Watch and listen closely as he makes mincemeat of this pompous fool of an interviewer, recorded earlier today on the BBC:
Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:
Update: Andrew Gilligan, a columnist for The Telegraph — whom I used to consider semi-friendly towards our cause — published an op-ed today entitled “The British far-Right is nothing but a rabble”. The column is not really worth excerpting from, but a comment left on the article is far better than anything Mr. Gilligan says.
The commenter, pjwholland, is referring to this sentence by Mr. Gilligan:
The English Defence League, although vile, shows the British far Right’s weakness, not its strength.
This was pjwholland’s comment:
I am not entirely sure why you describe the “English Defence League” as vile. I have just heard the leader of that organisation discharge himself extremely well on Newsnight. Faced with, arguably, the most aggressive of the BBC’s interviewers he resolutely argued a case in which he stated his organisation is a non-racist organisation. He was also able to produce evidence of a very clear separation between them and people of the ilk of the Norwegian (alleged) nutter. Indeed he was at pains to express his disgust at what had been done and to condemn violence and terrorism.
What is vile about that?
Of course you will say that is not what they really think.
Perhaps that is the fault of a legal system which has attempted to outlaw thought. However the law only allows us to hear what the law permits. As a member of the minority which is the most subjected to hate attacks I very much prefer to know the actual opinions of my adversaries rather than the opinion some badly drafted law allows them to state. Then I can take steps to protect myself. ie. avoid them!
The EDL leader expressed exactly the same sentiments that have repeatedly been expressed in the Telegraph columns. Is the Telegraph vile? Are its readers?
I have never been tempted to seek out the EDL nor to support it. However this straight talking young man seems to have a point. Yes indeed he does not talk your kind of language. He is a blunt (to the point of pugnacious), straight-talking working class man. None of the trivial small-talk of the chattering classes! He declared the problem is the stifling of debate. I agree. Democracy dies when opinions cannot be expressed.