Tommy Robinson- A Fair and Balanced Interview on Canadian TV

Great interview with Tommy Robinson, leader of the English Defence League. Its a bit long at 14 minutes but please watch it if you have the time and you want to understand the truth about the EDL rather than accept the lies so frequently propagated by the left wing mainstream media.

It makes a big difference when the interviewer gives the guest a fair go, and it seldom happens where Tommy is concerned. Readers may remember the disgustingly biased interview with BBC communist Jeremy Paxton. This interview is entirely different and Tommy gets to articulate some good arguments against the cowardly smears that come from the Guardian and the BBC.

One excellent quote from the interview-

“The definition of a racist is someone who is winning an argument against a liberal”

Hat tip to commenter Sika.

29 thoughts on “Tommy Robinson- A Fair and Balanced Interview on Canadian TV

  1. Great interview. Finally the man gets asked relevant questions by someone who knows what’s really going on. Complete opposite of BBC “…that sounds like a threat” parting shot.
    As Tommy seems to be becoming more savvy, it gets better and better.

    Like

  2. I think that’s the first interview I’ve ever seen with Tommy Robinson where he actually got to finish a sentence.

    And something Coren said that I’ve not heard from the msm before either; that the people who join the EDL are the same was those who volunteered to defend Britain in 1940, against a very similar threat.

    Like

  3. I’m not a Roman Catholic, but I really like Michael Coren. And I like this interview; I’d never heard of the interviewee, so I’m glad Michael is the kind of interviewer who actually lets his guest speak.

    Thanks for posting the video.

    Like

  4. “But then it does show that he’s not afraid of tackling the most difficult of subjects”

    Of course Coren wouldn’t be alone in the above claim, Lucia.
    And He, as a “practicing Catholic” with presmuably Jewish heritage, obviously forgets that Catholics were historically forbidden to marry Jews by Rome. Must make marriage decisions for him [and his kids, etc] rather difficult and limiting.

    And another Catholic apologist, rather than making me “gag on [my] breakfast”, just makes me sad that another deluded fool puts his faith in a corrupt and evil institution rather than Christ who died for their sins.

    Like

  5. Kris,

    Catholics are currently forbidden from marrying non-Catholics – however, all that is needed is explicit permission and the promise that any children will be raised Catholic, and there is generally no problem with marrying outside of the Faith.

    I married outside of the Faith, but when I was not practising, and my return five years ago, a whole lot of sorting out needed to be had. But the Church is very big, and makes provisions (within reason) for a great number of situations.

    As for your last paragraph, I forgive you your ignorance.

    Like

  6. Kris,

    I’m working on my charity (and have very recently been to Confession on this very topic) and so that comment has come from a sincere place, rather than what it may appear to be. But you don’t need to accept it. 🙂

    Like

  7. Does Coran believe in Papal infallibility in his literary recommendation of Catholicism?

    Every bugger wants a guru, eh.

    Like

  8. Sika,

    From the product description:

    A practicing Catholic defends the faith and offers a passionate response to current anti-Catholic opinion.

    In Why Catholics Are Right, author, columnist, and practicing Catholic Michael Coren examines four main aspects of Catholicism as they are encountered, understood, and more importantly, misunderstood today. Beginning with a frank examination of the tragedy of the Catholic clergy abuse scandal, Coren addresses some of them most common attacks on Catholics and Catholicism. Tracing Catholic history, he deconstructs popular and frequent anti-Catholic arguments regarding the Church and the Crusades, the Inquisition, Galileo, and the Holocaust. He examines Catholic theology and central pillars of Catholic belief, explaining why Catholics believe what they do: papal infallibility, immaculate conception, the Church rather than Bible alone. Finally, he explores the dignity of life argument and why it is so important to Catholicism.

    In this challenging and thought-provoking book, Michael Coren demolishes often propagated myths about the Church’s beliefs and teachings, and in doing so, opens a window onto Catholicism, which, he writes, “is as important now as it ever was and perhaps even more necessary.”

    So, if he’s defending papal infallibility, I’d say he believes in it. As I do.

    Like

  9. I once wrote that the Christian churches could be the best allies in the fight against islamism. Nowadays I’m not so sure:
    German Catholicism Welcomes the Barracks and the Bayonets
    As Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan famously said, “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers.” The German Catholic hierarchy has decided to help the Turkish invaders build their barracks, affix their bayonets, and bring their faithful soldiers into Germany…’
    http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/09/german-catholicism-welcomes-barracks.html

    Like

  10. Lucia, so you’re different in the political structure of your belief system from an Islamist how?

    Let a market trader tell you something for free, from the Maharishi to the Pope…infallible guru’s have feet of clay.

    Like

  11. Sika,

    We have a central authority who is protected by God from error when teaching on faith and morals. Islamists do not, so they can just make anything up and say that God wills it.

    It’s subtle, I know, but subtlety in absolute terms still leads to a radically different outcome.

    Like

  12. It’s not my argument, but it seems to me that this statement is flat wrong:
    “We have a central authority who is protected by God from error when teaching on faith and morals. Islamists do not, so they can just make anything up and say that God wills it.”
    The koran is regarded by muslims as the immutable word of Allah and they certainly cannot “just make anything up and say God wills it”. Individual imams interpret the koran in various ways (just as individual Catholic priests and bishops interpret the bible differently) so the protection from error appears to be somewhat hit-and-miss.

    Like

  13. Trying not to laugh, Lucia.

    That means there can be no change and has been no change in any Catholic religious position decreed by a Pope from day 1.

    No-one expects the Spanish Inquisition.

    Like

  14. KG,

    The promise of protection from error is to the Pope alone. Everyone else has to work to constantly align themselves to the Magisterium, which for some can be very difficult. Those people either stay and become dissidents, or they leave and become Protestants where everyone can be their own Pope. Islam is much like Protestanism, where by everyone can interpret the Koran how they like, but then unlike Protestanism where a radical minority will enforce conformity through violence.

    Sika, the promise is for faith and morals, ie what we are to believe, which is like a diamond that gets more and more polished over time as it is more understood, and morals, ie how we are to act. Any other decree will change with the circumstances and the times.

    Like

  15. “It’s not my argument, but it seems to me that this statement is flat wrong:
    “We have a central authority who is protected by God from error when teaching on faith and morals. Islamists do not, so they can just make anything up and say that God wills it.”

    And I second that, Keith.
    More RC dogma from Lucia.
    The ONLY “central authority” genuine Christianity has is the word of God; the Bible. Some ‘infallible’ man just won’t cut the mustard. Like Sika said above, “infallible guru’s have feet of clay” – as do all men. Putting your faith in any sinful man [ALL popes are/were sinners] will only lead to destruction.

    Because Roman Catholics, like Lucia, put their faith in their “central authority who [they wrongly presume] is protected by God”, by which they mean their pope, they actually elevate this man to above God’s word, and [they] must accept his views on all matters of “faith and morals”, and therefore ONLY his interpretation of scripture is the ‘correct’ interpretation according to RC belief.

    This is the main failing (and there are many) of the RC church; faith is in a [most definitely] fallible man and NOT God’s word or His gospel contained within. Feet of clay indeed!

    Like

  16. “The promise of protection from error is to the Pope alone.”

    Yet more RC dogma by Lucia. Where do I start?!
    How about this:

    Rom 3:23 For all [including Mary and ALL popes] have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

    Oh, but I forgot, the pope trumps God’s word … [but only in some parallel and delusional RC universe]
    Your sinning pope will lead you to only one place, Lucia, and it’s not heaven. Only faith in Christ alone will take you there.
    I’ll leave you with it.

    Like

  17. “is for faith and morals, ie what we are to believe, which is like a diamond that gets more and more polished over time as it is more understood, and morals, ie how we are to act”

    Another predictable moving goalpost feast for the religious, the Papal Bulls setting up the SI told you “how we are to act”.

    “You can believe it if it helps you to sleep, singing works just fine for me.” JT

    Like

  18. “This way you get to read the Bible and decide what it means to you.”

    Actually, Lucia, the Holy Spirit leads me to all scriptural truth [not some fallible man/pope]:

    Joh 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
    Joh 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

    Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

    1Jo 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

    [emphasis mine]

    But no doubt the above [and many other verses I could quote] are little more than “casting pearl before swine”.

    Like

  19. Kris,

    And yet ask 10 different Protestants on what the interpretation of any number of verses in the Bible and you get at least 9 different answers, and that’s being generous. So clearly, just reading the Bible and relying on the Holy Spirit to guide you is not enough. I would say the missing piece is conformity to the established faith so that you don’t come up with your own interpretation, whereby you ignore what the Holy Spirit is telling you and go with what you want the Bible to say.

    Like

  20. LM, I normally ignore your ridiculous uneducated propaganda, but you’ve overstepped the mark. To suggest Protestantism (for that I assume you mean anyone who professes Christiantity who is not a catholic) is in any way, shape or form like the 7th century death cult is utterly and completely disgraceful, and unforgivable.

    By way of a juxtaposition:
    Your “church” is the only organisation in history which comes close to committing the murder-couched-as-religious war which islam espouses. Your false-prophets in Rome have instructed their armies to commit these atrocities, much like Osama Bin Laden did from his cave ni Afghanistan.

    I understand your desire to defend your Church, but at least try and stay within the bounds of reality.

    Like

  21. “Islam is much like Protestanism, where by everyone can interpret the Koran how they like”
    No, it is not.
    That’s so hopelessly uninformed I simply can’t be bothered.
    I understand now why you didn’t take issue with a loathsome commenter on your site who described the Amish as a “weird sect” and called for them to be wiped out.
    And why he’s still free to comment there.

    Like

Comments are closed.