As the dust settles over the Question Time BNP appearance, one thing is certain – the programme’s editors broadcast an atypical programme that was designed to attack Nick Griffin rather than explore (as it usually does) the issues of the day. I used to publicise the programme for the BBC. The then editors would never have permitted such a change in format, which they would have seen as a compromise of their independence and integrity. Meanwhile, the Daily Mail has an editorial which says it all about today’s BBC. Read and enjoy:
Talk about bare-faced hypocrisy.
Amidst the furore over the BBC’s decision to invite Nick Griffin on to Question Time, its director general, Mark Thompson, claims that he had no choice because of the Corporation’s ‘central principle of political impartiality’.
What a pity that the BBC for years has comprehensively trampled this so-called ‘central principle’ into the dirt.
This is an organisation that’s utterly in thrall to the left-wing agenda of the majority of its staff.
Until very recently, the BBC systematically censored any debate about immigration into Britain, a nation which, as was revealed yesterday, is on its way to a population of 70million.
It also treats global warming with the fervour of a religion, and is so pro-Brussels that even a report commissioned by the BBC itself found that it was hopelessly biased against the Eurosceptic position.
It’s an institution that by its very nature promotes alternative lifestyles and minority groups at the expense of traditional values, and it doesn’t have much time for Christianity, capitalism, or the countryside either.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of letting Mr Griffin onto Question Time, the BBC can’t pretend that some sacred principle of political impartiality had anything to do with it.
Yes, these somewhat mild criticisms of the BBC by the ‘Daily Mail’ are totally correct.
Not only is the BBC, in general, disdainful of Christianity, the BBC is also a dhimmi advocate of Islam.
I think it would have been better if they had used topical question as normal. It’s clear there would have been a question about immigration (40,000 go missing and population figures), something about the post office (the BNP’s left-wing approach to state ownership – oops sorry I forgot I was talking about the BBC) etc.
However I don’t know how they could have got what some are calling for, a ‘balanced audience.’ Balanced how one might ask. The simple fact is that the vast majority of the country don’t like the BNP, don’t vote for the BNP and never will. The BBC does select the audience and they said they invited self declared BNP supporters – I can’t verify this. But it would be rather odd if the BBC got a bus full of BNP supporters to stack the audience after all they are a fringe party.
Having said that Dimbleby lost control of the audience on several occasions which spoiled the show and provided more ammunition to Griffin’s victim complex.
The BBC habitually rigs its ‘QT’ audiences to have a political left bias; the BBC’s default position in hand picking its audience last night was to stack it with predominantly UAF people.
Daily Mail, commenting on hypocrisy? It’s enough to make your head spin. The Daily Mail was in rabid, drooling “eeeeevil racist” mode more than any other newspaper leading up to Nick Grifin’ds appearance on QT. Doing their utmost to mis-report, condemn and smear him. However, unlike the BBC their comments section isn’t heavily censured to fit their agenda. And you only had to read the comments section on each and every on-line Daily Mail article regarding Nick Griffin to see how hopelessly out of touch they are with their own audience.
The BBC did this show for two reasons, ratings and their idiotic hope that they would “show the dirty working classes how hated their racist ideals are”. An audience of foaming student lefties baying for blood. Yeah. That’s what you peons have waiting for you on the streets if you don’t step into line and get with the multi-culti agenda.
i despise that oaf Griffin, but i despise that oaf Dimbleby more, question time should have followed its regular format, not spotlight on the BNP.
The best way to get someone to hang them self is to give them enough rope but with a bang bang bang of quick questions from the “Moderator” the idiot didn’t get the chance to waltz to the gallows.
The saddest this is people think Griffin had a bad show, he pissed on Straw and Chris Huhme. Warsi did well and the Tories did well putting the most prominent asian woman up for the show, Greer was rather rude but she’s American…i liked her performance but I am shocked that audience were controlled better.
It was plain to see, as plain as the nose on your face!
The BBC rigged the audience with young anti BNP activists, the questions were rigged and it was a set up show trial lynching from the start, I watched with utter dismay and horror at the whole grubby set up.
As soon as the BNP opens up its membership to all British people I am joining AND making a donation.
Why am I doing this? The thought of our nation lowered to the level of the gutter with a whole mass media and political establishment using the tricks of the nazis and the brownshirts breaks my heart, from now on everyone should know what side I am on.
Whether you agree or disagree with BNP policies, the last few days have shown clearly who the real enemies of democracy are.
If the rent a rabble thugs are now emboldened enough to fire bomb the homes of suspected members and innocent people are killed then the people who agitated the rage mob will have blood on their hands.
The DM even had a cartoon comparing BNP supporters to sewer rats FFS, the nazis built an entire genocide around that notion, have we learned nothing?
Cassandra, you are right on the mark as usual. I watched the highlights of question time this morning and my blood was boiling. My attitude was, I couldn’t care less about the BNP but I do care for their right to free speech. Therefore, as much as I despise all political parties, I’m going to join. I want them to have my money so that they can continue to fight against the people who are trying to silence them in the worst undemocratic example of foaming bias I have ever seen in this country.
What the BBC doesn’t see:
“The clash of uncivilisations”
(by Melanie Phillips)
http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/5457918/part_2/the-clash-of-uncivilisations.thtml
Yesterday, the BBC via QT showed to the whole country proof positive that the BBC is biassed. This episode can be used ad nausseum as proof of this assertion.
May I suggest everyone takes a good long look at the BBC HYS readers recomended posts about last nights QT, the overwhelming number of anti BBC/QT and its rigged show trial speaks volumes about the gigantic and monumental political blunder the BBC/establishment/MSM axis has made with this show trial public lynching, the MSM comment sections have been flooded with people utterly disgusted with the treatment by the axis of one man, it was a rage mob, an ignorant jeering hate filled mob specially set up by the axis.
Theres an old saying about the British “we havent spoken yet” but after this bloody charade they most certainly will! Brits dont like bullies as a rule, this is as clear a case of bullying as I have ever seen.
I see that the BBCs lead story on teletext is “Nick Griffin criticises Islam”.
That from the State broadcaster, a leading apparatchik of Blair, who led British troops into needless war, that killed many thousands of Muslims for nothing other than greed and oil.
Twilight zone? You couldn’t make it up….
A wonderful choice of caller on the Jeremy Vine show about 12.20 on the subject of QT. None other than the odious Mark Lawson. All the balance of a regular BBC presenter who somehow seemed quite able to get his admiration for GWB (not) into his arts programmes.
The BBC stage management is attracting quite a bit of comment on their Have Your Say. The attempted hatchet job is beginning to look like a bit of an own goal.
The Mail was just as bad as any other participant in this establishment lynching.
Let’s just settle this here and now shall we?
Nick Griffin came across as a nasty, peculiar man who couldn’t bring himself to say that the holocaust actually happened. Griffin made it clear that at the end of the day his party are all about white supremacist beliefs and some bizarre notion of ‘the way Britain used to be’ – an allusion to some mythical past. He defended himself well in some quarters, and yes the programme was a bit of a waste in the way it all seemed to be focused on him. What they should have done was have the questions like normal; ask him about the post office strikes – which would probably prove he doesn’t know the first thing about a wide range of issues.
But, and this is really the key point here so I will highlight it for you, the fact that the BBC had him on, and allowed him to speak, proves they are a non-biased organisation.
On a separate point, I couldn’t help noticing how similar many of his views were to those expressed on this site. Griffin declared that Islam was wicked; David Vance, Cassandra, George R and co often do the same. Griffin grumbled about immigration being out of control; a view often expressed here. And he also spoke at length about this notion that white people are now victims in modern Britain; a thoroughly ludicrous idea, but again, one that pops up all the time on this site. I am not saying that B-BBC and the BNP are one and the same, but I’m sure many people here have BNP leanings. And that’s fine; they are political party, and we live in a democracy. Let’s just be clear who it is you are sympathising with – they may not be facists, they may not exactly be Nazis, but they are white supremacists, whose idealogy pinches bits from far left and far right viewpoints – without having a coherent narative other than ‘white people = good, everyone else = bad.’
FFPS – this attempted slur-by-association is also pretty weak. Many non-BNP people, many non-anglo-saxons, and many ex-muslims also assert that Islam is a wicked religion. Would you also claim that vegetarianism is Hitlerism-by-proxy?
I think you’ll find a majority of people in this country cite immigration levels as a primary political concern. Not only commenters here, and not only Nick Griffin, thank you very much.
Some here doubtless might support the BNP. I do not. I’m sure many do not, but I’m equally sure that many more will this morning, thanks to the patently unfair way your BBC friends skewed the system against them last night, in absolute contradiction of the obligation to party-political impartiality.
The logical endpoint of your argument is that anyone who voices concern about immigration levels to our already creaking cities is smeared as a virtual neo-nazi. That won’t do. That stifles debate and expression. That is the same as saying that critics of Obama’s expansion of the State are racists. Attitudes like that – the broad-brush attempt to morally delegitimize opinions with which you disagree – are sadly rather good recruiting sergeants for the likes of the BNP.
Listen up yellow mate, if you inferred from my piece that I think any discussion about immigration is wrong/racist then you took it the wrong way. The discussion about immigration on this site is often in a prejudiced and pseudo racist context – as it is with the BNP, hence the association I made. My argument has nothing to do with linking concerns about immigration to nazi types. When immigration is discussed on this site it is often to do with muslims, and people with different coloured skin. The majority of people may cite immigration as a concern, and it may be a valid concern, but people tend to get their facts/opinions on these matters from papers and sites that are pushing an agenda. That agenda is basically this: Britain used to be great when it was full of white Brits, now all these foreigners have come, they’ve messed stuff up. Of course, they don’t phrase it like that, but that is the ovbious subtext. When people talk about competing resources, they are barely able to do without talking about Islam in some way.
I can’t be held responsbile for your stupidity at adding 2 and 2 to get 5.
Pingu,
how misguided could one little south atlantic bird be.
Just because they set up Griffin for a show trial on telly doesnt make them unbiased. It makes them incredibly misguided.
By setting out to attack Griffin in such an obvious cackhanded and slanted way made him come acrossas a bit of a matyr.
The only person to score any points against the vile one eyed NAZI was Bonny Greer.
Dimbleby Straw The Tory peer and The Lib Dem failed totally to nail him on any subject.
If you view it from the side of the miguided idiots who voted for him in the europeans you would have seen a lone hero standing up against the combined forces of the establishment.
The beeb didnt need to load the dice against him. Bonny showed that clever questioning rather than artscool ranty invective was the best weapon against his vile double speak.
The main parties should have sent true hard hitters to wipe the floor with the side show freak instead they sent, son of conshie Straw, a Wet behind the ears peer and a lib democrat that was so bland he could have been magnolia.
Labour should have sent Prescott the tories should have sent Hague and the Liberals should have sent Kennedy. Those three big dogs would have torn Griffin to shreds. Instead he managed to survive intact and his poisonous ideas unchallenged.
The Beeb were foolish. Their usual bias was shown up last night and only played to the persecution complex of the blackshirt supporters.
What was Greer doing there anyway?, i was under the impression that Romans had to earn there citizenship, as for me, i left school at fifteen to do all those jobs that apparantly only immigrants do, twenty two years working for and with muslims in the rougher areas of Birmingham and in some cases i was the only red haired blue eyed white,poor example of a christian in the whole area.
I seen my first two headless chickens at six years of age as i peeped in to next doors garden, i am fifty five now and i will be a minority in five years, islam respects strength and will never compromise with liberal leftie ideology although it may appear to do so, of course i worked with the lower class Muslims who told me all i need to know, Nasty Nick, The EU, ISLAM, seems to me we are spoiled for choice. See partition of india.
http://www.partitionofindia.com/
<small>
</small>
<small>.</small>
FFPS, don’t worry – nobody here holds you responsible for any stupidity but your own. That is burden enough for any man to carry.
“Muslims, and people with different coloured skin.”
Try an ‘or’ instead of an ‘and’ – you’re putting two and two together yourself.
I have concerns about immigration. They have no racial component to them whatsoever. They do indeed concern Islam. I have made religious studies and theology my lifetime’s study. I am not some post 9-11 Muslim-hating bandwagon-jumper. Many years before the recent resurgence of hostilities I actually spent three years at University studying the subject. I learned what Islam taught and how it is practised well before it became a public concern and a BBC obsession, long before 9-11. I know there are some who now teach themselves snippets of Islamic law in order to support their fundamental pre-existing distrust. I did not. I learned about Islam under a very sympathetic tutor. I visited Egypt, Israel, Turkey, Lebanon.
And it’s because of that – nothing to do with race – that I am deeply concerned about the levels of Islamic immigration into Europe. Islam is an ideology, it is not a race. It is a man-made system of thought and action. And I find that there is much in it that is simply not going to feel at home in a liberal democracy, ever. And liberal democracy is one of mankind’s finest creations, despite what Andrew Marr says. There is no racist ‘subtext’ in opposing the ideology called Islam – but fortunately for you the majority of Muslims are of non-white race, so you can simply conflate concerns over Islamic immigration levels with racism.
I will know that Islam has changed when the first Synagogue opens in Saudi Arabia without people being killed. At that point I will have no concerns about millions and millions of Muslims coming to Europe. Whatever their colour.
People who are concerned about Islamization are not by definition racists who want a cosy white Britain back. You wish.
Yes, some no doubt get their “racist” concerns fed into them from websites and newspapers – the dumb sheep! – so thank god that people like you have no agenda to push, no impurity in the absolute reason by which you always operate. Thank god all your views come as a result of first-hand research and study, never second-hand opinion pieces from someone else. Please…. spare us the superiority and hypocrisy.
“the obvious subtext” – yeah, you people are fond of that. You know what people are really thinking. You and Maureen O’Dowd. “You lie, boy” etc. The world and its nuances are so much easier to navigate when you simply get to put words into people’s mouths.
“the fact that the BBC had him on, and allowed him to speak, proves they are a non-biased organisation”
Oh, little Fat-Faced Penguin -you have much to learn.
well living and working with Muslims at there level is a bit different to globe trotting, like i said i left school at fifteen, what you fail to understand from my vocational choices such as twenty five years doing private hire is i have been the minority, The infidel on holy grounds after Blairs illegal war, This was when they changed to preachers of hatred in the mosques before that time there was none of that, we are talking the future here and i do not see anybody listning to my concerns, just endless immigration, ok for you Sir you can go anywhere in the world i cannot.
This morning Martel Maxwell (standing in for John Gaunt on Sun Radio this morning) did a marvellous job fielding calls about Nick Griffin’s Question Time appearance, however, the difference between her programme and 5 Live’s biased offering was quite amazing. The voices of those the BBC has actively sought to disenfranchise over the years could be heard for the first time on a British radio broadcast. Yes some of those voices may be ugly but isn’t that is what ‘freedom of speech’ is all about – letting an opponent speak even if you dislike what is being said? BNP supporters have as much right to voice an opinion as those on the Liberal Left? The BBC don’t understand the meaning of balanced debate – what hypocrisy to claim credit for letting Nick Griffin speak while, at the same time, they plan a complete hatchet job on the man. Needless to say many of the callers to Martel Maxwell found Question Time a complete travesty and, if a general point is to be drawn, then it seems the BBC have added many new recruits to the BNP. Thanks BBC, thanks Gordon Brown, thanks Jack Straw.
By the way, I wouldn’t vote BNP even if you paid me the BBC Director Generals’s salary.
If Nink Griffin is a Nazi, then why aren’t we all lampshades?
Because he hasn’t got any power yet, thank God.
Do you really think that after some 50 years of mass immigration and indoctrination – by the MSM and our education system – that (once in power), the BNP would be able to mobilise some vast network of people to morph into the British equivalent of the Nazi terror machine?
How will you persuade the necessary millions of normal people required to do such evil? And, how would you be able to cover it all up in the age of the internet?
It will never happen, will it?
Yeah, right. The fact that they had Nick Griffin on and changed the entire format of the programme in order to lynch him proves that they are not biased. The fact that they treated him in a unique way, distinct from the way they’ve treated any other guest in the programme’s entire history… proves they are impartial.
FFPS – for your information, (and this is “a key point” too) – using bold text formatting doesn’t turn bullshit into fact. That was a risible effort.
It was certainly a desperate, unprecedented and totally bizarre attempt to destroy Nick Griffin by Aunty, and, as one’d expect from a bloated organisation comprised mainly of handwringing lefty bedwetters with no experience in anything useful, who wouldn’t know what happened in the real world if it came up to them and attached its teeth to their feeble, shrunken genitals, it seems to’ve managed to make a big, fat mess of it.
If I was the BNP, I’d send a box of chocolates, a bunch of flowers and a greeting card reading ‘thanks for the boost’ to the BBC. Then I’d laugh. Hard.
Asuka
Griffin was offered a whole programme in which he could advance his cause. It is no surprise that a panel balanced across the mainstream political spectrum treated him in the way it did. Unlike the fetid cartel which dominates Biased BBC, the genuinely wide spectrum of British political belief is repulsed by the BNP’s agendas, both official and covert: No surprise that its representatives reacted as they did. Warsi in particular was living proof of all the lies Griffin – and many on these pages – tell about Muslims, and Muslim women.
It’s Ok to wet the bed as a child, BTW. No need to compensate for it now. Same goes for your genitals. It’s a common preoccupation, but you’re almost certainly in the normal range. Almost certainly.
“… the fetid cartel which dominates Biased BBC…”
Is that like a coven, or a cabal, a lobby perhaps?
Are you insinuating that there’s some sinister hand “dominating” B-BBC from a smoke filled committee room, somewhere in a high rise office block in Gotham City, or perhaps from a damp cellar in Kilburn?
After all the time you spend here have you really not noticed that regular posters range from the disillusioned left (holds hand up) to convinced conservatives, with everything in between and to the left and right of both extremes.
One of the things that keeps me coming back here is that it’s one of the few sites where people of different backgrounds and political views can put aside their differences and debate in a civilised manner (trolls permitting) their common concerns about BBC bias.
You could say B-BBC is a truly multicultural place.
Anyway, it’s foetid not fetid.
BioD
I’m afraid that the thing I’ve noticed most is the remarkable harmony of the miserabilist right-wing views I find here, a notch or two nearer to the BNP than UKIP. No surprise you describe yourself as a disillusioned left-winger. Wherever you started, you fit in here very well.
I would also give up the hallucinogens if I were you. The one thing which this places is not is one of the few sites where people of different backgrounds and political views can put aside their differences and debate in a civilised manner.
I call the following witnesses to the stand:
1. The redoubtable, turd-spattered Martin
2. His soul-mate Asuka
3. Their baby brother Heads On Poles
4. Numerous anons
5. The gent who used to say things like Die, you stinking, lying offal
Wherever you started, you fit in here very well.
You just made my point for me!
I think you should take some water with it OMTE.
Perhaps you should ask yourself what the BBC really thought it was going to achieve with last night’s ratings stunt and whether it actually managed it or not.
The mere fact that you and others are so upset merely by the words of others shows how shallow your ideology really is.
Anyway, I’ve never met a cheerful leftie – envy is cruel isn’t it.
Thanks for the mention BTW, always happy to get under the skin of a BBC apologist.
Wherever you started, you fit in here very well.
Which is more than can be said for you. Isn’t it?
Bio 15:50
Nice post ! Funny how often lefties prefer US spellings like “fetid”. Even funnier that OMTE seems to think all muslim women are like Baroness Warsi !
I wonder if he has ever visited a muslim country , let alone lived in one !
Probably not. It’s almost invariably the case that a lefty’s sympathy with an ‘opressed’ group is in inverse proportion to experience of said group.
Those who do not base their concerns upon other peoples race but rather have concerns about or are against multiculturalism, Islam, mass immigration, illegal immigration, EU etc. I care and wish to protect the English culture (“What was the good of going to Peking when it was just like Shrewsbury?”) and have been let down constantly by the main parties. Some will make the step of thinking that the BNP speaks for them.
The BBC calculated last nights show to cause the most harm to Nick Griffin but it has backfired. Like the 9/11 edition there was nothing impartial and there wasn’t anything impartial here either, this was the ‘Smash the BNP’ edition orchestrated by the UAF-BBC. No the BNP don’t speak for me and as it stands at the moment no-one else does either, especially the “Build a bonfire, build a bonfire, put Nick Griffin on the top, put the Nazis in the middle, and burn the fucking lot.” UAF.
*** the Lib/Lab/Con trick **** the European Union! **** the BNP! **** UAF! **** the Commies! **** Islam! **** the BBC!
This programme didn’t expose the BNP so much as the BBC. Given the blatant rigging of the programme to make it impossible for Griffin to put forward any opinion about current affairs, I think the effect on the BNP was neutral. Even people like myself who are not BNP supporters would have been repelled more by the BBC and its rentamob than by Griffin. The newspaper headlines seem unanimously to condemn Griffin. The comments columns tell a different story. There is a great deal of unfinished business here and I think this will prove to be a seminal event in which the issue of immigration can no longer be ignored.