Tommy Robinson has worked through a very difficult situation. It is or should be illegal, how he ended up in prison. The man is simply pointing out the hypocrisy.

I really like Tommy Robinson, as it seems to me that he is genuinely trying to do the right thing, though he does get himself into trouble. I do see how you can get the impression of malintention, as he is constantly being dealt dirty blows by the mainstream media in Britain, as well as the British legal system in many cases, and I think that to some extent this has affected his character in a sense, and it shows. Sometimes I do find him a bit difficult to watch when he talks about Tommy Robinson in third person, or as a cultural movement. This sort of thing seems to reflect some of the rhetoric of those he opposes, and I do imagine that if put under enough duress, this may develop into something pathological, but time and time again he seems to bounce back, and has consistently been able to prove that his values and character remain intact. If you haven't seen it, I would reccomend watching his Oxford Union Speech, I think that's what it was called, where he talks about how he began, and why, and his motivation. Insofar as you can assume he is telling the truth, and I do, it was one of the first videos I saw of the guy that actually made me understand him, rather than understanding someone else's opinion of him. And as far as Count Dankula is concerned, he is an absolute madlad.

I have followed his story closely since the beginning and am not convinced of him whatsoever. Psychopaths and such like - whether left or right (not that they care which side they are on) - always position themselves in a strategic place to boost their popularity and give them a chance at getting power, and he might very well be one of them.

I don't think he has been unfairly treated in any way by the British courts. We have innocent until proven guilty, something we all value especially with the recent call out culture. Robinson routinely shouts from the rooftops about defendants pre trial conclusion.

His recent stint in jail was absolutely deserved. He already had a suspended sentence for contempt of court, something which is taken very seriously in the UK and rightly so, as violators risk derailing trials - and these trials are generally of the worst criminals - grooming gangs. At his court hearing for the first such conviction, he was told this:

"In short, Mr. Yaxley-Lennon, turn up at another court,
refer to people as "Muslim paedophiles, Muslim
rapists" and so on 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? Thank you very much."

[judiciary.uk]

So then what did he do recently? He did exactly that.

His entourage bitterly complained that the new trial was over in record time - how could that be the case if the state weren't against him?

Because he did exactly what the judge ordered him not to do - risking the conviction of some of the UK's worst sex offenders, and in an act of either blind stupidity (or deliberate game playing to get attention) he live streamed it! There has likely never been a more open and shut case in British legal history.

He has never exposed any sex offenders - rather, the police and communities do so, then he "exposes" them before trial conclusions in blatant disregard for UK law, complaining that the media cover it up, when in actuality they are in most cases forbidden by law (and rightly so) from publishing details of trials until their conclusions; at which point, as expected, any convictions of foreign sex pests are splashed all over the front pages.

Furthermore, he remains quiet whenever white men are guilty of rape/etc, including one of his English defense league colleagues, and seems to want to paint rape as an exclusively Islamic crime, which couldn't be further from the truth. Its a big complicated picture of course, but it happens worldwide in all cultures.

I think his presence offers nothing other than antagonising an already prickly cultural situation, and sure enough every little stint he does in jail he sells another few hundred thousand books.

@Marcus_Aurelius I call bullshitte on your opinion and comments about Tommy Robinson. He was convicted and jailed in record time by a Judge whose conviction was overturned. He did not interfere in the trial as the scum had already been convicted. He only made comments in a public area of issues and convictions that where already in public domain. He has been harassed and falsely charged with hate crimes and smeared by the media and the government. If you do not believe his treatment is Orwellian in nature you need to give your head a shake.

@fisherman0707 I never said I think he was justly jailed, I happen to believe the opposite. If anything I am watching his actions as closely as I can, and am aware of his mistreatment by the judicial system, and the mainstream media. Was your response perhaps directed at heriseldon?

@fisherman0707 yeah I think that was directed at me. I haven't said anything bullshit dude. He wasn't already convicted in his most recent stint. I have included links to the actual trial verdict. I don't deny that silencing him online for example is Orwellian, but there is nothing Orwellian about expecting him to observe contempt of court laws that have stood his entire life, just like anyone else.

He also has previous convictions for:

football hooligan violence
entering the USA on a false passport
mortgage fraud - described by the judge as involving a "significant amount of forward planning" and being a " thoroughly dishonest course of conduct"
assaulting a police officer causing actual bodily harm

I already explained why he was convicted and jailed in record time - because he was probably the first person in history to be stupid enough to livestream the exact crime he had been warned would land him in prison.

He also sold loads of books during that little stint inside.

He has not exposed any grooming criminals, only recklessly threatened various trials of defendants who had already been investigated, arrested and put on trial. He is generally ordered - like the rest of the press - to wait until a trials conclusion before reporting, to avoid influencing a jury one way or another.

I am not whatsoever claiming that the issues he cares about shouldn't be discussed, but I am saying that in every political movement, even ones that anyone might wholeheartedly support, there are bad apples trying to use it as a vehicle for their own publicity and rise to power.