Simon Jordan leaps to John Terry's defence amid burqa ban debate: 'It is NOT racism!'

Terry entered the fray online, appearing to back elements of Lowe’s argument — a move that quickly drew criticism, with some accusing the former defender of endorsing divisive rhetoric.

But speaking on the White & Jordan Show on talkSPORT, Jordan was unequivocal in his defence, insisting that Terry’s comments had been mischaracterised and unfairly attacked.

“Some of Rupert Lowe’s views, I concur with. Some of the other views I don’t concur with,” Jordan explained.

“And if John Terry concurs with the idea that, in this country, there’s a degree of discomfort around facial coverings, that is not racism. That is an alternative view.”

Jordan’s remarks cut to the heart of what he sees as a growing intolerance in public discourse, a theme he returned to repeatedly as he criticised the reaction to Terry’s comments.

“You are allowed to have that view!” he said emphatically.

“But because we live in this stupid, binary world, where if you don’t agree with something, you are a racist, or a misogynist, or an Islamophobe.”

In a typically forthright intervention, Jordan suggested that labels are increasingly being weaponised to shut down debate rather than engage with it.

“You are whatever people want to be to discredit your argument,” he added, arguing that such tactics undermine meaningful discussion on complex issues.

The former Crystal Palace owner stopped short of fully endorsing Lowe’s position, but made clear that the broader principle at stake was freedom of expression — particularly for public figures like Terry, who often find themselves under intense scrutiny.

Jordan also ventured into wider cultural territory, highlighting what he described as personal discomfort with certain aspects of modern Britain.

“I am not comfortable going around London and seeing train stations written in Bengali. I don’t know why it needs to be done. Nowhere else in the world does this,” he said.

For supporters of Terry, Jordan’s intervention will be seen as a necessary pushback against what they perceive as an overreaction. Critics, however, are likely to argue that such comments risk legitimising views they consider exclusionary.

The episode underscores the increasingly blurred lines between sport, politics and cultural identity, with high-profile figures like Terry finding themselves drawn into debates far removed from the football pitch.

Yet for Jordan, the principle remains clear. Disagreement, he argues, should not automatically lead to condemnation.

In defending Terry, he has once again positioned himself as a vocal opponent of what he sees as a narrowing space for open debate in modern Britain — a stance that will no doubt continue to divide opinion.