ormester101 Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 You're answering a different question - you're speculating on his intentions for making the walk in the first place. I was asking if you had any idea why he chose to deliberately ignore the limits imposed on his walk. That isn't why he was arrested. He was arrested because he chose to ignore the limits placed on his choice of route. Exactly the same laws were used to arrest a large number of anti fascists a couple of weeks ago. They sat down in a road to try and block a march by the BNP. You condemn those arrests equally don't you? so have yo seen the video where tommy is asking all the time where to go to me he seemed ok to work with the police . the walk was for amelia mae and yes they walked through a muslim area of london but why in the 21st century is there no go areas? ---------- Post added 30-06-2013 at 12:09 ---------- sorry for apologising, seems your far too nasty to accept apologising when i posted something wrongly ---------- Post added 30-06-2013 at 12:04 ---------- as i see it they had a predefined route that they knew about they chose to detour off it no asking as they went needed no but they asked officers which way to go and to be honest the police have made themselves look like fools ---------- Post added 30-06-2013 at 12:11 ---------- The police told them in advance of the march that they couldn't walk through the area. They then tried to walk through the area. They were in breach of the conditions imposed on the march and that's why they were arrested. As I said in my first post, the rights and wrongs of the legislation are one matter. But I was responding to a post that basically stated that the EDL had been somehow 'proved right' by this police response because criticising Islam is illegal. It isn't, and that's Tommy Robinson's line, and repeating it uncritically with no acknowledgment that the police's control over protests applies across the spectrum just seems a bit off to me. ---------- Post added 30-06-2013 at 12:06 ---------- Yes, UAF are definitely the bigger problem here. That and our amazingly left-wing government and police force who of course are so extremely right on that they don't dare let a few racists just have their say. It's a cruel, hard world, isn't it? sarcasm isnt your forte dear stick to tree hugging your far better at that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 Nasty? You mean as nasty as posting a blatant untruth then leaving it there instead of deleting it? You're the nasty one. Prove me wrong by apologising and removing the lie then youll see how nice i can be. it wasnt a blatant untruth it was posted after the quote you replied to but didnt reply to that bit until later on after i'd posted mine, i saw it and edited in an apology i didnt delete because A: you cant B: if i removed the text and somebody had already quoted me itd have looked odd, so i left it and edited in an apology Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 the walk was for amelia mae A cause that has been rejected by the charity, without her or her parents involvement, and seperate fundraising from the EDL. [source] Using a young child's cancer to push more EDL nonsense is low - beyond words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 A cause that has been rejected by the charity, without her or her parents involvement, and seperate fundraising from the EDL. [source] Using a young child's cancer to push more EDL nonsense is low - beyond words. its a mistruth like all the far rights "excuses" they lie and cheat all the time, their oxygen is lies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 A cause that has been rejected by the charity, without her or her parents involvement, and seperate fundraising from the EDL. [source] Using a young child's cancer to push more EDL nonsense is low - beyond words. That I can certainly agree with, I love that the charity won't take their money and is in fact going to reimburse the campaign themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 That I can certainly agree with, I love that the charity won't take their money and is in fact going to reimburse the campaign themselves. thats the thing, they keep using these excuses to peddle their filth but they are seen straight through now that charity help for heroes and lee rigbys family all want no help from them, all decent people who see them for what they are pity idiots on here who consistantly apologise for them and twist the blame dont Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_W Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 A cause that has been rejected by the charity, without her or her parents involvement, and seperate fundraising from the EDL. [source] Using a young child's cancer to push more EDL nonsense is low - beyond words. Yep political correctness once again, hey people have to be pc these days or risk losing their livelihoods or credibility, that's the situation that has been created ..... however there is a strong undercurrent of sympathy for the EDL being fuelled by all the current nonsense, get away from your keyboard and you might notice it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 Yep political correctness once again, hey people have to be pc these days or risk losing their livelihoods or credibility, that's the situation that has been created ..... however there is a strong undercurrent of sympathy for the EDL being fuelled by all the current nonsense, get away from your keyboard and you might notice it yes blame it on the "pc brigade" rather than a hateful bunch of bigots causing trouble and strife who people see straight through and want nothing to do with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenRivers Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 That isn't why he was arrested. He was arrested because he chose to ignore the limits placed on his choice of route. Exactly the same laws were used to arrest a large number of anti fascists a couple of weeks ago. They sat down in a road to try and block a march by the BNP. You condemn those arrests equally don't you? Not the same then is it? The anti-fascists were actively trying to prevent others from going about their lawful business. Two people walking on a street doesn't prevent anybody from doing anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 It's probably this spellchecker on here, I've pointed it out before. It even makes me doubt myself and my spelling is pretty good normally. The spell checker will be in your browser not on the web site. You'll need to install an add-on for your browser. e.g. Firefox's is here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.