Geert Wilders in front of the British embassy: “I stand here in solidarity with Tommy Robinson”

Yesterday Geert Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV) in the Netherlands stood in front of the British embassy in The Hague and recorded his outrage about the arrest and imprisonment of Tommy Robinson:

The international coverage of Tommy’s case is unprecedented — he never had anywhere near this much publicity after any of his previous arrests and incarcerations. Maybe his stint at The Rebel has given him a high enough profile in North America so that the word got out.

While I was watching videos about Tommy this evening, I noticed the YouTube sidebar was crammed with clips about the case made by well-known people, not all of them from the “Counterjihad community”. This time is definitely different.

Now we’re all hoping for a Trump tweet about Tommy…

7 thoughts on “Geert Wilders in front of the British embassy: “I stand here in solidarity with Tommy Robinson”

  1. Thank you Mr Wilders!

    If only some of our Politicians would show the same courage that you do!

    • He has worked with Tommy, IIRC. That personal bond makes all the difference. No toff in England would touch Tommy – they live in fear.

  2. Tommy Robinson’s “case” is about how the British Traitor Class has committed itself to war against the ethnic British Citizenry for the express purpose of achieving what they refer to as their new order. To reduce this to a mere stint to improve someone’s “publicity” is a rather despicable thing to suggest. Right now the guy’s life is on the line. On the line mind you for the purpose of exposing the disgusting collusion between Muslim rape gangs running rampant and the British legal system allowing it to continue mostly unabated. Is that a society you’d be willing to live in? For Tommy Robinson it isn’t and he’s right now putting his own life on the line to oppose it.

    Yet I find it disgusting that people try to frame all of their usual Hegelian Dialectic artificial constructs of left, right, nationalist around this criminal activity in order to try and normalize it into irrelevancy. This isn’t a publicity war or some “stunt” by someone. No. This is something very, very “different”. People are genuinely outraged over this totalitarian tactic to silence Tommy Robinson. You’d think someone in the British Government would be removing the people who set this guy up for his eventual murder in prison. Yet hardly a peep from any of them and I fear they’ve decided to martyr him before someone acts on their own private political agenda.

  3. More details from TR’s trial. Here is, from the judge’s own mouth, what he was sentenced to 13 months in prison for:

    “Judge Geoffrey Marson QC said: ‘Not only was it a very long video, but I regard it as a serious aggravating feature that he was encouraging others to share it and it had been shared widely.
    ‘That is the nature of the contempt.
    ‘He referred to the charges that the defendants faced and some charges which are not proceeded against in relation to some defendants.’ ”


    Concerning the gag order on TR’s own trial, the BBC’s home affairs correspondent Dominic Casciani says:

    “Reporting restrictions are a long-standing part of the British legal system. In this case, the judge ordered a temporary media black-out because he feared reporting Robinson’s conviction could influence the jury in the very case Robinson was targeting.
    This is not some new form of censorship directed at Robinson. These are rules that apply to us all, equally.”


    So, according to this correspondent, the judge feared that an action performed by himself (= sentencing TR to 13 months in prison) would influence the jury in another case, and so he put a ban on anyone speaking about his own action?

    How interesting.

    Another thing is that the correspondent DC claims that “These are rules that apply to us all, equally” and spitefully adds “If he [Robinson] is unsure about that, he’s now got time on his hands to read a copy of Essential Law for Journalists.”

    However, where does this leave The Huddersfield Daily Examiner and its crime correspondent Andrew Hirst, who on May 11th 2017 (a year ago) wrote about the same trial that TR has reported on, with a wealth of detail? Including a list of the names of the defendants, what they are accused of, a video of them coming to the court house, and a photo gallery of them.

    Read it here:

    If you now scroll back and look again at the judge’s statement on TR’s trial, you may reflect on this:

    * AH’s article is very long.
    * He encourages others to share it by including Facebook, Twitter et al. icons at the top along with the word “share” in the imperative.
    * It has been shared 2646 times.
    * He refers to the charges that the defendants faced and some charges which are not proceeded against in relation to some defendants.

    In other words, Mr. Hirst has done all that Mr. Robinson did. If these are criminal offences, does this mean that Mr. Hirst should be tried for contempt of court, too?

    Any comment from Mr. Hirst on how he views his own work in comparison with TR’s would be most interesting.

    What are his thoughts on the TR case?
    How does he view the work conditions for crime reporters in Britain in general?
    Has the TR case changed how he will report further on this or other criminal cases?
    If yes, why, and how? If not, why not?

    A survey of British crime correspondents’ view on the same questions in the wake of TR’s conviction would also be relevant. As these questions must be vital to all British crime reporters and journalists in general, I hold my breath for them to be openly discussed in the press.

    Personally, I consider Mr. Hirst’s article well written, factual, and containing information that the British public should have access to. I do not see how a public listing of the bare facts of a case could possibly prejudice the jury. Not so in the case of AH, and not so in the case of TR.

    • Hirst’s article was written when all of the defendants made their appearance at Kirklees ( Huddersfield) Magistrates court . From this first appearance they were then committed for trial at Leeds Crown Court. But because there are 29 defendants the trial has been split into 3 taking place over most of this year. The first trial started in January and concluded in April . The second started soon after and it is this trial TR was arrested outside. The third trial will not begin till the autumn . The reporting restrictions were imposed for these 3 trials but were not in place for the committal hearing which is what Hirst reported on. Robinson was in contempt because he did what the judge at Canterbury (where he was given the suspended sentence) told him not to do.

Comments are closed.