fat BNp leader Nick "Creosote" Griffin on question

Post Reply New Topic

I thought that the recent Question Time wasn't very good. Everyone was against Nick Griffin. It was him against the panel and the entire audience. I think they should have had at least one neutral panelist or someone who would not constantly attack him and let him speak. Plus because it was in London the audience was very biased which was a shame.
Did anyone else think that Jack Straw spoke a load of rubbish? I mean he wouldn't even answer the questions he just kept dodging around them. The conservative on the panel(I think her name was baroness warsi) made a bit more sense.

There's only one solution: a civil war between monoculturalists and multiculturalists. The two sides are irreconcilable.

May the best men win

Okay, that's a reasonable argument. However, I'd suggest that few things can evoke such memories and emotions as ones own country. A country where one feels they belong, and where ones parents and grandparents have toiled to make life better for you. Exposure to other cultures is a good thing, but not to the extent that those cultures destroy your own sense of belonging and identity.

Nonsense. Wagner without medieval teutonic inspiration is unthinkable.

The Labour party spends millions on media training so the likes of Straw can perfect the art of communicating nothing in as many words as is necessary to fill the allotted interview time. In other words all Labour politicians talk rubbish at varying degrees of proficiency. Also, be aware that Jack Straw was monitored by MI5 during the 60's as a communist sympathiser and his father refused to do his duty during WW2. The man has no business having anything to do with government.

I missed this earlier. Were the Normans proficient ballet dancers, 0_equals_true? You know, I can imagine the invaders pirouetting across the battlefield each in a pink tutu. Must have scared the s**t out of ol' Harold and his men.

Parties like the BNP succeed at ballot box by pandering to the fears of the working class. Within this bloc of the electorate will be found many voters who do not or cannot take the time to examine critically the issues that affect their day to day living.

"Immigrants are taking your jobs." Almost any objective economist who has studied the issue will come to the conclusion that immigration creates more wealth than it consumes. Every immigrant needs goods and services, and needs people to provide them.

"Immigrants get a free ride." I don't know of any country in the world whose government provides more than settlement support to immigrants writ large. Supporting refugees and refugee claimants is a much more narrow sector.

"People on welfare are spongers." Well, suppose we cut benefits tomorrow--the person on welfare still has to have food, shelter and clothing (and possibly has to feed, clothe and shelter children, too). Without support from the State, where does a person with limited or marginal employment skills go? It is no coincidence that property crime rises in inverse proportion to the facility of access to State support.

"The Government is soft on criminals." Almost ever offender going into the corrections system is going to come out again. If the purpose of corrections is to make an offender's life miserable and release the person back onto the street with no support, and a great deal of resentment over the imprisonment experience, then all well and good. But I subscribe to the view that the primary purpose of the corrections system is to rehabilitate the offender, and reduce the recidivism rate.

Confronting the far right parties with labels like, "racist," isn't a productive argument. To my mind, the better approach is to give them an opportunity to present their case, and then demolish it, policy by policy.

Perhaps those economists would like a bunch of Somalian asylum-seekers move in next to them? As for what you believe those economists conclude, I think you'll find that the consensus is that those immigrants generally contribute less each than a native Brit because they send a large proportion of their income out of the country to their dependents in their native lands. Plus they are prolific breeders, and so use per-head a larger proportion of welfare handouts that our government foolishly dishes-out to families based on the number of kids they have. With 3 million unemployed we don't need them. Plain and simple.

@ - ascan

quoth I,

pray do tell, from whence doth thou possess the authority to speak for any being but thyself?

Or is it the case that the only 'real' British people to you are the ones who share your....'opinions'? Is this this the reasoning behind why Monsieur Creosote declared the most heavily populate area of the United Kingdom as 'not British', the same city which just happens to be the capital?

It is (yet again) The No True Scotsman fallacy.

ruveyn

I don't need any authority, I'm merely reporting that which is already in the public domain, as it were.

As for the real British, I can tell you for sure there weren't many in that QT studio the other night. Moreover, it is widely held that London is no longer very British. Have you heard of white flight? Well, a few of those who've fled live near me, and none of them paint a rosey picture of life in the multiculti kingdom of Boris and Ken.

But almost all the other Brits here are disagreeing with you.

Or are they not "real" British people?

I don't think anybody has stated that they don't want a predominantly English-speaking Britain. Do you think it likely they'd prefer most people to speak Urdu, for example, or maybe Polish?

Most immigrants eventually learn the language of the land, or at the very least their children will learn it. I'm in Miami right now, and most of the Cubans I know don't even speak Spanish- they learned English growing up. The Germans, Chinese, and Russians who teach my classes have also all learned English, and my education is better for them having immigrated to the US. For all the fuss the right-wing makes about how we'll be forced to learn a new language, I just don't see that happening, even in one of the most cosmopolitan cities in one of the most diverse nations on Earth.

assertion
assertion
assertion

by what objective standard do you judge someone to be 'really british'? (please god don't say white)
widely held by whom? what polls have you conducted?
yes I have heard of white flight, thank you very much - I always got the impression that it was those people who don't like them there coloured peoples speaking their gibberish and not being no british or nothin' doing the running. I'm not expecting anyone to paint a raosey picture of London - it's something else to say this is a direct result of human individuals who don't meet your standard of what be 'real British'. Beside I'd be f***ing bored in some Dickensian-British London of cor' blimey guvnor and Dick van Dyke or whatever else you want.

And you won't get very far throwing multicultralism my direction - I've already gone on record on this forum as saying it's a virulently racist ideology (and not specifically against 'whites' I might add).

Orwell, when you one day visit this country please be sure to spend time in some small English villages perhaps, say, in the Westcountry. Contrast your experiences there with that in some multicultural dump near London where gangs of marauding ethnic-minority newcomers swagger around menacingly with their trousers halfway down their backsides, ready to "pop a cap in your arse" for "dissing" them. Then you come back here and tell me I should swallow multiculturalism.