I've just been listening to Radio 5 Live - apparently Mr N Griffin was turned away from the Garden Party at BP today - his deputy said the decision to refuse his esteemed leader entry was a political one, with 'David Cameron's grubby finger marks all over it . . ' Hmmm. Grubby finger marks? Who has the grubbiest fingers? The BNP or the Conservatives? Discuss! DD
Have you got the despatches? No, I always walk like this. Eddie Braben
0
Comments
Barbara x
Barbara
Jan refused him entry to her pool party the other night too....
Toni xxx
He is very skilled at manipulating the media, and he probably calculated that his comments would cause a reaction of this kind. I don't think he could care less about not going to BP. He will be congratulating himself on gaining publicity for the BNP. In his book, any publicity is better than none.
A BP spokesman said, 'The decision to deny him entry is not intended to show any disrespect to the democratic process by which the invitation was issued.
'However, we would apply the same rules to anyone who would try to blatantly politicise their attendance in this way.'
BNP member Andrew Brons was still allowed to attend because he had not 'exploited' the party for political ends
I think that is fair enough.
But he is only doing it for the publicity anyway... He's entitled to his own opinion though... it's very confusing, isn't it?!
Nx
But don't they all do that????? All polititions.........
If they had allowed him to attend, he would have been crowing about ''having tea with the Queen'', and ''a highly symbolic breakthrough for the BNP'' forever more. He was determined to gain publicity from his invitation one way or another.
The BNP leader is quoted as saying: 'I am held to a different standard to everyone else in the country - that is thoroughly anti-British''.
No he's not! Anyone seeking to make political capital from an invitation to BP would have received the same treatment, and rightly so in my opinion.
Nick Griffin would never put politics aside, and he knew full well what he was doing.
what i meant was...BP know what he is,who he is, so they shouldnt have invited him in first place if they werent happy to have him there on the day.
That said Griffin is no Churchill and a lot of people see him for what he really is a nasty little thug who surrounds himself with middle aged neo Nazi thugs, as Joan said if he had been allowed to attend it would have been a big propaganda coup for him and his party the Queen did the right thing this time.
But on the other hand if we don’t allow him room to debate his concerns and views then we are not allowing free speech, it’s better to have him talking in public than behind closed doors to a hard core faithful who might well grow in numbers in the shadows, better to allow free and open debate so his less palatable views can be shot to bits in the public eye, debate might even bring out some genuine concerns a lot of people have and finally start to address them.
I saw his Question time appearance and felt he did have some points but not many and in the end he was a light weight who was way out of his depth, but what I didn’t like was the way the BBC had organised a lynch mob of activists who constantly berated and shouted him down whenever he tried to speak, it was almost like some reverse Fascism was at play, anyone trying to mention concerns over immigration etc even now is treated with deep suspicion of harbouring racist values when a lot of people are just very concerned, if debate isn’t allowed then things will just fester until something boils up, and if it does it will play right into the hands of the likes of Mr Griffin.
I didnt know that!
Mell
Is your sleen ok mow?
I worry about you :shock:
Love
Toni xx
Toni xxx
Send me a slice of lemon drizzle please, babycham. DD
For me I don't care about your colour, if you love Britain and want to be british and are willing to stand shoulder to shoulder with me when times are bad then that's fine by me, I can't however get my logic box around the argument for unhinderd mass immigration, we have to control numbers it's not posible to allow everyone who has been done an injustice in.
Australia Canada etc control numbers and have done for years they also only allow in the healthy with the skills they need, we don't which is bloody crazy.
The reverse logic here can be seen with people like Hamza and Binyamin Mohammed V's the Ghurkas, we all the ones who hate us and who are decidedly dodgy to come here and won't deport them due to their "human rights" but are quite happy to use the Ghurkas to do our dirty work and then deport them if they get sick or old or both, that's what really makes me angry.
Also if a person comes here and commits a serious crime such as rape or murder they should be deported after conviction and not put in prison, as when they come out they use their crime as an excuse to manipulate the "human rights act" to stay here by saying they will be hurt or worse if we send them home, sorry but if you break the rules then that's a tad tough in my book, and anyway my priority is with the human rights of our own citizens.
Sorry I went off on one there!.