Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mike E

News Thread Attempt 394

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Baz said:

Yep, the guy was on bail, but still didn't think the law applied to him. He knew there was reporting restrictions surrounding the court case he was live streaming, but still went ahead.

I'm not aware of the case itself, so can't comment on that.

I guess the main point here is the news blackout.

The Mainstream media is just as controlled here as anywhere else. No wonder they also want to 'shut down the internet' too . . . When you read unedited comments online you often get the real feeling of the people - which in the most part is the complete opposite to what's on the Mainstream. 2 massive case in points are Trumps' win and also the Brexit vote. Anyone that had been monitoring on-line could have predicted both of those . . the only 'shock' came from the MSN and their own fake bubble/safe space.

Edited by Husky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was on a suspended sentence for contempt of court, outside a court committing contempt of court. 

He’s an absolute moron and he manages to get loads of public sympathy for some reason. It’s so strange though that he didn’t have much to say about the ex-EDL member that got a 17 year sentence for paedophilia...

Edited by K-Hod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Baz said:

Yep, the guy was on bail, but still didn't think the law applied to him. He knew there was reporting restrictions surrounding the court case he was live streaming, but still went ahead.

I'm not aware of the case itself, so can't comment on that.

You need to ask "Why?"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Al said:

 

To maintain the integrity of the trial and so the members of the jury aren’t open to intimidation I imagine. I must admit, I find some people taking the view of Tommy Robinson over a judge quite insulting to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

To maintain the integrity of the trial and so the members of the jury aren’t open to intimidation I imagine. I must admit, I find some people taking the view of Tommy Robinson over a judge quite insulting to be honest.

I don't. You have to ask if it would be the same if it was a prominent celebrity. Freedom of the press is called into doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Husky said:

Tommy Robinson arrested for breach of the peace for 'reporting on grooming gangs'.  Petition on-line has over 340,000 signatures, yet there's been a complete news blackout. Yet when the Trump petition had about 500 signatures it was the headline on every single news network.

Free Speech? Free Press?

The UK is no better than China, Russia and all those other countries our government continually slags off.

That’s not the case.

Whilst a trial is ongoing, the defendants are “innocent till proven guilty”.

All “Tommy Robinson” aka Yaxley Lennon has done (repeatedly and been warned for it) is probably cause a mistrial. 

Deserves prison for repeatedly breaking the law. I am glad to see he isn’t being put on TV either because people seldom do enough research to realise this character is an EDL football hooligan with a chip on his shoulder, and a penchant for islamaphobia.

1 hour ago, Al said:

I don't. You have to ask if it would be the same if it was a prominent celebrity. Freedom of the press is called into doubt.

What are you talking about? When an open case is in trial, TV companies only report the legal aspect or way - careful not to be seen as biased or judgemental. Avoiding discussion that might cause some sort of grounds for issues in judgement.

Yaxley Stephen Lennon (Just one of Robinson’s aliases), always refers to these non-white Asian or African defendants (the only trials he is interested in, despite 90% of child abuse in UK is committed by white/British people) as “Muslim peadophiles/abusers” and therefore not only paints them as guilty before trial, also suggests all non white defendants in these cases practice a certain religion...

He is a virus and those who are infected by his nastiness should take a moment to realise just what type of animal they are supporting.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Al said:

 

 

3 hours ago, Al said:

I don't. You have to ask if it would be the same if it was a prominent celebrity. Freedom of the press is called into doubt.

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2018/05/tommy-robinson-and-reporting.html

Think this pretty much sums things up, there are restrictions because they don't want the defendants being given a retrial. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, K-Hod said:

He was on a suspended sentence for contempt of court, outside a court committing contempt of court. 

He’s an absolute moron and he manages to get loads of public sympathy for some reason. It’s so strange though that he didn’t have much to say about the ex-EDL member that got a 17 year sentence for paedophilia...

That's all very well, but according to the live stream footage he was actually arrested for 'Breach of the peace' - something that can befall anyone - including those that protest against Steve Kean and Venkys etc. It's basically a 'made-up' law used to silence literally anyone in any given situation.

 

Edited by Husky
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Husky said:

That's all very well, but according to the live stream footage he was actually arrested for 'Breach of the peace' - something that can befall anyone - including those that protest against Steve Kean and Venkys etc. It's basically a 'made-up' law used to silence literally anyone in any given situation.

 

So he is live streaming outside court, talking about the contents of the trial going on inside, when he has been told not to because it could effect the trials. 

It may not be a 'breach of the peace', but it's clearly something he has been told not to do, and yet continued to do so.

Sorry, no sympathy for him here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Baz said:

So he is live streaming outside court, talking about the contents of the trial going on inside, when he has been told not to because it could effect the trials. 

It may not be a 'breach of the peace', but it's clearly something he has been told not to do, and yet continued to do so.

Sorry, no sympathy for him here. 

Did you even watch the video? He didn't say anything that hadn't already been reported in the press. . . so . . .

Literally snatched from the street and threats of arrest for anyone that reports what happened at HIS 'trial' . . .

Very sinister things going on behind the UK iron curtain . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtilwMzitPw

"Help me infowarkenobi you're my only hope . . . "

 

 

 

Edited by Husky
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Husky said:

Did you even watch the video? He didn't say anything that hadn't already been reported in the press. . . so . . .

Literally snatched from the street and threats of arrest for anyone that reports what happened at HIS 'trial' . . .

Very sinister things going on behind the UK iron curtain . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtilwMzitPw

"Help me infowarkenobi you're my only hope . . . "

Alex jones?

Im sorry Husky but you cannot post a video from these people without opening yourself to ridicule and criticism for watching and listening to absolute crap. Please spare us from any more info wars please - This is an openly racist conspiracy theorist who admitted in court that his “internet persona” was a rouse, an act to make money - accused of sexual harassment and has been sued many times. 

This absolute cretin, like that Paul Watson bloke, financially benefits from stirring up far right views, how could you give his argument as a unbiased rationale for supporting the edl thug Yaxley?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing sinister going on.

Only if people think it's sinister to want to protect the victims by not revealing the perpetrators to avoid a retrial. You know, so the victims don't have to go through giving evidence again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Biz said:

Alex jones?

Im sorry Husky but you cannot post a video from these people without opening yourself to ridicule and criticism for watching and listening to absolute crap. Please spare us from any more info wars please - This is an openly racist conspiracy theorist who admitted in court that his “internet persona” was a rouse, an act to make money - accused of sexual harassment and has been sued many times. 

This absolute cretin, like that Paul Watson bloke, financially benefits from stirring up far right views, how could you give his argument as a unbiased rationale for supporting the edl thug Yaxley?

I know, it's funny. I'm sure he's an actor. He's always reminded me of that guy from the advert on the Original Robocop film "I'd buy that for a dollar'.

Standards have been in decline for a long time. It's a sad state of affairs when former respected newspapers like the Guardian have become little more than 'infowars' style rags - though pushing a different agenda. Whatever happened to journalism? It seems you don't even have to study it these days, like manufacturing they seem to just get things from the cheapest source available. Whether that be slave labour from China or a random emotionally unstable blogger. As for Huffpost, Jesus! That place seems to be run by bleach drinkers.

Then when you see programs on Sky News where they often have editors of newspapers discussing the headlines, you do worry even further. That guy from the Daily Mail for example seems like an immature prat (he must be in his 50's). Then the plethora of women (there are far too many of them by the way) all seem to be governed by emotions . . (as seen on the 'political discussion talk show' that Graeme Le Saux has been on in the past). Help! Help! You get the feeling that Parliament is similar and that's why the country is in such a state.

Meanwhile the Free Tommy petition has over 450,000 signatures. If that comes to light perhaps the state controlled BBC will be blaming the Russians again.

https://www.change.org/p/theresa-may-mp-free-tommy-robinson

 

Edited by Husky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it that the people who are desperate to free Tommy didn't complain when he was handed the suspended sentence?

All that's happened is that he has broken the conditions of that sentence, so must serve his time inside.

Personally, I think anyone who supports a man convicted of mortgage fraud, ABH, possession of and travelling with a false passport, and several drugs offences must be a bit soft in the head.

Add that to his propensity for telling 15 year olds how fit they are on Twitter and I really cannot see why any sane person would want to be associated with him.

That's all before you consider that he actually doesn't care about the victims at all. He just wants to see brown people in prison, but in his haste may see paedophiles freed onto our streets.

What a hero. Complete @#/?.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tommy, total idiot, he’d be the first to scream about it it the court case got thrown out yet his own self important attention seeking actions could have done just that.

He’d been warned, did it again, it’s a fair cop!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tommy Robinson set up a funding page for his legal fees and then plead guilty anyway!

I'm in the wrong job! His supporters are mugs and he's made a killing out of them time and again!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"This is not some new form of censorship directed at Robinson. These are rules that apply to us all, equally. If he is unsure about that, he's now got time on his hands to read a copy of Essential Law for Journalists"

Puhahahaha well said BBC News.

Internet famous moron thinks his popularity puts him above the law as he constantly chases 'likes'. He is then martyred by those as ignorant as he is. 

This story will be repeated again and again as there is seemingly no end of plonkers looking for an internet fight. The new hooliganism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/05/2018 at 02:01, Husky said:

Did you even watch the video? He didn't say anything that hadn't already been reported in the press. . . so . . .

Literally snatched from the street and threats of arrest for anyone that reports what happened at HIS 'trial' . . .

Very sinister things going on behind the UK iron curtain . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtilwMzitPw

"Help me infowarkenobi you're my only hope . . . "

 

 

 

Yes. I'm also aware it was a clip, in so that he had been live broadcasting for quite a while before that. I haven't seen that part, but maybe that's also related?

He was also, not directly, filming people passing by, who may have been part of the court case. They could easily have been witnesses, jurors etc for all he knew.

It matters not though, because if one of the conditions of his suspended sentence was not to film outside other court cases, then he's clearly doing that. 

I hope the number of idiots petitioning parliament demanding his release realise they are very lucky to live in a democracy. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎29‎/‎05‎/‎2018 at 09:30, K-Hod said:

There's nothing sinister going on.

Only if people think it's sinister to want to protect the victims by not revealing the perpetrators to avoid a retrial. You know, so the victims don't have to go through giving evidence again.

I ask again. If a non muslim prominent citizen would have received the same protection. NO THEY WOULD'NT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Al said:

I ask again. If a non muslim prominent citizen would have received the same protection. NO THEY WOULD'NT!

I honestly think that's conjecture at best and you're getting confused as Tommy Robinson sounds like the definition of a ‘Non-Muslim prominent citizen’, but I'll agree to disagree with you here. 

Remember, whenever there have been similar cases involving Muslim men recently (I.E in Rochdale), there haven't been reporting restrictions during the trial that I can recall.

Either way, I'm happy to trust the judgement of an experienced judge over an attention-seeking cretin like Tommy Robinson.

Edited by K-Hod
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The travellers who set up camp on Thwaites Brewery have literally left the place looking like a Bomb site.They have trashed offices and used them as toilets,stolen cable work etc.Damage estimated at Tens of thousands of pounds.

Absolute Vermin but zero arrests and no prosecutions to date...they just move them on.I am starting to think the authorities are genuinely scared of these low life's.

Meanwhile folk are prosecuted for driving at 36 mph and dropping cigarette ends.

What a ferkin Country this has become....

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/16256233.Criminal_investigation_launched_after_travellers_occupy_Thwaites_brewery_site/?ref=mr&lp=10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have people heard?  That journalist said to be killed yesterday in Kyiv Ukraine, HE'S ALIVE! Banchenko, that's amazing. They ran some sort of operation to fake the killing or something like that.  I thought hoax at first, then, I saw reputable news agencies reporting it. I feel happy for this. Guy has 7 children, 6 are foster children and those 6 are special needs children.

https://112.international/society/arkadiy-babchenkos-murder-family-had-seven-children-six-of-them-fostered-28921.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44307611

273968.JPG

 

 

 

Edited by Audax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Al said:

I ask again. If a non muslim prominent citizen would have received the same protection. NO THEY WOULD'NT!

Yes. They would. They do. EVERY case involving child sexual abuse has these restrictions placed on them UNLESS (crucial bit) the victims waive their right to anonymity.

These victims haven't, so the restrictions stay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.