Imagine David Attenborough’s version of Proud and Prejudiced. He’d most likely take the anthropologist’s view of the inhabitants of Luton. He’d examine Islamist Sayful, the dominant male, and peer at the female of the species, squawking as they flock together in their black head-to-toe plumage; the males, beards glistening luxuriantly, displaying. He might scrutinise the indigenous tribe, their dull appearance enlivened by the odd tattoo, and perhaps allude to its vigorous attempts to defend its miserable territory, driven by a fear that the invading species threatens to drive it to extinction. Would David have used the word ‘misguided’ to describe Tommy Robinson as the C4 narrator did early on in the programme? Would he have warned the audience to distrust his emphatic protestations that the EDL wasn’t based on racism?
There was no need for any explanation from the narrator regarding the Islamist inhabitants of Luton. They did exactly what it says on their tin. They behaved like the ludicrous cartoon characters they obviously were.
However much the programme makers wanted to portray the EDL as the ideological equivalent of the radical extremists, Tommy Robinson and his fellow EDLers wouldn’t play ball. They persisted in conducting themselves within reasonable bounds of respectability, forcing the filmmakers to resort to simply telling the audience that they were liars. A stupid childish drunken episode was mustered up, which somewhat dented Tommy’s credibility, but a couple of shots of tattooed, chanting shaven-headed men giggling as they behaved badly hardly amounted to the ideological equivalent of the religious rabble hell-bent on imposing their will upon a hitherto complacent majority.
I realise that this was not a BBC programme, unlike the Stacey Dooley’s strangely blindfolded effort aimed at BBC3’s youth orientated audience. But it is alarming that the press have almost unanimously swallowed the moral equivalence that the programme makers were driving at, apparently taking it on board wholeheartedly. The BBC’s continual portrayal of Islam as if it embodies righteousness on a par with applehood and mother pie plays no mean part in this tectonic swindle.
Take the Huffington Post. (please) Mark Hawker thinks the Jihad is a mere war of words. But he reveals a little more about the tint of his lenses when he continues: “Their anger at UK foreign policy is understandable, in my view.” So that’s his opinion filed in room 101.
But the Telegraph?
Andrew Marszal’s review was a diatribe warning us not to fall for the lies of Tommy Robinson. His final paragraph tells us what, in his opinion, was the most chilling thing the film had shown:
”But perhaps the documentary’s most chilling moment came when Robinson, out on a drinking binge, began doing “humorous” impersonations of Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Breivik, who killed 77 people in a bomb blast and gun rampage in Norway last year. Breivik claimed to be an EDL sympathiser – a disturbing reminder of how high the stakes in this quarrel really are.”
No mate. I’d say Andrew Marszal in the Telegraph writing such tripe is a much better reminder.
Haven’t seen either programme (sound worth health warnings for sanctimonious left wing twattery), but if the problem is Islam, the answer definitely is not the closet Nazi EDL, anymore than the answer to Hitler was Communism.
You might well have your reasons for denouncing the EDL and calling them Nazis, but there was nothing in either of those programmes which substantiated that accusation. If there was such evidence in the public domain the programme makers would probably have made use of it.
I know the BNP have a history of racism, and their attempts to reinvent themselves haven’t fooled many people. The EDL is usually tarred with the same brush, and Stephen Lennon/Tommy Robinson’s brief association with them, which he says he broke off when he found out that ‘his black mates’ weren’t allowed to join, wasn’t in itself enough to justify labelling him with the racist tag in order to dismiss him out of hand.
Tommy Robinson is undoubtedly a rough tough old lad, albeit with a surprisingly articulate manner and undoubted charisma, but in comparison to Sayful Islam’s bunch there’s no contest. Robinson comes nowhere near the radical Islamic fanatics in the hierarchy of dangerous rogues.
I’m aware of the EDL’s cynical use of the Israeli flag and their suspect exploitation of Jews and gays, which they trot out to rationalise their political unpalatability, and I don’t think their seal of approval helps the Israeli cause in any way whatsoever. But if no-one else is prepared to stand up to Sayful’s rabble, I’m all for it.
And I don’t much like the MSM’s reflexive ‘plague on both their houses’ knee-jerk reaction.
“But if no-one else is prepared to stand up to Sayful’s rabble, I’m all for it.”
If you think the EDL are just demonstrating against “Muslim Extremistis” you must be incredably niave.
Have the recent EDL demonstrations in Liverpool been because those accused are “Muslim Extremistis”? Or was it because they were known to be Asian; and therefore probably Muslim?
[Not “Muslim Extremist” – just “Muslim”]
Where was the EDL demonstration during this trial two months ago?
“Police described the case as one of the most horrific incidents of child abuse they have ever investigated“
Was it mentioned on this blog?
Can you even remember it happening?
What the EDL (of which I’m not a supporter) were demonstrating against was the racist nature of the abuse by the Liverpool gang. I quickly looked at the link you provided and couldn’t see the racist element in that case – please enlighten me as to what I missed.
And there’s no “probably” in the fact the gang were Muslims, so don’t hide behind the BBC smokescreen of using the word “Asian” which is insulting to the other people from that continent.
“What the EDL (of which I’m not a supporter) were demonstrating against was the racist nature of the abuse by the Liverpool gang.”
The EDL were demonstrating against racism!
“Muslim pedos off our streets”
You got away last time, but two hit and runs in a row make you a serial offender.
Naughty step if you don’t hand yourself in this time.
Why do you cite that particular quote from my comment I wonder? I’ll assume it was because you thought I support the EDL and have been bamboozled by their claims that they weren’t racist?
Then you implied that they must be racist, because not only did they demonstrate against the more obviously subversive Islamic brothers, they also demonstrated against “Asians” who had not yet been identified as Muslims, and furthermore, the crimes these men were accused of were identical to crimes perpetrated by white non Muslim paedophiles, about which the EDL did not demonstrate, and about which this blog did not comment.
There are so many holes in the logic of this argument that I don’t know where to begin, and since you have a history of ignoring my responses to your hits I think I’ll leave it there. If you want to discuss this you’re more than welcome, and I will respond if you want.
In my piece I was trying to point out that that the programme attempted to show a falsehood, namely that there was exact moral equivalence between the EDL and Sayful’s band of brothers. Because they couldn’t show this by merely running the footage, they had to stick it into the narration.
The episode that they did catch on camera, and which some people have milked to death, was a drunken bad-taste joke, which people unlike myself, who drink too much, ought to be able to put in context and twig that it was a demonstration of Tommy’s naivety rather than a revelation that his secret motive was to be the next Anders Breivik.
“Why do you cite that particular quote from my comment I wonder?”
Because I disagreed with it.
“I’ll assume it was because you thought I support the EDL and have been bamboozled by their claims that they weren’t racist?
You assume rather more than you listen.
If you agree that the EDL are nothing more than a bunch of idiot, racist thugs; then I congratulate you.
Yet when other regular posters on this blog make idiotic, racist comments you remain completely silent.
Why is that?
“Sayful’s band of brothers… …Tommy’s naivety”
Seems like you consider some flavours of bigotry better than others.
Is that really what you think?
I was surprised you bothered to answer, so you proved me wrong about that.
Some workmen severed a cable and disconnected 200 people’s phone lines, including mine; but they worked tirelessly for two days, down a hole, joining the bits together.
Hence late reply.
But your comment “Because I disagreed with it” Doesn’t make sense.
I asked why you cited this particular quote from my original piece, viz: “But if no-one else is prepared to stand up to Sayful’s rabble, I’m all for it.”
It’s me who’s all for it. How can you disagree with that? I think I should know what I’m all for, should I not?
If I assumed wrong, please explain. I’ll listen.
I don’t agree that the EDL are nothing more than a bunch of idiot racist thugs. Stephen Lennon is no idiot. I don’t know any of the others. As a group they do look rough, and they’re probably doing what they do because of boredom, maybe stupidity, anger, resentment about their own inadequacy or whatever you like. But the fact is that most of those characteristics apply to Sayful Islam’s moronic followers tenfold.
The difference is that Islamists have managed to claim immunity from criticism because they’ve persuaded a lot of gullible folk that their grievance-based politics is untouchable because it’s “a religion.”
Tommy Robinson’s naivety lay in allowing his childish Anders Breivik role-play to be filmed by a hostile film company. It was the only thing that the filmmakers had to substantiate their claim of moral equivalence between the radical Islamists and the EDL. He should have known better than to do such a stupid thing in front of the cameras.
It’s not my role to police other commenters’ remarks. I write a piece, and I answer criticisms directed at me, that’s it.
I certainly do consider some flavours of bigotry better than others. Who doesn’t?
sorry this has to be on a defunct thread.
Thank you for your reasoned and polite reply.
” ‘But if no-one else is prepared to stand up to Sayful’s rabble, I’m all for it.’ It’s me who’s all for it. How can you disagree with that?”
Sayful, Muslims 4 crusades, et al, are miniscule organisations with an absolutely tiny handfull of supporters.
Thanks (at least in part) to the EDL’s “opposition” they have achieved a level of publicity practically unheard of for any other group with less than a couple of hundred supporters.
You might well make excuses for good ol’ “Tommy” being a bit “naive” with jokes about Anders Breivik on camera. But when he talks about; “They’re breeding at en times faster than us…”, who do you think he’s talking about?
“I certainly do consider some flavours of bigotry better than others. Who doesn’t?”
Are you really sure about that?
Rendezvous on a defunct thread. Nobody here but us chickens.
Thank you, and I do like to think I am polite and reasoning, but I can’t accept your points. For instance, how do you know that Sayful’s extremists are insignificant?
I wish you were right, but stats and polls tell a different story.
These are the vociferous ones, I agree, but I don’t think the publicity they’ve achieved is due to the EDL’s antics. Sayful and Anjem and their respective disciples are inherently publicity-seeking. The disproportionate amount of publicity they get stems from a complicated collection of social phenomena, I’m sure you’ll concede.
I do think allowing that infantile episode to be filmed was a naive blunder by Tommy. Anyone who has a film crew following them round ought to stay sober. Impersonating Breivik was a joke, and he should have known that it would be exploited by his many critics.
There is concern about the high birth rate in the Muslim world. Apparently it’s predicted to fall by 2030, but it’s still relatively high. (Both worldwide and UK) Demographics. You may not think that’s relevant, but perhaps if their ire was directed at you and yours, you might think differently.
“I certainly do consider some flavours of bigotry better than others. Who doesn’t?” It was flippant, but it depends what you mean by bigotry. We all make generalisations, which can come across as bigotry. So I am really sure that some bigotry is fairly unimportant.
Scez, you know perfectly well that all the accused are Muslim. Typical dishonesty from a defender of BBC bias. Thanks for reminding us once more just what we’re up against.
“you know perfectly well that all the accused are Muslim.”
Erm, no I don’t and neither do you unless you can point me towards an offical source which states the accused religious beliefs?
Not that I’m particularly bothered either way. But for some reason the religion of those on trial in Liverpool concerns you greatly.
Yet, the religion of those convicted here:
Police described the case as one of the most horrific incidents of child abuse they have ever investigated
Is of no interest to you whatsoever.
Why the apparent double standards hippiepooter?
No, the their religion matters greatly too you, that’s why you’re trying to deflect from it.
Your allies in the global anti-Judeo/Christian pogrom must be defended at all costs Scez.
With regard to the white low-life you refer to, how do you know they have a religion?
Maybe they’d been reading tracts from great secularists like Richard Dawkins and Peter Tatchell that made them think it was OK to nonce children?
Beggars can’t be choosers. Those of us stuck in ‘enriched’ areas don’t have the luxury of waiting for the beeboid Christian Defence League to rise up from the wine bars & take it to the fascists of the crescent moon. With our government seemingly paralysed by Allah’s headlights, our senior police politicised by cultural Marxist ideology, our local councils working out of the mosques, there aren’t going to be many options open to non-muslims prepared to defend what’s left of their country. The urgency, desperation, of the situation has to be experienced first hand. When a big muslim crew comes rampaging down my street, I’d rather be standing next to the EDL than the Quilliam Foundation.
A very good point. Odd wasn’t it, that the documentary left UAF completely unexamined, given that although it is funded by mass trade union levies and receives the backing of all mainstream parties and politicians – David Cameron included – it is a creature of the SWP’s Central Committee, with two of its members – Weyman Bennett and Martin Smith heading up the campaign group? Hardly objective or peaceful I would wager. It would be good to see Dispatches do an expose on UAF and the SWP. For more, see the review here: http://durotrigan.blogspot.com/2012/02/review-proud-and-prejudiced-channel-4.html
well said sir, well bloody said!
Ah, the Tattoo Libel. Vilifying EDL is part of the formula “we’re not wacist” in media discourse. By so doing, abandon the local population “to be colonised by Pakistani immigrants”, if you object, you must be wacist. Its not multicultural its Islamic Suprematism at work. Submission. Roll the day all BBC girlie presenters have to appear on the sofa in full burquas, to preserve their modesty. Reap what they have sown.
We know how we got onto this mess. Labour’s intentional re-engineering of the English population through open-door immigration, compounded by “we’re not nasty” fake-Tories.
What I don’t know is how England can get out of this mess. We can’t all move to Dorset (Billy)
yawn! … much of this pap was pulled from a current tv!!!!
(i know i know, 😀 but hear me out) documentary, “islamophobia”
and well… if that doesn t tell you everything? 😀 .
You are right Sue, there is no equivalence, between the EDL aims
its nationwide,(and growing) support, and ideology following islamic fascists, absolutely none!.
Easily identified as thats why there are jewish, gay, black, sikh etc members in the EDL.
and nutjob islamic fascists, well they just have the UAF? … Orwellian or what.
Its a big ask, but if Robinson, keeps his house in order, he s well used to the likes of bbc/ch4 by now, i think they will continue to grow,
It will have to come from the ground up anyway, our spineless wonders in No10, will only ever ride on coat-tails, so he s got to keep it up.
Ch 4 seem to be losing the little respectability they had, after
dispatches undercover mosque, and the hilarious “ass whuppin” they gave george galloway on press tv, i think there is another probable
shocker on the way this week, make bradford british, the tv ad appears to be using some white chap (braincell singular), as their stooge … hmm not promising …. possible victimfest?
I sat and watched that programme – yes, all of it, though I was tempted just to go to bed.
One or two observations:
1). Thank God (or some other deity) I no longer live in the Former UK.
2). Thank God (or some other deity) I never lived in Luton.
3). I don’t understand why decent people of good English stock don’t rise up as one and beat the living shit out of these murderous Islamic nutters, once and for all, then do the same to the EDL.
4). The stereotypes of the EDL don’t do a lot to promote their cause
5). I’m SO glad I’m no longer a copper…
6). I shall watch (probably half -heartedly) the thing about Bradford on Channel 4 on Thursday.
Bradford, old Yorkshire town now an extension of the third world. Mind you, it won’t be long before the rest of the Former UK becomes Bradford, or Bolton, or Blackburn or Southall, or wherever.
How I remember and miss the old days, in almost every way.
Mulitculturalism? Stuff it.
The colonisation of Bradford started in earnest in the 1960s and much of the damage, and I make no apology for describing it that way, occurred under Tory governments. In that respect I disagree with London Calling’s comment, above, although I agree that the disgusting Blair and Brown made it worse.
Bradford has a long tradition of tolerance (Pakistani immigration is only the most recent wave, but it is certainly the largest). Some people will applaud the fact that it did not give rise to a Bradford version of the EDL, but what has that tolerance achieved? Nothing!
We can continue parading our tolerance, sophistication, compassion, lack of working class oikiness, if we want. Eventually, however, we might have to accept that we’ve appeased ourselves out of existence.
Natsman, type in t.sw. in Google and enjoy a trip down memory lane, when England was still a country and a proud one at that.
“Whose a naughty Abdul? What’s Allah going to say when he finds out?”
“I’m SO glad I’m no longer a copper”
After coming out with rubbish like “I don’t understand why decent people of good English stock don’t rise up as one and beat the living shit out of these murderous Islamic nutters”, I think we’re all better off without you in the police.
Do you have a problem with the sentiment, Scott, or with it coming from an former policeman, which casts you in the role of the Thought Police.
Any police officer who wishes that one sector of the public they serve should “rise up as one and beat the living shit” out of anybody should not only be an ex-copper, they’re clearly unfit to have ever joined the service in the first place.
I’m not surprised that there are people on Biased BBC who don’t see the problem with Natsman’s sentiments, mind. There do seem an awful lot of people here who want to think with their fists rather than with their head. Maybe they just find the latter too complicated?
The deluded, shrill voice of the English Gay Islamic Appeasement League. You have much to look forward to, Scott M. Bums up for Mecca.
With homobigots like Scez anyone who kills Christians have to be good in their book.
I notice Scez, how you dont express any objection to people doing the same to the EDL.
Won`t be watching it, but grateful to you Sue as ever.
The whole history of Islam is that it is only “liberal” whenever and wherever it is weak.
Whenever and wherever it is strong, then it is a pitiless steamroller that tortureds dissent or equivocation out of its domain.
It is in the very DNA of the bastard desert child of half-baked recollections of passing Jews and Christians through the Arab deserts…which is all Islam amounts to.
A political theology at the point of a sword with bloody borders wherever and whenever it comes up against Buddhism/Confucianism/Sikhs/Hindus…and of course Jews and Christians.
That they will end up lopping off the heads of the EU/UN pet projects of fey liberalism is their lookout…they won`t stand a chance against the Judeo-Christian axis as long as the USA?Israel and all good people get their history from the original sources…not f888in Simon Schama and the like.
I`ve decided to get a bit grumpy now whenever my Prophet(PBUH) is belittled and besmirched by the BBC…Thompson seems to rather fear that!
Goes by the name of Isa bin Maryam…and thanks to our blogger that gave us this translation….Jesus by any other name.
I did watch it after all.
1. Why were the Islamic hate-mongers pixillated , but the EDL clearly visible then?
2. The Islamic assault on Robinson as shown at the start of the show…any action taken?
3. The Islamist was quite proud of using his 7-yeat old boy as a shield to protect himself…and notice another kid being similarly used at the arrest at the end…no chance of social services from “Luton In Harmony” Borough Council thinking this abusive is there…just asking!
In short-the mealy-mouthed efforts to be balanced backfired…the EDL are far more sympathetic to most who will watch this show, and all Robinson needs is a few clever types around himself, and he`s the future for the coming South East Eurozone should he want it!
Aaah but normal rules of privacy do not apply to Nazis do they? You cant expect the BBC to hide the identities of Nazis, they need to be shown in the full so neighbours can dole out much deserved justice, no human rights for Nazis, not least because we are not human like the muslim ‘militants’ do not have a just and reasonable cause to be rage filled like the followers of Mo. I mean the followers of Mo have every right to be rage filled, the EDL have been shelling and bombing their homes for months now and where is the UN? Thousands of innocent rage filled islamic peace loving ‘millitants’ have been killed by the EDL and its leader Assad.
Yes the EDL, never before have so many suicide killing women abusing black clad Nazis been so utterly rampant and dangerous, why its only a matter of time before the BBC in association with the UAF demands that the name and address of every EDL member is posted and each member can be legally hunted down and exterminated.
1. Why were the Islamic hate-mongers pixillated , but the EDL clearly visible then?
Why because we all know how violent those nasty, nasty white folk are and how peaceful and tolerant Muslims are.
The programme is worth seeing, although I agree about the ridiculous and unnecessary editorialising. This seemed aimed at “balancing” a programme which made the EDL look clearly the less sinister group, which must have upset the makers. There was a Coppers episode last year that dealt with an EDL / UAF showdown and there the producers were honest enough to stand back and let what they recorded speak for itself – the UAF came across infinitely worse. It’s notable that while there was much mention of the UAF in Proud & Prejudiced, they were hardly shown.
I didn’t think Tommy Morrison came across very well. At times he makes his case well, elsewhere he makes enough of a tit of himself to undermine the whole message. It’s a crying shame that the populist right in this country allows itself to be led by the likes of him and Nick Griffin, who allow the left to easily portray them as troublemaking skinheads. If only Britain had a Geert Wilders.
However there is really no comparison between Morrison and the lunatics ranting about how they’re going to subjugate us and what they’re going to do to homosexuals and how terrorism is justified.
On the whole I rate Channel 4’s documentary output far higher than the BBC’s. Coppers is the best show of its kind on the telly. This isn’t one of their best but ignore the editorialising and it is a rare glimpse from the mainstream media of the cuckoo we’ve allowed into the nest.
“It’s a crying shame that the populist right in this country allows itself to be led by the likes of him and Nick Griffin, who allow the left to easily portray them as troublemaking skinheads. If only Britain had a Geert Wilders.”
There is one…Paul Weston of the British Freedom Party.
See interviews here and here.
He does a much better job of articulating many of the concerns people have about immigration and Islam than the EDL. Now he just needs to get some fair and unbiased coverage to give him a voice and a platform. Therein lies the problem.
First link is wrong (has doubled up with BBBC link on top of DT link)
You can clearly see who the greater threat to society is though cant you? Just one look at the shifty eyes and rat like faces of the EDL Nazi abteilung kommando tells you all you need to know about these Nazis.
How many innocent civilians have been murdered by the EDL? It must be in the thousands by now, their suicide bomber detachments are up and ready and just waitng for the order from Sturmbahnfuhrer Robinson.
Yes its a hard life being a Nazi terrorist EDL supporter, shaven headed and those big boots cost the earth these days and what with all the fertilizer we have been buying..er to…uhm help our roses grow better we hardly have any money left to buy 12yr old girls for forced domestic servitude and marriage. Of course there are no other kinds of EDL supporters, the BBC makes sure we dont get to see or God forbid talk to any ordinary EDL supporter lest we get the wrong idea.
Anyway have to go my MK5 panther tank is ready to collect and I am due in Poland ASAP. Seig Heil everyone and have a nice day. Oh and just remember ALL nationalists are evil nazis, no exceptions….apart from Scottish nationalists and Welsh nationalists and African nationalists and every other approved nationalist group, you must be part of an approved nationalist group. The English are certainly NOT an approved nationalist group so we are all evil jackbooted skinheaded Nazis. Now remember children, if you see an English nationalist they are evil Nazis.
Hauptsturmfuhrer Cassie & cats whose names I have changed to stormtrooper and master race.
A year in the making, it must have been so dissapointing for the programme makers to see that Mr Robbinson is not the racist that they would love to be able to portray him as (although they’ll still do their best). Robbinson did well to stand up infront of a crowd and publically declare his support for one of the sikh members there – would any of the programme makers or BBC liberal luvies have the courage to do so under the same circumstances ?
The World Service broadcast a report on the Oscar winning documentary “Saving Face”. A film about the plastic surgery undertaken in Pakistan on women who have been disfigured by acid.
How does that happen? Some Bhopal type outrage? Dangerous work in the Nike sweatshops? We were not told. But like a good Westerner I accept my guilt in the affair.
Hippiepooter – what do you base your accusations of Nazism on, reading the Daily Mail perchance ?
Attenburgh might assume the women were dead since they are already wearing shrouds.
While I have no love for the EDL (would they want to deport me back to Scotland?) I do wonder why while anybody to the right of centre has to emphasise they do not support the extremists, while those on the left like the BBC never feel any need to distance themselves from the far left.
Is it because one is the extremism of the thug and the other the extremism of the intellectual?
“I do wonder why while anybody to the right of centre has to emphasise they do not support the extremists”
Far too apologetic, that’s why.
“Is it because one is the extremism of the thug and the other the extremism of the intellectual?”
A great line! Well asked, Mr. Todd.
Nick Cohen’s latest book ‘You Can’t Read This Book’, covers many of the themes from this programme. Predominantly the failure of the Left and so called liberals to confront radical Islam. Cultural relativism at its worst. Shows the cowardice of our ‘moral superiors.’
You must also read The Retreat of Reason, by Anthony Browne; an excellent polemic and exposition on the lies and tyranny of political correctness. You ill find it on Amazon for a few quid 🙂
Nick Cohen ( a “leftie”) is one of the very few journalists with the sense and the balls to point to the truth about the incursion of Islam.
The rest are pig-ignorant, blase or appeasers.
With the BBC well in the lead.
I saw the film and, as David mentioned, apart from Tommy Robinson behaving like a childish dick/drunk out on the town, he came across as level- headed, and to be honest spoke pretty much the truth which the politically correct simply can’t bear to hear. They resort to name calling instead as they haven’t the intellectual or factual capacity to engage in or address the reality that these Islamic extremists are Nazi-like thugs who will stop at nothing in trying to dominate everything and everyone. But the worst offenders of all are those aiding and abetting through their cowardice and conspicuous silence to stand up against the encroachment of extremist islam.
Yes, he was a wally at one point, but no worse than many others.
And when he mentioned the pressures and crap he gets, for no salary and only pestering and threats…to be honest, I didn`t begrudge him at all, on reflection.
Surprised the Met didn`t do him for saying “God Bless you all” in a public forum…without being registered at the local imams anyway!
Erm, throwing stones at policemen as part of his ‘recreation’ on a night out showed him to be the yob people say he is.
Great interview with the excellent Paul Weston of The British Freedom Party, which are becoming the political wing of the EDL.
I’ve followed this guys blogs and essays for some time and he’s always impressed me.
He’s accused of being a ‘Nazi’ by the usual politically-naive feaks of UAF etc. so he’s definitely doing something right!
Thanks mate, I really like the look and sound of this bloke. I think we could be on to a winner with this. Fingers crossed and I look forward to hearing more from The British Freedom Party.
Thanks for this.
A pleasure to see a proper interview, and so unlike anything we see on MSM over here anymore.
I was able to form my own opinion….and Canada needs to watch out for where it is sleepwalking towards.
That said, their problems are nothing like ours yet.
Weston seems like a Redwood type, which is hopeful at least.
Beeboids, of political necessity, must propagandise their intrinsic NUJ opposition to the EDL, and their concomitant allegiance to the UAF and Islam.
Just as Beeboids oppose the past British Empire, so they support the ever colonising present Islamic Empire, not least in Britain and Europe.
If you want to see people scurrying away in all directions, scared of being branded racist and intolerant, have a look at the article and comments on Harry’s Place.
They seem to think that they have to register their condemnations of Islamophobia and bank them first, before they’ve earned enough tokens to legitimize their complaints about antisemitism. It’s disappointing.
People always instruct others to learn lessons from history. The trouble is that people are too quick to learn the wrong lesson. Look at what happened to the Jews in the 1930s and 40s by all means, but don’t extrapolate from the holocaust that what happened to the Jews is happening now to the Muslims, or that the Muslims are the new Jews, unfairly vilified, and in danger of being dehumanised and eventually slaughtered en masse.
Learn instead that the eternal figure of hate and resentment is the Jew, and the eternal Jew hater is the antisemite, be it Nazi Original or New Age Follower of Islam.
Ron Todd, you sayd: “While I have no love for the EDL (would they want to deport me back to Scotland?)”
This is just a typical reaction as a result ot the brainwashing we have all been getting from the appologist liberal media, and the Daily Mail.
The EDL are taking a stand against muslin, extremism. It’s not about race or colour, just an extreme form of one specific religion and the unpleasantness that has become associated with it. You’re quite safe as a Jock Ron – unless you want to commit terrorist offences in the name of Islam that is 😉 .
It’s also snobbery against working class people with tattoos, shaved heads and blunt forms of expression.
Whenever the so called intelligentsia get us into trouble, they’re quite happy to suspend their distaste and call upon these unwashed people to help them out. Many of the Tommies who got us through WW2 were rough and ready people, fired up with anger against the Germans. That was OK, but in 1945 it was back to business as usual.
O it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy, go away”;
But it’s “Thank you, Mister Atkins”, when the band begins to play,
The EDL might not be refined but at least they can see the wood for the trees.
mainly because few of them are troubled by the BBC or the Guardian I suspect.
The bit about getting deported was not intended to be taken seriously. As I am half Scottish half English and the only crime I have seriously considered is not paying my TV tax I would not really be worried.
I have some sympathy with the views of the EDF and agree that some (but not all) of their PR problems are due to a hostile MSM.
I am always slightly unsure about people or parties that have a long list of what they are against and a very short list of what they are for.
They need several people that they can put up as spokesmen who can highlight in a calm reasoned manner when the legal system or the benefits system is giving unfair advantage to some over others. This should be at all levels from local police and councils and local papers not just the big stuff that would get on the national news.
I’ve been wondering. As the BBC refer to the “Far Right” EDL, will they now be refering to “The Fascist” UAF ?
I’ve just watched it. It’s like watching an unintentional parody ‘Mrs Merton’s grand-daughter’.
Assuming you mean me (‘Scez’ being a fictional construct of your own creation) – I was responding to Natsman’s comments. If he expressed sentiments of the sort he did against anybody, he should be condemned. I think it’s telling that none of Biased BBC’s regular commenters have expressed any misgivings whatsoever. Telling, but not surprising.
Incidentally, Hippiepooter, it’s now several days since you accused me of being anti-Semitic on another thread. I asked you to explain why or apologise, and you have done neither. Have you had a chance to reconsider, withdraw your comment and make a full, unreserved apology?
Apologies – only just noticed that my comment above wasn’t attached to hippiepooter’s, which it was in reply to and which is currently at the bottom of page 1.
Hippiepooter, don’t let that get in the way of you apologising for calling me anti-Semitic.
Scez, if you were against the English people rising up giving the EDL a good kicking as well as jihadists, you would have objected to Natsman wishing such on both groups.
It’s like how you really dragged your feet in distancing yourself from Peter Tatchell’s nonce enabling activities.
You support the BBC’s demonisation of the Jewish State. Of course you’re an anti-Semite.
Actually, Hippiepooter, I *do* object to Natsman using that language against anybody.
Just as I object to you calling me anti-Semitic without any justification. You have not come up with a justification, you’ve just come up with a blanket smear.
Now, if you’d care to change the habit of a lifetime and engage your brain, perhaps you’d care to either come up with concrete examples of why I’m supposedly anti-Semitic, or do the decent thing and apologise.