Tommy Robinson Exposes Bbc Far Left Bias

[Khandro]

Who will be first to 'dismiss' this because it's on Breitbart?

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/02/24/tommy-robinsons-panodrama-exposes-the-bbcs-left-bias/#

from where will you gain the facts if not there and on social media ?

[Gromit]

Robinson is a millionaire despite having not worked for twenty years.
His constant attention grapping stunts keep the donations flowing from gullible alt right American nutjobs. Brietbart serves him well.

[retrocop]

Doesn't Tommy Robinson own a furniture store in Luton still?

[agchristie]

Retro,I think he is the Chairman o:)

[retrocop]

Could be a sleeping partner now. :-)

[retrocop]

He now works as a journalist for Canadian right-wing news organisation The Rebel Media and owns a sunbed shop in his home town of Luton.

From the Sun.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/uknews/3838990/tommy-robinson-jailed-edl-leader-change-name/

[andy-hughes]

Khandro - // kromo; //has several criminal convictions.//

There is an undeniable grain of truth in that well-worn mantra, can you name them?

One was a mortgage fraud, not really very serious - no one harmed and no thuggery.

He was arrested in Switzerland for climbing on to the roof of FIFA headquarters to protest that the English squad were not allowed a red rose on their shirts - no one harmed and no thuggery. //

Because you agree with the politics and actions of 'Tommy Robinson', it appears that you are willing to gloss over the occasions when he has broken the law, and been punished for it.

Last year, my house was burgled while my wife and I were asleep upstairs. 'No one harmed and no thuggery'.

I'll just pop down to the prison and ask if they can let the guy out for doing that to use, and half a dozen other houses nearby in the same night.

Of course, if your house is burgled and the burglar doesn't take anything and doesn't beat you up, and is a proven Oxfam donor, I am sure you will petition for the absence of legal process there as well.

[andy-hughes]

Whether or not you side with this, or not, depends entirely on your perceptions of 'Tommy Robinson' and of Breitbart.

People who support 'Tommy' are likely to be sympathetic to media that supports him as well, since their ideas will be in sync.

Logically, then people who don't, will not be in agreement with Breitbart, or indeed 'Tommy Robinson'.

My view, oft-stated, is that 'Tommy Robinson' is a racist thug who manipulates the media and gullible people for his own ends under the guise of being a social crusader. Similarly, I perceive Breitbart as am ultra-right wing conspiracy organ which wouldn't recognise the truth if it bit it in the bottom - I wouldn't believe Breitbart if it told me there was a 'y' in the day of the week.

You pays your money ...

[Khandro]

Retro; That Sun report is a bit of a hatched job to say the least, but if that falls short of impartiality you should try (not really) the Morning Star for hatred and vitriol on Robinson.

[Khandro]

^^ Perhaps Andy Hughes reads the Morning Star.

[andy-hughes]

Khandro - // ^^ Perhaps Andy Hughes reads the Morning Star. //

I don't obtain my opinions from any newspaper, and no, I don't read the Morning Star.

[Khandro]

andy hughes; But if you hold Breitbart in such low esteem, why do you read it?

[andy-hughes]

Khandro - // andy hughes; But if you hold Breitbart in such low esteem, why do you read it? //

What makes you think I do?

I don't read Hansard every day, but I have a view on the actions of Parliament.

[Khandro]

Surely, you must read it, [Breitbart] don't you?

[andy-hughes]

Khandro - // Surely, you must read it, [Breitbart] don't you? //

Why 'must I' read it?

Actually, let me save us both some time, you don't bother to answer that, because I'm not bothered about your reason.

[Ellipsis]

How you see the world depends on where you stand. Many things are far left of Tommy Robinson.

[naomi24]

//Many things are far left of Tommy Robinson. //

And many more far right .... although that generally goes unnoticed.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - // //Many things are far left of Tommy Robinson. //

And many more far right .... although that generally goes unnoticed. //

You are far too seasoned a debater to fall for the 'defence' that because something is worse than the subject under discussion, it somehow mitigates the wrong of the original subject.

Stalin murdered more people than Peter Sutcliffe - but that doesn't lessen what Sutcliffe did.

An extreme analogy I know, but the point is accurate I believe.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //You are far too seasoned a debater to fall for the 'defence' that because something is worse than the subject under discussion, it somehow mitigates the wrong of the original subject. //

I've fallen for no defence. Simply stating a fact that goes generally unnoticed - or purposely overlooked.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - // I've fallen for no defence. Simply stating a fact that goes generally unnoticed - or purposely overlooked. //

It does go unnoticed, mainly because it is not pertinent to almost any argument.

As I pointed out, trying to justify (or defend) one thing by measuring it against another and trumpeting that it comes out better, is not a valid way to debate - and I know that you know that.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //As I pointed out, trying to justify (or defend) one thing by measuring it against another and trumpeting that it comes out better, is not a valid way to debate - and I know that you know that. //

That isn't what I did and neither was that my intention - but that you have the wrong end of the stick doesn't surprise me.