The all encompassing BNP thread - keep all crap in here.

dirtydog said:
'Your question SHOULD ... be provocative'. Not 'it can be provocative if you like'.

article-1222586-06F13A88000005DC-789_468x253.jpg
Click to expand...

I bet that's standard.

Also, the article doesn't say they were encouraged to boo. It says they were told that it was acceptable to do so, and that's the way the Mail has phrased it so I'd already be slightly suspicious.
 
Last edited:
Good article

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/10/nick_griffin_on_question_time.html

Particularly

Update: 1515 Saturday, 24 October The document that appeared in both the Daily Mail and on its website today is not, contrary to the claim by the Daily Mail, the same document issued to members of the Question Time audience.

The version of the instructions printed in the Daily Mail has Nick Griffin's profile first - the version issued to the audience had Jack Straw's profile first.

There was only one instruction guide given to members of the audience and it is the same format as issued every week. The BBC instructions always begin with the panel member from the goverment - in this week's case Jack Straw.

On the version printed in the Mail, the Nick Griffin entry has been placed over that of Mr Straw.

As a result, Mr Griffin's entry appears twice in the version on the Mail's website and Mr Straw not at all.
Click to expand...
 
Last night it emerged that:
Complaints that the show was biased against Mr Griffin outnumbered by more than two to one those about him being allowed to appear;
Some of the audience appear to have been rushed through the vetting process in a bid to emphasise the multi-cultural nature of London;
Audience members were briefed to ask 'provocative' questions and host David Dimbleby told them it was acceptable to boo;
More than eight million people tuned in - four times the usual audience and more than watched Strictly Come Dancing last week;
The BNP boasted that since Mr Griffin's appearance, 3,000 people had registered to sign up as members;
Joel Weiner, 17, who dramatically confronted Mr Griffin about Holocaust denial, said he applied to attend a Question Time programme more than a year ago, but was approached just 24 hours before filming.
Click to expand...

Kind of back fired on them though, lol
 
Let me nget this right. Has the Daily Mail deliberately fabricated that document by cut and pasting the Nick Griffin section over Jack Straw?

EDIT - If the above is true ;) - Dirtydog, you get annoyed when other media outlets "twist" stories, yet you keep linking Daily Mail stories which do exactly the same thing? They are all as bad as each other :p
 
Last edited:
They don't call 'em the Daily Fail for nothing :)

I felt Dimbleby might have going after Griffin early on in the program, but he also pulled up Straw when he tried to avoid the immigration policy question, as well as the other panelists. He stayed pretty neutral throughout the program. The BNP will always pull the same "left-wing establishment conspiracy" line out of their ass, they've been doing it for literally years. The really ironic thing is that thought their social policies are very far-right, their economic policies are strongly to the left, yet they're ready to rant on about "communists".
 
dbappa said:
Let me nget this right. Has the Daily Mail deliberately fabricated that document by cut and pasting the Nick Griffin section over Jack Straw?

EDIT - Dirtydog, you get annoyed when other media outlets "twist" stories, yet you keep linking Daily Mail stories which do exactly the same thing?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't leap to blame the Daily Mail - they could have been given the document by anyone. They might have been wise to check it out though.

Besides, it certainly sounds like the whole "provocative" thing is standard.
 
vonhelmet said:
I wouldn't leap to blame the Daily Mail - they could have been given the document by anyone. They might have been wise to check it out though.

Besides, it certainly sounds like the whole "provocative" thing is standard.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but doesn't it look a little bit dodgy anyway (the grades of pink)? I can't tell as well on this crappy little screen.
 
dbappa said:
Perhaps, but doesn't it look a little bit dodgy anyway (the grades of pink)? I can't tell as well on this crappy little screen.
Click to expand...

Man, I've just looked at the full original pic on the Mail website. As Rich_L's link said, their version does indeed have Nick Griffin on there twice. That's comedy gold.
 
BBC conspiracy? why am I not surprised that DD would jump at anything to defend his precious BNP and the convicted racist Nick Griffin, even when it comes to citing shoddy journalistic conspiracies as an answer...
 
Dolph said:
Because it doesn't address the reason our crime rates are so high? (ie the crap cleanup rate for most crime)

It's also very sharia like ;)
Click to expand...

Not the crap about cleanup rates again :) You decided one day that was why our crime rates are high and ignore any and all the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Such as that the police do catch and get convictions for the same people dozens of times. The first dozen convictions they don't even go to prison. Then they get a few months. Then after the 50th conviction they might get a year. And so on. Nothing to do with cleanup rates and everything to do with weak sentencing.
 
I'm all for Corporal Punishment. The majority of thieving scum are cowards that would seriously reconsider any act of violence or theft if they knew they would be in for a flogging. Obviously it would have to be monitored and controlled incase of any abuse of the system, but quite frankly, you get what you deserve IMO.
 
dirtydog said:
Not the crap about cleanup rates again :) You decided one day that was why our crime rates are high and ignore any and all the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Such as that the police do catch and get convictions for the same people dozens of times. The first dozen convictions they don't even go to prison. Then they get a few months. Then after the 50th conviction they might get a year. And so on. Nothing to do with cleanup rates and everything to do with weak sentencing.
Click to expand...

So the fact that 9 out of 10 burglaries the perpetrator was never identified has nothing to do with it at all? Which means that for those 2 or 3 times they get away with a light sentance, they can easily commit 20-30 burglaries, and that assumes that the distribution of catching people is equal (it isn't, career criminals are much less likely to be caught than casual).



I noticed you didn't respond to the fact that harsh punishments are very much in line with what those evil muslims want and do....
 
Dolph said:
So the fact that 9 out of 10 burglaries the perpetrator was never identified has nothing to do with it at all?
Click to expand...

Almost certainly carried out by someone who has previous CONVICTIONS for burglary. Most crime is carried out by repeat offenders. Funnily enough they can't commit burglaries while they're in prison.
 
Dolph said:
I noticed you didn't respond to the fact that harsh punishments are very much in line with what those evil muslims want and do....
Click to expand...

The sort of corporal punishment the BNP advocates is a far cry from Sharia law - and we used to have it in this country.
 
dirtydog said:
Almost certainly carried out by someone who has previous CONVICTIONS for burglary. Most crime is carried out by repeat offenders. Funnily enough they can't commit burglaries while they're in prison.
Click to expand...

How does corporal punishment help that? Can they not commit burglaries with a sore bottom? Or are we betting that corporal punishment will stop them burgling after one caning? Do we have evidence for that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom