1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

No, but it doesn't make it universal as you seem to believe. Like virtually every other major world religion, there are lots of varieties of Islam.

What's your favourite?

Just now, vogie said:

What's your favourite?

Bruxism.

Double post (curse you global link)

13 minutes ago, MichaelJay said:

Tommy Robinson was a citizen journalist reporting on Muslim rape gangs. That was his crime. In the UK you cannot say anything about the crimes being committed so as not to offend the Muslim community.

His crime was the direct violation of a court order not to interfere in a proceeding.

This specific case was not about journalism, nor freedom of the news media to report.  Accredited journalists and the general public , whether from Al Jazeera, the BBC, Sky or Fox were all subject to the same court order and the same law.

 

This wasn't about  reporting on Muslims or crime. The case was specific to the  intentional breach of a direct instruction that the integrity of three important linked trials be protected from outside interference.  The failure to respect this simple law means that violent or guilty people can escape justice because they are denied due process. This law  has been in place for some time and is respected by people of all political views. It is not contested, nor disputed and is a fundamental part of due process.

 

 What part about  obeying the rule of law do you not get? 

26 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

And what about selling your daughters into slavery? Here's what they say about that:

“When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are."

That sounds like a religion in need of a Renaissance, Reformation and Enlightenment. Let's check back in 300 years.

Just now, lannarebirth said:

That sounds like a religion in need of a Renaissance, Reformation and Enlightenment. Let's check back in 300 years.

What? I'm sure you're not an anti-Semite but that's no way to speak about Judaism. Those words are from the old Testament.

Exodus 21:7-11

 

23 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Bruxism.

Every 1000 posts or so you say what you think, and I appreciate that. It makes a nice change from your constant critique of what other people think.

@ geriatrickid

The part that allows the advertising of names/family info/background of all the disgusting white peado’s/pervs but not the same for other types of the community.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

What? I'm sure you're not an anti-Semite but that's no way to speak about Judaism. Those words are from the old Testament.

Exodus 21:7-11

 

I'm not an anti-Semite. In fact I was going to post that sounded like something straight out of the Old Testament, but I was afraid someone would call me an anti-Semite for saying so.

5 minutes ago, DILLIGAD said:

@ geriatrickid

The part that allows the advertising of names/family info/background of all the disgusting white peado’s/pervs but not the same for other types of the community.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You're confused. Once convicted then public notice laws take effect no matter what shade the convicted party's skin is. But not until then. Are you familiar with the concept of innocent until proven guilty?

7 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Are you familiar with the concept of innocent until proven guilty?

 

Didn't seem to be in effect for Rolf Harris, Jimmy Saville, DLT et al.

Jimmy Saville didn't even have a trial, but we all know his name and the accusations.

(and the concept is called 'presumption of innocence')

48 minutes ago, MichaelJay said:

Tommy Robinson was a citizen journalist reporting on Muslim rape gangs. That was his crime. In the UK you cannot say anything about the crimes being committed so as not to offend the Muslim community.

That's not true. Stop making stuff up. He was revealing details of a court case where the judge imposed a publication ban. These bans are common in courts around the world to protect the judicial process. Journalist deal with publication bans at almost every trial they cover. He has a huge following on social media and he broke the publication ban. It's very simple really. 

 

In most circumstances, the ban ends with the trial. After that, you can share the details protected under the ban. This is British law imposed by a British judge. It has very little to do with Muslims, sharia law, deep state conspiracies, leftist agendas etc.  These bans are put in place in almost all trials involving serious crimes to protect the legal process and presentation of evidence. 

 

If you want to be a citizen journalist you better know laws regarding journalism. Otherwise, you are likely to end up in trouble. 

2 minutes ago, eng911 said:

Stop making stuff up. He was revealing details of a court case where the judge imposed a publication ban.

And yet outside the same trial, a Muslim chappie was reporting the same stuff and naming names, yet the judge and police ignored him.

Robinson's home town of Luton has a huge Muslim population. Like many throughout England Muslim 'areas' are a subject of worry or worse for many people.

Apparently his attention to 'grooming gangs' was inspired by an incident concerning a female family member.

Statistics show that 82% of 'groomers' were Muslims who seemingly have difficulty in having pre-maritial sex with Muslim women.

It seems to be forgotten that Robinson's almost exclusive target are paedophiles. Surely he should be supported in this?

His situation reminds me of Melanie Shaw who spent years in jail after whistle blowing about white paedophiles in children's homes some years ago.

9 minutes ago, eng911 said:

 These bans are common in courts around the world to protect the judicial process. Journalist deal with publication bans at almost every trial they cover.

 

That's not true, at least not in the United States. Publication bans, or as they are more commonly referred to, "gag orders", are an extremely rare order from the court.

Didn't seem to be in effect for Rolf Harris, Jimmy Saville, DLT et al.

Jimmy Saville didn't even have a trial, but we all know his name and the accusations.

(and the concept is called 'presumption of innocence')

Exactly, thank you.

There is not one law for all IMO!

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

58 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

The leftists did not take him out. His own disrespect of the law did. This was a contempt of court case. He intentionally interfered with a legal process.

 

The case he  was live broadcasting was subject to blanket reporting restrictions imposed under the Contempt of Court Act. The Section 4 (2) order is regularly applied in cases to ensure that a fair trial is provided. Interference in the proceedings can result in a dismissal of  charges or a mistrial. Mr. Robinson's actions had potential to sabotage three linked trials. I note that he readily admitted to his  contempt of court.

 

He wanted to protest and to name and shame. That is his  right. He did not have the right to interfere in a judicial process and to possibly allow three cases to be lost because of his publicity stunt. This was a long standing law enacted to protect the integrity of the  judicial process. It's all about respect for the rule of law, especially since Yaxley-Lennon  was subject to conditions arising from a previous  Contempt of Court conviction.

Read the facts for yourself:

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

 

Corruption and cover-ups from the highest levels to protect their own interests and incompetence, deliberately turning a blind eye to what amounts to the greatest catastrophic amounts of child grooming, child abuse, child rape and child murders probably throughout the whole of British history that went on for decades and is still continuing today. Those who dare speak out against it are silenced using our own British laws to protect the Muslim child rape gangs against us. The softly, softly approach by the British authorities towards Muslim criminals has caused great suffering and cost the lives of innocent people, many of them being children.

Once exposed, these officials simply resigned, whereas they should have been put on trial for humanitarian crimes. Yet, on the other side of the coin, celebrities that have been accused of committing sex crimes, are named, shamed, tried and condemned by the media without first being found guilty in a court of law. As yet I have not read of anyone being jailed for naming and shaming a celebrity accused of a sex crime prior to and during the legal proceedings.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/31/uk/manchester-bomber-royal-navy-intl/index.html

The leftist powers that be in Britain are still trying to silence those who speak out against and expose the wide scale of child abuse by Muslims, using the so-called judicial process as their weapon, that involves press, social media, mainstream media and individual silencing censorships, or in other words, they are imposing these laws how they feel fit to do so and only against those they feel fit to do so.

 

 

2 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

Read the facts for yourself:

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

 

Corruption and cover-ups from the highest levels to protect their own interests and incompetence, deliberately turning a blind eye to what amounts to the greatest catastrophic amounts of child grooming, child abuse, child rape and child murders probably throughout the whole of British history that went on for decades and is still continuing today. Those who dare speak out against it are silenced using our own British laws to protect the Muslim child rape gangs against us. The softly, softly approach by the British authorities towards Muslim criminals has caused great suffering and cost the lives of innocent people, many of them being children.

Once exposed, these officials simply resigned, whereas they should have been put on trial for humanitarian crimes. Yet, on the other side of the coin, celebrities that have been accused of committing sex crimes, are named, shamed, tried and condemned by the media without first being found guilty in a court of law. As yet I have not read of anyone being jailed for naming and shaming a celebrity accused of a sex crime prior to and during the legal proceedings.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/31/uk/manchester-bomber-royal-navy-intl/index.html

The leftist powers that be in Britain are still trying to silence those who speak out against and expose the wide scale of child abuse by Muslims, using the so-called judicial process as their weapon, that involves press, social media, mainstream media and individual silencing censorships, or in other words, they are imposing these laws how they feel fit to do so and only against those they feel fit to do so.

 

 

You take the exceptional case of celebrity - where the party in question is already known to the public - and try to turn it into something racial or ethnic or religious. If a famous or prominent person gets accused of something, it's going to be covered by the news. No matter if that person is white black brown christian muslim or tree worshiper.

50 minutes ago, DILLIGAD said:

@ geriatrickid

The part that allows the advertising of names/family info/background of all the disgusting white peado’s/pervs but not the same for other types of the community.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Nonsense.

15 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

As yet I have not read of anyone being jailed for naming and shaming a celebrity accused of a sex crime prior to and during the legal proceedings.

The BBC lost a few quid recently for naming and shaming Cliff Richard. I can't think of any others.

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

You take the exceptional case of celebrity - where the party in question is already known to the public - and try to turn it into something racial or ethnic or religious. If a famous or prominent person gets accused of something, it's going to be covered by the news. No matter if that person is white black brown christian muslim or tree worshiper.

You can conjure up all the smart answers you like, you have no case.

 

Many men, complete unknowns that have been accused by women of rape, have been named by the media prior to any guilty verdicts. There have been many anti paedophile vigilante groups set up in Britain that name and shame paedophiles, broadcast and follow them throughout their whole legal process. The reasons behind the strict no naming of alleged Muslim perpetrators is that this does not involve just one or a few individuals, these are organised gangs operating nationwide on a huge scale, which means the government`s policies of cultural enrichment have failed and why the government is so afraid of people like Tommy Robinson.

43 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

And yet outside the same trial, a Muslim chappie was reporting the same stuff and naming names, yet the judge and police ignored him.

Tommy has almost 1 million people who follow his facebook group. His words have the potential to disrupt the proceedings. 

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

So you say the previous poster was wrong in saying there is a liberal tide.

 

Because yes, I agree, the world is moving right.

No, the poster was right. There has been a liberal tide for decades regarding immigration from muslim countries. Even the Tories in the UK are "liberal"s in that sense. 

 

Islam is the enemy of liberalism, and it is the enemy of liberal muslims.

 

Witness: cutting off young girls' clitorises; murdering daughters who don't want to be married to someone from a Pakistani village whom they have never met and who can't speak English; hospitalising sons for the same reason; murdering non-muslims; murdering apostates; murdering gays.

 

I am a lifelong liberal who has seen the damage done by this vile superstition in its heartlands and in my heartlands.

 

 

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Voodoochile said:

And what is it that is so "distorted" about his political views?

He distorts facts...

5 hours ago, Voodoochile said:

Make a suggestion........

In the mean time he is doing something,  and his voice is being heard all the way over in the US. And he is giving some hope to the English people who have no more or very little left in their political leaders.

 

what are you doing??

You can read, so go back to my post, my recommendation is crystal clear.

 

I assume you're referring to Trump and Bannon who admire Orban, I guess T is the same, as well as certain members of this forum. A summary of Orban's ideology below which if fully realised will end up being a hard right dictatorship. Way to go - NOT.

 

http://www.onlinebreakingnews.info/hungarys-orban-launches-his-offensive-on-europe/

 

What am I doing? - following the advice of my country security agencies not to be a dick@#$%

 Speaking from across the big  lake. I think he represents ,truth, justice,he's a legend in his time!

6 minutes ago, simple1 said:

You can read, so go back to my post, my recommendation is crystal clear.

 

I assume you're referring to Trump and Bannon who admire Orban, I guess T is the same, as well as certain members of this forum. A summary of Orban's ideology below which if fully realised will end up being a hard right dictatorship. Way to go - NOT.

 

http://www.onlinebreakingnews.info/hungarys-orban-launches-his-offensive-on-europe/

 

What am I doing? - following the advice of my country security agencies not to be a dick@#$%

The loony left policies of PC, censorship and cultural enrichment is fuelling the support for the far right in the UK and Europe. Brexit was triggered by mass and uncontrolled immigration into Britain.

2 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

The loony left policies of PC, censorship and cultural enrichment is fuelling the support for the far right in the UK and Europe. <snip>

Replacing one set of morons, with another is good?

43 minutes ago, riclag said:

 Speaking from across the big  lake. I think he represents ,truth, justice,he's a legend in his time!

That’s hillarious oiven the problems the US is having with truth under a president(that you support) who puts out an average of six lies a day.

1 hour ago, My Thai Life said:

No, the poster was right. There has been a liberal tide for decades regarding immigration from muslim countries. Even the Tories in the UK are "liberal"s in that sense. 

 

Islam is the enemy of liberalism, and it is the enemy of liberal muslims.

 

Witness: cutting off young girls' clitorises; murdering daughters who don't want to be married to someone from a Pakistani village whom they have never met and who can't speak English; hospitalising sons for the same reason; murdering non-muslims; murdering apostates; murdering gays.

 

I am a lifelong liberal who has seen the damage done by this vile superstition in its heartlands and in my heartlands.

 

Again, contradicting.

 

Must be your lifelong liberalism playing up while writing anti-islamist texts.