How reliable is Wikipedia?

[George Szaszvari]

Anyone who thinks the EDL is a harmless movement of concerned citizens is uninformed. I won't cite the Guardian, the Independent, the Mirror or the BBC, as, no doubt, they will inanely be dismissed as "left wing". Try the Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... treet.html

Britain is relatively free of tensions between ethnic and religious groups. Long may it remain so.

Indeed. It is a bit puzzling that George so emphasises the EDL's "mission statement" - as if it was ever going to actually say "we are a bunch of far-right misfits and football hooligans who hate all Muzzies"

The mission statement is important. I mistrust political ambition of all persuasions, whether lamestream
or fringe. After some familiarity with any organization and its main issues I might find a few agendas better
than most others, but what concerns me here is fair media coverage. The mission statement is how the
EDL can be formally taken to task and everyone who isn't completely naive realizes that it might well
be (if not probably) just a mask of respectability. The vast majority get their information (or misinformation)
about the EDL through the lamestream media. Sure, the media articles raise legitimate concerns, but at
the same time overwhelmingly seek out and sensationalize the thuggish elements while just blowing off
(as anti-muzzie racist thugs) the growing membership, including some muzzies, who buy into the mission
statement. How many media articles are there that follow around, investigate and interview the milder
and more thoughtful members of the EDL? Such membership could well do a lot to keep the EDL truer
to its mission statement. There is a stranglehold of political correctness in today's lamestream media that
scotches attempts at all-round inquisitorial discussion of uncomfortable matters. The media greatly influences
how people see and think about the world and there is wholesale condemnation of the EDL (which may,
or may not be legitimate) while there is an awkward silence concerning the creeping stealth of Islamofascism
(Islamototalitarianism would be more accurate, but is bit long winded.) I guess the next question is whether
you believe that Islamofascism is a concern, or not.

[Paul McKeown]

George,

All I can gather from your posts is that you welcome the stated, but fake motivation of a violent crew of football hooligans and knife wielding neo-fascists in combating the threat from "islamofascism". Whilst British society has suffered greviously in the previous decade from the actions of nihilist sects from amongst the Muslim community, I think you will find precious little support in the UK for the idea that the propaganda, misrepresentations, provocations and violence from the EDL represent a useful program to deal with the problem. Recognition that nihilist Muslim sects are a phenomenon imported into Britain, rather than deeply rooted here, and engaging mainstream Muslim opinion in weeding out these sects is how extremism will be convincingly defeated, without compromising the longstanding British tradition of openness. I find your willingness to overlook the unsavoury origins and vicious activities of the EDL disturbing, repellent, misguided and perhaps indicative of too many hours spent listening to inflammatory right wing outlets.

[George Szaszvari]

George,

All I can gather from your posts is that you welcome the stated, but fake motivation of a violent crew of football hooligans and knife wielding neo-fascists in combating the threat from "islamofascism". Whilst British society has suffered greviously in the previous decade from the actions of nihilist sects from amongst the Muslim community, I think you will find precious little support in the UK for the idea that the propaganda, misrepresentations, provocations and violence from the EDL represent a useful program to deal with the problem. Recognition that nihilist Muslim sects are a phenomenon imported into Britain, rather than deeply rooted here, and engaging mainstream Muslim opinion in weeding out these sects is how extremism will be convincingly defeated, without compromising the longstanding British tradition of openness. I find your willingness to overlook the unsavoury origins and vicious activities of the EDL disturbing, repellent, misguided and perhaps indicative of too many hours spent listening to inflammatory right wing outlets.

Your conclusions about what I believe in and am discussing are erroneous, Paul. I've been aware of what you
describe as "disturbing, repellant, etc" for most of my life, and is largely the reason I've been highlighting these
issues here. From the beginning of this thread my concern has been with how superficially such controversial
issues are dealt with, if they they are dealt with at all, by our public sources of news and information. Yeah,
there is currently relatively little overt support in the UK for the idea that the way cetain people identified with
the EDL represents a useful program to deal with the problem. OTOH there is probably a lot more tacit sympathy
than some would like to admit. People might be joining the EDL because they wanna rumble, be part of something
controversial, or simply like the mission statement and put up with bad image. Why would any decent person
affiliate themselves to an organization with such bad press? Well, maybe they know more than the press, or they
are just frustrated: it seems that hardly anybody else is even daring to publicly discuss the matter, never mind
do anything about it. There seems to me a lack of political will or clear identity in the western world that is allowing
bullies of all persuasions to push aside my own cultural ideals, whether they are proponents of an imported Sharia
law who seek the Islamization of the world, or other political street thugs. The woes that give life to the EDL are
not being addressed. You might ask if reasonable non-violent people even exist within the EDL. Would any journalist
even dare suggest such possibility? Wouldn't they risk total censure from their peers and find it impossible to publish
again? Look at the reaction of yourself and Matt when I suggested the media were giving only biased one way
editorials on these issues. You wanna condemn the EDL, fine, but make sure you also recognize and condemn the
thuggery and murder in the name of Islam. BTW If you believe that engaging "mainstream Muslim opinion" is how
extremism will be convincingly defeated, good luck, coz you've got a long wait!

[Paul McKeown]

Perhaps this sheds some light on George's obsession with whitewashing the reputation of England's latest bovver boys: Pamela Geller - an interview in the Independent. It would appear that various American ultra-right mouthpieces find something to admire in the EDL. She's hardly an intellectual colossus, though.

[George Szaszvari]

Perhaps this sheds some light on George's obsession with whitewashing the reputation of England's latest bovver boys: Pamela Geller - an interview in the Independent. It would appear that various American ultra-right mouthpieces find something to admire in the EDL. She's hardly an intellectual colossus, though.

Paul, when are going to get it through your thick skull that I'm not the slightest bit interested in promoting or
whitewashing the EDL agenda? I quoted several issues in my initial posting but only the EDL got any response.
I'm just interested in getting a discussion going, where people can go beyond the first emotional reaction, to
look into how information sources and the media (in this particular case Wikipedia,) report and present controversial
and emotional issues, asking readers to get involved in carefully examining the varieties of agendas and deceit
perpetrated by both the people being reported on, AND the people doing the reporting. Isn't that better than
the boring one dimensional "yes it is, no it isn't" game? Isn't it better than engaging in shouting matches to slur
others? Isn't that the only real way ANYTHING can be convincingly shown for what it really is? The world is
full of people ranting and raving who only end up becoming part of problem. Wiki's omission of the EDL mission
statement was just an interesting example, a starting point for a potentially useful discussion. Perhaps it was
just that bit too sensitive for people who get emotional at just the mention of EDL, but no offense was meant
and it could have just as easily been about something else.

To compare with something we can more easily identify with, older chessplayers here will recall how Fischer made
chess front page news (justifiably) with the world title match in 1972. Fischer won a great match, the culmination
of a fantastic series of candidates matches against the world's best of the day. It was an historic achievement that
also resulted in a huge amount of hysteria from people who wanted to identify with Fischer's success. Journalists
of all kinds, intent on selling hard copy, suddenly became "chess experts" to the general readership, even though
most were recognized as rather ignorant by any club player. When Fischer lost his Queen in a resignable position,
BBC radio reported it as a brilliant "sacrifice" that didn't quite come off because of some "unlucky" twist. However,
the Fischer hysteria also affected chessplayers who should have known better. Take the opening game in which
Fischer played the "brilliant attempt to win" with ...Bxh2, giving himself only losing chances in a dead drawn position.
Even though he could still have subsequently drawn, Fischer lost. Incredibly, the "Fischer could do no wrong" effect
was still influencing opinions years later. I remember, as a proof reader, arguing with a well known chess editor against
continuing to print ...Bxh2 as speculative (!?) move in the earlier editions of a certain book, and how it really should
be given as a horrible mistake (??) brought on by the tension. The editor compromised with (?!) dubious!! I was
even accused of being anti-Fischer! The point is that we will find in our wonderful media all kinds similar nonsense
going on with much more complicated and vastly more emotional matters, whether economics, politics, history,
or whatever...

As stated at the very beginning of this thread, I had never even heard of the EDL a month or two back, and I know
nothing about the Geller person you quote and, frankly, prefer to avoid all such misguided, not to say loathsome,
neo-Nazi types. In the 60s I used to watch soccer at Loftus Road (and White City before QPR moved) and Stamford
Bridge (Chelsea) but one day decided to stay away for good due to the mindless Bovver Boy violence creeping in.
I've only been to one live soccer match since then (in the 70s to watch the great Borussia Moenchengladbach
team produce some magic in a Bundesliga game... I spent more time using the stadium perimeter for my early morning
run when I lived nearby). Is that clear enough for you, or do I have to come over there to put you across my knee for
a good spanking? Hmm, since you clearly show sadomasochistic tendencies, you might actually enjoy that, so better
give that one a miss...

[Arshad Ali]

How many media articles are there that follow around, investigate and interview the milder
and more thoughtful members of the EDL? Such membership could well do a lot to keep the EDL truer
to its mission statement. There is a stranglehold of political correctness in today's lamestream media that
scotches attempts at all-round inquisitorial discussion of uncomfortable matters. The media greatly influences
how people see and think about the world and there is wholesale condemnation of the EDL (which may,
or may not be legitimate) while there is an awkward silence concerning the creeping stealth of Islamofascism
(Islamototalitarianism would be more accurate, but is bit long winded.) I guess the next question is whether
you believe that Islamofascism is a concern, or not.

Which country are you based in? There are no "milder and more thoughtful members of the EDL." "Islamofascism" is a bogeyman serving political purposes, particularly in the USA. You don't have the foggiest idea what you're writing about. Paul McKeown is correct.

[George Szaszvari]

How many media articles are there that follow around, investigate and interview the milder and more thoughtful members of the EDL? Such membership could well do a lot to keep the EDL truer
to its mission statement. There is a stranglehold of political correctness in today's lamestream media that
scotches attempts at all-round inquisitorial discussion of uncomfortable matters. The media greatly influences
how people see and think about the world and there is wholesale condemnation of the EDL (which may,
or may not be legitimate) while there is an awkward silence concerning the creeping stealth of Islamofascism
(Islamototalitarianism would be more accurate, but is bit long winded.) I guess the next question is whether
you believe that Islamofascism is a concern, or not.

Which country are you based in? There are no "milder and more thoughtful members of the EDL." "Islamofascism" is a bogeyman serving political purposes, particularly in the USA. You don't have the foggiest idea what you're writing about. Paul McKeown is correct.

Arshad, you've three guesses to my location. Be real careful, now, and don't overlook that I'm the Great Conspirator
bogeyman that you've been looking for.... and I was one of those on the Grassy Knoll, November 22, 1963. In the
"yes it is, no it isn't" game, I look forward to your world championship match with Paul!

[George Szaszvari]

" "Islamofascism" is a bogeyman serving political purposes, particularly in the USA.....

http://www.militantislammonitor.org/

http://www.aifdemocracy.org/