Collett steals the Leicester MultiCult show
The BNP put up a short piece on its website yesterday about Mark Collett’s appearance at a BBC local radio debate on the wonders of multiculturalism in the city. Without him, in truth, it wouldn’t have been much of a debate. There were only a couple of rather weak dissenting voices besides his own - neither of them armed with much in the way of argument.
The format was a panel answering points made or, sometimes, questions raised by an invited audience. Collett, who was born and educated in the city, was among the invitees - which is certainly progress for a party that is still formally denied a media platform.
The panel of wise multicultural elders consisted of:-
* Wolde Selassie - Chair, Leicester African Caribbean Arts Forum and Leicester Black History Season consortium
* Prof Richard Bonney - formerly Professor of Modern History at the University of Leicester, now Emeritus Professor and Chairman of the Europe-Islamic Organization
* Riyaz Laher - youth worker and teacher
* Sir Peter Soulsby - Leicester South MP (Labour, naturally)
Collett was given a fair crack of the whip. He spoke from his place in the audience on, I think, three occasions. He is, of course, the BNP’s Head of Publicity, and the most striking aspect of his contribution was its careful avoidance of anything too controversial or shocking to the assembled black and brown folks and white ethno-suiciders.
You can listen to the whole debate here, though I found the rampant suicidalism on so very eager display too much for my taste. The BBC, however, kindly acknowledged Collett’s unique appeal on the evening with some links to a post-debate conversation recorded with some young or, certainly, youngish Moslems. The links are here, here and here.
It is disquieting to hear a senior BNP official apparently predicating Moslem integration on the wearing of the hijab rather than the full-face veil. But this is politics, a game the BNP are learning how to play. Winning trumps sincerity.
I guess he did at least bag the best line in the debating chamber, rounding off with the ringing declaration that the panel represented all manner of ethnicities, but none of them included the white native population. The BNP alone represented them.
Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 15 Feb 2007 21:58 | #
IMO Collett was weak.
1. What actually is the BNP’s platform?
2. What demographic are they actually appealing to?
3. Why argue integration or ideology with Muslims?
Religion is an ideology. No it’s not. Yes it is. No it’s not. Yes it is.
What exactly was the point? Isn’t the BNP better off mobilising its base rather than trying to appeal to young Muslims or by trying to appeal to young Muslims make their platform [whatever that is] more appealing to the less radical element amongst the English?