Despite BBC chiefs having shelved his daily chat show because of his explosive remarks, Kilroy-Silk insisted: 'If I am not allowed to say there are Arab states that are evil, despotic and treat women abominably, if I am not allowed to say that, which I know to be a fact, then what can I say?'
What's better are his excuses for the article being released...:
The offending article, headlined 'We owe Arabs nothing', was almost word-for-word the same as a column he wrote last April. Kilroy-Silk explained: 'It was a cock-up and I blame my secretary.'
...and this:
[...]when the piece originally ran, last April during the Iraq War, the phrase "Arab countries" was used instead of "Arabs"...Kilroy-Silk has stressed that the changes were not his fault. He said that the substitution of word "Arabs" for the phrase "Arab countries" was done at the Express. "Out of that context," he said, "it has obviously caused great distress and offence and I can only reiterate that I very deeply regret that."
[...]"They (Kilroy-Silk's staff) should not have sent it and we should have checked it. Of course there is mild embarrassment. Mr Kilroy-Silk is a bit pissed off about all the fuss but he's fighting his corner. He's obviously worried about his show being taken off the air but he is going back to work next week to film.
"The copy was passed by the lawyers - but then you can't be sued by the whole Arab nation."
However, last night the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), who made the original complaint to the BBC and Sunday Express, remained adamant that Kilroy-Silk's column was racist. Inayat Bunglawala, the MCB's media secretary said: "The phrase 'Arab countries' itself is unacceptable. Arab countries don't practice suicide bombing, individuals do.
The Express ran something like six pages on the story, trying to turn this into a free speech issue (including a rather mawkish piece about how Kilroy's father fought in World War II to protect free speech). Which is kind of ironic because Kilroy has also written column in favour of deporting a Muslim cleric who does not like the West and who also happens to be a UK citizen - someone entitled to free speech as well, surely?
For anyone with half a brain it is obvious that the issue is not whether Kilroy is entitled to freedom of speech but whether the BBC should pay a man with such uninformed, bigoted opinions a fat salary each year to present a very mediocre, one-sided talk show.
To its eternal credit, the Express allowed the Muslim Council of Britain to write a kind of rebuttal to Kilroy's claims which was very, very good (I will post it if I can track it down online - damn the Express!). They also printed a few letters from people incensed at such idiocy on Kilroy-Silk's part, all of which were very well written.
Though funnily enough, they were quite reluctant to run the MCB's article "as is" though:
The section which the Sunday Express was uncomfortable with included the council's rebuttals of Kilroy-Silk's description of Arabs as "suicide bombers, limb amputators, women repressors". According to Mr Bunglawala, the newspaper's lawyers did not want to repeat the claims.
"It was bizarre," he said. "They were defending him on one hand and not letting us quote him on the other."
It was not until yesterday lunchtime that the Sunday Express finally agreed to run the article without any changes.
Sources: Guardian | Independent