- Official EDL post (by Pyrus)
On 22nd October, EDL Leader Tommy Robinson appeared on BBC Radio West Midlands to respond to Labour Councillor Waseem Zaffar, who has written to the Home Secretary asking her to ban the upcoming EDL demonstration in Birmingham.
[Image above: Waseem Zaffar, right, with Salma Yaqoob.]
In response to it being put to him that he was trying to suppress freedom of speech, Mr Zaffar replied, “This is not… [freedom of speech], this is inciting racial hatred.”
Well we’re sorry Mr Zaffar, but you’re wrong on both counts. If it were true – if we really were inciting hatred (let alone racial hatred) – then the BBC would have had a duty to challenge these hateful views.
So, why didn’t this happen? Well, either the BBC are purposefully protecting the EDL from criticism (which hardly seems likely!), or the EDL do not hold any views that are in need of challenging.
The real hateful views – views that do need challenging – are those spread by radical Islam. And Tommy gives us plenty of examples of those in this interview.
But Mr Zaffar has the nerve to claim that the EDL are no different to Islamic groups who preach hatred. What an offensive (and quite frankly prejudiced) claim!
It’s this sort of clouded thinking, this absent-mindedness, that is preventing British Muslims from taking effective steps to tackle the extremism that is rife in their community.
Anti-extremism is not extremism. Acting in defence of your country, and doing so with full respect for its laws and for the rights of individuals, is a million miles away from the behaviour exhibited by Islamic extremists.
Tommy has said many times that we are a symptom of Islamic extremism. If Mr Zaffar would like us to go away, then he should probably start considering how to better combat the radical Islamic views that can (and regularly do) result in violent extremism.
If he thinks that EDL supporters and radical Muslims are at all similar, then he’s not off to a good start.
To claim that EDL supporters are no different from the hate-filled fanatics who burned poppies on Armistice Day, or who burned the Stars & Stripes outside the US embassy on the anniversary of the September 11th attacks, is an insult to all of the tens of thousands of supporters of the EDL. But it is also an insult to all who believe that much more needs to be done to prevent hateful preaching from turning into violent acts of extremism, because if it is considered ‘extreme’ to dare criticise extremist ideology, then we really are in trouble.
EDL Link: http://englishdefenceleague.org/
Counter-Jihad: Beyond the EDL addition (non-official):
Want to make the criticism of Islam a crime? Simple. Create a law which says that the criticism of Islam is actually racist ('in intent'). That doesn’t mean that the prosecutors need to simply assume that counter-jihadists/EDL are racist as well as being against Islam. No. It’s that the criticism of Islam is in itself, despite intent, racist. This way the people who criticise Islam, in any way, can be prosecuted for racism and then suitably punished. (Or banned, in the case of the Birmingham EDL demo.)
Indeed that’s even happening. Instead of saying that criticism of Islam ‘breaks sharia law’, which no non-Muslim leader would ever dare to say here in the UK, references have to be made to ‘racism’ instead. That way the state has a good way of silencing counter-Islamists - and I don’t just mean the supporters of the EDL. If criticism of Islam is deemed to be straightforwardly racist, then the state already has laws which can deal with these ‘crimes’. In the UK there are laws against racism and ‘discrimination’ which can be used on counter-jihadists.
The Case of Danny Parker
It is worth bearing mind here that an EDL supporter, Danny Parker, received an eight-month prison sentence for chanting ‘Muslim bombers off our streets’.
‘Converts must die.’ (The words of a Swedish imam.)
is not 'hate speech' (in Sweden, and also in the UK). Yet
‘Muslim bombers off our streets.’ (The words Danny Parker was punished for.)
is hate speech.
The former calls calls for murder whereas the latter speaks out against murder. Yet it was the latter which was classed as ‘hate speech’.
I am absolutely convinced that if a member of a right-wing group in Sweden, or any other European country, had called for Muslims - even ‘Muslim bombers’ - to be murdered, that he would have been immediately charged with ‘hate speech’. Yet this imam got off scot-free.
Why is all the violence and hatred of Islam is accepted - and even justified - by so many left-wingers and liberals? It’s because all that violence and hatred is part of a ‘personal faith’ (Islam) and this, miraculously, makes it OK. Such extraordinary dhimmitude!