Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"50 hostages for 150 prisoners... only one winner there and it will continue " Terrorism works. That's what makes it legitimate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"50 hostages for 150 prisoners... only one winner there and it will continue " 13,000 snuffed No winners there | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"50 hostages for 150 prisoners... only one winner there and it will continue 13,000 snuffed No winners there " It's a matter of perspective. 13000 glorious martyrs in heaven and concessions from Israel. Some people will believe it's a win. Whatever the case, the citizens of Gaza lost, big time. But Hamas will claim a win. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m sure Hamas are using the break to feed their people and take care of their medical needs. Still it isn’t really clear what the Israelis have been up to. According to the media all they’ve been doing since October 7th is bombing hospitals. Maybe if they’d focused more on military targets there would have been more progress." As of 2nd November an estimated 25,000 tonnes of bombs have fallen on 73 square kilometres Reported to be now double that dropped on Hiroshima | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m sure Hamas are using the break to feed their people and take care of their medical needs." Moussa Abu Marzouk is quoted as saying they its not their responsibility to do that. It's the UN's responsibility (and Israel's). https://www.memri.org/reports/hamas-official-mousa-abu-marzouk-tunnels-gaza-were-built-protect-hamas-fighters-not "Still it isn’t really clear what the Israelis have been up to. According to the media all they’ve been doing since October 7th is bombing hospitals. Maybe if they’d focused more on military targets there would have been more progress." It would appear so. In military circles, though, the progress through a hostile urban environment is considered remarkably quick and will inform most armies pursuing a similar goal in the future. See further on Rand Corporation https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2023/11/the-wests-incoherent-critique-of-israels-gaza-strategy.html A broader question: is Israel achieving its goals? Despite what's broadly a successful campaign militarily, it's goals are unclear and negotiating hostages at this point suggest weakness, which is more around political pressure. As for a focus on military targets, there are only hybrid targets, of course. Again, Israel and Gazans lose. Hamas thinks they're winning. The only actual winner is Iran. They achieved all that they wanted and more. Israel and Gaza are both having their strings pulled by Iran. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m sure Hamas are using the break to feed their people and take care of their medical needs. Moussa Abu Marzouk is quoted as saying they its not their responsibility to do that. It's the UN's responsibility (and Israel's). https://www.memri.org/reports/hamas-official-mousa-abu-marzouk-tunnels-gaza-were-built-protect-hamas-fighters-not Still it isn’t really clear what the Israelis have been up to. According to the media all they’ve been doing since October 7th is bombing hospitals. Maybe if they’d focused more on military targets there would have been more progress. It would appear so. In military circles, though, the progress through a hostile urban environment is considered remarkably quick and will inform most armies pursuing a similar goal in the future. See further on Rand Corporation https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2023/11/the-wests-incoherent-critique-of-israels-gaza-strategy.html A broader question: is Israel achieving its goals? Despite what's broadly a successful campaign militarily, it's goals are unclear and negotiating hostages at this point suggest weakness, which is more around political pressure. As for a focus on military targets, there are only hybrid targets, of course. Again, Israel and Gazans lose. Hamas thinks they're winning. The only actual winner is Iran. They achieved all that they wanted and more. Israel and Gaza are both having their strings pulled by Iran." I would go further in terms of whose strings Iran are pulling, quite a reach I would say… | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I would go further in terms of whose strings Iran are pulling, quite a reach I would say… " Absolutely, Saudi Arabia and the US. They played it masterfully and, so far, are winning. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I would go further in terms of whose strings Iran are pulling, quite a reach I would say… Absolutely, Saudi Arabia and the US. They played it masterfully and, so far, are winning." And let’s not forget the influence they have with Russia in their war.. They’ve taken a big step in how far they’re influencing international events, the question is will they continue to go unchecked? The mood changed when Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, in my opinion | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m sure Hamas are using the break to feed their people and take care of their medical needs. Still it isn’t really clear what the Israelis have been up to. According to the media all they’ve been doing since October 7th is bombing hospitals. Maybe if they’d focused more on military targets there would have been more progress. As of 2nd November an estimated 25,000 tonnes of bombs have fallen on 73 square kilometres Reported to be now double that dropped on Hiroshima" ............. I think thr japs might think hiroshima was worse off. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And 15 minutes into the ceasefire. Hamas started shooting rockets. " And isreal still taking prisoners/hostages during ceasefire | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And 15 minutes into the ceasefire. Hamas started shooting rockets. And isreal still taking prisoners/hostages during ceasefire " Have you got a link to proof of this? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And 15 minutes into the ceasefire. Hamas started shooting rockets. And isreal still taking prisoners/hostages during ceasefire Have you got a link to proof of this?" . BBC World at One on Radio 4 . Reporting no rockets fired but both sides accusing each other of sporadic gun fire , , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And 15 minutes into the ceasefire. Hamas started shooting rockets. And isreal still taking prisoners/hostages during ceasefire Have you got a link to proof of this?" Watch the news | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" So for Hamas to come out with this in a press conference, they would have to be super sure otherwise both Isreal and Qatar would be able to call them out on it" You cannot trust anything coming from Israel, Hamas or Qatar now. It's all theatre. There's a very delicate balance of trust and all sorts of reasons for saying, or not saying, anything at all (e.g. saving face, logistical issues, etc.). At the end of the day, Hamas is almost certain to hand over hostages by approximately midnight, because Israel can simply turn on the war again, with a couple of days grace. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Check out this tweet from Leo Varadkar below: “This is a day of enormous joy and relief for Emily Hand and her family. An innocent child who was lost has now been found and returned, and we breathe a massive sigh of relief. Our prayers have been answered” By “lost” does he mean brutally abducted by terrorists. Talk about obfuscation. "I suspect it's politicians talk to describe the heinous crime but worried of the reaction back home if he actually says it. Ireland are not immune to the recent problems. Not sure if it was northern or southern Ireland but the other day a council meeting was ambushed by pro Palestinian protesters with a banner saying expel the Israeli ambassador. Seems acceptable but it was soon noted that all the letters 'S' in the words were written in the same way as the Nazi SS used to use. Never did find out if that was deemed unacceptable by the police. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Check out this tweet from Leo Varadkar below: “This is a day of enormous joy and relief for Emily Hand and her family. An innocent child who was lost has now been found and returned, and we breathe a massive sigh of relief. Our prayers have been answered” By “lost” does he mean brutally abducted by terrorists. Talk about obfuscation.
I suspect it's politicians talk to describe the heinous crime but worried of the reaction back home if he actually says it. Ireland are not immune to the recent problems. Not sure if it was northern or southern Ireland but the other day a council meeting was ambushed by pro Palestinian protesters with a banner saying expel the Israeli ambassador. Seems acceptable but it was soon noted that all the letters 'S' in the words were written in the same way as the Nazi SS used to use. Never did find out if that was deemed unacceptable by the police."Politician's are filling their pants on how to put a positive spin on recent events with public reaction to the Ali akbar stabber | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Check out this tweet from Leo Varadkar below: “This is a day of enormous joy and relief for Emily Hand and her family. An innocent child who was lost has now been found and returned, and we breathe a massive sigh of relief. Our prayers have been answered” By “lost” does he mean brutally abducted by terrorists. Talk about obfuscation.
I suspect it's politicians talk to describe the heinous crime but worried of the reaction back home if he actually says it. Ireland are not immune to the recent problems. Not sure if it was northern or southern Ireland but the other day a council meeting was ambushed by pro Palestinian protesters with a banner saying expel the Israeli ambassador. Seems acceptable but it was soon noted that all the letters 'S' in the words were written in the same way as the Nazi SS used to use. Never did find out if that was deemed unacceptable by the police."How weak to not be able to tell the truth. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well it looks like the 2nd lot of releases has been delayed…. And it look like it is Hamas are accusing Israel of not abiding by the deal Huge part of the deal not mentioned on here was that 200 trucks of humanitarian aid was also to be allowed in as well…. Separated between 130 trucks going to the south and 70 trucks going to the north, Hamas are accusing Israel of only allowing 3 trucks in the north.. and 100 trucks in total They are also accusing Isreal of manipulating the prisoner release names, and still flying spy drones The last 2 can be disputed…. But since the agreement was mediated by the Qataris , it would be easy to know how many aid trucks crossed… and since it was the Palestinian Red Cross who were supposed to help deliver they would know what went where! So for Hamas to come out with this in a press conference, they would have to be super sure otherwise both Isreal and Qatar would be able to call them out on it " Delayed but not abandoned.....this aged well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Delayed but not abandoned.....this aged well." Well you can only write on what was current at that time… if I could see into the future I’d win the lottery every week! 
I am glad that the agreement seems to be being adhered to on all sides.. that prisoners and the innocent people of October 7 are being released, and that humanitarian assistance is finally getting into Gaza in the scale that is needed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from Tommy Robinson trying to muscle in and being dealt with robustly. Compare the quiet dignity of todays march with the other peace marches…… " whats tommy the tit been up to now? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from Tommy Robinson trying to muscle in and being dealt with robustly. Compare the quiet dignity of todays march with the other peace marches…… whats tommy the tit been up to now? " He was there to 'report' on the march. Police issued him a section 35 (I think) and he refused it claiming 'this country has a free press', so they nicked him. What was quite funny was he had at least 20 officers marching him to the van, and they supposedly maced him. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"17 presumably innocent hostages for 39 prisoners... seems very badly weighted in favour of terrorism " The ones Israel are giving up are the ones they are holding without charge….. primarily women and youngsters who have been held in detention for up to 18 months…. What you are seeing so far are elderly women and women with children released so far.. I bet the “price” will go up for the men and those serving of military age, Bearing in mind the Israeli government in the past have given up 1500 prisoners for 1 soldiers in the past this is cheap | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from Tommy Robinson trying to muscle in and being dealt with robustly. Compare the quiet dignity of todays march with the other peace marches…… whats tommy the tit been up to now? He was there to 'report' on the march. Police issued him a section 35 (I think) and he refused it claiming 'this country has a free press', so they nicked him. What was quite funny was he had at least 20 officers marching him to the van, and they supposedly maced him. " Was serious overkill it looked hilarious just bundles of cops around him. Plays right into his hands for his narrative of two tier policing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"17 presumably innocent hostages for 39 prisoners... seems very badly weighted in favour of terrorism The ones Israel are giving up are the ones they are holding without charge….. primarily women and youngsters who have been held in detention for up to 18 months…. What you are seeing so far are elderly women and women with children released so far.. I bet the “price” will go up for the men and those serving of military age, Bearing in mind the Israeli government in the past have given up 1500 prisoners for 1 soldiers in the past this is cheap " Thanks for the clarification however one is a recognised legitimate state, the other is a terrorist group | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from Tommy Robinson trying to muscle in and being dealt with robustly. Compare the quiet dignity of todays march with the other peace marches…… whats tommy the tit been up to now? He was there to 'report' on the march. Police issued him a section 35 (I think) and he refused it claiming 'this country has a free press', so they nicked him. What was quite funny was he had at least 20 officers marching him to the van, and they supposedly maced him. Was serious overkill it looked hilarious just bundles of cops around him. Plays right into his hands for his narrative of two tier policing. " Still on the bright side it's good to know the police have enough resources to tackle one man with a large march happening at the same time | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from Tommy Robinson trying to muscle in and being dealt with robustly. Compare the quiet dignity of todays march with the other peace marches…… whats tommy the tit been up to now? He was there to 'report' on the march. Police issued him a section 35 (I think) and he refused it claiming 'this country has a free press', so they nicked him. What was quite funny was he had at least 20 officers marching him to the van, and they supposedly maced him. Was serious overkill it looked hilarious just bundles of cops around him. Plays right into his hands for his narrative of two tier policing. Still on the bright side it's good to know the police have enough resources to tackle one man with a large march happening at the same time" Depends on the March mate  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from Tommy Robinson trying to muscle in and being dealt with robustly. Compare the quiet dignity of todays march with the other peace marches…… whats tommy the tit been up to now? He was there to 'report' on the march. Police issued him a section 35 (I think) and he refused it claiming 'this country has a free press', so they nicked him. What was quite funny was he had at least 20 officers marching him to the van, and they supposedly maced him. " ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there" They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites." The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. " yea but lets be honest mr yaxley lennon isnt a journolist and the organisers did ask him to stay away so perhaps he should of listend to the people who organised the march | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. yea but lets be honest mr yaxley lennon isnt a journolist and the organisers did ask him to stay away so perhaps he should of listend to the people who organised the march" Whether he is or isn't a journalist could be debated. Again though I'm not sure that's the point. Are we now saying anyone who organises a PUBLIC event can use the police as personal security? The key here is the event was in public and he wasn't antagonising any of the crowd. I'm not a fan of a law which removes people because the police decide they 'could' cause others to feel a certain way. Especially when that law isn't equally applied. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. yea but lets be honest mr yaxley lennon isnt a journolist and the organisers did ask him to stay away so perhaps he should of listend to the people who organised the march Whether he is or isn't a journalist could be debated. Again though I'm not sure that's the point. Are we now saying anyone who organises a PUBLIC event can use the police as personal security? The key here is the event was in public and he wasn't antagonising any of the crowd. I'm not a fan of a law which removes people because the police decide they 'could' cause others to feel a certain way. Especially when that law isn't equally applied. " perhaps the organisers didnt want him and his pals to start chanting english till i die, lets be honest tommy is no different to the muslim shit stirers who whip up there soppy bollox followers then slink away when it kicks off, only differennce is tommys soppy bollox followers are white and the others are brown, | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. yea but lets be honest mr yaxley lennon isnt a journolist and the organisers did ask him to stay away so perhaps he should of listend to the people who organised the march Whether he is or isn't a journalist could be debated. Again though I'm not sure that's the point. Are we now saying anyone who organises a PUBLIC event can use the police as personal security? The key here is the event was in public and he wasn't antagonising any of the crowd. I'm not a fan of a law which removes people because the police decide they 'could' cause others to feel a certain way. Especially when that law isn't equally applied. perhaps the organisers didnt want him and his pals to start chanting english till i die, lets be honest tommy is no different to the muslim shit stirers who whip up there soppy bollox followers then slink away when it kicks off, only differennce is tommys soppy bollox followers are white and the others are brown, " I've never heard Tommy call for the death of any others. Have you? Again, I'll reiterate that he was there with 2 others (one being a cameraman). Are we allowing 'organisers' to use police as personal security now? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Without seeing details I agree this feels different to the other weekend. It also shines a light in what we deem a reporter and what privalages (if any) that gets them. I probably get to journalists being part of a profession with standards and consequences. Notwithstanding that part I do struggle to understand the basics of this arrest. " There's a couple of videos on X where you'll be able to understand the basis of the arrest. Essentially, the arrest was lawful because they first asked him to leave, when he refused, they gave him the written order, when he refused that, he was arrested. So it looks like the letter of the law was adhered too. In my mind, what's happened here is the police have made it all about them/him rather than the focus of the day. Only 2 arrests were made, him and someone shouting anti-semitic language. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Delayed but not abandoned.....this aged well. Well you can only write on what was current at that time… if I could see into the future I’d win the lottery every week!
I am glad that the agreement seems to be being adhered to on all sides.. that prisoners and the innocent people of October 7 are being released, and that humanitarian assistance is finally getting into Gaza in the scale that is needed "So you assumed that the Hamas line was correct then, without actual knowledge of what may have delayed the hostage release? Based on no knowledge of the timetable or full terms and which side may have put delays into the equation? Just a willingness to assume the anti Israeli line and assume a pro Hamas line broached in terms of "there is no other reasonable explanation"? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why did he not just show his press card all journalists are required to carry one." No they aren't. It may be advantageous to carry one but at no point does any journalist need to have one. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why did he not just show his press card all journalists are required to carry one. No they aren't. It may be advantageous to carry one but at no point does any journalist need to have one. " So he was not carrying a press card at the time of his arrest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why did he not just show his press card all journalists are required to carry one. No they aren't. It may be advantageous to carry one but at no point does any journalist need to have one. So he was not carrying a press card at the time of his arrest." Why does he need to have a press card? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why did he not just show his press card all journalists are required to carry one. No they aren't. It may be advantageous to carry one but at no point does any journalist need to have one. So he was not carrying a press card at the time of his arrest. Why does he need to have a press card?" well if he claiming to be there reporting on it it would help if he had one otherwise he just a member of the public with a camera man, this is the problem these days people think if they say there reporting on something they think the old bill cant move them on, and what im seeing on news the organisers didnt want him there as they dont want any support from stephen | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. yea but lets be honest mr yaxley lennon isnt a journolist and the organisers did ask him to stay away so perhaps he should of listend to the people who organised the march Whether he is or isn't a journalist could be debated. Again though I'm not sure that's the point. Are we now saying anyone who organises a PUBLIC event can use the police as personal security? The key here is the event was in public and he wasn't antagonising any of the crowd. I'm not a fan of a law which removes people because the police decide they 'could' cause others to feel a certain way. Especially when that law isn't equally applied. perhaps the organisers didnt want him and his pals to start chanting english till i die, lets be honest tommy is no different to the muslim shit stirers who whip up there soppy bollox followers then slink away when it kicks off, only differennce is tommys soppy bollox followers are white and the others are brown, I've never heard Tommy call for the death of any others. Have you? Again, I'll reiterate that he was there with 2 others (one being a cameraman). Are we allowing 'organisers' to use police as personal security now?" his name is stephen by the way not tommy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. yea but lets be honest mr yaxley lennon isnt a journolist and the organisers did ask him to stay away so perhaps he should of listend to the people who organised the march Whether he is or isn't a journalist could be debated. Again though I'm not sure that's the point. Are we now saying anyone who organises a PUBLIC event can use the police as personal security? The key here is the event was in public and he wasn't antagonising any of the crowd. I'm not a fan of a law which removes people because the police decide they 'could' cause others to feel a certain way. Especially when that law isn't equally applied. perhaps the organisers didnt want him and his pals to start chanting english till i die, lets be honest tommy is no different to the muslim shit stirers who whip up there soppy bollox followers then slink away when it kicks off, only differennce is tommys soppy bollox followers are white and the others are brown, I've never heard Tommy call for the death of any others. Have you? Again, I'll reiterate that he was there with 2 others (one being a cameraman). Are we allowing 'organisers' to use police as personal security now?his name is stephen by the way not tommy" His name is whatever he wants it to be. Tommy is a stage name, I'm sure you refer to numerous others by their stage names. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why did he not just show his press card all journalists are required to carry one. No they aren't. It may be advantageous to carry one but at no point does any journalist need to have one. So he was not carrying a press card at the time of his arrest. Why does he need to have a press card?well if he claiming to be there reporting on it it would help if he had one otherwise he just a member of the public with a camera man, this is the problem these days people think if they say there reporting on something they think the old bill cant move them on, and what im seeing on news the organisers didnt want him there as they dont want any support from stephen" You're still refusing to answer if we should allow organisers of events to use the police as personal security. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why did he not just show his press card all journalists are required to carry one. No they aren't. It may be advantageous to carry one but at no point does any journalist need to have one. So he was not carrying a press card at the time of his arrest. Why does he need to have a press card?well if he claiming to be there reporting on it it would help if he had one otherwise he just a member of the public with a camera man, this is the problem these days people think if they say there reporting on something they think the old bill cant move them on, and what im seeing on news the organisers didnt want him there as they dont want any support from stephen You're still refusing to answer if we should allow organisers of events to use the police as personal security." i think there reason was he was causing fear to some of the people there so yes they have a right to ask for him to be removed, he was asked to leave refused then was given a written request to leave and still refused so the bell end ended up getting himself nicked, no one elses fault but his own, i thought you would be pleased you have been supporting the jewish community for weeks on here, they didnt want someone there who lets face it 20 yrs ago he would of been one of the bnp | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. yea but lets be honest mr yaxley lennon isnt a journolist and the organisers did ask him to stay away so perhaps he should of listend to the people who organised the march Whether he is or isn't a journalist could be debated. Again though I'm not sure that's the point. Are we now saying anyone who organises a PUBLIC event can use the police as personal security? The key here is the event was in public and he wasn't antagonising any of the crowd. I'm not a fan of a law which removes people because the police decide they 'could' cause others to feel a certain way. Especially when that law isn't equally applied. perhaps the organisers didnt want him and his pals to start chanting english till i die, lets be honest tommy is no different to the muslim shit stirers who whip up there soppy bollox followers then slink away when it kicks off, only differennce is tommys soppy bollox followers are white and the others are brown, I've never heard Tommy call for the death of any others. Have you? Again, I'll reiterate that he was there with 2 others (one being a cameraman). Are we allowing 'organisers' to use police as personal security now?his name is stephen by the way not tommy His name is whatever he wants it to be. Tommy is a stage name, I'm sure you refer to numerous others by their stage names." stage name infers he is somee kind of famous actor, he changed his name to tommy because stephen yaxley-lennon dont sound working class enough | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. yea but lets be honest mr yaxley lennon isnt a journolist and the organisers did ask him to stay away so perhaps he should of listend to the people who organised the march Whether he is or isn't a journalist could be debated. Again though I'm not sure that's the point. Are we now saying anyone who organises a PUBLIC event can use the police as personal security? The key here is the event was in public and he wasn't antagonising any of the crowd. I'm not a fan of a law which removes people because the police decide they 'could' cause others to feel a certain way. Especially when that law isn't equally applied. perhaps the organisers didnt want him and his pals to start chanting english till i die, lets be honest tommy is no different to the muslim shit stirers who whip up there soppy bollox followers then slink away when it kicks off, only differennce is tommys soppy bollox followers are white and the others are brown, I've never heard Tommy call for the death of any others. Have you? Again, I'll reiterate that he was there with 2 others (one being a cameraman). Are we allowing 'organisers' to use police as personal security now?his name is stephen by the way not tommy His name is whatever he wants it to be. Tommy is a stage name, I'm sure you refer to numerous others by their stage names.stage name infers he is somee kind of famous actor, he changed his name to tommy because stephen yaxley-lennon dont sound working class enough" It's clear you don't like the guy and that is fine. But, I feel its clouding your judgement. I've already said the arrest appears lawful (his refusal to disperse). Why would anyone be happy for a person who is in any public place, causing no bother to be treated the way he was? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why did he not just show his press card all journalists are required to carry one. No they aren't. It may be advantageous to carry one but at no point does any journalist need to have one. So he was not carrying a press card at the time of his arrest. Why does he need to have a press card?well if he claiming to be there reporting on it it would help if he had one otherwise he just a member of the public with a camera man, this is the problem these days people think if they say there reporting on something they think the old bill cant move them on, and what im seeing on news the organisers didnt want him there as they dont want any support from stephen" He doesn't need a press card to report on any news story he likes in open public spaces, especially. The days of old school media are long gone and I personally feel the police overreached in the removal of him, at the request of organisers. It is a very poor message and one that amplifies Braverman's two tier policing message. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The days of old school media are long gone and I personally feel the police overreached in the removal of him, at the request of organisers. It is a very poor message and one that amplifies Braverman's two tier policing message. " Did the organisers request his removal, or rather simply express that some would be intimidated either by him, or people likely to follow him? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The days of old school media are long gone and I personally feel the police overreached in the removal of him, at the request of organisers. It is a very poor message and one that amplifies Braverman's two tier policing message. Did the organisers request his removal, or rather simply express that some would be intimidated either by him, or people likely to follow him?" You are correct, organisers didn’t request his removal, they said he would cause fear for other participants. The police definitely overreacted and removed him, as I said showing Braverman was right in her comments of 2 tier policing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Stephen identifies as a Tommy. Let's respect his (pro)-names. "Bravo  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. " He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? " I do agree with you. He should have the right to express his views through protest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? I do agree with you. He should have the right to express his views through protest." He wasn’t there expressing any views as far as I’m aware, no protest re to do a job. Was that the truth, we will never know because the police became judge and jury…. The icing on the cake was seeing about 20 officers dealing with him, handcuffing him and then holding his head back to pepper spray him. Braverman was correct | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? I do agree with you. He should have the right to express his views through protest. He wasn’t there expressing any views as far as I’m aware, no protest re to do a job. Was that the truth, we will never know because the police became judge and jury…. The icing on the cake was seeing about 20 officers dealing with him, handcuffing him and then holding his head back to pepper spray him. Braverman was correct" Okay, I'll rephrase. He should have the right to have attended to protest in any peaceful capacity. Why was Braverman correct? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? " Everyone has bias to some degree, tbh I don't care which lowlife it is.. If they turn up as he did knowing he wasn't welcome, told to leave and why and still refuses to abide by a lawful order then what comes next is on his shoulders.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? Everyone has bias to some degree, tbh I don't care which lowlife it is.. If they turn up as he did knowing he wasn't welcome, told to leave and why and still refuses to abide by a lawful order then what comes next is on his shoulders.. " From the Guardian, last week (among a few other outlets): The Met's deputy assistant commissioner Ade Adelekan said: “Having spoken to the Campaign Against Antisemitism, Tommy Robinson is not welcome at the march on Sunday.” Police said they were aware that Robinson might try to attend posing as a reporter. Adelekan added: “What we cannot see and what we will not let happen, is the kind of violence that happened on 11 November. We’ve got enough officers in order to make sure we prevent that from happening.” A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “Contrary to what Tommy Robinson appears to believe, the d*unken far-right thugs who came to ‘protect the Cenotaph’ on Armistice Day, some of whom shouted ‘Sieg Heil’ or hospitalised police officers, are not allies of the Jewish community and are not welcome at our solidarity march on Sunday 26 November. “We look forward to seeing those who genuinely support our community and invite all of our allies to join us and march shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with British Jews.” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? Everyone has bias to some degree, tbh I don't care which lowlife it is.. If they turn up as he did knowing he wasn't welcome, told to leave and why and still refuses to abide by a lawful order then what comes next is on his shoulders.. From the Guardian, last week (among a few other outlets): The Met's deputy assistant commissioner Ade Adelekan said: “Having spoken to the Campaign Against Antisemitism, Tommy Robinson is not welcome at the march on Sunday.” Police said they were aware that Robinson might try to attend posing as a reporter. Adelekan added: “What we cannot see and what we will not let happen, is the kind of violence that happened on 11 November. We’ve got enough officers in order to make sure we prevent that from happening.” A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “Contrary to what Tommy Robinson appears to believe, the d*unken far-right thugs who came to ‘protect the Cenotaph’ on Armistice Day, some of whom shouted ‘Sieg Heil’ or hospitalised police officers, are not allies of the Jewish community and are not welcome at our solidarity march on Sunday 26 November. “We look forward to seeing those who genuinely support our community and invite all of our allies to join us and march shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with British Jews.” " This is the issue, CAAS are in no position to decide who attends their PUBLIC march. This was not a private event. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? Everyone has bias to some degree, tbh I don't care which lowlife it is.. If they turn up as he did knowing he wasn't welcome, told to leave and why and still refuses to abide by a lawful order then what comes next is on his shoulders.. From the Guardian, last week (among a few other outlets): The Met's deputy assistant commissioner Ade Adelekan said: “Having spoken to the Campaign Against Antisemitism, Tommy Robinson is not welcome at the march on Sunday.” Police said they were aware that Robinson might try to attend posing as a reporter. Adelekan added: “What we cannot see and what we will not let happen, is the kind of violence that happened on 11 November. We’ve got enough officers in order to make sure we prevent that from happening.” A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “Contrary to what Tommy Robinson appears to believe, the d*unken far-right thugs who came to ‘protect the Cenotaph’ on Armistice Day, some of whom shouted ‘Sieg Heil’ or hospitalised police officers, are not allies of the Jewish community and are not welcome at our solidarity march on Sunday 26 November. “We look forward to seeing those who genuinely support our community and invite all of our allies to join us and march shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with British Jews.” " This could have been said about every pro Palestinian protestor, especially the ones wearing the headbands... If I had written to the Met saying I don't want them at the march, would they have gone out and arrested those individuals, pepper sprayed them while in handcuffs? As already mentioned, you might not like what he stands for, but unless he breaks the law the police should not have arrested him for being a citizen in London | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? Everyone has bias to some degree, tbh I don't care which lowlife it is.. If they turn up as he did knowing he wasn't welcome, told to leave and why and still refuses to abide by a lawful order then what comes next is on his shoulders.. From the Guardian, last week (among a few other outlets): The Met's deputy assistant commissioner Ade Adelekan said: “Having spoken to the Campaign Against Antisemitism, Tommy Robinson is not welcome at the march on Sunday.” Police said they were aware that Robinson might try to attend posing as a reporter. Adelekan added: “What we cannot see and what we will not let happen, is the kind of violence that happened on 11 November. We’ve got enough officers in order to make sure we prevent that from happening.” A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “Contrary to what Tommy Robinson appears to believe, the d*unken far-right thugs who came to ‘protect the Cenotaph’ on Armistice Day, some of whom shouted ‘Sieg Heil’ or hospitalised police officers, are not allies of the Jewish community and are not welcome at our solidarity march on Sunday 26 November. “We look forward to seeing those who genuinely support our community and invite all of our allies to join us and march shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with British Jews.” This is the issue, CAAS are in no position to decide who attends their PUBLIC march. This was not a private event." But the police have a duty where there is intelligence to prevent any potential or possible breach of the peace, they do it all the time with the things who use football as an excuse.. They rightly placed a restriction upon the march for the Palestinian supporters on Armistice day to prevent any similar potential issues.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? Everyone has bias to some degree, tbh I don't care which lowlife it is.. If they turn up as he did knowing he wasn't welcome, told to leave and why and still refuses to abide by a lawful order then what comes next is on his shoulders.. From the Guardian, last week (among a few other outlets): The Met's deputy assistant commissioner Ade Adelekan said: “Having spoken to the Campaign Against Antisemitism, Tommy Robinson is not welcome at the march on Sunday.” Police said they were aware that Robinson might try to attend posing as a reporter. Adelekan added: “What we cannot see and what we will not let happen, is the kind of violence that happened on 11 November. We’ve got enough officers in order to make sure we prevent that from happening.” A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “Contrary to what Tommy Robinson appears to believe, the d*unken far-right thugs who came to ‘protect the Cenotaph’ on Armistice Day, some of whom shouted ‘Sieg Heil’ or hospitalised police officers, are not allies of the Jewish community and are not welcome at our solidarity march on Sunday 26 November. “We look forward to seeing those who genuinely support our community and invite all of our allies to join us and march shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with British Jews.” This could have been said about every pro Palestinian protestor, especially the ones wearing the headbands... If I had written to the Met saying I don't want them at the march, would they have gone out and arrested those individuals, pepper sprayed them while in handcuffs? As already mentioned, you might not like what he stands for, but unless he breaks the law the police should not have arrested him for being a citizen in London" They didn't though did they..? They nicked him after asking him to leave the area under a specific section of the law and he refused.. If they had said oh ok then carry on that would have rightly attracted due criticism.. He went there knowing what would happen and it did, he can now sell more tickets to speak about it .. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? Everyone has bias to some degree, tbh I don't care which lowlife it is.. If they turn up as he did knowing he wasn't welcome, told to leave and why and still refuses to abide by a lawful order then what comes next is on his shoulders.. From the Guardian, last week (among a few other outlets): The Met's deputy assistant commissioner Ade Adelekan said: “Having spoken to the Campaign Against Antisemitism, Tommy Robinson is not welcome at the march on Sunday.” Police said they were aware that Robinson might try to attend posing as a reporter. Adelekan added: “What we cannot see and what we will not let happen, is the kind of violence that happened on 11 November. We’ve got enough officers in order to make sure we prevent that from happening.” A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “Contrary to what Tommy Robinson appears to believe, the d*unken far-right thugs who came to ‘protect the Cenotaph’ on Armistice Day, some of whom shouted ‘Sieg Heil’ or hospitalised police officers, are not allies of the Jewish community and are not welcome at our solidarity march on Sunday 26 November. “We look forward to seeing those who genuinely support our community and invite all of our allies to join us and march shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with British Jews.” This is the issue, CAAS are in no position to decide who attends their PUBLIC march. This was not a private event. But the police have a duty where there is intelligence to prevent any potential or possible breach of the peace, they do it all the time with the things who use football as an excuse.. They rightly placed a restriction upon the march for the Palestinian supporters on Armistice day to prevent any similar potential issues.. " The restriction they placed on the Palestinian march was for an area. Not for any persons not to attend. If anyone can't see this clear bias, I'm not sure there's a discussion to be had. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? Everyone has bias to some degree, tbh I don't care which lowlife it is.. If they turn up as he did knowing he wasn't welcome, told to leave and why and still refuses to abide by a lawful order then what comes next is on his shoulders.. From the Guardian, last week (among a few other outlets): The Met's deputy assistant commissioner Ade Adelekan said: “Having spoken to the Campaign Against Antisemitism, Tommy Robinson is not welcome at the march on Sunday.” Police said they were aware that Robinson might try to attend posing as a reporter. Adelekan added: “What we cannot see and what we will not let happen, is the kind of violence that happened on 11 November. We’ve got enough officers in order to make sure we prevent that from happening.” A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “Contrary to what Tommy Robinson appears to believe, the d*unken far-right thugs who came to ‘protect the Cenotaph’ on Armistice Day, some of whom shouted ‘Sieg Heil’ or hospitalised police officers, are not allies of the Jewish community and are not welcome at our solidarity march on Sunday 26 November. “We look forward to seeing those who genuinely support our community and invite all of our allies to join us and march shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with British Jews.” This is the issue, CAAS are in no position to decide who attends their PUBLIC march. This was not a private event. But the police have a duty where there is intelligence to prevent any potential or possible breach of the peace, they do it all the time with the things who use football as an excuse.. They rightly placed a restriction upon the march for the Palestinian supporters on Armistice day to prevent any similar potential issues.. The restriction they placed on the Palestinian march was for an area. Not for any persons not to attend. If anyone can't see this clear bias, I'm not sure there's a discussion to be had. " On an area to keep people apart, which is common practise and the end result hopefully is the same.. Well when he's had his day in court if his representative thinks the same they can present that..  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He wasn't welcome, was fully aware of why etc and chose to turn up knowing what the response would be.. It's all about him and his numpty followers, clicks on social media and him maintaining a 'profile'.. Exactly the same as any other hate preacher who thrives on division and conflict, whomever they are and whatever their cause is.. The police rightly arrested 18 at the march on Saturday, same arse wipes different day but by the looks of it they chose not to resist arrest.. He's not and never has been a victim.. He was definitely a victim of police overreaction… You have your views on the person, your personal bias, but the police shouldn’t be policing on bias. Would you say the police have been consistent in their approach since October 7th? Everyone has bias to some degree, tbh I don't care which lowlife it is.. If they turn up as he did knowing he wasn't welcome, told to leave and why and still refuses to abide by a lawful order then what comes next is on his shoulders.. From the Guardian, last week (among a few other outlets): The Met's deputy assistant commissioner Ade Adelekan said: “Having spoken to the Campaign Against Antisemitism, Tommy Robinson is not welcome at the march on Sunday.” Police said they were aware that Robinson might try to attend posing as a reporter. Adelekan added: “What we cannot see and what we will not let happen, is the kind of violence that happened on 11 November. We’ve got enough officers in order to make sure we prevent that from happening.” A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “Contrary to what Tommy Robinson appears to believe, the d*unken far-right thugs who came to ‘protect the Cenotaph’ on Armistice Day, some of whom shouted ‘Sieg Heil’ or hospitalised police officers, are not allies of the Jewish community and are not welcome at our solidarity march on Sunday 26 November. “We look forward to seeing those who genuinely support our community and invite all of our allies to join us and march shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with British Jews.” This is the issue, CAAS are in no position to decide who attends their PUBLIC march. This was not a private event. But the police have a duty where there is intelligence to prevent any potential or possible breach of the peace, they do it all the time with the things who use football as an excuse.. They rightly placed a restriction upon the march for the Palestinian supporters on Armistice day to prevent any similar potential issues.. The restriction they placed on the Palestinian march was for an area. Not for any persons not to attend. If anyone can't see this clear bias, I'm not sure there's a discussion to be had. On an area to keep people apart, which is common practise and the end result hopefully is the same.. Well when he's had his day in court if his representative thinks the same they can present that.. "We'll find out next year, no doubt they'll drag it out and out. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what I can see (from following Reddit threads and a bit of google) there must have been a section 34 (which relates to an area) to arrest on section 35. To give direction under S35 it means the copper thought Tommy would contribute to either (a)members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b)the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder. One *may* argue that Tommy with both his history and repution *could* be caught under either. Section 36 means S35 can't apply go people who are taking place on a public procession which has written notice. But Tommy's defence he's there to report means he's not claiming he is taking part. Without commenting on if it was right or not, or a good call ... It appears there may be a legal basis " Section 36 (3) A constable may not give a direction under section 35 that prevents the person to whom it is given attending at a place which the person is— (a)required to attend for the purposes of the person’s employment, or a contract of services to which the person is a party | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what I can see (from following Reddit threads and a bit of google) there must have been a section 34 (which relates to an area) to arrest on section 35. To give direction under S35 it means the copper thought Tommy would contribute to either (a)members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b)the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder. One *may* argue that Tommy with both his history and repution *could* be caught under either. Section 36 means S35 can't apply go people who are taking place on a public procession which has written notice. But Tommy's defence he's there to report means he's not claiming he is taking part. Without commenting on if it was right or not, or a good call ... It appears there may be a legal basis Section 36 (3) A constable may not give a direction under section 35 that prevents the person to whom it is given attending at a place which the person is— (a)required to attend for the purposes of the person’s employment, or a contract of services to which the person is a party" Now let’s see how many people chime in with his nota a journalist…. Where was his press card, which we had above this post. Regardless of what people may think of him, it doesn’t take away his basic rights as a citizen, and the way the people are celebrating this as zero rights to anyone they think is not towing the line, makes me very uncomfortable. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what I can see (from following Reddit threads and a bit of google) there must have been a section 34 (which relates to an area) to arrest on section 35. To give direction under S35 it means the copper thought Tommy would contribute to either (a)members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b)the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder. One *may* argue that Tommy with both his history and repution *could* be caught under either. Section 36 means S35 can't apply go people who are taking place on a public procession which has written notice. But Tommy's defence he's there to report means he's not claiming he is taking part. Without commenting on if it was right or not, or a good call ... It appears there may be a legal basis Section 36 (3) A constable may not give a direction under section 35 that prevents the person to whom it is given attending at a place which the person is— (a)required to attend for the purposes of the person’s employment, or a contract of services to which the person is a party" I saw that. Imo required may be doing some heavy lifting there. However it may be an angle a defence lawyer could useif they could establish the contract. Who does Tommy work for do you know ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what I can see (from following Reddit threads and a bit of google) there must have been a section 34 (which relates to an area) to arrest on section 35. To give direction under S35 it means the copper thought Tommy would contribute to either (a)members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b)the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder. One *may* argue that Tommy with both his history and repution *could* be caught under either. Section 36 means S35 can't apply go people who are taking place on a public procession which has written notice. But Tommy's defence he's there to report means he's not claiming he is taking part. Without commenting on if it was right or not, or a good call ... It appears there may be a legal basis Section 36 (3) A constable may not give a direction under section 35 that prevents the person to whom it is given attending at a place which the person is— (a)required to attend for the purposes of the person’s employment, or a contract of services to which the person is a partyI saw that. Imo required may be doing some heavy lifting there. However it may be an angle a defence lawyer could useif they could establish the contract. Who does Tommy work for do you know ? " Says he work for Urban Scoop. I know he has made some documentaries for them. I don't know much more than that. Plenty will say he's not a journalist because he doesn't work MSM. My view is if someone makes documentaries (we don't have to like the content), then they are indeed a journalist. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what I can see (from following Reddit threads and a bit of google) there must have been a section 34 (which relates to an area) to arrest on section 35. To give direction under S35 it means the copper thought Tommy would contribute to either (a)members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b)the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder. One *may* argue that Tommy with both his history and repution *could* be caught under either. Section 36 means S35 can't apply go people who are taking place on a public procession which has written notice. But Tommy's defence he's there to report means he's not claiming he is taking part. Without commenting on if it was right or not, or a good call ... It appears there may be a legal basis Section 36 (3) A constable may not give a direction under section 35 that prevents the person to whom it is given attending at a place which the person is— (a)required to attend for the purposes of the person’s employment, or a contract of services to which the person is a partyI saw that. Imo required may be doing some heavy lifting there. However it may be an angle a defence lawyer could useif they could establish the contract. Who does Tommy work for do you know ? Says he work for Urban Scoop. I know he has made some documentaries for them. I don't know much more than that. Plenty will say he's not a journalist because he doesn't work MSM. My view is if someone makes documentaries (we don't have to like the content), then they are indeed a journalist. " I'm not talking that angle. Its whether he con demonstrate employment or contractual reasons (well, requirements) to be there. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what I can see (from following Reddit threads and a bit of google) there must have been a section 34 (which relates to an area) to arrest on section 35. To give direction under S35 it means the copper thought Tommy would contribute to either (a)members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b)the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder. One *may* argue that Tommy with both his history and repution *could* be caught under either. Section 36 means S35 can't apply go people who are taking place on a public procession which has written notice. But Tommy's defence he's there to report means he's not claiming he is taking part. Without commenting on if it was right or not, or a good call ... It appears there may be a legal basis Section 36 (3) A constable may not give a direction under section 35 that prevents the person to whom it is given attending at a place which the person is— (a)required to attend for the purposes of the person’s employment, or a contract of services to which the person is a partyI saw that. Imo required may be doing some heavy lifting there. However it may be an angle a defence lawyer could useif they could establish the contract. Who does Tommy work for do you know ? Says he work for Urban Scoop. I know he has made some documentaries for them. I don't know much more than that. Plenty will say he's not a journalist because he doesn't work MSM. My view is if someone makes documentaries (we don't have to like the content), then they are indeed a journalist. I'm not talking that angle. Its whether he con demonstrate employment or contractual reasons (well, requirements) to be there. " Urban Scoop said: We can confirm that Tommy Robinson aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon was in London yesterday specifically for the purpose of reporting for Urban Scoop as a paid journalist and hence the section 35 dispersal order does not cover. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what I can see (from following Reddit threads and a bit of google) there must have been a section 34 (which relates to an area) to arrest on section 35. To give direction under S35 it means the copper thought Tommy would contribute to either (a)members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b)the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder. One *may* argue that Tommy with both his history and repution *could* be caught under either. Section 36 means S35 can't apply go people who are taking place on a public procession which has written notice. But Tommy's defence he's there to report means he's not claiming he is taking part. Without commenting on if it was right or not, or a good call ... It appears there may be a legal basis Section 36 (3) A constable may not give a direction under section 35 that prevents the person to whom it is given attending at a place which the person is— (a)required to attend for the purposes of the person’s employment, or a contract of services to which the person is a partyI saw that. Imo required may be doing some heavy lifting there. However it may be an angle a defence lawyer could useif they could establish the contract. Who does Tommy work for do you know ? Says he work for Urban Scoop. I know he has made some documentaries for them. I don't know much more than that. Plenty will say he's not a journalist because he doesn't work MSM. My view is if someone makes documentaries (we don't have to like the content), then they are indeed a journalist. I'm not talking that angle. Its whether he con demonstrate employment or contractual reasons (well, requirements) to be there. Urban Scoop said: We can confirm that Tommy Robinson aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon was in London yesterday specifically for the purpose of reporting for Urban Scoop as a paid journalist and hence the section 35 dispersal order does not cover." he may have a case then... Although I don't know how "required" fits in with this. Presume there's a contract they can point to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what I can see (from following Reddit threads and a bit of google) there must have been a section 34 (which relates to an area) to arrest on section 35. To give direction under S35 it means the copper thought Tommy would contribute to either (a)members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b)the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder. One *may* argue that Tommy with both his history and repution *could* be caught under either. Section 36 means S35 can't apply go people who are taking place on a public procession which has written notice. But Tommy's defence he's there to report means he's not claiming he is taking part. Without commenting on if it was right or not, or a good call ... It appears there may be a legal basis Section 36 (3) A constable may not give a direction under section 35 that prevents the person to whom it is given attending at a place which the person is— (a)required to attend for the purposes of the person’s employment, or a contract of services to which the person is a partyI saw that. Imo required may be doing some heavy lifting there. However it may be an angle a defence lawyer could useif they could establish the contract. Who does Tommy work for do you know ? Says he work for Urban Scoop. I know he has made some documentaries for them. I don't know much more than that. Plenty will say he's not a journalist because he doesn't work MSM. My view is if someone makes documentaries (we don't have to like the content), then they are indeed a journalist. I'm not talking that angle. Its whether he con demonstrate employment or contractual reasons (well, requirements) to be there. Urban Scoop said: We can confirm that Tommy Robinson aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon was in London yesterday specifically for the purpose of reporting for Urban Scoop as a paid journalist and hence the section 35 dispersal order does not cover.he may have a case then... Although I don't know how "required" fits in with this. Presume there's a contract they can point to. " Honestly I have no idea about any contract. Be quite hard to interview people without being on scene so I guess that makes his being there a 'requirement' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"From what I can see (from following Reddit threads and a bit of google) there must have been a section 34 (which relates to an area) to arrest on section 35. To give direction under S35 it means the copper thought Tommy would contribute to either (a)members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b)the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder. One *may* argue that Tommy with both his history and repution *could* be caught under either. Section 36 means S35 can't apply go people who are taking place on a public procession which has written notice. But Tommy's defence he's there to report means he's not claiming he is taking part. Without commenting on if it was right or not, or a good call ... It appears there may be a legal basis Section 36 (3) A constable may not give a direction under section 35 that prevents the person to whom it is given attending at a place which the person is— (a)required to attend for the purposes of the person’s employment, or a contract of services to which the person is a partyI saw that. Imo required may be doing some heavy lifting there. However it may be an angle a defence lawyer could useif they could establish the contract. Who does Tommy work for do you know ? Says he work for Urban Scoop. I know he has made some documentaries for them. I don't know much more than that. Plenty will say he's not a journalist because he doesn't work MSM. My view is if someone makes documentaries (we don't have to like the content), then they are indeed a journalist. I'm not talking that angle. Its whether he con demonstrate employment or contractual reasons (well, requirements) to be there. Urban Scoop said: We can confirm that Tommy Robinson aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon was in London yesterday specifically for the purpose of reporting for Urban Scoop as a paid journalist and hence the section 35 dispersal order does not cover.he may have a case then... Although I don't know how "required" fits in with this. Presume there's a contract they can point to. Honestly I have no idea about any contract. Be quite hard to interview people without being on scene so I guess that makes his being there a 'requirement'" agreed... The contract feels the key point. He needs to become a deliveroo driver and order some pizzas... Can get anywhere then. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If he was there legitimately then it's a different issue, why did he not mention the outfit he was working for in the cafe and produce credentials from them which would have changed how the police dealt with him..? " He did mention the company. About 1 minute into the first video inside the cafe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If he was there legitimately then it's a different issue, why did he not mention the outfit he was working for in the cafe and produce credentials from them which would have changed how the police dealt with him..? He did mention the company. About 1 minute into the first video inside the cafe. " Cheers | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ah rite only just seen it on the news, from what they were saying it sounds like the organisers of the anti semitism march didnt want him there They didn't want him there. They put out a statement saying that they had no interest in the far right joining the march, or lending his group credibility. Hating Islam at this time more than hating Jews does not make the far right a friend of Jews/anti-antisemites. The charity did say they didn't want him or any 'far right yobs' there. Not sure that's really the point though. It was a public march on public land. The arrest is a perfect example of two-tier policing. He didn't incite anyone or anything, he was there with 2 other people, and claimed he was there to 'report'. The police said one day before that the freedom to report is as important as the freedom to march. As others have said, unless your name is Tommy Robinson. yea but lets be honest mr yaxley lennon isnt a journolist and the organisers did ask him to stay away so perhaps he should of listend to the people who organised the march Whether he is or isn't a journalist could be debated. Again though I'm not sure that's the point. Are we now saying anyone who organises a PUBLIC event can use the police as personal security? The key here is the event was in public and he wasn't antagonising any of the crowd. I'm not a fan of a law which removes people because the police decide they 'could' cause others to feel a certain way. Especially when that law isn't equally applied. perhaps the organisers didnt want him and his pals to start chanting english till i die, lets be honest tommy is no different to the muslim shit stirers who whip up there soppy bollox followers then slink away when it kicks off, only differennce is tommys soppy bollox followers are white and the others are brown, I've never heard Tommy call for the death of any others. Have you? Again, I'll reiterate that he was there with 2 others (one being a cameraman). Are we allowing 'organisers' to use police as personal security now?his name is stephen by the way not tommy His name is whatever he wants it to be. Tommy is a stage name, I'm sure you refer to numerous others by their stage names.stage name infers he is somee kind of famous actor, he changed his name to tommy because stephen yaxley-lennon dont sound working class enough It's clear you don't like the guy and that is fine. But, I feel its clouding your judgement. I've already said the arrest appears lawful (his refusal to disperse). Why would anyone be happy for a person who is in any public place, causing no bother to be treated the way he was?" i dont like or dislike the guy,have a few mates who used to attend edl marches, im going off what they have said about him, funnily enough after actually speaking to him face to face they stopped going on the marches because as i said further up stephen usually likes whipping his cheer leaders up then dissapearing when it all kicks off, no different to the likes of ajem choudary well apart from one being white and the other being brown | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it continues, another handful of hostages released in exchange for a bus load of prisoners. In who's world is this acceptable???? At absolute best it's one for one" Hamas knows Israel has the operational tempo. They are scared that if they release them all at once Israel will go back on the offensive. So giving token hostages spread out over days allows Hamas militants to rest and regroup. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it continues, another handful of hostages released in exchange for a bus load of prisoners. In who's world is this acceptable???? At absolute best it's one for one Hamas knows Israel has the operational tempo. They are scared that if they release them all at once Israel will go back on the offensive. So giving token hostages spread out over days allows Hamas militants to rest and regroup." This, hamas knows that they are not equipped to win, so yes, they are not releasing all the hostages at once, in order to buy more time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it continues, another handful of hostages released in exchange for a bus load of prisoners. In who's world is this acceptable???? At absolute best it's one for one Hamas knows Israel has the operational tempo. They are scared that if they release them all at once Israel will go back on the offensive. So giving token hostages spread out over days allows Hamas militants to rest and regroup.This, hamas knows that they are not equipped to win, so yes, they are not releasing all the hostages at once, in order to buy more time." it benefits Israel too imo. After all, what does a "win" look like for them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it continues, another handful of hostages released in exchange for a bus load of prisoners. In who's world is this acceptable???? At absolute best it's one for one Hamas knows Israel has the operational tempo. They are scared that if they release them all at once Israel will go back on the offensive. So giving token hostages spread out over days allows Hamas militants to rest and regroup.This, hamas knows that they are not equipped to win, so yes, they are not releasing all the hostages at once, in order to buy more time.it benefits Israel too imo. After all, what does a "win" look like for them. " Hamas knows they have the public support. It's a pyric victory from the ATM. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it continues, another handful of hostages released in exchange for a bus load of prisoners. In who's world is this acceptable???? At absolute best it's one for one Hamas knows Israel has the operational tempo. They are scared that if they release them all at once Israel will go back on the offensive. So giving token hostages spread out over days allows Hamas militants to rest and regroup.This, hamas knows that they are not equipped to win, so yes, they are not releasing all the hostages at once, in order to buy more time.it benefits Israel too imo. After all, what does a "win" look like for them. " when there are no one left to kill that's a win | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it continues, another handful of hostages released in exchange for a bus load of prisoners. In who's world is this acceptable???? At absolute best it's one for one Hamas knows Israel has the operational tempo. They are scared that if they release them all at once Israel will go back on the offensive. So giving token hostages spread out over days allows Hamas militants to rest and regroup.This, hamas knows that they are not equipped to win, so yes, they are not releasing all the hostages at once, in order to buy more time.it benefits Israel too imo. After all, what does a "win" look like for them. Hamas knows they have the public support. It's a pyric victory from the ATM." Yes and hamas knows that. I find it hard to believe how they can have the public support from the people and the media. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it continues, another handful of hostages released in exchange for a bus load of prisoners. In who's world is this acceptable???? At absolute best it's one for one Hamas knows Israel has the operational tempo. They are scared that if they release them all at once Israel will go back on the offensive. So giving token hostages spread out over days allows Hamas militants to rest and regroup.This, hamas knows that they are not equipped to win, so yes, they are not releasing all the hostages at once, in order to buy more time.it benefits Israel too imo. After all, what does a "win" look like for them. Hamas knows they have the public support. It's a pyric victory from the ATM.Yes and hamas knows that. I find it hard to believe how they can have the public support from the people and the media." They are relying on western sympathy even though they are using people as shields and it's working for them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it continues, another handful of hostages released in exchange for a bus load of prisoners. In who's world is this acceptable???? At absolute best it's one for one Hamas knows Israel has the operational tempo. They are scared that if they release them all at once Israel will go back on the offensive. So giving token hostages spread out over days allows Hamas militants to rest and regroup.This, hamas knows that they are not equipped to win, so yes, they are not releasing all the hostages at once, in order to buy more time.it benefits Israel too imo. After all, what does a "win" look like for them. Hamas knows they have the public support. It's a pyric victory from the ATM.Yes and hamas knows that. I find it hard to believe how they can have the public support from the people and the media. They are relying on western sympathy even though they are using people as shields and it's working for them." imo hamas have limited sympathy on western world. However palenstine does. I also think Israel have a degree of sympathy too when it comes to the situation they are in. However while many see Israel as being in a no win situation, many feel the level of the Israel reaction is not right. Tbh anyone who sees side A as being right and side B being wrong is probably too vested and and needs to take a step back. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And it continues, another handful of hostages released in exchange for a bus load of prisoners. In who's world is this acceptable???? At absolute best it's one for one Hamas knows Israel has the operational tempo. They are scared that if they release them all at once Israel will go back on the offensive. So giving token hostages spread out over days allows Hamas militants to rest and regroup.This, hamas knows that they are not equipped to win, so yes, they are not releasing all the hostages at once, in order to buy more time.it benefits Israel too imo. After all, what does a "win" look like for them. Hamas knows they have the public support. It's a pyric victory from the ATM.Yes and hamas knows that. I find it hard to believe how they can have the public support from the people and the media. They are relying on western sympathy even though they are using people as shields and it's working for them.imo hamas have limited sympathy on western world. However palenstine does. I also think Israel have a degree of sympathy too when it comes to the situation they are in. However while many see Israel as being in a no win situation, many feel the level of the Israel reaction is not right. Tbh anyone who sees side A as being right and side B being wrong is probably too vested and and needs to take a step back. " The west is doomed if there was a world war again. Everyone has become to complacent. Except Poland. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The west is doomed if there was a world war again. Everyone has become to complacent. Except Poland." Nope. If we could survive a couple of weeks into a World War, after a couple of atrocities, we'd all become warmongering animals. It's human nature. War protestors would be silenced or killed and the most liberal institutions would demand the blood from our enemies. The West has just forgotten what real war and struggle for survival is. That could change within a month. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The west is doomed if there was a world war again. Everyone has become to complacent. Except Poland. Nope. If we could survive a couple of weeks into a World War, after a couple of atrocities, we'd all become warmongering animals. It's human nature. War protestors would be silenced or killed and the most liberal institutions would demand the blood from our enemies. The West has just forgotten what real war and struggle for survival is. That could change within a month." Or 2 hours without the internet | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The west is doomed if there was a world war again. Everyone has become to complacent. Except Poland. Nope. If we could survive a couple of weeks into a World War, after a couple of atrocities, we'd all become warmongering animals. It's human nature. War protestors would be silenced or killed and the most liberal institutions would demand the blood from our enemies. The West has just forgotten what real war and struggle for survival is. That could change within a month. Or 2 hours without the internet " exactly everyone wants to follow a cause. Until that cause is not broadcasted on the Internet. They go back to watching tik tok videos. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
