Foreword - 2017
Alexander Baron,
Sydenham,
South London
July 6, 2017
Foreword And Acknowledgments
The initial inspiration for this short monograph came from American
researcher Laird Wilcox, (see below). It was suggested that I write it in May
2000, by which time I had already made copious notes on the subject. It has been
a labour of love. The direct inspiration for Crying Wolf came from two well publicised incidents early in the
new millennium. In April, a 17 year old youth who had allegedly been sprayed
with petrol and set ablaze in a racially motivated attack, was arrested along
with two other men in connection with an insurance swindle. The following
month, Chris Cotter, the white boyfriend of black track athlete Ashia Hansen,
was charged in connection with the sending of racially abusive literature to
his (now former!) girlfriend, and, incredibly, with a vicious attack on himself
in which he was said to have lost four pints of blood. Both these incidents are
discussed in more detail herein.
It is only in recent years that any documentation on hate crime hoaxes
in the UK has come into the public domain in any meaningful sense. It is there,
but what little there is remains buried in Public Record Office files or goes
largely unreported by academics or by the national press. The pioneering
studies of Laird Wilcox in the United States and my own modest contribution
will, hopefully, change that for good.
Unlike the Wilcox study, which is largely a collection of press reports,
this work has (I like to think) a more analytical slant with some historical
background, and not a little philosophy. The recently important concept of hate
crime and the not so recent (and increasingly boorish) concept of racial
attacks/racist attacks, ad nauseum, are promoted incessantly in
Britain more by the doctoring of, and the wilful false interpretation of,
statistics, than by any other means. Indeed, the very concept of “political
correctness” is based largely on the manipulation of such statistics. For
example, convicted murderer Satpal Ram (whose crime is discussed below) whines
that:
“Racism
within the Criminal Justice System has also been instrumental in criminalizing
a disproportionate number of Black people who are in Prison today. Black people
constitute 7 per cent of the population at large, as opposed to 18 per cent of
the prison population. This reflects the level of bias that exists within the
system.” (1)
Does it indeed? What then are we to make
of the following statistics?
The average prison population in England
and Wales from 1999-2000 was as follows:
males
remand:
11,581
sentenced:
49,418
total:
60,999
females
remand:
741
sentenced:
2,514
total:
3,255
In other words, on average, males in prisons in England and Wales
outnumber females by nearly nineteen to one. In 1999 there were 86 male
suicides in prison and only 5 female suicides. Here, males fare a little
better: by just over seventeen to one. (2)
In other words, using the logic of Satpal Ram and his ilk, the alleged
racial bias of the prison system (3) is dwarfed by its sexual bias. Real life
though is different; there are many factors at work in society which account
for such so-called racial imbalances and “disproportionate representation”
besides racism. It may be that black
criminals are more stupid than white ones, or that blacks, as a race, are more violent.
Ditto men and women.
Although this monograph is entirely my own work and any errors of fact
or of interpretation are therefore my own, this study in its current form would
not have been possible without the assistance of many people. In no particular
order I would like to thank Nick Griffin and Tony Lecomber; Laird Wilcox; the
staff of Hammersmith Library, the British Library at St Pancras and the
Newspaper Library at Colindale, the Public Record Office and the Family Records
Centre, Westminster Central Reference Library, Lewisham Reference Library and
Local Studies Library, Croydon Reference Library, and the Probate Office. As
usual, a very special thank you goes to my fellow independent researcher Mark
Taha. And to anyone and everyone who assisted me in any way whatsoever, whether
or not they are aware of it.
Alexander Baron,
Sydenham,
London.
June 1, 2002
A Word Of Warning To The Reader
My name is well known in certain circles
as an author on supposedly controversial subjects, and this has led to a
vicious campaign of slander and vilification against me by powerful vested
interests. To give just one, very mild, example, in one issue of the
self-styled international anti-fascist magazine Searchlight, publisher Gerry Gable referred to me as “the arch
conspiracy theorist Alexander Baron”. (4) Gerry Gable was one of the founders
of Searchlight magazine, he edited it
for several years and has exercised editorial control over it for most if not
all of its existence. (5) During that time, Searchlight (6) has run numerous
scare stories, (7) including, in chronological order, the Column 88 “Nazi
Underground” hoax which was allegedly a secret army of 400 men and women who
could bomb, maim and murder with impunity; an alleged conspiracy to supply guns
in Leicester; an alleged conspiracy to bomb the Notting Hill Carnival; an
alleged conspiracy by neo-Nazis to infiltrate and take over the youth wing of
the Conservative Party; an alleged conspiracy to murder Gable himself; an
alleged conspiracy by a group of men on the South East Coast of England to
overthrow the government of Nelson Mandela!
In spite of extensive efforts at entrapment, heavy surveillance, and in
two of the above, criminal investigations by the police, these Searchlight mooted/inspired
“conspiracies” resulted in a grand total of three arrests: one night in 1975,
three men were caught down a dark alley in Birmingham allegedly en route to
assault the staff of an Indian restaurant. One of these men was a Searchlight agent provocateur. (8) And Gable refers
to me as “the arch conspiracy theorist”. Nuff said.
Whether or not I am a conspiracy theorist, a raving lunatic, or the
reincarnation of Jack the Ripper, this publication is researched almost
entirely from the public domain and is minutely referenced. (9) Unlike Mr Gable
and his gang, I ask my audience to take nothing on faith. If the reader is
skeptical of the evidence I adduce, he can check every single important fact
himself. If he disagrees with my interpretation of any of the facts, he is free
to advance his own. And leave the Gerry Gables of this world to their ad hominem, sneers and innuendo.
Introduction
The concept of “hate crime” is a relatively new one, although according
to Laird Wilcox, the term was coined by the ADL (10) as long ago as the 1940s.
(11) A search of the British Library Current Catalogue for the terms “HATE
CRIME” and “HATE CRIMES” made June 7, 2000, yielded one entry for the former
and three for the latter. A search of the Retrospective Catalogue yielded no
entry for either. (12)
Neither “hate crime” nor “hate speech” appear in the Second Edition of
the mammoth 20 volume Oxford English
Dictionary (1989) or in any of the three volume Oxford English Dictionary Additions Series published 1993, 1993
and 1997 respectively. In an E-mail dated June 12, 2000, Dr Jeremy Marshall,
Associate Editor of the Oxford English Dictionary/Oxford Word and Language
Service pointed out that:
“The
phrase ‘hate crime’ is certainly of American origin, but we have not so far
traced examples in print prior to about 1986, the date of a notorious fatal
attack in New York City. The term seems chiefly to have been popularized after
the passing of U.S. legislation such as the Hate Crimes Statistics Act 1990 (parts
of which had been under discussion at Congress from at least 1985, but not
published until 1987). On scanning the website of the National Criminal Justice
Reference Service...I have not found any references to use of the term before
1986. Our draft dictionary entry for the phrase awaits further research in the
U.S.”
While of “hate speech” Dr Marshall says
this term:
“is
similarly traceable in our files to the mid/late 1980s. You may find further
information in ‘Hate Speech: the History of an American Controversy’ by S.
Walker (University of Nebraska Press, 1994), which is listed in the British
Library catalogue.”
He concludes :
“It
is, of course, common for phrases to enter popular spoken use long before they
reach the printed media, but we are usually unable to find or to reliably
confirm evidence of such use.”
The terms “hate speech” and “hate crime” were applied in the first
instance to alleged attacks on people by virtue of their race/ethnicity or
religious orientation. This can be real or perceived. The two groups most often
targeted by virtue of religion were Catholics and Jews, if only because they
were two of the largest and most influential minorities. The debate over who is
really a Jew is eternal; many, perhaps the vast majority of “Jews” nowadays are
people who are not Jewish in any meaningful sense but are simply of Jewish
origin. Likewise many Catholics are nominal Catholics. (13)
Political parties and other organisations which were/are perceived to
attack groups by virtue of their ethnic origin have come to be designated “hate
groups”. It should be stressed that it is not necessary to hate anyone to be
smeared as a member, supporter or fellow traveller of a hate group. Most if not
all organisations which oppose unrestricted (non-white) immigration into
Britain have been designated hate groups by the organised left.
In recent years, the concepts of hate speech and hate crime have been
quietly extended to cover attacks (real and imagined) on, or even perceived
antipathy towards, people who engage in particular sexual practices,
specifically homosexuals. Just as it is not necessary to hate any man by virtue
of his race, so it is not necessary either to hate anyone by virtue of his/her
sexual orientation in order to be branded a bigot or hater.
Under the entry for HOMOPHOBIA,
the Encyclopedia Of Homosexuality
reports that although precise definitions vary, it usually refers to “negative
attitudes toward homosexual persons and homosexuality” and recommends that
“Care should be taken...to identify homophobia as a prejudice, comparable to
racism and anti-Semitism, rather than an irrational fear similiar to
claustrophobia or agoraphobia”. (14)
The tendency for homosexual activists is to fudge the distinction
between the healthy aversion most people have towards their obscene practices,
with outright hatred. Because of the recency of the phenomenon and the
consequent lack of data, we will not be covering hate crime hoaxes of a
homosexual nature in this short study. I have no doubt though that a few will
have been perpetrated here and there.
The Iconoclastic Studies Of Laird Wilcox
In 1988, Laird Wilcox began a study of “racist and anti-Semitic hoaxes”
which culminated in the 1996 publication of his substantial large format pamphlet Crying Wolf: Hate Crime Hoaxes In
America. This seminal pamphlet was followed in 1998 by The Watchdogs: A close look at Anti-Racist “Watchdog” Groups.
Together, these two publications should be requisite reading for anyone and everyone
who is genuinely concerned about that most sensitive of subjects, race
relations. In view of the nature and scope of the phenomenon, it is surprising
that no one had made a dedicated study of it before; documentation on early
examples is sparse, but a surprising amount can be found if one looks in the
right places.
The current study is complementary in the sense that it covers hate
crime hoaxes from a British perspective, but I have gone far deeper into the
philosophical and historical background than Wilcox; I have also included such
things as the manipulation of statistics and the cases of Mumia Abu-Jamal,
Satpal Ram and Winston Silcott, who while not perpetrators of hate crime hoaxes
in the strict sense of the word have become icons for leftist/racial pressure
groups. All three of these men were convicted of murder - and rightly so - yet
they are presented as victims rather than perpetrators, fitted up by the racist system, (15) so in a very real
sense their names are being used to hoax the public.
I have also gone further than Wilcox in that I have included a number of
real crimes and incidents which have been cynically and sometimes callously
exploited by presenting them to the public as racially motivated hate crimes,
when the racial motive for the crime was tenuous to say the least, as in the
case of the murder of eighteen year old Stephen Lawrence, or in that of fifteen
year old Woolf Katz, when no crime was committed at all, the tragic accidental
death of a Jewish theological student being used as cannon fodder in the
struggle against a mythical Fascist menace.
The Historical Background:
Classical Anti-Semitism And Hate Crime Hoaxes
Although as stated the concept of hate crime is a modern one, both
components - hate and crime - have of course been with us since time
immemorial. The idea of holding entire classes of people responsible for the
sins of a few, whether those sins are real or imagined, is hardly a new one
either. Anti-Semitism arises out of this sort of mistaken collective
responsibility, so when Jews are falsely accused of crimes simply because they
are Jewish we could in theory classify this as a hate crime hoax just as we can
classify crimes committed against Jews simply because they are Jewish as hate crime
itself.
Classical anti-Semitism originates with the killing of Christ and
involves in its purest sense holding all Jews (past, present and future?)
responsible for his death. The history of the Jewish people goes back a long
way before Christ of course, (16) and it might be argued that their treatment
by the Egyptians and others amounted to anti-Semitism, or simply to racism, but since the dawn of time all
manner of tribes have been at each others’ throats, and the concept of race in
pre-Biblical, Biblical and even Mediaeval times was not properly formed if
formed at all.
Indeed, the idea of Jews as a race dates only from the 19th
Century with the writings of the Jewish philosopher Moses Mendelsohn (1729-86),
founder of the Haskalah movement;
(17) the nationalist (and author of Rome
And Jerusalem) Moses Hess (1812-75); and the German fanatic Wilhelm Marr
(1818-1904) who founded the Anti-Semitic League in 1879. (18) Theodor Herzl
(1860-1904), the founder of modern Zionism, was a somewhat late arrival on the
scene.
Whether or not they were regarded as a race, antipathy towards Jews as a
class of people often had a rational basis, because throughout history Jews
have lived as a privileged minority amongst their host nations as much as a
persecuted one (as their largely self-appointed spokesmen often claim).
The American-Jewish scholar Benjamin Ginsberg has written of the Jewish
people that:
“Their relationship to the state has often
made it possible for Jews to attain great wealth and power.” (19) The yellow
badge the Jews wore under the Nazis originated not as a badge of shame but as
one of privilege enjoyed by them in Moslem lands during the Middle Ages, “It
was not originally intended as an instrument for segregating and humiliating
the Jews...but to proclaim that its wearers enjoyed official protection.” (20)
During the 11th to 15th
Centuries, Jews were so prominent in the economies of the Spanish kingdoms
that:
“In some areas Jewish taxes accounted for one
half of the total revenues. Hence, the economy of the country depended mainly
on the Jews...” (21)
Even the conquest of England by William
of Orange was financed by Jews, in particular by Dutch Jewish financiers. (22)
The 12th Century Jewish usurer Aaron of Lincoln (circa 1125-86)
amassed a fortune second only to that of the king. (23) Jews were useful to
monarchs both
as Court Jews (eg as doctors) and as tax collectors. When they
allied themselves with a particular monarch they could indeed rise to positions
of great wealth and power, as Ginsberg points out, but when things turned
nasty, they and ordinary Jews could find themselves on the receiving end.
The Blood Libel
One allegation which has been levelled persistently against Jews
throughout history is the so-called Blood Allegation or Blood Libel or (Jewish)
Ritual Murder. This is specifically that at Passover, Jewish ritual demands the
murder of a young Christian child - usually a boy - whose blood is then drained
and baked in the Jews’ matzohs.
According to official Jewish sources, “The blood accusation has been
discredited in many ways. Non-Jewish authorities have been distinctly prominent
in exposing the absurdity of the charge.” (24) The charge is not necessarily
absurd because ritual murder has been
practiced by many societies up until the present day. For example, ritual
murder (or medicine murder) was commonplace in Southern Africa as late as the
1940s, and the British administration went to considerable lengths to stamp it
out, particularly in Basutoland. (25) Unless one accepts the doubtful
proposition that Jews are in some way morally superior to Africans, one must
concede that allegations of specifically Jewish ritual murder may be wrong, but
are not necessarily absurd, and under certain circumstances may be credible.
(26)
Be that as it may, false allegations have most certainly been made over
the centuries, not necessarily always out of hatred, but sometimes most
definitely out of pragmatism.
Although the origins of the Blood Libel go back a lot further, (27) the
first case in which Jews were actually accused of killing a Christian child for
ritual purposes was St William of Norwich (1144). (28) No one was tried for the
alleged murder of the four year old who was found dead on Good Friday, and as
far as anything we know about this period is reliable, it is most likely that
the boy’s death was not a homicide.
The first case in which Jews were accused purely out of malice is
difficult if not impossible to determine, but according to the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, “Philip
Augustus, king of France, is known to have used blood accusation to replenish
his funds with Jewish money (1180).” (29) If this is the case, then we might
call this the first recorded hate crime hoax, although I will readily defer to
any scholar who presents evidence and argument for an earlier date.
An Unusual Ritual Murder Allegation
An unusual case of alleged attempted ritual murder which may have had an
ulterior motive was reported in 1846. Charles Theodore Werner from Brünn,
Austria, was said to have abducted a young girl in his carriage. When
apprehended he gave his name as Baruch Israel Men, and said that he had
intended to murder the girl in order to use her blood in baking Passover bread.
He was a nominal Catholic, and was apprehended by a posse led by a Jewish
physician, who had apparently nearly been stoned on account of this abduction.
The back of Werner’s carriage was branded with the word “Jew”.
Werner was apparently sane and was gaoled for two years at hard labour
for attempting to incite a pogrom. He had not mistreated the girl, but it is
not stated what he intended to do with her. This incident happened the previous
summer and appears to have been documented in the German press at the time.
(30).
The First Documented Hate Crime Hoax By A Minority?
The first recorded hate crime hoax perpetrated by an ethnic minority
also has a Jewish connection. On November 28, 1870, Sir Richard Burton (31) who
was at that time British Consul in Damascus, wrote in a long dispatch of a
young Jewish boy who was caught in the act of defacing the “privy” of a mosque
in order to blame it on the local Christians. (32) According to a Burton
biographer, this act - the scribbling of the sign of the cross - in such
circumstances, was considered blasphemous by both Moslems and Christians. A
similar act had preceded a massacre ten years earlier, so this apparently
trivial incident could have had extremely serious repercussions. (33)
The response to this incident from the Jewish elite in both Damascus and
England does neither any credit, but unfortunately this sort of response has
become de rigueur from Jewish leaders
and spokesmen over the proceeding century and more. The Chief Rabbi of Damascus
demanded that the boy should not be punished simply because he was a Jew.
Claims that the boys concerned were abused were dismissed by Burton as
unfounded. (34)
The First Documented Hate Crime Hoax In Britain?
If one includes hate crime hoaxes perpetrated against minorities then,
leaving aside spurious allegations of Blood Libel and related matters, the
first hate crime hoax perpetrated - on a large scale - was also against the
Jews. This was the publication and dissemination of the Protocols Of Zion. The Protocols
is referred to universally by establishment historians as an anti-Semitic
document. This is manifestly not true, as anyone who has read - or tried to
read - this virtually unreadable book with an open mind, will swiftly realise.
People who hate Jews are anti-Semites, people who think Jews, or a secret cabal
of Jews, are plotting to take over the world are not necessarily anti-Semitic,
they may simply be foolish, or even more prosaically, wrong. But people who
think King Solomon sat down with the Elders of Zion in 929BC to plot the
conquest of the Universe by sending the Symbolic Snake of Judaism through its
great cities...well, that’s not necessarily anti-Semitism. And it is not
necessarily sane either.
The Protocols Of Zion is a
mystical document rather than an anti-Semitic one; the anti-Semitism associated
with the Protocols derives solely
from the intentions of those who promote it. This does not include the modern
mystic David Icke, who has been uncharitably smeared as an anti-Semite for
endorsing it in a non-anti-Semitic context. (35)
The history of the Protocols,
its origins and development, and even its probable author, have been well
documented, This though is far beyond the scope of the current work. The reader
is referred in the first instance to Norman Cohn’s 1967 study Warrant For Genocide, which was
republished in 1996.
Although it was by no means the first document to accuse the Jews (or
some of them) of plotting world revolution behind the scenes, the Protocols has become by far the most
notorious. It was first published in Britain in early 1920 by the eminently
respectable publishing firm of Eyre and Spottiswoode. (36)
Two more editions followed in quick succession: in August and September
1920. The Protocols was plugged
unremittingly by the Britons, a small, cranky, anti-Semitic publishing house.
There were even two editions published during the Second World War! (37)
In spite of its being thoroughly discredited and in any case
intrinsically unworthy of belief, the Protocols
continues to be plugged by both the mischievous and the gullible. It has acted
as a progenitor for much anti-Jewish literature, but although it has gone
through over eighty editions in Britain, (38) it never caught on with the same
fervour as in the United States for example, where the International Jewish
Conspiracy was given great prominence by its endorsement by the motor magnate
Henry Ford the Elder. (39)
The bulk of the rest of this study will be devoted to more specific
hoaxes in Britain, in particular those in which white Gentiles or white people
in general are portrayed as the villains and where they are accused of real
crimes rather than being involved in some nebulous plot to take over the world.
We start though with a look at a couple of American hoaxes.
Who Perpetrates Hate Crime Hoaxes?
Overwhelmingly, hate crime hoaxes in the modern world are perpetrated by
non-whites against whites, (40) or by Jews against Gentiles, but occasionally
whites are responsible for them. Wilcox has written that unlike hate crime
hoaxes by minorities, which can have various political/racial/personal motives,
“[w]ith whites...the motive is usually to implicate someone else in a crime
that they committed themselves, and the account seems more credible if, under
the circumstances, the offender is Black or some other minority...Cases where
the motive of the hoax is to falsely implicate minorities in anti-white racism
are apparently rare.” (41)
Rare or not, hoaxes by whites do occur, two of the most notorious were
perpetrated in the United States, and in both cases the perpetrators attempted
to lay the blame for their heinous crimes on (non-existent) black men.
Two Hate Crime Hoaxes Perpetrated By Whites
In an undated issue published late 1989 or early 1990, The Truth At Last newspaper recorded the
sensational story of the killing that shocked the nation. (42) A pregnant woman
named Carol Stuart was shot dead in her car by an unidentified Negro mugger.
(43) Her baby was delivered by Caesarean section but died some time later. This
killing did indeed shock the nation, and when the truth came out, America was
stunned, because it wasn’t a Negro mugger but her husband Charles who was found
to have murdered Carol Stuart!
This notorious case is reported briefly by Laird Wilcox. Carol Stuart
had left a childbirth class at a Boston hospital with her husband Charles, and
the two were on their way home when, according to the survivor, “a black gunman
forced his way into their automobile. The gunman forced them to drive to
another location where he demanded cash and jewelry. Then the gunman shot Carol
Stuart in the head and wounded Charles Stuart in the abdomen.” (44)
Charles managed to call the police on his mobile phone; he became a
media hero as the surviving victim. Unsurprisingly, the atrocity also caused
outrage. A black man named Willie Bennett was identified by Stuart as looking
“most like” the murderer. (45)
The hoax didn’t last long; although this was an apparently open and shut
case (save for positively identifying the murderer), the police with their
usual, nasty suspicious minds left no stone unturned. It soon transpired that
as well as grieving for his murdered wife, Charles Stuart stood to gain from a
substantial insurance policy, which in itself meant nothing, but when his
brother went to the police and confessed to being an accessory after the fact
by helping him to dispose of incriminating evidence, the game was up. Before he
could be arrested however, Stuart jumped into the river. (46)
The suicide of Charles Stuart made the front page of the New York Times the following day.
According to this report, Carol Stuart’s baby, which was delivered eight weeks
prematurely after her death, survived for seventeen days.
The paper reported that Stuart was said to have made a positive
identification of 39 year old William Bennett, who was in custody on another
charge. (Bennett was subsequently sentenced to twelve to twenty-five years for
an armed robbery on a video store on October 2, 1989). (47)
The bullet removed from Stuart’s body did not match the bullets found in
his wife’s body. His brother had just implicated him in the crime, and the
evidence that had built up against him was compelling. His motive appears to
have been financial or primarily financial, and he claimed that the gunman shot
the couple when he mistook Stuart’s mobile phone for a police radio. (48)
According to Wilcox, “What was scary about the case is how journalists
initially bought Charles Stuart’s story when there was evidence to doubt it
from the beginning”. And “His designation of the killer as a black man was
credible in a community with a high black crime rate. Statistically, the killer
was more likely to be black than white.” (49)
An even more heinous and callous murderer than Charles Stuart was 23
year old mother of two, Susan Smith. (50) On October 25, 1994, she reported
that her car had been stolen by a black man who had forced her out at gunpoint
and driven off with her two young sons on the back seat. The eldest was 3 years
old and the youngest 14 months. A hoax was suspected fairly early on in the
case for various reasons, not the least of which is that the story is prima
facie hard to swallow. On November 3, Smith confessed to the sheriff and
led the authorities to where she had dumped her car in 18 feet of water with
her sons still inside. An angry crowd screamed for her blood. (51)
The Reaction To Hate Crime Hoaxes
The usual reaction when there is believed specifically to be a racial
motive for a crime, is outrage, by the media, by politicians, by ethnic, and by
“anti-racist” and left wing groups.
When however the hoax is exposed for what it is, the incident is quickly
forgotten. Although The Truth At Last
newspaper referred to above reported the murder of Carol Stuart as the killing
that shocked the nation when it was believed the perpetrator was a Negro, the
newspaper published no retraction or correction when the truth came out. (52)
This is typical of the majority of hoaxes, indeed there has been such hysteria
about racism in Britain
especially about alleged racism in the media
that repressive self-censorship (referred to euphemistically as guidelines)
make it all but impossible to report the race of the perpetrator of any crime
where the said perpetrator is non-white unless it is unavoidable. (53)
The Consequences Of Hate Crime Hoaxes
I said above that hate crime hoaxes are perpetrated mostly by non-whites
against whites or by Jews against Gentiles. What I meant by this is that the
hoaxes usually implicate whites, or Gentiles as the mythical perpetrators. In
practice though the real victims of such hoaxes are not in general white
people, or Gentiles, or in the two aforementioned cases, blacks, but, where
such hoaxes are taken up by the mass media, the whole of society. Such hoaxes
can and sometimes do lead to knee jerk calls for repressive legislation and
changes in social policy. In the case of the Searchlight Organisation, which
will be discussed in detail below, the not-so-hidden agenda of this notorious
clique of mischief-makers and liars shines through.
Some hate crime hoaxes have indeed changed social policy and public
perceptions, especially of race relations, none more so than that of the murder
of Stephen Lawrence, (see below). This was a real crime with real victims: first
and foremost Stephen Lawrence himself, and secondly his family and friends,
most notably Duwayne Brooks. In one sense the murder of Stephen Lawrence was
indeed a hate crime, because no one ever stabbed an innocuous eighteen year old
teenager to death out of love. But the wide ranging imputations about this
cowardly murder, that it was/is part of a racist
mindset, and all the subsequent recriminations against the police for failing
to apprehend his killer or killers, have been totally unwarranted.
The resulting, prolix and for the most part totally irrelevant
Macpherson Inquiry led to calls for, among other things, the abolition of
double jeopardy so that the Lawrences - and especially Doreen Lawrence, the
victim’s mother - can have their pound of flesh against the five youths
originally arrested for and charged with her son’s killing if at any time in
the future real evidence came to light against them to supplement the innuendo
and supposition that led to the subsequently aborted indictment.
As well as for society as a whole, hate crime hoaxes can have dire
consequences for specific individuals. In one of the most notorious, and more
unusual hate crime hoaxes, the Tawana Brawley case of November 1987, the
spotlight fell on three totally innocent men who continued to have the finger
of suspicion pointed at them long after the allegations them were totally
disproved and after it was established conclusively that Brawley’s alleged
abduction and rape was a total fabrication. (54)
Hate Crimes Manufactured By The Media
And By Special Interest Groups
An all too common occurrence over the past twenty and more years has
been the manufacture of a hate crime from a genuinely tragic episode by the
attribution of an ulterior motive which is not necessarily there, and which is
sometimes clearly false.
The Murder Of Stephen Lawrence
Undoubtedly the most well publicised alleged racial attack of the 1990s
was the aforementioned knifing to death of 18 year old Stephen Lawrence on the
night of April 22, 1993 in Eltham, South East London. As stated, this was in
one sense a hate crime, because the victim was stabbed fatally and quite
intentionally while waiting for a bus with a friend. The attack was totally
unprovoked; the victim was stabbed twice with intent to wound severely if not
to kill. (55) His attacker was one member of a six strong gang; it is not clear
what role the other members of the gang played, and it is arguable that only
one of them was ultimately responsible, but the incessantly parrotted claim
that the murder was racially motivated and only racially motivated, as
announced by the media, by the victim’s parents, by the Macpherson Report, (56) by “anti-racist” groups, and accepted as such by all and sundry, is based on
tenuous evidence indeed.
At the time of the murder, one of the gang is alleged to have uttered a
“racial remark”. (57) Does this automatically qualify the murder of Stephen
Lawrence as racially motivated? The reality is that street gangs have in
general three motives for assaulting people. One is robbery, ie organised
mugging. Another is sexual, ie gang rape. The third is just plain nastiness.
When the motive for street assault is robbery, the victim is likely to
be someone who is unable or unlikely to fight back. Mugging is a cowardly
crime, and women and old people are easier targets than healthy young men. (58)
When the motive is sexual, young women and girls are naturally likely to be the
victims; sexual attacks by gangs on mature women, and attacks of a homosexual nature
are very rare indeed. The perpetrators of sex attacks and sex murders are
overwhelmingly lone individuals, and the crimes often involve the abduction of
the victim, or forced entry into premises.
The murder of Stephen Lawrence was clearly motivated neither by robbery
nor by lust - except perhaps blood lust. It is possible also that drink may
have been a factor, but as the attackers were never caught (contrary to the
facile assertions of the Lawrence family and the Daily Mail), (59) we will never know. Stephen Lawrence was not a
victim of racism, rather he was the
victim of a knife culture which is rampant in that particular area of London,
mainly but not exclusively by white street gangs. (60)
The Murder Of Rohit Duggal
Another fatal stabbing of a non-white youth happened in the same area
the previous year. This was the case of sixteen year old Rohit Duggal, who was
stabbed to death by another sixteen year old, the white Eltham youth, Peter
Thompson, on July 11, 1992. Enormous publicity was whipped up over this case
too, by local “anti-racist”
protesters, and Rohit Duggal’s death was used quite cynically, as was the
murder of Stephen Lawrence, as part of a campaign to shut down the British
National Party’s headquarters at nearby Welling.
After Thompson’s conviction however, the investigating officer,
Detective Superintendent Douglas Auld, was adamant that there had been no
racial motive for the murder. To this day though the death of Rohit Duggal,
what was essentially a playground fight which resulted in personal tragedy, is
misrepresented as a racist murder. At
the time of Thompson’s trial, leaflets were distributed by protesters outside
the court, something which could obviously have been prejudicial to the
under-age defendant. Protesters were warned by the trial judge that they were
in danger of being held in contempt of court. When the verdict was announced,
cheers erupted from the public gallery, (61) an undignified spectacle which
does rather make one question the motives of those engaged in “anti-racist” activities. At least one source
has attempted to link the murder of Rohit Duggal to that of Stephen Lawrence.
(62)
The “anti-racist” movement
continues to make capital out of this tragic death, in spite of the lack of any
sort of racial motive. (63)
The Rape Of The Austrian Tourist
Another case which bore similarities with the murder of Stephen
Lawrence, from a slightly different perspective, ie a gang attack on a totally
innocent person, was the well publicised rape of an Austrian tourist in London.
She was gang raped and then, incredibly, thrown into a canal. Unlike Stephen
Lawrence, she survived. For once when the victim was white and the perpetrators
non-white, the subject of race was not taboo in the media. The Times reported that “during the attack
she repeatedly heard the words ‘white bitch’.” (64)
When the seven strong gang were sentenced, they were described as a
“gang of misfit second-generation immigrants”. (65) The far right made some
capital out of this case, and there was undoubtedly a racial element in the
crime, although it is just as likely that an African tourist would have been
treated equally inhumanely. Be that as it may, the most noticeable and
disturbing feature of this case was the youthfulness of the attackers; the Times reported that “the smallest of the
gang” was fourteen years old at the time of the rape; he was sentenced to
twelve years. (66)
The Deptford Fire Or New Cross Massacre
The exploitation by agenda driven special interest groups of the fatal
stabbings of Stephen Lawrence and Rohit Duggal may have been cynical in the
extreme, but in mitigation it may at least be said that these were undoubtedly
senseless murders, and that the man on the Clapham omnibus could reasonably
read some form of racial motive into them, if only on the strength of at times
misleading press reports. A decade and more earlier though, another and far
more tragic incident, was exploited in a similar fashion, and unlike the
murders of Stephen Lawrence and Rohit Duggal there is no concrete proof that a
crime was committed, and indeed no evidence whatsoever that any white person
was involved in what was most likely simply a tragic accident.
On January 17, 1981, two young black girls - Angela Jackson and Yvonne
Ruddock - were celebrating their birthdays at a joint party at 439 New Cross
Road in South East London. As is not unusually the case with Afro-Caribbean
parties, it went on well into (and in this case well past) the small hours.
Just before 6am, a fire broke out in the house. Ten youngsters died in this
fire; three more died later in hospital; and two years later a survivor of the
blaze became the “fourteenth victim” by tragically committing suicide.
There was never any meaningful evidence that the fire was started by any
outsider, but from the beginning it was reported as a racially motivated arson
and mass murder. Irresponsible coverage by the left wing press (typically) and
also by the black press (which should have known better) led to a great deal of
ill-feeling and what could have been extremely serious public disorder.
Others tried to make capital out of the tragedy. A few days after the
fire, graffiti appeared on a wall in Catford - “13 down, 1,500,000 to go” (67)
Anonymous letters were also sent to families of the victims (68) and a letter
that was sent to the West Indian World
newspaper was forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions. (69) It is easy
to ascribe such mischief to racists,
but unless someone is brought to book, the actual motives of graffiti artists
and poison pen letter writers cannot be confirmed.
In one case however, the motive appears to have been fairly clear. At
the beginning of February, the News Of
The World newspaper, (70) which had been running a smear campaign against
the far right, revealed that the writer of the letter that was sent to the West Indian World was anything but a racist. The paper reported that
...yesterday Commander John Smith, head of South London police, said:
“The letter was anonymous, but the writer’s name and address had been impressed
on the paper from the sheet above.
The lady concerned is known to us as having strong Left-wing views. A
report has been sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions.” (71) This incident was also reported in the local press
where it was said that a woman had been questioned about the letter but that it
was not being linked to the poison pen letters sent to the families of the
victims. It was also reported that the Anti-Nazi League - a front organisation
for the Socialist Workers Party - had staged a demonstration outside Deptford
police station into the alleged police cover up. (72)
In the wake of the fire, a mass meeting was held at Pagnell Street
Community Centre, New Cross. About a hundred and fifty people attended, but
young blacks objected to whites being present and said they wouldn’t proceed
until they left! Commander Smith of the Metropolitan Police was told to “Go
away murderer.” (73)
Black agitators were prominent in the nascent campaign, none more so
that John La Rose, who in 1984 published a collection of interviews in which it
was claimed that the police had intended to frame a group of blacks who were at
the party, (74) and that a group of them were forced to sign statements
attributing the fire to a fight between youths. (75) The Declaration of New Cross was made March 2, 1981, and states blankly
that “On Sunday, 18th January, 1981 in an unparallelled act of
savagery, thirteen [young blacks] were murdered at 439 New Cross Road...” (76)
Not all blacks were happy with the way this tragedy was exploited
though, and at the end of January, the mother of one of the victims said she
was sickened that some people had tried to turn it into a racial issue: “There
were white people at the party, too.” (77)
This sentiment was echoed by Johnny Kwango, a TV personality who was a
relative of one of the survivors. He was quoted thus:
“I
believe some people who have valuable information are frightened to come
forward because of fear of reprisals from the coloured community...Some
elements within our community are trying to make this a racial issue. That’s
something it never was.” (78)
At the inquest, the Coroner recorded an open verdict, which in the
circumstances was the most logical one, but this didn’t go down too well with
either the black press or the left wing press.
The newspaper Socialist Worker
gave prominent coverage to the fire, although the front cover of the issue
following the fire was devoted to the shooting of Bernadette McAliskey by the
British Army in Northern Ireland. On page 3 it was reported that Local fury grows over bombing. The
author of this report was Kim Gordon, a black SWP member; the report,
apparently written on January 21, stated that to date there were ten dead. (79)
The following issue, the fire found its way onto the front cover; a
photo of the burned out building read: “...This was the house where 12 people
died after racists set fire to a West Indian party on Sunday 18 January”. (80)
There were also a number of speculations about the fire including an allegation
that someone saw a (white) man throwing something at the house. (81)
One left wing magazine went too far however, and in June 1983, Commander
Graham Stockwell, who was then head of the Metropolitan Police Fraud Squad, was
said to be set to receive “substantial” damages in relation to an article
published in the New Statesman. (82)
If nothing else this demonstrates that it is far easier to make irresponsible
and scurrilous allegations than to prove them.
Even more interestingly, later that same year it was revealed that the
police had sent a new report on the fire to the Director of Public
Prosecutions. According to one newspaper, although “Black pressure groups have
consistently maintained that the blaze was caused by a firebomb thrown by a
white racist, and that the police have been engaged in a cover-up”, a black man
then in the United States, was said to have been “almost certainly”
responsible, and several people were said not to have told the truth about the
fire. Charges were said to have been expected, (83) although none followed. The
police file on the fire was closed in August 1985. (84)
To this day, there are those who attempt to exploit the misnamed New
Cross Massacre as part of their racial/political agendas. In their misnamed
1993 book racism: the destruction of
civil and political liberties, Conor Foley and Sharron Nelles report the
fire as a racially
motivated arson: “The exact circumstances of the deaths are
still disputed”, they say. (85) One might just as well claim that the curvature
of the Earth is still disputed because it is possible to find some people who
will dispute even that, but we will reiterate that there is absolutely no
evidence that any racist was
responsible in any way for the fire.
The most likely reason that racists
have been scapegoated is the same reason the police were, that some of those
present saw what happened and feared the consequences if the truth came out. It
is well known that - rightly or wrongly - some young blacks bear a great
antipathy towards the police. No mention is made anywhere of drugs in this
case, but it is fairly likely that some drugs would have been circulated at
such a party, (86) and this may have been another factor in the wall of silence
that surrounded the investigation. This is a fairly common phenomenon even
today.
In 1999, an alleged drug dealer was shot dead in a night club
“apparently for accidentally standing on a suspected Yardie’s foot”. There were
nearly 2,000 people present, hundreds gave police false names and addresses,
and 350 claimed to have been in the lavatory when the incident happened! (87)
This conspiratorial mentality, referred to in Mafia jargon as omertá (88) can be found in many circles
which young blacks frequent. It can also be found in Northern Ireland, in the
“canteen culture” of the Metropolitan Police, (89) and in all manner of
institutions and situations worldwide.
Wall of silence or not, it may even have been not racism but fear of allegations of racism which led to the fire in the first place. Photographs of 439
New Cross Road show it to be a fairly average size three storey house. A party
of this apparent size taking place in such a dwelling would obviously have been
a fire risk, and if the police had been called to the scene they would most
likely have ordered some of the guests to leave. But if that had happened to a
party that was predominantly black, screams of racism would have gone up. Even in the early eighties the police,
the Metropolitan Police in particular, were having to tread softly softly on
racial issues.
Twenty years and more on, the last has not been heard of the New Cross
fire. In its May 21, 2001 issue, the front page of New Nation, an otherwise largely intelligent black newspaper,
screamed:
IT
WAS ARSON!
New
Cross fire WAS started on purpose say cops 20 yrs later
As usual though, the headline promised much, while the story itself - by
Stephanie Busari - delivered little or nothing. New forensic tests were said to
have proved that the fire was started by a naked flame placed next to an
armchair rather than by a cigarette. Of course, even if this is true, it doesn’t
prove arson.
I can only repeat that in spite of extensive investigations, no evidence
of a racial motive ever came to light for the New Cross fire, and that the fire
was most probably started accidentally, or at the very least the person
(obviously someone at the party) had no intention of causing a fatal blaze. We
turn now to a series of hate crime hoaxes which have been foisted on an at
times credulous media by an organisation with its own political and racial
agendas. This organisation is known as Searchlight.
The Column 88 Nazi Underground Hoax
Styling itself Searchlight Against
fascism and racialism, the first issue of Searchlight magazine is dated February 1975. On page 4 is a
reference to Column 88, which is said to be an “Under-cover hard-line Nazi
group”. This is the first such reference the current writer has found to this
outfit. Two months later, an article in the mainstream daily press announced
that Special Branch was said to have uncovered a sinister plan by Column 88 to
celebrate Hitler’s birthday in the heart of Sussex on April 20th.
(90)
The author of this non-story was a gullible Quaker journalist named
Peter Gladstone Smith. When he died at the age of 55, a glowing obituary was
published in Searchlight magazine.
(91) Leaving that aside, Gladstone Smith was the sort of dumb Christian who is
despised - and used - by the people who control Searchlight and similar organisations.
He was certainly useful to the magazine’s then controller, Maurice Ludmer,
because a number of stories about Column 88 crept into the heavies over the
next couple of years, and all of them were originated or inspired by
Searchlight.
The magazine’s own coverage of Column 88 was intense during this period,
and bordered on the hysterical. (92) A report in a short lived “anti-fascist”
magazine edited by photo-journalist and avowed Communist Daphne Liddle (93)
proclaimed that Column 88 had an underground army of three hundred men and
women. (94) David Irving was said to be a leading member; it was even hinted
that the Duke of Westminster might have bankrolled it. (95)
The name Column 88 was also linked to a number of possible terrorist
attacks. For example, on July 14, 1978 a fire gutted the Albany Empire cinema
in Creek Road, South East London, a venue that had been used for “anti-racist” concerts. Greenwich police
insisted there was no evidence of arson and, according to a local (and
obviously left wing) historian:
They
made no comment on the scruffy note pushed under the main entrance the day
after the fire. Letters cut out of a newspaper said “GOT YOU” and the note was
signed with the number 88, which ALCARAF (96) believed was a reference to
Column 88, a secret paramilitary organisation on the terrorist wing of 1970s
fascism. (97)
If the police made no comment on this note it was for the same reason
they make no comment on the vast majority of the countless misleading phone
calls, letters and other hoaxes they and the other emergency services receive
constantly: they have better things to do. There is no evidence that Column 88
was responsible for this fire any more than any of the other terrorist
atrocities it was alleged to have been planning at the time.
Today, Column 88 has been quietly forgotten, it is almost as if it never
existed, (98) but it did exist. The current writer was informed by two people
who were active in the far right at the time (99) that it was basically just a
small outfit of military fantasists, and indeed this conclusion is borne out by
a critical examination of contemporaneous reports in the national press,
extremist press, and Searchlight
itself.
The myth of Column 88, as opposed to the prosaic reality, was created by
two men: Maurice Ludmer, the then editor of Searchlight,
and his agent provocateur, Richard
David (Dave) Roberts. Dave Roberts was born December 15, 1949, the son of
dedicated Communist
parents. (100) Roberts himself became a fanatical Communist
and dedicated “anti-fascist”, and in the mid-seventies, probably on his own
initiative, he decided to infiltrate the far right in his native Birmingham.
Before long though he had teamed up with Ludmer, who was in the process of
establishing Searchlight as the major
instrument of disinformation on the extreme right, fascism and racism in Britain.
Roberts joined the National Front in Birmingham under the name Ralph
Marshall. At that time, the Front was by far the largest far right party in
Britain. Roberts’ role was primarily that of agent provocateur, (101) in
particular he attempted to incite the more gullible members of the far right to
commit criminal acts, and more generally to stimulate racially abusive
behaviour.
In August 1975 it was reported by Searchlight
that Ralph Steven Marshall also known as John Green, a hyper-cautious and very
secretive individual, was said to have made a none too polite racial remark at
a meeting in East Anglia a couple of years ago: “WE have more than our fair
share of Blacks in the urban Industrial areas, now if we had enough tree’s they
could swing on them to their hearts content.” (102)
The previous month though, Roberts had been less concerned with swinging
through the trees than with swinging blunt instruments, because on the evening
of July 16 he was arrested in the company of two of Birmingham’s lunatic fringe
“Nazis” while lurking in the vicinity of a left wing bookshop, Key Books, and an Indian restaurant, The Bombay. Roberts and his
co-defendants, King and McLaren, were accused of conspiring to burn down the
bookshop and were thrown into gaol. Roberts managed to get bail and, probably
in an effort to save his own skin, turned over a large number of covertly made
tape recordings to the authorities.
On March 19, 1976, King, McLaren and Roberts were found not guilty of
conspiracy to rob but guilty of conspiracy to assault the staff of The Bombay restaurant. King was also
found guilty of possessing offensive weapons - an air gun and a scaffold pole;
McLaren was found guilty of the scaffold pole only; Roberts was cleared of
both, and his conviction for the conspiracy offence was only on a majority
verdict, but guilty he was found! (103) His two co-defendants were gaoled, but
Roberts escaped with a suspended sentence, which he was later to serve after
assaulting National Front members on a demonstration. (104)
When the trial was over, the story of how Roberts had saved Birmingham,
Britain and the world from the hordes of Column 88 was told long and loud. The Guardian newspaper for example reported
in its March 25 issue that “evidence” handed to Minister of State Alex Lyons
was said to have included “the availability of guns at £25 a time”. A (tape
recorded?) statement was allegedly included in this “evidence” of members of a
Belgian militarist group being offered a working holiday [sic] in Ulster with a
guaranteed kill.
The authorities investigated all Roberts’ claims thoroughly, and several
reports appeared in the quality press which dismissed them in their entirety.
Two months later, one newspaper reported that Column 88 was dismissed by the
Minister of State for Defence as “a small drinking club of neo-Nazi nut-cases.”
(105) Another article revealed that one former “Nazi” had been involved in
exercises in the Savernake Forest the previous October. He had now been
dismissed. He had been an acting under-officer in the Army Cadet Force. This
was the sum total of the threat to democracy from the hordes of Column 88.
(106) Articles continued to appear about the organisation for a while but they
had all but fizzled out by the time Maurice Ludmer died from a heart attack in
May 1981.
Following his somewhat premature death, the
July issue of Searchlight published a
virtual hagiography including dedications from public figures. However, on the
back page of the following issue a curious message appeared:
“We
wish to make it clear that Dave Roberts is not and never has been a member of Searchlight’s editorial group and is in
no way associated with the work of the magazine. Some years ago he came to us
with his story, which we ran; in return for expenses he offered to compile an
index for us as he was unemployed and waiting to go to college. In the last few
weeks it has come to our notice that Roberts has been taking advantage of
Maurice Ludmer’s death and has been contacting journalists and anti-fascist
activists using Searchlight’s name.
He is not connected in any way with the magazine, nor would we wish him to be.”
Veronica Ware - Editor
Gerry Gable - Former Editor.
The
proof of any pudding is in the eating, and anyone who trawls through the
relevant back numbers of Searchlight
will realise that this claim that Dave Roberts is in no way connected with the
magazine (and by implication never was) is a blatant lie.
Dave Roberts died the following year at the young age of thirty-two; his
death went unnoticed by the “anti-fascist” movement which had made him out to
be some kind of hero six years previously, and was not even reported by Searchlight. (107)
It has often been said that liars ought to have good memories; one liar
who definitely hasn’t is Gerry Gable, who at the time of writing is publisher
of Searchlight. In 1991, Gable
contributed an essay called The Far Right
In Contemporary Britain”: An Analysis to a book called Neo-Fascism in Europe. (108) In this essay, Gable claimed that
Column 88 “has existed in this country since the war years”, (page 247); and
that the main reason John Tyndall was ousted from the leadership of the
National Front was that he had reneged on his oath of allegiance to Column 88,
into which he had been inducted at the age of nineteen, (page 260). Leaving
aside the fact that Tyndall resigned from the National Front and took with him
a core of members to form the New National Front (later the British National
Party), this is absolute nonsense.
The reader is invited to contrast these claims with the claim in the May
1978 issue of Searchlight which
claimed that Column 88 was formed around 1970. (109) An earlier Searchlight exposé reported that “Column
88 is a private army. It is illegal. There is no legitimate reason why it
should be allowed to continue.” (110)
Recall that Neo-Fascism In Europe
was published in 1991, yet only two years later, Searchlight was to proclaim that Column 88 was “a honey-trap
organisation controlled by British intelligence”. (111) The reader can decide
for himself which if any of Gable and Searchlight’s
lies deserves the most if any credence. (112)
Column 88, The Notting Hill Carnival Bomb Plot And
Another “Searchlight” Agent Provocateur
Nineteen eighty-one was an eventful year for the Searchlight team. The
death of Maurice Ludmer was both unpredicted and unavoidable, but the deaths of
perhaps dozens or even hundreds of people in a massacre at the Notting Hill
August Bank Holiday Carnival was thankfully averted due to the ultra-vigilance
of the magazine’s undercover agents. At least that is their version of the
story, but an examination of the facts as presented by them and the media over
the following months and years indicates otherwise.
At 10.25am on August 2, 1980, a bomb exploded at Bologna railway station
which left a staggering 85 people dead and 200 injured. This was the worst
terrorist atrocity in Europe since the end of World War Two, and naturally led
to widespread outrage and condemnation.
On July 14, 1988, four right wing extremists were convicted of the
bombing and jailed for life, but on July 18, 1990, their convictions were
quashed. (113) The truth about who really planted the Bologna bomb and why
remains and is likely forever to remain a mystery, but as well as outrage, the
bombing caused inspiration. In his 1988 book
The Other Face Of Terror, Ray Hill, who for a short time had been a leading
member of the British National Party, (114) recounts how he and his
puppetmaster Gerry Gable exposed the bomb plot and thus led to its abandonment.
Hill’s book does its best to implicate almost the entire far right in
Britain and Europe in the Bologna bombing, the Munich Oktoberfest bombing,
(115) and the supposedly aborted Notting Hill bomb plot. The story actually
first appeared as an exclusive on the front page of the Daily Mirror - a well-known Searchlight conduit - on July 21, 1981.
And on the front page of the August issue of Searchlight.
The
current writer has published an extensive critique of the Hill/Searchlight bomb
plot claims, (116) as has his fellow independent researcher Larry O’Hara. (117)
The fact that the Metropolitan Police took no action says it all. A potential
terrorist outrage which could have killed and injured dozens or hundreds of
innocent members of the public, black and white, as well as police officers,
(118) would surely have warranted serious attention from the forces of law and
order. If there had been the slightest substance to any of the claims made by
Ray Hill and his evil manipulators.
The Death Of Woolf Katz -
An Anti-Semitic Murder That Never Was
In 1966, two groups of young men were convicted at the Central Criminal
Court in relation to a series of arson attacks against London synagogues. On
February 15, Hugh Llewelyn Hughes and five others received sentences varying
from 6 months to 5 years. Hughes received the longest sentence; Paul Dukes, who
had shown genuine remorse for his involvement in the arson campaign, received
the shortest.
On April 5, the second group was sentenced. Hughes was the oldest of the
synagogue arsonists and in mitigation for the others it may be said that they
were more young and foolish than evil. The same thing cannot be said for the
person who incited them to commit their dastardly deeds. On January 17, 1968,
Mrs Françoise Jordan (neé Dior), the French heiress and former wife of the
British Nazi leader Colin Jordan, was gaoled for eighteen months for
conspiracy. Mrs Jordan had fled to her native France and was arrested on her
return to Britain. Françoise Jordan was a lifelong and quite fanatical
anti-Semite; although she denied any role in the arson campaign she stated
openly that she would like to see all synagogues burned by Act of Parliament.
(119)
The 1960s synagogue arsons were appalling acts of political terrorism,
but no one was killed during the campaign, and if anything can be said in
mitigation for the perpetrators, apart from their youthfulness and their naïveté,
it is that they appear to have gone to some lengths to ensure that they torched
only empty buildings.
In 1984, Harry Bidney died, and when his obituary appeared in Searchlight magazine, its author, Gerry
Gable, claimed that “His greatest success came in the mid-60s with the arrest
and conviction of 13 members of Colin Jordan’s and John Tyndall’s nazi groups
for a series of synagogue arsons. Harry broke the gang by persuading one of its
young members to give himself up to the police. At the Old Bailey the Judge at
one of the three trials praised the work of Harry and his colleagues in
stopping the arsonists - something the police had been completely unable to do
for over a year.” (120)
Who was Harry Bidney? According to Gable he was an heroic Jewish
“anti-fascist”. In fact, Bidney was a notorious street thug, one of the leaders
of the 43 Group, a mostly (but not exclusively) Jewish gang which waged a
violent campaign against “Fascists” in and around London after the Second World
War. The 43 Group was wound up in 1950 under pressure from the Jewish
establishment. (121) In 1962, the 43 Group was revived as the 62 Group (or 1962
Committee); Bidney was a leading light in this too; a youthful Gerry Gable was
also a member. (122)
What was Bidney’s actual role in bringing the synagogue arsonists to
justice? According to the case papers of the first trial, Paul Dukes appeared
at North London Magistrates Court for possessing an offensive weapon on October
25, 1965 where he was fined £10. After this court appearance, Dukes recognised
Bidney in the street, and, disillusioned with his handiwork, confessed to him.
Later, he surrendered himself to the police and when asked:
“Would you like to make a written
statement?”
He
replied: “Yes, that’s why I’m here.” He continued “I want to clear my
conscience and finish with that mob for good.” (123)
The current writer found no reference in the contemporary press - -
Jewish or otherwise - to any judicial praise for Harry Bidney or any of his
associates. The reader may draw his own conclusions.
He may also draw his own conclusions about the way this story has
metamorphosed, because in October 1987, Gable gave a now notorious interview to
the Jewish Chronicle, in which he
made no mention of Harry Bidney but instead took the credit for catching the
arson gangs himself, and he added for good measure that a trainee rabbi had
died in one of the attacks.
According to Gable, an unnamed yeshiva was torched in the small hours
killing a student, and “I stood in the burnt-out shell of that yeshiva at four
in the morning and made a private vow to get the people who’d done that”. Gable’s
“investigation” was said to have resulted in thirteen convictions.
The Jewish Chronicle reporter
who interviewed Gable parroted this story gullibly, but if he had taken the
trouble to dig into the paper’s own archive he would have found reports
relating to the actual fire which exposed Gable as a damned liar.
The Mesifta Talmudical College, Cazenove Road, Stamford Hill, in the
heart of Jewish London, went up in flames in November 1964. The fire left one
youth seriously injured, and 15 year old Woolf Katz dead. (124) According to
the fire brigade, there was no evidence of an incendiary device; the police too
were satisfied that there was no foul play. However, because of the nature of
the college, or because there had been Fascist activity in the area, or for any
of the usual reasons, gossip, etc, there were rumours that the fire had indeed
been set deliberately. These rumours were totally unfounded, and the
authorities went to considerable lengths to quash them.
The month after the fire, New Scotland Yard wrote to the local MP David
Weitzman to inform him that “Careful inquiries have been made into the
suggestions of suspected incendiarism consequent upon an outbreak of fire at
the above establishment. There is no evidence that any form of pseudo-fascist
or similar activity is present in the district, or that this incident was
perpetrated by any such local organisations.” (125) The documentation on the
accidental nature of the fire is substantial.
The current writer was refused access to the inquest file (which may not
be extant) because such documents are made available only to “properly
interested persons” (eg next of kin, the police, etc), but in a letter dated 12th
October 2000, Martin Leigh, Clerk to the Inner North London Coroner Dr S.M.T.
Chan, confirmed that:
...the inquest was held on 4th December 1964.
The cause of Volve Katz’s death was confirmed as “carbon monoxide poisoning due
to fire fumes” and the Coroner recorded a verdict of “accidental death”.
It could be concluded from the wording of the
verdict that the Coroner delivering it, having heard the evidence at the
inquest, did not consider that the deceased had been the victim of murder or
manslaughter.
End of story!
The first of the London arsons, at the Brondesbury Synagogue, which was
completely destroyed, did not take place until March 1965, a full four months
after the tragedy in Stamford Hill.
In March 1994 the current writer published a thoroughly documented exposé of Gable’s lies about this
mythical hate crime. In October of the same year I published a second, expanded
edition. I have continued to expose it as a lie, and Gable and his gang have
continued to perpetuate this lie.
For example, in March 1995, the Jewish
Chronicle interviewed Gable to celebrate Searchlight’s twentieth birthday - two decades of hatemongering! In
this article it was reported that during a two year period from 1962-4, no less
than thirty-four Jewish buildings were attacked, and that “A child died in one
of the attacks.” (126)
And later that same year, the Searchlight Educational Trust - part of
the Searchlight Organisation - published a large format “Community Handbook” called When Hate Comes To Town..., in
the Introduction to which it was
claimed that:
“In
1964 Searchlight appeared for the
first time in newspaper format as an occasional publication. Its research work
led to the arrests and convictions of neo-nazi terrorist gangs who had carried
out racial and antisemitic killings and firebombing campaigns.” (127)
In fact, four issues of a broadsheet called Searchlight were published from Spring 1965. The last issue,
undated, was published, apparently, in 1967. (128) The reader will note the
death of Woolf Katz has now become “racial and antisemitic killings”.
In the July 2000 issue of Searchlight,
this brazen lie was repeated yet again. This was a special issue devoted almost
entirely to David Copeland - the then recently convicted London nail-bomber. On
page 28 in an article entitled Nazi
terror is nothing new, it is claimed that the 1960s synagogue arsons had
left “one theological student dead and another with serious spinal injuries”.
And of course, the only reason the arsonists were arrested was as the result of
investigations by “a Searchlight
investigation team”. The student who allegedly suffered serious spinal injuries
was Judah Gottesman; when I spoke to him several years ago, Mr Gottesman - who
worked and as far as I know still works as a shochet (129) in Manchester - told
me he spent several weeks in hospital as a result of jumping out of a window
during the fire, and that thirty years on his injured leg still gave him some
trouble in the cold weather, but he never mentioned spinal injuries.
No doubt, Gerry Gable in particular and the Searchlight Organisation in
general will continue to lie unremittingly about how he and his fellow
“Searchlight intelligence officers” were responsible for solving the 1965
synagogue arsons. (130) But another person who didn’t think much of this claim
was the investigating officer. In 1995, the current writer saw retired
Commander Albert (Bert) Wickstead (now deceased) on a TV programme and wrote to
him in connection with the arsons case care of the Metropolitan Police pensions
department. He ignored my first letter but in response to my second he sent me
a handwritten missive dated “9TH April 1995” which reads as follows:
“Dear Mr. Baron,
I have received your letter asking for
information concerning one Harry Bidney.
As
far as I can remember I did not meet Bidney, if I did it must have been very
brief, because I have no recollection of the man.
Gerry
Gable I knew well, and he was extremely helpful throughout the whole Jordan
& Synagogue enquiry. As for my officers and I being incompetent, what utter
nonsense. We had to give evidence and present the case in Court. The fact that
we were commended by both the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Trial
Judge gives the lie to any scurrilous assertions.
I
have nothing further to say on this matter and do not want further
communication on the subject.”
Neither have I, so let’s move on.
Hate Crime Hoaxes Specific And General - Preamble
Having disposed of this notorious gang of mischief-makers and damned
liars, we will turn shortly to the perpetrators of specific hoaxes, usually of
a one-off nature. First though a few words of a more general nature to
illustrate to the reader the way hate crimes are whipped up out of thin air.
Unlike the Searchlight Organisation, not everyone who perpetuates the numerous
myths of hate crime hoaxes has a political or racial agenda. Some people do so
for personal or professional reasons, and this is something that is not limited
to hate crimes or even to crimes.
For example, the police and other law enforcement agencies often
exaggerate the risk of or the level of crime in order to justify higher
salaries for law enforcement officers, extension of police powers, and so on.
In other words they have a vested interest in the funding of crime prevention.
Likewise, doctors and medical people generally have a vested interest in
increasing funding for medicine, and so on. There is not necessarily any
all-encompassing conspiracy at work to con the public into believing we are all
about to be murdered in our beds, or to drop dead of cancer, but we should
learn to recognise vested interest when it is talking.
Journalists are one of the main perpetuators of hate crime hoaxes, often
for the same reason that they are great perpetuators of all manner of other
nonsense. Sensationalism sells, scandal sells, sex sells, so does crime, and so
does hate. Journalists often work under pressure, usually to meet deadlines.
Just as often they are lazy, and cut corners by relying on agenda-driven
special interest groups to provide them with their information - groups like
the Searchlight Organisation. They rush into print without bothering to check
their facts, and if the facts don’t fit, well, why let the facts stand in the
way of a good story? Man bites dog is news; dog bites man is dull; and nobody
bites anybody is less than dull, it is no news, and no sales. One of the
easiest ways of hoaxing the public is by spouting statistics at them.
Bogus Statistics As Hate Crime Hoaxes
There are two well known aphorisms
concerning statistics:
“There are lies, damned lies and
statistics.”
and
“Figures don’t lie, but liars can
figure.”
Statistics used correctly can be
extremely useful; without statistics, civilisation as we know it would not
exist. In isolation and out of context though they mean very little, and when
used incorrectly, or mendaciously, they can be used to prove almost anything.
The dogma of political correctness is based largely on the mendacious use of
statistics. They are frequently used to create the appearance of bias,
discrimination, and, bore, bore, racism,
where none exists.
Nobody in his right mind would claim that the judiciary discriminates
against young men by virtue of the fact that most judges, and all High Court
judges, are on the wrong side of forty. Most people accept the fact that
judges, who hold positions of great power and authority, should be men and
women of mature years and therefore (hopefully) of greater understanding of the
law.
The fact that a particular county has a higher than national average
death rate does not mean necessarily that it is an unhealthy place to live. It
may simply be that it has a large elderly population; if many people prefer to
retire to the seaside, then one should expect a higher than average death rate
in Eastbourne than in say Peterborough.
It is not necessary to doctor statistics in order to abuse them, but
nowhere are statistics more doctored or more abused than in the race industry,
where very few or even no reports of racial attacks are used as evidence of
widespread racial intolerance. How about this for starters?
In November 1999, the black newspaper the Voice announced the launch of a campaign to combat the mythical
disease of rural racism. This,
according to Jon McKenzie, is particularly bad in the South West where he
lives. In support of this assertion, Mr McKenzie comes out with this gem:
“Another
problem is the huge under-reporting of race incidents...Because Black people
are afraid to come forward, the police never know about the racial harassment
they suffer and therefore assume there is not a problem.” (131)
In other words there have been no - or precious few - reports of racial
abuse, harassment, attacks, etc, in rural areas, therefore racial antipathy
must be rampant! It is widely accepted that rape is a much under-reported crime, and doubtless there are many other real crimes which are likewise
under-reported for all manner of reasons - petty thefts, trivial assaults, and
so on - but any and all attempts to estimate the extent of any unreported
crime(s) is whistling in the dark. It is reasonable to assume that some racial
attacks, racial harassment, etc, go unreported, but it is manifestly not reasonable
without good reason to assume that
there is a problem here, county-wide or
nationwide in scope, and that people are not reporting such incidents because
they are afraid to come forward.
The prosaic truth about rural racism
is that it is largely non-existent, as reflected in the lack of reported
racially motivated attacks and other incidents in rural areas.
140,000 Racial Attacks A Year?
In 1994, the Advertising Standards Authority rejected a complaint made
by the Freedom Association against the Anti-Racist Alliance over an
advertisement in the national press. The advertisement read:
“In
Britain, racist violence is on the increase, and there are more than 140,000
racist attacks a year.” These “attacks” were said to include “threats” and “damage
to property”. The figure was said to have come from the Home Office. (132)
Does this mean that Britain is awash with bigotry and violence? No. This
Home Office figure is an extrapolation, and a particularly meaningless one at
that. In 1989, a far more accurate figure was put forward in a Home Office
report; based on real statistics gathered by the Metropolitan Police, the
contrast is staggering.
In 1986, there were 48 reported serious assaults on white-skinned
Europeans; 38 on Afro-Caribbeans; 132 on Asians. There were seven ethnic
categories in all, including unknown (For some reason they are labelled 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, and 9).
There were nine incidents of leafletting in which the victims (sic) were
white; nine in which the victims (sic) were Afro-Caribbean and nine in which
the victims (sic) were Asians. Other categories of “attacks” listed included SLOGAN WRITING and DISPUTES. (133)
If these figures are typical - and bear in mind that London has a larger
population of ethnic minorities than anywhere else in the country - then how is
one to reconcile this with the ARA claim of 140,000 racially motivated
“attacks” a year, a figure which the Home Office is said to endorse?
As I said, such figures are extrapolations, perhaps lies would be a better
word. They are plucked out of thin air and thrown around with gay abandon. They
make good press - sensationalism; and serve all manner of other purposes,
including keeping the shekels flowing into the coffers of organisations like
the Anti-Racist Alliance.
The above examples, especially the nonsense about rural racism, should give the reader an
insight into the way statistics on racial issues, particularly violence but
also “discrimination”, are gerrymandered by the venal, the indolent and the
gullible. The bulk of the rest of this monograph is devoted to a study of more
specific hate crime hoaxes in Britain. We begin with the earliest the current
writer has been able to trace.
A Fascist Outrage That Never Was
In the 1930s, Sir Oswald Mosley, a charismatic politician who had
supported both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party, founded first his
“New Party” and then the British Union of Fascists. (134) At first Mosley
enjoyed a certain amount of Jewish support and in fact went out of his way to
build bridges with British Jewry, but some Jews had other ideas, and both Jews
and Communists (with a great deal of overlap) declared war on Mosley’s
movement. At first Mosley ignored these attacks, but eventually he reacted by
excluding Jews from the party and then finally allowing (and very likely
covertly encouraging) rowdier elements to take over. (135) Although Mosley
himself was never personally anti-Semitic when - as he saw it - Organised Jewry
declared war on British Fascism - he had no qualms about using anti-Semitism as
a political device. This was clearly a case of giving a dog and bad name. But
although this dog did indeed bite, Mosley’s and Fascism’s opponents were not
content with portraying their enemy in a bad light, they had to lie and
fabricate about them as well.
In March 1937, Reynolds News,
(136) reported that: “A brick thrown through the upper window of a Jewish
worker’s home only just missed killing a tiny infant sleeping in a cot. The
babe escaped by inches.” This story, which was attributed to a Reynolds
correspondent, (137) does contain one element of truth; there was unrest in the
wake of the defeat of Fascist candidates in the London County Council
elections, which is part of this report.
The same canard appeared in the Jewish
Chronicle two weeks later, here it was reported that the victim (ie the
householder), was a non-Jew. (138) The baby was said to have been nine months
old.
So what really happened? Documentation on this incident - or perhaps one
should say non-incident - is held by the Public Record Office in the MEPO
series; (139) this story was one of many “protests” which found its way into
the Corridors of Power. Several such protests were said to have been made by
MPs and by the National Council of [sic] Civil Liberties. Some of these
allegations were substantiated, but this certainly wasn’t one of them.
In the police report there is no suggestion that the worker concerned
was Jewish, his name was George Lynch, and he was employed by the council as a
street scavenger. Mr Lynch was a member of the Labour Party, an active
anti-Fascist, and appears to have been a serial complainer as well.
The police investigation established that the window was indeed broken.
A two inch piece of granite was said to have come through it at the time. Mr
Lynch said the account which had appeared in the two newspapers had been
exaggerated, and he was not happy with the NCCL man on account of this.
The window though was about forty feet from the ground and ten by six
inches, ie very small. According to the police report:
“Examination reveals that only a small
stone could have broken it. Whoever threw the stone could not have taken a
deliberate aim at the window.”
It was suggested that the real target was a
Labour election board displayed below it.
“...by no stretch of the imagination
could it have been done with intent to injure the child in the cot.”
The report continues: “Lynch thought so
little of the incident at the time, that he did not even take the trouble to
report the matter to the Police, and we have only his word - and his wife’s -
that the window was broken in the manner alleged.” (140)
Reading between the lines, the police
didn’t believe his account. (141) This may be uncharitable, but assuming that
Mr Lynch was telling the gospel truth, the story easily qualifies as an early,
racially motivated hate crime hoax.
From Brick Through Window To Child Through Window
Nearly forty years later, the brick
through the window by the wicked fascists story reappeared in none other than Searchlight magazine where it was
claimed in a new twist that in October 1936, a group of fascists had hurled a
young girl through a plate glass window. (142) It remains to be seen how many
times this lie has been parroted in various forms over the years. (143)
Another Fascist Attack
A report of an alleged attack by Fascists on an innocent man is
contained in the same Public Record Office file as the “brick in the baby’s
cot” incident. The report was filed from the same division and resulted from
the same “protests”. The alleged victim was Albert Frederick Law, apparently a
Gentile. He was distributing a Labour newspaper The Citizen (apparently shoving it through people’s doors late at
night). (144)
He reported that at 10.10pm on February 10, 1937 while in the company of
two other men he had sustained a bruise over the left eye when he was assaulted
by six men, apparently Fascists. He could give no description of the men. He
was alleged to be “still carrying the marks on his body” when seen Sunday,
March 7, by an NCCL rep.
Law didn’t seek medical attention at the time, which would tend to
undermine the above claim, but he did report the alleged assault the same
night. Later though there was some genuine confusion over when the assault was
reported. Reading between the lines in this incident, the police doubted that
the assault happened, at least in the manner described.
But Were They Fascists?
Another MEPO file relating to the same subject contains documentation on
an attack about a year before the Law and Lynch incidents, an attack which
undoubtedly did happen. This attack though had an interesting twist to it. A
Special Branch report dated 2nd March 1936 records that the previous
month, two North London Jewish youths - who were cousins - were set upon by a
group of men they believed to be Blackshirts.
The report says that:
“Neither
of the youths has a typical Jewish appearance” and the lighting at the time
would cause further identification difficulties for any would-be attackers.
The
father of one of the youths suggested that because of the dark clothing they
were wearing at the time they had really been attacked by “anti-fascists” who
mistook them for Blackshirts!
The report concludes:
The
fact that the father of the writer of the letter...should put forward such a
theory shows that the family entertains considerable doubt that the alleged
assault was committed by “Blackshirts”, or fascist sympathisers. (145)
A Modern Anti-Semitic Non-Outrage
In 1992, the Trotskyite newspaper Socialist
Worker reported that the Anti Nazi League (146) had organised a march in
which three hundred and fifty “anti-fascists” led a “lively and angry
demonstration through the centre of Brighton last Saturday”. They then stood
outside the cemetery gates and observed a two minute silence for the victims of
the Holocaust. (147) This was in protest at the desecration of a Jewish
cemetery with swastikas. The rally was addressed by Brighton’s Jewish mayor.
But the normally wailing and gnashing of teeth Jewish Chronicle was far from impressed, probably because the
swastikas were said to have been removed by the cemetery’s gardener. The
punchline is that the cemetery didn’t employ a gardener! (148)
Black Propaganda Against Nazi Germany,
And Against Mosley
The 1930s saw the rise of Nazism. Because of the persecution of the Jews
under the Nazis - which was real enough - and because of the subsequent
revelations about the Nazi concentration camps, there has been a tendency since
the end of the Second World War to take any and all allegations of Nazi
atrocities at face value. This wasn’t always the case though. In April 1933,
the Jewish Chronicle reported that
“...certain Jewish organisations abroad circulated exaggerated atrocity
stories” about Nazi Germany. (149)
As with many atrocity stories, it is difficult if not impossible to
determine how much substance specific allegations against the Nazis had. We do
know though that during the Second World War the British Government operated a
covert “black operations” outfit called the Psychological Warfare Executive.
This organisation was liquidated immediately after the war and an archivist was
engaged “to destroy rather than preserve”. (150)
Two men who worked for the PWE wrote revealing autobiographies: Denis
Sefton Delmer (1904-79) and Ellic Howe (1910-91). (151) To what extent black
propaganda episodes can be considered hate crime hoaxes is more of a
philosophical issue than an empirical one. There are two quotes the reader
might like to bear in mind though. Delmer wrote in Black Boomerang that “...the simplest and most effective of all ‘black’
operations is to spit in a man’s soup and cry ‘Heil Hitler!’” A quarter of a century before he wrote these
words, Sir Oswald Mosley warned in the Blackshirt
against violent anti-Semitic propagandists thus:
“Some
do this in perfect good faith and honesty, and thus unconsciously help the
enemies of their cause. Others, no doubt, as the struggle develops, will
actually be employed, often unknowingly, by those very clever people, the big
Jews, to make wild and foolish attacks upon Jews in general, in order to
discredit anti-Semitism.” (152)
For several examples of professional if
rather unsophisticated Jewish hate propaganda - including hate crime hoaxes -
the reader is referred to the mischief-making of the Searchlight Organisation
discussed by the writer in this monograph (above), and in many of his other
publications.
“Official” Black Propaganda In
Peacetime
It has often been said that the first casualty of war is truth, this
applies as much to the “war on crime” as to any other war. (153) In the 1950s,
the American FBI launched its Counterintelligence Program against domestic
“extremists”. (154)
Groups targeted included the Ku Klux Klan and later the Black Panthers,
etc. The full extent of COINTELPRO and the quality of its operations is a
matter of debate and will probably never be known. Some people - mostly on the
left - claim that it was extremely extensive and imply that virtually every
rift in every left wing or “radical” organisation from year dot to the present
day has resulted from the dirty work of COINTELPRO. (155) Others regard the FBI’s
operations as rather amateurish. (156) As usual the truth is probably somewhere
in between. But leaving aside the war-time operations of Sefton Delmer and his
gang, the question needs to be asked: have and do the British authorities
operate such scams? And if the answer to this question is yes, do they operate
them in the field of race agitation/hate crime hoaxes?
The answer has to be yes, but finding evidence much less proof of such
dirty dealings is another thing entirely. Probably the best we can do is infer
the existence of such operations from some of the well-documented scams practised
by the security services in Northern Ireland. (157) In 1997, a man named Liam
Townson was gaoled for life in Ireland for the May 1977 murder of Captain
Robert Nairac, an undercover SAS officer.
In order to build up his false ID, Nairac had worked undercover in
London as a casual labourer to pick up an Irish accent and knowledge of the
building trade. He had been transferred to Ulster in 1974 when the SAS was not
officially operating there. The army denied he was in the SAS; (158) he was
listed as serving with a different regiment. (159) Undercover operations by
police (and possibly other agencies) in the far right would be both easier to
mount and less dangerous. Now let us return to some concrete examples of hate
crime hoaxes.
The Murder Of Lee Harvey -
A Racially Motivated “Road Rage” Hoax
(160)
On December 1, 1996, 25 year old Lee Harvey and his mistress Tracie
Andrews (161) were involved in a motoring incident which led to Harvey being
stabbed to death. Andrews was a single mother, and her live-in lover Harvey was
the father of one of her children; both she and Harvey were white, although the
dark complexioned Harvey was sometimes mistaken for a non-white.
According to Andrews, the only eyewitness, Harvey was stabbed to death
by an enraged motorist who branded him a “Paki bastard”. Possibly because
Harvey was white the racial aspect of the case was played down by the media; it
was reported widely as a “road rage” murder rather than as a racist one, road rage being highly
fashionable at the time. (162) Harvey’s murder was said to have been the fifth
such fatal attack that year. (163)
Andrews made a public appeal for information about the killer, and as is
so often the case, went on to be arrested herself and charged with his murder.
She was first arrested December 7 as she left a hospital where she had been
treated for taking an overdose. The implication at the time and later was that
she had been suffering from a guilty conscience. Andrews was finally charged
with her lover’s murder at 10pm on December 19. (164) Initially she was
remanded in custody but was subsequently granted bail.
The trial of Tracie Andrews for the murder of Lee Harvey opened at
Birmingham Crown Court on June 30, 1997. She pleaded not guilty and maintained her
story about the mysterious attacker who was never traced, a “fat man with
staring eyes”.
However, even though the murder weapon was never found, the case against
Andrews was very strong; not only did forensic evidence point to her, but a girl
had heard the couple arguing, though she couldn’t positively identify a woman’s
voice. Andrews also had a proven propensity for violence.
Although he clearly didn’t believe her, the judge in his summing up gave
a direction on provocation, ie he invited the jury to find Andrews guilty of
manslaughter as an alternative to guilty of murder or not guilty. This was most
unusual because both the prosecution and the defence had made their positions
clear. The victim had suffered more than thirty wounds, so the attack had
clearly been frenzied. The jury of nine women and three men didn’t believe
Andrews either, and on July 29, 1997, she was sentenced to life imprisonment,
still protesting her innocence.
At her appeal in October 1998, no mention was made of her fairy tale
about the overweight assassin; her Counsel argued simply that she should have
been convicted of manslaughter. (165) The sole ground for her appeal appears to
have been prejudicial pre-trial publicity. Among other things it was claimed
she had been portrayed as a “female terrorist” and “a firebrand”. The Crown
argued that she had courted the very publicity she was now complaining about.
The Court of Appeal concurred, and her appeal was rightly dismissed. (166) It
was not until April 1999 that Andrews finally confessed to the murder, in a
letter from Bulwood Prison published in a Sunday newspaper. (167)
Although the murder of Lee Harvey will go down in history as a crime of
passion, if Andrews had been able to destroy more of the forensic evidence, it
is quite likely that it would have been quoted widely in the years to come as a
racially motivated road rage attack.
Black Gang Falsely Accused Of Murder
Black muggers and street gangs are real enough, but they rarely murder
young girls - white or otherwise - for no rational motive. A potential hate
crime hoax involving one such mythical gang was the brutal and senseless murder
of a sixteen year old girl by an “obsessive boyfriend”. The murder of Carol
Sanderson received no extensive media coverage, and I noticed it only because a
report of the trial appeared in my local newspaper.
In December 2000, 24 year old Christopher Levey was convicted of the
murder and sentenced to life imprisonment:
“Levey,
24, denied the charges saying the couple had just had sex in the park and were
tidying up when a gang of black youths pounced on him, holding him down while
they dragged Ms Sanderson off.” (168)
She died three days after the attack. Her body had been found in the
undergrowth. The court heard that Levey had attacked a previous girlfriend when
she refused to have sex with him. (169)
Obviously, Levey concocted this cock and bull story only as an
afterthought, and although it is unclear from the brief press report how much
credence the police gave it, it is difficult to believe they ever took it
seriously, but as in the other cases cited here, it had the potential to cause
unwarranted racial animosity.
A Bomb Hoax
In the Spring of 1999, a psychopath
named David Copeland planted a series of nail bombs in London. The first
exploded in Brixton, an area well known to be “black”; the following week a
second bomb was planted in Brick Lane, which has a large Bangladeshi
population; the third was planted in a Soho public house known to be frequented
by homosexuals, and was the only bomb to cause loss of life. Copeland was
convicted of causing all three explosions at the Central Criminal Court in July
2000 and gaoled for life. He was picked up on closed circuit television
planting the Brixton bomb, and the police worked frantically to track him down,
eventually catching him after tip offs from the public, most notably from a
workmate.
Copeland worked alone and held most of the far right in contempt. In the
wake of the Brixton bombing however, there was obviously much speculation that
some sort of terrorist organisation was responsible, particularly a group
calling itself the “White Wolves”. The only thing that is known about this
group is that it has in the past distributed highly inflammatory literature
anonymously. There is no meaningful evidence that the group itself exists, and
its hate mail may be the work of one individual. As nothing is known about this
group, nothing meaningful can be adduced about its motivations. The police, and
others, doubtless, received calls and letters from many cranks claiming
responsibility. At least one of them was brought to book. His name was Mark
Ramos and he was described as the offspring of an Irish Catholic mother and an
Indian father. Incredibly, he escaped with a fine. The Daily Telegraph
reported that “A STUDENT who sent race-hate mail
claiming responsibility for the Brixton nail bomb and threatening further
attacks...” was fined £650 apparently under the Malicious Communications Act. The letters were supposed to have
come from Combat 18; they were sent to Southall Monitoring Group and Talk
Radio. (170)
Mr Ramos should count his blessings; three
and a half years earlier, a hoaxer who claimed to have planted a bomb the day
after an IRA outrage was gaoled for four years! (171)
An Unseemly Desecration
In August 1999, Doreen Lawrence, the mother of murdered black teenager
Stephen Lawrence, was interviewed by the Daily
Mirror newspaper in Jamaica where she had taken her son’s body out of fear
that his grave might be desecrated. This was no idle speculation, because the
previous February the memorial which had been erected to the unfortunate youth was desecrated. Not for the first time.
The police came in for renewed criticism because a CCTV camera that had been
trained on the site turned out to have been empty! When the memorial was
defaced, one senior police officer was quoted thus: “Only sick and racist
people would do something like this in London”. The Government was unhappy too,
and it was reported that “Last night the Home Secretary called for the incident
to be seen as proof of the need to drive out racism.”
Local residents were less enthusiastic, one quoted in the same article
said he wasn’t surprised by the desecration because the Lawrences and blacks
were seen as getting special treatment. (172) At this time many ordinary decent
white people were indeed becoming more than a little tired with the media’s
incessant harping on about racism and
“institutional racism”. However, it
was not, apparently, a racist nor
even a white person with a grudge, who desecrated the memorial. On March 7,
1999, the Sunday press reported that a 15 year old youth of “mixed race” was
arrested and bailed over the defacing of the Stephen Lawrence memorial plaque
after it had been daubed with white paint. (173)
Unfortunately, because of the age of the suspect, further reporting was
killed. There is a lesson to be learned here though, this is that if the
accused youth had been white, this minor outrage would not necessarily have
been racially motivated. The world is full of sick people, people who like to
stir things up, and teenagers of all races who are capable of behaving
reprehensibly, and who will hopefully grow out of this sort of thing in due
course.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
“Jewish Lightning?”
Years ago, the current writer heard a very politically incorrect joke on
an early evening TV comedy programme that would probably cause howls of outrage
and demands for the prosecution of the offending comedian were it to be related
nowadays. It went something like this:
“Manny, I heard your warehouse burnt
down.”
“Shh, tomorrow night.”
Such “Jewish lightning” (174) is a staple of anti-Semitic folklore;
whether or not it has any basis in fact remains to be seen, but it is one of
life’s little ironies that urban legends are sometimes strangely prophetic.
(175) A genuine example of Jewish
lightning occurred when 45 year old Jewish businessman Mauro Weingarten hired
32 year old Terry Dixon to burn down his factory in an insurance scam. Dixon
was black, and the sight of a black man in an isolated Scottish village aroused
suspicion, if not racism.
The police arrived as Dixon was leaving the building after setting the
blaze, and the link between them was cemented by Weingarten paying for Dixon’s
hire car with his credit card! Both men admitted fire raising and criminal
damage but denied conspiracy to defraud. They were bailed pending sentence.
(176) Dixon was later sentenced to two years probation and two hundred hours
community service; Weingarten was sentenced to three hundred hours community
service. (177) Curiously, this story was not reported in either the Jewish Chronicle or the Voice,
though had Dixon not been caught it is odds-on that the former would
have reported this as yet another example of the rising tide of anti-Semitism.
Mr Bashir’s “Asian Lightning”
Mohammed Bashir, who ran a shop in Newcastle called Cut-Price Mini Market, told police he was being targeted by white
youths “who taunted and abused his family”. Two weeks later his store was blown
up.
On June 12, 2000, Mr Bashir pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit arson
along with his 19 year old son and 36 year old Alan Stewart. [A multi-racial
partnership?] (178)
Bashir, who had recently moved from Huddersfield with his family,
claimed to have been targetted unremittingly “From the moment I arrived in
Newcastle”. He said his family had endured “five months of sheer hell”. While
investigating the arson attack, the police discovered he had taken out an
insurance policy on his shop shortly before. (179) Something that is always to
be regarded with suspicion! His motive appears to have been purely financial.
When Bashir was gaoled for six years in July 2000, he warranted a short
paragraph in the Times, in contrast
to the masses of publicity the alleged racially motivated arson received. His
son Umran received three years’ youth custody. (180) I could find no mention of
the trial,
conviction or sentencing of Mr Bashir in the Asian Times for the two weeks following, although to be fair the arson
attacks don’t appear to have been reported by this paper either.
From Arson To Self-Immolation:
Two Similar - And Shocking - Hate Crime Hoaxes
While Mr Bashir’s supermarket arson conspiracy must have come as a bit
of a shock to people who’d seen this poor man relating his tale of woe to a
sympathetic media, the crime of arson, although extremely serious, (181) doesn’t
cause public revulsion when there is no threat to life. Setting people on fire
though is a different matter entirely, so it is all the more shocking when
people set themselves on fire.
In April 2000, Chris Barton, a youth said to be “of mixed-race”, claimed
to have been sprayed with petrol, set ablaze, and called a Paki bastard. (182)
This was, clearly, a racially motivated attack. Or that was what it looked
like, but on April 13, the Sun
newspaper in what was billed as an exclusive, reported that the seventeen year
old unemployed Barton had been arrested along with two older men in connection
with an insurance swindle. (183)
The following September, Barton’s photograph appeared in a big story in
the Daily Mail when, after
maintaining his innocence, he changed his plea to guilty on the first day of
his trial for wasting police time. The stipendiary magistrate lifted a ban on
the reporting of the case. Barton, now eighteen, and said to be of “West Indian
origin”, had led with his hoax story to the setting up of road blocks and house
to house inquiries. And, undoubtedly, to a certain amount of consternation
among the non-white denizens of Oxfordshire. As well as trying to shift the
lion’s share of the blame onto an older accomplice, Barton was said to have
sold his story for four hundred pounds! (184)
Three weeks later, Barton was sent to a young offenders’ institution for
three months and ordered to pay four hundred pounds compensation. At the time
of the hoax, Barton, whose father, apparently, is white, was said to have been
on bail for “theft, handling stolen goods and driving offences”. (185)
The month following Barton’s hoax, a similar attack hit the headlines,
this too turned out to be a hoax. On May 2, the Guardian reported that “Police are hunting three white men who
yesterday sprayed a 24-year-old black man with inflammable fluid and then set
him on fire in a racist attack in Birmingham.”
The unidentified victim was said to have been subjected to racial abuse
during the incident and to have suffered 10% burns to his face and right arm.
He was in intensive care at Selly Oak Hospital. The police were quoted, and
obviously they were none too pleased. Detective Chief Inspector Neil James
appealed for witnesses saying: “It was a vicious, unprovoked attack, which
quite frankly is very sickening. It would appear he was walking home after
visiting a friend when he was attacked by three men. One of them sprayed a
substance in his face and set it alight.”
Forensic tests were being carried out to determine the liquid used.
(186) The forensic tests were unnecessary though; the police could simply have
asked the “victim” what substance he’d used because on May 18, the Daily Telegraph reported that:
“A
BLACK man who claimed he was set on fire by racist thugs has been arrested for
allegedly making up the attack, detectives said yesterday.
They believe Ashley Cane, 24, who was treated
for burns to his face and arms after the alleged attack in Northfield,
Birmingham, on May 1, may have been injured while setting fire to a stolen
car.”
Cane and two other people, a man and a woman both aged twenty-eight,
were charged with wasting police time and conspiracy to defraud.
Another Case Of Self-Immolation?
The Sad Tale Of Michael Menson
In addition to the chimera of institutional racism, the Stephen Lawrence case raised the question of police
competence, or the lack thereof. Anyone who has studied this case though and
who knows something about police procedure, especially in relation to murder
investigations, will conclude that any errors made by the investigating team
were of a relatively minor nature. The same cannot be said of those investigating
the murder of another young black man, one who didn’t have the same appeal of
Stephen Lawrence as a martyr to the wicked racists.
On January 28, 1997, thirty year old Michael Menson, a black musician
who had at one time been fairly successful commercially, was set on fire in a
North London street. He died from organ failure on February 13. Menson was
suffering from schizophrenia, and because of this, when he told the police that
he’d been attacked, they dismissed his claims and simply assumed that he’d set
himself on fire. Self-immolation, especially in a public place, is extremely
rare, but there have been cases. In January 1969, a 21 year old Czech
philosophy student named Jan Palach made world headlines when he burned himself
to death in protest at the August 1968 Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. And
in Britain in 1995, the “anti-racist”
magazine CARF reported the case of a
homeless 19 year old Ethiopian who set himself alight at a petrol station and
later died from his injuries. (187)
In
the Menson case, the initial insistence of the police on the victim’s
responsibility for his own death didn’t wash with his family, and they
campaigned long and hard to have the case re-opened and a proper investigation
mounted. Once a belated crime scene investigation had ruled out self-immolation
it was assumed that the victim had been torched by a racist gang. On January 18, 1999, Michael Menson’s elder sister,
Alex, an advertising executive, published a long article in the Daily Mail in which she blamed her
brother’s murder - without any evidence - on “A Gang Of White Youths”. (188)
In view of her loss she can be forgiven for this outburst. Others should
have been more circumspect, for example, in March 1999, the same newspaper
asserted that “DETECTIVES believe they are close to arresting the white thugs
suspected of the race-hate murder of black musician Michael Menson.” (189)
Interestingly, Alex Menson’s article reveals that she and her brother
came from a privileged family; Michael Kobina Menson was born in Moscow on July
19, 1966, the son of a Ghanaian diplomat. (190)
Once the Menson case had been re-opened, the police left no stone
unturned; the man put in charge of the investigation was John Grieve, who has
made a name for himself by making asinine statements about so-called racism, and other antics, but on this
occasion at least he proved that he has some uses. The killers of Michael
Menson were shortly brought to book, and whatever the alleged racial motive,
this was not a crime that could be laid at the door of the British National
Party (as the far left attempted to do with the murder of Stephen Lawrence).
His killers were Mario Pereira (191) who was gaoled for life for the
murder, and Charalambous Constantinou, who received twelve years including ten
years for manslaughter. Husseyin Abdullah aged 50 and by far the oldest of
those charged in connection with the murder, did not actually take part in the
attack but was gaoled for 21 months for perverting the course of justice.
(Prior to the trial of these three men, Ozgay Cevat, who had fled to Northern
Cyprus, was gaoled for 14 years in that country for manslaughter). The trial
judge said that although Pereira had used what might be termed “racist
language” he couldn’t be sure the case was racially motivated. (192)
Michael Menson was indeed the victim of both an heinous and callous
crime, and of prejudice, but the prejudice concerned here was not racial but
social. He was murdered by a gang of thugs who, although not exactly white,
thought it was a right laugh (193) to set a mentally ill man on fire in the
street and to watch him scream in terror as his body was consumed by the
flames.
Chris Cotter - An Insane Act Of Self-Inflicted Wounding
Chris Cotter was an athlete. As well as being white he was the boyfriend
of black track star Ashia Hansen. (194) When he was the victim of an appalling
knife attack by up to five white men in which he lost a considerable quantity
of blood, the police announced that the attack was being treated as racially
motivated. Shortly though, Cotter himself was arrested, and the police said
“they were no longer treating the incident as racist”. (195)
A year later, Cotter stood trial at Birmingham Crown Court and was
convicted along with his co-defendants. As well as faking the attack on himself
he had sent hate mail to his former girlfriend, apparently to cover his tracks.
He was said to have been obsessed with Hansen, and motivated primarily in his
perverse actions by a desire to win her back; he was cleared of trying to sell
the story to a national newspaper. Cotter was gaoled for two years; his
co-defendants, Craig Wynn and Surjit Singh Clair, were gaoled for two years and
three years respectively. (196)
When In Doubt, Blame “Racists”: The Reel Case
On the evening of October 14, 1997, twenty year old Lakhvinder (Ricky)
Reel and three Asian friends went out drinking at Kingston, Surrey. During the
course of the evening, there was an incident involving this group and two white
youths. The four Asians broke up and three of them regrouped. On October 21,
the body of the fourth member of the group, Lakhvinder Reel, was found in the
River Thames. That much is known. The rest is a matter of speculation,
intelligent speculation on the part of the police, wild speculation on the part
of the Reel family, and especially on the part of the victim’s mother, Sukhdev.
The best evidence indicates that the unfortunate young man fell into the
river while urinating. A briefing on the case posted to the website of the
self-styled National Civil Rights Movement claims that the alleged victims of
this so-called “racial incident” were in real danger and “Fearing for their
lives they fled.”
A cynic, or even someone with a little critical faculty, might reason
that two against four is not good odds, and that as there was no mention of a
weapon being used, this “racial incident” has been blown up out of all
proportion, and that more likely it was simply an encounter between two groups
of youths who were out drinking, whoever was to blame.
An inquest into the death of the unfortunate teenager was opened at
Fulham, London, in November 1999. The police argued that a verdict of
accidental death should be recorded, but the jury returned an open verdict, which
given the lack of information about the actual circumstances of the death seems
to be eminently sensible, but of course this in no way vindicates the
persistent and at times shrill claims of Sukhdev Reel that her son was
murdered, claims that will undoubtedly continue for the indefinite future.
(197)
When In Doubt, Blame “Racists”: The Telford Two
Just as there is no meaningful evidence that Lakhvinder Reel was
murdered, so is there no meaningful evidence that the so-called Telford Two
were murdered, in fact what evidence there is indicates that no one else was
involved in the deaths of either Errol McGowan or Jason McGowan, and that the
similarity of their deaths was simply a bizarre coincidence. It’s a pity the Independent newspaper didn’t do its
homework before raising the cry of racism.
This is another widely reported case, the aforementioned Independent and the usual suspects (ie the left wing press and
“anti-racist” groups) have made a lot
of noise about it, but as in most such cases they are long on speculation,
short on facts.
Harold “Errol” McGowan, a thirty-four year old black man from Telford
who had worked as a doorman, was found dead July 2, 1999; his nephew Jason,
aged twenty, was found dead on New Year’s Day 2000. Both men had been hanged.
Harold’s body was found in a house; Jason’s in the street. It didn’t take long
for the rumour mill to start - something which under the circumstances was
hardly surprising - but the idea that Telford, which is 96% white, is a
stronghold either of the Ku Klux Klan or of racially aggravated violence, is
simply not tenable. It remains to be seen how much of the racial abuse that was
allegedly directed at both men prior to their deaths can be substantiated, but
the solicitor Imran Khan and the
well known London “anti-racist” activist Suresh Grover were quick to jump in on the act, so
such allegations must be treated with extreme reserve. (198)
In April 2000, the Voice,
which styles itself “BRITAIN’S BEST BLACK PAPER”, reported on its front page
that IT WAS MURDER. The headline was
billed as an exclusive, but the actual story, which appeared on an inside page,
was less clear. The police were said to be following more than 80 lines of
inquiry. (199)
Two months prior to this so-called exclusive though, a related story
which appeared in The Mail On Sunday
had added a further bizarre twist to this already bizarre tale. The Telford Two
was actually The Telford Three! Another man had been found dead some seven
months before Errol McGowan and in similar circumstances, and this time the
victim was white.
The thirty-eight year old Paul Hotchkiss appears to have been a bit of a
hard case; he was extremely fit and had trained doormen and taught
self-defence. Hotchkiss was found dead November 30, 1998; the inquest into his
death was March 1999. (200)
Other, and probably no more reliable rumours, were that the deaths of
the three men were drug rather than race related. Jason McGowan’s father (who
is white) believes his son committed suicide. (201) The Independent revealed that Jason McGowan had made a complaint
against the police weeks before his death, and that he had been arrested over
an incident in a night club in which he’d apparently been taunted over his
uncle’s death. By a Pakistani! (202)
At the inquest into Errol McGowan’s death, a Home Office scientist named
Roger Ide scotched suggestions of foul play. Ide, a specialist in knots and
ligatures, carried out a simulation which led him to more or less rule out
murder. (203) On July 6, 2001, after sitting for five weeks and hearing
sixty-two witnesses, an inquest jury returned a verdict of suicide.
The following day the victim’s elder brother
was quoted thus: “I personally was not surprised by this verdict from an
all-white jury from the misinformation the police have given them. If he did
take his life, obviously it’s quite clear from evidence given here he was
driven to it by racists.” (204)
The evidence indicated that McGowan “had
become the victim of a racist hate campaign in his job as a pub doorman.”
Even the Telford Coroner got in on the act saying : “For this community
and each and every part of it the lessons are clear. The obscenity of racial
abuse and harassment must be rooted out”. (205)
On page 4 of the same report it is stated that “The Times has established five similar hangings over 25 months
involving a small community of people close to members of the McGowan family.”
There was certainly a fourth such mysterious death, the victim was again
black, and incredibly also a part-time doorman. Forty-four year old Johny
Elliot Junior was found hanged in his Telford flat in May. There were no
apparent signs that he was suicidal. His elderly father was understandably
distraught. He said there was a drugs link, maybe. (206)
On February 18, 2002, a jury returned a
verdict of suicide. The case was widely reported; to take one example, the
report that appeared in the Independent the
following day said that the victim had repeatedly warned of threats to his
life. This could indicate genuine concerns, or it could indicate mental
illness. Needless to say, neither the victim’s family nor the usual vested
interests were satisfied. It is of course understandable that his family and
friends should seek another explanation, but this is no excuse for the ongoing
exploitation of such tragic deaths by people with political and racial agendas.
As with the Elliot case, the claim in the Times article (above) that Errol McGowan believed that he was on a
hit list drawn up by Combat 18 is (if genuine) more indicative of a deeply
troubled man than of one genuinely persecuted by racists. Doormen (bouncers) are not in general shrinking violets;
most would be likely to answer verbal abuse (racial or otherwise) with their
fists rather than with a rope around their own necks.
It is most likely that all these deaths were nothing more than a bizarre
if tragic series of coincidences. In the first place, suicide is a surprisingly
common cause of death. The following table gives the official figures for
England and Wales (207) for three recent
years:
year suicides
and deaths from total number
self-inflicted
injury of deaths
1992 3952 558313
1998 3614 555015
1999 3690 556118
In 1999, (208) over .66% of deaths were classified as suicide (or
self-inflicted), that is more than one in two hundred.
In the second place, no one really knows what goes on in another man’s
mind, but a report of a double tragedy that appeared in the Guardian in April 2001 may hold the key.
A French schoolboy received a bad school report. His father took him to task
for this, and the boy shot himself.
“Seeing
his son lying dead with the report beside him, the father picked up the gun and
killed himself in front of his wife.” (209)
Without wishing to belabour this point, in May 2002, the current writer
read four reports of the suicides of young people in the press in the space of
two days, three of them were by hanging, and three of them were very widely
reported. On May 30, the Daily Telegraph
(for example) alluded to the case of 23 year old law student Julie Wintersgill.
Desperate to enter a London chambers on her graduation, she held up a cleaner
at Swansea University at gunpoint to obtain the keys to her law department! She
failed but later burgled the, department and altered her 2.2 grade to 2.1. She
was arrested, charged and bailed. Believing her life to be ruined, this
obviously highly intelligent but tragic young girl blasted herself to death on
a cliff top with her father’s shotgun.
The day before the report on this inquest, my local newspaper, the NEWS SHOPPER Beckenham & Penge,
reported the suicide of a 25 year old Sikh man, Jasbir Singh More, who hanged
himself with his own turban! There was no suggestion of foul play - he appears
to have left a suicide note - but a
motive was elusive; the coroner recorded that the only clue to this tragedy was
that the victim, a civil servant, had been facing difficulties at work.
The same day, a double tragedy was reported in the national press.
According to the Daily Mail, two
friends, thirteen year old Michelle Stewart and 12 year old Natasha Lake were
said to have hanged themselves within three months of each other.
The inquest into the death of the first girl recorded an open verdict.
The coroner stated “It is likely this was a deliberate act but there is no
evidence there was suicidal intent. ”
It goes without saying that in this particular double tragedy both girls
were white, and that there was no suspicion of murder much less of a racial
motive and the de rigueur hysteria
that would have been generated had they been black or Asian.
Afterword On The Reel And McGowan Cases
One should not judge Sukhdev Reel or the McGowan family too harshly for
their ill-founded claims that the deaths of Lakhvinder Reel and the McGowans
were racially motivated murders. In the first place, the “anti-racist” lobby has so brainwashed a
significant percentage of the population (both non-white and white) with its
lying propaganda that many people will accept any such claims at face value; racism if not the white man has surely
become the root of all evil.
In the second place, a murder, even a senseless murder, of a loved one,
is more acceptable or even more romantic in a bizarre sort of way than the
alternative. The public perception is that a mother whose son has been murdered
by a racist gang deserves sympathy,
while the mother of a youth who drowned while falling into the river drunk as
he answered a call of nature would receive at best ridicule, and at worst
opprobrium for failing to raise him properly.
In the third instance, in both the Reel and McGowan cases it may be that
the police did not investigate the deaths as efficiently as they could have.
The sudden or violent death of any young person should always be investigated
with an open mind, if not outright suspicion, but whatever laxness there may
have been in police procedures here, these cases are a far a cry from that
exhibited in the tragic case of Michael Menson, (see above). Finally, without
wishing to sound unduly cynical, there is also the question of criminal injuries
compensation, which of course is not paid in the event of suicide or accidental
death.
’Ello, ’Ello, ’Ello
Since the lunatic Macpherson
Report, the British police have been gripped by hysteria over racism. One time-serving officer with
two commendations for bravery was summarily dismissed for snapping “Sit down,
you black bastard” in a moment of frustration while arresting a 14 year old
youth. (210)
Another, an inspector with 22 years service, was reduced to constable
for making a witticism: “we don’t eat missionaries any more”! He was charged
with being “oppressive and abusive in that you made a racist comment”. (211)
The Trotskyite newspaper Socialist Worker
reported that a Scottish police officer who made “racist remarks” was sacked,
but later reinstated by the Chief Constable, who substituted a hefty fine for
dismissal. (212) This punishment was far too lenient for the comrades, who
railed at his boss.
While most people would agree that this hysteria has gone too far, most
people would also agree that some cases of racial abuse do warrant severe
sanction, especially when they are made anonymously with the intent of causing
ill-feeling between colleagues, and at the same time blaming the abuse on
someone else.
A case like this which was widely reported was that of Sikh police
sergeant (sans turban) Gurpal Virdi. He was summarily dismissed on March 3,
2000 after being found guilty of eleven offences involving sending hate mail to
seventeen colleagues and himself. He was also found guilty on three counts of
having confidential police documents at his home. (213) The hate mail was sent
in two tranches, in December 1997 and January 1998 respectively.
Sergeant Virdi had originally been arrested, but instead of facing
criminal charges, the Metropolitan Police dealt with the case at an internal
disciplinary hearing. Although he would have had a greater chance of acquittal
by a jury, the sergeant should consider himself lucky; the case against him was
overwhelming, although he continues to protest his innocence.
He claimed he was the victim of resentment because he had criticised an
investigation into a racial attack. The Met took a different view; he was said
to have been unhappy at being passed over for CID work, and the letters were a
ruse to prepare the ground for a race discrimination case against the police.
(214)
In August 2000, his case came before an employment tribunal which ruled
that he was not only the victim of racism
but that he was innocent of the charges which had been proved against him at
the internal hearing. No mention was made of the evidence against him, instead
the press announced that he had been treated unfairly because he had been
treated as a suspect in a different manner from another suspect, WPC Bachelor.
(215)
This sort of argument is ludicrous; in the first place one might ask
what right has an employment tribunal to overturn the findings of fact of a
police disciplinary tribunal? In the second place, the suggestion that all
suspects should be treated in exactly the same manner is an affront to common
sense. In a murder inquiry there may be dozens, hundreds or even thousands of
suspects, especially if the killing is ostensibly motiveless, a sex killing or
the murder of a child, for example. The degree of suspicion with which a
suspect is treated will depend on all sorts of factors: the relationship if any
with the victim, opportunity, motive, alibi, antecedents...
The tribunal found that Virdi had created the offending documents on his
own computer just hours before they were delivered. He attempted to cover up his authorship of
the second batch of letters by framing WPC Bachelor.
The case against Sergeant Virdi was proved and should remain proved
until sufficient exculpatory evidence is adduced, but in the current climate of
political correctness and hysteria over racism,
anything is possible. In November 2001 it was reported that this rightly
disgraced former police officer was awarded £150,000 damages, and a further
£200,000 in an unfair dismissal claim. The same article revealed that in 1999,
one hundred and eighty officers sued for race and sex discrimination, which
cost (ie cost the taxpayer) £20.3 million in total - £14 million in
compensation and the rest in legal fees! (216) Sergeant Virdi was subsequently
reinstated, and the new Police Commissioner gave him a grovelling apology. So
much for the strong arm of the law.
Self Defence Is No Offence: Framed By The “Racist” System?
Three cases of men convicted of murder - two of them black, one Asian -
deserve mention here because they have all three been presented by “anti-racist” propagandists as victims rather
than as perpetrators, purely on account of their ethnic origins. Their
supporters are in a very real sense hoaxing the public.
These men are Mumia Abu-Jamal, Satpal Ram and Winston Silcott. Abu-Jamal
is an American who was convicted of murder in his home town of Philadelphia,
but I have included him in this study because the case has received widespread
international publicity including in Britain where there have been meetings of
his supporters; at least one march has been held, and at one time there was a
telephone contact for the campaign. The National Union of Journalists - of
which I am a member - has also taken up his case.
Mumia
Abu-Jamal was sentenced to death for the December 1981 murder of police officer
Daniel Faulkner, and although I have no objection to people campaigning against
the death penalty either in general or for him specifically, it is an affront
to public decency for any half intelligent person who has investigated the
facts of the case to claim that he didn’t pull the trigger on officer Faulkner.
Satpal Ram is an Asian who was gaoled for life for the murder of a white
man during a frenzied knife attack in a restaurant; as far as murders go, this
was not the very worse type, but at trial Ram had the best legal representation
money could buy, and was undoubtedly convicted of murder on the clearest
evidence. And has been his own worst enemy since his conviction.
Winston Silcott’s case is unusual to say the least. He has the dubious distinction of being both guilty of murder and framed for murder simultaneously. The cases of Abu-Jamal and Silcott have both generated so much publicity that they hardly require footnoting. The case of Satpal Ram is less well known although his supporters have been extremely vocal. We will take the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal first.
“Innocent” Mumia
Mumia Abu-Jamal (formerly known as Wesley Cook) was a radio journalist
who had at one time had a promising career; there is no doubt that he had
talent, and could have gone far, but, failing to recognise the difference
between objective reporting and advocacy, he had clashed with his employer over
his approach to reporting on the MOVE organisation, a controversial black
sect/political outfit, and had subsequently been fired from/quit his job at
WUHY-FM, earlier in 1981. As a youth, Abu-Jamal had been heavily involved with
the Black Panthers, but significantly he had no criminal record whatsoever,
although there is evidence that he had in the past been under state
surveillance.
Abu-Jamal’s supporters have made much of this, but whatever files the
FBI or other government agencies may hold on him, to frame him for murder in
the manner suggested - or more often implied - by his most vocal supporters,
would take a quantum leap of the imagination.
By December 1981, Abu-Jamal had only a tenuous connection with
journalism; he was making a living driving a cab. At 4 o’clock one morning
while so engaged, he witnessed, by chance, his brother William Cook being
arrested by police officer Daniel Faulkner. Abu-Jamal pulled out his gun and
raced over to Faulkner, shooting the officer in the back. Faulkner managed to
return fire, putting a bullet in Abu-Jamal’s chest. Abu-Jamal then emptied his
gun into his victim, before sitting down, probably in shock at his own wound.
He was arrested at the scene of the crime.
Any objective individual who has read contemporary press coverage of the
case and the transcripts which are now available on-line (217) can be in no
doubt whatsoever that Mumia Abu-Jamal shot and killed Daniel Faulkner. One can
of course debate whether or not he should have been sentenced to death, or
indeed if he should have been convicted of first degree murder, but the problem
with a total denial is that it undermines any possible mitigation, including
the state of mind of the accused. And Abu-Jamal did plead not guilty. Not that
he denied shooting Daniel Faulkner; he didn’t give evidence at his trial, or
take the stand as our American friends say.
The evidence against him was extremely strong; there were several
eyewitnesses, the forensic evidence was impressive, and at the hospital where
he was taken to be treated, forcibly, by the arresting officers he was heard by
two witnesses to boast that he had shot “the motherfucker” and hoped he died.
The slaying of Daniel Faulkner was reported briefly in the New York Times of Sunday, December 13,
1981. Although he may have been known and respected as a one-time radio
journalist in his home town, Mumia Abu-Jamal was in every other sense a
non-entity. (218) The masses of publicity came later when people campaigning on
his behalf began making outrageous - and for the most part blatantly untrue - claims
about the way his trial had been conducted, how exculpatory evidence had been
excluded, and even about the racial make up of the jury that had convicted him
and sentenced him to death.
Abu-Jamal’s one-time lawyer, a famous attorney named Harold Weinglass,
has written a book on the case called Race
For Justice, but this work is so blatantly slanted that no objective
individual with a brain in his head could possibly be taken in by it.
One of the many things missing from the book by Weinglass - which does
rather taint the saintly image Abu-Jamal’s supporters have built up of his as a
champion of the “oppressed”, is that after sentence of death was passed on him,
Abu-Jamal threatened to kill the judge!
According to the Philadelphia Inquirer of May 26, 1983:
In
a final act of courtroom defiance, convicted murderer Mumia Abu-Jamal yesterday
threatened the judge who had moments before sentenced him to die in the
electric chair, shouting “Judge, you have just sentenced yourself to
die.”...Several dozen supporters of Abu-Jamal shouted their encouragement to
him. “Sabo, you won’t be around for the execution,” one of them yelled...
Threatening to kill a judge is always unwise, to say the least,
regardless of any means or lack thereof of carrying out the threat. For a more
detailed analysis of the Abu-Jamal case I would refer the reader to my own
pamphlet A TALE OF TWO CONVICTED COP
KILLERS: Why Mumia Abu-Jamal Is Not Winston Silcott, which was published in
1999. The Daniel Faulkner website - already cited - contains an exhaustive
analysis of the case and numerous updates. Regardless of the easily provable
facts of Abu-Jamal’s guilt, the “anti-racist”
movement worldwide continues to protest his innocence, usually in the context
of a racially motivated fit up. It remains to be seen how many of Abu-Jamal’s
supporters are innocent dupes, and how many simply don’t care that he gunned
down a police officer in cold blood.
Winston Silcott: A Bad Man Framed
In October 1985, serious public disorder broke out on Broadwater Farm
housing estate in North London. The most notorious outcome of the riot was the
death of a 40 year old police constable, Keith Blakelock, who was literally
hacked to death. Three juveniles and three adults were to be indicted for the
murder of PC Blakelock, the three adults, headed by black greengrocer and disc
jockey Winston Silcott, were convicted and gaoled for life.
After the trial, it emerged that press coverage of an earlier murder
trial had been squelched under the Contempt
Of Court Act; the defendant in that trial was none other than Winston
Silcott, and at the time he was arrested for the murder of Keith Blakelock he
was on bail for the December 1984 murder of a young black boxer, Anthony Smith.
By the time the Blakelock trial opened, Silcott was already a convicted
murderer.
After years of campaigning, the “Broadwater Farm Three” as they became
known were finally cleared when the Court of Appeal heard that the police had
fabricated in its entirety the unsigned confession of Winston Silcott, and had
engaged in other dirty tricks. Silcott didn’t give evidence at the Blacklock
trial. Unlike Mumia Abu-Jamal who had no previous convictions that he could be
cross-examined on, Silcott’s antecedents would have been extremely prejudicial
to his defence, which was a complete denial. (219)
To this day, Winston Silcott remains in prison; his supporters (and
apologists) claim that he is yet another victim of racism; Silcott himself claims that although he was convicted of
the murder of Anthony Smith he is really serving time for the murder of Keith
Blakelock. (220) What is the truth?
At his trial for the murder of Anthony Smith,
Silcott made a complete denial; he never did it. Period. His position now is
that he did kill Smith but that he acted in self-defence. (221) The victim
though suffered horrific injuries, a fact which even Silcott’s arch-apologist
David Rose cannot explain away as lawful self-defence. (222)
Satpal Ram: A Hate Campaign From Beyond The Grave
I could write reams about the Satpal Ram case; actually I have, most of
which can be found on the website satpalramisguilty,
the full address of which is
http://www.geocities.com/satpalramisguilty/
Full citations for what follows here can be found on that website,
including the post mortem (autopsy) report on Ram’s victim.
In the small hours of Sunday, November 16, 1986, the Sky Blue Indian restaurant in Birmingham
was fairly crowded; two parties concern us in particular. In the first party
were three couples: 22 year old Clarke Edward Pearce and his fiancée Jacqueline
Watson; Mrs Nadine O’Neill (Clarke’s elder sister) and her husband Eddie; and
David Lea and Sharon Badger. All were white. In the second party were two young
Asian men and a white German girl: 20 year old warehouseman Satpal Ram,
Narinder Singh Shinji, and Evelyn Schneider (Ram’s girlfriend). (223)
At some point Clarke Pearce made a remark about the background music, to
which Ram - who was drunk - took offence. Exactly what happened next is still a
subject of some dispute; in its 1995 judgment the Court of Appeal accepted that
Pearce had provoked Ram, that the two men had come to blows, and that maybe
Pearce had struck the first blow. Both Mrs O’Neill and her husband deny this in
its entirety. Having interviewed them both at length several times I am
satisfied that they are credible witnesses. Whether or not that is the case,
the version of events given by Ram to the police when he surrendered himself
eight days after the murder was not credible, and the lies that have been
churned out by the Free Satpal Campaign and its fellow travellers over the
years are for the most part both readily falsifiable and inconsistent.
The bottom line is that Ram drew a flick knife, an illegal weapon, and
made a ferocious attack on Pearce. He then left the restaurant accompanied by
his two friends and with the knife still in his hand, but not before gloating
over his victim.
Clarke Pearce was taken to Birmingham General Hospital where he was
pronounced dead at 4.23am. Ram attended a different hospital, and using a false
name, sought treatment for a cut face. He needed three stitches, which a doctor
managed to insert in spite of Ram being drunk and abusive. A murder
investigation was launched, and subsequently Ram surrendered himself to the
police accompanied by his solicitor.
Pleading self-defence and claiming that he was the victim of a racially
motivated attack, Ram failed to impress the police, and was charged with
murder. Racial abuse had indeed been used during the incident; according to Mrs
O’Neill, Ram had shouted at her brother: “Don’t you like Paki music?”
An independent witness, a diner named Mark Trace, reported that the
phrase “white bastard” was used by a member of Ram’s party (presumably by
either Ram or Shinji, but probably Ram).
Ram was remanded in custody and was appointed a top flight QC. Douglas
Draycott (1918-97) had been called to the Bar as long ago as 1950 and had been
Recorder of Shrewsbury 1966-71. Draycott and his Junior, Stephen Linehan, read
the case papers, and like the police were unconvinced by their client’s
purported defence.
The two men managed to convince Ram that the only chance he had was to
plead provocation rather than self-defence. Ram agreed, albeit reluctantly.
Because he had told a pack of lies to the police, they advised further that he
should not give evidence in his own defence. Again, reluctantly, Ram agreed.
When Ram’s trial opened in June 1987, Navinder Shinji appeared in the
dock with him, charged with assisting his friend to escape. Like Ram, Shinji
did not give evidence, probably because to do so would have left him with no
choice but to implicate Ram under cross-examination. Shinji was rightly cleared
of assisting Ram, although he was gaoled for eighteen months for possessing a
flick knife after the murder. Ram was
rightly convicted. Evelyn Schneider gave evidence for the defence.
Having taken the advice of his legal team, albeit reluctantly, Ram was
bound by this decision. As Douglas Draycott pointed out subsequently (and at
the time), Ram’s claim of self-defence would have been hopeless; the Court of
Appeal concurred.
Bound by his decision or not, Ram and his supporters wanted a second
bite of the cherry, and as well as launching an appeal, a campaign to free
innocent “race attack victim” Satpal Ram was launched. What the Free Satpal
Campaign lacked in integrity, it made up for in enthusiasm; Ram was convicted
because the police were incompetent, or racist,
or both; the judge was said to be both biased against Ram and surprised that he
had been convicted; Ram was the victim of a witch hunt, and so on. But the
grossest lies and the vilest calumny were reserved for the victim and his
family. Clarke Pearce was said to be a violent racist, Ram had been attacked not just by Pearce but by his entire
party, who are sometimes referred to as six white men.
The most vile lie concocted by Ram’s supporters though is the claim that
Clarke Pearce died only because he refused medical treatment. A widely
distributed leaflet says that he became abusive, refused to be treated by a
woman doctor, pulled out his drips, went home and died. Such has been the
persistence of this easily provable lie that in January 2000, an Early Day
Motion couched in the same terms was laid before Parliament by a gullible left
wing MP. The Court of Appeal is made of different stuff though.
In controversial cases, judges often warn the jury that they must
consider only the evidence that is put before them, and not what they read in
the press or hear elsewhere, a dictum the Court of Appeal follows; Ram’s
appeals - in 1989 and 1995 - have both been dismissed, the second time in a
strongly worded judgment. The gullible masses will no doubt continue to read
about this supposed miscarriage of justice, on the WorldWideWeb and elsewhere,
but the documented facts about convicted murderer Satpal Ram are now in the
public domain and only a few keystrokes away. Ram was not the victim of a
racially motivated attack, he is a cold-blooded killer who stabbed another man
to death in a drunken rage, and then tried, with a little help from his
friends, to pass himself off as the victim.
Three Potential Hate Crime Hoaxes That Never Materialised
A brief mention here of three incidents which could have been classified
as hate crime hoaxes or which could have escalated into such if they had been
handled indelicately by the media or if the opportunity had arisen for capital
or speculation to be made out of them; the first happened early in the 20th
Century, the second was reported nationally; the third I found in my local
press.
In September 1903 a young girl in Pontypridd, Wales, who was in the
service of a Mr M. Fishout told her friends that she had been taken to the
local synagogue by force, wrapped in a cloth, insulted and spat upon. As a
result of this, a mob gathered but was dispersed by the police. They thought
the girl had been abducted for “ritual purposes”. Later she confessed she’d
made the whole thing up “for a lark”. At this time the Jewish population of
Pontypridd was estimated at a hundred. (224) A follow up report in the Jewish
press claimed that in spite of the girl’s admission that she hadn’t really been
pricked with needles and severely injured as she had previously claimed, many
people were said to still believe her story. (225)
In 1994, an American student was gaoled for life for the murder of a
British student. Twenty-four year old Catherine Ayling was knifed to death by
Curtis Howard, who had developed an obsession with her. (226) It was reported
that, among other things, the mentally disturbed Howard had carved a swastika
in her bedroom, (227) Catherine Ayling was white; Howard was black. (228)
Finally, in 1999 a story appeared on the front page of my local free
newspaper which proclaimed CHURCH DEFACED
BY RACE HATE. (229) The headline though was misleading; the story was not
about race hate but mental illness. Ian Carstairs, a highly educated 35 year
old (with degrees in astrophysics and theology) had been accused of throwing a
beer can through a church window and of daubing a church notice board with
“swastikas, Stars of David and 666s”. However, a photograph of the board showed
one inverted swastika, two 666s and two encircled pentagrams - not Magans David.
He didn’t appear in court because he’d checked into a mental hospital.
The 1903 case was curious indeed, but there is no suggestion that it was
motivated by anything other than childish female hysteria; the case from my
local press makes a good headline but it is clearly a non-story. The tragic
murder of Catherine Ayling may well have led to a racially motivated hoax if
her killer hadn’t been brought to book. As the case of the Searchlight
Organisation demonstrates clearly, it doesn’t take much imagination to jump
from a carved swastika to a secret Nazi society.
Conclusion: Hoaxing The Public -
The Prosaic Truth About Racially Motivated “Hate Crime”
Over the years the media and in particular the extreme left and “anti-racist” groups and campaigners have made
enormous political capital out of this apparently escalating phenomenon.
Alleged racially motivated attacks on blacks (anyone who is not white!) have
been used to demonise the far right and all forms of white nationalism, except,
curiously, the two most murderous forms of “white nationalism”: Irish
“Republicanism” and Zionism. The Jewish-controlled, anti-British and anti-white
race-hate magazine Searchlight makes
it clear that any manifestation of racial consciousness by the white (Gentile)
majority is to be viewed as nothing less than the resurgence of Nazism, and is
to be stamped on forthwith. Ironically though, figures released by the misnamed
Commission for Racial Equality indicate that in Britain the majority of victims
of “hate crimes” are white.
According to a report published February 8, 1999, around 238,000 white
people claimed to have been victims during a 12 month period against 101,000
Asians and 42,000 blacks. These figures are said to have come from the British
Crime Survey and “should be treated with caution”. It is claimed that there
were eight murders or manslaughters between 1996 and 1998 for which there was
“a racial motivation”. Four of these victims were white. (230)
Eight months later, whitey was said to be still
under pressure. A report in the Daily
Mail claimed that “SOARING numbers of attacks on white people have led to a
police force setting up a specialised race crimes unit”. This was in Oldham,
Greater Manchester, which hit the headlines in 2001 when so-called race riots
erupted in the town. But a close reading of the Daily Mail article suggests that these so-called racial attacks
are largely the work of Asian street gangs. One of the cases cited was clearly
a robbery, whatever language may have been used against the victim. (231)
The rising tide of racially motivated violence against whites is an
international trend, it would appear. In the Foreword to a supposedly scholarly monograph on “hate crime”,
Morris Dees, who is better known as an anti-white agitator, wrote that “A few
years ago, hate crime was literally a black-and-white issue, usually involving
white perpetrators and black victims. Today, we see a significant increase in
black-on-white attacks.” (232)
But are “hate crimes” really rising? In their misnamed 1993 booklet racism: the destruction of civil and
political liberties, Conor Foley and Sharron Nelles claim that there were
ten racially motivated murders in Britain in 1992. If that were the case then
the number of racially motivated murders had actually decreased over the past
few years, recall above, eight murders or manslaughters between 1996 and 1998
for which there was “a racial motivation”, including of four whites. But do
these figures have any basis in fact? (233)
The prosaic reality is that we live in a violent society and a violent
world. Most of us don’t face violence every day, but we each and every one of
us encounter it at some point, if only as a spectator. We in Britain also live
in a society which although still predominantly white, is now far from racially
homogeneous, as it was largely in the sixties, and certainly in the fifties.
Indeed, in some places whites are actually now in a minority. Not only are
non-whites everywhere but violent criminals are everywhere, and it stands to
reason that there will be some overlap. If an area is 20% Asian and 20% black
for example, we shouldn’t be surprised
if some Asians are mugged by blacks, some blacks are beaten up by whites, and if occasionally a black man is knifed
by an Asian street gang.
In March 1999, an unnamed Asian man wrote to the Asian Times newspaper to record his disappointment “at the growing
number of young Asian prostitutes working in and around Birmingham”. Being a
“respectable man” he said “I have been brought up to believe that we Asians
have a higher moral upbringing than our Western counterparts”. (234) Sadly, he
is mistaken. Ironically, the same issue reported the case of another Asian who
was fined £200 for racially abusing a pregnant white woman. (235) Reminder
Singh Upal was condemned in an editorial. (236)
In fact his “crime” was not racially motivated at all in any meaningful
sense, his heated words were in an argument over a taxi fare. The pregnant
white woman was driving a taxi! Obviously if Mr Upal hated white people so much
he wouldn’t have hired one to drive him. In fact if he hated white people so
much he probably wouldn’t be living in this country at all.
When people argue they use angry words, including sexual swear words and
racial epithets. When people attack other people in the course of committing
robberies or gratuitous violence, politeness and etiquette are usually the last
things on their minds. The main evidence
for the supposed racial motive in the murder of Stephen Lawrence is that one of
the gang which attacked him is said to have used the word “nigger”, which is
certainly a racial epithet. It is also the preferred racial epithet of American
“street” blacks, as anyone who has seen the Janet Jackson film Poetic Justice will realise. (237)
It
is true that some street criminals target primarily or exclusively members of
other ethnic groups, but there need not be a racial motive for this. The
ghoulish American serial killer (and cannibal) Jeffrey Dahmer murdered mainly
young black and non-white men, not from a racial motive, but because they were
easier targets. (238) By contrast, serial killers usually target members of
their own racial group, one of the most notorious black serial killers, Wayne
Williams, murdered exclusively young blacks. (239)
Indeed, the greatest irony of supposedly racially motivated crime is
that the most horrible outrages are perpetrated against members of similar
ethnic groups. In Nazi Germany, Jews were singled out for persecution, both by
the state and by individuals, yet most Germans would have been hard pressed to
tell a German Gentile from a German Jew save for manner of dress in the more
Orthodox Jews. The killing fields of Rwanda is another terrible example: who
could tell a Hutu from a Tutsi?
In Britain, for all the talk of racially motivated violence and a few
tragic and dubious examples like the murder of Stephen Lawrence, the greatest
“racially motivated” violence in these islands is and always has been between
its “white tribes”, in particular those of Northern Ireland. Between 1969 and
1987, a staggering 2,618 people were killed and more than 33,000 injured in
such outrages in that strife torn land. (240) As a result of the “peace
process” many of the people who were brought to book for such outrages are now
back on the streets, including Michael Stone, a “Loyalist” who served twelve
years for murdering six people, and Sean Kelly, an IRA man who in October 1993
planted a bomb which killed ten people including his fellow bomber and a seven
year old girl.
By the same token, the only significant acts
of racial terrorism against non-whites by members of the white majority in
Britain in recent years and perhaps at all has been the work of a lone
psychopath, David Copeland. Murders and other crimes which are motivated purely
by racial bigotry are rare indeed, as any honest, objective investigation of
this phenomenon will reveal.
As far as the left are concerned however, and the “anti-racist” industry in all its myriad
manifestations, the facts must never be allowed to stand in the way of a good
story, or of ideology. For many years alleged white on black (read non-white)
racially motivated crime was used as a big stick to batter the white population
over the head. Reports of black on white crime were suppressed, and indeed
those who reported it have risked being dragged into court under the notorious Race Relations Act, most outrageously
Nick Griffin, whose “crime” was to publish a magazine called The Rune which a Jewish politician (and
hatemonger) found offensive. (241)
Incredibly, there are those who call for Britain’s already Draconian
race laws to be strengthened yet again, particularly since the September 11,
2001 atrocity in New York. Now, the tide has turned somewhat, partly because
the truth about non-white crime - in particular black street crime - can no
longer be suppressed, and partly because whites have learned to play the race
card as well.
At one time racism was seen
primarily or almost exclusively as a white disease, nowadays anyone who stands
in the way of the multi-racial juggernaut is likely to be squelched, and that
means anyone.
There is no single agenda at work here, and some hate crime hoaxes - the
murder of Lee Harvey, the self-immolation of Ashley Cane, the “Asian lightning”
of Mr Bashir - are clearly the work of individuals or small groups of
individuals who need a scapegoat. Tracie Andrews invented the fat man with
staring eyes in the hope of escaping retribution for the frenzied knife murder
of her lover; Ashley Cane had been up to no good and likewise sought to cover
his tracks; Mr Bashir was motivated by greed, so invented a racist gang to detract from his own
misdeeds.
Such has been the hysteria over racism
that as with tales of Nazi atrocities, any allegation of racism has come to be believed almost uncritically. In 1996 it was
reported that the misnamed Commission for Racial Equality spent £16 million of
taxpayers’ money a year and employed about 240 staff, 17 of them earning more
than £30,000 a year.
One of the proposals of this lunatic organisation was that in cases of
alleged racial discrimination the burden of proof should be shifted to the
alleged discriminator because “the discriminator’s evidence as to the state of
their mind is likely to be unreliable.” [The Commission’s quotes.] As one
critic pointed out “the race zealots only have to make the charge to find it
proven”. (242)
If you pay people enormous salaries to find racism they will find it, and will continue to find it even when
and where it doesn’t exist. As stated, whites have now discovered the race
card, and the CRE - perhaps hoping to avoid charges of racial bias - has now
started taking up cases of alleged racism
and discrimination brought by white people, including cases against non-whites.
Racism and racial attacks will continue to increase, if only in the lurid and
perverted imaginations of the race industry and its fellow travellers as long
as there is monetary profit and political capital to be made out of them. The
reader should bear this in mind every time he reads about yet another
outrageous racist incident, and hears
the same vested interests screaming for yet more legislation against hate, more brainwashing of the public by
racism awareness training, and more
public money for their own coffers.
Notes And References
(1) Criminal Justice Under The Microscope,
an essay by Ram, published on the Free Satpal Campaign website.
(2)
Whitaker’s Almanack, 2001, page 391.
(3)
And by implication the rest of white racist
society.
(4)
This magazine is now styled INTERNATIONAL
Searchlight; it is best known simply as Searchlight
or less flatteringly as “the comic” or “Gerry’s comic”. For the offending
article the reader is referred to issue No. 298, April 2000, page 9.
(5)
Searchlight was founded as a magazine
in 1975 (although four issues of a broadsheet of that name appeared in the
mid-sixties). Gable’s name appears as editor early on although the magazine’s
principal controller (until his death in 1981) was Maurice Ludmer, who in 1974
together with Gable co-authored A
Well-Oiled Nazi Machine, the pamphlet which can be said to have launched Searchlight. In recent years, Gable has
taken a back seat as publisher, although he is still a regular contributor.
(6)
Searchlight consists not only of Searchlight Magazine Limited but of
Searchlight Information Services and latterly the Searchlight Educational
Trust. The company structure has altered somewhat over the years. None of this
is terribly important, but when I refer to Searchlight
(italicised) I am referring specifically to the magazine; when the word is not
italicised, I am referring to the Searchlight Organisation in general.
(7)
Some of these will be discussed below.
(8)
Dave Roberts - see below.
(9)
Footnoting has been kept to a minimum where the case concerned is extremely
well known and where the facts are non-contentious. For example, it is hardly
necessary to give a precise citation for the date of the murder of Stephen
Lawrence, whatever view one takes of the reason for this murder or the
identities of the perpetrators.
(10)
The Anti-Defamation League, which is usually referred to - erroneously - as a
Jewish “civil rights” organisation. For an insight into the ADL’s
disinformation, smear-mongering and general mischief-making the reader is
referred to The Watchdogs: A close look
at Anti-Racist “Watchdog” Groups, by Laird Wilcox, Second Edition,
published by Laird Wilcox Editorial Research Service, Olathe, (1999).
(11)
E-mail to the current writer, June 2000.
(12)
The Retrospective Catalogue lists books published prior to 1976, but the
Current Catalogue contains many books published earlier (depending on when they
were acquired).
(13)
And Christians in general are nominal Christians.
(14)
Quoted verbatim from the ENCYCLOPEDIA OF
Homosexuality, Edited by Wayne R. Dynes, published by Garland, New York and
London, (1990), Volume 1, page 552.
(15)
While Winston Silcott was framed for the murder of PC Keith Blakelock he was
most definitely guilty of the murder of Anthony Smith, and racism had nothing to do with either case.
(16)
For the record, the current writer is a lifelong atheist and is of the opinion
that there is no meaningful evidence outside the Bible that Jesus actually existed, although he may of course have
been based on a real character or is possibly a composite.
(17)
The Haskalah was the so-called Jewish Enlightenment.
(18)
The term “anti-Semitism” was adduced specifically to mean hostility to Jewish
influences - real and imagined - and has never related to Arabs and other
Semites.
(19)
The Fatal Embrace: JEWS AND THE STATE,
by Benjamin Ginsberg, published by University of Chicago Press, Chicago and
London, (1993), page 10.
(20)
POWER & POWERLESSNESS in JEWISH
HISTORY, by David Biale, published by Schocken Books, New York, (1986),
page 67.
(21)
SPAIN The Root and the Flower: An
Interpretation of Spain and the Spanish People, by John A. Crow, Third
Edition, Expanded and Updated published by University of California Press,
London, (1985), page 110.
(22)
Ginsberg, Jews And The State, page
16, (op cit).
(23)
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia,
Volume 1, page 6, published by Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Corp, New York,
(1939).
(24)
Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Volume
2, page 408, (ibid).
(25)
The Public Record Office holds a number of files relating to ritual murder
trials in Twentieth Century Africa, mostly in the DO series, (Dominions
Office).
(26)
The evidence for ritual murder in the 1840 Damascus case (of Father Tomasso and
his servant Ibrahim Amara) is stronger than the (often misleading) references
in Jewish publications lead one to believe. Another such case occurred in
Hungary in 1882 and involved the alleged ritual murder of a 14 year old girl.
(27)
For the historical background to the Blood Libel and the generally accepted
origin of the belief the reader is referred to the entry BLOOD ACCUSATION, published in the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Volume 2, 1940, pages 407-10, (op
cit).
(28)
See for example under BLOOD ACCUSATION,
in Volume 3 of THE Jewish Encyclopedia,
published by Funk And Wagnalls, New York, (1925).
(29)
See under entry BLOOD ACCUSATION in Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Volume 2,
1940, (op cit).
(30)
CALUMNIOUS CHARGE AGAINST THE JEWS IN
BAVARIA. - ABDUCTION OF A CHILD, published in JEWISH INTELLIGENCE, AND MONTHLY ACCOUNT OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE
London Society FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIANITY AMONGST THE JEWS, April 1846,
pages 105-6.
(31)
Burton was knighted in 1886.
(32)
This dispatch can be found in the Public Record Office file FO78/2259.
(33)
THE DEVIL DRIVES A Life of Sir Richard
Burton, by Fawn M. Brodie, published by Eyre & Spottiswoode, London,
(1967), page 254.
(34)
Two boys were involved, aged ten and twelve. Reading between the lines it is
clear that Burton and the authorities thought someone else had put them up to
it.
(35)
Icke makes a number of references to the Protocols
in his 1994 book THE ROBOTS’ REBELLION
The Story of the Spiritual Renaissance. Like most of Icke’s writings, this
book is long on speculation, short on facts, and full of unsupported assertions
and scandalous stories which the gullible Icke takes at face value, all rapped
up in fallacious arguments.
(36)
Technically, although it was actually printed as a private order. Eyre &
Spottiswoode also published the first British edition of Norman Cohn’s Warrant For Genocide.
(37)
The persistence of prejudice:
Antisemitism in British society during the Second World War, by Tony
Kushner, published by Manchester University Press, Manchester, (1989), page
112.
(38)
The Britons’ 82nd impression of the Protocols was published in November 1960 with the cover title World Conquest Through World Government,
(see the Wiener Library Bulletin,
Summer 1966, vol. XX no. 3, new series no. 4, page 31).
(39)
Ford was no manner of anti-Semite but was simply extremely gullible. See for
example the biography THE LEGEND OF HENRY
FORD, by Keith Sward, published by Rinehart, New York, (1948).
(40)
The current writer has no information about such hoaxes perpetrated in
predominantly non-white countries, but it is reasonable to assume that such
hoaxes do occur from time to time, especially in countries such as Malaysia
where race relations between the indigenous community and the ethnic Chinese
minority have at times been strained, and where the latter still face official
discrimination.
(41) Crying Wolf: Hate Crime Hoaxes in America,
by Laird Wilcox, published by Laird Wilcox Editorial Research Service, Olathe,
Kansas, (1996), page 86.
(42)
The Truth At Last (formerly the Thunderbolt) is a far right, Christian
newspaper which might be described as anti-Semitic (to put it mildly!). As well
as monitoring the machinations, real and imagined, of Jewish groups and
individuals in America and on the world scene, the newspaper pays considerable
attention to minority (especially Negro) crime. Although its interpretation of
events warrants extreme caution, it is usually reliable on purely factual
matters, at least in relation to current affairs.
(43)
Killing Shocked Nation, published in The Truth At Last, issue 338, page 2. It
is a common practice not to date journals such as The Truth At Last. Carol Stuart was murdered on the evening of
October 23, 1989.
(44)
Wilcox, Crying Wolf, page 86, (op
cit).
(45)
Wilcox, Crying Wolf, page 86, (ibid).
(46)
A semi-documentary film was made of this case.
(47)
The New York Times, (Late Edition),
October 11, 1990, page A26.
(48)
New York Times, January 5, 1990, Late
Edition, front page and page A21.
(49)
Wilcox, Crying Wolf, page 86, (op
cit).
(50)
An hour long documentary on the case of Susan Smith was screened - as part of
the Women Who Kill series - on
British commercial TV on the evening of August 31, 2000.
(51)
See the feature THE SUSAN SMITH CASE: WHY
DID SHE DROWN HER SONS?, by Richard Devon, published in TRUE CRIME Detective Monthly, August
1995, pages 18-25. Smith’s trial was reported in the August 7, 1995, issue of Time magazine; she was sentenced to life
imprisonment.
(52)
As far as I have been able to ascertain.
(53)
When I wrote these words early in 2000, this was indeed the case, since then
however and in the wake of the Macpherson Inquiry/Report (see below), the
police appear to have gone over the top, and every time a crime is reported
where the race of the alleged victim and the suspect differ, a racial motive is
mooted.
(54)
Brawley claimed there were three attackers, although initially she didn’t say
anything at all. For the full background to this notorious hoax the reader is
referred to OUTRAGE The Story Behind the
Tawana Brawley Hoax, by Robert D. McFadden and Others (of the New York Times), published by Bantam,
New York, (September 1990).
(55)
The mens rea of murder.
(56) THE STEPHEN LAWRENCE INQUIRY, Cm 4262 - I & 4262 - II (Revised), published by HMSO, London, (February 1999).
The report was hastily withdrawn and re-issued (hence
revised) when the authorities realised that people who had given evidence to the inquiry in confidence had had their names and addresses appended!
(57)
This appears to have been “what, what nigger?”, which implies that Lawrence
said something to one of the gang although we have no idea what if anything
that was.
(58)
For the record, when in his thirties, the current writer was once mugged by a
three strong gang (two black and one white) in the small hours within a few
yards of his home. Had it not been for a man shouting out of his window, I
could have ended up like Stephen Lawrence, because one of my attackers had
drawn a knife and was attempting to slash my legs with it while I was on the
ground.
(59)
After the case against them was dropped, the five original suspects were
branded murderers. The Daily Mail for
February 14, 1997 ran this as a banner headline and challenged the five to sue
for libel, a recourse which is generally open only to the rich. In view of the
violence that was directed at them as a result of this wild assertion, the five
might have seriously considered bringing an action for criminal libel.
(60)
See for example Asian Times, May 30,
2000, page 6.
(61)
Teenager receives life sentence for boy’s
murder, published in the NEWS SHOPPER
- Beckenham & Penge, March 3, 1993, page 4.
(62)
An informant - who was not identified - claimed that Rohit Duggal had actually
been stabbed by one of the Acourt brothers rather than by Thompson. [The Case of Stephen Lawrence, by Brian
Cathcart, published by Viking, London, (1999), page 52].
(63)
The whinging magazine CARF, which is
controlled primiarly by white “liberals” of the worst sort, wrote in its
March/April 1993 issue that at the Rohit Duggal murder trial one witness, a
gang member, admitted in court that he’d called the victim a “Paki”. That is evidence of a racial motive? In the same
issue the murder of 52 year old Peckham man Donald Palmer was branded racist on equally tenuous evidence. Mr Palmer was stabbed to death
by two men he caught stealing his car. One was sentenced to life imprisonment,
the other to three and a half years youth custody. It is stated here that
“they” presumably one of them, was supposed to have shouted “We are the
National Front”.
(64)
Teenagers raped tourist and threw her
into canal, by Richard Ford, published in the Times, April 10, 1997, page 3.
(65)
The Times, April 19, 1997, page 3.
(66)
Ibid.
(67)
Turning the Tide THE HISTORY OF EVERYDAY
DEPTFORD From the Romans to the Present, by Jess Steele, published by
Deptford Forum Publishing, London, (1993), page 220.
(68)
Phyllis Collins, whose son Steven was one of the victims, was one of twelve
people to have received anonymous letters after the fire, (SE London Mercury, No. 8812, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1981, page 6).
(69)
SE London Mercury, No. 8814,
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1981, page 3.
(70)
Which was then a broadsheet and somewhat less scurrilous than it is today.
(71)
Letters of hate probe in death blaze,
by Peter Moore, published in the News Of
The World, No. 7,154, February 8, 1981, page 4.
(72)
SE London Mercury, No 8814, THURSDAY,
FEBRUARY 19, 1981, page 3.
(73)
SE London Mercury, No. 8810,
THURSDAY, JANUARY 22, 1981, page 1.
(74)
The New Cross Massacre Story,
Interviews with John La Rose, published by Alliance of the Black Parents
Movement, Black Youth Movement and the Race Today Collective, London, (1984),
page 5.
(75)
La Rose, The New Cross Massacre Story,
page 6, (ibid).
(76)
La Rose, The New Cross Massacre Story,
page 30, (ibid).
(77)
SE London Mercury, No. 8811,
THURSDAY, JANUARY 29, 1981, page 14.
(78)
News Of The World, February 8, 1981,
page 4, (op cit).
(79)
Socialist Worker, 23 January 1981, No
716.
(80)
Socialist Worker, 31 January 1981, No
717, page 1.
(81)
Socialist Worker, 31 January 1981, No
717, page 10.
(82)
Police chief wins damages for libel,
published in the Times, June 17,
1983, page 3.
(83)
Police send new report to DPP on Deptford
death blaze, by Mark Rosselli, published in the Times, November 21, 1983, page 2.
(84)
Steele, Turning the Tide..., page
220, (op cit).
(85)
racism: the destruction of civil and
political liberties, by Conor Foley and Sharron Nelles, Edited by Kate
Wilkinson, published by National Council for Civil Liberties/Anti-Racist
Alliance, (1993), page 37.
(86)
As I know from personal experience.
(87)
The Times, July 20, 1999, page 17.
(88)
Fear and silence.
(89)
As anyone who has tried to bring a corrupt police officer to book will realise!
(90)
Hitler birthday party uncovered, by
Peter Gladstone Smith, published in the
Daily Telegraph, April 6, 1975, page 3.
(91)
Searchlight, issue 22, (undated but
probably March 1977), page 13.
(92)
See for example COLUMN 88 THE STORY OF
BRITAIN’S UNDERGROUND NAZIS - A SEARCHLIGHT EXCLUSIVE, published in Searchlight, May 1975, pages 3-6.
(93)
Liddle has been an uncredited contributor to Searchlight for most if not all of its existence. She is though
credited with an article in the May 2001 issue.
(94)
Forewarned Against Fascism, May 1978,
issue 3, page 2.
(95)
Forewarned Against Fascism, April
1981, issue 9, page 20.
(96)
All Lewisham Campaign Against Racism And Fascism.
(97)
Turning the Tide THE HISTORY OF EVERYDAY
DEPTFORD From the Romans to the Present, by Jess Steele, published by
Deptford Forum Publishing, London, (1993), page 218.
(98)
On page 18 of the June 2000 issue of Searchlight
there are two very brief mentions:
1978 Column 88 investigated
and
1991 Searchlight reveals Column 88 as British
section of Gladio.
(99)
One of these was Keith Thompson, a former member of Sir Oswald Mosley’s Union
Movement. The other - who wishes to remain anonymous - provided me with a sheet
of its headed notepaper.
(100)
Several years ago I interviewed Terry Liddle in connection with my researches
into Dave Roberts and Column 88. His ex-wife, Daphne Liddle (see above), is a
time-serving Communist, and to this day an admirer of Stalin! She is also one
of Searchlight’s photographers, and, more importantly in this context, was at
the material time the mistress of Dave Roberts.
(101)
Roberts also appears to have contributed to Searchlight;
certainly the “information” he supplied was used for the basis of many articles
both in the magazine and elsewhere. The current writer was informed that he
also edited at least two of the early issues of the magazine, but I am unable
to confirm this.
(102)
Searchlight, August 1975, issue 6,
page 18. (Quoted here verbatim).
(103)
Men cleared of robbery attempt,
published in the Birmingham Post,
March 22, 1976, page 3.
(104)
DAVE ROBERTS JAILED - Documents of
Original Trial Show Innocence, published in Searchlight, issue 26, pages 7-9. (This issue is undated but was
probably published July or August 1977).
(105)
“No Evidence” of TA-Nazi “goings on”,
published in the Daily Telegraph, May
12, 1976, page 3.
(106)
OFFICER WAS NAZI, published in the Sunday Telegraph, May 16, 1976, page 3.
(107)
Roberts’ death was reported in the Staffordshire
Newsletter, June 11, 1982, page 7. His age was given erroneously as 33. His
entry in the June 1982 quarter death register at the Family Records Centre
gives his date of birth as December 15, 1949.
(108)
The full credits are Neo-Fascism in
Europe, Edited by Luciano Cheles, Ronnie Ferguson and Michalina Vaughan,
published by Longman, London and New York, (1991). Gable’s contribution is
Chapter Twelve and runs from pages 245-63.
(109)
The article is called Column 88: The Nazi
Underground, (A Searchlight
Exclusive!). Column 88 said to have been founded around 1970 as a result of a
split among Colin Jordan’s followers. John Tyndall was 19 in 1953, and doing
his National Service in West Germany at the time!
(110)
Searchlight, May 1976, issue 14, page 4.
(111)
Searchlight, April 1993, issue 214, page 11.
(112)
The reader is also referred to the current writer’s pamphlet Jeffrey Archer: The Gerry Gable Of Politics,
published by InƒoText Manuscripts, London, (2002), pages 3-4 for what may be
the ultimate truth about Column 88.
(113)
PUPPETMASTERS: The political use of
terrorism in Italy, by Philip Willan, published Constable, London, (1991),
page 14.
(114)
The first British National Party was founded during the Second World War and
had only a transient existence; another of the same name but no connection was
formed in the 1960s. The current BNP actually started life as the New National
Front when John Tyndall * led a breakaway group from the National Front in
1980; the name was changed from New National Front to British National Party in
1982.
*
Tyndall had been a BNP member in the 1960s.
(115)
The Munich Oktoberfest was bombed on September 26, 1980; thirteen people were
killed and over two hundred injured.
(116)
LIARS OUGHT TO HAVE GOOD MEMORIES: The True, Unsanitised Story Of “Searchlight” Mole Ray Hill with a critique of The
Other Face of Terror, by Alexander Baron, published by InƒoText
Manuscripts, London, (August 1994).
(117)
See in particular Notes from the
Underground: British Fascism 1974-92, Part Two, by Larry O’Hara, published
in Lobster, December 1992, issue 24,
pages 15-21.
(118)
There is always a heavy police presence at the Notting Hill Carnival, but aside
from the de rigueur trouble-makers
and thieves it is usually a peaceful event.
(119)
The relevant papers are held by the Public Record Office. I was informed by the
Home Office that the papers relating to the second trial were routinely
destroyed, but the PRO file CRIM 1/4469 (Parts 1 & 2) contains
documentation relating to the first trial, and CRIM 1/4749 contains
documentation relating to Regina v Jordan.
(120)
HARRY BIDNEY 1922-84, published in Searchlight, September 1984, issue 111,
page 5. The obituary is uncredited but Gable is clearly the author.
(121)
There is a biography of the 43 Group by a former member, Morris Beckman. *
Although it is replete with errors, many of them gratuitous, it is well worth
reading as it gives an insight into some of the rational causes of
“anti-Semitism”. Beckman’s claim that the 43 Group was wound up because it had
done its job and “destroyed” the Fascists is at best frivolous, at worst a lie.
The real reason for the 43 Group’s disbanding can be found in the Jewish Chronicle, June 16, 1950, pages
14 & 19.
*
THE 43 GROUP: the untold story of their
fight against fascism, by Morris Beckman, published by Centerprise
Publications, (1992), Foreword by Vidal Sassoon. The Second Edition THE 43 GROUP (no subtitle) was published
in 1993.
(122)
Lobster, issue 12, undated but
published cDecember 1986, page 35.
(123)
From the witness statement of Detective Sergeant Dennis Williams in REGINA V DUKES + ORS in CRIM 1/4469,
PART 2.
According
to a report in another Public Record Office file, DPP 2/4079, this was probably
not quite how Dukes met Bidney, but the explanation given here is undoubtedly
substantially correct, ie that Dukes was overcome with remorse and confessed
his involvement in the fires to Bidney.
(124)
His death is recorded in the December 1964 quarter death register at the Family
Records Centre.
(125)
YARD REPORT ON JEWISH COLLEGE FIRE,
published in the Hackney Gazette AND
NORTH LONDON ADVERTISER, December 22, 1964, page 1.
(126)
The full credits for this article are Shining
example: Helen Jacobus considers the progress of the battling anti-Fascist
journal, Searchlight, as it celebrates its 20th birthday, and meets its
indefatigable editor - building worker-turned-investigator, Gerry Gable,
published in the Jewish Chronicle,
March 17, 1995, page 27.
(127)
When hate comes to town: Community
Responses to Racism and Fascism, Edited by Ruth Levin, published by the
Searchlight Educational Trust, London, (November 1995), page xi.
(128)
Copies are held by the Wiener Library.
(129)
A ritual slaughterer.
(130)
Searchlight, April 1993, issue 214,
page 10. In this version it becomes the death of “a 19-year-old theological
student and the crippling of another”.
(131)
The Voice, issue 885, November 29,
1999, page 6.
(132)
ASA MONTHLY REPORT, Number 38, July
1994, page 6.
(133)
THE RESPONSE TO RACIAL ATTACKS AND
HARASSMENT: guidance for the statutory agencies, Report of the
Inter-Departmental Racial Attacks Group, published by the Home Office, (1989).
These figures can be found in ANNEX E,
Metropolitan Police statistics on RACIAL
INCIDENTS in 1986-7.
(134)
BUF members were known as Blackshirts. A few years ago the current writer
interviewed two of the organisation’s few surviving members.
(135)
These inconvenient facts have been largely written out of history by spineless
academics, but the authoritative and courageous biography of Mosley by Robert
Skidelsky sets the record straight.
(136)
According to the ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE
BRITISH PRESS 1422-1992, Reynolds News was launched in 1850 as a popular
weekly Reynolds’s Weekly Newspaper.
At the time of
the said report, the paper was sub-titled GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE. In 1962 it
merged with the Sunday Citizen.
(137)
CHILD NEARLY KILLED IN COT BY FASCISTS:
EAST END TERROR AGAIN, published in REYNOLDS
NEWS, Sunday March 7, 1937, page 1.
(138)
FASCIST OUTRAGES
Labour
man assaulted in Bethnal Green
BRICK
THROUGH BEDROOM WINDOW
Baby’s
Narrow Escape,
published in the Jewish Chronicle,
March 19, 1937, pages 23-4.
(139)
Also known as MEPOL, ie Metropolitan Police.
(140)
This report is dated and headed 24th April, 1937, “G” Division, Commercial
Street - a police station in the East End of London. It is held in file MEPO
2/3109.
(141)
Lynch made a witness statement only on April 14, 1937.
(142)
Searchlight, May 1975, issue 3, page
17.
(143)
The current writer and his colleague each made a careful search of the Jewish Chronicle for October and
November of 1936 and could find no reference to this incident, which obviously
never happened. The story is almost certainly a corruption of the George Lynch
incident.
(144)
This incident is also mentioned in the Jewish
Chronicle report on the baby in the cot story.
(145)
This report can be found in MEPO 2/3087.
(146)
ANAL is the preferred acronym!
(147)
Socialist Worker, 7 March 1992, No
1281, page 15.
(148)
ANL Daubing Protest, by Cecily Woolf,
published in the Jewish Chronicle,
March 13, 1992, page 9.
(149)
“Truth Must Out”., an editorial
published in the Jewish Chronicle,
April 14, 1933, page 5.
(150)
THE BLACK GAME British Subversive
Operations against the Germans during the Second World War, by Ellic Howe,
published by Michael Joseph, London, (1982), page 7.
(151)
Delmer’s autobiography was published by Secker & Warburg in two volumes: Trail Sinister: AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY,
(1961), and Black Boomerang, (1962).
Re Howe’s autobiography, see previous footnote.
(152)
The Blackshirt, October 3 1936, page
1.
(153)
This quote is usually attributed to the United States Senator Hiram Johnson in
1917, although the sentiment if not the exact phrase can be traced at least as
far back as Dr Johnson (and probably to antiquity).
(154)
The COINTELPRO Papers: Documents from the
FBI’s Secret Wars Against Domestic Dissent, by Ward Churchill and Jim
Vander Wall, Foreword by John Trudell, Preface by Brian Glick, published by
South End Press, Boston, MA, (1990), page 15. The acronym was formed in the mid
50s but COINTELPRO operations, albeit on an ad hoc basic, go back much further.
(155)
See for example Churchill and Vander Wall, The
COINTELPRO Papers, (ibid).
(156)
See for example the essay True Lies
by Cristopher Rapp which appears in THE
“RACE” CARD: WHITE GUILT, BLACK RESENTMENT AND THE ASSAULT ON TRUTH AND JUSTICE,
Edited by Peter Collier and David Horowitz, published by Prima Publishing,
Rocklin, CA, (1997).
(157)
A personal anecdote I offer here for what it is worth. In 1980 the current
writer was informed by a Leeds organiser for the British Movement that an
undercover police officer - probably from Special Branch - had joined the
Party. He was a skinhead - as was the majority of the membership at that time -
and had on at least one occasion tried to incite other members to acts of
racial violence. He was unmasked only by chance when he turned up under his
real name training at a gymnasium used by another member, who recognised him.
(158)
DEATH OF A SECRET SOLDIER, by David
Blundy, published in the Sunday Times,
November 13, 1997, page 17.
(159)
The ARMY LIST SPRING 1975 PART 1,
pages 511-512 lists Nairac, R.L. (A/Capt. 29/6/74) 1/8/71 with the Grenadier
Guards.
(160)
The murder of Lee Harvey, the subsequent investigation, and the trial of Tracie
Andrews, were reported in considerable depth in TRUE CRIME Detective Monthly, October 1997. The trial and
subsequent (frivolous) appeal were also reported widely by the mainstream
media.
(161)
Her Christian name has also sometimes been spelt Tracey in the press.
(162)
Road rage is a term which appears to have entered the English language only in
the 1990s. It applies specifically to motorists who commit violent acts against
other motorists, usually out of frustration, and is a new and apparently
rapidly increasing crime. We have also seen “air rage” which relates to
(usually drunken) passengers causing
disturbances aboard aircraft.
(163)
The Times, December 3, 1996, page 1.
(164)
The Times, December 20, 1996, page 1.
(165)
The Times, October 6, 1998, page 8.
(166)
The Times, October 15, 1998, page 11.
(167)
The Guardian, [CD-ROM], April 19,
1999, page 7.
(168)
Strangler sentenced to life imprisonment
OLD BAILEY:
Jury unanimous - jealous boyfriend guilty of murder, by Anil
Dawar, published in NEWS SHOPPER
Beckenham & Penge, WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 27, 2000, page 8.
(169)
Ibid.
(170)
Hate mail student escapes with fine,
published in the Daily Telegraph,
October 23, 1999, page 9.
(171)
Hoaxer jailed, published in the Times, April 27, 1996, page 4.
(172)
Blunder follows blunder: Racists deface
memorial which was guarded by dummy camera, by Stuart Millar, published in
the Guardian, CD-ROM version,
February 26, 1999, page 1.
(173)
The Observer, CD-ROM version, March
7, 1999, page 3.
(174)
Which the Gentile husband of one Jewish woman defines as “arson for commercial
gain”, [Paranoid? We have every reason to
be, by Philip Norman, published in the
Sunday Times, July 11, 1999, page 5.9].
(175)
In his 1986 book The Mexican Pet,
American folklorist Jan Harold Brunvand relates the story of a woman who took a
dead baby (stuffed with cocaine) on a flight from Columbia; the story, which
made the national press, had no basis in fact. In October 1994, a mentally
disturbed English civil servant named Caroline Beale boarded a plane in New
York with a dead baby concealed under her clothing. She’d given birth while on
holiday, apparently in total secret.
(176)
Arsonist was the odd man out, by
Shirley English, published in the Times,
[CD-ROM], February 26, 1999, page 3.
(177)
Daily Mail, March 23, 1999, CD-ROM
page 25.
(178)
‘Race victim’ blew up own shop,
published in Metro, June 13, 2000,
page 11.
(179)
Daily Mail, June 13, 2000, page 21.
(180)
Shopkeeper jailed, published in the Times, July 15, 2000, page 7.
(181)
In Britain, arson carries a possible life sentence.
(182)
Barton’s mother is, apparently, from Guyana.
(183)
RACE GANG TORCHING WAS A LIE, by
Jamie Pyatt, published in the Sun,
April 13, 2000, page 17.
(184)
Teenager who made up racist fire attack
to cover his tracks: ‘Torching victim’ may be locked up for story that left
people in fear, published in the Daily
Mail, September 19, 2000, page 19.
(185)
RACIST ATTACK FAKER GETS THREE MONTHS
‘Crime’ wasted
210 police hours,
by Jonathan Hayter, published in The
Mirror, October 10, 2000, page 18.
(186)
Police hunt racist gang after black man
is set on fire, by David Ward, published in the Guardian, May 2, 2000, page 2.
(187)
CARF, No 29, December 1995-January
1996, page 2.
(188)
Daily Mail, [CD-ROM], January 18,
1999. A version of this article also appeared in the February 1999 edition of Elle magazine.
(189)
Yard Closes In On Racist Gang Who Killed
Musician, by Peter Rose, published in the Daily Mail, [CD-ROM version], March 1, 1999.
(190)
The Lawrence family were not quite so privileged but were somewhat better off
than most working class people. It may be that class is a more important factor
than race in how victims and their families are treated by the authorities in
such cases.
(191)
According to the Daily Mail of March
13, 1999, the parents of 25 year old Pereira were from Mauritius.
(192)
Widely reported but this information was extracted from the Guardian, [CD-ROM], December 23, 1999,
page 4.
(193)
According to the Daily Mail of
November 17, 1999, Pereira claimed the murder was a joke that had gone wrong.
(194)
Cotter appears to have been a coal burner; he’d had an affair with at least one
other black woman, the well-known athlete Denise Lewis.
(195)
Boyfriend is held over ‘race attack’,
published in the Times, May 20, 2000,
page 8.
(196)
The Times, June 9, 2001, page 8.
(197)
There have been numerous references to this case, on the Internet and elsewhere,
where it is stated blandly that Lakhvinder Reel was murdered by racists.
(198)
Khan had acted for the Lawrence family; Grover is the sort of person who could
find racism in an egg cup.
(199)
The Voice, ISSUE No. 902, APRIL 3,
2000, pages 1 & 5.
(200)
Another Mystery Hanging Makes Title
Telford Three...But This Victim Is White: Bizarre Death Of One More Nightclub
Doorman Explodes Lynch Mob Theories, by Peter Hillmore and Alistair Self,
published in The Mail On Sunday,
[CD-ROM version], February 13, 2000.
(201)
Ibid.
(202)
Police arrested Jason McGowan ‘after row
about uncle’s death’, by Terri Judd and John Davison, published in the Independent, [CD-ROM version], January
28, 2000, page 4.
(203)
McGowan death was not murder, forensic
expert tells inquest jury, by Ian Herbert, published in the Independent, June 22, 2001, page 5.
(204)
The Times, July 7, 2001, page 1.
(205)
Ibid.
(206)
‘A CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE’,
Three hanged
black men from same town can’t be a coincidence, says grieving dad, by Lester
Holloway, published in the VOICE,
ISSUE NO. 982, OCTOBER 15, 2001, page 6.
(207)
Annual Abstract of Statistics,
published by The Stationery Office, London, 2001 edition, page 56.
(208)
The most recent year available at the time of writing.
(209)
Father copies son’s suicide,
published in the Guardian, April 9,
2001, page 14.
(210)
See the Daily Mail, March 1, 2000,
pages 18-9 and June 7, 2000, page 7. Steve Hutt was sacked and his appeal was
dismissed; he was later reinstated due primarily to a black woman detective who
exhibited a strand of common sense and decency which appears to be alien to the
increasingly politically correct police hierarchy.
(211)
This report appeared in the Daily Mail,
June 17, 2000, pages 16-7. Care must always be taken when relying on the press
for such reports as there is often more to the story than meets the eye. This
report is based on an interview with the wife of the officer concerned.
(212)
Socialist Worker, No 1703, 1 July
2000, page 4.
(213)
Sergeant sacked over fake hate mail, by
Stewart Tendler, published in the Times,
March 4, 2000, page 2.
(214)
Ibid.
(215)
Sikh policeman was victim of Yard racism,
by Conal Urquhart, published in the Times,
August 24, 2000, page 9.
(216)
£20m bill for police race and sex claims,
by Sinead McIntyre, published in the
Daily Mail, November 9, 2001, page 39.
(217)
From http://www.danielfaulkner.com.
(218)
I don’t mean that in a disparaging sense; I too am a non-entity outside of my
field and small circle of admirers and detractors.
(219)
In August 1994, Silcott told the Guardian
that he had wanted to give evidence at the trial. Unfortunately for him he was
defended by Barbara Mills QC who went on to become Director of Public
Prosecutions (she resigned in disgrace in 1998). In 1992, the trial judge
himself told journalist and author David Rose that he would not have allowed
Silcott’s murder conviction to go before the jury.
(220)
A smear campaign by the Metropolitan Police has continued to protest Silcott’s
guilt claiming that he was cleared only on a technicality; the reality is that
there was never a gramme of meaningful evidence that Silcott was in any way
responsible for the death of Keith Blakelock.
(221)
Silcott is refused murder appeal, by
Richard Ford, published in the Times,
July 22, 1997, page 4.
(222)
According to Rose, Smith’s face and abdomen were slashed, he had a lacerated
lung and had been stabbed in the heart.
(223)
Ram was born in Britain.
(224)
The Blood Accusation Fable in Wales.
JEWS INSULTED
AT PONTYPRIDD.,
published in the Jewish Chronicle,
September 25, 1903, page 28.
(225)
The Attack on Jews at Pontypridd.,
published in the Jewish Chronicle,
October 2, 1903, page 17.
(226)
Howard pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished
responsibility.
(227)
Tonight, October 26, 1994, page 1.
(228)
According to the Times, October 27,
1994, page 6, sentence on Curtis Howard had been postponed three times; he was
gaoled for life with a recommendation that he not be considered for parole for
seven years. He was said here to have stabbed the victim ten times, to have cut
her throat, and to have desecrated her father’s grave.
(229)
NEWS SHOPPER - Beckenham & Penge,
August 18, 1999, page 1.
(230)
Most victims of race crimes are white
says CRE: FIGURES THAT OVERTURN COMMON BELIEFS, by Steve Doughty, published
in the Daily Mail, February 9, 1999,
page 15.
(231)
Whites are the target, by Tim
Knowles, published in the Daily Mail,
October 28, 1999, page 43.
(232)
Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry
and Bloodshed, by Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt, published by Plenum Press,
New York, (1993), page vii.
(233)
One might just as easily ask do any of these alleged racially motivated murders
reported by Foley and Nelles have any basis
in fact? On page 55 they report the death of 60 year old Siddik Dada.
This murder made the front page of the Manchester Evening News, (FINAL)
on January 24, 1992 where a story HORROR OF
AXE ATTACK reported that the Asian shopkeeper was
smashed over the head with an axe or similar instrument in the course of an
attempted robbery. The same story reported on another, and less vicious attack,
on a (white) newsagent by two men armed with a knife.
(234)
Asian Times, March 16 1999, No. 826,
page 4.
(235)
ASIAN FINED FOR RACE HATE JIBES “Pregnant
White woman was subjected to vile outburst”, published in the Asian Times, page 2, (ibid).
(236)
Asian Times, page 4, (ibid).
(237)
The word “niggers” is sometimes spelt niggaz.
Incredibly, it appears to be used as a term of affection, along with bitch and ho-er, ie whore!!
(238)
Dahmer was also suspected of murdering a number of women when he was serving
with the US Army in Germany.
(239)
On February 27, 1982, Wayne Bertram Williams was convicted of the murders of 27
year old Nathaniel Cater and 21 year old Jimmy Payne. He was gaoled for life.
Out of a list of 29 listed unsolved murders, Williams was thought to be
responsible for 23 (including those of Payne and Cater). Three of the victims
were nine years old. See for example The
Atlanta Youth Murders and the Politics of Race, by Bernard Headley,
published by South Illinois University Press, Carbondale and Edwardsville,
(1998).
(240)
PUPPETMASTERS: The political use of
terrorism in Italy, by Philip Willan, published Constable, London, (1991),
page 15.
(241)
Griffin was convicted at Harrow Crown Court in 1998 as a result of a
politically motivated complaint from Alex Carlile, a so-called Liberal
Democrat. The current writer was given access to the case papers; I can only
say that if Carlile’s witness statement was sincere he should have sought out a
psychiatrist rather than the police.
(242)
How the race zealots promote racism,
by Leo McKinstry, published in the Daily
Mail, November 29, 1996, page 8.
To Back Cover
Back To Baron Pamphlets Index
Back To Site Index