Comments closed already at The Telegraph, although I am surprised they allowed them even for a few hours.
A few weeks back, Tommy Robinson, former leader of the English Defence League, sent me his self-published memoirs, called Enemy of the State. The book has been largely ignored by most of the established media, although has caused a bit of a stir among counter-Jihadist groups across Europe. I’d recommend people read it, although perhaps not for the reasons Tommy would like you to.
Analysts will find a lot to chew over in the stories about the EDL, and probably less in his views on religion and society.
But by far the most interesting parts of the book relate to his upbringing and his experience of the police. Though this is probably not his audience, for academics and civil liberties campaigners this book provides a wealth of almost accidental insight.
First, it’s notable just how much of his views about Islam are a result of his upbringing in Luton, and the troubles between Muslim and white youth. . .
When his second cousin, who was a heroin addict, was groomed and sexually assaulted by a gang of Pakistani men, it cemented his view – which hasn’t changed since – that in the end Muslims will always stick together against non-Muslims. “Islam trumps everything,” he writes.
Although my reading is that these troubles were with young men in gangs of Asian youths, Tommy sees it all linking back to religion. Ever since then, he’s been reading (and tweeting) stories which all support this thinking. To him, the Paris terrorist murders and recent Cologne sex attacks have been like a souped up, international version of what went on in his home town.
More interesting still are his accounts of the police, with whom he has had more experiences that most people.Tommy is convinced that from the moment he got involved with the EDL he was subjected to a non-stop campaign by the police to use every power they had to harass, disrupt, and, ultimately, recruit him. Prima facie it looks that way. He has been arrested and acquitted an incredible number of times; bail hearings were set at intentionally awkward times; bail conditions were sometimes highly dubious. He even claims that prison guards kept putting him on Muslim majority wings so he’d get beaten up. Perhaps most worrying of all is that, as I read it, most of this was probably all within the law – a series of quite clever, if very aggressive, policing tactics. It’s hard to make out whether or not there is a legal case to answer here, since the numerous claims he makes are difficult to investigate fully. A civil liberties specialist might look into it: but because it’s Tommy Robinson, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
And the reason I wouldn’t hold my breath is because Tommy is a pariah. That’s really the background noise for the entire book, although Robinson doesn’t raise it explicitly: that life as a political activist on the fringes of polite opinion really is no fun at all. . . Step too far outside mainstream opinion and life as an activist gets very hard indeed – especially if you’re not media-trained and you’re working-class.
How far people feel free – legally and socially – to voice controversial opinions is important even for those who detest Robinson’s politics. A society where people with views outside the mainstream have to go through all this is not a healthy one in the long term. In a strange sort of way, how we treat people we disagree with is an indication of how free society really is. I think we still have some work to do.
- Like
- Digg
- Del
- Tumblr
- VKontakte
- Buffer
- Love This
- Odnoklassniki
- Meneame
- Blogger
- Amazon
- Yahoo Mail
- Gmail
- AOL
- Newsvine
- HackerNews
- Evernote
- MySpace
- Mail.ru
- Viadeo
- Line
- Comments
- Yummly
- SMS
- Viber
- Telegram
- Subscribe
- Skype
- Facebook Messenger
- Kakao
- LiveJournal
- Yammer
- Edgar
- Fintel
- Mix
- Instapaper
- Copy Link
2 Responses
The author is tying himself in knots to avoid seeing the obvious.
He claims to know better than Tommy Robinson what Islam is and is not..and only succeeds in exposing himself as a fool.
I quote (1) – “First, it’s notable just how much of his [Tommy’s] views about Islam are a result of his upbringing in Luton, and the troubles between Muslim and white youth..”.
NOT ‘troubles between’. What was actually happening was that Muslims were engaging in routine and often very violent *aggression* against Infidels – not ‘whites’ per se but against *any* Infidel. And *that* is totally consistent with the core programme of classical Islam as found in its texts. As Tommy Robinson himself, reading the Quran in jail, came to see.
And now I quote, (2) “When his second cousin, who was a heroin addict, was groomed and sexually assaulted by a gang of Pakistani [sic: note that the reviewer just can’t bring himself to say ‘Pakistani MUSLIM’ – CM] men, it cemented his view – which hasn’t changed since – that in the end Muslims will always stick together against non-Muslims. “Islam trumps everything,” he writes.”
And in that, Tommy has put his finger on the principle that is clearly enunciated in many passages of the Quran – the injunction against befriending or allying with Infidels, the flat statement in 48.29 that Muslims are “harsh” (or cruel) toward the Unbelievers, and “compassionate *only* among themselves” (not that Muslims show much compassion even to each other…). Tommy Robinson is better able than his sniffy reviewer to understand one of *the* guiding principles of Islam – al-wala wa al-bara, “loyalty [to fellow Muslims ONLY] and enmity [toward ALL Infidels qua Infidels].” Dar al Islam makes *war* upon Dar al Harb. Again, that is orthodox Islam… and Tommy Robinson, unlike his sniffy reviewer who looks down on him as from a great height, *experienced* that when he saw a huge mob of Muslim boys lynching one of his (Tommy’s) infidel mates, after that mate had had a fight with a Muslim boy. Tommy *knows* the normal modus operandi of the Muslim mob. And in later reading of the Quran Tommy has seen the continuity between the core Muslim texts and teachings and the *behaviour* of ordinary Muslims in the schoolyard and in the street. The reviewer refuses to see it; Tommy, blessed with common-sense and street-smarts, *can* see it.
More snootiness – “Although my reading is that these troubles were with young men in gangs of Asian [sic] youths., Tommy sees it all linking back to religion”.
No: The trouble, the worst trouble of all, was gangs of MUSLIM youths, behaving the way they did because it was the way that ISLAM has always programmed Muslims to behave; and Tommy has enough sense to see it. It *is* all linking back… not to ‘religion’ (pfffft) but to ISLAM. Tommy isn’t blaming the specific ‘troubles’ he witnessed, on ‘religion’. He’s blaming it on ISLAM. And he’s right! He’s in good company, too: he’s with Jacques Ellul, Bat Yeor, Conor Cruise O’Brien (with whom he shares Irish ethnicity and sharp Irish natural wit), and Winston Churchill.
More, from this incredibly foolish reviewer – “To him [Tommy] the Paris terrorist murders and recent Cologne sex attacks have been like a souped-up international version of what went on in his home town”.
The reviewer, presumably, thinks they have nothing to do with it… again, pfffft, the reviewer is wrong, and Tommy is right… the mass murderous Muslim assaults on infidels at cafes and the Bataclan, and the Muslim sex attacks on infidel women in Cologne, *are* a souped up international version of the Muslim mob violence and Muslim gang rapes of Infidel girls that Tommy witnessed in the streets of his hometown. Tommy is calling it right; the reviewer is wilfully refusing to connect the dots, to engage in simple “pattern recognition”.
very interesting. I clicked on the link and read the article in situ. Then I spent a good part of my day reading through the 1000+ Comments. Many of which were in support of Tommy. Many of which were formidably well-informed about the evils of Islam. It was interesting to see which comments were rated highly and which, not so much. Some of the most strongly Islamocritical had garnered the most up-clicks.
Further observations.
The author of the article, Jamie Bartlett, is simply tying himself into knots to avoid the obvious. He refuses to accept that Tommy might just know exactly what he is talking about; that Tommy has got the measure of Islam whilst he, Jamie, has not. (And I observe he ignores the fact that Tommy *has* – while in prison, in fact – read the Quran and that Tommy actually *says* that it was reading the Quran that helped him *make sense* of all the awful stuff he’d been seeing Muslims do to infidels like him ever since he was a kid).
Jamie, sniffily – “it’s notable just how much of his views about Islam are a result of his upbringing in Luton and the troubles between Muslim and white youth..”.
No. Not ‘troubles between’. Rather: open and continual day in and day out Muslim aggression against Infidels qua infidels. In other words: Tommy had, from childhood on up, bitter personal experience of Islam-on-the-ground, Islam as lived in the street and in the schoolyard.
Again – the author, after mentioning Tommy’s reference to Muslim male mob assault upon a friend of Tommy, and the Muslim ‘grooming’ and rape of Tommy’s cousin, remarks that “it cemented his view – which hasn’t changed yet, that in the end Muslims will always stick together against non-Muslims. “Islam trumps everything”, he writes.”
What Bartlett ignores is that when Tommy writes that he is 100 percent correct. That *is* Islam. That *is* the Islamic core worldview and modus operandi. Dar al Islam vs dar al Harb. Al wala-wa-al-bara, Loyalty and Enmity – Loyalty to fellow Muslims ONLY, enmity toward the Kuffar qua Kuffar. Quran 48.29 – Muslims are ‘harsh toward the unbelievers, compassionate only amongst themselves’. And all the Quran verses that urge hatred and contempt for and aggression toward Infidels and warn against anything but temporary and feigned friendship or alliance. Tommy saw it as it played out in the behaviour of ordinary Muslims, and he saw it and describes it correctly.
Jamie Bartlett, however, knows better (has he ever even read the Quran? or anything else of the Islamic core texts?) and proclaims, “Although my reading is that these troubles [sic: this unrelenting and extreme and often very very violent Muslim assaults upon non-Muslims – CM] were with young men in gangs of Asian youths [PFFT – “Asian”? They weren’t Hindus, Sikhs, or Buddhists; they were muslims to a man and their behaviour is explicable in the light of Islam – CM], Tommy sees it all linking back to religion.”
No, not ‘religion’. ISLAM. Islam, Islam, Islam, Mt Bartlett. It’s not that they were South Asians; there are perfectly peaceful Sikh, Hindu and Christian people in the UK of identical South Asian ethnicity both Indian and ‘Pakistani’. It’s that they were Muslims. The gangs beating up Infidel lads were muslims to a man. The gangs doing the ‘grooming’ and pimping and raping were Muslims.
Tommy Robinson isn’t blandly attributing the ‘trouble’ to ‘religion’. He’s – correctly – recognising and stating a fact: that the aggression and the rapes are the fruits of …Islam.
And still more, from Mr Bartlett – “To him (Tommy) the Paris terrorist murders [carried out by whom, Mr Bartlett – BY MUSLIMS – CM] and recent Cologne sex attacks [carried out by whom, Mr Bartlett – BY MUSLIMS! – CM] have been like a souped-up, international version of what went on in his home town.”
But that is because that is exactly what that Muslim mass murder and Muslim mass sexual assault upon women *were* and are. Same thing, just on a bigger scale. Both perfectly consonant with Islam and with the model of Mohammed the war-lord and rapist of captive women. Tommy is completely correct to see a connection between Muslim rape of his cousin and Muslim rapes and sexual aggression in Cologne, and between the Muslim mob assault on a school-friend that nearly killed the boy, and the Muslim mass-murderous assault on the Bataclan. Tommy is connecting the dots. It’s called ‘Pattern recognition”. Tommy can see a pattern that is simply *there*, a fact: Islam has certain teachings and its adherents behave in certain ways that are consonant with those teachings. It is Mr Bartlett who is desperately trying to avoid seeing what Tommy sees and to prevent his readers from seeing it.