Source Here we go again... Just so we don't stray like we have done in previous arguments concerning the BNP, my issue is not to do with the BNPs views or Nick Griffin himself - both are equally odious - it is a question of transparency and fairness. I agree with Griffin that if there were rules against discussing attendance in any shape or form, they should have been included in the rulebook supplied alongside the invitation. I haven't exactly followed all of his media work, but from what I've seen, he's simply been shouting out that he's going. In fact, in some accounts he's been quite reasonable... that he's not going to try to approach the queen, but will speak to her if their paths cross...etc. The fact is, like it or not, the guy is an elected MEP and like all other MEPs, he gets invited to this event. The media, and you and I, can comment on it - but the Palace and the Government should not. The withdrawal of this invitation is turning the guy into a martyr, and his treatment will strike a chord with the millions of disaffected Britons who vulnerable to BNP sympathies. In addition - and let me first state that I am firmly pro-monarchy - instances like this, where the Palace or Royals are treading too far onto political turf, it is only going to fuel republican sentiments. The usual tabloid bigots will be demanding justice for the ordinary native working man, and the Guardian intelligentsia will be claiming proof that the Monarchy has had its day... Why couldn't they just let him have his day on the lawns, and they we can cast back into the margins where he belongs...
I agree fully, he gets more publicity by not being allowed in at the last minute than anything else. If he was allowed in, there would have been 5 mins coverage but now he's got his podium.
I actually think the the queen did the correct thing buy excluding him. Do we ever hear any other politician banging on about going to the garden party? No we do not. Griffin tried to use the event as a publicity stunt when it is quite clear that the royal family try to stay out of politics. This was a private party and he abused his invite and they cancelled it. The other BNP MEP who stayed quiet about his invite was allowed to attend. Griffin might have found a kindred spirit in Prince Philip if he'd got in. If the BNP and Griffin want to be recognised as a legitimate party then they should act like one.
Actually BNP's lesser known MEP, Andrew Brons was doing the exact same thing as Nick Griffin, but because he isn't well known he could still go. In fact in some instances Brons was being more public about it, just the media didn't care.
Not true. Virtually any politician would love the airtime to talk about their invite, but the difference is that the media only swarmed around Griffin. Nobody gives a damn about anyone else, and the media know it. This is all caused because you and I like a good scandal about neo-nazis dining with the Queen. It's like dealing with children... rather than rebuking the noisy, troublesome child, you should praise (and give media time to) the children behaving well.
one down now all we need is for the other one to be banned from the palace well done lizzy another victory for democracy
1) AFAIK he was just banned from the garden party, his invite was just taken away. 2) This is not, IMO, a victory for democracy, if anything it is a failure, although IMO it has very lttle at all to do with that. He was invited initially becase he was democratically elected as a MEP, as were all UK MEPs, so no matter your view of his political standing it was "right" for him to be invited. It was pulled becuase he used the invitation as a political tool, and the royal family is not affiliated to any political party/ideal. That has notthing to do with democracy at all. As a note I do not agree at all with his more extreme political ideas, the rest I can not comment on (as I imagine most people could not as all we are told by the media is about their views on immigration). I do think that the pulling of the invite was a mistake though. In much the same way as the media inflated the fact he was on question time, they - and the palace - have inflated this. If with question time they had not reported he was on it as widely as they did, would anyone (beyond the normal viewers) have watched it? Same here, if the palace had let him come there would have been no coverage at all. Let's face it, who even knew there was a garden party until this flared up?
Face it, he's a leader of a political party (as much as many of us loathe him) and as such he's entitled to go. Since there's no explicit rule saying that he can't bleat about how he's going to the event then there's no solid grounds on which to ban him. Alas, I personally hate the man and what he stands for and am glad he got banned. However, that is my view and is part of what makes a democracy a democracy. Other people will think the opposite and it's those people who should be thought about here, even if they are a minority currently.
No, he isn't "entitled" to go in the slightest. Buckingham Palace can invite or not invite whoever the hell they want, just like I can to my own home. No one is entitled.
Not true, I'm completely bored of Princes Philip and Harry. In any case, Buckingham Palace can rescind invites if they want; it's an invite-only party, not a political event to which anybody is entitled to attend. If you're going to be a d*** about it - as only Nick Griffin can gain the media attention to be - you've really only yourself to blame when they rescind your invitation.
Forgive my American ignorance here, but why is it considered taboo for him to talk about attending a garden party at the palace? Or was the invitation rescinded more due to this statement: If the latter is the official reason the invitation was rescinded, I can understand why he was no longer allowed to attend. There is no need to spoil a social event by pestering the Queen with political questions. On the other hand, with that many dignitaries in attendance I think it would be a naive to assume that they'll only discuss fashion and the latest cricket match.
He wasn't going to ask the Queen anything... he said as much publicly beforehand. He was doing what we all would do - shooting his mouth off.... "Look at me... I'm respectable, and I'm having tea with the Queen!". The problem is that it would have been fine, if we all ignored him instead of consolidating his support for him.
Everything you said, pretty much. The more people try and curb, silence or discourage the BNP, the more strength it lends them. They'd be found out much faster for what they are, and subsequently receive less and less support, if they were allowed a mainstream place and ordinary treatment so that their views could be heard. I suspect a lot of people do vote for them without much understanding of what they represent, largely because of sympathy generated by incidents like this. Perceived 'underdogs' are always rather appealing (ask any martial arts film director).
The irony of this statement. A victory for democracy, by banning political parties who represent some of the publics views from public events. I actually think it's a complete failure of democracy, and lending it's lines more to communism than democracy.
I'm pretty sure Goudg was being sarcastic. If not, hurp durp. If so, hear hear, it is a bit of a durp for democracy. On a small aside, though, how on earth is it approaching the realm of communism to ban a political representative? Surely you mean totalitarianism, which communism doesn't necessarily entail*? *It doesn't because SHUT UP! I can dream.
Queen: "I'm banning Nick Griffin from the garden party." Prince Philip: "You never make any effort to like my friends!"
This times 100 tbh. Though question time was fun to watch, as the toad faced little welp got grilled lol.
