Tommy Robinson fight back against BBC corruption

Status
Not open for further replies.
The march was about an arrest of a woman, nothing to do with child abuse, It was totally irrelevant.

Totally irelevent.

Your in Cuckoo land...

The thread is about Tommy Robinson... How is this irelevent
 
Sponsored Links
Totally irelevent.

Your in Cuckoo land...

The thread is about Tommy Robinson... How is this irelevent
How is a march about a Muslim women being arrested relevant to Tommy Robinson and his concern with Pakistani child abuse?
Or are you looking for excuses for his Islamophobia?
 
How is a march about a Muslim women being arrested relevant to Tommy Robinson and his concern with Pakistani child abuse?
Or are you looking for excuses for his Islamophobia?



Did you listen to the vile that come from their mouths??

Thus in your opinion is exceptable because a woman was arrested....

Why was she arrested ???
 
Stacey Jaclyn Dooley
She did know TR but I hardly
Believe that's she's part of his gang.
Just to clarify: can you repeat that comment. I think you may have had difficulty with your punctuation and grammar, and I may have misunderstood your meaning.
I saw it as,
"She did know TR but I hardly (knew him.)
(I) Believe that's she's part of his gang.

But you could have mistyped it and meant:
She did know TR. But I hardly believe that's she's part of his gang
 
Sponsored Links
Did you listen to the vile that come from their mouths??

Thus in your opinion is exceptable because a woman was arrested....

Why was she arrested ???
I am not disputing the video. I am saying it is irrelevant to this topic. It has nothing to do (nor did the march) with child abuse.
In fact, did the march occur before the child abuse saga kicked off?
If that is a 'yes', then TR's Islamophobia was probably present and in evidence before the child abuse came to light.

She was arrested for being the wife of a terrorist. I'm assuming you knew that.
 
Just to clarify: can you repeat that comment. I think you may have had difficulty with your punctuation and grammar, and I may have misunderstood your meaning.
I saw it as,
"She did know TR but I hardly (knew him.)
(I) Believe that's she's part of his gang.

But you could have mistyped it and meant:
She did know TR. But I hardly believe that's she's part of his gang


Always know your loosing...

Corrected now. Thank you
 
You think it is an acceptance of losing to question one's own judgement and request a clarification to clear up any misunderstanding?
You have a strange idea of debate.
 
I am not disputing the video. I am saying it is irrelevant to this topic. It has nothing to do (nor did the march) with child abuse.


Go back to the beginning... Its about the BBCs corruption. Did you even bother to watch it.
 
Whats this about??
Look back, and you will see I have corrected it to account for the clarification in your post.
We don't want any avoidable misunderstandings.

You do seem worryingly well informed about TR.
 
Go back to the beginning... Its about the BBCs corruption. Did you even bother to watch it.
No, dunna be daft. I can guess what it was about, and I am not interested in TR's perverse brand of Islamophobia.
Why would I want to watch a video posted by a racist?
I missed that whole evening of entertainment.
Did I miss the Tommy Robinson supporters reunion?
Sorry, just to clarify what I mean. ;)
I didn't miss it in the way that I would have wanted to have seen it.
I missed it in the sense that I didn't know it was happening.
 
BTW, I have to say, Stacey Dooley does not look like the typical passive reporter.
She appears to be more of an activist in that video.
 
BTW, I have to say, Stacey Dooley does not look like the typical passive reporter.
She appears to be more of an activist in that video.

Doesn't say so on her wiki page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stacey_Dooley

I'm not sure an activist would be working for the BBC or winning Strictly :)

She is just an "English television presenter, journalist, documentary filmmaker, media personality and author"

Funnily enough, that's what Tommy is too. :)
 
No, dunna be daft. I can guess what it was about, and I am not interested in TR's perverse brand of Islamophobia.
Why would I want to watch a video posted by a racist?
I missed that whole evening of entertainment.

Sorry, just to clarify what I mean. ;)
I didn't miss it in the way that I would have wanted to have seen it.
I missed it in the sense that I didn't know it was happening.

Islamaphobia or race had absolutely nothing to do with Panodrama, it was all about how the BBC are corrupt, racist, homophobic and so on - how they were not behaving within the standards that they are supposed to be held to.
 
Which is obviously not correct. There are other nationalities within the Semites ethnicity.
But as it is a socially constructed concept, the name does not matter too much, as long as we all understand what it means.



But as it is a socially constructed concept, the name does not matter too much, as long as we all understand what it means.



I demonstrated quite clearly this morning that it is the only possible definition that could be applied.
But my explanation this morning was deleted within minutes. I was the only poster in that thread. There was no abuse, no insults.
The only plausible explanation is that it was deleted to avoid someone's embarrassing flawed and racist ideologies.

If you can use your influence to prevent it from being deleted again, I'll happily re-post it.
Referring to Jews as Semites is a bit like referring to Poles as Europeans.
Polish people are also European people ,sometimes Polish people are attacked, they are attacked just for being Polish not for being European although Poles belong to the Greater European Language and cultural group.
Instead of using the term "antisemitic" the term "antiJewish" would be more accurate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top