Grebfromgrebland Posted 31 May 2018 Share Posted 31 May 2018 From what I can gather Tommy Robinson is a dick and the people he gets upset with are mostly dicks too. But his recent sentence was because he broke the law and he deserves his conviction. Citizen journalist out not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 31 May 2018 Share Posted 31 May 2018 Douglas Murray pretty much nails it. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Nick Posted 1 June 2018 Popular Post Share Posted 1 June 2018 7 hours ago, urban.spaceman said: Douglas Murray pretty much nails it. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist/ He really doesn’t. The article begins with an appearance of openness and fairness and descends in to shite right wing journalism with sweeping statements, conjecture and ridiculous bias. It reads like a Northfields fox undergrad media studies essay and wouldn’t get through the lowest journalistic integrity frameworks but does just enough in the first section to appear like a national publication with an edgy author. 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 11 hours ago, broughtonblue said: Jurt? Wakk ? Shput? I think he is jusy yhick ? ??? priceless So the content is not important just a couple of typos? It was poor light and did not check every letter for errors. Sorry for that crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 11 hours ago, broughtonblue said: Jurt? Wakk ? Shput? I think he is jusy yhick ? ??? priceless So the content is not important just a couple of typos? It was poor light and did not check every letter for errors. Sorry for that crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 (edited) 12 hours ago, broughtonblue said: Jurt? Wakk ? Shput? I think he is jusy yhick ? ??? priceless So the content is not important just a couple of typos? It was poor light and did not check every letter for errors. Sorry for that crime. Edited 1 June 2018 by Rincewind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 post would not load hence double post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voll Blau Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 10 hours ago, urban.spaceman said: Douglas Murray pretty much nails it. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist/ In what way has he "nailed it"? It's a whining defence making him out to be a political prisoner of sorts oppressed by every state institution imaginable, when politics has fvck all to do with the reason he's doing porridge right now. It's ironic that Murray is keen to stress what he himself can report on given reporting restrictions are in place, yet laments the fact the Yaxley-Lennon is in jail for ignorning basic media law. I suspect that any actual journalist, properly qualified in media law, wouldn't have got away so lightly with what he did at Canterbury. The judge wouldn't have been so lenient because they should know better, and are trained to know better. The fact he decided to carry on regardless after that episode is testament to his own stupidity. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 J wonder how the victims feel about being filmed without permission knowing that if a mistrial is called they will go through it again? Do they support Tommy R? They are not keen on the accused but I am sure they would rather they be given a fair trial than released because some idiot broke the law and broke the resticted reporting that was in place to protect the victims. On this occasion there is no conspiracy The law has the final say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 2 hours ago, Swan Lesta said: He really doesn’t. The article begins with an appearance of openness and fairness and descends in to shite right wing journalism with sweeping statements, conjecture and ridiculous bias. It reads like a Northfields fox undergrad media studies essay and wouldn’t get through the lowest journalistic integrity frameworks but does just enough in the first section to appear like a national publication with an edgy author. To be fair to him, Murray does a better job than most at dressing up his prejudice and failure to acknowledge his own privilege in eloquent words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 (edited) I have done a little reporting. Interviewed Peter Solsby. We had to ask him beforehand if it was ok to film and record. We did some training as in the dos and do nots. But it was only a small part of it. The mainstream jounos would have much more training and require higher qualifications. Solsby was not so keen with being interviewed near the end. We asked the wrong questions so he avoided us. Edited 1 June 2018 by Rincewind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voll Blau Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 1 hour ago, Rincewind said: J wonder how the victims feel about being filmed without permission knowing that if a mistrial is called they will go through it again? Do they support Tommy R? They are not keen on the accused but I am sure they would rather they be given a fair trial than released because some idiot broke the law and broke the resticted reporting that was in place to protect the victims. On this occasion there is no conspiracy The law has the final say. As a point of order he was only filming the defendants, not the victims. Although anyone who filmed the victims would be up before the judge too (unless they had waived their automatic right to anonymity first). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthfieldsFox Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 19 hours ago, Voll Blau said: London Bridge inquest is currently open: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/14/inquest-reveals-final-moments-of-three-london-bridge-victims As is the Manchester attack inquest: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-42197045 Victims' families will speak at both, in public, when the full hearings take place. Only took me four seconds on Google this time... More left liberal Propoganda from you , you twisted my point ! there is a PUBLIC INQUIRY being held for Greenall Disaster right now ! There has been NO PUBLIC INQUIRY for the above Islamic terrorist attacks ! Just bog standard Inquests !!! What is the establishment worried about hearing in PUBLIC ! THERE is a HUGE difference between an inquest and a Public Inquiry Public Inquiries are typically broader in scope than inquests and can therefore take much longer to complete. They often take years to grind to a conclusion. Victims and other interested groups are classed as “core participants” in inquiries and can be represented by lawyers who can ask questions of witnesses. In inquests, victims families’ can ask questions themselves or through lawyers, but witnesses are not required to answer any questions that may incriminate them. Unlike an inquest, an inquiry can apportion blame. the families of victims of terrorists are considered less worthy of the FULL public truth than families of an accidental fire ! so please keep your liberal propoganda to yourself sir ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnegan Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 13 minutes ago, NorthfieldsFox said: More left liberal Propoganda from you , you twisted my point ! there is a PUBLIC INQUIRY being held for Greenall Disaster right now ! There has been NO PUBLIC INQUIRY for the above Islamic terrorist attacks ! Just bog standard Inquests !!! What is the establishment worried about hearing in PUBLIC ! THERE is a HUGE difference between an inquest and a Public Inquiry Public Inquiries are typically broader in scope than inquests and can therefore take much longer to complete. They often take years to grind to a conclusion. Victims and other interested groups are classed as “core participants” in inquiries and can be represented by lawyers who can ask questions of witnesses. In inquests, victims families’ can ask questions themselves or through lawyers, but witnesses are not required to answer any questions that may incriminate them. Unlike an inquest, an inquiry can apportion blame. the families of victims of terrorists are considered less worthy of the FULL public truth than families of an accidental fire ! so please keep your liberal propoganda to yourself sir ? Can't you please keep your alt right brietbart propaganda to YOUR self? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voll Blau Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, NorthfieldsFox said: More left liberal Propoganda from you , you twisted my point ! there is a PUBLIC INQUIRY being held for Greenall Disaster right now ! There has been NO PUBLIC INQUIRY for the above Islamic terrorist attacks ! Just bog standard Inquests !!! What is the establishment worried about hearing in PUBLIC ! THERE is a HUGE difference between an inquest and a Public Inquiry Public Inquiries are typically broader in scope than inquests and can therefore take much longer to complete. They often take years to grind to a conclusion. Victims and other interested groups are classed as “core participants” in inquiries and can be represented by lawyers who can ask questions of witnesses. In inquests, victims families’ can ask questions themselves or through lawyers, but witnesses are not required to answer any questions that may incriminate them. Unlike an inquest, an inquiry can apportion blame. the families of victims of terrorists are considered less worthy of the FULL public truth than families of an accidental fire ! so please keep your liberal propoganda to yourself sir ? We don't need to apportion blame in the cases of two terror attacks where all of the attackers died at the respective scenes. We know they did it. Therefore why would public inquiries need to be held, at a greater expense to the taxpayer, when inquests, which would be held anyway, can do everything you want to see happen? To answer you, point by point: - Inquests are held in public, so don't worry your little cotton socks about "the establishment" running scared because it's "the establishment" who are responsible for the infrastructure which allows inquests to be heard. - Victims are also classed as core participants at inquests, where they can ask questions of witnesses and have legal representation present so, phew, no need to worry there either. - The full inquests haven't been heard yet because criminal investigations are still ongoing in relation to the terror attacks. - If you think these very general facts about how the legal system works are classed as "left liberal propaganda" then you probably ought to reconsider your newfound friendship with supporters of FC St Pauli. Ta. Edited 1 June 2018 by Voll Blau 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnaldo Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 This is the best thread since digitalalba came on here and reckoned a St. Goerge's Day consisting of morris dancing and folk music would attract droves of proud Englishmen, yet alone anyone under 60. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voll Blau Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 1 hour ago, Finnaldo said: This is the best thread since digitalalba came on here and reckoned a St. Goerge's Day consisting of morris dancing and folk music would attract droves of proud Englishmen, yet alone anyone under 60. The bloke who continued claiming Leicester City Council were doing nothing when it had been proven they were literally holding a St George's Day Festival? Yeah, some parallels here definitely... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnaldo Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 Just now, Voll Blau said: The bloke who continued claiming Leicester City Council were doing nothing when it had been proven they were literally holding a St George's Day Festival? Yeah, some parallels here definitely... Yep the one where a few hundred came out at most, and moaned it got less investment than one of the biggest Caribbean Carnivals in England and one of the biggest Diwali festivals outside of India.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 2 hours ago, Voll Blau said: As a point of order he was only filming the defendants, not the victims. Although anyone who filmed the victims would be up before the judge too (unless they had waived their automatic right to anonymity first). Point taken. However interferance would not help them, reporting restrictions or not. Because of the high profile of the trial and public outrage at the nature of the crimes there would be a lot of speculation and inaccurate reporting that could influence the jury. I see it as common sense to have restrictions for cases such as this. Maybe the law is not such an asss after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 *ass not asss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 1 June 2018 Share Posted 1 June 2018 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 2 June 2018 Share Posted 2 June 2018 On 01/06/2018 at 11:34, Finnegan said: Can't you please keep your alt right brietbart propaganda to YOUR self? Eh, without his posts would you be aware of this left wing conspiracy set up by a government lead by that famous left-winger Thatcher before Yaxley-Lennon was born? No. No-one would have spotted that without folks like NF. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthfieldsFox Posted 13 June 2018 Share Posted 13 June 2018 (edited) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5838589/Oxford-child-sex-gang-jailed-75-YEARS.html believe tommy was cautioned for covering this story the ITV/BBC/SKY state controlled media have made no mention of these c*nts today our media is controlled our children being mass abused we need to start talking about this *** no racist comments please Edited 13 June 2018 by NorthfieldsFox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 13 June 2018 Share Posted 13 June 2018 14 minutes ago, NorthfieldsFox said: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5838589/Oxford-child-sex-gang-jailed-75-YEARS.html believe tommy was cautioned for covering this story the ITV/BBC/SKY state controlled media have made no mention of these c*nts today our media is controlled our children being mass abused we need to start talking about this *** no racist comments please When you spout this shit, do you even bother to do a simple check as to whether what you've said is correct? A quick google and it brings up god knows how many articles, multiple across the BBC since the case has been ongoing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Voll Blau Posted 13 June 2018 Popular Post Share Posted 13 June 2018 18 minutes ago, NorthfieldsFox said: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5838589/Oxford-child-sex-gang-jailed-75-YEARS.html believe tommy was cautioned for covering this story the ITV/BBC/SKY state controlled media have made no mention of these c*nts today our media is controlled our children being mass abused we need to start talking about this *** no racist comments please https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-44456610 Three seconds. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts