To be totally APPALLED by how Robinson referred to Henry Nowak in his “speech” in Southampton on Tuesday?

[Whereismyjoiedevivre]

I’ve just seen a clip of this in a Guardian article on the main agitators in Southampton on Tuesday.
TR refers to Henry Nowak in this way: “White privilege?! Does Henry swear word beginning with F Nowak look as if he had white privilege when he was lying on the floor?”
He then smirks as he looks down, clearly proud of himself for delivering such an eloquent speech [sarcasm].
I’m beyond disgusted by how the name of this beautiful young man, who has lost his life in the most brutal way, was used in such a disrespectful way in order to rouse a rabble and boost TR’s ego.
AIBU to say that over the last two days TR, NF and their ilk are really showing us who they are and what motivates them?

You have missed the point! It’s not the actual word, it’s the way it was applied to a victim of murder.

Well, well..... Focus on the language... ONLY.....
Message is unimportant, is it?

Who cares if this is pointing to the fact that his murderer and family thought (strongly enough to use it as a scape route from murder charges) had ethnic minority priviledge (playing the system, the good reputation of their own ethnicity and culture, letting this boy down in front of their house). While there is enough noise around white priviledge and all the talk of how guilty white people should feel about what they have not done, but it was done in the past.
Ok, just ignore the message. Is it?
Because the attitude, arrogance and vile of the people who killed him (randomly, it could have been anyone's son), that is not worth the mention in your post as disrespectful to this boy and the whole of UK. Only a word put there to point at how disrespectful these family is to the whole of us, and in particular to Henry.
Ok, Robinson is not a character to be liked, but if he is right about something, then he is right. And I cannot stomach Farage, but if he says something that is agreeable, then I agree with it. Though, you will not find me on a crowd listening to Farage, that is for sure!

You know, this is exactly one of the main reasons why this country is sinking at this speed!

All in the name of equal OUTCOMES (????)

I did question this thing of two tier policing before this week.
After this, I know for sure it exists. Most likely it is a multitier policing, actually. One for each layer and nuance of society.

Me too. They're all the same in that respect...look at me I'm so concerned and kind and he/she's not...it's a tactic as old as the hills and so obvious. I wish they'd all stop doing it. It's cringeworthy.

Keir Starmer is the Prime Minister and has to show leadership in this whether you think he’s using it as a political tool or not! Much better leadership than the disgusting Farage

I do that too. Don't you have opinions on differing religions too? Surely you must criticise aspects of some religions that you disagree with?

I don’t believe at all there is two tier policing. People and organisations make mistakes, situations are difficult, some people are bad people - police officers are just people. Public sector organisations have been cut back for years. Yes improvements need to be made and the adults in the room are looking at this. Jumping on the two tier policing bandwagon is easy for many to do but lacks really thinking and understanding

Oh have men changed since then?

I agree. Properly analysed, this was a terrible mistake made within the five minutes after police had been called out of the blue to a confusing situation, when at least two witnesses were telling them that the man in the garden was an attacker who had fallen while trying to escape. Their mistake was to believe two witnesses against one, and of course their failure to check what the victim said properly. But they did call an ambulance within 5 minutes, and thereafter it seems to have been a textbook investigation leading to an arrest and charges, a thorough prosecution and convictions. If it was two-tier policing they would have been looking the other way and doing their utmost to avoid arrest, let alone the rest.

Well said. Common sense at last.

Absolutely agree. People making it out as anything different are just the type of people that blame the world for their problems. Typically a certain class of people with low level educational outcomes. The sort who 'can't get a job because of all the immigrants', or say 'the country is in such a mess because of all the immigrants' or 'they're put in hotels fancier than our homes'. Then they'll quote Farage and Zia Yusef as being highly educated to make it look like they're not alone in their thinking without acknowledging the fact that these people want power, money and political gain and have locked onto an easy group of people to manipulate. The sort of people who also misspell privilege with a 'd'. The sort of people that only riot when a white person has been targeted by someone of a different skin colour, spouting 'where's white privilege now' as though it doesn't exist and as though it absolutely should. Pathetic!

Wow. When you have to go back 60 years for your comparator, you really are scraping the barrel. It's not even a comparison that works, given that Profumo's offence was very different.

You could of course look at some more recent examples like, say, Boris Johnson who had a criminal conviction for breaking his own laws, got caught out lying on countless occasions, and ultimately got booted for appointing a known sex pest to a position of power and lying about it. However, I suspect that wouldn't suit your agenda.

What agenda? I'm quoting a big scandal at the time. I'm not saying it hasn't happened since. What comments about Carol Vorderman have to do with Henry Nowak's murder I don't know. Hence the barrel scraping.

Nope. You’ve lost me. Can you provide some context for the origin of your point as I think I’m missing something. Is it to do with something TR said?

A certain type of man may not have changed, but the standards we should expect from a man in office absolutely should. Are you saying that that's just how men are so you therefore think it's ok for our MPs to behave disrespectfully towards women, and say disgusting things, and no one should be bothered by this?

Most men can and do behave better than this, we don't need the men who can't/won't.

John Profumo died in 2006. I think applying criteria to assess his fitness for office would be a little late. However if it helps, he was indeed unfit for office and would be considered even more so today. Not least on account of being dead.
Happy to apply criteria consistently. Shall we start with being alive as an essential and work from there? Although, if the candidate in question was up against Reform, I'd be inclined to be flexible on that one.

He said on camera:

”I’ve spoken about this for 20 years. To be a victim of a race gang, i.e., Pakistani Muslims, will be beating up a white kid, the police will turn up, and they will jump on the white kid. Every time, I’ve seen it my whole life.”

Henry’s murder had absolutely nothing to do with Pakistani Muslims, so arguably he was bringing them into it with a real obvious agenda - the same one he always has.

If you want a more recent example there are plenty of MPs/ministers charged with rape, assault, leaving the scene of an accident while dressed as a woman, fraud or found to be covering up for or best friends with paedophiles. Just in the last couple of years.

Not really, because none if this is relevant to HN, as I've said. Love the way words or examples are picked up on in minutes, rather than looking at the comment in abstract! No wonder Farage and Robinson are scrutinised more than the PM who does have actual power. Bloody hilarious.

Relevance to Henry Nowak and Tommy Robinson is????? Shouldn't you take this to the feminist board?

He is clearly talking about multiple examples of a very similar situation where there is a white victim and non white perpetrators as Henry’s murder didn’t happen 20 years ago.

He has also seen the police refusing to help white girls who have been raped by mainly Pakistani Muslims and in some cases even delivering the girls back to their rapists and turning a blind eye to serious threats of violence and violence against their white families trying to help them.

This is all part of the same pattern of police behaviour, largely due to training dictated by special interest racial and religious groups.

Which bit of his speech is incorrect?

Oh! I remember those threads. Those were the one's where you tied yourself in knots trying to whatabout your way out from explaining how it was abhorrent for anyone on the left to say they weren't saddened about Charlie Kirk's murder, but was perfectly acceptable for the right, including one Donald J Trump, to celebrate and mock the brutal attack on Paul Pelosi or murder of the Hortmans

Out of interest why is it you, and the right in general, hold the left to a much higher standard of behaviour than your own side?

Well it’s good to know you have no other objections to the points he made.

I guess he’s getting to mainstream opinion now.

In relation to TR you said " why not engage your thoughts with the substance of his words". I have. At a protest about 2-tier policing focussed on a murder committed by a British Sikh man, TR chose to talk about 'Pakistani Muslims'. How about you take your own advice and engage your thoughts about why, in this context, TR made it about Pakistani Muslims.

Eh? Care to quote the threads where I said that. I think you'd be looking for a long time. You taking the piss about standards? According to the left the right have no standards! All puerile arguments.

So when we see troubling behaviour in a man looking to be elected, he should be barred from becoming an MP in the first place.

We need stricter rules and standards in order to clean up our elected officials. No wanting MPs who say sexist and degrading things on a public forum has surely got to be the lowest bar.