Friday, 23 October 2009


The only time I've ever seen it resembling that programme was the time the American ambassador was on the panel and everyone laid into him. I felt so ashamed that a guest in our country could be so abused and mistreated.

Last night was worse, except this time I'm not ashamed: I'm ANGRY!

The entire format of the program was changed; instead of the audience questions being about current affairs, with the panel members all giving their take on those events, it was a mugging of Nick Griffin. It was as if the BBC laid in wait down a dark alley with a club until Griffin walked by and then amushed him and bludgeoned him into intensive care.

QT selects its audience, QT selects which audience questions will be allowed, QT selects who will be represented on the panel. They selected an audience that was overwhelmingly hostile (and QT knew they would be because audience applicants are vetted and have to suggest what question they will ask - then QT selects both audience and question). Questions that were entirely about the BNP. Panel members that were also entirely hostile. And even the panel chair, Dimblebum was hostile, when he knows damned well he is supposed to be neutral. There was only one question related to current affairs (why are we admitting so many immigrants while unemployment is relentlessly rising?), and that was entirely ignored as everyone went back into bludgeon Griffin mode.

I believe this whole program was an ambush, deliberately planned by the BBC from the very first day they announced Nick was to appear. Indeed, I think they planned the ambush before then, got permission from Brown to do it, and THEN announced that we were to be represented. The BBC, and everyone involved in this mugging should be ashamed of theselves.

Why did they do it? There's a general election in a few months and we take an awful lot of votes from Labour. Labour wants them back. Indeed, it wouldn't surprise me if it was Labour's dirty tricks team that initiated the whole thing, and that's why Brown was so cool about us being on the show.

Here's a comment by a self-proclaimed Liberal who has no intention of ever voting BNP, taken from today's Gurdian. He has the decency to be thoroughly ashamed - it shows in what he said:


23 Oct 09, 11:56am (about 3 hours ago)

I'm a liberal and hate far-right ideas with a passion, but this edition of Question Time was disturbing, worrying and misconceived. In my opinion it was not Question Time at all but Lynching Time and it will only play right into the hands of the BNP.
The rules of liberal democracy state that a wide range of voices must be heard and the rules of the BBC state that politicians with enough electoral support can appear on Question Time. The BNP, unfortunately, is now in this position. As a liberal I subscribe to the ideal of diversity - I may hate your views but will defend to the death your right to express them in a democratic society.
Question Time last night fell way short of this imperative. The format of the programme was totally and utterly skewed to shape it into an all out, hour long attack on Nick Griffin and his (odious) policies. All of the rest of the panel attacked at every opportunity like mad dogs, as did the supposedly independent chairman and the supposedly balanced audience (all liberals like me it seemed). The questions were all loaded against Nick Griffin - where were the questions on the postal strike or any other current event, as there usually would be?
What's the problem you say - doesn't the BNP deserve it? Well yes I expect they do, but to screen a wholly biased lynching of this sort will only serve one purpose and that is to increase the standing of the BNP and give it what it most wants, to be seen as a victim bulied and excluded by an unaccountable liberal media and political elite. Hitler achieved power exactly by engineering hysterical confrontations and then milking them for all it was worth.
Let us ask one question - who seemed most hysterical and unreasonable last night, NIck Griffin or the panel and audience, particularly Jack Straw? This is not the way to deal with the BNP. Reasoned and calm argument is. More of this and the flames of fascism really will be fanned and then liberalism in Britain really will face an enormous challenge from which it may never recover."

When I last looked it had been 'recommended' by 119 Guardian readers - so we do have some civilised opponents out there.

Yours very angrily,



Anti-gag said...

I think Griffin won on points, but it certainly wasn't a normal QT. Once the BBC had decided to invite Griffin onto QT, and to their credit stood by that decision, they had to win back the Brownie points they had lost in doing so. I'm sure changing the format was their way of doing that.

8 million watched the QT program itself, but 38 million voters watched the violent antics of the Tory and Labour sponsored thugs on the BBC's and ITV's evening news. And I know which will stick in the minds of the voters for longer.

Chris Hill

Anti-gag said...

"See Griffin responds to the QT fiasco"

phoenix said...

In that interview posted by anti-gag, did anyone hear Mr Griffin say ANYTHING that was not true.?