English Defence League leader Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (aka “Tommy Robinson”) has recently given an interview to the Norwegian media, in which he made the following self-incriminating statements:
1) Yaxley-Lennon praised the terrorist Anders Breivik;
2) Yaxley-Lennon promoted Breivik’s manifesto;
3) Most revealingly, Yaxley-Lennon claimed that Breivik’s mass-murdering terrorist attack would have been “easier to justify” if the targets had been Muslims.
This article is published in conjunction with Loonwatch (
http://www.loonwatch.com/) and EDL News ( http://edlnews.co.uk/).
1) Yaxley-Lennon praised the terrorist Anders Breivik;
2) Yaxley-Lennon promoted Breivik’s manifesto;
3) Most revealingly, Yaxley-Lennon claimed that Breivik’s mass-murdering terrorist attack would have been “easier to justify” if the targets had been Muslims.
This article is published in conjunction with Loonwatch (
http://www.loonwatch.com/) and EDL News ( http://edlnews.co.uk/).
Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (aka “Tommy Robinson”), the leader of the EDL, has recently dropped the faux mask of condemnation against the terrorist Anders Breivik and has explicitly praised Breivik and his actions. The following is an extract from a recent article in the Norwegian media discussing Yaxley-Lennon’s statements (source: http://theforeigner.no/pages/news-in-brief/breivik-was-cunning-says-edl-leader/):
“Tommy Robinson, leader of the English Defence League, has spoken positively about Anders Behring Breivik’s approach to his twin attacks.
In an interview with Dagbladet he said justifying the attack on Utoya, which some conspiracy theory supporters allege was a place designed to support Fatah, would have been easier to justify if it was directed against Muslims.
“Nevertheless, he would only then have been brushed off as the one that killed Muslims because he did not like Islam. Whether you like it or not, that person was quite shrewd. What he did is despicable, but he managed to make people curious.”
Robinson, who has previously claimed Breivik was rather tough as “he dared to come forward with his opinions”, also cites the terrorist’s manifesto, major parts of which are comprised of blogs and books.
“The blogs are full of facts. You cannot yell at people because they tell the truth. You may find that the truth hurts, but it is still the truth. I read the blogs themselves – they contain facts about Islam,” he alleged.”
In Breivik’s manifesto, the two most heavily cited sources of “information” about Islam were SIOA & Jihadwatch’s Robert Spencer and the virulently anti-Muslim website Gates of Vienna; the latter includes the prolific anti-Muslim blogger known as “Fjordman”, who is due to appear as a witness in Breivik’s trial. It is worth remembering the following facts:
--- Firstly, Robert Spencer is on record as publicly admitting that his extreme hostility towards Muslims and Islam is motivated by his own Christian fundamentalism, specifically his vested interests as a Catholic; in an interview with the Washington Post in 2003, Spencer explicitly stated that he regards Islam as the [Catholic] Church’s “chief rival in terms of religion” and that this is one of the main motivations for his anti-Islam propaganda efforts (see: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2003/dec/1/20031201-091332-2655r/?page=all#pagebreak).
--- Similarly, Gates of Vienna’s main owner, Edward S. May ( http://powerbase.info/index.php/Edward_S._May), is on record as explicitly describing himself as a “propagandist” and explicitly stating that he is deliberately avoiding presenting accurate information about Islam, as his aim is to stereotype & demonise the religion (see: http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/10/fjordman-back-at-gates-of-vienna-whose-tipsters-include-caroline-glick/).
The Independent contacted Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and challenged him about his statements (see: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/edl-leader-forced-to-deny-praising-anders-breivik-7640181.html). Yaxley-Lennon has been forced into a position where he is denying that he praised Breivik, and his rambling disingenuous “explanation” bears no relation whatsoever to his original comments. Unfortunately for Yaxley-Lennon, his statements were quite clear.
The most revealing statement of all is Yaxley-Lennon’s claim that Breivik’s mass-murdering terrorist attack would have been “easier to justify” if the targets had been Muslims.
http://theforeigner.no/pages/news-in-brief/breivik-was-cunning-says-edl-leader/): “Tommy Robinson, leader of the English Defence League, has spoken positively about Anders Behring Breivik’s approach to his twin attacks.
In an interview with Dagbladet he said justifying the attack on Utoya, which some conspiracy theory supporters allege was a place designed to support Fatah, would have been easier to justify if it was directed against Muslims.
“Nevertheless, he would only then have been brushed off as the one that killed Muslims because he did not like Islam. Whether you like it or not, that person was quite shrewd. What he did is despicable, but he managed to make people curious.”
Robinson, who has previously claimed Breivik was rather tough as “he dared to come forward with his opinions”, also cites the terrorist’s manifesto, major parts of which are comprised of blogs and books.
“The blogs are full of facts. You cannot yell at people because they tell the truth. You may find that the truth hurts, but it is still the truth. I read the blogs themselves – they contain facts about Islam,” he alleged.”
In Breivik’s manifesto, the two most heavily cited sources of “information” about Islam were SIOA & Jihadwatch’s Robert Spencer and the virulently anti-Muslim website Gates of Vienna; the latter includes the prolific anti-Muslim blogger known as “Fjordman”, who is due to appear as a witness in Breivik’s trial. It is worth remembering the following facts:
--- Firstly, Robert Spencer is on record as publicly admitting that his extreme hostility towards Muslims and Islam is motivated by his own Christian fundamentalism, specifically his vested interests as a Catholic; in an interview with the Washington Post in 2003, Spencer explicitly stated that he regards Islam as the [Catholic] Church’s “chief rival in terms of religion” and that this is one of the main motivations for his anti-Islam propaganda efforts (see:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2003/dec/1/20031201-091332-2655r/?page=all#pagebreak). --- Similarly, Gates of Vienna’s main owner, Edward S. May (
http://powerbase.info/index.php/Edward_S._May), is on record as explicitly describing himself as a “propagandist” and explicitly stating that he is deliberately avoiding presenting accurate information about Islam, as his aim is to stereotype & demonise the religion (see: http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/10/fjordman-back-at-gates-of-vienna-whose-tipsters-include-caroline-glick/). The Independent contacted Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and challenged him about his statements (see:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/edl-leader-forced-to-deny-praising-anders-breivik-7640181.html). Yaxley-Lennon has been forced into a position where he is denying that he praised Breivik, and his rambling disingenuous “explanation” bears no relation whatsoever to his original comments. Unfortunately for Yaxley-Lennon, his statements were quite clear. The most revealing statement of all is Yaxley-Lennon’s claim that Breivik’s mass-murdering terrorist attack would have been “easier to justify” if the targets had been Muslims.
