Question Time - With Nick Griffin

[Mamazonabroomstick]

anyone else watching to see the vile pig legitimate political leader make an arse of himself himself understood??

I don't agree that Bonnie Greer contributed nothing - thought she gave some excellent and non-emotive food for thought in a dignified manner - a comforting contrast to the squirming, spluttering NG. The guy is like a cartoon villain.

i was almost clapping at jack straws opening statement re: the world wars/churchill question

i thought bonny and the "you'll know this nick...as you have a 2:2" was fucking hilarious

in fact i thought she was brilliant.

thought grifin came off as a twat - although i appreciate MQ's POV (below) that he could be seen as being persecuted a bit - feeding the BNPs agenda.

griffin did look like a weedy twat way out of his league

I know I can, and I will get involved, even if it is just trying to educate myself [for which mn is brilliant] and trying to show poeple I know to be sympathetic to some of their views, that the statement they might agree with is just the tip of a very nasty iceberg. My twitchiness is in part due to that whatever I say, at the end of the day I can only guarantee my vote [rightly].

I think the QT appearance could gain the BNP votes. What the people who vote BNP or who are thinking of voting BNP will have witnessed is: Politicians,students,muslims,academics, liberals etc. ripping into Giffin and not really letting him speak.

These are not sections of society who represent their lives.

They will have their views that they are not being listened to reinforced.

He should have been allowed to have a normal debate, and there should have been some real heavyweight debaters and he would have been shown for what he is.

bonny and the ice age - in relation to the BNP 'indiginous british people' history on website..."with it being ice, no-one could live here"
nick "when it melted"
"well when it melted people didn't come from the north after the ice age ..." [knowing look]"... they came from the south, they came from africa"

pmsl. so was great.

i really do not think qt will have altered many peoples voting last night

in the warehouse this morning some blokes might be cheering that he was on but equally others will retort that he looked like a dickhead with no support

its not the politicians and analysts who matter here

I havent read the thread but would like to add that:

they shouldve stuck to original programme format, had a more balaned audience and allowed him to speak.
I know no more about the BNP policies now that I did before the programme, I think had he been given that chance he would have been shown up for the vile racist that he is, but that didnt happen.
I think the BBC set him up to be shown up, but failed miserably with DD and poor audience choice.

but with the churchill question to start with, they went for this emotive idea of churchill being a simble of inclusive england and a patriotic icon claiming the bnp have hi-jacked his memory.
the problem with this is that churchill will have been a product of his times so will have probably held views which seem extreme when attempting to transpose them into modern society. so griffin countered that churchill also spoke on the threat of immigration and protecting british identity and values.
now i did not know either way who was correct in their facts not knowing much about churchill. so i did a quick google of "winston churchill immigration" today and was found an article from the telegraph which includes extracts like

"Churchill, then 79, told Cabinet colleagues that he did not "want a parti-coloured UK". At a Cabinet meeting on February 3, 1954, the prime minister told colleagues: "Problems will arise if many coloured people settle here. Are we to saddle ourselves with colour problems in UK?"

and

"Churchill said immigrants were attracted to Britain by the welfare state and he said: "Public opinion in UK won't tolerate it once it gets beyond certain limits.""

so if these are accurate,griffin is right in that he can line up some of his party values with that of winston churchill.so for me the panel shot themselves in the foot there.they went for a big emotive point, i.e. there's nothing british about the bnp essentially and were quite easily countered. but the points made by griffin where ignored even though he handled them easily and this will feed into the bnp core means of promotion.
the government are out to silence us,they ignore the facts,it was a witch hunt from start to finish etc.
when the panel have so much ammunition to destroy nick griffin in an educated debate, to fuck up the first question in this way was an awful start. it gave him exactly what he wanted. the ability to start with some facts which were being ignored by the other politicians.

Apparently Le Pen's profile and vote shot up after a similar TV grilling, so I do feel worried.

I was all for the BBC including him on QT. Because, as they said, they have an institutional obligation to give a neutral platform to all parties present in the electoral system: it isn't their job to pick and choose between candidates on behalf of the nation. And also because I thought that engaging with the BNP rather than piously marginalising it might prove a better strategy for defeating it.

BUT I think the BBC failed to handle it well. He was there because having an MEP means you get space in BBC debates; you get to be a minor talking head up against the main players and you get to communicate your party's policy stance on all the major issues of the week.

If they had given him that sort of a hum-drum presence he would not be able to play the martyred outsider, and he would have had to scrabble around in the attempt to present his politics of hate as a plausible manifesto for running the country.

But they made him the star of the show. And the star of the first 10 minutes of the News at Ten. You know, you just know that kind of lionising will increase his vote. Just like the sale of chocolate bars goes up when there is some news story about chocolate causing swine flu. He is at the forefront of people's minds now.

And I really think that the BBC has a nasty habit of manipulating its news coverage to give publicity to its programmes. It does that quite nakedly sometimes.

Agree Lenin - if only we could make thinking and voting compulsory

I see DP's here now, so shall post a small bit of RT @newsarse: NEWS! Nick Griffin lied, we are totally violent, insist the Ku Klux Klan bit.ly/jhmwA light relief and retire.

Bugger. Light Relief.

lenin i think we need a complete overhaul of the british polictics system before that can happen. The BNP have won seats because people are so disappointed with what else is on offer.
Even our 'mainstream' parties are full of lying, cheating idiots who no one trusts so what hope is there?

have noticed on the bbc website that ng is complaining about the lynch mob last night.

I thought that this QT was a totally wasted opportunity to put the boot into the BNP and the vile Griffin. He did not emerge from the programme looking any worse than when he went in IMHO.

I'm sorry, but Jack Straw was pathetic, as was Chris Huene (sp?) the Baroness was quite good, but she is not that far further to the left in her politics than Griffin.

I too love Bonnie Greer, but it was difficult to escape the conclusion that she had been chosen to appear because she is black. I think it would have been more effective to have had someone with rather more right wing views on the panel. Someone like Rod Liddle or Roger Scruton perhaps, who i think would have done a much more effective job at debunking NG.

I agree with Mamazon that instead of just attacking NG personally he should have been asked to expand on the BNPs other policies and how his party are going to use their EU seats. He is accustomed to this sort of rough treatment from journalists etc, and he is pretty good at dealing with it.

The person who should have been given a hard time is the Labour member of the panel (who just happened to be Jack Straw). Perhaps he could have explained how, after 12 years of Labour government, so many of their white, working class core voters have deserted them to vote for the despicable BNP. One million of them - as many as voted for the Green Party!

exactly jeff vader,this was a perfect opportunity to just dismantle the bnp in reasoned debate.
instead they made him the start of the show.
he was constantly interrupted and shouted down.every tiny point was greeted by rapturous applause by the crowd,it was like an episode of ricky lake.
it's probably the only time i've seen a politician criticise the gov. for the war and not be met with applause.
this all fed into the bnp's raison d'etre of "no matter what we do we'll be criticised".
jack straw came out pretty badly and was pushed by the presenter on immigration, yet due to his own conservative leanings he let the baroness off lightly on the gay marraige question.
the shows format was not the right one for nick griffin.it basically descended into a bullying session that made no one look good instead of being quiet and letting him answer to dig a hole for himself,he would have fucked it up all on his own,as it was it looked like a pantomime stitch up. mindless whooping and clapping after every question,constant interruption and just grilling him on his niche subject for an hour. i'd much rathger see him one on one with paxman for an hour.get grilled over his racism for about 10 minutes as that's all you need to show how vile he is. and then watch him completely destroy any credibility as a politician by askig him about schools,the nhs and every other issue of the day that he has no policies on and can't bring back to his favopurite topic.

Yep, agree about Paxman. Woud be fab to see him shot down on newsnight.

Loving the newsarse link

I also think that they should have tackled Griffin on actual policy and let him make a complete knob of himself. Because there are enough areas where the BNP are full of shit for them to be able to appal pretty much everyone with a functioning brainstem.
As it was, the programme did keep collapsing into 'Look! LOOOK! Me nasty to Nazi! Me GOOD PERSON!' pointlessness.
I would also vote for Paxman or someone equally stroppy (ANne Robinson, if well briefed, perhaps, given that the likes of Griffin are always petrified of GURLS) to give NG a good one-to-one skewering.

bc...who are you..?

on the other BNP thread you were getting very personal with me....like we know each other..

i don't think i've ever spoken to you..

Why was anyone watching Question Time? Curb your Enthusiasm was on More4 at the same time and it is the best show in the history of TV - it is criminally, magically funny.
A load of politicos or Larry David - er no contest!

I really don't get CYE but each to her won I guess

least Christians now are objecting to the BNP claiming to want a 'Christian' country . no idea how these people are as a group but its a link

fekkit having a bad day

"they shouldve stuck to original programme format, had a more balaned audience and allowed him to speak"

They did have a balanced audience. It's done really scientifically to give a good reflection of society at large.

What would the point have been of sticking to the usual format? No-one there would have done, so changing it was the best way to stay in control

Personally, I think he just showed what a buffoon he is. I feel quite reassured - he is not someone to take seriously.

How could he debate policies?

Look on his website- under polcies there is immigration and crime.

I searched on the things that apply to my life and that I know about- carers (and got a rant about how unaccompanied asylum seekers use all the budgets so send eem back.... I can't imagine what sort of human would want to send back a child to a warzone but anyway.... and nothing actually useful) and under disability I got a blurb suggesting I send them my email

That'd be

[email protected], then