Topic: EDL leader - 13 months for contempt.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

I would assert it is a far sadder state when entire police forces are too afraid to investigate the serial grooming and rape of minors, over several years, across the country, but that seems a less popular stance. 

If we are to speak of accidents befalling inmates, my preference would be them happening child rapists. It seems contempt of court must be a specifically triggering crime for you, more so than rape. I am left to wonder and worry as to what you would do should you ever get your handes on a perjurer

do you think people who were raped by these gangs enjoy testifying against them, especially a second time because some divvy couldn’t keep off Facebook live or whatever it was?

[Trim0582]

Are entire police forces "too afraid to investigate the serial grooming and rape of minors"? It doesn't seem that way to me, given that cases are being brought to court. Perhaps more should be being done to stop said grooming, I honestly wouldn't know, but arguably more should be done to minimise every crime, everywhere.

And no, contempt of court is not a specifically triggering crime for me, "more so than rape" or not. Suffice to say I have a very particular personal reason for despising the EDL relating to a rather nasty act of violence committed against a good mate of mine a few years ago, and have since regarded the group with extreme distaste (although my politics would have led to me disliking them anyway), and Robinson in my view embodies their thuggishness and ethos, even though he wasn't personally involved in the assault and has since left the organisation. Fuck the EDL and fuck him, basically.

FWIW I would shed no tears for child rapists either. They are utter, utter scum. Just because I dislike Robinson and everything he stands for doesn't mean that I see what he does as being "worse" than child rape - no rational person would, and were I the type to feign outrage over anonymous comments on the internet I'd find your insinuation borderline offensive. I hope this goes some way towards mollifying your righteous conservative indignation, and if it doesn't...well, in all honesty I can't say I'm that bothered.

Not conservative, nor indignant, as for righteous I wouldn't say so, I am an atheist, labour voter, certainly not some neo-conservative Christian, in fact religion and Tory's are quite specifically things I do not like.

Find it offensive should you wish. My point simply being that an idiot like Tommy Robinson being able to exist is the least concerning thing to come of all this. Do I think he deserves his jail time? Yes, he broke the law, but it is far from the most egregious point in this.

More than anything, I am annoyed that a waste of space like Robinson is being discussed, he in an ancillary and pathetic component of this whole this, yet it is his Topic with the posts in it.

I didn't mean to single out your post, I could have picked any, they all followed a similar motif.

[Trim0582]

Where are you getting this idea that you understand the balance of his values from? Nowt in his post to make any of what you've said valid.

Just seems like an excuse to build yourself up and claim you hold and unpopular stance..

Unpopular stance? Thinking that former EDL, little tit, is unworthy of attention. I wouldn't say that is an unpopular stance. There just seems a lack of equillibrium.

He broke the law, again, he will be spending time in prison, perfect.

[brownie 09]

Unpopular stance? Thinking that former EDL, little tit, is unworthy of attention. I wouldn't say that is an unpopular stance. There just seems a lack of equillibrium.

He broke the law, again, he will be spending time in prison, perfect.

You didn't word it like that though. You worded it in a way that was he cares more about tommy Robinson then child rape.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Trim0582]

Triggering,Mooslum Ray guns & kiddy fuddling,wow you got the lot in there didn't you mate.

Here's the thing though,I would think that Djozer is able to wish accidents on more than 1 person.

What exactly was it in Djozers post that triggered you so ?   Personally people who use the term triggered when commenting in the interwebs does me.

And perjury is a serious crime for a reason.

Are you saying I am trying to make this anti-Muslim? What and odd statement, seeing as I have said absolutely nothing of the sort?

I am not saying justice and ire are zero-sum games and in a reply to DJ I have stated it isn't specifically about their post, more that Tommy Robinson is the story. I find that a valid critique of the current "state of affairs" 

I used "triggered" sardonically, alas I guess my humour isn't as sound as I hoped. Saying I fear for a perjurer in his hands is obviously making a ridiculous statement. Obviously DJ wouldn't kill a perjurer, or would he?  I guess we will never know

[classycarra]

Unpopular stance? Thinking that former EDL, little tit, is unworthy of attention. I wouldn't say that is an unpopular stance. There just seems a lack of equillibrium.

He broke the law, again, he will be spending time in prison, perfect.

You must have misphrased it then - it was using your wording here:

I would assert it is a far sadder state when entire police forces are too afraid to investigate the serial grooming and rape of minors, over several years, across the country, but that seems a less popular stance. 

[Trim0582]

do you think people who were raped by these gangs enjoy testifying against them, especially a second time because some divvy couldn’t keep off Facebook live or whatever it was?

Happy for him to be in jail.

I actually watched a program about these poor girls. Many of them have given evidence and statements (obviously not in court) several times and at ages as young as 14, and were told by police they were at fault and were the issue. Blaming a 14 year old victims for being raped. That is the story in my mind.

Not Tommy Robinson, does anyone even listen to him anymore anyway?

[Trim0582]

You must have misphrased it then - it was using your wording here:

Oh for fuck sake.

Ok, I didn't end my statement with "that seems a less popular stance." because I was trying to grandstand, or build myself up. What it does show (at least I thought) is that people find it easier to talk about Tommy Robinson, than serious issues with UK police forces.

This forum doesn't appear have an active topic about the girls. It does have an active topic about a person arrested for contempt of court.

[Trim0582]

You didn't word it like that though. You worded it in a way that was he cares more about tommy Robinson then child rape.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Not him specifically, or anyone specifically, but in the last few days I have seen more news today about Tommy Robinson than I would ever care to, I then come on here and he is the story again.

The main story is grotesque police behavior the blaming of victims and serial child rapists and that I can't see anywhere.

I find Tommy Robinson completely unworthy of news, he was literally told exactly what he should do to avoid arrest and jail, he ignored it, we move on.

[nick_8589]

Not him specifically, or anyone specifically, but in the last few days I have seen more news today about Tommy Robinson than I would ever care to, I then come on here and he is the story again.

The main story is grotesque police behavior the blaming of victims and serial child rapists and that I can't see anywhere.

I find Tommy Robinson completely unworthy of news, he was literally told exactly what he should do to avoid arrest and jail, he ignored it, we move on.

You do know how forums work right, you could always start a thread about that, rather than trying to change the focus of this one, which is solely about Robinson

[classycarra]

Oh for fuck sake.

Ok, I didn't end my statement with "that seems a less popular stance." because I was trying to grandstand, or build myself up. What it does show (at least I thought) is that people find it easier to talk about Tommy Robinson, than serious issues with UK police forces.

This forum doesn't appear have an active topic about the girls. It does have an active topic about a person arrested for contempt of court.

I think you need to relax and stop blaming misunderstanding on other people, when you’ve not bee clear (and are struggling to be many clarifying posts later).

As for the rest of it, you say people shouldn’t discuss TR in a topic where he’s the subject (and where you spoke about him) and are now accusing of/implying people are uncomfortable discussing issues with police forces (when one of the top topics on the forum currently is dosucasing exactly that.

Why don’t you save your energy disagreeing with people in here and start a thread yourself if you’d like it discussed. Would seem more constructive than railing against the way online forum topics work

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Are you saying I am trying to make this anti-Muslim? What and odd statement, seeing as I have said absolutely nothing of the sort?

I am not saying justice and ire are zero-sum games and in a reply to DJ I have stated it isn't specifically about their post, more that Tommy Robinson is the story. I find that a valid critique of the current "state of affairs" 

I used "triggered" sardonically, alas I guess my humour isn't as sound as I hoped. Saying I fear for a perjurer in his hands is obviously making a ridiculous statement. Obviously DJ wouldn't kill a perjurer, or would he?  I guess we will never know

No I just found your post weird and you came across like you were defending that cowardly tit.

I have a problem,I get triggered by people accusing people of being triggered,mainly because it is something that the right wing c*nts in America started using like they were clever.

I am working on it though,but it is hard man,real,real hard.

[Djozer]

Not him specifically, or anyone specifically, but in the last few days I have seen more news today about Tommy Robinson than I would ever care to, I then come on here and he is the story again.

The main story is grotesque police behavior the blaming of victims and serial child rapists and that I can't see anywhere.

I find Tommy Robinson completely unworthy of news, he was literally told exactly what he should do to avoid arrest and jail, he ignored it, we move on.

I see your point actually and agree, Robinson shouldn't be the story here. But he's made himself the story again, knowingly, because he loves the attention.

Maybe we should be discussing the grooming gangs, although I'm not really sure what it would achieve because I think we're all in agreement that they're awful human beings (but what does discussing anything on an internet forum actually achieve?) and they deserve to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I dont think this forum is wilfully ignoring their existence, but I'd imagine that any thread on the subject would have to be pretty careful regarding the legalities of the situation and then there's always the possibility for a touch of Islamophohia in there too, though that sort of thing tends to be heavily frowned on in here, thankfully.

As far as I can tell you're right in that many mistakes have been made by police when dealing with these gangs. Hopefully they are rectifying those mistakes, though I don't know enough about policing to make any sort of informed judgement there. I do think the police and the courts are right to be careful in how they deal with these cases though - overly publicising them is likely to lead to exactly the sort of anti-Muslim backlash that Robinson and his cronies are trying to foment, but at the same time they definitely shouldn't be swept under the carpet.

And no, just to set your mind at ease, I wouldn't kill a perjurer.

Probably 

[Trim0582]

Defending that cowardly tit.

Triggered

I really want to be very and explicitly clear with this. I have never and shall never defend Tommy Robinson.

And next time I will use piqued instead of triggered.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Oh for fuck sake.

Ok, I didn't end my statement with "that seems a less popular stance." because I was trying to grandstand, or build myself up. What it does show (at least I thought) is that people find it easier to talk about Tommy Robinson, than serious issues with UK police forces.

This forum doesn't appear have an active topic about the girls. It does have an active topic about a person arrested for contempt of court.

Looks like it was locked because people started slandering other people & as is often the case on Rawk many threads get locked when the cases are in court.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

I really want to be very and explicitly clear with this. I have never and shall never defend Tommy Robinson.

And next time I will use piqued instead of triggered.

Piqued or heads falling off are both fine but would maybe be better if you use and only use nettled

[SP]

Yaxley-Lennon has become a cause celebre amongst the right on social media. This topic was resurrected to highlight how they are all talking out of their holes. I can recommend the Secret Barrister summary of contempt law. Knowing the truth of the situation allows you to quickly disregard the clueless zealots cheerleading for him, and see their arguments for the tissue of lies that they are.

[Trim0582]

I see your point actually and agree, Robinson shouldn't be the story here. But he's made himself the story again, knowingly, because he loves the attention.

Maybe we should be discussing the grooming gangs, although I'm not really sure what it would achieve because I think we're all in agreement that they're awful human beings (but what does discussing anything on an internet forum actually achieve?) and they deserve to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I dont think this forum is wilfully ignoring their existence, but I'd imagine that any thread on the subject would have to be pretty careful regarding the legalities of the situation and then there's always the possibility for a touch of Islamophohia in there too, though that sort of thing tends to be heavily frowned on in here, thankfully.

As far as I can tell you're right in that many mistakes have been made by police when dealing with these gangs. Hopefully they are rectifying those mistakes, though I don't know enough about policing to make any sort of informed judgement there. I do think the police and the courts are right to be careful in how they deal with these cases though - overly publicising them is likely to lead to exactly the sort of anti-Muslim backlash that Robinson and his cronies are trying to foment, but at the same time they definitely shouldn't be swept under the carpet.

And no, just to set your mind at ease, I wouldn't kill a perjurer.

Probably 

The last bit of the post is where things get very complicated. This obviously isn't a "Muslim" issue. It seems to be a very specific regional, cultural issue. The initial lack of Police action, will ferment more of a backlash against completely innocent muslims because the EDL use these cracks to take hold. It was allowed to persist and that is an injustice, with a very easy pantomime villain for the EDL latch onto.

All crimes and criminals should be judged purely on the weight of their crimes and actions, not of their religiosity. The Police and social services seemed to have made exceptionally bad judgements based on percieved risks of being considered racist or anti-muslim.
Maajid Nawaz uses a lovely phrase, the bigotry of low expectations. In this instance, the bigotry of low expectations against many muslums was that they would be unable to rationally see this as an awful crime and would just assume the police and social services are racist.

That is a very demeaning veiw of the Muslim population.

On perjurers, you can have Jeffrey Archer as a freebie. No one would mind that 

[Alan_X]

Muslim grooming gangs is inflammatory. Asian is a better descriptor...

Conclusion: There isn’t much publicly available information on [the colour of sexual abusers]. The data we do have shows a large majority of those convicted of sexual offences (no matter the age of the victim) are white.

https://fullfact.org/crime/what-do-we-know-about-ethnicity-people-involved-sexual-offences-against-children/

There are and have always been grooming gangs and grooming individuals of every colour. There appears to have been a particular problem with the Rochdale gang in that there was a reluctance to act because of a fear of being seen as racist.

But the bottom line is that paedophilia and abuse is not race specific. The most likely profile of someone sexually abusing children is white, middle-aged and a relative or friend of the victim.

Tommy Robinson has no interest whatsoever on the victims of sexual abuse. He couldn't give a shit. All he cares about is the colour and religion of a subsection of all paedophiles and child abusers.

[Trim0582]

Conclusion: There isn’t much publicly available information on [the colour of sexual abusers]. The data we do have shows a large majority of those convicted of sexual offences (no matter the age of the victim) are white.

https://fullfact.org/crime/what-do-we-know-about-ethnicity-people-involved-sexual-offences-against-children/

There are and have always been grooming gangs and grooming individuals of every colour. There appears to have been a particular problem with the Rochdale gang in that there was a reluctance to act because of a fear of being seen as racist.

But the bottom line is that paedophilia and abuse is not race specific. The most likely profile of someone sexually abusing children is white, middle-aged and a relative or friend of the victim.

Tommy Robinson has no interest whatsoever on the victims of sexual abuse. He couldn't give a shit. All he cares about is the colour and religion of a subsection of all paedophiles and child abusers.

There was something about type1 and type 2 sexual abuse on minors. Again I heard this from Maajid Nawas on LBC and I think he is credible.
Type 1 is the uncle or relative, that is overwhemingly white men, type 2 is grooming gangs and was found to be overwhemingly men of Pakistan descent. That is not to say one crime is better or worse. That was just how he reported the data. I cannot remember his source though.

Anyway I will leave this thread to get back on track.

[cloggypop]

Long history of far right nonces of course

https://malatesta32.wordpress.com/2015/06/11/updated-far-right-sex-offenders/

[Hazell]

Conclusion: There isn’t much publicly available information on [the colour of sexual abusers]. The data we do have shows a large majority of those convicted of sexual offences (no matter the age of the victim) are white.

https://fullfact.org/crime/what-do-we-know-about-ethnicity-people-involved-sexual-offences-against-children/

There are and have always been grooming gangs and grooming individuals of every colour. There appears to have been a particular problem with the Rochdale gang in that there was a reluctance to act because of a fear of being seen as racist.

But the bottom line is that paedophilia and abuse is not race specific. The most likely profile of someone sexually abusing children is white, middle-aged and a relative or friend of the victim.

Tommy Robinson has no interest whatsoever on the victims of sexual abuse. He couldn't give a shit. All he cares about is the colour and religion of a subsection of all paedophiles and child abusers.

Yep, sums it up perfectly.

[cloggypop]

Hilarious

[Alan_X]

Hilarious

Painted by someone too thick to understand how nooses work. And why has Tommy got a dummy in?

[Crosby Nick]

Painted by someone too thick to understand how nooses work. And why has Tommy got a dummy in?

Lundun has fallen Alan.

[Djozer]

Love the way they've added the star and crescent over Tower Bridge there. Very subtle.

Getting quite arty these days aren't they, the right wing? Thought they despised all that sort of stuff. Between this and Ben Garrison's oeuvre we might just have found the next great artistic movement.

[cloggypop]

I'm impressed how the artist must have varied his diet considerably before smearing his shit into the image of a tortured tiny Tommy.

[Alan_X]

Lundun has fallen Alan.

Lundunistan mate. It’s scary down here - the whole of London is a no go area. Apart from the areas that aren’t covered by Sharia... Which are all of the areas.

[Crosby Nick]

Lundunistan mate. It’s scary down here - the whole of London is a no go area. Apart from the areas that aren’t covered by Sharia... Which are all of the areas.

Sadiq Khan is a Liverpool fan, another reason for the idiots to hate him.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Muslim grooming gangs is inflammatory. Asian is a better descriptor. Religion is irrelevant to the crimes. There come from the same communities, which are typically linked by ancestry.

Muslim grooming gang may be  inflammatory in the specific cases being discussed here but its a more accurate description than Asian.  Asian can mean Thai, Filipino, Japanese etc, non of which were involved.  What the rapists have more in common is religion and coming from the subcontinent.  If we must categorise theses people them subcontinent Muslim is better term.  Would keep Muslim Malaysians and Indonesians happier too.

There was a well known case in N Wales, non of the men were referred to as White, Welsh paedophiles though.

[Alan_X]

Muslim grooming gang may be  inflammatory in the specific cases being discussed here but its a more accurate description than Asian.  Asian can mean Thai, Filipino, Japanese etc, non of which were involved.  What the rapists have more in common is religion and coming from the subcontinent.  If we must categorise theses people them subcontinent Muslim is better term.  Would keep Muslim Malaysians and Indonesians happier too.

There was a well known case in N Wales, non of the men were referred to as White, Welsh paedophiles though.

Why do you need to describe their race or religion at all? 

[Kenny's Jacket]

Why do you need to describe their race or religion at all?

You dont, thats why I included the last part about what happened in North Wales. However SP thinks its better to use the term Asian than Muslim, I disagreed.

[Alan_X]

You dont, thats why I included the last part about what happened in North Wales. However SP thinks its better to use the term Asian than Muslim, I disagreed.

Fair enough.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Why do you need to describe their race or religion at all? 

some cases it was known by the authorities but they didn’t press ahead because they didn’t want to be seen as racist

[Eeyore]

some cases it was known by the authorities but they didn’t press ahead because they didn’t want to be seen as racist

Then shouldn't we be looking to hold the relevant authorities to account. Surely the discussion should be about the authorities inability to follow the rules properly because if they do their job properly then race is irrelevant.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Then shouldn't we be looking to hold the relevant authorities to account. Surely the discussion should be about the authorities inability to follow the rules properly because if they do their job properly then race is irrelevant.

have you bothered to digest the point, that is their race was a very significant factor which is why it was brought up? Or are you just trying to point score on that last point as it’s something that wasn’t even brought into question in the previous point?

[Eeyore]

have you bothered to digest the point, that is their race was a very significant factor which is why it was brought up? Or are you just trying to point score on that last point as it’s something that wasn’t even brought into question in the previous point?

The point is very clear if people in positions of power failed to act because of the race of the perpetrator then they shouldn't be in positions of power. It is not a matter of race or racism it is about people failing to do their job properly.

[Kenny's Jacket]

have you bothered to digest the point, that is their race was a very significant factor which is why it was brought up? Or are you just trying to point score on that last point as it’s something that wasn’t even brought into question in the previous point?

If you can separate religion and race then I would argue their religion was the factor at play.   As SP said in a post earlier referring to these groups as Muslims is inflammatory, referring to them as Asian less so. If these groups were of any other background thn Muslim I dont think the same issues with the authorities would arise.

[Johnnyboy1973]

If these groups were of any other background thn Muslim I dont think the same issues with the authorities would arise.

If by issues you mean a lack of proper investigation; I do.

Whether the perpetrators were Muslim or not, the issue of an improper investigation by councils and police forces would still arise as a result of who the victims were.

I would say that if the victims were of any other background, I don't think the same issues with the authorities would arise.

The police have a shoddy record with regards child protection, irrespective of the offenders ethnicity or religious orientation.

[Kenny's Jacket]

If by issues you mean a lack of proper investigation; I do.

Whether the perpetrators were Muslim or not, the issue of an improper investigation by councils and police forces would still arise as a result of who the victims were.

I would say that if the victims were of any other background, I don't think the same issues with the authorities would arise.

The police have a shoddy record with regards child protection, irrespective of the offenders ethnicity or religious orientation.

Mate sorry but the bolded bit seems to contradict the rest of your post. Unless I am reading it wrong.