View Full Version : Nick Griffin's first speech in the EU
PoliceStory
07-15-2009, 22:05
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfhjBEfwctY
As much as I dislike the BNP, everything he says is completely accurate. I'm sad to say I'm glad this man was elected.
EmmaGallen
07-15-2009, 22:28
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfhjBEfwctY
As much as I dislike the BNP, everything he says is completely accurate. I'm sad to say I'm glad this man was elected.
Completely accurate? He seems to overlook the National Front as a violent organisation.
I agree with parts of what he said. I don't want to go to war with Iran. Don't beleive it's necessary. The human rights argument isn't acceptable seeing as we are fine with Russia, China and America.
PoliceStory
07-15-2009, 22:36
Completely accurate? He seems to overlook the National Front as a violent organisation.
Two wrongs make a right, amirite?
EmmaGallen
07-15-2009, 22:56
Two wrongs make a right, amirite?
What's that got to do with the price of bread?
Marcus89
07-16-2009, 00:50
OK, I respect that speech on Iran.
Simon Lock
07-16-2009, 08:54
A good speech. He was obviously nervous, but what he said was valid enough.
nobodysperfect
07-16-2009, 09:08
That was quite good to be honest.
He is paranoid. Everything he said was utter bull****.
monorail
07-16-2009, 09:37
everything he says is completely accurate.
He said that UAF are a "criminal" organisation. This isn't the case.
He talked about the "European liberals" being wrong on WMD. As far as I can remember, we went to war with Iraq despite the fact that the Liberal Democrats voted against war, as did half of the Labour party. We went to war with Iraq because the Tory party were instructed by Iain Duncan SMith to strongly support the war and they were the people who swung the vote in favour of military action.
Indeed, the notion of war with Iraq had been recorded as having come about prior to 9/11 when it was dicussed by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld at Camp David in 2001. Yep, they're all liberals aren't they?.....
Griffin criticised "hyperbolic rhetoric" - and then proceeded to become the hypocrite he was supposedly against by launching some exaggerated tirade.
He has a speaking style rather reminiscent of a doped Hitler.
You do all realise that the guy he is supporting has a gang of thugs at his disposal who look like this:
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/10/22/hungaryarmy_wideweb__470x332,0.jpg
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/5/27/1243448070244/Members-of-Jobbik-a-Hunga-001.jpg
Yeah, we really want our delegation associated with the Hungarian Nazi Party:rolleyes:.
I don't support the Iraqi War, or UAF however, that speech was wrong on so many levels.
*For a start he was supporting his holocaust denying mate President (thief) Ahmadinijad. You may remember a couple of years back that Nick Griffin attended a holocaust deniers conference in Tehran.
*The UAF may not be a terribly nice group-but they are no more criminal than the BNP. And a hell of a lot less criminal than C18!
*Is anyone even seriously suggesting invading Iran?
*Do you think Elvis Costello will appreciate Nick Griffin quoting him?:p
Daniel Frost
07-16-2009, 10:48
*Do you think Elvis Costello will appreciate Nick Griffin quoting him?
Griffin insulted Costello? Man, I sorta wanna support the UAF now.
'[our*] boys, from the Mersey, the Thames and the Tyne':p.
*Added by Griffin. The rest is Costello.
'Oliver's Army are....':rolleyes:.
@AKU//
Those Hungarians have pretty snazzy uniforms. Although not as snazzy as the SS.
I was thinking more along the lines of the SA actually:p.
Oh well, 21st Century Nazis have to move with the times you know.
PoliceStory
07-16-2009, 12:40
He said that UAF are a "criminal" organisation. This isn't the case.
He talked about the "European liberals" being wrong on WMD. As far as I can remember, we went to war with Iraq despite the fact that the Liberal Democrats voted against war, as did half of the Labour party. We went to war with Iraq because the Tory party were instructed by Iain Duncan SMith to strongly support the war and they were the people who swung the vote in favour of military action.
Indeed, the notion of war with Iraq had been recorded as having come about prior to 9/11 when it was dicussed by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld at Camp David in 2001. Yep, they're all liberals aren't they?.....
Griffin criticised "hyperbolic rhetoric" - and then proceeded to become the hypocrite he was supposedly against by launching some exaggerated tirade.
When they attack other people, I don't think it should be an organisation funded / condoned by anyone.
And to be honest Liberal is just a catchall term he uses for the consenus we have these days, the so called 'PC Brigade' and equality laws. It's not directed at any specific party. (Although I imagine Labour have the hypocrisy to call themselves Liberal).
When they attack other people, I don't think it should be an organisation funded / condoned by anyone.
100% agree.
UAF prevents freedom of speech.
Daniel Frost
07-16-2009, 14:16
No they don't. They would only be preventing freedom of speech if they were a public authority. They *want* to prevent freedom of speech, though.
EmmaGallen
07-16-2009, 14:39
'[our*] boys, from the Mersey, the Thames and the Tyne':p.
*Added by Griffin. The rest is Costello.
'Oliver's Army are....':rolleyes:.
I heard that bit and tried to work out where it was from! I think Costello should sue! I think that part of what that song says is what Griffin was saying and that's what we all here agree with. But the crux of it is any of the good points Griffin made were counterbalanced by his inaccuracies and determination to appear non-Racist. I mean honestly he doesn't want to fight Muslims? He has said in numerous interviews that he is not against Asian people but their Muslim religion...
:Vampiress:
07-18-2009, 18:29
The only reason he gave a speech which seems more ahem liberal than most is because non of the right wing parties in the EU will accept him. They don't want to be affilliated with his views so now he's like the outcast kid everyone pokes when lining up.
He's just a sychophant trying to buy his way in with cheap words and vapid actions.
Apart from the UAF stuff the speech struck me as oddly liberal. Are the BNP pro-civil rights? We just see the anti-immigration stance and label them facsists. Are we being unduly harsh? Yes, their view on immigration is unnacceptable but as long as they don't threaten to remove deomcracY I don't see why we shouldn't just treet them as another party. Don't get me wrong, I don't like them but maybe we should allow them to blurt the immigration crap if they want. After all, this is supposed to be a democracy.
buy his way in with cheap words and vapid actions.
And he is the only politician who does this?
Hamsterwaffle
07-19-2009, 15:42
He's just a sychophant trying to buy his way in with cheap words and vapid actions.
Well then he is right at home in the Europarl.
Apart from the UAF stuff the speech struck me as oddly liberal. Are the BNP pro-civil rights? We just see the anti-immigration stance and label them facsists. Are we being unduly harsh? Yes, their view on immigration is unnacceptable but as long as they don't threaten to remove deomcracY I don't see why we shouldn't just treet them as another party. Don't get me wrong, I don't like them but maybe we should allow them to blurt the immigration crap if they want. After all, this is supposed to be a democracy.
Can you point the liberal bit out to me? Just that I seem to have missed it.
The reason we label them fascists is not just to do with their anti-immigration stance, it is to do with their entire ideology, revealed policies and history.
The BNP wanted to reduce the "ethnic minority" population of the UK to around 1-2% that is well known. What is less well known is that they want to abolish all of the equality laws and any group that has been set up for minorities using public funds. Personally I think that is going a little to far, but I agree with it in principle. However, the BNP have another policy on expression. They want to establish a commission to investigate and prevent "political slander", making it illegal to spread lies about political parties. In a similar vein they want to 'reduce' foreign ownership of the British media, 'clear up' the BBC and launch a crusade against immorality and rubbish on TV.
In a similar vein they support extensive devolution. They want every parish or urban ward to be largely autonomous with a board elected by local people at public meetings. Again, it sounds very laudable. Until you hear that these boards are little more than electoral colleges for electing the district councils and county councils that will make the real decisions (effectively taking democracy out of the peoples hands). Another worrying thing is that these 'local boards' will be able to decide who gets what in terms of social welfare and will be able to set punishments for minor criminals (without judicial trial). Obviously a ward or parish of around 3,000 is not large enough to provide an effective form of governance in this day and age so all decisions of note will be taken by district or county councils which are answerable to the local boards-not to the electorate. When I read the BNP's paper in which they outlined these proposals I was interested to see that no provision was made for a secrete ballot for local board elections.
At a national level the situation is similar. The BNP want to create national parliaments for all four constituent nations, which will be appointed by local county councils, instead of being directly elected. The Westminster Parliament will cease to exist a new 'Council of the Isles' being established on the Isle of Mann (the BNP state that they want the RoI to reunite with the 6 counties, or at least accept the Council of the Isles as the supreme decision making body). The Council of the Isles will be elected using closed list proportional representation, thus severing the constituency link and giving people no say over who actually gets elected beyond a percentage (list PR is relatively easy to manipulate), MPs would have no independence from their party being dependent upon their position on the list.
In terms of law and society the BNP would introduce the death penalty for murder, terrorism offences and paedophilia. Their position on anti-terror and criminal legislation is generally unknown beyond a pledge to 'do what it takes'. They are known to be sceptical about trial by jury. There sentencing and prison policy can be best described as 'brutal'. The party's long standing commitment to outlawing homosexual acts and castrating/executing active homosexuals was recent relaxed to one of helping those who wish to change. The BNP's views on the monarchy are ambivalent.
The party supports segregated schooling and plan to send non 'British' pupils to schools that teach them about 'their culture'. Those who are seen as native shall be sent to either a Celtic or Anglo-Saxon school depending on where about's in the country it is and their family ancestry. Learning foreign languages will be discouraged whilst learning your 'native language' (which in the case of Anglo-Saxon, at least, never died out, just evolved) will be compulsory. Teaching will go back to how it was 50 years ago, strict uniform codes will be introduced and corporal punishment introduced. Membership of youth organisations will be compulsory as will be participation in 'traditional festivals' (the festivals are compulsory for all ages).
In the economic sphere the BNP back nationalisation of certain strategic industries, utilities and transport firms. As well as the establishment of corporate enterprises which sound not dissimilar to those of Mussolini. They also want to end free trade and raise taxes.
Yeah, that all sounds real liberal:rolleyes:. Either that or the foundations for a neo-fascist state;)-take your pick:p.
Daniel Frost
07-19-2009, 16:14
The Council of the Isles will be elected using closed list proportional representation, thus severing the constituency link and giving people no say over who actually gets elected beyond a percentage (list PR is relatively easy to manipulate), MPs would have no independence from their party being dependent upon their position on the list.
I don't see much wrong with this, but I agree everything else you pointed out is pretty bad ;)
:Vampiress:
07-19-2009, 16:37
And he is the only politician who does this?
The only one who spouts outrageous hate and aims for the annihilation of the foundations of the UK, yes.
PoliceStory
07-19-2009, 16:40
The only one who spouts outrageous hate.
You obviously haven't heard Harman's tirades...
:Vampiress:
07-19-2009, 17:15
You obviously haven't heard Harman's tirades...
Really? Didn't realise she was a ex-Nazi.
Should of seen it coming, that haircut is incredibly suspicious.
orcprocess
07-19-2009, 18:18
What is less well known is that they want to abolish all of the equality laws and any group that has been set up for minorities using public funds.
Don't see much wrong with this TBH.
But apart from that, good post
Hamsterwaffle
07-19-2009, 20:21
You obviously haven't heard Harman's tirades...
That could have just been Jacqui Smith, I mean they are freakin' identical.
Austin Sheridan
07-19-2009, 21:39
He was very nervous and full of s**t.
He was very nervous and full of s**t.
I would be a little nervous also....
Austin Sheridan
07-19-2009, 22:19
I would be a little nervous also....
Just image everyone in their underpants, then you feel like the smart and confident one lol.:p
orcprocess
07-20-2009, 17:26
Just image everyone in their underpants, then you feel like the smart and confident one lol.:p
I thought they disproved this on Braniac?
Austin Sheridan
07-20-2009, 17:27
I thought they disproved this on Braniac?
I don't know, I don't watch that TV program. Is it still going?
orcprocess
07-20-2009, 18:08
I don't know, I don't watch that TV program. Is it still going?
No just remebered an old programme about it.
Darryl'Libertarian'Jones
08-01-2009, 11:14
No just remebered an old programme about it.
That's true, they got a person to have a job interview with the interviewers wearing clothes, then later they brought him back in to be interviewed again, literally in nothing but their underwear.
It in fact made his pulse rate a hell of lot higher and made it much harder for him to speak clearly.
Can you point the liberal bit out to me? Just that I seem to have missed it.
The reason we label them fascists is not just to do with their anti-immigration stance, it is to do with their entire ideology, revealed policies and history.
The BNP wanted to reduce the "ethnic minority" population of the UK to around 1-2% that is well known. What is less well known is that they want to abolish all of the equality laws and any group that has been set up for minorities using public funds. Personally I think that is going a little to far, but I agree with it in principle. However, the BNP have another policy on expression. They want to establish a commission to investigate and prevent "political slander", making it illegal to spread lies about political parties. In a similar vein they want to 'reduce' foreign ownership of the British media, 'clear up' the BBC and launch a crusade against immorality and rubbish on TV.
In a similar vein they support extensive devolution. They want every parish or urban ward to be largely autonomous with a board elected by local people at public meetings. Again, it sounds very laudable. Until you hear that these boards are little more than electoral colleges for electing the district councils and county councils that will make the real decisions (effectively taking democracy out of the peoples hands). Another worrying thing is that these 'local boards' will be able to decide who gets what in terms of social welfare and will be able to set punishments for minor criminals (without judicial trial). Obviously a ward or parish of around 3,000 is not large enough to provide an effective form of governance in this day and age so all decisions of note will be taken by district or county councils which are answerable to the local boards-not to the electorate. When I read the BNP's paper in which they outlined these proposals I was interested to see that no provision was made for a secrete ballot for local board elections.
At a national level the situation is similar. The BNP want to create national parliaments for all four constituent nations, which will be appointed by local county councils, instead of being directly elected. The Westminster Parliament will cease to exist a new 'Council of the Isles' being established on the Isle of Mann (the BNP state that they want the RoI to reunite with the 6 counties, or at least accept the Council of the Isles as the supreme decision making body). The Council of the Isles will be elected using closed list proportional representation, thus severing the constituency link and giving people no say over who actually gets elected beyond a percentage (list PR is relatively easy to manipulate), MPs would have no independence from their party being dependent upon their position on the list.
In terms of law and society the BNP would introduce the death penalty for murder, terrorism offences and paedophilia. Their position on anti-terror and criminal legislation is generally unknown beyond a pledge to 'do what it takes'. They are known to be sceptical about trial by jury. There sentencing and prison policy can be best described as 'brutal'. The party's long standing commitment to outlawing homosexual acts and castrating/executing active homosexuals was recent relaxed to one of helping those who wish to change. The BNP's views on the monarchy are ambivalent.
The party supports segregated schooling and plan to send non 'British' pupils to schools that teach them about 'their culture'. Those who are seen as native shall be sent to either a Celtic or Anglo-Saxon school depending on where about's in the country it is and their family ancestry. Learning foreign languages will be discouraged whilst learning your 'native language' (which in the case of Anglo-Saxon, at least, never died out, just evolved) will be compulsory. Teaching will go back to how it was 50 years ago, strict uniform codes will be introduced and corporal punishment introduced. Membership of youth organisations will be compulsory as will be participation in 'traditional festivals' (the festivals are compulsory for all ages).
In the economic sphere the BNP back nationalisation of certain strategic industries, utilities and transport firms. As well as the establishment of corporate enterprises which sound not dissimilar to those of Mussolini. They also want to end free trade and raise taxes.
Yeah, that all sounds real liberal:rolleyes:. Either that or the foundations for a neo-fascist state;)-take your pick:p.
He didn't say any of that in the speech. I was refering to the speech only, in which he attacked places within the EU without full political freedom.
Austin Sheridan
08-03-2009, 13:26
He didn't say any of that in the speech. I was refering to the speech only, in which he attacked places within the EU without full political freedom.
Yes, he is a mad man lol.
Yes, he is a mad man lol.
I just find the disparity between what he said and what they're supposed to believe in staggering.
He did have a good point about those protests in eastern europe though.
Austin Sheridan
08-03-2009, 13:32
I just find the disparity between what he said and what they're supposed to believe in staggering.
He did have a good point about those protests in eastern europe though.
He tries to mix good points with bad points to try and make his bad points sound good. :p
joanne.b.
08-03-2009, 13:35
He tries to mix good points with bad points to try and bake his bad points sound good. :p
That's genius - more parties should do that.
PKDhande
08-09-2009, 12:27
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfhjBEfwctY
As much as I dislike the BNP, everything he says is completely accurate. I'm sad to say I'm glad this man was elected.
Completely accurate? Cool, in which case the holocaust was just the execution of the odd Jew here or there and the chimneys on the gas chambers were built on afterwards as part of some western conspiracy.
This man is a racist toe-rag that has no place in politics.
Generation Zero
08-09-2009, 23:16
Two wrongs make a right, amirite?
Two wrongs may not make a right, but sometimes three lefts do ...
Yes, of course Nick Griffin will have one or two good things worth saying. Adolf Hitler had one or two things worth saying.
That doesn't mean we should put either of them in a position of power.
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.