Long hair goes well with the skirts, like the old saying goes, if you ever pull a Scots bird, a swift kick in between the legs just to be sure.
Forza, more than just a keeper, LL was in the army. He knows a thing or two about wars. He saved his country several times... then let a soft one in at the near post.
John Sweeney sacked by the ALBBC, thanks to Tommy Robinson. The hunter became the hunted and got his just desserts, Well done Tommy
Didn't watch he whole thing I have to admit, but I didn't find many of Sweeney's comments to be particularly racist. Rude, certainly, but I draw the line at racist, 'specially as the Irish are the same race as he is. That Asian cab drivers don't like dogs in their vehicles? OK, so what? Some white drivers might feel the same. Queers? Yea, well, that was just plain rude. No need for that, but not, in my opinion, particularly abusive. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like the guy if I were to meet him, I'm not fond of the self opinionated PC Brigade or their friends the Pretend PC Brigade, nor, in fact, am I'specially fond of the far Right mob, but each to his own. I must say, though, good on Tommy Robinson for organising the 'sting'. Pity more people don't do this kind of thing. Some of these overbearing, opinionated, self appointed defenders of the society need to be closely watched. They have a lot of mouth and, sadly, the forum to be able to project their views publicly.
Imagine if Boris, Tommy or even Trump had been caught out saying those things the left wing libtards and msm would be having a field day with their faux outrage
It’s an interesting point. To be an investigative journalist like that I guess you have to have a certain kind of attitude. But if a guy who does stings for a living, allows himself to get stung, then it’s a pretty poor show. Thing with these tv investigations is they should first and foremost be expose’s and factual documentaries... but they often fall into the trap of sensationalism to make ‘better’ entertainment. Shame because it would have been interesting to see his take on Yaxley (balanced or otherwise) ... and the robust denials that would follow. Were someone to do a genuinely balanced appraisal of how people like Yaxley come to prominence, what they stand for, how they market themselves, finance themselves and generally how they tap into and reflect the mood of a segment of the population... would be an interesting watch.
His name's Tommy Robinson, don't disrespect him by calling him Yaxley. There's plenty on youtube how Tommy Robinson came to prominence. The only truth the BBC and other fake news media ever told is when they went looking for dirt on Tommy Robinson. They went back to his days as founder of the EDL, and kept mentioning it in every program they did on him. They also revealed other areas of his life. Other youtube videos, from the good guys fills in the blanks. You can bet your last quid that the other fake media will be standing up taking notice, cos they won't know if they're part of sting too. A great victory for Tommy Robinson and the people, his hard work, determination and perseverance paid off in long run. I think catching out Sweeney was only part of the reason for him getting sacked. Sweeney also highlighted how BBC do their investigating, and it's completely exposed them, they're embarrassed and humiliated. However, it hasn't stopped them doing the dirty on, and going after Boris Johnson, they do seem to be a bit carefull on the words they use and what they actually say or ask.
Jesus wept! Much ado about nothing. I think that journo bloke would fit in well here if he was a wee bit more controversial. Has he ever lied about Yaxley? Is that what he's being sacked for? Oh, wait a minute - he hasn't been sacked, has he? Only person to use that word is a sensationalist Yaxley Yank on a vid who seemingly forgot to use his robot voice to give himself credibility. But it's on the internet now that he's been sacked, so it must be true. Our Yaxley-follower-in-chief, Captain Jackboot has declare it too, so that reinforces it. Yeah, right. Factually incorrect, unless I've missed an official statement declaring such (which is always possible). The only thing the journo has been guilty of, if guilty is the word, is using information in the 'best' way to make a story on Yaxley makes a story. Just like every other journo. Just like the makers of Yaxley's piece. Hardly 'Lancaster bomber found on moon' stuff, though, is it? Sensation by omission, careful editing, taking advantage of the bladdered, and paid informers. The stuff of everyday journalism. Personally, I don't like it, no matter who the subject is - even Yaxley! But FFS, would there be such a hullabaloo if this was a hatchet job done on any other journalist? The answer is obviously no - unless he has previously targeted Yaxley. So this 'job' he's supposed to have done on Yaxley - did he tell any lies? If so, there is no doubt in my mind that Yaxley would sue him. Yaxley can smell a pound coin in a bucket of shiite from 50 paces. But funnily enough, despite Yaxley being so very, very keen to uphold the law, apart from when he's breaking it, (it appears that he's allowed to in Yaxleyland), there is not a whiff of a court case. Not even a threat - unless it was in the vid after I switched it off (which coincidentally was when Yaxley was about to speak). As I said at the start. Much ado about nothing. Man leaves job to do other projects. Ranter rants again & untrue 'sacking' claims made. Oops! I used Yaxley's name 13 times. Sorry, 14 now. Just as well Captain Jackboot can't read this or he's think I was really disrespecting Yaxley. Damn! Buggered up the count again. That's now 15 times I've disrespected Yaxley. Shiit, there I go again ......
I've got a great sense of humour, and I can give it as well as take it. So how much pleasure did you get from scraping the barrel about someone who's served his country and did 2 tours of Northern Ireland, and I include all the others on here who've served their country.....................did you get a kick out of it, cos it's obvious you don't have the ability to say something intellectual.
He was sacked as sure as eggs is eggs,they just gave the resign or get sacked option, same thing, he had to go one way or the other for sure.
Some people are too brainwashed and not man enough to admit they are wrong LL they only want to listen to one side of the story, suits their bullshit narrow minded, narrative, lefty ****s, a cancer on society, there needs to be a solution to this filth
They dont want to tell the world why he was sacked Chesh, it would go against their narrative Tommy is just too clever for these ****s
Perhaps, but nevertheless, an assumption. If his 'crime' was that bad, the BBC would have been forced to discipline him. When did this sting take place? Last night? If his 'crime' was that heinous, he'd have been sacked on the spot. He wasn't. So, officially, he wasn't sacked & to suggest he was is technically defamation. With this guy, anything is possible, so Yaxley might want to watch out. Could be interesting .... I don't care for either of them, for the record.
Applies on the other side of the fence too, remember! Can't remember reading a lot of balanced posts on this thread. Very polarised, do you not agree?
Tommy? Clever? No time to argue this one, but if he was that clever, why has he got such a long criminal record, and more to the point, why did he let himself get caught so often? Doesn't strike me as clever, does Yaxley. Just a nazi boot-boy who's coining it on from the disillusioned. Good money if you can get it!
No i dont agree, you just talk bollocks when it comes to Tommy You're just not man enough to admit anything good that he as done . I will ask you a question find me anything that Tommy has said or done that is racist, should be easy shouldn't it ?
I don't know a great deal about Yaxley, so unable to fully discuss his 'career'. Also completely uninterested in his history, Although astounded at the long list of convictions brought to my attention, which is omething of a rarity for someone who allegedly fights for justice. I simply see a conman milking gullibles. Let's take his contempt case. Yaxley maintains that he knows the law inside out. Perhaps he used his time inside wisely? (Joke). He also wants justice re. the rapist gangs. Admirable, but don't we all? However, Yaxley, with his contempt actions, failed to use this supposed legal knowledge & almost got them all off on a technicality. Was that his plan? Hmmm. Despite what you may think, it's clear to many that Yaxley was only interested in the publicity to further his own 'career'. If all went to plan, they would get off on a technicality, and despite causing it, Yaxley would harvest enormous publicity for himself. If the plan failed, he could - and would - milk his imprisonment, again with publicity to further his own 'career'. K'ching! Again. Why can people not see how obvious this is? So the man trying to ensure that the rapists get jailed jeopardises their fair trial by illegal means? Why? What is his reason? K'ching again? There is no suitable argument for trying to get them off like that. Was it his first, perhaps accidental, dalliance with Contempt of Court? No. Has he apologised to the victims for his foolhardy actions? No. Did the rapists get convicted anyway? Yes. And yet Yaxley is all over the media, bleating. Don't you see that it's all about him, his ego, & his bank balance? Did he really want these guys convicted? I have never, ever seen a compulsive reasoned argument for his ways of working. All I see is a serial criminal bleating about the crimes of others & attempting to get them off. Fact.
I’m referring to his birth name, hardly disrespecting. I also point out that a balanced (see that word) documentary would be interesting - something that looks at both sides of the debate. Neither a hatchet job nor a youtube fanboy take.
