I’m not happy with either. Anyway ... back to The atmosphere here..
Tommy Robinson (38 Viewers)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
I’m not happy with either. Anyway ... back to The atmosphere here..
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Nice bit of generalisation there.
Malaka
Well-Known Member
Tommy Robinson has his own agenda, which IMO is racially motivated. There was a family jailed only last week for the sexual abuse of children in Coventry. They were white, did it receive national coverage? I didn't see any. Having worked with many sexually exploited children, many are abused within the family, by children of their own age but there are a significant number abused by Pakistani males. The Pakistani gangs get much news coverage and the friends and family one goes under the radar. All types of abuse are damaging and have long term effects. To think that Pakistani's are the sole problem is naive. If Tommy Robinson focussed on all pedophiles equally, then I would have no problem with him. However, his EDL background convinces me that there is a racist element to his rhetoric.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
People are seemingly more focused on trying to find reasons for getting TR into jail, than the actual severity of these crimes.
It's certainly looking as if some people are uncomfortable with the people that are committing so many of these crimes being from those backgrounds and are therefore making excuses or deflecting away from the truth.
I can almost guarantee some of the people on here would not be saying the same things if the religion/ethnic roles were reversed.
It's certainly looking as if some people are uncomfortable with the people that are committing so many of these crimes being from those backgrounds and are therefore making excuses or deflecting away from the truth.
I can almost guarantee some of the people on here would not be saying the same things if the religion/ethnic roles were reversed.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I’m uncomfortable with all sex offenders myself. I don’t discriminate based on colour, religion or country of heritage/birth. That’s the difference between me and Tommy Robinson. He’s only concerned when the perpetrators are of a particular colour, religion or country of heritage/birth.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
The difference is you prefer a white sex offender, as it suits your narrative.
When multiple large groups of men from these backgrounds commit serious offences your cowardly, self-loathing self cannot deal with it.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Among the persons on trial...
Amere Singh Dhaliwal, 34, of Holly Road, Huddersfield is charged with 54 offences. He is charged with 21 counts of rape, 14 counts of trafficking, as well as inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, sexual assault, sexual touching, possession of indecent images of a child, racially aggravated assault and inciting a child into prostitution.
Raj Singh Barsran, 33, of Caldercliffe Road, Huddersfield is charged with sexual touching and rape.
Everton La Bastide, 50, of Manchester Road, Huddersfield is charged with two counts of sexual assault.
17 others who are almost certainly Muslim.
This information from Child sex inquiry sees 29 in court
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
It’s Robinson who favours white sex offenders not me. I hold them all in equal contempt. If Tommy Robinson held them all in equal contempt I’d be supporting him on this.
Cov City Daytrader 87
Well-Known Member
Time to dig deeper and maybe join the dots.
And what has this video below got to do with Tommy Robinson/
Let's just say watch the whole of it and you're know .
And what has this video below got to do with Tommy Robinson/
Let's just say watch the whole of it and you're know .
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Seems he favours ethnic minority ones, given he keeps trying to get them off!
Seriously, what kind of idiot tries to stop a criminal receiving justice?
Last edited by a moderator:
I had to stop half way through the first one.
I'm no fan of Nationalism or particularly what's called Patriotism.
For me the concept of the EU Is the right one or way to make peace and keep it
For me I feel it's dissintegration both suits and assists American Imperialist goals, possibly aided by their deep state.
That kind of puts me at odds with the second video as I largely agree with this guys assessment over their other World aspirations and being outmanouvered by Trump ..
Personally for me I'm so close to the concept of EU and distant from a Special relationship with USA.
It's far too destabalising outside of the perceived wrongs attributed to the EU, I'd overide the 52%opinion of those who vote for Brexit and wouldn't give a fig how that made them feel about me or so called democracy.
I have lived through 42 years of EU membership in one form or another.
I have never felt the threat my daughter 26 and grandson 9 are now being exposed to and I fear for them.
The rest isn't worth considering, it's piffling above a secure safe life, JMO
M&B Stand
Well-Known Member
So the police arrested a man for trying to report on a story they didn't want reported on, threw him in prison instantly under a suspended sentence of doing the same thing some time ago, and then went around the press telling them to pull stories of the arrest.
Take away the fact that it's Tommy Robinson we're talking about, and anyone would be either disgusted or thinking that we're talking about the USSR.
Absolutely Orwellian behaviour from the police.
Take away the fact that it's Tommy Robinson we're talking about, and anyone would be either disgusted or thinking that we're talking about the USSR.
Absolutely Orwellian behaviour from the police.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Are you serious? You do realise he could have ended up letting these people walk free?
M&B Stand
Well-Known Member
I’ve just watched the video of the arrest, they arrested him for breach of peace.
I certainly didn’t have you down as a supporter of trials taking place in private.
What do I know, maybe I’ve got the wrong end of it.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
That's a nonsense argument.
If you read into it properly instead of just hearing the name 'Tommy Robinson' and getting triggered, you'll find all he said was the names of the criminals and the crimes they were listed for. This information was already released and therefore wasn't in breach of anything. Literally no court in the real world will call a mistrial on this basis.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
They wouldn't not receive justice. This would never have got them off as 'his team' were very careful with what they said.
All he was doing was publicising the case to the nation as 'the real' journalists didn't want to touch it.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
I really like you wingy, but that is a shocking thing to say.
If I'm honest people now feel far from safe in the EU (look at Liege today), and the fact The EU doesn't care about democracy (reinforced by your opinion there) majorly contributed to the leave vote winning.
Anyway, this isn't the Brexit thread so perhaps we should save it for over there.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No it isn’t. The court issued a direction that no details should be allowed in the public domain as soon as the trial commenced as it may be deemed prejudicial. He also had a suspended sentence and was told if he committed the same act again he’d go to prison.
You do realise this character under one of his previous aliases put a boot through a policeman’s head and said it “was a fit up” as the policeman hadn’t identified himself as an officer of the law and was inducing the beating?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Hang on, I thought the reason Robinson had to broadcast was that there was a big cover up going on and no details had been released anywhere?
Sorry mate, I like your contribution on here too and you're right It belongs on the other thread .
However that is a shitfest of miniscule preferences and detail I won't be venturing into.
It's just simply that singular reason for its construct that concerns me .
Not at all wishing to sound arrogant or anti democratic or even draconian, I have the same voice as anyone else.
My POV comes purely from the security side .
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
Why does he keep putting himself in these situations if he thinks the police and government are out to stop and imprison him at any chance? His line of thinking makes absolutely no sense to me. Why does he need to 'expose' them don't the names get released after their sentenced?
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
Why does he not use his real name?
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
You're wasting time really, as you know that isn't correct.
The authorities have been covering these things up but this case did have some details released. These details TR broadcast.
The only reason he had to do that was because the wider media were not interested. Ask yourself, why is that?
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
The details TR announced were the same as what the court released. He said nothing further that would incriminate him or put the trial at risk.
Point two isn't relevant as the bloke is clearly a tosser. The argument isn't if he is an angel, more the fact he is having to do the work the rest of the media should be doing. The bigger picture behind that is the problem.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
He's started a lot of interviews with American right wingers like Alex Jones, Steven Crowder etc. All people who love a conspiracy and a straw man when one doesn't exist.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Its been stated several times in this thread that he has to take action such as this as nobody else is reporting on these cases. That he is bringing them to public attention. Yet its been shown on this thread that the cases he is 'exposing' are already being covered in the mainstream media.
So we come back to the question why does he do it and why is it only ever Muslim paedophiles he targets if its not racially motivated?
I've looked for non-Muslim cases he has highlighted but can't find any. I did find cases involving white British paedophiles in which he has been involved but bizarrely in those cases he has supported the accused.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Again - Restrictions were put in place which embargoed filming and live commentary of proceedings.
He ignored these restrictions and pleaded guilty. He seems not a particularly bright fellow as I assume he wants to be some kind of martyr to free speech.
The irony is his own trial was subject to restrictions which every press officer obeyed. No doubt if Mr Robinson had the opportunity he’d film his own trial so he can breach laws and again be a victim.
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
To avoid people finding it out so his family wouldn’t get threats :bored:
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
He may not be very bright but it takes a special kind of stupid to be on a suspended sentence and then turn up at a court and do exactly the same thing again.
Can only assume he wanted to be sent down.
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
What other mainstream media covered that trial? Absolutely none. It's a common theme and it's reinforced by the authorities who are scared of being called racist and have openly admitted they have swept previous incidents under the carpet.
You pick out a few articles of trials that have actually been covered and think you've won a losing argument, but the truth is far from that. If you really think Muslim grooming gangs are being covered openly and honestly then that's quite honestly pretty naive.
It's already been said that he doesn't like Islam which fuels part of his actions, but agree with that or not; The Muslim population of Britain is about 5%. Why are they involved in so many sexual abuse scandals, many that have been covered up? It should be flagged up. He might be biased but he's the only one with balls big enough to bring it to our attention.
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
The ever reliable Wikipedia informs me Tommy's Robinson's job title is an 'activist'. Do his supporters donate loads of money to him or something for him to be able to do that as a full time job? Usually it's done on the side
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
He was outside, not in the court house.
He was also arrested for breach of the peace, then tried for something completely different. He was then put through court and sentenced within 4 hours.
You're a bright lad, you're telling me you don't look at that and think it's even a ltitle bit odd?
Our prisons are like jihadi training camps and he almost certainly has a bounty on his head. It wouldn't surprise me if he ends being killed.
The judge supposedly said 'he knew the risks' when the defence lawyer said going to prison could kill him. He's given him a death sentence there and it has no doubt come from above. Now why would they want to shut him up?