Tommy Robinson jailed

thebull85

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i also linked to a news report from two journalists who were in the court. We could argue about sources all day but it would still come back to you relying on terrible sources that ANYBODY who was interested in intelligent discussion would know were rubbish.

I cant quite fathom how you can keep going on about the source, i quoted caolans words, i then posted the actual video of him saying those words. Yes it was alex jones of infowars but he is not the source.

But lets just say for arguments sake, Caolan does the very same interview on the late late show with Ryan Tubridy.

Would RTE now be the source? Would ryan tubridy and the late late show be the source?


Or is the source that actual person that says the words...?

Grayson

thebull85 wrote: »

I cant quite fathom how you can keep going on about the source, i quoted caolans words, i then posted the actual video of him saying those words. Yes it was alex jones of infowars but he is not the source.

But lets just say for arguments sake, Caolan does the very same interview on the late late show with Ryan Tubridy.

Would RTE now be the source? Would ryan tubridy and the late late show be the source?


Or is the source that actual person that says the words...?

RTE would be the source of the interview. He would be the source of any claims he made.

So if you said "he said X on RTE" there are two assertions in that sentence, that he said X and that he was RTE. If either of those is not true the original statement is untrue.

However neither of those confirms the validity of X. Let's say X = "all trees are green" we would still need to investigate that.

The unfortunate fact is though that a source can have a reputation for being untrue. Now that doesn't make a particular statement untrue but it makes it more likely to be.

So if you want to make a statement and expect it to be believed it's best to use a source which had a good reputation or some way to independently verify that their statement is true.

thebull85

Grayson wrote: »

RTE would be the source of the interview. He would be the source of any claims he made.

So if you said "he said X on RTE" there are two assertions in that sentence, that he said X and that he was RTE. If either of those is not true the original statement is untrue.

However neither of those confirms the validity of X. Let's say X = "all trees are green" we would still need to investigate that.

The unfortunate fact is though that a source can have a reputation for being untrue. Now that doesn't make a particular statement untrue but it makes it more likely to be.

So if you want to make a statement and expect it to be believed it's best to use a source which had a good reputation or some way to independently verify that their statement is true.

Thanks for that.

Captain Obvious

terryduff12 wrote: »

I am sincere. I worked in Manchester and live with a muslim for a time sound lad never had a problem with him he was going through a divorce at the time. Tommie grew up in Luton it now has over 30 mosques in over 20 years and increasing. Point I try and make is anyone that is critical of Islam is a racist your shut down when you try and say something about it.

No, that's just the right wing victim complex. You can criticise a religion if you want. Where you become racist is when you try to use the actions of a person or small group to judge the character of a massive amount of others simply because they share a certain cultural or physical similarity.

terryduff12

There's more than a small group. I criticized it and you more or less brought up right wing so like I said whatever way you look at it you say something about Islam your racist.

ohnonotgmail

thebull85 wrote: »

So you didnt spot any untruths in the article no?

I guess not if you are looking to have them pointed out to you.

Is that the best you can do? Too much to expect a reasonable response to a reasonable question i suppose.

thebull85

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Is that the best you can do? Too much to expect a reasonable response to a reasonable question i suppose.

You were the one that chose to answer a question with a question.

You need to practice what you preach.

Tipsy McSwagger

If the British establishment served justice to those Pakistani Grooming gangs as quickly as they served it to Tommy Robinson then hundreds of underage white girls could have been saved.

Captain Obvious

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

If the British establishment served justice to those Pakistani Grooming gangs as quickly as they served it to Tommy Robinson then hundreds of underage white girls could have been saved.

Wasn't that what they were doing both times he breached court reporting rules?

El Weirdo

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

If the British establishment served justice to those Pakistani Grooming gangs as quickly as they served it to Tommy Robinson then hundreds of underage white girls could have been saved.

*sigh*

Fair play to all of ye trying to explain to people such as the above what exactly happened to Lennon. I'd have been banned by now.

terryduff12

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FniPiSLut8

Another Far right lad

TomSweeney

terryduff12 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FniPiSLut8

Another Far right lad

Yeah what a far right nazi thug ... lock him up too ...



How dare he speak the truth !!!

TomSweeney

Good interview ... whatever you think of the guy, he is bang on here.


If you think he doesn't you have to be in denial.

thebull85

TomSweeney wrote: »

Good interview ... whatever you think of the guy, he is bang on here.


If you think he doesn't you have to be in denial.

I didnt actually know Salah Abdeslam was chilling in Molenbeek while he was one of the most wanted men in the world for the Paris attacks, and then the locals attacked the police as they were arresting him.

I wonder why Molenbeek is such a sh*thole.

ohnonotgmail

TomSweeney wrote: »

Good interview ... whatever you think of the guy, he is bang on here.


If you think he doesn't you have to be in denial.

what does this have to do with him being locked up for contempt of court?

wes

Guardian journalist Owen Jones has received threats from the Yaxley-Lennon fan club:

‘Tommy Robinson’ is no martyr to freedom of speech

--SNIP--
They portray their opponents as traitors. Condemning the likes of Yaxley-Lennon instantly brings threats of violence on social media: recent messages I’ve received include “Owen Jones your get what’s coming to you very soon you prick”, “Until one day one of us bumps into you I can’t wait”, “I hope someone fills your jaw you little prick”, “Remember places, traitors’ faces, you will pay for crimes”, ad infinitum..
--SNIP--

Such wonderful people the Yaxley-Lennon fan club threatening violence, due to the law being rightly being enforced.

jmayo

Deleted User wrote: »

The sooner everyone sits down and irons out their differences the better.

Just how that is going to be done is anyone's guess.

You just don't get it.
This isn't the PIRA, ETA, a trade union, Iran, North Korea, Britain and Brexit, etc.
Ok maybe not Britain and Brexit because Britain hasn't a clue what it wants.

The only thing a fundamentalist islamist wants is you to convert usually to a salafist/wahhabist version of sunni islam.

They don't want independent state like ETA, they don't want to join another country like PIRA, they want to drag you into a world wide muslim caliphate.
They don't want rights for some group of people like a trade union, they want no rights for everyone, bar the right to be subservient to a pile of crud written millennia ago.

They don't want a say in government, they want to be government.

And some will say what about moderate muslims ?

Well by the looks of it a moderate muslim wants the right to still have women living as second class citizens, wants the right to dictate how secular schools operate, wants to ban the publishing of anything that is critical of their religion, wants to make homosexuality a criminal offense.

Now some will argue those that want such things are not deemed moderate muslims, but fundamentalists.
Of course if that is the case then over 50% of the muslims in the UK are fundamentalist as over 50% are deemed to be anti homosexuality and want to make it a criminal offense.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what does this have to do with him being locked up for contempt of court?

And what does his record for mortgage fraud have to do him being locked up for contempt of court ?
What does him founding the EDL have to do with him being locked up for contempt?
What does his football hooligan days have to do with him being locked up for contempt ?

Yet all of those have been fired out there every time his name is mentioned by one side around here.

Grayson

jmayo wrote: »

And what does his record for mortgage fraud have to do him being locked up for contempt of court ?
What does him founding the EDL have to do with him being locked up for contempt?
What does his football hooligan days have to do with him being locked up for contempt ?

Yet all of those have been fired out there every time his name is mentioned by one side around here.

They have nothing to do with his contempt of court. they just make him a fraudulent, violent scumbag prick. His contempt of court conviction just means we can say he's a stupid, fraudulent, violent scumbag prick.

seachto7

But when some posh alickadoo gets done for mortgage fraud here, they're not considered "scumbags". In fact, most of them are still out socialising in the same shallow tacky haunts they previously would have been. "New business venture....."

ohnonotgmail

seachto7 wrote: »

But when some posh alickadoo gets done for mortgage fraud here, they're not considered "scumbags". In fact, most of them are still out socialising in the same shallow tacky haunts they previously would have been. "New business venture....."

he has done a bit more than just commit mortgage fraud. It is his other activities that make him a scumbag.

Grayson

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

If the British establishment served justice to those Pakistani Grooming gangs as quickly as they served it to Tommy Robinson then hundreds of underage white girls could have been saved.

I agree. If the abusers had all pled guilty rather than go to trial, this would have been over far quicker.
It might have also helped if they'd committed the offense outside a court house.

Zubeneschamali

Grayson wrote: »

It might have also helped if they'd committed the offense outside a court house.

How about if they committed the offense at a court house, were convicted, sentenced and specifically warned by the judge that if they did it again they would be locked up, and then proceeded to commit the offense at another courthouse within a year?

Grayson

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

How about if they committed the offense at a court house, were convicted, sentenced and specifically warned by the judge that if they did it again they would be locked up, and then proceeded to commit the offense at another courthouse within a year?

That might be too much to expect. No-ones that stupid

ancapailldorcha

wes wrote: »

Guardian journalist Owen Jones has received threats from the Yaxley-Lennon fan club:



Such wonderful people the Yaxley-Lennon fan club threatening violence, due to the law being rightly being enforced.

Almost as if they don't actually care about free speech at all...

Captain Obvious

Grayson wrote: »

I agree. If the abusers had all pled guilty rather than go to trial, this would have been over far quicker.
It might have also helped if they'd committed the offense outside a court house.

In front of the judge

The_Kew_Tour

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

he has done a bit more than just commit mortgage fraud. It is his other activities that make him a scumbag.

Ouch, no sympathy for him there

murphthesmurf

Grayson wrote: »

I agree. If the abusers had all pled guilty rather than go to trial, this would have been over far quicker.
It might have also helped if they'd committed the offense outside a court house.

Oh come on, I understand your point but the Muslim rape gangs were operating for the best part of 30 years. The police knew, they had recieved numerous complaints over the years. Social workers also knew. This has been shown. There is an interesting video on Youtube of a talk given by the reporter who first broke the story of what was happening (sorry I've tried to find it to link to it but can't ), heart breaking to listen to. They only started arresting people after hebroke the story. One incident he talks of was a 13yr old girl in a flat above a takeaway. The police were called by the girls parents. When they arrived they found her upstairs with 7 men, she was intoxicated. The polioce arrested her, not the men, no questions were asked of them. She was arrested for drunken disorderly.
As a previous poster said, had the law persued these men with the vigour they have persued Tommy Robinson thousand of girls lives would have been saved from rape and abuse.
Tommy Robinson is no angel, but he knew what was going on as many other English people did. But he was the only person who was talking out about what was happening. He was jailed for mortgage fraud, if you listen to his interviews it was hardly crime of the century. Yet there are thousands on the UK terrorist watch list, and they can't find anything to lock any of them up on. Not even an unpaid parking ticket.

Tipsy McSwagger

Grayson wrote: »

I agree. If the abusers had all pled guilty rather than go to trial, this would have been over far quicker.
It might have also helped if they'd committed the offense outside a court house.

You’ve already quoted this post but still don’t get it. I’ll give you a clue, ‘quickly’.

johnp001

murphthesmurf wrote: »

...
There is an interesting video on Youtube of a talk given by the reporter who first broke the story of what was happening (sorry I've tried to find it to link to it but can't ), heart breaking to listen to. They only started arresting people after hebroke the story. One incident he talks of was a 13yr old girl in a flat above a takeaway. The police were called by the girls parents. When they arrived they found her upstairs with 7 men, she was intoxicated. The polioce arrested her, not the men, no questions were asked of them. She was arrested for drunken disorderly.
...

Is this the talk you are referring to?

murphthesmurf

johnp001 wrote: »

Is this the talk you are referring to?

Thats the one, thanks.