The Jerusalem Post’s recent interview with Tommy Robinson represents a troubling lapse seen all too often in critical journalism. For over an hour, Robinson was given an uncritical platform to deliver his familiar apocalyptic narrative about Islamic threats in Britain and Europe, with barely a challenging question from the interviewer. A summary of the conversation appeared on September 26. This felt less like journalism and more like a promotion.
The question isn’t whether Robinson correctly identifies some genuine problems with Islamic extremism or integration in parts of Britain. The question is whether someone with his record and views should be uncritically embraced as an ally by the Jewish community and given legitimacy by Israeli media.
A pattern of criminality
Robinson’s credibility is fatally undermined by his criminal record. He has been repeatedly convicted in UK courts, including for violent acts, fraud, and contempt of court. This comes after losing a libel case following a racial slur he publicized against a Syrian refugee. These aren’t minor infractions but demonstrate a pattern of reckless disregard for truth and legal boundaries. Why would anyone accept, without critique, statements made by someone who has shown such contempt for factual accuracy and the rule of law?
The Luton myth
Robinson bases his empathy for the Jewish community on his testimony about Luton, where he says Jews were “driven out” by Muslim radicals. The local synagogue was sold and converted into a mosque, but what Robinson conveniently omits is that a Jewish community still exists in Luton, and the synagogue was sold in the most ordinary transaction to relocate to a more appropriate building. His narrative of expulsion is false, which should make listeners and readers question his other claims about being radicalized by his experiences there.
EDL ‘Jewish Division’
Robinson cites the English Defence League’s “Jewish Division” as evidence of the organization’s diversity and anti-racist credentials. Yet the woman who founded and led that division was Roberta Moore – a follower of Meir Kahane’s extremist ideology. She founded the “Jewish Defence League UK,” explicitly naming it after Kahane’s organization.
Moore attempted to coordinate with the American “Jewish Task Force,” whose founder had previously been imprisoned for terrorism offenses. When she left, it was reported that she had done so because of her concern that it had been hijacked by elements who wanted to use it for their own Nazi purposes. Quite the charge.
If this is Robinson’s idea of diversity – embracing a Kahanist – then his claims about opposing racism and far-right ideology ring hollow. There may be little value in the kind of diversity he champions. It certainly should not afford him credentials as an ally to the Jewish community or Israel.
Elite vs ordinary: A dangerous game
Robinson employs classic populist tactics during the interview, separating “ordinary” Jews from “elitist” Jewish leadership. He claims the Board of Deputies of British Jews and other communal organizations are out of touch and too politically correct, failing to represent actual Jewish interests. They’re “weak,” “cowardly,” and too accommodating to the Islamic community and far-left groups.
This rhetoric should sound alarm bells. While Robinson isn’t deploying traditional antisemitic tropes about Jewish elites controlling society, he’s using similarly divisive language to delegitimize the actual representative institutions of British Jewry. His message is clear: Bypass your leaders and align with my movement instead.
This is exactly how Robinson relates to all British institutions – political parties, media, and the police. Everyone must be either corrupt elites or victims of the Muslim invasion. Jews are being asked to join his broader populist project, not being offered genuine solidarity or partnership.
There is nothing centrist about the EDL
Robinson was the leader of the English Defence League. In the interview, he is unchallenged when he describes it as a centrist organization. Minimal checking would show the opposite. Academics, politicians, and NGOs alike have characterized it as anything but.
Sir Michael Ellis, former British MP and attorney-general, describes how the EDL exploited concerns about immigration and radical Islam, developing “violence on our streets and a terrifying subculture of casual racism.” Ellis wrote this in 2011 in an introduction to a report on Britain’s “New Far Right” social movement.
Although he left the EDL and has restyled himself as a crusader without an organization, it is hard to see how Robinson really differs from his start in the Luton football hooligan milieu.
Troubling embrace
It is no surprise that Robinson has been embraced by leaders of Europe’s new far-right parties, many of whom spoke at the Unite the Kingdom rally, echoing the messages about a Muslim invasion and extolling the virtues of repatriation for European Muslims. But Elon Musk and the late Charlie Kirk also adopted Robinson.
Closer to home, Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism Minister Amichai Chikli praised both the rally and “Robinson’s leadership,” declaring that “London has not looked so beautiful in a long time,” and expressing solidarity with what he called “healthy nationalism.” This is a serving government minister lauding a man with multiple convictions, including racially motivated libel.
No less troubling was former prime minister Naftali Bennett’s recent post warning that “Europe is becoming Islamized,” claiming that over half of the children in Brussels and 40% of children in Amsterdam, Vienna, and London are Muslims, statistics he presents without credible sourcing. Bennett frames this as requiring Israel to prepare for an increasingly anti-Israel Europe. This is replacement theory rhetoric in its purest form: demographic panic about Muslim populations threatening Western civilization.
Why this matters
Dave Rich, head of policy at the Community Security Trust UK and an authority on UK antisemitism, responded succinctly to the podcast: “Robinson isn’t really reaching out to the UK Jewish community; he’s been rebuffed too many times. But gullible Americans and Israelis still fall for it.”
It doesn’t take much effort to understand Robinson’s true nature and agenda. Yet mainstream figures choose to ignore them. The overlap is troubling. When Israeli political figures legitimize Robinson or adopt his apocalyptic framing about Islam, they make him appear more respectable than his record warrants and validate a worldview built on fear and division rather than facts. The enemy of your enemy is not always your friend; sometimes, they’re just someone who will exploit your fears for their own agenda.
The Jerusalem Post owes its readers better than uncritical stenography of a convicted criminal with extremist associations. British Jews deserve allies who share their values and respect democratic norms, not opportunists exploiting their legitimate security concerns for their own political projects. Robinson is not that ally, and it says much more about those who embrace him than it does about the challenges facing European Jewry.
The writer is founding partner of Goldrock Capital and founder of The Institute for Jewish and Zionist Research. He chairs a number of NGOs, including Leshem, ICAR, and ReHome, and is a former chair of Gesher and World Bnei Akiva.