Tommy Robinson

Outlaw Pete

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Yeah, not one ...





Or are you going to absurdly claim that suggesting the whole thing was concocted doesn't mean that they are saying the girl isn't being honest.

Wouldn't it make the most sense to allow an investigation? I completely accept this may have occurred. But so far, Tommy seems to be using this for self promotion. So either he's a disgrace of a father who is using abuse to promote himself to get donations. Or it's a concoction of his. None present him in a good light and condemning a random person based on YouTube videos isn't remotely beneficial and endangers a case getting convicted.

Outlaw Pete

Boggles wrote: »

Lolz. From a guy who still thinks Harvey Weinstein did nothing wrong.

Get up that fúcking you yard you absolute hypocrite.

Stop lying please. From the recent thread:

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It's clear Harvey is something of sleazeball and abused his position no end, intimidating young women at every chance he could get, using his position in the film industry as leverage but he wasn't charged with being a sleazeball creep. Had he been then I'd be the first to say he's guilty as charged, but rape and sexual assault are another matter..

Now, if you want to challenge my take on the lack of evidence in that recent case, have the chutzpah to bump that thread and do so. However, there is no hypocrisy here as I have pointed already out. Here's the post again as you seem to have missed it:

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Seen this said a few times and it makes no sense whatsoever. #ibelieveher is propagated by those who suggest we should believe any woman that makes a sexual assault allegation, even when there is a mountain of evidence to suggest that the complainant may have an ulterior motive for making it, such as weaponizing them for political purposes as we see a lot of in the States. It's nonsensical to suggest we should believe all allegations purely because the person making them is female

To suggest that those who believe due process should be applied in the above cases are some how now hypocrites because and inconsistent because they feel the accusation of an eight year old should be listened to is laughable. Have we said the man doesn't deserve his day in court? No. Have we said he must be guilty because a girl said it? No. We have just said that it's clear the girl is being genuine and it should be looked into and she should not be used to have a pop at her Dad because his politics don't happen to align with that of liberals.

The only hypocrites are those that fall over themselves to believe every sexual assault allegation which is made against men, but yet look the other way when the politics of it don't align with their oft trotted out narratives.

As I said at the start of the thread, I also thought it might be something which was made up BEFORE I viewed the footage, but once I had seen it I could tell that this little girl believes what she is saying and that's all it should take for people to park their political agendas in my view. Lots of liberal politicians I can't stand but if I seen footage of their 8 year old daughter, being as genuine as I feel this girl was about having been assaulted, there is not a chance I would be on here implying she was lying.

RWCNT

Snickers Man wrote: »

What's he actually saying in the original video? It sounds like "he folked my daughter" or was it "he photoed my daughter"?

There's a definite "Oh" sound but I can't make out what word he's using. Then again, I'm closer to 60 than 50 and not down with the street lingo of you young people. So if anyone could enlighten me I'd be grateful.

Just how severe a sexual assault is "Folking" or "photoing" or whatever word he's saying?

This is why I have a problem with the weasel term "sexual assault". It covers such a broad spectrum of behaviour and carries such a potentially dangerous loaded message.

Could it be that a man (possibly not the fairest skinned in the place) was using his phone and Mr Robinson/Yaxley-Lennon inadvertently (or perhaps not) jumped to the worst possible conclusion?

I only ask

I think it's "groped" he's saying.

It's possible that someone did that, of course, but I don't believe what TR is spouting about the person admitting it to the police and being let go without charge for a second.

And of course, Tommy is making videos about this and encouraging his supporters to turn up on his court date so he can get his name in the papers again and presumably drum up more donations. I was only thinking the other day how I hadn't heard anything about this twerp in a while, I suppose he needs the exposure.

str8talkingguy

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Or are you going to absurdly claim that suggesting the whole thing was concocted doesn't mean that they are saying the girl isn't being honest.

Well he is unscrupulous enough to video tape her reliving it so he can record it for hits.

The last thing a real loving parent does is make their child relive something like this unless absolutely necessary,which is while speaking to the relevant authorities,otherwise they want to make them completely forget the whole thing not force her to relive and relive it so he can record it for his followers to get donations and hits.

Billy Mays

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

This keeps getting posted, where has it been reported there were 3 men? Wheres thenproof these "3 men" were not there with their families?

It's on the videos on TR News so it must be true

ohnonotgmail

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Stop lying please. From the recent thread:



Now, if you want to challenge my take on the lack of evidence in that recent case, have the chutzpah to bump that thread and do so. However, there is no hypocrisy here as I have pointed already out. Here's the post again as you seem to have missed it:

in the weinstein case they are no longer allegations. they have been proven in court and you still dont believe them.

Outlaw Pete

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Those are clearly directed at Stephen. Did you even read them?

The irony of you asking me did I not read something. Did YOU not read:

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Or are you going to absurdly claim that suggesting the whole thing was concocted doesn't mean that they are saying the girl isn't being honest.

And that's precisely what you are now doing, trying to suggest that saying Tommy made it up is someone not also saying his daughter is making it up. They are not mutually exclusive. If Tommy is lying, his daughter also has to be. This is not complicated.

Here's the girl relaying what happened to her again. I suggest you (and everyone else suggesting that she is part of some elaborate lie) watch it. It's time stamped but in case YouTube block its hotlinking (as they did with the last one posted) you can hear her describe what happened at 44 seconds in:

Outlaw Pete

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

in the weinstein case they are no longer allegations. they have been proven in court and you still dont believe them.

As I said to the other user: bump that thread if you have an issue with how I see that case with regards to lack of substantial evidence and how I feel certain allegations entered into evidence should not have been ( with regards to the prior bad acts law). Didn't you lot question the verdict of the Belfast Rape trial by the way? Course ye did. Again letting politics dictate how you see sexual assault trials. Not so with me. Harvey gave millions to the Clintons, raving leftist politically speaking, and yet I had no trouble parking my political views and judging his trial on the merits of the evidence. Not everyone can do that though it would seem.

ancapailldorcha

str8talkingguy wrote: »

Well he is unscrupulous enough to video tape her reliving it so he can record it for hits.

The last thing a real loving parent does is make their child relive something like this unless absolutely necessary,which is while speaking to the relevant authorities,otherwise they want to make them completely forget the whole thing not force her to relive and relive it so he can record it for his followers to get donations and hits.

It's actually insane that he would force her to relive the ordeal for profit. I think on some level, his acolytes know this so they deceitfully pretend that anyone who criticises Yaxley-Lennon is actually implying that a child is willfully lying about being molested. She is nothing more than a pawn to them.

ohnonotgmail

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

As I said to the other user: bump that thread if you have an issue with how I see that case with regards to lack of substantial evidence and how I feel certain allegations entered into evidence should not have been ( with regards to the prior bad acts law). Didn't you lot question the verdict of the Belfast Rape trial by the way? Course ye did. Again letting politics dictate how you see sexual assault trials. Not so with me. Harvey gave millions to the Clintons, raving leftist politically speaking, and yet I had no trouble parking my political views and judging his trial on the merits of the evidence. Not everyone can do that though it would seem.

it shows far to the right you are when you describe the clintons as raving leftists. You made your judgement on his guilt beforet the trial and that judgement has not changed despite the guilty verdict. not sure how that qualifies as judging on the merits of the evidence.

Snake Plisken

str8talkingguy wrote: »

Well he is unscrupulous enough to video tape her reliving it so he can record it for hits.

The last thing a real loving parent does is make their child relive something like this unless absolutely necessary,which is while speaking to the relevant authorities,otherwise they want to make them completely forget the whole thing not force her to relive and relive it so he can record it for his followers to get donations and hits.

You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't with you boys! I posted the video with the girl and Alister/Boggles said basically it was probably it was fake after requesting the video!

Snake Plisken

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's actually insane that he would force her to relive the ordeal for profit. I think on some level, his acolytes know this so they deceitfully pretend that anyone who criticises Yaxley-Lennon is actually implying that a child is willfully lying about being molested. She is nothing more than a pawn to them.

As if you give a about his child Mr Wannabe Solictor!

ohnonotgmail

Snake Plisken wrote: »

As if you give a about his child Mr Wannabe Solictor!

do you consider it normal parenting to video your child reliving a traumatic experience and then using that video to ask for donations?

RWCNT

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The irony of you asking me did I not read something. Did YOU not read:



And that's precisely what you are now doing, trying to suggest that saying Tommy made it up is someone not also saying his daughter is making it up. They are not mutually exclusive. If Tommy is lying, his daughter also has to be. This is not complicated.

Here's the girl relaying what happened to her again. I suggest you (and everyone else suggesting that she is part of some elaborate lie) watch it. It's time stamped but in case YouTube block its hotlinking (as they did with the last one posted) you can hear her describe what happened at 44 seconds in:

She's eight years old child with the misfortune of being brought up by a racist scumbag with a noted history of fraud and a flair for self promotion. People aren't suggesting she's his accomplice in this, they're suggesting he's manipulating her.

Of course, you can take that to mean people are accusing the child of lying, but to do so is extremely reductive, not that you care, so long as it supports your trite "Oh look at these hypocritical liberals" narrative.

Throw Tommy a donation if you're feeling so bad for him and his family at the moment, he'll no doubt be facing another "death sentence" in prison soon over this, your help is clearly needed. Which is why he recorded the conversation you linked to and posted it on the internet.

Outlaw Pete

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's actually insane that he would force her to relive the ordeal for profit. I think on some level, his acolytes know this so they deceitfully pretend that anyone who criticises Yaxley-Lennon is actually implying that a child is willfully lying about being molested. She is nothing more than a pawn to them.

The only one that is undermining that young girl for their benefit is people like you who are suggesting her clearly genuine relaying of what happened to her is actually not genuine at all, and in fact she's just saying it to please her Dad. But that's not saying she's not telling the truth of course, oh no, not at all.

Look, you revealed yourself when you jumped into the thread two footed with your first post saying you didn't believe what was said (and got over 60+ thanks and counting for doing so). You hadn't even watched the footage at the time. In fact, you hadn't even watched the footage by your 2nd post either as what you said in it was clearly nonsense:

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Yaxley-Lennon should have informed the Police if this happened. The fact that he didn't and decided to film himself smacking someone suggests that he's just after some publicity.

Love how you use the word fact there as if that would somehow make your what you said true.

Park your political beliefs for two seconds and listen to the girl. There is no way she is making up what happened to her. As I said, there are too many times she says 'No' to her Dad when asked about what happened. She is telling him what happened her, not the other way around, and I don't blame him for wanting to capture her retelling of events as there was of course going to be people saying he made it up given his past. Which is understandable, what isn't is saying his daughter is given how genuine she clearly is being in that audio.

Snake Plisken

Billy Mays wrote: »

Making up stuff seems to be a common trait in Tommeh's Boards.ie fanboys

A bit rich coming from you and the other keyboard warriors!

Outlaw Pete

Billy Mays wrote: »

Making up stuff seems to be a common trait in Tommeh's Boards.ie fanboys

A scattergun post but just for the record, I'm no fanboy:

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Anyone that sucker punches someone is a cowardly cunt, don't care what they've done.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I'd say what with Tommy being something of a twat at times he gave him a slap

Boggles

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I also thought it might be something which was made up BEFORE I viewed the footage,

It's not footage, it's Stephen talking to "somebody" as his phone points to the ceiling.

Was this recorded before he assaulted your man or during the 3 hour wait for the police to get there after he assaulted your man?

I'll give you a clue, you don't know.

It's not fúcking evidence.

It's a 15 minute heavily edited narrated grift video with absolute no verifiable context. It's sole purpose it to steal money off simpletons so Stephen can keep himself out of prison because of yet more criminal thuggery.

As for Weinstein you had made up your mind very early on he was not guilty of any criminal offence, on a trial that largely hinged on verbal evidence you decided even after the trial there was not enough to convict.

But because Stephen says so on his "news" site you are convinced there was 3 Asian "paedos" touching up children in the centre parcs that day.

You are an absolute parody of your self lad.

LincolnsBeard

So many wimps on this board.

If my daughter told me a man pinched her bum in a swimming pool, and he admitted it to me, I would not let that man leave the premises either.

Hearing that he was in the pool with two other adult men would also send alarm bells ringing.

And if I was Tommy Robinson I would film every single situation I was in, including this. All of the news articles following this stated "Far right extremist arrested for assault in centre parcs" , failing to mention the allegation in the headline.

His website seems to be the only place he is actually allowed a response to allegations made against him, being that he has been deplatformed from all social media platforms.

Reading the beginning of this thread just displays the uninformed hatred some people have for him.

Timberrrrrrrr

Tasfasdf wrote: »

Yeah its sad to think instead of going to work or doing something productive with their lifes they spend 8-10 hours on boards.ie fighting 'fascists'.

Your 1st post yesterday 13.50

Your last post 22.22

11 posts

Total time 8 hours 30 mins

Lonesomerhodes

A total just shy of 8 hours.

15 posts

Oh the irony :pac:

Boggles

LincolnsBeard wrote: »

And if I was Tommy Robinson I would film every single situation I was in, including this. All of the news articles following this stated "Far right extremist arrested for assault in centre parcs" , failing to mention the allegation in the headline.

Literally every media outlet I have read does not mention it. Not even the redtops.

Why do you think that is?

They are all in cahoots and want to bring Stephen down?

Or do you think there might be another more plausible reason?

Snake Plisken

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Your 1st post yesterday 13.50

Your last post 22.22

11 posts

Total time 8 hours 30 mins

Lonesomerhodes

A total just shy of 8 hours.

15 posts

Oh the irony :pac:

You're in the UK! You should head to the trial and tell Tommy and his supports what you really think of him outside the courthouse if you feel so strongly about him! I No that's never going to happen is it!

Snake Plisken

Boggles wrote: »

It's not footage, it's Stephen talking to "somebody" as his phone points to the ceiling.

Was this recorded before he assaulted your man or during the 3 hour wait for the police to get there after he assaulted your man?

I'll give you a clue, you don't know.

It's not fúcking evidence.

It's a 15 minute heavily edited narrated grift video with absolute no verifiable context. It's sole purpose it to steal money off simpletons so Stephen can keep himself out of prison because of yet more criminal thuggery.

As for Weinstein you had made up your mind very early on he was not guilty of any criminal offence, on a trial that largely hinged on verbal evidence you decided even after the trial there was not enough to convict.

But because Stephen says so on his "news" site you are convinced there was 3 Asian "paedos" touching up children in the centre parcs that day.

You are an absolute parody of your self lad.

You seem to be getting upset there, maybe leave the box room and go out and get some fresh air and calm down there "Lad"!

Billy Mays

Snake Plisken wrote: »

A bit rich coming from you and the other keyboard warriors!

It's not really.

But hey, you keep fighting the good fight and carry on white knighting the convicted racist scumbag/fraudster if it makes you feel good. Maybe you can throw in a donation to Tommeh's latest gofundme and post up a screenshot

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

A scattergun post but just for the record, I'm no fanboy:

Just for the record, I didn't say you were

Timberrrrrrrr

Snake Plisken wrote: »

You're in the UK! You should head to the trial and tell Tommy and his supports what you really think of him outside the courthouse if you feel so strongly about him! I No that's never going to happen is it!

Timmy came to my town, thought the people would.love him and he would get elected MEP. He got milkshaked and laughed out of the town. When it was shown on the news that night it was hilarious to hear half the pub shouting wanker! At the TV when he came on and laugh as he was humiliated.

2% timmy skulked out of the count centre proving he has no support of the people. I would have no issue with telling him to his face that he Is a prick.

Lonesomerhodes

Tasfasdf wrote: »

Yeah its sad to think instead of going to work or doing something productive with their lifes they spend 8-10 hours on boards.ie fighting 'fascists'.

The astonishing thing is these dolehead keyboard warriors actually think they are doing something productive or relevant with their time!.

Boggles

I do love the projection from the constant "new" members.

All half dozen of them.

Timberrrrrrrr

Boggles wrote: »

I do love the projection from the constant "new" members.

All half dozen of them.

They say anyone posting over the space of 8 hours in a day is a "dole head" yet they post over the space of 8 hours a day themselves :pac:

Boggles

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

They say anyone posting over the space of 8 hours in a day is a "dole head" yet they post over the space of 8 hours a day themselves :pac:

Self awareness would not really be a strong point TBF.

Timberrrrrrrr

Boggles wrote: »

Self awareness would not really be a strong point TBF.

Makes a change from being called a Soros shill I suppose.