Tommy Robinson and the new Totalitarianism

[PZ99]

No, under the harsh light of publicity they had to revert to the actual rule of law. In any case you may have noticed that I was specifically referring to the circumstances of his imprisonment, which clearly be breached his human rights under British law.

It is alarming that you guys are actually ignoring this or waving it off as some sort of beat up. Also not the least bit surprised that the likes of basilio are referring to the initial falsehoods of secret barrusterr for the fact of the matter rather than referring to the actual truth of the matter.

****ing sinister.

Sinister is taking this guys' claim of human rights violations as fact which is what the video has done. If you want to believe it that's your prerogative. I am far more likely to buy the rebuttal by the prison more than a claim from a Youtube video about a criminal with form for being an a-grade bullshidder.

I await with fervent anticipation for proof of his Guantanamo Bay style torture

 

[Junior]

Hi wayneL, are you also a fan of Blair Cottrell?

 

[moXJO]

Hi wayneL, are you also a fan of Blair Cottrell?

Wasn't there some (overblown?) reaction after he was on sky?

 

[SirRumpole]

Wasn't there some (overblown?) reaction after he was on sky?

How Sky can claim to be a serious News organisation and give time to Neo Nazis is beyond me.

If they also gave time to Marxists they may claim to be balanced, but giving exposure to any extremists takes them out of the mainstream and into the looney brigade.

 

[wayneL]

Hi wayneL, are you also a fan of Blair Cottrell?

Ahh, the good old Strawman.

I don't really know enough about him to make a comment, however I support his right to state his views.

Vis a vis, I am not a "fan" of anyone. I find points of agreement and dsagreement with every person, to a greater or lesser extent, including TR.

However, Tommy is emblematic of the misrepresentation and demonisation as practiced by the left, and persecution thereof.

I say lets listen to reasonable debate from both sides, discuss and debate those opinions, and let the chips fall where they may in the broader community.

So, I say let Blair Cottrel (rather parodic spoof accounts ) air his ideology. That way, we can agree or disagree, to whatever extent we as intelligent humans se fit, with full cognizance of whatever those views are.

Are you a fan of Joseph Stalin? (Don't answer, the question was rhetorical)

 

[McLovin]

How Sky can claim to be a serious News organisation and give time to Neo Nazis is beyond me.

Middle aged men with failed careers spending their evenings hosting little watched tv shows – pro bono – doesn't sound like the makings of a serious news organisation.

Then again, that is their demographic skew so better the devil you know!

 

[McLovin]

Ahh, the good old Strawman.

Saved for posterity.

 

[wayneL]

Middle aged men with failed careers spending their evenings hosting little watched tv shows – pro bono – doesn't sound like the makings of a serious news organisation.

Then again, that is their demographic skew so better the devil you know!

Oh how puerile.

I gave you more credit than that.

 

[wayneL]

Saved for posterity.

Bring it on McLovin.

Anytime bro.

 

[basilio]

He has posted updates since: https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/01/the-tommy-robinson-judgment-what-does-it-all-mean/

I found all the analysis of the secret barrister very illuminating. Lots of law, lots of exploration of legal procedures. Well worth a read.

I'm not surprised that other posters have excised particular comments that somehow shine a favourable light on the issue on repeated contempt charges against Tommy. For what its worth I'll also add the final comments made by the secret barrister. In my view it puts it all in persepective.

I think I may have been. But looking back over the litany of plainly false statements circulated between May and now – that Robinson’s “reporting” was nothing more than the BBC had done; that he was targeted by the deep state; that Robinson’s original barrister was an “unqualified duty solicitor”; that TR was never in contempt of court as the trial was over; that the courts were “covering up” serious crimes by certain racial groups; the dishonest framing of the debate as one of “free speech” rather than interfering with justice; and the other hundreds of fantastical theories clogging my Twitter notifications today – I’d suggest, self-servingly, that an inaccurate but well-meaning prediction – such as we all make in the courts every day – is lesser a social evil than the deliberate, racially-tinged misinformation campaign that we do our best to counter.

 

[McLovin]

Bring it on McLovin.

Anytime bro.

Do as I say, not as I do, ay?

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/posts/991054/

 

[McLovin]

Oh how puerile.

I gave you more credit than that.

Who do you think is watching that cr@p? It's talkback radio on a TV screen.

The channel may have an ageing audience – 23,000 of Bolt's aforementioned 27,000 viewers were in the 55+ age demographic, while 27,000 of Jones' 34,000 were in the same senior bracket – but surely they could handle the odd jolt.

 

[Tisme]

I found all the analysis of the secret barrister very illuminating. Lots of law, lots of exploration of legal procedures. Well worth a read.

I'm not surprised that other posters have excised particular comments that somehow shine a favourable light on the issue on repeated contempt charges against Tommy. For what its worth I'll also add the final comments made by the secret barrister. In my view it puts it all in persepective.

I think I may have been. But looking back over the litany of plainly false statements circulated between May and now – that Robinson’s “reporting” was nothing more than the BBC had done; that he was targeted by the deep state; that Robinson’s original barrister was an “unqualified duty solicitor”; that TR was never in contempt of court as the trial was over; that the courts were “covering up” serious crimes by certain racial groups; the dishonest framing of the debate as one of “free speech” rather than interfering with justice; and the other hundreds of fantastical theories clogging my Twitter notifications today – I’d suggest, self-servingly, that an inaccurate but well-meaning prediction – such as we all make in the courts every day – is lesser a social evil than the deliberate, racially-tinged misinformation campaign that we do our best to counter.

I don't think you can discount what the exemplar appeals judge has said because of some, perhaps qualified, person posting under the cloak of anonymity.... great for conspiracy drones, but inadmissible as evidence in a court.

That "secret barrister" admits he has already been waxing lyrical with untruths of his own making prior to TR's release...... which goes to show how the law is a complex thing even way back when Dicey was leading the charge for rule of law as opposed to unchecked administrative licence.

 

[wayneL]

Who do you think is watching that cr@p? It's talkback radio on a TV screen.

How is that even relevant to the views put forth therein? Either a person has a right to air his or her views as per natural rights of free speech (subject to reasonable caveats) or not.

Censorship of those is counterproductive on a number of levels, whichever wing they come from.

It's obvious that you are unreasonably offended by what you *think my views are, and your responses more emotional than logical. Ipso facto, you have chosen to dislike me based on these online perceptions.

That's childish.

Happy to debate you anytime on actual issues on a reasoned basis, even in person. Ill meet anyone here over a beer or six.

 

[SirRumpole]

Who do you think is watching that cr@p? It's talkback radio on a TV screen.

About 5,000 so I heard.

Tony Abbott followers probably.

 

[Tisme]

About 5,000 so I heard.

Tony Abbott followers probably.

About 33k and has been televised on Fox News USA, Tommy Tucker's is in the mix now. Only 21 dislikes compared to 4300 likes.

 

[moXJO]

How Sky can claim to be a serious News organisation and give time to Neo Nazis is beyond me.

If they also gave time to Marxists they may claim to be balanced, but giving exposure to any extremists takes them out of the mainstream and into the looney brigade.

What was it about, or did they already take it down?

 

[SirRumpole]

What was it about, or did they already take it down?

Taken down I think.

This looney was going on about how every school kid should have a picture of Hitler on their desk and other such cr@p.

 

[Junior]

At some point freedom of speech becomes hate speech. Where that line is drawn is always going to be a matter of debate.

 

[wayneL]

How Sky can claim to be a serious News organisation and give time to Neo Nazis is beyond me.

If they also gave time to Marxists they may claim to be balanced, but giving exposure to any extremists takes them out of the mainstream and into the looney brigade.

Okay Horace. I can see the guy is anti Islamist. That is not necessarily a Nazi position.

Can you detail what his views are that makes him neo Nazi.

Before doing so, perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the actual policies of Nationalsozialistische, many of which are in common with the modern left, more than the right.