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.

 

High Court Finds Tommy Robinson guilty of contempt of court over Facebook broadcast

page: 46
14
<< 43  44  45    47  48  49 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 06:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

Nobody has tried to defend any of this but that does not stop a certain poster from constantly claiming that we have. To criticise Yaxley-Lennon in some folk's eyes on here is to support the rapist scum.

They are just being played by Yaxley-Lennon but there's none so blind as those that won't see.

This was indeed down to a culture of political correctness that infested the Police and Social Services and a complete lack of balls to actually recognise the elephant in the room and these failings need to be addressed and those responsible held to account.




posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 06:48 AM
link   
a reply to: bartconnolly

What do you have to say about the Application to dismiss the jury made by the defence layers for these nonces that was based on Yaxley-Lennon's antics, then?



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

First I come in to the thread and discuss the ag saying social media posts can be contempt, everyone ignores that and says I am defending a racist

Then we have posters saying the police were not in fact complicit in a cover up, it’s just they aren’t a well oiled machine

Then we have posters saying that we should focus at all on the fat that the one thing the groomers had in connection was the community they were from, Islamic communities. I’m called racist for disagreeing

Then that poster also says they could easily find and take care of the rapists if they wanted, but it’s nit their kid so they can’t be bothered

Then I show the actual law and how everyone who commented in Tommy’s case broke it, and you all just say your allowed to break the law and didn’t risk his trial, cause it’s different

You all don’t want a conversation, you want to pat yourselves on the back and celebrate taking the bad man tommy down, and call anyone racist that had a problem with how this went down

Oh and then as an aside, you also think child rapists are bad and authorities that allowed it

If only you spent one tenth of your energy you do shouting about tommy actually pushing your community to hold the officials accountable maybe justice could start to be served



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

You keep on with your inaccurate and self serving versions of what other posters are saying and it is now beyond irritating.

It is you that does not want a conversation, rather you just want to shout other posters down and put words in their mouths and raise "straw man" arguments to suit your own agenda.

Please stop telling people what they are thinking when plainly you have it backwards.



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: oldcarpy

First I come in to the thread and discuss the ag saying social media posts can be contempt, everyone ignores that and says I am defending a racist

Then we have posters saying the police were not in fact complicit in a cover up, it’s just they aren’t a well oiled machine

Then we have posters saying that we should focus at all on the fat that the one thing the groomers had in connection was the community they were from, Islamic communities. I’m called racist for disagreeing

Then that poster also says they could easily find and take care of the rapists if they wanted, but it’s nit their kid so they can’t be bothered

Then I show the actual law and how everyone who commented in Tommy’s case broke it, and you all just say your allowed to break the law and didn’t risk his trial, cause it’s different

You all don’t want a conversation, you want to pat yourselves on the back and celebrate taking the bad man tommy down, and call anyone racist that had a problem with how this went down

Oh and then as an aside, you also think child rapists are bad and authorities that allowed it

If only you spent one tenth of your energy you do shouting about tommy actually pushing your community to hold the officials accountable maybe justice could start to be served



People have explained the differences and why you are wrong. You have chosen to ignore this.

You have posted you tube videos of Robinson with seeming uncritical acceptance. People have shown him to be a proven thug and liar. You have chosen to ignore this.

It has been explained that Robinson has had nothing to do with bringng these people to justice or exposing their crimes. You have chosen to ignore this.

You have accused people of fixating on Robinson. It's been pointed out he is the topic of this thread. You have chosen to ignore this.

You have accused others of not caring about child abuse because they don't agree with you about Robinson. That makes you pathetic.

I don't think there is any point in anyone continuing to have a conversation with you.
edit on 9-7-2019 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-7-2019 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

What did I misrepresent?

It’s been this way the whole thread, it always is in this issue

I post the exact law, and show how even the judge said the filming law is broken all the time

I show how selective application of law is dangerous as it allows those selecting who to apply it to use it for their own benefit

The repos was I get is Tommy’s bad and different

That’s not an answer

I have people telling me criticizing Islam by tommy is racist

They then go on to tell me they hate Christianity

I ask them why that’s not racist

No response

I have people telling me the police weren’t complicit and o don’t know what that word means

I show the definition of the word and that they were complicit, and even went after victims

That poster then doubles down and says well it’s kist the police weren’t a well oiled machine

Yet then I’m told by the same poster and others no one has defended or excuses the police

I’m told I’m defending racism. I say I’m not seeing what tommy said that was racist, so show me. Everyone refuses and just says google it

It’s pathetic



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot




I don't think there is any point in anyone continuing to have a conversation with you.


Care for a wasp?



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




I have people telling me the police weren’t complicit and o don’t know what that word means I show the definition of the word and that they were complicit, and even went after victims That poster then doubles down and says well it’s kist the police weren’t a well oiled machine Yet then I’m told by the same poster and others no one has defended or excuses the police


Are you referring to me, by any chance?



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

One your paragraphs

1. No one explained the differences. You said he was at the courthouse, the law doesn’t say anything about that being necessary. You say he was filming. So were those outside the Gary glitter Rolf Harris and many other trials.

Every time someone is arrested anywhere that arrest is unique. So defending selective application of laws by saying this situation is different is worthless

The law is being broke all the time and not charged. The judge said that. The ag said social media posts can break the law. Your just saying tommy is different does not respond to that

2. I posted a video of tommy no one watched. I have an entire list of proof he gave on that video, and it was ignored because he is a liar

By the same token, the authorities are liars who allowed rapists to go one for three decades, but you believe them when they say something negative about tommy

3. You say tommy jumped on a bandwagon, yet despite being asked repeatedly no one can show any example of people talking about police covering for grooming gangs before tommy

That’s because even if there were someone (which any Norfolk admits a year after tommy said this is when they broke the story in the London times) it wasn’t a national conversation

Yet you ignore all of this and claim he jumped on a bandwagon

4. I haven’t ignored it. I’m not just talking about this thread. Where are the threads by you and others about being outraged the officials haven’t been held accountable that allowed these rapes to go on?

They don’t exist in ats, and not near as many people in other platforms discuss this as they do hating tommy

Because you all hate tommy more than the officials who allowed thousands of girls to be raped

5. I accused others of that in response to initially being told I defend racists by posting concerns about the selective application of law

Then people doubled down and said the police weren’t complicit, or that they could find and take out these rapists, but couldn’t be bothered because it’s not their job

6. It never was a conversation. It was you ignoring everything I say to claim i defend racist



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Grambler




I have people telling me the police weren’t complicit and o don’t know what that word means I show the definition of the word and that they were complicit, and even went after victims That poster then doubles down and says well it’s kist the police weren’t a well oiled machine Yet then I’m told by the same poster and others no one has defended or excuses the police


Are you referring to me, by any chance?


I can’t remember

Were you the one who said that? If so yes



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I posted how Yaxley-Lennon's antics gave these nonces' lawyers grounds to apply to have the jury dismissed - no response.

Etc.

You see? Two can play that game.



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

do you realise the guy was already found guilty? how could they dismiss the jury after a guilty verdict?



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

If you are quite willing to have a go at other posters but can't even remember who said what but just carry on regardless and have a pop at them anyway that does not do you much credit, does it?



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:32 AM
link   
a reply to: jd0Fengland

Which "guy" are you talking about?



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

the guy tommy asked how he felt about the verdict, you know the whole reason all this happened



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

I get the impression that some posters would rather push the myth that the UK is some sort of reactionary, authoritarian society whilst at the same time we are meekly bowing down to the Islamification of this country.
They seek to portray Yaxley-Lennon as some sort of shining light in the dark, a beacon for the downtrodden masses of this country that have no balls and no mind of their own.

When faced with first hand testament that this is not true they refuse to accept any evidence supplied, clutch at any straw to support their pre-conceived and set in stone opinions and resort to all the usual deflection tactics.

That they choose to argue English Law and legal technicalities with a practising UK lawyer amuses me a lot.



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

It wasn’t ignored

First my and others went through the fact the people were already found guilty, and it was the sentencing phase

Then you commented that if tommy was bad because he could have jeopardized the case, then everyone who discussed how horrible tommy was and how guilty he was before the end of his case was also bad

That was written off as it’s different, even though no one can point me in the law why has the case

This was my entire pint entering the thread

The ag says social media posts can be contempt

If tommy was guilty of contempt, or morally wrong because he could have jeopardized a case so should have kept his mouth shut, then the same can be said if all who called him guilty before the end of his case



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




. You say tommy jumped on a bandwagon, yet despite being asked repeatedly no one can show any example of people talking about police covering for grooming gangs before tommy


For goodness' sakes. How many times does it have to be pointed out to you that we are not stuck in 2010/2011 and that he has been on this bandwagon for the past few years?

This is just one example of how you inaccurately represent what others have said.



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Grambler

If you are quite willing to have a go at other posters but can't even remember who said what but just carry on regardless and have a pop at them anyway that does not do you much credit, does it?


Sorry i didn’t remember the name of the person claiming that police that treated rape victims like criminals just weren’t a well oiled machine

I’ll make sure to hive you credit for that profound statement from here on out



posted on Jul, 9 2019 @ 07:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

Yes where would people get the impression the legal system in the uk and those running it are bad

Sure they allowed thousands of girls to get raped for three decades just so they wouldn’t get called racist, but that’s no big deal

And besides, that was like four years agai, everything is fine now

I mean sure, none of the authorities that allowed this to happen have faced justice, but hey Tommy’s bad and they hit him so all is well

And if you are a lawyer, your a bad one if some non lawyer from across the pond can discuss the law better than you



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 43  44  45    47  48  49 >>

log in

join