Nick Griffin denied entry to Buckingham Palace

[-:Undertaker:-]

I think this is the answer which seems quite reasonable:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...n-2032487.html

You also have to wonder if he did this on purpose as he and his party gain lots of publicity which he probably needs after their very poor showing in the elections.

According to Griffin there are no rules for the garden parties which say he cannot announce it/use it as a political stunt. If that is the case then the Palace is very wrong in being remotely biased, and that is what will eventually make them loose their crowns as far as I see it (along with the stories which are emerging as of recent about some of the royals charging the taxpayer in expenses for trips). I do not want to see that, but for the state to be biased is totally and utterly wrong.

The BNP result was rather good in the General Election for the number of candidates they stood, they increased their share of the vote by quite a large margin.

though i agree he had the right to be invited, i think his invite was wholly inappropriate and the palace should've seen this happening prior to the invite.

Because you disagree with his views?

That is the kind of democracy we have in Zimbabwe and nations such as that. The difference between here (including corruption amongst our leading elite) and there is that we are just better at hiding the fact we [our leaders] cannot stand other views which differ to their own and are just as corrupt as the ones in the Third World.

[Catzsy]

Suppose, he does have a way of angering people and in saying that he has pretty much made himself a target. It's democracy with him being an MEP against security/protocol. Saying he's going to talk the Queen seems a bit unlikely, as they tend to be about meeting in Buckingham Palace, than a good tea and a buffet with the Queen :/

I don't make up the protocol rules It probably would have been better just to let him go as long as he didn't have a publicity stunt outsidel

[Jordy]

That is the kind of democracy we have in Zimbabwe and nations such as that. The difference between here (including corruption amongst our leading elite) and there is that we are just better at hiding the fact we [our leaders] cannot stand other views which differ to their own and are just as corrupt as the ones in the Third World.

No lol, this is an MEP not being invited to a garden party, this isn't rigging elections or silencing the opposition. You perhaps make a point about bias but then you blew it completely out of proportion.

[-:Undertaker:-]

No lol, this is an MEP not being invited to a garden party, this isn't rigging elections or silencing the opposition. You perhaps make a point about bias but then you blew it completely out of proportion.

..and ask yourself why he isnt being invited to this garden party, and as for unelected and corrupt in terms of comparsion to Third World nations - I am of course referring to the EU & MPs expenses along with Mandelson, Barroso and the rest of them.

[MrPinkPanther]

I am of course referring to the EU & MPs expenses along with Mandelson, Barroso and the rest of them.

...because Nigel Farage didn't claim £2 Million of Taxpayers money on top of his £64,000 yearly salary did he? He isn't a poor man so if UKIP are so principled and anti-European waste then why did he claim the frankly ridiculous figure?

[-:Undertaker:-]

...because Nigel Farage didn't claim £2 Million of Taxpayers money on top of his £64,000 yearly salary did he? He isn't a poor man so if UKIP are so principled and anti-European waste then why did he claim the frankly ridiculous figure?

That is not expenses, I told you this before - had it been expenses and had he pocketed it then yes he would be as crooked as the rest of them. The allowances system works differing in the European Parliament as you should know - MEPs are paid for signing on (meaning you can go to Brussels, sign on and then go home without lifting a finger) and the allowances system pays for constiuency staff.

Mr Farage does not pocket the money, it pays for consituency staff - the same applies to all members of the European parliament. The difference between Farage and the Westminister system is that the Westminister system was abuse, it was not for paying staff - it was for personal benefit.

The European parliament also had a scam/scandel a few years ago involving mostly German MEPs and was only covered by the German media and it caused quite a uproar back in Germany. News reporters had been filming MEPs arriving and signing on, missing votes and then going home - so yes the system is flawed, yes it is a waste of money (including all money to every single MEP regardless of party) and it'd be much nicer if the entire thing was closed down tommorow.

Farage was involved with banking/metal trading earlier on anyway, he's making less now than he made when he first left school.

[MrPinkPanther]

Mr Farage does not pocket the money, it pays for consituency staff - the same applies to all members of the European parliament. The difference between Farage and the Westminister system is that the Westminister system was abuse, it was not for paying staff - it was for personal benefit.

So you are saying using Taxpayers money to promote the UKIP message isn't for personal benefit?

[-:Undertaker:-]

So you are saying using Taxpayers money to promote the UKIP message isn't for personal benefit?

It is for personal benefit yes but of the party and not of Mr Farage, but thats within the rules and is how the system over in Brussels works. Then again that is the excuse the MPs in Westminister used - I don't like the Brussels system either and neither do UKIP hence why we'd rather the whole thing shut down. UKIP made the choice many years ago that if they were to fight this European Union they would take part and tackle it from the inside - Farage needs money to pay for staffing costs in the regional office. If Farage was flouting the expenses system similar to what occured in the Westminister system then I would be first to drop him (and yes there is a big question mark over the expenses of Lord Pearson who is a member of the Westminister system). UKIP MEPs take a portion of their salary and spend it on the party rather than themselves, it provides extra funding for the party and is their choice with what to do with their own wages. Personally I would like to see every single MP and MEP investigated by the fraud officers and if they were found to be flouting the expenses system like Alistair Darling, Nick Clegg and others then I would have been supportive of them all losing their jobs and the entire lot charged for it.

Allowances and expenses are entirely differing.

[dbgtz]

This is kinda off topic but tbh I think people misjudge the bnp, its not actually racist really to some extent its "britain for the british". Ok I dont support it but I can see where he is coming from. Im pretty sure its not like "only whites can stay" its just if you were born here or not i guess therefore he should not have been barred, anyone could have done what they were assuming he could do.

[MrPinkPanther]

It is for personal benefit yes but of the party and not of Mr Farage, but thats within the rules and is how the system over in Brussels works. Then again that is the excuse the MPs in Westminister used - I don't like the Brussels system either and neither do UKIP hence why we'd rather the whole thing shut down. UKIP made the choice many years ago that if they were to fight this European Union they would take part and tackle it from the inside - Farage needs money to pay for staffing costs in the regional office. If Farage was flouting the expenses system similar to what occured in the Westminister system then I would be first to drop him (and yes there is a big question mark over the expenses of Lord Pearson). UKIP MEPs also take a portion of their salary and spend it on the party rather than themselves, it provides extra funding for the party and is their choice with what to do with their own wages. Personally I would like to see every single MP and MEP investigated by the fraud officers and if they were found to be flouting the expenses system like Alistair Darling, Nick Clegg and others then I would have been supportive of them all losing their jobs and the entire lot charged for it.

It benefits UKIP and through UKIP it benefits Farage. I don't doubt there are far worse claims by other MEPs but you can't complain about Westminster MP's expenses when one of the few elected representatives UKIP has, and one of the highest ranking ones at that, is clearly not squeaky clean himself.

Allowances and expenses are entirely differing.

Expenses is the broader term which includes such claims as these.

This is kinda off topic but tbh I think people misjudge the bnp, its not actually racist really to some extent its "britain for the british". Ok I dont support it but I can see where he is coming from. Im pretty sure its not like "only whites can stay" its just if you were born here or not i guess therefore he should not have been barred, anyone could have done what they were assuming he could do.

The problem is there is a difference between what you say in public and what you say in private. Look on youtube and you will see some extremely racist videos of dear Mr Griffin. I hate to draw this parallel because I am no way indicating that the BNP are as bad as the Nazis but look back to the later 1920's and early 1930's. The Nazi's spread discriminatory propaganda but no more than this, look what happens when they get into office. The incitement of racial hatred, Kristallnacht and eventually of course the Holocaust. Every BNP member is not racist, it would be wrong to say that. Their leader? He is.