Tommy Robinson and Increasingly Brazen Government

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. – Frederick Douglass

In case you haven’t heard the Tommy Robinson story yet: Several days ago Robinson, an English citizen, was standing near a courthouse where a jury was deliberating in a trial about Muslim groups’ gang rapes of English girls. Robinson had his cell phone out, filming the courthouse and asking defendants questions as they entered. The police arrested Robinson on the pretext that this violated UK law about a fair trial – though they haven’t done this in similar cases.

The actual story here is what happened next; more on that below. But first I must note that the National Review, cucked as always, tries to justify the arrest:

“Some supporters of Robinson have been pointing out that there have been reporters outside the trials of celebrities accused of child abuse (Rolf Harris, for instance). But the comparison isn’t exact. It is exceptionally difficult to put reporting restrictions on the trial of a household name…”

Bullshit. Just do exactly the same thing: Arrest any reporters who try it.

But the arrest by itself is not really the story. The story is this:

After less than five minutes of a hearing without a jury, a judge sentenced Robinson to 13 months in prison. The judge also issued an injunction forbidding any media from reporting on the fact that Robinson had been arrested, given a meaningless no-jury four-minute “trial,” and thrown into prison for more than a year.

In other words, the English government disappeared a citizen. They seized him, threw him in prison with no trial, and threatened the media into silence about it.

Needless to say, people concerned with civil liberties were alarmed, and got around the censorship and lit up the Net. But UK media sources were gagged. They were forbidden from even saying the man’s name.

Finally, a few days later, under immense political pressure, the English government lifted the gag order. But Robinson is still in prison for 13 months.

Some relevant links:

PowerLineBlog:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/05/bruce-bawer-the-tommy-robinson-affair.php

Gateway Pundit:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/05/orwells-nightmare-articles-about-tommy-robinsons-arrest-rapidly-scrubbed-from-the-internet/

The Rebel:
https://www.therebel.media/let_us_report_on_tommy_robinson

And the left’s reaction? The left-wing media’s typical reaction was “For some reason, right-wingers are concerned about the Tommy Robinson thing.”(I’m not going to link them, but you can easily find the links yourself).

Time magazine’s headline: Why Is the Global Hard Right Upset About Tommy Robinson?
(If you’re alarmed by governments disappearing their citizens, apparently you’re “hard right.”)

Financial Times: How Tommy Robinson won the support of the global alt-right.

Just to make sure the point is clear, The Guardian weighs in with this breathtakingly Orwellian headline:
Tommy Robinson is no martyr to freedom of speech.

If you’re too young to have solidified political allegiances yet, ponder that: The left is now running interference for governments that jail their citizens secretly and without trial. And they’re calling people who are alarmed about this “right-wingers.” I’m pleased the left is conceding that the right is more concerned about civil liberties than the left… but how sad that that’s true in the first place. This shouldn’t be a right/left thing; it should be a sane thing.


And what about England?

The English media were incredibly craven about this. They should have defied the judge’s blackout and fully reported the story in all detail, while emphasizing the fact that the government would soon censor the story and presumably drag the media people off to prison. “When this story disappears from the Internet, you will know that police have raided our location, or at least threatened our Internet service provider into removing this page.” When that actually happened, then all their readers would be alerted to the censorship.

We can no longer just cave in to this sort of thing; it’s time to “push the contradictions,” as the Left used to say.

I’m disgusted by the craven cowardice of the English in this matter. They let their girls be raped and don’t do anything about it. And they let the government get away with censorship as a ringing slap across the face, adding insult to injury. What other nation would allow its girls to be raped by hordes of hostile foreigners, without doing anything to the rapists or the government officials who aided the rapes?

No other nation in the world would submit to this without many government officials swinging from lampposts.

Englishmen will never be slaves “Go ahead and rape English girls; we’re too craven to do anything about it.”

Advertisements

Censored UK story about man named Robin…

…son. His first name is Tommy.

SIGNAL BOOST THIS STORY IF YOU WANT TO TO TEACH THE UK GOVERNMENT A LESSON ABOUT THE STREISAND EFFECT.

Thousands Storm Downing Street, Demand Gov’t Free Tommy Robinson
https://yournewswire.com/revolution-thousands-storm-downing-street-tommy-robinson/

PowerLineBlog has Bruce Bawer on the Robinson story:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/05/bruce-bawer-the-tommy-robinson-affair.php

Someone ALTERED ANONYMOUS CONSERVATIVE’S SITE CODE TO BLACK OUT HIS BLOG for several hours today:
https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/interesting/
If you visited the blog portion of his site earlier today you just got two words: “Access denied.”

Thema News:
http://en.protothema.gr/protests-for-tommy-robinson-imprisonment-break-out-in-europe-with-uk-courts-issuing-a-gag-order-on-case-videos-photos/

Gateway Pundit:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/05/orwells-nightmare-articles-about-tommy-robinsons-arrest-rapidly-scrubbed-from-the-internet/

At The Rebel:
https://www.therebel.media/let_us_report_on_tommy_robinson
Morning May 29: Gag order lifted. But Robinson is still in prison for 13 months.

Mark Steyn:
https://www.steynonline.com/8675/tommy-this-an-tommy-that-an-tommy-go-away

Addendum May 31, 2018: The Washington Post reported the story, though in the most tendentious and biased way possible:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/05/29/conservative-outrage-after-anti-muslim-campaigner-tommy-robinson-secretly-jailed-in-britain

They identified Robinson as IIRC, an “ultra-hardcore mega-far-right super-extremist hyper-right-winger,” or whatever.

Some positive takeaways from the WaPo story: Apparently Matt Drudge Streisanded their ass, by splashing the story across his front page! And Donald Trump Jr. also tweeted about it.

The English media were incredibly craven about this. They should have resisted the censorship.

More on that later, maybe. For now: If you have a blog, a Twitter account, a Facebook page, whatever, then do what you can. Splash this story all over the Internet. Make the censors scream in terror any time they even THINK about doing this ever again.

The Left will start a civil war, though they shouldn’t

A few weeks ago I wrote that the Left will provoke a civil war due to their hatred and stupidity.

They really shouldn’t, though. The left can’t allow a civil war to start. The reason: Once a serious civil war is underway, this country will become a dangerous and unpleasant place to live. That means that invaders immigrants will leave by the millions.

The left, dependent on an ever-rising flood of immigrants for votes, can’t afford that politically. They need this country to be a safe and pleasant place to continue to draw immigrants. As soon as it becomes less pleasant, immigration will stop and the ones already here will go back home.

And it’s not enough for it to be a little bit more pleasant than the immigrant’s homeland. It has to be significantly more pleasant to overcome the chore of moving, the risks of moving, for those coming here illegally, and – for those who don’t plan to just stay in their own ex-pat community – the costs of learning a new language.

By the way, some non-leftists will also hasten this by going after the sources of welfare once the chaos of civil war is underway. I predict they’ll disrupt and destroy welfare payments in various ways, and the benefits of being here will plummet while the costs and risks skyrocket.

This will be fairly easy to accomplish once the civil war has broken out; cops and army guys dealing with a rain of bullets from rooftops at city block A are not going to prioritize that fact that someone broke into a welfare office at block B ten miles away and destroyed all its computers.

However, I doubt there are still any people on the left who have thought all this through. If not, then they’ll keep provoking the civil war they think they want, they’ll get it, and a significant amount of the expulsions that will be part of the war and its aftermath will already have been done by the “immigrants” themselves.

Why are so many House Republicans retiring?

Here’s an article at CNN, which is dishonest but probably not yet quite brazen enough to lie outright about a House member retiring.

43 House Republicans and 19 House Democrats have announced plans to retire or have retired. The Republican House majority right now has a margin of 48, so Democrats need to flip 24 House seats to retake the majority. (Each time a seat changes party, the old party loses a seat and the new party gains a seat, so flipping one seat changes the party margin by two.)

I don’t know the odds of a seat changing parties when someone retires. So I’m just going to assume that half of such seats switch to the opposite party. This probably overstates the frequency of a party change, since the whole reason that a seat is Republican or Democrat in the first place is probably that that district leans Republican or Democrat. But just to get a feel for the basic idea…

If the probability of a seat changing parties is one half, then with 43 Rs retiring and 19 Ds retiring, the Reps lose 21 and the Dems lose 9 (rounding down). So the R net loss is 12 and the D net gain is 12, for a net change of 24. That’s not enough to flip the House by itself: the Dems need to flip 24 seats for a net gain of 48, not flip 12 seats for a net gain of 24. Still, it sets up a headwind for the GOP in the battle for the House.

All this said, it’s important to note that some of these people are retiring from the House in order to run for a Senate or Governor position.

What about the Senate? Per USA Today, there are three GOP Senators retiring, and no Dem Senators retiring. But the Dems are defending a lot more Senate seats than the Repubs overall, so no one is predicting the Dems will take the Senate.

Also, those three retiring GOP Senators are Orrin Hatch, Bob Corker, and the aptly-named Jeff Flake, all of whom would have been defending their Senate seats this year anyway. In other words, these aren’t surprise mid-term retirements that make an otherwise-safe seat contestable. They were slated to be contested anyway. Flake, BTW, is an anti-Trumper, so losing him isn’t a hell of a loss. Orrin Hatch is simply a Washington D.C. creature, and I don’t know about Corker.

Note: The Infogalactic page on the House hasn’t been updated in years! As of this writing, May 21, 2018, it says that the “Next election” will be in November 8, 2016. Duuuuur. Come on, guys. So here’s the Wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives

Video Proof of Old Media’s Organized Brainwashing

Via Anonymous Conservative several weeks ago. Sorry late, catching up:

The link has video of many local news shows all saying the same phrases that are dozens of words long. It finishes with a clip of 15 of them saying, of independent sources of news, “This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.” The EXACT same phrase, uttered by 15 (I counted) different news anchors!

I went to YouTube and typed in extremely dangerous to our democracy. The autofill completed it, btw. As you finish the word extremely it’s the third choice of the autosuggestions, and at extremely d it’s the first choice. I wonder how long they’ll let THAT continue!

Here are some links. I’m including several in the anticipation of possible censorship by YouTube:

This one has some introductory material for a half-minute or so, then contains the entire video that’s at Anon Conserv (plus a 5-second blurb from the new Cosmos guy):

This one has lots of ads:

And finally:

Mueller: We Can’t Indict Trump

CNN: Giuliani: Mueller’s team told Trump’s lawyers they can’t indict a president

FOX: Mueller told Trump’s legal team he will not indict the president, Giuliani tells Fox News

Bretibart: Giuliani: Robert Mueller Has Said Special Counsel Will Not Indict Trump

From Breitbart:

President Donald Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani told Fox News on Wednesday that special counsel Robert Mueller notified Trump’s legal team two weeks ago that he will not indict the president.

Giuliani said Mueller will follow the Justice Department policy stating that a sitting president may not be indicted.

In a statement to CNN, Giuliani said, “All they get to do is write a report.”

“They can’t indict. At least they acknowledged that to us after some battling, they acknowledged that to us,” he added.

The Justice Department’s guidance on whether it can indict a sitting president is laid out in a 1999 memo.

“This case is essentially over,” Giuliani told Fox. “They’re just in denial.”

This is great news if Mueller is being honest. BUT: Remember that in the 2000 election, Gore called Bush to congratulate him on his victory… but it turned out to be a ruse to put the Bush campaign off its guard while the Gore campaign prepared to contest the election. (Note to young people: Yes, Democrats are actually that slimy.)

Watch for the same thing here. It would be absolutely par for the course for Mueller to pull that kind of sleazy trick. So tentatively accept this as good news, Mr. President… but have a plan for what to do if Mueller suddenly “changes his mind” and announces a surprise indictment.

An exchange I hope to hear about the Supreme Court

…in the near future, pertaining to the Court’s upcoming “ruling” on immigration:

Random person: Mr. President, do you pledge to abide by the Court’s ruling?

Trump: I pledge to take the text of the Court’s ruling as seriously as the Court takes the text of the Constitution.