There’s been plenty of heated discussion about what our stance towards Tommy Robinson ought to be, given his recent arrest.
When I first saw the video of Robinson’s arrest, I was horrified. The video really makes it look like Robinson was just arrested over a simple exercise of free speech. When I first saw people floating around comment sections who seemed to have more interest in pushing black-pilled conspiracy theories about Robinson than pushing back against the obvious injustice of a state ready to silence people for speaking about these ethnic rape gangs, that would crush us just as happily as it had apparently crushed him for doing the same thing, I was filled with rage. How can these people be so deeply missing the point just to countersignal someone who’s out there for God’s sakes at least doing something while they sit at home?
In the hours of reading since, however, I’ve become one of them. My position now is that what Tommy Robinson did was both tactically and strategically idiotic, and it would be a serious mistake for us to throw our lot in with his.
The leading pro-Tommy position is: “even though Tommy isn’t ‘our guy,’ it’s in our interests to stand up for his free speech when his speech is violated by the same people who would love to violate ours.”
It’s understandable that this has emerged as the leading pro-Tommy position, because it’s the best argument of the lot.
Much of the criticism of Tommy has focused on pointing out that he isn’t /ourguy/. His alliances with, and insistence that all “real Britons” are, Zionists. The fact that he went out of his way to slander everyone who appeared in Charlottesville last year as “Nazis,” when the vast majority of these people were “Nazis” in no more or less the same sense that so many people in the UK think Tommy himself is a “Nazi” and Tommy was doing to others exactly what he doesn’t want to see happen to him.
But this approach is unfortunate and misleading, because the fact that Tommy Robinson isn’t 100% on board with our program is not the reason we shouldn’t support him. The reason we shouldn’t support him is because he was not arrested for an act of free speech; he was arrested for a self-destructive, counter-productive, self-aware act of sabotage.
To the points about Tommy’s history with Zionist organizations, I should add that in 2013 when Tommy Robinson was arrested for £160,000 in mortgage fraud , the judge “described Robinson as a ‘fixer’ who had introduced others to fraudulent mortgage broker (((Deborah Rothschild))).” This is important not merely because it shows that Tommy isn’t “our guy” in terms of his platform, but because it proves his character is that of a disreputable opportunist. This is relevant because the most plausible interpretation of Tommy Robinson’s most recent action turns out to be ‘disreputable opportunism.’
So what actually happened here?
First of all, the reason laws in the UK and the US differ here on this specific issue is not because the two countries take different approaches to “free speech.” That actually has nothing to do with it at all. Rather, the laws differ for a far more straightforward and practical reason: because trials are conducted differently between the two countries. Quite simply, in the UK, when multiple related trials are planned to be held in sequence, it’s considered too costly and burdensome to sequester every jury involved in every single one of the trials for the entire duration until all of the trials have concluded. Instead, it seems far less onerous to simply ban reporting about any particular one of the trials until all of them have concluded. Then the juries can go about their lives until they’re ready to be called in for their particular trial, and the judiciary can rest assured that going about their lives in society won’t bias their judgments as a jury. This is why the reporting bans violated by Tommy Robinson exist. That’s it.
And if prejudicial reporting gets in the way of those assumptions, cases like these absolutely can and have declared mistrial. What does that mean? In the best case, it means justice is delayed, and taxpayers have to spend thousands starting the trial all over again, dragging witnesses through the emotional torture of being cross-examined all over again. At worst, it means cases can be dropped completely, or charges can be substantially reduced.
Some people think that these laws just wouldn’t be enforced in other circumstances, and that they’d selectively been pulled out here, and only here, in the case of Tommy Robinson. They’re just dead wrong. You can read a list of some high-profile cases that have been thrown out in the UK over this very issue right here . It really does happen, and anyone feeding you an opinion about this event that doesn’t understand that has no right to be talking about it. This is in fact standard procedure in the UK. 
There are some who support Tommy on this whether his actions were stupid or illegal or not because they have no hope for justice to come through the traditional court system in the first place. And there is a kernel of truth to this, for sure: there have been a disturbing number of cases of Muslim rapists getting off scot-free, and we know that some councillors and policemen had sex with Rotherham victims —and thus most certainly knowingly participated in the cover-up. The guarantee that justice will be served in this case is not 100%. This should concern all of us gravely.
But here is what these people need to keep in mind: we know that upwards of 75% of the child molesters in the UK are Muslim.
How do we know this? We know this because of successful conviction rates.
The UK is in fact arresting about three times as many Muslim as white pedophiles right now.  That’s how we know that upwards of 75% of child molesters in the UK are Muslim—because justice is still fortunately being served more often than not. “The state” is not one monolithic entity, and just because some elements of the state have participated in or covered up these events doesn’t mean others aren’t working to see justice served. Plenty of them still are.
The same goes for the British media: Channel 4 is apparently even quite willing to openly discuss the fact that whereas the minority of white pedophiles are ‘true pedophiles’ who have the disgusting and unfortunate condition of finding themselves sincerely attracted to children, most Muslim pedophiles are simply sexual opportunists who choose children as victims because they’re easier to get away with abusing for sex . The first type of pedophile is one that we can perhaps understand offering treatment and therapy for their condition under some circumstances, but there is no universe in which the second type of pedophile deserves anything but the end of a rope.
In this case, we know that Tommy Robinson knew that there was a reporting ban. here  attempting to entrap a mainstream journalist into contempt of court by talking about the results of a trial that weren’t to be released until later that day (the journalist didn’t know that the video recording them was live-streaming, and he promptly leaves after being alerted to the fact and seeing the shit-eating grin on Tommy’s face when he asks Tommy if he can turn the stream off).
In fact, Tommy himself was already arrested for committing this very offense previously—and here is how the judge concluded that trial at the time:
“[Y]ou should be under no illusions that if you commit any further offence of any kind, and that would include, I would have thought, a further contempt of court by similar actions, then that sentence of three months would be activated, and that would be on top of anything else that you were given by any other court.
In short, Mr Yaxley-Lennon, turn up at another court, refer to people as “Muslim paedophiles, Muslim rapists” and so and so forth while trials are ongoing and before there has been a finding by a jury that that is what they are, and you will find yourself inside. Do you understand?” (emphasis mine)
And here is a quote from the judge from the hearing when Robinson was arrested this time:
This contempt hearing is not about free speech. This is not about freedom of the press. This is not about legitimate journalism; this is not about political correctness; this is not about whether one political viewpoint is right or another. It is about justice, and it is about ensuring that a trial can be carried out justly and fairly. It is about ensuring that a jury are not in any way inhibited from carrying out their important function. … It is pejorative language which prejudges the case, and it is language and reporting – if reporting indeed is what it is – that could have had the effect of substantially derailing the trial. As I have already indicated, because of what I knew was going on I had to take avoiding action to make sure that the integrity of this trial was preserved, that justice was preserved and that the trial could continue to completion without people being intimidated into reaching conclusions about it, or into being affected by “irresponsible and inaccurate reporting”. If something of the nature of that which you put out on social media had been put into the mainstream press I would have been faced with applications from the defence advocates concerned, I have no doubt, to either say something specific to the jury, or worse, to abandon the trial and to start again. That is the kind of thing that actions such as these can and do have, and that is why you have been dealt with in the way in which you have and why I am dealing with this case with the seriousness which I am.
If Robinson continues using the lie that his “free speech” was violated and he had no idea he could be arrested to fleece his supporters for donations, then he is an out-and-out fraud who should be completely abandoned by everyone. Tommy Robinson has talked plenty about ethnic rape gangs for a plenty long time, and he has never once been arrested solely for “speech.”
What actually happened here is this:
1. Tommy had been arrested for endangering the integrity of criminal trials before.
2. The last time he was arrested for it, he was told in no uncertain terms he would be in jail if he did it again.
3. He went right out and did it again.
4. Even though it does absolutely nothing to help his cause, and
5. it did stand a serious chance of harming the real victims of this case.
Then when he was very predictably arrested for something he knew he would be arrested for, he turned around and pretended he had no idea why he was going to jail. This was nothing but an obvious case of grandstanding for his audience—and knowing all of this, it’s not too implausible to suspect that he may even have wanted the case to go to mistrial so he could then fleece his supporters for more donations while claiming to be the only person following the continuously more and more egregious cover-up (which would now be the result of Tommy Robinson’s actions, and not anyone else’s). And now is it the victims and witnesses who are receiving mass calls for donations? No; it’s Tommy Robinson. If this wasn’t a calculated move, then the only other possible conclusion we can make is that Tommy Robinson is an all-out idiot with the short-term memory span of a gnat. And in that case, he still shouldn’t be trusted in the role of public activism.
What about the (imaginary) fact that he was given a secret trial when they arrested him this time?
Well, that’s because they didn’t have to give him a trial at all—because they didn’t even jail the poor martyr the last time he knowingly did the same exact thing . I repeat: the last time he did this, they let him go free with only a warning. That’s why the only thing they had to do this time was activate his previous sentence. What a joke. If the whole power of the state was really so obsessed with Tommy Robinson, they would have thrown in him in jail for the full sentence right then and there—but they didn’t.
Isn’t it at least a good thing that white men are out marching angrily in the streets ready to change things because of this arrest?
It isn’t a good thing because they are going to lose. There is not one conceivable thing that these guys can possibly accomplish by marching out in the streets. They aren’t going to get the free speech martyr Tommy Robinson released from jail, because Tommy Robinson isn’t a free speech martyr. They aren’t going to change the UK laws on reporting, because those laws exist for a reason having to do with the different way trials are carried out in the UK and it has nothing to do with “free speech” at all. And even if they managed to do so, changing the way trials are carried out so as to circumvent this requirement might be reasonable, but it would do absolutely nothing for us anyway. Picking battles that we are going to lose is not the way to build up our confidence. The only thing that that does is increase our fatigue while leaving us nothing to show for it. It’s a waste of our time, it’s a waste of our energy, and it’s even a waste of our attention. When your take on things tells you that Glenn Beck (who calls this arrest “Orwellian” and “insane”)  is more ‘based’ than us, it really might be time to question your premises. No, the world hasn’t suddenly turned upside down and made Glenn Beck more ‘woke’ on questions of race than Counter-Currents.
And while we’re at it, Tommy actually stands in solidarity with other confirmed child lovers himself . EDL founding member Richard Price admitted to police he downloaded child pornography, and Tommy Robinson still came out to call him a “political prisoner” and imply that he’s just another dindu nuffin martyr anyway. I don’t know about you, but I’m noticing a pattern.
Lennon, also known as Tommy Robinson, backed the group’s founder member Richard Price, 41, after he was convicted of child porn charges. Officers found the sick snaps at his home after he was arrested for breaking police lines during an EDL rally. He was later put on the Sex Offenders’ Register after admitting downloading the images.