Why Do The Police Keep Arresting Tommy Robinson?

[JanetJ123]

Of course there bloody well should. Do you think anti-semites should be able to protest in support of the Holocaust outside a synagogue? Do you think paedophiles should be allowed to protest in support of child abuse outside a school? Do you think rapists should be allowed to demonstrate in favour of their favourite pastime outside a women's refuge?

 

Calm down dear. They are hardly peaceful protests. They are all protesting in favour of violent criminal acts.

[LeMaquis]

They are hardly peaceful protests. They are all protesting in favour of violent criminal acts.

 

Which sums up Tommy Robinson and his mates quite nicely.

[JanetJ123]

Which sums up Tommy Robinson and his mates quite nicely.

 

See... just mud slinging again, no substance to your argument.

[SevenRivers]

Of course there bloody well should. Do you think anti-semites should be able to protest in support of the Holocaust outside a synagogue? Do you think paedophiles should be allowed to protest in support of child abuse outside a school? Do you think rapists should be allowed to demonstrate in favour of their favourite pastime outside a women's refuge?

 

That's an interesting proposition.

 

What if there was such an anti-Semitic group in our society (for the sake of argument let us say they are Neo-Nazis). Let us assume they have cultural centres dotted across the UK where Neo-Nazis the land over can worship Hitler under Swastika banners. What if this Neo-Nazi group were incredibly intolerant towards other groups such as gays, also espoused extremely misogynistic practices, and wanted to convert many others to their brand of Neo-Nazism. Let us say a small but significant enough minority of them were extremists, who regularly plot to kill the general populace with bombs, for resisting their Neo-Nazi ideals.

 

Would you object to people wanting to protest against such a group? In fact why wouldn't you protest against such a group?

[Dentzler]

British? I mean anyone with a British passport, that includes a multitude of Races, Religions and Cultures...

 

Overseas people can protest if they want but they are just that, visitors, and shouldn't afford the same rights as us.

 

I do not have any passport at all, so which 'rights' shouldn't I be granted?

 

---------- Post added 11-09-2013 at 00:05 ----------

 

Of course there bloody well should. Do you think anti-semites should be able to protest in support of the Holocaust outside a synagogue? Do you think paedophiles should be allowed to protest in support of child abuse outside a school? Do you think rapists should be allowed to demonstrate in favour of their favourite pastime outside a women's refuge?

 

Interesting point, where do we draw the line? Maintaining peace and public order inevitably restricts all protest activities in certain ways.

 

I personally think let them all protest no matter what they're saying, instigating or wanting.

 

It's up to us to pick and choose whom we take notice of. The idea of free speech is that everyone can express themselves. The vast majority of people are decent and reasonable, forcing these nutcases underground only gives them credibility. Give them all a platform and they will show themselves up.

[Octagon]

I do not have any passport at all, so which 'rights' shouldn't I be granted?

 

---------- Post added 11-09-2013 at 00:05 ----------

 

 

Interesting point, where do we draw the line? Maintaining peace and public order inevitably restricts all protest activities in certain ways.

 

I personally think let them all protest no matter what they're saying, instigating or wanting.

 

It's up to us to pick and choose whom we take notice of. The idea of free speech is that everyone can express themselves. The vast majority of people are decent and reasonable, forcing these nutcases underground only gives them credibility. Give them all a platform and they will show themselves up.

 

This is, without a doubt, the most sensible and measured thing anyone has said in this thread so far.

[LeMaquis]

Interesting point, where do we draw the line? Maintaining peace and public order inevitably restricts all protest activities in certain ways.

 

I personally think let them all protest no matter what they're saying, instigating or wanting.

 

If you admit that restricting protests protects peace and public order then by implication allowing all protests must lead to a decline in peace and public order. One role of the state is to protect the public, something you're now saying it shouldn't do.

 

It's up to us to pick and choose whom we take notice of. The idea of free speech is that everyone can express themselves. The vast majority of people are decent and reasonable, forcing these nutcases underground only gives them credibility. Give them all a platform and they will show themselves up.

 

We can't just pick and choose who we ignore. If someone stood outside your front door with a megaphone how would you ignore them? That person may well show themselves up but how long would you tolerate it for?

 

---------- Post added 11-09-2013 at 08:04 ----------

 

This is, without a doubt, the most sensible and measured thing anyone has said in this thread so far.

 

No it's not.

 

---------- Post added 11-09-2013 at 08:09 ----------

 

See... just mud slinging again, no substance to your argument.

 

It's bottles the EDL like to sling, usually at the police.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cq2385Ic7vM

[Chris_Sleeps]

We need to examine Yaxley's opinions more. Get him on Question Time, listen to his point of view and then tear it to pieces with facts.

 

Mud slinging hasn't worked.

Why hasn't mud slinging worked?

The EDL have no power and no popular support. That sounds like a good outcome to me.

 

You seem to think that Tommy Robinson is a politician, with real ideas. Opposing violent Islam is sensible, most people hold that position. Marching a load of drunk blokes around and having a ruck is where his politics meets the sticky end of street violence. What's to debate about?

 

Tommy Robinson on Question Time would be another chance for his mistruths and empty narrative. The peaceful EDL who fight, with popular support and no membership, everyone agrees but nobody can join, not racist but calling people pakis and rats, not violent but smashing something up, not Nazi but doing a salute. That type of crap.

[hackey lad]

Which sums up Tommy Robinson and his mates quite nicely.

 

how many peaceful uaf protests have you seen ?

 

---------- Post added 11-09-2013 at 22:28 ----------

 

That's an interesting proposition.

 

What if there was such an anti-Semitic group in our society (for the sake of argument let us say they are Neo-Nazis). Let us assume they have cultural centres dotted across the UK where Neo-Nazis the land over can worship Hitler under Swastika banners. What if this Neo-Nazi group were incredibly intolerant towards other groups such as gays, also espoused extremely misogynistic practices, and wanted to convert many others to their brand of Neo-Nazism. Let us say a small but significant enough minority of them were extremists, who regularly plot to kill the general populace with bombs, for resisting their Neo-Nazi ideals.

 

Would you object to people wanting to protest against such a group? In fact why wouldn't you protest against such a group?

 

if such a group existed surely they would be protected by freedom of speech ,or are you against that?

 

---------- Post added 11-09-2013 at 22:34 ----------

 

If you admit that restricting protests protects peace and public order then by implication allowing all protests must lead to a decline in peace and public order. One role of the state is to protect the public, something you're now saying it shouldn't do.

 

 

 

We can't just pick and choose who we ignore. If someone stood outside your front door with a megaphone how would you ignore them? That person may well show themselves up but how long would you tolerate it for?

 

---------- Post added 11-09-2013 at 08:04 ----------

 

 

No it's not.

 

---------- Post added 11-09-2013 at 08:09 ----------

 

 

It's bottles the EDL like to sling, usually at the police.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cq2385Ic7vM

 

so there are no videos on youtube of the uaf abusing the police?

[LeMaquis]

if such a group existed surely they would be protected by freedom of speech ,or are you against that?

 

so there are no videos on youtube of the uaf abusing the police?

 

I think you missed SevenRivers' subtle sarcasm. He was referring to mosques.

 

I'm sure there are videos of the UAF abusing the police but this thread is about the EDL leader getting arrested at a demo. Or several demos.