“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."
A new report claims that investigators from the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington, D.C., recently interviewed former FBI Director James Comey in relation to the Justice Department's investigation of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horrowitz issued a criminal referral for McCabe in April — which led to his eventual firing — on the grounds that he intentionally misled DOJ officials on four separate occasions.
A source familiar with the investigation told the Washington Post the Comey interview indicates officials are seriously weighing criminal charges for McCabe, which are not guaranteed in a referral.
"A little more than a month ago, we confirmed that we had been advised that a criminal referral to the U.S. Attorney’s Office had been made regarding Mr. McCabe," Michael Bromwich, McCabe's attorney, told the Post when asked about the new revelations. "We said at that time that we were confident that, unless there is inappropriate pressure from high levels of the Administration, the U.S. Attorney’s Office would conclude that it should decline to prosecute. Our view has not changed."
Bromwich further criticized the DOJ employee who leaked the interview and pointed to Wednesday's reports on a memo, written by McCabe, which purported to show an intentional effort by President Trump to coerce Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein into framing Comey's 2017 firing in a beneficial manner.
"We think it is no coincidence that these leaks follow within 24 hours of media stories — based on other leaks whose source is unknown to us — about memos written by Mr. McCabe that suggest potential criminal conduct by the President,” Bromwich further stated. “We will be demanding a leaks investigation.”
On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that special counsel Robert Mueller had obtained McCabe's memo and was considering its implications as he seeks to determine whether obstruction of justice has occurred in the wake of multiple investigations into alleged Russian election tampering.
In the document, McCabe allegedly wrote that Rosenstein told him about a conversation in which Trump asked that the deputy attorney general's letter on Comey's firing specifically cite Russia as a primary cause.
The president denied on Twitter Thursday morning that Russia led to Comey's dismissal.
"Not that it matters but I never fired James Comey because of Russia!" he wrote. "The Corrupt Mainstream Media loves to keep pushing that narrative, but they know it is not true!"
On a steamy Houston evening, hundreds of Jordan Peterson fans lined up to hear the Canadian psychology professor speak in a venue normally filled by indy rock bands, glazed eyes, and singing banshees. Not this night. The Revention Center hosted bright group of mostly-white young men, high on big ideas.
Dave Rubin, who introduced Peterson asked him, joking, during the Q&A session, “What’s it like to be the representative of angry, white men?” Peterson responded with a sly smile, “Pretty great, actually.”
Pretty great, indeed. Twenty-four hundred people sat in too-small folding chairs, shoulder to shoulder for two and half hours of Socratic lecture. To start, Dr. Peterson discussed discernment and hierarchy and the importance of both. He illustrated the proposition of helpful hierarchy with a story of his very bad plumber who did a shoddy job and produced piping with 38 leaks. There were better plumbers, with better reputations, and probably got paid more because they had built a reputation for being the best and deserved to be atop the plumbing hierarchy. In capitalism, there are many such hierarchies:
If you’re going to have a value in a social context, you’re going to produce a hierarchy and much of that hierarchy is going to be based on competence if the thing you’re pursuing is worth pursuing.
Okay, now, having said that, you can look at the post-modern or the Marxist critique of hierarchies and the basic critique of hierarchy is something like, “All hierarchies are based on nothing but power.” Well, this is absurd. Some hierarchies are based on power sometimes. That’s a whole different claim because you know, once you set up a hierarchy of competence, this happens in corrupt countries with university diplomas. You can bribe your way into a university diploma. That’s the corruption of the hierarchy. It’s the transformation of a hierarchy that should be based on competence and it’s warped by power, the gaming of the system. And so as a hierarchy deteriorates, and ossifies, and becomes corrupt, then the raw expression of power becomes a more reliable way of getting to the top. And the ultimate expression of that is a tyranny.
But to say that all hierarchies are tyrannies is to destroy the utility of the concept “tyranny,” because the tyranny of the Soviet Union, for example, and the tyranny of Mao’s China, and the tyranny of present-day Venezuela, is a lot different than the tyranny you Americans experience. Which is the most benevolent tyranny that’s ever existed. That doesn’t mean that it’s perfect, by any stretch of the imagination. It doesn’t mean that it’s without its corruption, but… I mean, look at all of us. We’re not perfect, by any means. We’re not perfect and so when we produce hierarchies that means they’ll tilt toward corruption but that doesn’t mean they’re all corrupt and it doesn’t mean they’re all predicated on power. And it doesn’t mean that you get rid of the hierarchy or that hierarchies are a bad idea or that anyone who is well-positioned in a hierarchy got there because of their privilege or that everyone who is well-positioned in a hierarchy is there because they’re oppressing everybody at the bottom of the hierarchy.
Don’t accept that. If you think about plumbers again, it’s a pretty good example. It’s not like the successful plumbers are oppressing you, making your appointments. It is helpful. You might ask about the plumbers who just can’t cut it, who are at the bottom of the hierarchy? It’s like, well, if you don’t want to be knee-deep in sewage, then it’s a reasonable screen. It’s reasonable form of discrimination. But no one talks about that. Because we’ve lost the sense that there could be reasonable forms of discrimination.
But discrimination and thinking are the same thing. To think is to discriminate between things. [Applause.]
Okay, so we don’t want to be stupid about hierarchies. We want to notice that they’re necessary. We want to predicate them on competence. That’s the sign of a just and properly functioning society. It’s meritocratic in relationship to the hierarchy. The plumbers who are the best at installing plumbing pipes get to rise to the top.
And I would also say, and I think there’s evidence for this, …is that the multiplicity of hierarchies we have in the West are mostly functioning and you can tell that because things work.
This was the teaser, really, setting the plate for the real question of his talk. Peterson had been noodling some ideas about this question: How do we know when the Left goes too far? He made the point that on the right, everyone knows Nazis are evil. They’re something bad and something we don’t want to be and this moral judgment was clearly illustrated at the Nuremberg Trials, but that there is no such limit on the Left.
Dr. Peterson did something at the Houston talk he hadn’t done before to answer the above question. He’s been asked by a European publisher to write the preface to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s The Gulag Archipelago. To test the ideas, he read the newly formed thoughts to the Houston audience word for word. It took up nearly an hour. One was left hoping for more rhetorical exposition on his 12 Rules book and less reading but still, the concepts that Peterson touched on were profound and prescient considering the #resistance crisis facing America.
Concluding the preface, Jordan says, quoting himself:
Thus, the doctrine of group identity and victimizer/victim, inevitably ends with everyone identified, and rightly so, as an oppressor, as someone contaminated by bourgeois privilege and prosecuted without mercy for it. No mercy for the oppressor. But the oppressor is each of us because none of us deserve the advantage bequeathed upon us by favors of history.
There’s much more, of course, but that’s the gist. And so, to attempt to answer the central question that Peterson left unanswered: How does one define acceptable boundaries on the Left? When does the ideology become dangerous? Is it AntiFa’s lock hurling goons? Is it Black Lives Matters activists shooting cops? Is it a gay couple ruining a family business or else forcing them to violate their conscience? Is it the enforced “correct-think” that pervades Hollywood, academia, and the media, and now, increasingly, commerce?
The Left has never been called to account for the atrocities done in the extreme of their name: Marxism. As Peterson points out, professors can, with impunity, profess their love for Marxism. Why are Nazis (rightly) labeled anathema but communists march proudly, teach in state schools, and are never called to account for the evil done in their name? When the “oppressed” become the oppressors, why do the “compassionate” look the other way and why are they allowed to?
Dave Rubin said something at the beginning of the talk as a throwaway line that grabbed my attention. He said, “There is a revolution but it’s an idea revolution…” All revolutions, though, are ideas-based, and at the heart of all the bloodshed is a fight for certain ideas.
One gets the impression that those on the Left, the ones lying down on the floor at Publix, the ones freebasing in Starbucks bathrooms, the ones killing cops, the ones shooting Congressmen playing baseball, the ones shrugging when decent people are forced out of business, the ones reporting the wrong-think on Twitter, the ones sneering at those who cling to their God and their guns, are fully committed to the extermination of their opposition by any means necessary. The brazenness of branding half the country as racist and privileged is whole-scale dehumanization and a daily occurrence. It’s the foundation of Marxism.
Yet, to Dr. Peterson’s point, no one has defined a limit to Marxism. Even as a failed ideology, marred by the blood of millions, Marxism persists as an acceptable belief system. The precepts of envy, power, and ultimately, violence continue unchecked and ignored.
The Q & A session at the end of Peterson’s talk ended with a rousing standing ovation. He professed astonishment and gratitude for the unlikely situation that thousands of people would show up to hear an intellectual share his ideas. It fills him with hope.
While listening to the talk, it felt a bit like Peterson was preaching to the converted. The real problem for the West didn’t sit in this hall and it doesn’t even consist of tear-gas wielding AntiFa activists. It consists, like it did in Lenin’s Russia and Mao’s China, of the masses who don’t see themselves as potential oppressors or even as oppressed, but went along with the worldview of those who did, and didn’t realize, until it was too late, and then they faced a choice: either submit or die. And likely, even submission wouldn’t save them.
Hopefully, the few in that room are the beginning of an awakening and not the last remnants of those who possess discernment.
Next month, I will be visiting Prague, the capital of the Czech Republic. I have been invited to speak to a group of Czech patriots. The Czechs are a freedom loving people. In 2011, on the occasion of the 100th birthday of Ronald Reagan, they named a street in Prague after this great American president and freedom fighter.
This fact reminded me of a shameful event in my home town of The Hague, the seat of the Dutch Parliament and the government of the Netherlands. Look for a Ronald Reagan Street in The Hague and you will find none. A proposal in 2011 to name a street in The Hague after Reagan ran into fierce political opposition. Leftist parties, such as Labor, the Greens and the liberal D66 party, argued that naming a street in honor of Reagan would "do the image of the city no good." The whole affair ended in a disgraceful political compromise. Last year, a short stretch of a local bicycle path was named the "Reagan and Gorbachev Lane".
This anecdote is indicative of the difference between East and West in Europe. We can see the same difference in the attitude of their ruling elites towards Islam, the new totalitarianism that is threatening Europe today. In the East, political leaders oppose Islam; in the West, they surrender.
Islam has already gained a strong foothold in Western Europe. Its streets have come to resemble the Middle East, with headscarves everywhere. Parts of Western Europe, such as the Schilderswijk district in The Hague, the Molenbeek borough in Brussels, the banlieues [suburbs] of Paris, Birmingham in Britain, the Rosengård area in Malmö, Sweden, and many other neighborhoods, have become hotbeds of Islamic subversion.
Islam's totalitarian nature cannot be denied. The command to murder and terrorize non-Muslims is in the Koran. Islam's prophet Muhammad was a mass murderer and a pedophile. Those who leave Islam supposedly deserve death. And everyone who criticizes Islam and exposes what it actually says, ends up like me: on an Islamic death list.
In the past decades, Islam has entered Western Europe with the millions of immigrants from Islamic countries. Now, the European Union wants to distribute third-world immigrants over all the 28 EU member states. The nations in Central and Eastern Europe reject the EU plans to impose permanent and mandatory relocation quotas for all EU member states. They warn about the dilution of their identity, which is not Islamic, but Judeo-Christian and humanist -- rooted in the legacy of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome; not Mecca.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has denounced the EU's pro-immigration agenda as a means to eradicate the culture and Christian identity of Hungary. Czech President Miloš Zeman is an outspoken opponent of immigration and the Islamification of the Czech Republic. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has said that "Islam has no place in Slovakia" and warns that "migrants change the character of our country." Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydło staunchly defends Poland's refusal to accept the EU-imposed immigration quotas. "We are not going to take part in this madness," she says. In the Eastern part of Europe, anti-Islamification and anti-mass migration parties see a surge in popular support.
Resistance is growing in the West, as well. This year, we have seen my party, the Party for Freedom (PVV), become the second-largest party in the Netherlands. This is a great achievement in a country with 13 parties in Parliament. In France, Marine Le Pen made it to the second round in the French presidential elections and her party, the Front National, got more votes than ever. In Austria, the FPÖ became the second biggest party. In Germany, the patriots of the AfD forced their way into the Bundestag.
However, the political elites in the West do all they can to keep the winners of the elections from power. Last month, in my country, the Netherlands, a new government coalition consisting of no less than four parties was formed. Because they stubbornly refused to talk to PVV, it took the political elites a record seven months to put together a coalition. They preferred to take in D66, the party which had denied Ronald Reagan his street in The Hague, and still they were only able to form a government with a majority of just one single seat in Parliament.
Our democracies in the Western half of Europe have been subverted. Their goal is no longer to do what the people want. On the contrary, our political elites often do exactly the opposite. Our parliaments promote open-door policies that the majority of the people reject. Our governments sell out sovereignty to the EU against the will of the people. Our rulers welcome ever more Islam, although the majority of the people oppose it.
Our democracies have become fake democracies. They are multi-party dictatorships, ruled by groups of establishment parties. They wheel and deal, often selling away the principles for which they have been elected. The establishment parties control everything, not just the politicians in their pay, but also the top brass of the civil service, the mainstream media, even the courts. Parties such as mine are excluded from coalition talks. They call us "populists" because we stand for what the people want. They even drag us to court.
Three decades ago, the countries in Central Europe witnessed a Velvet Revolution: Democratic, political and peaceful. They took to the streets. They decided that enough was enough. Thanks to their Velvet Revolution, they have leaders today who truly represent the people and who are not afraid to stand up for their nation and its identity.
We, in Western Europe, can learn lessons from the Velvet Revolution in the East. We, too, urgently need to make clear that enough is enough. In Western Europe, too, it is time to drain the swamp and to drive the elites from power. Peaceful and democratic, but thorough. We have to make our so-called democratic systems truly democratic again. The political actors should no longer be the professional politicians alone. The crisis is existential. It is time for every man and woman to do his and her duty. Because the survival of our nations itself is at stake.
We, too, have to make it very clear that we no longer want to take part in the madness of leaders, who sell out their country to the EU institutions in Brussels, and the madness of the EU elites, who sell out our continent to mass-immigration and Islam. That is why the PVV will demonstrate in the streets of Rotterdam on January 20th. We need to show that Europe's streets are our streets, that we want to stay who and what we are, and do not want to be colonized by Islam. Europe belongs to us!
Geert Wilders is a member of the Dutch Parliament and leader of the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV) in the Netherlands.
Where is Tommy Robinson? A question whose answer should be demanded rather than merely asked.
We all know where Prince Harry is but not where Tommy, arrested Friday outside a court in Leeds, England, is.
Modern day Merry England has become far more nightmare than fairytale, as it steadily works its way toward ugly police state status.
Scores of pictures continue to dominate ‘The News’ one week after the Royal wedding while, according to a current Fox News headline: ‘Right Wing Activist Tommy Robinson reportedly jailed after filming outside child grooming trial’.
“Right wing activist”? How about civil rights activist or humanitarian activist?
“Reportedly” jailed? Was Tommy Robinson jailed or not?
The trial of the child sex scandal going on in Leeds, England right now is not a one-off, it’s an ongoing horror as Britain has been racked by a SERIES of child sex scandals perpetuated by gangs of predominantly Muslim men.
The stunning truth of horrific child abuse is not pretty and gallons of tea sipped from bone china cups won’t ever change it.
The antiseptic of God’s own sunshine is needed to penetrate Britain’s ongoing series of child sex scandals.
.
Here’s what happened Friday as many of the rest of us merely went about our business: Courageous Tommy Robinson showed up—alone— to livestream on his phone the trial of the latest alleged child grooming scandal, and was “reportedly” arrested during his remarkable act of valor.
So who’s the real prince here?
“U.K. right-wing activist and journalist Tommy Robinson was arrested and reportedly jailed Friday after he filmed members of an alleged child grooming gang entering a court for trial—but the details of his purported sentence remain murky after the judge ordered the press not to report on the case. (Fox News, May 26, 2018)
“Robinson, the former head of the English Defense League and a longtime activist against Islam and Islamic migration, was arrested after he was filming men accused of being part of a gang that groomed children. Britain has been rocked by a series of child sex scandals perpetuated by gangs of predominantly Muslim men.
“Video shows Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Lennon, being surrounded by as many as seven police officers as he livestreamed the incident on his phone. The police informed him he was being arrested for “breach of the peace.”
“But shortly after his arrest, a source with knowledge of the case told Fox News that he had been jailed for 13 months on a contempt-of-court charge.”
Dare we ask whether authorities seized the opportunity of arresting Robinson Friday for a contempt-of-court charge dating back to a year ago?
“A court listing indicated the case was “closed” by Friday afternoon. (Fox News)
“One source said he was jailed in Hull Prison. The prison declined to comment to Fox News on whether Robinson was there. Leeds Crown Court also did not return a request for information.
Continued below...
“What kind of police state have we become?”
Surely it matters to his loved ones and supporters into which gaol Tommy has been thrown.
“According to The Independent, Robinson was already on a suspended sentence for contempt of court over a gang rape case in 2017. (Fox News)
“The judge in the case on Friday slapped a reporting ban on the case. The order bans reporters from reporting on a case if there is reason to believe the reporting could prejudice a trial. The order prevents reporting until the conclusion of the trial Robinson was reporting on.
“The gag order led to news outlets in the U.K. removing their reporting from their websites to comply with the order. Most remaining reporting in the U.K. comments on Robinson’s arrest, but not on his purported sentencing.
“Reaction to Robinson’s sentencing from commentators and right-wing politicians was fierce, particularly as it is the latest in a series of commentators—particularly those who are critical of Islam and mass Islamic migration into the U.K.—being locked up by British authorities.
“What kind of police state have we become?” tweeted U.K. Independence Party leader and European MP Gerard Batten.
“I am trying to recall a legal case where someone was convicted of a ‘crime’ which cannot be reported on,” he added. “Where he can be cast into prison without it being possible to report his name, offence, or place of imprisonment for fear of contempt of court.”
“Arrested for “breaching the peace” while reporting on a Islamic grooming gang trial?”
“Arrested for “breaching the peace” while reporting on a Islamic grooming gang trial?”
If only British authorities spent as much time working to imprison child groomers as they did on Tommy Robinson.
If only the safety of children everywhere did not have to depend on “if onlys”.
“Sources with knowledge of Robinson’s case spoke on condition of anonymity in part because of fear they would be arrested for contempt. One told Fox that Robinson’s lawyer warned that, considering the presence of Muslim gang members in prison, a 13-month sentence was tantamount to a death sentence. (Fox News)
“Tommy’s lawyer said he will likely die in jail given his profile and previous credible threats, and the judge basically said he doesn’t care,” the source said. “He sentenced him to 13 months in prison.”
If, given his profile and previous credible threats, it is Tommy’s fate to “die in jail”, it should be the authorities responsibility to take preventative action to save his life.
Like American police vulnerable to false charges and exposed to life-threatening circumstances, British authorities should issue Tommy Robinson a 24-7 body cam for his own physical safety.
Isn’t Tommy Robinson’s life worth protecting with a body cam, Prime Minister Theresa May?
Will Tommy Robinson be subject to bail like anyone else arrested?
There’s no jail on earth where Tommy can be hidden, because the toughest political activists imaginable, far more resolute than those in the mainstream and social media—the relentless Court of Public opinion—has Tommy on their watch.
Please SHARE this story as the only way for CFP to beat Facebook anti-Conservative Suppression.
Do you remember the story of the dog in the manger? It’s an old Greek myth. A dog lies in the manger, surrounded by hay. The dog can’t eat hay. Only horses eat hay. But the dog won’t let the horses into the manger to eat.
That’s North Korea. The hay is North Korea’s nuclear arsenal. Kim Jong-un is the dog. He can’t use the nukes but he can’t let anyone else get them either.
And why not? Because of the way in which American foreign policy idealism creates monsters that threaten us.
Put yourself in Kim’s shoes. He doesn’t need the nukes to protect himself against his own people. If he has a problem with someone he’ll rip them apart with a machine gun. He did that to a Defense Chief who fell asleep during one of his speeches.
And he’s not about to initiate a nuclear war with the United States. He’d be signing his death warrant, and he knows that.
So why does he need the nukes? Why, to protect himself from America idealism. His nukes are defensive. What he’s telling us is that he’ll attack us if we try to depose him.
As we did in Libya. It’s all about Libya. It’s always been about Libya.
Remember how the Obama administration greeted the “Arab Spring”? It brought down some American friends such as Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, as well some deranged miscreants such as Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. It replaced them in Egypt with the Moslem Brotherhood and in Libya with the people who killed Ambassador Chris Stevens.
Ah, Libya. It was supposed to give us a democratic Arab nation, one as firmly committed to human rights as any San Francisco Democrat. The then-Secretary of State was so gung-ho for it that the Washington Post called it “Hillary’s War.”
What it got us instead was blackest chaos. The death of our ambassador and the death of Gaddafi.
Which is what’s going on in Rocket Man’s mind. He doesn’t need nukes to defend himself against his own people. He needs nukes to defend himself against the way in which American foreign policy idealism threatens him.
That’s why Trump has gone out of his way to signal a return to realism in foreign policy. We’re no longer in the business of regime-change, of nation-building, he’s announced. That was George W. Bush. That was Hillary. It’s not us.
If that promise were credible, Kim wouldn’t need his nukes. He only needs them against a Hillary Clinton.
So the question for Kim is, do I trust the United States?
Well, ask yourself. Would you trust us? Have we shown ourselves so consistent in our foreign policy, so credible, that we’ve earned the right to be trusted?
We didn’t make ourselves more credible by appointing John Bolton as National Security Advisor. I know, Bolton tells us he no longer believes in nation-building. But he carries a lot of baggage from the failed George W. Bush administration. With that kind of a history, he should be going out of his way to signal a return to realism, but old habits die hard with someone so imperious, so cocksure, so war-loving as Bolton.
Kim fears Bolton. He’s right to do so. What a spanner Bolton threw into the works when he mentioned Libya last week. Trump’s goal is to ensure that we’re not threatened by North Korea’s nukes. Kim’s goal is to ensure that he’s not threated by the United States. To get there, we need to take the example of Libya off the table. By raising the issue Bolton reminded us of twenty years of American foreign policy failures and of how we can’t be trusted.
Which is why, in Trump’s shoes, I’d think of firing Bolton. Or at least of signaling to Kim that Bolton doesn’t speak for us. Trump needs to remind everyone of how he promised realism in our foreign policy.
Some liberals have expressed surprise that we aren’t seeking regime change in North Korea. That’s because they’re idiots. Realism, and the abandonment of foreign policy idealism, is precisely what Trump has promised for the last two years.
Some conservatives have defended Bolton as the administration’s “bad cop.” We don’t need a bad cop, however. What is needed instead is realism, cynicism, and a recognition that both we and the Norks have a credibility problem. Bolton doesn’t help. He’s not dumb and he’s not especially sharp. He’s just a ventor cloaca.
F.H. Buckley is a foundation professor at Scalia Law School at George Mason University and author of
The Republican Workers Party: How the Trump Victory Drove Everyone Crazy, and Why It Was Just What We Needed,
#FreeTommyRobinson: UK Launches Petition Demanding Right-Wing Activist's Release
On Sunday, hundreds of people gathered at the gates of Downing Street to protest the arrest and detention of Tommy Robinson, founder of the right-wing street protest movement the English Defense League, “on suspicion of causing a breach of the peace.”
Stephen Yaxey-Lennon, known by the pseudonym Tommy Robinson, was detained by police officers while livestreaming outside a Leeds courthouse. His supporters have launched the hashtag #FreeTommy and started a Change.org petition, demanding that he be freed, which has already secured over 365,200 signatures.
“Arrested for “breaching the peace” while reporting on a Islamic grooming gang trial?” Dutch MP Geert Wilders tweeted. “Is this Saudi-Arabia?” Wilders also submitted parliamentary questions to the Dutch minister of foreign affairs on the matter. SIGN THE PETITION: FREE TOMMY ROBINSON
Petition · Theresa May MP: Free Tommy Robinson · Change.org
PETITION IN : ENGLISH - FRANÇAIS - ESPAñOL - DEUTSCH - ITALIANO - POLSKI - CZECH - RUSSIAN
Tommy Robinson has been arrested and jailed for reporting on Muslim grooming gangs. A job that he chooses to do with no regard for his own safety, informing the public of all the wrongs committed in the name of Allah. Fighting against adversity and reporting on issues that our mainstream media are too afraid to speak of.
Tommy is raising issues that are affecting all of our communities, and that are being swept under the carpet and hidden from the public.
Its time we stand together, stand strong, and stand by his side.
FREE TOMMY ROBINSON
Tommy Robinson a été arrêté et emprisonné pour avoir parlé des gangs pédophiles musulmans. Un travail qu’il choisit de faire au détriment de sa propre sécurité pour informer le public des horreurs commises au nom d’Allah. Envers et contre tout, il fait le travail d’information que les médias de masse refusent de faire. Tommy parle de problèmes affectant toutes les communautés, mais qui sont pourtant passés sous silence et cachés du grand public. Il est temps que nous soyons forts et solidaires, et que nous le soutenions.
LIBÉREZ TOMMY ROBINSON
Tommy Robinson ha sido arrestado y encarcelado por informar sobre pandillas de aseo musulmán. Un trabajo que él elige hacer sin tener en cuenta su propia seguridad, informando al público de todos los horrores cometidos en nombre de Alá. Luchando contra la adversidad e informando sobre temas de los que nuestros medios convencionales se niegan a hablar.
Tommy está planteando problemas que están afectando a todas nuestras comunidades, y que están siendo barridos bajo la alfombra y escondidos del público.
Es hora de que nos mantengamos unidos, nos mantengamos firmes y permanezcamos a su lado.
Libertad para Tommy
Tommy Robinson wurde verhaftet und inhaftiert, weil er über eine muslimische Vergewaltigerbande berichtet hat. Eine Arbeit, die er ohne Rücksicht auf seine eigene Sicherheit ausübt und die Öffentlichkeit über all das Unrecht informiert, das im Namen Allahs begangen wurde. Kampf gegen Widrigkeiten und Berichterstattung über Themen, bei denen unsere Mainstream-Medien zu feige sind, darüber zu berichten.
Tommy wirft Fragen auf, die unsere Gemeinschaft betreffen und die unter den Teppich gekehrt werden sollen, um sie vor der Öffentlichkeit zu verbergen.
Es ist Zeit, dass wir zusammen stehen, stark sind und an Tommys Seite stehen.
FREIHEIT für Tommy Robinson
Tommy Robinson è stato arrestato per aver segnalato casi di gang di pedofili musulmani. Informare l'opinione pubblica sui misfatti commessi nel nome di Allah, è una missione che ha scelto di portare avanti consapevole dei rischi per la sua incolumità personale, facendo luce su quello che la stampa nasconde per codardia o per paura.
Tommy sta cercando di sensibilizzare su episodi che colpiscono tutta la nostra comunità e che vengono ripetutamente nascosti al pubblico.
È giunto il momento di essere uniti, forti e di schierarci dalla sua parte.
LIBERTÀ PER TOMMY ROBINSON
“Tommy Robinson został aresztowany i osadzony w więzieniu za informacje (wolność słowa) o gangu muzułmańskich pedofilów. Praca, którą postanowił wykonywać, bez względu na swoje bezpieczeństwo, zdecydował przekazywać informacje dla opinii publicznej o wszystkich przestępstwach dokonywanych w imię Allaha.
Praca, walka która rozpoczął przeciwko nieszczęściom i przeciwnościom losu i faktom, o których główne media boja się mówić.
Walka o prawdę i wolność słowa.
Tommy wypunktował wszystkie problemy, które dotykają nasza lokalna społeczność, oraz inne które są „zamiatane pod dywan” i ukrywane przed opinia publiczna.
Nadszedł czas, najwyższy czas abyśmy się zjednoczyli, zjednoczyli w sile, i stanęli u jego boku.
NATYCHMIAST UWOLNIĆ TOMMY’EGO ROBINSONA!!!!!”
Tommy Robinson byl zatčen a uvězněn za podávání zpráv o muslimských pedofilních bandách. Práci, kterou se rozhodl dělat bez ohledu na vlastní bezpečí, informovat veřejnost o všech příkořích páchaných ve jménu Alláha. Boj proti nepřízni osudu a podávání zpráv o otázkách, o kterých se naše mainstreamová média příliš bojí mluvit. Tommy však vyvolává otázky, které mají vliv na všechny naše komunity, a ta jsou zametána pod koberec a ukryta před veřejností. V tuhle chvíli stojíme při sobě, stojíme silní a stojíme na jeho straně. OSVOBOĎTE
TOMMY ROBINSON
Томми Робинсон был арестован и заключён в тюрьму за репортаж о мусульманских бандах педофилов.
Томми информирует общественность о всех злодеяниях, совершенных во имя Аллаха, не заботясь о собственной безопасности.
Он ведёт борьбу с преступлениями, о которых наши СМИ слишком боятся говорить.
Томми освещает проблемы, которые затрагивают всех нас, и которые заметаются под ковер и скрыты от общественности.
Пришло время встать и поддержать Томми всем вместе.
On Friday, British free-speech activist and Islam critic Tommy Robinson was acting as a responsible citizen journalist — reporting live on camera from outside a Leeds courtroom where several Muslims were being tried for child rape — when he was set upon by several police officers. In the space of the next few hours, a judge tried, convicted, and sentenced him to 13 months in jail — and also issued a gag order, demanding a total news blackout on the case in the British news media. Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was immediately taken to Hull Prison.
Hull Prison, in Kingston upon Hull, England, where Tommy Robinson was taken to serve a 13-month prison sentence just hours after his arrest on Friday, May 25.
Most media outlets were remarkably compliant. News stories that had already been posted online after Robinson’s arrest at the Scottish Daily Record, Birmingham Live, The Mirror, RT, and Breitbart News were promptly pulled down, although, curiously, a report remained up at the Independent, a left-wing broadsheet that can be counted on to view Robinson as a hooligan. Indeed, the Independent’s article described Robinson as “far-right” and, in explaining what he was doing outside the courthouse, used scare quotes around the word “reporting”; it then summed up the least appealing episodes in his career and blamed him for an attack on the Finsbury Park Mosque last January. Somehow, the Independent also got away with publishing a report on London’s Saturday rally in support of Robinson.
Also on Saturday, Breitbart UK posted a copy of the gag order, but redacted it as required. The resulting document proved to be a perfect illustration of Western Europe’s encroaching tyranny.
Were all the articles in the British media pulled down “voluntarily”? There is no way to know for sure. On Sunday, at about noon Central European Time, one of my Facebook friends posted a link to what was apparently a new story at Breitbart UK, about Robinson’s imprisonment in Hull. Three hours later, however, the story was no longer there. Shortly afterward, I clicked on a link to an article at the Hull Daily Mail that Google summed up as follows: “Supporters of former EDL leader Tommy Robinson are urging people to write to him in Hull Prison — where they say he is in ‘grave danger.'” When I clicked on the link, however, the story had been pulled.
Carl Benjamin, who produces video commentary under the name “Sargon of Akkad,” is a popular British YouTuber who has somewhere around a million subscribers, and who routinely criticizes Islam, identity politics, and political correctness with wit and panache. He is generally a lively, free-wheeling, sardonic fellow, but in the two-hour-plus video he posted on Saturday about the Robinson case, he was uncharacteristically sober, exceedingly cautious, and at times even sounded mournful.
“I did tell you that Britain isn’t a free country, didn’t I?” he said a minute or so into his video. “I’ve been saying it for ages… and nobody listens.” He made it clear he was not about to violate the gag order — not, as he put it, about to “blunder into the jaws of the beast, in much the same way as I guess Tommy has,” and thus “deliberately put myself in the line of fire with the UK government, giving them just cause to arrest me.”
Benjamin is a gutsy guy, so it was unsettling to hear him speak this way. The look on his face somehow brought home the dark reality underlying Robinson’s fast-track arrest, trial, conviction and incarceration. Benjamin emphasized that the most “sensible” thing for someone like himself [Benjamin] to do right now — he used that word, “sensible,” repeatedly — is to do his best to stay out of jail so that he can continue to speak up. “I am in a country that is not free,” he repeated gravely. “My options are limited… I feel jealous as hell of you guys in America. You don’t know how lucky you are.”
The upside — and the irony — of this case is that the gag order, while silencing the British news media, has caused people around the world to take notice. To be sure, a quick tour of major mainstream newspaper websites in Western Europe, North America and around the Anglosphere turned up nothing. But on alternative news sites around Europe, the story was front and center. The Fox News website reported on Robinson’s arrest — but even Fox, frustratingly, insisted on calling him a “right-wing activist.”
Judi McLeod, editor of the Canada Free Press, began her article:
“Where is Tommy Robinson? A question whose answer should be demanded rather than merely asked…. Modern day Merry England has become far more nightmare than fairytale, as it steadily works its way toward ugly police state status.”
McLeod also challenged Fox’s label for Robinson: “‘Right wing activist’? How about civil rights activist or humanitarian activist?”
Yesterday, my article asked when anyone in a position of power in Britain would speak up against Robinson’s arrest. Since then, Gerald Batten, a UKIP member of the European Parliament, has done so:
“I am trying to recall a legal case where someone was convicted of a ‘crime’ which cannot be reported on,” he tweeted. “Where he can be cast into prison without it being possible to report his name, offence, or place of imprisonment for fear of contempt of court. Can anyone remember such a case”
Shortly after noon on Sunday, London time, Batten tweeted:
“UKIP Peer Malcolm Lord Pearson has written to Home Secretary Sajid Javid today saying: if Tommy is murdered or injured in prison he and others will mount a private prosecution against Mr Javid as an accessory, or for misconduct in public office.”
Good on Lord Pearson. We can only hope his efforts make a difference — and that, in the end, a prosecution of Javid will not be necessary.
Bruce Bawer is the author of the new novel The Alhambra (Swamp Fox Editions). His book While Europe Slept (2006) was a New York Times bestseller and National Book Critics Circle Award finalist. His other books include A Place at the Table (1993), Stealing Jesus (1997), Surrender (2009), and The Victims’ Revolution (2012). A native New Yorker, he has lived in Europe since 1998.
