"Great" Britain is Over

[LeviF]

5 hours ago, Brit said:

 

There is a major concern in the UK about people's health. The British are becoming a nation of fatties. Lumps of lard. Bags of ballast. Ad infinitum.

 

 

USA: "The circle is now complete.  When we left you, we were but the learners.  Now we are the masters."

UK: "Only the masters of obesity, Yanks."

[TakeYouToTasker]

6 hours ago, Brit said:

Jeez.

 

There was a whole slew of paedophile activities that have been exposed in the last decade or so. These included awful examples of childcare workers, entertainers, sports coaches, Catholic and Anglican priests, (a very small number of) Members of Parliament, and others in (and out of) the public eye. The grooming gangs of Muslim men are/were just one of these. The term grooming gangs is used not to lessen their awful crimes but to accurately label their methods - different child rapists have different methods of getting victims - most people in the UK are aware of what the grooming gangs are and how they operate (thanks to a series of in depth reporting from various news sources not called Tommy Robinson).

 

Tommy Robinson was not the catalyst for the exposure of these. Various journalists (BBC, The Times and others) exposed different scumbags over the years and also the appalling failures of the authorities to properly investigate and prosecute these scum. What Tommy Robinson has done is target the Muslim grooming gangs specifically for his own agenda. He is well aware people are outraged over the child rape scandals and has used them to gather support. He is not some great journalistic giant pursuing the truth. There is plenty being reported.

 

Interesting that the article you link has the Daily Mail being shown as being unfair to Tommy Robinson. The Daily Mail (like most of the UK's national press) is a right wing newspaper. So right wing that it was pro-fascist and pro-Hitler right up until it became obvious that war was coming in the summer of 39. Overall its views have not changed that much.

 

In the UK the right to a fair trial is considered an important thing, along with the presumption of innocence. In order to achieve this in some ongoing trials there are limits to what the press can report so that a fair trial can be achieved. Once the legal proceedings are over then the press is free to report the trial and its outcome. Tommy Robinson was well aware of the restrictions of this case and ignored them. He knew what he was doing. In due course the trial (like others before) will conclude and those judged guilty will be locked up for a long time. And they and their crimes will be reported in the press. As has happened before. Repeatedly. Essentially the right to a fair trial is considered so fundamental that we have these temporary restrictions to ensure that.

 

The historical failure of the authorities to stamp out the abuse at a far earlier stage is contemptible (and is not unique to Muslim paedophiles or to the UK). Sending Tommy Robinson to gaol for his actions is not.

 

In the United States we have a very different view on restrictions on the press and on speech.  The First Amendment of our Constitution protects both.

 

Your legal system seems more designed to protect the government from being impeded in it's business than to protect it's citizens from the government in this regard, which is what so many here find so abhorrent.

 

It appears, from all reasonable perspectives, that your government sought to simply put an end to someone they saw as extremely inconvenient towards it's desired ends.  This is evidenced by the fact that other major news outlets were commenting on the case, and none of them were jailed.

 

You are losing your culture to globalists, and you aren't even allowed to discuss it.  And if you do, you'll be hustled off to be murdered in jail.

[row_33]

15 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

In the United States we have a very different view on restrictions on the press and on speech.  The First Amendment of our Constitution protects both.

 

Your legal system seems more designed to protect the government from being impeded in it's business than to protect it's citizens from the government in this regard, which is what so many here find so abhorrent.

 

It appears, from all reasonable perspectives, that your government sought to simply put an end to someone they saw as extremely inconvenient towards it's desired ends.  This is evidenced by the fact that other major news outlets were commenting on the case, and none of them were jailed.

 

You are losing your culture to globalists, and you aren't even allowed to discuss it.  And if you do, you'll be hustled off to be murdered in jail.

 

it's not quite that simple

 

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

24 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

it's not quite that simple

 

 

 

It's exactly that simple.

[Brit]

21 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

In the United States we have a very different view on restrictions on the press and on speech.  The First Amendment of our Constitution protects both.

  

Your legal system seems more designed to protect the government from being impeded in it's business than to protect it's citizens from the government in this regard, which is what so many here find so abhorrent.

 

It appears, from all reasonable perspectives, that your government sought to simply put an end to someone they saw as extremely inconvenient towards it's desired ends.  This is evidenced by the fact that other major news outlets were commenting on the case, and none of them were jailed.

 

You are losing your culture to globalists, and you aren't even allowed to discuss it.  And if you do, you'll be hustled off to be murdered in jail.

Sigh. Well, no.

 

Robinson's broadcast breached contempt of court rules. There are specific rules involving court cases that are designed to ensure there is a fair trial. The press respects those rules, Tommy Robinson did not. End of. Reporting done by news outlets was within the guidelines. You are not making a true like-for-like comparison.

 

Free speech is a thing in the UK. It is covered in our laws. Right to a fair trial is another thing in the UK. This is also covered in our laws. In criminal proceeding the right to a fair trial can lead to temporary restrictions on reporting. These limits are set by our independent judiciary in relation to specific trials. Independent judiciary is another thing in the UK.

 

Robinson does not even count as a minor irritant in the UK, politically. There is nothing reasonable in the idea the government had a political agenda against the man. What press he gets is largely for his anti-Muslim rhetoric. He is seen as an abhorrent figure and a thug by the vast majority of people, if they think of him at all. He claims to be a former racist and homophobe who has changed his ways. At best he has shifted his hate to Muslims. And followers of rival football teams.

 

Our culture is fine. We can discuss anything we like (part of that free speech thing). Gaol is not a thing we fear for discussing contentious issues. So being murdered there is pretty unlikely. Plenty of public figures have spoken out against an array of issues. Including those of Muslim fundamentalists and sexual predators; funnily enough they avoid gaol easily enough.

 

 

[row_33]

15 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

It's exactly that simple.

 

Okay buddy....

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

7 hours ago, Brit said:

Tommy Robinson was not the catalyst for the exposure of these. Various journalists (BBC, The Times and others) exposed different scumbags over the years

 

 

To be fair, the BBC has a shameful record of covering for pedophiles in positions of power. They did so for years, and years. Their history is longer on the side of covering this abuse up than it is exposing it. 

 

[Brit]

46 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

To be fair, the BBC has a shameful record of covering for pedophiles in positions of power. They did so for years, and years. Their history is longer on the side of covering this abuse up than it is exposing it. 

 

 

More a shameful record of not investigating rumours properly and taking perverts at their word when they denied the rumours.

 

Well, Savile had no position of power. He was a popular entertainer and did a lot of work for charity. The fact he was a POS was not clear at the time.

 

The management did not believe rumours about Saville - without hard evidence they were unlikely to do so. That piece of trash was reported to police on multiple occasions for sexual offences. He committed crimes in over a dozen hospitals. Other times he committed sex crimes in schools and children's homes. He used his fame and public image to gain access to children all over the place (I think the victim count is close to 500 in total). Unfortunately without any real evidence being presented the old boys club ideals of the time led to Savile being taken at his word at the BBC.

 

After his death there was a  serious crisis where a documentary featuring allegations of Savile's crimes was shelved. People rightly question whether this was a cover up after the fact. It seems it wasn't, but management did go into a massive panic at the time.

 

What is worse, though, is the attitude of the police and authorities at that time. If they had shown any kind of real determination to get to the truth he should have been caught decades earlier. And not just Savile - the number of cases where complaints were not thoroughly investigated, ignored or, at the very worst, suppressed is depressing and infuriating at the same time. The general assumption was it was the kids who had made things up. There have also been allegations of outright bribery by Savile to corrupt police officers in order for investigations to be dropped.

 

On a positive note the BBC did start a child telephone service where kids could call for help / advice in the mid-80s. And management was very supportive for this. This still runs today. Pity there were apparently no calls about Jimmy the pervert, though.

Edited June 4, 2018 by Brit

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Brit said:

 

More a shameful record of not investigating rumours properly and taking perverts at their word when they denied the rumours.

 

Well, Savile had no position of power. He was a popular entertainer and did a lot of work for charity. The fact he was a POS was not clear at the time.

 

This is the revisionist BBC line and it's bull. It was clear to a lot of people, with lots of evidence and victims' statements - and then was systematically covered up. Not because of JS's power or status but because of the status and power of those he cavorted with who had the same predilections.  

 

This is a systemic issue at the highest levels of power - not just in GB but the world. GB is a hub though, and it's media has been happy to cover it up for decades.

[The_Dude]

5 hours ago, Brit said:

Er, no. I said he admired much of Islam and was very critical of aspects of it. Perhaps I should have emphasised the 'very' bit more. Apologies for that. Many aspects of Islam do deserve to be criticised.

 

Nothing in what I said was indicative of a love of Islam. His family was worried he might convert such was his admiration of some parts of it (a conversion which was never on the cards). You would think he may well have said something to his family to cause such concerns - it is unlikely they would have pulled something like that out of the blue or if he had been so totally against Islam at that point. Orientalism was popular in the UK when he was a young man, unsurprising given the state and breadth of the Empire at that point in history.

 

He noted that many, many Muslims were brave and loyal to the British crown. This was during a critique of Islam.

 

Refusing to call Istanbul by its correct name is something you could expect from Churchill.

 

Istanbul is its Muslim name and I’ll never call that city by that name. 1453 and I still ain’t over it. Maybe we’ll get a war with Turkey one of these days and we can right old wrongs. God I hate Turks. 

[LeviF]

24 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

Istanbul is its Muslim name and I’ll never call that city by that name. 1453 and I still ain’t over it. Maybe we’ll get a war with Turkey one of these days and we can right old wrongs. God I hate Turks. 

 

Make Istanbul Constantinople Again

[3rdnlng]

32 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

Istanbul is its Muslim name and I’ll never call that city by that name. 1453 and I still ain’t over it. Maybe we’ll get a war with Turkey one of these days and we can right old wrongs. God I hate Turks. 

Starting with the Young Turks.

[The_Dude]

46 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Make Istanbul Constantinople Again

 

...If I could start one war that would be it. I would drive the muslims out of Europe like Ferdinand and Isabella, then I would hand that sacred land back over to the Armenians -- the people who deserve it. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

38 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

...If I could start one war that would be it. I would drive the muslims out of Europe like Ferdinand and Isabella, then I would hand that sacred land back over to the Armenians -- the people who deserve it. 

 

Or the Greeks.

 

[The_Dude]

30 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Or the Greeks.

 

 

Yeah, or Italians. 

 

Either way, I'd like to give it to the Armenians with the option for them to genocide the Turks. They deserve that option. 

[Koko78]

3 hours ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Make Istanbul Constantinople Again

 

The 1400's called. They want their foreign policy back.

 

Oh, and...

 

 

[DC Tom]

4 hours ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Make Istanbul Constantinople Again

 

It's Byzantium.

[#34fan]

17 hours ago, row_33 said:

 

 

Just looked it up, kinda wished I didn’t....

 

The rape conviction part that was redacted, -was that an error?

 

19 hours ago, Brit said:

You are mistaken. Last time it was checked London was 60% White.  Likely to be a couple of %age points down from that now, but still majority white.

 

Thanks! -I was citing a 2011 census statistic that had the "White British" population of London at 44.9%  Link

 

-Haven't been able to find more recent reliable numbers.

 

 

[#34fan]

13 hours ago, Brit said:

 

Well, ISIS controlled areas which were almost totally Muslims. And many of those Muslims had been so badly treated by their neighbours (ie the Sunnis were badly treated by the Shias) that they gave support to ISIS as they were (to all appearances) their coreligionists. The fact their judgement in this was badly wrong would be a serious understatement. Muslims in the UK for the most part get on with their non-Muslim neighbours. While there are idiots and scumbags who stir up tensions (on both sides) and there are issues that need to be redressed there is sod all chance of ISIS forming a caliphate here at any point.

 

I haven't been over sinces spring of '17

 

Tommy has a lot of friends in all communities, including Sikh, and Black Carribeans.... One of his counterparts Known as "Red-pill Phil" is also vocally on Tommy's side.

 

How would you explain his wide appeal?

 

Edited June 5, 2018 by #34fan

[B-Man]

BRUCE BAWER: Trashing Tommy Robinson.

So I ask: how far is “too far” when you’re sounding the alarm about a nationwide child-rape epidemic that authorities up and down the line have conspired to cover up, that is still going on, that is (although one is not allowed to say so) a byproduct of Islamic theology, and that the mainstream media, even after they’ve finally been forced to face up to the reality of it, prefer to treat as if it were a series of parking violations?

 

As for Robinson being “detained illegally”: I, for one, certainly wouldn’t say that his detention is illegal. No, it’s entirely legal. That’s precisely the problem.

 

British law itself — the whole process of deciding what’s legal and what’s illegal — is no longer what it used to be, and hence no longer worth respecting. It’s been twisted into a tool of those who wish to protect Muslim criminals and troublemakers (and their apologists and defenders) and to punish those who blow the whistle on Muslim crime and tell the truth about Islamic ideology.

 

 

 

Needless to say, read the whole thing.

 

 

 

.