Tommy Robinson has had the threat of prosecution lifted as a judge throws his case out of court…
Tommy Robinson has had a charge of battery dismissed in court. He said the judge questioned the police’s motives for pursuing the case against him when they did.
“My case has been dismissed. Even the judge made comments about the police’s motive of prosecution. Thank you all”, he announced….“The QC absolutely tore it to pieces… Yeah, he made a mockery of it. He made a mockery of just another stitch up”.
This was always a politically motivated police action, no doubt directed by the Home Office which has mounted a campaign to ‘deal with’ Tommy Robinson and the EDL in order to silence them, was this their ‘effective public order policing response’…a ‘successful approach to dealing with the problem’ [of the EDL and its ilk]?….The same Home Office that paid the unpleasant people of ‘Hope Not Hate’ money to produce anti-EDL propaganda….as this FOI request shows….
Dear Mr Green
Thank you for your email of 31 January requesting clarification of the response I sent you on 7 August 2012 – reference F0007043 on whether ‘Hope Not Hate’ had received any funding from DCLG.
On 20 June 2012 we signed a funding agreement with Searchlight Educational Trust for £66k. Searchlight Education Trust established community partnerships in four areas prone to EDL activity. Partnerships set up newsletters which contained: positive stories from the area that promote shared local identities; advertise events that bring the community together; and provide space for faith, community and voluntary organisations to advertise and encourage participation” and you can find more information about it on our website at https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/b…. Payments were made to Searchlight Educational Trust as follows:Date Amount paid
6 September 2012 £16,750
22 November 2012 £46,623.38
26 March 2013 £2,626.62
TOTAL £66,000
Apparently it received over £150,000 in total between 2010 and 2012….how much more since then?
There can be little doubt the BBC has been recruited to help out as well, a very willing recruit no doubt.
Douglas Murray in the Spectator spelt out the State inflicted troubles that Tommy Robinson suffers…and the BBC doesn’t care one jot…if however he was a Muslim that would be a different story..one that would be on every BBC ‘front page’ demanding justice.
The BBC hasn’t bothered to report on the persecution of Tommy Robinson and the failed police action….if only he were Black or Muslim the BBC would be all over this injustice.
Speaking of which, the BBC’s desire to campaign for all things ethnic however dangerous and misguided their actions maybe….the BBC joined in enthusiastically with the anti-white, anti-police witch-hunt in the US, apparently #Blacklivesmatter…or #mattered…was it all merely infantile BBC Marxist posturing against the hated white man with no real interest in the Black man’s issues or lives? Seems so…where is the BBC’s interest in the Blacks who are being killed in ever increasing numbers, mostly by other Blacks, now that the police have withdrawn from policing the streets due to pressure from the likes of the BBC?
Since the McDonald incident, police conduct has been affected. In the first three months of 2015, Chicago’s police officers stopped and searched 157,346 people for suspicious behaviour. This year, that number dropped to 20,908 – down 86%. This is put down to a drop in morale and a reluctance to stop and search for fear of becoming the next YouTube video that goes viral.
The terrible toll of gun deaths in America has tormented the presidency of Barack Obama unable to even moderately curtail the absolute right of gun ownership so entrenched in America’s political DNA. Now the media’s scrutiny of the issue has turned to the city where Obama first forged his political reputation, Chicago where gun crime, poverty, racial tension and policing have fused into a nightmarish vision for parts of America’s second city.
Police statistics clearly show this. Between January and the end of March 2016, there were 677 shootings, a staggering 88.5% increase from the 359 over the same period in 2015. Levels of violent crime are also up and the first quarter of this year saw 141 murders across the city – more than Los Angeles and New York put together – and a 72% rise compared with 2015.
When I searched the BBC’s online news site a few minutes ago, I couldn’t find anything on the Robinson case.
It must be my lack of search skills. Unless … …
Clearly, no time or space available.
I wonder… what did make the cut?
Tommy Robinson, former EDL leader, recalled to prison – BBC News
Tommy Robinson, former EDL leader, fined for public order offences – BBC News
Ex-EDL chief Tommy Robinson has Twitter account suspended account of English Defence League co-founder and former leader Tommy Robinson has been suspended. Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, is serving 18 months
etc, etc – BBC News
When Sentenced for mortgage fraud, BBC headline news.
When he walks free from the trumped up charge … who? … Tom who? … never heard of him
“walks free” … hmm must be the Joos
Alan,
“This was always a politically motivated police action, no doubt directed by the Home Office which has mounted a campaign to ‘deal with’ Tommy Robinson and the EDL in order to silence them”.
But of course, it’s all been a government conspiracy!
That must be why Stephen Yaxley-Lennon aka “Tommy Robinson” was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment for kicking an off-duty police officer in the head; 3 months imprisonment for assault with intent to resist arrest; was convicted of assault after headbutting a member of the EDL during a rally in Blackburn; sentenced to a 12 month community rehabilitation order, a three-year ban from football and 150 hours of unpaid work, for leading a fight involving 100 football fans in Luton; sentenced to 10 months imprisonment for using a false passport (because of convictions for drugs and assault); sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for a £160,000 mortgage fraud; and numerous bail/licence infringements.
To quote Mrs. Merton; “What first attracted you to the violent criminal and serial fraudster Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, Alan?”
Presumably you call yourself Zero because that’s the amount of attention to detail you pay to things and subsequently the power of argument you muster….Details such as evidence laid out for you to read should you be bothered….you do know the Home Office is a government department don’t you? I assume you can read and saw the money that the government gave to Hope Not Hate to propagandise against the EDL, and you can follow links to ones such as to Douglas Murray?
But then all that would undermine your rant…so best ignore it and give us the benefit of your freethinking insights. We are grateful and enlightened…..though not as to any of your thoughts on the BBC’s bias and why they haven’t reported the story.
To quote Mrs Merton Zero….‘What first attracted you to the biased, dishonest, prejudiced, hypocritical and corrupt BBC…apart from the lucrative little pension tucked away in the Caymans?‘
Alan,
“Details such as evidence laid out for you to read should you be bothered…”
You said; “This was always a politically motivated police action, no doubt directed by the Home Office…”
If you actually had any evidence of that you might earn some credibility.
But you don’t.
Resorting to ‘conspiracy’; “There can be little doubt the BBC has been recruited to help out as well, a very willing recruit no doubt.” (again, with absolutely no evidence) clearly demonstrates you’ve got nothing and you know it.
Tommy Robinson, political prisoner,. Arrested by direct intervention from the Home Office. Biggest news story for a generation…
Quick, talk about Chicago instead!
I realise you’re trying you your best Alan, but really, it’s quite pathetic.
Nights again? And two likes already? Impressive stamina, and loyal support in the wee smalls.
To avoid BBC attention, clearly Mr. Robinson has gone down the route of BBC fave Reg Dwight and hubby, though in their case one suspects professional courtesies over super injunctions apply more on occasion.
But equally clearly, applause from Paul Hewson is called for, even if some die a little each time his thoughts are shared, especially on matters EU.
Meanwhile, a bit of news I was not aware of…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36047173
I had always though Room 101 was based elsewhere. Tell it often enough and I guess things can be whatever you say they are.
All in it together. Apparently.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36043220
Dream team like this, with the BBC reporting versus ‘analysing’ for once, who can resist?
Odd the BBC has mind, given Dave’s recent difficulties and the stellar political records of giants of modest public service statesmanship such as Mssrs Ashdown and Kinnock.
I of course continue to weigh my voting options impartially based on what the BBC serves me, though the single malts may nudge from one finger to a full tumbler to swallow the narrative on the plate.
Want to turn that spotlight on your buddies Shaker Aamer, Mozzam Begg, etc?
Zero, still refusing to actually read anything. Wilful ignorance and shouting loudly won’t get you far.
No evidence…except for the letter from the Home Office setting out their intentions in black and white to smash the EDL not only by trying to discredit their message but by an active police response.
As soon as Tommy Robinson set up the EDL the police began raiding his and his families homes…their latest effort is just another example of the harass, disrupt and contain policy adopted by the government.
As for the BBC, you just have to listen to their prolific and aggressive anti-EDL outpourings to judge their attitude….guided by government? You prove it isn’t…because there is a 100% chance that someone in a nice suit has been in touch with the BBC and other media to coordinate a response….not that the BBC really needs a quiet word to guide them.
I note you have nothing to say about BBC bias either on the topic of Robinson’s story nor on the BBC’s whipping up of anti-white feeling in America. Hard to refute but give it a go. At least try to win some credibility with a reasoned argument instead of the usual drive-by automatic gainsaying of anything anybody says about your paymaster.
I assume you must have done something wrong and are in the doghouse at the Beeb….paying penance by proving your loyalty and getting your hands ‘dirty’, forced to lower yourself to talk to people outside the Bubble. Bet you feel like a latte right now and Polly Toynbee giving you a rub down with the Guardian. Ah bliss.
Zero
The Police got it wrong this time, where is the BBC consistency? That is the thrust of this news item.
Zero by name zero by nature!
Zero, can you explain why you and the UAF crowd find it necessary to add ‘aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon’ every time you mention Tommy Robinson? Does it have a role in your argument? Or is it merely an SWP requirement?
UAF
uneducated and foul
Unwashed against freedom
Utter arsehole fuckwits
It’s the same game as they play with George Osborne, thinking that it is funny to keep calling him ‘Gideon’.
It is a fair indication of their puerile, twatter-flatulent existence.
Zero, it looks like you have fallen hook, line and sinker, for the media propaganda.
If you look at Tommy’s Oxford lecture you will see the videos complete and not the bbc type of edit.
You will then see that the charges were trumped up.
Where his friend was arrested by the police after being attacked by a Muslim who was (of course) not arrested.
These edits, like Donald Trump saying stop all Muslims coming to the USA which are then abruptly cut off to stop the rest of the sentence are typical of the biased media.
It fools simple people and it seems to have fooled you.
Tommy is a target for our rulers because he speaks the truth.
Hellfire and damnation Zero – if all that’s true I like our Tommy even more. He’s just like an understudy Che Guevara! (albeit proper working class). He’s fighting the system, stirring up a new Jacquerie can’t you see?
Join in the revolution, fight the good fight – and all your years of self loathing will magically be at an end. Foucault himself would surely smile benignly on your radical efforts.
Let us be realistic. How can the BBC report this? Even given the level of incompetence in their reporting staff they could hardly fail to mention that the judge threw out the charge against Tommy. So silence is the BBC’s best option.
That is how things were often done in the old USSR. Opponents became non persons. Literally they did not exist in the eyes of the state.
Here our state is not quite at that level yet but well on the way. The liberal marxist media is further along the road. Pushing at the state and quite determind to either silence or ignore those who do not accept it’s fantasies and fight against it’s urge to destroy and corrupt our country and culture.
So Tommy is free. The money to defend him came from all over the still free world. I hope whoever bought the charges notes this well. And also that the BBC- that world class news gatherer- also notes it well and reflects upon it.
No doubt in the next few days the BBC will make some reference to Tommy’s case and our trolls will point to it as some evidence that the BBC is really world class and impartial.
Yet again I quote or slightly misquote Solzhenitsyn. The lie comes into the world not always openly but indirectly and disguised as a portion of the truth . That is now how our liberal media operates and I despise it as should all men and women who value free speech and freedom.
Silence is golden.
At the BBC, like the showers.
Clearly, again, no time or space for editorial integrity to manifest.
Great comment. Reference to Solzhenitsyn is apt.
Tony Robinson has put himself and his family in grave danger from supposedly “British” Muslims, who would like nothing better then to behead him, to alert us to the deadly Islamic ideology, second only to Marxism in its lethality to human life. He has done this with no protection from the police. Quite the contrary.
Thank you Tony Robinson.
There are only Muslims so therefore it will always be “Muslims that live in Britain”. We are the infidels. The Kafir. We are destined for an eternity in hellfire. Muslims will never see us as equals
Islam does not differentiate between the non Muslim holding the banner stating “against islamphobia” and non Muslim Tommy Robinson. We are all heretics that need cleansing from the face of this earth.
Islam is a virus that will destroy everything around it. Do we fight like Tommy to prevent the seemingly inevitable future of death and horrific violence, or do we just ignore this destiny and be complicit in losing everything we care about in this world?
Tothepoint, This is exactly what the appeasers do not understand. They do not understand the nature of the beast. An Infidel is an Infidel unless he converts. For muslims, the appeasers are just useful idiots.
Islam does not differentiate between the non Muslim holding the banner stating “against islamphobia” and non Muslim Tommy Robinson. We are all heretics that need cleansing from the face of this earth.
I think Muslims have far greater respect for Tony Robinson, as he is a God fearing Catholic. What Muslims absolutely loathe are athiests, that is those who deny the existence of God altogether.
I completely and utterly agree. In Islam, to not believe in Allah means horrific death. Death is a merciful ending for none Muslims. A none Muslim will have to explain to Allah why they disowned him. To not believe in Allah means you are at war with Allah’s message. That you are Homosexual, Apostates, atheists…. In the eyes of Allah you are worse than vermin. Evil. Destined for an eternity in hellfire…..
But my point about not differentiating between ANY Muslim and none Muslim.. Just look at Shia and Sunni’s…
There is only one Islam. One Allah. One belief. One message. One path. One life. One Koran. One final prophet. If you do not utterly and completely conform to that…. Death, rape, genocide, cleansing, killing…
Marxism/communism are two totalitarian ideologies that are lethal not just to flesh and blood, but to the human spirit.
Bernard Lewis in his 1954 essay, “Communism and Islam” expounded upon the quintessence of totalitarian Islam, and how it was antithetical in nature to Western democracy, while sharing important features of Communist totalitarianism — in particular, global domination via jihad.
Quite obviously, the Ulama [religious leaders] of Islam are very different from the Communist Party. Nevertheless, on closer examination, we find certain uncomfortable resemblances. Both groups profess a totalitarian doctrine, with complete and final answers to all questions on heaven and earth; the answers are different in every respect, alike only in their finality and completeness, and in the contrast they offer with the eternal questioning of Western man. Both groups offer to their members and followers the agreeable sensation of belonging to a community of believers, who are always right, as against an outer world of unbelievers, who are always wrong. Both offer an exhilarating feeling of mission, of purpose, of being engaged in a collective adventure to accelerate the historically inevitable victory of the true faith over the infidel evil-doers. The traditional Islamic division of the world into the House of Islam and the House of War, two necessarily opposed groups, of which- the first has the collective obligation of perpetual struggle against the second, also has obvious parallels in the Communist view of world affairs. There again, the content of belief is utterly different, but the aggressive fanaticism of the believer is the same. The humorist who summed up the Communist creed as “There is no God and Karl Marx is his Prophet'” was laying his finger on a real affinity. The call to a Communist Jihad, a Holy War for the faith-a new faith, but against the self-same Western Christian enemy-might well strike a responsive note.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/ann_barnhardt_fights_totalitar.html#ixzz45upq7gxp
And Bernard Lewis was a top academic in this field . Many thanks for the quote.
Was just checked. I think he may still be alive age 99 !!
“The terrible toll of gun deaths in America has tormented the presidency of Barack Obama unable to even moderately curtail the absolute right of gun ownership so entrenched in America’s political DNA.”
Lazy journalism. Try owning a gun legally in Chicago, Washington DC, New York City or San Francisco if you believe American citizens enjoy an absolute right of gun ownership. In the USA, as here, the only people who enjoy unfettered access to guns are the criminals. In the USA, they are mostly black or hispanic.
Certainly enough to turn his hair grey.
Luckily he seems more sanguine on Russian jets trying to ratchet up the military tensions, with no apparent affect on his golf game.
Priorities, people.
Well it gives Obama something to do since he has avoided doing anything about the big problems of the world .
Obama has a very busy schedule, supporting golf all over the world. He can only do so much in the time remaining.
And I’m truly grateful for that.
I think it would be better to say that in most of the USA’s largest cities, as here, the only people who enjoy unfettered access to guns are the criminals.
For instance in Vermont, next to NY State, restrictions are surprisingly lax.
And their crime rate is?
Anything to do with the fact Vermont is somewhat lacking in diversity?
If I’m reading the comment correctly, I think you’ve spectacularly missed the point.
There are several reasons why legal firearm ownership is ‘discouraged’ in large cities, including:
– they tend to get their owners killed
– they tend to join the armoury of illegal firearms
Once they have passed into illegal possession, surprise surprise, they do not necessarily stay in one place. What is bought in Vermont does not necessarily stay in Vermont.
Some estimates put the number of firearms in circulation in the US as high as 300 million. Some are smuggled in but, with that sort of number, it’s probably easier to steal one.
“There are several reasons why legal firearm ownership is ‘discouraged’ in large cities, including:
– they tend to get their owners killed
– they tend to join the armoury of illegal firearms”
Those are mere assertions without any facts there Iain.
Legal firearm ownership is not “discouraged” in the cities I mentioned, it is next to legally impossible. In Washington DC and Chicago the Democrat establishment actually made it illegal to own a handgun in their cities, even as the crime rate rocketed. Although the Supreme Court has overturned those bans, the Democrat establishments are acting with typical bad grace to make legal gun ownership as difficult and expensive as possible. And yet hundreds of black youths are killed by other black youths every year. If these gun bans worked at all, they would have worked by now, don’t you think?
I was with the Greater Glasgow Police for 23 years, mainly Pollokshaws and Giffnock. We were involved in liaison with other forces in the UK from time to time and, on two or maybe three occasions, the US East Coast (NY x2 and one other I think) on crime involving firearms. The attitude of US police departments towards gun ownership was explained, and it’s not just about blacks, hispanics, street crime and gang feuds.
On one occasion, paraphrased, it was explained to us in a very memorable way like this. Given the chance, too many people obtain a gun legally, or bring one in, for self defence. The precise threat they face is usually unclear and they can be a pain in the ass. They visit a range a couple of times and, once they’ve become Bruce Willis, put it in a drawer. If maintained, it stinks out the drawer so usually ends up in a more secure place like the top of a wardrobe away from the kids. It collects dust and other stuff gets put on top of it but they still think they can get at it reasonably quickly, in the middle of the night, half asleep, and hit a shadow in a doorway. They can’t. Provided the thing actually works, and an unmaintained semi automatic pistol (bad choice) might not for reasons I won’t go into, they would probably hit the top of the doorframe. The shadow might be an intruder or, and this is important, might not. Then there are domestic disputes and suicides……
I’m sorry that I didn’t record the conversations as proof for your benefit and that my use of the word “discouraged” was not to your liking. Treat it anyway you wish.
Interesting, particularly the lazy assumption that it’s all about street and gang violence. In a case a few years ago, a teenager from Denmark/Sweden/Germany (can’t remember which) staying with friends was shot dead stealing cans of beer from a fridge in a neighbour’s garage. It wasn’t unusual amongst teenagers in that area at the time but violence was never involved. The owner of the house shot blindly into the dark with his shotgun. The disturbing thing is that it was dark and the clown admitted that he couldn’t even see what he was firing at. Could have been a small child.
I know Vermont a little, which I why I mentioned it. The total number of murders is certainly low, but then it has one of the lowest populations of any US State whereas New York state has one of the highest. Your comments are in accord with what I learned there.
Iain:
Thank you for your reply.
The fact that you were a British police officer will certainly have coloured your view with regards to armed self defence: you basically think it is a bad thing, and civilians cannot be allowed to do it. The American cops from big cities you talked to shared the same prejudices. They would rather that no-one had guns but them, and disparage any civilian who would challenge their assumptions (their snide “Bruce Willis” comments make perfect sense). None of this is any surprise to me, but thank you for taking the trouble to confirm it.
The fact, and it is a fact, which I wanted to make was that the statement in the news article that Americans enjoy an absolute right to own arms is clearly wrong. I have cited several major cities where this is not the case, and there cannot be any argument over that fact. But I thank you for confirming anecdotally that the NYC cops have the same attitide towards an armed citizenry that a British cop would have.
This does not surprise me, because before World War I the Home Office and NYC authorities were actually in liaison over imposing gun control, in both cases because of fear of armed immigrants, the Sidney Street Siege being the catalyst in this country. New York beat us to it, imposing gun control in 1911 (the Sullivan Act). Our authoritarians had to wait until 1920, when fear of Bolshevism led our establishment to endorse gun control (the Firearms Act 1920). It was sold in Parliament as a measure to disarm burglars, but the relevant Cabinet papers disprove that. It seems Tony Blair did not invent lying to Parliament, it has a long and dishonourable tradition.
I don’t think there’s much more that can be said on this. Just a couple of thoughts:
“…armed self defence: you basically think it is a bad thing, and civilians cannot be allowed to do it. The American cops from big cities you talked to shared the same prejudices.”
Even though I had some weapons training (nothing like the training that some officers receive now), I never wanted to ‘do it’ as a matter of routine either. Further, I don’t think it’s entirely fair to refer to the attitudes of the American cops as ‘prejudices’. Contrary to what many people seem to think and, I must admit, to my expectations before meeting them, they were not gung ho idiots (although I’m sure some exist). They were well aware that guns are, in many ways, just too convenient, harder to use effectively than the movies imply and, like a bright red Farrari, do something to the minds of testosterone fuelled young men. People reach for them as a precaution and end up using them. They’d seen it happen too often.
I also forgot to mention the drug angle. Like here, this problem is not confined to blacks and hispanics, or poor whites for that matter, but it makes a gun problem worse.
——
On a totally unrelated note, I am disgusted with the way that British policing is going. I’d never go back. The recent politically motivated persecution of Tommy Robinson, whether you agree with him or not, is unforgivable. What has happened to us?
Damn -“Ferrari”, not “Farrari”.
You can tell I don’t drive one.
Iain:
I quite agree with you with regard to Tommy, I am glad we are on the same wavelength there.
As regards armed self defence, you may be aware that this was abolished by the Home Office in 1968, when they sent a secret note to Chief Constables telling them that self defence should not be accepted as a good reason for granting a firearm certificate. There was no debate or public comment. The doctrine is probably unconstitutional but it has never been challenged in the courts as far as I know.
Your NYC colleagues have a similarly jaundiced view of civilians defending themselves, but since armed self defence is also effectively banned in NYC, it is hardly surprising that any citizen doing it is somewhat lacking in training. Nonetheless, you can look at any edition of the American Rifleman to see a page of press cuttings of citizens who have used a gun to defend themselves against criminals. It can and does happen.
You might be aware that armed self defence is not totally banned in the UK, as it still exists in Northern Ireland. I believe that about 9,000 citizens there are licenced to carry a pistol for self defence, and they do not seem to spend their time shooting petty criminals or their family members. But this only applies to NI. When Sir John Hermon retired to England, he was not allowed to be armed, even though he was a major IRA target, much to his dismay. The Home Office will not even allow a former RUC Chief Constable to be armed for his own protection. Think about that. What a narrow minded bunch of pencil pushing bastards.
If our politicians were so concerned about our safety from bombs, bullets, and rape of women, and in Britain, the rapes of vulnerable little girls by the tens of thousands, they wouldn’t have imported millions of Muslims into Britain.
And now we have a deluge of illegal Muslim immigrants, hell bent on breaking the borders by force. Shouldn’t we be armed to defend our home from people who are invading our border by force
Defence of the borders is the prime duty of any government. If it cannot do it, then it should say so. We can then do the job as it should be done.
Rob in Cheshire wrote: The fact that you were a British police officer will certainly have coloured your view with regards to armed self defence: you basically think it is a bad thing, and civilians cannot be allowed to do it.
The statement refers to armed self defence. But it is an extension on self defence as a whole. The British police do not like anyone to impinge on their monopoly on defence of any kind. Its a closed shop thing.
It is one of the reasons why men walk by, as Muslim men prey on non-Muslim women. Something that never happened a few decades back, before Muslims were allowed to come into Britain. It is why men didn’t do anything while their daughters were raped by the thousands by Pakistani Muslim men. They were waiting for the police to excercise their monopoly of defence/offence. Till Tony Robinson called attention to it. Then the police were all over …….Tony Robinson. No surprise.
So it is now. Any man interfering against the predation by Muslims , is very likely to be charged, while the main predators walk away. It is so bad that even writing anything on Twitter that “hurts” Muslims, will lead to a visit by the “force”, and a charge..
It can thus be argued, that as the police have reneged on their oath to defend the weak from predation by a foreign force, the monopoly of force of any kind should be removed from them, and handed to a citizen militia. This is the reason why Americans retain the right to arms. It is the last defence against a corrupt, ineffectual, or ruthless tyrannical government. So it is too in Switzerland.
I have to agree with you, I am afraid. I would not dare to get involved in a situation for fear of being arrested myself. As you say, the police see the use of force as a closed shop, and it is for them to do. Fair enough, but please do not expect the rest of us to help out if that is your attitude.
Thanks Rob for raising this very important issue. The fact remains that the police can only arrive in time to sketch the chalk lines on the pavement. In the final analysis, when push comes to shove, and make no mistake, it is coming., it is the decent citizen who will have to take up what ever comes to hand. That citizen who has never lifted a rifle, will be the one who saves society.
I don’t think Ian meant any contempt of “Bruce Willis” type citizenry. He should realise that when it comes to war, it is not the professional police officer or the soldier , who really makes the difference. It is the armed citizen. Why so? Well, I will leave that to the reader to guess. And its not numbers.
As I view the contemporary scene of the world, I’m full of foreboding. It reminds me of disaster movies, where birds and animals flee a region that is about to be hit by a catastrophic event. Except this time it will be a man made catastrophe.
God help us.
Sadly, I feel much the same way.
Perhaps Obama could instruct his security team to give up their guns ?
No? Thought not. Fucking Hypocrite.
If you have time, this is enlightening and very interesting, (very new as well – only broadcast today):
That is the first time that I have heard Mr Robinson given an opportunity to hold the floor so to speak without constantly being attacked ,and boy was he good. I can see why the establishment is so frightened of him. He presents the facts about the UK in powerful way which , if allowed air time in the UK, would surely awaken the Brits from their BBC induced sleep.
Well worth a watch charlatans, so thank you.
Don`t care if it`s a bit long, confused and diffuse at times…there is so much truth to be found here that it`s not an issue.
Thank God SOMEONE is promoting the books, running such forums to speak on and willing to give both Nonie and Tommy time enough to expand on the usual harried soundbites.
Delighted that the Canadian “West In Danger” managed to get the £12,000 needed to get a decent lawyer-hell of an industry this one, but Tommy is worth way more.
Hats off to our Canadian friends…hope we can repay them when we`re a bit better off.
The state’s failure to railroad Tommy is important that we can all agree. It is also now necessary that if we are trolled on this matter that no reponse at all is made however provocative the posting. Allow the troll freedom to write and speak but do not respond. Do not argue. That is what the cultural marxist media wants
The marxist media really fear a man like him and the loyalty he inspires around the still free world. He is not theirs and never will be. So it behoves us to remember this at all times.
Our ancestors understood without the necessity of words the concept of loyalty. To the nation and to those who always spoke up for us.
These trolls understand nothing of this and we need nothing from them at all.
Our ancestors understood without the necessity of words the concept of loyalty. To the nation and to those who always spoke up for us.
How true. Our present rulers owe their allegiance to a foreign power sitting in Brussels – something that Britain never accepted, and sacrificed blood to resist it. We have to get out of the EU. This is a life and death matter, not of flesh and blood, but of the spirit.
Expect the State to go for the Judge next ! He obviously need re-educating.
For a horrible moment I thought you meant, that the EU and Britain will appeal to the EU court to declare the referendum illegal, if we voted the wrong way. It wouldn’t take much for a kangaroo court to come up a with a reason that pleases its masters in Brussels.
I suspect if Plans A (Project Fear) or B (‘massaged’ postal voting) fail, they will resort to the old ‘temporal displacement’ trick – ballot boxes that pop into and out of the fifth dimension for a little ‘adjustment’.
Be Judge Constance Briscoe on “TV Trials-You the public get to pull the lever” if the liberal elite get to try again with their Nuremburg Night Rallies.
The problem comes when the trolls tell lies. If you don’t challenge them, it perpetuates the lie. So, whilst I broadly agree that trolls should be ignored, it’s not always possible to do so.
I agree Roland, trolls should be engaged with politely and always challenged on fact.
This approach can disorient them as they have been propagandised to demonise those who disagree with them and cannot compute when they find they are arguing with well informed, sensible and amusing people.
They invariably lose their rags first because they are used to operating in “safe spaces” where all agree that posters here are …..well we all know the boo words don’t we?
They enable us to hone our arguments and, sometimes, change minds.
Whilst I agree sensible engagement is probably the mature response. What irks me is their refusal to comment on the indefensible such as Cologne, Rotherham, murder of Asad Shah etc.
I have nothing but contempt for their hand wringing, fussing, smoke and mirrors approach to dealing with any controversial issue and therefore find that ridicule in a bizzare sort of way seems a more fitting (and certainly more satisfying) response to many of their more ridiculous rantings. It is noteworthy that the BBC takes exactly the same deceitful/disingenuous approach to controversial subjects that do not sit well with their narrative.
Unfortunately the left wing has been successfully honing the technique of outrage and offense for years and whilst I agree sensible adult debate would normally be the right response. However I believe that In many circumstances, taking a step back and highlighting their tone rather than their content puts their rantings into its true perspective.
You can spend all day arguing points of reference, and the subtle meanings of words. However if we go fully down this road we run the risk of looking like a bunch of LSE freshers smoking their first joint and putting the world to rights at the students union bar. Lampoon or cut to the chase – dont play them at their own sad little game because its their game and they have made the rules.
I had to ask Jerrod 3 times whether he condemned the Brussels atrocities. I was beginning to feel like Paxman !
I have also asked him a number of times about his views on the Asad Shah murder – unfortunately they only play by lefty rules. Ie ignore the main question. I am now leaning towards just ignoring them as you will never get any sort sort of straight answer only a projectile vomit of outrage, accusation and key facts psychobabble.
Oaknash, It really annoys them when you ask a question and they know the true answer but it goes against their rigid opinions. So, yes, they just ignore it and hope it goes away.
To add to my previous comment they have absolutely no loyalty to the society and culture that gave them the freedoms they take for granted.
It is far easier to rubbish the likes of Tommy Robinson as a racist than actually accept he is actually a brave man who has made some very serious points about some real evils in our society which the left in particular have colluded to try and sweep under the carpet. If he wasnt working class and had a degree in sociology they would probably listen to him a bit more.
They cannot see beyond their own bigotry and would far rather embrace a culture that would take away the freedoms that they enjoy so much than make honest comment on real issues. Hence I think sensible debate with most of them is a waste of time.
It’s interesting to see this discussion developing.
Perhaps on reflection I should have qualified my remark to read, WHERE POSSIBLE trolls should be engaged with politely and always challenged on points of fact.
I think it is useful to challenge opposing viewpoints because as I say, minds may be changed… not necessarily the trolls themselves but those who observe a discussion and never post may just see something that challenges their opinion and sets them off thinking…..or following a link.
I have certainly changed my views in the last 10-15 years, a result of experiences but also because I have seen different analyses of events that helped me to understand those experiences that the BBC, and the story tellers would have me believe are “unusual” or “atypical” or even “misunderstood” as they contradict the new establishments line.
I agree with much of what you have posted above Oaknash, especially the bit about “LSE freshers” but I take the view that if its good enough for the likes of Tommy to argue the point then it’s good enough for me. Peoples opinions can be changed by persistent challenges to the dominant left-liberal narrative, or in other words always challenge the purveyors of bulls faeces, their evasions and dishonesty are noticed more than they’d like to admit or even realise.
Who would have thought, in Blairs pomp, that in a few short years we’d be having a referendum on the EU, a renewed debate about immigration, a debate about islamisation, millions of votes going to UKIP?……..all the result of argument and refusal to accept the politicians consensus. Keep challenging!
Embolden – I do agree that we should challenge them/and ask them their opinion on “uncomfortable” subjects but I do think that what we should attempt to avoid is being drawn down a garden path lined with poisoned empty accusations, barbed comments and a confusing bindweed of semantics.
As we all know it has always been the lefties game to answer a difficult question with another slightly off the point question and the whole argument moves on and everyone else is either bored or confused (a BEEB speciality I think).
This “white noise factor” is I believe another minor yet still important factor as to why the left leaning media have got away with so much over the years with subjects such as Rotherham.
We address these issues by worry and hand wringing, we appoint focus groups, Committees, never mention the Islam word, generate report after report as to why many muslims do not wish to integrate into our country, dont respect women blah blah blah – yawn!!
Unfortunately many people have built careers on grievance management and being professionally offended – the ultimate creation of this being the likes of Phil Shiner. So there is more at stake than just reputations there are large amounts of dosh too.
You cannot deal with a problem if you cant effectively talk about it – PERIOD!
We have lost our way – the bottom line should always be if you do not want to be part of our society then “piss off” Its not difficult. Not ask how can we support you more not to be nasty to us!
Blunt questions should get blunt answers not an avalanche of bull.
I agree with you. Clear, free speech is something our adversaries detest.
This is why their use of jargon should always be turned on them.
They like to “control the discourse”, we must control it with objective truth.
They have twisted the laws on free expression which they call “hate speech”, we must reverse that process, by argument and challenge.
What they call “equality and diversity” is actually dominance and repression.
The good news is that the tide is turning, not least due to the efforts of the awkward squad who will never surrender the rights and responsibilities of freedom.
People are talking about the things that their aspiring controllers think they shouldn’t be. Good.
Never forget the look on Ceacescus face when he stood before the jeering crowd and it dawned on him that the game was up.
You always know when you are getting to them when they resort to personal abuse early in the discourse. Politeness towards them is difficult but necessary, in order to hold on to the moral high ground.
The EDL did something that was unacceptable to the authorities, and to imams – it brought to attention the rapes of tens of thousands of young Kuffar White girls by Pakistani men, thus revealing open treason. This was a very “divisive” thing the EDL did.
The under secretary of state – Broken Shires . How apt.
The Shires are indeed broken. The Orcs have taken over. We are still looking for Aragon. Is it Tony Robinson, or the ranger from distant lands – Trump.
In less then 30 years, Muslims will be a majority in once United Kingdom. What has happened to Christians, Buddhists, and Hindus, will happen in Europe. It may even be worse, as Europeans resisted for a thousand years, and thus do not deserve the normal courtesy of those who surrender immediately..
It may even be worse, as Europeans resisted for a thousand years, and thus do not deserve the normal courtesy of those who submitted immediately..
Have just sat and watched it, WOW ,,if there are any Americans on this site you need to push it out across the USA because he’s speaking the truth. We used to live north of Luton (Lutonistan) and used to drive around it to get to the B&Q , we would drive past Luton FC which is on the edge of the muslim area, when they were building the new tramway they had a diversion through it and I have to admit I was scared. I have never seen so many walking letterboxes and all of the shops had extra stalls down to the roadway,people had to walk in the roads like in the ME. After that we went the long way around via the M1 .
Mrs Kitty, good advice, I have posted it to numerous US groups. It is spreading and the only way to stop Cameron and May’s attempt to seriously harm Robinson and this country is to make it an international issue.
But here is a question that is nagging me. For years rebels, dissidents, whatever, have claimed persecution and there has always been MP’s in our Parliament to speak up for them, whether they are ISIS wannabees, IRA, or members of of extremist left groups. But no one in Parliament has raised a question about Robinson, or of the behaviour of the police and Home Office. Why?
Not only silence from the MPs but the media – don’t expect the BBC – have not put a question to the government. Why?
Both Robinson and the issues he raises will have to go international, such that when our esteemed politicians go to the US or Canada someone just might embarrass the treacherous and cowardly bastards.
I don’t know if you’ve read his book “Enemy of the State ” I recommend it , there is a part near the end where he and his family try to get the “Usual Suspects ” interested in his case, Amnesty International etc , they all agreed his case was disgraceful and his rights were being violated until they heard his name when they backed off. I thought at first he was being paranoid but follow the money……Saudi Arabia….still maybe I’m being paranoid now and will have to watch my back as I’ve bought and read his book.
Thank you. I will certainly buy and read it.
I really hope Trump gets to be POTUS. If that happens, there will be new a emperor in town, and all the EU and NATO courtiers will have to visit DC to pay homage. As we know that Trump is not exactly thrilled with what has happened to Brussels, I expect changes.
I also feel that the persecution of Tony R will cease.
My worry is that Trump is a pragmatist. The US provided the bulk of defence against the Warsaw Pact out of self-interest but also because they thought Europe was interested in defending itself and being free and democratic. If President Trump sees a Europe that is happy to descend into self-inflicted chaos why should he waste hard-earned US tax payers money bailing us out again. How do you sell that to a US voter?
If the UK votes to stay in Europe and the US decides to become isolationist, as it nearly did just before WW2, then we are well and truly finished.
I’m afraid your analysis is likely to be right. But let me have hope. As long as we don’t lose hope, we can win.
When Skakar Aamer was flown into the UK recently I wrote to my MP asking why the British Government brought back an individual who is not a British National (he is a a Saudi National) from Gauntanamo. I also asked if the Government had chartered this private jet for him. I questioned the legitimacy since Aamer had voluntarily moved to Afghanistan and therefore forfeited his right to refugee status.
James Brokenshire replied that it was not their policy to comment on the legal status of Aamer but admitted that the Government had chartered a private jet to fly him here.
This is a man detained by Allied forces and known to have assisted both the Taliban and AQ in Afghanistan (confirmed in evidence by Baig). He has also stated that he went to Afghanistan because he supports the Taliban way of life.
Ministers who behave like this are deliberately putting this country at risk.
“It is the primary right of men to die and kill for the land they live in, and to punish with exceptional severity all members of their own race who have warmed their hands at the invader’s hearth.
Winston Churchill