If Tommy Robinson is a 'racist' whatever that means, it doesn't make him wrong about everything.
He is a gift for all the main political parties because they can say, we might be scum bag untrustworthy politcians but at least we are better than that evil racist bigot Robinson. It's amusing to watch.

Irrespective of the Robinson circus, it is simply not good enough to ignore harsh realities because they don't sit well with one's 'woke' mentality.

What facts have I presented that are selective? Let's get to the bottom of it.
What is 'racist' about what I've stated? What context am missing here?

Enlighten Us. Be specific.

I'm just wondering how many people will be tarred with the racist paint brush when they proffer an opinion about the young ISIS girl wishing to return to the UK so her baby can be looked after (by the taxpayer).........

Pro USA & Israel

How does that affect you personally?

Paua oouaarancì Irà chiyeah Ishé galé ma ba oo ah

Now that really is telling and where you clearly have your blind spot. So you are talking about trusting the politicians, the social services, the police and local authorities? (the media perhaps?) How did that go in Rotherham and elsewhere and what lessons have fundamentally been learned? Where is the public inquiry like the £25m one we had to have for Abu Ghraib for enemy combatants? (which found pretty much nothing)

The point is they are all our institutions right up to and including the house of lords and the monarchy are compromised by the same left wing ideology as you. They will never address any of these problems directly unless they change course and allow true free speech. You wonder why this is such a hot topic on forums like this but nobody dare express anything that might be even remotely *interpreted* asracist/sexist/Islamophobic etc in the real world. It's now taboo, a non-discussion and it's mass censorship. People are even getting knocks on the door by the Police for saying the wrong thing (I think they now call it non-criminal hate speech).

In a world where people have their own "truth", nothing is objective and everything is relative and malleable (even gender) then everything can be explained by ideology.

You are basically arguing that peoples right to be offended trumps all others and people do not have the agency to think for themselves (it's dangerous so let the state do it for us). It's madness and it also plays into the hands of extremists on both sides.

I asked you to re-read my comments because I have already answered this point, at some length so you have no excuses for missing it.

To describe any criminal group by their racial origin is, almost by definition, racist. It suggests that all pakistanis are group rapists. Now I guess you will be in denial of that because you won't see it in the same way but for many it really does suggest that and, most importantly, it will to the whole pakistani community who will feel ostracised and marginalised when the objective must be the absolute opposite.

Exactly the same considerations apply to the knife crime and terrorism. Crimes are committed by people and not by the colour of their skins. Condemn the sin and not the ethnicity of the sinner.

We need to separate evil from things that aren't evil. Being pakistani and/or Muslim, Black or White, or anything else, is not evil and to suggest otherwise is racist.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

First bold: he's got a fantastic excuse, like the rest of us he didn't bother to read your essay.

Second bold: absolute tripe. If a pakistani or black or white person attacked you, you would immediately describe them as such to old bill on the phone. It is not racist to accurately describe something.

"What did the offender look like?"

"A person". Just isn't going to yield results, is it?

Virtue signalling on another level.