Phanerothyme Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I didn't see the interview, but I was told by someone who did (who is certainly no supporter of the EDL, but who is capable of reasonably objective judgement) that he put in a creditable performance. I got the impression that they were using the interview as a flexible filler; Paxman pulled the guy up on a few glaring inconsistencies early on and then, like John X said, just couldn't be arsed with it any more and let Robinson chunter on to fill the space up to the end of the program. If Paxman had had the time or inclination, he could have had Robinson weeping, but I got the feeling he didn't consider his quarry had a sporting chance. Robinson lost his way a few times, but the camera likes him a lot more than someone like Nick Griffin for example. He's "authentic" where Griffin is slimy. I predict he'll go far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Thought he did alright. Got my vote. And where will you be voting for him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 What a muppet, i would get great satisfaction from kicking his scummy head in. Surely that would make you as bad as the EDL:confused: Thought he did alright. Got my vote. You do realise that the EDL are not a political party, so you can't "vote for them"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Glypta Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I didn't see the interview, but I was told by someone who did (who is certainly no supporter of the EDL, but who is capable of reasonably objective judgement) that he put in a creditable performance. That just about sums it up. Not only that it gave him a platform, and I'm sure that even in his intoxicated state he said a lot of things that his intended audience could relate to, particularly his continued references to having no problem with blacks, imigrants, etc etc who made the effort to fit in. What I've seen on this thread are the usual suspects who all saw exactly what they wanted to on the broadcast. Although they could probably have achieved that without switching on the set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I think its a mistake to dismiss them, there are some very angry young people about.............. Ignore and dismiss them at our peril.... The mistake you (and the EDL) are making is that this is a big issue to a lot of people. The vast MAJORITY of working class people in this country get on fine with their neighbours, whatever their race or religion, despite the best efforts of stirrers like the BNP and EDL. When it comes down to it people are much more concerned about jobs, health, education, the defecit and inflation than the colour of someone's skin. The BNP's appalling showing at the general election showed this. Yes, immigration is a big issue but only to a very small minority of people. The rest of us just want to get on with our lives. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordChaverly Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Ithe camera likes him a lot more than someone like Nick Griffin for example. He's "authentic" where Griffin is slimy. I predict he'll go far. Those who last night were slavering over the prospect of the guy being slaughtered on Newsnight were probably labouring under the misconception that it would be a re-run of Griffin's appearance on Question Time. Griffin was faced with a hostile, baying mob, abetted by an equally hostile chairman, so it was a Lion's den situation even before Griffin could open his mouth. As I said earlier, I didn't see the interview with the EDL guy last night, but I gather he did get some points across about the fear felt by his supporters about the dangers from Islamic extremism, fears which I suspect are widely shared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Glypta Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Those who last night were slavering over the prospect of the guy being slaughtered on Newsnight were probably labouring under the misconception that it would be a re-run of Griffin's appearance on Question Time. Griffin was faced with a hostile, baying mob, abetted by an equally hostile chairman, so it was a Lion's den situation even before Griffin could open his mouth. As I said earlier, I didn't see the interview with the EDL guy last night, but I gather he did get some points across about the fear felt by his supporters about the dangers from Islamic extremism, fears which I suspect are widely shared. Judging by the first page of this thread, most folks had made their minds up before the broadcast. They saw exactly what they wanted to see. It was just like the party leaders debates at election time. Most posting on here had made up their minds who got the most from the debates before they happened and didn't change their minds afterwards. In the country as a whole open minded people saw it totally differently and Clegg mania was born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clairelaw123 Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I realise that this thread is based on the Newsnight programme but has anyone seen one of their "marches" first hand? They are an awful group, no matter how much they can <REMOVED> their way through a TV programme, the things most of them stand for are disgusting and its proven by what happens at many of the marches. Note: I am referring to their 'unofficial' marches rather than the very few 'official' ones they seem to have held. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Judging by the first page of this thread, most folks had made their minds up before the broadcast. They saw exactly what they wanted to see. And you saw what you saw. What I read on the first page of this thread, was a few people interested in how the convicted football hooligan ex-BNP member leader of a far-right fringe group would fare in an interview with one of the UKs toughest political interviewers. Most thought not very well and so it proved. As I said before, he came across to me as a confused conspiracy theorist. To those who agree with his bizarre view of the world I suspect he would have come across as having done OK. I doubt that the EDL have gained any more support as a result of last night's programme. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 The mistake you (and the EDL) are making is that this is a big issue to a lot of people. The vast MAJORITY of working class people in this country get on fine with their neighbours, whatever their race or religion, despite the best efforts of stirrers like the BNP and EDL. When it comes down to it people are much more concerned about jobs, health, education, the defecit and inflation than the colour of someone's skin. The BNP's appalling showing at the general election showed this. Yes, immigration is a big issue but only to a very small minority of people. The rest of us just want to get on with our lives. John X My bold. I wouldn't accept that only a small minority are concerned with immigration levels. I'm not getting into a long drawn out argument which will eventually end in me being accused of being a direct descendent of Adolf Hitler but that doesn't add up. I never said I support the EDL, although by quoting what they say seems to imply one is in bed with them... They will gain support and by merely dismissing them as football hooligans and thugs you are misguided. I'm not sure how to define a "racist" but if they welcome any race can they be accused of this? Their problem is one of religion and not race, there's a big difference... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.