26 5 mins 4 yrs

The British State does not like dissent, let alone when it revolves around a charismatic and popular figure in the form of Tommy Robinson. I have never met Mr Robinson but I am well aware of the fact that he is a high profile individual who is outspoken on issues the Government finds sensitive, it not downright embarrassing. This has turned him into a walking talking target with his reputation, and now potentially his life, in the cross-hairs.

Robinson has spoken out against the mainly Pakistani Muslim rape gangs that have spread across the country and it was against that context that he was arrested for “allegedly breaching the peace”today outside Leeds Crown court. Video footage of his arrest is available here. At a time when we are told that Policing is under-resourced due to savage cuts, it is instructive to observe the vast number of Police officers there to arrest Mr Robinson, an unarmed and defenceless man.

Whilst I do not wish to comment on the specific legal case itself as there are reporting restrictions in place, the Independent reports “court officials confirmed that the trial of nine defendants is ongoing”. Nine.

The past number of years have seen many court cases where groups of mainly Pakistani muslim men have been convicted of commiting industrial scale levels of sexual abuse of young girls. Rotherham, Rochdale, Oxford, Telford, and Bristol to name but a few pay grim testimony to their egregious crimes. Surely history shows we should be focusing on the groomers rather than those who seek to expose the groomers?

The ongoing demonisation and persecution of Tommy Robinson cannot go with comment. The legacy media set him up in all news reports as a “far-right” figure and no story is complete without a mention of his time as leader of the EDL. Robinson left the EDL in 2013and has publicly and vocally condemned it.

“I acknowledge the dangers of far-right extremism and the ongoing need to counter Islamist ideology not with violence but with better, democratic ideas.”

But the legacy media never lets him forget his political origins. Compare that to how it treats those with terrorist convictions such as Old Bailey bomber Gerry Kelly of Sinn Fein/IRA repute, whose historical pedigree is deeply sanitised. The double standard is obvious and repulsive.

Robinson has had his Twitter account permanently closed quite recently. Last time I checked it he had almost 500,000 followers and clearly it was decided that this was unacceptable. His popularity was a problem. He has a Facebook account and it was from that one that he was using the livestream from Leeds Crown Court before his arrest. It remains debatable how long his Facebook account will continue.

Regardless of whether one agrees with him or not, it is deeply disturbing to see the State and its agencies move against this man. Make no mistake, it seeks to place him behind bars. Once inside, his safety becomes a real concern. It is worth remembering he has a wife and three kids. Could he become a sacrifical victim on the high altar of political expediency?

I fully accept that contempt of court is wrong and no one should expect to avoid the consequences of such. I also think that the UK has a major problem with mainly Pakistani grooming gangs. Mr Robinson has spent the past number of years seeking to shine light on this dark reality. What sort of Nation persecutes a man who seeks to expose mass sexual abuse and depravity? The answer is – the Nation that we have become in 2018.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

26 thoughts on “The media crucifixion of Tommy Robinson

  1. The past number of years have seen many court cases where groups of mainly Pakistani muslim men have been convicted of commiting industrial scale levels of sexual abuse of young girls. Rotherham, Rochdale, Oxford, Telford, and Bristol to name but a few pay grim testimony to their egregious crimes. Surely history shows we should be focusing on the groomers rather than those who seek to expose the groomers?

    Nothing must stand in the way of diversity & multiculturalism.

    Not Tommy Robinson, Lauren Southern, or anyone else speaking out against Muslim child rapists, not even little white raped British children matter anymore.

    This will all end in tears…for all of us.

  2. The legacy media set him up in all news reports as a “far-right” figure ..

    Everything is “far-Right” when your worldview is soaked in cultural Marxism. By any measure, Tommy Robinson is a classical liberal.

  3. there are reporting restrictions in place

    Such restrictions would not exist in the US. They go against free speech

  4. Phantom

    I agree. I’ve not long learnt about this reporting restrictions in relation to these cases. But the fact that they’ve been imposed is outrageous.

  5. Pete Moore,

    Everything is “far-Right” when your worldview is soaked in cultural
    Marxism.

    Just like everything is far-left, when you’re Pete Moore.

  6. The Voice of Europe has it about right.

    “I’ts Tommy today, but it’s you tomorrow”

    Australian Imam Tawhidi (Imam of peace) says on Twitter:

    “We all have different opinions on Tommy Robinson. But what hurts my eyes the most is seeing the left celebrating his arrest, rather than condemning the MSM for purposely ignoring a case involving a rape gang that has sexually assaulted nearly 100 women, some as young as 11.”

    https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/05/tommy-robinsons-arrest-shocks-the-world-its-tommy-today-but-its-you-tomorrow/

  7. there are reporting restrictions in place

    sheer nonsense…. everyone on that side of the Pond has to fight for the one Human Right that is more important than anything and without it you live under Tyranny….

    FREE SPEECH !

    Every Day that should be your FIRST Priority… every Election every Candidate should be grilled on what they are going to do to lift you out of slavery.

    Because if they can arrest you for speaking you are a Slave.

  8. It’s Tommy today, but it’s you tomorrow

    Maybe, but only if you break conditions of a previously imposed suspended sentence for contempt of court?

    There are reporting restrictions in place

    As I explained to Dave earlier Pat / Phantom, I don’t know the circumstances of this particular case but reporting restrictions are usually imposed on sexual offence cases where there might be a possibility of identifying the victim.

  9. Why do you use the term “grooming gang”

    This plays into the lamestream media playbook that attempts to sanitise the horrific nature of the crimes (both alleged & proven).

  10. The Left: “It’s terrible how blacks are mistreated by the police and courts.”

    The Left: “Ha ha ha screw Tommy Robinson.”

    Thirteen months in prison for reporting on the case of muslim torturers and sex slavers, a case which the media consciously chose to ignore. Let that sink in.

  11. Thirteen months in prison for reporting on the case of muslim torturers and sex slavers

    Actually it was for breaching a suspended sentence for a previous contempt of court offence.
    Welcome to British law.

  12. After quite possibly decades of turning a blind eye to what has and is going on, the authorities are uncovering the stones the vermin have been hiding under. I think it is not just the fact that they have been shown as being complicit by their wilful inaction but, the sheer scale of the problem is proving be too embarrassing for them and they have to now somehow hide the problem by denying reports of trials

  13. I think the video link below gives a fair assessment of the situation over Tommy Robinsons arrest. Especially for our American friends on here.

  14. This case is much bigger than Tommy Robinson. Whatever one may think of him and his work, style, or approach, he is being harassed and persecuted by the British government for calling attention to the activity of Muslim rape gangs, which British authorities have done everything they could to cover up, and to jihad violence and Sharia oppression in general. Yes, he was arrested for violating the terms of his probation by filming outside a courthouse where a Muslim rape gang was being tried, but the prohibition on him doing that was wrong in the first place. Clearly he was arrested, rather than simply given a warning as Janice Atkinson says in this video, because of who he is and what he does: his arrest was of a piece with the government’s desire to keep people ignorant and complacent regarding Muslim rape gangs and the high cost of mass Muslim migration.

    The British government, in arresting Tommy, as well as Amy, is showing itself willing to incarcerate people for having opinions that it considers unacceptable. That heralds the death of Britain as a free society and the beginning of an authoritarian police state there, unless this slide to totalitarianism is stopped now. British public figures, whatever criticism they have leveled against Tommy Robinson in the past, should be calling for him to be freed today, or else they will be exposing themselves as supporting the degeneration of Britain into a police state.

    https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/05/uk-mep-says-tommy-robinson-arrest-politically-motivated-amid-massive-protest-in-london-over-his-arrest

    In an interview with us last year, Tommy said:

    “The alliance of big business and governments to restrict freedom of speech to control populations is the very essence of fascism.”

    He is right.

  15. Thanksfor that video Dave although to be honest I found it a bit convoluted. From a cursory first watching a few things leept out at me, the lawyer asked to give a legal analysis saying that he wasn’t aware of all the facts and he incorrectly stating that there was no system for deselection of jury members during a trial, (I know this from personal experience).

    The alliance of big business and governments to restrict freedom of speech to control populations is the very essence of fascism

    Harri, Robinson wasn’t arrested because of some ‘freedom of speech’ issue. He was arrested and subsequently imprisoned for breaching a suspended sentence given to him last year on a contempt of court charge under domestic British law.

    http://www.kentonline.co.uk/canterbury/news/far-right-activist-spared-jail-126340/

  16. Paul.

    And Nick Griffith’s, Lauren Southern, Freya Jaden, bit to name a few?.

    Tommy Robinson is simply an enemy of the state.

    I have a sinking feeling, we have now reached that slippery slope.

  17. Tommy Robinson is simply an enemy of the state

    Harri, the simple fact of the matter is that if Robinson had abided by the conditions of his suspended sentence after previously being found guilty on a contempt of court charge he wouldn’t now be in prison.

    Robinson isn’t above the law and his arrest and imprisonment has nothing to do with ‘freedom of speech’

  18. Paul.

    I think one of the things the video was pointing out, is the difference between the UK and us legal systems when it comes to freedom of speech. As the lawyer said in the US, freedom of speech is valued above everything else. In the UK, a fair trial is valued above freedom of speech. So in the UK you or the press can be silenced if the courts believe it could be prejudicial to the outcome of a trial.
    My own personal opinion on this, is that freedom of speech comes first.

    I’m no fan of Tommy Robinson, but I’ve got to say what I think they’ve done here is wrong. Yes Tommy was on a suspended sentence, and yes he peacefully reported outside Court on a trial that I believe had a D notice on it, but my complaint here is the reassons for a gagging order, on reporting on this trial. Which I believe are bogus.

  19. Harri, the simple fact of the matter is that if Robinson had abided by the conditions ..

    He did. Unedited video shows that he asked the police where he can stand and report from. He stood where where they told him to.

    Then when he started talking to camera, the police – acting with an alacrity they’ve never shown against jihad sex slavers and torturers – swooped in on him.

    So within minutes a man is taken from the streets and hauled for 13 months – and the state imposes a total reporting block on it – because he campaigns against the mass rape of women.

    And you instinctively side with his oppressors and the rapists. Shame on you.

  20. I agree Dave, I think that the vid was ostensibly a comparison of both legal systems I was just surprised at a number of inaccuracies in the lawyer’s analysis.

    My own personal opinion on this, is that freedom of speech comes first.

    Then we’ll have to disagree on this one Dave. If unrestricted reporting on the a case means that a victim of sex crime is identified, that the guilty are acquitted on a mistrial or, in an absolute worse case scenario, the innocent are convicted then for me restrictions are a necessary evil.

    I’m no fan of Tommy Robinson, but I’ve got to say what I think they’ve done here is wrong.

    Of course you do Dave. That’s because you’re a decent bloke who believes in fairness.

    There are two separate issues at play here : freedom of speech and Robinson’s arrest.

    The reason that Robinson was arrested was because he breached the conditions of a suspended sentence for a conviction for contempt of court last year when he attempted to film inside a court which is an absolute no no. There’s a strict liability rule in the 1981 Contempt of Court Act which states:

    1 The strict liability rule.
    In this Act “the strict liability rule” means the rule of law whereby conduct may be treated as a contempt of court as tending to interfere with the course of justice in particular legal proceedings regardless of intent to do so.

    2 Limitation of scope of strict liability.
    (1)The strict liability rule applies only in relation to publications, and for this purpose “publication” includes any speech, writing, [F1programme included in a cable programme service] or other communication in whatever form, which is addressed to the public at large or any section of the public.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/49

    That’s the reason Robinson was banged up. Now, right wing social media of every shade are trying to portray Robinson as some kind of martyr for free speech and standing up against the big bad system when in actual effect if Robinson hadn’t breached the conditions of his conviction he’s still be free to waffle away on Youtube and Twitter etc to his heart’s content.

    Robinson became a statistic of the domestic British judicial system, which all are subject to, initially because he broke the law by trying to film inside a court.

  21. Paul –

    If unrestricted reporting on the a case means that a victim of sex crime is identified, that the guilty are acquitted on a mistrial or, in an absolute worse case scenario, the innocent are convicted then for me restrictions are a necessary evil.

    Bullshit. You’re happily being played.

    The BBC broadcast the raid on Cliff Richard’s home live. It reported every detail of Rolf Harris’ trials. Once past the shame of covering for Jimmy Savile, it was all out there.

    Don’t give me this bullshit that Tommy Robinson standing 100 yards from a court endangers a trial. You simply hate that he does an effective job of exposing what dirty jihadi-rapist bastards do.

    Shame on you.

  22. I said IF Pete, it’s a hypothetical. I don’t know the reason why there’s restrictions on the case hence:

    As I explained to Dave earlier Pat / Phantom, I don’t know the circumstances of this particular case but reporting restrictions are usually imposed on sexual offence cases where there might be a possibility of identifying the victim.

    Shame on you.

    You’re the shameless one.

    Robinson was banged up because he he was thick enough to break the conditions of his suspended sentence and not because he was a martyr to free speech. Oh, and it wasn’t Sharia Law it was that Brit domestic law that you guys are always banging on about.

    Get over it.

  23. Paul McMahon, on May 27th, 2018 at 10:30 PM Said:
    Pete, see S.2 of the Strict Liability rule above.

    Robinson, from Bedfordshire, pleaded guilty to a charge of contempt of court. […]

    In footage which was played to the court on Friday, Robinson was seen filming himself and people involved in the trial.

    The court heard how the footage, which supposedly lasted around an hour, had been watched 250,000 times within hours of being posted online via Facebook

    During Friday’s hearing, Matthew Harding, defending, claimed that his client had “deep regret” for what he had done .

    Robinson was already subject to a suspended sentence for a contempt charge related to a separate case in Canterbury.

    The judge had warned him then he should expect to go to prison if he committed further offences.

    Robinson was given 10 months in jail for contempt of court, and a further three months for breaching the previous suspended sentence.

    Judge Geoffrey Marson QC initially imposed restrictions for fear that reporting his arrest would prejudice an ongoing trial.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-44287640?SThisFB

    So it wasn’t about freedom of speech after all?

    You’re welcome Pete

  24. Of course you do Dave. That’s because you’re a decent bloke who believes in fairness.

    Patronising quip of the year

Comments are closed.