Griffins appearance on Question time in doubt

[Guest]

Yes. Because it's illegal. She should stay where she is or move somewhere where she won't offend the law.

The right answer is that as a western woman, she wouldn't be "offending" any law. Ok, she would be expected to cover up her tattoos in public, but aside from that, the cultural differences are tolerated.

Griffin's right about immigration, to an extent, and he is right about homosexuals. I have no problem with gays but if they are rubbing it right in my face, I would be more than unhappy. Some absolute idiots in the audience/panel.

Teaching school kids about homosexuality? Is that a fooking joke? Disgraceful.

So it's better not to teach kids about homosexuality? It's better to make kids confused about the situation hide away and feel ashamed of themselves? It's better that kids who don't understand and are not homosexual are ignorant and treat gays and lesbians as freaks?

Nice.

I just want to know, if you stuck Jack fooking Straw in a area full of immigrants, what his reaction would be. Just if he lived their for a week or something, because thats why people vote BNP. They live in areas which rapidly change, and if they changed immigration laws the BNP would be alot smaller.

Have you ever lived in an area that is "full of immigrants"?

Straw said it had been catastrophic for the BNP & claimed that immigration laws currently are working.

1. It was almost definitely a success for the BNP.

2. Immigration laws are not working, and to be quite frank, it's a joke.

Why are immigration laws not working?

havn't done history for a while

but wasn't christianity only introduced into this country so Henry VIII could divorce his wife?

corect me if i'm wrong

Catholicism was introduced in the middle ages, and our religious affairs were governed by the Pope. Henry VIII wanted a divorce, and I think it was the reason that he couldn't remarry that meant that he couldn't. IIRC he then looked at nullity, which wasn't an option either (nullity means that the marriage never existed. I can't remember exactly, but I think it was argued on the basis that she had been married to his older brother, or something, first. Complicated stuff). So our Henry decided that to form the Church of England. In a nutshell.

[breadandcheese]

I was actually quite surprised at how poor a performance Griffin put in. Now we all know he's a buffoon and deserves contempt, but usually he comes across far more polished, with pre-prepared answers. Instead he, thankfully, looked completely uncredible, and this wasn't even because of the panellists.

I hope he's never allowed back on to question time because quite frankly, it made for dull viewing. There was no discussion on anything relevant to that week's news as it was all dominated by a d*ckwad leading a d*ckwad party.

[Head Honcho]

I was actually quite surprised at how poor a performance Griffin put in. Now we all know he's a buffoon and deserves contempt, but usually he comes across far more polished. Instead he, thankfully, looked completely uncredible, and this wasn't even because of the panellists.

I hope he's never allowed back on to question time because quite frankly, it made for dull viewing. There was no discussion on anything relevant to that week's news as it was all dominated by a d*ckwad leading a d*ckwad party.

I agree. Bonnie Greer aside it was a pretty lame performance by all the other panellist.

It's pretty ironic that the only non politically elected panellist saved the show.

[Guest ttfn]

Nobody on that panel cameout with any credibility. And as Griffin was the only one to come in with no credibility, he kind of did the best in a perverseway.

The Conservative woman was exactly the sort of self-righteous politician I hate. She was pandering to the crowd, not listening to what Griffin or anybody else had to say.

As much as Griffin and his largely dispicable policies incite racial hatred, the ridiculous bear pit atmosphere put across by the rest of the panel last night (with the possible exception of Chris Huhne, who I found tolerable) does equally as much to promote racial discord.

And how bleeding pretentious were some of the members of the audience? 'Dick' griffin. Oh Ha dee fooking ha. Then some bloke asked a question which seemed to be supportive of the BNP and he was shouted down by some ridiculous woman ranting about the fact that she worked with immigrants.

I don't agree with the majority of what the BNP has to say, but last night I felt more distanced from politics than ever before. If somebody came out with a moderate right party, with sensible policies on immigration which actually recognised the needs and fears of British people, I would vote for them in an instant and I'm sure I would not be the only one. AS it is, the BNP remains a racist party with bigoted views on everything ranging from immigration to inter-race marriage to homosexuality.

[Babylon]

Nobody on that panel cameout with any credibility. And as Griffin was the only one to come in with no credibility, he kind of did the best in a perverseway.

The Conservative woman was exactly the sort of self-righteous politician I hate. She was pandering to the crowd, not listening to what Griffin or anybody else had to say.

As much as Griffin and his largely dispicable policies incite racial hatred, the ridiculous bear pit atmosphere put across by the rest of the panel last night (with the possible exception of Chris Huhne, who I found tolerable) does equally as much to promote racial discord.

And how bleeding pretentious were some of the members of the audience? 'Dick' griffin. Oh Ha dee fooking ha. Then some bloke asked a question which seemed to be supportive of the BNP and he was shouted down by some ridiculous woman ranting about the fact that she worked with immigrants.

I don't agree with the majority of what the BNP has to say, but last night I felt more distanced from politics than ever before. If somebody came out with a moderate right party, with sensible policies on immigration which actually recognised the needs and fears of British people, I would vote for them in an instant and I'm sure I would not be the only one. AS it is, the BNP remains a racist party with bigoted views on everything ranging from immigration to inter-race marriage to homosexuality.

[breadandcheese]

I agree. Bonnie Greer aside it was a pretty lame performance by all the other panellist.

It's pretty ironic that the only non politically elected panellist saved the show.

I thought David Dimbleby was excellent last night. He chaired the panel excellently.

[Asha]

I thought that woman from the Conversatives (Sayeeda, was it?) made some excellent points, and wasn't really challenged herself. She came off quite well after that, at least in my eyes.

[Guest Bilo]

Mixed feelings about the episode last night as Griffin put in an awful performance that showed how little substance and weight his views carry. He couldn't answer simple questions, denied quotes that he must know can be found in five minutes on YouTube and came across as a weird mix between nervous and highly arrogant with his bizarre outbursts of laughter. Evasive throughout, answering questions with hollow soundbites, sleazily trying to put his arm around Bonnie Greer; he won't have persuaded anybody to vote for the BNP last night. Evidently his polished media-friendly speeches don't quite stand up to on the spot debate.

On the other hand, it's easy to see how a BNP supporter could argue he wasn't given a fair crack of the whip against what was a very hostile panel and audience. No other politician will have been subjected to such hostility from an audience, and I worry the BNP will use that fact as a means to present their fuhrer as a victim of the 'ultra-left.' The panel generally was weak, epitomised by a dreadful and evasive performance from Jack Straw after what was a powerful start on the importance of African and Asian soldiers to the war efforts in WW1 and WW2. He looked every inch the representative of a government that is in its dying days and it could be argued that his showing last night was almost as bad as Griffin's, the rambling speech on Labour's immigration policy being the nadir as even Dimbleby demanded he get to the point. Huhne was disappointingly anonymous, save for a couple of angry outbursts at Griffin. Warsi and Greer was better, but overall the panel could have condemned Griffin more strongly.

The audience was ridiculous. Childish in the extreme, yelling 'rubbish' and booing like they would at a pantomime aged 6, the BNP press office must have thought their bacon had been saved by an audience more hostile than Galatasaray's ground on matchday. 'Dick Griffin' is the kind of thing you could expect to hear from a primary school child, and that was how the audience behaved at times. If they wanted to make Griffin look like a victim of bias rather than the bigoted, deluded and hollow excuse for a politician that he is, they succeeded brilliantly. It could have been a classic episode as the BNP were smashed for good, but it turned into a dull insult fest that would have shamed a sixth form debating society. Underwhelming in the end, and I can't help feel that the fight against the BNP has at best stagnated, and at worst taken a step backwards after that.

[Guest Bilo]

I thought David Dimbleby was excellent last night. He chaired the panel excellently.

He did very well last night in what was a very unusual QT atmosphere.

I thought that woman from the Conversatives (Sayeeda, was it?) made some excellent points, and wasn't really challenged herself. She came off quite well after that, at least in my eyes.

Baroness Warsi.

She was one of the few who impressed me. Sound, common sense points and I disagree she pandered to the audience. Certainly the strongest panellist last night, and can come away proud of her showing. One hopes she has a prominent place in the new Tory government if and when it comes next year.

[TrickyTrev]

Mixed feelings about the episode last night as Griffin put in an awful performance that showed how little substance and weight his views carry. He couldn't answer simple questions, denied quotes that he must know can be found in five minutes on YouTube and came across as a weird mix between nervous and highly arrogant with his bizarre outbursts of laughter. Evasive throughout, answering questions with hollow soundbites, sleazily trying to put his arm around Bonnie Greer; he won't have persuaded anybody to vote for the BNP last night. Evidently his polished media-friendly speeches don't quite stand up to on the spot debate.

On the other hand, it's easy to see how a BNP supporter could argue he wasn't given a fair crack of the whip against what was a very hostile panel and audience. No other politician will have been subjected to such hostility from an audience, and I worry the BNP will use that fact as a means to present their fuhrer as a victim of the 'ultra-left.' The panel generally was weak, epitomised by a dreadful and evasive performance from Jack Straw after what was a powerful start on the importance of African and Asian soldiers to the war efforts in WW1 and WW2. He looked every inch the representative of a government that is in its dying days and it could be argued that his showing last night was almost as bad as Griffin's, the rambling speech on Labour's immigration policy being the nadir as even Dimbleby demanded he get to the point. Huhne was disappointingly anonymous, save for a couple of angry outbursts at Griffin. Warsi and Greer was better, but overall the panel could have condemned Griffin more strongly.

The audience was ridiculous. Childish in the extreme, yelling 'rubbish' and booing like they would at a pantomime aged 6, the BNP press office must have thought their bacon had been saved by an audience more hostile than Galatasaray's ground on matchday. 'Dick Griffin' is the kind of thing you could expect to hear from a primary school child, and that was how the audience behaved at times. If they wanted to make Griffin look like a victim of bias rather than the bigoted, deluded and hollow excuse for a politician that he is, they succeeded brilliantly. It could have been a classic episode as the BNP were smashed for good, but it turned into a dull insult fest that would have shamed a sixth form debating society. Underwhelming in the end, and I can't help feel that the fight against the BNP has at best stagnated, and at worst taken a step backwards after that.

I agree with all of this lot. Nick Griffin won't have won any supporters, any right minded person could see that he is a total moron. However, those supporting the BNP at the moment will have just seen a man attacked from all angles by a cosmopolitan elite who did not give him the chance to explain himself or address his concerns. If there were a somewhat charismatic and intelligent ultra-rightist then I'd be concerned.

I just want to know, if you stuck Jack fooking Straw in a area full of immigrants, what his reaction would be.

Jack Straw divides his time between London and Blackburn, I think he has seen a collection of brown men before. Leicester isn't the only place in the country which has seen a changing face as a result of immigration you know.

[Guest Bilo]

It felt like she as reciting from a book most of the time to me, it never really felt like those were her actual thoughts.

The audience was like a toned down Jerry Springer crowd. Whooping whenever someone called Griffin a name, pathetic really. Some tramp turned up at the back and one point and said something, looked like he'd just awoken from a park bench.... that was my highlight., well that and Edgar Davids in drag.

Clocked him early on in the show and thought he'd settled down for a kip.

[Guest]

It felt like she as reciting from a book most of the time to me, it never really felt like those were her actual thoughts.

The audience was like a toned down Jerry Springer crowd. Whooping whenever someone called Griffin a name, pathetic really. Some tramp turned up at the back and one point and said something, looked like he'd just awoken from a park bench.... that was my highlight., well that and Edgar Davids in drag.

That was funny

Looked like he'd had a few HSLs and a packet of Sovereign at least

[StanSP]

I suppose I will elaborate, slightly. I see religion as a scapegoat for people who cannot handle death. "If your a good boy you go to heaven and if your naughty you go to hell" is more of a trick on children really. I don't see how you could believe that God created the world and heaven and hell etc. I honestly do not get why people believe in religion, so if someone could tell me why they do I would appreciate it and try and see.

As NSLL touched on it earlier, some people see God/religion as comforting. Knowing that they have God's faith and support can surprisingly go a very long way to reassuring people in life.

Plus, the idea that religion is a test for believers can also be comforting as well as work in a negative manner. They're tested day-in, day-out with life's struggles and if they come through these they are 'rewarded' in some way bu God.

At the end of the day (I really don't like using that but yeah), everyone will always have their opinion on religion/science and will probably remain one of life's unanswered mysteries, but I'm not gonna berate anyone for being a believer/non-believer .

[samlcfc]

I suppose I will elaborate, slightly. I see religion as a scapegoat for people who cannot handle death. "If your a good boy you go to heaven and if your naughty you go to hell" is more of a trick on children really. I don't see how you could believe that God created the world and heaven and hell etc. I honestly do not get why people believe in religion, so if someone could tell me why they do I would appreciate it and try and see.

stuff like this, i know you can take it alot deeper than this, but alot of religious stuff when it comes down to it is basic things that maybe you'd believe back when religions started forming and nobody knew much about anything. Ive thought about it before and probably will again but its all a bit too fantastic for me. They seem to have alot of fancy answers aswell like once when I asked this guy where hell was, he replied "anywhere god isnt". Its like a quick fix for something they dont know.

[Budweiser]

When that guy called Griffin "Dick" it really summed up how poor the show actually was. I know everyone hates Griffin, with right, but atleast let him speak. It was actually fustrating. He was supposed to come on the panel and give his views/contribute to the discussion but all you saw was one of the panelists or audiences shouting over him, fooked me off, no matter how much I despise the man.

[TrickyTrev]

He did very well last night in what was a very unusual QT atmosphere.

Baroness Warsi.

She was one of the few who impressed me. Sound, common sense points and I disagree she pandered to the audience. Certainly the strongest panellist last night, and can come away proud of her showing. One hopes she has a prominent place in the new Tory government if and when it comes next year.

She was the most accomplished politician out there i.e. she didn't make it so obvious when she was ducking the question.

She dodged her own homophobia when Dimbleby questioned her because she knew it put her in the same position as the moron.

She said what the audience wanted to hear about immigration, that there needs to be a cap, but what she knows is that if the Conservatives stick with their current policy of leaving the cap number to a review, based on business and public service need, then that number will be considerably higher than present levels of immigration. Just like everyone else she didn't mention that the vast majority of immigrants into the UK come from inside the EU and that no government has any serious power to stop it or cap it.

Saying "We need to be honest with the public about immigration" is not the same thing as being honest with the public about immigration is. "We need immigration or you're all going to have to work till you are 75 and we're never gonna grow out of this recession without low wages" would be an example of an honest statement about immigration that you will never hear from a politician. Particularly an ambitious one like Baroness Warsi.

[Babylon]

When that guy called Griffin "Dick" it really summed up how poor the show actually was. I know everyone hates Griffin, with right, but atleast let him speak. It was actually fustrating. He was supposed to come on the panel and give his views/contribute to the discussion but all you saw was one of the panelists or audiences shouting over him, fooked me off, no matter how much I despise the man.

It was plainly obvious that if they had let him speak he would have hung himself at one point. His mind isn't quick enough to process what he's saying and something would have slipped out.

What was he doing with his tongue all the time, it looked like it was about to shoot 5 feet into the air and catch a fly. Or lick his cod eye, one or the other.

[Guest Bilo]

She was the most accomplished politician out there i.e. she didn't make it so obvious when she was ducking the question.

She dodged her own homophobia when Dimbleby questioned her because she knew it put her in the same position as the moron.

She said what the audience wanted to hear about immigration, that there needs to be a cap, but what she knows is that if the Conservatives stick with their current policy of leaving the cap number to a review, based on business and public service need, then that number will be considerably higher than present levels of immigration. Just like everyone else she didn't mention that the vast majority of immigrants into the UK come from inside the EU and that no government has any serious power to stop it or cap it.

Saying "We need to be honest with the public about immigration" is not the same thing as being honest with the public about immigration is. "We need immigration or you're all going to have to work till you are 75 and we're never gonna grow out of this recession without low wages" would be an example of an honest statement about immigration that you will never hear from a politician. Particularly an ambitious one like Baroness Warsi.

Her record on homophobia has been poor in the past, and the answer she gave on civil partnerships was pretty weak. More disappointing still, she wasn't pressed on it.

I like the fact that she was as realistic as she could be about immigration, it has been a mess under Labour and the Tories need to recitfy that if and when they are elected. The chances of a politician being as honest as you have been on immigration are remote however, the public doesn't want to hear that because of the tripe fed into their heads by the media every day.

I admired her showing last night, but it was far from the best shown on Question Time. In my opinion, Baroness Warsi was the best of a bad bunch. How she would fare on a stronger panel remains to be seen but I admired what she had to say last night.

[BoneDog]

I thought that woman from the Conversatives (Sayeeda, was it?) made some excellent points, and wasn't really challenged herself. She came off quite well after that, at least in my eyes.

I thought she was talking sense for most of the show. In the last 15 minutes though I started dis-agreeing with her, but I can't remember why!

[davieG]

Her record on homophobia has been poor in the past, and the answer she gave on civil partnerships was pretty weak. More disappointing still, she wasn't pressed on it.

I like the fact that she was as realistic as she could be about immigration, it has been a mess under Labour and the Tories need to recitfy that if and when they are elected. The chances of a politician being as honest as you have been on immigration are remote however, the public doesn't want to hear that because of the tripe fed into their heads by the media every day.

I admired her showing last night, but it was far from the best shown on Question Time. In my opinion, Baroness Warsi was the best of a bad bunch. How she would fare on a stronger panel remains to be seen but I admired what she had to say last night.

It sums up all that is wrong with Party Politics it prevents politicians from being honest as they are forced to tow the party line. It might be acceptable for very minor differences but often it's on major issues and I don't see how they can sit there and address the public and expect to be taken as people with integrity.

Party Politics encourages dishonesty and yet we let these people run the country.

[weluv]

what really pissed me off was griffin going on about Britain being a 'christian country'

this being the country where only 5% of the population go to church regularly

45% of people describe themselves as atheist or agnostic.

so what do we unbelievers do in your new christian nation, Nick?

racist twat got hammered into the ground last night, best TV i've watched in a long time.

[davieG]

Can we cease with the religious arguments unless it's directly relevant to this topic, there's been plenty of topics on that, if you feel you must continue go and revisit one of them.

[Guest Bilo]

Can we cease with the religious arguments unless it's directly relevant to this topic, there's been plenty of topics on that, if you feel you must continue go and revisit one of them.

THANK YOU DAVIE G!

[Flynny]

I thought he came across dangerously unextreme, frankly, and nothing that anyone said to him will have done a thing to dissuade any of his followers.

[Babylon]

Can we cease with the religious arguments unless it's directly relevant to this topic, there's been plenty of topics on that, if you feel you must continue go and revisit one of them.

AMEN..... ooooops.