General politics discussion thread

[David]

No one, and I mean not one interviewee has said what if he cocks up... it could happen, he may not connect with people and the Tv perfomace could be a complete disaster..That he is bigging himself up ala Jean Marie Le Pen saying watch nme fly... would mean the fall would be even more hilarious

 

Thats because they probably know that he won't fuck up. The fellow panelists aren't qualified enough to challenge him.

 

The worst that can happen is that he gets heckled and shouted down.

 

As for the protesters, i'm hoping that things end up going as they usually do. We already have a few arrests for violent conduct, so we'll hopefully see some good scuffles later tonight.

 

The build-up has been top notch viewing to be honest.

[patiirc]

Thats because they probably know that he won't fuck up. The fellow panelists aren't qualified enough to challenge him.

 

The worst that can happen is that he gets heckled and shouted down.

 

 

I meant in the case that forever reason its flat, he doesnt 'sparkle' ect not just in what he says.. he may not be a 'TV person' as it were and could do him more damage just by appearing if that makes sense..

 

 

The Panel doesnt really inspire me with confidence...

 

 

Tony Benn, George Galloway, Claire Short, Ann Widdiecombe, Charles Kennedy, Ken Clarke Tommy Sheridan, Ian Hislop and so on and so forth and so on could have made it really fun!

 

Sometimes asthetics can be as damaging as what is said for TV appearence.

 

 

This is better than the Christian Protests over Jerry Springer.... AWESOME!

[David]

Tony Benn, George Galloway, Claire Short, Ann Widdiecombe, Charles Kennedy, Ken Clarke Tommy Sheridan, Ian Hislop and so on and so forth and so on could have made it really fun!

 

George Galloway is no saint either to be honest, but i'd take a certain Mr Thomas Sheridan for the panel anyday!

 

The people who are being interviewed representing the protesters are doing themselves no favours at all.

[patiirc]

Tony Benn, George Galloway, Claire Short, Ann Widdiecombe, Charles Kennedy, Ken Clarke Tommy Sheridan, Ian Hislop and so on and so forth and so on could have made it really fun!

 

George Galloway is no saint either to be honest, but i'd take a certain Mr Thomas Sheridan for the panel anyday!

 

The people who are being interviewed representing the protesters are doing themselves no favours at all.

 

 

True but would have made the discussion more interesting at least

[BionicRedneck]

Galloway may be a wanker, but he's great TV.

[David]

Galloway may be a wanker, but he's great TV.

 

He's been confirmed as supporting Hamas with financial aid and accused the British media of being controlled by "Zionism".

 

I also recall him saying something about the UK not being on decent terms with Syria because the country did "good" things like oppose Israel.

 

Galloway is as much of a tit as Griffin is.

[tiger_rick]

I found it hilarious on 5 Live drive tonight when the presenter accused a protester of giving the BNP more publicity by protesting. This from the BBC who haven't just invited Griffin on question time but have spent the whole week talking about nothing else.

[BionicRedneck]

According to people (like The Sun's David Wooding and the Mirror's James Lyons) on Twitter, Griffin is 'rattled' and even Jack Straw is getting cheered.

[David]

Also according to Twitter;

 

All kicking off in Shepherds Bush

 

From a protester apparently.

[SpursRiot2012]

<-- click on 'spoiler' to show/hide the spoiler

According to BBC News he said this, "We're the aboriginies here."

 

[close spoiler]

");document.close();

 

I can't wait to see what context he said that in. I also think the protesters storming Television Centre and dumbfucks. Anybody would think they'd invited Ian Huntley onto Question Time.

 

It would be really cool if at the beginning of the show they do an Attitude era WWF build-up video.

[BionicRedneck]

According to http://twitter.com/DavidWooding

 

Griffin on Question Time all over. He's left. Worth watching. He gets an absolute pasting.

[Dynamite Duane]

Galloway may be a wanker, but he's great TV.

 

He's been confirmed as supporting Hamas with financial aid and accused the British media of being controlled by "Zionism".

 

I also recall him saying something about the UK not being on decent terms with Syria because the country did "good" things like oppose Israel.

 

Galloway is as much of a tit as Griffin is.

What exactly is Zionism?

Does it mean to be Jewish or is there more to it than that?

 

EDIT:

Zionism - wikipedia entry.

 

Zionism is the international political movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland for the Jewish People in Palestine. The area was the Jewish Biblical homeland, called the Land of Israel (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el). Since the creation of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily as support for the modern state of Israel.

Edited October 22, 2009 by Dynamite Duane

[David]

The BNP's website was down earlier, and maybe still is, due to the sheer volume of traffic it's gotten over the past five or six hours, and Griffin is apparently one of the most 'tweeted' people in the world tonight.

 

Just watched the clips on BBC news, and have to say, he didn't look as though he did too badly for a guy who was basically facing off against an entire studio watching his every move, and a panel & presenter all gunning for him.

 

Will the sympathy factor come into effect? Who knows.

 

It certainly signals the birth of the BNP as a "mainstream" political party. No more operating behind a cloak of secrecy, thats for sure.

 

The old phrase "watch what you wish for, as you may just get it" springs to mind.

[BionicRedneck]

Every single audience member, journalist or politician who has been interviewed on the news has basically said he made a complete dick of himself.

[David]

Every single audience member, journalist or politician who has been interviewed on the news has basically said he made a complete dick of himself.

 

To be fair, they aren't really going to say that he did a good job and will certainly be winning people over, are they?

 

With all of the carry-on thats been attached to the show tonight, it wouldn't surprise me if the actual 60 minutes themselves become an after-thought.

 

A police officer in the hospital, protesters getting tossed around by BBC security (which got a chuckle out of me if i'm honest), their site blowing up from too many visitors, the whole twitter thing, and anything else that happens in the aftermath.

 

The show itself was never going to be difficult to predict really. People shout at him, blacks & asians get all hulked up and crazy, Griffin talks nonsense, they get more crazy, etc, etc.

 

The kind of people who are ever going to vote BNP in a serious, UK election ( ) won't be sitting down tonight thinking "hmmmm.....Griffin got shouted down by blacks & asians. I'm gonna vote Green instead".

 

It was mainly about the publicity in my opinion, and they certainly fucking got that.

 

Edit: Jesus, it seems ol' nasty Nick was right about big Winston;

 

Sir Winston Churchill and his cabinet colleagues, concerned at the number of "coloured people" they thought were moving to Britain to take advantage of the welfare state, considered introducing immigration controls more than 50 years ago, according to records released yesterday from the National Archives.

 

In hand-written notebooks, the cabinet secretary, Sir Norman Brook, noted that the then home secretary thought there was a good case for excluding "riff-raff".

 

Brook stated that controls were discussed at a cabinet meeting on February 3 1954, six years after the ship the Empire Windrush docked at Tilbury with 492 immigrants from Jamaica.

 

Churchill commented: "Wd lke also to study possibility of a 'quota' - [number] not to be exceeded."

 

The prime minister began the discussion, saying: "Problems will arise if many coloured people settle here. Are we to saddle ourselves with colour problems in UK? Attracted by Welfare State. Public opinion in UK won't tolerate it once it gets beyond certain limits."

 

Florence Horsbrugh, the minister of education, added that the problem was becoming "serious" in Manchester. David Maxwell-Fyfe, the home secretary, reported that the total of "coloured people" in Britain had risen from 7,000 before the second world war to 40,000 at the time of writing, with 3,666 of those unemployed, and 1,870 on national assistance, or benefits.

 

He referred to those "living on immoral earnings". Of 62 people convicted the previous year in the Metropolitan police area, 24 were "coloured". He added: "All administrative measures to discourage have been taken. Only further step would be immigration control over admittance to the UK. We would have to admit in Parliament that purpose of legislation was to control [admission] of coloured. There is a case on merits for excluding riff-raff. But politically it would be represented & discussed on basis of a colour limitation. That would offend the floating vote, and the old Liberals. We should be reversing age-long tradition that British [subjects] have right of entry to mother-country of Empire. We should offend Liberals, also sentimentalists."

 

But fearing public feeling, he said the risk of introducing controls should not be taken "today". He warned: "The colored populations are resented in Lpl, Paddington & other areas By those who come into contact with them. But those who don't are apt to take Liberal view."

 

And on the whole army shenanigans as well;

 

The British Army secretly restricted the number of recruits from ethnic minorities for 20 years, newly released official documents show.

 

From 1957 Army medical officers were instructed to note all new recruits with "Asiatic or Negroid features".

 

The data were used to limit the number of "non-white" troops in the Army.

 

The secret system was uncovered after about 50,000 government files were made public on the first working day of the Freedom of Information Act.

 

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) says the report "does not reflect the current situation" within the armed forces.

 

Many of the government papers had been kept hidden from the public for decades under the 30-year rule.

 

But under the Act, implemented on 1 January, the public gains the right to see documents held by more than 100,000 bodies.

 

The army's recruiting system was even kept secret from government ministers and official race monitors, the documents released under the Freedom of Information Act show.

 

It appears from the documents, released to the National Archives, that the information was used to limit the number of ethnic minority troops, designated "D factor" personnel.

 

Medical officers were given considerable latitude in deciding who was classified as "D factor" or non-white. It could even include people of Mediterranean appearance or a "swarthy Frenchman", according to the documents.

 

The system was outlined in a confidential briefing paper, written for the Adjutant General of the Army in 1972.

 

"Officially, we state that we do not keep statistics of coloured soldiers," it says.

 

"In fact, we do have a record, resulting from the description put on the attestation paper by the medical officer, of the features of the recruit.

 

"At Manning and Record offices, a broad division is drawn between north European and all others, and punch cards for the latter are punched in such a way they can be identified if required."

 

It added: "The determination of the characteristics is at the discretion of various medical officers, and could include Chinamen, Maltese or even swarthy Frenchmen."

 

The system was supposed to help the Army ensure its quota restrictions on non-Europeans was adhered to.

 

In February 1974, Denis Brennan in the Adjutant General's office said the way the Army recorded colour was "complex".

 

He said: "We do not feel it would be appropriate to mention it to ministers."

 

The Army chose to lie when asked for a breakdown of serving coloured officers by the Institute of Race Relations in 1972. The Army had agonised over what to do for nine months.

 

The Institute was told by the Army it did not keep such data. In fact, the Army's "D factor" data showed how few non-white personnel there were.

 

Source: BBC.com

 

Fucking hell. Makes you wonder what else they are "keeping secret".

 

No wonder the Government don't want the BNP on the TV!

Edited October 22, 2009 by hardcore_harry