Tommy Robinson

[Eddie Moliano]

This is crazy. In Israel Tommy interviews an Imam from Leicester who is a fan, they find common ground, gets selfie with him! 🤣

 

[PalazioVecchio]

This is crazy. In Israel Tommy interviews an Imam from Leicester who is a fan, they find common ground, gets selfie with him! 🤣

it was nice to hear the words of that bloke with the hat. Sadly, i fear that he will have now put a target-sign onto his own back. Same as Salman Rushdie.

 

[cryrst]

This is crazy. In Israel Tommy interviews an Imam from Leicester who is a fan, they find common ground, gets selfie with him! 🤣

He’s been banned from his mosque

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

That’s isn’t the point. He excused those covering it up and not acting on it whatsoever. Absolutely appalling in all regards. Have another think mate.

You need to get a new brain!

You attribute meanings to things that simply don’t exist.

Anyone attempting to understand why any person or organisation acts in any way or reaches particular conclusions is merely trying to shine a light. It doesn’t mean they agree or disagree. I was never in a position to agree or disagree. Like all of us I was, and remain, just an observer.

I never excused anyone covering up things. I defended, and still defend, those hard working and under appreciated public servants who try to do their best in very difficult circumstances.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

As I said in the post, he's emblematic.

You did, but you also made direct and totally incorrect assertions about me.

That means you are suggesting that my attitude is typical. When your view of my approach is wrong it means your view of the typical approach is also wrong.

Thus you are asserting that the typical approach is correct.

The typical approach today is to welcome the establishment of the dedicated task force, having learned the scale of the issue, and to support the efforts made to try to understand even more via enquiries.

Many times here I have advocated for another change of approach which I argue goes to the actual heart of the problem. One that would not yield instant results but ought to reshape the future for the upcoming generations.

If you truly want to see a genuinely big and positive change in society then I suggest that you support such suggestions.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

I would guess the police superintendent knew more about the cases he was referring to than you.

It's clearly not a black and white issue.
Yes your points are true in some cases.

This police superintendent was sincere in what he was saying and saddened by it.

I don't think either of us know 100 percent whether the copper was correct. But I'll take his testament over yours in this case.

The recent ongoing events with Pakistani grooming gangs,goes to show that someone in authority high up is blocking progress, as well as police on the street.

If you don't agree, this suggests you don't belive there are any good coopers.

But I think like me, you believe there are a lot of good ones.

I don’t doubt that for a moment. It’s obvious he did.

That, with due respect, isn’t the issue.

The police are often frustrated and disappointed when the CPS refuse to allow a case to go to Court. They may be as convinced as the policeman that they are dealing with low life who need to be locked away but they must also look at the evidence and how it would be used by a defence barrister.

Occasionally they will allow a case to go to trial, even if they expect it to fail, because it’s in the public interest for it to be heard. It’s though a very expensive procedure.

 

[georgenorman]

You need to get a new brain!

You attribute meanings to things that simply don’t exist.

Anyone attempting to understand why any person or organisation acts in any way or reaches particular conclusions is merely trying to shine a light. It doesn’t mean they agree or disagree. I was never in a position to agree or disagree. Like all of us I was, and remain, just an observer.

I never excused anyone covering up things. I defended, and still defend, those hard working and under appreciated public servants who try to do their best in very difficult circumstances.

They didn't "try to do their best". Some of them actually admitted that they didn't take action because they were afraid of being accused of racism. They knew what was going on and as a matter of policy did nothing about it and even persecuted parents who were trying to get them to act.
Your posts on this have been a continued defence of all this along with attempts to play down the clear and obvious fact that the rape gangs were composed of predominately men of Pakistani heritage.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Free speech brother.

That's most important when defending our cornish friends free speech.

I don't think he'd do the same for us.

During "covid" he was massively into supporting the cancellation of people who had a different opinion. Using "misinformation " as the reason.

We are not like him in that respect.

During any time of national crisis the government is bound to control the agenda.

In today’s world that’s much more challenging than it used to be because there really is misinformation that sweeps across the internet which has its origins in places that seek to harm us.

No one wants to curtail reasoned arguments which are backed up by evidence from trusted and respected sources. What is necessary is to ensure that, if it is deemed important that we all follow rules and adopt behaviours that are in our collective best interests, they are followed.

That demands that misinformation is identified and separated from reasoned arguments. That some object and confuse them is as inevitable as the fact that others exploited distrust and monetised it. There are still some who cling to some of those ideas.

Of course when dealing with something like Covid, with unknown outcomes but catastrophic worse case scenarios, steps will be taken that are later seen as incorrect. That’s inevitable and why detailed enquiries are needed to learn as many lessons as possible.

Nor does it stop know it all posters on football fan forums claiming they were right all along.

 

[Stirlingsays]

He’s been banned from his mosque

Kind of proves Robinson's point.

 

[Mattconrov]

I don’t doubt that for a moment. It’s obvious he did.

That, with due respect, isn’t the issue.

The police are often frustrated and disappointed when the CPS refuse to allow a case to go to Court. They may be as convinced as the policeman that they are dealing with low life who need to be locked away but they must also look at the evidence and how it would be used by a defence barrister.

Occasionally they will allow a case to go to trial, even if they expect it to fail, because it’s in the public interest for it to be heard. It’s though a very expensive procedure.

The guy was talking of systematic abuse that was stopped by his superiors. Over 50 cases I think he said. Not just a few.

I agree with you on some points. But your total subservience to the hierarchical system is so rigid it appears to blind you from yourself. Otherwise I'd probably find a lot common ground with you.

The system is set up for injustice to protect those they want to protect. Call me a conspiracy nut if you like. But that's how it is.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

The posts we had on this topic were long and detailed and mostly on the older site.

I'll say to anyone who wants an objective view and sense of what I was dealing with, people can go and gangs and come to their own conclusions.

On this I agree completely.

Anyone reading without a prejudiced prior opinion would, I am quite sure, realise where the objectivity and openness truly existed.

By your own admission you hold views that are “further to the right than Reform”.

Such attitudes colour everything.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

The guy was talking of systematic abuse that was stopped by his superiors. Over 50 cases I think he said. Not just a few.

I agree with you on some points. But your total subservience to the hierarchical system is so rigid it appears to blind you from yourself. Otherwise I'd probably find a lot common ground with you.

The system is set up for injustice to protect those they want to protect. Call me a conspiracy nut if you like. But that's how it is.

I am not though subservient to anything. I am not defending the system. I am trying to explain its impact.

If you want to explore how it could be improved that’s a wholly different debate. A very complex one that is probably above my pay grade.

I don’t though believe the system has been designed to protect anyone. It has just evolved. You can argue it does protect some, but not that it was deliberately intended to.

 

[Rudi Hedman]

They didn't "try to do their best". Some of them actually admitted that they didn't take action because they were afraid of being accused of racism. They knew what was going on and as a matter of policy did nothing about it and even persecuted parents who were trying to get them to act.
Your posts on this have been a continued defence of all this along with attempts to play down the clear and obvious fact that the rape gangs were composed of predominately men of Pakistani heritage.

Yep, he’s a disgrace.

 

[Mattconrov]

I am not though subservient to anything. I am not defending the system. I am trying to explain its impact.

If you want to explore how it could be improved that’s a wholly different debate. A very complex one that is probably above my pay grade.

I don’t though believe the systeim has been designed to protect anyone. It has just evolved. You can argue it does protect some, but not that it was deliberately intended to.

All institutions protect themselves. It's not that " complex ".

Companies, schools, NHS and of course the police and politicsl system. Everyone and everything. That's the nature of the beast.

So when a serious complaint comes in, damage limitation is the first thought.

I'm not in a high position myself to judge. I have family members in high positions with Companies, so I understand the compromises and that institutions protect themselves.

I want justice, it rarely happens.
Sad but true.

We're are kidding ourselves otherwise.
There will be well meaning people in
institutions. But they we soon find out they are faced with an incrediblely tough challenge. Plus they may lose everything they have ever worked for - and still get no justice. That's why you get so few whistle blowers.

Faced with the integrity of the institution coming into disrepute after allegations of child abuse for instance; the institution.will first look to protect itself.

Nothing has ever really evolved, we are still the same.

 

[Mattconrov]

During any time of national crisis the government is bound to control the agenda.

In today’s world that’s much more challenging than it used to be because there really is misinformation that sweeps across the internet which has its origins in places that seek to harm us.

No one wants to curtail reasoned arguments which are backed up by evidence from trusted and respected sources. What is necessary is to ensure that, if it is deemed important that we all follow rules and adopt behaviours that are in our collective best interests, they are followed.

That demands that misinformation is identified and separated from reasoned arguments. That some object and confuse them is as inevitable as the fact that others exploited distrust and monetised it. There are still some who cling to some of those ideas.

Of course when dealing with something like Covid, with unknown outcomes but catastrophic worse case scenarios, steps will be taken that are later seen as incorrect. That’s inevitable and why detailed enquiries are needed to learn as many lessons as possible.

Nor does it stop know it all posters on football fan forums claiming they were right all along.

I said I'd respect your free speech but you wouldn't mine. Here's the proof.

The facts were many people didn't trust the "trusted and respected sources"

Questioning power is one the quintessential elements of free speech . Otherwise you will have what we have anyway; a government and system that is totally against free speech.

You will say we have free speech; but then say you can't say can't quiz and debate in a so called national emergency..

You come out with a lot of words to describe a simple problem. Do we have free speech, answer is no.

Its not we have free speech until the government doesn't like it. That's not free speech.

You talk out of both sides of your mouth.

We all know you by now. Lol.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

I said I'd respect your free speech but you wouldn't mine. Here's the proof.

The facts were many people didn't trust the "trusted and respected sources"

Questioning power is one the quintessential elements of free speech . Otherwise you will have what we have anyway; a government and system that is totally against free speech.

You will say we have free speech; but then say you can't say can't quiz and debate in a so called national emergency..

You come out with a lot of words to describe a simple problem. Do we have free speech, answer is no.

Its not we have free speech until the government doesn't like it. That's not free speech.

You talk out of both sides of your mouth.

We all know you by now. Lol.

Out of his arse mostly.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

All institutions protect themselves. It's not that " complex ".

Companies, schools, NHS and of course the police and politicsl system. Everyone and everything. That's the nature of the beast.

So when a serious complaint comes in, damage limitation is the first thought.

I'm not in a high position myself to judge. I have family members in high positions with Companies, so I understand the compromises and that institutions protect themselves.

I want justice, it rarely happens.
Sad but true.

We're are kidding ourselves otherwise.
There will be well meaning people in
institutions. But they we soon find out they are faced with an incrediblely tough challenge. Plus they may lose everything they have ever worked for - and still get no justice. That's why you get so few whistle blowers.

Faced with the integrity of the institution coming into disrepute after allegations of child abuse for instance; the institution.will first look to protect itself.

Nothing has ever really evolved, we are still the same.

We aren’t though talking about institutions protecting themselves! We are talking about the duties of the CPS to ensure cases are not brought to trial that they believe will fail because of weaknesses in the evidence.

I owned two businesses after I stopped being the MD of a company you will know. So I understand how companies are organised. Of course they must protect themselves, and their shareholders investments. That doesn’t put them outside of the law though and one they they do protect themselves is to ensure they are compliant with it.

We all want justice. The only question is whose justice we want. That of the product of centuries of distilled experience, flawed though that might be, or that of any particular group or mob?

Yes, the present system is tough. Yes, it’s imperfect. But is still better than the alternative.

It may well be the instinct of any institution under criticism to become protective and close ranks. It’s then down to other institutions to prise that open. Which is exactly what has happened.

I don’t think things have stayed the same. I have witnessed enormous changes during my lifetime, some of which will be tried, rejected and reversed and others accepted and continued. That’s evolution in a nutshell.

 

[Mattconrov]

We aren’t though talking about institutions protecting themselves! We are talking about the duties of the CPS to ensure cases are not brought to trial that they believe will fail because of weaknesses in the evidence.

I owned two businesses after I stopped being the MD

Was this the company you were MD of Wisbech. Lol

 

[HKOwen]

Was this the company you were MD of Wisbech. Lol

His "glittering" career was in sales , never a C suite executive. Of course he does a Rachel Reeves on his CV to self promote. I recall it was food additives or something similar. The Philipinnes is where companies send people who can't make the grade in the other Asian countries. Last chance saloon for failed expats

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

I said I'd respect your free speech but you wouldn't mine. Here's the proof.

The facts were many people didn't trust the "trusted and respected sources"

Questioning power is one the quintessential elements of free speech . Otherwise you will have what we have anyway; a government and system that is totally against free speech.

You will say we have free speech; but then say you can't say can't quiz and debate in a so called national emergency..

You come out with a lot of words to describe a simple problem. Do we have free speech, answer is no.

Its not we have free speech until the government doesn't like it. That's not free speech.

You talk out of both sides of your mouth.

We all know you by now. Lol.

The real question in that crisis was not that they didn’t. That was obvious. It was why they didn’t.

We elect governments to govern. Not to delegate responsibility to our adversaries spreading malicious information on the internet.

Of course questioning power is the foundation of free speech. It’s not challenged by anyone in normal times and is encouraged because only by defeating bad arguments by better ones can democracy work.

Covid was not a normal time. It was a national crisis. Extraordinary times demand extraordinary responses from those we have asked to govern us.

People spread misinformation all the time. No one tries to stop them, even during Covid. The only difference then was that our government was more aggressive than usual in countering it and in spreading their own messages. Free speech applies both ways. Lies are still lies and it’s perfectly acceptable to say so.