Griffins appearance on Question time in doubt

[l444ry]

It's a shame that so many in this country attempt to show their liberal attitude and try to defend "free speech" for this bunch of BNP scum. You just cant treat Nazis the same as UKIP or the Greens.

Firsty, it is an insult to virtually every person who died in the Second World War who fought for real freedom.

Secondly, it demonstrates a naivety bordering on lunacy to be taken in with the bile/lies that Griifin spouts.

It's about time that people got of their complacent knees and faced reality to the threat that faces this country.

Hitler was only a modest Austrian house painter once!!

[davieG]

It's a shame that so many in this country attempt to show their liberal attitude and try to defend "free speech" for this bunch of BNP scum. You just cant treat Nazis the same as UKIP or the Greens.

Firsty, it is an insult to virtually every person who died in the Second World War who fought for real freedom.

Secondly, it demonstrates a naivety bordering on lunacy to be taken in with the bile/lies that Griifin spouts.

It's about time that people got of their complacent knees and faced reality to the threat that faces this country.

Hitler was only a modest Austrian house painter once!!

So if they're illegal why haven't the Labour Government done something about them?

[l444ry]

So if they're illegal why haven't the Labour Government done something about them?

Sometimes people have to do things themselves rather than rely on a bunch of complacent, self-serving potato pickers in the House of Commons.

[Budweiser]

Do you actually know any Muslims?

Yes. One in particular I know said that he broke away from the religion because it was bollocks! Make of that what you will.

[Guest]

Yes. One in particular I know said that he broke away from the religion because it was bollocks! Make of that what you will.

Like countless number of people brought up as Christians?

[Thracian]

It's a shame that so many in this country attempt to show their liberal attitude and try to defend "free speech" for this bunch of BNP scum. You just cant treat Nazis the same as UKIP or the Greens.

Firsty, it is an insult to virtually every person who died in the Second World War who fought for real freedom.

Secondly, it demonstrates a naivety bordering on lunacy to be taken in with the bile/lies that Griifin spouts.

It's about time that people got of their complacent knees and faced reality to the threat that faces this country.

Hitler was only a modest Austrian house painter once!!

I remember watching good Christian Tony Blair spout all sorts of lies as he talked us into accepting war with Iraq and all the death and destruction that resulted in.

Don't dream of dictating to me who should and shouldn't be acceptable television. There's been quite enough attack on freedom of speech as it is without further erosion. Doesn't that fellow Choudery still get to have his say - and others who support him?

http://theopinionator.typepad.com/my_weblo...am-england.html

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/...urn-Muslim.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/369...stmas-evil.html

When folk have finished reading that they will doubtless form their own opinion as to where the threat to our way of life lies.

My father fought the Germans and I'm damned sure he didn't do so only to have Labour play host to the likes of Choudary.

[l444ry]

I agree with you about Choudary and others like him. But letting the Nazis get a foothold in the democratic process is not a price worth paying. BOTH should be stopped from spouting their vile ideologies.

[Thracian]

I agree with you about Choudary and others like him. But letting the Nazis get a foothold in the democratic process is not a price worth paying. BOTH should be stopped from spouting their vile ideologies.

If you could arrange the trade off I'd be happy to listen but I suspect that Choudary will be much harder to silence than Griffin and that while Peter Hain and his Labour pals might work hard for the one they may well have supporters of the other among their own councillors and MPs.

[Raj]

Hope this will be repeated as im on earlies and need my beauty sleep.

BNP should be allowed to air their views on TV just like any other "political party"....that way we can all laugh at the c.unts making complete and utter fools of themselves...

Cant wait to hear one of his supporters in the crowd pipe up and say"we dont hate non whites.....we just want the ****ers to fcuk off back to their own countries!!!!!"

[Dr The Singh]

I can't remember the Sura, it is a while since I read the Koran. I do remember reading a few verses that said a Muslim in another country must obey that lands laws. I found the below quote online and it seems to say what you said about having to obey the laws of a country unless they force you to do something against your religion. I don't think that British law enforces anything against religion just yet.

"Muslims are generally obliged to abide by the laws of the land and the country they live in, whether it is an Islamic state, Muslim country, or non-Muslim country such as those in the west, as long as they are not ordered to practice something that is against Shariah. If they are forced by the law to commit a sin, then in such a case, it will not just be unnecessary to abide by the law, rather impermissible.

Some are under the impression that it is permissible to violate the laws of countries that are not an Islamic state, which is totally incorrect. Muslims must adhere to the laws of any country they live in, whether in the west or the east, as long as the law is not in contradiction with one’s religion."

El Empty, I suggest you read the Koran again, there is no Sura or passage that describes a muslim obiding the law of another land!!!

Again, the muslim people have an issue on the doctrine they are taught, various scholars of exemplery background disagree, basing there disagreements on the documentation (hadiths) at hand!

[BoneDog]

El Empty, I suggest you read the Koran again, there is no Sura or passage that describes a muslim obiding the law of another land!!!

I have read it 3 times and I definately read verses where it said that if you live in a non-Muslim country then you have to obey the laws of the land.

[Dr The Singh]

I have read it 3 times and I definately read verses where it said that if you live in a non-Muslim country then you have to obey the laws of the land.

Cool buddy, i've just looked and couldn't find it, if you could forward me the sura, it would be much appreciated!!

[Thracian]

I have read it 3 times and I definately read verses where it said that if you live in a non-Muslim country then you have to obey the laws of the land.

What is actually said is that Muslims can and should abide by the laws of a non-Mulsim country if that can be seen as the means towards furthering the cause of Islam.

It is clearly stated that Muslims can recognise no administration which acts contrary to the doctrine of Islam. They may strategically hide their non-recognition until they are in a position to effect change but the non-recognition is there nontheless.

[Zingari]

I can't remember the Sura, it is a while since I read the Koran. I do remember reading a few verses that said a Muslim in another country must obey that lands laws. I found the below quote online and it seems to say what you said about having to obey the laws of a country unless they force you to do something against your religion. I don't think that British law enforces anything against religion just yet.

"Muslims are generally obliged to abide by the laws of the land and the country they live in, whether it is an Islamic state, Muslim country, or non-Muslim country such as those in the west, as long as they are not ordered to practice something that is against Shariah. If they are forced by the law to commit a sin, then in such a case, it will not just be unnecessary to abide by the law, rather impermissible.

Some are under the impression that it is permissible to violate the laws of countries that are not an Islamic state, which is totally incorrect. Muslims must adhere to the laws of any country they live in, whether in the west or the east, as long as the law is not in contradiction with one’s religion."

maybe i'm missing something but the way i read this is, sharia law takes precedence over the state law , not the other way around

[Shrenchel]

http://www.paddypower.com/bet?action=go_ty..._grp_ids=119031

[MC Prussian]

Look at the situtation in Germany.

There, the NPD (Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschland) was almost banned from any political partake (thus being on the brink of becoming illegal for the period) and monitored by the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, the German Intelligence, for decades, even had spies infiltrate the organization in order to gain information and/or to unsettle members. It has been declared nationalist, anti-constitutional and racist by a Bavarian High Court. The NPD itself claims to be against the current German constitution.

The NPD in its language resembles the ancient NSDAP. The party is anti-women, homophobic and anti-capitalistic and publicly endorses the ideology of the "Führer Cult".

They want the borders to go back to the level of 1937, demand a re-writing of the German/Prussian history surrounding WWII and some of the NPD leaders still, up to this day, deny the Holocaust ever took place.

Ironic enough, the NPD following has grown especially in the former East Germany territories, which used to be a Russian satellite state and thus Communist. So, within about two decades, they've gone from the extreme left to the extreme right. Funny how opinions chance or how one generation changes its opinion or how economical and social crisii impact so many people.

Now what does this have to do with the BNP? Both are minority parties who feed a certain percentage of the population with their ancient fascist views and revisionist theories. Their ideology is backwards-oriented (one could even say it's part-romantic).

So, part of me says it's ok to give them and Griffin an opportunity to make a complete fool of themselves in public whilst appearing on TV, so hundreds of thousands if not millions can see how ridiculous such a party and its program is. It's part of the democratic process. A ban would only act as an incentive for the tempted to join, as they indulge themselves in the thrills of forbidden activities. As long as a clear majority of voters can distinguish progressive parties from the likes of the BNP, we're all good. And so far, this has always been the case.

Just stay alert.

[Ford Super Sunday]

http://www.paddypower.com/bet?action=go_ty..._grp_ids=119031

:laugh: David Dimbleby 50/1

I can picture it now, that would be a headline and a half

[Zingari]

interesting read here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/ga...te_working.html

[Dr The Singh]

interesting read here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/ga...te_working.html

Nothing new or really interested, the FACT is that we all feel fooked and abused by New Labour one way or the other, it's just that the 'white' have a protest vote, unlike many others in society that have the same 3 poltical parties!!

[Zingari]

Nothing new or really interested, the FACT is that we all feel fooked and abused by New Labour one way or the other, it's just that the 'white' have a protest vote, unlike many others in society that have the same 3 poltical parties!!

very true , it's interesting how voters look around for someone to blame other than the bunch of crooks in office , but i was merely trying to point out how some white voters are using BNP as a protest rather than a real belief in their ideology .

and as you say whites do have this option , but it's no a particularly tasteful one

[Dr The Singh]

very true , it's interesting how voters look around for someone to blame other than the bunch of crooks in office , but i was merely trying to point out how some white voters are using BNP as a protest rather than a real belief in their ideology .

and as you say whites do have this option , but it's no a particularly tasteful one

Zingari, it's sad state of affairs, I can imagine people from all walks of society doing the same, if they had the choice. The problem is that most people are effected most of what happens on there door step and there immediate viccinity, they don't care about the economy or how great britian is. What people see is an invasion of foriegn workers (although not true), job losses, longer waiting times for the doctor or hospital, people can't get into there first choice schools, yob culture etc..............all issues in many eyes that the government have failed on, and unfortunately, there is a perception that the foriegners with government policy is to blame!

Unfortunately the media is also to blame, it exaggerates, eg the issue with Islamic fundamentalism.....all of a sudden whites and non muslims are scared of Britain becomming an Islamic state!!! White peopl all of a sudden have come to a conclusion that there way of life is at risk????

[BoneDog]

maybe i'm missing something but the way i read this is, sharia law takes precedence over the state law , not the other way around

The Koran does say that your religion comes first yes. But it does say that you must obey the laws of the land you live in if those laws don't force you to do anything un-Islamic. And the laws in Britain don't force people to do anything un-Islamic, so therefore according to the Koran, Muslims living here have to respect British law (which I think 99% do, just as 99% of British people do).

I've just been trying to point out that Muslims are not trying to take over our Houses of Parliament as some people seem to think! We might see them on the street in town doing a bit of preahing or 'calling to Islam' but I can't see anything wrong with that.

[Zingari]

The Koran does say that your religion comes first yes. But it does say that you must obey the laws of the land you live in if those laws don't force you to do anything un-Islamic. And the laws in Britain don't force people to do anything un-Islamic, so therefore according to the Koran, Muslims living here have to respect British law (which I think 99% do, just as 99% of British people do).

I've just been trying to point out that Muslims are not trying to take over our Houses of Parliament as some people seem to think! We might see them on the street in town doing a bit of preahing or 'calling to Islam' but I can't see anything wrong with that.

many in islam wants to change our laws to accommodate them though , and many are ignoring the laws of polygamous marriage, with the authorities turning a blind eye .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/791263.stm

[BoneDog]

Cool buddy, i've just looked and couldn't find it, if you could forward me the sura, it would be much appreciated!!

I'll make it my mission in the next couple of weeks to read through again and if I find it I'll post it. If I can't find it I'll admit I dreamed it (could be possible)

EDIT : I did have a good 20 minute look online yesterday and couldn't find anything

[BoneDog]

It is clearly stated that Muslims can recognise no administration which acts contrary to the doctrine of Islam.

They may strategically hide their non-recognition until they are in a position to effect change but the non-recognition is there nontheless.

Our administration doesn't act contrary to Islamic doctrine, that's why all the Muslims I know have no problem with any of our laws (apart from maybe how leniant some of them are for nasty crimes).

I don't think that there is any danger of the Muslim religion ever being in a position to effect change in Britain, so I don't think anyone should worry about the second point. I think that there are only around 2 million Muslims in Britain and probably less than half of that number are practising. And every one of them that I know just wants to get on with their family life peacefully and would never dream of doing anything to upset people in their community.

There really is no threat from Muslims in Britain. The only real threat is of some group within the secret services committing atrocious acts and blaming them on Muslims. Wouldn't be the first time.