The aftermath of Question Time on the interweb is riveting, unlike the show itself.
The hooha does reveal the extent of everyone’s awareness of the BBC’s agenda.
The BBC reduces it all to : Griffin Attacks Islam on BBC Show!
Nick Griffin said he thought the sight of two men kissing on telly was creepy. The BBC spun that into “Nick Griffin says gays are creepy.” The villain.
As the unremitting attack ground ever onwards, Griffin’s physical decline grew increasingly more alarming. It began with a nervous lip-licking twitch, rapidly accelerating to sweaty brow and trembling hand. Sympathy was the only option.
The holocaust denial evasion moment ensured no-one could seriously believe he wasn’t racist, but the media has succeeded in convincing everyone that fear of the Islamisation of Britain is the same thing as antisemitism, and that Muslims are the new Jews. This ensured no-one could get to grips with the real matter at hand, the attraction the BNP undeniably has for people who see no other way to express their feeling of helplessness at the immigration of so many, dare I say it, Muslims.
Griffin’s so called indigenous population is no longer the 1950s Britain where white men wore tweed jackets and smoked a pipe and women with perms enjoyed labour-saving kitchen appliances. Those days are never coming back. Now, whitey has turned into a chocolate- box assortment of tattooed shaven-headed obese working class blokes, binge-drinking female ladettes, Richard Ingrams-style racists, or liberal lefty, lesbian’n’gays who are so bound and gagged by P.C. that all they dare do is bleat in unison. Excuse me if I’ve forgotten anyone.
Somehow, the other panellists, the audience, the transparency of the BNP’s half-baked re-invention and the customised-for-Griffin format of the programme managed to make Nick Griffin himself seem almost an irrelevance compared to the elephant in the room.
Diverse Britain okay: Islamisation, no way.
Put that in your loudhailer and hail it.
And let that be a lesson to all you eeeeeeeevil racists! You too will have rotten fruit tossed at you by right-on students in the street if you continue your vile ways. Well that’s if you should happen to wander down the all white home county dwellings that these creatures come from.
Public execution is always a good deterrent for would be criminals.
Anyway, for some reason the BNP are not accepting any new memberships on their website, so I couldn’t join as a protest to last nights show trial. I wonder if that has anything to do with last night.
Never mind, I just made a substantial donation to them instead. Not because I support the BNP, but because I oppose all who are trying to silence them. My enemy’s enemy is my friend and all that.
Travis,
dont be a t+t mte.
We all hate the Beebs hideous left wing excesses but dont let that persuade you to waste your hard earned cash on some Nazi trojan horse.
I love having a pop at auntie but couldnt ever stomach helping the blackshirts in any way.
The blackshirts? Grow up mate, you sound like your own avatar.
Travis,
Dont let Griffins undoubtedly skilled and well placed words persuade you.
Remember during the years of the troubles when SF kept on parroting the lie that they were a party of Peace when they were hard wired to the IRA. Griffin looks like a friendly slightlyloopy old Tory but behind the smile lies an ugly sinister maniplative side.
He may deny it but his party is essentially Nazi.
He and his party are racist and anti semitic in nature and before you mention it yes I do know they supportted Israel in their fight against hesbollah. Remember even Adolf would ally himself to Stalin when it suited him.
The BNP are supported by some very wealthy people including quite a few multimillionaires(I went to school with one). They are growing in power and if the mainstream parties dont get their act together they could exert real influence.
You can delude yourself all you want. It is after all a free country but step back think and look at who you are voting for.
Freedom for Tooting
Well said Sue – I agree with every word.
Travis – that’s your right, of course. But I can’t agree. My enemy’s enemy is not my friend. My enemy’s enemy is either Sadaam, or Stalin, or Hitler himself, depending on your viewpoint. It’s not logical and it never works. The pact against Hitler handed Eastern Europe over to Stalin. The desire to contain Iran empowered Sadaam to torture his own population and invade neighbouring states. Your enemy’s enemy usually ends-up being your enemy when you’ve helped him defeat your mutual enemies.
If you oppose Islamization then why not support the likes of Michael Gove, or pressure Conservative or UKIP candidates to give the issue their fullest attention? Why make a donation to a Holocaust denier?
I can’t go with you there, but in any case it’s not BBC related so I am perhaps unwise to discuss the issue here, and it’s your right, absolutely.
“or pressure Conservative or UKIP candidates to give the issue their fullest attention?”
Because I’m not a hopeless fantasist. If you think these parties are anything other than a shadow of the existing labour party then you need help. And maybe if you’d read my post instead of jumping on the reactionary bandwagon you would realise that I’m not funding the BNP because of what they say, I’m funding the BNP because of all the people who are trying to silence them.
I don’t agree with a word you say, but there isn’t yet an MSM mission to shut you up. Mores the pity.
“And maybe if you’d read my post instead of jumping on the reactionary bandwagon you would realise that I’m not funding the BNP because of what they say, I’m funding the BNP because of all the people who are trying to silence them.”
Maybe if you could step outside of that cocoon of arrogance you’d notice the amount of words I devoted to that very notion – that you don’t support someone disgusting merely because you despise the people who oppose them. I did read your post, you arrogant imbecile. I haven’t jumped on any bandwagon, though for what it’s worth, there’s little to choose between a reactionary bandwagon and the ignorant bandwagon that you yourself seem to be willing to fund.
The kneejerk presumption that anyone who disagrees with you simply hasn’t read what you said carefully – that’s the hallmark of a truly arrogant fool. Well done.
No black racism against whites?:
Rather lost, under a typically bland BBC headline, in the ‘Magazine’ section:
“Betting the farm against Mugabe”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8318147.stm
The problem is the “big 3” parties talk a good game but never actually do anything for fear of getting similar treatment to what Griffin got last night.
That is why the BNP attract people, they say what is politically unsayable and for any other party would be political suicide.
Labour won’t do anything because they don’t think it’s a problem and they need the immigrant vote.
Tories won’t do anything because they are desperate to avoid the Nasty Party label.
The libdems? utterly pointless posturing from the party of also rans.
In short, we’re screwed.
How are we screwed? By whom? With what?
And how might we be unscrewed?
Die in a fire troll
What is a fire troll? And how to I get inside one?
Die of cancer troll
I’ll bet you a fiver I know what the reply will be :-$
Ah he’s just an obsessive troll fixated on this place.
It’s pretty sad really.
Perfect purrfect riposte, I just spilled my coffee!
Now that is humour, I wish I could do witty comebacks like that. You may not agree with OMTE but he has got style!
Sad, sick, and most likely in need of counselling, or just a walk in the park and some fresh air.
Pathetic how he’s built a web site dedicated to copying posts from here and then replying to them there, instead of engaging with us here.
I’d bet you another fiver that all the commenters on his site are sock puppets.
I have no truck with the BNP (being a Zionist) — but a mate who lives oop north in Keigthley can give you chapter and verse why the former labour voting “working classes” in his district do.
Of course, the thing about a faierly marginal public figure such as Nick Griffin is that GREENPEACE and the ecoloons are far more extremist than the BNP.
And they get loads of support from the BBC (how big is YOUR CARBON ARSEPRINT BBC?)
Just as an aside: any allegedly hetero guy who says he DOESN’T think it’s creepy and icky to see two males tonsil tickling on the TellyBox, in their living room, is… LYING.
Either that, or they really are playing for the wrong team.
But two hot babes — NOW YOU’VE GOT A SHOW worth watching.
He he, well I do find two males kissing creepy. I’m just waiting for the day I get a knock on the door by the thought police… Which I’m most phobic of.
Jack 17:45
Steady on, some of us find any public shows of affection a bit creepy !!!
Grant. That is true.
Oh I don’t know two hot women kissing is fine by me 🙂
It was a total pre-planned mass-media (not just the BBC) orchestrated hatchet job that no politician, no matter what their stripe, would have come away looking good from.
If QT had stuck to its format Griffin would have tore into Straw over illegal wars, ageism in the NHS, uncontrolled immigration, MP’s expenses, lack of equipment for our troops and the banking crisis..
But no, the BBC moved the goal-posts at the last mintue to protect themselves and the liblabcom cabal. All I learned from last-night’s QT, is that I, as a white English person, don’t exist!
A total disgrace!
“If QT had stuck to its format Griffin would have tore into Straw over illegal wars, ageism in the NHS, uncontrolled immigration, MP’s expenses, lack of equipment for our troops and the banking crisis..”
Yes you’re right, that’s why the BBC who promoted their “central principle of political impartiality” beforehand had to move those goal-posts. >:o
Miss Grace Corbin. Your views show that you are a closet Nazi, just like Nick Griffin. I have no objection to a neo-Nazi panellist getting the treatment that Nick Griffin got. Having a Nazi panellist on Question Time is an exceptional event. However, Griffin’s extremist counterparts on the far-left are welcomed with a warm embrace by the BBC. Nick Griffin should have been introduced as the leader of the neo-Nazi British National Party. Panellists’ such as Mark Steele and Jeremy Hardy should be introduced as members of the extreme left-wing Socialist Workers Party, and in Hardy’s case, an ally of the anti-semitic terrorist group Hamas. … But hold on a sec, should these left-wing extremists be invited on at all? What electorate mandate do their views or their party have that oblige their presence?
A very interesting piece in the Telegraph today.
“More than half of those questioned said they agreed with the BNP, or thought that it “had a point” in wishing to “speak up for the interests of the indigenous, white British people … which successive governments have done far too little to protect.” ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/6417906/One-in-four-would-consider-voting-BNP.html
I would have been among this majority if asked. However, I would rather see Britain destroyed by multi-culturism than have a Nazi Government. However, it should be noted that coloured British subjects from immigrant families vote BNP because they are appalled by multi-culturism that is destroying the identity of a country they wish to be proud of and because they feel abandoned as much as their white fellow countrymen in parts of the country to the evil of Muslim supremacism.
Hippiepooter
“I have no objection to a neo-Nazi panellist getting the treatment that Nick Griffin got. Having a Nazi panellist on Question Time is an exceptional event.”
You may not have any objection but…
“Impartiality lies at the heart of the BBC’s commitment to its audiences. It applies across all of our services and output, whatever the format, from radio news bulletins via our web sites to our commercial magazines and includes a commitment to reflecting a diversity of opinion.”
…
“The Agreement accompanying the BBC’s Charter requires us to produce comprehensive, authoritative and impartial coverage of news and current affairs in the UK and throughout the world to support fair and informed debate”
…
“we must ensure we avoid bias or an imbalance of views on controversial subjects.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/edguide/impariality/
Anyway the BBC should be shut down for their political biases.
Dear Hippiepooter,
Reducto ad nazium, shows that you are a not so closet moron.
lynn
x
First they insulted people’s intelligence, then they just insulted. (Paraphrasing Dietrich Bonhoeffer)
Martin 19:10
For heaven’s sake get a grip of yourself !!! Preferably in private !!! 🙂
The hysteria that greeted the quaint notion that England has/had an indigeneous population, particularly from that idiot Straw, is instructive.
Thinking about it I sincerely believe that we need to do the following.
Firstly we need an urgent rewrite of the history books lest our children get an incorrect view of England’s past.
There were of course many immigrant waves between the last of the Danish incursions and the late 19th century. It is just that apart from the Hugenots the historians forgot to mention them. This must and will be put right and we must call on all right minded liberals to do their duty and speak the truth.
Secondly although this country does not have an indigenous population, this certainly does not apply to a brave and suffering people currently persecuted by an oppressive largely immigrant population that has no right to exist on their land. This indigenous people deserves and usually gets our full support, particularly from the BBC’s Middle Eastern reporters, the Guardian and assorted seekers after truth.
.
What ever your views about the BNP, the whole QT was a disgraceful stitch-up, with Dimblebore acting as a biased, aggressive so called chairman. Then for the BBC to claim that they are impartial etc etc (Mark Byfield, I think) is an insult to the intelligence. What a farce and quite likely that the BNP will gain more support as a result!
I have never watched Question Time for years and I didn’t see this one either. You don’t have to watch to know exactly what will be asked and what answers they will recieve just by checking out the “guest list”.
I cannot abide Nick Griffin, but he does have the right to be heard and not set upon. The BNP are only one intelligent and charistmatic leader away from gaining seats in parliament.
“More than a fifth of the public would consider voting for the British National Party, according to the first opinion poll taken since the appearance of its leader, Nick Griffin, on Question Time.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/6417906/One-in-four-would-consider-voting-BNP.html
I would add, just in case I get lablled as a “Nazi “- I would not be one of them.
<h2>
</h2>
Whie I was hunting for QT on the internet I had a look at this six-minute clip on the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8321566.stm
Silly me, I thought they’d just taken the first six minutes of the show. I should have realised it was a cunningly edited selection, with attack after attack on Grifin from the audience and panel members, whereas the actual show wasn’t quite that drastic.
Eventually I caught the whole sorry episode on YouTube. Dimbleby was despicable in his bias. He launched a personal attack on Griffin during a discussion on his Holocaust denial, saying, “Why are you smiling; there’s nothing amusing about this.” And he remained silent when an aggro punk in the audience began his comment with “Dick,” and then changed it to “Nick,” to the accompaniment of much laughter, and when another little shmuck said, as the girl next to him looked at him adoringly, that Griffin wanted to “get his slimy arms around somebody.”
That Dimbleby didn’t find it necessary to remonstrate with those two is astounding. He should be fired. But knowing the BBC, he’ll get a bonus for his performance last night.
Mass immigration into Britain continues.
I think that one of the key reasons why more British people are considering voting for the BNP is because of the continuing catastrophic effects on most British people of Labour’s policies of mass immigration, supported by default by Lib Dems and Tories.
To the mainstream parties, plus all the ‘liberal media’ esp. BBC-Guardian, criticism of mass immigration is virtually taboo, with veiled insinuations of ‘racism’ used to close down debate.
Now Mr. Griffin is saying that London has too many immigrants and that ‘London is no longer part of Britain’. His critics don’t want to talk about the figures.
The response of the ‘liberal-left’ is not to end immigration, but to give immigrants even more resources:
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/indicators/topics/ethnicity-low-income-and-work/low-income-and-ethnicity-by-region/
(Pre-recession figures.)
There’s a fun mashup here:
love that 😀
Excellent – cheers for that.
Poll: 22% of Britons prepared to vote BNP after Question Time. >3000 applied to join after show. More at the Torygraph.
I found this quote quite illuminating.
“Labour encouraged mass immigration to help socially engineer a “multicultural” country and to try to “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”, according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair.”
From the horses mouth – so to speak.
“BBC commissions the Nick Griffin Show
He has already been signed to succeed Jonathan Ross. That will save the corporation (or rather the licence fee payer) £18 million, for Nick Griffin comes at a bargain price (free) and his views are not quite so offensive. And, as far as Cranmer knows, Mr Griffin has never verbally assaulted a pensioner or made obscene phone calls. But he has managed to boost the Question Time audience to record levels. The show usually trundles along with 2.5 million anoraks transfixed by tedious partisan posturing in the presence of the occasional pseudo-celebrity. But last night’s viewing figures smashed the previous Question Time record, when 4 million tuned in to hear Margaret Beckett and Sir Menzies Campbell drone on about moats and duck houses.”
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2009/10/bbc-commissions-nick-griffin-show.html
Having now seen the whole thing, I think it’s fair to say that this was a massive display of bias from the BBC. Having Griffin one one time doesn’t make up for the endless stream of open condemnation of Griffin and the BNP from the evening of the EU elections to Thursday morning. The mere fact that Griffin was on once is not proof of BBC balance.
The show itself was evidence of bias. The whole thing was set up to be, and Dimbleby eagerly presided over, a demonstration that most people don’t like the BNP. I’d like to see another one of these where panelists spent far more time denouncing one panelist to the audience, nearly always referring to him in the third person, than debating issues or answering serious questions.
The dead giveaway was the moment where Dimbleby said, “Hold on, if you all attack him from different directions we’ll never get anywhere.”
…..as opposed to, “If we attack him one by one we’ll really be able to get him?”
Yes, I see what you mean, but those were not Dimbleby’s words, as I recall. I think he said, ” If you all attack him at once we’ll be here all night. Come to think of it, that doesn’t contradict your point.
Dimbleby did say that he wanted to move on and take questions on other issues (meaning those unrelated to Griffin) but by then it was really late in the show and they’d already done their thorough hatchet job on him.
Meanwhile:
<h1>BNP leader Nick Griffin blasts BBC over Question Time</h1>
He’s apparently fighting back now, but he should have done at least some of this fighting on QT, when he had a unique opportunity so to do. I guess he must have consulted his lawyers and worked out a strategy with them:
*He says QT was a lynch mob, the BBC admitted that it changed the format and he wants to do another QT to deal with the issues instead of having to ward off personal attacks and, “Do it properly this time.”
*He wants David Cameron to dissociate himself from ‘Unite’, which he apparently sponsors and which organised the mob outside the BBC yesterday.
*He wants a one on one with Jack Straw for an hour so that they can properly discuss five issues.
I think he’s got an undeniable argument with the first point but I’m not so sure about the second. As for the third, as the representative of a small party I don’t think he has the right to demand a one on one debate with a member of the ruling party.
(Dunno what’s happening with the text or how to get it to revert to normal size. Sorry about that.)
The whole thing was set up to be, and Dimbleby eagerly presided over, a demonstration that most people don’t like the BNP.
If that’s all it was, that would be undoubted bias. Truth was each of the panelists, along with Dimbleby, used Griffin’s own answers to challenge the quality of his positions. most powerfully on race-based politics, but ultimately on the nature of British identity. Like the Militant Tendency, Griffin is selling a public version of his platform, whilst concealing a very nasty private agenda. Dimbleby took this apart, most notably on Griffin’s appearance with the KKK, in which Griffin had laid out this very approach.
Griffin’s fatal flaw is this baggage, unique among elected British politicians. It is no evidence of BBC bias that this baggage gets pulled apart in public when he chooses to appear on a platform like QT.
Fair point about the baggage – there is no doubt that Griffin has baggage he’d rather not be carrying, but then again – and in a different way – so does Barack Obama.
The ‘unique among British elected politicians’ half of your argument is spurious, however. What are these if not examples of historical extremist ‘baggage’?:
Jack Straw, Justice Minister – ex-Communist
John Reid, former Home Secretary – ex-Communist
Peter Mandelson, unelected fixer/enforcer – ex-Communist
Alistair Darling – Chancellor – ex-Marxist
Alan Johnson, Home Secretary – ex-Communist
Skeletons and closets are nothing new in politics. Griffin is not alone in having a past he’d prefer not to be dragged up.
Your assertion that the BNP has a hidden, ‘very nasty’ agenda is, however – and can only be for now – speculation. They claim that they do not support forced repatriation, for instance – but how would we ever know that unless they were in power?
And speaking of hidden agendas – where was it written in Blair’s ’97 pledge card that his administration would oversee the introduction of up to two million immigrants into Britain?
But coming back to the programme itself – do you really think that there was nothing orchestrated about the show? You really didn’t see the difference between Thursday’s and a normal QT episode? Are you looking closely enough?
Excellent point Phillip and one I have made several times – http://notasheepmaybeagoat.blogspot.com/2009/08/marxist-as-secretary-of-state-for.html – might be of interest.
Good article, NaS – and your observation about the infiltration by leftists into other areas of public life is also on the money – only these days it’s usually under the aegis of the creepy Common Purpose.
“Griffin’s fatal flaw is this baggage, unique among elected British politicians. It is no evidence of BBC bias that this baggage gets pulled apart in public when he chooses to appear on a platform like QT”
I would say that Martin McGuinness, former IRA commander in Derry and Chief of Staff, Gerry Adams, IRA Belfast Brigade leader in charge on Bloody Friday, as well as Billy Hutchinson MLA and late Loyalist politician and terrorist David Ervine, who served time for murder, all had a rather more unique claim to that epithet.
And even after 30 years of intractible conflict and violence that resulted in over 3000 people losing their lives, none of the above were treated with the same level of hostility that Nick Griffin receieved on Thursday.
Now I wonder why that was…?
That programme was probably the best recruiting sergeant the BNP could have hoped for – it seems the left (including the BBC) have no understanding of the law of unintended consequences.
Their social engineering will result in the destruction of the UK but after reading the quote from Andrew Neather above, it appears that was the idea all along…
No, the panelists gave monologues about Griffin’s words and supposed words from the past. With the exception of Bonnie Greer, none of them really responded or even spoke directly to Griffin. Mostly they preferred to condemn past statements and general positions while referring to Griffin in the third person.
Dimbelby seemed to think his job consisted mainly of getting Griffin to admit to Holocaust denial and ask if there was anyone else who wanted to bash him. The Mohammedans called on to speak were dressed in nice Western fashion, sans bushy beards or drapery. Funny that.
Griffin stated openly that the BNP was – he used past tense – “an admittedly racist and anti-Semitic party” to one who now supports Israel’s right to defend itself. He also pointed out that the other parties weren’t so supportive. Dimbleby couldn’t move away from this truth fast enough. A genuinely unbiased moderator would have jumped on that. Since the accepted bien pensant wisdom is that one cannot accuse someone critical of Israel as being anti-Semitic, I guess it follows that someone who is an anti-Semite can support Israel. But no, we wouldn’t want to possibly contribute to the rehabilitation of the BNP by following up on his support for Israel against terrorism, now would we?
Beeboid Dimblebly, instead kept asking if Griffin was just lying now and would reveal his party’s racism and anti-Semitism once in power. Griffin couldn’t say no enough times to satisfy him.
There was also a moment where an overweight, bald, white man voiced a concern about illegal immigrants coming in and taking jobs away from the locals. Another audience member shouted out an objection, and, rather than let the man continue to make his comment, Dimbleby cut him off to let the rude shouting woman explain that – just like in the BBC’s “Here Come The Poles” – the feckless indigenous white people were shirkers. Dimbleby shut down the white man’s debate to allow someone who interrupted him state what is observabley the BBC Narrative on the issue.
It was a stitch-up, no mistake, and badly handled. Not that there could possibly have been a decent outcome of this show, considering the atmosphere created by the BBC for the last few months.
Any democrat watching the mass media lynching over the last few days should be thoroughly ashamed and disgusted at the depths to which our democracy has sunk.
It was a perverted charade, a grubby mass rage mob of bullies centered around the BBC QT, the MSM is now shocked to find that its actions has only increased support for the BNP!
What did they think would happen when the British people are presented with that kind of brutal bullying?
This whole episode shows us what the UK establishment is capable of, this is a good thing I think.
People can clearly see what the future holds for any dissident who dares to question the mass media and the political establishment, if they win and destroy the BNP then who is next on the list?
Cassandra, you voted BNP in the European Elections, didn’t you?
As indicated above, I can understand why both white and coloured British Subjects can be driven to vote for the BNP as a protest, even delude themselves about the nature of the Party they are voting for to make it more palatable to themselves, but c’mon Cassandra, you’re a Zionist, the BNP are Nazis. The BNP get in power they will be in bed with Muslims torching synagogues, as simple as that.
I support Israel fully, I support Britsh patriots of all colours living in these Islands and abiding by British customs and laws.
I say to people who critisise jews that ‘I am a Jew’ I say clearly that I am British regardless of the colour of my skin, I say Britishness is not the tint of a persons skin its what is in their heart and mind.
My beautiful country is worth preserving for the future, the pace of change to due forcing third world immigration was in fact pre planned by newlabour and its destroying our country.
I am for immigration of the finest and brightest people the world has to offer to share our way of life, I support looking after genuine asylum seekers and helping them resettle when its safe to return OR if they attain the highest citizens standards then ask them to remain.
I am for punishing the criminal and protecting the victims, I am for real justice, equal true justice.
I am BNP supporter and as soon as the BNP opens up its membership books to all British people then I am joining and many like me will follow.
You warn me of islamist violence against my Jewish brothers and sisters? Its happening now my friend, right now and its a tragedy that Jews who have contributed so much to our land now walk in fear of the rage mob islamists.
I promise you that if you could only talk to the majority of BNP members and supporters you would find that they are good kind people for the most part and certainly not nazis, its hard to accept that everything you have been told about the BNP is lies BUT that is the case.
I ask you to just talk to the BNP where you can, be friendly and polite and find out for yourself what the truth is, only when you have found out by talking to members can you judge them. We have two eyes, two ears and only one mouth for a good reason!
Shalom my friend.
Cassie K.
Cassandra, I’m sure there are very many well intentioned people in the BNP like yourself, but c’mon, you know you’re kidding yourself. The leadership of the BNP are hardcore Nazis and they are laughing they’re heads off at you behind your back, just as their Islamist counterparts in the Nazi fold laugh their heads off when … yes, I’ll use the term, .. complete idiots run with their propaganda by blaming their atrocities on our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan to protect our freedom instead of the fact they wish to impose Islam upon us. Cassandra, have you looked at BNP statements on Iraq and Afghanistan? Herr Griffin wants to put British Generals on trial for their lives for our presence there. There is not a fig leaf between them and their ugly sister double act on the far Left with regard to our defence of democracy from Islamic terrorism.
Hippiepooter
Just watching Newswatch. Interesting. 3 folk. A sulky bloke who doesn’t know much but knows what he doesn’t like. A young lady who was in the QT audience. And a BBC ‘I don’t think so/it was all fine’… for a change.
‘They have devoted the whole programme…’, a bit like the QT show itself, which was changed fundamentally to suit a warped notion of balance. They might as well have stuck him in stocks and had all present pelt him with eggs to really hand him a martyr’s tag.
The young lady – who was there – says ‘the people who were coming’ were there probably because they were anti-BNP. Mr. BBC leaps in and tries to ‘improve’ matters (not sure he did) by claiming audiences are ‘carefully selected’. Plus an interesting leap to ‘if the audience was not with him, they must have been against him’. I thought it was a cross-section, many of whom might not have been decided, or carrying burning torches.
‘Carefully selected’? Do what? By whom? On what criteria? Sounds like a uniquely funded licence to rig it any way an arrogant few can enhance the narrative any way they like. Should they wish.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/newsid_4130000/newsid_4130800/4130826.stm
And, just for fun, the young lady – who was present – tops it off by suggesting Mr. Dimbelby was a less than effective moderator. I believe she, a non-BNP supporter I’d say, reckoned he was not impartial and handed the BNP further bias ammo.
Explain all that away BBC. Oh, you will, and claim this Newswatch was just that, and it’s time to move on… to your next victim of a unique view of how the world ‘should’ be, as opposed to reflecting on how it is.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/
Now watching BBC Breakfast News reporting.
Seems this is not panning out well for the narrative. So.. try and interpret events…
Loved the reporter…’The BNP’s poll ratings have gone from 2 to 3%, which is very signif… er… not very sigificant’
A 50% boost? In totality still small, but the BBC just managed something most political parties would love… especially Mr. Brown’s.
Guess the other panellists did not shine much.
50% boost in BNP popularity is nothing. -4% would have been something worth talking about. Gordon Brown decided to shrink the economy by 4% rather than grow it by 50. The former is great, the latter not significant, irrelevant even. Gordon Brown is great. I love working for the BBC. It’s wonderful. Can anybody else hear those voices? They’re telling me to hurt myself. They’re telling me to stop taking my medication.
And so on.
“Our smug leaders have done nothing to see off the BNP”
(by Charles Moore):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/6418583/Our-smug-leaders-have-done-nothing-to-see-off-the-BNP.html
“BBC show trial that taught us nothing”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1222623/BBC-trial-taught-nothing.html
If this bit is true, then we have proof positive of BBC bias and don’t need to make another comment on this thread:
Before filming began, a crib sheet was handed to the audience (which, being predominantly young, metropolitan and multicultural, bore little resemblance to the demographics of the average community) demanding ‘provocative’ questions and littered with quotations about how loathsome the BNP was
Incredibly, before the show started, David Dimbleby even encouraged the crowd to boo, as if it was a trashy Jeremy Kyle-type show, rather than a serious current affairs programme.
<div id=”TixyyLink” style=”border: medium none; overflow: hidden; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;”>
</div>
<div style=”border: medium none; overflow: hidden; color: #000000; background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;”>No further evidence needed.
</div>
The Telegraph article – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html – (if true) shows that in the words of Migration Watch’s Sir Andrew Green: “Many have long suspected that mass immigration under Labour was not just a cock up but also a conspiracy. They were right.” There is more here – http://notasheepmaybeagoat.blogspot.com/2009/10/mass-immigration-under-labour-was-not.html
<div class=”post hentry”></div>
Dam good summary. This level of honesty will go down like a shit butty though, but I can tell that you are aware of this. Keep up the excellent work.
BBC predictably not on the case about Labour’s mass immigration conspiracy:
“Labour’s Immigration ‘Plot'”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/135887/Labour-immigration-plot–
“Labour let in migrants ‘to engineer multicultural UK'”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1222613/Labour-let-migrants-engineer-multicultural-UK.html
The following essay seems to be avoided by BBC and ‘liberal left’ while they irresponsibly advocate and implement mass immigration still:
“Multiculturalism -merits and debits” (by Paul Weston)-
http://paulweston101.blogspot.com/search/label/Multiculturalism
Griffin performed fairly poorly overall, he often answers more sharply – but he is totally entitled to claim that the whole thing was a show trial. Brits don’t like the underdog being kicked around, Dimbleby’s “chaitmanship” was a travesty of fair play, holding the ring.
Net result – Griffin gathers more support, Straw was made to look a fool, Dimbleby’s reputation ??? for even-handedness is damaged, the BBC earns itself even more critics for such blatant bias in audience selection and the way they set the whole show up as a “Get Griffin” diatribe.
The Tory Baroness came out OK, certainly against Jack Straw, but of course Dimbleby failed to bait either of them with the muck in their own pasts.
(And how the hell does an airhead like Bonnie Greer get to be deputy chair of the British Museum ?)
……………
This site is about BBC bias. I think Thursday’s performance helped show many more people the way the BBC is slanted.
The last post was by “JohnA” as was. I’ve been abroad for a while.What is the easiest way to log-in while keeping my old monicker ?
BBC is silent, but ‘Sky News’ has:
“Labour ‘Encouraged Mass Immigration to UK'”
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Ex-Government-Adviser-Andrew-Neather-Says-Mass-Immigration-To-UK-Was-Deliberate/Article/200910415414170?lpos=Politics_First_Home_Article_Teaser_Region_3&lid=ARTICLE_15414170_Ex-Government_Adviser_Andrew_Neather_Says_Mass_Immigration_To_UK_Was_Deliberate_
REGULAR POSTERS AND BLOG ADMIN – PLEASE READ
Could we put in a freedom of information request on the details of the Question Time audiences? They ask a series of questions about political allegiances etc in the audience application form – so surely we could find that out under freedom of information?
The scale of the BBC bias on ‘Question Time’ is evident from the ‘Daily Mail’ report:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1222586/The-BNP-backlash–MPs-accuse-BBC-playing-Nick-Griffins-hands-stage-managing-Question-Time-onslaught.html
Note the final section-
“Anatomy of an ambush: How the BBC hand picked its audience.”
yes, note how their picture shows a large white majority in the audience, and is pretty much bang on for London’s demographics