Review: ‘Angry, White and Proud’, Channel 4, 15 January 2015

“I saw my first dead jihadi when I was ten years old.” (Paul, commenting on his childhood recollection of a Muslim Turk who had crossed the Green Line in Cyprus). 

“Don’t tarnish us all as racists, bigots, Nazis.” (Andy, speaking after recounting how his son died at the age of 19 defending one of his comrades whilst on his first tour of duty in Afghanistan).

“There’s no threats of violence. Yet.” (Colin, reflecting upon the possible direction of future direct action by splinter groups within the nationalist movement).  

The narrator opened the documentary by revealing that he had spent a year getting to know the individuals whose personal perspectives and stories formed the primary subject matter of the programme. That he had successfully gained a degree of trust was apparent from the sense of ease with which the subjects of his piece spoke about their personal motivations for involvement in anti-Islamist direct action. It was thus an insightful piece of journalism infused with human interest, and a degree of sympathy for individuals who often indulged in actions and behaviours that would ordinarily elicit little other than unease, if not outright revulsion.  

The film provided a snapshot of just one of the small groups – the South London Infidels (SLI) – to have emerged from the fragmentation of the English Defence League (EDL), and from what was on display here, the EDL of old appeared to be very moderate by comparison. Although each of the SLI members interviewed claimed a political motivation – specifically an anti-Islamist one – for their actions, it was evident that for some this was indeed simply a peg upon which they hung their innate anger, as was made most clear by Colin, who at the beginning of the programme revealed that he had been a “tearaway as a youth”, before graduating to football hooliganism, the ‘Far Right’ (interestingly he here interjected that it could just as well have been the Left, as they’re “both the same”) and anti-Islamism. He stated that he had joined the nationalist movement six years ago and that he hated Muslims “with a passion!” Together with someone named Jason, he had set up the SLI. 

Apparently, Colin’s own mother habitually refers to him as “a dick”. Towards the end of the programme, he had gravitated towards more hard-core interpretations of nationalism, associating himself with individuals sympathising with the Golden Dawn, as well as Combat 18. He had come to believe that the formation of some kind of militia or ‘task force’ to deal with the Islamist threat was both desirable and inevitable. So far, so bad. Colin confessed that “I’m in a bit of a bad place at the moment”, before later going on to admit that he didn’t like himself, and that he’d directed his self-hatred outwards in anger channelled through the comradeship of the groups to which he had attached himself. Worse still, he claimed that he knew of violent actions that had recently taken place, but that he was not prepared to divulge details, as he did not wish to incriminate his sources or the perpetrators of these violent acts. He was thus the living embodiment of the far-right extremist that everyone loves to hate: the belligerent, self-loathing ex-football hooligan skinhead turned defender of patriotic values, advocating violence against his objects of hate. To top it all, he was half Italian and half Irish.  

Paul, another SLI member, was born in Tottenham of Cypriot parentage, hence his nightmarish childhood recollection of an incident in Cyprus. In talking about the group’s demonstrations, he stated: “We’re not looking for violence, but believe me, if we’re attacked, we’ll defend ourselves.” He said this ahead of a demonstration in Brighton shortly after St George’s Day, where it was anticipated that there would be a confrontation with counter-demonstrators. Paul and his fellow SLI members were not to be disappointed on this score, as ‘anti-fascist’ campaigners and ‘nationalists’ got into a bit of a ruck and threw sundry pieces of street furniture around a Brighton street. Neither a good day for the locals, nor the police. The violence that was traded between the two sides seemed to bear witness to Colin’s comment that the Far Right and the Far Left were in this respect alike. Paul however, disowned one tenet of traditional ‘Far Right’ belief: “No, I’m not a racist. I think that’s offensive.” Although, unlike Colin, Paul did not advocate the formation of a militia, by the end of the documentary he stated that he thought that “we will end up in a sectarian war,” and that this would inevitably lead to the formation of a militia if the Government fails to act sufficiently strongly to combat radical Islam. 

The SLI activities that were shown – marching in Brighton and latterly in Rotherham in connection with the cover-up of mass child abuse by Pakistani taxi drivers because of ‘cultural sensitivities’, turning up outside of Regent’s Park Mosque to confront Anjem Choudary, and appearing at a Muslim Brotherhood bookshop – all seemed to involve a great deal of shouting, ill temper and the threat (sometimes the use of) violence. It was a depressing display. Clearly, many who are involved in this group and others like it are in it primarily for the adrenaline kick that they obtain from indulging their violent impulses, but others – such as Andy – have evidently become involved in these groups because they feel that their concerns regarding Islamism are not being adequately addressed.

All in all, it made for dispiriting viewing. Islamism could be tackled and defeated quite easily in this country if our political leaders possessed the will, but it seems that with few exceptions, they do not. “Why not?” you may ask. It would appear that the unwillingness to act derives from a combination of factors, such as the internalised belief that multiculturalism and cultural relativism are ‘a good thing’, a desire not to alienate Muslim voters, and, most importantly of all, the socially corrosive impact of Saudi and Qatari capital, and the vigorous export of Wahhabi ideology by the Saudis. Out of the high-profile electable political parties, UKIP might be willing to tackle some of these problems, but, I suspect, not all of them.

Bradford’s Muslim Grooming Gangs: have the politically correct blinkers been removed?

The Telegraph and Argus today ran with a prominent report on local MP Kris Hopkins’s contribution to the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee’s inquiry into child grooming. Although it does not describe itself as investigating Muslim child grooming, which would be the case if this phenomenon were no longer being treated in a politically correct fashion, this is in effect what it is examining, following the recent scandals connected to such practices in Rotherham and Rochdale. Indeed, whilst this inquiry takes place the nine Muslim men arrested as part of Operation Bullfinch are standing trial for perpetrating this sort of crime in Oxford over a number of years.

Hopkins stated that over the past two months 30 people had been arrested in the Bradford area in connection with grooming crimes, and that there are also a number of “ongoing cases”. However, according to the Telegraph and Argus, he claims that this crackdown was evidence of the fact that ‘the days when alleged “political correctness” made the authorities reluctant to act were gone.’ Ann Cryer, an earlier incumbent of Hopkins’s Keighley and Ilkley seat, has also appeared before the Committee. She is quoted by the Yorkshire Post as stating that the inter-agency working necessary for tackling this and related problems simply “wasn’t happening” when she was an MP. Moreover, she drew attention to another repellent cultural aspect of the ‘community’ from whose ranks the grooming gangs originate: 

The West Yorkshire Police, Bradford local authority, social services, schools, hospitals even – because abortions were taking place – none of them were working together. None of them were giving information. I feel pretty convinced that at that time there was a fear of being called a racist.

There still is such a fear Ann. Ask anyone who works in the public sector and who has to pay at least lip service to the irrational diversity dogma that is thrust upon us. Criticise Islam or associate any negative practice with it and you’ll find yourself in pretty damned hot water very fast. If you offend a Muslim colleague in this manner you can kiss goodbye to any prospects of career advancement. We live in a self-inflicted climate of fear thanks to the legislation that emanated from the thoroughly wrongheaded Machpherson Report and its invention of the fictitious crime of ‘institutional racism’ and the extension of the term ‘racism’ to include criticism of negative practices conducted predominantly by ethnic minorities.

Although Ann Cryer has over the years done much good in trying to draw attention to this form of paedophile grooming, the local Labour Party that she represented was at least initially reluctant to publicise the true extent of this ugly reality, and it is unfortunate to say that at that time it took the actions of the BNP to flush this scandal out into the public arena. Similarly, it does beg the question as to how seriously Hopkins et al would be taking the gang grooming phenomenon were it not for the series of noisy protests mounted by the EDL across the country, including in Keighley, Rotherham and Rochdale. Whether you happen to agree with their tactics or not, they have helped to bring this ugly phenomenon to the attention of a wider public, no matter how unwelcome that might be to certain Westminster politicians eager not to ‘offend’ the Muslim bloc vote. One can only conclude therefore, that given the sluggishness of Westminster politicians to recognise the nature and extent of this type of criminal behaviour and their ongoing inability to name it for what it is – Muslim paedophile grooming – political correctness reigns supreme. Only once we are rid of the intellectually and morally corrosive effects of the Macpherson Report will we be able to deal with this problem properly, and root it out once and for all.

Alas, what does BBC3 offer us tonight? ‘Make Me a Muslim’. 

Kris Hopkins: Keighley & Ilkley MP

EDL Solihull Demo

This afternoon an EDL demo has been taking place in Solihull, the first of 2013. According to various reports on Twitter, anywhere between 40 and 60 supporters took part. One estimate even placed their numbers as low as 25. Although billed as a ‘regional demo’, the numbers are small. There seems to be little other information circulating about the demo, although its detractors have asserted that its organiser – Matthew Pile – had been involved in a violent racist attack on a fellow bus passenger last October. Press coverage of the protest was limited to an article in the Birmingham Mail, which claimed that there were circa 60 demonstrators in total and whilst hostile in tone noted that the demonstration was peaceful. There was no counter-demonstration.

With Stephen Lennon/Tommy Robinson having recently been sentenced to a ten-month custodial sentence for having entered the US on someone else’s passport, and the EDL seemingly having passed its high watermark in terms of numbers attending demonstrations, some observers have been touting this as signalling the demise of the anti-Islamist campaign group, although in reality the picture is rather more complex. Lennon himself had assumed a high-profile role in the BFP alongside Kevin Carroll in April last year, but left in October, announcing that he was to transform the EDL itself into a political party. Carroll however stayed in the BFP whilst remaining a high-profile member of the EDL. To the surprise of many, Carroll became BFP Chairman earlier this month when Paul Weston stepped down from the role after a little over a year in the position. Adding to the confusion was the fact that the BFP became deregistered as a political party in November 2012 following its failure to pay its annual registration fee. The current status of the party is therefore unclear.

With Kevin Carroll having become BFP Chairman and his cousin now sitting in prison for the best part of this year, will Lennon’s intention to transform the EDL into a fully-fledged political party remain, or will he rejoin the BFP now that Weston has stepped down? It seemed that one of the primary reasons for Lennon’s departure was linked to a failure to see eye-to-eye with Weston’s political agenda despite the party's near monomaniac obsession with Islam, but with Carroll in control, this difference will now in all likelihood have been removed. If the BFP is to continue, it would appear that it will now be the electoral arm of the EDL, although this poses questions both for the BFP’s existing membership and for many EDL supporters who are averse to involvement in electoral politics. It is unlikely that there will be any clarity on this score for quite some time to come, and it seems probable that those EDL protests that do take place in the coming months will be organised by local divisions rather than by the national leadership. 

EDL Solihull Demonstration

Shotton Colliery ‘Muslim Education Centre’ Poll Results

Whilst being aware that Ed Miliband has delivered a speech on immigration in which he attempted to look ‘concerned’ at the same time as he extolled the ‘virtues’ of the transformation that mass immigration has wrought in our country in recent years, I shall leave my thoughts on its content until a later post. This evening, it is instead time to look at the results of a poll opened up to blog readers a fortnight ago on the so-called ‘Muslim Education Centre’ that has been given planning permission to open in the village of Shotton Colliery.

As of this evening, the article on the EDL protest at Shotton Colliery on Saturday 1 December had attracted 1,537 page views, but only 134 visitors to the blog felt moved to participate in the associated poll. Regular readers will be aware that although many who visit the blog do so because they find its content broadly to their taste, quite a few most certainly do not. Given that the sample for this poll is self-selecting, it is completely unscientific and I will thus not seek to draw any wide-ranging conclusions from it other than the fact that it will provide a reasonably accurate gauge of readers’ feelings relating to this issue over the past fortnight.

The poll itself posed a question – ‘What do you think of Shotton Colliery’s proposed ‘Muslim Education Centre’?’ – which was followed by a number of statements that respondents could either agree with or ignore. Each respondent could participate in the poll only once, but multiple answers could be ticked.

The two questions that opened the poll revealed strong opposition to the centre, which was not a surprise: ‘I oppose it’ – 96 votes (71%); ‘I support it’ – 16 votes (11%). The remaining statements are ranked below in order of their popularity:

• MP Grahame Morris should publicly condemn the proposed centre – 56 votes (41%).

• It is intended to pave the way for a larger Muslim population in Shotton Colliery – 53 votes (39%).

• We need a political party to back us in our campaign against this centre – 46 votes (34%).

• Its backers wish to use it to convert people to Islam – 44 votes (32%).

• I am willing to campaign against the centre – 37 (27%).

• I am willing to campaign for the centre – 6 votes (4%).

It was interesting to see that so many respondents thought that the local MP ought to come out against the centre and make a public statement to that effect, when in fact he has done precisely the opposite. If these 53 respondents could all write to Grahame Morris asking him to make such a public condemnation, whilst highlighting that they, their families and friends would not consider voting for him unless he did so, this could cause the MP something of a headache, although in all likelihood it would prompt him to issue a statement condemning ‘far-right’ agitators in his constituency.

Well over a third of respondents think that one of the centre’s functions will be to pave the way for an increase in the size of the village’s Muslim population, and just over a third want a political party to help campaign against the centre’s presence. Only marginally less – 32% - think that another core function of the centre will be to seek to convert locals, yet despite a strong sense of opposition towards this development only 27% of respondents stated that they are willing to actively campaign against it. The only small crumb of comfort that they can glean in this respect is that a mere 4% of the sample would be willing to campaign on its behalf.

Overall therefore, readers do not wish to see a ‘Muslim Education Centre’ in Shotton Colliery and instead would like local political figures to take a lead in opposing it, which is unlikely to happen. However, as in any such instance, only a certain proportion of those who hold such views are willing and/or able to become actively involved in making their opposition known. As for the comments attendant upon the Shotton Colliery protest article, it was often difficult to divine whether a number of them were genuine or had been fabricated by troublemakers, and there was a lack of clarity with respect to the identities of some of the commenters who posted anonymously, which made it difficult to know whether or not comments should be retained or removed owing to disputed ‘identities’. As we are fast approaching the festive season it is to be assumed that the next protest in the village will not take place until some point in 2013, and if another such protest does take place, what angle will its organisers choose to take, and what, if any, prospect of success will lie before it?  

Bradford’s Muslim Population Explosion

In an article written in July after the release of the initial raw headline results from the 2011 Census, I noted how the highest population increases in the country appeared to take place in the boroughs possessing the largest Muslim populations, and today’s release of census results relating to religion appear to confirm this supposition. In July I observed that Tower Hamlets and Newham were recorded as displaying the greatest rate of population increase between 2001 and 2011, and today’s results state that Tower Hamlets has the highest share of Muslims in the country, and Newham the second, with the percentages standing at respectively 34.5% and 32.0%.

In Yorkshire, Bradford had experienced the fastest population growth, and once again I had attributed this to its growing Muslim population. This latter supposition also seems to be borne out by the statistics, for whereas the city’s Muslim population was recorded at 16.08% in 2001, the 2011 census reveals this percentage to have increased to 24.7%, making it the borough with the fourth largest share of Muslims in the country. Blackburn and Darwen, with 27.0%, stood in third place. Luton, the birthplace of the EDL, possessed the fifth highest concentration of Muslims at 24.6%. Across England and Wales as a whole, the number of Muslims increased rapidly during this 10-year period to a total of 2.7 million, its proportion of the population exploding from 3.0 to 4.8%.

The Muslim share of Bradford's population has risen by 53.6% in just ten years. Demographic Islamisation is thus a reality in England today, and the greater the number that profess that faith, the louder will be the calls for it to be protected and for the admission of co-religionists from overseas. Overall, what with London now being not only a minority English but also a minority British city, the census results make for grim reading.

Bradford Today, Bradford on Avon Tomorrow?

EDL Shotton Colliery Demo

Today the EDL held a demo in the village of Shotton Colliery in County Durham. The protest was prompted by the decision of a locally resident businessman named Kaiser Choudry to transform a closed pub into what has been described as ‘a Muslim education centre’.

Given the name of the village, it will come as no surprise to the reader that it grew up around the eponymous pit which was closed by the NCB in the early 1970s with the loss of around 800 jobs. The village has never recovered from this swingeing economic blow, and the proposed ‘Muslim education centre’, which was once the Melrose Arms, is but one of eight former local pubs that have now been shut. Clearly, what Shotton Colliery requires is economic investment and job opportunities, not such a pointless entity as a ‘Muslim education centre’.

The pointlessness and unwelcome nature of such an intrusion into the life of an English village was overlooked by the Hartlepool Mail, which naturally chose to cover the story from a pro-Muslim perspective under the heading of ‘Muslims fear EDL demo’. Apparently, the village is home to five or six Muslim families. Presumably they are all familiar with Islam, so why would Shotton Colliery require a ‘Muslim education centre’? Obviously, it does not, and is simply intended as a base for Islamic proselytisation – dawa – amongst the resident English population. There is nothing favourable that can be said either about such an intent or this specific move, so the EDL were certainly right to demonstrate in this instance, for such a centre can bring good to nobody. The less that Islamic doctrine is preached and spread in our country, so much the better for all. 

Residents of the village should be aware that Easington MP Grahame Morris has sided with the proponents of the Muslim propaganda centre. At the very least, those who object to its presence should write to him and complain about his stance, asking him directly what benefit he thinks such a proselytising mission centre could possibly confer upon the area and the lives of local residents. There is nothing positive in Islamic doctrine that cannot be found in any other faith or general system of ethical conduct, but there is much in it that is inherently negative and inimical to the public good. We do not need more Islam in Britain, but less of it. We should not grant planning permission for Muslim mission centres. It would be better if the former Melrose Arms were to be bulldozed.

As for the turnout at the demo today, there has been scant information, although one opponent of the EDL, a self-styled ‘anti-fascist’ claimed in a tweet that some 200 EDL turned up in Shotton. On the other side of the divide, someone named Peter Sloan asserted that there were between 500 and 600 EDL and locals demonstrating against the proposed Muslim centre. From the picture of the demo below, it is impossible to estimate numbers, as it only shows part of the crowd. If you were in Shotton today, what were your impressions of the protest? Were you for it, or against it? What happened? Feel free to leave comments below, because the press will not report it in an objective fashion. A poll has been added to the blog column on the right where you can make clear your opinion on Shotton's proposed 'Muslim education centre'. Multiple answers can be submitted, and the poll will close on 21 December. It will be interesting to see what readers think.

UPDATE:

On 2 December the Sunday Sun reported that two men were arrested at the demo ‘for breach of bail conditions’ and cited a police estimate of the number of EDL present as 200. However, it is not clear as to whether or not this figure also included locals who turned out to protest against the proposed ‘Muslim education centre’. The article also noted that Durham County Council has already ‘received a 102-signature petition and 13 letters against the conversion.’ Clearly, much more opposition will need to be effectively marshalled to put an end to this plan for the former Melrose Arms. According to the Hartlepool Mail, which decided to describe the demonstrators as 'far-right extremists' in its Sunday edition, Durham County Council has already approved plans for the centre to go ahead. Are you a local resident who opposes this centre? If so, how do you feel about being labelled a 'far-right extremist'?

A report that appeared in the Sunderland Echo on 3 December confirmed (as mentioned by a commenter below) that a woman wearing a niqab threw a bag of what appeared to be 'dog excrement' at the protesters, but the police have stated that it 'contained mud'. Her action cannot be described as being within the bounds of legitimate objection to the protest and was unnecessarily provocative. Nonetheless, she was only 'ushered away' and did not, so far as can be deduced from the report, receive a police caution. Although the protest itself is said to have been generally peaceful, it is stated that a bottle was thrown at the police (which fool did that?) and a number of fireworks were let off. It claimed that the demonstrators numbered about 200.

EDL Demonstrators in Shotton Colliery (Saturday 1 December 2012)

John Humphrys on Pakistani Muslim Grooming

"It is patently the case that Pakistani men are implicated in this [paedophile grooming] more than other groups, isn't it?" So spoke John Humphrys this morning on Radio 4's Today Programme. The interviewee, naturally, batted this aside conveniently ignoring the facts. In September 2011 Humphrys once posed the question as to whether the English Defence League ought better to be described as "the Englishness Defence League". As mentioned previously on this blog, it seems that Humphrys enjoys moments of clarity relating to these issues. More later, but now it is time to head to work.

EDL to Demonstrate in Norwich

An EDL demonstration will be taking place in Norwich today, accompanied by a customary counter-demonstration under the now well-known "We Are" franchise created by the SWP-dominated UAF: We Are Norwich. The demo has apparently been prompted by ‘a decision by the city council, banning a Christian preacher from distributing anti-Islamic“hate-motivated” leaflets from a stall on Hay Hill.’ Given the blanket use and abuse of so-called hate-crime laws when it comes to matters of belief, it is hard to adjudge whether or not the leaflets really were “hate-motivated”, but such an allegation really ought to be taken with a pinch of salt. In all likelihood, he was just proclaiming that Christianity is the true religion, as would be the position of any Christian preacher, and probably highlighting some of the bloody and intolerant aspects of Islamic doctrine.

The ‘preacher’ in question may of course have been one of those ranting types yelling about fire and brimstone and eternal damnation for those who do not follow ‘The Lord’, but such people are best ignored rather than prosecuted. From the little information available, it seems that he is one of those types, and in line with doctrinaire Islam, enjoys inveighing against the evils of homosexuality. There is often little that differentiates literalist Old Testament ‘Christians’ from their doctrinaire Muslim equivalents, with both holding exceptionally objectionable views and making for very bad company.

Norwich, it would seem, does not possess a significant Muslim population, but the city is home to a group that calls itself the ‘Norwich Muslim Community’, which possesses its own website and claims to be some 150 strong (including children). Whereas in the bulk of our towns and cities where such a presence is in evidence the representatives of this faith originate from overseas, in Norwich, the situation is different, with the website claiming that ‘The majority are British-born converts to Islam.’ Those words – ‘British-born converts to Islam’ – always sadden me, for I cannot understand why anyone would wish to freely embrace that faith in particular, when so many others (and none) are available. Why would anyone in the full possession of his or, particularly, her mental faculties who was not of a malicious bent choose to embrace such a doctrine? Perhaps asking such a question is superfluous, for there is a strong irrational urge in many people.

Thus, having ascertained that Norwich is not home to a large Muslim population and that there are no specific problems with those who describe themselves as adherents of that faith in the city, is holding a march the best way to protest against the idiotic decision by the local council to ban a fringe Christian preacher from distributing leaflets? Perhaps it is. Then again, it might be better if the EDL were to get behind the Reform Section 5 Campaign instead. Whatever the merits or otherwise of the chosen course of action, expect a lot of people under the banner of We Are Norwich to be screaming ‘fascists!’ at the EDL today. It is only a matter of time before the reports start rolling in, with the press giving a platform only to the anti-EDL protesters. A live blog of the demo is being provided by Norwich Evening News.

 'Norwich Muslim Community': mostly Converts

EDL Walthamstow Demo Cancelled: will the EDL demonstrate elsewhere?

Today the EDL have been banned from protesting in Walthamstow, but given that in the past small groups of EDL have turned up at a variety of locations - such as Hebden Bridge and Totnes - for impromptu flash demos, will such activity take place today? It had been suggested that the EDL could protest outside of Parliament instead, but whether anyone will take up the offer to do so is unclear. If information emerges, from whatever source, it will be posted here as it becomes available.

However, for some reason the SWP front group We are Waltham Forest and its umbrella UAF campaign have been exempted from the protest ban in the borough, and this morning therefore gathered for a static protest - a self-billed "victory" rally - in Walthamstow town centre. Around 250 are said to have attended. However, the deeply unappealing prominent UAF member and anti-free speech activist Martin Smith claimed that they numbered over 1,000. Quite why UAF is not seen as a threat to public order whereas the EDL is when activists associated with the former have instigated a great deal more violence than the latter over the years, is something of a mystery. For some reason, although UAF is under de facto SWP control, David Cameron continues to support the campaign.

Updates
The anti-EDL Hope Not Hate blog reports that a number of EDL were drinking in St Stephens Tavern near Parliament at the beginning of this afternoon, with representatives of the Dudley, Exeter, Portsmouth and Torbay divisions being present. It looks as if Totnes will not be getting a visit from the EDL today. The numbers are said to be "low". Compiling estimates of numbers in various Hope Not Hate postings, their blog is claiming, as of 13:33, that the EDL number circa 100. It also states that a number of "anti-fascists" [sic] have turned up to oppose them. As the police have not given these agitators the right to protest near Westminster today, will they deal with them appropriately, for they have clearly turned up with a view to provoking conflict with the EDL?

The Casuals United blog has posted an image of a leaflet handed (shown below) out to EDL protesters by the police at King's Cross. As can be seen, they have been instructed to demonstrate in Old Palace Yard opposite the Houses of Parliament between 1pm and 2pm only, with the leaflet stating that the demo had to take place there instead of in Walthamstow "to prevent serious public disorder, serious damage to property or serious disruption to the life of the community". It would be interesting to know what intelligence the police had received pertaining to the likelihood of such violence erupting in Walthamstow and who was behind any associated threats. It seems unlikely that they would have originated with the EDL.

Despite the EDL not being in Walthamstow this afternoon, one tweeter by the name of Henry Comfort claimed at 13:13 that nonetheless police in riot gear were "eveywhere in Walthamstow today".

The Waltham Forest News reports that UAF supporters this afternoon violated the ban on marches in Walthamstow, with several hundred of them breaking away from their static protest at 1.30pm to march down to the junction at Selbourne Road. There, the police stopped them, and scuffles broke out. Clearly, had the EDL come to Walthamstow today, it would have been the UAF demonstrators who initiated any violence. By 2.30pm the UAF marchers had been dispersed.

Leaflet handed to EDL Supporters by the Metropolitan Police at King's Cross

EDL Walthamstow Protest: Banned, but will it go ahead?

This Saturday, the EDL plan to return to Walthamstow to demonstrate following a not so successful visit on 1 September when a large number of counter-demonstrators turned out to oppose them under the aegis of SWP-front group 'We are Waltham Forest' (WAWF). On Tuesday the Metropolitan Police applied to Home Secretary Teresa May for a banning order on marches in the borough, claiming that they had received intelligence that the protests could result in 'serious public disorder, violence and damage.'

Minister for Policing Damian Green this afternoon announced a ban on marches in the following areas for the next 30 days: Islington, Newham, Waltham Forest and Tower Hamlets. The EDL have instead been offered the opportunity to protest outside if Parliament this Saturday, but it is thought that they will instead opt to try and hold a static protest in Walthamstow. Green's decision has also irritated WAWF, so it would seem likely that at least a number of its supporters are likely to ignore the banning order.

This comes at the end of a turbulent week for the EDL, insofar as its leader - Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (Tommy Robinson) - was arrested on Saturday as one of a group of 53 EDL supporters who were en route to east London. He was arrested for the alleged assault of Sayful Islam in Luton on Saturday morning; 'suspicion of conspiring to cause a public nuisance' (this is why the 53 were detained) and for illegally entering the USA in September, allegedly using forged documents. Kevin Carroll, subsequently released, was also amongst the 53 detainees. According to the Gates of Vienna blog, Yaxley-Lennon's former political colleague Paul Weston was also arrested outside of Wormwood Scrubs on Monday when attempting to ascertain whether the former was being held at the prison, the pretext for his arrest being stated as 'a breach if the peace'. What has happened since then is not clear, as no information appears to have been forthcoming.

It thus seems that whatever happens on Saturday, the EDL leader will not be at the demo, wherever it takes place. His recent announcement that he was to turn the EDL into a political party and leave the BFP of which he had been joint vice-chairman for a number of months, underscored Yaxley-Lennon's desire to reconnect with the EDL support base, having ascertained that leading the movement was where his strength lay. The EDL's opponents will doubtless view this week's developments with a certain malign glee, but although they would wish that it were finished, it doubtless has life left in it yet.

EDL Walthamstow Demo: 1 September 2012

The Odd Couple: Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and Nikki Sinclaire

Yesterday’s announcement that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, alternatively known as Tommy Robinson, was leaving his position as joint Vice-Chairman of the BFP to focus on his leadership of the EDL came as a surprise to many. Quite what precipitated his decision is unclear, but this announcement comes only a fortnight after an unsubstantiated rumour circulated that Paul Weston had resigned from his position as BFP Chairman, a rumour that was swiftly rebutted. It begs the question as to who started this rumour and why?

In his interview with The Independent yesterday, Lennon (for the sake of brevity I shall avoid the double-barrelled formulation) stated:

"I am looking at how to change the EDL into a genuine political party but we can't put a time on it at the moment. We are looking at the 2014 elections in Europe.

"It [the BFP] just isn't for me, I want to stick to the EDL. I wanted to make this decision before I committed myself to campaigning for the BFP. I have not been involved in an election campaign for them yet, so it is the right time."

What was it about the BFP’s policy platform that caused Lennon to take this decision, if indeed it was a matter of policy that caused his departure? Whatever the underpinning cause happened to be, attempting to turn the EDL into a political party is an utterly pointless venture, being as it is a single-issue protest group. Lennon would be better off re-evaluating his movement’s aims, objectives and tactics, transforming it into a more tightly focused and effective campaigning vehicle independent of any particular political party. Although it has managed to establish itself in the public consciousness, the EDL has not, generally speaking, projected an image that would exert electoral appeal to anything other than a small hardcore of supporters. Irrespective of the fact that there are certain widely-recognised negative behaviours exhibited by Islamists in this country which the majority of the general public find abhorrent, voters are not going to cast their ballots for a party that makes tackling Islamism its number one issue, although they would of course be happy to vote for a party with a comprehensive policy platform that dealt appropriately with the Islamist problem as part of its wider policy mix. Voters are primarily concerned about the economy, public services, education, housing and immigration, not Islamism, no matter how much distaste they may possess for it.  

Does Lennon intend to transform the EDL into a political party with such a broad policy mix? This seems doubtful. For all of its flaws and fixation upon the Islamic issue, the BFP does at least profess to possess objectives other than tackling Islamism and Islamisation; the EDL does not. In this respect, Lennon’s move brings to mind the recent announcement by former UKIP MEP Nikki Sinclaire in connection with the creation of a new political party named ‘We Demand a Referendum’ (WDAR), which possesses no policy other than to secure a referendum on the UK’s continued membership of the EU. For some reason, The Sun threw its backing behind this venture last month, presumably because Murdoch no longer finds Cameron’s Conservative Party to his liking.

How peculiar it is, that both Lennon and Sinclaire have decided to leave single-issue fixated parties and establish new splinter parties focused purely upon Islam and the EU respectively. This is not the stuff of electoral politics, but of pressure group agitation, and given the obsession of both figures with these single issues, they would be best advised to keep out of electoral politics and instead concentrate upon building up convincing arguments and campaigns in support of their respective positions. A vote for either will be a wasted one; both parties will fail, and badly at that. Voters need to be presented with a credible alternative to which they can lend their support; a party that genuinely tackles both of these concerns alongside the pressing need to address those issues that are central to the winning of any campaign. The EDL will not be such a party, and neither will the WDAR.

Stephen Yaxley-Lennon: Leader of the EDL

  Nikki Sinclaire: Leader of 'We Demand a Referendum'

EDL to rally in Rotherham: Saturday 13 October

Following recent revelations concerning Muslim grooming gangs in Rotherham and the failure of the local police and social services to tackle this problem for years despite being aware of its existence, a decision has been taken to hold an EDL demo in the town. This is scheduled to take place on Saturday 13 October. Shamefully, the Far Left have thus taken the decision not to highlight the statistically significant overrepresentation of a particular ethno-religious group in perpetrating this type of crime, but to try and blind the public to its reality by calling for a “multi-cultural rally” in Rotherham on the same day. In essence, judging by what has happened historically, this means that some UAF supporters will be seeking to initiate a violent clash with the EDL.

The Rotherham Advertiser quotes Pat Keenan (President of Rotherham Trades Council) at some length, and to his shame he has fallen for the dangerous myths constantly peddled and regurgitated by UAF spokesmen across the country:

“The overwhelming majority of people reject the EDL’s attempt to use racism to divide our society."

“Their attempts to spread racist myths about sexual exploitation must be exposed and challenged. They seek to blame one community for society’s problems."

“The EDL does nothing to protect the victims of sexual violence. Sexual predators and paedophiles exist in all communities, as do their victims.”

He added: “Each time the EDL assemble, minorities and trades unionists are subjected to threats and racial and religious abuse."

“Recently the EDL were prevented from marching through Walthamstow in London due to a fantastic show of unity from the local community.”

“It is essential that we show the same level of unity here. There’s no place for Nazis, racists or their allies in Rotherham’s multiracial, multicultural and multi-faith community.”

If Rotherham locals have any sense, which I am sure many do, they will keep well away from UAF and its deceitful spin about the allegedly anodyne nature of Islam. Advocate of violent confrontation with the EDL Weyman Bennett will be addressing a public meeting at the town’s ‘Unity Centre’ next Monday evening, with the paper claiming that local MP Denis MacShane will also be present. Being aware of MacShane’s politics, it would be nothing short of a miracle if he did not seek to make political capital out of this by appealing to Rotherham’s Muslim voters.

Pat Keenan employs a number of routine lies about the EDL including: calling them Nazis, whereas the EDL have burnt swastika flags and have ethnic minority members and supporters; claiming that the EDL scapegoat “one community for society’s problems”, which they do not, and neither do they claim that paedophilia is uniquely perpetrated by Muslims, but they do correctly highlight the fact that the phenomenon of on-street grooming is a predominantly Pakistani Muslim one. Given that the EDL are routinely and purposefully mislabelled as “racists” and “Nazis” by some trades unionists and UAF ethnic minority supporters, is it any surprise that some EDL demonstrators are tempted to voice their dissatisfaction by yelling abuse at their sworn enemies? The EDL are not, as UAF would have you believe, the current incarnation of Mosley’s Blackshirts, but a grassroots protest group made up of people from disparate backgrounds, although many who turn out for their marches are drawn from football firms.

UAF's effective controlling organisation - The Socialist Workers Party (SWP) - has in a recent article sought to exonerate Muslim grooming gangs from responsibility for the crimes that they have perpetrated in Rotherham, instead laying the blame for the abuse on lack of staff, thereby using the case to call for an increase in public spending in this sphere. This is also, of course, a blatant attempt by this anti-free speech party to solicit support from public sector workers in the town. The article states:

But social workers in Rotherham give a very different account of why the authorities failed to stop the abuse. “I’m not surprised young women fell through the safety net,” one social worker based in the town told Socialist Worker.

“There’s a huge shortage of staff—and particularly of qualified staff. The way the service is run is all about ‘cost management’ rather than getting out there and helping people.”

And it is sexist attitudes towards the victims, rather than imagined “sensitivities” about race, that hold back investigations.

The SWP is part of the problem when it comes to the specific crime of organised Pakistani Muslim paedophilia, because it constantly pushes the line that it does not exist and that to say that it does is 'racist', thereby facilitating ongoing abuse and running the risk of allowing the abusers to go unpunished. It claims to be a party representing the 'workers', but when it comes to ordinary working class English people, it sees them as expendable, preferring instead to court Muslim support.

How much money will be wasted on supporting the UAF counterdemonstration and who will be footing the bill? Doubtless, much of the funding will be drawn from union members’ subs, which is a disgraceful misuse of trades unionists’ funds in the current economic climate, and other monies may be forthcoming from the local council. If you are a Rotherham voter, keep an eye on which of your councillors are backing this protest in favour of hiding the reality of Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs, and be sure not to vote for them at the next election. Too many vulnerable Rotherham girls have suffered already because of this type of crime, and with its reality having been recently exposed, nobody – such as UAF – should seek to hide it from view again. One last question: why is it that the Rotherham Advertiser only allowed UAF and its supporters to give their perspective, whilst denying a platform to the EDL and their supporters? Is this balanced reporting, or propaganda? Why not write to the Rotherham Advertiser demanding that they allow the EDL the opportunity to give their side of the story in its pages?

UPDATE
The Morning Star reports that the anti-EDL meeting that took place at Rotherham's Unity Centre attracted circa 100 attendees on the evening of Monday 7 October. It is their expectation that the EDL will manage to muster between 100 and 200 demonstrators this coming Saturday. As at previous such meetings, EDL supporters were subjected to ritual denunciations as "fascists". Local paper The Sheffield Star also ran a story on the protest on Wednesday 10 October stating that extra police would be coming to Rotherham to police both demonstrations on Saturday, but as with the Rotherham Advertiser, UAF were given the opportunity to state why they were demonstrating, whereas the EDL were refused any voice in the paper, which described them as "far right". South Yorkshire Police estimate that the EDL will draw approximately 200 supporters to the town, whereas they anticipate that about 250 counter-demonstrators will congregate next to the town hall.

EDL Rotherham Division at Bristol Demo

Anti-Free Speech Meeting at Labour Party Fringe

It has been announced that elements of the anti-free speech Far Left will be holding a fringe meeting at the Labour Party Conference in Manchester on Tuesday evening. Gathering beneath what it terms “the antifascist flag”, UAF will be bringing together a range of individuals who will be discussing how to make political capital out of manufacturing a phantasmogorical “fascist” threat in Luton specifically, England more widely, and Europe generally. To date, they have been highly successful in raising funds from innocent trades unionists through invoking the spectre of a non-existent recrudescent fascism, and in order to legitimise their ongoing existence and continued funding it is necessary for this bogey to be kept alive in the public's, or at least the Labour Party’s, imagination.

Kelvin Hopkins, MP for Luton North, will be making the most brazen bid for Muslim votes by inveighing against the evils of “the racists and fascists of the English Defence League in his Luton constituency”, whilst other veterans of the cause will include the previously convicted Weyman Bennett, as well as a number of current and former Labour MEPs. Although there are certainly minority elements within the EDL that have caused violence at some of their demonstrations, violence and threat are inherent within UAF’s modus operandi, as most recently demonstrated by the decision to cancel a debate between Stephen Lennon of the EDL and representatives of the Muslim Debate Initiative at London’s Conway Hall that was scheduled for 4 October. In a post on their blog, the Muslim Debate Initiative (MDI) made it clear that it had been cancelled not because of any perception of potential violence from the EDL or from Muslim objectors, but because of the threat from so-called “anti-fascists”. The MDI blog reports the decision relating to the cancellation as follows:

Conway Hall, has decided based upon advice from the Police, and under pressure from various anti-fascist organisations and at least one MP, that the event may put the public at risk to public health and safety concerns under the current climate. Despite the security procedures of MDI within the building, the Venue Director was concerned about the safety of attendees outside the hall when going to, and leaving the event. Therefore, Conway Hall has informed Muslim Debate Initiative that for the time being, they will have to cancel the hire of the hall to MDI for this public event.

The MP concerned was Frank Dobson. Contrary to the assertions of UAF and its ideological confederates, it is not some phantom “Far Right” that we should fear with respect to our liberties, but the very real and influential Far Left of which it is a part. Reading the jubilant piece relating to the forcing of the cancellation of this debate on the UAF website, one is met with the following startling passage:

We believe the EDL is a fascist organisation. Fascism stands for: the total annihilation and mass murder of its opponents including trade unionists, liberals, social democrats, socialists, communists, Jewish, Muslim, black, Asian, lesbian, gay communities and other large sections of humanity. It also stands for war, the destruction of all democracy and freedom. History shows this is what happens when fascism gains power.

Is this what the supporters of UAF truly believe? Does the quote above strike you as having been penned by someone with a rational perspective fully apprised of the facts, or by someone suffering from a paranoid set of delusions? The question is superfluous. UAF is a dangerous anti-democratic campaign group that employs PC anti-racism slogans to mask its SWP-driven agenda. Any decent delegates at the Labour Party Conference this week would be wise to give this thuggish fringe a wide berth, and thereby avoid complicity in manufacturing unnecessary social conflict. 

UAF's Weyman Bennett: arrested for conspiracy to commit violent disorder

Video: Police and EDL Clash

Why did some members of the EDL clash with the police in Walsall today? This was idiotic behaviour on the part of those who engaged in it.

EDL Walsall Demonstration

The EDL has held a demonstration in Walsall today. It cited the following reasons for holding the protest in this West Midlands town:

We are going to Walsall,‭ ‬not to protest about Muslims or even Muslim violence,‭ ‬but to protest about Islam,‭ ‬an ideology that denigrates non-Muslims and places them lower than animals and sees non-Muslim women as targets for grooming and sexual exploitation.‭ ‬We are going to Walsall because the West Indian community is suffering even more attacks‭ ‬every day‭ ‬on their community than the white community of the town.‭ ‬The very same people who stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the Pakistani/Muslim community to fight down the far-right National Front and their racist attacks.‭

We are going to Walsall to show our support for the West Indian community,‭ ‬to protest the vile ideology of Islam that is splitting communities and breaking down social cohesion.‭ ‬Other ethnic communities,‭ ‬black,‭ ‬white,‭ ‬Afro-Caribbean,‭ ‬European all seem to get along together and have been doing so for many years.‭

Admittedly, this is only an excerpt, and there is far more on the EDL website here.

According to the Birmingham Mail, there have been confrontations between the police and demonstrators in Walsall today, but as is normal in the reporting of EDL demos, the identity of those clashing with the police is not made clear, for the report mentions "two rival groups" that the police were attempting to keep apart. Central News confirmed the customary presence of a counterdemonstration - this time held under the banner of 'We Are Walsall' (WAW) - which is in effect a front group for the SWP-dominated UAF. Many well-meaning individuals may well have been caught out by this strategy and lured into joining the counterdemonstration without being aware of the background agenda of the SWP. The local Labour Party also threw its backing behind the WAW initiative, with the police allotting them a spot to demonstrate some half a mile from the location of the EDL static protest. Whether or not WAW has attracted violent 'antifa' and anarchist elements as in Bristol this summer has not been confirmed, although one tweet by someone calling themselves ST3-walsall claimed that four Muslims got through the police lines and set off fireworks.

Information on numbers attending either of the demonstrations is currently lacking, but the police confirmed that a total of 28 arrests were made, some for throwing missiles which included bricks, bottles and planks. The affiliation of those arrested has not been divulged. The short video posted at the end of this piece appears to have been taken by an observer on his phone, with the EDL hoving into view in the ninth second. It is of rather poor quality, and does not allow for an estimate of the numbers to be made. However, a BBC report states that the EDL managed to draw about 1,000 supporters and the opposing demonstration circa 500. In the last couple of demonstrations held in Walthamstow and Bristol, the EDL contingent had only numbered in the low hundreds and had been significantly outnumbered by their opponents, so this turnout provides something of a fillip for the protest group. Unusually, the BBC refrained from dubbing the EDL "far-right" in its online report.

EDL in Walsall

'Vibrant' UAF counterdemonstrators (peaceful looking, aren't they?)

Walthamstow EDL Demo Reports

Today's EDL protest in Walthamstow was due to get underway with a march from the station at 1.30pm. Police had anticipated that there would be some 700 supporters present, but according to a report posted at BLOTTR at 1.09pm, only 200-300 EDL had turned up. Numbers at EDL demos appear to have passed their high watermark, and it is likely that the disruptive action by the RMT at Kings Cross today has prevented some protesters from arriving at their desired destination. However, according to a Hope Not Hate (HNH) posting at 12:36, circa 500 EDL were setting off from Kings Cross, whereas "a smaller group of "Casuals" have  been spotted moving independently." In a later posting the HNH blog was claiming "that the proposed EDL demo site has been changed as the original one has been "occupied"."

The blogger Quiet Man claims that some reports estimate the number of EDL supporters to be in the region of 1,000. Once the police figures become available, which are invariably the most accurate, they will be posted here.

On Thursday, I highlighted how the mass media uncritically accepts accounts from the self-styled "revolutionary socialist" Left such as the SWP in its slanted reporting of officially sanctioned pariah groups who oppose Islamism, multiculturalism and mass immigration. Today, true to form, the Metro report on the Walthamstow EDL demo and counter-protest has done just this, only allowing quotes from groups opposed to the EDL to appear in its story. Moreover, it quotes directly from the SWP's online piece about the opposition to the protest that it helped to create in the lead-up to today's events.

The SWP front group "We are Walthamstow" (WAW) appears to have been successful in its objective of whipping up an atmosphere conducive to violent confrontation, with this small but influential sect of the "revolutionary socialist" Left managing to mobilise a reported 3,000 individuals (some ideological fellow-travellers, others naive dupes) into turning out against the EDL. Given the numbers, the police were faced with the unenviable task of seeking to prevent the violent faction within the WAW crowd from attacking the EDL, and unfortunately, the Waltham Forest News reports that a group of the former managed to break through the police lines making it "to the Bromley Road turning where fighting started with bottles, flower pots and firecrackers being thrown." A number have been arrested, but no figures have been released as yet.

Watching the video of the EDL march below, it seems that an estimate of 300 individuals would be about right. The recent decline in turnout at demonstrations would seem to suggest that a rather clearer rationale needs to be provided for any particular protest that the group stages. Having previously provided an overview of the treatment of this EDL protest by the press and its opponents in the lead-up to the demo, a summary and analysis of press and opposition post-event reactions will appear within the next week or two.

EDL Walthamstow Demo: 1 September 2012

This Saturday, the EDL will be holding a protest in Walthamstow which had originally been planned to take place in August. Although this will be a national demo, recent attendance figures at such events – such as in Bristol and Dewsbury – have been rather modest compared to those that took place earlier in the protest group’s history. An explanation of why the march will be taking place has been provided in an article by Esmerelda Weatherwax, focusing upon how the borough has become a hotbed for Islamists in recent years, some of the most notable being involved in Anjem Choudary’s numerous differently-named groups consisting for the greater part of the same members articulating the same backward Islamist ideology.

Contrary to the shrill and predictable denunciations of the EDL protest made by the latest Trotskyite front group to spring into existence – ‘We are Waltham Forest’ – as well as formulaic imprecations issued by UAF, the SWP and sundry soi-disant ‘antifascists’, the police adjudge that the EDL march poses no threat of violence. Whether or not they believe that the same can be said of the miscellaneous anti-democratic elements of the Trotskyite and anarchist Left has not been divulged, but judging by past experience, including the recent ‘antifa’ attack upon police in Bristol, violence could well be forthcoming from that quarter. These groups employ the language of ‘anti-racism’ and ‘anti-fascism’ as a means of camouflaging their true intent of subverting public order and fomenting violence, and yet although these facts can be ascertained by anyone who cares to look at the literature that they produce, observe the manner in which they act and listen to the words that they speak, the mass media seem to possess a perplexing blind spot in this regard. Why are their claims, given their serious nature and implications, never subjected to objective scrutiny? The failure of the press, television and radio to investigate the murky world of the violent fringe of the anti-democratic Left, and the willingness of broadcasters and journalists to accept all of its pronouncements at face value, constitutes a baffling mystery. 

Turning to what the opponents of the EDL Walthamstow Demo have written, their true colours are revealed. For example, one article entitled ‘We Are Waltham Forest: residents to confront EDL racists’ appears on a website called Counterfire. This organisation describes itself as follows:

Counterfire is an organisation of revolutionary socialists. We work in the trade unions, student movement, and protest campaigns to link together different struggles, push them forwards, and build resistance to the system.

Counterfire members have played a key role in the Coalition of Resistance, Stop the War, and the student revolt.

Note the term “revolutionary socialists” and how the organisation freely owns that it infiltrates trade unions, student groups and protests to “build resistance to the system”. We live in a democracy where any “socialist” candidate is free to stand for office via the ballot box, and yet these people – “revolutionary socialists” – reject this route, preferring instead the tactics of infiltration and destabilisation, for they realise that in the cold light of day only a tiny minority of people would ever vote for them, so unappealing are their policies and the dystopian vision that they hold dear. They make clear their contempt for democracy and pluralistic thought and declare that their intent is to gradually curtail the compass of what passes for legitimate political debate so that eventually only those adhering to their own “revolutionary socialist” agenda are allowed to articulate their views. Still, history is unfortunately replete with examples where such “revolutionary socialists” have taken power and then violently turned on each other, such is the nature of their chiliastic urge to power in the name of an abstract humanity, the concrete reality of which they despise.

Such a tendency as outlined is clearly at play in the article written by Counterfire writer Charles Brown after he has written off the EDL as a dying force:

But this does not mean that we should downplay the threat posed by the EDL and fascist groups like the BNP and National Front. The scapegoating and scaremongering favoured by these organisations can often be found, in only marginally less virulent form in the right-wing press, and we have seen a ratcheting up of rhetoric against multiculturalism from Cameron and other Tory leaders.

Here we see the tactics of the “revolutionary socialist” Left laid bare: turn on any organisation or anybody who questions their ideological position. Thus, the first focus of their opposition was the National Front followed by the BNP then the EDL. Now that they think that the EDL are on the ropes, attention shifts to the Conservative Party and the “right-wing press” (presumably anything not falling under the control of the “revolutionary socialist” Left?). What are their weapons of choice? Smear, slur and insinuation. “Racist”, “fascist”, “far-right” and “Islamophobe” are just a few of the pejorative labels that they favour and employ with wild abandon, enjoying great success owing to the uncritical receptivity of the mass media, who help them to implement their strategy of: stigmatise, isolate and destroy. The SWP is also happy to whip up an atmosphere of fear with a view to inciting confrontation, hence its recent direction of propaganda towards Walthamstow's Muslim population. This, unfortunately, is one story that you will not see covered in mainstream reporting of the EDL protest in Walthamstow this Saturday.

UPDATE: Click here for demo coverage.

Welcome to Walthamstow: 'friends' of the revolutionary socialist Left

Hebden Bridge flooded (by EDL)

It turns out that today witnessed a number of small flash demos by the EDL besides the modest sized protest against the building of a mosque in Chelmsford. To the consternation of some, members of the EDL turned up for a return visit to Hebden Bridge, a small West Yorkshire former mill town renowned for its unusually right-on collection of residents, who have since the 1970s transformed the Pennine settlement into an oasis of metropolitan alternative lifestyles. So, rather like their kindred spirits who have set up home in Totnes and who also received a visitation from the EDL today, the inhabitants of Hebden Bridge were a bit put out by having their Saturday afternoon shopping for crystals and ethically sourced coffee interrupted. After what took place, a number of them will doubtless be booking themselves in for additional Reiki sessions to overcome the trauma. Why, did you not know that some of these EDL ruffians even drank lager (Red Stripe to be precise - look at the picture) in the open air from cans!?

One histrionic Hebden Bridge blogger affiliated to the Labour Party was tormented by visions of blackshirted mobs and thus grimly labelled the picture displayed below as "Fascist EDL in Hebden Bridge this afternoon" (later sarcastically amended to "The freedom fighting EDL in Hebden Bridge this afternoon"). Quite how he knew that they were "fascist" was not divulged, as I don't think that he bothered enquiring into their political philosophy or affiliation. Is drinking Red Stripe "fascist"? Isn't it from Jamaica? Hardly something that a "fascist" would drink, surely? Anyway, Tony was not alone in his distress, for as can be seen in the screen grab from Indymedia, Luke Knight was concerned about the arrival of "Around 40 EDL" in the town this afternoon who were confronted by a local "Anti fascist" (such folk are apparently known by sight in Hebden Bridge and are not an uncommon breed) who "went berserk and started screaming NAZIS at them and attempted to assault an EDL supporter" which led to an exchange of punches. Just what are these self-styled "anti-fascists" supposed to be saving us from? Violence? Hmm. Somehow, that just does not wash given the behaviour of this fellow and many of his self-righteously aggressive ideological brethren elsewhere.

Also, just why is it that Luke Knight writes about "An EDL female"? It sounds as if he is describing another species, which constitutes, to me at least, the language of dehumanisation, and as "anti-fascists" never tire of telling us: dehumanisation is just a step away from cattle trucks and gas chambers. Well, they do appear to possess a morbid fascination with such subjects, and for all their protestations about desiring "peace", are often frighteningly willing to deploy violence in order to silence those who happen to disagree with them. Although I paraphrase somewhat for the hour grows late, there seems to be much truth in the statement that never is evil so readily done as when men are convinced of the righteousness of the cause in which they act. Thus it is with the "anti-fascists", tortured by demons in human form of their own creation, which they think must be exorcised for the moral benefit of the "community" and for the sake of their own psychological well-being. And to think that these people have the temerity to use a slogan such as "hope not hate". Which of these two principles truly animates their thoughts and their actions?

The second screengrab also comes from a contributor to Indymedia, displaying his reaction to this article. As can be seen, the demonising mentality of the "anti-fascist" is in full spate, anathematising me as a "Neo-Nazi Troll" and a "racist w*****r". My point about the inherently unpleasant, stigmatising and aggressive nature of these people is thereby fully confirmed.

 

EDL foraging for organic hummus in Hebden Bridge