Politics Forum and Political Blog discussing and debating political and social issues.


Go Back   Politics Forum and Political Blog discussing and debating political and social issues. > Politics and Political Issues Forum > United Kingdom Politics
Register Blogs FAQDonate Members List Calendar Link Exchange Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


United Kingdom Politics Having secured a third term, we will fulfil our promise to renew our country and take Britain forward to a better future not back to a failed Tory past. Our continuing success depends on our continuing to pursue a new Labour agenda as a modern progressive party. We will focus on three crucial areas: the economy, modernising public services, tackling crime and asylum; building on what we have achieved to make Britain better since coming to office in 1997


Welcome to the Politics Forum and Political Blog discussing and debating political and social issues. forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 29-07-2008, 04:10 PM
Jack Black's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 83
Rep Power: 0
Jack Black is an unknown quantity at this point
Some Lives are Worth More Than Others!

I'll be putting this out in various non-Nationalist web sites today.

On 29 July 2008, The Daily Mail reported thus:

Quote:
In the first major changes to homicide laws in 50 years, ministers have ruled that other categories of killer… should be offered new partial defences of provocation.

They include those 'SERIOUSLY WRONGED' BY AN INSULT.

Beneficiaries of this change may include those who strike out after long and bitter disputes with neighbours… Instead of receiving a mandatory life sentence for murder, they too could escape with a manslaughter conviction. (As Habib Khan, who went into his house to get a knife and then stabbed Keith Brown in the back, did. Check out OUR DEAD MUST TELL NO TALES here: I Am An Englishman)

Robert Whelan of the Civitas think-tank accused Ministers of introducing 'gang law' into the legal system. He said:

Quote:
To take someone's life because they say something that offends you is the law of gang culture. Are we really going to introduce into our criminal justice system that it is a defence to say ‘I was insulted'?
He also voiced concern about the plan to give special protection to certain groups. Mr Whelan said:

Quote:
By creating all these special categories, THE GOVERNMENT ARE MAKING SOME PEOPLE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS before the law. It seems SOME LIVES ARE WORTH MORE THAN OTHERS’…
Lyn Costello of Mothers Against Murder and Aggression described the changes as 'utter madness'. She warned…

Quote:
You will have some VERY CLEVER LAWYERS WHO WILL TWIST THIS AROUND TO SUIT THEIR CLIENTS.
Officials, however, denied they were creating any loopholes. In an interview with the Daily Mail, Justice Minister Maria Eagle gave an example of where the new defence could apply as a 'serious neighbour dispute' in which the provocation of one person had reached a 'very high level'.

She also cited A PERSON WHO HAD BEEN SUBJECTED TO REPEATED RACIST ABUSE. (Habib Khan? Once again, ladies and gentlemen, the actual record would suggest that Keith Brown’s family were more sinned against than sinning)

Her officials stressed later that any neighbour dispute would have to go 'QUITE BEYOND what an ordinary person should be expected to deal with'.
Quite beyond?

Not a long way beyond?

Just a bit beyond?

And you get away with murder?

Yeah, well. That’s what happened when Habib Khan went indoors to get a knife and, subsequently, stabbed Keith Brown in the back with it.

The “very clever lawyers” played the race card, saying Khan had been subjected to “repeated racist abuse”. (Keith’s family said it was the other way around - Khan’s behaviour had been reported to the police on several occasions)

This law has the fingerprints of the Keith Brown murder all over it.

THEY do not want their immigrant pets being done for murder when it’s only a BNP man who got done away with.

I don’t really see why THEY need a new law. THEY managed to find Khan guilty of manslaughter only and he is as obvious a premeditated murderer as it’s possible to be. Perhaps they just want it to seem less embarrassing. Less of an anti-Brit fit-up.

Anyway, folks, it going to be official very shortly.

If your immigrant stands up in a court of law and declares that he was “seriously wronged by an insult”, he may very well get away with murder. Why on earth would a man capable of murder not instruct his lawyers to use this defence, whether it be true or not?

Do stop voting for your own destruction, folks. The people you keep on putting in parliament need stringing up not voting for.

In the olden days, if you betrayed the British people, you were found guilty of treason and executed. Nowadays, we are routinely presented with such creatures at election time. And, as often as not, if there isn’t some first or second-generation immigrant standing against them, this treacherous type will be all there is on offer.

If you want your country back, ladies and gentlemen, do you think you’re going to get it by electing for those who “are making some people more equal than others” and insisting that “some lives are worth more than others”?

Do you believe such Brit-loathing Orwellians are going to do the right thing by you?

Ever?

THEY have been at this for a long, long time you know. Putting the immigrant first in the land that the British made. That’s why the race laws were devised. To keep us subdued as our country was being overrun by aliens.

You do know what George Orwell said in Animal Farm, don’t you?

Here is the immortal pig proclamation:

Quote:
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
The pigs gain control of the government in Animal Farm. Orwell is commenting on the hypocrisy of the government that proclaims equality whilst, in fact, according power and privilege to a corrupt elite.
Robert Whelan of Civitas thinks “the government are making some people more equal than others”.

I think the government is in the business of making “some animals… more equal than others”.

Let me show you just how p***-takingly Orwellian those who create our laws have been happy to be in recent times.

On 12 April 1994, the Criminal Justice And Public Order Bill was debated in parliament.

During the debate, Gerald Kaufman, MP for Manchester, Gorton, said this:
Quote:
If you attack someone, that is odious, but IF YOU ATTACK SOMEONE BECAUSE THEY ARE BLACK OR AN ASIAN OR CHINESE OR A JEW, THAT IS EVEN MORE ODIOUS…

It is such a good new clause, that the racial element carries with it an additional punishment, to say to people… BECAUSE YOU COMMITTED THAT CRIME, WHICH HAD A RACIAL CONCOMITANT, YOU SHALL BE PUNISHED EVEN MORE, to teach you and to send a message to the ethnic minority communities that… THEY SHALL HAVE SPECIAL PROTECTION’…

PARLIAMENT CONSIDERS CRIMES WITH A RACIAL ELEMENT AS EVEN MORE INTOLERABLE THAN OTHER CRIMES… IF YOU ATTACK SOMEONE, THAT IS ODIOUS, BUT IF YOU ATTACK SOMEONE BECAUSE THEY ARE BLACK OR AN ASIAN OR CHINESE OR A JEW, THAT IS EVEN MORE ODIOUS…

Parliament needs to send a signal to members of the ethnic minorities in this country that PARLIAMENT HAS A SPECIAL CONCERN FOR THEM.
In other words, folks, as Orwell might have said, if he'd been a creep like Kaufman:

Quote:
People are equal, but some people, especially ethnic minorities, are more equal than others.
Barbara Roche, who was the MP for Hornsey and Wood Green at the time of the above debate, said this:

Quote:
Our new clause says… that the racial element carries with it an additional punishment, to say to people, ‘YOU HAVE COMMITTED A CRIME… BECAUSE YOU COMMITTED THAT CRIME, WHICH HAD A RACIAL CONCOMITANT, YOU SHALL BE PUNISHED EVEN MORE’.
Sir Ivan Lawrence, MP for Burton, who is also Jewish but, unlike the previous three speakers, was a Conservative MP at the time, had this to say in the same debate:

Quote:
Most of us believe that we may be able to deter racist attacks by the threat of greater punishment… We believe that… an assault motivated by racism is more socially divisive and corrosive of the very fabric of our tolerant society and, for that reason, is itself more serious.

The majority of members of the Home Affairs Committee believe that the matter is so… that the present state of the law is simply not enough. We therefore suggest that new clause 127 should create five new offences of racially motivated assault… the Commission for Racial Equality and other organisations are in favour of the measure…

Is there a need for a new offence of racial harassment to deal with the drip, drip, drip effect of constant harassment? THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES OF BRITISH JEWS, THE COMMISSION FOR RACIAL EQUALITY, THE ANTI-RACIST ALLIANCE AND A NUMBER OF OTHERS ALL SAY YES.

There were strong criticisms of the working of the present legislation, PARTICULARLY FROM THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES OF BRITISH JEWS.
Many of those who have, latterly, risen to the top of New Labour's parliamentary pole voted for this bill.

These include:

Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, John Prescott, Peter Mandelson, David Blunkett, Stephen Byers, Alan Milburn, Geoff Hoon, Peter Hain, Harriet Harman, John Reid, Tessa Jowell, Robin Cook, Clare Short, Alstair Darling, Chris Smith, Nick Brown, Ian McCartney, Frank Dobson, Margaret Beckett, Ron Davies, Paul Boateng, Estelle Morris, Mo Mowlam, George Robertson, Gavin Strang, Ann Taylor, Paul Murphy, Andrew Smith, Barbara Roche and Keith Vaz.
All of the above would, subsequently, rise to Cabinet rank in Tony Blair's government with the exception of Barbara Roche and Keith Vaz.

When Tony Blair became Prime Minister, he decided to give the job of Europe Minister to Keith Vaz.

Which is interesting. You see, Vaz is an African Asian. Not exactly the kind of man most of us would have chosen to represent the will of the vast majority of those whose ancestors are buried in Europe, wouldn't you say?
Tony Blair would make Barbara Roche Immigration Minister when he came to power.

In this position, she was the first ever person to tell us that we NEEDED another 150,000 LEGAL immigrants entering the country every year in order to help us out.

It's pretty easy to see why Roche would have little sympathy for those who wanted to keep Britain British. Her grandparents were a fascinating mixture of Polish, Russian, Spanish and Portuguese.

And all of them were Jewish.

Just like the New Labour MP, Gerald Kaufman.

And the Tory MP, Ivan Lawrence.

And the New Labour MP David Sumberg, who said this in the same debate:

Quote:
The Government have tabled new clause 125, which I warmly welcome. It will make the publication of racist literature an arrestable offence…We must tackle the evil… It is unacceptable for there to be a rise in membership of the hard right in Britain… a society that has welcomed immigrants to its shores for many years.
Keith Vaz, himself, said this:

Quote:
We live in a multicultural society… We must today send out, not just to the black and Asian community but to the country at large, the message that we are not prepared to do nothing. Action must be taken to protect our fellow citizens.
The black MP, Diane Abbott, said this during the debate:

Quote:
Racism is a phenomenon--a social and political manifestation--that our society will not tolerate. Racial attacks ought to be singled out in the way set out in the new clause because of what they represent politically--a threat to the stability of society that no amount of individual attacks on elderly, poor or disabled people could ever represent.
So, if Robert Whelan is correct, “the Government are making some people more equal than others” and “some lives are worth more than others” to this same Government.

If anyone out there thought that such Brit-bashing Orwellian activity was a new phenomenon, as you can see, the Jew, the Black and the African Asian were at it in earnest 14 years ago.

Stop Press:

On 26 July 2008, The Sunderland Echo reported thus:

Quote:
A graduate has been spared jail for stabbing a man in response to racial taunts. Amar Burton, 27, lashed out after a group of stag night revellers hurled racial abuse at him and his pal in Newcastle city centre.
Newcastle Crown Court heard how Burton, who claims he had never been the victim of racist behaviour before, became ‘incensed’ by their treatment and stabbed and slashed Christopher Linden…

Prosecutor Alec Burns told the court…

‘He was clearly incensed by what had happened and the racist abuse they had received. He went back to confront them… Christopher Linden began scuffling with the defendant. The defendant produced a knife he had with him and stabbed Christopher Linden a number of times and slashed him across the chin’…

Defence barrister Carl Gumsley said…

‘This is the first time he has received racist abuse. He was upset by the racist abuse’…

Recorder Neil Davey sentenced Burton to nine months imprisonment, suspended for 12 months…

He told him:

Quote:
Normally, as you know, the court would be looking at an immediate custodial sentence for offences of this type. But this is a highly unusual case and I can take a different course. Your record is exemplary
Racist jibe led to knife attack - Sunderland Echo

Ah, the exemplary black, immigrant stabber thing.

Let’s not jail him, eh?

Especially when he goes back to his car to get a knife and then stabs and slashes a white bloke “a number of times”.

Anyway, ladies and gentlemen, as I said earlier, “I don’t really see why THEY need a new law” seeing as how they’re already able to find murderers not guilty of murder and attempted murderers undeserving of anything more than a suspended sentence.

I wonder how long it will be before the White victim is imprisoned for upsetting the Black attacker?

I wonder how long it will be before the Black is handsomely rewarded every time he attacks a White?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks

Tags
lives , worth


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Natural decline 'hurting lives' stevectaylor The green issue and policies 1 22-02-2008 01:21 PM
The Foreign Office lives up to its name! Lord Nelson Government Department 0 04-04-2007 06:46 PM
Virtual worlds are 'worth $1bn' stevectaylor Money 0 20-03-2007 06:28 PM
George Carlin - Life is Worth Losing Solve et Coagula Countries 0 05-09-2006 03:51 PM
Investors say L'Oreal's worth it stevectaylor Money 0 31-08-2006 11:25 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:43 AM.


Bargainarena LimitedAd Management by RedTyger
Sedo - Buy and Sell Domain Names and Websites project info: politic.co.uk Statistics for project politic.co.uk etracker® web controlling instead of log file analysis

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78