Tommy Robinson [Archive] - Kiwi Biker forums

pritch

15th June 2018, 15:11

And if this thread was simply about the whys and wherefores of his imprisonment then there would be very little cause to question the validity of his sentence.

But there's a much bigger picture to this.

Well there isn't really but you could make one if you worked at it. F'rinstance you could look at how some of those agitating for his release actually want him killed in prison so as to give them a martyr.

Or you could look at the Rotherham child sexual abuse case which may be similar to the current events, but we don't know for sure because we have no good information about the current case(s).
In Rotherham the South Yorkshire Police, who appear uncommonly accident prone, did nothing for decades in spite of numerous complaints. They thought any action would bring allegations of racism since all suspects were Asian (mainly of Pakistani origin). It was only when they got an Asian lawyer on the staff that they started investigating.

There will be a shit ton of stuff on the web about what went on there. Most cities have houses that provide a temporary homes for young people who for whatever reason cannot be with their family. There will usually be more than one of these in most towns as you can't be putting teenaged male sex offenders with primary school aged females. The problem started when the British Government and councils farmed their homes out to private industry. The primary focus of a corporation is to make a profit, so they purchased properties in the cheapest parts of town all over Britain. This brought the at-risk young females within reach of some of the less reputable parts of society. And unsurprisingly shit did happen.

In this country such homes are currently controlled by OT for the government. I'd hate to see them privatised but there's always likely to be some MP with a bee in their bonnet wants change for the sake of it.

Katman

15th June 2018, 15:18

Well there isn't really but you could make one if you worked at it.

Ah yeah, there actually is.

There is the simmering unrest among a significant proportion of English people about the rampant immigration and the increase in crime that seems to have gone with it.

This has the makings of a powder keg that would only take the murder of Tommy Robinson to ignite.

Now you might happily call that nothing of a story but I would respectfully disagree.

Paul in NZ

15th June 2018, 15:57

Ah yeah, there actually is.

There is the simmering unrest among a significant proportion of English people about the rampant immigration and the increase in crime that seems to have gone with it.

This has the makings of a powder keg that would only take the murder of Tommy Robinson to ignite.

Now you might happily call that nothing of a story but I would respectfully disagree.

I want to agree with you but remember that this happened before. Right back even before Enoch Powell's famous 'Rivers of Blood' speech but that's the one from my personal memory. In that case it was West Indian migrants, then Indian and Pakistanis... Eventually all these groups became more English than the English.

The difference here is Islam...

I don't think this is a race thing - its a religion thing... Which is feck crazy as its an imaginary sky fairy we are arguing over

TheDemonLord

15th June 2018, 16:02

Tommy Robinson was imprisoned for 13 months for contempt of court after live streaming a broadcast, including footage of participants in a criminal trial, outside Leeds Crown Court (3 months suspended etc ...) The trial was subject to blanket reporting restrictions ..

The sentencing judge pointed out that his actions were illegal, and may well have lead to an adjournment of the trial he was filming ... and a new trial ordered.

There were signs all over the court where he was filming that filming was illegal .. he still chose to do it and break the law ...

There are some who think that the blanket restrictions are more about trying to downplay the problem and cover it up, as opposed to any impact on the trial.

Given what we know of recent UK government behaviours - I tend to fall on that side.

Katman

15th June 2018, 16:04

There are some who think that the blanket restrictions are more about trying to downplay the problem and cover it up, as opposed to any impact on the trial.

Given what we know of recent UK government behaviours - I tend to fall on that side.

Sounds like a conspiracy. :sherlock:

TheDemonLord

15th June 2018, 16:07

Sounds like a conspiracy. :sherlock:

It does, doesn't it...

What a strange world we live in...

russd7

15th June 2018, 19:34

this thread should be pink,I don't know nor do i care who Tommy Rob is and unfortunately had to read this to find i don't actually give a rats arse

Katman

15th June 2018, 19:47

this thread should be pink,I don't know nor do i care who Tommy Rob is and unfortunately had to read this to find i don't actually give a rats arse

So why are you even posting?

Is your life that empty that you feel compelled to comment on things you have no interest in?

You should hook up with Woodman.

russd7

15th June 2018, 20:58

because you wind up so fucking easily, you must really be the life of the party.

aaaaaand i was bored enough to read some of the comments so thought it only polite to put my 2cents worth in.

Katman

15th June 2018, 21:06

because you wind up so fucking easily

Yeah, boing.

Berries

15th June 2018, 21:18

Well I'm not aware on any mention of it in the mainstream media here and sadly, a large proportion of society is probably too lazy to even learn to spell google.

I'm not sure to what degree the story has been presented in the Northern hemisphere media, but I'd be interested to hear what the general murmurings in the cosy little sitting rooms of sunny England might be.

Do you think that this has the potential to blow out of control if something happens to Tommy Robinson while he's inside?
I don't consider it internationally newsworthy so the fact it hasn't bumped the All Blacks or Dancing with the Stars off the news is neither here nor there.

I see Tommy was attacked on the street a few weeks ago. It's not like he doesn't realise that what he says is inflammatory and will likely result in further attacks. Cant see it happening in prison though as I am sure he will have quite a lot of support in there, your Muslim Brit is generally not known for their criminal tendencies.

Katman

15th June 2018, 21:30

I don't consider it internationally newsworthy so the fact it hasn't bumped the All Blacks or Dancing with the Stars off the news is neither here nor there.

Skripal who?

Berries

15th June 2018, 22:06

Bit of a difference I would suggest between some right wing agitator who purposefully broke the law and is now paying the price for it and someone being poisoned by a foreign power on UK soil.

Unless, that is, Skripal is the blond judge on Dancing with the Stars?

Katman

15th June 2018, 22:13

Berries

16th June 2018, 00:01

Yes, I will happily admit I have no idea why you would post about a Russian spy and the international intrigue that followed his poisoning after I responded about the lack of media attention in NZ for what is a minor story in England. Unless someone is going to enlighten me I guess I will remain in the dark.

sidecar bob

16th June 2018, 01:22

So why are you even posting?

Is your life that empty that you feel compelled to comment on things you have no interest in?

You should hook up with Woodman.

Spends his life on kb talking utter shyte. Accuses another of having an empty life. Ironing anyone?

jasonu

16th June 2018, 02:15

Yeah, boing.

Whoooosh...

Pure genius.

Woodman

16th June 2018, 06:46

So why are you even posting?

Is your life that empty that you feel compelled to comment on things you have no interest in?

You should hook up with Woodman.

Seriously you should try not giving a fuck about shit. Its a revelation.

Laava

16th June 2018, 07:21

Seriously you should try not giving a fuck about shit. Its a revelation.

Katman thread modus operandi,
Start inflammatory thread
Abuse contrary opinions
Assert moral superiority
Abuse contrary posters
Have a tanty
Whine on endlessly
Achieve nothing.

Berries

16th June 2018, 09:26

I’m sorry. From the first few posts I thought there was a genuine desire to learn from people about how the situation might develop rather than rely on the media. This would be understandable given New Zealand just does not have the history of multiculturalism that the UK does and why someone here could even begin to contemplate that the people of middle England would rise up to defend Mr Robinson.

Then the KGB get introduced and I realise it is just another Katman conspiracy thread.

pritch

16th June 2018, 10:14

This morning opportunist fuckwits of the far right are appealing for donations to a Tommy Robinson defence fund. Interesting. The guy pleaded guilty, logically there is no defence, so one might wonder what will happen to the money? If there actually is any. There was a counter suggestion that people should donate $0.01 per Paypal. That would occur Paypal charges resulting in an "undonation".

I suppose we can be thankful that all this is happening on the other side of the globe. Apathy does have advantages.

Katman

16th June 2018, 10:24

Then the KGB get introduced and I realise it is just another Katman conspiracy thread.

My point was that the media control what you think is internationally news worthy.

The same as they've obviously decided that proof of who was responsible for the Skripal poisoning is no longer news worthy.

(I thought it was a fairly obvious point.)

Katman

16th June 2018, 10:27

I’m sorry. From the first few posts I thought there was a genuine desire to learn from people about how the situation might develop rather than rely on the media.

Are you familiar with the Rotherham child exploitation scandal?

And do you think it indicates a systemic failing in the English system?

Berries

16th June 2018, 11:23

My point was that the media control what you think is internationally news worthy.
Clearly they do, nationally and internationally. But in this particular case I disagree that this individual going to prison is newsworthy in New Zealand which was your question.

Katman

16th June 2018, 11:37

Clearly they do, nationally and internationally. But in this particular case I disagree that this individual going to prison is newsworthy in New Zealand which was your question.

I agree that on the surface, one person going to prison might not seem internationally newsworthy but.....the underlying reasons behind that person going to prison probably are.

Is there (or has there been) a failure within the English system to prosecute certain people for fear of being accused of racism?

pritch

16th June 2018, 12:56

I agree that on the surface, one person going to prison might not seem internationally newsworthy but.....the underlying reasons behind that person going to prison probably are.

"Underlying reasons" in this instance is a synonym for conspiracy. It is simple, the twat had been warned multiple times that he was breaking the law, he had previously been told what would happen if he did it again. He did it again, he went to jail. It couldn't be more simple.

Is there (or has there been) a failure within the English system to prosecute certain people for fear of being accused of racism?

Equally simple. Yes.

Katman

16th June 2018, 13:03

"Underlying reasons" in this instance is a synonym for conspiracy. It is simple, the twat had been warned multiple times that he was breaking the law, he had previously been told what would happen if he did it again. He did it again, he went to jail. It couldn't be more simple.

The EDL formed as a direct result of the system's failure to prosecute certain people for fear of being labelled 'racist'.

That's the 'underlying reason' I'm talking about.

So do you consider it to be a conspiracy?

Honest Andy

16th June 2018, 14:19

4 pages. All for just another aggressive bastard who uses racism as an excuse for violence. It must be a wet weekend....

Fuck it, I'm going for a strop anyway. Who's with me?

:ride:

pritch

16th June 2018, 15:55

So do you consider it to be a conspiracy?

Nah. The EDL is just racist fuckwit birds of a feather flocking together. Fuckem.

If you want a conspiracy this was a good one, with the added bonus it went all the way to lying bitch the top. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsborough_disaster

Berries

16th June 2018, 16:03

South Yorkshire again, like Rotherham.

Talking of Yorkshiremen -
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Kzn_uDxW-Fc" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

tigertim20

16th June 2018, 16:18

Seems to me like tommy is a little retarded.
Had he waited until the trials were over, he would have had the opportunity to (hopefully) see justice served (assuming the accused were actually guilty), AND he could have aired his hateful tirade openly and freely.
He's just paying the price for being a) impatient and b) too dumb to heed warnings.

Is there (or has there been) a failure within the English system to prosecute certain people for fear of being accused of racism?
Why do you give a fuck about england?

Dont you think there are more interesting conversations that could be had in similar veins with regard to New Zealand, both historic, contemporary, and in the foreseeable future?

RDJ

16th June 2018, 16:37

Certainly the NZ Police (some of them) appear to be inviting Rotherham-in-Jafaland....

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/83883823/police-and-banks-considering-adding-hijab-to-official-uniform

https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2018/06/ramadan-nz-police-dinner-has-nothing-to-do-with-diversity/

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/104718870/senior-cop-it-took-me-more-than-20-years-to-say-i-was-muslim

...

nzspokes

16th June 2018, 19:22

So why are you even posting?

Is your life that empty that you feel compelled to comment on things you have no interest in?

You should hook up with Woodman.

:laugh::laugh:

Katman

16th June 2018, 20:01

Why do you give a fuck about england?

I don't much give a fuck about England.

The issue is much bigger than just England though.

Honest Andy

16th June 2018, 20:32

The issue is much bigger than just England though.

No it isn't. You're a fool.
And it's only a tiny little bit of England anyway.
600,000 signatures on a petition? Fuck off, that's only 1% of the population.
Christ, 4% of the population are dim witted enough to listen to talkback radio! 1% is below the margin of error

Katman

16th June 2018, 20:56

No it isn't. You're a fool.

Do you condone turning a blind eye to the offending of a certain race due to a fear of being called a racist if you point it out?

TheDemonLord

16th June 2018, 22:23

Lord knows that Me and Katman almost never agree on anything - but Hell hath frozen over, so it would seem.

There's a number of comments in this thread - I'll try and boil them down to commonalities:

1: Tommy Robinson is a Racist.

Now - I've listened to a fair bit of Tommy, it's possible to make the claim if you lift what he says out of context and also lift HIM out of context. He's a working class lad and his word choice can be called careless at times. This does not make him a Racist. I've yet to hear Tommy say something expressly racist. He's talked about certain cultures that are objectively highly patriarchal and treat women (especially Western, non-islamic Women) as less than Prostitutes, these claims are backed by objective facts - if you want to use this as a claim for racism, then you have to argue that reality is racist.

He also talks about all his Black, Muslim and pakistani friends, in fact he has on many occassionals waxed lyrical about his love for the Sikh community in England. I'll end this rebuttal with a picture that paints a thousand words:

http://www.islamophobiawatch.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Stephen-Lennon-greets-peaceful-Sikhs-in-Wolverhampton.jpg

Does that look like a Racist?

2: Tommy Robinson could have kept quiet and none of this would have happened.

This claim is a little more nuanced - Tommy's main schtick (in this instance) is that the Rotherham scandal wasn't an isolated incident and that there is an invasive attitude that has seeped into British Political and Policing circles that has resulted in blind-eyes being turned, for fear of the accusation of Racism.

first part to this claim - we need to look at Rotherham:

It was first documented in the early 1990s, when care-home managers investigated reports that children in their care were being picked up by taxi drivers.[18] From at least 2001, multiple reports passed names of alleged perpetrators, several from one family, to the police and Rotherham Council. The first group conviction took place in 2010, when five British-Pakistani men were convicted of sexual offences against girls aged 12–16

That's 20+ years - where Silence on pain of "RACIST!" allowed Girls to be raped by Pedophiles (and worse). The key word in that sentence is Silence - Nobody wanted to know or to listen to people who weren't racist and were following the correct paths to address a grievance.

So when all legitimate means of redress have been exhausted, the Masses must be mobilized - this is where the EDL came into being. People were pissed off at authorities in Ivory towers not listening to them, when they knew something was happening. So when the same authorities tell you to be quiet - what logical option is there?

Stand by in silence whilst Pedophiles fuck your daughters with impunity? If any among you could stand idly by whilst such horrors were being inflicted on the most vulnerable in society, then you will have naught but my contempt.

Now, if the powers that be could have an open and honest discussion about Islam, or even just certain parts of Islam and certain cultural aspects that have been imported, If the police were to do their job without any prejudice toward Creed, Colour, Gender, or any other attribute - then at that point, Tommy might be able to sit down and be quiet.

But if you still can't abide by Tommy, have a listen to one Douglas Murray.

3: That what is happening in the UK has complete irrelevance to what is happening over her.

Au Contraire - firstly, since Her majesty is the Sovereign of New Zealand, where the UK goes - NZ invariable follows, secondly - we share a derived Legal system and so anything that is happening in the Legal landscape of the UK is of paramount importance to NZ:

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/domestic-judgment/newzealand.php

Historically, New Zealand courts have looked to the courts of England for sources of precedents in order to apply established principles and rules. Over time, ... the courts have expanded the range of countries from which foreign cases are examined, particularly looking to Australia, Canada, and the United States

Thirdly - there has been a direct collusion between the Political wing and the Policing wing - Labour held counties didn't want to upset their labour-voting Islamic community, and so pressured the Police not to act. This is eerily similar to the Inspector Generals report about FBI bias in the Clinton affair. Interesting to note that this has been done by 2 Left-wing parties - the point here is that 2 mature Western democracies have put a hole in a very VERY important wall, separating the Judiciary from the Legislature.

Fourthly, Remember when the Police were exempt from fining unlicenced Maori drivers in NZ? I'll grant it's miles and miles behind pedophilia - but even in lil' ol' NZ - we have one of the foundational cornerstones of our Justice system being slowly hammered out of the groundworks. Need I remind you why:
Lady justice stands the way she does - A Sword in one hand, to enact justice. A scale in the other, to weigh the evidence. And a Blindfold across her eyes so that she sees no Race, no Colour, no Gender.

https://itc2u.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/lady-justice.jpg

She is depicted that way for a reason - and once we forget that, once we think that it's okay to let Race or gender or colour be a factor in the application of Law, even just a little bit, even with the noblest of intentions - we've started down a very dangerous path. One that I hope we have the good sense to turn around from.

jasonu

17th June 2018, 04:47

The issue is much bigger than just England though.

Says who? (other than yourself)

Katman

17th June 2018, 10:07

Says who? (other than yourself)

This issue could have serious ramifications for anywhere that has seen rampant immigration - especially if there is a perception that it has gone hand in hand with an increase in crime.

Plenty of places in Europe (and in the States) seem to have burgeoning Nationalist movements who would happily exploit a martyrdom to it's fullest extent.

jasonu

17th June 2018, 14:29

This issue could have serious ramifications for anywhere that has seen rampant immigration - especially if there is a perception that it has gone hand in hand with an increase in crime.

Plenty of places in Europe (and in the States) seem to have burgeoning Nationalist movements who would happily exploit a martyrdom to it's fullest extent.

It seams the Italians have the right idea.
Of course if America did the same thing there would be a huge international uproar.
http://www.ktvz.com/news/national-world/italian-official-warns-migrant-ships-not-to-dock/754065739

jasonu

17th June 2018, 18:51

It seams the Italians have the right idea.
Of course if America did the same thing there would be a huge international uproar.
http://www.ktvz.com/news/national-world/italian-official-warns-migrant-ships-not-to-dock/754065739

Apparently the wops folded. Hardly surprising...
http://www.ktvz.com/news/national-world/migrants-disembark-in-spain-after-mediterranean-standoff/754326482

husaberg

17th June 2018, 20:57

1: Tommy Robinson is a Racist.

He also talks about all his Black, Muslim and pakistani friends, in fact he has on many occassionals waxed lyrical about his love for the Sikh community in England. I'll end this rebuttal with a picture that paints a thousand words:

Does that look like a Racist?

2: Tommy Robinson could have kept quiet and none of this would have happened.

This claim is a little more nuanced - Tommy's main schtick (in this instance) is that the Rotherham scandal wasn't an isolated incident and that there is an invasive attitude that has seeped into British Political and Policing circles that has resulted in blind-eyes being turned, for fear of the accusation of Racism.

.
Even David Duke claims to have Black friends
Plus even other Members of the KKK will shake a black persons hand as below so your points are a little simplistic.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/O6VTzjG_SRU/hqdefault.jpg

TheDemonLord

17th June 2018, 21:03

Even David Duke claims to have Black friends
Plus even other Members of the KKK will shake a black persons hand as below so your points are a little simplistic.

If you've listened to Tommy speak about when Multiculturalism was going well, these are not the words of someone who is a Racist.

For sure, the point is simplistic - but how many of you have actually listened to him speak? As opposed to read a report on him?

husaberg

17th June 2018, 23:53

If you've listened to Tommy speak about when Multiculturalism was going well, these are not the words of someone who is a Racist.

For sure, the point is simplistic - but how many of you have actually listened to him speak? As opposed to read a report on him?
You are computer savy why not go back and look at what Tommy had said that has been deleted now.

Every single Muslim watching this… on 7/7 you got away with killing and maiming British citizens… you had better understand that we have built a network from one end of the country to the other end… and the Islamic community will feel the full force of the English Defence League if we see any of our British citizens killed, maimed, or hurt on British soil ever again.

” Robinson held aloft a copy of the Koran, ” Robinson told Morgan, “This book is the reason we are in such a mess,”

Tommy wasn't jailed because he was a racist he was jailed for contempt of court.

TheDemonLord

18th June 2018, 09:11

You are computer savy why not go back and look at what Tommy had said that has been deleted now.

He speaks plainly and is rather careless in his word choices - I've acknowledged that, he's not from Academia, he's from the working class. Taking what he said in Context - he's pissed off - he's pissed at both the people that did it and at the wider Islamic community that stood by and did nothing to stop it.

Tommy wasn't jailed because he was a racist he was jailed for contempt of court.

Just like he wasn't jailed for racism the first time, but for Mortgage Fraud - I think Douglas Murray articulates this best:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UoJareHfIw

Voltaire

18th June 2018, 10:55

He speaks plainly and is rather careless in his word choices - I've acknowledged that, he's not from Academia, he's from the working class

" he's from the working class"

Aircraft Technician is hardly working class, but getting pissed and punching cops is, I wonder if football was involved.

According to Robinson, after he left school he applied to study aircraft engineering at Luton Airport: "I got an apprenticeship six hundred people applied for, and they took four people on". He qualified in 2003 after five years of study, but then he was convicted for drunken assault of an off-duty police officer.[11] He served a 12-month prison sentence,[16] and as a result lost his job at Luton Airport owing to security measures imposed since the September 11 attacks.[11]

TheDemonLord

18th June 2018, 11:09

" he's from the working class"

Aircraft Technician is hardly working class, but getting pissed and punching cops is, I wonder if football was involved.

Probably was - he himself admits that in his youth he was a bit of a prat.

However, he most definitely is working class, both from the locale that he grew up in and the education he received (he got an apprenticeship, he didn't go to Uni to study Aeronautical engineering)

But all that is a Red Herring to the actual issue being discussed.

You can argue that Tommy broke contempt of court rules and should go to prison, and on a purely technical level - I can't fault that argument.

However, in a wider context (given certain socio-political happenings in the UK) you could make a counter argument that Tommy's breach of the contempt of court restrictions was part of a valid protest and that the restrictions on the case, placed by the Judge were contrary to the public interest and that Tommy was acting within the Public interest (and so his actions were justified, possibly even lawful).

Circling back to the point made by Douglas Murray - It is clear that they are using every technicality to throw the book at Tommy, with the hopes of shutting him up.

husaberg

18th June 2018, 11:49

He speaks plainly and is rather careless in his word choices - I've acknowledged that, he's not from Academia, he's from the working class. Taking what he said in Context - he's pissed off - he's pissed at both the people that did it and at the wider Islamic community that stood by and did nothing to stop it.

Just like he wasn't jailed for racism the first time, but for Mortgage Fraud - I think Douglas Murray articulates this best:
He committed mortgage fraud. that's why he was jailed. Hint if he hadn't committed the mortgage fraud he would not have been jailed for it.
He or his supporters cant claim it never occurred as he admitted he was guilty

English Defence League (EDL) founder and former leader Stephen Yaxley-Lennon has admitted mortgage fraud offences.
He pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiring with others to obtain a mortgage by misrepresentation from the Abbey and Halifax banks.

You can argue that Tommy broke contempt of court rules and should go to prison, and on a purely technical level - I can't fault that argument.
However, in a wider context (given certain socio-political happenings in the UK) you could make a counter argument that Tommy's breach of the contempt of court restrictions was part of a valid protest and that the restrictions on the case, placed by the Judge were contrary to the public interest and that Tommy was acting within the Public interest (and so his actions were justified, possibly even lawful).

Circling back to the point made by Douglas Murray - It is clear that they are using every technicality to throw the book at Tommy, with the hopes of shutting him up.

Are you really suggesting that the same rules shouldn't apply to Tommy as apply to others.
He was given plenty of chances before they "threw the book at him"
He was sent to prison for his own continued breaches of the law.
To say otherwise is a Red Herring.
Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon aka Tommy Robinson, aka Andrew McMaster aka Paul Harris.

Lennon was convicted in April 2005 for assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Lennon had assaulted an off-duty police officer who had intervened to stop a confrontation between Lennon and his partner Jenna Vowles, another BNP member, who was cautioned for possession of cocaine

In June 2011 he was arrested in connection with a brawl at an EDL demonstration
The following month he was sentenced to twelve months of "community rehabilitation" for his front-line role in a fight between rival football hooligans, to which he responded that the country is a "police state (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Police_state)

On 20 October 2012 Lennon was arrested on suspicion of possessing a false passport (under the name "Andrew McMaster"), and, after spending Christmas (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Christmas) in jail, was found guilty in January 2013.[15] (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson#cite_note-15)[16] (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson#cite_note-16) He was released from prison the following February, under bail conditions that kept him away from the EDLStephen Lennon, 30, from Luton, admitted possession of a false identity document with improper intention.
Lennon used a passport in the name of Andrew McMaster to board a Virgin Atlantic flight from Heathrow to New York, Southwark Crown Court was told.

The terms of his early release included having no contact with the EDL until the end of his original sentence in June 2015. He was due to talk to the Oxford Union (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Union) in October 2014, but was recalled to prison before the event for breaching the terms of his licence.

In May 2017, he was arrested for contempt of court (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court) after he attempted to take video of the defendants in a child rape case outside Canterbury Crown Court.

In May 2017, Robinson was convicted of contempt of court for using a camera inside Canterbury Crown Court and received a suspended sentence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspended_sentence)
According to Judge Heather Norton, "this is not about free speech, not about the freedom of the press, nor about legitimate journalism, and not about political correctness. It is about justice and ensuring that a trial can be carried out justly and fairly, it's about being innocent until proven guilty. It is about preserving the integrity of the jury to continue without people being intimidated or being affected by irresponsible and inaccurate 'reporting', if that's what it was

On 25 May 2018, Robinson was arrested for a breach of the peace (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_the_peace) while live streaming (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_streaming) outside Leeds Crown Court (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeds_Crown_Court) during a trial on which reporting restrictions had been ordered by the judge

Following Robinson's arrest, Judge Geoffrey Marson QC issued a further reporting restriction on Robinson's case, prohibiting any reporting of Robinson's case or the grooming trial until the latter case is complete

On 29 May, the reporting restriction was lifted with regard to Robinson, following a challenge by journalists, and the media reported that Robinson had admitted contempt of court by publishing information that could prejudice an ongoing trial (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice_(legal_term)), and had been sentenced to 13 months' imprisonment

Marson sentenced Robinson to ten months for contempt of court and his previous three months' suspended sentence was activated because of the breach. Robinson's lawyer said that Robinson felt "deep regret" after comprehending the potential consequences of his behaviour.Robinson was told that if a retrial had to be held as a result of his actions the cost could be "hundreds and hundreds of thousands of pounds

Voltaire

18th June 2018, 12:48

Probably was - he himself admits that in his youth he was a bit of a prat.

However, he most definitely is working class, both from the locale that he grew up in and the education he received (he got an apprenticeship, he didn't go to Uni to study Aeronautical engineering)

But all that is a Red Herring to the actual issue being discussed.

ah you must be English with that take on your place in life is determined by who your parents are, place of birth, formal education etc.

I can see why immigrants to the UK struggle, did you watch the Royal Wedding.:lol:

Your working class as you get up each day and go to work, although probably not much as you spend so much time on here.

Anyway back to your in depth discussion with people you don't know.:banana:

TheDemonLord

18th June 2018, 12:49

Are you really suggesting that the same rules shouldn't apply to Tommy as apply to others.

Not at all - can you point to where I've suggested that?

There has been a well documented failing, at multiple levels of Governance to address the problem(s) that Tommy is speaking out against.

He was given plenty of chances before they "threw the book at him"
He was sent to prison for his own continued breaches of the law.
To say otherwise is a Red Herring.

Do you not find it interesting, that there is a correlation between the rise of the EDL and the rise of arrests against Tommy?

I again, refer to Douglas Murray's point - it seems clear that these were politically motivated. I think his current actions fall within the purview of Civil Disobedience - Namely, the current laws have objectively failed (Rotherham, failure to deal with extremist clerics/imams/Mosques etc.) and Tommy is protesting this.

Here's a question for you, Husa - Put aside your character judgements of Tommy for the moment - do you think that the issues have

1: Been correctly dealt with by the UK governmental structure
and
2: that the current legal means of redress have been working correctly

I put it to you that the objective answer to both questions is No. This then leads to the follow question:

3: If you assume my a priori position (and that of Tommy's) that the answer to question 1 and 2 is no - what other means is there to enact change?

TheDemonLord

18th June 2018, 12:54

ah you must be English with that take on your place in life is determined by who your parents are, place of birth, formal education etc.

Well, yes... I didn't think that was news to anyone here...

I can see why immigrants to the UK struggle, did you watch the Royal Wedding.:lol:

I didn't - I support the royal Family, I'm just not fussed with some of the pomp and ceremony associated with it.

Your working class as you get up each day and go to work, although probably not much as you spend so much time on here.

Anyway back to your in depth discussion with people you don't know.:banana:

Interesting point regarding class, I'd put myself as Middle class - but trying to find a concrete definition as to what is and what is not middle class turns out to be a pandoras box.

pritch

18th June 2018, 13:16

you could make a counter argument that Tommy's breach of the contempt of court restrictions was part of a valid protest and that the restrictions on the case, placed by the Judge were contrary to the public interest and that Tommy was acting within the Public interest (and so his actions were justified, possibly even lawful).

No you couldn't, now you're just being silly.

Circling back to the point made by Douglas Murray - It is clear that they are using every technicality to throw the book at Tommy, with the hopes of shutting him up.

The only reason he was "shut up" was to prevent a mistrial. There are no "technicalities" involved.

You seem to have forgotten, he pleaded guilty.

Katman

18th June 2018, 13:24

No you couldn't, now you're just being silly.

The only reason he was "shut up" was to prevent a mistrial. There are no "technicalities" involved.

You seem to have forgotten, he pleaded guilty.

Do you think Tommy Robinson (and every other English person for that matter) would be justified in feeling aggrieved by the apparent systemic failing of the English justice system to deal with Muslim rape gangs?

TheDemonLord

18th June 2018, 14:13

No you couldn't, now you're just being silly.

I'm being very serious. I've been very critical of numerous protests, but I hold the right to protest in the highest esteem - it is one of the checks and balances upon which our civilization relies.

Given the failings of the current system and that the UK government does not seem to have dealt to this issue, then yes, I do believe that this

The only reason he was "shut up" was to prevent a mistrial. There are no "technicalities" involved.

You seem to have forgotten, he pleaded guilty.

Or, because just like at Rotherham, certain groups (political, religious, social etc.) don't want to address this problem.

Banditbandit

18th June 2018, 15:10

husaberg

18th June 2018, 15:11

Not at all - can you point to where I've suggested that?

However, in a wider context (given certain socio-political happenings in the UK) you could make a counter argument that Tommy's breach of the contempt of court restrictions was part of a valid protest and that the restrictions on the case, placed by the Judge were contrary to the public interest and that Tommy was acting within the Public interest (and so his actions were justified, possibly even lawful).

His actions were not lawful though were they I would expect if anyone else had blatantly and repeatedly did what he did they would suffer the same fate.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/86738393/Journalist-convicted-for-breaching-name-suppression
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/26034/blogger-charged-with-breaching-suppression-orders

There has been a well documented failing, at multiple levels of Governance to address the problem(s) that Tommy is speaking out against.
Do you not find it interesting, that there is a correlation between the rise of the EDL and the rise of arrests against Tommy?

I again, refer to Douglas Murray's point - it seems clear that these were politically motivated. I think his current actions fall within the purview of Civil Disobedience - Namely, the current laws have objectively failed (Rotherham, failure to deal with extremist clerics/imams/Mosques etc.) and Tommy is protesting this.

Here's a question for you, Husa - Put aside your character judgements of Tommy for the moment - do you think that the issues have

1: Been correctly dealt with by the UK governmental structure
and
2: that the current legal means of redress have been working correctly

I put it to you that the objective answer to both questions is No. This then leads to the follow question:

3: If you assume my a priori position (and that of Tommy's) that the answer to question 1 and 2 is no - what other means is there to enact change?

All the issues with Tommy have been dealt with by the legal system in a clear and transparent manner (as clear as could be)
Simply put If Tommy had simply chosen not to continually do illegal things he would not have been jailed.
Its pretty simple, irrespective of your own beliefs that he was trying to do good, he was clearly in contempt of court.
By filming and identifying people prior to their being found guilty (despite how abhorrent their crimes were), when their was a media ban in place and by filming court proceedings he clearly broke the law.

TheDemonLord

18th June 2018, 15:27

Yeah - but Robinson broke the law - there are better ways to bring the ideas to the fore than deliberately breaking the law in that way ..

I agree - but it seems to me that those better ways have been tried and failed...

I'll appeal to your Anarchistic tendencies - When legitimate means fail, what is left apart from illegitimate means?

TheDemonLord

18th June 2018, 15:28

All the issues with Tommy have been dealt with by the legal system in a clear and transparent manner (as clear as could be)
Simply put If Tommy had simply chosen not to continually do illegal things he would not have been jailed.
Its pretty simple, irrespective of your own beliefs that he was trying to do good, he was clearly in contempt of court.
By filming and identifying people prior to their being found guilty (despite how abhorrent their crimes were), when their was a media ban in place and by filming court proceedings he clearly broke the law.

I think I didn't frame the question properly - the Issues I referred to was that of Muslim Pedophile gangs, not the issue of Tommy himself.

husaberg

18th June 2018, 16:02

I think I didn't frame the question properly - the Issues I referred to was that of Muslim Pedophile gangs, not the issue of Tommy himself.
The issue is with Tommy actions, thats the name of the thread
The issue with the Accused pedophiles was clearly being dealt with by the courts. that's where Tommy was filming and live streaming them.
Tommy was breaking the law, Tommy was warned, Yet Tommy continued to do so.
You seem to be somehow pushing the legal system should favour Tommy rights to repeatedly contravene the media blackout regarding the case.
Its pretty simple and has been spelled out with the judgement. Thats its clearly not his right to free speech being contravened.

according to Judge Heather Norton, "this is not about free speech, not about the freedom of the press, nor about legitimate journalism, and not about political correctness. It is about justice and ensuring that a trial can be carried out justly and fairly, it's about being innocent until proven guilty. It is about preserving the integrity of the jury to continue without people being intimidated or being affected by irresponsible and inaccurate 'reporting', if that's what it was
The media and individuals have rules that they must follow.
Tommy previous record of criminal behavior does not interfere with him getting a fair hearing in the legal system, but it does mean he will not be treated as a first offender on his subsequent sentencing.

By continuing to flaunt a law, resulted in exactly what he should have expected to happen happening. Tommy apparently wishes to be a martyr for a cause.

On 25 May 2018, Robinson was arrested for a breach of the peace (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_the_peace) while live streaming (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_streaming) outside Leeds Crown Court (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeds_Crown_Court) during a trial on which reporting restrictions had been ordered by the judge

In May 2017, Robinson was convicted of contempt of court for using a camera inside Canterbury Crown Court and received a]suspended sentence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspended_sentence)

In May 2017, he was arrested for contempt of court (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court) after he attempted to take video of the defendants in a child rape case outside Canterbury Crown Court.

Katman

18th June 2018, 16:13

Katman

18th June 2018, 19:25

I would expect if anyone else had blatantly and repeatedly did what he did they would suffer the same fate.

Or maybe they wouldn't.

If Tommy Robinson had been grooming and raping young girls in Rotherham (and had been reported to the police for doing so) do you think he'd be allowed to carry on doing so for 15 years?

husaberg

18th June 2018, 20:01

Or maybe they wouldn't. If Stephen Yaxley-Lennon had been grooming and raping young girls in Rotherham (and had been reported to the police for doing so) do you think he'd be allowed to carry on doing so for 15 years?
If Stephen Yaxley-Lennon had been doing that, he would also be with in his basic rights to expect a fair impartial trial which is something he was not so keen on giving the accused.
You would have to be a special kind of idiot to infer there was a travesty of justice against Stephen Yaxley-Lennon when you know and admit he continued to knowingly and repeatedly attempt interfere with the fair impartial process judicial process of others

according to Judge Heather Norton, "this is not about free speech, not about the freedom of the press, nor about legitimate journalism, and not about political correctness. It is about justice and ensuring that a trial can be carried out justly and fairly, it's about being innocent until proven guilty. It is about preserving the integrity of the jury to continue without people being intimidated or being affected by irresponsible and inaccurate 'reporting', if that's what it was

Marson sentenced Robinson to ten months for contempt of court and his previous three months' suspended sentence was activated because of the breach. Stephen Yaxley-Lennons lawyer said that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon felt "deep regret" after comprehending the potential consequences of his behaviour.Robinson was told that if a retrial had to be held as a result of his actions the cost could be "hundreds and hundreds of thousands of pounds

Here is part of the ruling from the first time he was sentenced to three months (suspended)

Mr. Yaxley-Lennon, on 8th May of this year in the course of ongoing proceedings for allegations of rape faced by four defendants at this court, that trial still in fact being in progress, you attended, together with another, and carried out some filming.

Your intention in being at this court and in carrying out the actions that you did was, on your own account, to film the defendants.

You were told very clearly by security staff at this court that you were to stop filming and that if you were to film then you would be potentially committing an offence and may be held in contempt of court.

These were deliberate actions on your part. They were deliberate actions intending to take photographs of the defendants; they were actions which you continued to take, despite having been told that you should not do it, and I find, as a clear logical inference, that your intention on coming into the court building was to seek out the defendants, who you referred to in the way in which we have all seen and heard.

The sentence, therefore, that I pass upon you, is one of three months' imprisonment which will be suspended for a period of 18 months. That will be suspended. There will be no conditions that need to be attached to that suspended sentence, but you should be under no illusions that if you commit any further offence of any kind, and that would include, I would have thought a further contempt of court by similar actions, then that sentence of three months would be activated, and that would be on top of anything else that you were given by any other court. In short, Mr. Yaxley-Lennon, turn up at another court, refer to people as "Muslim paedophiles, Muslim rapists" and so on and so forth while trials are ongoing and before there has been a finding by a jury that that is what they are, and you will find yourself inside. Do you understand? Thank you very much.
Not to mention a pretty good chance that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon actions have provided the defendants (that were subsequently found guilty) grounds that they can attempt to appeal for a mistrial.where was Stephen Yaxley-Lennon on about how long it has taken for some priests to be finally brought to justice, or are they not in his sights on account of them being white? on about how long it has taken for some priests to be finally brought to justice, or are they not in his sights on account of them being white?<strike></strike>

TheDemonLord

18th June 2018, 22:28

The issue is with Tommy actions, thats the name of the thread
The issue with the Accused pedophiles was clearly being dealt with by the courts. that's where Tommy was filming and live streaming them.
Tommy was breaking the law, Tommy was warned, Yet Tommy continued to do so.
You seem to be somehow pushing the legal system should favour Tommy rights to repeatedly contravene the media blackout regarding the case.
Its pretty simple and has been spelled out with the judgement. Thats its clearly not his right to free speech being contravened.

The media and individuals have rules that they must follow.
Tommy previous record of criminal behavior does not interfere with him getting a fair hearing in the legal system, but it does mean he will not be treated as a first offender on his subsequent sentencing.

By continuing to flaunt a law, resulted in exactly what he should have expected to happen happening. Tommy apparently wishes to be a martyr for a cause.

You're missing a key point - the causal factor for all of Tommy's activism - that being a systemic silencing and ignoring of some exceptionally serious crimes being committed by a certain demographic.

To be clear - I'm originally from the UK - and the news does report on court cases and even ongoing court cases. So why the Gag order? It's entirely possible that it is just for the purpose as stated - fair trial etc.

But, it is also possible that it is part of the same systemic silencing that caused the issue in the first place.

Then there is the issue - how can you be certain of a fair judicial process for Tommy, when objectively, the judicial process has been anything but fair in respect to the grooming gangs?

The institutions integrity is predicated on fairness - and the Rotherham scandal (both in terms of length of time and seriousness of the offending) has severely tarnished that reputation.

This leads to the question as to what legal standard to adhere to: The letter of the law or the Spirit of the law.

husaberg

18th June 2018, 22:57

You're missing a key point - the causal factor for all of Tommy's activism - that being a systemic silencing and ignoring of some exceptionally serious crimes being committed by a certain demographic.

To be clear - I'm originally from the UK - and the news does report on court cases and even ongoing court cases. So why the Gag order? It's entirely possible that it is just for the purpose as stated - fair trial etc.

But, it is also possible that it is part of the same systemic silencing that caused the issue in the first place.

Then there is the issue - how can you be certain of a fair judicial process for Stephen, when objectively, the judicial process has been anything but fair in respect to the grooming gangs?

The institutions integrity is predicated on fairness - and the Rotherham scandal (both in terms of length of time and seriousness of the offending) has severely tarnished that reputation.

This leads to the question as to what legal standard to adhere to: The letter of the law or the Spirit of the law.
The key factor in Stephen performances is publicity. He in case you missed it,Even has a stage name.
He needs Publicity to sell books and boost subscribers, the reason he was focused on the trial was because most of the offenders were of Middle easten descent.
he was not protesting at the trial of catholic bishops and cardinals now was he.
As for the speed of justice against Stephen Its pretty simple Stephen was caught bang to rights, multiple times, he was already on a suspended sentence, he then pleaded guilty.
As a contrast the others drew out the procedings as long as they could, Some of the delay in justice being served against the sex offenders was likely due to what would clearly appear to be a lack of effective policing. thats already been established during multiple inquiries and has resulting in plenty of people being dismissed, some delays would be the victims reticeince to come forward. due to deaths and threats against them and their age and vunerability.
its pretty hard to break a code of silence of a ring of criminals when neither the victims or the preperators talk.
One only needs to draw the obvious parrallels with the sex offending of the Christian Comunity, Centerpoint or the greater catholic church.
The gag order i believe was placed to protect other vulnerable parts of the comunity in this case it was imigrants and victims.
One would expect they also wanted to make sure that they had no effective grounds for a mistrial or for further appeals.

What Stephen did was clearly illegal. whether you believe he had good intentions is irelevent in assesing his obvious guilt.

pritch

19th June 2018, 10:14

The problem seems to stem from the fact that a significant proportion of the English public have lost all faith in the integrity of the justice system when it comes to dealing with crime within the Muslim community.

The South Yorkshire Police sat on their hands for decades. It's possible that they were too busy with the Hillsborough cover up though. Anyway they and others have lurched into action. The Rotherham gang was eventually prosecuted and jailed. Other cases are proceeding such as the one "Robinson" was endangering. So the system is dealing with crimes by muslims now, and with idiots that interfere.

Big improvement.

TheDemonLord

19th June 2018, 11:01

The key factor in Stephen performances is publicity. He in case you missed it,Even has a stage name.

Cause it's not like Islam has a record of murdering people that critique their religion or their Prophet - do I need to bring up Charlie Hebdo?

He needs Publicity to sell books and boost subscribers, the reason he was focused on the trial was because most of the offenders were of Middle easten descent.

You are putting the Cart before the Horse: It's because of their middle eastern descent and values that they committed the crimes they did, It's the values that Tommy is objecting to.

As for the speed of justice against Stephen Its pretty simple Stephen was caught bang to rights, multiple times, he was already on a suspended sentence, he then pleaded guilty.

Indeed - now compare the actions of the Police against Tommy (raiding his house, picking him up on multiple technicalities) vs the actions of the Police in Rotherham (20 years of inaction)

Do you see the double standard and why people are a little bit annoyed?

he was not protesting at the trial of catholic bishops and cardinals now was he.
As a contrast the others drew out the procedings as long as they could, Some of the delay in justice being served against the sex offenders was likely due to what would clearly appear to be a lack of effective policing. thats already been established during multiple inquiries and has resulting in plenty of people being dismissed, some delays would be the victims reticeince to come forward. due to deaths and threats against them and their age and vunerability.
its pretty hard to break a code of silence of a ring of criminals when neither the victims or the preperators talk.
One only needs to draw the obvious parrallels with the sex offending of the Christian Comunity, Centerpoint or the greater catholic church.

You're trying to setup a false equivalence - There's a very key difference between the Catholic Church offences and these offences:

With the Catholic church, they were investigated by the police multiple times, however the Church actively hindered investigations (such as posting a cardinal to another country, paying off the victims etc.)

In the Rotherham (and subsequent cases) The police, the Council and other institutions colluded to actively NOT investigate the cases for fear of being labelled racist

So no, there aren't parrallels to be drawn.

The gag order i believe was placed to protect other vulnerable parts of the comunity in this case it was imigrants and victims.
One would expect they also wanted to make sure that they had no effective grounds for a mistrial or for further appeals.

You mean - they didn't want people angry at the Islamic community for raping their daughters? So they abused the legal system to prevent people from talking about it? Why! Thanks for proving my entire point!

This is entirely in line with their previous actions, so from there - it's rather plain to see why people are objecting to it - they are seeing that the political class has not learned from Rotherham and are committing the same mistakes.

What Stephen did was clearly illegal. whether you believe he had good intentions is irelevent in assesing his obvious guilt.

It's entirely relevant - ever heard of a Jury acquittal?

TheDemonLord

19th June 2018, 11:10

So the system is dealing with crimes by muslims now, and with idiots that interfere.

Big improvement.

Is it?
Have they raided various Mosques that were run by Imams and Clerics that were preaching an ISIS-style version of Islam?
Have they shutdown the so-called "Sharia Courts"?
Have they stopped calling Islam a religion of Peace?
Have the so-called moderate wing of Islam come out in force and openly condemned these crimes?
Have they investigated the flow of money from various Saudi-based Wahabi organizations into certain Islamic lobby groups?

No?

Well - not really a BIG improvement then, is it?

Banditbandit

19th June 2018, 12:01

I agree - but it seems to me that those better ways have been tried and failed...

I'll appeal to your Anarchistic tendencies - When legitimate means fail, what is left apart from illegitimate means?

Yeah - I might agree

BUT

There's questions of fair trials and justice involved - so no, I think that over rides any sort of protest.

TheDemonLord

19th June 2018, 12:32

Yeah - I might agree

BUT

There's questions of fair trials and justice involved - so no, I think that over rides any sort of protest.

3 questions then:

considering that in the UK there is press coverage of criminal cases, what is the standard between a case where the Media get free reign and a case where they get gagged?

Following on from that Question, there is a social contract of sorts that is predicated on any judge who issues a Gag order that they will do so free from any political bias, issuing it only on the strictest merits of the case. Given the systemic failings at multiple levels for cases of this nature, the judiciary has breached that Social Contract - how then can we be sure that subsequent Gag orders are being applied correctly?

Which brings me to the final point - if we (the public) do not have confidence that the Gag orders are being properly implemented - free from Political machinations or fear from being labelled as racist or other failings that Rotherham revealed - what option is there, other than to violate it?

I'll appeal again to your anarchistic streak - each of us (being moral agents) understands that the Law is a best effort basis to codify into words the highest principles of Justice and fairness that we (as a nation) collectively possess. Being that it is a best effort, the Law is invariably sometimes wrong or applied incorrectly or abused.

We then have a choice (as moral agents) to adhere to a corrupt law or not. And when all legal and legitimate means of protest, debate and activism to change a corrupt law (or legal principle) - then as Moral Agents - we are left with a single recourse - which is Civil disobedience.

Banditbandit

19th June 2018, 12:41

I think I didn't frame the question properly - the Issues I referred to was that of Muslim Pedophile gangs, not the issue of Tommy himself.

Clearly the pedophile gangs are being dealt with - that's why they were in court ... the direct issue around Robinson his his contempt of court.

The problem seems to stem from the fact that a significant proportion of the English public have lost all faith in the integrity of the justice system when it comes to dealing with crime within the Muslim community.

A lo of that is based on Fake News - which has distorted public perceptions.

Like this shit ..

https://www.snopes.com/news/2016/07/14/for-public-purity/

You're missing a key point - the causal factor for all of Tommy's activism - that being a systemic silencing and ignoring of some exceptionally serious crimes being committed by a certain demographic.

That statement needs backing up .. like, which crimes are being ignored? How do YOU know tyhey are being commited?

To be clear - I'm originally from the UK - and the news does report on court cases and even ongoing court cases. So why the Gag order? It's entirely possible that it is just for the purpose as stated - fair trial etc.

There are reasons for a gag order - usually to ensure a fair trail but also to protect witnesses, victims - and sometimes those reasons are made public - but sometimes to make public the reasons for the gag order would be to make public what the courts do not want made public.

But, it is also possible that it is part of the same systemic silencing that caused the issue in the first place.

Can you PROVE a systematic silencing anywhere? In any shape or form?

Then there is the issue - how can you be certain of a fair judicial process for Tommy, when objectively, the judicial process has been anything but fair in respect to the grooming gangs?

Contempt of Court is not a trial process - the judge has the power to sentence. Usually because the judge witnesses the contempt - as he did in this case.

The institutions integrity is predicated on fairness - and the Rotherham scandal (both in terms of length of time and seriousness of the offending) has severely tarnished that reputation.

How? back up that statement.

Is it?
Have they raided various Mosques that were run by Imams and Clerics that were preaching an ISIS-style version of Islam?

Preaching is only speaking - the law only bans Hate Speech - it does not limit free-speech. Don't go down that path - it leads to limits on free speech

Have they shutdown the so-called "Sharia Courts"?

Woud it surprise you to learn that the major religions in New ZEaland have CGHurch courts? Go here - describes the Presbyterian Church courts.

The last person I know of to be tried ina church court was Lloyd Geering - charged with heresy - found not guilty.

https://teara.govt.nz/en/presbyterian-church/page-3

How are Muslim courts different from this?

Have they stopped calling Islam a religion of Peace?

Islam is NOT one single group - it is just as disparate as Christianity, with two major groups - Sunni and Shi'ite ... and then other groupings within that. Islam is generally a religion of Peace - the minority of Wahhabism followers are the problem ..

Have the so-called moderate wing of Islam come out in force and openly condemned these crimes?

Clearly they have - but the western media rarely reports Muslims condemning the actions of a crazy minority.

Have they investigated the flow of money from various Saudi-based Wahabi organizations into certain Islamic lobby groups?

No?

Not easy to do - or even to action - How do you investigate and stop another country placing its money where it likes/ That is called Sovereignty - and we would object if people tried to impose on us.

Yes - Saudi Arabia is the largest and most powerful group of Wahhabism ... and that is a worry ..

Katman

19th June 2018, 12:50

A lot of that is based on Fake News - which has distorted public perceptions.

Dude seriously, the numerous inquiries and reports that have been conducted into this child exploitation scandal can hardly be called fake news.

Banditbandit

19th June 2018, 12:53

Dude seriously, the numerous inquiries and reports that have been conducted into this child exploitation scandal can hardly be called fake news.

No - I was not meaning that specific incident .. but there is a whole range of fake news out here - all designed to warp people's view of Islam - and it seems to work ..

Banditbandit

19th June 2018, 12:54

Here's one I bet you all LOVE ..

http://www.tehrantimes.com/news/424543/Baby-killer-executed-on-Monday

Katman

19th June 2018, 13:00

No - I was not meaning that specific incident .. but there is a whole range of fake news out here - all designed to warp people's view of Islam - and it seems to work ..

The Rotherham incident would have had a profound impact on many peoples view of how the English system deals with crime within the Muslim community.

To even attempt to link this incident to your fake news story shows your level of desperation.

Banditbandit

19th June 2018, 13:37

The Rotherham incident would have had a profound impact on many peoples view of how the English system deals with crime within the Muslim community.

To even attempt to link this incident to your fake news story shows your level of desperation.

Oh crap ... I knew very little about the Rotherham incident until last week - following this thread and going to look.

This is from the House of Commins investigation and report from 2012.

The failure to address the abuse was attributed to a combination of factors revolving around race, class and gender—contemptuous and sexist attitudes toward the mostly working-class victims; fear that the perpetrators' ethnicity would trigger allegations of racism and damage community relations; the Labour council's reluctance to challenge a Labour-voting ethnic minority; lack of a child-centred focus; a desire to protect the town's reputation; and lack of training and resources

Yes - this does address the issues of ethnicity and race - and lots of other failings as well. Race and class - sexist attitudes, proect the town's reputation.

I am in no way suggesting that this is Fake News - nor even attempting to link it to fake news. Clearly this will have damaged the reputation of the system.

What I am saying is that people's general distrust of the system is pushed by Fake News that is put out there to damage Islam. This alone damages perceptions - as it is intended to do.

The Rotherham abuses quite justifiably damage people's trust in the system .. it adds to the problem.

Banditbandit

19th June 2018, 13:38

PS - I am no more a supporter of Islam than I am of Christianity ..

Katman

19th June 2018, 13:42

Oh crap ... I knew very little about the Rotherham incident until last week - following this thread and going to look.

Like you, I knew nothing about the Rotherham scandal before starting this thread.

It does go some way towards explaining the degree of contempt that the likes of Tommy Robinson have for the system though.

Katman

19th June 2018, 14:01

Yes - Saudi Arabia is the largest and most powerful group of Wahhabism ... and that is a worry ..

Doesn't appear to be a worry for America.

They're still happy to supply Saudi Arabia with the means to bomb the fuck out of Yemen.

TheDemonLord

19th June 2018, 14:30

Clearly the pedophile gangs are being dealt with - that's why they were in court ... the direct issue around Robinson his his contempt of court.

I see you and Katman have discussed the Pedohpile issue and why it's entirely relevant here - so I'll not go over that ground.

That statement needs backing up .. like, which crimes are being ignored? How do YOU know tyhey are being commited?

There are reasons for a gag order - usually to ensure a fair trail but also to protect witnesses, victims - and sometimes those reasons are made public - but sometimes to make public the reasons for the gag order would be to make public what the courts do not want made public.

Can you PROVE a systematic silencing anywhere? In any shape or form?

Contempt of Court is not a trial process - the judge has the power to sentence. Usually because the judge witnesses the contempt - as he did in this case.
How? back up that statement.[/quote]

See above.

Preaching is only speaking - the law only bans Hate Speech - it does not limit free-speech. Don't go down that path - it leads to limits on free speech

I'm no fan of Hate Speech laws, but I'll draw comparison to the Rwandan massacre - Preaching the death and destruction (whether it is an abstract flourish or fully malevolently intended) of the West/Western democracy is not protected by Free Speech.

To be clear - I've got no problem with Islamic leaders criticising the West - that is their want and right, I've got every problem when they tell impressionable young people that if they commit acts against the west and die in the process - they will go to Heaven with 77 Virgins.

Woud it surprise you to learn that the major religions in New ZEaland have CGHurch courts? Go here - describes the Presbyterian Church courts

I've got no love of them, however the Sharia courts in the UK have a history of some dubious, even illegal rulings.

Islam is NOT one single group - it is just as disparate as Christianity, with two major groups - Sunni and Shi'ite ... and then other groupings within that. Islam is generally a religion of Peace - the minority of Wahhabism followers are the problem ..

Sure - and if TPTB stood up and said "Islam is a religion of Peace, but there is a small subset who are using it for evil means" - that would go a long way to actually dealing with the problem.

That said - there are parts of the Qu'ran that explicitly allow for violence, in a way that is different from the New Testament

Clearly they have - but the western media rarely reports Muslims condemning the actions of a crazy minority.

There are a few reformist clerics and Imams - who have espoused views that Islam needs to undergo something akin to the renaissance and the enlightenment - they are in the Minority and are often ostracized from the Islamic community - some have even reported Death threats and other such actions against them.

There's a secondary issue that there is a veil of silence within some Islamic communities - some of it is cultural, some of it is also seated in a belief that whilst they may not like the extremists - they are still following the Qu'ran and therefore are still good muslims.

Not easy to do - or even to action - How do you investigate and stop another country placing its money where it likes/ That is called Sovereignty - and we would object if people tried to impose on us.

Yes - Saudi Arabia is the largest and most powerful group of Wahhabism ... and that is a worry ..

I'll draw a comparision to what the USSR was doing in the 50s through to 70s - actively financing Union groups, Marxist institutions and other far-left organizations - When it became clear that McCarthy was right, we pressured those groups to sever ties with the Communist bloc.

I think something similar can be done - however, as Katman points out - that would rather upset the Saudis.

Banditbandit

19th June 2018, 15:44

Like you, I knew nothing about the Rotherham scandal before starting this thread.

It does go some way towards explaining the degree of contempt that the likes of Tommy Robinson have for the system though.

Doesn't appear to be a worry for America.

They're still happy to supply Saudi Arabia with the means to bomb the fuck out of Yemen.

Yes to both .. The likes of Robinson will trash the immigrants for not adopting the ways of British culture and society - and then refuse to follow those ways themselves

WALRUS

19th June 2018, 15:48

Just to put in my own two cents..

If people like Mr Yaxley-Lennon are so confident, sure, and proud of how right they are to incite hate and all these negative vibes.. Why hide behind an array of monikers and aliases?

Banditbandit

19th June 2018, 15:53

I'm no fan of Hate Speech laws, but I'll draw comparison to the Rwandan massacre - Preaching the death and destruction (whether it is an abstract flourish or fully malevolently intended) of the West/Western democracy is not protected by Free Speech.

How do you deal with the groups that advocate exactly that - from wthin - the anarchists, the hard line communists ... the fascists? They all preach death and destruction to the Western systems.

I've got no love of them, however the Sharia courts in the UK have a history of some dubious, even illegal rulings.

Can you give specific examples?

Sure - and if TPTB stood up and said "Islam is a religion of Peace, but there is a small subset who are using it for evil means" - that would go a long way to actually dealing with the problem.

That said - there are parts of the Qu'ran that explicitly allow for violence, in a way that is different from the New Testament

Yes - just as the Bible does - the interpretation s important - and the minority interpret it in a different way .. just as in Xianity ..

There are a few reformist clerics and Imams - who have espoused views that Islam needs to undergo something akin to the renaissance and the enlightenment - they are in the Minority and are often ostracized from the Islamic community - some have even reported Death threats and other such actions against them.

Show me how they are a minority ... The ones you speak of are Wahhabi fiollowers - and a minority ..

There's a secondary issue that there is a veil of silence within some Islamic communities - some of it is cultural, some of it is also seated in a belief that whilst they may not like the extremists - they are still following the Qu'ran and therefore are still good muslims.

Wrong - see below ..

I'll draw a comparision to what the USSR was doing in the 50s through to 70s - actively financing Union groups, Marxist institutions and other far-left organizations - When it became clear that McCarthy was right, we pressured those groups to sever ties with the Communist bloc.

I think something similar can be done - however, as Katman points out - that would rather upset the Saudis.

But I bet you support groups that tried to overturn Soviet Russia ...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2017/mar/26/muslims-condemn-terrorism-stats

https://muslimscondemn.com/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/01/02/why-dont-more-moderate-muslims-denounce-extremism/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.fac6702d9571

https://pics.me.me/this-is-london-in-1993-after-an-ira-truck-bomb-17555072.png

Katman

19th June 2018, 15:57

WALRUS

19th June 2018, 16:11

Why does it matter?

It's not like he hides behind a computer screen.

Fair point, I just think it's a little odd.. If I have that much conviction in anything, I'll gladly put my name to it and spruik that "this is what I think", rather than tell people that my name is Guybrush Threepwood and hope that nobody finds out who I am (or at least, I figure that was his intention, why else would someone use a moniker or alias in place of their real name??)..

Personally, I've got my own opinion about all this crap and I've seen enough bollocks on social media to avoid an internet conversation about it. Wires get crossed, context lost, and messages misinterpreted and everyone just ends up being shitty with everyone else, which there is too much of in the world already without adding yet more to the division by bickering about these matters.

I'm out, have fun guys!

TheDemonLord

19th June 2018, 17:12

How do you deal with the groups that advocate exactly that - from wthin - the anarchists, the hard line communists ... the fascists? They all preach death and destruction to the Western systems.

Well, I'm not fans of any of those groups - the difference is - they've been relatively good at keeping the Rhetoric strictly Rhetorical.

Can you give specific examples?

Not of a specific case, but I can give a specific of a type of case - namely where a Sharia court adjudicates over the dissolution of an Islamic marriage and strips the woman of all her rights (property, children etc.) that she is granted under Western Law.

Yes - just as the Bible does - the interpretation s important - and the minority interpret it in a different way .. just as in Xianity ..

In the old testament, certainly - but most of the silly rules in Christianity were retconned in the New Testament - it's why Christians can enjoy Shellfish, clothes of 2 fibres and eat Pork.

The Qu'ran (and supporting haddiths) have no such qualifiers.

Show me how they are a minority ... The ones you speak of are Wahhabi fiollowers - and a minority ..

People like Maajid Nawaz for example - who is a very moderate Muslim - was labelled as "An anti-muslim Extremist" by the SPLC (although as of a few hours ago - they've now admitted that he isn't) - I think that is proof enough that people like Maajid are not in the majority.

Wrong - see below ..

There's a quote (which for the life of me I can't find) from I believe a leading Egyptian Immam when he was pressed as to whether or not ISIS where conforming to the tenants of Islam, he acknowledged that they were. I'll see if I can find it.

But I bet you support groups that tried to overturn Soviet Russia ...

Ultimately - it was the Russians that overthrew Communism. I guess you could say I support them - but from a point of principle, not from a point of lobbying and pouring money into the cause.

Katman

19th June 2018, 21:51

I'm out, have fun guys!

Forgotten you already.

husaberg

19th June 2018, 22:25

Cause it's not like Islam has a record of murdering people that critique their religion or their Prophet - do I need to bring up Charlie Hebdo?

You are putting the Cart before the Horse: It's because of their middle eastern descent and values that they committed the crimes they did, It's the values that Tommy is objecting to.

Indeed - now compare the actions of the Police against Tommy (raiding his house, picking him up on multiple technicalities) vs the actions of the Police in Rotherham (20 years of inaction)

Do you see the double standard and why people are a little bit annoyed?

You're trying to setup a false equivalence - There's a very key difference between the Catholic Church offences and these offences:

With the Catholic church, they were investigated by the police multiple times, however the Church actively hindered investigations (such as posting a cardinal to another country, paying off the victims etc.)

In the Rotherham (and subsequent cases) The police, the Council and other institutions colluded to actively NOT investigate the cases for fear of being labelled racist

So no, there aren't parrallels to be drawn.

You mean - they didn't want people angry at the Islamic community for raping their daughters? So they abused the legal system to prevent people from talking about it? Why! Thanks for proving my entire point!

This is entirely in line with their previous actions, so from there - it's rather plain to see why people are objecting to it - they are seeing that the political class has not learned from Rotherham and are committing the same mistakes.

It's entirely relevant - ever heard of a Jury acquittal?

I typed a long reply this afternoon and it was lost but Bandit covered most of it anyway.
Especially the bit with the IRA.
Point is Not all people from the Middle east are rapists
you might find it incredible but Some rapist are even born in the UK While some are not
but all rapists are rapists
You cant blame a religion or a community for the acts of a few.
The vast majority of the middle eastern immigrant's to the UK are hard working honest people

There would not be cry's to beat all ex pat poms in the streets of NZ if an Ex pat pom raped a kiwi in NZ
Yet that's exactly what is occurring in the UK.
This is exactly what the media ban was in place to prevent.
I have never seen call to beat all priests because some were paedophiles
I covered all the real world issues with dealing with an organised crime were the witness and the people involved don't co-operate.
ts not a double standard that AKA was convicted so quick he was caught bang to rights and pleaded guilty.
AKA was already on a suspended sentence for similar offences.
The rapists took time because the police investigation was poor the victims were reticent in coming forward due to fear and the legal defence teams slowed the legal process.
The results were the same the guilty were punished in the end but the speed was different.

TheDemonLord

19th June 2018, 22:59

I typed a long reply this afternoon and it was lost but Bandit covered most of it anyway.
Especially the bit with the IRA.
Point is Not all people from the Middle east are rapists
you might find it incredible but Some rapist are even born in the UK While some are not
but all rapists are rapists
You cant blame a religion or a community for the acts of a few.
The vast majority of the middle eastern immigrant's to the UK are hard working honest people

Then why haven't we seen German Grooming gangs? or US grooming Gangs? or Australian grooming Gangs? or Jewish grooming gangs? or Sikh grooming gangs?

I've not said all people from the Middle east are rapists, however - there is a combination of cultural attitudes towards women AND teachings within the Qu'ran that are uniquely combined to create this phenomena.

So yes, I can explicitly blame a religion and a community if their values/teaching are what allowed this to happen. This is the part that you have to acknowledge - it's why this particular type of crime was carried out by groups of people with a number of common traits - namely where they were from and who their god was.

To try and spin this differently is to deny the very problem - which is what the British government and political class did for Decades, until such time that the working classes had enough.

There would not be cry's to beat all ex pat poms in the streets of NZ if an Ex pat pom raped a kiwi in NZ
Yet that's exactly what is occurring in the UK.
This is exactly what the media ban was in place to prevent.
I have never seen call to beat all priests because some were paedophiles
I covered all the real world issues with dealing with an organised crime were the witness and the people involved don't co-operate.

Firstly - you are trying to setup a false equivalence - Ex-pat poms don't look at NZ women who aren't wearing a full body covering as automatically prostitutes.

Next - I thought you said the media ban was about a fair trial? now it's about protecting a Minority? Seems to me you don't know exactly why it was in place...

ts not a double standard that AKA was convicted so quick he was caught bang to rights and pleaded guilty.
AKA was already on a suspended sentence for similar offences.
The rapists took time because the police investigation was poor the victims were reticent in coming forward due to fear and the legal defence teams slowed the legal process.
The results were the same the guilty were punished in the end but the speed was different.

It's not that the police investigation was poor. I want you to be really clear on this point:

They actively didn't investigate for fear of being Racist. The council actively didn't want it investigated for fear of upsetting their voter base.

That's not a poor investigation - that would imply ineptitude and mishandling - the Rotherham report is quite clear on this, that was active dereliction of duty by the Police, Council and associated bodies.

So yes - there is an absolute double standard here.

Berries

19th June 2018, 23:36

Ex-pat poms don't look at NZ women who aren't wearing a full body covering as automatically prostitutes.
Speak for yourself duck, I have been to Christchurch.

husaberg

19th June 2018, 23:40

Then why haven't we seen German Grooming gangs? or US grooming Gangs? or Australian grooming Gangs? or Jewish grooming gangs? or Sikh grooming gangs?

I've not said all people from the Middle east are rapists, however - there is a combination of cultural attitudes towards women AND teachings within the Qu'ran that are uniquely combined to create this phenomena.

So yes, I can explicitly blame a religion and a community if their values/teaching are what allowed this to happen. This is the part that you have to acknowledge - it's why this particular type of crime was carried out by groups of people with a number of common traits - namely where they were from and who their god was.

To try and spin this differently is to deny the very problem - which is what the British government and political class did for Decades, until such time that the working classes had enough.

Firstly - you are trying to setup a false equivalence - Ex-pat poms don't look at NZ women who aren't wearing a full body covering as automatically prostitutes.

Next - I thought you said the media ban was about a fair trial? now it's about protecting a Minority? Seems to me you don't know exactly why it was in place...

It's not that the police investigation was poor. I want you to be really clear on this point:

They actively didn't investigate for fear of being Racist. The council actively didn't want it investigated for fear of upsetting their voter base.

That's not a poor investigation - that would imply ineptitude and mishandling - the Rotherham report is quite clear on this, that was active dereliction of duty by the Police, Council and associated bodies.

So yes - there is an absolute double standard here.
Again you are attempting to place blame on a group of people for the acts of a few.
As for it being the only sex ring of its type that's horse shit
There was a sex ring involving very young girls in Dunedin in the late 70's early 80's not one of the group were middle eastern
They were high profile legal professionals and judges and policeman involved.
There was another ring uncovered that involved a American friend of prince Andrew you may recall.
The boy scouts have had issues with paedophile's grooming victims as have schools.
There has been other Child sex rings uncovered in the USA, none of these involved the same religion or ethnicity as the rotheram ring.
The media ban served to protect the community and the victims and to ensure justice was served.
Judging by your own reaction and that which AKA tried to make happen it seems it was needed
Nothing AKA did speed up the process or made it happen, he just used it as a platform for publicity.
You can go on that the police didn't do it on account of race all you want saying over and over again it doesn't make it true.

TheDemonLord

20th June 2018, 04:12

Again you are attempting to place blame on a group of people for the acts of a few.
As for it being the only sex ring of its type that's horse shit
There was a sex ring involving very young girls in Dunedin in the late 70's early 80's not one of the group were middle eastern
They were high profile legal professionals and judges and policeman involved.
There was another ring uncovered that involved a American friend of prince Andrew you may recall.
The boy scouts have had issues with paedophile's grooming victims as have schools.
There has been other Child sex rings uncovered in the USA, none of these involved the same religion or ethnicity as the rotheram ring.

Again, you're trying to setup a false equivalence - I'm not going to deny the existence of sporadic pedophile rings - you don't seem to want to contend with the fact that 3rd world attitudes towards women and certain versus in the Qu'ran/Haddiths.

And it's not just Rotherham - Derby, Newcastle, Rochdale etc.

The media ban served to protect the community and the victims and to ensure justice was served.
Judging by your own reaction and that which AKA tried to make happen it seems it was needed

Bull shit. Have you read the Rotherham report or any of the literature surrounding it? The Media ban(s) have been made for purely political reasons. The Victims in these cases were catastrophically let down by the Justice system.

As for my reaction - Let's compare apples with apples shall we? On the one hand you had a group that systematically raped girls and justified it within their small community, using their sexist 3rd world attitudes to women and their religion.

Then you've got people saying that Pedophiles can Fuck off. We've not done anything, there's been no pogroms, no Mosques have been burned down, no lynchings - so Pray tell Husa, exactly how is it that My reaction is requires that the Government protect Pedophiles?

Nothing AKA did speed up the process or made it happen, he just used it as a platform for publicity.

The EDL was started in 2009, since the rise of the EDL, funnily enough, the government started to investigate these issues - and low and behold! There's a reason why a whole bunch of working class people are seriously fucked off at Islam.

In a way that they aren't fucked off at say Sikhism or Buddhism or Judaism.

You can go on that the police didn't do it on account of race all you want saying over and over again it doesn't make it true.

It's not me that is saying it - it's the independant inquiry into it that is:

the Police dared not act against Asian youths for fear of allegations of racism.

expressed the general view that ethnic considerations had influenced the policy response of the Council and the Police

Those who had involvement in CSE were acutely aware of these issues and recalled a general nervousness in the earlier years about discussing them, for fear of being thought racist

The issue of race, regardless of ethnic group, should be tackled as an absolute priority if it is known to be a significant factor in the criminal activity of organised abuse in any local community. There was little evidence of such action being taken in Rotherham in the earlier years

One senior officer suggested that some influential Pakistani-heritage councillors in Rotherham had acted as barriers.

Several councillors interviewed believed that by opening up these issues they could be 'giving oxygen' to racist perspectives that might in turn attract extremist political groups and threaten community cohesion.

Do you see a pattern? They deliberately did not do their job properly, out of a fear of being Racists.

RDJ

20th June 2018, 06:58

What TDL said.

Katman

20th June 2018, 07:35

Voltaire

20th June 2018, 08:00

Ex-pat poms

How come we don't talk about Ex pat Syrians, Mexicans and so on......:laugh:

Out of interest have you been to any Muslim countries?

Kickaha

20th June 2018, 09:03

Is it?
Have the so-called moderate wing of Islam come out in force and openly condemned these crimes?

Frequently, but it apparently isn't newsworthy

TheDemonLord

20th June 2018, 12:49

How come we don't talk about Ex pat Syrians, Mexicans and so on......:laugh:

Out of interest have you been to any Muslim countries?

Not really, I've wanted to go to Egypt, I've got friends who've been to Syria (and they loved it). I've stopped over in Dubai a bunch of times (and yes, I changed out of my Metal T-shirt, to something a little more neutral - I'm a guest and I've got to respect their customs)

TheDemonLord

20th June 2018, 12:51

Speak for yourself duck, I have been to Christchurch.

I must have been to the wrong part of Christchurch...

husaberg

20th June 2018, 19:30

And when those crimes were uncovered did the police and local authorities make a concerted attempt to cover them up again?

Maybe you might want to read up a bit on the Dunedin Sex ring. Before you post stupid things like that, Because in that case it was exactly what occurred.
I don't recall much more being mentioned about the one that referenced Prince Andy by association either.

husaberg

20th June 2018, 19:32

Again, you're trying to setup a false equivalence - I'm not going to deny the existence of sporadic pedophile rings - you don't seem to want to contend with the fact that 3rd world attitudes towards women and certain versus in the Qu'ran/Haddiths.

And it's not just Rotherham - Derby, Newcastle, Rochdale etc.

Bull shit. Have you read the Rotherham report or any of the literature surrounding it? The Media ban(s) have been made for purely political reasons. The Victims in these cases were catastrophically let down by the Justice system.

As for my reaction - Let's compare apples with apples shall we? On the one hand you had a group that systematically raped girls and justified it within their small community, using their sexist 3rd world attitudes to women and their religion.

Then you've got people saying that Pedophiles can Fuck off. We've not done anything, there's been no pogroms, no Mosques have been burned down, no lynchings - so Pray tell Husa, exactly how is it that My reaction is requires that the Government protect Pedophiles?

The EDL was started in 2009, since the rise of the EDL, funnily enough, the government started to investigate these issues - and low and behold! There's a reason why a whole bunch of working class people are seriously fucked off at Islam.

In a way that they aren't fucked off at say Sikhism or Buddhism or Judaism.

It's not me that is saying it - it's the independant inquiry into it that is:

Do you see a pattern? They deliberately did not do their job properly, out of a fear of being Racists.
Only one of your examples actually pertains to the case.......

AS for stirring up Muslim hate
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5485105/Counter-terror-police-investigate-Punish-Muslim-Day-letters.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/man-british-muslims-killed-manchester-attack-facebook-post-keegan-jakovlevs-jailed-wrexham-wales-a7933896.html
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/19/several-casualties-reported-after-van-hits-pedestrians-in-north-london
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/30/britain-first-anti-islam-far-right-muslims
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/682675/British-teen-gun-nut-vows-kill-muslims-buy-weapons-ammo-facebook-rant-Isaac-Reed

Katman

20th June 2018, 19:38

Maybe you might want to read up a bit on the Dunedin Sex ring. Before you post stupid things like that, Because in that case it was exactly what occurred.

Perhaps you could post up a link about it so we can see how closely matched the issues are.

Katman

20th June 2018, 20:08

And please do tell us more about Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein's exploits.

You might just find Bill and Hilary Clinton's names popping up in the story too.

husaberg

20th June 2018, 20:22

Perhaps you could post up a link about it so we can see how closely matched the issues are.

Read up about it yourself Mr Lewis the investigating officer wrote a book about it.
Cover Ups and Cop Outs its right up your alley katspam

husaberg

20th June 2018, 20:28

And please do tell us more about Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein's exploits.

You might just find Bill and Hilary Clinton's names popping up in the story too.

I don't need to tell you anything other than Epson is a convicted sex offender. Epstein was convicted of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution 2008.
They were unable to convict anyone else as is common on those cases.
AS for Clinton that's just funny

TheDemonLord

20th June 2018, 20:29

Only one of your examples actually pertains to the case.......

All of them pertain to a string of cases with numerous similarities.

AS for stirring up Muslim hate
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5485105/Counter-terror-police-investigate-Punish-Muslim-Day-letters.html

Whilst the letter is most distasteful, if you look a little closer All the acts of violence are ones that Muslims have been carrying out on non-muslims (with the exception of Nuking Mecca)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/man-british-muslims-killed-manchester-attack-facebook-post-keegan-jakovlevs-jailed-wrexham-wales-a7933896.html

Dude was pissed after another terrorist attack carried out by a Muslim...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/19/several-casualties-reported-after-van-hits-pedestrians-in-north-london

I remember that well - the Mosque had produced something like 10 different terrorists who had successfully carried out attacks - someone finally got pissed off at the police inaction and decided to go vigilante - I don't condone said action, but it isn't like it's without it's reason.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/30/britain-first-anti-islam-far-right-muslims

And? This is the logical conclusion to the continued negative influence of Islam on British Society. They aren't wrong on some of the points either.

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/682675/British-teen-gun-nut-vows-kill-muslims-buy-weapons-ammo-facebook-rant-Isaac-Reed

The teenager is not believed to have a gun licence, but he makes references which suggest he intends to modify deactivated guns into live ones.

So, he doesn't actually have access to any working firearms and without a licence - good luck buying ammunition in Britain - The entire article is woefully alarmist and misleading (the rules for owning a Deactivated weapon are such that it would be easier to manufacture a new weapon, than convert a deactivated one to an active one)

http://dwsuk.org/Deactivated-Weapons-FAQ

Katman

20th June 2018, 20:30

Read up about it yourself Mr Lewis the investigating officer wrote a book about it.
Cover Ups and Cop Outs its right up your alley katspam

So was it about the police covering up the crimes of a certain race due to a fear of being called racist or was it just some fucking pigs trying to cover up their own crimes?

husaberg

20th June 2018, 20:31

So was it about the police covering up the crimes of a certain race due to a fear of being called racist or was it just some fucking pigs trying to cover up their own crimes?

Maybe you should actually read the book.

Katman

20th June 2018, 20:32

I don't need to tell you anything other than Epson is a convicted sex offender. Epstein was convicted of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution 2008.
They were unable to convict anyone else as is common on those cases.

So are you now saying there was no 'cover-up' regarding Prince Andrew?

You should probably make up your mind.

husaberg

20th June 2018, 20:32

All of them pertain to a string of cases with numerous similarities.

Whilst the letter is most distasteful, if you look a little closer All the acts of violence are ones that Muslims have been carrying out on non-muslims (with the exception of Nuking Mecca)

Dude was pissed after another terrorist attack carried out by a Muslim...

I remember that well - the Mosque had produced something like 10 different terrorists who had successfully carried out attacks - someone finally got pissed off at the police inaction and decided to go vigilante - I don't condone said action, but it isn't like it's without it's reason.

And? This is the logical conclusion to the continued negative influence of Islam on British Society. They aren't wrong on some of the points either.

So, he doesn't actually have access to any working firearms and without a licence - good luck buying ammunition in Britain - The entire article is woefully alarmist and misleading (the rules for owning a Deactivated weapon are such that it would be easier to manufacture a new weapon, than convert a deactivated one to an active one)

http://dwsuk.org/Deactivated-Weapons-FAQ

You used to be logical what happened?

husaberg

20th June 2018, 20:35

So are you now saying there was no 'cover-up' regarding Prince Andrew?

You should probably make up your mind.

I never said there was a cover up you did I just said it went very quiet. the cover up was referring to the Dunedin sex ring, maybe you should read the book written by the ex policeman who investigated it.
RE the Epstein I only gave it as an example a alleged sex ring which TDL suggested somehow only existed in Muslim cultures.

Katman

20th June 2018, 20:54

AS for stirring up Muslim hate
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5485105/Counter-terror-police-investigate-Punish-Muslim-Day-letters.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/man-british-muslims-killed-manchester-attack-facebook-post-keegan-jakovlevs-jailed-wrexham-wales-a7933896.html
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/19/several-casualties-reported-after-van-hits-pedestrians-in-north-london
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/30/britain-first-anti-islam-far-right-muslims
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/682675/British-teen-gun-nut-vows-kill-muslims-buy-weapons-ammo-facebook-rant-Isaac-Reed

I don't think anyone has suggested that crime perpetrated against Muslims doesn't exist.

Can you directly link Tommy Robinson to any of those crimes though?

And maybe if the police dealt with all criminals equally, regardless of race, there might be somewhat less aggravation.

TheDemonLord

20th June 2018, 21:15

You used to be logical what happened?

That would be your classic Ad Hominem my Dear Husa.

I should point out, for the record, I don't hate all of Islam.

There are parts of Islam I believe to be incompatible with Western Ideals (which I hold to be objectively the best set of principles that Mankind has yet created, as evidenced by the success of the nations that hold dear to them)

I believe that within Islam, not enough is being done to cast out the salafist/Wahhabist traditions, and I believe the reason for this is because they are fundamentally adhering to the Qu'ran and the surrounding Hadiths.

Until that perception amongst the wider Islamic community changes, then we will have issues.

I further believe that a large degree of Western Guilt has stopped our leaders from adequately and honestly discussing and addressing the problem and objectively there is a problem, we don't see this behaviour from Sikhs or Buddhists or Taoists etc.

I finally believe that some of the cultural attitudes (forced marriage, honor killings, acid attacks etc. etc.) that certain groups have brought over from their country of origin are completely unacceptable and we need to give these people an Ultimatum of sorts - If they wish to stay in the UK, that means that have to adopt the bare minimum of UK principals. If they want to continue with their traditions that are in conflict with those bare minimum of principals - they can fuck off.

Edit: Furthermore - I believe there is a STRONG causation between the success of the country and the adoption of those principles and the failurea of their country of origin and their continued use of those barbaric traditions.

husaberg

20th June 2018, 21:53

That would be your classic Ad Hominem my Dear Husa.

I should point out, for the record, I don't hate all of Islam.

There are parts of Islam I believe to be incompatible with Western Ideals (which I hold to be objectively the best set of principles that Mankind has yet created, as evidenced by the success of the nations that hold dear to them)

I believe that within Islam, not enough is being done to cast out the salafist/Wahhabist traditions, and I believe the reason for this is because they are fundamentally adhering to the Qu'ran and the surrounding Hadiths.

Until that perception amongst the wider Islamic community changes, then we will have issues.

I further believe that a large degree of Western Guilt has stopped our leaders from adequately and honestly discussing and addressing the problem and objectively there is a problem, we don't see this behaviour from Sikhs or Buddhists or Taoists etc.

I finally believe that some of the cultural attitudes (forced marriage, honor killings, acid attacks etc. etc.) that certain groups have brought over from their country of origin are completely unacceptable and we need to give these people an Ultimatum of sorts - If they wish to stay in the UK, that means that have to adopt the bare minimum of UK principals. If they want to continue with their traditions that are in conflict with those bare minimum of principals - they can fuck off.

Edit: Furthermore - I believe there is a STRONG causation between the success of the country and the adoption of those principles and the failurea of their country of origin and their continued use of those barbaric traditions.

That's a lot of I believes mine was a simple observation based on your posts.

husaberg

20th June 2018, 21:55

I don't think .

I know right Cheers....

The media ban served to protect the community and the victims and to ensure justice was served.
Judging by your own reaction and that which AKA tried to make happen it seems it was needed
Nothing AKA did speed up the process or made it happen, he just used it as a platform for publicity..

.
Then you've got people saying that Pedophiles can Fuck off. We've not done anything, there's been no pogroms, no Mosques have been burned down, no lynchings - so Pray tell Husa, exactly how is it that My reaction is requires that the Government protect Pedophiles?.

Katman

20th June 2018, 22:23

I know right Cheers....

A little out of context there but I'll leave TDL to speak for himself.

TheDemonLord

20th June 2018, 22:45

That's a lot of I believes mine was a simple observation based on your posts.

Absolutely there is, as a lot of them are value judgements. I put it to you that there is a fair amount of evidence (anecdotal, empirical and circumstantial) to back up each of those beliefs - so it's not an irrational set of propositions.

I know right Cheers....

Again, you are setting up a false equivalence and you are ignoring the findings of the Rotherham report. I could turn a blind eye if the Rotherham report had found only one or two instances of complicity, but that isn't what they found - at multiple levels there were endemic, repeated issues that were causal to this.

A few people getting pissed at Islam is not the same as the systematic rape and torment of Girls. The only group that the UK Government has been protecting is the scum that had been carrying out these crimes.

husaberg

20th June 2018, 23:07

Absolutely there is, as a lot of them are value judgements. I put it to you that there is a fair amount of evidence (anecdotal, empirical and circumstantial) to back up each of those beliefs - so it's not an irrational set of propositions.

Again, you are setting up a false equivalence and you are ignoring the findings of the Rotherham report. I could turn a blind eye if the Rotherham report had found only one or two instances of complicity, but that isn't what they found - at multiple levels there were endemic, repeated issues that were causal to this.

A few people getting pissed at Islam is not the same as the systematic rape and torment of Girls. The only group that the UK Government has been protecting is the scum that had been carrying out these crimes.

Its not a false equivalent.
Because on one hand you are saying a small group of peoples activities and threats and deeds are not relevant to the whole community.
But on the other hand you are saying a small group of peoples activities and threats and deeds are relevant the whole community.
That's not logical.
You need to take a step back and realise it was a small group of individuals that perpetrated the crimes, not a race or religion.
Did you look at the people that were convicted because at least 4 were not even Islamic. Some were Caucasian women born in the UK.

TheDemonLord

20th June 2018, 23:50

Its not a false equivalent.
Because on one hand you are saying a small group of peoples activities and threats and deeds are not relevant to the whole community.
But on the other hand you are saying a small group of peoples activities and threats and deeds are relevant the whole community.

It absolutely is a false equivalency - because you are ommitting the actual crimes that have been committed against potential crimes that could be committed.

That's not logical.

That's why it's a fallacy ;)

You need to take a step back and realise it was a small group of individuals that perpetrated the crimes, not a race or religion.
Did you look at the people that were convicted because at least 4 were not even Islamic. Some were Caucasian women born in the UK.

Except you are ignoring the cultural and religious factors in these case(s) - and it wasn't just one crime in one area, there have been multiple near-identical crimes - all perpetrated by the same set of cultural and religious beliefs.

In fact - lets put it in perspective here:

Of the 56 offenders convicted since 1997 for crimes relating to on-street grooming of girls aged 11 to 16, three were white, 53 were Asian (in the UK - Asian refers to someone of Indian/Pakistani descent) of which 50 were Muslim,

Since you know that I love maths:

That gives us 89% of pedophile grooming is from Muslims
and
94% of Pedophile grooming is from people of Pakistani/Indian descent.

Now, are you trying to assert that the Cultural and religious factors didn't have a part to play when there is a correlation of 90+%?

husaberg

21st June 2018, 00:35

It absolutely is a false equivalency - because you are ommitting the actual crimes that have been committed against potential crimes that could be committed.

Since you know that I love maths:

That gives us 89% of pedophile grooming is from Muslims
and
94% of Pedophile grooming is from people of Pakistani/Indian descent.

Now, are you trying to assert that the Cultural and religious factors didn't have a part to play when there is a correlation of 90+%?
The fallacy is yours though.
Perspective yeah....
Wow so using your logic your ethnicity says its fine for me to pin the label that says you are a serial killer.
Seeing as most well known serial killers belong to your ethnicity and all.
All non Caucasians are well with in their rights to do so launch hate websites against your ilk, protest in the streets convict you in the media before a trial etc

PS your maths is faulty because you are only using the data from one case it also doesn't include the fact that their are over 3 million people of Indian or Pakistani decent in the UK.
thus 0.001%. is hardly a telling statistic to condemn a whole race as being complicit in raping and grooming children.

Especially considering your ethnic groups demographics' percentage in the UK and Irelands 67,000 convicted paedophiles
Studies suggest

Paedophiles tend to be shorter than average in height, and are three times more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous. The majority of the sample (81.5%) identified as Caucasian

Katman

21st June 2018, 07:12

All non Caucasians are well with in their rights to do so launch hate websites against your irk,

Does his ilk irk you so much you can't even find the right words? :weird:

TheDemonLord

21st June 2018, 08:12

The fallacy is yours though.
Perspective yeah....
Wow so using your logic your ethnicity says its fine for me to pin the label that says you are a serial killer.
Seeing as most well known serial killers belong to your ethnicity and all.
All non Caucasians are well with in their rights to do so launch hate websites against your irk, protest in the streets convict you in the media before a trial etc

Sure - all you need to do though is provide some form of proof that a combination of my Religion (oh dear!) and my cultural values permit me to kill people en masse.

And that, is where your argument falls apart.

PS your maths is faulty because you are only using the data from one case it also doesn't include the fact that their are over 3 million people of Indian or Pakistani decent in the UK.
thus 0.001%. is hardly a telling statistic to condemn a whole race as being complicit in raping and grooming children.

and yet, for the white demographic - it gives us a percent of 0.0000005%

So from that basis someone of Pakistani descent 2000% more likely to commit that type of Crime. Why do you think that is? There is something unique related to that demographic that is causal. Your refusal to admit it, is the same refusal that lead to the cover-up in the first place.

Is it all Muslims or all Pakistanis? No, of course not - but you have to come to terms with the fact that of the people that commit this type of crime, it's nearly all Muslims and Pakistanis and furthermore there are reasons as to why this is.

Especially considering your ethnic groups demographics' percentage in the UK and Irelands 67,000 convicted paedophiles
Studies suggest

That's a bait and switch - we aren't talking about all Pedophiles, we are talking about a particular type of pedophillic crime.

Kickaha

21st June 2018, 11:09

I remember that well - the Mosque had produced something like 10 different terrorists who had successfully carried out attacks - someone finally got pissed off at the police inaction and decided to go vigilante - I don't condone said action, but it isn't like it's without it's reason.

You're living in the past, there was a big shake up in that place that stopped all that and that was over a decade ago

Police said he Darren was radicalised online within the space of a month, he also claimed "Dave was driving", seeing as he was a Tommy Robinson follower we should be able to blame all of them though

Banditbandit

21st June 2018, 11:30

Not of a specific case, but I can give a specific of a type of case - namely where a Sharia court adjudicates over the dissolution of an Islamic marriage and strips the woman of all her rights (property, children etc.) that she is granted under Western Law.

I'll deal with this one first - In Islam women hold property ...

Women often entered marriage with substantial capital in the form of mahr and the trousseau provided by their family, which they were not obliged to spend on family expenses, and they frequently loaned money to their husbands. Because of this, and the financial obligations incurred, talaq could be a very costly and in many cases financially ruinous enterprise for the husband. Many repudiated women used the divorce payment to buy their ex-husband's share in the family house.

Talaq is a form of divorce - where a man casts away a wife .. Khul is divorce by mutual consent.

Khulʿ is a contractual type of divorce that is initiated by the wife. It is justified on the authority of verse 2:228:[5]

It is not licit for you to take back anything you have given them unless the two of them fear that they cannot conform to the bounds of God, no blame attaches to them both. If the woman gives back that with which she sets herself free. These are the bounds set by God; do not transgress them.

It is further based on a hadith in which Muhammad instructs a man to agree to his wife's wish of divorce if she gives back a garden received from him as part of her mahr. A khul' is concluded when the couple agrees to a divorce in exchange for a monetary compensation paid by the wife, which cannot exceed the value of the mahr she had received, and is generally a smaller sum or involves forfeiting the still unpaid portion

If the husband pressures his wife to agree to khul' instead of pronouncing talaq, which would let him avoid attendant financial responsibilities, the divorce is considered to be invalid.[5] Like talaq, khulʿ takes place out of court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_in_Islam

Now, we know that cultural practices frequently differ from the religion - as exampled by the difference benweet Christinity and cultural practices.

ISLAM does not strip the women of rights and assets.

And of course, there are different legal schools in Islam - i is NOT a unified system of thought.

Banditbandit

21st June 2018, 11:34

Well, I'm not fans of any of those groups - the difference is - they've been relatively good at keeping the Rhetoric strictly Rhetorical.

Only 'relatively' good ..

"US citizens and legal residents have committed 80 percent of terrorist attacks since 9/11"

https://www.vox.com/2015/11/23/9765718/domestic-terrorism-threat

SUre - some of these a jihadis . the rest

Of the 28 deadly homegrown terrorist attacks, only 10 of those attacks were related to Islamic extremism. The other 18 attacks were led by right-wing extremists, including, most recently, the mass shooting on November 27, 2015 that killed three and wounded nine at a Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

And then there are ones like Timothy McVeigh .. 186 people killed in that one ..

Banditbandit

21st June 2018, 11:40

People like Maajid Nawaz for example - who is a very moderate Muslim - was labelled as "An anti-muslim Extremist" by the SPLC (although as of a few hours ago - they've now admitted that he isn't) - I think that is proof enough that people like Maajid are not in the majority.

This is interesting ..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_attitudes_toward_terrorism

here's the stats

In Asia, 58% said it is never justifiable, 12% said it is sometimes justifiable, and 15% said it depends.
In the post-Soviet states, 56% said it is never justifiable, 8% said it is sometimes justifiable, and 20% said it depends.
In the MENA (Middle East and North Africa) region, 85% said it is never justifiable, 9% said it is sometimes justifiable, and 4% said it depends.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, 66% said it is never justifiable, 17% said it is sometimes justifiable, and 11% said it depends.
In the United States and Canada, 50% said it is never justifiable, 47% said it is sometimes justifiable, and 2% said it depends.
In Europe, 69% said it is never justifiable, 12% said it is sometimes justifiable, and 11% said it depends.

The results of these polls show that, in ALL areas, the majority (more than 50%) say Terrorism is NEVER justified.

I believe that shows the majority of Muslims oppose terrorism.

Banditbandit

21st June 2018, 11:45

Then why haven't we seen German Grooming gangs? or US grooming Gangs? or Australian grooming Gangs? or Jewish grooming gangs? or Sikh grooming gangs?

Interesting .. white men groom alone - Asians work in gangs .. Notice ASIANS not Muslims (Asia has a multitude of religions, including Islam.)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/quilliam-grooming-gangs-report-asian-abuse-rotherham-rochdale-newcastle-a8101941.html

Banditbandit

21st June 2018, 11:51

I've not said all people from the Middle east are rapists, however - there is a combination of cultural attitudes towards women AND teachings within the Qu'ran that are uniquely combined to create this phenomena.

So yes, I can explicitly blame a religion and a community if their values/teaching are what allowed this to happen. This is the part that you have to acknowledge - it's why this particular type of crime was carried out by groups of people with a number of common traits - namely where they were from and who their god was.

To try and spin this differently is to deny the very problem - which is what the British government and political class did for Decades, until such time that the working classes had enough.

rape and sexual violence is not permitted in Islamic texts. It is of course something that causes harm to other humans, which is not Halal (permissible) and, in early Muslim communities, rape was a crime punishable by death.

Chapter 23:1-6 in the Quran. It reads:

“And successful are the believers who guard their chastity … except from their wives or those that their right hands possess.”

The reference is about sexual relations, which are forbidden with any woman unless she is a spouse or ‘those their right hands possess’. To be clear, this means a concubine, bondmaid or a slave, but intercourse has to be consensual. Rape is forbidden as it is violent, and Islamic texts legislated for the proper and honourable treatment of slaves.

Even consensual sexual relations with a slave were not permissible if it caused harm and abuse elsewhere (e.g. to a wife) as all parties involved would be affected.

Furthermore this is not an entitlement. Concubinage and interpersonal relations with various bondmaids/slaves was already occurring at the time the Quran came about and subsequent passages list restrictions as a starting point to help to bring about the end of slavery. In any case, marriage was encouraged (Chapter 24:32) with slaves.

In fact, slavery was never endorsed by Islamic texts; rather it was something inherited from pre-Islamic cultures (pre-600s) that needed to be voluntarily and gradually weeded out of society through manumission, which was highly encouraged (Chapters 24:32-33 & 16:71). Islamic texts list a plethora of avenues to free slaves, as it was seen as a highly virtuous act. It’s difficult to find any references on how to make slaves out of people; rather the focus is always on ending slavery.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-truth-about-muslims-and-sex-slavery-according-to-the-quran-rather-than-isis-or-islamophobes-a6875446.html

Katman

21st June 2018, 11:52

The story behind the uncovering of the scandal.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/D7xhNYJV430" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Banditbandit

21st June 2018, 11:58

Dude was pissed after another terrorist attack carried out by a Muslim...

I remember that well - the Mosque had produced something like 10 different terrorists who had successfully carried out attacks - someone finally got pissed off at the police inaction and decided to go vigilante - I don't condone said action, but it isn't like it's without it's reason.

And here is the response of the Imam ...

Mohammed Mahmoud, an imam at the Muslim Welfare House, arrived moments later and was praised for stopping anybody attacking the suspect. “By God’s grace we managed to surround him and protect him from any harm,” Mahmoud said at a press conference on Monday afternoon. “We stopped all forms of attack and abuse towards him that were coming from every angle.”

By your reasoning he had every reason to join in the attacks on Osborne. He instead demonstrated that Islam is a religion of Peace (with a few actively violent crazies .. )

Banditbandit

21st June 2018, 12:00

And maybe if the police dealt with all criminals equally, regardless of race, there might be somewhat less aggravation.

I absolutely agree ...

Banditbandit

21st June 2018, 12:03

I finally believe that some of the cultural attitudes (forced marriage, honor killings, acid attacks etc. etc.) that certain groups have brought over from their country of origin are completely unacceptable and we need to give these people an Ultimatum of sorts - If they wish to stay in the UK, that means that have to adopt the bare minimum of UK principals. If they want to continue with their traditions that are in conflict with those bare minimum of principals - they can fuck off.

Edit: Furthermore - I believe there is a STRONG causation between the success of the country and the adoption of those principles and the failurea of their country of origin and their continued use of those barbaric traditions.

I agree - and NONE of those practices are from Islam - or supported by any Islamic text - the Qu'ran and Hadiths ... they are all cultural and some leaders twist Islam to support those practices ..

pritch

21st June 2018, 12:18

Can you directly link Tommy Robinson to any of those crimes though?

Well, I've seen it reported in the British press that it was Robinson's rantings that radicalised Darren Osborne. He who drove a van into people outside London's Finsbury Park mosque.
Which would tend to indicate that, as sunbed salesmen go, Robinson has the potential to be dangerous. And that's after allowing for the fact that sunbeds can cause cancer.

pritch

21st June 2018, 12:46

Katman, I was initially inclined not to read the clip you posted, too many of the clips in Rant and Rave are batshit crazy. That one is an exception. I particularly liked his reference to the corporate owned childcare houses that I mentioned here a while back. You can see why the corporate interest when they are paid something approaching half a million dollars a year to provide care for one kid. Especially when the "care" is almost non-existent.

Katman

21st June 2018, 12:56

Katman, I was initially inclined not to read the clip you posted, too many of the clips in Rant and Rave are batshit crazy. That one is an exception.

It's a very revealing video.

Anyone who feels they're qualified to comment on this issue should watch it to get the facts regarding the root cause of Tommy Robinson's case.

husaberg

21st June 2018, 13:40

Sure - all you need to do though is provide some form of proof that a combination of my Religion (oh dear!) and my cultural values permit me to kill people en masse.

And that, is where your argument falls apart.

and yet, for the white demographic - it gives us a percent of 0.0000005%

So from that basis someone of Pakistani descent 2000% more likely to commit that type of Crime. Why do you think that is? There is something unique related to that demographic that is causal. Your refusal to admit it, is the same refusal that lead to the cover-up in the first place.

Is it all Muslims or all Pakistanis? No, of course not - but you have to come to terms with the fact that of the people that commit this type of crime, it's nearly all Muslims and Pakistanis and furthermore there are reasons as to why this is.

That's a bait and switch - we aren't talking about all Pedophiles, we are talking about a particular type of paedophilic crime.
If my argument falls apart its because it was a argument based on your own silly example.
The bait and switch is you using convictions to say that the percentage of which a crime occurs.
Point one “British white men they tend to work individually. They tend to work online where they groom and they are the majority of perpetrators.
Point two In an inquiry by the Office of the Children’s Commissioner (https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/) in 2012, 36 per cent of victims of group or gang child abuse identified their attackers as white, 27 per cent as Asian, 16 per cent as black, with 16 per cent unspecified.
Point three researchers said their data’s sample size had been too small and more research needed to be conducted.

AKA quotes that are threats to a whole community that you seem to think are okay.

Every single Muslim watching this... on 7/7 (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings) you got away with killing and maiming British citizens... you had better understand that we have built a network from one end of the country to the other end... and the Islamic community will feel the full force of the English Defense League (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Defense_League) if we see any of our British citizens killed, maimed, or hurt on British soil ever again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j7IX_5a_9M

Islam is not a religion of peace (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Religion_of_peace). Islam is fascist and it's violent and we've had enough! They're chopping our soldiers' heads off. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lee_Rigby) This is Islam. That's what we've seen today. They've cut off one of our army's heads off on the streets of London. Our next generation are being taught through schools that Islam is a religion of peace. It's not. It never has been. What you saw today is Islam. Everyone's had enough. There has to be a reaction, for the government to listen, for the police to listen, to understand how angry this British public are.

Despite platitudes to the contrary, AKA routinely fails to draw a distinction between Islamist extremists and ordinary Muslims. To see akas prejudiced homogenisation of all Muslims in sharp focus, one need look no further than his reaction to the arrival in Europe of refugees and migrants fleeing Islamic extremism in the Middle East. He has completely refused to draw a distinction between perpetrator and victim.
“I’d personally send every adult male Muslim that has come into the EU over the past 12 months back tomorrow if I could. Fake refugees,” he tweeted in early 2016.

TheDemonLord

21st June 2018, 14:45

placeholder post for when I can collate all of Bandits and Husas points and respond

Edit:

I'll deal with this one first - In Islam women hold property ...

Talaq is a form of divorce - where a man casts away a wife .. Khul is divorce by mutual consent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_in_Islam

Now, we know that cultural practices frequently differ from the religion - as exampled by the difference benweet Christinity and cultural practices.

ISLAM does not strip the women of rights and assets.

And of course, there are different legal schools in Islam - i is NOT a unified system of thought.

I'll be honest and say that I'm going off the reports by UK civil liberties groups as to the violations of Womens rights by Sharia courts. I'd offer a mild rebuttal - if you look at Saudi Arabia - it's clear women don't own shit - as they require a male guardian for everything - I'll agree though that Islam is complex, however if I could draw a quick distinction - If you were to put an Ardent Catholic and Ardent protestant up against each other - they would both agree on the 10 commandments (which forms the basis of Judeo-christian law)

Only 'relatively' good ..

"US citizens and legal residents have committed 80 percent of terrorist attacks since 9/11"

https://www.vox.com/2015/11/23/9765718/domestic-terrorism-threat

SUre - some of these a jihadis . the rest

And then there are ones like Timothy McVeigh .. 186 people killed in that one ..

Well, no one's perfect - and interesting the cut-off date that Vox uses, I wonder why... However - we are predominantly talking about the UK and Europe - where most of the serious terrorist activity has a distinctly Islamic flavour.

This is interesting ..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_attitudes_toward_terrorism

here's the stats

The results of these polls show that, in ALL areas, the majority (more than 50%) say Terrorism is NEVER justified.

I believe that shows the majority of Muslims oppose terrorism.

From your link:

published two weeks after the July 2005 bombings in the London Underground, showed that 88% of British Muslims were opposed to the bombings, while 6% (about 100,000 individuals) fully supported them, and one British Muslim in four expressed some sympathy with the motives of the bombers

Now, indulge me for a moment - an approximated 100,000 people fully supporting a Terrorist act. That's quite a large number of individuals fully supporting Murder. That's like the entirety of Hamilton supporting Terrorism. Hell, even the KKK has a top estimate of 12,000 members - and that's in the US with a larger population than the UK.

1 in 4 have some sympathies? I'll be quite blunt, I couldn't give a toss what their sympathies are nor how small they might be - There is no justification for Terrorism. Period. It's especially enraging because they are taking full advantage of the freedoms granted to them by our Western ideals, to have those sympathies towards those who would destroy the very civilisation that allows them to openly express them.

That's like giving a hi-5 to the person who Murdered the Doctor who just gave you a lifesaving operation.

Interesting .. white men groom alone - Asians work in gangs .. Notice ASIANS not Muslims (Asia has a multitude of religions, including Islam.)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/quilliam-grooming-gangs-report-asian-abuse-rotherham-rochdale-newcastle-a8101941.html

Remember - Asian in a british sense refers to Indian and Pakistani descent - but see what I posted previously - 90% of those involved in Grooming Gangs are islamic - that's not a coincidence.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-truth-about-muslims-and-sex-slavery-according-to-the-quran-rather-than-isis-or-islamophobes-a6875446.html

That's some interesting revisionist history, Now - I should point out that I don't read arabic - but in that passage - I believe there is something of a translation issue in what "right hand possesses" to mean - if you take for example:

Sunan of Abu Dawud, vol.2, #2150

Which describes good, old fashoned post-battle rape and pillage:

Abu Sa’id Al Khudri said “The Apostle of Allaah(ﷺ) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of Apostle of Allaah (ﷺ) were reluctant to have relations with the female captives because of their pagan husbands. So, Allaah the exalted sent down the Qur’anic verse “And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hand posses.” This is to say that they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period.

https://sunnah.com/abudawud/12/110

I believe there are other Hadiths that draw distinction between the rights granted to a believer and the lack of rights to unbelievers.

And here is the response of the Imam ...

By your reasoning he had every reason to join in the attacks on Osborne. He instead demonstrated that Islam is a religion of Peace (with a few actively violent crazies .. )

I remember that too - mainly due to the cynical debate around whether it was a true act of compassion or something more deceptive. I gave the Imam the benefit of any doubt.

I agree - and NONE of those practices are from Islam - or supported by any Islamic text - the Qu'ran and Hadiths ... they are all cultural and some leaders twist Islam to support those practices ..

I'm not so sure, again - for clarity sake, I'm not a Qu'rannic Scholar, but I understand that the later verses (when Mohammed had an army and was conquering) are somewhat more aggressive than the earlier verses.

There is also the practice of short-term marriages - which is basically a loophole to get around prostitution being illegal.

We also have to contend that within countries that practice Sharia, some of the protections granted to women against rape don't seem to exist (there's been quite a few instances of women being stoned to death as adulturers for being Raped), given what we know of Fatwas (islamic legal opinion) and how they differ from English Common Law precedent - I don't think you can say with certainty that the prohibitions exist as you describe them.

If my argument falls apart its because it was a argument based on your own silly example.
The bait and switch is you using convictions to say that the percentage of which a crime occurs.
Point one “British white men they tend to work individually. They tend to work online where they groom and they are the majority of perpetrators.

That's not the same type of crime that we are talking about... There's your bait and switch. It's deplorable for certain, but in almost all cases it's the work of one or two people - not an interconnected group of multiple people.

Point two In an inquiry by the Office of the Children’s Commissioner (https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/) in 2012, 36 per cent of victims of group or gang child abuse identified their attackers as white, 27 per cent as Asian, 16 per cent as black, with 16 per cent unspecified.
Point three researchers said their data’s sample size had been too small and more research needed to be conducted.

That inquiry was from 2012 - which is before most of the Grooming Gang cases were fully exposed.

AKA quotes that are threats to a whole community that you seem to think are okay.

Again - a bit of Context is needed here - FWIW - I happened to be in the UK when Lee Rigby was murdered (on my Honeymoon in fact) People were pissed off, Pissed off people aren't particularly cautious or nuanced in their words. I went through the working class neighbourhoods near where I grew up - Flags were everywhere in tribute. In that same neighbourhood - someone smashed up a mosque and desecrated the Qu'rans there.

I've said as many times that Tommys working class background means he speaks carelessly (although he is getting better at being more nuanced) - it's not okay to go after an entire community, but it is okay to go after a Religion that not only explicitly allows this, but promises a reward of 77 virgins in Heaven for doing so.

Edit edit: I think it's also right to talk a little bit about those working class neighbourhoods I mentioned - they are the home of the quintessential Chav - and whilst I could wax lyrical about tales of their antisocial disposition and their ability to be offensive to anyone and everyone - I can't recall any serious religious resentment - TBH I think the Sikhs got a harder time than the Muslims, simply on account of their Turbans - and even then - they weren't social pariahs - mainly because they upheld those bare minimum of british values that I referenced.

Which is what I think it's right to end on - for all the critical talk of Islam, If someone wants to believe in Allah, pray 5 times a day facing Mecca, undertake the Haj etc. etc. - I've got no problem with that, I'll also be sure not to offer them a Beer and Bacon Sammich - we'll get on like a house on fire.

Edit Edit Edit:

A nice little ditty on the subject of Islamic attitudes towards Kafirs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSS_Zqrnsz0

Banditbandit

21st June 2018, 17:59

placeholder post for when I can collate all of Bandits and Husas points and respond

No rush ...

pritch

21st June 2018, 19:19

Anyone who feels they're qualified to comment on this issue should watch it to get the facts regarding the root cause of Tommy Robinson's case.

Don't go looking for root causes there aren't any. He was a football hooligan, when that became unfashionable he decided to hate muslims. Don't go looking for intelligent reasons for his behaviour, there aren't any. He's just a cunt.

Berries

21st June 2018, 19:23

placeholder post for when I can collate all of Bandits and Husas points and respond
All this tension is starting to get to me.........

Katman

21st June 2018, 19:32

Don't go looking for root causes there aren't any. He was a football hooligan, when that became unfashionable he decided to hate muslims. Don't go looking for intelligent reasons for his behaviour, there aren't any. He's just a cunt.

What a load of shit.

The root cause is that for years groups of Muslims got away with crimes that would have seen an Englishman imprisoned in a heartbeat - simply because they were groups of Muslims.

If you can't recognise that fact then you're fucking blind - at the very least.

I find myself wondering just how much of a useless fuck you'd be if a crime of this magnitude happened in New Zealand.

You watched a video that spelled the problem out in words of one syllable and yet you're still as fucking clueless as ever.

Well done you.

husaberg

21st June 2018, 21:24

Perhaps you could post up a link about it so we can see how closely matched the issues are.
Not the book but it covers a fair bit of it.
https://issuu.com/iwishart/docs/investigate_june07/33
I wouldn't normally take much notice of wishart but seeing as t came from a book written by the actual detective which I have read.

pritch

21st June 2018, 21:32

What a load of shit.

The root cause is that for years groups of Muslims got away with crimes that would have seen an Englishman imprisoned in a heartbeat - simply because they were groups of Muslims.

Robinson was just a violent thug. Anti-social arseholes often adopt some "cause" in an attempt to legitimise their behaviour. If it wasn't muslims it'd be something else.

If you can upgrade your comprehension skills you will see that I do understand what went on in Rotherham, and have since it hit the news years ago. What happened there though has little to do with Robinson.

His circus act could have resulted in pedos going free.

Katman

21st June 2018, 21:39

Robinson was just a violent thug.

Ok, forget Tommy Robinson for a minute.

How do you feel about the authorities turning a blind eye to groups of Pakistani Muslims using underage English girls as sex toys?

How would you feel if it happened in New Plymouth?

Katman

21st June 2018, 22:07

Let's not forget that the number of girls involved in this has gone past 1500 and will no doubt still climb.

That's offending on a grand scale.

And it was ignored.

Katman

21st June 2018, 22:12

If I was Tommy Robinson I'd be fucked off too.

pritch

21st June 2018, 23:54

We know all about that, but none of that has fuck all to do with him. Underlying causes, technicalities, it’s all bollocks.

The prick is simply too stupid to be free. It’s that simple, stop looking for problems.

If you want to look at a conspiracy, check the story in today’s Guardian about the 600 early deaths in a hospital. There may well turn out to have been a conspiracy there too. That’s got nothing to do with his nibs either.

TheDemonLord

21st June 2018, 23:57

Katman

22nd June 2018, 08:30

We know all about that, but none of that has fuck all to do with him. Underlying causes, technicalities, it’s all bollocks.

Seriously, are you too, that scared of being accused of being a racist that you can't concede that Tommy Robinson's activism stems from the knowledge that Pakistani Muslims have been treated completely differently in the eyes of the law to the average English person and that the English justice system completely failed to protect over 1500 English girls?

You should go for a job at Rotherham Council.

Banditbandit

22nd June 2018, 12:24

OK - let's go ..

I'll be honest and say that I'm going off the reports by UK civil liberties groups as to the violations of Womens rights by Sharia courts. I'd offer a mild rebuttal - if you look at Saudi Arabia - it's clear women don't own shit - as they require a male guardian for everything - I'll agree though that Islam is complex, however if I could draw a quick distinction - If you were to put an Ardent Catholic and Ardent protestant up against each other - they would both agree on the 10 commandments (which forms the basis of Judeo-christian law)

And there are base equivalents that all Muslims would share .. but like Christianity - a whole lot they would disagree on. Even the Trinity is not agreed on

Well, no one's perfect - and interesting the cut-off date that Vox uses, I wonder why... However - we are predominantly talking about the UK and Europe - where most of the serious terrorist activity has a distinctly Islamic flavour.

Understandable (but not excusable). It is in the western countries where they are confronted by Islamic hatred, and see pictures every day on TV of anti-Islamic action.

That is not to excuse terrorism - but goes some way to explain attitudes to terrorism among Muslims in the west.

Now, indulge me for a moment - an approximated 100,000 people fully supporting a Terrorist act. That's quite a large number of individuals fully supporting Murder. That's like the entirety of Hamilton supporting Terrorism. Hell, even the KKK has a top estimate of 12,000 members - and that's in the US with a larger population than the UK.

1 in 4 have some sympathies? I'll be quite blunt, I couldn't give a toss what their sympathies are nor how small they might be - There is no justification for Terrorism. Period. It's especially enraging because they are taking full advantage of the freedoms granted to them by our Western ideals, to have those sympathies towards those who would destroy the very civilisation that allows them to openly express them.

That's like giving a hi-5 to the person who Murdered the Doctor who just gave you a lifesaving operation.

Yes - and you come from Britain. During the provos bombing campaign did anyone suggest taking out all the Irish? Support for the provos was high, but did anyone blame Ireland, or did they blame the provos?

Remember - Asian in a british sense refers to Indian and Pakistani descent - but see what I posted previously - 90% of those involved in Grooming Gangs are islamic - that's not a coincidence.

Can you give equivalent figures for Christians involved in sex crimes? Humans are fucked up things .. I'll bet the number of Christians involved in sex crimes in Britain is higher than the number of Muslims.

That's some interesting revisionist history, Now - I should point out that I don't read arabic - but in that passage - I believe there is something of a translation issue in what "right hand possesses" to mean - if you take for example:

The right hand are members of the community - the Umma - Muslims eat with the hand - the right hand - in a shared bowl. The left hand is used to wipe yourself, and NEVER goes i the food bowl. It's an Arabic metaphor and the meaning is not the same in English.

Yes - not al Muslims agree ..

Sunan of Abu Dawud, vol.2, #2150

Which describes good, old fashoned post-battle rape and pillage:

https://sunnah.com/abudawud/12/110

I believe there are other Hadiths that draw distinction between the rights granted to a believer and the lack of rights to unbelievers.[QUOTE]

Yes - there are. How they are applied depends on the legal school making the judgement. Yes, there are things in the Qu'ran that not all Muslims agree with. Just as there are things in the Bible ..

[QUOTE]
I'm not so sure, again - for clarity sake, I'm not a Qu'rannic Scholar, but I understand that the later verses (when Mohammed had an army and was conquering) are somewhat more aggressive than the earlier verses.

Yeah - Mohammed was at war with the leaders of the cities - especially Mecca and Medina .. read it in that context .

There is also the practice of short-term marriages - which is basically a loophole to get around prostitution being illegal.

We also have to contend that within countries that practice Sharia, some of the protections granted to women against rape don't seem to exist (there's been quite a few instances of women being stoned to death as adulturers for being Raped), given what we know of Fatwas (Islamic legal opinion) and how they differ from English Common Law precedent - I don't think you can say with certainty that the prohibitions exist as you describe them.

As I said , there are many legal schools making interpretations. They do not always agree with each other. I also said there are cultural practices. Some Islamic schools interpret the Qu'ran to support such practices. These are NOT universally agreed on by Muslims.

I'm not defending Islam - it's messy and complex. What I am saying is that your views of the religion are warped. You condemn a whole religion from the actions of a minority. Sure, there are groups I dislike and condemn their practices - just as I do with Christianity. There are other groups I admire.

Again - a bit of Context is needed here - FWIW - I happened to be in the UK when Lee Rigby was murdered (on my Honeymoon in fact) People were pissed off, Pissed off people aren't particularly cautious or nuanced in their words. I went through the working class neighbourhoods near where I grew up - Flags were everywhere in tribute. In that same neighbourhood - someone smashed up a mosque and desecrated the Qu'rans there.

I've said as many times that Tommys working class background means he speaks carelessly (although he is getting better at being more nuanced) - it's not okay to go after an entire community, but it is okay to go after a Religion that not only explicitly allows this, but promises a reward of 77 virgins in Heaven for doing so.

Never happened over IRA attacks - no-one suggested taking out the Catholic Religion - even though priests supported and encouraged the terrorism. No-one suggested taking out all the Irish.

Islam has been demonized in ways similar to the way Hitler demonized the Jews ... and not to stop the terrorists, but for internal political gain .. stop listening to those who would demonize a religion ...

And what reward does Christianity offer to its followers?

Edit edit: I think it's also right to talk a little bit about those working class neighbourhoods I mentioned - they are the home of the quintessential Chav - and whilst I could wax lyrical about tales of their antisocial disposition and their ability to be offensive to anyone and everyone - I can't recall any serious religious resentment - TBH I think the Sikhs got a harder time than the Muslims, simply on account of their Turbans - and even then - they weren't social pariahs - mainly because they upheld those bare minimum of british values that I referenced.

I see angry young men - hanging their anger on a cause - the cause doesn't matter - any cause will do. Mods and Rockers ... skinheads - all angry young men ..

Which is what I think it's right to end on - for all the critical talk of Islam, If someone wants to believe in Allah, pray 5 times a day facing Mecca, undertake the Haj etc. etc. - I've got no problem with that, I'll also be sure not to offer them a Beer and Bacon Sammich - we'll get on like a house on fire.

Nice - but you do demonize Islam.

Banditbandit

22nd June 2018, 12:37

pritch

22nd June 2018, 13:50

And if it was your Daughter and granddaughters being systematically raped - would you be happy if the Police told you to "stop looking for problems."

Somehow, I think not...

What insanity took you there from anything I said? Talk about the logically impaired. You and katman should both fuck off and get your meds checked.

What I said was that Robinson has always been a thug. Before this he was just into giving opposition football fans the bash (and the odd cop?). Now it's muslims. He's just doing what thugs do, don't complicate things, apparently it confuses you.

husaberg

22nd June 2018, 14:01

Seriously, are you too, that scared of being accused of being a racist that you can't concede that Tommy Robinson's activism stems from the knowledge that Pakistani Muslims have been treated completely differently in the eyes of the law to the average English person and that the English justice system completely failed to protect over 1500 English girls?

You should go for a job at Rotherham Council.

The inquiry as far as i am concerned did not say the police or the legal system did not investigate due to fear of being labeled racist that was directed at the Councillors.

the report actually said in regards to race.

Asian perpetrators
The majority of those behind the abuse were described as Asian, while the victims were young white girls.
Yet the report found that councillors failed to engage with the town's Pakistani-heritage community during the inquiry period.
Some councillors were said to have hoped the issue would "go away", thinking it was a "one-off problem".
several staff members were afraid they would be labelled racist if they identified the race of the perpetrators, while others said they were instructed by their managers not to do so.
Several councillors interviewed believed highlighting the race element would "give oxygen" to racist ideas and threaten community cohesion.

The report said the "collective failures" of political and officer leadership were "blatant" over the first 12 years covered by the inquiry.
Senior managers within social care were said to have "underplayed" the scale and seriousness of the problem.
Staff were said to have believed the extent of CSE had been exaggerated, while some were "overwhelmed" by the numbers of cases involved.
Police were said to have given CSE no priority, regarding many child victims "with contempt" and failing to act on their abuse as a crime.
As has already been stated it is not a simple issue of victims coming forward and making complaints of rape and it being ignored.
This is not how it transpired.

Despite identifying "systemic failings", the report highlighted "many improvements" by the council and police over the past four years.
Police have been trained and resourced to deal with CSE, while there was now a central team in children's social care that worked jointly with police on the issue, the report said.
It made 15 recommendations in total to Rotherham Council, its partners and the Rotherham Safeguarding Children Board.
These included areas involving risk assessment, looked-after children, outreach and accessibility, the joint police and council CSE team, collaboration with Children and Young People Service, ongoing work with victims, post-abuse support, quality assurance, minority ethnic communities and the issue of race, and serious case reviews.

The latest series of arrests are a result of an investigation Operation Shelter that started in 2014 after two victims separately came forward to police.
the people convicted were actually Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Indian, Iranian, Iraqi, Kurdish, Turkish, Albanian and Eastern European.

AS for Rotheram
April 2007 An investigation into the grooming and sexual abuse of young boys identifies more than 70 alleged victims. A man is convicted of offences against 10 children.
2008 Operation Central is set up to investigate other men believed to be involved in child sexual exploitation.
Arrests started to be made from November 2010.
So to Say or infer that this was any way the resiult of any activities of AKA is trite. as this as years before he was even involved.
P

YellowDog

22nd June 2018, 14:16

Wiki states that he owns a Sunbed shop in Luton. I thought those were otherwise known as knocking shops ?

Prostitution is not legal in the UK :no:

TheDemonLord

22nd June 2018, 14:56

What insanity took you there from anything I said? Talk about the logically impaired. You and katman should both fuck off and get your meds checked.

What I said was that Robinson has always been a thug. Before this he was just into giving opposition football fans the bash (and the odd cop?). Now it's muslims. He's just doing what thugs do, don't complicate things, apparently it confuses you.

Your apathy, expressed as "stop looking for problems." is in the same vein as what the police and authorities did when these crimes were occurring.

So, I'm asking that if you were in the position of those that Tommy and his community found themselves in, would you be happy with that same apathetic statement if it was your family that this was happening to?

I don't think you would be.

Katman

22nd June 2018, 16:03

What I said was that Robinson has always been a thug. Before this he was just into giving opposition football fans the bash (and the odd cop?). Now it's muslims. He's just doing what thugs do, don't complicate things, apparently it confuses you.

We understand that you don't like Tommy Robinson.

Some of us can understand the reasoning behind Tommy Robinson's actions though.

Clearly you can't.

TheDemonLord

22nd June 2018, 16:29

OK - let's go ..

And there are base equivalents that all Muslims would share .. but like Christianity - a whole lot they would disagree on. Even the Trinity is not agreed on

The question comes down to percentages and what is in the Qu'ran and surrounding Hadiths - In the Bible (and I'm going from pure memory here) there is a single book (leviticus - which is Hebrew for "the laws" I think) - outlines the Crimes and punishments.

Some of which (for me) are some very interesting laws - for example, the prohibition against shellfish - in modern times it's completely silly, but for a predominantly desert dwelling people, where an outbreak of Norovirus could kill multiple members of the extended tribe - in particular the Elders and the Children - it's completely sensible.

With Christianity, however, you have the teachings of Jesus which paraphrased is: Believe in God, Don't be a Cunt - essentially nullifying all the old testament laws and teaching (although for some reason, they still don't like Gay people...).

Whereas with Islam, the concept of Sharia is much MUCH more developed and there is no such qualifier in Islam that there is when compared to Christianity. Essentially we have 5th century thinking and legal structures without the modifier that exists within Christianity. This is where some of the conflict occurs.

Understandable (but not excusable). It is in the western countries where they are confronted by Islamic hatred, and see pictures every day on TV of anti-Islamic action.

That is not to excuse terrorism - but goes some way to explain attitudes to terrorism among Muslims in the west.

From where did the hatred come from? Now, I'll grant you a degree of colonial hangover, but it seems that things such as the actions of the Ayotollah in the 70s? The Salman Rushdie affair and yes - Israel vs Everyone else has somewhat shaped popular opinion. Furthermore, the resurgence of concepts that were relics of a less-civilized time re-occurring: Honor killings is the prime example. This is something that is fundamentally opposed to our principles. We can acknowledge that Murder is bad regardless and we can acknowledge that we have Murders in the west - however, killing your own family for a concept such as Honor? There is nothing more dishonorable to us.

Then futhermore why do they want to live in Western countries? This is not a justification for the Hatred, but it seems to me, that there is something good and desirable in the West - It's something that we have spilt blood over, something that is worthy of hanging onto, something that is incompatible with some tenants of Islam - and it's here that the conflict arises IMO.

Yes - and you come from Britain. During the provos bombing campaign did anyone suggest taking out all the Irish? Support for the provos was high, but did anyone blame Ireland, or did they blame the provos?

From direct experience - I can't remember much of the Troubles - I can remember a lot of waffle on differentiation between the IRA and the Real IRA. But it's an area I've not read too much on. One distinction I think that is valid is that the IRA didn't want to get rid of Western values - they just wanted self-autonomy. That's a pretty important difference - Attacking me because you just want to be left alone is different from Attacking me because you want to destroy who I am.

Can you give equivalent figures for Christians involved in sex crimes? Humans are fucked up things .. I'll bet the number of Christians involved in sex crimes in Britain is higher than the number of Muslims.

How about this - I'll concede that the number of individual christians involved in Sex Crimes is higher (because it probably is) - At a stretch, I could concede that the catholic policy of Celibacy for Priests probably had a causal effect on it, but compare with the excerpt from the Hadith that I posted where a sunnah is quoted to legitimise Rape as part of war. Although in the Old Testament there are stories of battles and what happened after the battle (namely rape and pillage) I don't believe there is anything in Leviticus or in the wider part of the Bible that explicitly allows this behavior, in the same way that it does for Islam.

The right hand are members of the community - the Umma - Muslims eat with the hand - the right hand - in a shared bowl. The left hand is used to wipe yourself, and NEVER goes i the food bowl. It's an Arabic metaphor and the meaning is not the same in English.

Yes - not al Muslims agree ..

I think the point is - sure, not all Muslims agree, but those that do can point directly to their Holy Book to provide justification for their actions.

Yes - there are. How they are applied depends on the legal school making the judgement. Yes, there are things in the Qu'ran that not all Muslims agree with. Just as there are things in the Bible ..

I don't think the phrasing of that statement is entirely correct - namely that in the Qu'ran they are explicitly stated, whereas in the Bible they are more implicit - as I said at the beginning, Sharia is much more fully developed compared to the Bible.

Yeah - Mohammed was at war with the leaders of the cities - especially Mecca and Medina .. read it in that context .

I think you miss my point - when Mohammed didn't have an Army at his command, he preached a much stronger message of love and tolerance - when he got strength of arms - it was much more domineering.

As I said , there are many legal schools making interpretations. They do not always agree with each other. I also said there are cultural practices. Some Islamic schools interpret the Qu'ran to support such practices. These are NOT universally agreed on by Muslims.

I'm not defending Islam - it's messy and complex. What I am saying is that your views of the religion are warped. You condemn a whole religion from the actions of a minority. Sure, there are groups I dislike and condemn their practices - just as I do with Christianity. There are other groups I admire.

For sure - I condemn that parts of their holy book that some people interpret literally, which in turn condemns the religion as a whole. Now, if Islam as a whole rejects those parts or at least updates the interpretation, I would relent somewhat.

Never happened over IRA attacks - no-one suggested taking out the Catholic Religion - even though priests supported and encouraged the terrorism. No-one suggested taking out all the Irish.

Dunno about you - but I certainly advocated that Catholicism should be held responsible for the IRA, For that very reason.

Islam has been demonized in ways similar to the way Hitler demonized the Jews ... and not to stop the terrorists, but for internal political gain .. stop listening to those who would demonize a religion ...

I disagree with this assessment - at least in the Working Class communities of England, they didn't care about Islam, until Muslims started acting up. As for demonizing a religion, part of the problem (that I see) is that certain parts of society don't want to have a brutally honest conversation about the parts of Islam that allow for these acts to be permissible. If we could have that frank and honest conversation, I think it would soothe a good deal of the anguish - instead we have the likes of "This has nothing to do with Islam" - when it patently has something to do with Islam, because it's almost exclusively Muslims doing it.

And what reward does Christianity offer to its followers?

For acts of Terrorism? Well that would be Eternity in Hell, Suicide bombings - Eternity in Hell - both of these are Mortal sins. It's why the I believe the IRA never really went with Suicide bombings as a tactic.

The only absolution for a Mortal sin is to repent, now I believe part of the Catholic theology that Repentance has to be genuine. I don't think Protestants have a similar concept, with the exception that Murder is explicitly against the 10 commandments with no exception, whereas for a large amount of Islamic law - there is a strata of laws that apply to Muslims and a different strata that applies to everyone else.

I see angry young men - hanging their anger on a cause - the cause doesn't matter - any cause will do. Mods and Rockers ... skinheads - all angry young men ..

And to be honest - I agree in part, I see the anger too, but I think that underpinning part of the Anger are some legitimate grievances.

Nice - but you do demonize Islam.

Well....

I am a Demon Lord....

BaDum CHA!

But in seriousness, there are parts of Islam I'm highly critical of, I don't like how some Clerics and Imams handwave these parts away or at least acknowledge what is written in the Qu'ran and Haddiths (even if they then proceed to provide the interpretation of it).

I'd like nothing more than for all this hostility to end - and I'll invoke Tommy himself when he talks about what his life was before the Wahhabist/Salafist influence amongst British Muslims - he talks about all the Muslim friends he had growing up and how they were part of the community.

husaberg

22nd June 2018, 16:41

Your apathy, expressed as "stop looking for problems." is in the same vein as what the police and authorities did when these crimes were occurring.

So, I'm asking that if you were in the position of those that Tommy and his community found themselves in, would you be happy with that same apathetic statement if it was your family that this was happening to?

I don't think you would be.AKA lives in Luton
i am not from the UK but that is nowhere near Rotheram it would be 100's of KMs away.
It is not his community at all, unless you are meaning because he is not an immigrant.
But wait he practically is......Seeing as both his parents were immigrants.
I should also point out that the families were in most cases not aware either, that their children were being abused, as they didn't tell them or the police either.
Thats the issue with cases such as this its not a black and white as you would like it to be.

husaberg

22nd June 2018, 20:06

Ok, forget Tommy Robinson for a minute.

How do you feel about the authorities turning a blind eye to groups of Pakistani Muslims using underage English girls as sex toys?

How would you feel if it happened in New Plymouth?

Not all the girls were white english girls

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30152240

BuzzardNZ

22nd June 2018, 20:24

Not all the girls were white english girls

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30152240

You probably have inside information :rolleyes:

jasonu

23rd June 2018, 15:36

I must have been to the wrong part of Christchurch...

Is there a right part of Christchurch?

pritch

23rd June 2018, 16:30

We understand that you don't like Tommy Robinson.

Some of us can understand the reasoning behind Tommy Robinson's actions though.

Clearly you can't.

My understanding of his actions likely is different to yours but no less valid. If you haven't grasped what I've said by now I'll just have to consider you a lost cause. It's understood that there is always a conspiracy and there is always an inquiry required, those are your default settings. So it strikes me as odd that you unquestioningly accept Robinson's rubbish.

Similarly you always used to bang on about situational awareness even though at that time you had 90 demerit points, which would tend to indicate you were not really much of a sitiational awareness guru.

So I'll leave you and others to your imaginings and will not try to convince you further. Just as I would not waste my time trying to change the mind of a Trump cultist.

husaberg

23rd June 2018, 16:32

Remember - Asian in a british sense refers to Indian and Pakistani descent - but see what I posted previously - 90% of those involved in Grooming Gangs are islamic - that's not a coincidence.

That's not the same type of crime that we are talking about... There's your bait and switch. It's deplorable for certain, but in almost all cases it's the work of one or two people - not an interconnected group of multiple people.
Incorrect Sexual exploitation of a minor is still the sexual exploitation of a minor. You seek to dismiss the far larger problem that there is far more offenders of sexual exploitation of minors that are not pakistani or Indian, You are attempting to say its different, Just to suit what AKA says. Its not.
Its just another form of the same crime, there is no moral or legal distinction in that they are sexual exploitation of children between them.
You are also as i have pointed out multiple times using the stats only of those recently convicted which in itself is rather ironic when AKAs cornerstone was they were not being punished.
How do we know there is not multiple other grooming rings involving Caucasians that ere not being caught and prosecuted due to them being white?

- it's not okay to go after an entire community, but it is okay to go after a Religion that not only explicitly allows this, but promises a reward of 77 virgins in Heaven for doing so.
IF you truly believe this, Should we send all the members of the Islamic religions to a concentration camp and fire up the ovens in 1939 style then?

Lets look at some other religions
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/catholic-church-sex-abuse-paedophile-criminal-injuries-compensation-scheme-victim-support-sexual-a7903396.html

The Catholic Church and British local authorities have been accused of using a legal loophole to avoid paying compensation to victims of child sex abuse.
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, a government agency, has denied some children financial settlements because it said the victims had “consented” to the abuse,

Or were the real stats of sexual abuse of children

The most common institution that offers the highest risk of child sexual abuse is the family. Research has found that approximately 80% of child sexual abuse victims report that the sex offender in their life was a family member with step-fathers, fathers, uncles, cousins, and siblings being the most frequent offender.

Katman

23rd June 2018, 16:57

My understanding of his actions likely is different to yours but no less valid.

You have no understanding of his actions.

You just don't like him so you're not interested in even trying to understand his actions.

Honest Andy

23rd June 2018, 17:05

You have no understanding of his actions.

You just don't like him so you're not interested in even trying to understand his actions.

Is this where you hold your breath until you turn blue and then storm out in a huff?

oh look, you dropped your toy
https://edfcdn-everydayfamily.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/july-2010-toddler-recalls.jpg?x43781

Katman

23rd June 2018, 17:15

Is this where you hold your breath until you turn blue and then storm out in a huff?

Remind me again........who the fuck are you?

Honest Andy

23rd June 2018, 17:27

Hahahahahahaha:nya:

light fuse and stand well clear

:clap:

Woodman

23rd June 2018, 19:45

Seems to me from reading this thread that Tommy Robinson is being persecuted for calling a spade a spade and is therefore a racist, whereas if the police had treated the pedo gangs equally irrespective of race then there would have been a lot less victims, therefore the police are actually the racists for treating another race differently.

jasonu

24th June 2018, 03:00

You have no understanding of his actions.

You just don't like him so you're not interested in even trying to understand his actions.

Apparently you know fucking everything and everyone else knows fuck all.

carbonhed

24th June 2018, 10:17

husaberg

24th June 2018, 12:26

14th June
I know very little about him.

23rd June
You have no understanding of his actions.
You just don't like him so you're not interested in even trying to understand his actions.

I don't agree with everything that Tommy Robinson says (he's a staunch supporter of Israel after all)

Some of us can understand the reasoning behind Tommy Robinson's actions though.
Clearly you can't.
What a difference a week makes aye...........

Katman

24th June 2018, 12:53

What a difference a week makes aye...........

Well that depends on how open one is to learning.

Some on here don't seem to have learned anything in that time.

husaberg

24th June 2018, 15:20

Well that depends on how open one is to learning.

Some on here don't seem to have learned anything in that time.

Oh really.

I know very little about him but if what I'm reading is correct, if he should be killed in prison we could see violence on the streets of England like we haven't seen before.

Do you think that this has the potential to blow out of control if something happens to Tommy Robinson while he's inside?

To be honest I'm not really questioning the sentence he received. I'm more interested in whether he will be given adequate protection while serving his time and whether this will instigate massive violence on the streets of England if he doesn't receive it and he's killed while in there.

This has the makings of a powder keg that would only take the murder of Tommy Robinson to ignite.
Yet this is opinion is not backed by any facts of any of his previous imprisonments now is it?
For you to make the statements you did, shows you are either lacking in intelligence or are prone to making stupid irrational statements.
Tuesday 8 Oct 2013
English Defence League leader Tommy Robinson quit the controversial group saying he came to his senses while in solitary confinement in prison.

<amp-timeago title="Wednesday 23 December 2015 12:27" class="amp-timeago i-amphtml-layout-fixed-height i-amphtml-layout-size-defined i-amphtml-element i-amphtml-layout" style="height: 20px;" i-amphtml-layout="fixed-height" layout="fixed-height" height="20" datetime="2015-12-23T12:27:00+00:00" cutoff="604800" locale="en"><time datetime="2015-12-23T12:27:00+00:00">Wednesday 23 December 2015</time></amp-timeago>
Robinson told me that when he was jailed for mortgage fraud, he was kept in solitary confinement for 23-and-a-half hours a day for 22 weeks.

Maybe before you share your stupid conspiracies and outlandish statements in the future you might take note and learn of your own posts.

sadly, a large proportion of society is probably too lazy to even learn to spell google.

Katman

24th June 2018, 16:49

Yet this is opinion is not backed by any facts of any of his previous imprisonments now is it?
For you to make the statements you did, shows you are either lacking in intelligence or are prone to making stupid irrational statements.

Apparently Tommy Robinson was moved to solitary confinement in the last few days due to the intervention of Lord Pearson who has said that Sajid Javid would be held personally responsible if anything was to happen to Tommy Robinson while serving his sentence.

husaberg

24th June 2018, 18:23

Apparently Tommy Robinson was moved to solitary confinement in the last few days due to the intervention of Lord Pearson who has said that Sajid Javid would be held personally responsible if anything was to happen to Tommy Robinson while serving his sentence.
Last few days really?
Yet even he even admits He has been in solitary confinement from the 15th June, its highly likely he also was well before than also.
Your supposed intervention by Lord Pearson happened on the 27th May btw.
Seeing as you made the statements that he was in danger its now up to you prove that he was ever in the general population of any prison.
You need to prove he was in the general population between the 27th May and the 15th of June.
Meanwhile AKA is busy writing his next book
Tommy Robinson Aka Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon Andrew McMaster and Paul Harris "Enemy of the state" or "they were out to get me"

TheDemonLord

25th June 2018, 16:02

AKA lives in Luton
i am not from the UK but that is nowhere near Rotheram it would be 100's of KMs away.

Indeed - and if you read a little more on this issue, you'd know that multiple communities have reported similar issues - namely the rise in popularity of a certain strain of Islam that is antithetical to Western values, the rise of Migrants from certain locales that view western Women as effectively prostitutes.

It is not his community at all, unless you are meaning because he is not an immigrant.
But wait he practically is......Seeing as both his parents were immigrants.

You're trying to poison the well, Tommy's rhetorhic against immigration is to do mainly with the European Migrant crisis, and in particular with the juxtaposition between wanting to help those in need (often portrayed as Women and Children) and those who crossed the Borders (the so-called Military Aged Male)

I should also point out that the families were in most cases not aware either, that their children were being abused, as they didn't tell them or the police either

I should point out that your statement is complete Horse Shit. In Rotherham and in many other locations the locals knew EXACTLY what was going on, they reported it multiple times to the police, to the council, to charity workers, to crisis centres, to their MPs, to their councillors.

Thats the issue with cases such as this its not a black and white as you would like it to be.

Sure - I can accept that, but in doing so would mean admitting there is an area of Grey, that perhaps there are parts of the so-called 'Religion of Peace' that give it's followers either explicitly or implicitly religious sanction to carry out horrific acts.

The black and white of the issue, as it is currently portrayed, is that Islam is a Religion of Peace and anyone who says otherwise is (insert preferred pejorative here)

Incorrect Sexual exploitation of a minor is still the sexual exploitation of a minor.

Then tell me Husa, why do the Police have an organized Crimes unit? Afterall, a Crime is a Crime yes? That is the point you are making? Unless, of course, the presence of there being an organized element puts it into a higher, more complex category of offending - because Groups of people can do things that individuals simply cant (a perverse version of Economies of Scale)

You seek to dismiss the far larger problem that there is far more offenders of sexual exploitation of minors that are not pakistani or Indian, You are attempting to say its different, Just to suit what AKA says. Its not.

No, I'm stopping you from trying to conflate two issues in order to downplay the original issue. The main reason to do so is to avoid the discussion of the religious and cultural aspect that is causal to this specific type of crime.

Its just another form of the same crime, there is no moral or legal distinction in that they are sexual exploitation of children between them.

See above - Gang crime is treated differently (both at a Moral and Legal level) than non-gang crime.

You are also as i have pointed out multiple times using the stats only of those recently convicted which in itself is rather ironic when AKAs cornerstone was they were not being punished.
How do we know there is not multiple other grooming rings involving Caucasians that ere not being caught and prosecuted due to them being white?

Okay then - can you point to a Report by an authority that indicates that? Cause otherwise you're making something up that has no evidential basis to try and prove and inverse issue.

That's what you have to contend with - we've got clear and documented instances where this has happened as I've described it.

IF you truly believe this, Should we send all the members of the Islamic religions to a concentration camp and fire up the ovens in 1939 style then?

Not at all - but I am of the opinion that those that actively want Sharia in the UK should be actively encouraged to migrate to the nearest country that has Sharia as part of their legal system. I'm also of the opinion that those that preach the death and destruction of the West, whilst reaping the benefits of the West, should be given a choice to either reign it in or move to a country where that behavior is acceptable.
Those that think Honor killings, Acid attacks, murder of Homosexuals, rape and pedophilia are acceptable - Well - what do you think is Acceptable for those Husa?

Edit: To give balance to the above - I've already stated, that I've got no problem with a good Muslim who prays to Allah 5 times a day, abstains from alcohol and Pork, celebrates Ramadan, undertakes the Haj etc. None of those actions or beliefs are at odds with Western Democracy.

The rest of your post is basically the Fallacy of relative privation.

Katman

25th June 2018, 16:24

Not the book but it covers a fair bit of it.
https://issuu.com/iwishart/docs/investigate_june07/33
I wouldn't normally take much notice of wishart but seeing as t came from a book written by the actual detective which I have read.

So it would appear that we have our own scandal involving police and government ministers covering up crimes.

Why would the story have gotten no further than an Investigate magazine article?

husaberg

25th June 2018, 16:30

So it would appear that we have our own scandal involving police and government ministers covering up crimes.

Why would the story have gotten no further than an Investigate magazine article?

The story was written about the book heres an idea, why don't you actually read it.

Katman

25th June 2018, 16:47

The story was written about the book heres an idea, why don't you actually read it.

I read the article.

husaberg

25th June 2018, 16:54

Indeed - and if you read a little more on this issue, you'd know that multiple communities have reported similar issues - namely the rise in popularity of a certain strain of Islam that is antithetical to Western values, the rise of Migrants from certain locales that view western Women as effectively prostitutes.

You're trying to poison the well, Tommy's rhetorhic against immigration is to do mainly with the European Migrant crisis, and in particular with the juxtaposition between wanting to help those in need (often portrayed as Women and Children) and those who crossed the Borders (the so-called Military Aged Male)

I should point out that your statement is complete Horse Shit. In Rotherham and in many other locations the locals knew EXACTLY what was going on, they reported it multiple times to the police, to the council, to charity workers, to crisis centres, to their MPs, to their councillors.

Sure - I can accept that, but in doing so would mean admitting there is an area of Grey, that perhaps there are parts of the so-called 'Religion of Peace' that give it's followers either explicitly or implicitly religious sanction to carry out horrific acts.

The black and white of the issue, as it is currently portrayed, is that Islam is a Religion of Peace and anyone who says otherwise is (insert preferred pejorative here)

Then tell me Husa, why do the Police have an organized Crimes unit? Afterall, a Crime is a Crime yes? That is the point you are making? Unless, of course, the presence of there being an organized element puts it into a higher, more complex category of offending - because Groups of people can do things that individuals simply cant (a perverse version of Economies of Scale)

No, I'm stopping you from trying to conflate two issues in order to downplay the original issue. The main reason to do so is to avoid the discussion of the religious and cultural aspect that is causal to this specific type of crime.

See above - Gang crime is treated differently (both at a Moral and Legal level) than non-gang crime.

Okay then - can you point to a Report by an authority that indicates that? Cause otherwise you're making something up that has no evidential basis to try and prove and inverse issue.

That's what you have to contend with - we've got clear and documented instances where this has happened as I've described it.

Not at all - but I am of the opinion that those that actively want Sharia in the UK should be actively encouraged to migrate to the nearest country that has Sharia as part of their legal system. I'm also of the opinion that those that preach the death and destruction of the West, whilst reaping the benefits of the West, should be given a choice to either reign it in or move to a country where that behavior is acceptable.
Those that think Honor killings, Acid attacks, murder of Homosexuals, rape and pedophilia are acceptable - Well - what do you think is Acceptable for those Husa?

Edit: To give balance to the above - I've already stated, that I've got no problem with a good Muslim who prays to Allah 5 times a day, abstains from alcohol and Pork, celebrates Ramadan, undertakes the Haj etc. None of those actions or beliefs are at odds with Western Democracy.

The rest of your post is basically the Fallacy of relative privation.

If you are going to disagree with an actual formal inquires outcome provide some evidence or bugger off.
If you are going to make statements that the police failed to investigate complaints properly as they would have been able to feel free to provide proof.
If you are going to claim comunitys knew and had actual admissable evidence they provided to police which the police ignored prove it.
If you are going to claim that AKA interst was only in what was going on, provide evidence that he show any interest at all before the legal process against the criminals started.
AS for your latest "good Muslim"
here is a clue the guilty people were put before a court and found guilty of crimes thats how a legal system works.

After they have served their sentence they will be sent back to were they come from (on the most part.) this has been spelled out during the legal process.
You speak of AKAs rhetoric its not rhetoric its racial hate speach and legal breachs to do with trials.

TheDemonLord

25th June 2018, 17:38

If you are going to disagree with an actual formal inquires outcome provide some evidence or bugger off.

I've done no such thing.

If you are going to make statements that the police failed to investigate complaints properly feeel free to provide proof.

Rotherham Report.

If you are going to claim comunitys knew and had actual admissable evidence they provided to police prove it.

Rotherham Report.

If you are going to claim that AKA interst was only in what was going on prove evidence that he show any interest at all before the legal process again the criminals started.

I think you need to retype that - I'm not sure what your challenge is.

AS for your latest good Muslim
here is a clue the guilty people were put before a court and found guilty of crimes thats how a legal system works.
After they have served their sentence they will be sent back to were they come from on the most part.
You speak of AKAs rhetoric its not rhetoric its racial hate speach and legal breachs to do with trials.

You are looking at one half of the picture, whilst ignoring the other, well-documented half.

Yes, people are being charged and convictions are being secured, There is still apprehension in mainstream British society in either drawing causal relationships between the crimes and the religion or critique of the negative parts of Islam in general.

Put it this way - England has a long tradition of Crack-pots and eccentrics, most of which might gain a bit of a following, but once they are given sunlight, it shows quite clearly the absurdity of their claims. A brilliant example is the BNP - it was doing really well in the UK, right up until their leader went on a national TV programme and exposed the BNP for being the closet Fascists.

The Truth will out.

And so to Tommy, if he was just another far-right crack pot, spouting hate - why hasn't he received the BNP treatment? The problem you are faced with, is that on some issues, he's right. We may not like that he is right, we may not want him to be right, but he has withstood multiple attempts to smear and silence him and yet his message is still getting traction.

husaberg

25th June 2018, 17:43

I've done no such thing.

Rotherham Report.

Rotherham Report.

I think you need to retype that - I'm not sure what your challenge is.

You are looking at one half of the picture, whilst ignoring the other, well-documented half.

Yes, people are being charged and convictions are being secured, There is still apprehension in mainstream British society in either drawing causal relationships between the crimes and the religion or critique of the negative parts of Islam in general.

Put it this way - England has a long tradition of Crack-pots and eccentrics, most of which might gain a bit of a following, but once they are given sunlight, it shows quite clearly the absurdity of their claims. A brilliant example is the BNP - it was doing really well in the UK, right up until their leader went on a national TV programme and exposed the BNP for being the closet Fascists.

The Truth will out.

And so to Tommy, if he was just another far-right crack pot, spouting hate - why hasn't he received the BNP treatment? The problem you are faced with, is that on some issues, he's right. We may not like that he is right, we may not want him to be right, but he has withstood multiple attempts to smear and silence him and yet his message is still getting traction.

What i am lookin at is a katman like reply that again provides no evidence to the claims i called you out on.
If you you want to claim its proven to have occured in any of the official reports, show it.
Because there is a huge diference to what you and katman have previously claimed is in the report that what the reports have actually stated.

As for your claims i are looking at one half of the picture, get a grip, you are taking the vile deeds of a few and saying its indicative of the many.

TheDemonLord

26th June 2018, 09:28

What i am lookin at is a katman like reply that again provides no evidence to the claims i called you out on.
If you you want to claim its proven to have occured in any of the official reports, show it.

I did... You dismissed it...

Because there is a huge diference to what you and katman have previously claimed is in the report that what the reports have actually stated.

All I've claimed is what the reports confirms - that the police, council et al failed to act on multiple reports of Child abuse (including claims of systematic child abuse) for fear of appearing racist or islamaphobic.

You can read the report if you wish, you can dispute the interpretation of the sections I've quoted, you can refer to other documents written about the content of the report - take your pick

As for your claims i are looking at one half of the picture, get a grip, you are taking the vile deeds of a few and saying its indicative of the many.

And when you phrase it like that, it sounds absurd because you aren't adding the relevant addendums - This is what I mean by deliberately ignoring one half of the picture.

husaberg

26th June 2018, 14:51

I did... You dismissed it....
You said its in a report I have asked you to prove that is the case you have failed to do as has Katsilampam

All I've claimed is what the reports confirms - that the police, council et al failed to act on multiple reports of Child abuse (including claims of systematic child abuse) for fear of appearing racist or islamaphobic.
As I have suggested this is not the case with the police it was in reference in one report to youth and abuse councillors,

You can read the report if you wish, you can dispute the interpretation of the sections I've quoted, you can refer to other documents written about the content of the report - take your pick
.
The report there are three.
I have skim read all three and read the summaries .They dont contain the outcomes or the proof you suggest they do.
while they are rightfully critical of the invesigations the police carried out they are to do with communication between parties, resources, training and understanding of the issues.
Note two of the reports came out after arrests and prosecutions against the offenders were initiated.

And when you phrase it like that, it sounds absurd because you aren't adding the relevant addendums - This is what I mean by deliberately ignoring one half of the picture.
No mater how its phrased Your own stance sounds absurd because it is a absurd racial generalisation.

Katman

26th June 2018, 15:11

The report there are three.
I have skim read all three and read the summaries .They dont contain the outcomes or the proof you suggest they do.

Don't be shy - post them up.

TheDemonLord

26th June 2018, 16:42

You said its in a report I have asked you to prove that is the case you have failed to do as has Katsilampam

https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/185625-Tommy-Robinson?p=1131101662#post1131101662

There, at the bottom of the posts, a series of Excerpts from the Rotherham Report

As I have suggested this is not the case with the police it was in reference in one report to youth and abuse councillors,

Again, from the Rotherham report (THE Rotherham report):

the Police dared not act against Asian youths for fear of allegations of racism

... expressed the general view that ethnic considerations had influenced the policy response of the Council and the Police

I'm not sure how it can be any clearer than that?

The report there are three.

No, there is only one report that is referred to as THE Rotherham report, there are other reports about Rotherham - but there is one definitive report on this issue, which is the only one I've cited.

I have skim read all three and read the summaries .They dont contain the outcomes or the proof you suggest they do.

Then why do multiple seperate sources that comment on the Rotherham report have that excerpt? From Wikipedia:

The failure to address the abuse was attributed to a combination of factors revolving around race, class and gender—contemptuous and sexist attitudes toward the mostly working-class victims; fear that the perpetrators' ethnicity would trigger allegations of racism and damage community relations; the Labour council's reluctance to challenge a Labour-voting ethnic minority; l

Or from Jay herself:

Over the first twelve years covered by this inquiry, the collective failures of political and officer leadership were blatant.

Within social care, the scale and seriousness of the problem was underplayed by senior managers.

Some at a senior level in the police and children’s social care continued to think the extent of the problem, as described by youth workers, was exaggerated, and seemed intent on reducing the official numbers of children categorised as CSE.

“Seminars for elected members and senior officers in 2004/05 presented the abuse in the most explicit terms. After these events, nobody could say ‘we didn’t know’.”

“By far the majority of perpetrators were described as ‘Asian’ by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage directly with the Pakistani-heritage community to discuss how best they could jointly address the issue. Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.”"

while they are rightfully critical of the invesigations the police carried out they are to do with communication between parties, resources, training and understanding of the issues.
Note two of the reports came out after arrests and prosecutions against the offenders were initiated.

Look at the quote from Jay - I'm going to re-iterate it for clarity:

“Seminars for elected members and senior officers in 2004/05 presented the abuse in the most explicit terms. After these events, nobody could say ‘we didn’t know’.”

The first major trial occurred in 2010 but the scandal really broke in 2012 - That's nearly a Decade from knowing about systematic abuse of Children and doing NOTHING

There's also a fair amount of evidence that people were raising multiple red flags, at multiple levels in around 2000/2001

No mater how its phrased Your own stance sounds absurd because it is a absurd racial generalisation.

And that, is the same head-in-the-sand thinking that allowed this tragedy to perpetuate.

Katman

26th June 2018, 18:52

In case anyone's interested.....

https://www.rotherham.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/1407/independent_inquiry_cse_in_rotherham.pdf

Murray

26th June 2018, 20:01

In case anyone's interested.....

https://www.rotherham.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/1407/independent_inquiry_cse_in_rotherham.pdf

I'm not its a motorcycle forum!

Cry me a river!

Katman

26th June 2018, 20:08

I'm not its a motorcycle forum!

Cry me a river!

Then fuck off and find a thread about motorcycles to read.

Murray

26th June 2018, 20:12

Then fuck off and find a thread about motorcycles to read.

Maybe I should try Kiwibiker?

And you fuck off you moron and thanks for the red rep

You are still the biggest tosser on the site. Shame Axle and Cassina have gone you should have way before them

Katman

26th June 2018, 20:31

Maybe I should try Kiwibiker?

That's a good idea Murray.

This site has plenty of threads about motorcycles - but this isn't one of them.

Murray

26th June 2018, 20:35

That's a good idea Murray.

This site has plenty of threads about motorcycles - but this isn't one of them.

Will fuck off to a site that is interested - dickhead

Katman

26th June 2018, 20:41

Will fuck off to a site that is interested - dickhead

For someone who supposedly has no interest in this particular thread Murray, you seem to be having a considerable amount of trouble ignoring it.

TheDemonLord

26th June 2018, 20:44

Context
As I have pointed out to Katman none of what you refers to are the finding of the Report.
Also as I have pointed out they do not refer to the police ignoring the problem for fear as being perceived as being racist they refers to councillors.

Did you miss the part where it talks about Officers (that would be police officers) not acting on the reports?

Your next one shows the lengths you are prepared to distort facts

What the report actually says that you ignore is

The problem with that statement is that later on in the report, there are statements that contradict the addendum of "we found no evidence for that" - The perception of the people is entirely valid.

For example (liberally taken from Wikipedia)

Weir wrote in October 2001 to Mike Hedges, the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, and to Christine Burbeary, the District Commander. The letter said:

I have been visiting agencies, encouraging them to relay information to the police. Their responses have been identical—they have ceased passing on information as they perceive this to be a waste of time. Parents also have ceased to make missing person reports, a precursor to any child abduction investigation, as the police response is often so inappropriate. ... Children are being left at risk and their abusers unapprehended.

The letter was not well received by the council or police. During a meeting at Rotherham police station with senior police and council officials, they seemed incensed that Weir had written to the Chief Constable. Jayne Senior, who was present, said Weir was subjected to a "tirade that lasted I don't know how long". According to Weir, at some point after this an official warned her against mentioning Asian men:

She said you must never refer to that again. You must never refer to Asian men. And her other response was to book me on a two-day ethnicity and diversity course to raise my awareness of ethnic issues.

Now key points - Letter written to the District command of the Police about shitty Police response, Author of the letter had a meeting at a police station and had an official warning about raising the ethnicity of the perpetrators.

Their response was not to thoroughly investigate the claims (if only to prove the author of the letter was just some hateful racist, as apparently we all are...) but instead to mandate a spot of re-education.

Does that sound like the actions of a Police force that is concerned with upholding the Law, defending the weak and being paragons of Civic virtue? Or does that sound like a Police force scared to call a spade a spade, lest someone level an accusation of "RACIST" against them.

What you are doing is what both you and I have shown Katman does. in that he takes snippets of information and then attempts to use them to prove his point regards of them being taken out of context.
Note you and Katmanislamspam started of saying they ignored it for 20 years now its halved to ten you also don't take into account the time it takes to investigate charge and put someone before a court.
They also need the actual victims to come forward with allegations before they can proceed with an investigation.

So - the estimated offending starts sometime in around the late 80s, early 90s - and there are documented reports as early as that from the early 90s, then in 1997 you had the Risky Business initiative, then there was the Weir report in 2001, then you had briefings in the Mid 2000's - which is what Jay refers to - at that point, the defence of Ignorance can no longer be levied - at this point - both the Council and the Police declined to act for another 4-5 years (2008).

It was ignored for 20 years, but the most egregious ignorance came from the time period from about 2000-2010 - when they had multiple Victims and reports from different sources. So there is no confusion on the Timeline. As for the investigation - 2 years from 2008 to 2010 - That's reasonable for a large scale investigation (although given the tardiness it took to actually get an investigation, I will infer a degree of foot-dragging)

Murray

26th June 2018, 21:00

For someone who supposedly has no interest in this particular thread Murray, you seem to be having a considerable amount of trouble ignoring it.

After seeing it up for some days and now 15 pages I thought I would have a look and when after looking at it, who cares and why does some idiot start a thread like this in a motorcycle forum,

Bring back Cassina at least he/she talked motorcycles and in some ways made more intelligent comments than you!

husaberg

26th June 2018, 21:01

I see you ignore how your cornerstone argument collapsed.
so I will post it again

Along with many others.

He also talks that because of a fear of being labelled "racist" parts of the UK law enforcement have failed to properly investigate serious crimes,

British Political and Policing circles that has resulted in blind-eyes being turned, for fear of the accusation of Racism.

They actively didn't investigate for fear of being Racist. The council actively didn't want it investigated for fear of upsetting their voter base.

All I've claimed is what the reports confirms - that the police, council et al failed to act on multiple reports of Child abuse (including claims of systematic child abuse) for fear of appearing racist or islamaphobic.

https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/185625-Tommy-Robinson?p=1131101662#post1131101662
No, there is only one report that is referred to as THE Rotherham report, there are other reports about Rotherham - but there is one definitive report on this issue, which is the only one I've cited.
Then why do multiple seperate sources that comment on the Rotherham report have that excerpt? From Wikipedia:

As I have pointed out to Katman none of what you refers to are the finding of the Report.
Also as I have pointed out they do not refer to the police ignoring the problem for fear as being perceived as being racist they refers to councillors.

By far the majority of perpetrators were described as ‘Asian’ by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage directly with the Pakistani-heritage community to discuss how best they could jointly address the issue. Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.”"

Your next one shows the lengths you are prepared to distort facts

the Police dared not act against Asian youths for fear of allegations of racism

I challenged you every time you said this I said prove it. yet when challenged you produced these quotes. that do not say what you claim they say.
What the report actually says, that you ignore is
"a widespread perception that council and police dared not act against Asian criminals for fear of allegations of racism, , the very next sentence is , "we found no evidence" of that.

THIS IS WHAT THE ACTUAL REPORT SAYS.
Which is not what you have reported it to say now is it.
You choose these quotes (not me)as being in the report as evidence that backed up your assertions that the police did not investigate due to fear of being seen as being racist yet they clearly do not.

Katman

26th June 2018, 21:33

After seeing it up for some days and now 15 pages I thought I would have a look and when after looking at it, who cares and why does some idiot start a thread like this in a motorcycle forum,

Bring back Cassina at least he/she talked motorcycles and in some ways made more intelligent comments than you!

Did you notice where it says 'Rant and Rave - Talk about any non-motorbike stuff here' ?

If you want to talk about motorcycles Murray there are plenty of other sub-forums where you can do exactly that.

But then again, you've made 5 posts today and 4 of them have been in this thread.

You've either got more interest in this subject than you're letting on Murray, or you're just fixating on me again. :sherlock:

jasonu

27th June 2018, 02:22

Bring back Cassina !

Thats going a bit far...

sidecar bob

27th June 2018, 02:24

Will fuck off to a site that is interested - dickhead

Aww c'mon, leave the poor cunt alone, this place is his whole reason for living. Tragic, but true.:facepalm:

Katman

27th June 2018, 08:26

Aww c'mon, leave the poor cunt alone, this place is his whole reason for living. Tragic, but true.:facepalm:

And right on cue, another one of my fans who likes to cry "This is a motorcycle site - let's only talk about motorcycles" comes on here and makes one post for the day - in a thread titled Tommy Robinson.

Voltaire

27th June 2018, 08:55

Aww c'mon, leave the poor cunt alone, this place is his whole reason for living. Tragic, but true.:facepalm:

Either you have insomnia of stuck in an overseas airport with poor internet service limiting you to KB...:lol:

Madness

27th June 2018, 09:03

I'm not its a motorcycle forum!

Funny, I thought it was a forum for motorcyclists.

Grumph

27th June 2018, 09:23

Either you have insomnia of stuck in an overseas airport with poor internet service limiting you to KB...:lol:

More likely a hangover from wine sampling.....

TheDemonLord

27th June 2018, 15:00

I see you ignore how your cornerstone argument collapsed.
so I will post it again

Not at all,

As I have pointed out to Katman none of what you refers to are the finding of the Report.
Also as I have pointed out they do not refer to the police ignoring the problem for fear as being perceived as being racist they refers to councillors.

That statement ignores other pieces of documented actions by the police. It ignores other statements in the report that contradict this narrative

Your next one shows the lengths you are prepared to distort facts

No, I addressed that - namely that other statements within the report itself contradict this.

I challenged you every time you said this I said prove it. yet when challenged you produced these quotes. that do not say what you claim they say.
What the report actually says, that you ignore is

That statement is contradicted by other statements and other documented occurences - hence why I left it out. Where did this public perception of Police inaction against a certain group come from? The public knew that the group was committing crime, they were reporting it and upon seeing that their reports went un-investigated based solely on the race of the perpetrator - they formed this opinion.

Then you have the letter from Weir - where she raises the ethnicity of the offenders from the reports of the victims - and instead of acting on this letter to apprehend or investigate the offenders - they told her not to refer to the offenders Race again and booked her for a re-education course.

Taking those 2 data points into consideration - can you hand on your heart say that Race did not play a factor in Police inaction?

Furthermore you have to take into account the wider public discourse surrounding the Rotherham case - all of which cite the report as evidence of Police failure to act, based on fear of accusations of Racism.

So a question for you then Husa - If Myself, Katman (and lord knows we agree on pretty much nothing, save possibly the color of the Sky and the manufacturer of our preferred Motorbikes), The Rotherham public and the Wider UK populace have all reached this conclusion - what information are you privy to that invalidates the mainstream interpretation?

THIS IS WHAT THE ACTUAL REPORT SAYS.
Which is not what you have reported it to say now is it.
You choose these quotes (not me)as being in the report as evidence that backed up your assertions that the police did not investigate due to fear of being seen as being racist yet they clearly do not.

They do when read in the wider context of the Report - which is why the prevailing interpretation of the report is that is shows the Police failed to act on fear of Racism...

husaberg

27th June 2018, 17:54

Not at all,

That statement ignores other pieces of documented actions by the police. It ignores other statements in the report that contradict this narrative

No, I addressed that - namely that other statements within the report itself contradict this.

That statement is contradicted by other statements and other documented occurences - hence why I left it out. Where did this public perception of Police inaction against a certain group come from? The public knew that the group was committing crime, they were reporting it and upon seeing that their reports went un-investigated based solely on the race of the perpetrator - they formed this opinion.

Then you have the letter from Weir - where she raises the ethnicity of the offenders from the reports of the victims - and instead of acting on this letter to apprehend or investigate the offenders - they told her not to refer to the offenders Race again and booked her for a re-education course.

Taking those 2 data points into consideration - can you hand on your heart say that Race did not play a factor in Police inaction?

Furthermore you have to take into account the wider public discourse surrounding the Rotherham case - all of which cite the report as evidence of Police failure to act, based on fear of accusations of Racism.

So a question for you then Husa - If Myself, Katman (and lord knows we agree on pretty much nothing, save possibly the color of the Sky and the manufacturer of our preferred Motorbikes), The Rotherham public and the Wider UK populace have all reached this conclusion - what information are you privy to that invalidates the mainstream interpretation?

They do when read in the wider context of the Report - which is why the prevailing interpretation of the report is that is shows the Police failed to act on fear of Racism...

Yet you actually stated and used these statements that you provided as being proof of a cover up.
You did so repeatedly.
Then when you were shown what they were and that they were false and out of context you still continue to fail to acknowledge they are edited, used out of context and not representative of the report further proves you are not interested in the truth of what occurred.
as its pretty clear you are only interested in distorting information so that suits your agenda.
Here is a hint rumors and il informed opinion are not admissible in court. nor are they indicative of being facts if they have no evidence to back it up.
So i suggest you and katman just circle jerk back and forth in this thread about how its a cover up and tommy is a god without who the people of rotheram would never have got justice.
Then i sugest as a next step you start a think tank with to go about figuring out how to lynch all those people from the indian subcontinent as being child rapists.
You should also be prepared to face the inconvenient turth that a lot of these kids parents were also highly negligent in the fact that they clearly had no idea where their children were who they were with and what was going on with their children. That is not the job of the police or politicians. Thats is he parents responsibility.
Despite your protests to the contrary the police can only respond to people coming forward and giving evidence.

Katman

27th June 2018, 18:46

So i suggest you and katman just circle jerk back and forth in this thread about how its a cover up and tommy is a god without who the people of rotheram would never have got justice.

You have a real knack for making shit up.

I've never claimed Tommy Robinson was responsible for gaining justice for the people of Rotherham.

I've said that the scandal that engulfed Rotherham (and elsewhere) goes a long way towards explaining the emergence of activists such as Tommy Robinson.

husaberg

27th June 2018, 19:57

You have a real knack for making shit up.

I've never claimed Tommy Robinson was responsible for gaining justice for the people of Rotherham.

I've said that the scandal that engulfed Rotherham (and elsewhere) goes a long way towards explaining the emergence of activists such as Tommy Robinson.

Thats rich...
AKA is a racist retard who is likes to feed of racist hysteria, idiots like you that fail to appreciate that fact only provide him a platform to spread his vile racial hate messages.
His only interest in Rotherham is because it had some Islamic's.
Just as your only interest is that you think its a massive conspiracy.
AKA is your god, just as conspiracy is your religion

sidecar bob

27th June 2018, 20:40

And right on cue, another one of my fans who likes to cry "This is a motorcycle site - let's only talk about motorcycles" comes on here and makes one post for the day - in a thread titled Tommy Robinson.

Fans? I only feel pity for you for having no life.
At least i know theres not any chance of bumping into you at the Assen round of Moto GP this weekend, you will be too busy minding the internet for the rest of us that have lives.
Could u possibly come up with a different red rep. "Fuck off shitforbrains" has about run its course. Even if u just break it up into "shit- for-brains" it might look a bit smarter. Cheers.:niceone:

Katman

27th June 2018, 20:49

Fans? I only feel pity you for having no life.
At least i know theres not any chance of bumping into you at the Assen round of Moto GP this weekend, you will be too busy minding the internet for the rest of us that have lives.
Could u possibly come up with a different red rep. "Fuck off shitforbrains" has about run its course. Even if u just break it up into "shit- for-brains" it might look a bit smarter. Cheers.:niceone:

You don't handle rejection well, do you?

husaberg

27th June 2018, 23:12

Fans? I only feel pity for you for having no life.
At least i know theres not any chance of bumping into you at the Assen round of Moto GP this weekend, you will be too busy minding the internet for the rest of us that have lives.
Could u possibly come up with a different red rep. "Fuck off shitforbrains" has about run its course. Even if u just break it up into "shit- for-brains" it might look a bit smarter. Cheers.:niceone:
Its odd that he gets away with the Abusive rep messages know one else is allowed to do it.
He does give out "fuck off and die" occasionally.
I did once get from him a "fuck off and die you retarded cumstain"
That was the day he really must have thought he won the internet.
Laava called it on one of the first pages

Katman thread modus operandi,
Start inflammatory thread
Abuse contrary opinions
Assert moral superiority
Abuse contrary posters
Have a tanty
Whine on endlessly
Achieve nothing.

sidecar bob

28th June 2018, 03:31

Its odd that he gets away with the Abusive rep messages know one else is allowed to do it.
He does give out "fuck off and die" occasionally.
I did once get from him a "fuck off and die you retarded cumstain"
That was the day he really must have thought he won the internet.
Laava called it on one of the first pages
Ive got bigger worries, im stuck in some Belgian town called Spa. Dont be fooled by the name, its not a Spa at all & theres a goddam racetrack & noisy supercars everywhere. Theres been no significant conspiracys of any note here though, so i doubt anyone has heard of it.

Grumph

28th June 2018, 06:28

Ive got bigger worries, im stuck in some Belgian town called Spa. Dont be fooled by the name, its not a Spa at all & theres a goddam racetrack & noisy supercars everywhere. Theres been no significant conspiracys of any note here though, so i doubt anyone has heard of it.

There is of course a conspiracy, LOL. Check the regs - and admire the 18in wheels. I believe the age limits have been raised to 1986 so admire the XR69's fitted with GSXR engines....And i've accused the Register of running to a false history here, LOL.

Voltaire

28th June 2018, 07:19

sidecar bob

28th June 2018, 08:10

There is of course a conspiracy, LOL. Check the regs - and admire the 18in wheels. I believe the age limits have been raised to 1986 so admire the XR69's fitted with GSXR engines....And i've accused the Register of running to a false history here, LOL.

Yes, not impressed with a '82 CB1100f Badged as a 750 with flatslides & 4 pot brembo's
Makes the tale of tommy pale in comparison.

Katman

28th June 2018, 08:53

At 5.50 Tommy Robinson does his husaberk impression.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/paV0ElRVjFI" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Grumph

28th June 2018, 09:48

Yes, not impressed with a '82 CB1100f Badged as a 750 with flatslides & 4 pot brembo's
Makes the tale of tommy pale in comparison.

Fuck the tale of Tommy....

I wuz wrong, It's Donington and Oschersleben endurance races allowing up to '86. Spa has gone for 750's up to '92.
I'm assuming that the RC30 will finish up there next year....

Re the honda quoted, you really should try to get to Greymouth to see what some try to get away with...

jasonu

28th June 2018, 12:12

TheDemonLord

28th June 2018, 12:26

Yet you actually stated and used these statements that you provided as being proof of a cover up.
You did so repeatedly.
Then when you were shown what they were and that they were false and out of context you still continue to fail to acknowledge they are edited, used out of context and not representative of the report further proves you are not interested in the truth of what occurred.

In your opinion, you still haven't come up with how the most widely held is as I've described it. You are trying to make it out like that the interpretation we hold is some fringe conspiracy. Here's a hint - it isn't.

I've outlined my reasons for choosing the statements I did and I've outlined why later parts of the report uphold the view of Police in-action.

as its pretty clear you are only interested in distorting information so that suits your agenda.

Not at all, I care about the Children that got raped.

Here is a hint rumors and il informed opinion are not admissible in court. nor are they indicative of being facts if they have no evidence to back it up.

I repeat the question - Given all the evidence surrounding this and similar cases - how is it that the most widely held opinion? Do we share some form of national delusion?

If I bend over backwards to see your point of view - The police were still Negligent of their duties, the Council were active in downplaying the Religious and cultural factor and that there was complicity between both the Police and Council.

Tell me this - how is that a conspiracy?

So i suggest you and katman just circle jerk back and forth in this thread about how its a cover up and tommy is a god without who the people of rotheram would never have got justice.

Except neither of us have ever claimed that. Douglas Murray clearly articulate that Tommy is a secondary symptom of a problem that has been ignored and suppressed.

Then i sugest as a next step you start a think tank with to go about figuring out how to lynch all those people from the indian subcontinent as being child rapists.

Well, that would fix the problem...

But I've got a better idea, How about we actually talk about the problem? Openly and Honestly? That way we might actually understand the problem. Then if we understand the problem and we can openly discuss the cultural and religious factors that caused the problem, perhaps we can engage with the Cultural and Religious leaders on how to Identify the warning signs, how to inoculate members of the community against it and how to protect those in the community from it.

Don't you think that's a better idea? Than either killing everyone or pretending it doesn't exist?

You should also be prepared to face the inconvenient turth that a lot of these kids parents were also highly negligent in the fact that they clearly had no idea where their children were who they were with and what was going on with their children. That is not the job of the police or politicians. Thats is he parents responsibility.

That's horseshit. For multiple reasons:

1: You don't know how working class communities raise their children and it's not your place to judge.
2: A number of these abuses were occurring under the cover of services provided by the government to Help the children - so that is ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY the job of the Politicians, if it is a Government service
3: Their Children were in their early teens - it's not uncommon for teens to experiment with freedom - and lets not forget, they went with their supposed boyfriend to a location (again, not uncommon at all) only to be jumped by multiple grown Men.

Despite your protests to the contrary the police can only respond to people coming forward and giving evidence.

And multiple people did, and the Police ignored it. That's the problem you've got. Then, if you consider all the reports that were made and then retracted under duress (ie the scum were threatening their family members) - Maybe, the police might go:

"Hmmm we are getting a lot of young girls say they've been raped and then suddenly after a phonecall or text they mysteriously drop all charges and stay quiet - Maybe there's something we should investigate here"

Thats rich...
AKA is a racist retard who is likes to feed of racist hysteria, idiots like you that fail to appreciate that fact only provide him a platform to spread his vile racial hate messages.
His only interest in Rotherham is because it had some Islamic's.

So tell me, Why'd he work with the Quillium foundation and Maajid Nawaaz (whom he speaks highly of)?

Secondly, Islam is not a Race. His interest in Rotherham is because it is yet another manifestation of backwards antiquated social and religious customs that we have allowed to be imported to our country, and that for nearly a Decade (when it was crystal clear to authorities what was happening) that no one wanted to do anything about it.

I've listened to a fair amount of Tommy - talking to Jews, Muslims, Sikhs and English people - he's neither Vile nor a Racist. He's pissed off at something (with a fair amount of justification).

If you want to shut the likes of Tommy up - there's one simple way to do it: Talk about the problem instead of pretending it doesn't exist. If you do that, he will no longer have a reason for existing.

Just as your only interest is that you think its a massive conspiracy.
AKA is your god, just as conspiracy is your religion

To be fair, I think Alex Jones would be better as a God of the religion of Conspiracy....

Honest Andy

28th June 2018, 12:36

In your opinion, you still haven't blah blah blah

Fuck off, this is a thread hijack.

We want to hear more live updates from our man in the field
And more expert commentary from a man in a shed

:headbang:

Katman

28th June 2018, 12:44

Fuck off, this is a thread hijack.

We want to hear more live updates from our man in the field
And more expert commentary from a man in a shed

Now if only Bob would start a thread about it, you could have all the live updates you wanted.

Instead, he seems intent on helping to bump a thread about Tommy Robinson back to the top - all the while claiming to have no interest at all in Tommy Robinson.

What a crazy world we live in.

TheDemonLord

28th June 2018, 15:58

Fuck off, this is a thread hijack.

We want to hear more live updates from our man in the field
And more expert commentary from a man in a shed

:headbang:

Pfft - Ya'll Amateurs if you think this is a Hijack.

Voltaire

28th June 2018, 16:28

Pfft - Ya'll Amateurs if you think this is a Hijack.

Tommy is quite good on the guitar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPkQn5nDTZs

husaberg

28th June 2018, 19:17

In your opinion, you still haven't come up with how the most widely held is as I've described it.
..
Incorrect it is the opinion of the Documents and quotes you provided. you either never read or are just foolishly jumping on a racist bandwaggon in attempting to manipulate what was actually in them.

He also talks that because of a fear of being labelled "racist" parts of the UK law enforcement have failed to properly investigate serious crimes,

British Political and Policing circles that has resulted in blind-eyes being turned, for fear of the accusation of Racism.

They actively didn't investigate for fear of being Racist. The council actively didn't want it investigated for fear of upsetting their voter base.

All I've claimed is what the reports confirms - that the police, council et al failed to act on multiple reports of Child abuse (including claims of systematic child abuse) for fear of appearing racist or islamaphobic.

https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/185625-Tommy-Robinson?p=1131101662#post1131101662
No, there is only one report that is referred to as THE Rotherham report, there are other reports about Rotherham - but there is one definitive report on this issue, which is the only one I've cited.
Then why do multiple seperate sources that comment on the Rotherham report have that excerpt? From Wikipedia:

the Police dared not act against Asian youths for fear of allegations of racism

I challenged you every time you said this I said prove it. yet when challenged you produced these quotes. that do not say what you claim they say.
What the report actually says, that you ignore is
"a widespread perception that council and police dared not act against Asian criminals for fear of allegations of racism, , the very next sentence is , "we found no evidence" of that.

THIS IS WHAT THE ACTUAL REPORT SAYS.

we found no evidence" of that.
Which is not what you have reported it to say now is it.

Also as I have pointed out they do not refer to the police ignoring the problem for fear as being perceived as being racist they refers to councillors.

By far the majority of perpetrators were described as ‘Asian’ by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage directly with the Pakistani-heritage community to discuss how best they could jointly address the issue. Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.”"

Your next one shows the lengths you are prepared to distort facts

You choose these quotes (not me)as being in the report as evidence that backed up your assertions that the police did not investigate due to fear of being seen as being racist yet they clearly do not.
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/185625-Tommy-Robinson?p=1131102199#post1131102199

they said they found no evidence, Amusing that you are prepared to quote it as being proof but them omit the next sentence were they say that they believe there was no evidence to support the claim. Then you claim it to be my opinion. That's truly pathetic.

husaberg

28th June 2018, 19:56

Voltaire

28th June 2018, 22:06

What are the waffles like?
I always thought Spa was in France.
Due to the franconchamps.....

Here is pretty good for waffle.:woohoo:

Spa, Belgium - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spa,_Belgium

Spa is a Belgian town located in the Province of Liège, and is the town where the word spa comes from. The town of Spa is situated in a valley in the Ardennes ...

husaberg

28th June 2018, 22:28

Here is pretty good for waffle.:woohoo:

yeah, i prefer a little more substance myself, i googled spa afterwards, but who cares about Belgiums borders they get redrawn up every time zee germans get a little bored.

turns it must be pretty close to the border as it says later on, they occasionally run legs of the tour d france there

TheDemonLord

28th June 2018, 23:56

Incorrect it is the opinion of the Documents and quotes you provided. you either never read or are just foolishly jumping on a racist bandwaggon in attempting to manipulate what was actually in them.

That wasn't the question that was asked though, was it?

I'll break it down for you - Interpretation (when it comes to Language at least) is a Majority rules sport (because Language is organic) - Most people interpret the entire Rotherham report (taking into account all the various statements and points) and conclude that both the Council and the Police failed to act on account of the perpetrators Race.

I've asked you to explain why that is?

I challenged you every time you said this I said prove it. yet when challenged you produced these quotes. that do not say what you claim they say.
What the report actually says, that you ignore is

THIS IS WHAT THE ACTUAL REPORT SAYS.

Which is not what you have reported it to say now is it.

Also as I have pointed out they do not refer to the police ignoring the problem for fear as being perceived as being racist they refers to councillors.

Your next one shows the lengths you are prepared to distort facts

You choose these quotes (not me)as being in the report as evidence that backed up your assertions that the police did not investigate due to fear of being seen as being racist yet they clearly do not.
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/185625-Tommy-Robinson?p=1131102199#post1131102199

they said they found no evidence, Amusing that you are prepared to quote it as being proof but them omit the next sentence were they say that they believe there was no evidence to support the claim. Then you claim it to be my opinion. That's truly pathetic.

I'll simply repeat myself (since that is what you are doing) - when taken in context with all the other data and statements surrounding the case, it's clear that the Police failed to act due to the race of the Perpetrators.

I've explained why I ignored the addendums you've cited - namely because of contradictory statements later in the report and by Author herself. I'm not denying their existence in the report, I'm saying that when read as a whole, they aren't relevant.

And I'll ask once again - assuming your interpretation of the report is correct - how do you explain the Mainstream view of the report? Interpretation of language is a Majority rules sport - and in this case, the Majority (having read the report and other relevant source material) have drawn the conclusion that both Police and Council failed to act due to Race.

husaberg

29th June 2018, 00:18

I'll break it down for you - Interpretation (when it comes to Language at least) is a Majority rules sport (because Language is organic) - Most people interpret the entire Rotherham report (taking into account all the various statements and points) and conclude that both the Council and the Police failed to act on account of the perpetrators Race.

Blather again face up to what you did which was to attempted to distort what the finding of the report was.

He also talks that because of a fear of being labelled "racist" parts of the UK law enforcement have failed to properly investigate serious crimes,

British Political and Policing circles that has resulted in blind-eyes being turned, for fear of the accusation of Racism.

They actively didn't investigate for fear of being Racist. The council actively didn't want it investigated for fear of upsetting their voter base.

All I've claimed is what the reports confirms - that the police, council et al failed to act on multiple reports of Child abuse (including claims of systematic child abuse) for fear of appearing racist or islamaphobic.

https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/185625-Tommy-Robinson?p=1131101662#post1131101662
No, there is only one report that is referred to as THE Rotherham report, there are other reports about Rotherham - but there is one definitive report on this issue, which is the only one I've cited.
Then why do multiple seperate sources that comment on the Rotherham report have that excerpt? From Wikipedia:

the Police dared not act against Asian youths for fear of allegations of racism
I challenged you every time you said this I said prove it. yet when challenged you produced these quotes. that do not say what you claim they say.
What the report actually says, that you ignore is
"a widespread perception that council and police dared not act against Asian criminals for fear of allegations of racism, , the very next sentence is , "we found no evidence" of that.
THIS IS WHAT THE ACTUAL REPORT SAYS.

we found no evidence" of that.
Which is not what you have reported it to say now is it.
Also as I have pointed out they do not refer to the police ignoring the problem for fear as being perceived as being racist they refers to Councillors. these are not local body elected government authorities they are Councillors akin to youth councilors.

By far the majority of perpetrators were described as ‘Asian’ by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage directly with the Pakistani-heritage community to discuss how best they could jointly address the issue. Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.”"

I'll simply repeat myself (since that is what you are doing) - when taken in context with all the other data and statements surrounding the case, it's clear that the Police failed to act due to the race of the Perpetrators.

I've explained why I ignored the addendums you've cited - namely because of contradictory statements later in the report and by Author herself. I'm not denying their existence in the report, I'm saying that when read as a whole, they aren't relevant.
Bullshit. its a finding of the report. you can repeat yourself all you want i will keep posting the actual findings, until you realise how hypocritical you are being.
If as you claim the fact they found no evidence that police didn't investigate due to fear of being percieved as racst why did you deem it nessercary to edit it out.
Also why do you continue to say it stated as being a finding of the the report, when it is clear the finding was THat they could find no evidence of it.
What you fail to grasp is you cant on one hand offer the report as being proof that an event occurred when the actual finding of the exact same report is that they could ind no evidence.
it would be akin to a report into a UFO sighting interviewing someone who said they seen a UFO but the reports investigation found no evidence of a UFO, and then you saying because someone said they thought saw a UFO the report clearly acknowledges the existence of UFO's.

And I'll ask once again - assuming your interpretation of the report is correct - how do you explain the Mainstream view of the report? Interpretation of language is a Majority rules sport - and in this case, the Majority (having read the report and other relevant source material) have drawn the conclusion that both Police and Council failed to act due to Race.
Racist be racists, your claims that it is the fault where they were from is the classic example of that.
the large group being blamed for the actions of a few are a soft target.
along with your continued refusal to admit what is actually clearly stated in the report. Lets get this clear, its not my interpretation at all they clearly stated they could find no evidence.

"a widespread perception that council and police dared not act against Asian criminals for fear of allegations of racism, , the very next sentence is , "we found no evidence" of that.
Mainstream view in this case has been twisted by idiots loudly quoting incomplete information.