Daggers Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 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. 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. 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. Nice cave you live in, is it? Nice moss? Bloke in the next cave hit you too much on the head, has he? Bless. Wait around for a few thousand years and someone will be able to sort you out.
Zingari Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 asian visitors cause ruffled feathers flocking ooop north http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/n...zy-1808131.html
Budweiser Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Going back to the homophobia issue, good to see the Church of Sweden voting in favour of conducting same sex marriages.Fred Phelps will not be happy... Why? It's completely wrong. Why should they get married?
MPH Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Cassetteboy vs Nick Griffin, it's brilliant. love it
Leicfox Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 I thought the whole programme was a sham and turned into a staged witchhunt from start to finish infront of a handpicked audience.
Guest Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Why? It's completely wrong. Why should they get married? Why is it wrong?
FilboFox Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Cassetteboy vs Nick Griffin, it's brilliant. Brilliant!!
Nick Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Why? It's completely wrong. Why should they get married? If I kissed you, I know you'de change your mind. I bet there is a big gay liberal in you watching re-runs of Brokeback Mountain just trying to get out. I have no problem with gay men kissing if that's what they want to do and it makes them happy. I bet you have no problem with women kissing huh? Did someone construct your masculinity out of a bad lego diagram and now it's all messed up? I'd love a Budweiser. :w00t: Guess I'll keep hanging round the Malcolm Arcade looking for the one that got away, instead........
Nick Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Cassetteboy vs Nick Griffin, it's brilliant. How dare you misquote the Griffin!
Budweiser Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 If I kissed you, I know you'de change your mind. I bet there is a big gay liberal in you watching re-runs of Brokeback Mountain just trying to get out. I have no problem with gay men kissing if that's what they want to do and it makes them happy. I bet you have no problem with women kissing huh? Did someone construct your masculinity out of a bad lego diagram and now it's all messed up? I'd love a Budweiser. :w00t: Guess I'll keep hanging round the Malcolm Arcade looking for the one that got away, instead........ You know me to well ! But seriously, it's just weird if 2 men or women marry, and it is wrong, because it's not normal.
Guest Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 You know me to well !But seriously, it's just weird if 2 men or women marry, and it is wrong, because it's not normal. But two people in love, should it matter?
Budweiser Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 But two people in love, should it matter? Yes. Im sure priests would agree with me
Guest Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Yes. Im sure priests would agree with me Bad choice of support there, matey!
Budweiser Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Bad choice of support there, matey! I stand by my decision.
Nick Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Whatever happened to the "Freedom of Speech" that this country was once so proud of?Our Democratic right to this has been swept away by the pathos of "political correctness" and the fear of retribution for speaking, what we as individuals, believe in. I agree with this. We should build a nice safe environment for racists to chat and embrace each other. Let's create an environment for the the stupid, the prejudice and the readers of the daily mail that are voting tory because they are not brave enough to vote BNP. Unemployment - that's the immigrants; Recession that's Immigrant's too; Broken Britain - Children wearing hoods and homosexuals. Let's make Dangerous Tiger a thread where he can be prejudicial, bigoted, politically incorrect and skirt around issues of race in a nice safe environment. Nick Griffin - poor little fascist being picked on. Get a grip. Freedom of speech is one thing but freedom to ridicule relentlessly, massively misguided, and disgusting little demonisers of society that prey upon the vulnerable and exploit fear, is a privilege I will never tire of. I hope the little rat has a painful accident and is nursed embarrassingly for years by those lovely people from many races that he despises, prior to a slow painful end. He makes me wretch just looking at him - give me gay men having full sex in my driveway every night over one BNP Canvasser coming to my door to peddle indoctrinated marginalised hate once per annum. Indigenous British people? You have an idea in your head and an image about what that looks like don't you? Problem is, it's more complicated than that! Christ, I bet it's a power issue - you probably dress up at weekends and play police officer. Give me strength.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Why? It's completely wrong. Why should they get married? Why not? Why should men and women get married? Why even create marriage in the first place? How does a man deciding to show his affection to another man directly effect you? (other than creeping you out?) And on the flip, why should men and women be allowed to show effection in public?
Daggers Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 Yes. Im sure priests would agree with me Absolutely. As long as you are a 12yr old boy wearing a cassock.
Leicfox Posted 24 October 2009 Posted 24 October 2009 More than a fifth of voters would consider voting for the British National Party according to the first opinion poll taken since the controversial appearance of Nick Griffin on Question Time.'One In Five Voters Now Considering BNP' 8:38am UK, Saturday October 24, 2009 Mark Langford, Sky News Online More than a fifth of voters would consider voting for the British National Party according to the first opinion poll taken since the controversial appearance of Nick Griffin on Question Time. Taken in the hours after Mr Griffin's appearance, the YouGov poll for The Daily Telegraph found 22% of voters would seriously consider voting BNP in a future local, general or European election. Two thirds said they would never vote BNP under any circumstances, with the rest unsure. More than half of those questioned said that they agreed with the BNP, or thought that the party had a point, in wishing to speak up for the interests of the indigenous, white British people which successive governments have done too little to protect. This included 43% who said that while they shared some of its concerns, they had no sympathy for the party itself. Twelve per cent said that they completely agreed with the BNP and supported the party's decision to speak up, while 38% said that they disagreed totally with the BNP's political outlook. The figures are based on a sample of 1,314 electors across Britain interviewed online from October 22-23 A BBC spokesman said: "We have been very clear in setting out our reasons for having Nick Griffin on Question Time. "The BBC's obligation is around due impartiality. It is not our job to comment on the ebb and flow of opinion polls." Mr Griffin's debut appearance on the show sparked uproar, with angry scenes outside BBC TV Centre in west London as nearly 1,000 demonstrators protested at the move. He said he is to make a formal complaint to the BBC about his treatment on the panel, which he believed had been deliberately "twisted" in order to focus on him and his party's policies, leaving him to face a "lynch mob". Meanwhile, a former government adviser said Labour had allowed huge increases in immigration over the past decade to socially engineer a more multicultural Britain. Andrew Neather, a speechwriter who worked in Downing Street for Tony Blair and in the Home Office for Jack Straw and David Blunkett, said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration". Ministers hoped to radically change the country and by doing so "rub the Right's nose in diversity". But Mr Neather said senior Labour figures were reluctant to discuss the policy, fearing it would alienate its "core working-class vote".
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.