Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

BNP leader to appear on Question Time

Options
12467…12

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    walshb wrote: »
    No such thing as a bogus asyleum seeker? That was the most inaccurate stament from the lot from last night!
    stevedublin wrote: »
    Was this the woman who said there was no such thing as a bogus asylum seeker and accused Griffin of trying to discredit Christianity?

    Her point was that being an asylum seeker is a legal status. You can be accepted or turned down, in which case you cease to be an asylum seeker, but there is no legally identifiable thing called a bogus asylum seeker, which would be needed for the BNP's policies to be put into effect.

    She wasn't saying that all asylum applications are genuine.


    Personally, I think that overall the BNP won, if you look at it in the broader scheme of things.


  • Options
    #93
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    misstierney wrote: »
    Why? They have nothing to be ashamed of.

    As their history states otherwise, right? :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #94
    Can'tseeme
    Registered Users Posts: 611 ✭✭✭Can'tseeme


    Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »
    Thought the BBC were supposed to be impartial. It was pretty much an ambush. Should have had someone from UKIP on as well. Or dare I say it Kevin Myers might have added some balance hehe

    I disagree with that. I watch QT most weeks and Dimbleby does generally give the panel a hard time. If Nick Griffin can't handle that then that's his problem. Labour politicians have been getting a hammering on the show for ages.


  • Options
    #95
    OS119
    Registered Users Posts: 2,518 ✭✭✭OS119


    misstierney wrote: »
    Why? They have nothing to be ashamed of.

    they bloody do!

    i certainly don't doubt that a pretty large percentage (probably a good majority?) of BNP votes are 'we've got no jobs, our schools are crap and we've not seen a politician in years' protest votes - votes the BNP wouldn't get in a million years if those voting believed there was a chance of them getting their hands on government - but the fact remains that the BNP's policies are openly racist, and its senior figures have a number of criminal convictions for their actions towards minorities, and their membership have been video'd saying how they'd like to "line *minorities* up against a wall and machine-gun them".

    they also, should you have the misfortune to meet them, tend to foam at the mouth and steer any conversation around to immigration and ethnic minorities.

    boring, and thick as pig-shit.


  • Options
    #96
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    Can'tseeme wrote: »
    I disagree with that. I watch QT most weeks and Dimbleby does generally give the panel a hard time. If Nick Griffin can't handle that then that's his problem. Labour politicians have been getting a hammering on the show for ages.

    Point taken, admittedly I haven't seen very much of it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    RabbleRouser
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43 ✭RabbleRouser


    During the 60's, 70's and 80's the BBc frequently featured interviews with Unionist and Loyalist representatives from Northern Ireland. Some of whom were openly racist and bigoted. Where there any protests from Anti-rascist groups then? Not at all. There were protests from nationalist groups but none of them protested against the rascist policies of the Unionist parties. Its total hypocrosy.


  • Options
    #98
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    RabbleRouser wrote: »
    During the 60's, 70's and 80's the BBc frequently featured interviews with Unionist and Loyalist representatives from Northern Ireland. Some of whom were openly racist and bigoted. Where there any protests from Anti-rascist groups then? Not at all. There were protests from nationalist groups but none of them protested against the rascist policies of the Unionist parties. Its total hypocrosy.

    As you are comparing social values of today verses those of 50 years ago. Hardly a like with like comparsion.


  • Options
    #99
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users Posts: 24,083 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    RabbleRouser wrote: »
    During the 60's, 70's and 80's the BBc frequently featured interviews with Unionist and Loyalist representatives from Northern Ireland. Some of whom were openly racist and bigoted. Where there any protests from Anti-rascist groups then? Not at all. There were protests from nationalist groups but none of them protested against the rascist policies of the Unionist parties. Its total hypocrosy.

    That's why Enoch Powell found a political home in the North, but I wouldn't exactly say that no-one protested against racist policies in those days. There were protests each time Powell opened his mouth.


  • Options
    #100
    RabbleRouser
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43 ✭RabbleRouser


    rovert wrote: »
    As you are comparing social values of today verses those of 50 years ago. Hardly a like with like comparsion.

    Well firstly, the 1980's were not 50 years ago- indeed some of the representatives I was referring to still appear on the BBC even today- however they are careful not to proclaim any of their deeply held rascist beliefs (something which they would have been more likely to have done 20 years ago).

    But more to the point, No I'm not comparing social values of today with those that were held 50 years ago. Thats not the issue I was addressing at all. I was commenting on the level of protests which have greeted Nick Griffin in the last few days compared with the level of protest made against other public representatives with similar sentiments to that of Mr. Griffin.


  • Options
    #101
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    RabbleRouser wrote: »
    But more to the point, No I'm not comparing social values of today with those that were held 50 years ago. Thats not the issue I was addressing at all. I was commenting on the level of protests which have greeted Nick Griffin in the last few days compared with the level of protest made against other public representatives with similar sentiments to that of Mr. Griffin.

    Which has a lot to do with changing social values :P


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    RabbleRouser
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43 ✭RabbleRouser


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    That's why Enoch Powell found a political home in the North, but I wouldn't exactly say that no-one protested against racist policies in those days. There were protests each time Powell opened his mouth.

    You're right, there were many protests against Enoch Powell (and by no means do I wish to accuse any of Mr. Powell's opponents of inactivity), however, I belive that this was the case because Enoch Powell became a pariah within the British political establishment; and was subsequently denounced by his former Conservative party colleagues. It was not necessarily because he was a bigoted rascist that this happened, it was because he became someone who was targeted by other politicians so that those particular politicians could enhance their anti-rascist profile. Did any politicans protest against the rascist sentiments of Unionist representatives when those Unionist representatives were needed to bolster the support of certain political parties within the house of commons? In the words of Iain Paisley: "Never, Never, Never".


  • Options
    #103
    getz
    Registered Users Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    and the world is getting smaller,if somebody farts in gorey ,i can hear it in fleetwood


  • Options
    #104
    getz
    Registered Users Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    RabbleRouser wrote: »
    You're right, there were many protests against Enoch Powell (and by no means do I wish to accuse any of Mr. Powell's opponents of inactivity), however, I belive that this was the case because Enoch Powell became a pariah within the British political establishment; and was subsequently denounced by his former Conservative party colleagues. It was not necessarily because he was a bigoted rascist that this happened, it was because he became someone who was targeted by other politicians so that those particular politicians could enhance their anti-rascist profile. Did any politicans protest against the rascist sentiments of Unionist representatives when those Unionist representatives were needed to bolster the support of certain political parties within the house of commons? In the words of Iain Paisley: "Never, Never, Never".
    is this turning into brit/bashing again ?


  • Options
    #105
    RabbleRouser
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43 ✭RabbleRouser


    rovert wrote: »
    Which has a lot to do with changing social values :P

    I'll refer you to the point I made in relation to Enoch Powell (above).


  • Options
    #106
    RabbleRouser
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43 ✭RabbleRouser


    getz wrote: »
    is this turning into brit/bashing again ?

    No, its not Brit-bashing. In fairness I did say the following in my first post on this topic "There were protests from nationalist groups but none of them protested against the rascist policies of the Unionist parties", what I meant by this was that I believe there was a rascist element to the nationalist movement in Northern Ireland during the 70's and 80's- however, it was not as evident as it was in the Unionist movement.


  • Options
    #107
    getz
    Registered Users Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    RabbleRouser wrote: »
    No, its not Brit-bashing. In fairness I did say the following in my first post on this topic "There were protests from nationalist groups but none of them protested against the rascist policies of the Unionist parties", what I meant by this was that I believe there was a rascist element to the nationalist movement in Northern Ireland during the 70's and 80's- however, it was not as evident as it was in the Unionist movement.
    lets all keep our fingers crossed and we can move forward, dispite the publicity no one in the UK takes this party seriously, except the ban the bomb mob,and they will move on to another protest soon,


  • Options
    #108
    Captain Furball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Captain Furball


    marco_polo wrote: »
    Somebody better tell this guy he is not Welsh. :rolleyes:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Malcolm
    If a family immigrates to a certain country, then has a child, that makes them welsh in legal terms.


  • Options
    #109
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 56,040 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    The BNP are spouting off the stuff that many others are thinking and believing, but daren't' say. Is anyone seriously gonna' claim that the likes of Starw or Brown or Cameoron or the Labour Party and Tory party in general aren't thinking along the lines of the BNP?

    The average English guy is also thinking it. They aren't happy with the foreign invasion, multiculturalism, Black people taking over their towns, Asian people taking over their towns and Arabic people taking overt their towns. Add in any other ethnic group to this too. We are talking about the bloody British, the most patriotic and
    superioristic' nation on earth. They usually don't like anyone but their own.

    By taking over, I mean moving in and becoming a large part of the towns throughout
    Britain


  • Options
    #110
    Captain Furball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Captain Furball


    Nodin wrote: »
    Because they haven't had the chance.

    Do you think removing non-white people from Britain would be a pleasant sort of business?



    A well thought out phillosophy. I see you've devoted time to this.



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7Dygboz4Ew

    He doesn't want non whites removed.Letting in every tom dick and harry into your country is a bad policy.He thinks there's enough immigrants there already.And i think most immigrates actually agrees with him.


  • Options
    #111
    Captain Furball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Captain Furball


    misstierney wrote: »
    Why? They have nothing to be ashamed of.
    They do there white.

    Seems liking your own race when your white is looked down upon these days.But if you take pride in any other race you have to accommodate them even more so than your own.I see it everyday in my country.
    Try that in japan or africa and you will be respected.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Captain Furball wrote: »
    He doesn't want non whites removed.

    Better tell his party that.

    "............ the introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin assisted by a generous financial incentives both for individuals and for the countries in question. "
    http://bnp.org.uk/policies/

    "The British National Party exists to secure a future for the indigenous peoples of these islands in the North Atlantic which have been our homeland for millennia.
    We use the term indigenous to describe the people whose ancestors were the earliest settlers here after the last great Ice Age and which have been complemented by the historic migrations from mainland Europe."
    http://bnp.org.uk/about-us/mission-statement/

    Policies dictated by 'racial origin'....dear me.


  • Options
    #113
    Captain Furball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Captain Furball


    Will be offered the opportunity.My understanding of that word is correct.What is yours?I don't see anything that says removed.


  • Options
    #114
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 56,040 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    I think if Griffin had his way, non whites would be removed, and if many others who claim to be not of this view, had their TRUE way, they wouldn't be so far off that mark

    But, Furball is technically correct in saying that Nick said, "he doesn't want non whites removed."

    I think Nick, although outspoken, isn't going to be so blatant here. He is stopping short
    of really saying, "non whites out."


  • Options
    #115
    marco_polo
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    Captain Furball wrote: »
    If a family immigrates to a certain country, then has a child, that makes them welsh in legal terms.

    It makes them Welsh.


  • Options
    #116
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    walshb wrote: »
    The BNP are spouting off the stuff that many others are thinking and believing, but daren't' say.

    O - that makes everything ok then so.
    walshb wrote: »
    Is anyone seriously gonna' claim that the likes of Starw or Brown or Cameoron or the Labour Party and Tory party in general aren't thinking along the lines of the BNP?.

    That level of racism? Not likely, no.
    walshb wrote: »
    The average English guy is also thinking it.

    Yet the BNP are a minor party with no Westminister representation who only managed two Euro seats because nobody else turned up to vote....Does the "average English guy" not vote at all?
    walshb wrote: »
    They aren't happy with the foreign invasion,

    Whats the word?..."Hyperbole"...thats it.

    walshb wrote: »
    multiculturalism, Black people taking over their towns, Asian people taking over their towns and Arabic people taking overt their towns. Add in any other ethnic group to this too. ,

    The imagination of the thick should never be used to set the agenda for a state.

    What "Arabic people" are involved in this "taking overt their towns", btw.
    walshb wrote: »
    We are talking about the bloody British, the most patriotic and
    superioristic' nation on earth. ,

    All of them? Fascinating. I take it you haven't heard the various stories about 'the French', or 'the Americans' either, seeing as we're in generalisation territory......
    walshb wrote: »
    By taking over, I mean moving in and becoming a large part of the towns throughout
    Britain

    "Darkies" moving into British towns!!!!?????!!!1! The cheek of them.


  • Options
    #117
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Captain Furball wrote: »
    Will be offered the opportunity.My understanding of that word is correct.What is yours?I don't see anything that says removed.

    He wants them gone/He wants them removed. While its not forced repatriation, its certainly a racist policy.


  • Options
    #118
    Captain Furball
    Closed Accounts Posts: 909 ✭✭✭Captain Furball


    Doesn't Spain have the same policy?
    So now your changing your mind of the understanding of that word?And instead you insert the magic word "racist".Oh my argument is null and void now dammit.


  • Options
    #119
    censuspro
    Registered Users Posts: 881 ✭✭✭censuspro


    Freedom of speech as long as we agree with what your saying otherwise it's racist.


  • Options
    #120
    PaulieD
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 932 ✭✭✭PaulieD


    The best moment of the night was when the black man brought up mass immigration. Straw was rattled. "I am of an immigrant background, and I presume you are of an immigrant background yourself." How I chuckled.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    PaulieD
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 932 ✭✭✭PaulieD


    Nodin wrote: »
    He wants them gone/He wants them removed. While its not forced repatriation, its certainly a racist policy.

    Socialist Spain has the same policy. As does Czech Republic. And Italy. And Japan. And Germany. I could go on.

    Do you consider them to be racist states?


Advertisement