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.

 

Tommy Robinson...vile little thug.

page: 24
4
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: MadLad

I imagine Article 6, the Right to a fair trial applies for a start.

Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

You might not get an independent and impartial jury nor judge, or they could at least have their opinion influenced if Robinson's mumbo-jumbo racily skewered views we're plastered all over the internet.

It's beside the point though because Robinson was gaoled for contempt of court relating to another, previous offence.

This has already been pointed out to you I'm afraid, numerous times. LoL


edit on 19-2-2019 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MadLad

I imagine Article 6, the Right to a fair trial applies for a start.

Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

You might not get an independent and impartial jury nor judge, or they could at least have their opinion influenced if Robinson's mumbo-jumbo racily skewered views we're plastered all over the internet.

It's beside the point though because Robinson was gaoled for contempt of court relating to another, previous offence.

This has already been pointed out to you I'm afraid, numerous times. LoL



It was pointed out that Robinson might somehow set these guys free, almost as if the decision to do so was up to him. But no, it is clear, as I was saying all along, that the laws and judge - the only things with the power to set child abusers free - could do so.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 12:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MadLad

I imagine Article 6, the Right to a fair trial applies for a start.

Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

You might not get an independent and impartial jury nor judge, or they could at least have their opinion influenced if Robinson's mumbo-jumbo racily skewered views we're plastered all over the internet.

It's beside the point though because Robinson was gaoled for contempt of court relating to another, previous offence.

This has already been pointed out to you I'm afraid, numerous times. LoL



It was pointed out that Robinson might somehow set these guys free, almost as if the decision to do so was up to him. But no, it is clear, as I was saying all along, that the laws and judge - the only things with the power to set child abusers free - could do so.


It was his actions that would have resulted in that decision.

If a police officer conducted an illegal search and evidence that would result in a conviction was thrown out is the fault with the officer or the judge who enforces the law?
edit on 20-2-2019 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 02:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MadLad

I imagine Article 6, the Right to a fair trial applies for a start.

Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

You might not get an independent and impartial jury nor judge, or they could at least have their opinion influenced if Robinson's mumbo-jumbo racily skewered views we're plastered all over the internet.

It's beside the point though because Robinson was gaoled for contempt of court relating to another, previous offence.

This has already been pointed out to you I'm afraid, numerous times. LoL



It was pointed out that Robinson might somehow set these guys free, almost as if the decision to do so was up to him. But no, it is clear, as I was saying all along, that the laws and judge - the only things with the power to set child abusers free - could do so.


No, once again you have no idea what you're on about Les.

The decision to risk trial collapse was all Tommy's.

1) He'd had several judges explain how courts, child protection laws, innocent until proven guilty, witness and victim intimidation ad intrusion into their private life.

2) There was a notice on the court steps reminding people it's illegal to film. Not only did he ignore that, he broadcast that they were guilty while the trial was ongoing - which is highly illegal.

3) The judge had issued reporting restrictions in the pre-trial hearing to secure a fair trial which would mean the pedo scum couldn't appeal and walk free as a result of the right to fair trial being denied.

4) If Tommy had two braincells, wasn't a self-promoting cokehead and actually gave a # about the law and how the press are gagged while trials of such nature are ongoing he would have submitted evidence to the Attorney General's review of Press Coverage of Child Grooming trials instead of knowingly trying to make paedo's walk free.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 02:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MadLad

I imagine Article 6, the Right to a fair trial applies for a start.

Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

You might not get an independent and impartial jury nor judge, or they could at least have their opinion influenced if Robinson's mumbo-jumbo racily skewered views we're plastered all over the internet.

It's beside the point though because Robinson was gaoled for contempt of court relating to another, previous offence.

This has already been pointed out to you I'm afraid, numerous times. LoL



It was pointed out that Robinson might somehow set these guys free, almost as if the decision to do so was up to him. But no, it is clear, as I was saying all along, that the laws and judge - the only things with the power to set child abusers free - could do so.


No, once again you have no idea what you're on about Les.



Yes it's disturbing this member has so many accounts, is so obvious and the mods have to be aware of it surely...



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 03:39 AM
link   
a reply to: MadLad

It seems clear that no amount of educating you about the UK legal system is going to be worth the bother so I will leave you to your own delusional version.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 04:07 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

He actually made my head spin, no amount of explanation or rationale could make him see sense and view Yaxley-Lennon as anything other than some sort of avenging angel fighting a lone battle against all the evil, paedophile supporting government, judiciary, media and even ATS members.

He openly accused ATS members who have the temerity to disagree with and criticise Yaxley-Lennon of supporting and defending the accused.
Despite repeated requests he failed to offer any sort of evidence to back this inflammatory accusation up and even repeated it.

I've given up conversing with him....I only have so much patience and I don't want to join our friend CCG!



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 04:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

Yes - no point in banging your head against a brick wall.

Just a wind up merchant anyway.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

Did CCG get banned? I've been worried about his absence due to him mentioning ongoing health condition. Shame if so, was a really interesting contributor and seems a really nice guy.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 06:47 AM
link   
a reply to: bastion

Yes, I'm afraid so.

He was a great member, truly lit the place up.

Sure, he could be confrontational and was opinionated but he generated discussion and incredibly gregarious.
I certainly miss him.

There's only been three members here on ATS who I've considered a friend in real life.
Unfortunately two of them have passed and are dearly missed. I'm still in contact with the other member but for various reasons he's no longer active on ATS.
CCG was close to becoming a fourth.

I don't know much about the circumstances surrounding his banning.....but he was aware of the T&C's same as all of us.
I know he really liked ATS and like many of us he had to restrain himself at times....but he must have crossed the line.

Its my experience that Mods and Admin don't actually like banning people.

I've probably said too much.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: MadLad

It seems clear that no amount of educating you about the UK legal system is going to be worth the bother so I will leave you to your own delusional version.


It's clear you are just unable to back up your claim.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

No, it would be the judges choice to set those child abusers free. Robinson has neither the power or the authority to set people free.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: oldcarpy

He actually made my head spin, no amount of explanation or rationale could make him see sense and view Yaxley-Lennon as anything other than some sort of avenging angel fighting a lone battle against all the evil, paedophile supporting government, judiciary, media and even ATS members.

He openly accused ATS members who have the temerity to disagree with and criticise Yaxley-Lennon of supporting and defending the accused.
Despite repeated requests he failed to offer any sort of evidence to back this inflammatory accusation up and even repeated it.

I've given up conversing with him....I only have so much patience and I don't want to join our friend CCG!



Because your reasoning was complete, authoritarian piffle.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: bastion

Nonsense. Your authoritarian inclination to simply repeat what a judge says on faith has rotted your thinking. Only judges and your silly law would or could allow these child abusers free. Your round-about casuistry in support of the state silencing a journalist is immediately apparent.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

Apparently Stephen Yaxley-Lennon is now 'a journalist'.

You couldn't make it up....oh wait a minute, somebody did.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: oldcarpy

Apparently Stephen Yaxley-Lennon is now 'a journalist'.

You couldn't make it up....oh wait a minute, somebody did.



You can't argue with your opponent, you have do do it vicariously through your mates. That's how group think works.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: MadLad

It's impossible to debate anything with you, you have a closed mind.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: MadLad

It's impossible to debate anything with you, you have a closed mind.



I often liken it to trying to debate evolution with a creationist.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin



Or a globe earth with a flat earther.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: MadLad

It's impossible to debate anything with you, you have a closed mind.



Your mind is so open your brains fall out. All I see is you guys repeating the official story, whatever the authorities, the courts, and the Guardian taught you to believe.

Yet, one of your fellow citizens was imprisoned for filming outside a courthouse. And all you guys can do is gossip about him and pat yourselves on the back.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join