Nick Griffin on Question Time Page 17

Well, that achieved very little, other than making Nick Griffin appear the most realistic and honest about immigration.

This will be presented as "Griffin exposed" show, and will make the liberal middle-classes sleep soundly tonight, but objectively it wasn't and it won't do anything to end the rise of the BNP.

There will be a lot of people who will have watched this tonight and will have seen a bunch of smug, self-satisfied people (both in the audience and on the panel) ganging-up on this bloke Griffin, who was saying many things they sympathise with.

Jack Straw was the worst of the mainstream politicians tonight. He's always been a wet, woolly-headed man, but he showed just how out of touch the left is on immigration and social policy (despite the fact the man cannot seem to ever give a reply without saying "in my constituency" - like some confused parrot). He summed up the well-meaning liberal's utter incomprehension at the legitimate concerns regarding immigration and culture.

The sad truth is that the rise of the BNP is due to the immigration and social policies of both the Major governments, but most significantly of Labour governments since 1997. (I voted Conservative in 1992, which seems embarrassing now, but I'm far more ashamed of myself for voting Labour in 1997. For the record, no, I have no sympathy for the BNP.)

Quote: Badge @ October 22 2009, 10:53 PM BST

Dimbleby is skewering Griffin

View original

Aside from the joyous innuendo afforded to me in the above quote, that made me quite uncomfortable. The chairman should be impartial.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00nft24/Question_Time_22_10_2009/

For anyone who missed it.

This debate on Question Time has got me so excited and has added to my hate of Dick Griffin that I can't sleep now and I have to be up at half past six. F**king BNP have a lot to answer for.

Quote: Badge @ October 22 2009, 11:05 PM BST

Dimbleby usually pitches in when the panellist doesn't answer or is inconsistent.

View original

Not quite in that tone or to such an extent as he did tonight.

Well I guess he is human, and couldn't help having an opinion tonight.

Quote: Timbo @ October 22 2009, 11:59 PM BST

Sorry, the Knights of St. John (The Hospitallers) wore a white cross on a black background. As you say, it was Templers who wore red on white, but while the Cross of St. George might share a common origin, I doubt it is derived from The Templers. IIRC the Red Cross was founded after the Battle of Magenta, and the flag was an inversion of the Swiss flag.

View original

In the films I saw, the Knights of St. John wore red tunics with white crosses and films can never be historically wrong can they? Plus they were Hospitallers, which is like, Hospital and that.

I don't think it mere coincidence that the Cross of St. George and the Templar Cross are virtually the same.

Quote: Dolly Dagger @ October 22 2009, 11:09 PM BST

Call youself a history buff? It was 1805 young man.

View original

No I don't, I have a shocking memory.

But being in 1805 wouldn't help any in finding out whether the day was remembered or celebrated afterwards.

Quote: Jack Massey @ October 23 2009, 12:07 AM BST

This debate on Question Time has got me so excited and has added to my hate of Dick Griffin that I can't sleep now and I have to be up at half past six. F**king BNP have a lot to answer for.

View original

Ooh, for a moment there I nearly missed the subtlety of Dick Griffen !

Quote: Kevin Murphy @ October 22 2009, 11:59 PM BST

What I was getting at is I reckon our intelligence agencies use relief efforts as cover.

View original

There's a subtle difference there. Sneaking a spy into a country like North Korea under the guise of medical relief is not the same thing as using the protected status of an ambulance to ferry men and materiel on a battle zone. Such behavior would eventually lead to the targeting of all ambulances and medical personnel and we wouldn't ever want that to happen. Unfortunately, the enemy doesn't always follow the same rules.

Quote: zooo @ October 23 2009, 12:09 AM BST

Well I guess he is human, and couldn't help having an opinion tonight.

View original

Do you think his father would have been like that ?

Quote: Timbo @ October 22 2009, 11:59 PM BST

Sorry, the Knights of St. John (The Hospitallers) wore a white cross on a black background. As you say, it was Templers who wore red on white, but while the Cross of St. George might share a common origin, I doubt it is derived from The Templers. IIRC the Red Cross was founded after the Battle of Magenta, and the flag was an inversion of the Swiss flag.

View original

CORRECTION: It was the Battle of Solferino in 1859. The reversal of the Swiss Flag was to honour the organisation's Swiss founder, Henri Dunant.

On the Cross St. George from Wikipedia:

At the beginning of the Crusades, a red cross on white was already associated with England because this was St. George's cross, the emblem associated with England's patron saint. Although the Pope decided English crusaders would be distinguished by wearing a white cross on red, and French crusaders a red cross on white (Italian knights were allocated a yellow cross on a white background), English knights soon decided to claim "their" cross of red on white, like the French. In January 1188, in a meeting between Henry II of England and Philip II of France, the two rivals agreed to exchange flags (France later changed its new white cross on red for a white cross on a dark blue flag). Some French knights carried on using the red cross however, and as English knights wore this pattern as well, the red cross on white became the typical crusader symbol regardless of nationality.

Quote: Oldrocker @ October 23 2009, 12:11 AM BST

Do you think his father would have been like that ?

View original

I barely know what you mean. Was his dad also a political TV person? I guess that rings a bell. Richard?

I'm a bit thick.

Thanks Timbo. Did you know St. George wasn't even English?! Bloody foreigners at it again.

I'm in the minority, but I rather like it when a newsreader/host who should normally be impartial, is so incensed by something that they can't help but show it. I don't really require people to be robotic automatons. I like a bit of passion with my politics now and again.