If we could, IE would be in the white house

The faith in the UK government to adequately punish muslims is laughable.

We’re not even Brits so wtf?

Excusing that by blaming Tommy for it is gross

Moments, however imperfect, must be capitalized upon for a nobler goal (stopping future rapes)

@Nerv - VA true

@Nerv - VA the eternal anglo always thinks about the old land lol

Are they not white? Should we ignore their plight because weren't born on the same lands?

@Sam Southern - TN Anglos... so powerful yet always misguided.

no, I'm supermajority Anglo but still way more focused on problems here than there ya know @Josh M. -OH

@Nerv - VA skrrrrrt we're too focused on restarting the empire

If "what we have" is supporting a guy who knowingly decreased a grooming gangs chance of getting convicted, it's better to wait for it to blow over and build something new.

I don't mean any disrespect to you as a person, so I'm sorry if it came off like that, but the idea that we should support someone like this is absurd.

It might succeed in getting some right wing working class people riled up, but anyone on the fence watching this is going to think we've crazy. @Wood-Ape - OK/MN

@Josh M. -OH we’re not an English group.

@Nerv - VAyeah, so?

We shouldn't care about others?

nibba he's saying that we are more focused on stuff here than stuff there for obvious reasons

@Sam Southern - TNno one is arguing against that. Doesn't even need to he said really

it does if you're asking why we don't care about others

I'm saying you should care but should put your interests first

Our interests I should say.

@Josh M. -OH Really? It's gross to say that he shouldn't have done something which could have given the judge an excuse to set rapists free?

You can disagree with the law, but that doesn't change the impact of what he did.

By the way, the law wasn't politically motivated at all. The idea is that a jury is only supposed to get information from the trial so they remain impartial, so, if an ongoing trial is reported on, it could "prejudice the jury". It had nothing to do with his political beliefs. He wasn't a political prisoner.

If you have no faith in your government getting rightful justice for those victims what would you do?

@Josh M. -OH No we should. But we should also realize that we have no ability to do anything in the UK. Because we have no UK members.

Lol

This is what happens when you get all your news from sources that already agree with you. The truth is, far right sources make stuff up to.

@Nerv - VAwe can still debate the issues.

Ok 👍

@Josh M. -OH I would raise awareness *without* reporting on an ongoing trial. Literally that simple.

Ok, we can agree that maybe he was foolish but his heart was in the right place?

@Jacob But the only sources I have seen with your take have been hardline WN places like Counter Currents... 🤔

His heart wasn't in the right place. He wanted publicity. If you read the Counter Currents articles, there's evidence he was well aware of this law. I highly doubt that a guy so involved in politics was unaware of a fairly simple law like this in his own country. @Josh M. -OH

@Wood-Ape - OK/MN The Guardian had a good take on it

@Jacob he was capitalizing on the publicity of the trial to raise awareness.

I guess you could try and say it was selfish

Leadership is enjoying a retreat and we are fighting... I am not a mod but I kindly suggest a topic change

No fighting. Debating. Which is healthy.

Again, there was an infinite number of ways he could have raised awareness without reporting on an ongoing trial.

@Jacobyeah, I'll concede he was foolish. I wont concede he intentionally sabotaged a trial to get muslims off

@Wood-Ape - OK/MN let's let <@&358437309076602912> decide

what's up?

Is this conversion too divisive?