Tommy Robinson jailed for contempt of court

I support the right to march as well. But Tommy Robinsons'organisation Urban Scoop is a deliberate, complex,
planned attempt to incite hate specifically against Muslims in the UK.

"Tommy Robinson’s plan to use Sikhs, Jews and Hindus to turn people in UK against Islam
The far-right figure tried to garner support from religious groups and communities to support anti-Muslim rallies"

inews.co.uk/news/tommy-robinson-plan-sikhs-jews-hindus-turn-uk-against-islam-3241786?srsltid=AfmBOoo18CpyNbfbWWNq2qfKnB4V-ta0Q3oYPulM0q9ZxtI2szvAkNhB

I hope you can access the rest of the article which opened for me (the I is usually behind a paywall) as it details how Robinson plans to do this.

here is some:

"Details of meetings held by Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, were passed to i revealing the inner strategy of the far-right figure’s attempts to canvas support for a campaign against British Muslims.

The details obtained by i expose how Robinson tried to garner support from varying religious groups and communities in the UK, co-ordinated with far-right influencers, and mobilised football hooligans in an attempt to launch anti-Muslim rallies across the country."

"The details of meetings seen by i show how Robinson had a clear plan to use his large social media following to spread his anti-Muslim message and laid out plans to co-ordinate with other influential right-wing accounts to spread promotional videos to millions.

Robinson said he was in contact with a number of controversial figures who would help generate support for his rallies including Andrew Tate, Katie Hopkins, and Laurence Fox.

At Robinson’s July “patriot” march in Trafalgar Square, Mr Fox led a crowd of thousands towards a counter demo by Stand Up to Racism. Live-streaming on X, Mr Fox told the camera with a smile, “This is our community”, while protesters in the background chanted, “We want our country back”.

During private meetings about future rallies, Robinson insisted that any promotional video would not mention Muslims specifically, but rather call people to march in support of British values stating that the UK is under attack.

He also detailed how his media team, including three full-time employees, would specifically look for non-white faces at rallies to use in his promotional videos in a bid to join communities against British Muslims.

Yes, they have a right to march. But Y-L does not have a right to libel a Syrian boy, and counsellors' wives do not have a right to incite violence and murder online.

I support those peoples right to march in the same way as I support the right of those who march in support of Palestine. I have said this before but I have been pro choice all my life but I completely opposed the ban that some universities had on having pro life stalls at their events. You cant support the right to speak of just those you agree with.

The limits to free speech is a philosophical debate that goes beyond the likes of S Y-L.

I believe in free speech, in the sense that I would hate to live somewhere where people could be jailed (or worse) for saying they disagree with the (any) government, or that a law is wrong etc.

But even if I think a law is wrong, I accept that laws have to be obeyed (although demonstrating against them is, and should remain perfectly legal), and incitement to hatred is against the law, as is incitement to violence. I don't think that posting a guide to making and detonating bombs is ok, for instance - not that (AFAIK) Y-L has done that - and it is not ok to libel individuals like the Syrian boy in Y-L's 'documentary' (aka propaganda video), or to encourage people to set fire to hostels with people inside them, particularly during a riot.

Where the principle of free speech should intersect with the principle of the rule of law is an interesting debating point, but realistically the law has to prevail, I think.

Robinsons arrival on Friday 25th and handing himself in was all choreographed in timing with the long planned far right "Unite the Kingdom" rally in London on Saturday 26th. Thousands turned out to watch the Robinson (and friends) film, "Lawfare".

And of course, there were opportunities to call for "free Tommy Robinson" as if he were a martyr.

"Lawfare" is "against tyranny" and yes it's partly about social Media posts and arrests made on the basis of violent and racist deaths threats during the riots and in general. It's apparently OK to not just threaten in this way but organise violent riots.

Words do matter when they incite and plan and give directions go where to commit violence, when they directly suggest "bomb the mosques with the adults in them", and when individuals names and addresses as suggested targets for attack are given out.

Because that is generally the way control of speech pans out. You think that it will always be who you see as the 'good guys' who get to control it. It wont be.

madalene

It would still be horrible Maizie, but not quite as horrible as murdering 1200 people in their beds early on a Saturday morning.

I tried to ignore that comment, but murdering some 40,000 plus people in revenge is even more horrible.

MaizieD

madalene

TR writes some horrible things on the internet, as jasper’s example shows, but I’m struggling with the idea that words are worse than actual physical violence.

What if we were to substitute 'Judaism' for the word 'Islam'. Would that make any difference?

No, not to me, I’ve heard worse!

It would still be horrible Maizie, but not quite as horrible as murdering 1200 people in their beds early on a Saturday morning.

I agree with madalene and Galaxy in that words/opinions are just that, however unpleasant they are, unless they are literally inciting others to do violence to a group of people.
Saying ‘clear them off to the desert’ isn’t the worst that he’s said surely?
He’s a horrible individual and has a big following so incitement is always on the cards but free speech does matter too unless a line is well and truly crossed.

madalene

TR writes some horrible things on the internet, as jasper’s example shows, but I’m struggling with the idea that words are worse than actual physical violence.

What if we were to substitute 'Judaism' for the word 'Islam'. Would that make any difference?

Primrose53

Jane43

Primrose53

Sitting with popcorn just waiting to see whether the Labour MP thug gets jailed. He really should be.

There are sentencing guidelines, people aren’t sentenced to satisfy popular opinion. If it is a first offence of either ABH or GBH he may get a fine and/or a community order. If not a first offence there may be jail time according to the severity of the assault.

I get that but surely someone who knocks someone to the ground and carries on while he is on the ground deserves to go to prison more than people who write some words on social media that others disagree with.

He is very lucky that the man he hit did not lay there with a smashed skull or worse.

But, Jane43 that can’t be true as quite a few people who threw something or pushed someone/ hit someone or jumped on a car and damaged it were jailed recently in the riots in different locations.I read that some were first offences.

jasper16

*people who write some words on social media that others disagree with*

Here's a little taster for you

“Islam is a cancer that needs eradicating … clear them all off to the desert”

TR is a disgrace as is anybody who seeks to defend him.

Well. According to Galaxy, restricting people ability to say things like that will have an adverse effect on the vulnerable. I don't quite understand why...

TR writes some horrible things on the internet, as jasper’s example shows, but I’m struggling with the idea that words are worse than actual physical violence.

We are not defending TR we are trying to have discussions about complex issues.

people who write some words on social media that others disagree with

Here's a little taster for you

“Islam is a cancer that needs eradicating … clear them all off to the desert”

TR is a disgrace as is anybody who seeks to defend him.

Jane43

Primrose53

Sitting with popcorn just waiting to see whether the Labour MP thug gets jailed. He really should be.

There are sentencing guidelines, people aren’t sentenced to satisfy popular opinion. If it is a first offence of either ABH or GBH he may get a fine and/or a community order. If not a first offence there may be jail time according to the severity of the assault.

I get that but surely someone who knocks someone to the ground and carries on while he is on the ground deserves to go to prison more than people who write some words on social media that others disagree with.

He is very lucky that the man he hit did not lay there with a smashed skull or worse.

I am quite on the extreme side of freedom of speech mainly because I think control of speech impacts the vulnerable the most. So I think the control of speech results in worse outcomes than most speech that people can produce. Those who want to control speech tend to be very much part of the echo chamber that you describe.

When it comes to freedom of speech would those who feel it is being eroded want everyone to have the freedom to speak?
I mean would they feel happy if alongside those who peddle Islamophobia or antisemitism, an Islamic fundamentalist stood up and spouted extreme views??
If we believe all should have freedom of speech that is what it boils down to.
And as for those who just want to say mildly racist or sexist stuff etc., they do have the freedom to say what they want but just don’t want to be criticised for it, which isn’t freedom of speech at all because if they want to indulge in this then others are free to shoot them down in flames.
Nobody has the right or freedom to just say whatever they want whenever they want, that doesn’t exist, because we live in a society where there are other people, not just ourselves living in our own little echo chambers.

I dont support him strangely enough but have ongoing concerns about freedom of speech. I to be honest couldnt care less if you decide that makes me far right ( centre left all my life) those words have no meaning anymore.

I think those who support Stephen - will give him his real name - are those who also believe that there is no freedom of speech - an oft repeated lie - which basically equates with the law getting in the way of their hate speech which can and does incite violence.
However, there are those who are not as hard core as Stephen’s closest fans but have similar views about freedom of speech, and wrap their racism up in concern about immigration which generally ends up with Islamophobic hate speech which resulted in the riots earlier this year.

Oreo

I wonder why he doesn’t use his own name, which is better than Tommy Robinson.🤔

The name 'Tommy Robinson' originated in the war, when it was a general term for all British soldiers. He sees himself as standing up for British interests, even though he's Irish.

Yes, I am intrigued as to how he has the support of anyone.
He has convictions for fraud, an assault ( kicking the head) of an off duty police officer who intervened in a dispute with his wife, has been declared bankruptcy owing Inland Revenue a great deal of money..and does not attend court when required.
I understand that there are some doubts, also, about the legitimacy of his passport. He is a holocaust denier.
However, all is forgiven, it seems, by some people if he invents facts villifying a Syrian.
I am astonished that anyone can support this man. Can any of his friends here explain why?

growstuff

nanna8

I don’t know or want to know much about Tommy Robinson , he sounds like a shocker, but a jail sentence? Seriously ? Why don’t they fine the backside off him and give him community service? Strange decision.

Because it was contempt of court. He made false allegations about a young Syrian refugee, who sued him for libel and was awarded £100,000. TR was ordered not to repeat the allegations, but he deliberately did repeat them. In other words, he took no notice of the court's injunction, which led to abuse directed at the boy and his family, who had to leave their home. It had already gone beyond the fine stage.

He made a video ‘Silenced’ in which the allegation about the Syrian was repeated, the video is attached to his X account and he has refused to take it down. He has also published a fake photo of a Muslim gang supposedly engaging in violence and was fined for that. After these racially motivated actions he has called himself a journalist. It is futile fining him because his supporters just crowd fund to pay his legal costs, he lives in Spain because he has an Irish passport so community service would not be appropriate. He thinks he is above the law and his supporters think the same.

Primrose53

Sitting with popcorn just waiting to see whether the Labour MP thug gets jailed. He really should be.

There are sentencing guidelines, people aren’t sentenced to satisfy popular opinion. If it is a first offence of either ABH or GBH he may get a fine and/or a community order. If not a first offence there may be jail time according to the severity of the assault.