Tommy Robinson attacked at McDonald’s
Discussion
Countdown said:
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/t...
I wonder if any BiB can help with a query; if somebody asks you to hit him, and you oblige, is it still a criminal offence?
It's standard practice for racist bellends. If the other party hits first then they can paint themselves as the victims. It happened to me recently and when I didn't hit first they just went for it anyway.I wonder if any BiB can help with a query; if somebody asks you to hit him, and you oblige, is it still a criminal offence?
It strikes me that we have a big asymmetry between attitudes to left and right wing "extremism."
Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
JuanCarlosFandango said:
It strikes me that we have a big asymmetry between attitudes to left and right wing "extremism."
Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
Bloody good post!Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
It must be nice to live in such a simplistic world, where anyone who disagrees with Robinson is a 'leftie'.
It's totally not possible someone 'central' or 'right' could disagree with him...
So I'm guessing a mild slap around the chops is going to be ok but smashing the little t
t's teeth through the back of his skull is probably going too far even though he's clearly asking for it?Assuming he consented, I think the standard is the injuries can be 'no more than transient'.
It's totally not possible someone 'central' or 'right' could disagree with him...
Countdown said:
La Liga said:
Yes.
There was a some bondage test case (IIRC) that provides guidance as the level of injury you can consent to (outside of sport / medicine).
Thanks.There was a some bondage test case (IIRC) that provides guidance as the level of injury you can consent to (outside of sport / medicine).
So I'm guessing a mild slap around the chops is going to be ok but smashing the little t
t's teeth through the back of his skull is probably going too far even though he's clearly asking for it?rambo19 said:
JuanCarlosFandango said:
It strikes me that we have a big asymmetry between attitudes to left and right wing "extremism."
Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
Bloody good post!Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
JuanCarlosFandango said:
Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.<snip>
Other than Tommy Robinson encouraging people to hit him who exactly is threatening violence agains anybody? I’ve watched the video a couple of times and all I can see is several blokes in dark coats and balaclavas who Tommy seems to think are anti fascists, whilst braying with laughter.I wouldn’t be surprised if it was all balls, quite frankly. Much like him being “attacked at McDonalds”.
Countdown said:
Other than Tommy Robinson encouraging people to hit him who exactly is threatening violence agains anybody? I’ve watched the video a couple of times and all I can see is several blokes in dark coats and balaclavas who Tommy seems to think are anti fascists, whilst braying with laughter.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it was all balls, quite frankly. Much like him being “attacked at McDonalds”.
Maybe. Do you suppose they just walk around in balaclavas all the time and fancied a selfie with him? Shy squaddies?I wouldn’t be surprised if it was all balls, quite frankly. Much like him being “attacked at McDonalds”.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-new...
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/t...
https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/an...
"Confronted by antifa" seems to be the common theme in reporting of the incident.
JuanCarlosFandango said:
It strikes me that we have a big asymmetry between attitudes to left and right wing "extremism."
Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
I'm still waiting for this though, for someone to come along with this logic to dispute his arguments. To give a logical argument on how mass immigration and the importation of a incompatible ideology on mass is good for this nation.Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
Not-The-Messiah said:
JuanCarlosFandango said:
It strikes me that we have a big asymmetry between attitudes to left and right wing "extremism."
Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
I'm still waiting for this though, for someone to come along with this logic to dispute his arguments. To give a logical argument on how mass immigration and the importation of a incompatible ideology on mass is good for this nation.Owing to a very legitimate horror of Hitler and the Nazis we're very jumpy about a working class movement that appears to be targeting an ethnic minority, but pretty blasé about things like this: a gang of masked thugs threatening violence against someone because of their political views.
On what planet is that acceptable? By what possible route could that lead to a more tolerant and pluralistic society? Whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his views it is absolutely disgusting behaviour which has no place in a civilised society.
It's also dangerous.
Firstly neither a prosecution for hate speech nor street battles with communists actually stopped the rise of the Nazi party. In fact they quite possibly fanned the flames, by giving the impression that the ludicrous ideals of Adolf Hitler were somehow linked with the legitimate grievances that drew people to his party in a way the authorities would rather suppress.
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
Secondly it gives us a huge blindside where the left have almost free rein to engage in some truly foul behaviour and be deemed 'a bit radical' or eccentric. As though supporting Hamas, harassing Jewish parliamentarians and beating up political opponents were some logical extension of nationalising the railways and having unisex toilets in colleges.
This opens the door to a very real tyranny. Not of angry blokes with tattoos shouting about this or that, but of opportunistic scumbags who will latch on to unchecked power wherever they find it, and use righteous indignation however they can get away with it to impose their world view.
That's real fascism. That's real tyranny. It cost millions of lives in the 20th century and not only when angry little men with moustaches set their sights on a particular ethnic group.
Your blinkered view is exactly what Mr Fandango is talking about. Dangerous because you believe something to be true without being able to present a coherent argument for it.
Why should there be a need to convince you, or do you not have the courage of your convictions to come out and say why you believe what you believe?
Come out from under your rock and let the rest of the world dissect YOUR argument. If you do not believe it to be strong enough to stand up to scrutiny, then most of us will simply ignore you and park you in the "not worth it category."
Prove my assumption of your character wrong. Try it, you never know what might happen...
Not-The-Messiah said:
JuanCarlosFandango said:
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
I'm still waiting for this though, for someone to come along with this logic to dispute his arguments. To give a logical argument on how mass immigration and the importation of a incompatible ideology on mass is good for this nation.colin_p said:
Not-The-Messiah said:
JuanCarlosFandango said:
If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.
I'm still waiting for this though, for someone to come along with this logic to dispute his arguments. To give a logical argument on how mass immigration and the importation of a incompatible ideology on mass is good for this nation.I would love to hear the counter-argument from one of his supporters though, prove those that throw the term around wrong. Show that he or his views aren't racist.
Someone has to put their views forward in a sensible manner.
The career criminal Stephen Yaxley-Lennon is so racist he is prepared to try and stir up the masses even when it obviously complete bks.
https://uokhun.uk/2018/10/12/heres-tommy-robinson-...
ks.https://uokhun.uk/2018/10/12/heres-tommy-robinson-...
berlintaxi said:
The career criminal Stephen Yaxley-Lennon is so racist he is prepared to try and stir up the masses even when it obviously complete bks.
https://uokhun.uk/2018/10/12/heres-tommy-robinson-...
They're complaining that he was taken in by their own bks.https://uokhun.uk/2018/10/12/heres-tommy-robinson-...
ks? And he retweeted one a year ago and the other two years ago?I don't know why people are so worked up about this guy, he doesn't seem that bright but the case against him as some ultra right wing career criminal always seems so weak.
berlintaxi said:
768 said:
but the case against him as some ultra right wing career criminal always seems so weak.
Member of BNP, founder of EDL, but not ultra right wing? 7 criminal convictions but not a career criminal, interesting point of view.
Boydie88 said:
Robinson is anti Islamisation of the West. And not much else it seems. And going by the number of followers it's a message that strikes a chord with a lot of the working class.
What makes him far right in opposing far right ideology (going by other Islam run countries) taking over?
An extremely pertinent point.What makes him far right in opposing far right ideology (going by other Islam run countries) taking over?
The left have a massive blindspot when it comes islam. The most unlikely of bedfellows. It is of course easily explained that in the heirachy of causes that the left involve themselves in, that racism, at the expense of everything else, is top trump. Even when islam transcends every and all races.
As for him being preceived as far right whilst opposing a far right ideology, it is easy to see how many leftists fail to compute the difference when their own anti-fascists (antifa) behave like actual facsists whilst trying to be anti-facsist against people who are not fascist in the first place.
It doesn't take much, without any realisation, for them to go full "animal farm".
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff