December 2017
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Some people’s “hate crimes” are more “hate crimes” than other people’s

You probably saw the reports yesterday from PC Plod claiming that the number or supposed ‘hate crimes’ had shot up by 29% from 62,518 in 2015-16 to 80,393 offences in 2016-17

This was apparently the largest increase since the Home Office began recording figures in 2011-12

Let me just remind you of the extraordinarily all-encompassing definition of a ‘hate crime’ from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS):

‘The Association of Chief Police Officers and the CPS have agreed a common definition of hate crime: “Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race; religion or perceived religion; sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation; disability or perceived disability and any crime motivated by hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender.”

So, if I see you calling someone a “dickhead” and I believe you have called that person a “dickhead” because I believe you perceive they are in some way mentally challenged, then you have committed a hate crime purely because I think you have. So much for being innocent until proved guilty.

Personally, I suspect the police’s figures of a supposed rise in ‘hate crimes’ are total bollox. What I suspect is happening is that the definition of a ‘hate crime’ keeps getting broadened by our rulers to crush anyone daring to criticise their policy of race replacement and, due to political correctness, more and more police time is being wasted on trying to find supposed ‘hate crimes’ rather than on catching real criminals.

But there’s another not totally insignificant problem with the new catch-all criminal offence of ‘hate crimes’ – it seems that the white indigenous population are much more likely to be punished for ‘hate crimes’ than anyone from a foreign country or culture.

This, for example, is apparently a ‘hate crime’ – putting a bacon on a mosque door handle – or as the police claimed “attacking a mosque with a bacon sandwich”:

For this ‘appalling hate crime’ Kevin Crehan was sentenced to one year in prison where he died. He was probably murdered by a certain peaceful group in prison, but we’ll never be told the truth about Kevin Crehan’s death.

However, this is apparently NOT a hate crime:

Nor is this:

Nor is this:

And, of course, in Britain making a sarcastic comment in a supermarket or on the street about a woman wearing a Burkha is a ‘hate crime’ whereas raping over 40,000 white girls over a 15 year period in many of our major cities is not. Raping and sodomising white girls is apparently not racist or a ‘hate crime’ even though white girls were targeted which I would have thought of as ‘racist’, but clearly I have misunderstood how ‘hate crimes’ should be identified.

Welcome to Canadistan

And here’s a lovely story from the People’s Caliphate of Canadistan. A white Canadian has just been sent to prison for the ‘hate crime’ of scrawling “No more M*sl*ms” on a few bus-stop benches. But a taxi-driving gentleman from our favourite religion avoided prison even though he, like several of his taxi-driving co-religionists, had sexually assaulted a white teenager.

I rest my case:

3 comments to Some people’s “hate crimes” are more “hate crimes” than other people’s

  • Soviet-Hell

    Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship.
    Vladimir Bukovksy, the 63-year old former Soviet dissident, fears that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union. In a speech he delivered in Brussels last week Mr Bukovsky called the EU a “monster” that must be destroyed, the sooner the better, before it develops into a fullfledged totalitarian state.

    In January of 1989, for example, a delegation of the Trilateral Commission came to see Gorbachev. It included [former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro] Nakasone, [former French President Valéry] Giscard d’Estaing, [American banker David] Rockefeller and [former US Secretary of State Henry] Kissinger. They had a very nice conversation where they tried to explain to Gorbachev that Soviet Russia had to integrate into the financial institutions of the world, such as Gatt, the IMF and the World Bank.

    In the middle of it Giscard d’Estaing suddenly takes the floor and says: “Mr President, I cannot tell you exactly when it will happen – probably within 15 years – but Europe is going to be a federal state and you have to prepare yourself for that. You have to work out with us, and the European leaders, how you would react to that, how would you allow the other Easteuropean countries to interact with it or how to become a part of it, you have to be prepared.”

    This was January 1989, at a time when the [1992] Maastricht treaty had not even been drafted. How the hell did Giscard d’Estaing know what was going to happen in 15 years time? And surprise, surprise, how did he become the author of the European constitution [in 2002-03]? A very good question. It does smell of conspiracy, doesn’t it?

    Luckily for us the Soviet part of this conspiracy collapsed earlier and it did not reach the point where Moscow could influence the course of events. But the original idea was to have what they called a convergency, whereby the Soviet Union would mellow somewhat and become more social-democratic, while Western Europe would become social-democratic and socialist. Then there will be convergency. The structures have to fit each other. This is why the structures of the European Union were initially built with the purpose of fitting into the Soviet structure. This is why they are so similar in functioning and in structure.

    It is no accident that the European Parliament, for example, reminds me of the Supreme Soviet. It looks like the Supreme Soviet because it was designed like it. Similary, when you look at the European Commission it looks like the Politburo. I mean it does so exactly, except for the fact that the Commission now has 25 members and the Politburo usually had 13 or 15 members. Apart from that they are exactly the same, unaccountable to anyone, not directly elected by anyone at all. When you look into all this bizarre activity of the European Union with its 80,000 pages of regulations it looks like Gosplan. We used to have an organisation which was planning everything in the economy, to the last nut and bolt, five years in advance. Exactly the same thing is happening in the EU. When you look at the type of EU corruption, it is exactly the Soviet type of corruption, going from top to bottom rather than going from bottom to top.

    If you go through all the structures and features of this emerging European monster you will notice that it more and more resembles the Soviet Union. Of course, it is a milder version of the Soviet Union. Please, do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that it has a Gulag. It has no KGB – not yet – but I am very carefully watching such structures as Europol for example. That really worries me a lot because this organisation will probably have powers bigger than those of the KGB. They will have diplomatic immunity. Can you imagine a KGB with diplomatic immunity? They will have to police us on 32 kinds of crimes – two of which are particularly worrying, one is called racism, another is called xenophobia. No criminal court on earth defines anything like this as a crime [this is not entirely true, as Belgium already does so – pb]. So it is a new crime, and we have already been warned. Someone from the British government told us that those who object to uncontrolled immigration from the Third World will be regarded as racist and those who oppose further European integration will be regarded as xenophobes. I think Patricia Hewitt said this publicly.

    Hence, we have now been warned. Meanwhile they are introducing more and more ideology. The Soviet Union used to be a state run by ideology. Today’s ideology of the European Union is social-democratic, statist, and a big part of it is also political correctness. I watch very carefully how political correctness spreads and becomes an oppressive ideology, not to mention the fact that they forbid smoking almost everywhere now. Look at this persecution of people like the Swedish pastor who was persecuted for several months because he said that the Bible does not approve homosexuality. France passed the same law of hate speech concerning gays. Britain is passing hate speech laws concerning race relations and now religious speech, and so on and so forth. What you observe, taken into perspective, is a systematic introduction of ideology which could later be enforced with oppressive measures. Apparently that is the whole purpose of Europol. Otherwise why do we need it? To me Europol looks very suspicious. I watch very carefully who is persecuted for what and what is happening, because that is one field in which I am an expert. I know how Gulags spring up.

    It looks like we are living in a period of rapid, systematic and very consistent dismantlement of democracy. Look at this Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill. It makes ministers into legislators who can introduce new laws without bothering to tell Parliament or anyone. My immediate reaction is why do we need it? Britain survived two world wars, the war with Napoleon, the Spanish Armada, not to mention the Cold War, when we were told at any moment we might have a nuclear world war, without any need for introducing this kind legislation, without the need for suspending our civil liberaties and introducing emergency powers. Why do we need it right now? This can make a dictatorship out of your country in no time.

    Today’s situation is really grim. Major political parties have been completely taken in by the new EU project. None of them really opposes it. They have become very corrupt. Who is going to defend our freedoms? It looks like we are heading towards some kind of collapse, some kind of crisis. The most likely outcome is that there will be an economic collapse in Europe, which in due time is bound to happen with this growth of expenses and taxes. The inability to create a competitive environment, the overregulation of the economy, the bureaucratisation, it is going to lead to economic collapse. Particularly the introduction of the euro was a crazy idea. Currency is not supposed to be political.

    I have no doubt about it. There will be a collapse of the European Union pretty much like the Soviet Union collapsed. But do not forget that when these things collapse they leave such devastation that it takes a generation to recover. Just think what will happen if it comes to an economic crisis. The recrimination between nations will be huge. It might come to blows. Look to the huge number of immigrants from Third World countries now living in Europe. This was promoted by the European Union. What will happen with them if there is an economic collapse? We will probably have, like in the Soviet Union at the end, so much ethnic strife that the mind boggles. In no other country were there such ethnic tensions as in the Soviet Union, except probably in Yugoslavia. So that is exactly what will happen here, too. We have to be prepared for that. This huge edifice of bureaucracy is going to collapse on our heads.

    This is why, and I am very frank about it, the sooner we finish with the EU the better. The sooner it collapses the less damage it will have done to us and to other countries. But we have to be quick because the Eurocrats are moving very fast. It will be difficult to defeat them. Today it is still simple. If one million people march on Brussels today these guys will run away to the Bahamas. If tomorrow half of the British population refuses to pay its taxes, nothing will happen and no-one will go to jail. Today you can still do that. But I do not know what the situation will be tomorrow with a fully fledged Europol staffed by former Stasi or Securitate officers. Anything may happen.

    We are losing time. We have to defeat them. We have to sit and think, work out a strategy in the shortest possible way to achieve maximum effect. Otherwise it will be too late. So what should I say? My conclusion is not optimistic. So far, despite the fact that we do have some anti-EU forces in almost every country, it is not enough. We are losing and we are wasting time.

    https://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865

  • Stillreading

    Do the opinionated, self-aggrandised European political leaders never reflect on the supreme irony that, at the very moment they were cooking up means to bring about an ever greater artificially created European Federation, other artificially created federations, namely the USSR and Yugoslavia, were blasting themselves apart in an orgy of gunfire, siege and “ethnic cleansing”? And it didn’t stop there; Iraq is still blowing itself apart and Syria, having actually been a far from disagreeable country under the autocratic Assad, couldn’t resist coming out in sympathy. And let’s not even mention various African states. In Europe itself, it is clear that Hungary has had enough of being told by the powerful Germany that it must admit tens of thousands of “refugees” and has taken the necessary steps to prevent it. The ordinary people of Austria showed their teeth last week when they elected an astonishingly young, anti-immigrant, centre/right leader, who will possibly form a coalition with the very aggressive far-right. France is well on its way to disillusion with the liberal, pro-European Macron and will probably heave him out next time around. Germany, still collectively bearing its hangover of guilt from WW2 decided to give Merkel another chance, although with a greatly reduced majority. And we, the stalwart, independently-minded Brits, have already told Europe where to go. Now we just need our Great Leader and her team of sycophants to get on with it! The fact is that, whether political leaders like it or not, federations which cross long-standing cultural, ethnic and religious borders never work in the long term.
    Of course Bukovsky is right. If the EU is to continue to grow in power in the way envisioned by its political leaders, it can only do so at the expense of the freedom of action and speech of the individual citizen. Sadly, we are already, in the UK, a significant way along that disastrous path and unless we all make a stand, it will speedily become worse. Of course, since in effect, following Alison Saunder’s recent pronouncement, we are already muzzled, there’s not a lot we can say or write.

  • I have just discovered your blog-you are doing an excellent job. Keep up the good work!

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>