Tommy Robinson (real name etc etc) last week pointed out that there hasn’t been a day in the last fifteen years when he hasn’t been preparing for a court case – even when he has been in gaol. Now is no exception, despite the massive success of Unite the Kingdom last Saturday week, and I’m writing this for readers in distant lands and those in the UK who haven’t kept up, essentially to ask you to pray (or whatever other action seems appropriate) for his court case in October.
The background is that before his last imprisonment, whilst he was awaiting trial for Contempt of Court for showing a documentary revealing the corruption of our legal and political systems, he was arrested under the Terrorism Act whilst leaving England for a preparatory holiday. (This was, naturally, reported in the press as his fleeing the country to avoid prison).
Now, from the start of his interview, it was made clear that there was no actual suspicion he had ever engaged in terrorist activity. That shows that the arrest was simply made in order to benefit from the exceptional provisions of the Terrorist Act, which (a) denies the usual right of silence – in this case, it would seem, mainly enabling an intimidatory six hour interrogation, and (b) gives the police the right to seize electronic devices and demand access to them, without having to have a specific and warranted due cause.
The Terrorist Act allows an exception to the latter provision for journalists protecting their sources. In Robinson’s case his phone contained the detailed testimonies of hundreds of female victims of Pakistani rape gangs, together with other confidential sources whose very lives would be in jeopardy should the information be leaked, and to whom Robinson had promised absolute confidentiality.
Another advantage of using the Terrorism Act is (c) that it leads to trial without a jury. So since no terrorist activity has ever even been implied, the prosecution is purely technical, in order to procure a spurious terrorist conviction. Given such misuse of a law designed for extreme national emergencies, there is no reason why the police should not turn up on your doorstep, demand the PIN code to your private information, and then get you gaoled for terrorism by a bent judge if you refuse to hand it over. There’s certainly no risk of corruption there! It’s not the only time the Terrorism Act has been perverted in this way.
Everyone in the world is now aware that the British regime has been desperately trying to cover up the rape gangs in our cities for a couple of decades, and that this is the very reason that Tommy has been hounded from pillar to post (or from court case to court case) and his character assassinated in the media. The two operating principles have been “Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime” (Lavrentiy Pavlovich Beria) and “He who controls the media controls the minds of men” (Journal of Tennessee Baptist Convention, 1957). Quite apart from playing fast and loose with the letter of the law, the State has already shown that it cannot be trusted with information on the victims of the rape gangs. And so, quite legitimately, Tommy refused to hand over the PIN number of his phone.
A cool look at the Contempt of Court conviction that followed soon afterwards confirms that it was, indeed, part of the long campaign not only to silence him, but to destroy him pour encourager leas autres. Contempt of Court is a civil offence which seldom attracts a prison sentence, and if it does results in the lowest category of risk, usually in an open prison. But Tommy Robinson was committed for 18 months to the highest security prison, with a high Muslim population actually controlling the place, knowing that he would have to be in solitary confinement to protect his very life (he had been severely assaulted by Muslims during his previous incarceration, eventually declared illegal on appeal in mid-sentence).
In fact it appears that, fearing for his sanity, he actually asked to be put out “on the wing,” but the governor insisted on his serving his entire sentence in solitary, which by definition is a “cruel and unusual treatment,” but which in this case was repeatedly endorsed by the Home Office. They could, of course, have transferred him to a safer low-security prison, but refused. Objectively, that is torture imposed by the highest level of the State, for a civil offence. Even Guatanamo Bay only tortured real unconvicted terrorists…
It was while Tommy was actually in prison, but only shortly before he qualified for release (note the psychologically precise timing), that he was informed that charges under the Terrorism Act, for refusing to unlock his phone data, would follow, and that is where we are now. One assumes the Crown’s case will be that he is not a proper journalist – despite his making numerous documentaries and exclusively interviewing Elon Musk live! One would also think that such a charge would be easy to refute, but since they have brought it anyway, there seems every likelihood that, once again, the “random” process will allocate a hanging judge to his case. And we are living in a country where “insulting Islam” has just been regarded an aggravating factor in another public disorder case, resulting in a longer prison sentence because of a blasphemy law that does not exist. So we cannot safely rely on the charge being thrown out of court, as it clearly should be unless the Terrorism Act is not restricted to terrorists, but is a catch-all tool against dissidents.
So that’s the situation, as far as I can tell. It’s all of a piece with our Dear Leader Sir Keir’s stirring saying recently:
“We have a long history of free speech in this country. I’m very proud of that and I will always defend it.”
