Can't talk about it in England. Likely no one in England will read these words, but in case someone from England does happen across this blog, I share the reportage of Ezra Levant:
On Friday, May 25, Tommy [Robinson] was reporting from outside the courthouse in Leeds, where an accused Muslim rape gang was on trial for repeatedly raping British girls as young as eleven years old. Tommy was broadcasting on Facebook, from his cell phone.
Tommy was very careful:You aren't allowed to talk about certain things in England any more. In the United States, we have a First Amendment. In England, there are hate speech laws. If the government hates your speech, you can be thrown into a police van without warning. Back to Levant:
He did not set foot on the court precinct.
He did not call the men “rapists”, but rather called them “accused rapists”.
In no way did he interfere with the trial, which was on its final day.
When Tommy mentioned the names of the accused rapists, he was reading from a BBC website — so the names were clearly public information, on the state broadcaster.
Tommy did nothing wrong.
But suddenly, seven police officers swarmed Tommy and threw him in the back of a police van.
They said he was causing a disturbance, which is absurd — he was by himself on the street, with only a cameraman and a friend.
But it got worse. Much worse.
Within hours, Tommy was summoned before the judge. Tommy’s long-time lawyer was not informed of this. Rather, the court appointed a lawyer who didn’t know Tommy and wasn’t an expert in the specialized law of contempt of court.
In a matter of minutes, Tommy was sent to prison — with a 13-month sentence. He is now in HM Prison Hull, a brutal facility near Leeds.
The basic facts here — what Tommy was doing and what he didn’t do; the shocking speed with which he was imprisoned; the fact that his own lawyer was not notified; the fact that Tommy has not had a proper chance to meet with his lawyer — are banned in the UK.Why? Because he rightly assumed he could get by with it. More at the link, including a fundraising appeal if you're so inclined.
Not just the underlying facts of the rape gang trial — but the whole incident involving Tommy.
The judge who sent Tommy to jail, made it illegal to report that he sent Tommy to jail.
Why did the judge keep his justice secret?
6 comments:
Orwell is not spinning in his grave, but I'm pretty sure you might hear a spectral "Told ya" in the vicinity.
George might want to be careful, though. The English government exhumed John Wycliffe's body some 40 years after his death, burned the remains and cast them into the river as punishment for his "disturbance".
I've heard a different angle on this from some conservatives I follow on Twitter. They present the case that Tommy Robinson is a huckster with a persistently criminal past, who was not arrested for speech, but for violating parole.
This case certainly seems to confirm the bias that I would have towards Britain at this point in time so, for me at least, caution is warranted. I'll not be climbing on the Free Tommy train.
They present the case that Tommy Robinson is a huckster with a persistently criminal past, who was not arrested for speech, but for violating parole.
Violating parole -- that would be the same rationale Obama used to put away Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. Robinson may be a huckster, but putting someone away for reporting on a trial is a problem for me. I don't have to climb on a "Free Tommy" train to decry his being tied to the tracks.
Exercising free speech is a violation of parole? Now there's an even more interesting legal question, no?
I think I first read that he was on parole for a "hate speech" violation of reporting on another trial - which was probably why he was so careful in what he did and didn't do this time around.
Maybe it's time we started allowing refugees from Britain to crash our borders. Its not like it hasnt happened here before.
Post a Comment