Tommy’s Possible Visit to America

From the Middle East Forum some intriguing and welcome news:

The Middle East Forum has, in conjunction with the David Horowitz Freedom Center, invited activist and journalist Tommy Robinson to the United States.

In addition, Rep. Paul Gosar (Republican of Arizona) and six other members of Congress have invited Mr. Robinson to speak to the Conservative Opportunity Society in a closed-door event.

Assuming all the legal issues are sorted out, he will address the public in Washington, D.C. on November 14. Americans will then have a chance to hear Mr. Robinson, a long-time target of UK authorities attempting to silence criticism of Islamism, about his first-hand experience confronting radical Islam and his cautionary tale about political correctness run amok.

The Forum first sprung to the defense of Mr. Robinson’s rights last May when he was arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced to 13 months prison, and jailed — all in the course of five hours — after covering a rape grooming trial involving Muslim defendants in England.

On August 1, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales threw out his conviction and released him from prison, citing a lack of due process. A re-trial was ordered and Mr. Robinson is currently free on bail after a London judge referred the case to the UK Attorney General, saying it was too complex an issue for him to decide on his own.

“Mr. Robinson titled his autobiography Enemy of the State and that title is dismayingly apt,” notes MEF counselor and Legal Project director Marc Fink. “The UK government and press have come down hard on him by way of conveying a general message: discuss Islamic issues with caution. This could be a warning to Americans too, as some voices here argue that ‘hate speech’ should not enjoy First Amendment protection. Is Mr. Robinson’s plight America’s future?”

The Middle East Forum will continue to support Mr. Robinson personally, as well as the general right to publicly discuss controversial subjects — including those related to Islam — without facing legal jeopardy.

Can you imagine the security costs for this visit??

Can you imagine the twisted MSM accounts of his travels… on both sides of the Atlantic??

14 thoughts on “Tommy’s Possible Visit to America

  1. Dymphna- you beat me to it! Just got home a little while ago and saw the news and was about to post a link. I am so thrilled but instead of such a small event, I wish that Tommy could appear with President Trump at one of his rallies. If not there, then maybe at a small stadium or other large venue where his American supporters could go to hear him in person. Tommy Robinson is giving hope to many who have lost it. It seemed that he was in such an impossible situation but he never gave up and he stuck by his principles. He is one of my all time Heroes.

  2. I wish with all my heart we could get him up here in Canada. But I don’t think there’s any chance that our liberal gov’t would let him in. In Canada we are only about 10 years behind the U.K. on the slippery slope to a scared population ruled by leftist P.C. tyrants, hell bent on the advancement of the R.O.P. Glad I left.

  3. He should apply for asylum in the US, or just stay here like all the rest. I’d like to see him move to Hamtramk or Minneapolis and run for office.

    • Tommy’s not likely to leave England. All his family is there. And those Congressmen who invited him are going to make certain he returns unharmed.

      As for Minneapolis, et al, he’d be dead in a week. And for what??

  4. Everyone remembers the last time he came here he did so on someone else’s passport right? Talk about illegal immigration.

    • Tommy was a different person then. He didn’t understand Britain’s deep animus toward rebels. He was also more impulsive and hadn’t been through all those months of dangerous solitary – twice now – that have left him changed.

      No, he never came as an immigrant and never meant to do so; his intention was to visit.

  5. Given the years of extreme and extraordinary political harassment Tommy Robinson has endured, it would not surprise me if the courts attempt to prevent Robinson’s travel abroad while his legal case remains open.
    I truly hope that is not the case.
    Instead I pray he and his family are given the opportunity to soak in a hearty dose of real freedom here in the USA and celebrate the enormous support he can have faith in from his brothers/sisters here across the Atlantic.

  6. I hope that in the not-too-distant-future Tommy backs and gives publicity to a crowd-funding campaign dedicated to compensation claims against the British authorities who wilfully failed in their duty to protect the hundreds of children abused by Muslim paedophile rape gangs.

  7. Falling asleep last night (Wed), heard “Today in Parliament” (BBC Radio 4, 11.30pm) and some deeply biased comments from our parliamentarians: here’s the “Guardian” report:

    One might almost think that the British Establishment was ashamed of its failure to address the grooming gangs’ activities, and projecting its guilt onto the principal whistleblower.

    • Tommy stands up for betrayed underage girls. John Bercow, Speaker of the House of Commons, describes him as “a loathsome, obnoxious, repellent individual” (Guardian article, above).

      • “…a loathsome, obnoxious, repellent individual.” that sounds like another case of the left accusing its opponents of being what it is.

  8. In all the so called ‘reporting’ on Tommy Robinson there are references to ‘the law’ on reporting on court cases, a ‘blanket reporting ban’ on this grooming case, and a ‘court order’ prohibiting Tommy from doing something or other. The reporters say there is a ‘law’ against taking photos of inside of or maybe outside of a courthouse. I have never seen a link or the text of any of these.

    England is the home of common law. There must be written statutes and written cases to allow people to know when they are and are not violating the law. Has anyone else ever found these? I gave up.

    I grew tired of reading that Tommy had violated a law or court order but the ‘professional reporters’ never could tell me what those were.It also seemed that the ‘professional’ press must be violating those same laws, if they exist.

Comments are closed.