Milo’s Full BBC Interview

Milo sits down with a reporter from the BBC to explain why the white supremacy, Nazi-hiding-around-every-corner media hysteria is just that: hysteria. Nazi hunting is a moral panic created by the media, and Milo isn’t letting them get away with it.

Watch the interview here:




  1. lilyred

    September 26, 2017 at 9:28 pm

    Love it when he gets serious.

  2. Dmitry Krotchlikmeoff

    September 26, 2017 at 9:34 pm

    great interview. stick it to the BBC

  3. Jesse James

    September 26, 2017 at 10:01 pm

    Watched that a few days ago. That guy was taken aback at first, then went full shaming language mode, and just quit at the end as his nonsense wasn’t working.

  4. Oil Can

    September 27, 2017 at 12:40 am

    He’s baaaack!

  5. RemAcuTetigisti

    September 27, 2017 at 4:20 am


    • Dante Alighieri ????

      September 27, 2017 at 6:54 am

      Milo started out preening himself with the usual effeminate shtick and then it was over.
      He got down to business pretty quickly.

      But i get your point.

  6. Dante Alighieri ????

    September 27, 2017 at 6:33 am

    milo (bbc/paraphrased) — berkley is publicly funded and it shuts down free speech

    you never talk about reilgious houses who are publicly funded (exempted from local/state taxes) who shut down free speech You never address this point probably cuz it can’t be defended

    • Rusty Esq

      September 27, 2017 at 11:55 am

      It’s a matter of priorities. The churches are struggling. The alt-left is very strong. They’re being trained by universities and recruited through the media and social media. There are only so many battles you can fight. The church has its issues but it’s way down the list, at least in my view. I’d even argue some of the community care that churches bring is needed (and I’m an atheist).

      • Dante Alighieri ????

        September 28, 2017 at 5:23 am

        • lots of corporations do good charity work, that doesn’t justify calling them charities.
        • take the dollar amount churches spend on charity and allow a tax exemption for that portion, but tax the churches for the balance, including city land taxes as you would any corporation
        • as to churches are struggling — aren’t we all ??

    • harlan leys

      September 27, 2017 at 3:28 pm

      The Supreme Court defended the public funding of religious organisations by claiming that, rather than state support for religions (a violation of the First Amendment), State governments fund (indirectly via tax breaks) certain organizations because they are deemed to be beneficial to the community (spiritually, mentally, materially, healthily, educationally, etc.). As these apply equally to all faith denominations (and many more organisations besides religious ones) then the state is not engaging in ‘an establishment of religion’ (so it upholds the First Amendment).

      But the sole dissenter to that SCOTUS ruling (Walz, 1970) – Justice Douglas – cuts through the BS:

      “one of the best ways to ‘establish’ one or more religions is to subsidize them, which a tax exemption does.”

      James Madison,the Founding Father who, more than any other, created the Constitution, strongly opposed the idea that any citizen should have to give even “three pence” to support a church.

      But if the SCOTUS had overruled religious tax exemption, would Federal and State legislatures unite, and add a new Constitutional amendment to ensure such subsidies continue? Religious groups have too much power over politicians?


      Corporate America is primarily composed of bosses who’ve been through a liberal dominated, elite education system. Most of them are liberal leaning as a result. They may be capitalists, but the left surrendered on economic policy decades ago. Cultural,identity-based PC is the left’s bag today – apart from a minority on the militant margins – and most corp bigwigs are down with that. In a sense, billionaire bosses of supercorps are America’s royal family; and most align as liberals.
      [Source: National Review: Why Corporate Leaders Became Progressive Activists; March 13, 2017]

      • Dante Alighieri ????

        September 28, 2017 at 5:18 am

        • perhaps everybody and every corporation should declare themselves a church
        • that way they can tax neither my house nor my income
        • and call me a priest, and my kids parishioners while your at it.
        • if Scientology can be a religion why not me & my neighbours

        • harlan leys

          September 28, 2017 at 7:38 pm

          IRS guidelines, when deciding if a claim of ‘church’ status is legit:

          Distinct legal existence
          Recognized creed and form of worship
          Definite and distinct ecclesiastical government
          Formal code of doctrine and discipline
          Distinct religious history
          Membership not associated with any other church or denomination
          Organization of ordained ministers
          Ordained ministers selected after completing prescribed courses of study
          Literature of its own
          Established places of worship
          Regular congregations
          Regular religious services
          Sunday schools for the religious instruction of the young
          Schools for the preparation of its members

    • James Beil

      September 29, 2017 at 6:18 am

      Exemption from taxation is not public funding. Public funding suggests the direct passing of money from the government to a person or organisation, which is not what is happening in the case of churches.

      • Dante Alighieri ????

        October 6, 2017 at 8:33 am

        utter nonsense — Any tax you don’t pay, everybody else has to make up for.
        It is socialism any way you cut it.

  7. Rusty Esq

    September 27, 2017 at 11:50 am

    An open letter of sorts.
    Hey Milo, good to see you back on the horse again. This interview is most probably not a success because it’s too much of a monologue. I like when you ask questions of others. There was a lot of talking over this gentleman. I don’t think he was swayed.
    Most of your arguments are valid and reasonable. Next time I suggest you condemn the Charlottesville driver in slightly stronger terms. He is an extreme fringe, like antifa. The guy interviewing you was correct and he wanted you to condemn the driver which you half did.
    I was not comfortable about your Bannon and Coulter comments. I’ll leave that comment alone for now (just don’t repeat it please).
    I am glad you turned the focus on the media. If I can work out a way, I want to expose the media for what they mostly are (I have accumulated a list of evidence that will embarrass many outlets using nothing but analysis of what they say). The good and bad news is that the media still isn’t listening (as you said), which means they keep generating more data to hang themselves with. The media (in my view) is a key player in the anti-democracy, anti-western movement.
    It was wise to downplay the Berkeley university comments.

    Keep it up Milo. Stay the path. The UC Berkeley setback can make you a much better person. Free speech is needed on the fringes. Use this quote from Jordan Peterson, it nails what you’re trying to say. “There’s only two alternatives to that [free speech],” he said. “One is silent slavery with all the repression and resentment that that will generate, and the other is outright conflict. Free speech is not just another value. It’s the foundation of Western civilization.”

    For now, I’ll keep challenging and praising you. I might get told to suck a few Jewish dicks here and there. I might even publish the Book of Rusty through dangerous publications.

    • RonnieandStephanie Lewis

      September 27, 2017 at 1:15 pm

      The Charlottesville narrative is media drive

    • harlan leys

      September 27, 2017 at 2:34 pm

      Sometimes, a monologue may be necessary; this time, to answer all the speculative shit that’s been thrown at Milo over recent weeks (I’m guilty too in a micro, non-entity sense). He seemed to be using this interview to answer some of those critics, rather than get bogged down with this joker’s personal peeves.

      The Charlottesville driver’s been condemned across the cosmos, for Chrissakes! Milo was right to dismiss this meek’s feeble attempts to pursue that point, given how the MSM have conflated this loner’s moronic, murderous action with right wing protestors in general, to claim the right’s violence is much worse than the left’s. Yet what incidents are there apart from it, to justify this? As Milo says, most of the violence is from the left. It’s the left seeking to silence rightwing speech; and using violence, intimidation, destruction and disruption to do so.

      Why should and would Bannon and Coulter expose themselves to violent protestors? There’s far more and serious hatred on the left against them than Milo.

      Wise to play down Berkeley university comments; why? Because of possible future court action against them?

  8. harlan leys

    September 27, 2017 at 2:18 pm

    Back on form, Milo! That interviewer might as well’ve been cut out completely in the final edit, for all the point of his perfunctory presence. Sometimes a rant can be so satisfying, eh?

    The college still owe Milo Inc $65k; for rooms never booked? Is that Patriots group also out of pocket?

    Yes, the threat to free speech seems stronger from corps than the government; in some areas. But the likes of the ironically named (in a bad way) Patriot Act have given the state considerable powers to harass, spy on, invade privacy, prosecute people for speech on ‘terrorist’ or ‘treason’ grounds.. the list is long. Get designated as a ‘(hybrid) gang’ member, for instance, and watch your freedoms vanish.

    As for the clashes between ‘left’ and ‘right’, and who’s the most violent? Milo maybe right that it’s mostly from the left, though the heavily armed ‘far right’ presence in Charlottesville suggests significant numbers are more than willing to get stuck in. But the most important question should surely be: who’s bent on suppressing speech; and whose speech is silenced?

    Clearly, the boot then is starkly on the left’s foot. Antifa, BAMN, campus censorship, the MSM (for the most part) are and have been stifling the right; from a leftist perspective. That requires a certain kind of violence, even if its mostly indirect and/or implied. Sacking, fining, banning, expelling, excluding, arresting, charging, prosecuting, imprisoning are all forms of violence (they’re backed up and enforced through violence as a last resort).

    So, to cut through all this shit about who’s to blame: the right are trying to speak and the left are trying to stop them. That’s a largely one way street, and has been on campuses now for many years.

  9. Ishare

    September 28, 2017 at 12:53 am

    Good job, Milo. Stick the truth to the out-of-touch MSM and you’ll win. Plain truth kills the left.

    • Dante Alighieri ????

      September 28, 2017 at 1:52 pm

      Like the Grim Reaper, the Truth catches up to all of us — left and right

  10. DaisyToo

    September 28, 2017 at 10:02 am

    Have watched this over the past couple of days. Keep telling it like it is, Milo. The journalist will remain in his bubble, along w/all the other journalists, but you will keep winning sensible others to the side of freedom from the slavery of illiberalism.

  11. Steve O

    September 28, 2017 at 5:15 pm

    At the end I was imagining a Batman comic… Wham!! Biff!! Pow!!!!

  12. Ludovico Technique

    September 29, 2017 at 3:23 am

    Bravo. This is precisely how to treat the know-nothing, panic-mongering press.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To Top