Ready ....aim ....fire !!!!!!!

[BadWool76]

Just finished laughing at Nick Griffin . I swear that I saw his meathead body guard prevent his glass eyeball from busting out of its socket

My only disapointment was that someone didnt chin him John Prescott style although I have little doubt that someone , sometime and somewhere will do .

Made my night that did , if only Tony Blair had had that treatment aswell . Hazel " Chipmonk " blears needs slapping aswell .

 

[Robert Jarvis]

I can understand your reaction but do not agree. let me be clear I do not support thr BNP and never will. But what has happened in this country to freedom of speech. It was quite clear that this was a hastily organised rent a mob.

I wonder if your reaction and that of the police would have been the same if the receipient had been Gordon Brown or David Cameron. You can bet your life that there would have been demands for a public inquiry.

On another point on this matter rather than getting at Griffin, do you not think the rent a mob and their organisers should have been going out and asking why people had in their tens of thousands voted for the BNP.

 

[Welton Toffee]

Exactly Rob. Their two candidates were elected in a democratic election.

Who on earth voted for them?!??!?!

 

[daza_1973]

We are supposed to live in a democracy (although we have a prime-minister who was never elected), so in my eyes any person from any party who is elected by his or her own people is entitled to free speech - if not - democracy is dead in britian and we are no better than the Taliban / N korea etc.... or any other oppresive regime....

Right I'll get off me soapbox

 

[Latch]

Posted via Mobile Device That c*unt Griffin once stated that the Holacaust had ever happened, that the Genocide was staged propoganda (he has since said sorry and addmited it had occured! ). How could anyone who denied the slaughter of over 6 million Jews be voted in !?. Crazy world we live in eh!

 

[davek]

I dont understand this 'freedom of speech for nazis' argument. If they got control of the state they'd scrap freedom of speech, open concentration camps and start planning who they were going to sell the human soap and lampshades to.

 

[BadWool76]

I wasnt laughing at the way the mob appeared out of nowhere then subsequently lashed him with eggs well ok I was actually but i just found it hilarious .

Your right though its one rule for the leftists and one of the right wingers . If the boot had been on the other foot the sh*t would well and truley hit the fan . The left wingers should really let Griffin speak as I am more or less certain that he would end up hanging himself .

 

[GrandOldTeam]

I'm with Rob.

Whoever threw the eggs should be charged with assault. "Look at us, we are moral" - Bad belters.

 

[BadWool76]

I'm with Rob.

Whoever threw the eggs should be charged with assault. "Look at us, we are moral" - Bad belters.

Come on lads it was funny regardless of who did what . Just like I laughed hard when presscott and Mandelson got it . There is something beautiful about ccoksucking politrick purveyors getting lamped

 

[NeoNaoNeo]

I dont understand this 'freedom of speech for nazis' argument. If they got control of the state they'd scrap freedom of speech, open concentration camps and start planning who they were going to sell the human soap and lampshades to.

Abso-*******-lutely.

I'm sorry, I get the little intelligentsia ideological argument about everything being okay or nothing being okay with regards to what we can say, but allowing idiots like this to spout oppressive, hateful [Poor language removed] is just wrong. There is no merit to it. It denegrates our society, it doesn't elevate us to some mythical level of tolerance (in that we allow anyone to say anything).

These are the kinds of people who will use the guise of free speech to get into power and then abolish it once they sit on the throne.

 

[SuitsBlueX2]

Fear. I do not like them, and I do not condone their "policies". That a BNP membership was published in november last year, goes to show just how frightened the current establishment really are about the extremist right.
Embarrassed BNP admits its members list has been published online - Times Online
"One police woman on the list, whose entry included a note asking for discretion, faces potential dismissal since officers are proscribed from joining the right-wing political party. "
Like I said, I do not like them, or hold any beliefs similar to theirs, but what state is the state in when certain political beliefs and ideologies are actively oppressed and punished?
The best thing to do to Griffin and his henchmen would be to allow them the oxygen of publicity, and hope the greater public had the intelligence and bravery to recognise and condemn the thinly veiled threat to common decency and equality that is the 'BNP'.

 

[NeoNaoNeo]

No, sorry, I still don't agree. Everybody NOW knows about Griffin, he is bollocked in the papers every day, it's quite obvious what he's about.

And yet people still voted for the little scrote. Because (and this may be a bit condescending) a lot of the people who did vote for him were reactionary, ignorant of politics, and didn't have a clue even though the information is mainstream.

Also, I think it is perfectly acceptable to oppress and punish someone whose views are oppressive, hateful and volatile. At least when they're trying to become the leader of the land. Surely we are smart enough to recognise when an argument has no merit, and is therefore indefensible.

 

[lordyefc]

Also, I think it is perfectly acceptable to oppress and punish someone whose views are oppressive, hateful and volatile. At least when they're trying to become the leader of the land. Surely we are smart enough to recognise when an argument has no merit, and is therefore indefensible.

Who is we? Just us, or the public at large?

For example, a Catholic might find the views of anybody pro-abortion as oppresive, hateful and volatile, and they consider abortion to be indefensible. Do we give Catholic activists (which I admit is more of an American thing) the right to oppress and punish pro-abortion politicians?

On the other hand, there is a growing anti-religion wing (Dawkins et al) who think that the Catholic view (that everybody else is going to hell) is oppressive, especially to young children (which they view as a kind of mild child abuse). They see belief in religion as indefensible, and think that the beliefs are oppresive and volatile (see Northern Ireland, amongst many, many other places).

Basically, who decides?



This thing should be fought in the press. The BBC is supposed to be impartial, and other media outlets at least want to appear impartial. But they all interpret that as "you can't ridicule one party more than another". Sod that - treat them equally not by giving them equal praise/criticism, but by holding them to the same standards. If one party is acting dumber than another, fricking say so. If a particular party has zero positive attributes, it's not impartial to point that out.

The fact that the BBC did "proper" interviews with Griffin is a joke. He managed to stop them asking more than a couple of questions on subjects that he didn't want to talk about.

Basically, my view is that Griffin is entitled to say what he likes. However, if he wants to do that on a political program, then the interviewer should ask the most important political questions - it's not supposed to be a Party Political Broadcast on behalf of the Adolf Hilter Was My Lover Party. Man up and be a journalist for Christ's sake.

 

[davek]

Who is we? Just us, or the public at large?

For example, a Catholic might find the views of anybody pro-abortion as oppresive, hateful and volatile, and they consider abortion to be indefensible. Do we give Catholic activists (which I admit is more of an American thing) the right to oppress and punish pro-abortion politicians?

On the other hand, there is a growing anti-religion wing (Dawkins et al) who think that the Catholic view (that everybody else is going to hell) is oppressive, especially to young children (which they view as a kind of mild child abuse). They see belief in religion as indefensible, and think that the beliefs are oppresive and volatile (see Northern Ireland, amongst many, many other places).

Basically, who decides?



This thing should be fought in the press. The BBC is supposed to be impartial, and other media outlets at least want to appear impartial. But they all interpret that as "you can't ridicule one party more than another". Sod that - treat them equally not by giving them equal praise/criticism, but by holding them to the same standards. If one party is acting dumber than another, fricking say so. If a particular party has zero positive attributes, it's not impartial to point that out.

The fact that the BBC did "proper" interviews with Griffin is a joke. He managed to stop them asking more than a couple of questions on subjects that he didn't want to talk about.

Basically, my view is that Griffin is entitled to say what he likes. However, if he wants to do that on a political program, then the interviewer should ask the most important political questions - it's not supposed to be a Party Political Broadcast on behalf of the Adolf Hilter Was My Lover Party. Man up and be a journalist for Christ's sake.

I disagree. It's quite simple: they should be marginalised, ignored and not given the chance to get a toe-hold in mainstream political culture. The conditions that they feed on should be tackled head on not their ideology, which, as you point out, is nothing more than the same racist nonsense they and their predecessors have always peddled.

 

[gkpaul]

Like I said in another thread about the BNP, I have lost all respect for the guy the moment he said the Holocaust was something that never happened and was nothing more than allied propaganda. The guy is dressing racist views as politics and I think its going to get ugly very soon.

They like to use the idea of fighting for the beliefs of soldiers who have fallen in past wars, yet their immigration 'policies' would mean they would have voted against Gurkhas rights to stay in this country after serving the nation. I will try to find where I read that and post it here. It was interesting reading from a prominent member of the party. But, highly hypocritical if you ask me.