Jeremy Clarkson has found himself at the centre of an alleged racism row after appearing to mock Indian culture during the Top Gear Christmas special.
The outspoken TV presenter mouthed off about the country’s food, clothing, toilets, trains and history in a series of ‘Carry On’ style jibes. The 51-year-old host prompted a flood of complaints as he was shown stripping his trousers off and claiming he used a trouser press to heat naan bread. He then mocked the country’s sanitary conditions by driving around slums in a Jaguar fitted with a toilet, joking: “This is perfect for India because everyone who comes here gets the trots.”
A BBC spokeswoman confirmed that they have already received eight complaints accusing the show of racism. She reportedly said: “If viewers or religious groups want to complain, they can complain to the BBC. We won’t be responding through the media.”
The racism row set Twitter on fire as furious viewers branded Clarkson a “Nazi” and condemned the show’s “casual racism”. One viewer posted: “Just watched top gear India Special. A new low for the bbc. Sickeningly base. Borderline racist stereotyping. And just not very good.”
Another added: “Whats wrong with the BBC that they think casual racist stereotyping is acceptable on top gear?”
The BBC has also been slammed after it aired the programme on Wednesday, just two days after the murder of Indian student Anuj Bidve in Salford. Raj Dhutta, of Manchester Indian Association, reportedly said: “The Manchester community is in shock at the murder of Anuj, and this was tasteless timing. The show itself was also tasteless. These are perceptions that shouldn’t be picked up anywhere.”
The Top Gear presenters also found themselves in trouble with stunts on board Indian trains. Clarkson and co-hosts Richard Hammond and James May attached banners to the trains which read “British IT is good for your company” and “Eat English muffins”. However when the carriages split, the banners ripped to reveal rude messages.
Earlier this year Top Gear was embroiled in another racism row when Richard Hammond, 42, branded Mexicans “lazy”, “feckless” and “flatulent” when comparing the country to a Mexican sports car.
Griffin: Dying horse/cash cow, it's all the same...
I'm beginning to lose count of how many videos from how many different locations the BNP has issued in the last 24 or so hours.
Of course, when they say they're "answering the smears", the BNP are not really doing any such thing. The evidence suggests that in fact, most BNP members are feeling quite uncomfortable while Nick Griffin waffles down the camera while being interviewed by another one of his guilty party.
Obviously the cynicism expressed here and in other quarters last night put paid to any pre-planned emergency appeals that the BNP may have been planning once their website mysteriously went off line, but there is no denying that despite the recent limit being placed by the racing industry on race horses being whipped too much, the BNP persists in still absolutely flogging their old nag to death.
Seriously, "Turn Smears into Cash" says one of their satellite sites today. More appropriate would surely be "We make cash disappear, no questions asked". Or should that be "no questions answered"?
Nick Griffin was apparently "trending" very highly on twitter last night. Apparently most of it was abuse directed at him, while we're very happy to see that national curry week is still at number five. I'm sure that must leave a nasty taste in someone's mouth. That and paying the BBC license fee must really grind Griffin's gears (sorry, I wasn't going to mention his missing Skoda), because the BBC is according to one absolute senior BNP bore "one of the lynchpins of the entire multicult and globalist mind control machine..." I kid you not!
That would explain why the last thing of note that Nick Griffin ever wrote was about the BBC and the alleged Jewish conspiracy in it, right down to children's television presenters.
Griffin also claimed last night that the BBC was apparently the largest contributor to women in this country being sent to prison-for non payment of their license fees, apparently! I did a check, and while there is a surprisingly high number of incarcerations for that, it is not true. However, women in general are imprisoned mainly for crimes where they actually pose no risk to the wider general public. Perhaps Griffin should be thanked for drawing attention to that? Of course, that was never his intention. What wishy-washy liberal nonsense would that be in his eye(s)?
Over the past few of days alleged EDL member Daryl Hobson's name has been mentioned in various media outlets in connection to claims that the Norwegian terrorist, Anders Behring Breivik, met members of the English Defence League and visited the UK in 2010 to take part in EDL demonstrations.
Viewers of last night's (Mondays) BBC flagship programme "Newsnight" will have seen EDL leader Stephen Lennon (aka Tommy Robinson) tell the interviewer Jeremy Paxman, that he (Lennon), did not know who Daryl Hobson was and that Hobson was merely a "random" member of the EDL's Facebook group.
Lennon made a number of other claims that the BBC decided not to challenge.
Well, pictured above is a photograph of Lennon with the Hobson himself. Yes, the "random" and allegedly unknown to Lennon, Daryl Hobson.
Lennon is reported to be charging sections of the media £50 for an interview. Let's hope it is on a sale or return agreement. Based on this evidence, he is selling faulty merchandise.
Undeterred by the huge sums of money the British National Party already owes in legal costs, Nick Griffin is considering applying for a judicial review of the BBC’s decision not to invite his party to take part in Question Time again.
Writing on his blog today, Simon Darby, the BNP’s press spokesman, complained that the party was “effectively banned” from appearing on the flagship political discussion programme. “Upon that matter we are now looking at a the concept of a judicial review as the BBC refuse to budge,” added Darby.
Judicial review is an expensive legal process by which an individual can apply to the Administrative Court, part of the High Court, for a review of a decision by a public authority such as a local council. A claim can only be brought if the High Court grants leave.
A barrister told Searchlight that the cost of bringing judicial review proceedings, which would need specialist legal representatives, was likely to amount to at least £50,000.
Why Griffin should want to appear on Question Time again after his dismal performance last time is unclear. Many people count his appearance on the programme in October 2009, when he defended the Ku Klux Klan and refused clearly to reject Holocaust denial, as one of the elements that prompted the criticism of his leadership that has grown steadily since then.
Two men who racially abused two Asian reporters working undercover for a BBC Panorama programme have been jailed.
Sean Ganderton, 23, and Martin Durnell, 18, admitted racially-aggravated harassment during various incidents in Southmead, Bristol, last year. Bristol Crown Court was shown footage which revealed Ganderton verbally and physically abusing the men.
Sentencing them Judge Michael Roach said their behaviour was "cowardly and not to be tolerated".
The programme featured the two undercover Asian reporters posing as a couple living in the Southmead area of Bristol. Tamanna Rahman and Amil Khan spent two months living on an estate to find out if racism was still an issue in 2009.
The programme was broadcast on BBC One in October 2009.
British National Party leader Nick Griffin today said he was unable to tell if a caller to a radio phone-in was British as he couldn't see what he looked like. He told the Nottingham man – who said three of his grandparents were born outside Britain – that he could class himself as "civically British" but not "indigenous British".
His remarks came as he took calls from listeners on BBC Radio 4's The World at One. During the phone-in, caller Sean Fowlston asked: "Would you be good enough to tell me whether I am British or not, given that three of my grandparents were foreign-born?"
Mr Griffin said: "It doesn't matter where on earth they come from, obviously I can't you see you down the radio."
He then added: "You're British."
But pressed why it would make a difference what colour the man was, Mr Griffin went on: "It would make a difference in particular, if he was what the BBC would call white, then I would assume from his name he was Irish, and I am part-Irish as well. We regard the Irish as completely part of Britain."
Asked why he would need to see him to know whether he was British or not, Mr Griffin said: "Because if I could see him I could tell whether his three ancestors were Irish or not."
During the phone-in Mr Griffin was asked if the Royal Family were "indigenous" British as their ancestors originally came from Germany in the 18th century. Mr Griffin said: "Erm, well that was part of the Royal Family. They are a fairly old mixed-up bunch of Europeans, but they are fully integrated. Once you reach a stage where you simply can't tell, when the whole community regards someone as being part of the indigenous, that is when they are indigenous. That is the case in the Amazon jungle, why is it different here?"
Thursday saw a small but lively anti-war demo outside Bristol’s Arnolfini, the venue for the second of the “leadership debates” between Brown, Cameron and Clegg. It made enough of an impact to get onto the BBC News, and the protest forced the police to cordon off the building and the surrounding streets. Mounted police and police in riot gear were present, while (in a rather absurd touch) a boat manned by officers with sub-machine guns patrolled the harbour.
The real downside to this demo was that a group of around ten EDL thugs were able to mingle with the crowd, threatening and abusing demonstrators and openly attempting to start a fight. They were escorted by police officers, who made no attempt to arrest any of them, but eventually walked them to a bar right in the middle of the demo, from which position they were able to continue shouting obscenities and provocations at the protesters with impunity. They stayed until they finished their drinks and were ready to leave. Police officers were seen laughing and joking with them throughout these events.
Later there was some trouble, with the police reporting six arrests – though who was arrested and why isn’t clear as I write this. I suspect the people arrested may have been members of the anarchist group that tried to follow the EDL as they moved off. Maybe it was actually the EDL who were busted, but somehow I doubt it.
The police not only failed to enforce the law in a situation where the EDL were acting in an openly provocative, threatening and abusive manner – they actually seemed to be happy for the EDL to act as a catalyst in turning a peaceful demonstration into a violent one. I’ve been an activist for 30 years, and don’t have any illusions about the role of the cops, but even I was shocked by what I saw. I believe that the collusion of the police has implications for how we deal with the EDL threat. That threat is small at present in Bristol, but it’s essential that all Left and labour movement events are carefully stewarded from now on. Click here for mugshots of some of the EDL knuckle-draggers.
The British National Party have been accused of exploiting murder victims and their families
The party has run a campaign featuring murders allegedly with a racial element, to call for support for BNP policies. But the families of some of those involved are unhappy at being used in this way. In response, the BNP accused the BBC of indulging in "simplistic and emotive propaganda concerning a campaign that is over two years old".
Freelance journalist Michelle Gribbon, who has worked at the BBC, has this personal report.
Christians should stop interfering in the electoral process, according to the deputy leader of the British National Party (BNP)
During a tense interview with the BBC’s Politics Show (North East and Cumbria edition) Simon Darby said: “Well, there’s an issue here that the church consistently, every time there is an election, interferes in the electoral process. Perhaps if the church took the attitude that they’ve got a problem with falling congregations and the fact that churches are being rapidly turned into mosques all over this country, people would, would listen to them.”
Mr Darby’s controversial comments came in response to a remark by the show’s presenter, Richard Moss. During the interview Mr Moss put it to Mr Darby that church leaders were right to urge Christians not to vote for the BNP as it contradicted Christian virtues of “tolerance” and “generosity of spirit”.
Mr Darby’s unprecedented attack on the democratic rights of Christians comes at a time when many believers feel that their faith is being sidelined by politicians. The BNP has previously attempted to depict itself as the protector of the nation’s Christian heritage.
However, a number of senior church leaders have previously warned Christians of the dangers posed by the BNP. Last October Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, cautioned that the BNP must not be allowed to hijack Christianity. Lord Carey called for all Christians to stand “shoulder-to-shoulder in rejection of Nick Griffin’s notion that ‘Christianity’ has anything to do with his despicable views”.
The former Bishop of Rochester has also warned that the values held by the British National Party are not Christian. Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali warned that the BNP’s “narrow, racist vision” is not in line with Christian traditions. And last May the Archbishops of Canterbury and York jointly urged the public not to vote for the British National Party out of dissatisfaction with MP’s expenses.
In a joint statement, Dr Rowan Williams and Dr John Sentamu warned that the party’s views “are the very opposite of the values of justice, compassion and human dignity which are rooted in our Christian heritage”.
The BNP currently holds two seats in the European parliament, and is hoping to make gains in the upcoming General Election.
Today's Politics Show in London covers the battle for Barking and Dagenham, which in electoral terms mostly means the struggle of the Labour-run Council and Labour MPs Jon Cruddas and Margaret Hodge to keep the BNP at bay. As we know, BNP leader Nick Griffin is contesting the Barking seat. As we also know, he has taken part in BBC television debates before. So why did he turn down an invitation to participate in today's Politics Show discussion with fellow candidates for the Barking seat?
A BNP press release predictably foams on about a "lynch mob set-up" and quotes Griffin being affronted that a local channel covering elections in a particular locality appears to want to ask him questions about local issues. He is also rather rude about the Liberal Democrat candidate, who he describes as:
A failed journalist and plastic candidate...whose sole intention is to lie about me instead of dealing with the national issues.
This candidate, who will be on the show along with Hodge and Tory Simon Marcus, is Dominic Carman. He is not only the son of the late George Carman, a rather famous libel lawyer, but also Griffin's biographer. From The Times's Fiona Hamilton:
Mr Carman said that his only motivation for running was to try to stop Mr Griffin from taking the seat. He intends to use information from his research into the biography to attack his opponent. It was never released because publishers were unwilling to associate their brand with the BNP leader.
"I will put it to good use in exposing Griffin beyond what's already been in the public domain," he said. "It's very important to fight a strong campaign and it will be critical to challenge Nick Griffin every step of the way. I want to make people think long and hard about voting for him in Barking. It's very, very important."
Mr Carman has more than 20 hours of videotaped interviews with Mr Griffin over two years from 2003. He has interviewed Mr Griffin's family and associates, including the National Front leaders who shaped his views, on numerous occasions. "I do not claim to have a silver bullet — one specific piece of info so damaging that Nick Griffin would lose all credibility. But the cumulative information I have can be presented in such a way...it will make him uncomfortable."
Carman's candidacy only become known a week ago. Is it already having the desired effect?
The major broadcasters face anger after deciding to invite Nick Griffin, the British National Party leader, to reply to the televised Prime Ministerial debates during the general election campaign
The BBC, ITV and Sky this week reached agreement on the format of the three encounters between Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg. They have also agreed to give three other parties with substantial electoral support – the Green Party, the UK Independence Party and the BNP – the opportunity to respond.
The decision threatens a rerun of the protests faced by BBC after Mr Griffin appeared on BBC1’s Question Time last October.
Tonight the corporation confirmed it would give him a fresh platform immediately after the end of the BBC-hosted debate between the Tory, Labour and Lib Dem leaders. He will be invited, along with Caroline Lucas of the Greens and Nigel Farage of UKIP, to give interviews on BBC1’s News at Ten and BBC2’s Newsnight, as well as on Radio 4’s Today programme the following morning. ITV said it would also give a platform to the BNP leader, and Sky looks certain to follow suit.
A spokesman for BBC News said the decision was aimed at ensuring that “due impartiality is achieved in line with its election guidelines”. The BBC argues it is legally required to give airtime to the far-Right party because of the electoral support it attracted during the European elections, when it won two seats in the European Parliament.
ITV said: “We will be ensuring that we include an appropriately wide range of views throughout our election coverage.”
But a spokesman for Searchlight, the anti-fascist organisation, said: “The BNP are being allowed to hijack the election debates.”
The BNP will also be entitled to at least one party political broadcast on each channel because of the large number of candidates it is fielding. Mr Griffin’s appearance on Question Time attracted 7.9 million viewers, almost three times its usual audience. Police mounted a major security operation outside Television Centre while Mr Griffin was inside, but failed to prevent demonstrators briefly getting into the building.
Both UKIP and the Green Party said yesterday they were unhappy at not being invited to participate in the main debates between the leaders. Mr Farage said: “We think the way it has been set up is unfair. We came second across the UK in the European elections last year.”
A spokesman for the Green Party said: “We would have thought the broadcasters would recognise the Green Party has a strong claim to being part of the main debate.”
The BBC is to hold separate party leader election debates in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, it has also confirmed. But in a joint statement the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cmyru yesterday denounced the “unfair treatment of Welsh and Scottish licence fee payers who are being denied the opportunity by the public broadcaster to hear from their respective national parties in these set-piece leaders’ debates.”
British National Party leader Nick Griffin is set to return to the BBC following his controversial appearance on Question Time last year. The politician will appear as part of the broadcaster's coverage of the general election this spring.
The corporation yesterday announced plans to follow the TV debate between major party leaders Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg with a 'minor parties debate'.
In a statement published on the BBC website, chief political advisor Ric Bailey said: "There will be arrangements in the programming around the BBC debate, a week before polling day, to ensure other parties which have demonstrated they have some electoral support - UKIP, the Green Party and the BNP - will have their say."
Though ITV and Sky will also air live debates, it has not yet been announced whether they will also make room in their schedules for a similar arrangement. Griffin's deputy Simon Darby also revealed the BBC's plan to feature the far right group in an edition of Panorama in the next few months.
But, while some see the move as a triumph, others are angry. A spokesman for anti-facist group Searchlight condemned the plan, saying: "These are supposed to be serious debates allowing people to make an informed choice. Nick Griffin has no place there."
Newspapers may profess to hate the far right, but their narratives about race continue to shore up support for the party
There was a brilliant column by Johann Hari a few years ago about his experience of appearing on a Sky News programme hosted by newspaper columnist Richard Littlejohn. Having admitted he didn't know how much an asylum seeker got in benefits, Littlejohn screeched at Hari: "It's people like you who help the BNP!"
Now, you could be forgiven for thinking that the election of two MEPs would bring the BNP under closer scrutiny since last year. Surely the media glare would expose its nasty underbelly? The party's deputy leader, Simon Darby, doesn't seem to think so:
"Dealing with the press on a daily basis it is hard not to develop a healthy disrespect for the people who quite rightly can be blamed for the state this country is in today. However, certainly over the last year I am not the only one here at BNP Towers that has noticed a distinct thaw in the attitude towards us from some aspects of the media."
The problem here is that while newspaper columnists and reporters keep stating they hate the BNP and all it stands for, they nevertheless keep promoting narratives that harden BNP support. Here is a short list I prepared earlier.
Blaming racism on immigrants
A common media theory is more immigration leads to a breakdown of social cohesion and hence more racism. If we want to stop racism then we must stop immigration, apparently. This assumes that people naturally hate those of other races or cultures – which isn't true. We don't have moral panics about Americans, Europeans or Chinese people coming here because there's no threat assumed from them. People don't naturally hate the other but are afraid if they think the immigrants represent a threat to their way of life.
There are different kinds of threats, of course, which may not even be to do with difference. Sometimes completely different cultures are tolerated as long as people "do their own thing". My point is that examples countering this myth are numerous. Social cohesion doesn't need to automatically break down but it sometimes does need to be managed if flashpoints take place (which could happen even in a racially homogenous country – for instance mods and rockers). However, I prefer a stronger sense of Britishness.
Blaming racism on minorities
You know the answer to this one – are Jews to blame for antisemitism? I think not. This trick is usually directed towards long-settled ethnic minorities and used to hold them responsible for problems as a whole. But rather than blame them directly, these days the vague punch-bag of "multiculturalism" is used instead. There is the strong insinuation for example that all black Londoners are to blame for knife crime (which has fallen hugely incidentally), or "their culture" is to blame. That inevitably leads some to call them "savages". And because minorities are then labelled as backward or uncivilised, it becomes easy to blame them for hating them. After all, the mythical "race relations industry" is also commonly blamed for all the evils of the world, as is the funding of cultural festivals (I've dealt with this one in more detail here).
Overplaying BNP gains, underplaying Greens
Come election time, every media outlet is anxious to see how much the BNP vote will expand by. But despite the Nick Griffin on Question Time drama and two new MEPs, the BNP's electoral support remains woefully small at around 2%. In contrast, more successful parties such as the Greens are ignored by the media, because they're not seen as "dangerous". This always overplays the BNP presence in people's minds and gives the impression it has become a widely successful party.
Playing down impact of BNP victories
Racial and religiously motivated crime usually rises following election of BNP councillors, research has shown. And yet this fact is rarely highlighted.
But people who vote BNP aren't racist are they?
If you want to vote BNP and think people of different cultures and races are scary, why not just say so? Every modern interview with a BNP voter is prefaced with: "I vote BNP, not because I'm racist but ... ", which inevitably leads to a diatribe on why immigrants are leading the country into hell in a handcart. It has been repeatedly pointed out, even in most tabloids and broadsheets, that the BNP is a racist party. It is tearing itself over the issue right now. Surely it should be obvious to most what it stands for by now?
Debate on immigration is being suppressed
Probably the oldest trick in the book. The rightwing press talks about immigration every day. And yet commentators on the right maintain with a straight face that the debate on immigration is being suppressed. What they actually mean is: those immigrants who don't agree with us are all bad.
Let's be clear: Britain is now a multiracial and multicultural country. This means more mixing, which in turn means that racism can never become as socially acceptable as it was in the 70s and 80s. But people's attitudes are way ahead of many journalists – who are still happy to push their bigoted agenda. That is what keeps the BNP's agenda alive, and it needs to be exposed.
An analysis being published today by the Jury Team, one of the political parties in the newly formed Alliance for Democracy, shows that in last summer’s European elections the BBC flouted its own guidelines for impartiality.
The political parties UKIP and the BNP had much more coverage than the BBC Trust had decided they should have as individual producers sought extra ratings by featuring those parties. As a result of the extra BBC coverage, UKIP won an additional MEP seat and the BNP won two MEP seats for the first time.
The BBC Trust decided at its 15th April 2009 meeting to give the same coverage to UKIP as it would to the three main traditional parties (Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrats) because UKIP had done well in the 2004 EU elections even though by early 2009 it had dropped way back in popularity. However an analysis for the Jury Team by Taylor Nelson Sofres (TNS), the major market research agency, shows that this is not what happened. TNS analysed the total number of items broadcast on Radio 4, BBC1 and BBC2 over the election period 28th April to 6th June 2009. This shows that UKIP was featured 58 times whereas the Conservatives only had 50 and 45 mentions respectively and the Liberal Democrats less than half as much as UKIP with 28 mentions, a complete distortion of the BBC policy of equal treatment for these four parties.
At the same meeting the BBC Trust agreed to give some national coverage to the Green Party but none to the BNP. However subsequently Helen Boaden, Head of BBC News, told her staff to give as much coverage to the BNP as to the Green Party. In fact the BNP got 38 mentions, more than the 33 of the Green Party and the 28 of the Liberal Democrats.
The Jury Team is committed to changing the way that the BBC decides on election coverage which is mainly on the basis of the results in the previous equivalent election. Sir Paul Judge, Founder of the Jury Team, said:
“By using mainly the results of the last election to decide on coverage the BBC stultifies our political system and entrenches the status quo, not living up to the BBC’s Charter requirement of innovation. People are fed up with the existing political parties. People want to vote for ‘none of the above’. In the 2009 EU elections, two thirds of the electorate did not vote. In the last general election in 2005, 40% of the electorate did not vote but the BBC ignored those licence payers in its election coverage. The BBC should be giving much more coverage to new political parties and ideas.”
By mainly basing election coverage decisions on what happened at the previous election the BBC is failing to take into account:
the increasing volatility of the electorate
the fact that the largest party at a general election is the Abstainers and the BBC must strive to find candidates and parties who can represent that two-fifths of the electorate
the latest polling evidence
the formation of new political parties and movements
The Jury Team policy is that it is for Parliament to decide how parties may be formed and people may validly be nominated as candidates for elections. Sir Paul added:
“The BBC’s impartiality requires that it treats all candidates the same and should give news coverage to all parties predominantly on the basis of the number of candidates they are putting forward rather than on the basis of previous elections. It is essential that the BBC does give more publicity to new parties in order to help to break the stultifying stranglehold of the current political system.
The BBC must consult widely about their election guidelines as it is quite clear that the decisions made about coverage can affect the result of the election. These decisions must no longer be made in private by the BBC Trust or, even worse, by an individual executive. The BBC also needs better to monitor its election coverage to ascertain what actually happens. It is quite clear from the analysis above by TNS that the coverage policies were not translated into actual coverage. The BBC needs to take its responsibilities for democracy more seriously.”
This need to publicise all strands of opinion on an equal basis was set out in a letter to The Times from David Jordan, BBC Director of Editorial Policy and Standards, who wrote in August 2009:
“Our job is to find the facts, test a wide range of opinion fairly and rigorously and let the audience, armed with the best assessment of the evidence we can provide, make up its own mind.”
The Jury Team is working to persuade the BBC to implement this clear policy in its political coverage.
Dominic Kennedy, Investigations Editor of The Times, is evicted from the BNP meeting in Hornchurch
The British National Party voted yesterday to change its constitution to allow black and Asian people to become members
The decision came at an extraordinary general meeting in Essex that was called after a court ordered the far-right party to comply with race relations laws. A court will decide in March whether the changes bring the BNP within the legislation. However, the party’s democratic credentials were called into question when a reporter from The Times was bundled out of a press conference shortly before Nick Griffin, the BNP leader, was due to speak. A party official objected to a profile which had appeared in the newspaper at the weekend.
The Times had been invited by Simon Darby, the party's press officer, with other media, to hear Mr Griffin describe the constitutional changes. However Richard Barmbrook, a local councillor and a member of the London Assembly, who was upset by an article about him in The Times on Saturday, said that the newspaper was unwelcome inside the Elm Park pub in Hornchurch, where the meeting took place.
After The Times tried to explain that the newspaper had been officially invited into the building, the BNP's security staff lifted and shoved its reporter out of the building, grabbing his nose. A punch was also thrown by security staff and the reporter was flung at a parked car outside.
Mr Griffin said The Times had lied about the party. He said: “Because he is from The Times, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch, and it lies and it lies and it lies about this party. So he was told ’we’re sorry, you told one lie too many’, The Times, so we are not allowing anyone from The Times in – kindly leave. He refused to leave when he was asked so he had to be encouraged to leave.”
A BBC reporter asked if he would be removed if he said the wrong thing. Mr Griffin replied: “If you utter some outrageous lie about me... you won’t be welcome again.”
Mr Griffin told Sky News he expected a “trickle, rather than a flood” of applications from black and Asian people. He said: “Anyone can be a member of this party. We are happy to accept anyone as a member providing they agree with us that this country should remain fundamentally British.”
One man grabbed my nose and tried to remove it from my face. I was seized and shoved out of the door towards a parked car. I threw my hands out to steady myself. A BNP thug snarled: “Don’t touch people’s cars mate.” Obviously, I offered no resistance.
I had gone to the Elm Park pub in Hornchurch to report on a press conference at which Nick Griffin, MEP for North West England and chairman of the British National Party, was to explain how his activists had just passed an historic membership reform. Although I had been invited, one prominent BNP politician had taken exception to an article in Saturday’s edition of The Times. After he lost his temper with me I was quickly shoved and lifted out of the building, hit in the back and had my face squashed.
The BNP, the most successful hard-right party since Oswald Mosley’s 1930s neo-Nazi Blackshirts, had been forced by equality legislation to hold an extraordinary general meeting to let non-whites become members.
The party faithful had gathered at Upminster railway station at 11am to be given directions to a secret location — all part of the effort to outwit any left-wing agitators who might have been leaked Mr Griffin’s location. The activists soon found themselves on a five-minute drive through East End suburbs to the Elm Park pub.
It was Valentine’s Day but the hundred or so white activists, mainly men and almost all clad in black, walked past the florists into a room with a bar, snooker table and stage festooned in St George’s crosses, Union flags and posters saying: “Support our troops — bring our boys home”. Everybody in the BNP looks like a bouncer, so it is only by the “Security” signs on the back of their jackets that the real protection team can be spotted, ready to save their leader from the Lefties who had, frustratingly, failed to appear.
I recognised Richard Barnbrook, the BNP’s London Assembly member and a local councillor, outside the pub and approached him for a quote. When I introduced myself, he became extremely angry, objecting to an article in The Times on Saturday that said that in his local area he was spat at on the street and that some of his neighbours were worried about kind of visitors he had at his house.
A few minutes later he stormed across the road carrying a copy of the story, printed from Times Online at 10.57 yesterday morning, just before the party get-together. He made it clear that The Times was not welcome in his manor. I listened patiently to his objections but made no comment.
While the BNP met behind closed doors I visited people from ethnic minorities in the neighbourhood to see if they would join when the rules changed. A Turkish man serving at a general store had no idea what they stood for and was unable to comment.
I followed the sound of clapping upstairs to the Redeemed Christian Church of God, where one of the elders. Peter David, 56, who came to Britain from Trinidad in the 1970s, left the worshipping to tell me that, yes, he would consider supporting the BNP. He said that he was a former Labour councillor but had become disillusioned. “I have come to the point where this small island, if you put too many people on it, the island might sink. It’s only now the British Government have decided the borders have got to be tightened and secured. The BNP have been talking about this for some time. People have the wrong idea of the BNP as a racist group.”
With this viewpoint in my notebook, I headed back to the pub, where a press conference was being organised. Simon Darby, the BNP’s national spokesman, had been speaking with me on the telephone during the day and had briefed me for ten minutes about the constitutional reform while we stood on the pavement outside.
The press were led to the entrance to the pub, where we could hear a tape of Jerusalem being played, followed by enthusiastic applause. The security guards checked each individual into the room. The Times photographer and I were clearly identified. Mr Darby called me by my first name and said that I could come in, although he added: “Don’t send Fiona” — a reference to my colleague Fiona Hamilton, who has a series of BNP scoops behind her. In my job I have to try to speak with people from all walks of life. I have met Mr Griffin before and spoken with him plenty of times on the telephone. This was the first time I had met Mr Darby in person although we had often discussed matters by phone. Both are quite capable of displaying basic manners.
Mr Griffin, wearing a smart suit and looking younger and fitter than I last remember, was preparing to do some interviews for television cameras and I prepared to take notes of what he said. At that point Mr Barnbrook appeared and said that I was unwelcome in the pub because I worked for The Times. I tried to explain to an official that I had been invited in by the press officer but I was told to leave. A security official gave me a sneaky hit in the small of the back. I pointed out that he had assaulted me. He denied it.
I stood my ground. The official asked me whether I would leave, and warned me that I would be ejected. I declined to give a yes or no answer since I thought that there must be a misunderstanding and that Mr Darby, or maybe Mr Griffin, would sort it out. It was a long way to the door, and I could hardly believe that they would physically force me out of the room in front of the massed media, having invited me in by my first name.
In a matter of moments I found about half a dozen security guys enthusiastically removing me. One threw a punch but it failed to land.
Inside, Mr Griffin gave a series of interviews. Asked about my rough ejection, he said that it was “because he is from The Times, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch, and it lies and it lies and it lies about this party. So he was told, ‘We’re sorry, you told one lie too many’, so we are not allowing anyone from The Times in — kindly leave. He refused to leave so he had to be encouraged to leave.”
No such exchange took place. I was simply invited in and then ambushed by his henchmen.
Maybe they were all just frustrated because the Anti-Nazi League failed to turn up. I’ve just looked in the mirror at the Burger King where I am filing this story and spotted the blood drying on my face. I never thought I would actually get my nose bloodied trying to cover a press conference for a British political party — but that is the true face of Nick Griffin and his BNP. The Times
Here is a video with the above taking place in the background.
Talkboard post seeks readers' views ahead of interactive World Service programme Africa Have Your Say
The BBC today asked users of its news website "Should homosexuals face execution?" on a talkboard discussion for a World Service programme for African listeners. Posted on a BBC News premoderated talkboard, the thread was designed to provoke discussion ahead of the latest edition of interactive World Service programme Africa Have Your Say.
"Yes, we accept it is a stark and disturbing question, but this is the reality behind an anti-homosexuality bill being debated on Friday by the Ugandan parliament which would see some homosexual offences punishable by death," the post said.
The talkboard post asked users to send in their views to the programme, which goes out on the World Service and is also available online.
"Has Uganda gone too far? Should there be any level of legislation against homosexuality? Should homosexuals be protected by legislation as they are in South Africa? What would be the consequences of this bill to you? How will homosexual 'offences' be monitored?," the post added.
Premoderated posts included one from Chris, Guildford, posted at 8.59am, which attracted 51 recommendations of support. He wrote: "Totally agree. Ought to be imposed in the UK too, asap. Bring back some respectable family values. Why do we have to suffer 'gay pride' festivals? Would I be allowed to organise a 'straight pride' festival? No, thought as much!! If homosexuality is natural, as we are forced to believe, how can they sustain the species? I suggest all gays are put on a remote island somewhere and left for a generation - after which, theoretically there should be none left!"
Another, from Aaron in Freetown, said: "Bravo to the Ugandans for this wise decision, a bright step in eliminating this menace from your society. We hope other African nations will also follow your bold step."
The Africa Have Your Say programme aired at 4pm today. By 5.30pm, the headline of the discussion had been changed to "Should Uganda debate gay execution?".
Liliane Landor, the BBC World Service acting head of Africa region, defended the radio programme and talkboard post, saying it allowed gays and lesbians from Uganda, whose voices have never been heard in the UK, to talk with dignity about the impact the legislation would have on their lives.
The show also included the opinion of those who supported the anti-homosexual legislation, including religious leaders, she said. "The programme was a dignified exchange between people who have differing beliefs," Landor added.
Landor said that the World Service realised that the headline on the talkboard was blunt, but it was carefully put in context. "We wanted to frame the question starkly, in order to reflect the stark reality of the Ugandan bill," she added.
The BBC Pride board, composed of gay and lesbian staff at the corporation, lobbied the World Service to change the headline and close discussion "to minimise negative reflection on the BBC".
Eric Joyce, the Labour MP for Falkirk, labelled the post "more than offensive". "It's completely unacceptable. And it's mainly British people replying," he said on Twitter.
The talkboard post is understood to have been written by a female member of the BBC World Service Africa bureau. The World Service, which broadcasts in 32 languages on TV, radio and the web, is part of BBC Global News, but funded by the Foreign Office.
Anti- BNP demonstrators protest against the appearance of BNP leader Nick Griffin at the BBC Centre in London in October
Racism among white supremacist groups in Britain’s towns and cities is getting worse, a Cabinet minister will warn today
John Denham, the Communities secretary, will give warning that Muslims are not the only group which can breed extremism. Pointing to recent convictions of white supremacists, and a broader rise in overt racism, Mr Denham will say: “It is important that local Muslim communities do not feel that are being singled out if other forms of extremism are a threat in the area”.
The Home Office has already been developing a new programme, called Channel, to support young people who at risk of being drawn into white racist violence. But speaking in Birmingham today, Mr Denham will unveil a new £5million fund to deal with the spectre of rising white racism. He will say that every local area country should, where necessary, have a comprehensive strategy for tackling all forms of extremism, including, particularly white racist extremism.
The warning comes amid growing evidence of racial tension against ethic minorities by whites. Last month it was claimed that white supremacist gangs with names like The Aryan Brotherhood were building up support in British jails.
In September a neo-fascist dubbed the 'tennis ball bomber’ was jailed indefinitely at the Old Bailey today for plotting a terrorist campaign for white supremacy. In August, an American white supremacist was stopped from entering the country to attend a British National Party festival in Derbyshire, after the UK Border Agency said it believed his presence could stir up racial tension.
The BBC also came under fire in October for giving a platform to Nick Griffin, the BNP leader, on the BBC television’s panel show Questiontime.
The cash announced by Mr Denham today will be in addition to the Home Office’s Prevent strategy which targets extremism among Muslim communities through local councils, schools, community groups and police. The Communities Secretary will tell a conference of 1,000 Prevent workers to “completely reject accusations that Prevent is spying on Muslim communities” and insist that the strategy can only work if it is supported by local Muslim groups.
He will say: “Any programme that is surrounded by suspicion or misunderstanding simply will not work. Despite the significant progress and achievements that have been made in the first year of the programme, controversy, criticism and lack of clarity have unnecessarily limited its effectiveness."
I was glad to see the panellists and members of the audience confront British National Party (BNP) Leader, Nick Griffin, head on during the BBC Question Time, with regards to his despicable views of the Nazi Holocaust and ethnic minorities earlier this month. However, I was equally raged when asked about his views on Islam, he was left to openly preach hate and ignorance without any challenge whatsoever from neither the panellists nor members of the audience. A sad sight indeed.
While most commentators are consumed with how he came across long after the programme, with his unchallenged remarks on Islam, it will inevitably lead to more and more attacks on British Muslims. In recent months the so-called English Defence League have openly been demonstrating throughout the country against British Muslims. We have witnessed attacks on mosques in Luton, Sunderland, Woolwich and recently in Bishops Stortford. The national press are also at it. Recently the Daily Express ran with the headline, ‘Now Muslims Demand Full Sharia Law’, clearly an exaggeration. The alarming rise in Islamophobic attacks on British Muslims, sadly fanned by some parts of the media, is flourishing unchallenged by politicians as well as security forces alike.
Under the current climate it was clearly a serious error of judgement on the part of the BBC to give the BNP a national platform. Today the situation facing British Muslims is identical to that of the American McCarthyite era in the 1950s. We are merely seen through the prism of security; surrounded with suspicion and continuously faced with claims of disloyalty that our way of life is incompatible with the British way of life.
No. We are part and parcel of this society and our contributions speak for themselves - not least the Muslim soldiers who fought for Britain during the First and Second World Wars. Yet we are always misunderstood. Yes, there are a handful of Muslims who wrongly, for example, call for Shari’ah Law in the UK. But one bad apple should not equate an entire community.
The BNP and far-right fascists are concealing their true colour under a veil by attacking British Muslims and Islam (because we are an easy target), but they will soon move to the rest of the “non-indigenous” population. By allowing Griffin a seat on their flagship political programme, the BBC has given the once convicted criminal his much craved legitimacy and recognition.
Many commentators have said that ‘the only way to defeat the BNP’s ideas is by having them out in the open and properly contested’. Of course we all agree. But don’t give them a national platform with 8 million viewers. It was completely the wrong setting. If he is to be robustly challenged, let it be in local community centres up and down the country; not a short debate on a panel alongside real mainstream panellists. It has created an unprecedented interest in the BNP which the recent YouGov poll in the Daily Telegraph clearly shows. 22% of people questioned now “seriously consider” voting the BNP. The taboo of voting for the BNP vanished overnight. The BBC cannot shirk its responsibility.
During the summer I was travelling as a Global Fellow of the Prime Minister: learning about culture in India. Every Indian I spoke to said how brilliant, open and free they thought Britain was: as one student said, “The UK is the real land of opportunity.” While there, the Indian media and public were gripped by reports of racist attacks on Indian students in Australia. One student where I was teaching said: “We should cut all ties with Australia until they act.” The image of Australia is now tainted in India. Sadly, I think the image of our country will now be tainted internationally too.
As a young British Muslim, I feel the saga surrounding the BNP and Question Time marked a dark period in our country’s history. A dark week in fact for democracy. Because democracy is not about giving a platform for one to openly preach hate and vilify a whole community without debate. It sadly marked a grave period for mainstream political opinion and a rise for far-right extremism. At the end of the day: there is only one community who will suffer: the Muslim Community.
I, as well as many British Muslims up and down the country, feel let down. Let down by the silence on the panel and in the audience of the unchallenged Griffin attack on Islam, and let down by the BBC for allowing the media hype. As the Guardian wrote, it was “a once in a generation PR opportunity.”
Make no mistake. British Muslims will be left picking up all the pieces of the BBC’s decision. And frankly, from anger, the sentiment amongst British Muslims is now turning to more alienation, disenfranchisement and mistrust with resulting negative implications for our society. No one seems to be challenging the fact that the Far Right are using Muslim extremism as a pretence to gain mainstream following. It appears our politicians and the media alike do not seem to appreciate the real threat the BNP and other far-right fascist groups are posing to British Muslims and for that matter our society.
Tragically, Griffin’s appearance on the Question Time has played into the hands of those who seek to demonise Islam and its teachings. By leaving Griffin’s attacks unchallenged, the BBC has recklessly added fuel to an already ignited fire. And for that the BBC should be held responsible, if as I suspect, there is a rise in anti-Muslim attacks.
Kawsar Zaman is Vice-Chair, Youth Committee, Muslim Council of Britain
THAT Question Time, with 'creepy' Griffin and Bonnie Greer
Bonnie Greer described sitting next to Nick Griffin on Question Time as "probably the weirdest and most creepy experience of my life". Mandrake can disclose that it has, however, proved inspirational for the American-born playwright, who is planning to stage an opera about the rise of the British National Party.
"It's a modern opera because the country is an opera," she told me at the launch of her book Obama Music, at the Sanctum Soho Hotel, in London. "It's a conglomeration of voices. The people are speaking and the people are singing."
The 61-year-old author, who is married to a British solicitor-turned-teacher, David Hutchins, said she was involved in discussions with the Royal Opera House about staging her planned work. "I'm talking to ROH2 to see if they're interested," she said.
Greer said her appearance on the controversial edition of the BBC programme, which achieved a record figure of more than eight million viewers, had transformed her life. "It's been a whirlwind," she said. "My life has just changed. I've been a pretty solitary person, and since then I've been walking down the street and people are talking to me. I have just been on a television programme that I do once a year, and it meant so much to people. I feel so humble."
The BBC was criticised for inviting the BNP leader to appear on the panel of its flagship political discussion programme, but Greer said Mark Thompson, the director-general of the corporation, made the correct decision.
"The BBC's job is to educate," she said. "The party does have the same amount of voters as Ukip. It's about the people who decided that that's the party that they want to vote for. The BBC's obligation was to respect that. I think it's about respect: we need to listen to one another. Question Time is enabling that listening to happen. The people made that choice; we don't want a Victorian society where our betters decide what we need."
Greer, who acquired British citizenship in 1997, is the daughter of a Mississippi sharecropper who was stationed in Britain during the Second World War and took part in the D-Day landings.
Nick Griffin's disastrous appearance on Question Time landed taxpayers with a £143,000 security bill for protecting the BNP leader. That's how much police spent dealing with angry protesters outside BBC Television Centre, closing roads and using a helicopter to keep the far-right boss safe.
Furious critics have demanded Beeb chiefs cough up the cash out of the £17.5million they pocketed in bonuses last year.
Labour MP Andy Slaughter, whose constituency covers TV Centre at White City, West London, said: "It was a decision by managers to put him on the programme so maybe they should put their money where their mouth is. People will be horrified to find out that so much public money has been spent giving a fascist party their best-ever publicity."
The decision to invite Griffin on to Question Time sparked a furious backlash. Police had to draft in thousands of officers after anti-fascist groups called a demonstration. Diverting cops who should have been fighting crime in other areas cost £109,000 alone. Another £13,000 was spent on overtime pay for extra officers. The helicopter, transport costs, barriers and sign posting road closures added a further £21,000 to the bill.
BBC heads refused to say how much it spent on extra security for Griffin, claiming freedom of information laws didn't apply because staff may be put in danger. But Mr Slaughter branded the notion "ludicrous".
He added: said: "If the police can tell you how much it cost why can't the BBC? They should come clean about how much money they have wasted."
Mr Slaughter had tried to persuade the BBC to film Question Time at another location where Griffin's appearance wouldn't cause as much disruption. And he argued that allowing the racist BNP a platform in such a diverse area of the country was an insult to locals.
Before the show Beeb staff went around removing signs so any protesters who did break in would not be able to find senior managers' offices.
Griffin was humiliated when the audience and fellow panellists exposed and ridiculed his vile views. But he later presented himself as a victim in a bid to win sympathy.
