tommy-robinson-arrest-facebook-live-court-jailed-13-months-leeds-crown-case-order-ban-EDL-706024

Hundreds of demonstrators gathered outside the site of Tommy Robinson’s arrest in an effort to ensure the former English Defence League (EDL) leader’s discharge from prison. About 500 demonstrators droned “let Tommy out” at police officers outside Leeds Crown Court and the procession saw followers of the 35-year-old brand police officers a “disgrace”, as mantras of “you ought to be ashamed of yourselves” broke out.

The event was coordinated by the organisation Proud British, which claims on Facebook that its mission is to “voice freedom of speech” and “stop the strain on the NHS, schools and our public services” and the demonstration came a week after the right-wing activist’s imprisonment for using social media to relay details of a trial which is subject to blanket broadcasting constraints.

Leeds Crown Court learned how Tommy Robinson had filmed himself and people involved in the case, in footage that was viewed about 250,000 times inside hours of being posted on Facebook. Robinson, who was listed by his real name Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon on court papers, was sentenced to 13 months in prison on the same day as his arrest.

He was given 10 months in prison for contempt of court, and an extra three months for breaching an earlier suspended sentence.

Judge Geoffrey Marson QC told Robinson at the time: “Everyone understands the right to freedom of speech but there are responsibilities and obligations.”

Freedom of Speech is pretty restricted these days except, of course, if you’re saying something nice about the Monarchy or the government, otherwise there’s a straitjacket on most people and we have to be extremely cautious on what we say or how we word it.

What we talk about in our homes is fine, or so we believe because the government have indicated it will use smart home gadgets for intrusion and numerous consumers are completely oblivious that the smart devices making their home more custom and responsive are making data that can be hacked or collected.

The internet of things and the various accessories like thermostats, cameras and other devices that are frequently connected to the internet are giving adequate opportunity for intelligence agencies to spy on victims, and maybe the masses and it’s a risk that many consumers who purchase these commodities may be totally blind to.

And there is already a gagging order to suppress information or a comment being made known or transferred to any unofficial third person.

Gag-Order

Gag orders may be applied, for instance, to keep certain trade secrets of a corporation, and to protect the integrity of ongoing police or military services, or to protect the privacy of victims or children but as a downside, they may be exploited as a valuable instrument for those of financial means to browbeat witnesses and stop freedom of information, using the legal system rather than other techniques of coercion.

Gag orders are sometimes applied in an effort to ensure a fair trial by restricting prejudicial pre-trial reporting, although their use for this idea is questionable because they are a possibly illegal preceding restraint that can lead to the press’s using less credible sources such as off-the-record statements and second-or third-hand accounts.

In a similar way, a gag law may restrict freedom of the press, by establishing censorship or limiting access to information.

A reporting restraint had originally barred the media from announcing Tommy Robinson’s punishment, but this was lifted at the same court and throughout the march, caches of people were seen flying banners displaying the St George’s Cross and handcrafted placards voicing support for Tommy Robinson.

One read “Stand with Tommy, free Tommy now,” whilst another branded the police, government and justice system as “corrupt” and demonstrators also invited members of the press to publish details of the case that Tommy Robinson, of Bedfordshire, had been filming, in line with “the principle of open justice”.

Freedom of paper no longer exists in Britain. The country that gave the world the Magna Carta, the Levellers, and John Stuart Mill, three of the fundamental foundation stones of the modern idea of freedom is now arresting and even imprisoning people simply for speaking their minds.

To see how corrupt things have got, analyse three incidents from the past week alone.

Twitter_logo_bird_transparent_png

A man has been examined by the police for a hashtag he used on Twitter. Seriously. Never mind speechcrime or even tweetcrime, now we have hashtagcrime and the man in question, Stephen Dodds, committed the transgression of taking a photo of two Muslims praying at Anfield, the home ground of Liverpool Football Club, and posting it on Twitter alongside the tweet: “Muslims praying at half-time at the match yesterday. #DISGRACE.”

Of course, Freedom of Speech has special duties and responsibilities because not everybody will agree with what one has to say, especially if it’s about somebody else, especially if they’re Muslim.

These days we’re a multi-national society and we have many ethnic minorities, whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing is in the opinion of the masses. Sadly, our government knows this and use it to their advantage and now they’ve made it into a place of opposition.

That hashtag on Twitter saw this guy Stephen Dodds the victim of a tumultuous Twitterstorm, the latest version of a tomato-wielding mob and he was ultimately reported to the police.

They investigated the matter for two weeks before eventually telling Liverpool FC to take suitable action against the wicked hashtagger and Liverpool announced it was deciding how to punish this man who dared to type the word “Disgrace” on the internet.

Journalist, Katie Hopkins, was reported to the police, and, strangely, to the International Criminal Court (ICC), for writing an article for the Sun in which she referred to the African migrants seeking to get into Europe as “cockroaches.”

Of course, Katie Hopkins is known for her weird opinions and she’s been reported to the police before, for hate crimes against fat people when she announced “fat people are just lazy,” which is supposedly a police matter now.

The police didn’t charge her over her fat-shaming, but they might well question her over her migrant-bashing and her cockroaches comment prompted the Twittersphere to go into meltdown and 285,000 people signed a petition asking the Sun to fire her.

What a heartfelt answer to Europe’s migrant crisis is to barter these 285,000 narrow-minded Brits who assume they have the freedom to shut down journalists they don’t like for 285,000 African who want to live in this country.

Do you see what the government are doing?

Our government are waging war on white English people and my friend England is in the midst of a deeply sinister social experiment and for the first time in a mature democracy, the government is waging a crusade of aggressive bias against its native people.

And now the Society of Black Lawyers have reported Katie Hopkins to the UK police and further to the ICC, asking it examine her remarks under the provisions of incitement to commit crimes against humanity, this is a scandal, although I didn’t hashtag that!

If people don’t want hashtag, twitter and facebook comments then close them all down, but isn’t this why we call it social networking? But what’s more is that people relish this sort of excitement and then they whine about it, yelling from the rooftops that it’s shameful or it’s not proper, well, if people don’t like what they read, don’t read it.

We might not have Freedom of Speech but we do have the freedom to click off the page, do something else or even devise their own drama.

But it’s the wow factor and the government know this and they take advantage of people and exploit them and in the name of social diversity, they attack anything that smacks Englishness and the mainstream public is treated with disdain, their rights disregarded, their history trashed. In their own country, the English are being transformed into second-class subjects.

And this bias was highlighted by the case of Abigail Howarth, a vivacious teenager who applied for a training post with the Environment Agency in East Anglia but was turned down because she was too white and English and the post, which carried a £13,000 grant, was open solely to ethnic minorities, including the Scots, Welsh and Irish.

Such social engineering was supported by the Agency on the grounds that minorities were under-represented in its workforce, the parrot cry used by functionaries throughout the public sector to support prejudice against the English.

Though Abigail’s case truly created affront, it was not uncommon. This sort of mirrored prejudice is now widespread across the state machine, supported by the very English tax­payers who are the victims of institutional discrimination.

Although it is technically unlawful to limit jobs to some ethnic groups, the racially fixated commissars have found a way around that problem by developing training projects open solely to minorities. Under the 1976 Race Relations Act, it is lawful to use racial factors in recruitment to trainee positions such as the one to which Abigail applied.

Such methods are dressed up as “positive action” to broaden diversity and, in the words of one Labour council, “to overcome past discrimination”. So HM Revenue and Customs offer work experience positions, worth up to £15,900 a year pro-rata, to ethnic minority graduates, while the Museums Association has a two-year ethnic minority apprenticeship.

Furthermore, Birmingham City Council gives £16,000 a year to “black and minority ethnic individuals” in its “Positive Action Traineeship Scheme”, and a £10,000 allowance to clerical trainees from “the Bangladeshi and Pakistani communities”.

Unfair training schemes can further be found in ITV, the civil service and the NHS, which boasts “a management development programme specifically designed and tail­ored to the needs of black and minority ethnic midwives”.

It was reported that Avon and Somerset Constabulary denied 186 applications from white men on the grounds that they were now “over-represented” in the force. In the same way, London Mayor Ken Livingstone refused to endorse a series of nominations for the London Fire Authority because they were dominated by whites.

Plus whole towns are starting to suffer state disapproval. Eighty administrative jobs in the Prison Service have lately been transferred from Corby in Northamptonshire to Leicester because, as the Home Office revealed, Corby’s population is predominantly “white British”, which is supposedly such a terrible crime in our multicultural society.

It is a painful contradiction that the Government, which works itself into such a false fury over racial discrimination, should exercise such obvious discrimination on such a grand scale and the unrelenting centre on helping minorities that have led to a distorted doctrine of anti-white prejudice.

Virtually every interaction with any public service now points to a comprehensive study of one’s ethnic standing and a huge race equality industry has been formed, loaded with overpaid paper shufflers, consultants and advisers with little to do besides create new grievances.

There is an air of the Maoist permanent revolution about their activities. Since immigration now operates at apparently one million people a year, and the make-up of society is shifting dramatically. So, in this climate of continuous demographic upheaval, the race relations army will always be able to create more work for itself.

Yet anti-English prejudice threatens the central platform of the propaganda for mass immigration and we’re continually told we require large penetrations of immigrants to support our economy and fill jobs but unem­ployment levels in immigrant populations are so huge and skills so lacking that we need to keep parts of our economy for them.

So if we have to spend a bundle on training schemes, why are we inviting hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the Third World and Eastern Europe here every year?

Economics has little to do with the problem and the Left in Britain have seized on mass immigration and multiculturalism as a battering ram to shatter the society they dislike.

They once tried to alter our country through economic revolution and that crashed with the Winter of Discontent and the destruction of communism. But demographic development through migration has proved far more damaging.

george-orwell

George Orwell once wrote: “England is perhaps the only great country whose intellec­tuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In Left-wing circles, it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution.”

That is now exactly the mentality that predominates inside the machinery of the British state and our country is drowning as a result.

Other tweeters have been detained and questioned by police for making off-colour remarks. A 19-year-old man was arrested for making a quip about the truck disaster in Glasgow when an out-of-control truck crashed into Christmas shoppers and killed six people.

The tweeter said: “So a bin lorry has apparently driven into 100 people in Glasgow eh, probably the most trash it’s picked up in one day.”

For that, for doing what people have been doing for generations, making up puns in the wake of a tragedy. He was arrested and then let off, but the police sent a chilling warning, anyone who makes terrible banter on Twitter we will be visited and given strong words of advice.

Many laws allow this police aggression of the online world with the Public Order Act of 1986, which criminalises racially aggravated expression, the Malicious Communications Act of 2003, which criminalises offensive, indecent or menacing communication in electronic media, these are the laws the police have used to colonise the internet.

The war on Katie Hopkins isn’t a one-off, either. It follows hot on the heels of the Leveson Inquiry’s creation of a chilling, choking climate in connection to the British press and started by David Cameron in 2011 purportedly to investigate phone-hacking at the News of the World, but actually having the vastly extended remit of looking into the full culture, practice, and ethics of the press, the Leveson Inquiry has generated a situation where Britain might someday have a press regulator set up by the Royal Charter which would be the first system of state-backed regulation of the press in Britain since 1695.

Even before that Royal Charter has been endorsed, Leveson has already, predictably, encouraged the narrow-minded censors in our midst who have long sought to quell offensive journalists, particularly tabloid ones and as one agitator against Katie Hopkins revealed. “Leveson was a smack in the teeth” of newspapers like the Sun, he said, which should now feel less able to publish Hopkins’ and others’ “vicious… right-wing opinioneering.”

In brief, a state-decreed, a judge-led inquiry is leading to the emasculation of the press.

Advertisements have been outlawed for hair products that were deemed insulting to Christians, they highlighted nuns in suspenders and advertisements for an airline that had a woman dressed as a schoolgirl, on the grounds that they could create widespread offence, in fact, only 13 people complained about them and then there was even an advertisement for a supermarket that showed a girl taking the salad out of her hamburger on the grounds that it condoned poor nutritional habits.

Censorship in the United Kingdom has become so insane that even the presentation of hamburgers is now rigorously policed.

Tommy Robinson has been sentenced to 13 months for breaching contempt of court laws with a Facebook Live video. He acknowledged committing contempt of court by distributing information that could prejudice an ongoing trial by a live stream on his Facebook page.

At one point the video was being viewed by more than 10,000 people, as Tommy Robinson tried to film defendants entering the court and discussed the case, which is subject to a separate reporting restraint.

A judge originally banned media reports of contempt proceedings upon Tommy Robinson over fears it could affect the ongoing trial but lifted the order after hearing submissions that members of the public and foreign media outlets were publishing incorrect information.

However, followers of the far-right figurehead have opposed his incarceration and the reporting constraints, using them to claim the establishment was trying to quell his views.

Donald Trump Jr, the US President’s son, shared a tweet from a Robinson fan with the comment “don’t let America follow in those footsteps”, while foreign diplomats including Dutch opposition leader Geert Wilders have asked for his release.

A “free Tommy” demonstration is being organised for London’s Whitehall on 9 June, while an appeal to free him has reached nearly half a million names and supporters have given money for legal expenses online.

Tommy Robinson made it clear that he was aware of the restrictions during the Facebook Live video, as well as the risk of being imprisoned.

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s