It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lifting of gag order in robinson case proves it was never about protecting child rape case

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 04:46 AM
link   
a reply to: 3n19m470



Nevermind warning and educating the public that these gangs exist and how they work, so they know what to watch out for so it DOESNT Happen Again!!


The grooming gangs have been in the news for a few years now. It's big news regardless of TR and his overall agenda. People are watching out for them. There are agencies like CSE (child sexual exploitation) which have almost no public profile but work alongside police and social services. They gather intelligence about ALL molesters although the groups are predominantly Asian.

CSE also work to protect the victims and targets. Sometimes it takes a lot of effort to disengage the young person from the lure of these people. The molesters aren't all dirty old Asian men. A lot are young Asian men in new cars like Mercs and Audis offering new clothes and drugs/alcohol. They're out there as taxi drivers too which is one of the ways they get access to young, vulnerable girls.

Schools, police, social services, CSE and the CPS are all working to squash these gangs. Angry mobs outside of Courts don't actually help the process of gathering evidence. The girl being picked up by some flashy #ing molester in Bury or Bolton won't be saved by TR either. IMO TR is all about TR. His beliefs aren't useful as evidence in prosecutions. "Let's have a march," helps some people to vent, but the real goals (prosecution, sentencing etc) are achieved by investigation, evidence and safeguarding the young people.




posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 06:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Maajid has definitely said the right thing in that video.

And this 'contempt of court' does not warrant 13 months inside. That's way too long for something so trivial. Maybe a fine would have been more appropriate but anyway how do the media get away with reporting on other cases then? The whole Media should be in contempt.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Going to just leave this excellent explanation posted by Paraphi in another thread which explains exactly what happened and why.

thesecretbarrister.com...



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 08:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Going to just leave this excellent explanation posted by Paraphi in another thread which explains exactly what happened and why.

thesecretbarrister.com...



Hahahahaha!

I love how much y0ou love that article!

It fits right ion with your style, calling anyone who has a problem with this case a knuckle dragging racist!

Telling that this is now your go to article, even though it doesnt answer what you think it does.

On the issue of this thread, this article does not remotely give a good answer as to why the judge would have put in a restriction on reporting on tommys case, only to lift it because news outlets around the world reported on it.

If that is the case, then this judge would lift the exact same section 4(2) ban on reporting on the child rape court case, because news outlets around the world are reporting about it.

For some odd reason, the judge thought reporting on tommy case of firday would jeoprdize the child rape case, but on tuesday that had changed for no reason.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 08:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Going to just leave this excellent explanation posted by Paraphi in another thread which explains exactly what happened and why.

thesecretbarrister.com...



Hahahahaha!

I love how much y0ou love that article!

It fits right ion with your style, calling anyone who has a problem with this case a knuckle dragging racist!

Telling that this is now your go to article, even though it doesnt answer what you think it does.

On the issue of this thread, this article does not remotely give a good answer as to why the judge would have put in a restriction on reporting on tommys case, only to lift it because news outlets around the world reported on it.

If that is the case, then this judge would lift the exact same section 4(2) ban on reporting on the child rape court case, because news outlets around the world are reporting about it.

For some odd reason, the judge thought reporting on tommy case of firday would jeoprdize the child rape case, but on tuesday that had changed for no reason.


And I love your level of denial about the article when it clearly demonstrates how completely wrong your arguments are.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
If that is the case, then this judge would lift the exact same section 4(2) ban on reporting on the child rape court case, because news outlets around the world are reporting about it.

You got any direct links? Not being flippant just I've been searching US sites and haven't seen anything which I think is much different to UK media.
I'm curious to see if I'm filtered out because I'm in the UK.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy

originally posted by: Grambler
If that is the case, then this judge would lift the exact same section 4(2) ban on reporting on the child rape court case, because news outlets around the world are reporting about it.

You got any direct links? Not being flippant just I've been searching US sites and haven't seen anything which I think is much different to UK media.
I'm curious to see if I'm filtered out because I'm in the UK.


About people reporting about the child sex case?

Yes, every single article that has posted about the tommy case (which there are dozens) has mentioned that he was reporting ion the child sex case.

I could also post dozens of the same right wing blogs and what have that is being as an excuse by the article of the author they arre siting that has commented on cbhild rape gangs and this case and how disgustuing it is.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Ah no mate, I meant anything now which is currently under a restriction?
Genuine question.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:03 AM
link   
They would defend the feelings of child sex gangs before they would defend the rights of Tommy Robinson.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: Grambler

Ah no mate, I meant anything now which is currently under a restriction?
Genuine question.


I know I get you.

Who knows what is currently under restriction.

I guess "details of the child rape case" are.

Tommys was accused of violating that by merely reporting on publicly available material from the media. (and by filming defendants, but we see from other cases such as gary glitter this occurs all of the time)



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
They would defend the feelings of child sex gangs before they would defend the rights of Tommy Robinson.


Of course they would.

They argue tooth and nail that there sint a problem with grooming gangs, ignoring the cgovernments on internal invetsigation that said police treated victims with contempt and knowingly hid these facts and let the rapes occur for years, to the tune of 1400 girls raped in one city alone.

But these people dont care at all.

Get tommy, he is a bad guy!



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
They would defend the feelings of child sex gangs before they would defend the rights of Tommy Robinson.


Of course they would.

They argue tooth and nail that there sint a problem with grooming gangs, ignoring the cgovernments on internal invetsigation that said police treated victims with contempt and knowingly hid these facts and let the rapes occur for years, to the tune of 1400 girls raped in one city alone.

But these people dont care at all.

Get tommy, he is a bad guy!



I don’t even like the euphemism “grooming gangs”. These are child rape and sex slavery gangs.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yep you are right, I try to say that usually.

I just wish these uk members would have spent one tenth the energy they do complaining about tommy robinson and cheering his arrest demanding the police and politicians that allowed thousands of kids to be raped to be held accountable.

But that doesnt accomplish the virtue signalling that makes them feel all warm and cozy, so no need to do that.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
I guess "details of the child rape case" are.

If you see anything like that would you share a link so I can check I'm not being filtered out as using a UK ISP please, anything like names of defendants or whatever. It interests me how much filtering goes on for me, if it does, so direct links are useful to check.
Cheers.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yep you are right, I try to say that usually.

I just wish these uk members would have spent one tenth the energy they do complaining about tommy robinson and cheering his arrest demanding the police and politicians that allowed thousands of kids to be raped to be held accountable.

But that doesnt accomplish the virtue signalling that makes them feel all warm and cozy, so no need to do that.



Safety over liberty is an easier logic for the thought-poor mind.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy

originally posted by: Grambler
I guess "details of the child rape case" are.

If you see anything like that would you share a link so I can check I'm not being filtered out as using a UK ISP please, anything like names of defendants or whatever. It interests me how much filtering goes on for me, if it does, so direct links are useful to check.
Cheers.


The names of the defendants and their charges were all publicly published by the bbc before tommy did his live stream

Its hard to find it, but it did exist. I will look for it.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Safety over liberty is an easier logic for the thought-poor mind.
Agreed, but many in Britain are not like that.
I've destroyed test crops with thousands of others, defeating Monsanto who gave up, same disrupting hunts for foxes with dogs. I've been arrested multiple times for activist civil disobedience, most of my friends have.

The Muslim gang rape thing is not my gig, I live in an almost 100% non Muslim area of England. If it started going on here then people would be getting buried in the moors and nobody would be a witness or even call the police.
I'm surprised it hasn't happened up North and other places where the Pakistani's are raping white girls, vigilante is still a thing here, never see a cop anyway, but the first one if it happened in my parts would get a savage beating from multiple men...if he was lucky.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Ah cheers, I know they took it down, was just wondering if it is still up on US sources?



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Now you can do one.
You would stick up for the abusers freedom of speech to talk to kids then blame the parents for it.
edit on 1-6-2018 by testingtesting because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
They would defend the feelings of child sex gangs before they would defend the rights of Tommy Robinson.


Defend the rights of accused to a fair trial over the feelings of Tommy Robinson that he is above the law.

Defend the rights of victims of these crimes get to see justice done over the feelings of ill informed posters who think this is a free speech issue.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join