BBC stands by Griffin invitation
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
GETTY IMAGES
The BBC's governing body met to debate 11th-hour attempts to block British National Party leader Nick Griffin's appearance on Question Time.
enlarge
The BBC tonight stood by its decision to invite British National Party leader Nick Griffin on to Question Time as its governing body debated 11th-hour attempts to block his appearance.
Tonight a specially-convened BBC Trust panel met to consider appeals against the ruling that his participation in the flagship political programme should go ahead.
There has been widespread controversy about Mr Griffin's appearance on Question Time tomorrow, with a protest rally to be held in London tonight and further demonstrations planned during the filming of the show.
Today an academic warned Mr Griffin's appearance could boost support for the BNP as happened when French far-right leader Jean-Marie Le Pen made his prime-time TV debut in the 1980s.
But Ric Bailey, the BBC's chief political adviser, said the corporation would have been breaking its charter if it had not treated the BNP with impartiality.
The decision to have Mr Griffin on Question Time was based on the party's success in June's European elections, at which it won more than 940,000 votes and two seats, he said.
"We absolutely stand by that judgment, even though there's obviously been a lot of controversy about it," he added.
Welsh Secretary Peter Hain wrote to the BBC Trust asking it to look again at the decision to allow the BNP to "the top table of UK politics".
He argued the party is currently illegal because it does not allow ethnic minorities to join.
His letter to the Trust was a last resort after BBC director general Mark Thompson rejected his arguments.
Mr Hain wrote that Mr Thompson "shows no willingness or ability to genuinely review his own decision" and was "too close to the decision".
In response the Trust set up a special committee, chaired by former Newsnight editor Richard Tait, to consider first whether it can look at the appeals and then - if appropriate - to decide whether they should be upheld.
The panel is expected to report back this evening.
Also appearing on tomorrow's Question Time, which will be filmed at BBC Television Centre in London, are Justice Secretary Jack Straw, shadow community cohesion minister Baroness Warsi, Lib Dem home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne and black writer Bonnie Greer.
Mr Bailey said the panel and audience for the show had been put together in the usual way.
"To all intents and purposes it's a normal programme," he said.
He declined to predict what would happen, saying: "Question Time is a spontaneous show, it's driven by the audience.
"The audience is very carefully selected, it's very difficult to predict how it will turn out."
Mr Hain will send a message of support to a Unite Against Fascism rally being held in central London tonight.
The rally will feature poet and former children's laureate Michael Rosen, director of the Anne Frank Trust Gillian Walnes and Reverend and the Makers frontman Jon McClure.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Really? I didn't think anyone was that bothered. Certainly I've not seen or heard any members of the public getting particularly het up about it. Nobody I know personally seems to care either.
The main sh1tst0rm seems to be coming from Westminster, Anti-fascist groups etc. (which is understandable from their point of view).
Oh, right, this is persuasive language designed to make anyone who's not 'on message' feel marginalised..
I, for one, am looking forward to this televised debate. It won't persuade me to vote BNP by any stretch of the imagination, but it should get me shouting at the TV screen nicely (Even though I know it's pointless and the people on the TV can't hear me...).
Those looking forward to this televised debate are probably white and have nothing to fear when he wins more supporters. He will manage to twist things during the debate because he is not stupid and people make the mistake of thinking that he is. Hitler was no fool and nor is this hateful man. Should we wait until the streets are on fire before we call a halt to the BNP? There can only be one outcome from their advance - division and conflict.
The problem here is that we don't want to acknowledge that there is an increasing element of our society that actual endorses the BNP and their odious charter simply because the disenfranchised bottom end of the white majority feel they are suffering due to "pro" minority schemes and with some reason.
Far better to bring them into the light and have the debate in the open rather than denying their existence; otherwise can we claim to be any better on freedoms?
Furthermore, doesn't Christianity seek to follow the path of Jesus Christ, a Jew. Hasn't your 'voice of the common man' Griffin voiced and been convicted in 1998 of distributing material likely to incite racial hatred via his denial of the Holocaust?
And how does good old Nick feel about British homosexuals or the disabled?
You and your ilk disgust me and make me ashamed to be British.
in the certain knowledge he won't be called upon to deliver them in practice.
# withdrawal from Afghanistan
# increased spending on healthcare
# prosecuting Sir Richard Dannatt for war-crimes
# forcing MPs to repay every last penny of misappropriated expenses
... all popular measures on which Zanu Labour has shot itself repeatedly in the foot.
However, to claim this makes the BNP a legitimate party is like claiming that Hitler was a great campaigner for vegetarianism.
Yet in a country of just over 60 million people, how can anyone be overly fearful of such a small party? Maybe it's because we have a long memory of what the fascists of the world are capable of? Having seen their rise in the late 1930's, and after defeating Nazi Germany in 1945, we saw with horror the cruel extent of the fascist mind. Yet I am still not convinced that all this commotion is justified.
Looking on the other side of the coin, so to speak, I am not that much comforted by the organization "Unite Against Fascism". For an organization that is against racism and fascism and all for democracy, why does it fall down oh so heavily on the democracy part? When the UAF and any of it's opposing groups meet, (EDL, BNP), they start chanting slogans at each other, then after a very short time it all descends into verbal and then physical violence, on both sides. These organizations aren't about democracy at all. They are about confrontation and violence. As a result of this, they should all be banned from holding any demonstrations at all, because it will always end in the same way, hate and violence on the streets of England.
Then there is the support for the UAF. On the support page you have a long list of MP's that Support the UAF. Next to that list is a long list of union representatives that support the UAF. Then there is a long list of important people who support the UAF and lastly at the bottom a smaller list of pop groups. Right near the top of the list of MP's is a certain Peter Hain MP. Now I wonder were I've heard that name before?? Nope, the name doesn't ring a bell. Yet all these MP's, who support democracy, (the basis for there existence as MP's), support an organization that is totally undemocratic, why?
BNP have been fairly elected and have a democratic right to political debate on tv as enjoyed by other political parties.
As soon as we start choosing which elected representatives can voice their opinions on tv and which cannot - we know for certain we have entered the final stages of dictatorship by President Blair's Broadcasting Corporation.
For once - I applaude the BBC - keep it up
Like them of not, the BNP secured nearly a million votes and have two MEP's. They are a vaild and legitimate political party who act under the rule of law and inside the political system.
What are their opponents so afraid of? That the BNP tell the truth unlike other political parties, or that they tell lies that will confuse the feeble-minded who cannot be trusted to rely on their own judgement?
(a) race is a false categorisation and we are all of one race (human).
(b) cultural sensitivity is temporal and therefore relative. What does it matter if white people are no longer white or British (or whatever other silly adjective racists choose to employ) in 50-100 years from now? Those who fear this outcome won't be here to experience it and those few remaining white people who are around in the future will regard it is perfectly normal since they will have no other experience to draw on! Those who fear a natural decline in whatever race they choose to identify with are working on the basis that they will live forever! Who would have thought 30 years ago that football managers of international teams would not be from that nation? I would have laughed at it and yet here is England today being led by an Italian against Italy.
A proper definition of a racist is someone who spends every waking moment of their existence hating races that he/she views as different or inferior to their own.
Nick Griffin is a race-realist - not a racist (see my definition below).
A race-realist as the name implies, assesses the reality of evolutionary and cultural shifts that harbour the potential to destabilise successful mono-cultural societies. Proponents of cultural Marxism dismiss race-realist opinion - as racism. Politically correct left-wing communities and individuals drawn toward victimhood can become the unwitting pawns in a Marxist orchestrated political-gambit that is sufficiently complex to elude 80% of voters as to the goal.
Race-realists strive to preserve racial-identity by exposing the Marxist agenda for multiculturalism as nothing short of a bloodless-genocide. Upon destroying the binding-fabric of a successful, mono-cultural-society Marxists act fast, to impose widespread draconian measures that allow unimaginable sums of wealth to be extracted from the non-politically aware host.
Nationalism (pride in one’s homeland/traditions and people) is the Marxist greatest obstacle to overcome. If the Marxists’ fails to trick the inhabitants of a mono-cohesive-society into celebrating their own annihilation as a just-fight against prejudice, the cultural-identity of the target host will survive such an attack.
LET THIS MAN SPEAK
We have had years of a 2 party system which is not working, we need someone to come in and kicks these thieving, lying self serving career politicians in the nether regions and get them to LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE.
We put them there to serve us not the EU elite
We put them there to look after this country not the BANKS
We put them there to safeguard our borders, instead they sold all the padlocks
We put them there to stop people wanting to destroy us, instead the made the IRA legit and bombed irag and afghanistan, when all of the bombers had links to pakistan
We put them there to look after our old people, the ones who fought for us, and instead they give pakistan billions so they can send rockets to the moon and build nuclear submarines
We....
You all could make a list so WE NEED A CHANGE dont we or are you all to scared to hear some truth as to the state of this country.
Bring on Mr Griffin and lets hear some Non-PC truths.
The truth does hurt and as we have had 12+ years of lying thieving toads, I WANT A CHANGE
joolz
In the UK system the Prime Minister cannot order the military to do anything, only invite them. That is why the senior military officers got their own legal opinions before the illegal war. They got these opinions from the handful of lawyers who thought the law lawful. Nearly every other lawyer thought that the war was illegal, it is very rare for there to be that degree of agreement amongst lawyers.
Trying to link the BNP with the Second World War will sicken many who fought in it and insults the memory of the many who are now dead. Trying to invoke Winston Churchill in their anti-European propaganda just shows how little the BNP know about him. He was a great believer in an integrated Europe, something much deeper than a trading block.
Race-realists strive to preserve racial-identity by exposing the Marxist agenda for multiculturalism as nothing short of a bloodless-genocide. Upon destroying the binding-fabric of a successful, mono-cultural-society Marxists act fast, to impose widespread draconian measures that allow unimaginable sums of wealth to be extracted from the non-politically aware host.
Nationalism (pride in one’s homeland/traditions and people) is the Marxist greatest obstacle to overcome. If the Marxists’ fails to trick the inhabitants of a mono-cohesive-society into celebrating their own annihilation as a just-fight against prejudice, the cultural-identity of the target host will survive the attack.
The media is pretty much responsible for the BNP gaining seats and gaining votes, all the crap about illegal immigrants and whatnot, and then having the gall to slam them after handing them votes on a plate! Which only increased the votes even more! All so they can make money out of a hot issue. It's sickening!
We need to just stop making an issue out of the BNP and stop giving them free publicity, this is the way to ensure that they don't get any more votes and seats. As it stands, they are probably going to do better and better in elections if the media continues to put them in the public eye like this.
The Chief Rabbi has spoken out many times about the threat that 'marrying out' poses to the Jewish community yet he is a regular visitor to the BBC studio's without having the epithet 'racist' attached to his name.
I happen to disagree with both of them but cannot be alone in noticing the very different treatment both receive in the media.
What nobody can call him is a liar cheat embezzler or traitor to the British People
DNA lineage show we call come from one ancient mother. Are you going to go back to Afrika with the rest, the family of mankind?
Mr Griffin is feeling totally honoured with all the publicity. Yesterday on the BBC news
I heard , " The BNP ", mentioned 12 times in just one report We've listened to suicide
bombers, so why not Griffin ? Every time he speaks, he puts his foot in it. Every time
he appears, it's always an anti-climax.
He's a great advertisment for anti-national politics. He's doing a grand job for
conventional party politics. Let him speak, and let him keep digging. If he
breaks the law, it's game set and match.
Straight out of the Goebbels propaganda booklet. I keep expecting to see them draw in a big nose and horns.
So it has now come to the point where a democratically elected member of a legal political party cannot be heard because a minority of fascists think that adults like myself can only be permitted to hear specially sanctioned information as permitted by the governing dictatorship. WOW!
As for Hain and the UAF, if there was a better example of fascism at work I cant think of better. How dare they dictate to us through force and political leverage what we are entitled to hear. I will make up my own mind concerning the BNP. I WILL NOT have it made for me.
"Referring to their accusations, Mr Hain said "new factors need to be properly considered afresh in balancing freedom of speech versus protection of the vulnerable". "
What, such as imprisonment. And just what is acceptable free speech because as far as I am concerned, once you start regulating free speech it is NO LONGER FREE IS IT! Plus, just who exactly are the vulnerable. Oh, sorry, that must be us. Were to stupid to have our own minds we need a shining light such as Hain to guide our thoughts and actions. Sheesh!
As for the generals, well, my grandfather and others fought and died for free speech and expression. It now appears their sacrifice was in vain.
Let Griffin appear and do his worst. He has that right as an elected MEP unlike Brown who got in because the previous grinning Antichrist bailed.
I'm not in his fan club, but have to say if our self confidence is such we are afraid to highlight these people & ensure all understand exactly what he/they stand for then we are afraid of ouselves not he or similar, & have to say I'm as sick of the people who try so very hard to ensure my ever so delicate ears & eyes are protected from said influence when I'm more than capable of understanding him, & as I live in the real world not the world of cheese & nibble are far more likely to rubbish him in the definitive than those who went to the university next door to his own & are of the same snotty nosed club if a different branch but have no wish to disturb their own very comfortable lifestyle by association through the universities of the oh so clever clogs.
Bring him on & why not have some mad mullah on with him, they'd probably find they've so much in common they'd written the same book with a different cover.
My concerns are:
1. Will he be made to look like a nasty, twisted, hate-filled neo-fascist (which he is), or will the free-for-all sound-bite nature of Question Time allow him to strike some resonating hits, which will not be allowed to be fully challenged ("...moving on to the next question. Lady in the green top there, at the back...")
2. If he IS exposed as a nasty, twisted, hate-filled neo-fascist, will it really matter if the kind of people most likely to vote BNP don't tend to watch political programmes like Question Time? Will they instead just see his (reported) appearence as an endorsement of political credibility?
I don't believe in censoring him or his party. I would like, IDEALLY, to see him exposed as the piece of nasty rubbish he is, and the truth about what the BNP stand for come out.
Otherwise quite decent people are voting / thinking of voting for the BNP, because the main parties aren't addressing many concerns of white, working class people. If they were a little more sensitive and reactive to these concerns, then far less people would feel driven to support a racist, fascist political party.
I tentatively look forward to the smell of fried bacon all over the Question Time studio following the programme. Fascism needs to be opposed with reason and sense, not censorship, or punch-ups with the well-meaning but pugilistic likes of the UAF and ANL.
We will just have to see what happens on Thursday.
Mr Griffin said:
"Those Tory generals who today attacked the British National Party should remember that at the Nuremberg Trials, the politicians and generals accused of waging illegal aggressive wars were all charged — and hanged — together."
He added:
"Sir Richard and Sir Mike fall squarely into this bracket, and they must not think that they will escape culpability for pursuing the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Never thought I'd wholeheartedly agree with anything this man said.
There are degrees of evil, his provincial bigotry is on a different scale to the war criminals in Whitehall.
So it has now come to the point where a democratically elected member of a legal political party may potentially not be heard because a minority of fascists think that adults like myself can only be permitted to hear specially sanctioned information as permitted by the governing dictatorship. WOW!
As for Hain and the UAF, if there was a better example of fascism at work I cant think of better. How dare they dictate to us through force and political leverage what we are entitled to hear. I will make up my own mind concerning the BNP. I WILL NOT have it made for me.
"Referring to their accusations, Mr Hain said "new factors need to be properly considered afresh in balancing freedom of speech versus protection of the vulnerable". "
What, such as imprisonment. And just what is acceptable free speech because as far as I am concerned, once you start regulating free speech it is NO LONGER FREE IS IT! Plus, just who exactly are the vulnerable. Oh, sorry, that must be us. Were to stupid to have our own minds we need a shining light such as Hain to guide our thoughts and actions. Sheesh!
As for the generals, well, my grandfather and others fought and died for free speech and expression. It now appears their sacrifice was in vain.
Let Griffin appear and do his worst. He has that right as an elected MEP unlike Brown who got in because the previous PM bailed.