More thought provoking

Thanks for the link, jen.

The point remains that there are reasons beyond racism and thuggery for the rise of the EDL, and we need to think good and hard about what they are, and deicde what to do in organisations that we do feel we can support (see, e.g., blogger's suggestions above).

I read all of the enlightenment website.
I do not agree that we should read about the EDL to try and understand them The leadership are thugs. I'd rather read
www.hopenothate.org.uk/
supported by people I like who are not thugs.

That is what the blogger is saying too, jen – support more civilised organisations who recognise the same problems. You are in agreement with him on that.

There are over 400 articlesplus many links on that website. I'm impressed with your speed reading. I think you must be even faster than Harold Wilson.

Sorry, I meant all the articles on the EDL, as you probably guessed.
I presume you've read about Selfridges and the threats that the assistant has been getting from EDL supporters for refusing to serve Robinson, or Lennon or whatever his name is. Even he does not seem to know his own name having used a false passport to get into the US.
And Guramit Singh is another pleasant leader of the EDL.
I am sorry but I am no longer going to read about this loathsome group and if I just confirm your prejudices about my prejudice, you are right. I am prejudiced against anyone who victimises a whole sector of society.

For those who might be seduced by 'the well-written blog' read this first

EDL News

Yes, Riverwalk, that's what I've been reading as well.

The remainder of the website isn't quite so measured. And it appears that the person who has written this is not willing to disclose his/her identity.

The failings in our education system and the lack of opportunity for white working class males certainly need to be addressed, but that is an entirely separate issue.

Jendurham agreed. I recognise the problems of immigration - someone mentioned (maybe petra?) it's not racist to be concerned, it's about numbers. Parts of the country are groaning under the weight of immigrants which fuels the rise of the EDF - successor to the National Front wasn't it? I don't care how they dress their rhetoric up, it is a racist organisation.

I have seen their members and they aren't pretty.

The blog writer used to identify themselves. I expect there's a reason why they've stopped doing that.

sel said: "Jendurham agreed. I recognise the problems of immigration - someone mentioned (maybe petra?) it's not racist to be concerned, it's about numbers. Parts of the country are groaning under the weight of immigrants *which fuels the rise of the EDL*" [I changed your F to L, Sel and it's my bolding]

That is the salient point, not a defence of EDL thuggery. The blog(s) are about why the EDL has arisen. In my mind there is a certain resemblance to the rise of the Nazis is pre-war Germany. That is why it worries me.

In addition, the blogger is saying that it isn't just immigration numbers that he sees as the problem, but successive governments allowing unfairness (e.g. Sharia courts) to invade our society. People, whether thugs or not (I'm not a thug), are right to object to that.

Sel, would you care to identify which parts of the country are 'groaning under the weight of immigrants'? I live in an area of high immigration and I hear no groans anywhere.

I think it is a perception rather than a reality, mice. Can't say I've noticed any groaning either. The perception is wrong, but it is still worth seriously considering what arises from wrong perceptions.

another point:
The threats that the Selfridges assistant has received are certainly wrong and hatefully unnecessary. The assistant's refusal to serve a customer was wrong and unnecessary too. The first (assistant's refusal) doesn't excuse the second but the first is the root of this particular problem. It is not in a shop assistant's remit to refuse to serve someone who is simply a customer and not causing trouble at the time of the shop exchange.

No, I am not defending the threats. I'm pointing out why the threats happened. I'm looking at both sides of the issue.

For me the whole issue of the EDL is about my confronting and tackling in my mind difficult and uncomfortable thoughts.

This is somewhat off the point, but listening to the BBC news this morning, I for one get really pissed off with the way the murderers who have carried out this latest atrocity in Kenya are referred to by them as "militants". Apparently the BBC cannot describe these ghastly people as terrorists, it's not their policy to use that word, they have to downgrade their description, presumably on the basis that "terrorists" is too inflammatory. Good God could they be any more mealy mouthed and this sort of stance is another thing that is part and parcel of this creeping, apologetic approach by some liberals in choosing their words carefully so as not to offend. Militants just doesn't go far enough. Yes they are militant, but so are some trade union members, but they don't go around committing acts of barbarity against their fellow man. Say it BBC stop being so feeble, THEY ARE TERRORIST AND MURDERERS!

Well said, bananas.

This is why I object to the term "militant atheist". I don't think there is a single example of an atheist committing acts of terrorism in the name of atheism.

But militant islamists...

I rarely use the fword but if someone says I'm being islamophobic for the above thought, they can just fuck off. It is a complete distortion of truth to call anyone an islamophobe who calls islamic fundamentalist extremists what they are: terrorists. Damn right I'm afraid, but not phobic (phobias are irrational fear; tell me what's irrational about being afraid of extremism), about such nutters.

Just saying. Calmly.

Bags I see this creeping sort of liberalism by some of those on the left as part of the problem in shutting down debate and it only fuels right wing extremism. For example, we know that the grooming of young girls by muslim men went on unchallenged for so long because the authorities feared having the words "racist" and "islmaphobe" levied at them. So what happens is that by not addressing any issue with the appropriate sanctions it gives the victims and their families the impression that somehow they matter far less than the sensibilities of a minority. Fertile ground for extremism of the far right. As I think you pointed out previously there is a gaping void to be filled.

Do I fear islamic fundamentalism and their aim to impose it on the rest of us. Yes I do, particularly if there is a section of society that pretends that it isn't happening or will go away, if anything it's gaining momentum. I have said before that I worked in London at the height of the IRA bombing campaign and yes I feared them too, even though I had a certain sympathy with their objective of a united Ireland, in the same way as I have a certain sympathy for Palestinians who are oppressed by Israel. However, I can never support random terrorist acts they are too wicked for words. Also it has to be said regarding the IRA, I don't think it was ever their intention to turn Britain as a whole into a catholic state. The idea of having an idealogy or religion imposed on all of us is totally repugnant to me.

Going out now, will log on later.

Bananas and Bags you both put so eloquently what I would like to say if I had your clarity and logic. Thank you.

The thing that I find difficult is why Muslim leaders show no sign of addressing or controlling the hot heads in their midst and little sign of outrage or condemning the dreadful atrocities perpetrated in the name of their religion. At least they do not do it loudly enough if they do it at all.

As I see it the only way there can be any end to these awful murders and religious terrorism is if the Muslim community condemn and disown those who preach and practice it. But can you see that happening?

Hear, hear, gaga. I'm so tired of hearing people (often muslims) saying 'this is not Islam'. Yes it bloody is! It isn't 'most muslims' but it is part of Islam.

The christian crusades, the inquisitions, and the imposition of organised christianity in countries such as those of S America were the same – the bad part of christianity.

We are not talking about the universal moral and ethical values that most world religions and non-religious ethicists endorse.