Tommy Robinson so Correct with his ranting. IMHO

a reply to: Kurokage

Kurokage if you think I don't know what our American media is you are mistaken.

It is exclusively propaganda. Even the pro-Trump MSM is biased (toward Trump) but there are vastly more biased anti-Trump MSM outlets. Something around 90% (at least) of our MSM is either biased information, factually untrue information or intentionally misleading information.

No my eyes are wide open to our mass media, including the shareholders (and their layers of shell companies) and their various (sometimes opposing) political agendas.

I also did not say the UK was "evil" or 100% wrong. But it is hard to defend a position when you are illegally occupying a sovereign nation and brutalizing its people for hundreds of years. Yet you only focus on the very small limited period of time in which the retribution and political bombings took place. But you ignore many hundreds of years of history before that, including the IRA forces (in Belfast and others) fought invading foreign soldiers on their home soil

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: LightSpeedDriver

Damn right.

I guess they expected the Irish people to just sit there and take it while they were invaded by foreign nationals and occupied by their military. Which proceeded to rape, pillage, beat and steal. Until the Irish Citizens rose up, raised an army and drove the invaders back, freeing all but 6 counties from the tyranny of foreign occupation and pursue their own political ambitions

It is disgusting to see how many here have believed the BBC propaganda, naturally painting the Irish and the Citizen's IRA as somehow "less than" the British military invaders they were fighting. Naturally, the British can do no wrong and when you accuse them of something their reaction is always the same: "You just don't like the UK!"

....couldn't be the fact that so many are tired of double standards and tired of watching Republicans everywhere villified because they dare to stand up for themselves. And even though they want to make it about politics, it really isn't. There are left-wing Republicans and right-wing Republicans, along with centrist Republicans... and whether Citizens want to form a socialist Republic, a constitutional Republic, a democratic Republic or whatever type of Republic, they have the right to make that choice without influence from a foreign occupying army.

Glad to see all of those replying here would be so docile, so compliant if a foreign army invaded your own country. I know at least us Americans and Irish will not. And yet I still can't help but point out how the many-hundred years resistance by the Irish Republicans mirrors the American revolution against the same enemy for the same reasons.

Unbelievable how many support the American revolution from British tyranny yet can't/won't support the Irish revolution from British tyranny

Man alive, that's the funniest thing I've read in a long time.

I'm sympathetic to the republican cause and, in the late 80s, went to a few Troops Out meetings. But you, sir, haven't got a clue about what happened in any part of Ireland, let alone UIster.

originally posted by: Freeborn
Why these lads should be 'investigated' is beyond me.
They took a photo and shared it on social media....like millions upon millions of people in this world.
I may not like social media, you may not like social media but its the world we live in and it isn't going to change any time soon.

These lads didn't add any comments praising Tommy Robinson, just shared a photo.

What on earth is wrong with that?

They're in uniform. Same rules apply for any unauthorised political activity. Also apply to the police and civil servants.

Oh, and for the record Jeremy Corbyn is a complete twat!

He's also the only major party leader who wanted to leave the EU.

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

1916? And before that? How about their war that ran concurrently with the American revolution (nearly)

Yea everyone wants to focus on recent history, pretending the other stuff didn't happen I guess

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

unauthorised political activity

Sheesh, people want to talk about "fascism" and "authoritarianism" in the States 🙄

So you're saying the government decides what political speech is acceptable? Nice sounds like a fair system that couldn't/wouldn't be abused

a reply to: Kurokage

Great posts....just one minor detail - Tommy Robinson is a wannabe football hooligan, he never actually was one.

I'm sure Brother Burns fellow ultra-conservatives back in the US will be impressed with his support for a terrorist organisation which was, and still is, aligned to Muslim terrorist groups, and whose desire was to bring about a socialist revolution.

I've heard he knows the words to Bella Ciao and The Red Flag off by heart.

originally posted by: JBurns


I also did not say the UK was "evil" or 100% wrong. But it is hard to defend a position when you are illegally occupying a sovereign nation and brutalizing its people for hundreds of years. Yet you only focus on the very small limited period of time in which the retribution and political bombings took place. But you ignore many hundreds of years of history before that, including the IRA forces (in Belfast and others) fought invading foreign soldiers on their home soil

I like that last sentence. I like it very much.

Ireland was historically the third kingdom of Britain. Unlike Scotland, it was never a sovereign nation. Like Scotland, it was effectively ruled by the crown of England and Wales and any dissent brutally crushed. That dissent included Irish troops rallying behind the English king and invading England during the English Civil War.

Ireland was partitioned in 1922 and Eire, too, had a civil war - the IRA fought against the legitimate, sovereign Irish government. The IRA that, later on, became close buddies with Moscow and Tripoli...

What happened in the six counties of the north was wrong, very wrong (which is why the Irish border question is such a huge sticking point in the Brexit mess), but don't simplify the history.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

unauthorised political activity

Sheesh, people want to talk about "fascism" and "authoritarianism" in the States 🙄

So you're saying the government decides what political speech is acceptable? Nice sounds like a fair system that couldn't/wouldn't be abused

Great cherry picking. You forgot to quote the "in uniform" part.

Out of uniform, you can do what you like, although I think you need permission to stand for public office.

In uniform, you're a soldier.

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

He's also the only major party leader who wanted to leave the EU.

During all his time on the backbenches he opposed the EU.
The minute he was appointed leader of The Labour Party he started supporting the Remain campaign.

So much for his principles.

Lets not derail this thread even further by dragging Brexit in to it.
There's plenty of threads for us to discuss and debate Corbyn and / or Brexit, I'll gladly join you in any of them.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

1916? And before that? How about their war that ran concurrently with the American revolution (nearly)

Yea everyone wants to focus on recent history, pretending the other stuff didn't happen I guess

In 1916 is a silly example. It was a nationalist revolt in what was a legitimate, if brutally mismanaged, part of the United Kingdom. What invasion?

The war that ran concurrently with the American Revolution? Do you mean the police action against the likes of the Whiteboys? That was no war, that was some houses burned down and some people getting hanged. I hesitate to use the word terrorism, although some contemporary descriptions are pretty brutal. At the time, Ireland was the third Kingdom of Great Britain with its own devolved Parliament. Again, where were the invaders.

You want invasion, go back to the 1650s, when Cromwell invaded Ireland. Ireland had supported Charles I in the English Civil War so, when Cromwell declared a republic, the Irish refused to follow. His brutal suppression of the Irish is a stain on history, even if it was partly in revenge for Irish troops invading England in the 1640s.

You want invasion, I'll even let you have William's invasion at the end of the seventeenth century. Again, Ireland was behind the Stuarts (as were the Jacobite Scots) and the new broom decided to sweep away resistance. Not as bad as Cromwell but airbrushed out of British history.

That's 300 years since the last invasion...

a reply to: JBurns

It is exclusively propaganda. Even the pro-Trump MSM is biased (toward Trump) but there are vastly more biased anti-Trump MSM outlets. Something around 90% (at least) of our MSM is either biased information, factually untrue information or intentionally misleading information.

If you truly believed this to be true, you wouldn't be here shouting there propaganda like a brain-washed puppet, our main TV media (BBC, Channel 4) are publicly owned and are far less biased than any media in the US, most of the newspapers are privately owned and love pushing an agenda and propaganda which is why most British members laugh when one of you U.S. members post a story from the likes of the daily FAIL or other tabloid toilet paper.

You are the one focusing on a small period of time in Irelands history not me, you where after all saying you supporting terrorists.

including the IRA forces (in Belfast and others) fought invading foreign soldiers on their home soil

And again you are the one only seeing one side of the problem, and "forget" to see the Northern Irish who wanted to be British citizens! I know my history, and also know that with a history of a people that spans a few thousand years instead of a few hundred, that the British past isn't all bright, and rosey, but name one country that has? America is a newish country and it already has a chequered history.

originally posted by: Freeborn


During all his time on the backbenches he opposed the EU.
The minute he was appointed leader of The Labour Party he started supporting the Remain campaign.

We'll agree to split hairs. He whiskered towards Remain during the Referendum.

originally posted by: LightSpeedDriver
a reply to: Flavian

Did the English not at least try to resist the Romans in the beginning?

Some Brits didn't. They were seduced by the spangly new shiny shiny and allied instead.

Also note the Brits. The Angles and Saxons were still in Denmark and Germany. The Normans weren't even a twinkle in someone's eye.

Which i suppose in a roundabout way brings us back to Tommy.......bloody foreigners, huh?!

a reply to: Freeborn

So you are saying someone deserves to be targeted by the State or harassed by other Citizens because their political views are different than the prevailing views? I don't want to put words in your mouth and if that is not what you are saying tell me. But if so

Yeah, it is very "conservative" and "libertarian" to oppose that. Pretty evil group think BS if you ask me. Not unlike what the radical unhinged left is doing to our country. But like I said, Republicanism extends beyond the typical low-information left vs. right paradigm/box that so many stuff themselves into. In fact, standing against that tyrannical group think collective-punishment BS is epitome of libertarianism.

And what terrorist organization is he alleged to support? That sounds like yet another tactic your government uses to discredit its opposition. Much like his arrest for reporting facts or Sweden's targetting of Julian Assange with false sex allegations AKA "honey pot."

For instance, the fact your government was inches away from collapse is likely under-reported while the so-called "threat" of fake-Russia and fake-Right wing "conspiracies" to undermine "liberal democracy" (which does a good enough job undermining itself on its own, doesn't need our help)

I understand what you're saying. If this guy is a "racist" "terrorist" then so be it. But he is still entitled to an opinion, and to be free from harassment or especially State persecution merely for exercising his right to speak and hold an opinion contrary to ones others dictate. You don't have to respect the idea to respect the fact others may have different opinions and points of view. Your opinion (which is probably fairly close to my own) may not be his opinion, and vice versa. They call them opinions because there is no objective yes/no right/wrong answer - only the personal beliefs of each unique individual. Isn't the object of "diversity" learning to accept those differences of opinions and integrate them into a monolithic and cohesive culture?

A country can and will thrive when it is diverse (although the opposite is also true, Japan for instance is ~99% homogeneous). But a nation can not handle the collapse of a unified culture shared by the various demographics that make up its society. We are collapsing into tribalism, and the effort by the left to characterize that as the right's doing is simply fiction

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

And you are right, what happened in the North was wrong IMO. Like the Republicans, North Ireland had every right to determine its own path. I fully agree with that concept. Like I also said, the bombings/terrorism and indiscriminate attacks on non-military non-combatants was equally wrong.

But it helps to remember the North American colonies were not considered sovereign nation either. That is something you must take for yourself, not be granted. And by my account, that is exactly what they tried to do (and why the United States supported their efforts)

Like Scotland, it was effectively ruled by the crown of England and Wales and any dissent brutally crushed.

Agreed, not unlike dissent brutally crushed by the United States government even in more recent times. As I wrote earlier, I'm not vilifying or demonizing the English, only pointing out that this conflict (like every other conflict) has many gray areas and there is no objective "good vs. evil" or "right vs. wrong" (usually, any way). Both sides have done some pretty horrible things to the other, no getting around that. Although it is no secret I do not like your government (due to its own authoritarian leanings, such as criminalizing certain speech it deems offensive) I can assure you it is not limited only to the UK gov.

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

Ah, my apologies I see what you were saying there

I was not trying to be facetious or dishonest. I genuinely missed that part (or at least forgot to include)

My mistake Whodathunkdatcheese

a reply to: biggilo

If you say so then it must be true

LOL

On topic...
BBC ran a story about Tommy tonight here's a clip of what turned out to be a pretty interesting piece.

a reply to: JBurns

All those words and so little content.

No, its about you being a rabid anti-leftist, socialist but because it serves your anti-English bigotry you support a group of socialist terrorists who indiscriminately killed innocent people and aligned themselves with extremist Muslim terrorist groups and organisations.

Those self-same socialist terrorists also terrorised their own communities in a manner very similar to American Mafia for one purpose only - power.

How a person who continuously rants and raves about leftist ideas and principles and who is allegedly so opposed to Islam and its extremism can possibly support a socialist terror group truly beggars belief.

The hypocrisy and double standards are absolutely staggering.

The fact that you can't see that hypocrisy about sums it up....an absolute joke.

Bella Ciao.

a reply to: SprocketUK

Not being funny but I've just got in from the pub and I really can't be arsed watching a 12minute video at present.
Probably will some time tomorrow but, in the mean time.....any chance of a summary?