Jump to content

Rivers of Blood, and censorship.


Colinjb

Recommended Posts

Are you kidding- it's a wild assumption to presume thousands knew about it? Have you not seen the list of towns/cities where this went on? If you think the only people who committed these acts, or who knew what was going on, are the ones up in the dock, then you are one incredibly naiive person. Again, I feel you haven't really read into the cases much if you find this such a 'wild assumption'.

 

The fact you're honestly comparing this to Ched Evans shows how far gone you are :lol: And there are no groups of white men carrying out this style of social, ethnically targeted, abuse on the scale we've seen. If I'm wrong please show me evidence? Are there white men in positions of power carrying out sexual abuse? Of course, we had endless news coverage and debate about Saville etc. Rightly. Of course there's white peodos luring over kids online, abusing their kids behind closed doors etc. But you'll never be able to identify the reasons this was allowed to happen because you won't even identify the issue.

 

Yes it is a wild assumption because neither you nor I have any idea about the number of people who knew about it and have no shame (as you said). I dont think that the only people who knew about it were the ones in the dock. I also dont believe that the whole community knew about it. There are plenty of things that go on in all communities that other people in that community know nothing about. I am not "comparing" this to the Ched Evans' case. They are clearly two different sets of circumstances although I think you would be more outraged by his conduct if he was Muslim. If you read my comments you will see that I am talking about respect for women and the lack of it shown by those who abuse them - which relates to your lack of shame comments. That is comparable in pretty much every sexual abuse case going. If you watched the BBC programme about grooming, they did make the point that there was a lack of respect for the girls involved but they also pointed out that the girls were "available." Had Muslim girls been hanging around with the "white girls" do we know that they wouldn't have been involved with the sexual abuse too? As I say, you make huge assumptions based on your clear prejudices. There are plenty of Asian communities in this country that dont include these grooming gangs, not that you are bothered about those because you have made your mind up that Muslim men = sexual abusers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

So then Tommy Robinson has won his appeal after the judge accepted that the process for convicting him was fundamentally flawed. He's still guilty of contempt of court in my opinion and should be sentenced for that but this judgement does give some credence to those saying he was treated differently by the system because of who he is. I want to see all individuals treated equally before the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading the judgement and looking over the original court decision to imprison him, I get the feeling that it was the fact that he was live-streaming via Social media that was the problem, not necessarily who he was. The fact that he had already got a Contempt of Court conviction in place didn't help either.

 

I agree he is in contempt of court and will probably go back to jail (if only for a few weeks). The bigger problem is that his release won't be seen by his supporters for what it is - allowing someone to get a fair trial, despite his d*ckish actions and general tw*tishness; rather as proof he was right in what he was doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading the judgement and looking over the original court decision to imprison him, I get the feeling that it was the fact that he was live-streaming via Social media that was the problem, not necessarily who he was. The fact that he had already got a Contempt of Court conviction in place didn't help either.

 

I agree he is in contempt of court and will probably go back to jail (if only for a few weeks). The bigger problem is that his release won't be seen by his supporters for what it is - allowing someone to get a fair trial, despite his d*ckish actions and general tw*tishness; rather as proof he was right in what he was doing.

Quite possibly. Hopefully it should act as a deterrent to people who could potentially put court cases at risk even if that wasn't their intention. I'm sure many people didn't even realise that filming in that manner could result in contempt of court. I am glad that it appears they are going to do the whole court case properly now but I am concerned that they rushed through the conviction in the first place when as the judgement says there was no need to after the video was taken down.

 

I hope the original judge considers matters like this and makes the correct judgements if he ever has to try similar cases in the future- I saw he was in the window watching Tommy outside before he was arrested which seems pretty dodgy on its own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it a "re-trial" when he plead guilty? There was no trial.

 

I'm not sure if he can now plead not guilty at the next one. The argument was that it was all rushed through with no opportunity for the defence to discuss mitigating factors. Would be interesting to know actually. It seems he pleaded guilty but it wasn't actually spelled out what parts of the video amounted to contempt and therefore what he was pleading guilty to. I expect if he subsequently pleads not guilty that his lawyers could argue that. "There was no clarity about what the appellant was admitting or on what basis he was being sentenced." Pretty shocking stuff!

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it a "re-trial" when he plead guilty? There was no trial.

 

Because the prosecution didn’t specify any charge, so it is not clear what he was pleading guilty to. If the prosecution want to bring charges, they need to specify what he did, and the he can prepare a defence. That anyone can be locked up within 5 hours without a clear reason is pretty shocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if he can now plead not guilty at the next one. The argument was that it was all rushed through with no opportunity for the defence to discuss mitigating factors. Would be interesting to know actually. It seems he pleaded guilty but it wasn't actually spelled out what parts of the video amounted to contempt and therefore what he was pleading guilty to. I expect if he subsequently pleads not guilty that his lawyers could argue that. "There was no clarity about what the appellant was admitting or on what basis he was being sentenced." Pretty shocking stuff!

 

You seem to have taken a keen interest in his plight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Post lunch findings.

Just hammer attacks in the capital.

People being battered with the thing this afternoon

 

 

Just another day..............

 

You should be glad the poor are killing each other instead of organising effectively against austerity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Batman jumps to stereotypical conclusion.

Just another day on an Internet forum.

 

Well he might be partly right here. Bloke was a nut job apparently, dopehead as well but could be "radicalised". Now for me anyone who is overly influenced by religion in their general comportment is a nut job anyway. The French authorities always blame "desequilibrés" anyway.

Overly influenced meaning doing stuff like killing your mum and sister because of religion.

Edited by Window Cleaner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well he might be partly right here. Bloke was a nut job apparently, dopehead as well but could be "radicalised". Now for me anyone who is overly influenced by religion in their general comportment is a nut job anyway. The French authorities always blame "desequilibrés" anyway.

Overly influenced meaning doing stuff like killing your mum and sister because of religion.

 

Like you WC, I think that they are all nutjobs, but you have to be particularly screwed up to kill your mother and sister because of a religion. Apparently the police arent treating it as a terror attack (I never got that terminology, surely anyone coming at your with a knife, it has to be terrifying) but the point is that Batman has plenty of previous for jumping on murders and claiming they are down to Islam before knowing the full facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like you WC, I think that they are all nutjobs, but you have to be particularly screwed up to kill your mother and sister because of a religion. Apparently the police arent treating it as a terror attack (I never got that terminology, surely anyone coming at your with a knife, it has to be terrifying) but the point is that Batman has plenty of previous for jumping on murders and claiming they are down to Islam before knowing the full facts.

 

Oh the bloke is an islamist alright but whether that was the prime influence remains to be seen. Been convicted in the past for apology of terrorism and was supposed to be under surveillance. Bus driver apparently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

The problem is that many see Islam as a monolithic faith were all its adherents believe the same thing. This is partly fed by media and I suppose a lazy assumption by us, however in the same way that certain Christian countries are more devout than others, the same goes for Muslim countries. There are so cultural considerations that need to be taken account of - a Saudi family will treat this situation entirely differently to say an Iranian one. It has very little to do with Islam, rather tribal and family loyalties and historic cultural views.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that many see Islam as a monolithic faith were all its adherents believe the same thing. This is partly fed by media and I suppose a lazy assumption by us, however in the same way that certain Christian countries are more devout than others, the same goes for Muslim countries. There are so cultural considerations that need to be taken account of - a Saudi family will treat this situation entirely differently to say an Iranian one. It has very little to do with Islam, rather tribal and family loyalties and historic cultural views.

 

Do you respect the young lady’s decision - that’s the the debate the BBC wanted us to have.

 

Madness

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its good to see you still chipping away at easy targets Batman. Meanwhile on a daily basis young men are being stabbed to death in the streets of our homeland. This is something that doesnt seem to both you as much as what people in other countries do or believe. The latest was a 14 year old boy who was knocked off his moped and then apparently stabbed several times whilst unconscious. The Rivers of Blood that we are experiencing on a daily basis have precious little to do with Islam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its good to see you still chipping away at easy targets Batman. Meanwhile on a daily basis young men are being stabbed to death in the streets of our homeland. This is something that doesnt seem to both you as much as what people in other countries do or believe. The latest was a 14 year old boy who was knocked off his moped and then apparently stabbed several times whilst unconscious. The Rivers of Blood that we are experiencing on a daily basis have precious little to do with Islam.

 

Was it in the murder Capital of the world Maidstone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})