Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
⚠️For those who have not received Wednesday's email from Rebel Media⚠️
This is what Ezra Levant, had to say....
He said Tommy's trial has been confirmed for Tuesday, October 23rd, at the Old Bailey criminal court. It had been tentative, but now the judge says that will indeed be the full hearing.
But what’s new is this: the judge has said that he will personally lead the case — not the Attorney General, as is usually done. The judge rejected that. He will likely cross-examine Tommy directly. And he could issue his decision in the matter as soon as that afternoon.
I’m worried about that. Normally two opposing barristers argue, and the judge decides.
Here, the judge himself could enter the fray.
I’m worried that this trial is at the Old Bailey. That’s the high-security court for the most serious criminal matters in the UK. And the judge who is presiding is the most senior judge of the court, Nicholas Hilliard, QC.
I find it odd that they have put a criminal judge, who normally hears cases of murder and terrorism, in charge of a minor civil contempt hearing. It’s unusual. Contempt of court isn’t even a crime.
But then again, a lot of unusual things are done to Tommy Robinson by the state.
It’s unusual for a journalist to be sentenced to jail time at all for contempt of court. It’s usually a small fine.
It’s unusual for a civil prisoner to spend 10 weeks in solitary confinement. That’s against prison regulations.
It’s unusual to have a second, re-hearing of a contempt case — especially after hard time was served.
I hope the judge does the right thing. But this entire matter has been irregular and improper since the beginning — that’s not my opinion, that’s the scorching ruling by the Court of Appeal.
Twelve minutes of crucial viewing from Tommy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMQWwL21bfc
.
This is what Ezra Levant, had to say....
He said Tommy's trial has been confirmed for Tuesday, October 23rd, at the Old Bailey criminal court. It had been tentative, but now the judge says that will indeed be the full hearing.
But what’s new is this: the judge has said that he will personally lead the case — not the Attorney General, as is usually done. The judge rejected that. He will likely cross-examine Tommy directly. And he could issue his decision in the matter as soon as that afternoon.
I’m worried about that. Normally two opposing barristers argue, and the judge decides.
Here, the judge himself could enter the fray.
I’m worried that this trial is at the Old Bailey. That’s the high-security court for the most serious criminal matters in the UK. And the judge who is presiding is the most senior judge of the court, Nicholas Hilliard, QC.
I find it odd that they have put a criminal judge, who normally hears cases of murder and terrorism, in charge of a minor civil contempt hearing. It’s unusual. Contempt of court isn’t even a crime.
But then again, a lot of unusual things are done to Tommy Robinson by the state.
It’s unusual for a journalist to be sentenced to jail time at all for contempt of court. It’s usually a small fine.
It’s unusual for a civil prisoner to spend 10 weeks in solitary confinement. That’s against prison regulations.
It’s unusual to have a second, re-hearing of a contempt case — especially after hard time was served.
I hope the judge does the right thing. But this entire matter has been irregular and improper since the beginning — that’s not my opinion, that’s the scorching ruling by the Court of Appeal.
Twelve minutes of crucial viewing from Tommy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMQWwL21bfc
.
Show More
I welcome those with differing views , it is essential for reasoned intelligent debate on varying issues . I was unaware that your views differed to mine regarding this subject 
⚠️For those who missed Tommy Robinson on Radio Four just now⚠️
I turned the radio on @ 16:43 and I heard the great man's name mentioned
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0000v9j
I'll listen back to hear what was said
I turned the radio on @ 16:43 and I heard the great man's name mentioned
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0000v9j
I'll listen back to hear what was said
My view is that Mr Robinsons incarceration was unjust and almost certainly politically motivated - You disagree ? 
Mr Robinson , along with a number of others , is concerned that there is a disproportionate threat to vulnerable young girls posed by pakistani muslim men . You are not ?
If you condone such actions and activities then you really need to have a serious look at the evidence .
Mr Robinson , along with a number of others , is concerned that there is a disproportionate threat to vulnerable young girls posed by pakistani muslim men . You are not ?
If you condone such actions and activities then you really need to have a serious look at the evidence .
classic 'OH LOOK OVER THERE' statements from 'progressives' to divert attention away from the main issue and severe problem that exists in the community
When someone pops up to raise awareness of crimes committed and covered up on young girls they decide to attack the TR over something unrelated to make out that he cannot be trusted, the left are just a sick group who need help.
My view is that Mr Robinsons incarceration was unjust and almost certainly politically motivated - You disagree ?
I disagree it was both to be honest. Sentences are always open to interpretation but to call it unjust is wrong imo. Politically motivated also no. He was prejudicing a very important case. If he hadn't been stopped those men could have called a mistrial and the victims would have had to give testimony again.
Mr Robinson , along with a number of others , is concerned that there is a disproportionate threat to vulnerable young girls posed by pakistani muslim men . You are not ?
I've yet to see evidence of anything except him solely focusing on muslims and asians and turning a blind eye to everyone else. When he starts turning up outside court to highlight white, British paedophiles then, maybe, I'd start taking him more seriously. I'd take this "concern" more seriously if it wasn't such an obvious deliberate career path. He's a young man with a criminal record. However, he's persuasive and organised and knows a lot of thick, easily influenced people. He's smart enough to monetise that and be able to afford flash homes and nice holidays. Got to give him credit for that to be fair.
If you condone such actions and activities then you really need to have a serious look at the evidence .
If you think any of that acts as someone condoning child rape then you're beyond help. Maybe if I did something likely to cause a mistrial you could accuse me of that like.
I disagree it was both to be honest. Sentences are always open to interpretation but to call it unjust is wrong imo. Politically motivated also no. He was prejudicing a very important case. If he hadn't been stopped those men could have called a mistrial and the victims would have had to give testimony again.
Mr Robinson , along with a number of others , is concerned that there is a disproportionate threat to vulnerable young girls posed by pakistani muslim men . You are not ?
I've yet to see evidence of anything except him solely focusing on muslims and asians and turning a blind eye to everyone else. When he starts turning up outside court to highlight white, British paedophiles then, maybe, I'd start taking him more seriously. I'd take this "concern" more seriously if it wasn't such an obvious deliberate career path. He's a young man with a criminal record. However, he's persuasive and organised and knows a lot of thick, easily influenced people. He's smart enough to monetise that and be able to afford flash homes and nice holidays. Got to give him credit for that to be fair.
If you condone such actions and activities then you really need to have a serious look at the evidence .
If you think any of that acts as someone condoning child rape then you're beyond help. Maybe if I did something likely to cause a mistrial you could accuse me of that like.
It is not just robinson - it is almost anyone who mentions the heavy muslim connection - like certain labour mps who were attacked and/or demoted by their own party.
4 million votes are more important.
4 million votes are more important.
You haven't read the Judge's statement have you PP?
There was NO chance of a mistrial according to the judge. TR's facebook stream could IN NO WAY influence the jury. His inacarciration was illegal.
As for not highlighting white gangs raping Pakistani girls for the last 20 years, TR hasn't done this because it's not hapening.
The Filth in Rotherham arrested an 11 year old girl for being drunk and disorderly in a house where she was being raped. The men were not charged.
The Filth in Rotherham said a 12 year old girl who was raped by 5 men was said she had sex consensually.
- Jay Report.
There was NO chance of a mistrial according to the judge. TR's facebook stream could IN NO WAY influence the jury. His inacarciration was illegal.
As for not highlighting white gangs raping Pakistani girls for the last 20 years, TR hasn't done this because it's not hapening.
The Filth in Rotherham arrested an 11 year old girl for being drunk and disorderly in a house where she was being raped. The men were not charged.
The Filth in Rotherham said a 12 year old girl who was raped by 5 men was said she had sex consensually.
- Jay Report.
I've yet to see evidence of anything except him solely focusing on muslims and asians and turning a blind eye to everyone else. When he starts turning up outside court to highlight white, British paedophiles then, maybe, I'd start taking him more seriously. I'd take this "concern" more seriously if it wasn't such an obvious deliberate career path. He's a young man with a criminal record. However, he's persuasive and organised and knows a lot of thick, easily influenced people. He's smart enough to monetise that and be able to afford flash homes and nice holidays. Got to give him credit for that to be fair.
He has stated on numerous occasions that he holds the Catholic Church in contempt for the abuse cases within . But these cases are covered in the main by the media . He focuses on highlighting the cases that the media are unwilling to cover .
He was prejudicing a very important case. If he hadn't been stopped those men could have called a mistrial and the victims would have had to give testimony again.
If you had paid the slightest bit of attention to Tuesdays proceedings at the Old Bailey you'd be fully aware by now that his actions DID NOT prejudice this trial and that he acted within the law at all times .
If you prefer to concentrate on Mr Robinsons previous convictions , even exaggerating the seriousness of the charges laid against him , rather than the issues of child rape in many UK towns and cities then you make it clear where your priorities lie .
He has stated on numerous occasions that he holds the Catholic Church in contempt for the abuse cases within . But these cases are covered in the main by the media . He focuses on highlighting the cases that the media are unwilling to cover .
He was prejudicing a very important case. If he hadn't been stopped those men could have called a mistrial and the victims would have had to give testimony again.
If you had paid the slightest bit of attention to Tuesdays proceedings at the Old Bailey you'd be fully aware by now that his actions DID NOT prejudice this trial and that he acted within the law at all times .
If you prefer to concentrate on Mr Robinsons previous convictions , even exaggerating the seriousness of the charges laid against him , rather than the issues of child rape in many UK towns and cities then you make it clear where your priorities lie .
Again with the "stop talking about millionaire Yaxley Lennon and focus on the work that I'm paying my subscription for instead please" argument.
He's a public figure and so is worthy of scrutiny. In my opinion he's a modern day snake oil salesmen or TV evangelist. You parroting everything that all his fans say whenever we bring up his crimes or rationale merely confirms you are a paid up member. Way too far down the rabbit hole I reckon. Keep sending your money. Maybe he'll name his yacht after you.
He's a public figure and so is worthy of scrutiny. In my opinion he's a modern day snake oil salesmen or TV evangelist. You parroting everything that all his fans say whenever we bring up his crimes or rationale merely confirms you are a paid up member. Way too far down the rabbit hole I reckon. Keep sending your money. Maybe he'll name his yacht after you.
PorcupineorPineapple • October 26, 2018 5:18 PM BST
Again with the "stop talking about millionaire Yaxley Lennon and focus on the work that I'm paying my subscription for instead please" argument.
He's a public figure and so is worthy of scrutiny. In my opinion he's a modern day snake oil salesmen or TV evangelist. You parroting everything that all his fans say whenever we bring up his crimes or rationale merely confirms you are a paid up member. Way too far down the rabbit hole I reckon. Keep sending your money. Maybe he'll name his yacht after you.
Can you try and keep it simple rather than injecting unsubstantiated nonsense into your argument . It only serves to cloud the issue (intentionally?) .
Are you confusing Mr Robinson with the BBC ? I was unaware of any subscription fee , I pay nothing to Mr Robinson or the BBC for that matter . I do not send him money and finally , where is your evidence of this 'yacht' that you speak of ?
Again with the "stop talking about millionaire Yaxley Lennon and focus on the work that I'm paying my subscription for instead please" argument.
He's a public figure and so is worthy of scrutiny. In my opinion he's a modern day snake oil salesmen or TV evangelist. You parroting everything that all his fans say whenever we bring up his crimes or rationale merely confirms you are a paid up member. Way too far down the rabbit hole I reckon. Keep sending your money. Maybe he'll name his yacht after you.
Can you try and keep it simple rather than injecting unsubstantiated nonsense into your argument . It only serves to cloud the issue (intentionally?) .
Are you confusing Mr Robinson with the BBC ? I was unaware of any subscription fee , I pay nothing to Mr Robinson or the BBC for that matter . I do not send him money and finally , where is your evidence of this 'yacht' that you speak of ?
How about addressing your earlier remark claiming that "He was prejudicing a very important case" ? That statement has been proven not to be correct . Just throw out unsubstantiated allegations and labels and when proved wrong , throw out more . It really is very difficult having a discussion with someone who blindly refuses to stick to the facts .
And continuing to refer to those who follow or support Tommy Robinson as "fans" is clearly an attempt to trivialise those who share many of his views and concerns . It's really quite unpleasant to try and demean a large number of like-minded individuals . It's really rather childish .
yaxley lennon appealed against two counts, the first one in which
he was given a suspended sentence saw his appeal thrown out
he faces a retrial on second count
it may well be decided he has served enough time ...
he was given a suspended sentence saw his appeal thrown out
he faces a retrial on second count
it may well be decided he has served enough time ...
Well the reason he was sent to prison was for that so unsubstantiated allegations is simply false. A different judge disagrees and now it's going to the AG.
Sorry if a bit of hyperbole throws you so much. The yacht reference I first used yesterday or maybe the day before. It is simply a means of illustrating the spending of those who newly find themselves very wealthy. Could have been a second home, a posh Jag, a jet plane. I mean if you've got documented evidence he gets sea sick so the yacht reference is way off beam then I wholeheartedly apologise.
btw - thanks for the tip on randomly putting words in bold. Given it a go myself. Hope you like it.
Sorry if a bit of hyperbole throws you so much. The yacht reference I first used yesterday or maybe the day before. It is simply a means of illustrating the spending of those who newly find themselves very wealthy. Could have been a second home, a posh Jag, a jet plane. I mean if you've got documented evidence he gets sea sick so the yacht reference is way off beam then I wholeheartedly apologise.
btw - thanks for the tip on randomly putting words in bold. Given it a go myself. Hope you like it.
I simply highlighted your earlier mistruths and unsubstantiated lablels in bold .
I'll happily respond when you actually post something with sufficient structure so as to constitute an intelligent argument . For now I'll just watch you waffle and duck the relevant issue .
Warning : I am easily bored when faced with childish rubbish
I'll happily respond when you actually post something with sufficient structure so as to constitute an intelligent argument . For now I'll just watch you waffle and duck the relevant issue .
Warning : I am easily bored when faced with childish rubbish
I thought weatherspoons were a good group.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcktvWFxtzQ
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcktvWFxtzQ
osmond and porky are classic distractors - why they defend the perps in this and the rest of the horrific organised gangs is beyond me.
but then this is how 'progressives' operate
they do not want you to look at the issue of gang related exploitation of young girls by specific groups
these groups must be so grateful for people like those two who try to muddy the issue
but then this is how 'progressives' operate
they do not want you to look at the issue of gang related exploitation of young girls by specific groups
these groups must be so grateful for people like those two who try to muddy the issue
clearly by slinging mud at robinson they do not support the exposure of these groups and their methods
they certainly are not on the side thousands of young girls who have been harmed by these gangs
they certainly are not on the side thousands of young girls who have been harmed by these gangs
Moysey, show me one example of me defending the perps. Go on, just one. Promise I won't report the slander if you do.
Listen to the wrong people and you would be led to believe that Tommy Robinson is a free speech warrior and a political prisoner, who’s only crime is exposing establishment lies.
The truth, however, is completely different. Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, has committed multiple offences with absolutely none of them having anything to with being a free speech martyr.
Assault
In 2005, Robinson was jailed for 12 months for assault occasioning actual bodily harm, for which he was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment, and assault with intent to resist arrest, for which he received a concurrent term of three months.
Assaulting a police officer
In 2010, Robinson was charged with assaulting a police officer during clashes at a poppy burning protest. After the fighting, a police officer was taken to hospital after trying to intervene in a 50 man brawl.
Rooftop protest
In 2011, Robinson and EDL co-founder Kevin Carroll flew to Zurich to protest on the roof of a FIFA building that England were not allowed to wear poppies on their kit because of FIFA’s political symbol ban. They were fined £3,000 for their troubles.
Assault at his own rally
In 2011, Robinson was convicted of assault for an attack at an EDL march in Blackburn. After he was goaded for being a government and police informant Robinson launched into a verbal tirade against those protesting against him. Robinson then proceeded to headbutt one of the march goers.
Luton football riot
In July 2011, Robinson was found guilty of leading a brawl that included 100 Luton Town football fans into a fight with Newport County fans. Fans were heard chanting ‘EDL till I die.’ For the crime committed, he was given a suspended 12-month prison sentence and banned from Luton football matches for 3 years.
Using someone else’s passport
In January 2013 Robinson was jailed for 10 months for travelling to the USA on his friend’s passport. Robinson admitted the charge of possession of a false identity document with improper intention. The passport Robinson used was under the name of Andrew McMaster. He checked himself in on the way out from Heathrow airport however when he arrived in the USA customs officials took his fingerprints and realised he was using a passport that was not his own.
Mortgage fraud
In 2014, Tommy Robinson was sentenced to prison for 18 months for committing mortgage fraud with the crime dating back to 2009. After pleading guilty in November 2013 to committing £160,000 worth of mortgage fraud Robinson was sentenced at St Albans Crown Court.
Whilst passing the sentence, the judge told Robinson: ‘This was an operation which was fraudulent from the outset and involved a significant amount of forward planning.’
“I am satisfied you took part in a thoroughly dishonest course of conduct,’ he told him.
Contempt of court 1
In 2017, Robinson was given a 3 month suspended sentence after he admitted a contempt of court charge for attempting to photograph juvenile defendant in a court case whilst having no right to do so. Court security had told Robinson not to film in and around the court as it would lead to his arrest. The 3 month suspended sentence could be activated within 18 months.
Contempt of court 2
Finally, earlier this year, the crucial case that led to Robinson being jailed and sparked the ridiculous Free Tommy protests. Robinson is currently serving a 13-month sentence for contempt of court. Robinson was arrested after Facebook live streaming outside Leeds Crown Court for an hour despite their being reporting restrictions on the case. Because he had a suspended sentence for the same crime the judge sentenced Robinson to 13 months in prison. Robinson pled guilty.
The truth, however, is completely different. Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, has committed multiple offences with absolutely none of them having anything to with being a free speech martyr.
Assault
In 2005, Robinson was jailed for 12 months for assault occasioning actual bodily harm, for which he was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment, and assault with intent to resist arrest, for which he received a concurrent term of three months.
Assaulting a police officer
In 2010, Robinson was charged with assaulting a police officer during clashes at a poppy burning protest. After the fighting, a police officer was taken to hospital after trying to intervene in a 50 man brawl.
Rooftop protest
In 2011, Robinson and EDL co-founder Kevin Carroll flew to Zurich to protest on the roof of a FIFA building that England were not allowed to wear poppies on their kit because of FIFA’s political symbol ban. They were fined £3,000 for their troubles.
Assault at his own rally
In 2011, Robinson was convicted of assault for an attack at an EDL march in Blackburn. After he was goaded for being a government and police informant Robinson launched into a verbal tirade against those protesting against him. Robinson then proceeded to headbutt one of the march goers.
Luton football riot
In July 2011, Robinson was found guilty of leading a brawl that included 100 Luton Town football fans into a fight with Newport County fans. Fans were heard chanting ‘EDL till I die.’ For the crime committed, he was given a suspended 12-month prison sentence and banned from Luton football matches for 3 years.
Using someone else’s passport
In January 2013 Robinson was jailed for 10 months for travelling to the USA on his friend’s passport. Robinson admitted the charge of possession of a false identity document with improper intention. The passport Robinson used was under the name of Andrew McMaster. He checked himself in on the way out from Heathrow airport however when he arrived in the USA customs officials took his fingerprints and realised he was using a passport that was not his own.
Mortgage fraud
In 2014, Tommy Robinson was sentenced to prison for 18 months for committing mortgage fraud with the crime dating back to 2009. After pleading guilty in November 2013 to committing £160,000 worth of mortgage fraud Robinson was sentenced at St Albans Crown Court.
Whilst passing the sentence, the judge told Robinson: ‘This was an operation which was fraudulent from the outset and involved a significant amount of forward planning.’
“I am satisfied you took part in a thoroughly dishonest course of conduct,’ he told him.
Contempt of court 1
In 2017, Robinson was given a 3 month suspended sentence after he admitted a contempt of court charge for attempting to photograph juvenile defendant in a court case whilst having no right to do so. Court security had told Robinson not to film in and around the court as it would lead to his arrest. The 3 month suspended sentence could be activated within 18 months.
Contempt of court 2
Finally, earlier this year, the crucial case that led to Robinson being jailed and sparked the ridiculous Free Tommy protests. Robinson is currently serving a 13-month sentence for contempt of court. Robinson was arrested after Facebook live streaming outside Leeds Crown Court for an hour despite their being reporting restrictions on the case. Because he had a suspended sentence for the same crime the judge sentenced Robinson to 13 months in prison. Robinson pled guilty.
I find it funny that the left are obsessed with a criminal history, dont you feel a little pathetic when you post your crap ?
Are the left saying anyone with a criminal record is not worthy of anything ?
The left know TR has a point but the left are sticking to their scripted posts.
Are the left saying anyone with a criminal record is not worthy of anything ?
The left know TR has a point but the left are sticking to their scripted posts.
the point is that given he has proven how dishonest he's been in the past and willingness to break the law, why should we believe a word he says now especially as this is basically his career isn't it, he sells books and it was a bestseller, is paid to be interviewed by broadcasters, was paid by rebel media, he was paid/sent tens of thousands in bitcoin payments since he was recently sent to prison, receieved 10's of thousands more via crowdfunding and has donation option on his own website.
Being Anti Muslim is a nice money earner for him, and he's riding this train for as long as it lasts.
Being Anti Muslim is a nice money earner for him, and he's riding this train for as long as it lasts.
Hello from Scotland.
There are plenty of proper people up here.
ALWAYS
There are plenty of proper people up here.
ALWAYS
they are only interested in slagging robinson off to take away the attention from what he is saying about white girls being groomed by muslim gangs
by doing this those who do that are actually siding with these groups by trying to cloud the issues
you will not see them coming out and condemning these organised groups and asking why it appears just one cultural group seem to be mainly responsible
the other active one is the albanian importers - very interesting there too
but essentially porky osmond and scandanavian are doing this
by not coming out and declaring the repugnance and supporting those who have been exposing - but spending time denegrating those who do the exposing, examining, investigating, they are in fact supporting groups who are exploiting these white girls
just like the senior copper in telford who tried to play down 40 years of it (not all muslim there by the way)
it is too dirty a subject for the elite and their supporters to touch
it is too dirty a subject for the tv news/investigations to examine
we cannot have the personalised news media programmes like the kay burley show etc etc getting into it
far too nasty and messy - lets do the royal family continually instead
by doing this those who do that are actually siding with these groups by trying to cloud the issues
you will not see them coming out and condemning these organised groups and asking why it appears just one cultural group seem to be mainly responsible
the other active one is the albanian importers - very interesting there too
but essentially porky osmond and scandanavian are doing this
by not coming out and declaring the repugnance and supporting those who have been exposing - but spending time denegrating those who do the exposing, examining, investigating, they are in fact supporting groups who are exploiting these white girls
just like the senior copper in telford who tried to play down 40 years of it (not all muslim there by the way)
it is too dirty a subject for the elite and their supporters to touch
it is too dirty a subject for the tv news/investigations to examine
we cannot have the personalised news media programmes like the kay burley show etc etc getting into it
far too nasty and messy - lets do the royal family continually instead
just a silly post tbh, anyone caught doing the things the asian gang have done should be lifers, I've said that before because it's the worst of the worst crime, but to think TR is doing this out of the goodness of his heart with no interest in using his supporters like you as cash cows is far fetched to say the least.
scandanavian_haven • October 26, 2018 11:08 PM BST
was paid by rebel media
He worked as a journalist for Rebel Media , for which he was paid .
I cannot for the life of me understand why being paid to work should be used as a stick with which to beat someone
Why you include this as evidence of his dishonesty is totally baffling . Are you suggesting that being paid for work undertaken is a measure of ones dishonesty ? Oh , and he wrote a bestselling book . WOW !
What it is , in fact , is an example as to the lengths that his detractors go to in an attempt to dismiss him and his views .
You actually make Sky News and the BBC look like balanced , unbiased broadcasters . Quite a feat
( I can't believe I even wasted time responding to such garbage )
was paid by rebel media
He worked as a journalist for Rebel Media , for which he was paid .
I cannot for the life of me understand why being paid to work should be used as a stick with which to beat someone
Why you include this as evidence of his dishonesty is totally baffling . Are you suggesting that being paid for work undertaken is a measure of ones dishonesty ? Oh , and he wrote a bestselling book . WOW !
What it is , in fact , is an example as to the lengths that his detractors go to in an attempt to dismiss him and his views .
You actually make Sky News and the BBC look like balanced , unbiased broadcasters . Quite a feat
( I can't believe I even wasted time responding to such garbage )
what are you even talking about, I was highlighting the number of differnt ways he is paid to be anti muslim, given that I was saying he's making a career out of being anti muslim, then listed all the different ways he's paid to promote anti muslim rhetoric, rebel media being one, shouldn't come as a shock that was relevant. He was not journalist for them covering the motorway accidents or the weather.
speaking about imbalance, you're not even on the same page, taking one thing out of context and presenting it as another.
All those different streams of income are all based around being anti muslim, he is using the topic to make himself wealthy, it's simple enough stuff to follow.
All those different streams of income are all based around being anti muslim, he is using the topic to make himself wealthy, it's simple enough stuff to follow.
the lunatics have taken over the asylum,but some of us have escaped the asylum before it was taken over
let battle commence world war 3 would be nice
oops has it already begun and we dont realise we are in one
lets look at the facts
in world war 2 estimates are about 20 million dead
since end of that and only counting armed conflicts around the world be that civil war or national wars
is already past that
let battle commence world war 3 would be nice
oops has it already begun and we dont realise we are in one
lets look at the facts
in world war 2 estimates are about 20 million dead
since end of that and only counting armed conflicts around the world be that civil war or national wars
is already past that
"The War to End all Wars" , a famous quote but I'm not sure whose words they were .
PorcupineorPineapple
26 Oct 18 17:03
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,229 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
My view is that Mr Robinsons incarceration was unjust and almost certainly politically motivated - You disagree ?
I disagree it was both to be honest. Sentences are always open to interpretation but to call it unjust is wrong imo. Politically motivated also no. He was prejudicing a very important case. If he hadn't been stopped those men could have called a mistrial and the victims would have had to give testimony again.
Mr Robinson , along with a number of others , is concerned that there is a disproportionate threat to vulnerable young girls posed by pakistani muslim men . You are not ?
I've yet to see evidence of anything except him solely focusing on muslims and asians and turning a blind eye to everyone else. When he starts turning up outside court to highlight white, British paedophiles then, maybe, I'd start taking him more seriously. I'd take this "concern" more seriously if it wasn't such an obvious deliberate career path.
^
Do you find it unacceptable for anyone/group to be a primarily a single issue activist?
e.g.
Do you condemn Shelter UK for mainly speaking about housing?
Do you condemn Femi Oluwole and Gina Miller for mainly speaking about Brexit?
Do you condemn Stonewall for mainly speaking about trans rights?
Do you condemn Breast Cancer awareness campaign for mainly speaking about breast cancer awareness?
Do you condemn the fast food rights campaign for mainly speaking about fast food workers rights?
26 Oct 18 17:03
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,229 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
My view is that Mr Robinsons incarceration was unjust and almost certainly politically motivated - You disagree ?
I disagree it was both to be honest. Sentences are always open to interpretation but to call it unjust is wrong imo. Politically motivated also no. He was prejudicing a very important case. If he hadn't been stopped those men could have called a mistrial and the victims would have had to give testimony again.
Mr Robinson , along with a number of others , is concerned that there is a disproportionate threat to vulnerable young girls posed by pakistani muslim men . You are not ?
I've yet to see evidence of anything except him solely focusing on muslims and asians and turning a blind eye to everyone else. When he starts turning up outside court to highlight white, British paedophiles then, maybe, I'd start taking him more seriously. I'd take this "concern" more seriously if it wasn't such an obvious deliberate career path.
^
Do you find it unacceptable for anyone/group to be a primarily a single issue activist?
e.g.
Do you condemn Shelter UK for mainly speaking about housing?
Do you condemn Femi Oluwole and Gina Miller for mainly speaking about Brexit?
Do you condemn Stonewall for mainly speaking about trans rights?
Do you condemn Breast Cancer awareness campaign for mainly speaking about breast cancer awareness?
Do you condemn the fast food rights campaign for mainly speaking about fast food workers rights?
Don't be so pathetic.
If Shelter were only worried about white British people being homeless then I'd condemn them.
If Gina Miller was only concerned about how Brexit affected white British people then I'd condemn her.
If Stonewall weren't bothered about Muslim, Jewish or other trans people then I'd condemn them.
etc et bloody cetera
Hope that's clear enough.
If Shelter were only worried about white British people being homeless then I'd condemn them.
If Gina Miller was only concerned about how Brexit affected white British people then I'd condemn her.
If Stonewall weren't bothered about Muslim, Jewish or other trans people then I'd condemn them.
etc et bloody cetera
Hope that's clear enough.
Gina Millar is only concerned with overturning the democratic vote of the majority of the people to get her way
That’s her single issue , do you think that’s right ?
That’s her single issue , do you think that’s right ?
Hope that's clear enough.
Yes , perfectly . Thanks for the clarification
Yes , perfectly . Thanks for the clarification
We could look at the others as well if you wish pineapple
I think it's neither right nor wrong. I think that's your biased interpretation of it. That's all.
You see I think you’ve got a biased and wrong interpretation of TR , and I think you are even more wrong in the case of Gina millar
How about that ?
How about that ?
lfc - I think if I took a blind tactic of simply opposing everything you said or believed I'd probably do ok. So you disagreeing with me here is something I'm very comfortable with.
lfc - I think if I took a blind tactic of simply opposing everything you said or believed I'd probably do ok. So you disagreeing with me here is something I'm very comfortable with.
no answer I notice , do you know I’m starting to think you’re not very clever pineapple
I'm more than happy for you to think that.
PP if I took a blind tactic of simply opposing everything you said or believed I'd probably do ok
lfc I’m starting to think you’re not very clever pineapple
PP I'm more than happy for you to think that.
lfc I’m starting to think you’re not very clever pineapple
PP I'm more than happy for you to think that.
its ok you don't have to answer, I think we both know the answer 
no answer I notice , do you know I’m starting to think you’re not very clever pineapple
tick tock
tick tock
sometimes the question is more important than the answer, more enlightening
more beautiful
more beautiful
Apologies. My fans seem to be waiting. Is there a question addressed to me I have missed?
No, I'm being serious. What was the question? I'm here to please.
Why are people so openly scared of Robinson? Many millions of people in this country dislike Islam and it's followers and they will not change their minds if he is removed. Problems are coming with or without him, are we just hoping to delay them?
I believe a manager from Wetherspoons dealt with the issue very quickly, apologising for the mistake. It was certainly a shocking incident though. Blind veteran refused service?!
There's no point arguing anymore. Of course Tommy's done some stuff but bigger picture always takes precedent, especially when it's as serious as this.
Lord Pearson, Douglas Murray, Maajid Nawaz and the Dalia Lama have all been far more outspoken than Tommy but TR draws a crowd. And the potential to stir millions of white working class people gives the elite sleepless nights.
Just to quote the Dalai Lama again and ask if any poster would call him extreme right wing, xenophobic etc etc......' Europe is for Europeans'. He calls for repatriation of refugees/migrants so they can rebuild their nations.
Neither Batten, nor Robinson, nor Levant nor Farage have said anything like that....
There's no point arguing anymore. Of course Tommy's done some stuff but bigger picture always takes precedent, especially when it's as serious as this.
Lord Pearson, Douglas Murray, Maajid Nawaz and the Dalia Lama have all been far more outspoken than Tommy but TR draws a crowd. And the potential to stir millions of white working class people gives the elite sleepless nights.
Just to quote the Dalai Lama again and ask if any poster would call him extreme right wing, xenophobic etc etc......' Europe is for Europeans'. He calls for repatriation of refugees/migrants so they can rebuild their nations.
Neither Batten, nor Robinson, nor Levant nor Farage have said anything like that....
PorcupineorPineapple
27 Oct 18 08:33
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,237 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
Don't be so pathetic.
If Shelter were only worried about white British people being homeless then I'd condemn them.
If Gina Miller was only concerned about how Brexit affected white British people then I'd condemn her.
If Stonewall weren't bothered about Muslim, Jewish or other trans people then I'd condemn them.
etc et bloody cetera
Hope that's clear enough.
^
So if a problem is caused predominately by one section of the community due to cultural or religious interpretations we are not allowed to comment on it?
If a group of from a non-religious cult that taught its followers that women were inferior to men and it was ok to take sex slaves and then those men from that cult committed terrible crimes would it be ok to highlight that cult was causing problems - or not?
27 Oct 18 08:33
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,237 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
Don't be so pathetic.
If Shelter were only worried about white British people being homeless then I'd condemn them.
If Gina Miller was only concerned about how Brexit affected white British people then I'd condemn her.
If Stonewall weren't bothered about Muslim, Jewish or other trans people then I'd condemn them.
etc et bloody cetera
Hope that's clear enough.
^
So if a problem is caused predominately by one section of the community due to cultural or religious interpretations we are not allowed to comment on it?
If a group of from a non-religious cult that taught its followers that women were inferior to men and it was ok to take sex slaves and then those men from that cult committed terrible crimes would it be ok to highlight that cult was causing problems - or not?
But he's not interested in unmasking paedophiles. He's only interested if they're Asian. Then he gets his camera out and the donations start flooding in. He's giving his followers what they want to hear and you/they lap it up. An important part of journalism is balance and context and he's interested in neither. He's a story teller. Telling his fans the same one just re-packaging it and, just like Oasis fans, you don't care if it's the same song and that it's sh!t. You close your ears to everything else and get sucked in. Meanwhile he's looking round his mega-garden to see where his helipad should go.
If he unsettles Guardian fans then he is earning his money.
lol injera you misquote the dalai lama having been shown up already
If the music is not good I always feel that something is missing
And if we didn’t have Oasis and TR , then I would feel that something was really missing
I suppose the novel that Solzhenitsyn was writing was always the same novel
He was a journalist , a better and braver journalist than the millions in Britain
Not at all osmond. You just want to ignore what he said. The independent said his quotes 'sparked anger' 
Pretty obvious what he said then isn't it!
Social media users condemned the comments, calling the Dalai Lama a “bigot of the first order” and a “hypocrite”.
“Europe, for example Germany, cannot become an Arab country,” he said in an interview with German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in 2016, in which he also said that there were “too many refugees” in Europe.
Pretty obvious what he said then isn't it!Social media users condemned the comments, calling the Dalai Lama a “bigot of the first order” and a “hypocrite”.
“Europe, for example Germany, cannot become an Arab country,” he said in an interview with German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in 2016, in which he also said that there were “too many refugees” in Europe.
That’s what I said , the novel he was writing was always the same novel
you quoted him injera, on this thread
you dont quote him now after it was pointed out to you what he said
still, you can draw comfort by kidding yourself, again, and again and again
you dont quote him now after it was pointed out to you what he said
still, you can draw comfort by kidding yourself, again, and again and again
Do you disagree with the Lama when he said refugees should go home donny?
Do you disagree with the Lama when he said refugees should go home donny?
Do you disagree with the Lama when he said refugees should go home donny?
if they can return home having been welcomed and helped here
i see no problem with them returning when things are safe for them
to do so,
why not?...
i see no problem with them returning when things are safe for them
to do so,
why not?...
What osmond and porky do is to deflect away from the main issue which is muslim trafficking gangs, therefore they are clearly not in favour of robinson and others bringing this to the country's attention as it needs to be.
Why would that be I wonder ? You can guess.
Why would that be I wonder ? You can guess.
PorcupineorPineapple
27 Oct 18 11:57
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,238 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
But he's not interested in unmasking paedophiles. He's only interested if they're Asian.
^
Yes because that is what his activism is about highlighting due to his life experiences from Luton.
Do you condemn the ECA for predominantly talking about Clerical Abuse? Would you say they are only only interested because they are Catholic?
27 Oct 18 11:57
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,238 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
But he's not interested in unmasking paedophiles. He's only interested if they're Asian.
^
Yes because that is what his activism is about highlighting due to his life experiences from Luton.
Do you condemn the ECA for predominantly talking about Clerical Abuse? Would you say they are only only interested because they are Catholic?
porky and osmond simply do not want the subject raised and seek to find something else to cloud the matter. You make your minds up to which side they are on.
But they resist going home donny, we have released sex monsters from jail and are paying a million pounds for their defence against being sent home, as directed in their sentencing. Merkel has tens of thousands of court cases pending, they don't intend going home and are going to court to demand entry for extended family.
osmond - the DL said Europe should help refugees, educate them and SEND THEM BACK!
UKIP nor Tommy have gone that far. They are in favour of our Welfare State giving shelter to those who need it BUT they want to control who comes. See the difference?
The Dalai Lama said 'Europe is for Europeans'. That's BNP stuff yet you won't condemn him. Why?
(Ps I think the DL is bang on the money..)
UKIP nor Tommy have gone that far. They are in favour of our Welfare State giving shelter to those who need it BUT they want to control who comes. See the difference?
The Dalai Lama said 'Europe is for Europeans'. That's BNP stuff yet you won't condemn him. Why?
(Ps I think the DL is bang on the money..)
So do I, he knows oil and water will never mix, a realist.
there is a difference between a refugee and a migrant
i take your point about some of the criminals we have atracted to this country
that should be deported...
and of the chaos merkel caused with her open door policy,
i take your point about some of the criminals we have atracted to this country
that should be deported...
and of the chaos merkel caused with her open door policy,
Once they leave a place of safety they aint refugees donny, a hard fact, but a fact.
once again injera you misquote the dalai lama
hey ho
hey ho
Once they leave a place of safety they aint refugees donny, a hard fact, but a fact.
???
???
Come now, feigned ignorance is time wasted. They don't get on a plane in Syria and land in London.
IT - see my original reply about Shelter and White British Homeless etc etc.
ok saddo, i didnt understand what you were saying
once again a refugee is a refugee and a migrant is a maigrant
yes let's not mentiong the muslim grooming gangs - you know - the ones that porky and osmond don't want to talk about
I wonder why?
I wonder why?
moysey - see the title of the thread. If you want talk about other stuff, then there's a big wide world and no-one's stopping you. But on a thread about Yaxley-Lennon we're talking about him.
I mean, that should be easy enough to understand right?
I mean, that should be easy enough to understand right?
PorcupineorPineapple
27 Oct 18 12:51
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,240 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
IT - see my original reply about Shelter and White British Homeless etc etc.
^
Why are you bringing race into this?
TR is an activist against child rape gangs that are predominately Muslim.
The ECA campaigns against child abuse by clerics that are predominately Catholic.
It is not a race issue. All religions have people from all races.
Do you think both the ECA and TR are wrong to highlight and campaign against child abuse?
27 Oct 18 12:51
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,240 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
IT - see my original reply about Shelter and White British Homeless etc etc.
^
Why are you bringing race into this?
TR is an activist against child rape gangs that are predominately Muslim.
The ECA campaigns against child abuse by clerics that are predominately Catholic.
It is not a race issue. All religions have people from all races.
Do you think both the ECA and TR are wrong to highlight and campaign against child abuse?
I'm bringing race into it because Yaxley Lennon is only focused on race. If you want to go down the route of "it can't be racist to criticise Islam as it's not a race" then go for it. CBA going down that path today. Point is, he only points his cameras at Muslims. Because that's where the money is. There's no money in going after the church or after middle aged divorcees suddenly re-locating to Cambodia. But hashtag muslim and twitter lights up. Ker-ching.
Show me one time where he's stood outside a court pontificating when it's a white person being tried.
Show me one time where he's made videos about non-muslims threatening or committing terror.
Show me one. Show me the balance. Show me that he's interested in these issues, and it just so happens, awfully coincidentally, that they solely involve Muslims.
Oh, and as if by magic - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/27/tommy-robinson-edl-stands-to-make-1-million-pounds-on-us-speaking-tour?CMP=twt_gu
That lad can smell the money and he's determined to get his share.
Show me one time where he's stood outside a court pontificating when it's a white person being tried.
Show me one time where he's made videos about non-muslims threatening or committing terror.
Show me one. Show me the balance. Show me that he's interested in these issues, and it just so happens, awfully coincidentally, that they solely involve Muslims.
Oh, and as if by magic - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/27/tommy-robinson-edl-stands-to-make-1-million-pounds-on-us-speaking-tour?CMP=twt_gu
That lad can smell the money and he's determined to get his share.
let's not talk about the exposure of what you favourite culture gets up to porky
PorcupineorPineapple • October 27, 2018 3:03 PM BST
Show me one time where he's made videos about non-muslims threatening or committing terror.
H'ed be hard pushed to find a non-muslim looking to commit terror.. HTH
Show me one time where he's made videos about non-muslims threatening or committing terror.
H'ed be hard pushed to find a non-muslim looking to commit terror.. HTH
PorcupineorPineapple
27 Oct 18 15:03
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,242 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
I'm bringing race into it because Yaxley Lennon is only focused on race. If you want to go down the route of "it can't be racist to criticise Islam as it's not a race" then go for it. CBA going down that path today. Point is, he only points his cameras at Muslims. Because that's where the money is. There's no money in going after the church or after middle aged divorcees suddenly re-locating to Cambodia. But hashtag muslim and twitter lights up. Ker-ching.
Show me one time where he's stood outside a court pontificating when it's a white person being tried.
Show me one time where he's made videos about non-muslims threatening or committing terror.
Show me one. Show me the balance. Show me that he's interested in these issues, and it just so happens, awfully coincidentally, that they solely involve Muslims.
^
Many cases he has reported on have one or two non-Muslims.
If you are reporting on child grooming gangs and over 80% of those convicted as from one religion what is he supposed to do?
He is an activist in this area.
You did not answer my question about the ECA. Should they talk about other issues than what they do? Should they highlight problems in other religions? Should they not take donations on their website?
27 Oct 18 15:03
Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 6,242 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
I'm bringing race into it because Yaxley Lennon is only focused on race. If you want to go down the route of "it can't be racist to criticise Islam as it's not a race" then go for it. CBA going down that path today. Point is, he only points his cameras at Muslims. Because that's where the money is. There's no money in going after the church or after middle aged divorcees suddenly re-locating to Cambodia. But hashtag muslim and twitter lights up. Ker-ching.
Show me one time where he's stood outside a court pontificating when it's a white person being tried.
Show me one time where he's made videos about non-muslims threatening or committing terror.
Show me one. Show me the balance. Show me that he's interested in these issues, and it just so happens, awfully coincidentally, that they solely involve Muslims.
^
Many cases he has reported on have one or two non-Muslims.
If you are reporting on child grooming gangs and over 80% of those convicted as from one religion what is he supposed to do?
He is an activist in this area.
You did not answer my question about the ECA. Should they talk about other issues than what they do? Should they highlight problems in other religions? Should they not take donations on their website?
"One or two non-muslims". Chortle. God, he must have panicked there.
Regarding grooming gangs, let's start by taking your figures as true for a second. That means 20% were done by others. Therefore, if he was being balanced 20% of his reports would be outside courts for these.
Should be dead easy to find a link for one then.
Regarding grooming gangs, let's start by taking your figures as true for a second. That means 20% were done by others. Therefore, if he was being balanced 20% of his reports would be outside courts for these.
Should be dead easy to find a link for one then.
It is 84% (Asian) according to Quilliam.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/quilliam-grooming-gangs-report-asian-abuse-rotherham-rochdale-newcastle-a8101941.html
Out of a gang of 10, 1 or 2 will not be. This is consistent with what he has reported.
Do you ever ask why that is the case? This is what he is highlighting. Is there something in attitude to women, non-muslim women, in particular that can cause these stats? Or is it entirely random?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/quilliam-grooming-gangs-report-asian-abuse-rotherham-rochdale-newcastle-a8101941.html
Out of a gang of 10, 1 or 2 will not be. This is consistent with what he has reported.
Do you ever ask why that is the case? This is what he is highlighting. Is there something in attitude to women, non-muslim women, in particular that can cause these stats? Or is it entirely random?
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539