Is The BBC Biased Against The EDL?



“Nothing of importance will not offend somebody, somewhere.”


Is the BBC biased against the EDL?

I think it is…though arguably justifiably. The EDL does get a lot of airtime and coverage…but there is definitely not a neutral stance from the BBC when it talks about them or to them, there is always an undercurrent to every BBC report on them…the default approach is always that the EDL is extremist, violent and racist, that their anti-radical Islamist rhetoric is just an excuse to have a go at Muslims rather than to reform the ideology as they claim.

Regardless of the actions of some EDL members at demonstrations the EDL would have a problem…that problem being the fact that the vast majority are white, working class and Christian. The BBC takes one look and shudders.  Someone like Tariq Ramadan though can say the same things and get a warm welcome at the BBC…as noted later in this post.

Here is Sarah Montague talking on the Today programme about such groups:

Montague says: ‘It’s one thing to say these are extremist groups on the fringes…but it’s the extent to which they pollute the rest of the population I suppose in terms of how you deal with it is the concern and how much pollution do you think has gone on?’

What other politcal group would get spoken of in such terms?  Their ideas ‘pollute’ the rest of the population?  Can’t imagine her saying that about a religion.

Of course the EDL do themselves no favours by presenting a certain ‘face’ to the world….however that is almost inevitable given the demographic that they mainly spring from and the method of passing on their mesaage…but is that any reason to discount and ignore their beliefs?

This was John Simpson’s reaction to riots in Paris a few years ago:

‘The riots in France by the Muslim immigrants were due to Muslim’s fury and resentment, bitter grievances, ignored and demeaned, kept in poverty by a system which cares very little about them.’

There is a similar BBC reaction to the riots in Sweden….and of course to the ones the UK recently.


 It would be interesting to  see the BBC’s reaction if the EDL adopted the ‘Sinn Fein/IRA’ approach and separated the ‘direct action’ protest group from the political…and got themselves some media savvy spokesman with some gravitas and stature….perhaps even a Muslim.

The BBC were always ready to talk to Gerry Adams…going so far as to evade a government ban on broadcasting interviews with the IRA…despite his links to the murderous IRA who tortured, bombed and killed so many.


A few facts about the EDL:

The EDL has just over 30,000 members.

The EDL’s basic values are laid out in this document:

Memorandum of Understanding relating to the formation of a European network of advocates for human rights and personal freedoms, in opposition to Sharia Law and other forms of oppression.


The EDL’s avowed intention is to stop radical Islam, which they believe stems from the Koran which they view as ‘barbaric’ and out of date…they want to see the Koran reformed and brought into the modern , progressive world…controversial stuff.

How different is that to the call by highly respected, and controversial, Muslim ‘reformer’ Tariq Ramadan who says Muslim communities must take immediate steps including facing down literal interpretations of the Koran that bear no relationship to modern life?

The BBC is quite happy to chat to Ramadan and accord him the greatest respect….

Islamic extremist or the man leading reform of the faith? Professor Tariq Ramadan explains why his critics are wrong and why the London bombings mean more than ever that Western Muslims must split from the East. 

Muslim communities must take immediate steps, he says, including facing down literal interpretations of the Koran that bear no relationship to modern life.


So is Tariq Ramadan a ‘far right extremist’ then?  His views are the same as the EDL’s…expressed somewhat more diplomatically.

Dr Usama Hasan is also allowed a voice on the same subject:

‘Specific examples of literalist, fundamentalist readings that still dominate Muslim attitudes worldwide are manifested in the resistance to progress in human rights, gender-equality and democratic socio-political reforms that are too-often heard from socially-conservative Muslims.’

Is he on the ‘far Right also…is he ‘polluting’ the population?


How popular is the EDL and just how many people agree with their views?

Matthew Goodwin, a leftwing academic has made it his job to study the ‘far Right’ and the ‘Counter Jihad movement’……from his work we can see that 50% of his poll agree that there will be a ‘clash of civilisations’ between white Britons and Muslims…36% disagree.  Further more 52% of Conservatives, 33% of Labour, 18% of UKIP and 24% ‘other’, and only 5% of the BNP agree with the EDL.

So there is a large ground swell of opinion that does think the EDL have something worth saying…Goodwin himself admitting:

‘Their beliefs about the threatening nature of Islam have wider public support.’


Having said that the EDL say it came into existence precisely because the voices of those people were being ignored:

We’re English, we’re working class, millions of us out there, we’re not being listened to.

The BBC followed the EDL in a film: ‘Young, British and Angry’ from which that quote came.

The film maker, Ben Anderson, concluded that they may still not be listened to…not because the message is wrong…indeed many Muslims, as shown above with Tariq Ramadan, support the reform of Islam but the violence and abuse at EDL marches turns people away:

‘I was in a Luton pub with two of the founding members of the EDL, who had been celebrating St George’s Day.

Two childhood friends of theirs arrived, brothers, and African Muslims. One was practising, the other wasn’t.

“We agree with you about Islamic extremism,” they told their EDL friends.

“We’d be side by side with you at those demos, but there are just too many idiots there, we’d end up in fights.”

This summed up perfectly the problem the EDL has – as long as you can hear and see racism and violence at its demos – as long as its main tactic remains organising what is essentially football awaydays – where hundreds, and sometimes thousands of young men get tanked up and march into town centres, looking and sounding like they want that civil war they have predicted, it’s difficult for many people to take any political point seriously.’


That is a dangerous game though from the BBC to join in…to dismiss the EDL because of their ‘football hooligan’ image only serves to further their frustration at their views not being taken seriously…once they believe that democracy  and the politicians have failed them some on the Far Right might eventually conclude that the IRA or Islamist approach is the only one that gets respect and results….everyone takes what they have to say seriously….before 9/11 no one cared a jot about ‘Muslim issues’…no one even knew what they were…now everyone listens.

As I say a dangerous game to keep denigrating, demonizing and whipping  up hate against these people because of their views…views which coming out of the mouth of a Muslim the BBC respects.


Mathew Goodwin himself admits  in a letter to the Labour Party advising it on its immigration and identity politics that faith in politics will fail if such issues are not addressed ….though he is no friend of the EDL:

‘You [Labour] will be nervous about the conversations above. But not having them may well undermine your longer-term goals. The same applies in Britain, where academics such as Lauren McLaren have shown how feelings of cultural disunity do not apply only to feelings toward other citizens: they also stretch to feelings about political elites and how the overall community is governed. Put in other words, by ignoring these concerns over immigration and identity – and in particular getting to get to grips with the cultural dimension – you risk undermining not only your own goals, but broader trust in the British political system.’


It is perhaps ironic that I use those figures from Matthew Goodwin because he is someone who is engaged in a battle against the EDL…not the Islamic radicals though…just the Far Right and the EDL.

All the more ironic when he lectures Labour on the need to listen to the ‘people’ about immigration and national identity when Goodwin seeks to push the EDL out of the debate.

In his study : The Roots of Extremism: The English Defence League and the Counter-Jihad Challenge, he makes the case for an intensive campaign against such groups:

‘Few mainstream voices in Europe are actively challenging counter-Jihad narratives, or the surrounding reservoir of anti-Muslim prejudice among the general public, but this is an essential part of any successful counter-strategy.’

 ‘The paper takes the English Defence League (EDL) as a case study to reveal the drivers of support for counter-Jihad groups, which can assist in designing effective and appropriate responses to the counter-Jihad movement.’ 


So rather than believe that the EDL may have something to say Goodwin has immediately decided they must be silenced.  You have to wonder how much the BBC has bought into Goodwin’s ‘strategy’ and shapes its approach to reporting on the EDL based on ‘countering’ their movement as he suggests.

Goodwin has of course made regular appearances on the BBC promoting this approach.…on the Big Question, on Today, on various news programmes.

How much can we trust Goodwin?  Is he a disinterested bystander?

He is pro Labour as noted above…

and Pro Islam

What is it that he claims about the likes of the EDL?:

‘They are not simply anti-Muslim or overtly racist, but xenophobic and profoundly hostile towards immigration. They are more likely than others in society to expect inter-communal conflict and to believe that violence is justifiable.’


That’s taking a pretty broad brush to a whole organisation…the ‘silent majority’ of whom do not shout racist abuse or engage in violence.


Back with Montague on the Today programme we are told:

Muslims are scared…they are gripped by an endemic fear after this attack…which alienate and isolates them from society.

Not only that but:  There was a general fear of [British] society…not just of the EDL and the Far Right.

The EDL are exploiting the murder [of Lee Rigby]…aiming to be ‘at war’ with Islam…encourage low level conflict and tension in communities.


You have to ask, as the BBC doesn’t, just what is the real cause of this supposed ‘endemic fear’?

The non-Muslim’s ‘endemic fear’ of Islam is of course not considered….or just dismissed as islamophobia.

What is it that Muslims fear?  Attacks in retaliation?  Retaliation for what?  Retaliation caused by bombs and a horrifc murder by other Muslims in the name of Islam.

So in other words the problem isn’t really the Far Right…it’s Muslim extremists…who  were the ones who openly declared that they wanted to start a war and went ahead and tried to start one.

As said, no one had the slightest interest in Muslims, or Sikhs, or Mormons, or even Christians before 9/11….who changed that atmosphere of benign neglect and tolerance?

The BBC has carried out many interviews with ‘Tommy Robinson’, leader of the EDL.

The problem is of course that the EDL are mostly white, working class and haven’t been to Oxbridge…not only that but they promote a view that the BBC recoils at.  They lack credibility in the BBC’s eyes to talk about Islam and reform..whatever the actual merits of their case,  Tariq ramadan is ‘brown’ and Muslim…he wears a suit and doesn’t get involved in street demos…the BBC loves him.

Here is one of Jeremy Paxman’s interviews with Tommy Robinson which demonstrates the contemptuous disdain the patrician journalists of the BBC hold the EDL in. Here Paxman is only concerned with linking the EDL to Breivik….Paxman states that no one denies there is lots of concern [about Islam]…but he doesn’t address those concerns at all….I wonder if Tariq Ramadan’s work gets referenced in Breivik’s ‘manifesto’? 

In this other interview Paxman denies the Muslim rape gang theory  (now proven of course)and again treats Robinson with disdain.


Listen to the radio and you will always hear the EDL talked of in the same breathe as the BNP, labelled as extremist, far right and racist.

In this report the BBC side step the EDL’s reason for existence…to ‘fight’ Islamism…stemming from the ‘barbaric 7th century Koran’…instead the BBC declares that its members join up because they are fed up with the mainstream political parties and the economy…nothing to do with Islam… fact it compares the EDL  and the Far Right to the Green Party bizarrely…whilst calling the EDL extremist.

An indepth study of the EDL and its members refutes this:

Widely held assumptions about their supporters – which often stress economic austerity, political protest and Islamophobia as the key drivers – are challenged by new survey data on public attitudes towards the ideas of one leading counter-Jihad group, the English Defence League.


The BBC  has a highly defensive attitude towards Islam….firstly we know that the hierarchy are concerned about violent retribution if they broadcast something Muslims might find offensive:

Without question, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms’, is different from, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms and I am loading my AK47 as I write’,” he said. “This definitely raises the stakes.”

Second, the hierarchy look on Muslims as an besieged minority….to allow criticism of Islam would stoke racism and communal conflict.…Mark Thompson refusing to broadcast a play that claimed Islam was damaging free speech…and saying other faiths had “very close identity with ethnic minorities” and as a result were covered in a more careful way by broadcasters.’

 That is why a Muslim like Tariq Ramadan is ‘allowed’ to speak in the subject of Islam, the detrimental cultural practices that result from a literal reading of the Koran and reform of it.


This is the theatrical performance that the BBC wouldn’t show: Can We Talk About This? is a verbatim theatre work investigating the interrelated issues of freedom of speech, multiculturalism and Islam as manifest in Western democracies. How does the West support progressive Muslim voices that want a modern and moderate version of Islam which offers equality to women, homosexuals and tolerance towards other  faiths? If we don’t, won’t or can’t discuss aspects of religions that are oppressive, as we do in debate over secular matters, how does a society, or community, develop?

But who defines what is offensive and on what grounds?

As one of our interviewees succinctly noted: “Nothing of importance will not offend somebody, somewhere.”



Matthew Goodwin says (in 2011) supporters of the far right are generally neither irrational nor isolated, and that a far right party without extremist baggage could be electable in Britain.



Bookmark the permalink.

79 Responses to Is The BBC Biased Against The EDL?

  1. Dysgwr_Cymraeg says:

    Alan, some may criticise a post which includes a significant Islamic element, although primarily it concerns bbc bias and the EDL.
    There are left wing types, with whom I have traded insults recently, ( should that say debated? ) have exclusively argued that the EDL are ” disgusting” because they have hijacked an appalling event which to peddle the filth of their racist views. Utter bollocks of course, and none of them able to see the irony of using the argument while ignoring their own use of said event.
    When I say ” get rid of murdering savages” they assume universally that I actually said anyone of the wrong colour! And say as much in response.
    The term disgusting of course as recently used on QT, backfired against UKIP but is still peddled by the lefties to slander EDL.
    It was revealing to see the Rutland slander backfire on her, when she got 14% in council elections, against 47% for the UKIP candidate.
    Thank you shining a light into the dark corners the bbc would prefer to keep hidden.


    • Alan says:

      Yes, inescapable though as the EDL is all about Islamism and have to compare what it says and what Ramadan etc say and how BBC treats them when they both say the same things…..and the EDL is such a big current theme at the moment it is something that is worth looking at.

      Reverse the situation and have Muslims ‘defending’ their nation against the encroachment of Christianity and where is the BBC?

      Here is a story about 100,000 Christians every year being killed for their faith….but the BBC haven’t reported this…despite a link to a yahoo report on the website.


    • noggin says:

      The likes of the BBC, gave birth to the EDL, as did
      our own government for not dealing with fact truth and reality, for the benefit of the people it supposed to represent,
      Instead of being spineless handwringing appeasers to the greatest national threat we face, and the world faces.
      Extremist threat Islam a real threat, to our lives and our society.
      By showing the rank cowardice in dealing with it, the people directly affected by it are bound to take some action .. there comes the EDL, these are not the overpaid ideological cream puffs of the BBC, or the two faced snout troughers from Westminister.

      T Ramadan, 😀 i hope the grandson of the Muslim Brotherhood founder, the son of a prominent MB activist so extreme he that fled to Swiz in the 50s remembers to tell his audience those same messages when abroad, and not revert to type.
      In her 2004 book, Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan, Caroline Fourest analyzes Ramadan’s writings/audio tapes. She concludes that he is not a promoter of peace, but rather a “war leader” and the “political heir of his grandfather

      This very morning the bbc was in rampant “far right far right” mood.
      An upcoming England football match, brings dire warning and concerns about this match … because of the far right? EDL? and racism?,
      cor lummy! which part?
      the jewish part?, the sikh part?, the black and white, mixed heritage fellas who make up the majority? the womens section perhaps? or the homosexual members?

      Well look on the bright side, BBC eagerly reports, the ejector seat eagle eyed opportunists at “kick it out” now have an “AP” so if anyone thinks they know somebody who might have
      heard that somebody, went to a footy match with someone who overheard someone say that fella might be waaycist, or (god forbid), was caught eating a banana
      … they can report it immediately.
      Is there an AP for anyone who needs a modicum of protection from this righteous “Stazi”?

      bbc bias … you betcha!


  2. George R says:

    This is a well argued analysis, Alan.

    One particular problem which National Union of Journalists (NUJ) Beeboids have with the English Defence League (EDL) is that the NUJ, by its own trade union policy, is politically opposed to the EDL.
    And the BBC-NUJ not only expresses this anti-EDL political bias in its ‘reports’, but also gives support (as endorsed by NUJ policy) to the UAF disrupters of the EDL.


    • Alan says:

      Yes…I should have mentioned the UAF…funny how they get a free pass..when they are as violent or possibly even more violent than elements of the EDL…they certainly seek to provoke the EDL into a response for the cameras.


      • George R says:

        And when BBC-NUJ mentions ‘disruption’ at any EDL demonstrations, it fails to indicate the confrontational role of UAF in causing such disruption.


        • Pat says:

          BBC News page – 27 May 2013.
          “Help For Heroes refuses donations from EDL”

          Second from last paragraph… ‘a small group of anti-fascist protesters gathered to oppose the EDL’. Nothing to worry about then.


          • Chop says:

            Help for heroes don’t accept donations from ANY political movement, not just EDL, so, really, it’s not even a news story, they wouldnt print “H4H refuses Labour donations” (like THAT would happen anyway!)

            Saying that, I saw this same news report in “The Sun” the other day, so, it’s not only the BBC demonizing an indigenous protest group, it’s the whole MSM.


            • Pat says:

              I first read about this story on an American web site and then the Mail. Agree with you it is practically the whole MSM, but the BBC in particular appear to treat the UAF with kid gloves. I agree with what Alan and George R posted.


          • Dave666 says:

            “anti-fascist” that normally means rent a mob. I once observed several coaches of rent a mob being shipped in. When out of curiosity I went over to talk to some of them it became obvious that they had no idea what they were actually there to demonstrate against.


    • Demon says:

      I still have serious reservations about the EDL, but they are not a fraction as violent as the UAF.

      Something to annoy the Lefties is to remind them that the UAF appear to support the murderers of that soldier in the same way they supported the sex-gangs in Rochdale.

      The use of the word “disgusting” applies to the UAF like no other political organisation in this country at the moment. The nearest rivals in the disgusting stakes are the BNP, but even they have very low standards.


      • Mice Height says:

        UAF are concerned with nothing but violence.
        No UAF ‘counter demonstrations’ = no violence.


      • ROBERT BROWN says:

        Yes, at a BNP march a few years ago, a bearded UAF idiot was filmed throwing darts into the general melee, luckily not seriously injuring anyone. Was he arrested? No. Police were given copies of the tape. Action taken? None. The Police give the UAF a free ride in the main, probably ordered by Cameron, who of course, endorsed their formation.


        • Mice Height says:

          Don’t expect a Panorama special on the most violent political organisation in the country though. Despite the fact they’re ridiculously easy to infiltrate.


  3. Stewart says:

    Is the BBC biased against the EDL?Yes it cant help it self but be so.

    I have made this point before but will do again as I think it is important

    To think that the BBC is promoting an ideological position is a mistake. Cultural relativism (there is very little Marxist about it) is more a theology. And is based on faith not reason, hence its acceptance of seemingly contradictory positions (not least its adoption of Darwinism as a revealed truth)

    The fundamental premise of their faith is that white Europeans are the cause of all the evil in the world and that non Europeans (most especially Africans) are the original uncorrupted version of humanity

    All sorts of pseudoscience is used to support this, but basically it is an act of faith.

    So any movement, group or organisation that expresses doubt or concern, let alone opposes their drive towards the multicultural (another contradiction) utopia is heretical and must be stamped out be all and any means.

    It would not matter how that group was mandated, who formed it or how it conducted its campaign, it would be considered intrinsically evil and would be treated accordingly. (Even the smallest shoots of heresy must be ripped up lest they flourish an contaminate the new Eden)

    Even those who seek to conserve the best of the past are seen as heretics, witness their recent witch hunt against UKIP.

    And those that mourn the passing of the familiar world those that ‘look’ like themselves they are the worst of all for they are unrepentant.

    And to those that will heap scorn on me as a tin foil conspirasist or hatred as an unreconstructed racist, I ask this.
    Is there any voice that said even “mass immigration was has been, overall a negative experience or that we fear the growing influence of Islam in this country and what it holds for our future” that you would allow to be represented or even exist?


    • Andrew says:

      I agree about Cultural Relativism being based on “faith not reason”, though there are Marxian elements in there too. It all depends on what view you take of human nature.
      If you are comfortable economically and “educated” (e.g. an early 19th century Romantic or a liberal/Left middle class BBC employee today) you may incline towards over-optimism about human nature, because you can afford to be sentimental and even generous. You may agree with Rousseau that “man was born free and he is everywhere in chains”, even though he admitted in the “Discourse on the Origins of Inequality” that he might be wrong in his assumptions about the noble savage. You could look to Africa for a more uncorrupted humanity and, if blind enough, find what you hoped for, if you had become so critical of European culture after the disasters of the 20th century that almost anything else seemed better.
      Those closer to reality would be glad that European civilisation had, after many faltering steps, moved away from the primitive world imagined by Hobbes: “No arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” Quite why anyone would want to risk the achievements of British and European civilisation by an experiment in naive multiculturalist optimism and worship of the primitive, is beyond my understanding.


      • Dave s says:

        Excellent. it is essential that the unreal nature of liberalism is held up for examination. It is a retreat from reason and a descent into gnosticism.
        It cannot last as nothing ever does. But it can do real harm and could destroy Western civilisation.
        As usual we will have to leave it to chance and hopefully the common man.


  4. George R says:

    Even ‘London Evening Standard’ has a piece today which, somewhat grudgingly, suggests that the EDL have have a political point.

    (The author seems unaware that Tommy Robinson has been physically attacked and had his home attacked.)

    “Both Left and Right underestimate political Islam.
    The concerns of EDL supporters are ill-informed and badly expressed but they are not invalid.”

    By Peyvand Khorsandi.


    • Stewart says:

      That’s interesting as the Metro/Standard is, if anything, even more zealous in its promotion of multiculturalism


  5. Alex says:

    In a word, YES!


  6. JimS says:

    “O, wad some Power the giftie gie us
    To see oursels as others see us!
    It wad frae monie a blunder free us,
    An’ foolish notion.”

    – Robert Burns

    Some Muslims seem keener to engage with the EDL than the BBC! Vanessa Feltz covers the story of the York Mosque that opened its doors to the EDl. Later an angry Muslim caller told her that he ‘had’ to accompany his children to school. Vanessa had a half-hearted attempt to challenge him on the ‘why’ and at least extracted the response that ‘nothing happened’. Her caller put me in mind of the modern ‘liberals’ that don’t see any irony in their ‘intolerance of intolerance’. Just as we, according to Imam Cameron, are not under threat from ‘Muslims’, Muslims are not under threat from the Kafir. It all depends from where you look.


    • pah says:

      I’m not sure what to make of the EDL purely because I’m yet so see any real info that isn’t smothered in agit-prop against them.

      But this story is enlightening. Typically the BBC report it but hide it away. The EDL can’t be all bad if they are prepared to sit down to tea and biscuits with the ‘enemy.’

      Incidentally look at the side bar. It contains this. I’ve been to many England matches and have never heard this song sung. With the coming ‘friendly’ with RoI is the BBC trying to ratchet up the ‘tensions’?


  7. Dazed & Confused says:


    • Beez says:

      Cracking video! There’s more backbone and premise from this man in 6 minutes than there ever will be from the likes of Cameron. This country really is run by cowards and the consequences of their gutlessness is starting to emerge. Traitors the lot of ’em!


      • ROBERT BROWN says:

        Been watching his videos for years, he is always on the money.


  8. Cosmo says:

    Where can a white working class labour voter turn after a Labour “A LABOUR” prime minister call her a bigot behind her back. The EDL need a major PR makeover. They need to become a political party as opposed to a street movement, stop with the anti-social demo’s so some drunk thick hanger on can be photographed making a nazi salute, and speak what everybody thinks in secret about an alien culture intent on taking over. The BBC always say the EDL & BNP in the same sentence. From what I have read on the EDL website anybody other than an Islamist is welcome not so the BNP.


    • Backwoodsman says:

      Getting close to the nub of the issue there, Cosmo. Whilst its easy for our self appointed media and political elite to patronise EDL members and point out their visible defects, its safe to assume they aren’t going to get their votes back anytime soon.
      If one assumes that the demographic of EDL supporters are members of the public who have the most experience of living in ‘culturally enriched’ environments, it doesn’t bode well for many sitting MP’s chances at the next elections !


  9. Fred Sage says:

    In Saudi Arabia If three Christians hold a prayer meeting in a private house, they are liable be arrested if discovered.


  10. George R says:

    This is what the EDL is up against:-

    “Hacking group Anonymous publish mobile numbers and addresses of senior EDL members as they vow to bring down far-right organisation”

    Does BBC-NUJ support ‘Anonymous’ hackers, or post-Leveson is it not concerned with such activity?


  11. Jeff says:

    From what I have seen of the EDL they’re just a group of working class blokes pissed off by the dreadful antics of militant Islam. Yes, it’s true, they can be a bit boisterous (ahem!) but why shouldn’t they be? If we didn’t have public beheadings in London backstreets, poppy burning oiks abusing our troops and gangs of Muslim paedos grooming vulnerable white girls they wouldn’t exist.
    As for the ultra left wing and violent Unite Against Fascism, has ever a movement given itself a less appropriate name?


    • Derek says:

      “…has ever a movement given itself a less appropriate name? “

      Religion of Peace?


    • Frank Words says:

      I think I am right in writing (and sorry if I am repeating other posts) that our country’s Prime Minister David “Dave” Cameron is a supporter of Unite Against Fascism.

      Pretty much like the Anti Nazi League it has at its core the opposition to free speech and democracy.

      No wonder the current political classes feel at home endorsing the UAF.


  12. Teddy Bear says:

    Back in December 2010, the BBC reported:
    Hackers steal English Defence League membership list

    A controversial anti-Islamist group has told its members to be “vigilant” after their details leaked online.
    Hundreds of names and addresses linked to the English Defence League have been circulated on the web after hackers broke in to one of the organisation’s websites.
    In a warning to members, the group said it feared the potential for reprisals.

    Those affected should “remain extra vigilant where their home and personal safety is concerned,” it said.
    The security breach began last weekend, when a clothing website linked to the organisation was accessed by hackers.

    The attackers, who claimed to be part of a group called the “Mujahideen Hacking Unit”, obtained lists of those who had recently bought items from the site or donated money to the group.

    Today we have this article from the BBC:

    Hackers post ‘EDL members’ contact details’ online

    A list apparently showing the contact details of English Defence League members has been published online.

    It has been posted by people claiming to be part of a computer hacking network known as Anonymous.

    Now wouldn’t you think any ‘impartial’ journalist would have noted the previous hacking that occurred? Perhaps the BBC don’t want to join the dots for their public as to just who ‘Anonymous’ might be.


  13. johnnythefish says:

    ‘This was John Simpson’s reaction to riots in Paris a few years ago:

    ‘The riots in France by the Muslim immigrants were due to Muslim’s fury and resentment, bitter grievances, ignored and demeaned, kept in poverty by a system which cares very little about them.’

    There is a similar BBC reaction to the riots in Sweden….and of course to the ones the UK recently’.

    I’ve heard that particular BBC mantra over and over again since they started reporting on the Sweden riots.

    However, here’s a different view from somebody not quite so ‘incurious’ as our intrepid reporters of great world reknown:

    ‘Certainly, wandering around Husby last week, it was hard at first glance to see quite what the problem was. Built in the 1970s as part of the “Million Programme” that aimed to give affordable housing for all Swedes, the estate is one of dozens on Stockholm’s outskirts that now house mainly immigrant populations, including large numbers from Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Iraq.

    However, comparisons to the Paris “banlieus”, or indeed riot-hit Tottenham or Salford, are limited. Between the rows of clean-looking housing blocks are well-tended flowerbeds and neatly- kept public gardens, and in the shopping precinct, where an ornamental fountain still bubbles away, there are bars, shops, and a smart cafe-bakery that would not look too out of place in an IKEA catalogue. At eight per cent, Husby’s joblessness rate is three times the Swedish average, but only slightly higher than that in the UK.’

    If that doesn’t prove the BBC is showing bias to further its own pro-immigrant, Leftist agenda, I’m an Imam.


  14. George R says:

    “Exclusive: Pamela Geller laughs out loud in response to media’s coverage of jihadi attack.”



  15. DangerMouse says:

    How does this:
    ‘There are currently no plans to broadcast Can We Talk About This?, but this is not due to the play’s content or themes.”

    equal ‘Mark Thompson refusing to broadcast a play’.


  16. David Brims says:

    There’s no ‘vibrancy’ in the EDL, therefore it must be condemned.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      I saw a few Sikhs in that EDL protest video somebody posted the other day. So much for the racism.


  17. Andy S. says:

    I remember seeing a Channel 4 documentary about Tommy Robinson and the EDL around 18 months ago. Despite its obvious attempt at a hatchet job, and the resulting editing, it couldn’t make Robinson and his organisation into the pariahs the makers believed them to be. What I took away from that programme was how reasonable Robinson sounded, and not the Hitlerite demagogue the BBC tries to portray him as being. The programme also showed the different ethnicities that make up his organisation. The only violence that was shown was committed by an Islamic antagonist who punched Robinson in the face as he stopped to engage with him and, of course the UAF, who threw bottles at EDL demonstators. The Police were also shown harassing Robinson and his members.

    The programme was obviously made by spending some considerable amount of time with Robinson and he evidently didn’t set a foot wrong in that time, or they would have shown anything damaging to him.

    The latest news items showing some EDL supporters behaving like drunken football hooligans haven’t done any favours for the group’s image but one wonders if selective editing has been used as there was no footage shown of the behaviour of the UAF at the same demo.

    My guess is the establishment and media are scared to death the EDL may be touching a popular nerve with the general public and so are doing their best to demonise them as racist, which they patently are not. I don’t think they make any secret of being “Islamaphobic” – a word fabricated by Islamists and their left wing allies.


    • Alan says:

      Yes…as said lefty academic Matthew Goodwin is on a government panel advising how to ‘deal’ with groups like the EDL….working on a strategy to counter the ‘counter jihad’ movement.

      Can’t help wondering if the BBC is not actively part of that strategy just as it was with Rochdale etc…hiding the truth there. So much for an ‘independent’ BBC.


    • Andy S. says:

      Sorry, pressed the send button before I’d finished.

      Ref: “Islamaphobia” – a word coined by Islamists and their Left-wing allies in an attempt to conflate it with the word “racist” .

      I thought the EDL was formed because they saw this country being Islamised with the connivance of both naive and traitorous politicians and establishment stooges. Evidently Robinson has made himself familiar with the more extreme teachings of the Koran and does not like what he’s learned and decided to make a stand against it. The act of doing so has made him an enemy of the left who, along with the BBC and the rest of the media, have enacted Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Revolutionaries” and tried to isolate, demonise and ridicule the EDL hoping to shape public opinion and neutralise Robinson and his organisation.


      • Teddy Bear says:

        FrontPage Magazine has a book for sale titled Islamophobia: Thought crime of the Totalitarian Future
        where the description goes:
        his vitally important essay by David Horowitz and Robert Spencer describes the origins of the word Islamophobia as a coinage of the Muslim Brotherhood, traces the campaign in the U.N. to criminalize the criticism of Islam and exposes its role in the Brotherhood’s campaign to “destroy the American civilization from within.” An absolutely essential primer of the global struggle against religious intolerance and totalitarianism.



        • Teddy Bear says:

          Best definition I’ve seen is from the website
          Islamophobe (is-slahm-o-fohb) – A non-Muslim who knows more than they are supposed to know about Islam.


          • David Preiser (USA) says:

            It’s like the flip-side of a naughty definition of anti-semitism: hating Jews more than is necessary.


            • apothecary says:

              Come on Dave you seem to think the babylonian jewish Talmud is as benign and honourable as the new testament. You know whats really in there don’t you. Its the most disgustingly racist book ever written. The anti Christian stuff in there is incredible.


              • David Preiser (USA) says:

                LOL. Missed your turn in line when senses of humor were passed out because you were too busy reading the Protocols, eh? You have no idea what I think of the Babylonian Talumd. Or the Jerusalem one, for that matter. You’re making things up just to play games and start your little religious fight. I couldn’t care less. Classic response to my joke, by the way. Absolutely classic.

                Why were you drawn to this blog and not Comment is Free or other popular websites where people are more interested in what you have to say? It’s especially pathetic because we’ve just had a special post from management informing people like you that you’re wasting people’s time and will be asked to leave if you don’t keep it within the realms of BBC bias.

                You never admitted why you’re really here, either. You claimed mere curiosity, but your one-track mind reveals itself in every comment. Be honest. Did you expect to find some simpatico company? What specifically clued you in that this was a place where you could share your wisdom? It’s okay to be honest. You’re hiding behind a pseudonym and a fake email, so you can be brave.


        • David Brims says:

          David Horowitz, Unholy Alliance, the American Left and Islam.

          ”He finds an answer in a political Left that shares a view of America as the “Great Satan” with America’s radical Islamic enemies. This Left, which once made common cause with Communists, has now joined forces with radical Islam in attacking America’s defenses at home and its policies abroad. From their positions of influence in the university and media culture, leftists have defined America as the “root cause” of the attacks against it. In a remarkable exploration of the “Mind of the Left,”

          Horowitz shows how today’s radicals, unwilling to reflect on the internal flaws that destroyed Marxism-Leninism from within, have embraced an all-consuming nihilism in its place. This has led them to a hatred of American institutions and a solidarity with Islamic terrorists that makes the radical left more properly regarded as dangerous than loony.”


      • David Brims says:

        Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals”, Alinsky dedicated the book to Lucifer.

        “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer.”



  18. Emerson v says:

    What I have thought for a long time , BBC definitely anti white male working class, to be honest the 3 main political parties are also anti white working class.


    • David Brims says:

      ” Anti white working class ”

      Let’s face it, all 3 parties are anti British.


  19. stuart says:

    the edl are just the bogeyman at the moment that the left wing media,bbc,sky news,channel 4 etc try to demonise,the bbc and other media outlets never attack the violent far left uaf and extreme muslim groups that preach hatred and murder on are streets,the big questions must be asked .why,that might be a good subject this sunday on the big questions.why are the far left and muslim extreme groups given such an easy ride by the media.


  20. George R says:

    Has INBBC noticed whether police are as keen to defend EDL’s Tommy Robinson, who has been attacked more than once, and whose home has also been attacked?

    “Police rush to home of hate preacher Anjem Choudary to protect him and his family after threats as he blames Cameron’s ‘crusade’ for ‘turning young Muslims to terror’ ”


  21. George R says:

    In contrast, this is what a certain liberal-left mentality results in:-

    “UK recommended that Kenya release jihad murderer Mujahid Adebolajo”

    [Opening excerpt]:-
    “And they got what they wanted: they got Adebolajo back on the streets of London, where he could brutally murder Lee Rigby.
    “So we see the price of this politically correct willful blindness about Islam and jihad.”


  22. George R says:

    “Left-wing policies have promoted the rise of barbarism.”

    “THE fashionable progressive agenda is wrecking our once stable, free society. In the name of tolerance, the craven political establishment has promoted barbarism in our midst. For decades, our rulers have presented mass immigration and multi-culturalism as forces for social advancement.”

    By Leo McKinstry.


    • stewart says:

      “And who pushes the multicultural agenda. Who owns the media. Who runs the NGOs. Who finances this left wing agenda”
      The Saudis with their oil billions


      • apothecary says:

        You’re a loony. One example. Foreign policy initiative. Mega powerful American think tank. Directors eric Edelman, Robert Kagan, William Kristol and Dan senor. Guess what religion all four of them derive from. They are pushing and I mean pushing for full scale US backing of the Syrian rebels.


  23. George R says:

    Updsate for INBBC:-

    “Woolwich terror attack: Serving soldier Sergeant Glen
    Hughes to ‘stand in’ for Tommy Robinson in sponsored walk after Help for Heroes ban on EDL fundraising”


    • noggin says:

      A very important point, “far right far right” squeakers like Ch4 news/BBC, have tried to use their position in the media, to vilify on this issue, but i noted this on the last open thread … and hey ho here it is again.

      “Mr Robinson had planned the 17- mile walk to raise money for Help for Heroes, however the armed forces charity have rejected EDL donations, saying they do not allow “political fundraising”.


  24. apothecary says:

    Stew there is an element of truth regarding the petrodollar. S.A is very important to the American economy. S.A has never been a threat to the Zionists because S.A acts in the interests of Zionists. Alongside Qatar they are absolute monarchies. They are the real enemy. They are also untouchables. Don’t forget most of the alleged 911 hijackers were Saudis. Much of terrorist financing comes from there too. They can do no wrong. They don’t run foreign policy though. That is ludicrous.


    • stewart says:

      No and neither do the Jews or Tehran would be a pile of radio-active bricks by now
      Or perhaps you think those cunning Jews are behind appointment of Chuck Hagel
      That’s some long game


  25. apothecary says:

    He’s already been emasculated in that senate hearing earlier in the year. They must have something on him already. Hagel has retracted all his anti Israeli lobby posturing. A monumental coward.


  26. George R says:

    ‘Atlas Shrugs’:-

    [inc video]-


    “And let me assure you that if the media deigns to cover this, it will be described as a violent EDL rally. Oh yes, this sock in the infidel’s face of a woman by a muscular Muslim is what the BBC and their attendant quislings refer to a ‘violent clashes.’ Every time the EDL holds a freedom demo, Muslims and their leftist goons attack.

    “This is despicable, and people are not going to stand for it. And if the government won’t protect them, they will protect themselves. And they will need an army of defenders of freedom.”


    • Andrew says:

      Note how the coward waits for the police to turn their backs, to attend to something else, and then throws a very poor punch at the blonde woman.