Neighbour has put up huge Unite the Kingdom flag

'Why would they interview him?' For the same reasons they found the BNP interesting enough to do a documentary on perhaps. A better question is why wouldn't they, considering the information I've put to you. Three guesses as to why.... We have already established this scandal was known about amongst the BBC as far back as 2001. We also know there were mass cover ups going on across the country during this time, so as not to inflame racial tensions. Were the media really going to bring the whole pack of cards tumbling down and face the wrath of complicit politicians? Of course not.

Much easier to ignore the whistle blowers then discredit them when you can't ignore them any longer!

'He wasn't a politician.' Indeed. I love how you have undermined your own argument there regarding him not exposing it, and supported my point regarding the fact it is near impossible to 'expose' anything if nobody is listening or you are deemed unimportant or a liar, regardless of whether you are telling the truth.

'What exactly do you think Tommy Robinson did?' If you had actually read any of my comments or links you wouldn't need to ask me this. I'm finding it tedious trying to have a conversation with someone who refuses to analyse the information put before them. I've answered this already, multiple times.

I really don’t understand how you can be this naive. The flag itself isn’t a problem, it’s who is waving it and what the intentions are . The far right have used the flag to be racist and have taken it as a symbol . The OP is concerned her neighbours are racist because of the rhetoric and connotations.

This! I find this rhetoric utterly bizarre. To those who don't like our national flag, I'd definitely say that's a you problem.

Why would they interview him? He wasn't a politician. He wasn't a spokesman for the victims. He didn't expose the scandal. He didnt investigate or collect evidence to be handed into the police.

What exactly do you think Tommy Robinson did?

Well, I agree that it's worrying when people start denying basic facts, but there is a long tradition of holocaust denial so perhaps we shouldn't really be surprised.

I also think the protests today are in very bad taste and I would far rather that they didn't go ahead. I would not personally attend any of the pro-Palestine protests anyway, as already stated, because I would not want to align myself with some of the people on them. That said, I do really understand the horror that people feel about the actions of the Israeli government in Gaza and about the UK's ongoing sale of arms to Israel, and the feeling that they need to speak out about these things. It is not inherently antisemitic to do so.

What happened on Oct 7th was horrific and unforgivable, and no decent human being can possibly try to justify it. But I also think it's a bit too simplistic to suggest that the current conflict all started with the Hamas atrocities two years ago. As a historian, you will be well aware that it is much more complex than that. Not that the history in any way excuses the abhorrent terrorist acts which were perpetrated by Hamas on that day, but I think we have to acknowledge that the conflict didn't just start there.

You said he was exposing the grooming gangs a decade before the contempt of court case. Who was he exposing them to, other than BNP members in a private meeting?

What the hell has that to do with anything?

No, the point is was making is that Tommy Robinson did nothing about grooming gangs other than exploit the victims for content and pretend he was a hero in their story.

Amazing that you know so much about TR, yet don't know hes a racist.🤔 But then he and his friends dont bring that up in the hagiographies and sycophantic interviews he does on the internet.

The poster's point is that at the time the BBC documentary was made, in 2004, the claims the BNP made about the grooming gangs were seen as evidence of their racism.
Presumably also by all the people who ignored the evidence that the claims were true, due to their 'anti-racism'.

The grooming gangs were first exposed by Ann Cryer MP in 2002.

Members the BNP were recorded discussing it, briefly, by Panorama in 2004. It was not exposed nor was it "investigated" by TR.

Following The Times actually exposing the scandal everyone took notice.

Around 2013 Tommy Robinson started using the cases for Internet content thereby jeopardising trials.

He didnt expose the grooming gangs. The victims and the supportive people around them exposed the grooming gangs. TR disrespects them by taking credit for their hard, painful work. But then he doesn't give a shit about them, he's shown that already. Its all about creating Content for his Internet fans.

What on earth do you mean, "finally got there". I have been quite clear from the very outset that I think everyone who attended that march was racist, apart from a few who may have been genuinely too stupid to understand that they were on a racist march. Sure, some might not be vocally racist, but the tacit condoning of racism is still racism imo.

If that's the point you are trying to make all along, then it seems that we have been talking at crossed purposes. It had been my impression that you had been trying to argue that some of the marchers might not have been racist even though they had chosen to march alongside a racist.

FWIW, I do accept that some people might agree with some of TR's views but not all of them. What I don't accept is that someone who isn't racist would choose to go on a demonstration organised by a notorious racist in order to promote his racist rhetoric.

That good old bastion of anti racism.

The bubble extends to LAs and to the museum service, unfortunately.

Hi, I was thinking of the pro-Palestinian protests in London (nearly every week and apparently one is planned for today, 7th Oct) and those at university campuses mainly in the US and there have been anti-Israel demos in Spain lately. Almost everyone I know is horrified by the Gaza war and blames its inception on Hamas' actions on 7th Oct. I don't support the conitnued bombing, of course, and nor does anyone I know. I do know a few people who don't believe that Oct 7th happened (or that the Israelis did it themselves); they mostly come from London, oddly, and are certainly well-educated. This worries me a lot.

It is utterly abhorrent that anyone should applaud or otherwise celebrate the atrocities that were perpetrated by Hamas on October 7th 2023. But you make it sound as if this was a "normal" mainstream view, which it wasn't. I know a lot of people who have supported the plight of the Palestinian people for decades. Every single one of them expressed nothing but horror in response to the Hamas attacks. Yes, there will always be an extreme minority who celebrate evil acts, but they are not influential voices in our society.

To be honest, I find it hard to relate to the concerns that you're expressing because I just don't recognise the issues that you're raising as being particularly relevant to the society that I am living in. As a white person, I don't feel that I'm vilified or asked to constantly feel guilty and I don't see an issue with learning about the less glorious aspects of our history. I just don't really understand exactly what you're concerned about.

Yeah, I worked in HE for a while. I don't dispute that it can be a weird environment - it is its own bubble and often divorced from what's going on back in the real world. I've been out of it for a while now, but I can understand how spending a lot of time in certain institutions might give you a somewhat warped perspective on our society. I just don't think that perspective necessarily reflects what is happening outside of the HE bubble.

As for the fuckers who celebrated the Hamas atrocities on 7/10, there will always be extremists who thrive on hate, but I genuinely believe that they are a small minority.

I find the conflation of progressive politics and celebrating acts of appalling terrorism more offensive than I can possibly say. And I have a couple of degrees too. Not “several” though-so there’s that.

MN is the only social media I go on, in fact, and mainly the feminist boards. I follow a couple of education blogs (I support SSP and explicit teaching having seen the damage the altrnative brings) and several GR feminists e.g. Milli Hill, Helen Joyce. That's it. Probably no more social media than you.
Re reparations for slavery, you seem to not understand that no-one now living is responsible for any slavery unless they are currently involved in it, in e.g. the continent of Africa (c.9M slaves of various sorts e.g. slaves, forced marriage, child soldiers, child workers in colbalt mines etc.) in India (debt slaves) etc. No living person owes anyone, whoever they are descended from, reparations for slavery - and who gets paid? Ancient Sumeria, Egypt, Greece, Rome, Turkey...slaved, so did the Vikings, the Saxons, the Arabs. Slavery has existed for millenia and until c.1750 was considered normal, though unfortunate for slaves (and there were charities in many European countries dedicated to raising ransoms to pay the Barbary Pirates for enslaved Europeans). A handful of people during those thousands of years stood up and said slavery was wrong - the brave - but not until Europe in the eighteenth century (where slavery had been outlawed between the 11th and 13th centuries) began to have anti-slavery campaigns did anyone manage to do anything about ending the scourge upon humanity: one which still continues.
The UK constitution has, since 1215, mandated that no-one should be deprived of legally owned property. In 1833 the UK government borrowed £20M to buy the slaves mostly from West Indian plantations in order to free them (they remained bond servants until 1838 mainly for economic reasons). The slaves were owned by the banks who had funded their purchase in the first place, under a regime that made slave owning legal (we may not like that, but that was the legal situation in the W. Indies, though not the UK). Not to pay the banks the money owed by plantation owners would have caused possibly world recession (20M was one-fifth of the UK's GDP in the 1830s) and certainly bankruptcy in the West Indies, which meant there would be no work for the freed slaves or anyone else.
It was not 'compensation' it was staving off recession by paying for legally purchased property - it sticks in our craw (and probably the craw of the British at the time) but it had to be done. The UK repaid the (rolled-over) loan c. 2015.
I have answered your 'oh, look around' point in another post but it irked me that you acccused me (a historian with several degrees) of getting information from social media, so I have bothered to refute you.

It is utterly abhorrent that anyone should applaud or otherwise celebrate the atrocities that were perpetrated by Hamas on October 7th 2023. But you make it sound as if this was a "normal" mainstream view, which it wasn't. I know a lot of people who have supported the plight of the Palestinian people for decades. Every single one of them expressed nothing but horror in response to the Hamas attacks. Yes, there will always be an extreme minority who celebrate evil acts, but they are not influential voices in our society.

To be honest, I find it hard to relate to the concerns that you're expressing because I just don't recognise the issues that you're raising as being particularly relevant to the society that I am living in. As a white person, I don't feel that I'm vilified or asked to constantly feel guilty and I don't see an issue with learning about the less glorious aspects of our history. I just don't really understand exactly what you're concerned about.