Tommy Robinson - Interviews and Dialogue Analysis - The 4 Freedoms Library2024-03-19T12:45:21Zhttp://4freedoms.com/forum/topics/tommy-robinson-interviews-and-dialogue-analysis?groupUrl=argumentation&feed=yes&xn_auth=no[A great comment copied from…tag:4freedoms.com,2017-10-27:3766518:Comment:1912302017-10-27T03:39:57.713ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<div class="comment-content"><p>[A great comment copied from GOV: <a href="http://gatesofvienna.net/2017/05/more-on-julia-ebner-quilliam-and-tommy-robinson" target="_blank">http://gatesofvienna.net/2017/05/more-on-julia-ebner-quilliam-and-t...</a>]</p>
<p>I hope you don’t mind Baron, if I post a summary of some of my comments under those two pieces about Tommy, along with a few other thoughts.</p>
<p>This comment below the line in an anti-EDL two-minute hate piece in the Guardian, exemplifies…</p>
</div>
<div class="comment-content"><p>[A great comment copied from GOV: <a href="http://gatesofvienna.net/2017/05/more-on-julia-ebner-quilliam-and-tommy-robinson" target="_blank">http://gatesofvienna.net/2017/05/more-on-julia-ebner-quilliam-and-t...</a>]</p>
<p>I hope you don’t mind Baron, if I post a summary of some of my comments under those two pieces about Tommy, along with a few other thoughts.</p>
<p>This comment below the line in an anti-EDL two-minute hate piece in the Guardian, exemplifies the self-loathing and scorn of an element of middle-class liberals.<br/>“The English lower classes are an embarrassment to our progressive, tolerant country the sooner they have disappeared for good the better for society.”<br/><a href="https://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/96404610" rel="nofollow">https://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/96404610</a></p>
<p>Because the violent Islamists and Salafist jihadis of al-Muhajiroun, of whom the EDL originally protested against, are such an improvement but of course they’re rarely to never mentioned, no context is provided.<br/>That members of al-Muhajiroun were offered police protection, after getting a slap on the wrist for burning poppies, while the forces of the state and supposed antifas were turned on the EDL instead, is never mentioned either.<br/><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10120706/Woolwich-outrage-we-are-too-weak-to-face-up-to-the-extremism-in-our-midst.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10120706...</a><br/>Quilliam and the British state’s ‘anti-extremism’ Prevent programme make an utterly fatuous (and convenient) cultural relativism, wherein opposition to Salafist jihad and supremacist Islam, is painted as merely the other side of that ‘extremist’ coin and has meant the state getting involved, in what are effectively playground rants, which as Mark Steyn might say, is no small thing.<br/><a href="http://participator.online/articles/where_next_for_the_pretend_strategy.php" rel="nofollow">http://participator.online/articles/where_next_for_the_pretend_stra...</a><br/>Various luvvies, Labour MPs and assorted virtue-signalers claim the EDL are closer to al Qeada and ISIS that “us”.<br/><a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/hope-not-hate-letter-mirror-1925188" rel="nofollow">http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/hope-not-hate-letter-mirror-19...</a></p>
<p>This is how Quilliam represented Tommy visiting their office to confront Julia Ebner about her piece in the Guardian;<br/>‘Extremists Storm Quilliam Office……Quilliam was victim to extremist Tommy Robinson and alt-right Rebel media’s George Llewelyn-John’.<br/><a href="https://www.quilliaminternational.com/extremists-storm-quilliam-office-2/" rel="nofollow">https://www.quilliaminternational.com/extremists-storm-quilliam-off...</a></p>
<p>More ”victims’ of extremism.</p>
<p>An Arab saying comes to mind, ‘I cry and hit you, then in tears say why did you hit me?’ </p>
<p>In comparison and only to reveal just how fatuous the other side of the ‘extremist’ coin notion is- some of those ‘extremists’ in al-Muhajiroun, have been implemented in numerous acts of terror and some are apparently now in Syria, sending death threats to British MPs and instructions on how to avoid detection while plotting vehicular&knife jihad, (which the Telegraph kindly reprinted), this is also never mentioned.<br/><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11490030/British-Islamic-State-fighter-calls-for-Muslims-to-kill-Theresa-May.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11490030/Br...</a></p>
<p>Tommy and those like him, are presented as acting out of sheer bigotry, and that any grassroots resistance to Salafist jihad, is racist, white supremacism or at the very least the other side of the ‘extremist’ coin.</p>
<p>Let’s not forget Quilliam’s position, according to their Wiki-page is that “Islam is just a religion, not a political religion or an ideology”<br/>“Socio-political Jihads are needed to achieve the goals of noble causes such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights”<br/><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quilliam_%28think_tank%29" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quilliam_%28think_tank%29</a><br/>Such wishful-thinking and claims about Islam are debunked here:<br/><a href="https://ecawblog.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/examining-quilliams-claims-4/" rel="nofollow">https://ecawblog.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/examining-quilliams-claim...</a><br/>Never-mind the OIC has signed up to the Declaration of Cairo, the Islamic human rights ‘subject to the Sharia’.</p>
<p>All of this slots into the wider progressive/Islamist convergence, where any resistance to the EU, replacement migration from MENA&Africa and the Islamisation of Europe is also vilified as ‘white nationalism’ and racism.<br/>(Brexit is a start in a fight against this but with progressive globalist Tories in charge, it will be an uphill struggle).<br/>Legitimate criticism of Islam is being slowly and incrementally criminalised.<br/>Readers here at the GoV, thanks to it coverage, will be well aware of this process.</p>
<p>That vague term ‘Islamophobia’ is being conflated with ‘anti-Muslim’ and that’s being conflated with ‘racism’; blasphemy laws in all but name, albeit without Sharia punishments (we have de-facto Sharia executions like that of the Hebdo staff for that).<br/>In other words:<br/>“Islamophobia Is Racism”<br/><a href="http://www.osce.org/odihr/84495?download=true" rel="nofollow">http://www.osce.org/odihr/84495?download=true</a><br/><a href="https://islamophobiaisracism.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/islamophobiaisracismsyllabus.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://islamophobiaisracism.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/islamophob...</a></p>
<p>How might this all play out? well, look at what happened when Tommy is subject to a kangaroo court by liberal media.<br/>Muslims and ineffably smug middle-class liberals repeatedly shout ‘racist’.<br/><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB7XaPT71eg&spfreload=5" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB7XaPT71eg&spfreload=5</a><br/>Critics of Sharia law are already called racists and Islamophobes.<br/>Anne Marie Waters was called the other side of the pro-Sharia extremist coin by the BBC and Baroness Cox, was repeatedly interrupted and called a right-wing racist and Islamophobe by Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadan Foundation.<br/>Baroness Cox is campaigning on the behalf of Muslim women, who had contacted her because they had suffered ill-treatment at the hands of Sharia councils in the UK.<br/><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8VVAbCjJTc" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8VVAbCjJTc</a></p>
<p>Not only are Europeans being primed to accept violent Salafist jihad as ‘part and parcel’ of urban living but pointing out violent jihad along with notions of demographic and cultural imperialism, draws from mainstream Islamic doctrine, is also being incrementally criminalised as ‘extremism’ and ‘racism’.</p>
<p>Tommy Robinson is at the fore-front of this process and the ongoing vilification of Tommy as a ‘racist’ and an ‘extremist’, is part of the reason why certain people, feel they can incite violence against him without recrimination. whether Muslim or virtue-signaling progressive.<br/>It’s hard to tell them apart sometimes.</p>
<p>I had given Quilliam the benefit of doubt on numerous occasions but no longer, they are just yet more apologists for Islam, who obfuscate mainstream Islamic doctrine and who wouldn’t exist if Islam itself wasn’t ‘extremist’.<br/>In another bitter irony, Quilliam are said to be widely despised in the Muslim community, where they are perceived as government stooges.<br/>Frankly I’m past caring, the video clip of Tommy Robinson facing a hostile liberal crowd, is a troubling snapshot of where things are going and it’s that type of audience Quilliam have provided, by way of half-truths,smears and guilt by association, plenty more ammunition.</p>
</div> http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-15:3766518:Comment:1273152013-06-15T11:05:18.764ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b02qbj8y/Nihal_Your_questions_to_EDL_leader_Tommy_Robinson/" target="_blank">http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b02qbj8y/Nihal_Your_questions_to_EDL_leader_Tommy_Robinson/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b02qbj8y/Nihal_Your_questions_to_EDL_leader_Tommy_Robinson/" target="_blank">http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b02qbj8y/Nihal_Your_questions_to_EDL_leader_Tommy_Robinson/</a></p> tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-15:3766518:Comment:1275042013-06-15T10:59:40.881ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<iframe width="640" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KB7XaPT71eg?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0"></iframe>
<iframe width="640" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KB7XaPT71eg?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0"></iframe> I see what you are saying. I…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-13:3766518:Comment:1268962013-06-13T16:10:11.703ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>I see what you are saying. I cut and pasted those points there as guidelines. I didn't mean that Tommy just read them out verbatim. He needs to put different clothes on it.</p>
<p>Those 12 points are phrased in non-discriminatory terms, so that they can be implemented as acts of parliament, without breaking one of the core principles - 'equality before the law' - that our secular democracy (and 4F) are based on. So yes, they are confusing, and its not immediately obvious what they are…</p>
<p>I see what you are saying. I cut and pasted those points there as guidelines. I didn't mean that Tommy just read them out verbatim. He needs to put different clothes on it.</p>
<p>Those 12 points are phrased in non-discriminatory terms, so that they can be implemented as acts of parliament, without breaking one of the core principles - 'equality before the law' - that our secular democracy (and 4F) are based on. So yes, they are confusing, and its not immediately obvious what they are about. But unless you phrase them that way, they will be torn to pieces by opponents, as 'racist' discrimination.</p>
<p>That said, for the purposes of an interview in front of the general public, the speaker can merely rephrase those 12 points in a more recognisable way. Then later, in a more formal setting, when presented with the charge of discrimination, he can show that they are not actually discriminatory, in fact, when actioned properly, they are removing discriminations that have been allowed to creep in, thanks to the power of the Islamic lobby, and the virus-like nature of its culture.</p>
<p>So he could simply rephrase as follows, and give a more complete plan for stopping the 'Islamisation' process, as in the Example plan here:</p>
<p><a href="http://4freedoms.com/group/argumentation/forum/topics/keyframeworks?commentId=3766518%3AComment%3A127602&groupId=3766518%3AGroup%3A1677" target="_blank">http://4freedoms.com/group/argumentation/forum/topics/keyframeworks?commentId=3766518%3AComment%3A127602&groupId=3766518%3AGroup%3A1677</a></p>
<p>I don't know how Tommy would prefer to word and describe all those points, but they are sufficient to constitute a comprehensive program and reduce the interviewers (correct) charge that "You haven't told me what you would do". He only mentioned about 4 points, and for half of those, she could say that 'we're trying to do that already'.</p>
<p>I've seen this played out so many times I'm really frustrated by it. The interviewers have been asking for serious actions the government can pursue for years, and they've just been getting vague and disjointed answers. Its not helping.</p> I think this would not work i…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-13:3766518:Comment:1270652013-06-13T12:35:40.010ZJoehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/38DD
<p>I think this would not work in the scenario in which Tommy is interviewed. This thing might work in a 30 minute discussion programme, between the Home Secretary, head of MCB, Archbishop of Canterbury, Peter Tatchell.</p>
<p>This is all too wordy, too subtle, too imprecise for the situation in which Tommy finds himself. It is all about trying to not name islam as the problem, when in fact it is all about islam. Tommy needs to improve his debating technique for sure. But he doesn't need to…</p>
<p>I think this would not work in the scenario in which Tommy is interviewed. This thing might work in a 30 minute discussion programme, between the Home Secretary, head of MCB, Archbishop of Canterbury, Peter Tatchell.</p>
<p>This is all too wordy, too subtle, too imprecise for the situation in which Tommy finds himself. It is all about trying to not name islam as the problem, when in fact it is all about islam. Tommy needs to improve his debating technique for sure. But he doesn't need to add so many levels of indirection to what he is saying.<br/><br/>For most of the 12 point plan (assuming he got the opportunity to actually list all 12 points) the audience (and probably the presenter) would say "what's that got to do with islam?"</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>Alan Lake said:</strong></span></p>
<blockquote cite="http://4freedoms.com/forum/topics/tommy-robinson-interviews-and-dialogue-analysis?groupUrl=argumentation&xg_source=activity#3766518Comment127138"><p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>3. What do you want?</strong></span></p>
<p>Q: What would a Britain governed by the EDL look like?</p>
<p>A. Well, thanks for the thought, I like that :-) But seriously, we have a 12 Point Plan to roll back the incursions that the political ideology of Islam has made ...</p>
</blockquote> "We don't want EDL with our c…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-13:3766518:Comment:1268832013-06-13T10:34:53.629ZAntonyhttp://4freedoms.com/profile/Antony
<p>"We don't want EDL with our cornflakes" ; <a href="http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13706/" target="_blank">http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13706/</a></p>
<p>"We don't want EDL with our cornflakes" ; <a href="http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13706/" target="_blank">http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13706/</a></p> 7. So why don't you clean out…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-12:3766518:Comment:1271392013-06-12T03:56:24.502ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>7. So why don't you clean out the EDL?</strong></span></p>
<p>Tommy makes the same mistake again of rushing to answer the question. He has again assumed good faith on the part of the interviewer, and not realised that she doesn't give a damn about his answer and whether he has 'cleaned out' or not, but is just looking to trap him. I would suggest a response more like this.</p>
<blockquote><p>Now let me just stop you there. When you say…</p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>7. So why don't you clean out the EDL?</strong></span></p>
<p>Tommy makes the same mistake again of rushing to answer the question. He has again assumed good faith on the part of the interviewer, and not realised that she doesn't give a damn about his answer and whether he has 'cleaned out' or not, but is just looking to trap him. I would suggest a response more like this.</p>
<blockquote><p>Now let me just stop you there. When you say 'clean out', what are you implying needed to be cleaned out? We need to be sure that you are not slipping into a libelous area here. So please tell me:</p>
</blockquote>
<ol>
<li><blockquote>What are you alleging that EDL has that I need to clean out?</blockquote>
</li>
<li><blockquote>What proof do you have of that, in the form of criminal convictions?</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
<p>I suspect she would withdraw the question. </p>
<p>This point has a similarity with point 2. In point 2, she made 2 assertions and left Tommy to draw the conclusion that they contradicted each other, which he did, then retreated. </p>
<p>Here, she asks him about cleaning out, and leaves Tommy to jump to the conclusion that he has something to be guilty of, and therefore needed to clear out. In that respect, she faces two problems:</p>
<ul>
<li>the things she wants to convict him of, like bad behaviour or insulting Islam, are not actually offences, so they aren't proven in a nice convenient way, from a legal point of view</li>
<li>the things she can easily convict him of, like number of arrests of EDL people, are very small, not large enough to justify the charge she is making</li>
</ul>
<p></p> 6. Why do you wear balaclavas…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-12:3766518:Comment:1268722013-06-12T03:36:35.898ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>6. Why do you wear balaclavas?</strong></span></p>
<p>Here Tommy says he's had 4 official Osman warnings, but doesn't say what they are. For most people, the significance of that will be lost because they've no idea what an Osman warning is; worse, they may even thing that he's being warned by the police because he's committed a crime!</p>
<p>He has to say that an Osman warning is issued by the police when they have credible intelligence…</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>6. Why do you wear balaclavas?</strong></span></p>
<p>Here Tommy says he's had 4 official Osman warnings, but doesn't say what they are. For most people, the significance of that will be lost because they've no idea what an Osman warning is; worse, they may even thing that he's being warned by the police because he's committed a crime!</p>
<p>He has to say that an Osman warning is issued by the police when they have credible intelligence that someone is planning to harm or kill you, AND, they are not able to provide you with any protection. So they are effectively saying "somebody is planning to murder you, we know about their plans, but we aren't going to stop them, and if you die, its not our fault".</p>
<p>After that, just ask the interviewer how she would feel if the police came to her home and gave her an Osman warning with her family. </p>
<p>Later she played a dirty trick on Tommy with: "So do you object to women wearing veils?"</p>
<p>Veils? as refined women sometimes have hanging from their wedding or funeral hat? As damsels word in the time of King Arthur?</p>
<blockquote><p>Please don't sneakily change the topic, we're talking about the Burqa and the Niqab, and yes, I do object to those face coverings. Actually you may find that Selfridges also object to them since 6 robbers just stole £1.5m of jewellery from them by wearing burqas with axes hidden underneath. Or any one of a whole host of crimes committed by men and women wearing burqas:<br/><a href="http://4freedoms.com/group/women/forum/topics/burqa-deceit-and-abuse-2010" target="_blank">http://4freedoms.com/group/women/forum/topics/burqa-deceit-and-abus...</a></p>
</blockquote> 5. Tactics
Tommy says "Our ta…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-12:3766518:Comment:1270382013-06-12T03:29:18.636ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>5. Tactics</strong></span></p>
<p>Tommy says "Our tactics are completely questionable, but what choice do we have as working class people ..."</p>
<p>He makes a mistake in English, in the heat of the moment, but the fascist Left, far from recognising the statement as a proof of his struggle in a difficult area without the benefit of a PPE from Oxford, hold his mistake against him and quote him as saying that the EDL tactics are…</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>5. Tactics</strong></span></p>
<p>Tommy says "Our tactics are completely questionable, but what choice do we have as working class people ..."</p>
<p>He makes a mistake in English, in the heat of the moment, but the fascist Left, far from recognising the statement as a proof of his struggle in a difficult area without the benefit of a PPE from Oxford, hold his mistake against him and quote him as saying that the EDL tactics are questionable!</p>
<p>What he meant was "Our tactics are open to question if you like ..." or "We welcome dialogue about our tactics ...".</p> 4. Are there Good Muslims?
Q.…tag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-12:3766518:Comment:1268712013-06-12T03:03:44.901ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>4. Are there Good Muslims?</strong></span></p>
<p>Q. Presumably you don't believe that all Muslims are bad, that there are good ones?</p>
<p>A.</p>
<p>Tommy accepts the premises of this question, that:</p>
<p>(a) its about the people and not the ideology</p>
<p>(b) its about percentages, and the percentages are small enough to be ignored</p>
<p>So he took the question at face value and talked about the Ahmadiyas as being an 'acceptable' sect…</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>4. Are there Good Muslims?</strong></span></p>
<p>Q. Presumably you don't believe that all Muslims are bad, that there are good ones?</p>
<p>A.</p>
<p>Tommy accepts the premises of this question, that:</p>
<p>(a) its about the people and not the ideology</p>
<p>(b) its about percentages, and the percentages are small enough to be ignored</p>
<p>So he took the question at face value and talked about the Ahmadiyas as being an 'acceptable' sect of Islam, and the Wahabi Saudi ones, not acceptable. But all talk of 'people' eventually leads to a trap. It is better to get the discussion back on track with:</p>
<blockquote><p>There will always be a percentage of good and bad people in any community. For example, there are 5 times more Muslims in prison in Britain than there are other groups, proportionate to population. That would lead you to think that Muslims are 5 times more criminal than other communities - but I digress.</p>
<p>The issue is not about the people, but about the ideology. Then when you want to find out about an ideology you can go down to your local pub to discuss Bolshevism or whatever, or chat to your Muslim neighbour over the garden fence, but honestly speaking, that is a childish approach.</p>
<p>You discover the ideology by reading the authorised texts of the belief system, that is to say, the ones that are recognised by a majority of the adherents of that ideology. You then look amongst the people who follow that belief system. If the belief system tells them to do X, and a significant number of them do X, and when they do it they say they are doing it because their books say X, then you can say that those texts are clearly implicated in X. </p>
<p>Now, if X is an action which breaks the legal code, if it is an action which harms society, if it is one of a set of actions which are designed to actually overthrow your society, then you are warranted in holding the texts to account. Therefore, you are also justified in holding the majority supporters of those texts to account. </p>
<p>A Nazi does not have to say 'I hate jews and want to exterminate them' to be guilty of anti-semitism. If he holds a copy of Nazi defining documents, and says he fully supports those documents,, and refuses to edit out any of the offensive phrases in them, then he too is guilty of anti-semitism.</p>
<p>The exact same argument applies to all Muslims, except those that leave, or try to alter the scriptures to remove the political components. But the latter two groups are generally silenced or killed by the majority Muslims anyway, so their effect is negligable.</p>
</blockquote>