Dear England

[Martin]

Re: Tommy Robinson Martin, iirc (and correct me if I'm wrong) you used to post about him a bit? I remember you putting up videos of him being interviewed and kind of being treated unfairly. What do you think of him these days? Kind of like that C4 interview with Jordan Peterson.

I did, when he speaks he can be quite smart, and just because he does stupid things it doesn't mean everything he says is wrong or we have to go against it. When I saw him on Free Speech on the BBC I didn't like the name calling and narcissism on display from the audience and panel. There was no attempt to have any discussion. I hate it when people do that.

To be honest I always thought he was a bit of a knob (but who also was raising some hard questions that are treated as taboo). The more I see of him now it seems he has bought into his own persona and hype that he'll do anything to stay relevant (rather than actually caring about the issues he supposedly stands for).

I agree with that, he has made a career out of it all, which isn't even bad imo but he loses credibility when you see him outside mosques shoving microphones in people's faces and being confrontational about things.

Douglas Murray is the guy to highlight the issues Tommy Robinson wants to highlight imo.

[Mushy peas]

I agree, it winds me up too. Let people speak. If they have fornicate up views they will hang themselves.

[Dante]

Of course he did.. This is what the state lawyer "advised" him to do. He'd probably get a better "deal" out of it.
It happens all the time. People plead "Guilty" to get a lighter sentence even if they are NOT.... Honestly are you people that gullible ... Turn of BBC for God's sake...

Plea bargaining is not a concept in English law as it is in America. Sentencing is decided by the judiciary on the facts of the case. You can't plead guilty in an English court in exchange for a lesser sentence. Calling the barrister who represented him a 'state lawyer' is misleading. Barristers get two types of work. They can be 'instructed', which means hired directly essentially. Tommy Robinson has previously been represented by a barrister who confirmed that they were not in attendance, but will not speak further on the matter unless instructed to by Tommy Robinson. So we don't know for certain, but it seems likely that she could not attend. When this happens another barrister, often from the same chambers, but not always will step in. This is called a Return, and there is absolutely nothing unusual about this.

The barrister in question has previously worked as a prosecutor, but he specialises in criminal defence, so most of his cases are in that.

I'm not a legal expert but a quick google search shows that "breach of peace" and "contempt of court" are NOT the same fornicate thing but I guess one can lead to another..

Still it is painfully obvious that the police wasn't even instructed properly to use the correct terminology... This is why TR asked several times.
"What does it mean?, What does it mean" He realized that that was a bogus charge and wanted to have the explanation on camera.

No they aren't the same thing, but that doesn't matter. It doesn't even matter if his arrest wasn't lawful (it was, but it wouldn't matter if it wasn't). You can be arrested for one thing and charged with another, or even released without charge. This is perfectly normal.

I agree with one thing though.. If Tommy Robinson wanted to stay out of jail he should've kept quiet, and stay off line and the public eye until the sentences are read and the publication ban removed. I get it that he willingly put himself in this situation, but then again because of this "Play it safe, don't say anything attitude" the west is in such a deep shit.
It's a well documented fact that all those grooming scandals, child rapes and pedophilia went on for decades because authorities were afraid to be accused of being "Racist"..
This is how pathetic the UK has become, so spare me all this legal mambo jumbo "Oh he disobeyed court orders he deserves to be in jail" bullshit

Again, you are misunderstanding the problem. Reporting restrictions were in place to ensure that, if these men are guilty, they are able to be convicted in a fair trial where the verdict cannot be overturned, or a mistrial declared. He was quite clearly warned about this at the previous contempt of court trial when he was given a suspended sentence, but chose to ignore it. He knew what would happen if he did it and he did it anyway.

I can guarantee you that if the roles were flipped and a bunch of white British dudes had raped thousands of innocent muslim/migrant girls everyone would be singing a totally different tune.. There would be no publication ban.. There would be crowds of angry muslims on the streets protesting and rioting and neither the police nor the injustice system would dare to touch them. You know it I know it everyone knows it ..

There are two different sets of rules.
One for native Europeans and one for the so called minorities .. and this is the same all across western Europe..

Quite simply, you're wrong. This is the guide for reporting restrictions. A key quote from this as it applies to this case:

Section 4(2) is regularly invoked in cases involving sequential trials. The aim in those cases is to postpone
the reporting of specific parts of the evidence in the first trial to prevent prejudice to the defendants in
the second trial.

[Dante]

On Tommy Robinson specifically, I think he either doesn't realise the harm he does to his chosen causes, or he doesn't care. I'll grant him good faith though and assume he just doesn't realise.

This idea of Tommy Robinson, citizen reporter has a massive flaw in it, which is that Tommy Robinson is a terrible reporter. This case for example, his reporting consisted of an hour long diatribe about muslim peodophile gangs, and cover ups with repeated insistence that he was covering it because "the media won't. Except that there were media covering it, they just abide by the reporting restrictions, and won't publish anything until the postponement period is up. He hadn't attended a single day of the trial, which is something that strikes me as a sensible thing to do if you plan on reporting on it.

He lacks any discernible journalistic skills, and frequently violates journalistic ethics and standards. He's packing enthusiasm and a smart phone essentially, which isn't really the qualifications you want. He needs to work with an actual producer (Caolan Robertson is absolutely not one) and stop the live streams. He needs to fact check (an actual producer would make him do this) and produce scripted, pre-recorded content. He probably also needs to get a writing partner to help him structure this whilst retaining his voice, because as I said, he's not very good at this.

Once he learns these skills, he can probably do it himself again. but now he'd be credible.

[Relly]

Why even bother

Yeah, why bother, I will never become a dumb sheep with his head down on the way to the slaughter. Clearly I differ greatly from the majority here in that I value freedom of speech and due process of the law and saving my country from the global elite and their army of invaders.

You have, once again, commented on issue without bothering to find out the real story

You "Value freedom of speech" yet condemn any black American footballer willing to exercise that right and celebrate their punishment

Spare me

Can't decide if you are incredibly stupid or just incredibly dishonest. I have stated my opinion about that half white, raised in a rich while family football player. I have zero issues with people utilizing their right to free speech (a concept most on here wouldn't understand) I think he is fully within his rights to use his spare time to go to police stations, hold rallies, whatever he wants to do. My issues are as follows, firstly his whole premise is based on defunct facts. Harvard (huge leftist school) put out a study that debunked every thing his protest is based on. I love free speech, but I don't like people using free speech to spread lies. Fine he can do that, but then the media should be doing their jobs properly and countering his protests with the facts. Secondly, and most important in this case, you have a right to free speech in the US, but that is on your time. He was an employee of the NFL, and when he was on the field he was doing his job as an employee. His personal opinions, which don't necessarily reflect the views of the league, led to actions which hurt the bottom line of said business. It's really as simple as that, do what you want on your own time, but when at work act professional and abide by the rules set forth by your employer.

I won't tell you this again, but to be honest this is probably one of the last posts you're likely to see from me on here.

[Sandies]

Philando Castle
Tamir Rice
Michael Brown
Eric Garner
Stephon Clark....

The fact that ONE of these happened, is an injustice. So even IF he is arguing against one of them, he is arguing injustice

[Relly]

Philando Castle
Tamir Rice
Michael Brown
Eric Garner
Stephon Clark....

The fact that ONE of these happened, is an injustice. So even IF he is arguing against one of them, he is arguing injustice

Daniel Shaver
Jason Michael Robison
Ricky Whidden
Chase Anthony Tuseth
Jake Childers
Michael Tyler Jacques
Roy Minton
Jimmy Lee Lawson
Amber Lewis
Randy Lee Cumberledge
...

I could go on and on and on. The first guy is probably one of the worst examples of a police shooting you will hear, white guy. The rest are all white and they were from a list from 2016, barely skimmed the list. You can keep saying the same wrong thing over and over again, it's not going to make it right. There is a police problem in the US, not a racism problem.

Even when dealing with day to day situations that are supposedly examples of racism, I listen to this radio show and one of the things the host (white guy) does is tell stories about interactions he has out in public with other people, or employees at businesses he goes to where the person he is dealing with gives him attitude, treats him poorly, made rude gestures, etc and he will follow it by saying, this is an example of someone being an asshole, now I'm white so I will take as someone just being an asshole, but if I was black than I would just assume it's racism. I think it's a pretty eye opening bit, there are a lot of assholes out there who treat their follow citizens like shit, and if you aren't white it's easy to assume it's because they are racist, but in actuallity they are just assholes. Not saying there aren't racist people, there are and they come from all races, but there are a lot more assholes then there are racists.

[Sandies]

So shooting unarmed black men is alright because they do it to white folk as well? If a white player protested the killing of white men by police would you be okay with that?
Kaepernik has focused on the blacks because there are not as many people fighting for them. The conviction rate is a lot higher for those who have killed whites than the black. While white is killed as well, ARMED white men are as likely to be arrested peacefully as UNARMED black men are to being shot.
Kaepernik started the blacklivesmatter movement, which focuses on justice for wite victims just as much as black. Guess who pushed for the release for the Shaver video, and campaigned for justice ever since.

Want to know what else the studies showed
25% of all police shootings are black - despite making up 13% of the population
Black people are 3 times more likely to be shot than white
Large cities involve police killing more black men than the national murder rate
Larger cities involve black men being 7 times more likely to be killed by a policeman than by another black man


But yeah - its "invented injustice"

If you have an issue that people are only protesting black men dying, then fine, argue against that. But don't spout bullshit to me that you "value freedom of speech" when you openly celebrate someone exercising that right losing their job over it

The fact you constantly mention the fact that he is "half white" tells you everything you need to know

[Dante]

From this talk, I can only assume that we have once again taken control of the colonies.

[ivandaman]

And the good news just keep on coming


Britain is 'home to 35,000 Islamist fanatics, more than any other country in Europe, top official warns

[Dante]

This isn't quite true.

As well as the number being misreported, what the number refers to has been as well. It's the number of "subjects of interest" to counter terrorism agencies, and we don't know what period of time this covers.

It also isn't just Islamic related terror groups. It's all possible terror threats. So for example, the threat level in Northern Ireland related terrorism in Northern Ireland is Severe, the same level as international terrorism is rated across the UK. In March, the threat level to Great Britain from Northern Ireland was dropped to Moderate, but at the time we're talking about these numbers being gathered, it would have been at Substantial.

[ivandaman]

Of course it isn't "quite true" Dante .. Those are the official figures.

The actual number or radical islamic lunatics who can't wait to blow your brains off is most likely triple that number .. Somewhere around 100K ..

[Relly]

So shooting unarmed black men is alright because they do it to white folk as well? If a white player protested the killing of white men by police would you be okay with that?
Kaepernik has focused on the blacks because there are not as many people fighting for them. The conviction rate is a lot higher for those who have killed whites than the black. While white is killed as well, ARMED white men are as likely to be arrested peacefully as UNARMED black men are to being shot.
Kaepernik started the blacklivesmatter movement, which focuses on justice for wite victims just as much as black. Guess who pushed for the release for the Shaver video, and campaigned for justice ever since.

Want to know what else the studies showed
25% of all police shootings are black - despite making up 13% of the population
Black people are 3 times more likely to be shot than white
Large cities involve police killing more black men than the national murder rate
Larger cities involve black men being 7 times more likely to be killed by a policeman than by another black man


But yeah - its "invented injustice"

If you have an issue that people are only protesting black men dying, then fine, argue against that. But don't spout bullshit to me that you "value freedom of speech" when you openly celebrate someone exercising that right losing their job over it

The fact you constantly mention the fact that he is "half white" tells you everything you need to know

Quite being so disengenuous in your arguements, do you really think I was implying that it's okay to shoot black people because they shoot white people too? I clearly stated that the shootings in general are a problem, but the problem is the cops and poor training, not that the are specifically targeting black people because they are all racist.

And I know that the percentage of black people shot compared to their percentage of the population seems high, but the Harvard study shows that despite being only 13% of the population black people commit over 50% of the violent crimes, thus are much more likely to have a run in with the police. Not nice to say, but facts don't care about your feelings.

Kaepernik started this for two reasons, his football career was falling apart and he wanted to stay relevant and he started dating a whackjob, far left, race baiting activist that told him to do this.

And I don't know if you have Black Lives Matter where you live and that gives you an impression of what they stand for, but what you described is not at all what they are in the US. They have one message and one cause, perpetuating the false narrative that all cops are racists and target black men. They only care and get involved when a white cop shoots a black man. They don't care about black cops shooting black man, they don't care about black civilians shooting black civilians, they don't care that more black babies are aborted then born, they don't care about the violence in Chicago affecting their community, they don't care about any crime directed at any other race other then black people. It is a racists terrorist organization that ensites violence against innocent people.

[Martin]

Relly's point is that police brutality is not a race issue and that an overrepresentarion in per capita shootings doesn't necessarily mean it is racist especially when per capita crime within that demographic aligns with it.

Both of these I agree with.

Some of your stats were suspicious but this is the most shocking one for me:

"Larger cities involve black men being 7 times more likely to be killed by a policeman than by another black man."

Do you have a source Brent? I have heard the number 1 cause of preventable death for white males in the US is car accidents, the number 1 cause of preventable deaths for black males is homicides. Just going off the figures for Chicago I cannot believe that a black male is seven times more likely to be killed by a policeman than by another black male. That just doesn't add up.

[Sandies]

Relly's point is that police brutality is not a race issue and that an overrepresentarion in per capita shootings doesn't necessarily mean it is racist especially when per capita crime within that demographic aligns with it.

Both of these I agree with.

Some of your stats were suspicious but this is the most shocking one for me:

"Larger cities involve black men being 7 times more likely to be killed by a policeman than by another black man."

Do you have a source Brent? I have heard the number 1 cause of preventable death for white males in the US is car accidents, the number 1 cause of preventable deaths for black males is homicides. Just going off the figures for Chicago I cannot believe that a black male is seven times more likely to be killed by a policeman than by another black male. That just doesn't add up.

https://policeviolencereport.org/

[Martin]

Can't find where it says that. Seven times more likely to be killed by police, how was this calculated? Which cities? Link to study?

Also that link shows that the biggest victims when it comes to being unarmed and killed by police, is white people.