nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Tommy Robinson jailed

[Deleted User]

Apparently according to Lauren Southern, Tommy has been sentenced to 13 months but there is a UK wide embargo on reporting.

Anyone else got any info?

Edit. Not too sure about the authenticity of the embargo. I'm assuming that it's for this https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-arrested-leeds-court-child-grooming-trial-edl-founder-latest-a8368821.html?amp

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

SnakePlissken

Billy86 wrote: »

I mean it was you that was demanding a source to believe what you were being claimed.

Almost as poorly written as the referenced article.

Captain Obvious stated Tommy Robinson supported a child abuser post conviction, I doubted this claim and asked for a source, what was provided was an article from the online edition of The Daily Star. It is your bias that allows you to accept this sole article as proof of Captain Obvious' statement, I'm much more discerning as to what sources I hold with any respect. Lord knows he has enough detractors, had he done what Captain Obvious has claimed I'm sure he can link to a Times or even, dare I say, a Guardian article as evidence... the online Daily Star? I'm going to have to pass.

Odhinn

tiger55 wrote: »

.................

A 'white nationalist'? Classy.

Captain Obvious

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Very poorly written article, or dare I say, purposely written poorly to confuse those who use it as their only source.

No, Tommy Robinson did not support Richard Price after his conviction for possession of child porn, he supported him only after his arrest for affray at an EDL rally, once the evidence against Price was confirmed, long before his conviction, Tommy Robinson did indeed condemn his former associate. But don't let the facts get in the way of your continuous claim of Tommy Robinson being supportive of child abusers.

The opening line is.

Lennon, also known as Tommy Robinson, backed the group’s founder member Richard Price, 41, after he was convicted of child porn charges.

No ambiguity there. Has Tommy brought successful libel proceedings against this publication or have you another source for your claim?

tiger55

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwEP-TcujeU

Billy86

SnakePlissken wrote: »

A claim was made that Tommy Robinson supported a child abuser after their conviction of same, had he done so I'm sure a reputable source can be provided to substantiate this.

So... no then, you don't have a source to counter that which was provided to you?

I mean it was you that was demanding a source to believe what you were being claimed. Now you're trying to claim that the source provided was wrong, so you'll need to provide a source to counter it or you don't really have a leg to stand on.

SnakePlissken

Billy86 wrote: »

So you have a reputable source for that version of events?

A claim was made that Tommy Robinson supported a child abuser after their conviction of same, had he done so I'm sure a reputable source can be provided to substantiate this, an appallingly wriiten article in the revered online edition of The Daily Star isn't particularly trustworthy.

super_furry

Billy86 wrote: »

So you have a reputable source for that version of events?

Red it on facebook mate.

Billy86

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Very poorly written article, or dare I say, purposely written poorly to confuse those who use it as their only source.

No, Tommy Robinson did not support Richard Price after his conviction for possession of child porn, he supported him only after his arrest for affray at an EDL rally, once the evidence against Price was confirmed, long before his conviction, Tommy Robinson did indeed condemn his former associate. But don't let the facts get in the way of your continuous claim of Tommy Robinson being supportive of child abusers.

So you have a reputable source for that version of events?

SnakePlissken

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Sure

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/176587/Paedo-rap-for-EDL-leader

Very poorly written article, or dare I say, purposely written poorly to confuse those who use it as their only source.

No, Tommy Robinson did not support Richard Price after his conviction for possession of child porn, he supported him only after his arrest for affray at an EDL rally, once the evidence against Price was confirmed, long before his conviction, Tommy Robinson did indeed condemn his former associate. But don't let the facts get in the way of your continuous claim of Tommy Robinson being supportive of child abusers.

Captain Obvious

SnakePlissken wrote: »

You have a reputable source for that of course, one which states Tommy Robinson lended support to a child abuser after their conviction.

Sure

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/176587/Paedo-rap-for-EDL-leader

Lennon, also known as Tommy Robinson, backed the group’s founder member Richard Price, 41, after he was convicted of child porn charges.

After he was jailed for three months for threatening behaviour at the rally, the EDL launched a campaign to free him and Lennon claimed Price had been “stitched up”.

After a barrage of criticism from EDL members, Lennon later retracted the statement and said: “We completely condemn Richard Price.”

WinnyThePoo

terryduff12 wrote: »

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

What is there to debate about?.

You don't like the term spastic. I suggest you suck it up.

Stephen Yaxley lennon is not a warrior for justice. His actions past and present are at the best often times mindlessly dumb.

Tommeh's spastics has a ring to it.

With a little bit of thought and a little bit of logic. No one could possibly be enamoured with the chap.
Hes done nothing. He will do nothing. Facebook likes are his game.

WinnyTheSpastic Used my logic on the one, nice ring to it too.
Don`t remember saying i either like or don't like the saying either.

That's amazing. The creativity that went into that. As usual thr wonders of life prevail.

terryduff12

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

What is there to debate about?.

You don't like the term spastic. I suggest you suck it up.

Stephen Yaxley lennon is not a warrior for justice. His actions past and present are at the best often times mindlessly dumb.

Tommeh's spastics has a ring to it.

With a little bit of thought and a little bit of logic. No one could possibly be enamoured with the chap.
Hes done nothing. He will do nothing. Facebook likes are his game.

WinnyTheSpastic Used my logic on the one, nice ring to it too.

Don`t remember saying i either like or don't like the saying either.

SnakePlissken

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Tommy and the EDL

You have a reputable source for that of course, one which states Tommy Robinson lended support to a child abuser after their conviction.

WinnyThePoo

jmayo wrote: »

terryduff12 wrote: »

What a spastic thing to say

It is no use arguing of even trying to debate with some.

They actually want you to start labeling them back so they can run to one of the mods, who more often than not share the same worldview, to have you banned.

BTW the laugh is you have some left minded folks decrying fascists, nazis, etc whilst at the same time admitting they want to see some get a good kicking.

The irony.
Two cheeks of the same ar** is the best summation.

What is there to debate about?.

You don't like the term spastic. I suggest you suck it up.

Stephen Yaxley lennon is not a warrior for justice. His actions past and present are at the best often times mindlessly dumb.

Tommeh's spastics has a ring to it.

With a little bit of thought and a little bit of logic. No one could possibly be enamoured with the chap.
Hes done nothing. He will do nothing. Facebook likes are his game.

Captain Obvious

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Who's they? Tommy Robinson certainly didn't lend any support following his conviction.

Tommy and the EDL

jmayo

terryduff12 wrote: »

What a spastic thing to say

It is no use arguing of even trying to debate with some.

They actually want you to start labeling them back so they can run to one of the mods, who more often than not share the same worldview, to have you banned.

BTW the laugh is you have some left minded folks decrying fascists, nazis, etc whilst at the same time admitting they want to see some get a good kicking.

The irony.
Two cheeks of the same ar** is the best summation.

terryduff12

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

His 'so called supporters' :pac::pac::pac:

You mean Tommeh's spastics? Has a ring to it.

What a spastic thing to say

WinnyThePoo

jmayo wrote: »

Says more about you than any of his so called supporters.

His 'so called supporters' :pac::pac::pac:

You mean Tommeh's spastics? Has a ring to it.

jmayo

Jayne Senior in 2011 was responsible for blowing the whistle on the industrial scale of the Rotherham child grooming gang.

Andrew Norfolk of The Times started investigating the Rotherham grooming gang in 2010.
He really brought it to prominence.

On the 5th of January, 2011, The Times newspaper launched an exclusive four-page exposn the “sexual exploitation of hundreds of young British girls by criminal pimping gangs”. The article talked about on-street grooming, and that most of the victims were white and that most of the convicted offenders are of Pakistani heritage.

On a Feb 1st 2011 BBC Newsnight interview with Jeremy Paxman, Tommy Robinson then head of EDL says at one stage ...

Do you know anyone that is hooked on herion sold to them by a muslim gang?
You probably don't, I do.
Do you know any beautiful girls that you went to school with that are now wearing a burka, that don't see their family?
You probably don't, I do.
Do you know anyone murdered by a muslim gang?
You probably don't, I do.
Do you know how many 15 year old girls, that you know, that you have grown up with, that have been raped or pimped?
You don't, so I don't expect you to understand ...
...
Are we going to pretend muslim groups are not out there purposely targeting our youth and pimpin them ?

BTW to have made it onto Newsnight as a guest he had to already have a reasonably high profile and he did through the EDL.

But Julie Blindel had been investigating since the 90s, but it took until 2007 for someone to publish her findings because it was deemed too sensitive.
And that it would be used by National Front or BNP.
Of course by then they were already using this.

She was involved in a charity started by, Ireene Ivison, the mother of a young murdered prostitutes who been groomed from early age and had gathered lots of information from families, victims, etc.

Grayson

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Thousands of vulnerable young girls sexually exploited for years because many of those in authority were too frightened of being labelled as racist to expose the level of abuse**... but the system worked eventually so nothing to be outraged by?

**Not my opinion, this is fact as highlighted by the Jay Inquire.

This is simply not true and is confusing the chronologically of events, Tommy Robinson was highly vocal about these gangs years before their report by the Mainstream Media.

No he wasn't. Every single case he's reported on was after they were charged and normally when they were on trial. And they had extensive media coverage. Everyone had heard about it beforehand.

And yes, i said they made mistakes. They were horrible mistakes that had a horrible effect on the victims. But they were investigated by the media. There was an official inquiry and none of it was because of Tommy Robinson.

ohnonotgmail

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Thousands of vulnerable young girls sexually exploited for years because many of those in authority were too frightened of being labelled as racist to expose the level of abuse**... but the system worked eventually so nothing to be outraged by?

**Not my opinion, this is fact as highlighted by the Jay Inquire.

This is simply not true and is confusing the chronologically of events, Tommy Robinson was highly vocal about these gangs years before their report by the Mainstream Media.

Can you tell us on what page in the interim report Tommy is mentioned as exposing this scandal?

SnakePlissken

Grayson wrote: »

He didn't expose them. Yes, police and social services made mistakes but the only reason we know about this is because the system eventually worked.

Thousands of vulnerable young girls sexually exploited for years because many of those in authority were too frightened of being labelled as racist to expose the level of abuse**... but the system worked eventually so nothing to be outraged by?

**Not my opinion, this is fact as highlighted by the Jay Inquire.

Grayson wrote: »

We had all heard about it in the news before Robinson got on board.

This is simply not true and is confusing the chronologically of events, Tommy Robinson was highly vocal about these gangs years before their report by the Mainstream Media.

SnakePlissken

FTA69 wrote: »

https://m.facebook.com/PeoplesMomentum/video_grid/?ref=content_filter
First of all the quotes, if you look at the above list of videos and pick the Tommy one near the top it has him, on video, saying the above statements and more besides.

As I said, I'm always open to new information, and after looking at the video I freely admit to sharing your view that some of those terms he has used in the past are indeed just as ill-judged and childish as calling those with differing viewpoints "spastics".

Grayson

SnakePlissken wrote: »

You are misinformed, these are the same Police Force who were found negligent by the Jay Inquiry and proven as grossly incompetent in their duties to protect the victims of these grooming gangs?

From the Jay Inquiry;

The police had shown a lack of respect for the victims in the early 2000s, according to the report, deeming them "undesirables" unworthy of police protection. The concerns of Jayne Senior, the former youth worker, were met with "indifference and scorn". Because most of the perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage, several council staff described themselves as being nervous about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others, the report noted, "remembered clear direction from their managers" not to make such identification. The report noted the experience of Adele Weir, the Home Office researcher, who attempted to raise concerns about the abuse with senior police officers in 2002; she was told not to do so again, and was subsequently sidelined.

As highlighted by the Jay Inquire, there are many persons in positions of authority who have failed/continue to fail some of the UK's most vulnerable for fear of being labelled "Racist" by those same dullards who throw out such a term far too liberally. I do not agree with all his rhetoric, but I do openly commend Tommy Robinson's bravery against daily death threats to help continue to expose these vile gangs.

He didn't expose them. Yes, police and social services made mistakes but the only reason we know about this is because the system eventually worked. It was not a system that Robinson is part of. We had all heard about it in the news before Robinson got on board. To claim that he exposed something is to claim that it was hidden before he came along. It wasn't.

ohnonotgmail

SnakePlissken wrote: »

You are misinformed, these are the same Police Force who were found negligent by the Jay Inquiry and proven as grossly incompetent in their duties to protect the victims of these grooming gangs?

From the Jay Inquiry;

The police had shown a lack of respect for the victims in the early 2000s, according to the report, deeming them "undesirables" unworthy of police protection. The concerns of Jayne Senior, the former youth worker, were met with "indifference and scorn". Because most of the perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage, several council staff described themselves as being nervous about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others, the report noted, "remembered clear direction from their managers" not to make such identification. The report noted the experience of Adele Weir, the Home Office researcher, who attempted to raise concerns about the abuse with senior police officers in 2002; she was told not to do so again, and was subsequently sidelined.

As highlighted by the Jay Inquire, there are many persons in positions of authority who have failed/continue to fail some of the UK's most vulnerable for fear of being labelled "Racist" by those same dullards who throw out such a term far too liberally. I do not agree with all his rhetoric, but I do openly commend Tommy Robinson's bravery against daily death threats to help continue to expose these vile gangs.

Can you tell us what page in the interim report Tommy is mentioned as exposing this scandal?

SnakePlissken

Grayson wrote: »

He didn't expose them. The police exposed them.

You are misinformed, these are the same Police Force who were found negligent by the Jay Inquiry and proven as grossly incompetent in their duties to protect the victims of these grooming gangs?

From the Jay Inquiry;

The police had shown a lack of respect for the victims in the early 2000s, according to the report, deeming them "undesirables" unworthy of police protection. The concerns of Jayne Senior, the former youth worker, were met with "indifference and scorn". Because most of the perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage, several council staff described themselves as being nervous about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others, the report noted, "remembered clear direction from their managers" not to make such identification. The report noted the experience of Adele Weir, the Home Office researcher, who attempted to raise concerns about the abuse with senior police officers in 2002; she was told not to do so again, and was subsequently sidelined.

As highlighted by the Jay Inquire, there are many persons in positions of authority who have failed/continue to fail some of the UK's most vulnerable for fear of being labelled "Racist" by those same dullards who throw out such a term far too liberally. I do not agree with all his rhetoric, but I do openly commend Tommy Robinson's bravery against daily death threats to help continue to expose these vile gangs.

jmayo

Billy Mays wrote: »

Underage rape and sex trafficking trial involving girls from a care home going on in Cardiff recently

I presume are Tommy has been all over this. Perhaps one of his fans on here can confirm?

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/jury-delivers-verdicts-rape-sex-15510431.amp?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar&__twitter_impression=true

So you drag out a case with two guilty verdicts as opposed to say the hundreds from muslim background grooming gangs.

And yes they are muslim, they come from a muslim background be it Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Afghani and in Newcastle's case also including Indian, Iranian, Iraqi, Kurdish, Turkish, Albanian.
Now riddle me what do all bar one of those countries have in common.

The one overriding common theme is they come from muslim Asian background.

How many was in Rochdale ? 9 convicted and 1 fled to Pakistan
How many was in Rotherham ? 2010 5 convicted, 2015 6, 2016 8,
How many in Newcastle? 112 convictioned I believe.
How many in Huddersfield ? 20 convicted.
How many Telford? 7 convicted.
How many Oxford? 8 convicted.

And just by me highlighting all of those does not in any way excuse or condone what the pri**s in Wales or anywhere else were at.

Grayson wrote: »

You notice none of his defenders are coming back to defend his actions?

Just because you can agree with him on some issues does that mean you have to agree and defend all of his actions ?
And just because you agree with some of his points doesn't mean you have to like him.
Or is everything black and white in your world ?

And by downplaying the assault on a poor kid he is being a gobshyte.
It doesn't matter the background of the poor kid or it doesn't matter that the usual pro migrant pro muslim groups are using it to make a point.
It was still very wrong what was done to that kid.

AllForIt wrote: »

Were the perpetrators protected because of their white ethnicity?

Muslim grooming gangs are in there with the catholic church when it comes to long term sustained abuse and the authorities turning a blind eye to it.
But the same fookers that have no problem rightly calling out the catholic church as paedo protectors have a fooking conniption when the same is done about gangs operating within the muslim communities across Britain.
Fooking bunch of hypocrites.
And then you label Robinson that because he isn't outside of every paedo trial in the country or commenting on it.

And I bet the same ones would be labeling him anti traveller anti gypsy if he was outside the one in Cardiff.

Billy86 wrote: »

Well it's been going on and known about for years, so in the interests of consistency, I'm sure the Tommy Robinson supporters are of the opinion that, yes they were.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-29009500

Are we really going to go down that avenue.
The one where muslim grooming gangs were operating for decades, and when people confronted them they were targeted by authorities.
FFS.
The only ones probably operating longer has been the catholic church.

And we all know you have no problem calling them out.

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Do love the term spastics. Fitting aswell.

Says more about you than any of his so called supporters.

SnakePlissken

Captain Obvious wrote: »

As soon as the facts were known? They supported him after his conviction.

Who's they? Tommy Robinson certainly didn't lend any support following his conviction.

Grayson

SnakePlissken wrote: »

In your opinion, and this is fine, we're allowed opposing viewpoints. Just as, in my opinion, anyone who remains so close-minded to hearing what Tommy Robinson has to say after his sterling work exposing the racist grooming gangs who decimated his hometown with impunity deserves any one of the following adjectives;

He didn't expose them. The police exposed them. The victims who went to the police exposed them. The journalists who covered the story exposed them.

He did no investigative work, he created no new material. He just took what was already publicly known and he just shouted loudly and angrily after everyone already knew what was going on. He was the last person to that party.

FTA69

SnakePlissken wrote: »

You did not, you posted an opinion piece from The Daily Mail, one that contains no reference to Tommy Robinson misappropriating donations to purchase a mansion as you claimed in your earlier post.

Another poster did link to a Times article, but as it's hidden behind a paywall I can't comment on it, please do feel free to quote the passage which was your basis for your claim of Tommy Robinson's home being funded from campaign donations.

I know a great many people from working class backgrounds who live in homes worth over €500,000 and, quell surprise, own cars substantially more luxurious than the BMW 1 Series Tommy Robinson drives. That to you, his car and home is evidence of the misappropriating of donations, when the reality is he funds his lifestyle through a number of successful businesses only betrays your own bias.

As you've put quote tags on both these statements, is it too much to ask that you provide some source for same, I must admit I have not once heard or read of Tommy Robinson stating either so would certainly be open to being educated on these statements.

https://m.facebook.com/PeoplesMomentum/video_grid/?ref=content_filter

First of all the quotes, if you look at the above list of videos and pick the Tommy one near the top it has him, on video, saying the above statements and more besides.

I’ll come back to the rest of your post later.