Gisèle Pelicot - Husband Jailed...
News7 mins ago
Free Tommy
223 Answers
https:/
There is not doubt Tommy is a political prisoner.
The support he is getting cant be ignored.
Now it is protests, next it will be violence.
People have reached breaking point.
Do you agree?
There is not doubt Tommy is a political prisoner.
The support he is getting cant be ignored.
Now it is protests, next it will be violence.
People have reached breaking point.
Do you agree?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The not the amount replies, it was me shouting 180 because Prudie is bang on.
https:/
https:/
andy-hughes, If you thought your action would benefit no-one but yourself, you wouldn’t have chosen that course through a sense of morality so that response is irrelevant.
//If I really thought that my behaviour would be of notable benefit to society as a whole, I would consider breaking the law, and accepting the consequences.//
I’m pleased to hear it. You clearly understand where Tommy Robinson is coming from then.
//If I really thought that my behaviour would be of notable benefit to society as a whole, I would consider breaking the law, and accepting the consequences.//
I’m pleased to hear it. You clearly understand where Tommy Robinson is coming from then.
Rather long but well worth the read.
https:/
https:/
>As a bystander it's interesting to note that the vitriol poured out on this thread against Tommy Robinson seems to be quite acceptable whereas similar against the perpetrators of these crimes is only dared by the most reactionary of ABers and is dismissed as bigotry.
Then Talbot says "Prudie is bang on."
Prudie/Talbot, I'm not aware that anyone here has ever defended Muslim (or any other) grooming gangs. The crimes are despicable. Has anyone on AB suggested otherwise? Or is this another made up statement/non-sequiteur upon which some ABers specialise
Then Talbot says "Prudie is bang on."
Prudie/Talbot, I'm not aware that anyone here has ever defended Muslim (or any other) grooming gangs. The crimes are despicable. Has anyone on AB suggested otherwise? Or is this another made up statement/non-sequiteur upon which some ABers specialise
//I'm not aware that anyone here has ever defended Muslim (or any other) grooming gangs. The crimes are despicable. Has anyone on AB suggested otherwise?//
No, but you could easily get the impression that some posters hate Robinson more than they do the rapists Robinson is campaigning against.
Some posts express a malicious glee that Robinson is in prison, yet nothing Robinson has done, or is ever likely to do is one hundredth as bad as the acts committed by thousands of rapists who today are free men walking the streets of major towns and cities.
Ought that not be the bigger cause of outrage?
Robinson may indeed be an odious man, but he isn't odious for wanting redress for gang rape. And, whatever, you may think of his methods, he is a reaction to the indifference of all the organs of state to the scandal.
And ought not he be given credit for publicising (at some cost to himself) what others have tried to keep hidden?
This is how Douglas Murray (from the article in AOG's link) puts it:
"...any challenge Robinson presents is all a secondary issue. The primary issue is that for years the British state allowed gangs of men to rape thousands of young girls across Britain. For years the police, politicians, Crown Prosecution Service, and every other arm of the state ostensibly dedicated to protecting these girls failed them. As a number of government inquires have concluded, they turned their face away from these girls because they were terrified of the accusations of racism that would come their way if they did address them. They decided it wasn’t worth the aggravation.
By contrast, Tommy Robinson thought it was worth the aggravation, even if that meant having his whole life turned upside down. Some years ago, after crawling over all of his personal affairs and the affairs of all his immediate family, the police found an irregularity on a mortgage application, prosecuted Robinson, convicted him, and sent him to prison on that charge. In prison he was assaulted and almost killed by Muslim inmates."
No, but you could easily get the impression that some posters hate Robinson more than they do the rapists Robinson is campaigning against.
Some posts express a malicious glee that Robinson is in prison, yet nothing Robinson has done, or is ever likely to do is one hundredth as bad as the acts committed by thousands of rapists who today are free men walking the streets of major towns and cities.
Ought that not be the bigger cause of outrage?
Robinson may indeed be an odious man, but he isn't odious for wanting redress for gang rape. And, whatever, you may think of his methods, he is a reaction to the indifference of all the organs of state to the scandal.
And ought not he be given credit for publicising (at some cost to himself) what others have tried to keep hidden?
This is how Douglas Murray (from the article in AOG's link) puts it:
"...any challenge Robinson presents is all a secondary issue. The primary issue is that for years the British state allowed gangs of men to rape thousands of young girls across Britain. For years the police, politicians, Crown Prosecution Service, and every other arm of the state ostensibly dedicated to protecting these girls failed them. As a number of government inquires have concluded, they turned their face away from these girls because they were terrified of the accusations of racism that would come their way if they did address them. They decided it wasn’t worth the aggravation.
By contrast, Tommy Robinson thought it was worth the aggravation, even if that meant having his whole life turned upside down. Some years ago, after crawling over all of his personal affairs and the affairs of all his immediate family, the police found an irregularity on a mortgage application, prosecuted Robinson, convicted him, and sent him to prison on that charge. In prison he was assaulted and almost killed by Muslim inmates."
FF you have completely misunderstood what I said which I thought was reasonably clear - I didn't say a single word about ABers defending Muslims or grooming gangs in fact quite the opposite, I said if ABers called these gangs the equivalent of thugs, guttersnipes whatever (I'm not trawling through it all again) then they'd get a mouthful of names like bigot/racist/Islamaphobe back. Nothing at all to do with what you said.
Can I add why is there a group on here who keep using this patronising look at me Latin phrase of Non Sequitur? No-one speaks like that, I don't know what it means and I'm certainly not going to google it so I can use it too.
Can I add why is there a group on here who keep using this patronising look at me Latin phrase of Non Sequitur? No-one speaks like that, I don't know what it means and I'm certainly not going to google it so I can use it too.
// Just an immediate reaction when presented with andy-hughes’ garbled u-turn. Sorry it went over your head. Let's just say double standards abound. //
There is no 'u-turn', garbled or otherwise.
If 'Tommy Robinson' and others want to fret themselves stupid about what they perceive as a Muslim 'takeover' - then I completely understand why they feel that way.
That is not to say that I support their views in any way shape or form.
It is possible to understand someone's viewpoint whilst fundamentally disagreeing with it.
But if you recall the thrust of my posts about 'Tommy Robinson', they concentrate not on the validity of what he claims to be his 'concerns' - but the way those claims are rooted entirely in the aggressive criminal arrogant loud-mouthed posturing ego-polishing prescence with which he goes about making his views heard.
Such a rampant self-worship make him blind to the fact that laws apply to him as much as anyone else - which is why his complete contempt for the law has landed him in prison.
The depthless irony of 'Tommy' protesting about his perceived inadequacies of the laws of the land, while he simultaneously arrogantly breaks them, and is punished accordingly is something that I imagine escapes him, and I know for certain it escapes his supporters on this site.
There is no 'u-turn', garbled or otherwise.
If 'Tommy Robinson' and others want to fret themselves stupid about what they perceive as a Muslim 'takeover' - then I completely understand why they feel that way.
That is not to say that I support their views in any way shape or form.
It is possible to understand someone's viewpoint whilst fundamentally disagreeing with it.
But if you recall the thrust of my posts about 'Tommy Robinson', they concentrate not on the validity of what he claims to be his 'concerns' - but the way those claims are rooted entirely in the aggressive criminal arrogant loud-mouthed posturing ego-polishing prescence with which he goes about making his views heard.
Such a rampant self-worship make him blind to the fact that laws apply to him as much as anyone else - which is why his complete contempt for the law has landed him in prison.
The depthless irony of 'Tommy' protesting about his perceived inadequacies of the laws of the land, while he simultaneously arrogantly breaks them, and is punished accordingly is something that I imagine escapes him, and I know for certain it escapes his supporters on this site.
andy-hughes, Yes, I do recall the thrust of your posts on Tommy Robinson. In general // aggressive criminal arrogant loud-mouthed posturing ego-polishing prescence // Not sure what precence is, but if you say so.
//Such a rampant self-worship make him blind to the fact that laws apply to him as much as anyone else - which is why his complete contempt for the law has landed him in prison.//
And yet you say, “If I really thought that my behaviour would be of notable benefit to society as a whole, I would consider breaking the law, and accepting the consequences.”
No u-turn? Make your mind up.
//Such a rampant self-worship make him blind to the fact that laws apply to him as much as anyone else - which is why his complete contempt for the law has landed him in prison.//
And yet you say, “If I really thought that my behaviour would be of notable benefit to society as a whole, I would consider breaking the law, and accepting the consequences.”
No u-turn? Make your mind up.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
Body & Soul18 mins ago
ChatterBank21 mins ago
Society & Culture25 mins ago
