Counter-Currents
2,399 words
There’s been plenty of heated discussion about what our stance towards Tommy Robinson ought to be, given his recent arrest.
When I first saw the video of Robinson’s arrest, I was horrified. The video really makes it look like Robinson was just arrested over a simple exercise of free speech. When I first saw people floating around comment sections who seemed to have more interest in pushing black-pilled conspiracy theories about Robinson than pushing back against the obvious injustice of a state ready to silence people for speaking about these ethnic rape gangs, that would crush us just as happily as it had apparently crushed him for doing the same thing, I was filled with rage. How can these people be so deeply missing the point just to countersignal someone who’s out there for God’s sakes at least doing something while they sit at home?
In the hours of reading since, however, I’ve become one of them. My position now is that what Tommy Robinson did was both tactically and strategically idiotic, and it would be a serious mistake for us to throw our lot in with his.
The leading pro-Tommy position is: “even though Tommy isn’t ‘our guy,’ it’s in our interests to stand up for his free speech when his speech is violated by the same people who would love to violate ours.”
It’s understandable that this has emerged as the leading pro-Tommy position, because it’s the best argument of the lot.
Much of the criticism of Tommy has focused on pointing out that he isn’t /ourguy/. His alliances with, and insistence that all “real Britons” are, Zionists. The fact that he went out of his way to slander everyone who appeared in Charlottesville last year as “Nazis,” when the vast majority of these people were “Nazis” in no more or less the same sense that so many people in the UK think Tommy himself is a “Nazi” and Tommy was doing to others exactly what he doesn’t want to see happen to him.
But this approach is unfortunate and misleading, because the fact that Tommy Robinson isn’t 100% on board with our program is not the reason we shouldn’t support him. The reason we shouldn’t support him is because he was not arrested for an act of free speech; he was arrested for a self-destructive, counter-productive, self-aware act of sabotage.
To the points about Tommy’s history with Zionist organizations, I should add that in 2013 when Tommy Robinson was arrested for £160,000 in mortgage fraud, the judge “described Robinson as a ‘fixer’ who had introduced others to fraudulent mortgage broker (((Deborah Rothschild))).” This is important not merely because it shows that Tommy isn’t “our guy” in terms of his platform, but because it proves his character is that of a disreputable opportunist. This is relevant because the most plausible interpretation of Tommy Robinson’s most recent action turns out to be ‘disreputable opportunism.’
So what actually happened here?
First of all, the reason laws in the UK and the US differ here on this specific issue is not because the two countries take different approaches to “free speech.” That actually has nothing to do with it at all. Rather, the laws differ for a far more straightforward and practical reason: because trials are conducted differently between the two countries. Quite simply, in the UK, when multiple related trials are planned to be held in sequence, it’s considered too costly and burdensome to sequester every jury involved in every single one of the trials for the entire duration until all of the trials have concluded. Instead, it seems far less onerous to simply ban reporting about any particular one of the trials until all of them have concluded. Then the juries can go about their lives until they’re ready to be called in for their particular trial, and the judiciary can rest assured that going about their lives in society won’t bias their judgments as a jury. This is why the reporting bans violated by Tommy Robinson exist. That’s it.
And if prejudicial reporting gets in the way of those assumptions, cases like these absolutely can and have declared mistrial. What does that mean? In the best case, it means justice is delayed, and taxpayers have to spend thousands starting the trial all over again, dragging witnesses through the emotional torture of being cross-examined all over again. At worst, it means cases can be dropped completely, or charges can be substantially reduced.
Some people think that these laws just wouldn’t be enforced in other circumstances, and that they’d selectively been pulled out here, and only here, in the case of Tommy Robinson. They’re just dead wrong. You can read a list of some high-profile cases that have been thrown out in the UK over this very issue right here. It really does happen, and anyone feeding you an opinion about this event that doesn’t understand that has no right to be talking about it. This is in fact standard procedure in the UK.
There are some who support Tommy on this whether his actions were stupid or illegal or not because they have no hope for justice to come through the traditional court system in the first place. And there is a kernel of truth to this, for sure: there have been a disturbing number of cases of Muslim rapists getting off scot-free, and we know that some councillors and policemen had sex with Rotherham victims—and thus most certainly knowingly participated in the cover-up. The guarantee that justice will be served in this case is not 100%. This should concern all of us gravely.
But here is what these people need to keep in mind: we know that upwards of 75% of the child molesters in the UK are Muslim.
How do we know this? We know this because of successful conviction rates.
The UK is in fact arresting about three times as many Muslim as white pedophiles right now. That’s how we know that upwards of 75% of child molesters in the UK are Muslim—because justice is still fortunately being served more often than not. “The state” is not one monolithic entity, and just because some elements of the state have participated in or covered up these events doesn’t mean others aren’t working to see justice served. Plenty of them still are.
The same goes for the British media: Channel 4 is apparently even quite willing to openly discuss the fact that whereas the minority of white pedophiles are ‘true pedophiles’ who have the disgusting and unfortunate condition of finding themselves sincerely attracted to children, most Muslim pedophiles are simply sexual opportunists who choose children as victims because they’re easier to get away with abusing for sex. The first type of pedophile is one that we can perhaps understand offering treatment and therapy for their condition under some circumstances, but there is no universe in which the second type of pedophile deserves anything but the end of a rope.
In this case, we know that Tommy Robinson knew that there was a reporting ban. He mentions the fact on his own livestream the very day he was arrested. That means he knew he was likely to get arrested for what he did, and it means he knew that a mistrial could occur as a consequence of it. We can also see Tommy on video here attempting to entrap a mainstream journalist into contempt of court by talking about the results of a trial that weren’t to be released until later that day (the journalist didn’t know that the video recording them was live-streaming, and he promptly leaves after being alerted to the fact and seeing the shit-eating grin on Tommy’s face when he asks Tommy if he can turn the stream off).
In fact, Tommy himself was already arrested for committing this very offense previously—and here is how the judge concluded that trial at the time:
“[Y]ou should be under no illusions that if you commit any further offence of any kind, and that would include, I would have thought, a further contempt of court by similar actions, then that sentence of three months would be activated, and that would be on top of anything else that you were given by any other court.
In short, Mr Yaxley-Lennon, turn up at another court, refer to people as “Muslim paedophiles, Muslim rapists” and so and so forth while trials are ongoing and before there has been a finding by a jury that that is what they are, and you will find yourself inside. Do you understand?” (emphasis mine)
And here is a quote from the judge from the hearing when Robinson was arrested this time:
This contempt hearing is not about free speech. This is not about freedom of the press. This is not about legitimate journalism; this is not about political correctness; this is not about whether one political viewpoint is right or another. It is about justice, and it is about ensuring that a trial can be carried out justly and fairly. It is about ensuring that a jury are not in any way inhibited from carrying out their important function. … It is pejorative language which prejudges the case, and it is language and reporting – if reporting indeed is what it is – that could have had the effect of substantially derailing the trial. As I have already indicated, because of what I knew was going on I had to take avoiding action to make sure that the integrity of this trial was preserved, that justice was preserved and that the trial could continue to completion without people being intimidated into reaching conclusions about it, or into being affected by “irresponsible and inaccurate reporting”. If something of the nature of that which you put out on social media had been put into the mainstream press I would have been faced with applications from the defence advocates concerned, I have no doubt, to either say something specific to the jury, or worse, to abandon the trial and to start again. That is the kind of thing that actions such as these can and do have, and that is why you have been dealt with in the way in which you have and why I am dealing with this case with the seriousness which I am.
If Robinson continues using the lie that his “free speech” was violated and he had no idea he could be arrested to fleece his supporters for donations, then he is an out-and-out fraud who should be completely abandoned by everyone. Tommy Robinson has talked plenty about ethnic rape gangs for a plenty long time, and he has never once been arrested solely for “speech.”
What actually happened here is this:
1. Tommy had been arrested for endangering the integrity of criminal trials before.
2. The last time he was arrested for it, he was told in no uncertain terms he would be in jail if he did it again.
3. He went right out and did it again.
4. Even though it does absolutely nothing to help his cause, and
5. it did stand a serious chance of harming the real victims of this case.
Then when he was very predictably arrested for something he knew he would be arrested for, he turned around and pretended he had no idea why he was going to jail. This was nothing but an obvious case of grandstanding for his audience—and knowing all of this, it’s not too implausible to suspect that he may even have wanted the case to go to mistrial so he could then fleece his supporters for more donations while claiming to be the only person following the continuously more and more egregious cover-up (which would now be the result of Tommy Robinson’s actions, and not anyone else’s). And now is it the victims and witnesses who are receiving mass calls for donations? No; it’s Tommy Robinson. If this wasn’t a calculated move, then the only other possible conclusion we can make is that Tommy Robinson is an all-out idiot with the short-term memory span of a gnat. And in that case, he still shouldn’t be trusted in the role of public activism.
What about the (imaginary) fact that he was given a secret trial when they arrested him this time?
Well, that’s because they didn’t have to give him a trial at all—because they didn’t even jail the poor martyr the last time he knowingly did the same exact thing. I repeat: the last time he did this, they let him go free with only a warning. That’s why the only thing they had to do this time was activate his previous sentence. What a joke. If the whole power of the state was really so obsessed with Tommy Robinson, they would have thrown in him in jail for the full sentence right then and there—but they didn’t.
Isn’t it at least a good thing that white men are out marching angrily in the streets ready to change things because of this arrest?
No.
It isn’t a good thing because they are going to lose. There is not one conceivable thing that these guys can possibly accomplish by marching out in the streets. They aren’t going to get the free speech martyr Tommy Robinson released from jail, because Tommy Robinson isn’t a free speech martyr. They aren’t going to change the UK laws on reporting, because those laws exist for a reason having to do with the different way trials are carried out in the UK and it has nothing to do with “free speech” at all. And even if they managed to do so, changing the way trials are carried out so as to circumvent this requirement might be reasonable, but it would do absolutely nothing for us anyway. Picking battles that we are going to lose is not the way to build up our confidence. The only thing that that does is increase our fatigue while leaving us nothing to show for it. It’s a waste of our time, it’s a waste of our energy, and it’s even a waste of our attention. When your take on things tells you that Glenn Beck (who calls this arrest “Orwellian” and “insane”) is more ‘based’ than us, it really might be time to question your premises. No, the world hasn’t suddenly turned upside down and made Glenn Beck more ‘woke’ on questions of race than Counter-Currents.
Note
And while we’re at it, Tommy actually stands in solidarity with other confirmed child lovers himself. EDL founding member Richard Price admitted to police he downloaded child pornography, and Tommy Robinson still came out to call him a “political prisoner” and imply that he’s just another dindu nuffin martyr anyway. I don’t know about you, but I’m noticing a pattern.
Lennon, also known as Tommy Robinson, backed the group’s founder member Richard Price, 41, after he was convicted of child porn charges. Officers found the sick snaps at his home after he was arrested for breaking police lines during an EDL rally. He was later put on the Sex Offenders’ Register after admitting downloading the images.
35 comments
Thanks for explaining this to us. Things are often not what they appear to be, that’s for sure!
It may have helped his cause much more than you think.
And by the way, will you please stop punching right. Damnit man we best the shit out of our own and even potential allies. How the fuck can we when when we seem to find enemies everywhere?
Sorry, we reject the absurd taboo on “punching right” here:
https://counter-currents.com/2016/12/punching-right/
https://counter-currents.com/2017/07/punching-right-2/
Who punched who? As stated in this very article, Robinson said our guys at Charlottesville were Nazis and that had he been there, he would have fought them alongside Antifa.
Given Robinson’s stance on Israel he is at best a neo-con cuckservative, the same type that has ruined American politics. By pledging allegiance to the very people who pushed for mass immigration of Muslims and refugees into our lands, he is no fellow traveler of mine. That said, when an outlet like Counter Currents criticizes him it is punching left, not right.
Tommy climbed up on a cross and demanded that he gets nailed to it. Big iron tacks driven through his hands and feet.
What his motives are, I
Can’t tell.
An alternative view by Douglas Murray which captures the ambiguity:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist/
As Huntley points out and Murray overlooks: if the state were so keen on jailing Robinson, he would not have received a suspended sentence on his first offense.
We’re not living in 1984 yet. The British state is not a monolith. Individuals still matter, and reason can still prevail. But the signs are not hopeful, prosecutions of rapists notwithstanding.
This is a pretty accurate assessment of the matter. I should add that reporting restrictions are in place to prevent the jury that will try a well known and very reckless young nationalist in the autumn learning about his conviction earlier this month of various offences, so as to forestall prejudice against him. In other words, the law is being applied more or less even handedly and benefits all accused facing further trials, especially for similar offences. You would not think so, reading some of the ill informed commentary upon Stephen Yaxley-Lennon alias Tommy Robinson’s latest escapade, but it is true.
That’s a really interesting point that I haven’t heard anyone else point out.
I first became aware of this incident when it appeared on the front page of Drudge which showed TR being whisked away by the police as a free speech martyr. I felt bad for the guy. Then I came here and got another perspective. My final impression days later is that there is a lot of cynicism and anti-establishment feeling out there in the public. Folks don’t seem to trust their institutions much.
TR does seem to enjoy being in front of a camera. Perhaps he is just a misguided glory hound? I hope it’s nothing more sinister.
When Huntley had said, “…the most plausible interpretation of Tommy Robinson’s most recent action turns out to be ‘disreputable opportunism.”, I don’t think you were in full awareness about other evidences. Since I’m not aware about your comment policy on numbers of links, I’ll post separate links each time. The first of the three are from here. I’ll leave a short synopsis and link for the two following this one.
A Tanstaafl post from 2013 reveals that he was aware of Robinson’s game then.
“Tommy Robinson & Friends Abandon English Defence League, Join Anti-English Regime” – Tanstaafl
https://counter-currents.com/2013/10/tommy-robinson-and-friends-abandon-english-defence-league/
Simple points:
I don’t trust the English elite/system (an understatement – I despise them)
they have a past record of burying the Muslim gang rapes
the issue isn’t whether there is some chain of legal logic to this – there is
the issue is whether the courts are abusing the postponement order system
also fact based issues – what are the details of the future trial ?
why was it separated from this trial (joining of charges is a fraught issue in criminal law) ?
hard to evaluate it if you’re not an insider
one case I know – Rolf Harris – didn’t seem to be any use of postponement orders for him
goes back to – I don’t trust them
the gag order on Robinson’s arrest doesn’t help me with my suspicions of them
10 years ago – I would give them the benefit of the doubt
not now
Apparently the system is prosecuting so many rapists that they can’t deal with them all at the same time, so they are doing it in stages over a period of months.
Well there’s a bit more to it than that. Often charges which relate to “related” subject matter are heard together (eg look at Rolf Harris – his 2014 trial related to apparently 4 different girls PLUS they bought in other girls from foreign locations to give evidence against him – I am going off Wikipedia). A Defendant in that situation is in deep shit, because the jury looks at all the charges and think “this guy is guilty”.
So here we know for a fact that they are separating these gang rape charges for the same Ds. I don’t know whether that was right. But if the charges were of a similar nature (eg cab rank bribe and pimp or the like), then why weren’t they ? then they put postponement orders on the trials so that the whole thing is impenetrable.
We don’t know.
Again. 15 years ago, I would give them the benefit of the doubt. Now – you have to be fucking kidding me.
“The Quilliam think-tank which influenced Tommy while in the EDL is a pro-Islam public relations group led by Majid Nawa and Ed Husain which promotes “Moderate Islam” and fights “far-right extremism” (white people who are tired of the lies).
Quilliam has known Islamic terrorists on their payroll. So it seems while on the weekend Tommy fights the Islamic invaders, mon-fri he’s working with them.
The trick being played against the People is simple: focus on fighting the Muslim migrants while you completely ignore the fact that it’s Zionists responsible for the crisis. If you believe Tommy is fighting to save England what motivation do you have to fight? Tommy will just do it for you. Only he isn’t. By not exposing the Zionists behind the migrant crisis, and by only attacking the migrants themselves, Tommy wastes everyones time. How can you stop the migrants from pouring into your country if you don’t acknowledge the cause?
If we stop the Zionists we stop the migrant crisis. It’s that simple, and Tommy knows it.”
https://spencergate.wordpress.com/2017/07/21/tommy-robinson-%E2%9C%A1%EF%B8%8F/
And the Quilliam report is deeply flawed.
https://medium.com/@Reg_Left_Media/grooming-gangs-quilliam-the-myth-of-the-84-percent-cc834b57fcf3
“Tommy Robinson, Former EDL Leader Holds Secret Meeting with Manchester Jews” [July 7, 2017]
“His secret meeting with the Jewish Community in Manchester has apparently sparked controversy with other Jewish activists. —- However, Robinson has made no secret of the fact that he is committed Zionist – which may explain why members of the UK’s Jewish Community are now courting and supporting him: —- [According to his own Tweet, it appears that Robinson had collected money from the Jewish Community].”
http://www.europereloaded.com/tommy-robinson-former-edl-leader-holds-secret-meeting-manchester-jews/
It’s amusing to me watching a site like this which has a record of routinely praising reckless, illegal actions of the right such as those of Yukio Mishima and Corneliu Codreanu be this on the fence about supporting a little English upstart getting into a little problem with the law. It would be one thing to denounce Breivik, but someone as harmless as Robinson really isn’t anything to get your panties in a twist over.
They’ve really put the fear into you lot.
Approved for comic relief.
Personally, I would have respected Tommy Robinson a hell of a lot more if instead of pulling this stunt that achieved nothing besides endangering the trial, he had taken one of the defendants out back and lynched them and gone to jail for that instead. Then I could also hope that an appropriate amount of anger might begin to flow through society as a whole. Then I could hope that others might charge the streets in large numbers with agreement to a concrete, specific goal and outcome in mind that I would actually say is desirable: namely, sending the message to the State that we are angry enough that if it does not carry out the appropriate amount of justice here, its citizenry will — and it has every right in the world to feel that anger.
We then might have fought the point that Tommy doesn’t deserve jail time for murder because he acted on a rage that in fact every single British citizen rightly ought to feel. We then might have challenged directly the notion that outsiders to our society who enter from the outside and then violate its most basic principles of law deserve equal protection by those laws: we don’t take people to court before shooting them in war, so why should we do it here when this is in fact also a war against Western society as a whole? This would have been a risky gambit, but it would have pushed us into the real crux of the matter directly.
Of course I wouldn’t actually be so naïve as to think we would win the battle as to whether this was in violation of the law or not. But this could be a case where losing one battle means winning a larger war. And in proving himself willing to go down in hopes of inspiring that reaction, Tommy would have shown us all that he really is a true ‘martyr.’
My problem with Tommy’s action isn’t strictly that it was ‘illegal,’ per se. Even as an illegal action it lacked balls as well as any sense of being strategically effective. That is, strategically effective at anything besides propping Tommy up as a faux-martyr at relatively little actual cost to himself. Admiring anyone and everyone who performs “civil disobedience” by doing whatever stupid illegal thing is nothing more than a leftist meme.
Inelegantly phrased as it is, this comment raises a relevant point, i.e. why bother caring about whether a potential cause celebre is perfectly legal or not? The storming of the Bastille wasn’t lawful but it would be foolish for a committed revolutionary to oppose it; as white nationalists we can be confident in our ability to create a better society in the future while realizing that every step of the way won’t perfectly conform to some kind of civics guide book. The Counter-Currents position, as I understand it, is that random chimpouts are not going to produce a “flash flood” change in society and that it’s only after years of the populace seeing us as the only ones willing to stand up for truth that we’ll be able to make headway. That’s where I stand as well, but even if you are more in support of Tommy it’s good to have the “gadfly” argument here presented. In any case, hopefully events like this will lead to the Lauren Southern types to smarten up and stop ignoring the free speech cases of anyone who’s not a committed Zionist.
Be careful of the aspersions cast in a statement like this.
That’s how we know that upwards of 75% of child molesters in the UK are Muslim
The is a spike in convictions right now is because of the recent intense investigations and proceedings. Overall, convicted child abusers are mostly white British men, at around 85%, reflecting the population of the UK.
We’re not talking about “child abusers”, which could mean a lot of things, including domestic violence (which is probably seriously underreported in Muslim households), we’re talking about participants in child grooming gangs which intentionally solicit, exploit and enslave young White girls due to their vulnerability. Nice try, anti-White child rape apologist.
Thanks Leon. Right on POINT!!
But we are talking about child sexual abuse which is what my post relates to.
What is the difference between a grooming gang and a peadophile ring? None whatsoever, and yet we have invented a new term for Pakistani peadophile rings. Why?
I would be very careful of calling anyone a rape apologist simply for pointing out that CSA is a problem across ALL communities and cultures. Those genuinely concerned about it recognise that as opposed to those hijacking the issue for their own agenda, namely one of prejudice against a single religion or group. I am guessing you belong to the latter.
First off, your counter-argument stated that 75% of “child abusers” are White British (a dubious number), to which I pointed out, truthfully, that the term “child abuser” in UK law encompasses not only sexual abuse, but all forms of “abuse”, including neglect, domestic violence (which is probably way under-reported in Muslim households due to the strong stigma on speaking about such things in Muslim culture), and others, so it is irrelevant to the case at hand.
As to your comment: “What is the difference between a grooming gang and a peadophile ring? None whatsoever, and yet we have invented a new term for Pakistani peadophile rings. Why?”
The sexual grooming gang is a specific kind of phenomena particular to Asian immigrant gangs in the UK who solicit underage White girls (never Muslim girls to whom they have closer proximity), feed them drugs, rape them, physically abuse them, and forcefully prostitute them (essentially enslaving), knowing that they are the most vulnerable, in a pattern that has been repeated in cities throughout the UK in a systematic way.
https://counter-currents.com/2016/05/the-battle-of-britain/
Can you name me any equivalent to the following sexual grooming gang cases throughout the UK where the perpatrators were White?:
Rotherham (pop. c. 100,000):
1,400+ 11-16 year old white girls who were gang-raped, tortured, and for all intents and purposes enslaved by Muslim immigrants, according to the British Government’s Independent Inquiry Into Child Sexual Exploitation In Rotherham (1997-2013)
Similar case in Oxford
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/Asian-grooming-gang-convicted-of-appalling-acts-of-depravity-on-children.htm
and in Telford
http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/crime/horror-of-telford-girls-sex-abuse-ordeal.htm
and in Rochdale
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9347305/Rochdale-grooming-trial-how-the-case-unfolded.html
and in Oldham
http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news/73735/child-sex-scandal-the-missed-chances
and in Bradford
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/10279957.54_arrested_in_crackdown_on_grooming_of_young_girls_for_sex/
and in Banbury
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banbury_sex_gang
and in Aylesbury
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aylesbury_sex_gang
and in Derby
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derby_sex_gang
fears that it may be happening in London
“The Metropolitan police are setting up a specialist unit to counter Rochdale-style child sex abuse in London.”
Prosecutor says Rotherham only the tip of the iceberg: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/12174168/Home-Office-to-use-powers-to-strip-Asian-sex-abusers-of-UK-citizenship.html
Saying that child sexual expolitation is a problem across all communities and cultures is grossly dishonest as it ignores the major disparities in the frequency and nature of the practice between different groups:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/21/children-commissioner-defends-sex-abuse-report/
https://counter-currents.com/2017/02/every-4-8-seconds-a-white-woman-or-girl-is-raped-by-muslims-in-europe/
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/what-do-we-know-about-the-ethnicity-of-sexual-abuse-gangs
It would be like saying that all animals sometimes bite, so there’s no difference between leaving your eight-year-old next to a poodle, than next to a crocodile. It’s patently idiotic.
The reason I call people like you that try to deny the problem of Muslim sexual predation on White girls “Anti-White child rape apologists” is simple. We know now that one of the main reasons these gangs were able (and apparently continue) to prey on White British girls without being stopped is the ubiquitous fear in British society to pursue any question that might lead to the conclusion that different groups are unequal in their behaviour and moral standards, and that Muslim immigration might not be an unqualified good for British or any other European society. By promoting your narrative in face of the facts, you in fact encourage the atmosphere which makes police hesitant to investigate and prosecute non-White crime and malfeasance, even at the cost of literally thousands of White British children. Whether it is your intention or not, you are in fact enabling the rape of underage White girls, and this will not soon be forgotten.
@Leon
Excellent comment.
Well-known “alt media” outlet UK Column News have argued there’s no domestic organised alien rape problem, and suggested it’s principally political/institutional abusers responsible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu5EB5f_WII&t=29m27s [at 29m 27s] 2018-03-22 Breitbart reports* “UK Court hears of plot to rape, dissolve in acid, children for pleasure of unnamed ‘top politicians’ ” and the UK Column News’ comments the involvement of top politicians has been buried by the media etc etc.
* http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/02/14/plot-rape-dissolve-girls-acid-court/
Same episode, then go to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu5EB5f_WII&t=12m19s
[at 12m 19s] commenting on UKIP’s Gerard Batten specifically at 13m 10s onwards: UKC News deny UK has a ‘Muslim’ grooming problem. Brian Gerrish (speaking) then says if violence ensues there will be a massive Government clampdown – but the UKC News also allege the police and military are under-resourced and over-stretched.
A prior example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygOFNzilnRA&t=9m19s [at 9m 19s on] 2018-03-12
– at 11.05 we have co-host Mike Robinson saying “…again we’re gonna probably head towards this narrative that it’s all to do with the Asian community and Asian pedophiles targeting White girls… of course this is not the case, … if you want to understand this … you need to read this series of articles on [ukcolumn.org] ‘The Common Purpose Effect’…. (I visited the site but didn’t find immediately an obvious explanation there of the views on ‘Asian’ representation in the ‘grooming’ stats.
The UK Column News seem to have come up with some good and important information on a range of topics, but on this they lost me. What explanation is there?
1. they’re covering up – why?;
2. they’ve correctly identified proven cases of abuse by politicians and officials numerically in excess of the victims in the “Asian” ‘grooming gang’ cases – where’s the proof?; or
3. the mass media is publishing false news reports in order to perpetrate the “Revelation of the Method” disempowerment psych-attack on the general public discussed by Michael A. Hoffman II in his ‘Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare’?
Greg, you really run a great site. I have a minor pedantic but not entirely meaningless quibble on your comment re. ‘suspended sentence on his first offense.’. He had already done prison and detention more than once, initially for being a pure hooligan, so the qualifier ‘for the same offense’ is essential.
I just spent 40 or so minutes trying to find an account of exactly which sentence he was serving to have his front teeth kicked in by Islamists in prison, the ‘net diversions and distortions are strong for this one. Have no doubt it happened.
That, as the article states, he was guiding people to a corrupt Jewish mortgage broker seems very likely true, but no site hit by the search engine was mentioning it (OK, I only spent 40 min. checking).
Internet information on this very public figure is very clouded, no need to wonder why.
BTW, I don’t know if Nim Chimpsky has been a commentator here longer than I have been an occasional commentor, but imaginative people will arrive at similar conclusions.
Both to ridicule the man with yeshiva background, the most exaggerated and failedi and false ntellectual ”achievements’ perhaps since Freud.
For what it’s worth, in the last few years mainstream British newspapers have branded people ‘murderers’ before they were convicted (Stephen Lawrence murder), and have reported on – for instance – the trial of Rolf Harris in a way which could have been prejudicial, but have faced no consequences. So there seems to be a dual standard.
Free speech
Concerning the incident, Geert Wilders(making by his appearance a statement of supra-national White Identity, which is a major achievement), should have talked about Robinson and Assange in the same breath. The Julian Assange and Wikileaks argument oppressed against all regards for free speech is way stronger then the popular Robinson personality. Assange is high-brow, and Robinson is low brow. Both are needed popularizers, to reach the whole of the White Identity scope.
I support Tommy, because I’m looking at it from his view…surrounded by a bunch of wannabe murderers…this revolution will start with a giant spark from the middle, conservative types…our movement ignored the Cowboy Rebellion, now Tommy…..which is why we are still an intellectual ghetto…but, a very smart one…
It looks like this Tommy Robinson movement has gathered a momentum of its own, never mind the logic of the situation. This begs the question of how capable the white right is. I am speechless. Even persons from whom I would expect better judgement have climbed on the Tommy Robinson bandwaggon, like horses that have bolted and are not open to reason anymore. What is going on here?
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.