Tuesday, 22 June 2010

Leaflet Court Case

.
{I actually wrote this article yesterday night - and I knew I should have posted it up last night because the issue has already been around the Nationalist circuit of blogs today and now it feels a bit of a waste of time lol.  However, it was late, I needed to re-read it and so left it for today}.

Those nationalists amongst us who are from the Lancashire area will probably know all about the court case brought against Tony Bamber already (for his leaflets that highlighted the propensity of 'Muslims' to be behind the heroin trade in Lancashire and in wider Britain).

Well, despite some fanfare in the local news bulletins about it the other week - where they crowed about how a "BNP activist" was in court for incitement to religious hatred - the news of him being cleared has been deafening by its silence, or so short in the coverage that I have missed it this evening.

What else should we expect from the BBC though? They are hardly likely to celebrate the news or bring it to public attention - they would much rather leave it in the airwaves that he was brought to court for it, and therefore have him left automatically guilty in people's subconscious minds. If it was mentioned, I can only presume the tone of the news would be thinly veiled disgust and it framed to be a total miscarriage of justice.



Instead, we were actually treated to some sob story about some local failed asylum seekers being 'mistreated' in their sending to a detention centre. Another prime piece of BBC garbage, it used words like "prison" and even described how the children were "bundled into van". Smacks of association to abduction or kidnap. That the family were here illegally, had been through the courts and had their case rejected was seemingly not an issue. That this woman's children were separated from the mother for two hours was enough for highlighting the 'inhuman' plight suffered and how we should all be jolly well disgusted with ourselves for deporting illegal immigrants.

Anyway, I digress.

It seems Tony presented his own case to the courts - and by God would that take some doing. Good for him, and good for him for winning the case too.

Tony appears not to be the knuckle-headed halfwit that most would like to paint a 'typical BNP supporter', as he was (according to the Lancashire Evening Post) the  "former lecturer of politics and economics at the University of Central Lancashire".  I am pretty sure this level of status led to his capability to present his own case.

A BNP activist from Lancashire who wrote and distributed leaflets which blamed Muslims collectively for the heroin trade has been cleared of intending to incite religious hatred.

Anthony Bamber, 54, told a jury his intention was to create a debate about the "crime against humanity" that was the flow of the drug on to Britain's streets.

Bamber {...} pleaded not guilty to seven counts of distributing threatening written material intended to stir up religious hatred between March and November 2008. He was cleared by a jury at Preston Crown Court of all seven counts.

Representing himself, Bamber said there had been "no unpleasant incidents or social unrest" following the sending of the leaflets.

The former part-time lecturer of politics and economics at the University of Central Lancashire in Preston said: "It was a desire to protest at what I say is a monstrous abomination. I believe I have the right to protest about the heroin trade".

Opening the case, David Perry QC, prosecuting, said the leaflets were filled with "hate speech" in which the obvious intention was to provoke hatred of Muslims.

Following the verdict, Detective Supt Neil Hunter, of Lancashire Constabulary's Force Major Investigation Team, said: "While we are disappointed with today's decision, we accept the decision of the court. We have worked very closely with the Crown Prosecution Service throughout this inquiry and careful consideration was given before any decision to charge was made."

Now, that is 'one in the eye' for the opposition. However, here comes the twist as far as my own views go.

(Why is it I always have to disagree with the rest of the consensus over some aspect or other? lol).

The thing is, I actually remember the leaflet, as I received one through the letterbox at the time.

My first reaction to it?....It was "Oh no! This is really bad, the the BNP are going to get in some trouble with this.....and why was it not on official BNP paperwork?......"

I tend to have a nose for these things - and I was sadly proven right again.

My recent nostril flare was over the Marmite gimmick - and my first reaction upon hearing about the logo was also "Oh No! This is really bad, the BNP are going to get some trouble over this"...... and look what happened in the fall out to that one!

Yes, I did not wholly agree with the leaflet. I did not agree with the wild jumps it was making about 'Islam' (not 'Muslims', but 'Islam') and Heroin. This is because some parts of it were akin to an argument from Muslims trying to blame Christianity for the Iraq war. It would just not wash with most people.

Also, I did not agree with these 'side groups' (which nobody really knew who they were) pushing this material through doors. In this case I seem to remember it being "Preston Pals". I admired the intentions and the dedication to hand deliver so many leaflets - what a task! - but I had doubts about its effectiveness.

I felt it would undermine trust in the party having these satellite groups knocking about which were associated with the BNP but not directly from the party either. Why the secrecy, why the disassociation? It all helps to perpetuate that old stereotype of the British National Party being a bit dodgy.

I also felt that people want to have something they can feel and associate with; and despite the good intentions behind it, this was not really it.

Those already supportive of the British National Party would probably have found it okay to leap the stepping stones from drugs to Islam and get the message it was giving out - but the audience it was targeted towards were probably clueless about how any link could be made between "a faith" and drug dealing.

This is where some of the contents, or at least the 'vibe' of the leaflet failed in my view. This is going from memory though, as I haven't seen it since.

I think people also want to understand just where the material is coming from and for what purpose it is being distributed. Either the British National Party should campaign on it, or it shouldn't - officially - so it is all above board and clear.

If any leaflets are outside the official sanction of the party and can be tied to British National Party officials, representatives etc and are distributed in such ways then I am afraid I would have little sympathy if people behind them were temporarily suspended from the party. In wider terms, we cannot afford to have lone wolves claiming to speak for the party.

Thankfully, I believe the BNP sorted this issue out years ago and as far as I know they no longer allow loosely affiliated leaflets to be designed and issued. The false leaflets made up by the UAF/Searchlight the other year which were printed in the Sun newspaper as being official party literature is another example of why we really need to be air tight in our sealing of what is and what is not in our name or done on our behalf.

However, despite my misgivings, I did have some sympathy at the time (and still have today) regarding how the people of this country (this area in particularly) are completely hamstrung under the law to even describe or pinpoint where the problematic elements are in our society.

The vast majority of drug dealing in this area is due to Asians. That is just the way it is. They are not Sikhs or Hindu's either, that is also a demographic fact too. As we know, they are Asian Muslims - and although they would probably kick your head in if you ever insult Mohammed within ear shot, their strength of actual religiosity when it comes to attending a Mosque could be contested.

Despite this set of facts, despite umpteen national newspaper articles and a TV documentary making the same conclusions that Asian youths and other ethnic minorities are responsible for the heroin trade in the UK - it is virtually impossible to relay that information to the public, that is, unless you are part of the "elite" and state sanctioned media (or of that particular race or religion yourself).

If you are black, you can talk about black gun crime till the cows come home. If you are Asian and a Muslim, you can talk about Asian drug dealing problems till the cows come home. It is the same for "grooming" too. Yet if you are white, you can't talk about either - unless you are a dripping wet liberal who blames white society for everything and puts the issue into the frame of "helping" those "vulnerable, impoverished, disenfranchised communities" where it is the white racism making them do these wicked things through "lack of understanding" and "lack of opportunity". You know the pack-drill.

In the case for grooming, we are told to be on the look out for all ethnicities doing this grooming and there are official people from the police and support groups who are at pains to point out that "white people are paedophiles too!"  - but in these parts we all know the situation of how they do this and that the culture and nature surrounding it is pretty unique to Asians. We are not talking about 'chavs', and we are not talking about dirty old mac's lurking around playgrounds.

The British National Party could not issue a leaflet saying that "Asians" are responsible for the drug dealing around here because the party would be brought to court over the Race Relations Act just for highlighting this commonality and fact. It would, so they claim, be "incitement to racial hatred".

However, since they have now altered the laws to include "religious hatred" - the British National Party (or anybody else) can not even circumvent the description of "Asian" in this area by using "Muslim" to inform the wider public about just who are the people most responsible for this particular problem in our society.

This is the absurdity of it. We are supposed to not notice (or care) that the vast majority of perpetrators involved with both of these issues are Asians. Officially, it is just a coincidence, just random people caught up in criminal acts individually - and hey, it could have been anybody, so why highlight it, right?

Honestly, that is the attitude against stating the truth.

Not only is it ridiculous, but in the case of the grooming it is positivity dangerous and irresponsible.

Like any concerned citizen, Tony is disgusted about the affects of drugs on our society. Whilst the Asians tend to be the ones dealing it - it is sadly mostly the whites who are addicted to it.

It wrecks lives, wrecks families and undermines both our society and our wider civilisation. This is perhaps where the leaflet was coming from in terms of 'Jihad'.  I have no doubt whatsoever that some people (who know the effect it has on the Western world) see it as an additional perk in their transition to supersede us.

I share Tony's disgust at the drug trade and its effects, I just wish it had been gone about differently. Although, when trapped between a rock and hard place when it comes to the law, I am not sure how they could be described as a collective without contravening some kind of act of parliament!

One thing which caught my eye in the article from the Lancashire Evening Post was the remark from the police. You remember the police don't you...those nice friendly impartial upholders of the law.......

Following the verdict, Detective Supt Neil Hunter, of Lancashire Constabulary's Force Major Investigation Team, said: "While we are disappointed with today's decision, we accept the decision of the court. We have worked very closely with the Crown Prosecution Service throughout this inquiry and careful consideration was given before any decision to charge was made."
Why does this officer seem to think he can have an official 'police opinion' on it?

At the time, I seem to remember the Muslim Police Association putting pressure on the Crown Prosecution Service to bring this case to court.

This is despite an article ( http://www.prestoncitizen.co.uk/news/preston/3704441.No_trial_for_BNP_man/ ) which stated in 2008 that:

A member of the British National Party in Preston who delivered hundreds of leaflets blaming Muslims for the heroin trade, will not face criminal charges, it has emerged.

Race hate unit officers at Lancashire police have been told by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) there is “insufficient evidence” to prosecute Tony Bamber who distributed the pamphlets.
{...}
But one of the county’s top police officers has slammed the BNP distributors, saying the leaflets risked creating tensions between racial groups.

Lancashire Deputy Chief Constable Mike Cunningham acknowledged the CPS’s advice that no criminal act had been committed, adding: “While we understand that this advice is based on established case law, we roundly condemn the contents of these leaflets and those distributing them.

They can only be described as inflammatory in nature and we are obviously concerned that their distribution in Lancashire could damage community cohesion.”

A CPS spokeswoman added: “We advised Lancashire police that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute for inciting racial hatred or to prosecute under the Public Order Act.

"We advised the police that if they come to us with more evidence, we will look at it.”
In other words, the Police were determined to bring a case regardless of the law, probably because they risk people in the public reading the material and how they might go on to "feel" an emotion which could then go on to "damage community cohesion".

The police, amongst others, seem to believe ordinary people have some unfathomable inability to control themselves and their thoughts when reading such material.

They must believe that hoards of upper-middle class and middle class mums and dads will pull the leaflet from their letterbox, read the contents and within the space of 20 seconds froth at the mouth, go out on an "anti-muslim' war path and target the nearest bearded man on the street as being the sole person responsible.

It seems impossible for them to believe that people might read the leaflets and just throw them away, or read the material and disagree with it, or read the material and agree with it but not lose all mental faculties and kick start a new 2001 riot.  No, that would mean we have liberty and freedom to make up our own minds and act as we see fit - and Christ knows we can't have such things let loose! We need to be told what is acceptable to think and say and also what is acceptable to feel.

Thought crimes and perhaps feeling an emotion about something (which would be an emotion not allowed by the elite) must come before freedom to highlight the truth.

Of course, he might actually be talking about the very short fused "Muslim community" - and he fears that they will not be able to control themselves and kick off (yet again). In which case, in my view, the problem would be Asians deciding to react violently to the material - not the material itself. In my world, people should have the right to say what they want about whatever they want and it is up to the recipient to behave themselves and appreciate freedom of speech and freedom of thought even if they happen to think it is insulting or idiotic.

The officer also assumes we have "good community cohesion" to damage.  We don't - despite what is claimed in the elite bubble and its puppet media. The vast majority of people avoid each other like the plague.

The police tried to hang the BNP out to dry, ploughed countless time and costs into it and then found out they could not achieve a case. The CPS was then only too happy to "advise"  the police that if they came back with a bit more of a case they will act on it. How cosy. I wonder if they gave a few clues as what to construct to help bring a case too?....(How could I be so cynical?)

Seeing as this whole affair was a few years ago, how it had already been dropped by the CPS two years ago and that Tony had essentially been cleared of the accusations, I thought it was all done and dusted. I couldn't believe it was actually due in court and being pursued again this year!

Like a dog with a bone, they will just not let it drop. I bet it is not the last time it rears its head either.

Good result Tony. Well done. 

I also noted in the story though, that the paper liked to give his address. This is often not done with contentious issues such as ethnic minorities who mow down little children without even having a driving license or right to be in the country, for example. I guess they think that people will track them down and serve their own justice - yet the papers do not seem to have a problem with naming which street Mr Bamber lives on, even though the police essentially suggested the material could stoke reaction from the Muslims and cause riots/instability.  Keep safe, Tony.

My advice though, to any out there who wish to distribute such leaflets - don't.  I think it only seems to cause trouble for what would be very little result in real terms. I doubt the leaflets in question would have won us many supporters or new members.

If at all possible, I would try and find other ways to tackle these kinds of things - or at least make sure it is absolutely water-tight before issue, so that they cannot pull this kind of rouse again.

1 comment:

  1. Quelle surprise etc. What do you reckon the consequences of the outrage the populous are going to be feeling when they finally twig that they've been conned again will be? A bit of a sit down and a biscuit? Cygnus.

    ReplyDelete