Enter the leader of the BNP…

Last night the leader of the British National Party, Nick Griffin, was welcomed by the popular political program, Question Time. His appearance on the show has been that of great controversy, and the fuel behind a series of protests leading up to the show.

The first issue, addressed to opposers of the BNP, is as follows: is it right to let a representative of the BNP onto the program to join the debate and have questions posed to him like any other political party? Yes it is. It is so clearly is it right to do so that I must admit I find it hard to understand why some people disagree with letting him on the show. Opposers of the BNP believe in diversity, tolerance, and acceptance of other people, no matter what their background, race, or views are, so long as they’re not physically threatening. So why be intolerant of another man’s views because they differ at such a fundamental level? It’s hypocritical. In this country we have the freedom of speech to voice any opinion, and, given that the BNP has received enough votes to bring two of its members into the European Parliament, it is right that the BBC respects and represents the views of this proportion of voters by allowing the BNP to represent themselves on Question Time. Furthermore, suppressing a faction’s viewpoint is not the way to defeat this viewpoint. The way to do so is to have the debate, as they did last night, allowing the party to express their views, and of course, to challenge them. It should then be down to the public to decide their stance towards the party. If the nation watched the program last night, and the majority were won over by Griffin’s views, so much so that he wins the next general election – so be it. Let speech be free and open, and the public will decide. This is democracy, as opposed to surpression.

The show was executed well, the audience allowed Griffin’s views to be heard, and posed decent, intellectual questions to him, demonstrating strong political arguments. The whole purpose of the show was fulfilled, to allow the BNP to represent themselves, discuss their political viewpoints, and to answer questions posed by the public. But was the show biased? Well, it’s perhaps hard to find other panelists that come towards the side of the political spectrum Griffin was representing, so the show appeared to be a four vs. one fight for the majority. But that’s how the political battle is. No other political figures have the same views as Griffin. But it wasn’t always Griffin on his own. Labour’s immigration policy was brought into question, where it appeared Jack Straw (who opened by superbly contrasting Winston Churchill’s views to that of the BNP) was on his own.

What the show managed to achieve was that it displayed Nick Griffin for who he really was. He demonstrated a deluded view of society,  a many-faced approach to comments made over past years, a lack of an ability to back his points up with appropriate evidence, and a way of handling issues that resembled that of a young child, clapping and smirking away in a most unprofessional manner. The BNP failed last night to demonstrate their viewpoint appropriately, and why this viewpoint is the correct way for the British society.

But now the show’s finished, and low and behold Griffin’s just appeared on the news claiming the show’s format had been changed and that the show was subject to bias. “That was not a genuine question time, that was a lynch mob,” Griffin claims. No it wasn’t. That was the majority of the British public’s views, arguing to a man who could clearly be seen to be struggling to make any effective counter arguments without further angering the audience. People exceedingly disagree with you, Griffin! The format of the show was not changed. How on earth was it? The audience took turns in making points and questions to the panel, and the issues that they felt were most important to discuss was the BNP. MPs on previous Question Times did not complain when the entire program was focused on their expenses. It’s what the public wants to discuss. It’s the current issues of the day. The diversely selected audience may bring up any issue they wish, and the issues on the minds of the audience was the BNP. What a chance to discuss these issues, and of course this chance was taken, and the BNP was shown up and brought down. Roll over Nick Griffin.

Understanding the MU0 Processor

In hopefully a single page…

The MU0 processor is a very basic processor used at the University of Manchester to teach students the fundamentals of a CPU architecture. It is abstract design used for teaching purposes. The MU0 features at the start of the 2nd Year Computer Science COMP25111 Operating Systems course. I’m just going to run through how I understand this processor to work in my own terms. I’m not going to mention low level gate stuff because as far as I can see we don’t need to be concerned with that low level an abstraction for the Operating Systems course! Please try and follow this through with the diagrams provided by the University.

MU0 is a single-address processor, which means that each of the instructions only ever have one address in the instruction at most (the other two are implied). The effect of this is that it may take a considerable amount more instructions in order to achieve the same thing you could do with two-address architecture. It’s more basic. The processor is also only 16 bit. This means that each instruction can have, at most, 16 bits to it. Hence, it’s only a one-address processor – there’s only enough space in the instruction for one address. Of the 16 bits, 4 of them are allocated to the instruction type and are known as the ‘f’-bits, leaving 12 bits for instruction information, known as the ‘s’-bits.

The processor has three registers;

  • IR (instruction register for storing the current loaded instruction)
  • ACC (accumulator for storing a working value)
  • PC (program counter for storing the current position in the instruction set).

It also has an adder for doing all it’s computation (also known here as the ALU, or Arithmetic Logic Unit, and not to be confused with the ACC register). Here are the seven instructions available for use with this processor design:

Sorry for poor quality – couldn’t work out how to do a table in WordPress!

This is great so far. We can now understand how to write a program using this processor as we have all the instructions in front of us. This is also the specification for the processor design, and our problem is how to implement these registers and instructions. So what we need is a design that incorporates the features we’ve just outlined. The design will be achieved using two sections to the processor, a datapath and a control. The datapath is responsible for following the instructions and interpreting them, and the control is responsible for controlling components by enabling and disabling them, and setting those with options to the right state (the adder/ALU will need three states). These two sections of the processor will be synchronized using a global clock. A reset will be wired up to both too so that if the reset is flicked, the whole processor resets, not just one section.


On each clock cycle (each pulse of the CPU where everything happens), the MU0 processor will be in one of two states; fetch and execute. On the fetch “pulse” the MU0 ‘fetches’ (gets) an instruction from the memory (instructions begin at the first address in memory i.e. #000) as indicated by the PC (initially set to #0000) and loads it into the IR. The ACC/ALU side of the datapath does nothing. For simplicity we can say that the PC auto-increments without going into the lower levels, which happens at the end of the Fetch cycle.


Now we wait for the next clock strike. When this happens, the MU0 switches to the execute state, and depending on the instruction that’s just been loaded, the ALU may do one of three things with the ‘s’ bits of the instruction. It will either perform an addition of s to the ACC, make a similar subtraction, or simply bypass (pass through unchanged) s. Any necessary change to the ACC (if it’s an add/sub) or PC (if it’s a jump) will be performed, and after the execution of the Execute state, the processor will wait for the clock to strike again, and then return back to the Fetch state. The PC has been incremented from the last time the processor was in the Fetch state, so the next instruction will be loaded, and so on.

If the reset is switched, the state returns to Fetch, and if the stp instruction is processed, the state remains in Execute (not further processes are ‘fetched’).

The control of course is key, and I can’t write too much about it, as it’s the basis of the first lab exercise. Although I will say this. Each instruction needs to use the components of the CPU in a slightly different way (there’s no two same instructions). The control basically lets each component (including memory as it needs to be read or write enabled) needs to know what way to act differently for that instruction. The eight control bits outlined on the diagram below of the MU0 datapath design display eight different ‘options’ for controlling the components. If you’ve managed to follow how the CPU has been put together and what each instruction does, it should be clear which settings the control needs to set in order for each instruction to perform the right thing. Note that the control’s main input from the datapath is the four F bits (data out on the diagram). The datapath tells the control at this point which instruction it’s working with, and the control sets the the eight control bits accordingly.


Just to let you know I spoke to some other student’s whilst writing this for clarification on some issues.

We’re all learning! There may well be errors so please let me know if you find one. If anyone has any issues or something’s not clear let me know and I’ll make changes, and I hope this helped and please leave comments!