Tommy Robinson

Well if he chooses to wear a particular hat and gets called on it then that is perfectly reasonable, isn't it?

If Les thinks racist piece of shit and serial criminal "Tommy Robinson" 's concerns are reasonable then let's hear them.

After all it is rare for Les to hold back one of his pithy one-liners to express his opinions in most circumstances so why would he be so reluctant now?

Well, that's up to Les if he want's to elaborate on his shared concerns with TR. I'm not sure if Les shares some of the same concerns as TR, he has to wear a particular hat. It sure doesn't mean he's of the same ilk, does it!

You know how forums go, Franny. You can be rounded upon and found guilty by association before you know it. As Les say's - a thankless task. Sometimes it's just not worth the hassle.

TR's racist bile aside - I also think he makes a 'few' valid points re migration and over population. Should I try my hat on? Anyway - I'm not racist - I have a colour TV!

TR opposes FGM and forced marriages, would we be allowed to share his concerns or would that make us racists?

FGM and forced marriage are to be deplored, I also think that circumcision is also usually an unnecessary procedure.

Just ask Frank he'll know whether we are racist or not. He is the oracle or orifice.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Well if he chooses to wear a particular hat and gets called on it then that is perfectly reasonable, isn't it?

If Les thinks racist piece of shit and serial criminal "Tommy Robinson" 's concerns are reasonable then let's hear them.

After all it is rare for Les to hold back one of his pithy one-liners to express his opinions in most circumstances so why would he be so reluctant now?

I mostly choose "pithy one liners" to try to express my opinions as opposed to the sermon approach deployed by yourself for time/can't be arsed reasons, why say it in 10 words when 1000 will do eh Frank lol, the twitter character limit must be a real killer for you.


If I were to fully lay out and then debate back and forth the concerns I share with Tommy Robinson half of the summer holidays would be frittered away and in reality we'd have achieved nothing but a bit of name calling, both openly and implied.

Enjoy the sun while it shines Frank, you aren't getting any younger.

He's getting more like that Kenny Everett character with the brollie every day.

I can't imagine why anybody would hesitate to oppose forced marriage or female genital mutilation especially when they are quite clearly illegal practices.

Nobody could be accused of being racist for being appalled by either.

(<140 charcaters)

Maybe we can't be bothered as you'd only manage to spin it in some direction jog on angry man.

Another Straw Man.



Well until Les says what he meant we'll never know, will we?

Who are you arguing with now? Go out get some rays have a bifta and chill out.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Well if he chooses to wear a particular hat and gets called on it then that is perfectly reasonable, isn't it?

If Les thinks racist piece of shit and serial criminal "Tommy Robinson" 's concerns are reasonable then let's hear them.

After all it is rare for Les to hold back one of his pithy one-liners to express his opinions in most circumstances so why would he be so reluctant now?

Having outline two particular concerns of TR that we all seem to share, maybe SFD could detail the concerns he feels are unreasonable?

No I can't because Les won't tell me what those concerns are.

Weeds illegal anyway.

[quote="Sir Francis Drake"]Another Straw Man.





Is that Beesrus and Victoria Parkington?

Victoria parkington?

Elias wrote:

Victoria parkington?

Beezy’s freechat name on Facebook...

there really is no need for these Pasoti Mod type outings. If people want to use a pseudonym then let them FFS!

Very Porky.

Really?

A bit like saying Donald Duck is also Sponge Bob Square Pants...

If it bullies at the drop of a hat, spits anger at specified targets for no good reason, cosies up to football club owners, and has no respect for other people's' privacy, it's a Newell.  
You're "all washed up" Rickler, more and more people are twigging what you get off on. The web is full of people like you with no real regard for online community and it's rules, and you've been doing it for decades. Having a grudge with Newell is no defence. We all have that one on here
And all you can do when caught logging on purely to get rid of your dirty water, is point the finger elsewhere.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

PatDunne wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Racist piece of shit "Tommy Robinson" pleaded guilty. No matter what happened yesterday he remains guilty, yet again, by his own admission.

In fact looking at it a little more deeply yesterday's decision in the court of appeal, which maintained one of the findings of guilt and concommitant sentence with which racist piece of shit "Tommy Robinson" was charged, calling for a re-trial on the other complete disavows the charge from his supporters that it was a kangaroo court and that he'd been Shaghai'd into jail by "the establishment" because it is the very same "establishment" that has found partially in  his favour.

If "the establishment" (by which "Tommy Robinson" supporters mean British judges applying British laws in British courts as voted through the British legislature by democratically elected British politicians in line with the British constitutional requirements which represent the British sovereignty seemingly so important to them) is trying to feck him over this is a bizarre way of going about it.

They did not apply British laws correctly.....

This morning, the Lord Chief Justice's ruling in Robinson's appeal underlined that the rule of law - the rules that apply to us all - must be applied fairly in all circumstances.

And that's why the Court of Appeal ruled that Robinson's second conviction in a year for contempt of court was flawed. In essence, the five hours from arrest to sentence at Leeds Crown Court was rushed.

Is that not what I said?

The second sentence (not conviction because he pleaded guilty) is being reviewed explicitly because of British judges applying British laws in British courts as voted through the British legislature by democratically elected British politicians in line with the British constitutional requirements which represent the British sovereignty.

Really

Your very confusing

The precedence of European law over national laws is absolute.

European law has nothing to do with this.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

European law has nothing to do with this.

Maybe not, but

“The second sentence (not conviction because he pleaded guilty) is being reviewed explicitly because of British judges applying British laws in British courts as voted through the British legislature by democratically elected British politicians in line with the British constitutional requirements which represent the British sovereignty”

is all very confusing after your extolling of the EU.

It isn't confusing at all.

What I am doing is highlighting the contempt for BRITISH law that "Tommy Robinson" has shown for many years.

God knows why you brought the EU into this.