Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Toomy Whatsisname...
Sorry I haven't got a link. I heard on the radio and BBC telly that TR has been judged on the wrong side in a court case against him for falsely accusing a teenager (who was filmed being beaten by school 'chums') of attacking young women, and that he has to pay £100,000 penalty, plus legal costs. I'm surprised that TUS haven't been on here defending him. He seems to be pleading bankruptcy and saying that he's had a bad year. Are there many here who feel sorry for him?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Atheist. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Up until this incident, this was Stephen Yaxley Lennon’s rap sheet:
He is a former spokesman and former leader of the English Defence League (EDL)
He was a member of the British National Party (BNP) from 2004 to 2005.
He was joint vice-chairman of the British Freedom Party (BFP).
A leopard doesn’t change its spots.
He used the pseudonyms Andrew McMaster, Paul Harris and Wayne King. His most famous AKA name, Tommy Robinson, is in homage to a known football hooligan who was the leader of Luton Town’s MIG gang. Why anyone in their right mind would name themselves after such a person is beyond me. Maybe his defenders know?
His criminal record includes:
He pleaded guilty at to using someone else's passport to gain entry to the United States. He had been previously banned from entering the US due to a drugs offence.
He was convicted of three counts of conspiracy to commit fraud by misrepresentation relating to a mortgage application. The fraud apparently amounted to £160,000 over a period of six months, so no small beer.
He was convicted of using threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour, for leading a group of Luton Town F.C. supporters into a brawl involving 100 people.
Being sentenced to 13 months' imprisonment for which also included activation of an earlier three-month suspended sentence for a similar contempt of court at Canterbury.
He was convicted of assaulting an off-duty police officer in a drunken argument. This resulted in him losing his job.
He was convicted in 2011 of using "threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour" during a fight between supporters of Luton Town and Newport County.
He was arrested after an EDL demonstration in Tower Hamlets in September 2011 for breach of bail conditions.
He was convicted of common assault after headbutting a fellow EDL member at a rally in Blackburn.
He received a suspended sentence for putting a trial at Canterbury Crown Court at risk of collapse, by broadcasting prejudicial statements about defendants from inside the court building.
Some of his other endearing actions:
He blamed "'every single Muslim' for 'getting away' with the 7 July bombings. His defence was 'I'm sorry, I'm sorry.’
He attended court in support of Mark Meechan, who had been charged for a hate crime after posting footage online of a dog performing Nazi salutes in response to the phrases "gas the Jews" and "Sieg Heil". Meechan was found guilty.
In October 2018, Robinson falsely accused a Syrian boy who was a bullying victim, of previously attacking two schoolgirls.
He is also said to have made a false allegation using a photo stolen from a news article on a teenage cancer patient.
This isn’t an exhaustive list.
And some people support and defend him!
He is a former spokesman and former leader of the English Defence League (EDL)
He was a member of the British National Party (BNP) from 2004 to 2005.
He was joint vice-chairman of the British Freedom Party (BFP).
A leopard doesn’t change its spots.
He used the pseudonyms Andrew McMaster, Paul Harris and Wayne King. His most famous AKA name, Tommy Robinson, is in homage to a known football hooligan who was the leader of Luton Town’s MIG gang. Why anyone in their right mind would name themselves after such a person is beyond me. Maybe his defenders know?
His criminal record includes:
He pleaded guilty at to using someone else's passport to gain entry to the United States. He had been previously banned from entering the US due to a drugs offence.
He was convicted of three counts of conspiracy to commit fraud by misrepresentation relating to a mortgage application. The fraud apparently amounted to £160,000 over a period of six months, so no small beer.
He was convicted of using threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour, for leading a group of Luton Town F.C. supporters into a brawl involving 100 people.
Being sentenced to 13 months' imprisonment for which also included activation of an earlier three-month suspended sentence for a similar contempt of court at Canterbury.
He was convicted of assaulting an off-duty police officer in a drunken argument. This resulted in him losing his job.
He was convicted in 2011 of using "threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour" during a fight between supporters of Luton Town and Newport County.
He was arrested after an EDL demonstration in Tower Hamlets in September 2011 for breach of bail conditions.
He was convicted of common assault after headbutting a fellow EDL member at a rally in Blackburn.
He received a suspended sentence for putting a trial at Canterbury Crown Court at risk of collapse, by broadcasting prejudicial statements about defendants from inside the court building.
Some of his other endearing actions:
He blamed "'every single Muslim' for 'getting away' with the 7 July bombings. His defence was 'I'm sorry, I'm sorry.’
He attended court in support of Mark Meechan, who had been charged for a hate crime after posting footage online of a dog performing Nazi salutes in response to the phrases "gas the Jews" and "Sieg Heil". Meechan was found guilty.
In October 2018, Robinson falsely accused a Syrian boy who was a bullying victim, of previously attacking two schoolgirls.
He is also said to have made a false allegation using a photo stolen from a news article on a teenage cancer patient.
This isn’t an exhaustive list.
And some people support and defend him!
Theland - // If Tommy was as racist and bigoted as his critics maintain, he would have been prosecuted many times over for hate speech, but he hasn't, which proves the old adage, ''give a dog a bad name ......''
Lazy criticisms of him are totally out of order. //
It proves nothing of the kind.
First of all, 'Tommy' is adept at skating just inside the hate speech rules most of the time - except when he reverts to type, which is a mindless hate-filled racist thug, and then he feels the force of the law.
As for 'Giving a dog a bad name ...' 'Tommy' is absolutely more than capable of giving himself a bad name with no help from any of his critics - he just has to use the majority of his brain which is devoted to pointless racial agitation, open his mouth, let his garbage spill forth, and the rest follows on like night follows day.
Lazy criticisms of him are totally out of order. //
It proves nothing of the kind.
First of all, 'Tommy' is adept at skating just inside the hate speech rules most of the time - except when he reverts to type, which is a mindless hate-filled racist thug, and then he feels the force of the law.
As for 'Giving a dog a bad name ...' 'Tommy' is absolutely more than capable of giving himself a bad name with no help from any of his critics - he just has to use the majority of his brain which is devoted to pointless racial agitation, open his mouth, let his garbage spill forth, and the rest follows on like night follows day.
ich - // It is quite shocking that he has apologists on here. //
What I find shocking about the two who have spoken in defence of this horrible individual is that their history on here shows that neither of them are stupid bigoted people, and like you I am amazed at their defence of someone who has done the right thing once - not that he is unique in that - and the wrong thing dozens of times afterwards.
What I find shocking about the two who have spoken in defence of this horrible individual is that their history on here shows that neither of them are stupid bigoted people, and like you I am amazed at their defence of someone who has done the right thing once - not that he is unique in that - and the wrong thing dozens of times afterwards.
To my mind, defending 'Tommy Robinson' because he (and let's not forget he was not alone in this) drew attention to Asian rape gangs, in view of what he has done since, is akin to defending Adolf Hitler becuase he liked dogs, or Mussolini because he made the trains run on time.
As I have pointed out, one good deed does not give you liscence to spend the next number of years creating mayhem, discord, paranoia and race hate simply in pursuit of a self-advancing need to be heard, even if it is largely by people with the IQ of a pencil.
As I have pointed out, one good deed does not give you liscence to spend the next number of years creating mayhem, discord, paranoia and race hate simply in pursuit of a self-advancing need to be heard, even if it is largely by people with the IQ of a pencil.
I guess when you use the term 'apologist', AH, you're referring to anyone who agrees with you and doesn't froth at the mouth at the very mention of this man's name. Additionally, I didn't realise I was working against the clock so sorry to keep you waiting.
I don’t defend his crimes - and I haven’t defended them - but I have no hesitation in applauding him for speaking out frankly against Muslim grooming gangs when for years the police and the authorities were, in pursuit of racial harmony, consistently turning a blind eye. His crimes, in my opinion, pale into insignificance against those of the whole lot of them.
I don’t defend his crimes - and I haven’t defended them - but I have no hesitation in applauding him for speaking out frankly against Muslim grooming gangs when for years the police and the authorities were, in pursuit of racial harmony, consistently turning a blind eye. His crimes, in my opinion, pale into insignificance against those of the whole lot of them.
Naomi - //His crimes, in my opinion, pale into insignificance against those of the whole lot of them.//
The 16 year old lad he falsely accused of being a sex pest may disagree.
The issue I have with him is that in my opinion, his hatred of Muslims seemingly came before his (albeit justified) outing of the paedo gangs. He's proven himself time and time again to be an absolute thug, who is eager to harass anyone Muslim, whether guilty of anything or not.
The 16 year old lad he falsely accused of being a sex pest may disagree.
The issue I have with him is that in my opinion, his hatred of Muslims seemingly came before his (albeit justified) outing of the paedo gangs. He's proven himself time and time again to be an absolute thug, who is eager to harass anyone Muslim, whether guilty of anything or not.
Mozz. As I indicated in my first post on this thread, the man is a fool to himself but what those Muslim gangs did to those young girls - and the way the authorities and the police ignored it was utterly shameful. All criminals in my opinion. Thank goodness there were a few who did have the guts to speak out - if only ‘the likes’ of Tommy Robinson! I firmly believe in credit where credit is due but somehow he gets none - even for what he has done right.
naomi - // I guess when you use the term 'apologist', AH, you're referring to anyone who agrees with you and doesn't froth at the mouth at the very mention of this man's name. Additionally, I didn't realise I was working against the clock so sorry to keep you waiting.
apologist
/əˈpɒlədʒɪst/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: apologist; plural noun: apologists
a person who offers an argument in defence of something controversial.
Clearly not then - a brave try, to deflect the paucity of your case into making me the 'bad guy' because I call 'Robinson' out for the agitating racist thug he is.
// I don’t defend his crimes - and I haven’t defended them - but I have no hesitation in applauding him for speaking out frankly against Muslim grooming gangs when for years the police and the authorities were, in pursuit of racial harmony, consistently turning a blind eye. His crimes, in my opinion, pale into insignificance against those of the whole lot of them. //
Really?
Seriously?
You are putting forward as a defence against the horrible damaging things this idiot has done, of which the last is probably the most heinous, and has damaged an entire family, and one innocent man, possible for life - that because he (and again he was not a lone crusader) helped expose other crimes, that's OK because you deem their crimes to be worse?????
That beggars belief, and I am seriously surprised at you.
You and I know that 'Robinson' is indefensible, but to try and offer a 'comparison' of wrongs in order to prop up his reputation is really weak, and I thought better of you - not that you care.
Lots of people think Harold Shipman was a caring GP - shall we skip his murders because he did do good in his life?
Using your evidenced moral compass, which frankly should be given the last rites - I am sure no-one will have an issue with that.
apologist
/əˈpɒlədʒɪst/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: apologist; plural noun: apologists
a person who offers an argument in defence of something controversial.
Clearly not then - a brave try, to deflect the paucity of your case into making me the 'bad guy' because I call 'Robinson' out for the agitating racist thug he is.
// I don’t defend his crimes - and I haven’t defended them - but I have no hesitation in applauding him for speaking out frankly against Muslim grooming gangs when for years the police and the authorities were, in pursuit of racial harmony, consistently turning a blind eye. His crimes, in my opinion, pale into insignificance against those of the whole lot of them. //
Really?
Seriously?
You are putting forward as a defence against the horrible damaging things this idiot has done, of which the last is probably the most heinous, and has damaged an entire family, and one innocent man, possible for life - that because he (and again he was not a lone crusader) helped expose other crimes, that's OK because you deem their crimes to be worse?????
That beggars belief, and I am seriously surprised at you.
You and I know that 'Robinson' is indefensible, but to try and offer a 'comparison' of wrongs in order to prop up his reputation is really weak, and I thought better of you - not that you care.
Lots of people think Harold Shipman was a caring GP - shall we skip his murders because he did do good in his life?
Using your evidenced moral compass, which frankly should be given the last rites - I am sure no-one will have an issue with that.
naomi - // I firmly believe in credit where credit is due but somehow he gets none - even for what he has done right. //
So do I - and if I believed for a nanoscond that 'Tommy's motives were actually based on the care of the poor individuals involved, rather than his eagerness to tar all Muslims as rapists, then I would give him credit as well.
Sadly, his subsequent behaviour renders that an impossibility.
So do I - and if I believed for a nanoscond that 'Tommy's motives were actually based on the care of the poor individuals involved, rather than his eagerness to tar all Muslims as rapists, then I would give him credit as well.
Sadly, his subsequent behaviour renders that an impossibility.
sunny-dave - // Praising Mr Robinson for the occasional thing he gets right (and which, even then, he twists to his own agenda) makes about as much moral sense as lauding that nice Mr Mussolini for making the trains run on time ... //
I made exactly the same point at 15:43.
And don't forget that Mr Hitler - he loved dogs you know ...
I made exactly the same point at 15:43.
And don't forget that Mr Hitler - he loved dogs you know ...
"SD, I believe that's the second mention of Mussolini and his trains on this thread. The first was irrelevant too."
Not irrelevant at all - a good point which bears making twice (I'd missed A-H's earlier reference).
The moral bankruptcy of Mr Robinson renders immaterial any apparent 'good works' he may appear to have done in furtherance of his vile racist agenda - if you can't see that, then there is a danger of getting a splash of tar from his brush onto your own escutcheon.
Not irrelevant at all - a good point which bears making twice (I'd missed A-H's earlier reference).
The moral bankruptcy of Mr Robinson renders immaterial any apparent 'good works' he may appear to have done in furtherance of his vile racist agenda - if you can't see that, then there is a danger of getting a splash of tar from his brush onto your own escutcheon.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Body & Soul4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
Crosswords31 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.