British Government Bans Female Rape Accusers From Being Cross-Examined In Court

The feminization of the justice system has continued unabated, with the nominally Conservative British government of Theresa May pledging to ban courtroom cross-examinations of alleged rape victims. The practice of prerecording rape complainant evidence is already in place for children, which poses the irony that women, who make up the vast majority of rape accusers, will be treated like children are.

UK Justice Secretary Liz Truss believes that the plan “will not reduce the right to a fair trial, but will ensure victims of these crimes are protected.” This shows a shocking ignorance of the nature of the British system and history of law. Unlike on the European continent, England and Wales’ court procedures are adversarial. Unless changes to courtroom procedure involve something neutral like painting the walls beige instead of white, an advantage given to one side, in this instance the prosecution and obliquely the accuser, naturally disadvantages the other (here, the accused).

Ideas about a more impartial and even-handed conception of justice in Britain date back to the Magna Carta and the noble agitations that prompted it. Over the centuries, this evolved into more ironclad protections against judicial errors in the form of carefully selected juries and the testing of evidence in open court. Theresa May and Liz Truss’ efforts in the Prisons and Courts Bill represent an egregious dismantling of this time-honored legacy. Relative to its size, Britain has often been the most respected country in the world when it comes to legal matters. A direct outcome of this stability and fairness is the continued flourishing of its economy and society over the course of the 20th century. This reputation as a bastion of common sense, though under attack for some time, is presently being strangled like never before.

To appease a few SJWs, May and Truss are undermining the right to a fair trial. There is no guarantee that video evidence will not be tampered with or that multiple takes will not be done, giving the “best” one to the court for viewing by the judge and jury. Compare this to the situation of the accused, who cannot ask for a “redo” of his statement to police, except if he wants to be branded as a liar who changes his story. The accused has a lot more to lose from a trial, yet will be expected to front court with the public, if not the entire country knowing his name and every detail of his past being trawled over. By contrast, rape accusers in the United Kingdom are granted perpetual anonymity.

A perfect storm

Yes, this is the woman who worked to classify men approaching women as “hate criminals.”

In all three major aspects of the criminal legal system, investigation, the laying of charges, and prosecution in a court, the standards for evaluating men as “rapists” have been deleteriously lowered in Britain. Readers will remember how Nottingham Police, in a move being followed by other UK police forces, decided to regard men approaching women as perpetrators of “hate crimes.” This is despite proponents freely admitting that such behavior was not actually criminal in many ways (and nor should it be).

Likewise, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) pursued innocent man Mark Pearson for an eternity over a “rape” allegation by Game of Thrones actress Souad Faress. CCTV footage was deliberately slowed down by the CPS to make it look like Pearson could have (rather than did) digitally assault Faress as it would have otherwise been impossible. After all, Liz Truss and CPS head Alison Saunders have publicly made it their mission to increase the number of rape convictions, rather than seeking sound and properly proven rape convictions.

Rape isn’t the only traumatic crime

Feminists falsely portray court cross-examinations as an abuse towards (female) accusers, when, in fact, there is usually next to no hard evidence to support allegations of rape.

Like me, you may have family members who have gone through terrible criminal ordeals. One of my closest family members was caught up in an armed robbery and had a high-powered weapon aimed right at her face. In addition, an acquaintance of mine was so badly beaten in an unprovoked attack that he went through months of excruciating physical rehabilitation, to the point where simple functions like eating and walking had to be thoroughly remastered. Neither he nor my family member were spared cross-examination in court.

Consequently, the move to ban courtroom cross-examinations of rape complainants reeks of unwarranted exceptionalism. Time and again, the alleged or plain obvious suffering of other victims of crime is minimized in favor of the narrative that rape claims are the only cases ever deserving of special consideration. Did someone carve up your father with a knife and kill him in front of you after both of you were taken hostage? Well, you have to give evidence in court. Were you attacked by a mob, causing you to spend five weeks in a coma? If so, chances are you’ll have to be cross-examined once you’re physically able to be, irrespective of any lingering mental and emotional trauma you will have.

More importantly, the two violent crime examples I just mentioned are almost universally accompanied by a plethora of hard evidence, as opposed to the invariably flimsy and vague corroboration we see with allegations of rape. Because of the huge delay in many rape accusers coming forward, the need for cross-examination is even more pronounced than for most other serious alleged crimes.

So many things could go wrong

Exceptions for rape accusers are being pushed by people like this.

If courtroom cross-examinations are supposedly too traumatic, what’s to stop accusers and feminists from saying prerecorded cross-examinations are as well? Remember, we live in the political and social climate of “listen and believe,” where questioning a woman’s story of rape is equated with misogyny. What’s more is that the public focus has been entirely on the efficacy of courtroom cross-examinations versus prerecorded evidence, not what robust form the prerecorded evidence-gathering should be taking and how open to revision it will be. And, of course, anything is up for revision in the UK, including due process, as it lacks a powerful constitution and Parliament at Westminster has what is called parliamentary supremacy.

Sadly, the atmosphere of man-hating in the legal system is going to roll on well into the future. The range of false rape stories out there, from Emma Sulkowicz’s lies to the Duke lacrosse case to Ched Evans’ cock carousel accuser, has led to SJWs and others openly trying to subvert due process to secure Stalinist-style conviction quotas.

So, the million-dollar question is this: are you currently protecting yourself from false accusations? If not, you need to be.

Read More: British Soccer Star Ched Evans Found Not Guilty Of Rape After Years Of Abuse From Feminists

286 thoughts on “British Government Bans Female Rape Accusers From Being Cross-Examined In Court”

  1. I just want to murder that ugly feminist cunt that gives all western woman a bad name.

      1. Gladly just to tell those cucks in the court room what I think of them…I would pay for that opportunity.

  2. Pfft…
    A classic case of women not being able to comprehend the notion of justice. It will backfire hard soon but ’till that happens many men will have their lifes ruined, while the barely human invaders will be allowed to groom as many children as they like, ’cause diversity and racism.
    I want to see how the future society will be to counter such phenomena.

  3. I’m beginning to understand why the Arabs require four witnesses to corroborate a woman’s claim.

    1. There is an old Arabic saying that its meaning translates into “A nation is to never succeed once they let a woman lead them”

        1. It’s like the women are tired of being respected, so they purposely weaken society so that manly invaders take over and put them back in their place. Women hate power, responsibility, and getting everything they want; of course they want to be loved but also yearn discipline; and more importantly they crave to be dominated and want to submit to strength.

        2. Women have been tricked, they are not doing anything purposely. They honestly think that feminism is going to make them happy in the long run. Thats’ why its so sad, they’re being brainwashed to participate in their own destruction.

        3. Guess they (majority of them) are not “innocent” to be tricked ! They knew and they are enjoying! reaping the benefits, freebies, disrespecting & looting MEN !! They KNEW it !

        4. Classic photo.

          people 100 years ago already knew what consequence feminism would have.

          Having read a few of them, I think they would be shocked at our modern society.

        5. Absolutely amazing stuff and prescient. I always say that when they write books about the fall of western civilization, chapter one will be “Girl Power”.

        6. Well, a lot of them don’t really want but deep down they need it. Sometimes they’re not the same thing.

        7. I think we need to be a little less concerned about women’s happiness for once and be a little more concerned with creating stable nations. We’ve spent FAR too much time and effort on “What women want” instead of what our nations need.

    2. The premise for that law is: well if a woman is stupid enough to put herself into a situation where she can get raped then she deserves to get raped.

    3. Basically, they want it so that a man is guilty by default and be guilty until proven innocent and even then, it’s still questionable.
      Even if you get a signed, notarized statement from her saying she consented, they’ll just say she was scared or manipulated so it doesn’t count.

      1. Under feminist legal doctrine there can be no such thing as female consent to sex. They believe that no woman in her right mind would consent to sex, therefore if a woman did consent then she must have been out of her mind, and therefore unable to give consent. This is where we are being pushed, and have been pushed for decades.

    4. I’m beginning to understand why Islam is taking over the world, even in absense of force.

  4. One of the pillars of western justice is being treated equally under the law. I fail to see how this is equal treatment.

    1. You’re also supposed to be able to face your accuser and question him directly. Which is where cross examinations fall.

  5. After being falsely accused of rape by Wanetta Gibson, Brian Banks took a plea deal rather than risk a lengthy sentence if convicted. His accuser was very convincing. After serving 5 years, Mr. Banks was released and met with Ms. Gibson at her behest. Ms. Gibson then admitted that she had fabricated the rape accusation. Unknown to her, Mr. Banks had video recorded this confession. He immediately took the recording to the authorities. Eventually his conviction was overturned. Despite the recording Ms. Gibson refused to admit to her deception. She received no punishment but was sued by the Long Beach Unified School District to recoup a settlement paid to her plus attorney fees all totaling $2.6 million.
    Things like this make me wonder how many women are just better liars than Wanetta Gibson or “Jackie”.
    If the future is female, weep for the future.

    1. The way europe is going now i dont think it will have much of a future and that sucks as i always wanted to visit it .it sucks that by the time i would have enough money and stability to visit it it would be another stronghold of these pedophilic ,barbaric muslims

    2. First off – if I’m falsely accused, no fucking way will I take a plea deal. Cases are extremely hard to prove – so she can try to fucking prove it.
      Second – if I somehow manage to get convicted, serve time, get released, an obtain a taped confession of her lies which I turn over to the authorities and they do nothing, well, justice will be done by someone…

      1. I wonder if this shit will stop when falsely accused men start using a shotgun for justice.

    3. Yep a Gynocracy ..we are all going to be dancing around a golden vag here pretty soon…

    4. Fuck her. Why don’t a few thousand men hound her wherever she goes? She should never get a job. Any employer who hires her we could make it impossible for them. Completely burn her ass on social, hound her in public, protest her as a hate-criminal everywhere she goes. Hound anyone who provides a service or does business with her. She should be scared to leave her house.

      1. I don’t have any answers. All I know is what I read and see on the news. There’s much more to this. I just encapsulated it. This was a big story when it broke especially since Brian Banks had aspirations of playing professional football that had been dashed although he didn’t fare too well when finally given the opportunity. I suspect that Wanetta Gibson is something of a pariah in the community but a heroine amongst her peers. She’s definitely low class. I don’t think that I would have been as calm and forgiving as Mr. Banks appeared to be but thank god I didn’t have to put that to the test. For me, the issue is that there are plenty of women who have no compunction about making false accusations but are better liars than Ms. Gibson, and other women who have been caught lying. Mr. Banks’ case would be considered a valid rape case if Ms. Gibson could have kept her mouth shut or Mr. Banks had not surreptitiously recorded her. For women, victimhood is power even if it is false flag.

      2. Who was the idiot that decided a womans testimony without evidence is grounds to throw a man in a cage for five years?! THAT is the actual problem.
        We are a generation of boys that have zero concept of what it even means to be a man. Being a man means making the hard decision, to accept reality as it, to keep our emotions in check. To pause. To THINK it through before chimping out and goong crazy because some smirking asshole told us a story that he knew would press our buttons.
        Everything is about convenience. We dont give a shit about the ovnsequences of that convenience. So long as we can have convenience, that is what is important.

        1. Women are fickle. That’s why a woman may consent to sex tonight and in the morning FEEL that she was raped. Since feelings are subjective, she may actually feel that way.
          But courts of law are supposed to be about what you can objectively prove. Yes, rape is difficult to prove for various reasons, but the burden of proof still has to be on the accuser.
          Workplace sexual harassment is sort of in the same vein. You can say something to a woman she may be ok with right at that moment, but tomorrow she feels it was harassment. Who can really argue with it?

      3. because men don’t stick together. We need to start. Muslim , Black ,& Hispanic men go around in groups . White men don’t. We better learn & fast.

  6. This destroys a number of fundamental principles of law:
    1. Presumption of innocence until proved otherwise.
    2. Fair trial.
    3. Equality under the law.
    4. Burden of proof.
    Those fucking brits, everyday they dig a deeper grave.

        1. I recently vacationed in London. As far as London is concern it is already Londonstan. Only the rural parts of England are still British.

    1. Hey, they’re simply racing France, Germany and Sweden to see which country gets to that nice molten rock that will incinerate them first!

      1. That would be an interesting bet, to see which one falls first. Where is Bob Smith?
        I bet for the brits because a) they have already too much muslim invaders in there, b) the locals are brainwashed enough, c) they have a large ‘british’ black population, d) the local jewish community is one of the most, if not the most powerful in Europe.
        Slighty OT, I found this documentary this morning and its very decent:

        1. It’s funny how elites in a country like England (that’s people can identify where you live/were born by your dialect) fail to recognize diversity in white populations; they may dismiss the notion entirely. While arguing to the tenth of a percent the frequency of Muslim terrorism and its influence, they will gladly describe the near limitless ethnicities “poc” bring when emigrating from a homogeneous country to a formerly homogeneous country. Their only nod to white cultures is frequent reminders of our racism and privilege, conditions archetypal to whites and whiteness. That kind of thinking may as well be taken from Webster’s definition of racism. Knowing this, leftist mouthpieces have absolved themselves by quoting OTHER leftists’ jaw-droppingly stupid “theory” that ALL whites exhibit the trait of racism, but that THAT’S not racist because only whites are capable of racism. Whatever current outrage the left is shouting about is precisely what they are engaged in. Of course THAT’S ok because opposition member “X” is….(insert laundry list of words ending in phobia, ism, phobic, ist)

    2. Ironic insofar as all of those concepts come from the English concept of Natural Law as understood by their Saxon forefathers.

    3. They’re a bunch of self-loathing, self-destructive dickheads. People murdered in cold blood and what will they do instead? Hold vigils, light candles, hold hands and sing kumbaya and use filters on social media apps. They have a death wish as some form of atonement because God forbid they had an Empire that civilised savages. They fucking sicken me.

      1. I lit into some Brits on the BreitBart thread the other day regarding the Muslim attack. Said almost word for word what you’re detailing. They’re so weak.

        1. They are. The thing is that they fail to accept reality because they have encounter maybe 0.00001% of the savages that can integrate enough to get suspicion off them and accordingly have this romanticised view of them whereas those with experience of the animals know exactly what they’re all about. They persecuted my ancestors for centuries up to and including the early 20th century so for that I will hate them with every fibre of my being, forever.

        2. Exactly the same thing with the French and German. They don’t want to acknowledge they have a problem inside home. Reasons? Brainwashing, ignorance? OK, but I would say that deep inside in their libtard minds, there is cowardice and fear on the future.

        3. Cowardice. Defending one’s identity used to be tough. Much better and easier to tolerate others’ and hope the winners are not too hard on them.

        4. GOJ do you think the US will pull through and have some kind of conservative renaissance? Or are you planning on leaving for total collapse?
          I grew up in a christian home in Ohio myself. But today my moms been divorced three times. Sister cheated on her husband and became an alcoholic. Other sister is a feminazi. If that happened to us, aconservative family in the midwest, I have a hard time seeing hope for the nation for following generations.

        5. I get where you’re coming from, as another Christian from Ohio. There are still quite a few feminazis, sluts, leftists, you name it. Thus is the West these days. But, it’s a lot worse other places.
          It’s always a nice culture shock going home from the major city I live in, because the vast majority of people at home are openly and unabashedly nationalist, Christian, and proud of their (((white))) European heritage. Last fall there were Trump signs everywhere. Gave me some hope after living in an urban leftist wasteland in Texas. I’m personally planning on getting back to Ohio in the next few years.
          In my opinion if there’s one place in the US that can turn it around, it’s the Midwest. The south and Texas, conservative as they may historically be, have massive minority populations (I believe Hispanics are the majority in Texas now), coupled with younger generations of white liberals indoctrinated in public schools with white guilt over slavery and Jim Crow laws that “their people” did. This might be reaching, but I think that effect is lessened in the Midwest, especially considering that the education system paints the Civil War as completely having been about freeing the slaves, as inaccurate as that may be. When your ancestors were the “good guys fighting to free the slaves” in the Civil War (as they teach), when your state had nothing to do with Jim Crow laws and segregation, when your hometown was a key stop on the underground railroad, it’s harder to shame you into feeling “white guilt,” at least where I’m from. Their indoctrination, their own oversimplification of historical events into diametrically opposed good vs. evil backfires, or at least it did with me. As a kid in school, I got to feeling like “why should I feel guilty about any of this? According to you, my ancestors were the ones you say were the good guys. Why should I feel bad about what other people who have nothing to do with me did, especially when my people opposed them?” Maybe it’s just me, who knows.

        6. Very well said. Pass your message along. It’s very true & very inspirational. America & Europe have finally awakened. On Twitter I see more angry women than men now. Strange. But I think most are finally getting it & are pissed off that their lives have been ruined by these Feminazis . & see the danger & violence of Islam. It took a rich Patriot like TRUMP to lead our New movement. We all just need to turn out for events. & remember the MSM are our Mortal enemy as are Islam & Feminists. It’s NOW or Never. Stay strong Brothers.

        7. Honestly they don’t sound too Christian to me. Too much freedom for women = destruction. It always has.

      2. Exactly the same response you see in France, Germany, Belgium and the US. It is the West that is sick.

        1. Idiots. That father deserves to be slapped around. If it were me I would say ‘The reality is that they have imported horses that hate us and the feckless political leadership will do nothing but allow these incidents to continue; be smart and always vigilant’.

    4. It starts with confiscating the guns. Then you lose the rest of your rights and legal protections. No one should be surprised by this. It will end in civil war and or the extinction of the British male, which I believe is the master plan.

      1. only the criminals will have guns. They don’t care about laws. Islamists will also be armed. & they always move around in groups.

        1. Charlie you’ve got it right. You’ll notice that in both of the Paris attacks, the terrorists used weapons that were illegal in France. At least some of the weapons were purchased in Belgium where they are also illegal. Some came from a movie prop house in Slovakia and were restored to fully functional condition which was also illegal. When the first round of cops showed up for the Charlie Hebdo massacre they were unarmed so they couldn’t stop it. And when the criminal element can’t procure firearms any other way? Ask the Aussies about DIY:

  7. Good, strong men with courage and moral clarity used to be the most significant bulwark between a woman and someone who would rape her or hurt her. Forcible rapists were hunted down, thrown in prison and left to rot, their lives and reputations ruined by their deviancy. Men who crossed the line or took advantage of a women were dealt with in usually violent terms by fathers, brothers and male friends. It wasn’t perfect. There were times when an influential or powerful person could get away with beating his wife or other crimes. But in a strong community, it was usually effective.
    There was a cost to that system, too. Women had to acknowledge that they were generally physically weaker than most men, they had to behave with a modicum of decency in public and they had to acknowledge that they needed some level of protection. But even these costs had good sides… a woman who knew she needed a man’s protection also knew she was valued and worth being protected by her man, for example.
    Now, that bulwark is gone. Those good, strong men have (for the most part) been sapped of their strength, their courage and their moral clarity. They have been neutered for the “greater good” of political correctness and progressive society. They have Clockwork Orange’d their staunchest, most fervent protectors.
    Women have to rely on the government to protect them. They find out that the police can’t protect them from actual forcible rapists, but they only show up to collect the evidence in the hope they can prosecute him after the rape. They also have to hope the rapist isn’t given a plea bargain or gets his sentence lessened for some other politically correct reason.
    Women can’t rely on the men in their lives to protect them from men who take advantage of them, or even just treat them badly emotionally. So, they take those things to the justice system, as well. The justice system wasn’t really designed for that, so they have to keep changing the rules. See how well that has worked out for them.
    And this new progressive system has pretty much all the same flaws as the old system. An influential or powerful man can still get away with it, for example. But it has none of the protection, none of the value of the old system. And the people who get their lives ruined most often seem to be the ones who actually follow the rules.
    But at least she can slut it up as much as she wants and she doesn’t have to acknowledge that a man is physically stronger than she is….. except when that forcible rapist gets a hold of her….

    1. Most rapes aren’t strangers hopping out of bushes. Most are date rapes that are done by men that women know. They didn’t happen often in the past because it was assumed women would never be alone with a man she wasn’t married or related to. If for no other reason besides the fact that it didn’t look right.
      And Since most women were known to be of chaste reputation, if she said she was raped, it probably was true. It’s more common today because casual sex is the norm, women are likely to go off alone with a charming man they just met and because women are easily intimidated so they won’t fight back against an aggressive man so they have no injuries which make a rape case indistinguishable from consensual sex.
      And that’s why they say a woman’s sexual reputation is irrelevant to if she was raped or not. But that’s not reality. Granted, a 20 year old pornstar could be telling the truth about being raped while a 70 year old nun could be lying about being raped. But to pretend that a woman’s reputation has nothing to do with whether she’s lying or telling the truth is absurd

  8. A healthy, happy sexuality *increases* one’s appetite for life, *decreases* one’s willingness to be a slave that is kept like livestock, and is outright impossible without a certain amount of material security. (Gnawing worries about how to afford the doctor you seem to need for that coughing that doesn’t go away, or about how to pay rent, just make it impossible to have a “healthy, happy sexuality.”)
    Therefore, it is not in the interest of the ruling class (=non-ideological for “elites”) that their subjects enjoy their sexuality, therefore, they promote all kinds of ideologies that make it harder to enjoy one’s sexuality such as religion or feminism, therefore, it’s not in their interest, that people don’t have to be afraid of AIDS and all these other nasty STDs. (Socialist Cuba has one of the lowest AIDS rates of the whole world, but of course, the Western ruling class has called Cuba’s approach on how to deal with AIDS “fascist”, “tyrannical”, against “human rights”, etc. They WANT people to be afraid, they DON’T want people to enjoy their sexuality)

  9. … I thought they also had laws protecting muslims from ever being acccused of anything? And aren’t they kind of to blame for the rape crisis in Europe right now?

  10. Before long, men will be in court defending themselves against an empty chair…

    1. As predicted by the Great Prophet Eastwood. PBUH

        1. You don’t remember Clint doing his schtick about Obama being an empty chair back in 2012?

        2. oh. duh. thought maybe he and Clyde did something weird in one of those movies

        3. She is truly an embarrassment, which is saying a lot because the standards in Hollywood are already so low as to be ridiculous.

        4. Hey Michelle Obama is out of the White house we don’t to see any more pictures of that

        5. Seems to me the Entertainment Industry is trying to get the YOLO’ers or whatever type of people that ‘thing’ alludes to besides black people to generate more revenue.

        6. I felt a physical reaction just looking at her. It’s like Brienne of Tarth crossed with a gorilla.

    1. Great point. Why should I defend myself if the accuser does not exist? Well they will just throw your ass in jail anyway! The objective is not fairness at law, the objective is to destroy men so that they will NEVER be able to take back the government from the jews.

        1. Hating the Jews is anti-Semitism. I’m not saying don’t hate Jews, but it is what it is.

  11. Anyone having an issue with this site? I keep getting redirected to a virus removal download most times I’m on.
    It’s the only website I’m having this issue with.

    1. No, not at all.
      Are you using Firefox with AdBlock Plus? That stops all sorts of nonsense.

      1. I had issues using safari on an iphone where I’d get flooded with ads in javascript making it impossible to view the comments section. So to view RoK on my iphone, I would have to disable javascript.
        I see this on a lot of other sites as well: Using the safari browser sometimes results in so many ads flooding in that it’s impossible to use the site. Perhaps I’ll use chrome instead because RoK is pretty viewable in Chrome on a PC.

      2. I do but when I go to the main page there are no listing of any articles at all. Weird.

    2. me too. sometimes I click on an article and it redirects to video clips of “The View”

    3. Maybe once, on my phone, quite some time ago, I recall something like this happened.
      Tread carefully, more than likely that isn’t a virus removal download, but a virus installation download.

      1. I’m positive it is. Thankfully my phone blocks whatever it’s trying to DL. I just wish I knew how to get it out or make it stop. I’ll have to look into some blocking software

  12. Now, were these people a bit more sane, they’d establish rules like these:
    – Punish those who try to sway public opinion ahead of case
    – Encourage all to embrace “innocent unless proven guilty”
    – Equal punishment for false accuser as they would give to the accused on conviction
    – Reestablish flogging in the public square and public executions, to discourage further criminality
    Time tested solutions the Brits once knew. Their common law contains all of these provisions, but they have chosen to disgrace the laws of their ancestors.

    1. musta been awesome to live in an era without 24/7 “news” channels

  13. There’s not really a whole lot to add to this; it’s been quite thoroughly presented. Maybe just perhaps a suggestion that honest men ought to consider departing the UK before these rules are implemented. Otherwise, you’re just waiting around for your turn to be falsely accused. And that doesn’t seem like a good idea.

    1. I keep extending the invitation to come to flyover country America, but only insofar as they leave their leftist voting records back in the U.K. Come on out to Ohio, or Indiana or whatever, get a job, settle down, and get on with life.

      1. Unfortunately for them, they’ll have to wait in line with everyone else who wishes to legally move to the USA, and that line is decades long. British males don’t get any preferential treatment.

        1. Eh, just come in on a visa for “vacation” and then go rogue. It’s not like all the illegals are standing in line, and white British folk look “just like everybody else”.

        2. True, but if you want a real job, as opposed to mowing lawns or washing dishes at a restaurant you will need a proper visa or a green card to get one, and if you are willing to do menial work that can be done off the books and under the table, remember that you will be competing with 20,000,000 illegals for those jobs,

        3. So come here, do yard work (obviously manager in about a month) have kids and boom, anchor baby.
          Use their tactics against them.

        4. Only the “politically correct” illegals/tourists are awarded the anchor baby privilege.
          The Deena Gilbey debacle made that all too clear. A British woman living in the USA, with two US-born kids, who would have been summarily deported back to the UK if not for (gag) Hillary Clinton trying vainly to make herself appear sympathetic & haranguing Dubya’s admin to cough up a green card.

        5. You’ll still earn peanuts, and, at least under the new administration, anchor babies are no longer offer protection against deportation.

        6. It’s better to flee to a Muslim dictatorship and pay money for a wife. Right?

      2. The wimpier, “tolerant” Brits would fit right into Indianapolis.
        Thanks for that, Mike TPPence.

    2. I departed shortly after being accused in British family court (nearly 10 years back). No evidence required, no right to reply, held in secret ….. that’s British family court.

  14. I’m starting to wonder if the intent behind all this is to make Sharia Law look rational…

    1. Nope sharia is still much worse ,women wear curtains ,religion is supreme and those who dont like that pedo mohhamad are to be killed

      1. I think what he is saying is that, they want men to forcefully become muslims to protect themselves from these useless laws.

    2. Maybe not… but with each new “equality and diversity” law the libs roll out… the more those that just HATE Islam will start looking at it and going… “Hmmmm… you know, if these guys take over….????”

  15. Why dont they just make them kangaroo courts that way their twisted ideology will be more exposed

    1. Kangaroo courts tend to be held in secret here in the UK. They do exist. The family court itself is a secret kangeroo court, and lots of heinious injustices and activities happen there but they are not allowed to publicized by the press.

    1. I know you are but what am I?!
      This needs to escalate into the “neener neener” phase.

  16. Britain is a basket case i.e. it has lost both arms and legs and therefore must be carried in a basket.

  17. Isn’t this the same justice system that turned a blind eye to the widespread and systematic rape of women in Rotherham?

      1. Dude thats classic middle east what did you expect them to stop worshipping that pedo mohammad and settle down ?

        1. Oh, I know. I’m just amazed that they were able to give that a pass. Nothing in the West motivates absurd levels of outrage as much as little white girls being harmed.

        2. Dude i dont know what wrong with you people because i had this uncle who brought us some trinkets from Europe every time and now he doesn’t go there except for his job and never stays out after 8pm the way he quotes it is as if in france the devils roam free

        3. Hard to take them seriously about being concerned about the victim’s trauma— when there were a whole lot of traumatized victims where the police/government completely ignored the crimes…

        4. It got a pass because thats what (((tptb))) want.
          More savages in white countries, and they want them having tons of offspring(on taxpayer dime).
          And they want white women doing ANYTHING other than having kids with white men.

        5. Though the situation is getting worse, Western Europe and especially Northern Europe is still overwhelmingly safe for the most part. Safer than whiter parts of Russia or all of those dodgy eastern or southern european countries, where people don’t live by the same code of morals that northern europeans and americans do, though northern european morals are closer to american liberal morals than conservative morals and I think that’s a good thing; it means people cannot kill one another in cold blood for stepping on their property and crazy excess like that. I live in Northern Europe myself, in a mid sized, reasonably popular town and am never concerned about leaving my apartment unarmed though there are increasing numbers of rapugees loitering about and I understand that more women are concerned about it. It’s not that I’m not concerned about it; it’s just that saying that things are out of control is a bit hyperbolic at this point. Five years from now I might have to join the doomsday crowd.

        6. It does, but it is so overused by this point. It’s the basis of refer madness and countless other manipulations.

  18. I went trying to figure out if the headline picture of the girl holding the feminism sign was real or not. Frequently, these kinds of images are altered. I’ve not found the answer yet, but I did come across this:
    If you found the subject matter of this article a bit on the depressing side, reading her ‘stolen picture’ rant will cheer you right up:

        1. Confirmation not necessary, Rosie O’Donnell is an easily recognized celebrity.

        2. GOJ – You’re absolutely right. Rosie O’Donnell could drive anyone to celibacy. Ohhh…you said celebrity. My bad. 😉

    1. Christ, women are stupid! “Stole my picture.” That’s a picture of her, in public, holding a sign, broadcasting a message.
      She didn’t take it herself, and so if it wasn’t taken with her camera, it’s not “her” picture in an ownership sense. And, even if it was, when you put it on the internet, where it could be grabbed an copied, you relinquished whatever ownership rights you had, at least as far as privacy is concerned.
      When I was a kid, there was no internet, but you would use a sharpie to scribble a mustache or buck teeth onto posters and write nasty shit underneath. Memes are the same thing, amplified by the internet. Don’t want a meme with your face on it? Don’t post your fucking photo somewhere, especially if you’re going to make a political statement that a huge chunk of the population won’t agree with.

      1. What in bloody hell? Crazy doesn’t even begin to describe it.
        The day this cunt dies would be a good day for celebration. That’s how sick she makes me.

  19. I was reading the comments on the terror attack on the Daily Mail, so many people saying how England and the rest of the west deserved this and blah blah. Remember how we knew who were our enemies in times of war? Now it’s always this self hatred, people rooting for and staying on the enemy’s side, saying how bad they were. What kind of history do these people study? It’s like their country are the only ones who ever did something wrong. So what if Europeans invaded savage lands and conquered it? And this is the pic of the terrorist scumbag. E pluribus unum.

      1. Normal English school uniform pre 90s.
        I would say that photo was taken some time in the 1970s.
        (trousers and hair styles)

      2. looks like a standard comprehensive school uniform i.e. with school blazer. I’m not aware if he went to a public (i.e. privately paid) school but it doesn’t look like it

    1. I had a feeling that nothing good would come out of Slitherin.

    2. The Marxist kind of history.
      History books based on Marxist theory, written by Jewish professors, who on the surface pass off as fellow Whites.
      So that the students will think: “One of us, a learned White elder like our father is criticizing our nation’s past actions so we can learn from them, for a better future for all of us”.
      And even if they realize the writer is Jewish, the students will think:”Our grandfathers saved the Jews in WW2, so surely the Jews can not have negative intentions towards us, right? Surely they love us and are grateful, with us being Philo-Semitic and all? Jews only hate the Anti-Semites, not Whites or Christians in general?”
      You get the picture. They are not teaching what really happened in the past and why. They are teaching Marxist subversion, anti-White propaganda, and White self-hatred, under from which white-skinned Jews are exempt, naturally. Jews are not “Whites”, they do not identify as fellow “Whites”: they are Jews, and nothing else.

  20. Is it just me, or does that picture of the chick strapped to the chair turn anybody else on? It might be a “me thing”.

      1. You’re getting *waaaaayyyy* too intellectual about this, bro.
        It’s kind of sexy, that whole getup. And she’d love it, hell, she’d get wet at just the suggestion. I’ll bet that actress had to go and rub one out right after that scene was shot.

        1. Holy crap yes. ” The sentence for this heinous crime of stealing your neighbor’s chicken is public humiliation. As you are aware in our country there is only one punishment for this. Remove the defendant to the stripping block and slowly begin carrying out the sentence forthwith.”

        2. Bro, you start implementing that punishment and you won’t be able to keep women from stealing chickens.

        3. I will be allowing my chickens to run rampant around the neighborhood, moreso around some neighbor’s houses than others.

      1. I don’t think so, but I like seeing a girl get hot due to her natural inclinations, if that makes sense?

    1. Nothing wrong with that.
      Does not turn me on, but to each his own.
      Now….this turns me on…BIG TIME!!!

  21. Well If your a lucky fella going through a divorce in America and your awesome ex lass accuses you of Domestic Violence which happens ALL the freaking time….you can’t cross examine that lying bitch. It’s already in America brothers!!

  22. “To appease a few SJWs, May and Truss are undermining the right to a fair trial. There is no guarantee that video evidence will not be tampered with or that multiple takes will not be done, giving the “best” one to the court for viewing by the judge and jury”
    Exactly. All an accusatory female need do now is simply put on 1 good ‘command performance’ – coached by the DA who directs her on how to act in front of the camera.
    I thought Teresa May was supposed to be the right wing conservative for the UK? What the fuck happened?

    1. Women cannot be trusted with any form of responsibility. She openly admits that Sharia law would be good in the UK also that there is no threat from Muslim terrorists, that is how deluded she is.

      1. “She openly admits that Sharia law would be good in the UK also that there is no threat from Muslim terrorists”
        Are you fucking serious? Damn… I thought May was the new Thatcher.

        1. Thatcher was one of the very, very, very, very few women -exceptions that prove the rule- who was fit to be in charge of a country. Basically she was a woman with (metaphorical) balls. Now whatever a person may think of her policies there is no denying that. May is just like the prim, booksmart, headgirl who goes all gooey in the presence of an alpha male. Look at how excited she was to be led by the hand by Trump when they met. She was not immune to his charm-to be frank, not many women are able to resist that jerkboy charisma.
          Of course he knew that just holding her hand would be a bit off so he says he has a fear of stairs in order to give her a plausible excuse to hold his hand.
          I am not suggesting for a moment that he fancies her but, like all alpha males, he knows that charming women can only be a good thing.
          And they say this man is stupid (!)

        1. She needs to be deported to the Taliban or ISIS right now because that’s just nuts!

      2. Yeah, I agree that most women cannot be trusted as leaders. Some degree of patriarchy often works well for a reason, however Cameron was dodgy as well. We haven’t had a good leader in the UK for decades. No doubt the UK government is invested in pushing Islam and Sharia law. They assist America in going over to these countries to blow up and torture innocent civilians, then they invite them into Western countries enmass and they create social chaos. No doubt there is a sinister agenda at play here.

    2. Nothing happened except that you believed the judenpresse. Nothing “conservative” about the British Conservative party or any other. All Uniparty all the time.

      1. The British Tory party are a bunch of liberal corporatists. It’s not worth registering your right to vote in Britain anyway unless you want big brother and all and sundry to be able to see where you live.

    3. There is no such thing as a fair trial in the UK. The judges are all full of liberal bias and they are specially selected based on their political and social beliefs.

      1. What a terrible, terrible place to be. I understand it must be quite shameful to live there if you are a native Brit.
        I think the natives should form gangs and accept a life outside the bounds of a system steeped in gross faggotry.

  23. The Feminists are presently working towards the setting up of a “legal process” when it will be enough for a woman to point a finger at a man, saying “He is a rapist!” for the man to get arrested and executed on the spot, no questions asked.
    Does it sound like a dystopian nightmare, gentlemen? Because this is where we are heading. There is clear evidence! Correct me if I am wrong, contradict me if you can, I beg of you!

    1. It’s already in the tenets of many of the leading feminist authors:
      1. Only lesbianism is true feminism
      2. All heteronormative sex is rape
      3. All men are rapists (even the homosexuals?…)
      Remember, the president of NOW declared that women can not be truly equal until the institution of marriage is destroyed. (It flows from the notion that even sex within a marriage is just institutionalized rape)

      1. You know, equality for me always meant equal in the eyes of the law. That the same laws apply for everyone, irrespective of anything. This is a cornerstone of modern Western civilization, I underwrite it, and women have it. This is what equality means – or so I thought.
        But these days I hear Feminists talking about the fight towards TRUE or total equality as their final goal. Pray, what the fuck is that? Must be that women are more equal then men, or some similar orwellian bullshit. Some total nonsense, which must be stopped.

        1. feminists don’t care a monkey’s about the individual’s equality before the law. Equality for feminist’s involves the abolition of gender difference, which is seen as inherently unequal. There are feminists out there who will argue that matriarchy is about equality

        2. Funny thing, though, is that if men and women were naturally equal as Feminists claim, then it would be self-evident and no further action would be needed, because then they were, like, equal.

        3. Feminism is a superiority movement that promotes gender difference, that women are superior. Sure they cloak themselves in “equality” but what is their equality? It’s an equality of outcome where women do as good or better than men. Where women have the net advantage.

        4. yeah, pretty much, although I don’t think they promote gender difference in any real sense, only with respect to seeking preferential treatment on account of their sex / gender. In every other sense feminism seeks to masculinize women or minimise differences, which actually works towards matriarchy

      2. How ironic ! A MAN is expected/obliged/forced to Feed, Shelter, Provide Healthcare, Amenities, Luxuries and Pamper his Wife.
        But when the MAN wants/expects SEX, something that his Wife enjoys equally (probably more than Him, and for FREE !), He is termed as “rapist” and “selfish” !

        1. The marriage vow is an oath of fidelity, the man is asserting that he will put aside/control promiscuous tendencies in exchange for a woman’s vow to be the sole provider of intimate affection/sex. She vowing to put aside/control her hypergamous tendencies in exchange.
          From the outset it is an agreement of mutual fidelity.
          If all sex is rape, even within marriage, it is another instance of feminism infantalisng women and insisting they are incapable of understanding consequences and obligations of decisions they make.

        2. Exactly. That’s what I am saying. Whatever a MAN has to do/does is His duty/vow/oath/obligation but when it comes to females, it’s all about “themselves”. As if they are doing any “favor”, As if they are not “interested”, As if they are not getting any “benefits”, As if they are not getting “ROI” !!!

    2. Makes me glad there are more and more female police,
      and where I`m from they`re usually small and chubby women:)
      I`ll take anarchy or even Sharia over what you describe.

    3. Maybe its almost time for us to be the ‘animals’ they claim we are and show them just how awful life can be for the wymyn when men go to war against them.

    4. Strange ! We (non-muslims) all blame/criticize muslims about how they “treat” the pussies, how they put restrictions on them and “control” the pussies.
      If there is anything I appreciate about islam/muslims, that will be “their control over pussies”.

  24. And women want to be in the Special Forces. Since we are finding that a lot (?majority) of rape allegations are false women don’t want to be cross examined by the defense attorney since their case will fall apart in most cases..

  25. I instruct my friends:
    Don’t talk about anything sexually charged at work
    Record Record Record audio & video
    Make sure her friends know where she is going & why
    Keep all text & email correspondence for years and backup
    Wear a GODDAMN CONDOM & take it with you
    Can they still charge you? Of course, but you stand better being prepared.

    1. “There is no such thing as luck, merely opportunity meeting preparedness”- Gen. George Patton

  26. In the shithole of a 3rd communist Afro country called Brazil, there are laws and even a branch of police specifically to combat crimes against women. Killing a woman here is “feminicide”, a type of murder that carries harsher punishment, longer jail times and it’s considered a heinous crime. Just now, I saw some news, about a black woman who stabbed her boyfriend and killed him because he “didn’t want to take her to eat pizza”. She disappeared for 3 days, came back, will answer for the crime in freedom because she fled the “flagrant” and will never spend one day in jail. Nowadays I just pray that Brazil get obliterated by a natural disaster of some sort. I’d also love if China invaded here and killed every single person living in this hellhole. Never, I repeat, NEVER set foot in this country and if any of you get to have access to nuclear weapons, please use them on us first.

    1. “Nowadays I just pray that Brazil get obliterated by a natural disaster of some sort. I’d also love if China invaded here and killed every single person living in this hellhole.”
      Amen !

      1. Brazil should be studied in the future. People should know that a nation of more than 200 million can go completely insane if allowing leftism to go unchecked and and unchallenged.

        1. It’s why I’ve said before that it’s not enough to defeat the Left, it must be DESTROYED completely. The alternative is the complete collapse of our nations into chaos.

      1. It is in a sense. I don’t like to be cruel about people’s looks WHEN they cannot help it but look at her-her looks ARE very much malleable but she actively chooses to have hair like that, actively chooses, those glasses. She would be just an average looking woman if her hair were longer, no glasses and a bit of make-up.
        She identifies as a pre pubescent boy-or rather one that has stirrings he can’t yet explain- one that feels the need to white knight to get back at all those nasty men who get the females she is beginning to feel she wants-hence the hate crime nonsense.
        So you’ve basically got a confused young boy here laying down the law. Great.

    1. She made herself look like that. She would have no issue attracting men if she decided to well, look like a woman instead of a 12 year old boy.

  27. So much for justice in the *fair* courts. I guess punishment will have to do, handed out en masse to all these kangaroo judges and legislators in their failed legal systems. In time they will rue the day they eliminated due process.

  28. British family court has never been fair and has always believed the word of women, no evidence required, held in secret session. They don’t even require the presence of the accused man, and can hold the hearings without him even knowing about it. This is merely an extension of that.

    1. The British family court tends not to be pro family at all. Britain is the only country in the world that innocent people flee from to prevent their children from being adopted.

  29. Quite pussy-footing around, there IS no escape. The only reason any one of us, even here in the US, isn’t in prison is because we haven’t been targeted yet.
    The justice system is getting to be so one-sided that in a short while the incentive to kill all your accusers and witnesses will be justified.
    When are men going to concede that victory over feminism through “reforms” or “politics” is never going to work? There are only three options: bow to the inevitable and pray you get lucky, escape to a different system, or stand up and fight!
    By fight I mean real fighting. These women need to be afraid for real, like everyone is afraid of muslims rioting whenever someone disses their religion. When some bitch lies about rape, there needs to be 10,000 men surrounding her house, harassing her at her job, making her life unlivable. When some feminist decides to speak publicly, 10,000 men need to riot at the same location to prevent it.
    Feminists are using state violence against us, we must either respond or become slaves.
    The government is never going to be concerned with justice. Why should we?

    1. You… as “defeatist” as this may sound, I have to agree with you. This is an excellent article by David but… as I was reading it… all I could think was “all we are really doing is reporting the continued assault on men.” I am not calling for violence. In that regard, you are wrong. What I am calling for… is precisely what Trump just did. I have never been a believer in protesting, you have to take power and power is government. Get into politics. Get on a ballot box. Get elected. If you think a person with red pill views and active membership in ROK will never get elected… I suggest you look to the effect feminism is having on the masses. This reporting is doing the FIRST thing that is needed… awakening people. But the more I read “look how bad it is now”, the more I feel it is time to get truly political.

      1. You may not “believe” in violence, sir, but “violence has settled more issues in history than any other factor”(starship troopers)
        Once you concede that you will never use violence to achieve your political aims, YOU LOSE!
        Politics IS violence, and the more numerous your adherents are AND the more willing they are to use naked force than the other guy, the more likely you are to win.
        Power isn’t government. Government is force, to quote G. Washington. Force is violence. Renounce violence and you will lose every single time.
        Voting is violence. The government is your proxy for taking to the streets and smashing your enemy; when you vote, you are asking the gov to do the dirty work. Problem is, we don’t and never will, have the numbers. Trump is cucked already.
        If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.
        I suggest you wake up and smell the reality. The “masses” do not care. Feminism, cultural marxism et al is winning. And will continue to win until men decide they have had enough and fight. Fight at the ballot box, fight at the work place, fight at church, fight at schools, fight with their money, votes, and fists, guns, what ever.
        Ask yourself this: how did such a small minority turn this country into a vast socio-political wasteland?
        Answer: they were willing to lie, cheat, suborn the political process, riot in the streets. In short, they do anything to win. Winning is all that matters in this game.
        Like I said above, either fight, quit, or don’t play. But its time to stop whining about it. Documenting injustice doesn’t stop it from happening.

        1. This is the golden truth right here.
          The problem today is that we have masses and masses of human flesh which are purely useless eaters. The lowest common denominator level of human consciousness is what they all share. For most if not all of these, no amount of education, charity or benevolence is going to suddenly turn a pig into a thoroughbred horse.
          Until there is some form of calamity, natural disaster or wars that cull the useless and the weak from our lands, this will all continue to degenerate until a massive calamity/culling DOES happen.

        2. Politics is violence… only… when you lose the argument. Violence in politics… comes from having to DEFEND yourself. There are a lot of ways to fight and you listed them… what I am not calling for is for US, the ones with the winning argument, to start physical violence. We won’t have to start it… they will and THEN its on like donkey kong. Never be the aggressor, but if aggressed, go Hulk mode to ensure that is the LAST time they think about challenging you physically ever again. (Not to mention being able to stay out of jail for NOT starting it.)

    2. Only ONE option: ” stand UP and FIGHT !”
      Bowing to the inevitable is far more SIN than suicide !
      Escape to different system; doesn’t make any “difference”.
      All the “systems” are becoming (or already became) same when it comes to pampering “pussies”.
      Time for MEN (white/black/brown/yellow/whatever) to stay UNITED.

  30. There is only one solution: all men must pretend to be transwomen. Surely, a court of law would be lenient with a female rapist (as they are with any crimes) and undoubtably much more with a trans person.
    So yeah, I’m a lesbian transwoman from now on.

    1. This is why progressivism is collapsing in on itself. Liberal progressives have basically given true perverts the ability to identify readily as trans women without any effort to transition and without taking hormones. This automatically puts them into a more ‘opressed’ class than regular ‘cis’ women, making women a lot more vulnerable to sexual crimes and exploitation. It’s obvious perverts are going to use this to their advantage.

  31. This is the kind of shit we have to start organizing against. It is such an abortion of justice, and a clear grab for complete domination over men that it must spur us to some sort of action. Interestingly enough, it is almost exactly what Roosh called for in his infamous essay on how to end Rape–take one sexes say completely out of it. Of course, not only will this end rape, it will almost end ALL heterosexual sex, which is exactly what these dike feminist want.

    1. I’d request that she immediately recuse herself, from all practice of law.

  32. So glad the Brits dragged the whole world into war with Germany in 1939. It’s worked out so well, hasn’t it?

    1. Yeah, I remember when England invaded Poland…

      1. Hey moron, England invaded some 25% of the Earth – “the sun never sets on the British Empire”.
        All Germany wanted from Poland was the return to Germany of the city of Danzig (which had always been German) and a 1 km wide road and rail corridor through the Polish Corridor, to connect East Prussia to the rest of the Reich. All the other lands stolen from Germany at Versailles and handed to Poland (West Prusia, Silesia, etc) Hitler was willing to cede to Poland in perpetuity. And then he was willing to extend an alliance with Warsaw against aggression by the USSR.
        It was the idiot Polish gov’t who chose war. By refusing to return Danzig, by making a war alliance with England aimed at Germany, by ordering a partial mobilization, by openly talking about a “Greater Poland” stretching from Berlin to Kiev, and by viciously persecuting the ethnic German minority inside Poland.
        The Poles brought it on themselves. And the Brits were beyond stupid to get involved.
        Take a history class, will ya?

        1. Umm, no. In 1933, Danzig’s government was taken over by the local Nazi Party, somewhat before any of the wailings by the Poles. and they then suppressed the democratic opposition. Due to persecution and oppression, many Jews fled. After 1939, the Nazis abolished the Free City and incorporated the area into the newly formed Reichsgau of Danzig-West Prussia. The Nazis classified the Poles and Jews living in the city as subhumans, subjecting them to discrimination, forced labor, and extermination. Many were sent to death at Nazi concentration camps, mainly at nearby Stutthof. The Soviets had neither the military or the inclination to move West but Stalin saw the writing on the wall after meeting with the coked up Hitler and made plans accordingly. The British Empire did indeed invade and conquer a hell of a lot of the planet, but the reason the Empire proved popular was because any taxes raised in the occupied countries was used solely to improve infrastructure in that exact same country. Hell, even Ghandi just wanted equal rights WITHIN the Empire as he saw the benefits!

        2. Sorry, I call bullshit.
          The 350,000 Danzigers were more than 90% of them ethnic Germans. They were practically screaming to be reunited to their Fatherland. Any plebicite would have shown this overwhelmingly.
          Danzig had always been German – heck, it was a Hanseatic League city!
          Even the Brits thought Danzig should be returned to Germany…they thought it should never have been given to Poland in the first place!

        3. I’m sure they were ‘practically screaming’…but mainly due to the Nazi’s silencing all political opposition and murdering anyone who stood up to them! If they all screamed to ‘join the Fatherland’ it was mostly likely through mortal fear of the alternative!

        4. Aw, bullshit.
          No one believes that crap anymore. Only bluepill cucks buy that war propaganda nowadays.
          Why don’t you go post over at Salon? I’m sure they’ll love your hasbsra bullshit over there. Readers of ROK are a little too smart to fall for it. We know who the real murderers were – research the Blomberg massacre or the Katyn Forest killings, for example.

        5. No need, my Grandfather was in the liberation force of one of them and saw first hand that that is EXACTLY what they were. Take your revisionist b*llshit and shove it up yer ar*e!

        6. Cool story bro – even though, according to our own official history, American and UK troops didn’t see any death camps
          There were no supposed death camps in Western Europe – they were all supposedly in eastern Europe
          Even our own official (and fake) history books don’t claim there were any death camps in Germany
          Keep spinning those lies……

        7. Cool story bro, unfortunately you are full of sh*t as the 11th British Armoured Division liberated the Belsen Death Camp in Northern Germany, on April 15th 1945. Thousands of corpses lay unburied, the rest of the prisoners in extreme starvation. All witnessed and documented. So take your lies and shove them up yer hole.

        8. No gas chambers there, no evidence of it being a ‘death camp’, no evidence or claims that genocide ever occurred there
          The only crimes against humanity in ww2 were committed by the Allies, which fire bombed to death entire cities full of women and children
          Keep on peddling those lies though……

        9. You must be swimming in a river in Egypt. In denial…. The Nazi scum got what they deserved despite your pathetic bleating and childlike whining revisionism…

        10. I’m still trying to understand the kind of mind that takes pleasure in lying about there being gas chambers in Germany, when even the official history books don’t claim that

        11. The only person who mentioned Gas Chambers in Germany is you, you hypocritical halfwit. I guess you really flunked History AND Comprehension in school, yeah?

        12. Ah so you admit there were no death camps – OK, looks like we’re on the same page after all

        13. Ah, you are either trolling me or are a complete idiot. Either way I can’t be arsed with you anymore. Having Gas Chambers is not a prerequisite to being a Death Camp. Why use gas when starvation works just as well? Toodles.

        14. What a rapier like wit you have, you must have been up all night thinking of that witty retort!

      2. Would that be the Poland that the USSR (our ally) invaded at exactly the same time as Germany and which went on to occupy the country for 50 years as a hideous police state?

      3. True Britain didn’t invade Poland but let’s look at the reason Britain and France declared war on Germany and what happened after the war.
        When Germany invaded Poland Britain and France declared war on Germany. Why? Because they had given Poland a guarantee. And what was that guarantee? Its freedom. But what happened at war’s end? Was Poland free? No. Instead of being dominated by Hitler it became dominated by an equally brutal dictator, Joseph Stalin. Based on that what was the point?
        Britain also had created a huge colonial empire so I find it kind of hypocritical for them to condemn someone else (whoever it is) for the same thing. They did the same in WWI. They hypocritically condemned Germany for being “imperialist” while both France and Britain had large colonial empires.

  33. “Hate crimes”? LOL
    Since when the west decided to be so fragile?
    If you say those 2 words anywhere in SEA, people will tilt their head and laugh their ass off at you
    You stab people, steal stuff, rob people, not eating your rice, those are crimes.
    Get it together. Seriously.

  34. I see your British minister of “women’s equality” picture and all I can think of is sometimes life imitates art. Then again sometimes it imitates a burning dumpster.

  35. I don’t even believe that children should be able to get out of a cross examination, unless they are too young to speak and give an articulate account of things. This doesn’t surprise me, this is Britain we are talking about here. The whole court system is a mess. Also, with video link and Skype technology, can we not cross examine people who have suffered sensitive crimes in a different room? Surely they shouldn’t have to take the stand physically in front of the judge and jury any more? You can easily cross examine someone in a room alone with the defense and their own legal team and put it out via video link to the judge and jury, surely this would be a good way of making it less daunting for more vulnerable or possibly traumatised people?

    1. “Surely they shouldn’t have to take the stand physically in front of the judge and jury any more? You can easily cross examine someone in a room alone with the defense and their own legal team and put it out via video link to the judge and jury, surely this would be a good way of making it less daunting for more vulnerable or possibly traumatised people?”
      This is exactly what the bill does, they just have a list of questions and record it outside the court room.

        1. I know, I think its ridiculous, but that is what OP proposed and I was simply telling OP that is what they are doing.

      1. So effectively there is still a cross examination? It just doesn’t take place upon the stand.

  36. Don’t give hoes the power of this shit fuck we might need to convert to Islam and shit man.

  37. damn, is uk government not right wing? why are they pandering to all these leftist policy, how could the brexit happen when shitty laws like this are allowed

  38. That cunt holding that sign is only one of thousands of reasons why im a full blown misogynist now. I only wish I could legally take a chainsaw to these bitches heads.

Comments are closed.