|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Aug 26, 2018 19:32:38 GMT 1
 What is the difference between Douglas Murray and Tommy Robinson? They both say exactly the same things (in different ways): Mass immigration is destroying the European Culture In particular mass Moslem immmigration is a direct threat to our liberal values In particular that Islam is self evidently a danger to our safety - That European goverments are in denial about the dangers of Islam That Eurpean governments are more concerned with their 'liberal' credentials than they are with the welfare of the European people That the European governments' efforts to control mass immigration are pathetically inadequate That the people of Europe are turning away from liberalism as they see their commuities deteriorate Both Murray and Robinson are in agreement on this Yet one, Murray, is lauded by the liberal elite as a 'brave, honest and truthful' writer, unafraid to face up to discomfiting realities The other, Robinson, is castigated by the liberal elite as a racist, someone to be shunned by polite society, an extremist, a right-wing fascist. Why is this when they say the same things - albeit in somewhat different language Could it be because Murray is toff, an Etonian, educated at Oxford, and Robinson is working class, educated at the local Comp , and never been to University, even a Poly-Wolly? Could it been because Murray's friends are articulate liberals that have never encountered the effects of mass Moslem immigration, whereas Robinson's friends are working class grunts that have to deal with it every day? Could it be that Robinson is a 'criminal' beacuse of his efforts to draw atention to what is happening? YOU decide. YOU answer the question why when two people say the same things, one is a criminal, the other a 'brave journalist' |
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Aug 26, 2018 23:35:14 GMT 1
Whilst they may agree on the question, I think they disagree on the answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Aug 27, 2018 7:06:15 GMT 1
Whilst they may agree on the question, I think they disagree on the answer. Perhaps you are right, but what are their answers? |
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Aug 27, 2018 7:22:43 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Aug 27, 2018 9:55:30 GMT 1
Perhaps you are right, but what are their answers? AFAIK Donald Trump has never actually beaten up a Mexican or shot any schoolchildren. The art of politics is to get others to do your dirty work whilst denying or deploring it. Robinson takes to the streets, Murray hides behind newspapers. |
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Aug 27, 2018 14:15:33 GMT 1
It is true that he is a convicted criminal At least of those convictions is quite alarming for our 'democracy' Robinson founded the EDL after a confrontation with Moslems in Luton, that welcomed the Anglian Regiment exercising their freedom to march through that town. The Moslems carrried banners and shouted slogans including 'baby killers', 'murderers of Moslems' and other jolly greetings. I suppose they were just exercing their freedom to protest, but it offended many people (Robinson later had a group of people attend similar affairs and the police often prevented him from demonstrating on the grounds of 'breaching the peace') Anyway Robonson and his mates (they included 'people of colour') were so offended by this demonstration, by the rife Moslem drug trade in Luton, and the emerging scandal of Moslem mass rape of children, that he formed the EDL to oppose what he saw as scandalous Moslem behaviour that was being ignored by the authorities Immediately he became leader of the EDL he was branded a racist (even though its members included coloured chaps), an Islamophobe (of course) and was marginalised by the media. The police raided his home and offices and took away his computers etc looking for incriminating evidence (thp' no crime had been committed). After a trawl through his accounts and bank balances etc they found that he had loaned £20k to a friend to help him acquire a mortgage. Unfortunately this person had been convicted of mortgage fraud because he had not fully disclosed (or lied about) his assets. Our loveable Bobbies (riding on bicycles two-by-two) charged Robinson with assisting in the fraud by loaning the £20k. Robinson denied their charge claiming innocence. So our urban plods said if he did not plead guilty,they would also charge his wife with assisting in fraud. Alarmed at that prospect he pleaded guilty and to everyones astonishment was imprisoned for 1 year Now all this is from Robinson himsekldf, so you must make up your own mind about its veracity What is beyond doubt is that 1. The police raided his home, offices and banks when no crime had been committed 2. As a result of that raid he was charged with fraud , convicted and sentenced to 1 year in prison What is beyond doubt to my mind is, that after founding a political movement which the State did not like, the full powers of the state were deployed to criminalise him, and that process continues to this day. Sure he has acted stupidly (to the delight of the state)but the fact seems he was targeted by the State for political reasons As an afterthought, dear Mr Mandelson apparently did something similar in not declaring assets when he applied for a mortgage loan, but I feel sure that the circumstances were so dis-similar that I am making aan error by comparing them. Our Laws are blind are they not- at least that woman over the Old Bailey is, so I must be wrong |
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Aug 28, 2018 8:21:27 GMT 1
The Wiki article shows that he was convicted in 2003 of assaulting an off-duty police officer. OK, that's only one incident 15 years ago when he was age 20. On the other hand he seems to be very prone to get into trouble. In his contempt case he didn't film inside a court room, but he did go into the court building with his camera, for which he was, perhaps wrongly, convicted.
I can see that there appears to be some institutional "hounding" of him but, let's say, he does give them excuses to nab him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Aug 28, 2018 14:09:49 GMT 1
The Wiki article shows that he was convicted in 2003 of assaulting an off-duty police officer. OK, that's only one incident 15 years ago when he was age 20. On the other hand he seems to be very prone to get into trouble. In his contempt case he didn't film inside a court room, but he did go into the court building with his camera, for which he was, perhaps wrongly, convicted. I can see that there appears to be some institutional "hounding" of him but, let's say, he does give them excuses to nab him. Yes that incident was odd He claims he was having a heated argument with his girl friend when a stanger intervened. There was a scuffle and the stranger was knocked to the floor. Robinson laid into him and the stranger pulled out his police identity card and arrested him. Yes he has acted stupidly, even oddly at times, but he is becoming an icon of State harassment and persecution, with some evidence that supports that. The circumstances of his last court appearance do not help in dispelling that image. He was arrested whilst filming for 'breaching the peace', taken to a court room where he was charged not with breaching the peace, but with contempt of court. The court hearing lasted about an hour I believe, he had no defence laeyer of his choice, the judge did not bother considering Robinsons recording of the film, and he was sentenced to 1 year in prison The Appeal Court found that due process had not been followed and annulled the sentence. He is now awaiting a re-trial |
|
