Nick Griffin investigated over Cookham B&B gay couple remarks (From Bucks Free Press)

What's Griffin's address? Obviously he wouldn't mind it being posted all over the internet...

when you get Nick Griffin on your side you know you just can't win

Another reason why this case should never have come to trial.

TweedleDum and TweedleDee have done the LGBT movement no favours at all here.

Whether you like Nick Griffin or not is irrelevant. The address of the B&B was made public so that the homosexual lobby were able to make threats, so why is it wrong for the address of the homosexuals to be made public? The whole charades was a sham. They could have gone to Brighton where they would have been most welcome, and they knew it. It was a total set up from start to finish!

"Mr Black has said the politician has missed the point and thinks he has been merely chasing headlines."

Well it seems like he's successfully achieved his objective then

Peter Cyprus wrote:
Whether you like Nick Griffin or not is irrelevant. The address of the B&B was made public so that the homosexual lobby were able to make threats, so why is it wrong for the address of the homosexuals to be made public? The whole charades was a sham. They could have gone to Brighton where they would have been most welcome, and they knew it. It was a total set up from start to finish!

So it's ok to limit the movements of people based on their sexual preferences then? I don't think it was set up, believe it or not the vast majority of homosexuals are not looking for a fight, most just want to get on with their lives and be treated equally and lawfully.Or is bershire just a bit too posh for that kind of thing.
It looks like griffin, who is a skid mark in society's underpants, has broken the law, and should be treated as such.

A good point Peter, your not suggesting that TweedleDum and TweedleDee are anything other than a reliable, right-on, cosy gay couple who were looking for some hug-time in sunny Cookham are you?

The whole thing stage-managed, you mean these two might actually be douche-bags who contrived the whole thing from the start?

Heaven forbid!

Would love to know what brought them to Cookham in the first place, apart from the £3k of course ;-)

The swivel eyed goon Griffin, and his homophobic apologists are not welcome in my county or my country thank you very much.
Don't even bother trying to argue against that.

swearmeister wrote:
The swivel eyed goon Griffin, and his homophobic apologists are not welcome in my county or my country thank you very much. Don't even bother trying to argue against that.

Well, that might be true, if not a single person voted for them, but there are some misguided souls who see them as saviours of the country.
The worst aspect of all this is that it's a tiresome irrelevance; as Malcolm Muggeridge said, around 50 years ago, "The trouble with the British is they have sex on the brain, and it's the wrong place for it."
Whatever your preference, just go into the bedroom, quietly close the door behind you, and leave the rest of us to cope with important things, like corrupt politicians, raging inflation, and inclement weather.

Edgar Brooks wrote:

swearmeister wrote:
The swivel eyed goon Griffin, and his homophobic apologists are not welcome in my county or my country thank you very much. Don't even bother trying to argue against that.

Well, that might be true, if not a single person voted for them, but there are some misguided souls who see them as saviours of the country.
The worst aspect of all this is that it's a tiresome irrelevance; as Malcolm Muggeridge said, around 50 years ago, "The trouble with the British is they have sex on the brain, and it's the wrong place for it."
Whatever your preference, just go into the bedroom, quietly close the door behind you, and leave the rest of us to cope with important things, like corrupt politicians, raging inflation, and inclement weather.

Spot on Edgar. No one is trying to stop homosexuals doing what they want to do providing it is lawful, and doesnt involve making laws especially for them. What I object to is that they are continually punching above their weight, helped by the BBC and other institutions. Approximately 2,500,000 electors voted for parties other than the 'big three' at the last election, which I suspect is somewhere near the number of homosexuals. Some of these actually voted for BNP, but their voice is completely ignored, unlike the homosexual lobby.

What makes me cross is the assumption by many people that these two guys booked into a B&B to have loud gay sex.
It's like the assumption that all gay men are going to fancy you because you are a man.

Has it crossed anyone's mind that they might have actually just wanted to go to sleep?
Maybe Edgar & Peter should check in together. It never seemed to spoil Morecome and Wise's popularity.

Im sure mr griffin and his bunch of nutters would like to go back to the days where you could proudly hang a sign:
"no blacks no dogs no irish"
Nasty bunch of s**ts.

BucksNationalist, what are you proposing : an LGBT-v-Muslims Smackdown at the Rye?

usvelt wrote:
Im sure mr griffin and his bunch of nutters would like to go back to the days where you could proudly hang a sign:
"no blacks no dogs no irish"
Nasty bunch of s**ts.

Perhaps they want to say; blacks welcome, dogs welcome, Irish welcome but 2 men sleeping in the same bed not welcome! And what is wrong with that?

sai-diva wrote:

Peter Cyprus wrote:
Whether you like Nick Griffin or not is irrelevant. The address of the B&B was made public so that the homosexual lobby were able to make threats, so why is it wrong for the address of the homosexuals to be made public? The whole charades was a sham. They could have gone to Brighton where they would have been most welcome, and they knew it. It was a total set up from start to finish!

So it's ok to limit the movements of people based on their sexual preferences then? I don't think it was set up, believe it or not the vast majority of homosexuals are not looking for a fight, most just want to get on with their lives and be treated equally and lawfully.Or is bershire just a bit too posh for that kind of thing.
It looks like griffin, who is a skid mark in society's underpants, has broken the law, and should be treated as such.

He is only a skid mark as far as you are concerned but of course you cannot accept that anyone can disagree with homosexuality. As I have already said homos can do what they want but to infringe on my right to free speech is non negotiable, and should be for every citizen of a "democratic" country, which the UK no longer is.

usvelt wrote:
Im sure mr griffin and his bunch of nutters would like to go back to the days where you could proudly hang a sign:
"no blacks no dogs no irish"
Nasty bunch of s**ts.

hurry up that day

Peter Cyprus wrote:

sai-diva wrote:

Peter Cyprus wrote:
Whether you like Nick Griffin or not is irrelevant. The address of the B&B was made public so that the homosexual lobby were able to make threats, so why is it wrong for the address of the homosexuals to be made public? The whole charades was a sham. They could have gone to Brighton where they would have been most welcome, and they knew it. It was a total set up from start to finish!

So it's ok to limit the movements of people based on their sexual preferences then? I don't think it was set up, believe it or not the vast majority of homosexuals are not looking for a fight, most just want to get on with their lives and be treated equally and lawfully.Or is bershire just a bit too posh for that kind of thing.
It looks like griffin, who is a skid mark in society's underpants, has broken the law, and should be treated as such.

He is only a skid mark as far as you are concerned but of course you cannot accept that anyone can disagree with homosexuality. As I have already said homos can do what they want but to infringe on my right to free speech is non negotiable, and should be for every citizen of a "democratic" country, which the UK no longer is.

Thank you Peter, about time the watering down on common decency was sorted out! I can't wait to hear the squealing gayboy "everythings against me" chant. About time they were treated as equals rather than another special"minority" case...they just love that!

swearmeister wrote:
What makes me cross is the assumption by many people that these two guys booked into a B&B to have loud gay sex. It's like the assumption that all gay men are going to fancy you because you are a man. Has it crossed anyone's mind that they might have actually just wanted to go to sleep? Maybe Edgar & Peter should check in together. It never seemed to spoil Morecome and Wise's popularity.

I'm not cross, not even slightly peeved, just sad that, as so often, the pro-homosexual brigade (if there's no such word as "heterophobe," it's about time it was invented) resort to infantile jibes more suited for the playground of a girls' preparatory school than an adult website.

Edgar Brooks wrote:

swearmeister wrote:
What makes me cross is the assumption by many people that these two guys booked into a B&B to have loud gay sex. It's like the assumption that all gay men are going to fancy you because you are a man. Has it crossed anyone's mind that they might have actually just wanted to go to sleep? Maybe Edgar & Peter should check in together. It never seemed to spoil Morecome and Wise's popularity.

I'm not cross, not even slightly peeved, just sad that, as so often, the pro-homosexual brigade (if there's no such word as "heterophobe," it's about time it was invented) resort to infantile jibes more suited for the playground of a girls' preparatory school than an adult website.

Really?
Look back on this thread,
I can see far more insults towards gay men then I can see towards hetrosexuals.

And as for your point that the B and B address was made public.
It is a business is it not?
Therefore it's address will be public.

Mr Totterdge Hill wrote:

Peter Cyprus wrote:

sai-diva wrote:

Peter Cyprus wrote:
Whether you like Nick Griffin or not is irrelevant. The address of the B&B was made public so that the homosexual lobby were able to make threats, so why is it wrong for the address of the homosexuals to be made public? The whole charades was a sham. They could have gone to Brighton where they would have been most welcome, and they knew it. It was a total set up from start to finish!

So it's ok to limit the movements of people based on their sexual preferences then? I don't think it was set up, believe it or not the vast majority of homosexuals are not looking for a fight, most just want to get on with their lives and be treated equally and lawfully.Or is bershire just a bit too posh for that kind of thing.
It looks like griffin, who is a skid mark in society's underpants, has broken the law, and should be treated as such.

He is only a skid mark as far as you are concerned but of course you cannot accept that anyone can disagree with homosexuality. As I have already said homos can do what they want but to infringe on my right to free speech is non negotiable, and should be for every citizen of a "democratic" country, which the UK no longer is.

Thank you Peter, about time the watering down on common decency was sorted out! I can't wait to hear the squealing gayboy "everythings against me" chant. About time they were treated as equals rather than another special"minority" case...they just love that!

Peter I think you gave up your rights to critisize this country when you moved to Cyprus.
As for the bnp and free speech, do you think that it is ok for people such as griffin and his neo nazi thug henchmen to incite violence which is what he does.
Love the use of the phrase 'common decency' coming from a man who has to use the term 'gayboys', and seems to support some of the insults being bandied about here. Common decency as long as it's the decency you decide is right is not common to all.
And |I would think that all these two gentlemen want is to be treated equally, ie, to be able to book a hotel room in advance without having to explain themselves, to be able to live without being abused by an mep.
So How many of you support griffin's stance on this, and his parties other 'policies'?

sai-diva wrote:

Mr Totterdge Hill wrote:

Peter Cyprus wrote:

sai-diva wrote:

Peter Cyprus wrote:
Whether you like Nick Griffin or not is irrelevant. The address of the B&B was made public so that the homosexual lobby were able to make threats, so why is it wrong for the address of the homosexuals to be made public? The whole charades was a sham. They could have gone to Brighton where they would have been most welcome, and they knew it. It was a total set up from start to finish!

So it's ok to limit the movements of people based on their sexual preferences then? I don't think it was set up, believe it or not the vast majority of homosexuals are not looking for a fight, most just want to get on with their lives and be treated equally and lawfully.Or is bershire just a bit too posh for that kind of thing.
It looks like griffin, who is a skid mark in society's underpants, has broken the law, and should be treated as such.

He is only a skid mark as far as you are concerned but of course you cannot accept that anyone can disagree with homosexuality. As I have already said homos can do what they want but to infringe on my right to free speech is non negotiable, and should be for every citizen of a "democratic" country, which the UK no longer is.

Thank you Peter, about time the watering down on common decency was sorted out! I can't wait to hear the squealing gayboy "everythings against me" chant. About time they were treated as equals rather than another special"minority" case...they just love that!

Peter I think you gave up your rights to critisize this country when you moved to Cyprus.
As for the bnp and free speech, do you think that it is ok for people such as griffin and his neo nazi thug henchmen to incite violence which is what he does.
Love the use of the phrase 'common decency' coming from a man who has to use the term 'gayboys', and seems to support some of the insults being bandied about here. Common decency as long as it's the decency you decide is right is not common to all.
And |I would think that all these two gentlemen want is to be treated equally, ie, to be able to book a hotel room in advance without having to explain themselves, to be able to live without being abused by an mep.
So How many of you support griffin's stance on this, and his parties other 'policies'?

As a UK taxpayer and citizen I have every right to comment on the situation in the country and am totally appalled that a supposedly democratic country is becoming more undemocratic day by day with the gay rights and other minorities stifling free speech. Having worked for 50 years to earn a meagre pension I am also very surprised that large amounts of cash can be found for minority causes when hospitals and schools are on the breadline together with hundreds of thousands of pensioners.

Peter Cyprus wrote:

sai-diva wrote:

Mr Totterdge Hill wrote:

Peter Cyprus wrote:

sai-diva wrote:

Peter Cyprus wrote:
Whether you like Nick Griffin or not is irrelevant. The address of the B&B was made public so that the homosexual lobby were able to make threats, so why is it wrong for the address of the homosexuals to be made public? The whole charades was a sham. They could have gone to Brighton where they would have been most welcome, and they knew it. It was a total set up from start to finish!

So it's ok to limit the movements of people based on their sexual preferences then? I don't think it was set up, believe it or not the vast majority of homosexuals are not looking for a fight, most just want to get on with their lives and be treated equally and lawfully.Or is bershire just a bit too posh for that kind of thing.
It looks like griffin, who is a skid mark in society's underpants, has broken the law, and should be treated as such.

He is only a skid mark as far as you are concerned but of course you cannot accept that anyone can disagree with homosexuality. As I have already said homos can do what they want but to infringe on my right to free speech is non negotiable, and should be for every citizen of a "democratic" country, which the UK no longer is.

Thank you Peter, about time the watering down on common decency was sorted out! I can't wait to hear the squealing gayboy "everythings against me" chant. About time they were treated as equals rather than another special"minority" case...they just love that!

Peter I think you gave up your rights to critisize this country when you moved to Cyprus.
As for the bnp and free speech, do you think that it is ok for people such as griffin and his neo nazi thug henchmen to incite violence which is what he does.
Love the use of the phrase 'common decency' coming from a man who has to use the term 'gayboys', and seems to support some of the insults being bandied about here. Common decency as long as it's the decency you decide is right is not common to all.
And |I would think that all these two gentlemen want is to be treated equally, ie, to be able to book a hotel room in advance without having to explain themselves, to be able to live without being abused by an mep.
So How many of you support griffin's stance on this, and his parties other 'policies'?

As a UK taxpayer and citizen I have every right to comment on the situation in the country and am totally appalled that a supposedly democratic country is becoming more undemocratic day by day with the gay rights and other minorities stifling free speech. Having worked for 50 years to earn a meagre pension I am also very surprised that large amounts of cash can be found for minority causes when hospitals and schools are on the breadline together with hundreds of thousands of pensioners.

I think it has been said before, but if you think that this country is democratic,you are mistaken.
I'm sorry that you worked for 50(blimey how old are you?) years to get a meagre pension, but that is not the fault of any 'minority causes'. If you chose to invest unwisely, or were foolish enough to believe the state would carry you through your retirement just because you paid your tax and ni, then that's down to you.
Free speech is not stifled in this country, if it were we wouldn't have to put up with extremists from both sides of the political and relgious divides. Being allowed to speak out against inequalities is part of free speech. The problem with griffin and his like is that they use free speech to turn one group against another.
You have boasted on here in the past that you are glad that you don't have to put up with one thing or another because you have moved to Cyprus, I just think that weakens your argument somewhat.If you live in Cyprus, how does the action of 2 men in berkshire affect you?
If you are concerned that pensioners are getting a raw deal, start a campaign, write to your mp, vote for a party that will support pensioners. Don't blame the ills of the country on 'minority causes'

@Peter Cyprus

As a UK taxpayer and citizen I have every right to comment on the situation in the country and am totally appalled that a supposedly democratic country is becoming more undemocratic day by day with the gay rights and other minorities stifling free speech

Maybe you'd like to point out when you consider this country to have been democratic (or at its most democratic)?

It's not, it never was; it probably never will be. But gay rights are not stifling free speech - only someone terminally stupid or a regular reader of the Daily Mail could possibly think this was the case.

What I find so worrying about the whole thing is not that its one minority group getting it over on an individual but that that it seems that no one can have any personal views, feelings, likes or dislikes other other than what a loud vocal group or the media wants, weather its right or wrong is now irreverent and has been lost in all the shouting.

What ever happened to personal conscience out side the approved line of thought or is it now wrong to have personal feelings on any subject.

If so then its Welcome back to the new dark age with the killing of free speech and thought.

demoness the second wrote:

Edgar Brooks wrote:

swearmeister wrote:
What makes me cross is the assumption by many people that these two guys booked into a B&B to have loud gay sex. It's like the assumption that all gay men are going to fancy you because you are a man. Has it crossed anyone's mind that they might have actually just wanted to go to sleep? Maybe Edgar & Peter should check in together. It never seemed to spoil Morecome and Wise's popularity.

I'm not cross, not even slightly peeved, just sad that, as so often, the pro-homosexual brigade (if there's no such word as "heterophobe," it's about time it was invented) resort to infantile jibes more suited for the playground of a girls' preparatory school than an adult website.

Really?
Look back on this thread,
I can see far more insults towards gay men then I can see towards hetrosexuals.

And as for your point that the B and B address was made public.
It is a business is it not?
Therefore it's address will be public.

Does that mean that every business must trade with every person or company that want to use its services even if they don't want to.

On that logic no business can refuse to sell to anyone who has the money. Sorry but that's silly and totally against personal choice.