griffin or gargoyle?
By jb78000
@jb78000 (15139)
October 23, 2009 7:05am CST
did anybody watch question time last night? i completely agree that the bbc was right to allow nick griffin on, we do have freedom of speech and however nasty what he represents is the bnp is still a legitimate political party, but they said that he would certainly not be given an easy time. now i don't have a tv so will have to catch up on iplayer later but i have had reports from those that watched it (couple of friends and a taxi driver) and apparently although most of the time he was struggling he did recover a bit at one point and said, scarily, things that a number of people might agree with. so if you are from the uk and saw it what was your take? if you are not from the uk do you agree with me that freedom of speech means that representatives from political parties, no matter how nasty, have to be allowed to say their piece?
1 person likes this
6 responses
@celticeagle (166761)
• Boise, Idaho
24 Oct 09
Ofcourse they do! No matter how nasty they are they have their rights as well. And we have the right to tune them out too! Hee hee. We don't have to listen to them. They have their rights to speak and we have our right not to listen to them or anyone like them.
@celticeagle (166761)
• Boise, Idaho
26 Oct 09
It was as plane as the nose on my face! Just setting there infront of me.
@thea09 (18305)
• Greece
23 Oct 09
Hi jb, well I'm also for freedom of speech as long as it doesn't involve politician spouting on about being one religion or another in a country where politics and religion are meant to be separate issues not vote winners. I'm referring here to the likes of Blair with his constant harping on about how next to god he was, it has no place in politics but I'm more than happy to not watch him on Songs of Praise.
Tony here has some really good points but they don't overrule in my mind the freedom of speech concern. More people should learn from the history of fascism etc but I don't think any of the BNP thugs are intelligent enough to draw more than thug support, whilst Hitler was able to draw in some rather influential types and just use the thugs for brawn rather than brain. It would be hoped that if the likes of Griffen are given a bit of air time on TV that they would put far more people off the BNP than turn them onto the idea.
I think the solution would be a bit of enforced National service to straighten these thugs out a bit.
@thea09 (18305)
• Greece
23 Oct 09
Yes of course it can happen again but not in the UK. It tends to be Eurpoean soil which is decked in blood, or countries in the East. The English on the whole wouldn't be taken in as not enough indoctrination in their past, but it will work in coutries where the leaders have a few key cards - mindless patriotism, a people used to being subservient to authority and countries which can scare or provoke hatred against another race of country enough. Hitler had all 3 going for him, as do many Arab countries. I also doubt very much that it would happen in the US unless they self manufacture enough atrocities to instill complete hatred in most against another country, but again I think the mindset of turning neighour against neighbour to make it work as a totalitarian state is just not there.
@Stiletto (4579)
•
25 Oct 09
I watched it. I thought the BBC were right to allow Griffin on the show but they got it completely wrong when they changed the format and allowed it to appear as if he was facing a lynch mob. Dimbleby was clearly biased, every question focused on the BNP and both the audience and other panel members were allowed to get away with much more than usual when it came to personal attacks, etc. If the aim of this was to make Griffin and the BNP look bad it was unnecessary and counter-productive. Had the programme been conducted as normal I'm confident Griffin and his party would not have come out of it well. Let's face it, they're idiots. Instead he looked like a victim, one man against the mob sort of thing, and unfortunately that seems to have worked in the BNP's favour if the opinion polls of the last few days are correct.
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
23 Oct 09
I don't think we have the BBC, I've never seen it on my guide.
@sunny68 (1327)
• India
23 Oct 09
freedom of speech...yes. but certainly not freedom to misuse 'freedom of speech'.
everyone is free to express his views as much as to accept or reject a view. in democracy such speeches don't matter....however what does matter is that how many votes does the 'speaker' get. generally such speeches are made to stir sentiments (in this case recession, unemployment and expats might have prompted such a speech). under these circumstances such speeches do get votes. however when such people get to power...their agenda changes to a milder tone. so they key factor is how the masses respond to such speeches.
@LittleMrsSunshine (201)
•
23 Oct 09
Hi JB, yeah i watched and have been reading the comments on news websites about it all day and thought i'd come here and see if anyone else had watched it or started a discussion about it. I watched it laughing mostly as he got whooped by everyone there, audience and other panelist included, but you are right in what you heard. At one point he broke through to give a speech about how the normal British public are getting scared and annoyed with immigration at the levels we currently had, andJack Straw could not argue back really, though Sayeda Warsi (cons) managed to get a good argument in. I really like her and she was very articulate in all her discussions. Overall though I think he came accross as a slimy, self concious uncomfortable toad who couldn't back up his own arguments. Do watch it!!
On the point of freedom of speech, yes i too believe that the BBC were right to put him on. Unfortunately millions of people are voting for him, which means he has a legitimate stand in this country and so should be recognised as such. Thats how democracy works. I think the discussion on im igration should be a continuation debate, as it is obvious that this is one of the main reasons that people vote for them and what will put a strech on an already delicate economy if it is not properly addressed. I do not agree with his "send them all back or shut the gates" but I think the controls should tightened and we should have better awareness of what is going on. Griffin played onthat fear and the lack of control in the border to get people to vote for him, if the main parties address this problem, then less people will be likely to vote for the BNP.
He sweated like a pig in heat though which was funny to watch!
@jb78000 (15139)
•
23 Oct 09
that was what the taxi driver said. the goblin's take on immigration was the only bit that average people would have agreed with. this particular td was i suspect slightly racist but he'd worked in manchester and knew exactly what bnp types were like - 'thugs' - and wouldn't have voted for them in a million years. [my friends just said griffin got the p ripped out of him] horrible thing is an awful lot of people may fall for it. incidently despite all the prattling about immigration it is not actually the problem here, easy thing to blame if you are the mail though. (and btw do you know how many polish are going home because they can make better money back there?). however given how dense a number of people are then tightening up immigration might stop idiots voting for the likes of the bnp.
@LittleMrsSunshine (201)
•
24 Oct 09
I know, migration is actually higher than immigration. Everyone is slightly racist, it is just the fear of being different. The problem is the world is changing very swiftly and people are scared of change.
It is the stories of unknown illeagals and criminals not deported that fan the flames.
I really hope the person above is not predicting the future or i might join th migration!