Altfish
Veteran Member
What has that got to do with you condemning his actions and seeking the full force of the law be brought against him?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Tommy Robinson the bravest man in the UK?
- Thread starter Notanumber
- Start date
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
His Youtube account was deleted after all that happened. He had plenty of time to make rebuttals in video. What he lacks is the cranial capacity or the patience to sit down and try to analyse what others have said, and why they might say it. That also doesn't stop him from writing for any one of the multiple right-wing rags masquerading as 'journals of reputable opinion'.
He is not being silenced. Youtube removed his channel because people pushed them to uphold their own Terms of Service.
Notanumber
A Free Man
He was only trying to protect a Remainer.
Altfish
Veteran Member
So, it is only when SYL2% gets a milkshake thrown at him that you become a snowflake?
Shad
Veteran Member
It is still assault under the law. The fact that you downplay this show you support limited violence. This raise the question if violence increases if you will also support it under the facade of comedy as it targets your political enemies.
Toss in no victim knows it is a milkshake until after the attack means you support people being victims first and foremost.
Altfish
Veteran Member
As the law has agreed, he was fined, etc. I agree it is an assault but it is a benign assault with harm not intended; just humiliation.
Whereas Mark Field's assault was physical and hurtful.
Notanumber
A Free Man
Altfish
Veteran Member
You are so hypocritical, just like all Brexiteers
Notanumber
A Free Man
You and that leftwing bubble are inseparable.
Shad
Veteran Member
Intention is not required. Harm is not determined by the perpetrator nor is it restricted to the physical. Humiliation falls under harassment.
That is still under the same degree of assault as the milkshake.
Do note that you are not babbling about intent and harm for Mark yet you did so when the perpetrator attacked a politician you do not support. This is your bias.
Altfish
Veteran Member
I have never stated anything to the contrary
The female protester was protesting about the chancellor who was giving a speech; she did not target her assailant; he took it upon himself to assault her. I am not taking sides, I am trying to highlight the hypocrisy of NotaNumber.
Notanumber
A Free Man
If you are concerned about hypocrisy, try looking in the mirror.
Notanumber
A Free Man
Tommy Robinson was ahead of the game on this one as well.
CENSORSHIP OVER MUSLIM PRISON GANGS (Video) - The Daily Coin
CENSORSHIP OVER MUSLIM PRISON GANGS (Video) - The Daily Coin
Altfish
Veteran Member
The usual alt-right tactic; throw the accusation back...with no evidence
Altfish
Veteran Member
Jail is something Mr2% knows a lot about
Notanumber
A Free Man
I am a true liberal so your statement means nothing.
Notanumber
A Free Man
I am glad that you appreciate that Tommy is an expert.
Altfish
Veteran Member
In prisons, intimidation and violence.
Shad
Veteran Member
You argued about intent and harm caused via the perpetrator's view so yes you did.
"but it is a benign assault with harm not intended; just humiliation."
It still falls under the same law. 1st degree requires a weapon. 2nd require intent to cause injury. 3rd cover other contact which is the case of detainment and removal by Field as per the video. He was not security, law enforcement nor property owner thus had no right to remove anyone. Also note the BBC security let her do what she wanted at an invite only event. I think this was done on purpose to cause a scene.
Last edited:
Shad
Veteran Member
He can not act as security nor did the video establish an attack against someone was about to occur. The BBC security is a joke and let her walk in doing whatever she wanted. The protestor is arrogant to believe she can do as she pleases. Field was out of line. The whole situation could have been avoided by having security do it's job which points to the BBC playing it's political agenda instead of being neutral.