allowed is that which the Left/Right agree with.

The most ironic thing of all is that the most brutal and racist governments and dictatorships have always been those of the Left/Right, who ruthlessly remove any dissent and persecute minorities. Stalin/Hitler for example is a perfect example of this, as are a variety of South American and African Left/Right wing dictatorships.

The biggest threat to freedom comes not from the BNP, who will never be more than a minority protest party, but the massed ranks of the LEFT/RIGHT who are doing their utmost to shape this Country into their idealogical ideal by suppressing free speech and making concerted attacks on those who oppose them by labelling them racist/******-lovers, anti-gay/gay, anti-feminist/feminist, etc, etc."

Tidied in the interests of political balance.

 

[TrainBrain185]

One day people in this country will realise Nick Griffin's ideology made some sense after all.
Just watch an old Ealing Movie from the 50's and see how London used to be compared to today and there his vision can be proved.
I admire Nick Griffin for making his views public. As a neutral, I do not mind at all if the BNP gets more votes at the expense of the Labour Party failings to Police our Borders. The Train "United Kingdom" is full, room for no more!!

 

[royaloak]

It was Voltaire who said "I disagree with what you say, but would fight to the death to protect your right to say it". Nobody seems to have that attitude today.

i thought that was Jasper Carrot.

coat, taxi.

 

[mrcheek]

Much as I support free speech over all, and much as I think it was right to let Nick Griffin on the show, this video is funny regardless:

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

 

[jamesontheroad]

As a neutral, I do not mind at all if the BNP gets more votes at the expense of the Labour Party failings to Police our Borders. The Train "United Kingdom" is full, room for no more!!

I am so bored with this baseless argument from the right. 2008 witnessed a 44% fall in net migration into the UK (source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/21/uk-population-growth-70-million). EU Nationals are free to come here to work and live just as I am (and as I have) to go and work elsewhere in the EU. As the jobs have dried up, people have gone home. All this talk of population explosion has been completely misunderstood, especially as the figures quoted are based on old pre-recession statistics.

We have had and continue to have plenty of room for people to live and work in the UK. And if you really don't like it, then take advantage of the fantastic opportunities presented by our membership of the EU. If you can't find work here or don't like our climate, move somewhere else. As other figures this week have shown, the economic recovery has already picked up speed in France and Germany for instance. And don't you dare complain to me about language barriers. It's our laziness as a nation (no longer requiring a second language to be taught in school) that has left our teenagers and young people completely disadvantaged in the global workplace. Regardless of whether you want to be a barmaid in Lanzarote or a captain of international commerce, our educational and cultural distrust of anything foreign is now a shameful burden on all our prospects.

The BNP represent a stubborn, lazy and unintelligent political argument that wants to turn the clock back to an era without personal mobility. Isn't it odd that this thread is on a forum dedicated to railways, an invention that permits anyone and everyone to travel from one end of our country to another, or even into the rest of continent.

History cannot be undone. Evolution of peoples, nations and societies cannot be reversed. And I for one do not think it would be at all appealing to turn the clock back the 1950s. What a *#@!ing stupid idea. Have you any idea how impoverished Britain was in the fifties? Your life expectancy was in the high sixties, our country was an economic basket-case and wartime rationing was still in effect. The average family had no opportunity to ever leave the country, especially not for holidays, and the British diet was a horrific and stodgy mix of all that is awful about British cuisine. Tropical and exotic fruits that we now take for granted everyday were expensive rarities too. Bananas? Oranges? Kiwi? Ha! What's more, the railways were in a state, cars were expensive and generally crap, British music and film was dire and life in general was monotonous.

We already know what happened to the one European experiment at 'purifying' a race, even if Mr Griffin denies it ever happened. While our country and our society has many problems, the BNP is a single issue party that thinks turning our country into a retrogressive mono-cultural island disconnected from the world will solve everything. No thanks.

 

[Old Timer]

I didn't watch the programme, but from what excerpts I have heard, it demonstrated a complete lack of logical thinking or direction.

That of course was when you could hear what was being said. That complete fool and hypocrite Straw not only made a complete Dick of himself, as did the LibDem person, but also managed to prevent any real debate from developing.

It is quite ironic (but in Straw's case fully appropriate) that his own father should have been happy to sit the War out safely at home whilst others, such as Nick Griffin's father, did their bit to try to prevent what is has now been imposed on us by the last 12 years under Liebor. It is also very ironic that Straw should have cynically made a 180 degree turn about since he was a student demonstrator, and NUS activist demanding the sort of "Freedoms" HE has actually been primarily involved in destroying.

I have also heard excerpts from a Radio 5 Live discussion with the BNP member for Leeds, who was a complete tool, spouting out contradictions every second sentence.

The Left of course want to prevent free speech, but what has happened by means of the BBC is that the BNP has demonstrated itself to be a Party that has no clear idealogical values and no thought out strategy or ideals. Had Nick Griffin not been given the platform to demonstrate this then no-one would have seen how badly he performed.

What is slightly more worrying is that I read today that 1 in 5 i.e. 20% of the total Electorate would consider voting BNP. Now whilst the BBC and others make little of this, the figure actuallyrepresents MORE people than elected this shower we have now.

That is the price we have paid by allowing the Left to dictate the Political freedom to speak in this Country about things that concern many of the core voters.

The Left have created an atmosphere where no-one dare open up a subject on Immigration, or quotas or Border Controls, or anything that involves anyone who is not part of the idiginous race becasue this is immediately regarded as wrong, racist, or whatever the latest "ism" happens to be.

That is why I believe that the Left are actually a bigger threat to our freedoms than anyone else.

 

[EM2]

Jack Straw's father was a pacifist and had been since 1934, well before the outbreak of war. He was not 'happy to sit the War out safely at home', but declared his pacifism and he was in prison as a conscientious objector.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1222597/Nick-Griffin-Jack-Straw-tale-dads.html

 

[Old Timer]

Great comfort I am sure to the relatives of those who died, so that he could have that pleasure.

In Germany or indeed the Soviet Union he would have been taken out and shot.

Why didn't he work down a coal mine like other Pacifists, or do something constructive ?

Neither he nor his son have done anything to the benefit of this Country.

 

[EM2]

Deleted - will repost shortly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In Germany or indeed the Soviet Union he would have been taken out and shot.

Why didn't he work down a coal mine like other Pacifists, or do something constructive ?

Neither he nor his son have done anything to the benefit of this Country.

It may have escaped your attention, but at the time Germany and Russia were run by totalitarian dictators whereas Britain was a democracy. Dictators tend to do things differently.
Walter Straw wasn't given the option to work, he declared his pacifism, was required to attend a tribunal and was imprisoned.

 

[Old Timer]

I disagree.

The vast majority of Conscientious Objectors took work, only a small number faced imprisonment.

To face imprisonment was the final resort.

Here is what the Peace Pledge Union has to say about it.

The British prime minister, Neville Chamberlain, had himself served on a tribunal (the panel interviewing COs to assess their request to be exempted from military service) in the First World War. He said that people asking for unconditional exemption should be respected. 'It was a useless and exasperating effort to attempt to force such people to act in a manner contrary to their principles.' If the principles were 'conscientiously held, we desire that they should be respected, and that there should be no persecution'.

COs were once again required to face a tribunal, but this time the panel members were better chosen, and at least intended to be more fair. The chairman had to be a lawyer (usually a county court judge, not wearing judge's robes). Every tribunal panel had to have a trade union member on it, and, if the CO applicant was a woman, a woman member as well. There was no 'military representative'.

As in the First World War, the tribunals had the power to allow full exemption from military service, without conditions; or exemption conditional on doing alternative civilian service; or exemption only from combatant duties in the army. Otherwise they could dismiss an application altogether. COs had the right of appeal against their tribunal's decision; the appeal ('appellate') tribunals were chaired by a High Court judge.

There were a number of organisations which supported the COs, and all of them were represented on the Central Board for Conscientious Objectors (CBCO), set up in 1939 with government recognition as the organisation to consult on everything to do with conscientious objection. Many veteran COs from the 1914-1918 war manned about 100 CBCO groups which worked throughout the country to advise and inform COs, keep records (as the No-Conscription Fellowship had done in the previous war), monitor tribunals, lobby Parliament and generally protect the interests of COs. There was also the Pacifist Service Bureau (given a licence to operate by the London County Council), which worked to find suitable employment for COs who had been allowed conditional exemption.

About 60,000 men and 1,000 women applied for exemption from armed service. Nearly 3,000 were given unconditional exemption. Around 18,000 were turned down altogether as not 'genuine'. The remainder were either allowed exemption conditional on doing alternative civilian work, or put on the military service register as non-combatants. About a third appealed against the decisions; subsequent appeal tribunals revised about half of these after re-examination.

Of the COs who took up non-combatant duties, 6,766 ended up in the Non-Combatant Corps (NCC). This was set up in August 1940. It was divided into 14 companies mostly commanded by army veterans or reservists; 465 of these COs volunteered to specialise in bomb disposal. Others worked in army-run medical units or on other projects 'not involving the handling of military material of an aggressive nature'.

Civilian work regarded by tribunals as most useful was agriculture or forestry, hospital work, and social service; towards the end of the war coal mining was added to the list. Civil defence was also favoured by tribunals, but a number of COs resisted it because of its closeness to military activity. For some COs alternative civilian service meant being ordered to stay in their present posts (for example, in education, scientific research or on the land), but many tribunals were keen to despatch applicants to work away from home, so that they made some sacrifice, as fighting men did.

Each conscript woman was given the choice between the women's military services (no use of any 'lethal weapon' without her written consent), civilian defence, or work in industry, often in armaments factories. Women COs, it turned out, often had to appeal to gain exemption under conditions they could accept. Some women managed to make their own informal arrangements which were accepted as satisfactory, but these weren't listed in the records.

By the end of the war, about 5,000 men and 500 women had been charged with offences to do with conscientious objection, and most of them were sent to prison. A further 1,000 or more were court-martialled and given prison sentences for refusing to obey military orders.

 

[EM2]

Neither of us know the full story behind his imprisonment, for example how long he was in jail, or if he carried out any work after his release, so we shall just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Old Timer]

No problem, pointless to fall out over silly things.

Life is too short.

 

[TheSlash]

Jack Straw was useless!
The first question;
"Is it fair that the BNP has hijacked Churchill as it's own?"
By the time Jack Straw had finished his first verse, i was completely lost as to how any of his reply related to the question. Have alook [/url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXfxD8ehDsU]here[/url].
Nick Griffin wasn't very good. I would of thought that if he was appearing on Question Time, he might of had some coaching on how to behave. The first time he got to speak, he blurted out the bit about Jack Straw's father.

 

[SouthEastern-465]

To be honest I agree with some of the BNPs opinions and dont care what anyone thinks.

We are all entitled to a opinion.

 

[mrcheek]

To be honest I agree with some of the BNPs opinions and dont care what anyone thinks.

We are all entitled to a opinion.

Good for you for saying what you believe in.

I personally dislike the BNP. and I am disappointed with anyone who votes for them.
But, I personally HATE the current government, who have done more to harm this country than the BNP could ever dream of doing. And I am DISGUSTED with anyone who votes for them!

The BNP are bad. But Labour are far worse. And making out the BNP to be some kind of evil, which is what many are doing, is pretty pathetic.

 

[Kneedown]

I missed the programme as i was attending a funeral in Wales, but from what i hear it was everything i expected it to be.
I didn't for a minute believe that Mr Griffin was going to be given a fair hearing from the grotesquely left wing BBC. It was obvious that the audience was going to be taken a group of people who were least likely to vote for them. That has been confirmed in todays papers.
To be honest from what i hear it seemed to be a slanging match rather than an informed political debate. The lefties keep going on about the holocaust, for goodness sake change the record and study the political histories of those who are ruling us now! Most of em are ex communist party members, and Stalin was responsible for far more deaths than the nazi's ever were!
Nick actually gave an interview on Radio 4 the day before, and succeeded in chewing up the hostile interviewer and spitting her out again. Not with slime or trickery, just with simple common sense.
I'll keep voting BNP, my resolve is even stronger now and i don't care what anybody thinks!

 

[jamesontheroad]

It was obvious that the audience was going to be taken a group of people who were least likely to vote for them.

I.E. the British public.

The BBC have responded to those allegations: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/10/nick_griffin_on_question_time.html

The last time I applied to be in the Question Time audience the booking form asked me for my demographic background, and political affiliation / intended voting etc. I presume that nothing has changed; there were proportionally as many BNP supporters in the audience as applied to be. It is, of course, possible that hosting the debate in London - a vastly more ethnically diverse city than the BNP heartlands - affected this.