To almost feel a shred of sympathy for Tommy Robinson

Yes. They lost the debate at that point. Shameful really. If they had someone better talking then it would at least been a more balanced argument.

There were systemic failures to protect those girls. As has historically been the case for women and girls, particularly those from lower socio economic backgrounds.
We live in a society where women, girls and those without privilege are judged, scorned and disbelieved when it comes to male crimes against them, as countless women failed by the CJS will testify.
Is our society responsible for spreading agendas, hyperbole and misinformation about WC women and girls? Yes. (I recall some right wing journalists a few months ago putting out an awful piece targeting Angela Raynor, where she stereotyped WC girl children in an extremely harmful way, including calling them 'obsessed with shagging')
Is our society responsible for condoning hate based violence against women and girls? Given its a national epidemic no one appears able to fix, it's looking that way.
So in my reckoning we have on one hand the 'bad guys' who actively seek to harm others on the grounds of their sex, race, religion, ethnicity, class, who sometimes excuse their harm of one group by pretending its to protect another. TR is clearly in this category. There may be officials who failed the girls who also were.
On the other, we have the 'good guys' who don't want to harm anyone, and this is the group who's voices need amplifying.

I'm no Tommy Robinson fan, but no-one came across as badly as that Aisha lass smugly declaring he was lucky about the security or her co-religionists outside would have killed him for suggesting Islam isn't a religion of peace.

I'm completely aware and I think it's appalling. Anyone who takes cocaine gets very short shrift from me. My point was that it's not worth mentioning in relation to TR specifically. It isn't relevant when discussing his behaviour or his opinions. At least no more relevant than it is for virtually everyone who works in media/ TV/film/theatre and is part of that north London 'champagne socialist' set. And probably half the MPs in Westminster.

The people who should have been doing calm evidence-based analysis of the grooming gangs, for example, were far too busy worrying about looking bad.

They brought their agendas and misinformation, and thousands of girls were avoidably raped as a result.

Is TR a purveyor of agendas, hyperbole and misinformation? Yes absolutely. Is he responsible for condoning hate-driven violence? Yes. Has he done his best to pervert justice? Yes.

More than the 'good guys' did, over decades, in that case? I'm really not so sure. What's your accounting of it?

People like SYL and Farage with their agendas, hyperbole and misinformation are a barrier to understanding and fixing problems.
We can't fix problems we don't understand, and we can't understand problems if information is presented to us distorted by bias.
We also can't fix problems of extremism by trying to counter it with an opposing form of extremism. The counter point to extremism is moderation. Calm evidence based analysis uncontaminated by bias.
YL is the last man for that job. With Fararage not far ahead.

I've said earlier up thread that I live in a right of centre echo chamber. You'd be interested to hear that YouTube produced some interesting clips of the debate which show Robinson winning some points, making some telling comments and the speakers against looked very aggressive.

So we have him getting his arse kicked on one side of the house and winning some telling arguments on the other.

And here my friends is where society is falling to pieces. This thread is an example of this. Some people are making really intelligent posts on both sides of the argument and others are proving that the idea of civilised discussion is dead.

There are many people with similar views to Tommy who probably have been failed. By their parents, and society, perhaps by not accessing the education offered to them.

But Tommy, he's a violent thug. He has received many opportunities and though undoubtedly poorly educated, it's not because of lack of exposure or even ability. He is just a thug who idolises violence. Really, I wish he didn't get so much air time.

He's funded by the cesspit of humanity. These evil men know who to pay to rip society apart. They are succeeding with the likes of Tommy and Nigel who are so filled with hate and easily bought.

You forgot he's also available to disrupt the legal trials of rapists.🤔

Cash or coke upfront payment.

Just because you think something, doesn't make it true. Are you aware of the impact of cocaine on the psyche?

Are you aware of the impact the cocaine trade has on the people of our country and the countries that produce it? Do you take it yourself?

It is not barely worth mentioning. It's a scourge and drain on our society. Just like TR.

Yes sorry if my post wasn’t clear. My point was that that was how we should have responded but didn’t.

As someone who’s not naturally aligned with TR, Farage etc (not saying they are the same), I still find it immensely annoying when people say things like: “The real shame is that the far right will exploit [such and such problem]”. I always think no, the real issue to focus on is the problem itself, not worrying about how people of different politics to yourself would fix it.

Tbh I assumed we agreed from the start but were just hashing out the details. 😀

I think we agree.
I also don't think he's low IQ. If I did id be more inclined to think the court thing was genuine ignorance on his part but he knows what he's doing and he's made a lot of money doing it I guess.

Yeah there's no excusing him for what he did with regards to the trial. I don't so much give him the benefit of the doubt it's more I accept he exists and that simply throwing insults at him as you can see on here or dismissing him out right as "low IQ" etc out of a sense of superiority I feel is irresponsible if not dangerous and actually does more to help him than hinder him.

I don't like it but knowing your enemy (for want of a better term) and knowing them well is better than assuming that they are dumb and therefore easily dismissed, if that were the case he would have disappeared years ago.

Oh Lowe is definitely the bigger hypocrite I agree! My point with SYL really is I know people (not famous and not as rich) who might come across kind of like he does, and probably have some "unPC" views. But they do actually care about stuff like the grooming gangs and aren't bad people. I sort of gave SYL the benefit of the doubt for a while for that reason - even if I don't like all someone's views I can still think they are genuine. But the really blatant grifting combined with the willingness to risk a trial in order to grift further from said trial was the point at which I stopped being able to think maybe he is well intentioned or at least partly motivated by genuine anger.

Back to the OP but Tommy boy had a bit of a sniff going on . Hmm! Wonder what caused that

My comment was more surface level than an endorsement or validation of Robinson and now he certainly does use the rape gang issues and others for his own political and career purposes and he's waded into things he's shouldn't have causing more trouble for victims.

That said when compared to lowe, Robinson at least wears his vile beliefs on his sleeve for all to see while Lowe has put out videos talking about the "poor Christian girls" who were raped feigning concern when it's painfully obvious it's all in service or his Restore party.

I don't like either of them but I have a philosophy that the more I watch and learn from the people I dislike or disagree with the more balanced my opinion is and it's easier to see through the bullshit coming from people I do support the regrettably use similar tactics.

The problem with platforming him like this it gives him a legitimacy he can use for gain or ‘influence’. It gives him a veneer of credibility - he must be important to be invited, right? Pitting him against Rees-Mogg, a stone cold awful human being, but a big national hitter with a weighty reputation shows that Oxford takes him seriously and therefore so should we - the very opposite of what’s happening in Clacton at the moment as Farage is rightly ridiculed for spending his summer arguing with a bin with a resultant loss of authority and trust.

Tommeh’s followers like him because he is a thick, racist, grifter, not in spite of it. Somewhere on the internet there will be a thread full of awful spelling where everyone thinks he was stitched up by the ‘establishment’. For every hundred people who watched that Oxford video, 98% will think he’s a prick, but 2% will think he’s got some good ideas, and so all of a sudden he has a couple of hundred new followers. It’s what happened to Boris Johnson on HIGNFY. He became an amiable, fluffy, duffer to the public instead of the lazy, bullying, lying, sex yeti he actually was.

I do too, but my belief fades slightly when I see him palling up with Tate. Actually that doesn't mean he doesn't care. You can care about one group of victims and not about another group of alleged victims. But it shows a certain inconsistency.
The thing which tips it for me though is his antics outside the court during a rape trial. It's hard to understand unless you have been through a trial (of any sort) how draining giving evidence can be. Especially for something as traumatic as what the victims went through. Plus having their lives in hold while they wait for it to come to trial. It's really horrifying that someone could risk a retrial in those circumstances just to push their own social media presence. People are soooonrelaxed about him doing that though, like he was just being a bit of a cheeky scamp or like it didn't matter because it didn't cause a retrial. Or like his rights to free speech overrule everything else. But it's really bad.

I can well imagine he partakes of cocaine, yes.

Then again, I think a good many people partake of cocaine, including most people on the liberal, luvvie, celebrity side of the progressive left. It's so ubiquitous it's barely worth mentioning. It certainly doesn't explain or define anything about Tommy Robinson.

So you don't actually feel a shred of sympathy for him then, do you? In spite of the thread title.

What did JRM say that was a comment on how stupid he was?

Just to add to my previous post as much as I despise Robinson I have an easier time believing he has some actual sympathy for the victims of the rape gangs due to the fact he grew up in and amongst us normal folk than Rupert Lowe.

Yes. Just as importantly, though, concede the points on which he is right and address them (or at least seriously engage with them) so that the pathway is removed.

TR: "Pakistani Muslims are raping white and Sikh girls and it's disgusting
Everyone else: "Yes, we know about that and stopped it as fast as we realised there was an issue. Anything else to add
TR: "Deport all Muslims?
Everyone else: "Don't be silly. That would be an absurd over-reaction"

versus what actually happened.

Oh, am I misunderstanding your post? It looked like you were framing "Everyone else" as the voice of reason and saying this was how people should be responding to Tommy Robinson. How should I have read it?

Either way, my point still stands to the people who react that way when TR brings up the issue of the gangs.

They didn't tackle him to the ground, but they very much did try to stop him. I think it's fair to say they panicked. There was clear discomfort in the room, and a number of excuses were hastily conjured up to try and stop Fox showing whatever was in the envelope.

First somebody tried to claim "props" weren't allowed in debates. This was ruled not to be true. Then someone else tried to argue that he'd been given enough free speech by being invited to the debate. Clearly not wanting Fox to take his free speech rights any further than that. She undercut her own claims to be pro free speech by doing that, because she was obviously attempting to control his speech, in her interruption. She could have complained after the fact, but chose to try and get him to change course mid-speech. She looked panicked to me.

Then the JRM cartoon, which wasn't very funny and was a bit of a cop-out really, got an outburst of nervous laughter from all sides, showing just how relieved everyone was that Fox hadn't actually shown Mohammed after all. I don't like Laurence Fox, but I don't have to, because he proved his point here. No-one should have to fear for their lives because they were in the room when a cartoon that offends Muslims was shown. That shouldn't even be a debate, in modern day Britain.

Talking of the rape gang enquiry recently done by Rupert Lowe I couldn't help feeling very angry and not at what most people were.

I had friends who experienced what went on and all I could think is that at the time folk like Rupert Lowe wouldn't have given a shit and would have joined the chorus of those dismissing the victims as "sluts". It's funny how he's now so concerned for the poor working class girls who suffered when the cause is useful to him.

An enquiry needed to happen but I hate the fact it's so obvious Lowe is doing it for political clout.