Griffin says people have right to “blow things up”


1:39 pm - April 6th 2010

by Sunny Hundal    


      Share on Tumblr

Nick Griffin, British National Party leader and election candidate for Barking & Dagenham, says white people “with a legitimate grievance” have the right “to hurt people, to maim and blow things up”.

BNP supporters “have a right to take up arms, arguably in fact a duty to take up arms”, using “physical force” against their enemies, he says.

Griffin’s chilling words were caught on film by journalist Dominic Carman, who spent days interviewing and videotaping the BNP leader.

Given the news yesterday of the death threats bandied about by BNP leaders, the findings from this investigation provide further evidence that violence is at the core of the party’s politics.

The revelations of Griffin’s call for armed resistance follow the jailing of BNP member Terence Gavan in January for terrorist offences after he accumulated a stockpile of bombs and weapons.

Domonic Carman will give a press briefing and answer questions on his research:
Wednesday April 7 7pm
National Union of Journalists,
308 Gray’s Inn Road, WC1X 8DP
Advanced registration: exposethebnp@gmail.com

Next week (Apr 12), white supremacist Ian Davison is on trial for producing the deadly poison ricin.
From a press release

Watch

Transcript
If the state won’t, when people have a genuine grievance, if the state not only doesn’t care, but actually, in everything it does and says, puts them down, then what choice are people left but to do something which is outside the parliamentary system.

They don’t have the right to hurt people, to maim and blow things up or whatever. People only have that right when they are not allowed any other way of expressing a legitimate grievance.

Video part 2

Yes, in overall morality, if a tyrannical government, establishment refuses its people any way in which to protest against genuine injustices, in particular at a cultural level – then they have a right to take up arms, arguably in fact a duty to take up arms, despite the cost.

They [white people] will be an oppressed minority – and they won’t be dealing with airy-fairy liberal fuckwits like Peter Hain, they’ll be dealing with people, who by our standards are psychopaths, and by the standards of our civilisation, psychopaths.

And the only thing when it comes to that an oppressed minority will do to preserve itself is by physical force.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: News

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


1. Charlieman

Dominic Carman has a wealth of stuff on YouTube, so make up your own mind:
http://www.youtube.com/user/dominiccarman67#p/u/5/zNAzLXdO31M

You could watch the video, but you’ll more enjoyably get the gist if you watch any of the Death Wish movies instead.

Yes, in overall morality, if a tyrannical government, establishment refuses its people any way in which to protest against genuine injustices, in particular at a cultural level – then they have a right to take up arms, arguably in fact a duty to take up arms, despite the cost.

Actually, I might have to agree with that. Of course, we’re absolutely nowhere near that here, nor are we noticeably moving in that direction – despite frequent claims to the contrary from people who apparently believe that having god-knows-how-many op-ed columnists and a selection of unpopular but nonetheless legal political parties pushing your agenda is a form of totalitarian repression. However, should we ever get to the stage where people like Mr Griffin are being crammed into cattle trucks to be sent to the extermination camps, they would have the right to take up arms.

I’m not holding my breath.

Useful stuff with regards to seeing the BNP for exactly what they are; they operate within the safety net of a democracy but would like to do many things that would destroy the very system that allows them to exist.

I haven’t watched the video (at work; no sound), but reading the transcript Griffin doesn’t appear to be saying anything all that controversial.

I absolutely think citizens have the right – and indeed, the duty – to take up arms in order to resist “tyrannical government” if there are “genuine injustices” which cannot be legitimately protested.

Hence I think the American Revolutionary War fought against the British was perfectly justifiable; I think the same of the early actions of the ANC in South Africa and the IRA in Ireland.

Where I obviously disagree with Griffin is in the definition of “tyranny”, “injustice” and “legitimate”. Naturally, the belligerents in the above conflicts have all been labelled ‘terrorists’ at one point or another. I think institutions and vested interests will always corrupt any notions of “legitimacy”, so the job of applying the definition should fall to the people.

This is why I believe in (pure) democracy and shun the fascist bilge of Griffin and his ilk.

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”
– Benjamin Franklin

I agree with those above. Griffin is a batshit crazy racist, but the “right of revolution” is hardly a controversial idea:

“I must deal immediately and at some length with the question of violence. Some of the things so far told to the Court are true and some are untrue. I do not, however, deny that I planned sabotage. I did not plan it in a spirit of recklessness, nor because I have any love of violence. I planned it as a result of a calm and sober assessment of the political situation that had arisen after many years of tyranny, exploitation, and oppression of my people by the Whites.”

– Nelson Mandela

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,[71] that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

– US Declaration of Independence

You don’t need to try this hard to criticize this loonball.

This is pretty much a non-story. It is exactly the same argument that fuelled the anti-apartheid ANC campaign and Nelson Mandela and that was right and just.

This was an answer to a theoretical question about a tyrannical government excluding people and parties from the franchise.

People aren’t stupid and can see and hear that and I think presenting such rubbish as this as something it isn’t actually helps the BNP.

This is pretty much a non-story. It is exactly the same argument that fuelled the anti-apartheid ANC campaign and Nelson Mandela and that was right and just.

Erm, really? And you think we’re living in an Apartheid state are we?

Griffin is openly advocating breaking the law.

Well I think I spelled it out in my very short comment Sunny just as I think pretty much all bar one of the comments above has:

This was an answer to a theoretical question about a theoretical tyrannical government excluding people and parties from the franchise and not about the current state, the here and now. He clearly said that we were nowhere near that theoretical state and that he was fully committed to democracy so he wasn’t and isn’t “openly advocating breaking the law” at all, he is describing his thoughts on a future scenario that hasn’t occurred.

This man and his party are many things and have many flaws that are unsavoury to say the least, why not focus on them instead of this desperate nonsense?

I find myself in 100% agreement with what he said on this issue and I think most people would. The only dividing line would be what constituted such a scenario that I would take up arms against oppression.

I stand by what I said Sunny, this is a non-story and it really does makes your position seem desperate and you personally to appear untrustworthy and dishonest, and as we all know, in politics perception is everything.

His act words are: If the state won’t, when people have a genuine grievance, if the state not only doesn’t care, but actually, in everything it does and says, puts them down, then what choice are people left but to do something which is outside the parliamentary system.

That can easily be applied to any situation where a psychopath thinks the system has gone to shit and needs to be blown up.

Think no one is going to take this rhetoric seriously?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/neonazi-found-guilty-of-racist-terror-plan-1747547.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jul/06/far-right-terrorism-threat-police

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6638139.ece

Sunny, I think I have made myself clear and I think most people can see for themselves that those comments are not for the here and now but some future scenario that hasn’t happened.

As I said, this all comes down to honesty and integrity; there is already plenty out there to beat this man and his party with, this story about taking up arms against a theoretical future oppressive regime is not one of them and it makes you and this site look desperate and dishonest.

It’s not hard to play devils advocate on such flimsy nonsense Sunny:

You have no evidence whatsoever that anything Griffin has said has led to any individuals doing what they do let alone these comments and in fact in the only actual act of criminality that you link to, the individual was so unmoved by the BNP and its leader he wasn’t even a member of that party but of the NF. The other two stories are just that from a politically charged and oppressive government who has thoroughly politicised the police. Nearly a year later and of those 32 questioned, how many have been charged? How many attacks have there been? Where are all of those guns, bombs and weapons cited?

The real terror threat in this country comes from Muslims not from the BNP. In fact the BNP have been responsible for no killings at all whereas this government are complicit in an illegal war with hundreds of thousands killed (or murdered depending on how you view the casualties of illegal wars) and were supported in this by the so-called opposition, who are also signatories of the UAF which has its leadership charged with conspiracy to commit violence and has carried out violent attacks at protests.

You see, that pretty much sums up the flip side to your coin with the problem that your side of the coin doesn’t have any grounding at all.

Like I said Sunny, non-stories like this are just ridiculous and does nothing other then undermine your own creditability and help the BNP.

and were supported in this by the so-called opposition, who are also signatories of the UAF which has its leadership charged with conspiracy to commit violence and has carried out violent attacks at protests.

Oh dear – that really is pathetic. But at least your real political leanings and sympathies come out – blaming the UAF than the English Defence League – which has done much more to stir up riots and distubances across England.

It’s not hard to play devils advocate on such flimsy nonsense Sunny:

Not surprised you see these people as ‘flimsy nonsense’. I’m sure people can make up their own minds indeed.

Sunny I clearly said I was playing devils advocate and I find it a shame that you have to resort to smearing me personally now merely because I have pointed out (as all but one comment on this thread has also) that in this one incidence I am in agreement with Griffins utterances and not only is there nothing controversial in them but it is something that most people would agree with and that this non-story undermines your creditability.

Are you really that delicate? Do you really have such an egg shell like personality Sunny?

What is really pathetic is that you do this and claim contrary to the caveat that my “real political leanings and sympathies come out” but still fail to grasp the supreme irony of the implications of what you are saying.

One the one hand you are saying that the police should be trusted 100% that hordes of right wing terrorist exist in this country waiting to wreck havoc but on the other hand you say that the police cannot be trusted when they charge the UAF leadership for conspiracy to commit violence and scores of it members for affray; and also by extension that the police are engaged in some sort of right wing conspiracy themselves as the EDL leadership face no such charges and statistically less EDL then UAF were arrested at the event that led to the UAF leadership being charged.

And so yes it is flimsy and yes people can make up their own minds.

That was the point I was making, they will see that this is a flimsy attack based on a house of straw and could easily conclude that you have no creditability or integrity and therefore benefit the BNP.

Meh, another non-story.

Just wanted to pick up on a point…

“Griffin is openly advocating breaking the law.”

Whilst I do not think this is the case (“They don’t have the right to hurt people, to maim and blow things up or whatever.”), your position appears to be one of defending the establishment no matter what.

We do not live in a “tyrannical” regime in the UK (which Griffin acknowledges), but again, consider the position of the ANC or IRA. To not break the law is to collude with apartheid or tacitly endorse the military occupation of Ireland.

It’s only establishment tools like Martin Luther who hold up ‘temporal authority’ as immutable and unchanging.

Were the UK to become a nightmare dystopia as portrayed in ‘1984’, ‘Children of Men’, ‘V for Vendetta’ or whatever other pop culture reference you care to dredge up, I’d not hesitate to take up arms against the government.

Though I rather hope I’d have already done so, or fucked off elsewhere…

18. James Barr

I don’t want to get into an argument, but… Danny (8) suggests that people are not stupid enough to follow Griffin…. well, I’ve been around a long time and I can say, sorry, but, there ARE an awfully large number of very stupid people out there. Add to that the large number of people who aren’t stupid but work hard and just want an easy life, and those that are plugged into 24/7 celeb-sprinkled entertain(t)ment , and you’ve got a following. I personally know a couple in their 70’s who are model citizens – stay home, watch Corrie, keep their front garden immaculate – but who would vote for that “nice Mr Griffin” in a flash if they could. And all he has to do is check that he’s not saying anything that is demonstrably illegal, keep his temper during media interviews, and wear a tie, in order to convince these voters (Yes! Stupid people are allowed to vote!) that he’s a good chap…

And all he has to do is check that he’s not saying anything that is demonstrably illegal, keep his temper during media interviews, and wear a tie, in order to convince these voters (Yes! Stupid people are allowed to vote!) that he’s a good chap…

Sounds like most politicians to me….

For another non-story read I like the BNP.

*sigh*

Or, Daniel, how about taking a radical departure from conditioning and just read the evidence presented objectively and form a real opinion based upon actual facts rather then knee-jerk reactions?

And realize that non-stories like this damage the purveyor’s creditability and help the BNP.

*sigh*

Hi Danny,

You’ve already been outed as an idiot, the Apartheid statement did that a long time ago and your further ‘debates’ with Sunny and others here have given you even less credibility.

Take care now!

Daniel, what on earth are you talking about? And why the insults? Good grief, what is wrong with you?

Pretty much anyone here can see that I carefully deconstructed Sunny’s musings for the reasons given and he couldn’t come back to me on it and actually no one else here has disagreed with my position on this ‘non-story’ save you Daniel, and you have not expressed one single reason or argument to ground your comments.

In fact you have only appeared here three times to make accusations without giving any reason at all for them, so yes, thanks, and take care; and maybe you could even learn to debate, who knows?

@22 After reading Dannys posts here he is making a valid point, but that probably makes me an idiot also.

One thing I’ve noticed about LC is although the emperor is naked, hes got the lovliest clothes I’ve ever seen.

Danny,

You have a disconnect between your opinion and reality, fair enough but not everyone buys your take on matters, including me, don’t forget that. Also, arguing opinions is a waste of time, we will not convince each other will we?

Simple.

Also, the Apartheid gaff puts you in bad light but hey, sure you’re at ease with that.

Dave:

Yes it does and one thing I’ve noticed about LC is that it attracts people who do not agree with it’s agenda at all, which is very odd.

Daniel, I thought you were bidding the thread farewell. Why are you returning here yet again to say absolutely nothing of substance once more? This is now the fourth comment you have made which consists of nothing but accusations without proof and condemnations without reason. What on earth are you doing? What do you think you are achieving with this nonsense?

You haven’t expressed any opinion so far or as much given any actual reason for your appearance here. And quite why you are appearing here at all in a comments area designed to give life to the exchange of opinions on a site that exists for debate when you have no belief or intention of exchanging anything other then accusations and insults is quite frankly pointless, and there is a common internet term for the practice too.

I haven’t made any ‘apartheid’ gaffe and neither did the commentators at Number 5 or Number 7 when they highlighted the same concept; Sunny hasn’t been able to return on it neither has anyone else so I can only guess that your function and reason here is to be some sort of attack dog and thread capper.

Danny,

You confused my sarcasm for a farewell.

I can say what I like here as long as it does not breach the comments code.

I see the last word is of importance to you.

I have expressed plenty of opinion, clearly I am as your comments to me are getting longer and the last time I checked I didn’t have to give a reason.

Fine if you don’t see the error in using an Apartheid reference in relation to the argument of this piece but I do.

You confuse silence on another person’s part with ‘hasn’t been able to return on it’, arguments with folk like you are, as this proves, circular and pointless.

I ma not an attack dog or thread capper but thanks for the compliments.

Daniel you are the one trying desperately to get the last word and that last word is comprised of nothing but hot air. I have been polite but clearly you are tiresome troll not here for debate but to abuse and accuse without foundation.

The ANC took up arms against a tyrannical regime that oppressed them, denied them their rights and their voice as anyone in that position would be justified in doing either in the past, now or in the future so you are alone here on that if you think the ANC were not justified.

That was the whole basis of the above musings.

And yes, Sunny’s silence is a message after several exchanges with him, the last one of which I clearly showed him the duplicity of his position; not that you would understand that as you are just a troll.

One who seems desperate to have the last word without actually saying anything at all?

I came here because I google searched a news story and this site appeared, I thought the writing was good and it was updated regularly. I Also thought the discussion was of a higher calibre than many other sites. I have read the agenda here, it mentioned:

“We welcome constructive scrutiny of our views but will deal harshly with off-topic, diversionary or trollish comments.”

In my humble opinion this was what Danny gave, just constructiove scrutiny, that was backed by two others before him.

“Abusive, sarcastic and troll-ish comments (aimed at writers or other commenters) will be deleted.”

You then replied troll-ishly, when you said he liked the BNP (sorry inferred) and then when you called him an idiot. You seem to pepper these boards with similar comments, you have said them to me on more than one occasion.

Danny:

Your search for the last word goes on it seems.

Also, if you think you’ve been abused then you’re a sensitive soul, which is fine.

Comparing the BNP and the ANC in this context was an error, the ANC were faced by a genuine threat, the BNP are making one up, also the ANC were not a bunch of daft racists.

That is the whole basis of my above musings.

And again, you keep confusing your opinion with fact, it might make it easier for you to sleep at night but it has little basis in reality.

This is a test.

Dave:

Cool.

Thanks for your explanation but it wasn’t needed, not by me anyway.

Dave, thank you and you are quite correct

Daniel, no thank you, you are very wrong and quite mad.

And again, you are the one obsessed with the last word, so go ahead and post your meaningless gibberish and comment policy breaching abuse.

This is a test.


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Tim Ireland

    RT @unslugged: RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  2. Stefan Isendahl

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  3. J

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  4. Sim-O

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  5. Sim-O

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  6. jimbobthomas

    RT: @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  7. Joscelyn

    BNP's Griffin apparently said supporters have the right “to hurt people, to maim and blow things up” http://bit.ly/cXOttN via @libcon

  8. Andy Sutherland

    RT @libcon: A transcript of Griffin's comments and a video of him has now been added to our blog post: http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  9. Pat Galea

    RT @unslugged: RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  10. Claire Butler

    RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right “to take up arms” and “blow things up” http://bit.ly/b1ygJB

  11. Jason Keen

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  12. Martyn Deedes

    RT @5ChinCrack: RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right “to take up arms” and “blow things up” http://bit.ly/b1ygJB

  13. James Mackenzie

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  14. D Braniff-Herbert

    RT @SamTarry: RT @libcon A transcript of Griffin's comments and a video of him has now been added to our blog post: http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  15. Greg Eden

    RT @uponnothing: RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right “to take up arms” and “blow things up” http://bit.ly/b1ygJB

  16. PumpkinSpider

    Isn't this inciting terrorism? RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  17. Owen David Griffiths

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  18. Eric Fish

    RT @uponnothing RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right “to take up arms” and “blow things up” http://bit.ly/b1ygJB

  19. Derek Oakley

    RT @pickledpolitics: BNP's Nick Griffin caught saying supporters have right to "take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  20. Paul Nolan

    RT @libcon: Griffin says ppl have right to "blow things up" http://bit.ly/ajqvxX

  21. Nessa Carson

    RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN << cos THAT's sensible.

  22. House Of Twits

    RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  23. unslugged

    RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  24. Claire French

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  25. aliceh

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  26. topsy_top20k

    RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  27. William Earp

    RT @juryteam2010: RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN >> Or murder their leader maybe?

  28. Daniel Selwood

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  29. Stephen Newton

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  30. sunny hundal

    BNP's Nick Griffin caught saying supporters have right to "take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  31. Tom Scott

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  32. matt_heath

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  33. Cai Wingfield

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  34. Pete Hoskin

    RT @pickledpolitics: BNP's Nick Griffin caught saying supporters have right to "take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  35. Pete Hoskin

    RT @pickledpolitics: BNP's Nick Griffin caught saying supporters have right to "take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  36. uberVU - social comments

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by libcon: Griffin says supporters have right “to take up arms” and “blow things up” http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  37. Green Steve

    RT @pickledpolitics: BNP's Nick Griffin caught saying supporters have right to "take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  38. Gordon Kennedy

    RT @juryteam2010: RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN >> Or murder their leader maybe?

  39. Liberal Conspiracy

    A transcript of Griffin's comments and a video of him has now been added to our blog post: http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  40. Jury Team

    RT @HouseofTwits: RT @libcon A transcript of Griffin's comments and a video of him has now been added to our blog post: http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  41. Chris Huang-Leaver

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  42. Naadir Jeewa

    Reading: Griffin says ppl have right to “blow things up”: Nick Griffin, British National Party leader and election… http://bit.ly/acm77H

  43. Richard North

    RT @unslugged: RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  44. Samuel Tarry

    RT @libcon A transcript of Griffin's comments and a video of him has now been added to our blog post: http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  45. Sunder Katwala

    RT @SamTarry: RT @libcon A transcript of Griffin's comments and a video of him has now been added to our blog post: http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  46. 5 Chinese Crackers

    RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right “to take up arms” and “blow things up” http://bit.ly/b1ygJB

  47. Thomas O Smith

    RT @libcon: Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  48. Jamie Potter

    Come on @libcon, seriously, using 'ppl' in a headline? http://bit.ly/d59xhw

  49. Kevin Arscott

    RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right “to take up arms” and “blow things up” http://bit.ly/b1ygJB

  50. Sadaf Qureshi

    Griffin says ppl have right to “blow things up” http://goo.gl/BJyr

  51. Chris Morton

    RT @libcon Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  52. grappling moves? | The BJJ Gi Site

    […] Liberal Conspiracy » Griffin &#1109&#1072&#1091&#1109 people h&#1072&#957&#1077 r&#1110&#609ht t&#9… […]

  53. Yakoub Islam

    Griffin says people have right to “blow things up” – Sunny H, Liberal Conspiracy: http://ow.ly/1vSPK

  54. RayBeckerman

    RT @VesselinaTP RT @libcon #Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  55. Simon Hewitt

    This is why you should vote in #ge2010 http://tinyurl.com/y85fodl

  56. Vesselina T. Plesser

    The man is a berk.. RT @libcon #Griffin says supporters have right "to take up arms" and "blow things up" http://bit.ly/cXOttN

  57. Matt Lodder

    I just Starred: Griffin says people have right to “blow things up”: Nick Griffin, British National Party leader an… http://bit.ly/cf5jXg





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.